Paule Ro. 5. v. 19. who maketh it all one to be iustified and to be made iust And againe by this reason that it shoulde bee manifestly repugnant to Gods iustice to account him for iuste that is not iuste and therfore that man in deede is made iust Thus Beza Woulde you not thinke hee were come to bee of our opinion but hee reuolteth againe and interpreateth all these goodly wordes in his olde sense saying Not that any qualitie is inwardly giuen vnto vs of which wee are named iust but because the iustice of Christe is imputed to vs by faith freely By faith then at the least we are truly iustified Not so neither but faith sayth he is an instrument wherewith we apprehende Christ our iustice So that we haue no more iustice in vs than we haue glorie for glorie also we apprehend by faith FVLK 2. Al learned meÌ„ I hope do see that you haue no regarde how vainely you cauil so you may seeme to the ignorant to say somthing against theÌ„ that be godly and learned Act. 13. v. 39. Beza translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absolui that is saith hee to bee declared iust or absolued and giueth this reason why he vseth not the worde iustificaâ—i in that place which he vseth elsewhere Ne quis illud ab omnibus perinde acciperet ac si casus esset modi aut instrumenti per quod iustiâ—icemur id est iustifiamus ac pronunciemur aut pro iustis habeamur hoc quidem loco malui absolueÌ„di verbum vsurpare vt magis perspicua esset oratio Least anie man should take this worde of the texte ab omnibus as though it were the case of the meane or instrument by which we are iustified that is made and pronounced iust or accounted for iuste In this place I chose rather to vse the worde of absoluing that the sentence mighte bee more cleare The Latine ab omnibus may signifie by all things or from all things Therefore leaste anye manne shoulde mistake the Apostle as thoughe hee saide wee are iustified by all those thinges where hee meaneth wee are iustified from all thinges Beza in this place vseth the worde of absoluing or acquitting in the same sense that he doth iustifying in other places where hee speaketh of the same matter and sayeth as plainely as a man can speake that to be iustified and to be made iuste or pronounced or accompted iust beefore God is all one Yet our Momus findeth faulte with him for expounding to be iustified Rom. 2. v. 13. to bee pronounced iuste as thoughe God will pronounce anye man iuste whiche is not iuste indeede But Beza hee saith elsewhere protesteth that to be iustified is not to be pronounced or accompted iuste but rather to be iust indeede If Martin hadde not beelyed Beza we shoulde haue hadde Bezaes wordes sette downe bothe in Latine and Englishe But in truth Beza hath no suche words yet in sense he hath thus muche that to be iustified before God is to be iuste indeede and not to bee onely pronounced or accompted iuste when hee is not so in deede But that wee are made truely iust indeede by the iustice of Christe whiche is imputed vnto vs freely by faith And as for that newe life or iustice whiche is called inhereÌ„t in vs it is not the cause but the witnes of that iustice by imputation of whiche wee are saued folowing him that is iustified and not going before iustification and faith indede is the instrument by which we apprehend Christ our iustice Neither doth Beza say that we are not truely iustified by faith but that faith is not the principall efficient cause which is the mercie of God but the instrumentall cause by whiche wee take holde of the mercie of God in Christe In al this Beza hath said nothing contrarie to himself nor to the truth And it is no absurditie to say that the iustice of Christe by which we are iustified is no more inherent in vs than his glorie And yet both assured vnto vs by faith As for that iustice whiche is an effect of Gods sanctifying spirite and a fruite of our iustification beefore God by whiche also we are iustified or declared iuste beefore men as S. Iames teacheth is inhereÌ„t in vs as also the first fruits of glorification by that peace of coÌ„science ioy that we haue in God being reconciled to vs by Christ. MART. 3. For this purpose bothe hee and the Englishe Bibles translate thus Abraham beleeued God and it was reputed to him FOR IVSTICE Rom. 4. v. 3. 9. Where he interpreateth for iustice to be nothing else but. in the steede place of iustice so also taking away true inherent iustice euen from Abraham himselfe But to admit their translation whiche notwithstanding in their sense is moste false must it nedes signifie not true inherent iustice because the Scripture saith it was reputed for iustice Do such speaches import that it is not so in deede but is onely reputed so Then if wee say This shall be reputed to thee for sinne for a greate benefite and so foorth it shoulde signifie it is no sinne indeede nor great benefite But let them call to mind that the Scripture vseth to speake of sinne and of iustice alike It shal be sinne in thee or vnto thee as they translate Bibl. 1577 or as S. Hierome translateth It shall bee reputed to thee for sinne Deut. c. 23. 24. as themselues translate it shall be righteousnesse vnto thee before the Lord thy God And againe Deut. c. 6. This shall bee our righteousnes before the Lord our God if we kepe al the commaundements as he hath commaunded vs. If then iustice onely be reputed sinne also is onely reputed if sin bee in vâ— indeede iustice is in vs indeede FVLK 3. Our translation taketh not from Abraham true iustice nor yet iustice inherent but declareth that he was not iustified before God by workes that is by iustice inherent but by faith whyche apprehendeth the iustice of Christ whych is altogyther without vs. And therefore you cauil in your olde rotten quarrell when you goe aboute to make reputed to bee contrarie to truthe or indeede Faith was reputed by God to Abraham for iustice indeede but not as iustice inherent And AbrahaÌ„ was truly iustified by faith as by an instrumentall cause not that faith was the iustice by which he was iust in the sight of God excluding all other causes but there was nothing in AbrahaÌ„ but faith which God accompted for iustice But Abrahams faith embraced the mercie of God in the promised seede in whiche as well hee as all the tribes of the earth should be blessed The places of scripture that you cite speaking of sinne iustice alike be not contrary to the imputation of iustice vnto them in which it is not inherent For in neither of both places the holy ghost vseth the word of imputation howsoeuer S. Hierome translateth
it but the verbe substantiue And the meaning is plaine It shal be sinne in thee for sinne is indeede inherent as perfecte iustice also shoulde bee if wee coulde obserue all the commaundements of God as Moses sayeth Deut. 6. and we shoulde be iustified thereby But by one iuste acte whereof Moses speaketh Deut. 24. thoughe it proceede of iustice that is in vs the scripture neuer saith that wee shall be iustified To conclude wee confesse that bothe sinne and iustice are in the children of God but not that iustice whereby they are reputed iuste or iustified or made iuste beefore God but an effecte or fruite thereof MART. 4. Againe the Greeke fathers make it plaine that to be reputed vnto iustice is to be true iustice in deede interpreating S. Paules worde in Greeke thus Abraham obtained iustice Abraham was iustified For that is say they It was reputed him to iustice Doth not S. Iames say the like cap. 2. verse 23. testifying that in that Abraham was iustified by faith and workes the Scripture was fulfilled that saith it was reputed him to iustice Gen. Cap. 15. verse 6. In whiche wordes of Genesis where these wordes were firste written by Moyses in the Hebrewe there is not for iustice or in steede of iustice whiche Beza pleadeth vppon by the Hebrewe phrase but thus He God reputed it vnto him iustice though heere also the Englishe Bibles adde for Whiche precisely translating the Hebrewe they shoulde not do specially when they meane it was so counted or reputed for iustice that it was not iustice indeede FVLK 4. I knowe not against whome you fight but against your owne shadow For we say that to be iustified and be reputed iust and to obtaine iustice is all one in this case But where S. Iames sayth that Abraham was iustified by workes he meaneth that he was declared iust before men euen as he sayth shewe me thy faith by thy workes for Abraham was not iustified by a dead faith but by a working faith and yet he was not iustified before God by workes but the Scripture was fulfilled which sayd Abraham beleued God and it was reputed to him for iustice which is as S. Paule expoundeth it Abraham was iustified before God by faith and not by workes But in Gen. 15. v. 6. there is not the preposition for or in steede but simply iustice therefore it should be translated he reputed it to him iustice And will you then controule both the Apostles Paule and Iames for adding the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth vnto or for Or will not common sense inforce the same vnderstanding that both the Apostles doe giue it He reputed it to him as iustice or for iustice Must not such particles in translation be alwayes expressed to make the sense plaine which in English without the particle hath no sense or vnderstanding To translate precisely out of the Hebrew is not to obserue the number of wordes but the perfect sense and meaning of them in fewer or more wordes as the phrase of our tongue will serue to be vnderstood or else 2. Cor. 8. qui multum why do you translate he that had much and qui modicum non minorauit he that had litle wanted not you should haue said which much which little not lessed if you would haue giuen word for word and not added any word for explication Againe 2. Cor. 1. Supra virtutem aboue our power why adde you our which is not in the text and in deede not necessarie to be added in the translation Againe 1. Cor. 13. Euacuaui quae erant paruuli I did away the things that belonged to a litle one Here for foure Latine wordes you haue giuen tenne or eleuen English wordes which no reasonable man can greatly mislike if you were not such a quarreller at other mens doing without all cause or wise colour but onely to bleare the eyes of the ignorant MART. 5. But as for either the Hebrew or Greeke word that is here vsed to repute or account they are then vsed wheÌ„ it must needes signifie that the thing is so in deed and not onely so reputed as Psal. 118. octonario SAMEC I haue reputed or accounted all the sinners of the earth preuaricators or transgressors praeuaricantes reputaui So did the Septuaginta take the Hebrew word and read it And S. Paule So let a man repute or account vs as the Ministers of Christ. Let them goe now and say that neyther they were sinnâ—rs in deede nor these Christes ministers in deede because they were reputed for such let them saye the children of the promise were not the seede of Abraham because the Apostle sayth Rom. 9. v. 8. they are reputed for the seede But howsoeuer it be the Protestants will haue it so to be taken at the least in the matter of iustification FVLK 5. Silence were the beste aunswer to these tedious repetitions It were sufficient once to saye among reasonable men When faith is reputed by God or accounted for iustice faith is truely and in deede the instrumentall cause of iustification or apprehending the iustice of Christ by which we are accounted and made iust in the sight of God It is therefore a most ridiculous cauill of the difference betwene reputing iust and being iust in deede For God when he iustifieth the vngodly doth both repute him and make him iust in deede by the iustice of Christ of his owne meere mercye and not of the mans merits or by iustice inherent For what iustice can be in an vâ—godly man and such is euery one of vs whome God doth iustifie and then giue vs his holy spirit to sanctifie vs in newnesse of life to set forth his glorie in our holye and blamelesse conuersation MART. 6. Againe where Saint Paule sayth 2. Cor. 5. That wee mighte bee made the iustice of God in him they in their firste translations intolerably corrupte iâ— thus That wee by his meanes should bee that righteousnesse which BEFORE GOD IS ALLOWED Who â—aught them to translate so dissolutely Iustitia Dei the righteousnesse which before God is allowed did not their errour and heresie which is that God reputeth and accounteth vs for iuste though wee bee in deede moste foule sinners and that our iustice beyng none at all in vs yet is allowed and accepted before him for iustice and righteousnesse FVLK 6. There is no texte in all the Bible more cleare against iustification by iustice inhaeâ—ent than this 2. Corinth 5. wherein not altogither causelesse you reproue our firste interpreters to translate dissolutely There it is certaine they had no suche purpose as you ascribe vnto them For their translation dothe rather obscure than sette out our iustification by the iustice which is not in vs but in Christ. The texte is therefore playne him that knewe no sinne he made sinne for vs that wee might become the iustice of God in him that is in Christ and not in our selâ—es For though
wilful needlesse or hereticall aâ—oyding For although the mariage of ecclesiasticall ministers generally is proued by that Scripture yet the mariage of votaries specially is nothing confirmed And for the mariage of Bishops Priestes and Deacons your owne translation of 1. Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. both Latine and English will warrant them to be the husbandes of one wife so that euery childe may see that he needed not for that purpose to corrupt the texte 1. Cor. 9. And as for the other texts 2. Pet. 1. although this worde by good workes is not expressed in the moste Greeke copies yet the whole circumstance of the place giueth it necessarily to be vnderstoode and yet it maketh nothing agaynst iustification by fayth only For our election which is most certaine immutable in Gods determinatioÌ„ is made certainly knowen vnto vs by good workes the fruites of iustifying faith euen as the effectes doe necessarily proue the cause gone before And so dothe Thomas Mathewes Bible note likewise the Bishops Bible and the Geneua Bible for so I had rather call them than by the yeares in whiche they were once printed whiche haue bene often printed and perhaps all in some one yeare Couerdales Bible also addeth these wordes by good workes whiche is redde in some Greeke copies So true it is that you say wee leaue it out because wee holde the selfe same heresie As likewise that you slaunder vs to hold that good workes are not necessarie to saluation whereas we beleeue that good workes are as necessarie to saluation as fayth in all them that are iustified by faith onely But because you are not able to withstand the truth which we beleeue you faine odious Monsters as Dragons Centaures Hydraes to fight withall before the people that you might gette the prayse of glorious conquerours like S. George on horsebacke that in a pageant vanquisheth an hideous dragon made of paper or painted clothes MART. 37. So do they in infinite places alter the olde text which pleased them well before they were Heretikes and they do it with brasen faces and playne protestation hauing no shame nor remorse at all in fleeing from that which all antiquitie with one consent allowed and embraced vntill their vnhappie daies Which though it be an euident condemnation of their nouelties in the sight of any reasonable man that hath any grace yet as I began to admonish thee gentle Reader we will not charge them for altering the auncient approued Latin translation because they pretend to folowe the Hebrue and Greeke and our purpose is not here to proue that they should not folowe the Hebrue and Greeke that now is before the auncient approued Latine text which is done briefly already in the preface to the new Testament FVLK 37. You were afrayde belike to be ouermatched in rayling and therefore you thought to beare vs downe at once with a whole floud of reprochfull slaunders and that you vtter euen with the same face with which you affirme that al antiquitie with one consente allowed and embraced your vulgar Latine texte for what else you shoulde meane I cannot coniecture seing you say afterwarde you will not charge vs for altering the auncient approued Latine translation What say you Martin doth all antiquitie with one consent allowe and imbrace your vulgar Latine translation What is the cause then that the most of all antiquitie of the Latine Church vsed not your vulgar Latine text or dare you ioyne issue with me that all the Latine doctors for 400 yeares after Christe vsed none other Latine translation but that or that they all knewe your vulgar Latine translation you are neuer able to proue it The 70. translation in deede was greatly esteemed and almost generally receyued in the Greeke and Latine Churches and out of it were innumerable Latine versions as S. Augustine affirmeth But your vulgar Latine followeth it not in many places as it were easie to shewe if time and occasion serued and I suppose you will not denie As for the reasons you bring in the Preface to the newe Testament to proue that we should not followe the Hebrue and Greeke that now is before that auncient approued text when they come to be considered it shall appeare how vayne and friuolous they are But as for the Hebrue and Greeke that now is may easilie be proued to be the same that alwaies hath bene neither is their any diuersitie in sentence how soeuer some copies eyther through negligence of the writer or by any other occasion do varie from that which is commonly and most generally receyued in some letters syllables or wordes MART. 38. Neither will we burden them for not folowing the vulgar Latine texte when the same agreeth with most auncient Greeke copies which notwithstanding is great partialitie in them must needes be of an heretical wilful humor that among the Greeke copies themselues they reiect that which moste agreeth with the vulgar Latine text in places of controuersies Yet will wee not I say neither in this case lay falsehood and corruption to their charge because they pretend to translate the common Greeke text of the newe Testament that is one certaine copie But here at the least lette them shewe their fidelitie and that they be true and exact translatours For here onely shall they be examined and called to account FVLK 38. In translation we follow the common vsuall and printed coppies as you doe in your translation and yet you know there be as many yea ten times as many diuerse readings in the Latine as are in the Greeke witnesse hereof the Bible printed at Antwerpe by Christopher Plantine 1567. of Hentenius castigation where the margents almost of euerie leafe be full of diuerse readings obeliskes asterisks stigmates signifying the variety that is in many copies by adding detracting chaunging The same is confessed by Arias Montanus Lindanus likewise acknowledgeth as much Of that which you say we reiect that which best agreeth with the vulgar Latine in places of controuersie you bring none example But that among your diuerse readings you reiect that which agreeth best with the Hebrue and with the Greeke in places of controuersie I will giue you an example Gen. 3 v. â—5 where the Hebrue truth teacheth that the seede of the woman shall breake the serpentes heade and the Greeke translateth the pronoune in the masculine gender he meaning Christ and some auncient copies of your vulgar Latine haue ipse you neuerthelesse followe that blasphemous corruption that in these later times hath bene receiued in your vulgar Latine Bibles and reade still in your texte ipsa she which though you would wrest blasphemously to the virgin Marie which is proper to Christ can not by the circumstance of the place be aptly referred to any but to Eue. MART. 39. And if they followe sincerely their Greeke and Hebrue text which they professe to followe and which they esteeme the onely authenticall texte so farre we accuse them not of hereticall
it if in this case they will adde only to the very text is it not most horrible and diuelish corruption So did Luther whom our English ProtestaÌ„ts honor as their father in this heresie of only faith are his owne childreÌ„ See ch 12. FVLK 24. In the question of iustification by faith only where S. Iames saieth no we say no also neyther can it be proued that we adde this word only to the text in any translation of oures If Luther did in his translation adde the worde only to the texte it can not be excused of wrong translation in worde although the sense might well beare it But seing Luther doth him selfe confesse it he may be excused of frawde though not of lacke of iudgement But why should our translation be charged with Luthers corruption Because our English Protestants honour him as their father A very lewde slaunder for we call no man father vpon earth though you do call the Pope your father albeit in another sense Luther was a reuerende father of the Churche for his time But as touching the doctrine of only faith iustifying it hath more patrones of the fathers of the auncient primitiue Church than Martine can beare their bookes though he would breake his backe who in the same plaine wordes do affirme it as Luther doth that only faith doth iustifie And the Apostle which saieth that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law speaketh more plainely for iustification by faith only as we do teach it than if he had sayed a man is iustified by faith only Which text of Rom. 3. and many other are as expresse scripture to proue that we teach and beleeue as that S. Iames sayeth against iustification by faith only where he speaketh of an other faith and of an other iustification than S. Paule speaketh of and we vnderstand when we holde that a man is iustified by faith only or without workes of the law which is all one MART. 25. If these that account themselues the great Grecians and Hebricians of the world will so translate for the aduauntage of their cause as though they had no skill in the world and as though they knew neither the significatioÌ„ of words nor proprietie of phrases in the saide languages is it not to be esteemed shamelesse corruption FVLK 25. Yes but if it can not be proued that so they translate then is this an impudent slaunder as al the rest are and so it will proue when it coÌ„meth to be tried MART. 26. I will not speake of the German Heretikes who to mainteine this heresie that all our workes be they neuer so good are sinne translated for Tibi soli peccaui to thee only haue I sinned thus Tibi solùm peccaui that is I haue nothing else but sinned whatsoeuer I do I sinne whereas neither the Greeke nor the Hebrewe will possibly admit that sense Let these passe as Lutherans yet wilfull corrupters and acknowledged of our English Protestants for their good brethren But if Beza translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when we were yet of no strength as the Geneua English Bible also doth interprete it whereas euery young Grecian knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither without strength is not this of purpose to take away mans free will altogither See chap. 10. nu 13. FVLK 26. I knowe not what German heretikes those be which maintaine that heresie that al our works be they neuer so good are sinne except they be the Libertines with whom we haue nothing to do For we neuer say that good workes are sinne for that were al one to say that good were euill But that al our good workes are short of that perfection which the law of God requireth we do humbly confesse against our selues Or else what soeuer seemeth to be a good worke and is done of meÌ„ voyde of true faith is sinne For these assertions we haue the scripture to warraÌ„t vs. And if to proue the later any man hath translated those words of Dauid in the 51. Psalme Lecha Lebadecha Tibi solum or tantuÌ„modo tibi peccaui c. To the only or altogither to thee I haue sinned in respect of his naturall corruption which he doth expresse in the next verse he hath not departed one whitte from the Hebrewe wordes nor from the sense which the wordes may very wel beare which he that denieth rather sheweth him selfe ignorant in the Hebrew tongue than he that so translateth For what doth Lebad signifie but Solum or Tantum and therefore it may as well be translated Solum tibi as Soli â—ibi And the Apostle Rom. 3. prouing by the later end of that verse all men to be vniust that God only may be true and euery man a lier as it is written that thou mayest be iustified in thy wordes c. fauoreth that interpretation of Bucer or who soeuer it is beside But if Beza translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when wee were yet of no strength as the Geneua Englishe Bible doth also interprete it whereas euerye young Grecian knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither withoute strengthe is not this of purpose to take awaye mannes free wyll altogither Chapter tenth Number 13. Naye it is to shewe as the Apostles purpose is that wee haue no strength to fulfill the lawe of God without the grace of Christ euen as Christ him selfe sayth without me you can do nothing Ioan. 15. v. 5. But euery young Grecian saye you knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither with out strength And is there then any old Grecian that will proue that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alway signifieth him that is weake but not voide of strength Doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alwayes signifie him that hath some streÌ„gth Certaine it is that the Apostle speaketh here of those that were voide of strength for the same he calleth in the same verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vngodly or voide of religion for whom Christ died Howe say you then had vngodly persons any strength to be saued except Christ had died for them Therefore he that in this place translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 weake feeble infirme must needes vnderstand men so weake feeble and infirme as they haue no strength For how might it else be truely sayed what hast thou which thou hast not receiued 1. Cor. 4. v. 7. Yes say you we haue some peece of freewil at least some strength to clime to heauen euen without the grace of God without the death redemption of Christ. If you say no why cauill you at Bezaes translation and ours The Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as great a Grecian as you would make your selfe signifieth weake or infirme sometime that which yet hath some strength sometime that which hath no strength at all as I will giue you a plaine example out of S.
〈◊〉 which the vulgar Latine and Erasmus translate Agite poenitentiam Repent or Doe penance This interpretation sayth he I refuse for many causes but for this especially that many ignorant persons haue taken hereby an occasion of the false opinions of SATISFACTION wherewith the Church is troubled at this day Loe of purpose against satisfaction he will not translate the Greeke worde as it ought to be and as it is proued to signifie both in this booke and in the annotations vpon the newe Testament A litle after speaking of the same worde he sayth why I haue changed the name poenitentia I haue tolde a litle before protesting that he will neuer vse those wordes but resipiscere and resipiscentia that is amendment of life because of their heresie that repentance is nothing else but a meere amendment of former life without recompense or satisfaction or penance for the sinnes before committed See chap. 13. FVLK 49. Of purpose against the heresie of satisfaction Beza will not translate the Greeke worde as the vulgar Latine translator dothe but yet as the Greeke worde ought to be translated Erasmus finding the vulgar Latine vnsufficient hath added Vitae prioris that is repent yee of your former life Neither dothe Beza finde faulte with the English worde repent but with the Latine Agite paenitentiam when you translate it do penaunce meaning thereby paine or satisfaction for sinnes passed to be a necessarie parte of true repentance which is not conteyned in the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth changing of the mind that is not onely a sorrow for the sinne past but also a purpose of amendment which is beste expressed by the Latine worde Resipiscere which is alwaies taken in the good parte as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in the Scripture where as the Latine wordes paenitere and Paenitentia are vsed in Latine of sorrowe or repentance that is too late As paenitere and paenitentia may be saide of Iudas grief of minde which caused him to hang him selfe but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or resipiscere and resipisscentia and therefore the Holye Ghoste speakinge of his sorrowe vseth an other worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this is the cause why Beza refused the worde Paenitentia hauing a Latine worde that more properlye doeth expresse the Greeke worde as wee might lawefullye doe in Englishe if wee had an other Englishe worde proper to that repentaunce whiche is alwayes ioyned with faith and purpose of amendmente for wante whereof wee are constrayned to vse the wordes repente and repentaunce whiche maye bee taken in good parte or in euill For wee saye repentaunce too late and Iudas repented too late but there is no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that can bee called too late But where you saye that resipiscere and resipiscentia is nothing but amendement of life and that repentaunce in our heresie is nothing else but a meere amendment of former life you speake vntruly for those words do signifie not only amendment of life but also sorrow for the sinnes past although without recompēce or satisfactiō which you call penance for the sinnes before cōmitted for we know no recompence or satisfactiō made to God for our sinnes but the death of Christ who is the propitiation for our sinnes 1. Iohn 1. Neither hath your blasphemous satisfaction any grounde in the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but onely a foolish colour by the Latine translation Agite poenitentiam which it is like your Latine interpreter did neuer dreame of and therefore he vseth the worde Resipiscere 2. Tim. 2. Of them to whom God should giue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repentaunce to the acknowledging of the truth Et resipiscant and so they may repent or as you translate it recouer themselues from the snare of the Diuell Seyng therefore repentance is the gifte of God it is no recompence or satisfaction made by vs to God to answere his iustice but an earnest and true griefe of minde for our transgression of Gods lawe and offending against his maiestie with a certaine purpose and determination of amendment so neere as God shall giue vs grace Hetherto therefore we haue no demonstration of any wilfull corruption but a declaration of the cause that moued Beza to vse a more exact translation and such as commeth nearer to the originall worde than that which the vulgar translation hath vsed vpon which occasion of a great blasphemie hath bene taken and is yet mainteyned MART. 50. Againe concerning the worde Iustifications which in the Scripture very often signifie the commaundements he saith thus The Greeke interpreters of the Bible meaning the Septuaginta applieth this worde to signifie the whole Lawe of God and therefore commonly it is wont to be translated worde for worde Iustificationes which interpretation therefore only I reiected that I might take away this occasion also of cauilling against iustification by faith and so for iustificationes he putteth constituta Tullies worde forsooth as he saith Can you haue a more playne tèstimonie of his heretic all purpose FVLK 50. Concerning the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Beza translateth Constitutionibus constitutions and you confesse that in Scripture it doth very often signifie the commaundements He sayth first that as the whole Lawe of God is diuided into three partes Morall Ceremoniall and Iudiciall so the Hebrewes haue three seuerall words to expresse the seueral precepts of those lawes For the Hebrew word which signifieth the Ceremoniall precepts the Greekes vse to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the sense is that Zacharie and Elisabeth were iust walking in all the Morall commaundements and obseruing the holy rites and ceremonies as much as concerned them but the thirde worde which signifieth Iudgements S. Luke doth not adde because the exercise of Iudiciall cases did not belong vnto them being priuate persons After this he saith that the Greeke Interpreters of the Bible transferred this worde vnto the whole lawe of God and especially to the holy ceremonies so verily exceedingly commending the law that it is a certaine rule of all iustice And therefore men are wont commonly in respect of the worde to turne it Iustifications And this worde in this place Beza in deede confesseth that he refused to vse for auoyding of cauillations against iustification by fayth seeing he hath none other worde neither woulde he for offence seeke any newe worde to expresse iustification by faith whereas the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this text Luc. 1. verse 6. signifieth not that by which they were made iust but the commaundements or precepts of God by walking in which they were declared to be iust For by the workes of the lawe such as Saint Luke here speaketh of no fleshe shall be iustified before God Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place must haue an other sense than iustifications namely commaundements as you saye it
as the cause shall require More examples might I bring but for tediousnesse to conuince the bolde rashnesse of this quarreller but these may suffice all indifferent Readers and aunswere sufficiently for vs within the newe Testament we translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinaunces or statuts seeing it is proued both by the Septuaginta which calleth the same Hebrewe worde not onely iustifications but often commaundements statuts precepts iudgements by the vulgar Latine Interpretor which commonly calleth it ceremonies or precepts MART. 2. But be it that you may controll them in the Hebrew which none but fooles will graunt vnto you in the newe Testament what pretense haue you doe you there also translate the Hebrew worde or rather the Greeke the Greeke vndoubtedly you should translate What reason then can you haue why you doe not none other surely than that which Beza giueth for him selfe saying that he reiected the word iustifications notwithstanding it expressed the Greeke worde for worde notwithstanding the seuentie Greeke Interpreters vsed it to signifie the whole lawe and in Latine it be commonly translated iustificationes notwithstanding all this for this onely cause sayth he did I reiect it to auoide the cauillations that might be made by this word against iustification by faith As if he should say This word truly translated according to the Greeke might minister great occasion to proue by so many places of scripture that mans iustification is not by faith only but also by keeping the law and obseruing the commaundements which therefore are called according to the Greeke and Latine iustifications because they concurre to iustification and make a man iust as by S. Lukes wordes also is well signified which haue this allusion that they were both iuste because they walked in all the iustifications of our Lord. Which they of purpose suppresse by other wordes FVLK 2. None but fooles considering what I haue brought of the vsage of that worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wil iudge that it signifieth onely iustifications and all wise men may see that we haue good warrant to translate it otherwise in the Greeke Testament where it must needes haue an other signification The concurrence of workes with faith to iustificatioÌ„ before God which the Apostle doth exclude Rom. 3. we may not admit But iustification by workes as Saint Iames teacheth we doe acknoweledge I hope you will not saye that your Latine translator against iustification by workes translated the worde so often ceremonies or that ceremonies of the lawe doe concurre to iustification by faith The commaundements in deede are called iustifications because the workes of the lawe if a man keepe it wholy are able to iustifie Not that euery ceremonie or obseruation of any peece of the law is a iustification â—or maketh a man iust which you may better say vpon the etymologie of the worde than that euery particular obseruation of the lawe or good worke doth concurre with faith vnto iustification MART. 3. And hereof also it riseth that when he can not possibly auoyd the word in his translation as Apoc. 19. 8. Bissinum enim iustificationes sunt sanctorum The silke is the iustifications of Sainctes there he helpeth the matter with this coÌ„mentarie That iustifications are those good workes which be the testimonies of a liuely faith But our English translatours haue an other way to auoyd the worde euen in their translation For they say here the righteöusnes of Sainctes because they coulde not saye ordinances of Saincts and they would not say iustifications of Saincts knowing very well by Bezaes owne commentarie that this word includeth the good workes of saincts which workes if they should in translating call their iustifications it would goe sore against iustification by onely faith Therefore doe they translate in steede thereof ordinances and statutes where they can which are termes furthest of from iustification and where they can not there they say righteousnesse making it also the plurall number whereas the more proper Greeke worde for rightuousnesse is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dan. 6 22. which there some of them translate vngiltinesse because they wil not translate exactly if you would hire them FVLK 3. When 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. 19. are translated iustificationes they signifie iuste works as I haue already proued the significatioÌ„ of the word to beare beside that it is so vsed by Aristotle in his Ethicks who of iustificatioÌ„ before God whereof wee speake vnderstoode neuer a whit Therefore if in steede of rightuousnesse which is the singular number it were translated rightuous or iust workes it were not amisse in mine opinion Although by rightuousnesse in that place is nothing meant but good or rightuous workes as Bezaes note doth tel you MART. 4. And therefore as for iustice and iustifications they say righteousnesse so for iuste they translate righteous and by this meanes Ioseph was a righteous maÌ„ rather than a iust man and Zacharie and Elisabeth were both righteous before God rather than iust because when a man is called iust it soundeth that he is so in deede and not by imputation onely as a wise man is vnderstoode to be wise in deede and not only so imputed Therefore doe they more gladly and more often say righteous men rather than iust men when they doe say iust men as sometime they doe least they might sâ—eme wilfull inexcusably there they vnderstande iust by imputation not in deede as is to be seene in Bezaes Annotations vpon the Epistle to the Romanes Note also that they put the word iust when faith is ioyned withall as Rom. 1. The iust shal liue by faith to signifie that iustification is by faith But if workes be ioyned withall and keeping the commaundementes as in the place alleaged Luc. 1. there they say righteous to suppresse iustification by workes FVLK 4. This is a maruelous difference neuer heard of I thinke in the English toÌ„gue before betwene iust righteous iustice righteousnes I am sure there is none of our translatours no nor any professer of iustification by faith onely that esteemeth it the worth of one haire whether you say in any place of Scripture iust or righteous iustice or righteousnesse and therefore freely they haue vsed sometimes the one worde sometimes the other Therefore it is a monstrous falshoode that you fain them to obserue this distinction that they ioyne iust with faith and righteous with workes Doe they not translate Rom. 2. ver 13. the hearers of the lawe are not righteous before God but the doers of the lawe shall bee iustified Haue you not again the righteousnesse of God is made manifest without the law c. by the faith of Iesus Christ. And where you reade the iust shall liue by faith haue you not immediatly the righteousnesse of God is reuealed from faith to faith as it is written the iust shall liue by faith Who then but the Diuell which hath his name of sclaundering woulde here inuent
we be in deede most foule sinners and all our iustice be as the Prophete saith as a menstruous cloth yet in Christe he washeth and cleanseth vs from our sinnes and reputing his iustice as ours he maketh vs truly iuste before him not hauing our owne iustice whiche is of the lawe but the iustice which is by faith of Iesus Christe the iustice which is of God through faith Where you charge vs to affirme that our iustice being none at all in vs yet is allowed and accepted before hym for iustice and righteousnesse it is no assertion of ours but a dogged slaunder of your owne MART. 7. Againe to this purpose they make S. Paul saie that God hath made vs accepted or freely accepted in his beloued sonne as they make the Angel in S. Luke say to our Lady Haile freely beloued to take away all grace inherent and resident in the B. Virgin or in vs whereas the Apostles worde signifieth that wee are truely made gratious or gratefull and acceptable that is to say that our soule is inwardly endued and beautified with grace and the vertues proceeding thereof and consequently is holy in deede before the sight of God and not only so accepted or reputed as they imagine If they know not the true signification of the Greeke worde and if their heresie will suffer them to learne it let them heare S. Chrysostome not only a famous Greeke Doctor but an excellent interpreter of all S. Paules epistles who in this place putteth such force and significancie in the Greeke worde that he saith thus by an allusion and distinction of wordes He said not WHICH HE FREELY GAVE VS but WHEREIN HE MADE VS GRATEFVL that is not onely delyuered vs from sinne but also made vs beloued and amiable made our soule beautiful grateful such as the Angels and Archangels are desirous to see and such as himselfe is in loue withal according to that in the Psalme THE KING SHALL DESIRE or BE IN LOVE WITH THY BEAVTIE So S. Chrysostome and after him Theophylacte who with many moe wordes and similitudes explicate this Greeke worde and this making of the soule gratious and beautifull inwardly truely and inherently FVLK 7. Wee make S. Paule saye no otherwise than hee saith in deede 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hee hath made vs accepted or he hath freely accepted vs in his beloued son And so we truely say the blessed Virgin Mary was freely accepted or freely beloued But this taketh not away the gratious gifts of God which the blessed Virgin in most plentifull maner was and we in some measure are indued by his grace and fauor which also God loueth in vs because they be his giftes and because he loueth vs freely in his beloued sonne whom alwaies you forget when you speake of iustice or acceptation before God For that being sanctified by his spirite we are holie indeed thoughe not perfectly as sanctification is begunne and not consummate in this life for if it were we should be voyd of sinne death we doe thankfully acknowledge yet those vertues wherewith our soule is inwardly indued and beautified are not the cause that iustifieth vs or maketh vs acceptable in Gods sight but onely his mercie in Iesus Christ for whose sake also he accepteth this vnperfect holines and righteousnes which is in vs by his grace and gift rewarding the same for his sake also with euerlasting glorie And nothing else doth Chrysostome say or meane in the place by you cited about whom you make so many wordes that you might be thought by giuing him his due praise to haue him as it were bound to you to maintaine your vnrighteous cause But Chrysostome careth not for your commendation and that which he sayth maketh nothing for iustice inherent by which we shoulde be iustified for he sayth not so much as that our soule is made amiable and beautiful by vertues and good qualities infused by his grace much lesse that for such qualities inherent in vs GOD shoulde iustifie vs but hee haeth made vs acceptable in Christe amiable and beautiful and louely to the Angels some effect of which grace also appeareth in our life and conuersation to the praise of God and good example of men MART. 8. And I would gladly knowe of the aduersaries if the like Greeke wordes be not of that forme and nature to signifie so much as to make worthy to make meete whether he whome God maketh worthy or meete or gratefull iust and holy be not so in very deede but by acceptation onely if not in deede then God maketh him no better than he was before but only accepteth him for better if he be so in deede then the Apostles word signifieth not to make accepted but to make such an one as being by Gods grace sanctified and iustified is worthy to be accepied for such puritie vertue and iustice as is in him FVLK 8. I haue told you before that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not to make worthye but to account worthye for many a man may desire vsing this verbe to be accoūted worthy of him which can not make him worthy but in his owne iudgement and account But where you demaund further whether he whome God maketh meete worthy gratefull iust holy be not so in deede but by acceptation onely I aunswer those whome he accepteth for worthy meete iust holy gratefull are so in deede but then it is further to be knowen whether they be such in them selues or in Christ. We say they are not such in them selues but in Christ. Then are they made nothing better say you in them selues Yes verily as soone as they are accepted to be Gods children and the iustice of Christ is imputed to thē through faith they receiue the spirite of adoption which reneweth them in the inwarde man and beginneth in them holines and iustice puritie vertue but because all these qualities are vnperfect they are not worthy in Gods iustice to be accepted for them but the cause of their acceptation is still the mercie of God in Christ in whome both they and their vnperfecte good qualities are accepted to reward MART. 9. Againe for this purpose Dan. 6. 22. they will not translate according to Chaldee Greeke and Latine Iustice was founde in me but they alter it thus My iustice was found out and other of them My vnguiltinesse was found out to draw it from inherent iustice which was in Daniel FVLK 9. I can but wonder at your impudence and malice which saye so confidently that for this purpose they translated thus Would any man by the iustice or innocencie that was in Daniel or in any iust man feare lest any thing should be detracted from the iustice of Christ whereby Daniel and all iust men are iustified in Gods sight Well let that purpose rest in Gods iudgement as Daniels iustice did when he was shamefully slaundered But what is the fault of the translation According to the Chaldee Greeke and Latine
it should be Iustice is found in me For Greeke and Latine we will not contende because we translate not Daniel out of Greeke and Latine but out of the Chaldee But in good sadnes are you so deepely seene in Chaldee that you will auouch the proper signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be in me A huÌ„dreth boyes in Cambridge knowe that it signifieth as well in Chaldee as in Hebrew to me rather than in me But moste properly haue our translators expressed the phrase in English saying my iustice or vnguiltines was found out for of a vertue inherent Daniel speaketh otherwise Dan. 2. v. 30. to the king 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not by wisedome which is in mee So that heere your quarrell bewrayeth more spite than wit more malice than learning MART. 10. Againe it must needes be a spot of the same infection that they translate thus As Dauid DESCRIBETH the blessednes of the man vnto whome God imputeth righteousnes Rom. 4. 6. as though imputed righteousnes were the description of blessednes They knowe the Greeke doth not signifie to describe I woulde once see them precise in following the Greeke and the Hebrew if not we must looke to their fingers FVLK 10. It must needes come of an high wit to haue such deepe insight into other mens intents purposes But why I praye you is not righteousnes imputed by God c. and so forth as Paule sayth a description of mans blessednes If they had sayd defineth where they saye describeth you would haue made much a doe But can you not allowe this that the Prophet sayth to be a description of mans blessednesse howsoeuer it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not to describe but to speake to saye to pronounce and in effect there is nothing els meant by the worde describeth here vsed but that Dauid pronounceth or setteth forth the blessednesse of man in such wordes You in your translation saye termeth as Dauid termeth which if you meane it not scornefully commeth as neare a definition as describeth the worde which we vse and our describeth is as neare the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as your termeth is to the Latine dicit But looke to our fingers and spare not to tell vs where you see vs goe wide from the Greeke or Hebrew but if you doe nothing but trifle and quarrell as you haue done hetherto be sure we will be bold to beshrew your fingers and hit you on the thumbes now and then also to your discredite CHAP. XII Hereticall translation for SPECIAL FAITH vaine securitie and ONELY FAITH MARTIN AL other meanes of saluation being thus taken away their onely and extreme refuge is Only faith the same not the Christian faith of the articles of the creede such like but a speciall faith confidence wherby euery man must assuredly beleeue that himselfe is the Sonne of God and one of the elect and praedestinate to saluation If he bee not by fayth as sure of this as of Christes incarnation he shall neuer be saued FVLK AL other meanes of saluation being taken away and only faith apprehending the mercie of God in the redeÌ„ption of Iesus Christ being left we haue great sufficient cause to account our selues happy and assured of eternall life because he that hath promised is faithfull also to performe But where you saye that our only faith is not the Christian faith of the articles of the creede you lye without measure impudently for that faith and none other doe we beleue teach and professe And that faith is a speciall faith and confidence in the mercie of God whereof euery man that beleueth doth make a singular confession for himselfe saying I beleeue in God c. And of all thinges contained in that profession of faith that is of forgiuenesse of sinnes resurrection of our bodies and life euerlasting by beliefe and trust in God the Father Almightie maker of heauen and earth and in Iesus Christ his only Sonne our Lorde conceiued borne suffered crucified deade buried descended into hell risen againe and ascended into heauen and in God the holy Ghost by whose gracious and mightie working we are incorporate into the bodie of Christ and made members of his holy Catholike Church which is the communion of Saincts euery Christian man ought to be as certainely persuaded as the things are most true being inwardly taught by the spirite of truth that he is the childe of God and consequently elect predestinate vnto eternall saluation But that a man sâ—â—â—l neuer be saued except he haue such certentie of this faith as the truth of Gods promises doth deserue none of vs doth teach none of vs doth thinke For we know our owne infirmitie we knowe the temptation of Satan neuerthelesse wee acknowledge in our selues and so seeke to persuade all men that these things standing vpon the immoueable pillers of Gods promises who can neyther deceiue nor be deceyued ought to be most certaine vnto vs and for dayly confirmation and increase of this faith all those meanes are of vs diligently to be vsed that God for this purpose in his holy Scripture hath appointed MART. 2. For this heresie they force the Greeke to expresse the very word of assurance and certaintie thus Let vs drawe nighe with a true hart IN ASSVRANCE OF FAITH Heb. 10. v. 22. and Beza Certa persuasione fidei that is with a certaine assured persuasion of faith interpreting him selfe more at large in another place that he meaneth thereby such a persuasion and so effectuall as by which we know assuredly without all doubt that nothing can separate vs from God Which their hereticall meaning maketh their traÌ„slation the lesse tolerable because they neither expresse the Greeke precisely nor intend the true sense of the Apostle they expresse not the Greeke which signifieth properly the fulness and coÌ„plement of any thing and therfore the Apostle ioyneth it sometime with faith els where Hebr. 6. v. 11. with hope with knowledge or Col. 2. v. 2. vnderstaÌ„ding to signifie the fulnes of all three as the vulgar Latin interpreter most sincerely Ro. 4. v. 21. alwaies translateth it to Timothee 2. Tim. 4. he vseth it to signifie the full accomplishment executioÌ„ of his ministerie in euery point Where a man may woÌ„der that Beza to maintaine his conceiued signification of this word translateth here also accordingly thus Ministerij tui plenaÌ„ fidem facito but their more currant Church English Bibles are coÌ„tent to say with the vulgar Latine interpreter fulfil thy ministerie or fulfil thine office to the vtmost And the Greeke fathers do finde no other interpretation Thus when the Greeke signifieth fulnesse of faith rather than assurance or certaine persuasion they translate not the Greeke precisely Againe in the sense they erre much more applying the foresaid wordes to the certaine assured faith that euery man ought to haue as they say of his
owne saluation Whereas the Greeke fathers expound it of the full and assured faith that euery faithfull man must haue of al such things in heauen as he seeth not namely that Christ is ascended thither c. adding further and prouing out of the Apostles wordes next folowing that the Protestants* only faith is not sufficient be it neuer so speciall or assured FVLK 2. Hauing nothing to impugne this cleare interpretatioÌ„ of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but the vnperfect translatioÌ„ of your vulgar Latine interpreter who was both an vnperfect grecian a very barbarous Latinist you are not ashamed to say we force the Greeke to make it signifie assurance whiche all men that are but meanly learned in the Greeke tongue may know that it signifieth assuraÌ„ce or ful certaine persuasioÌ„ Although for the question in controuersie the fulnesse of faith wil proue the certeintie as much in a maÌ„ner as the assuraÌ„ce But that the Greeke signifieth a full and certaine persuasion I report me not only to the best Greeke Dictionaries of this time but also to Budeus who citeth Isocrates out of Trapezuntius for proofe that it is so vsed also interpreteth that of S. Paule Rom. 14. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let euery man be certaine of his owne minde But you haue a doughty argument that it is not onely ioyned with faith but also with hope knowledge and vnderstanding as though there could not be a certaine persuasion and assurance of hope knowledge and vnderstanding yea the assurance of hope dependeth vpon the assuraunce of faith and the assuraunce of faith vpon the certaine persuasion of knowledge and vnderstanding Yea your vulgar interpretor translating 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 4. v. 21. Plenissimè sciens knowing most fully may teach you that it signifieth more than fulnesse for else he should haue saide being fulfilled And better doth Beza expresse the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 2. Tim. 4. than some of our English interpreters whiche say fulfil thy ministry wheras the Apostles meaning is that he should approue the credite and dignitie of his ministerie vnto other men But the Greeke fathers you say find none other interpretation of it and for proofe you cite Ignatius ep ad Smyr which although it be not authenticall yet I see no cause why we may not interprete 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being certainly persuaded in faith loue and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the assurance of faith And so is it translated in Bibliotheca sacra Margarini de la Bigne Plenè instructae in fide charitate cognoui vos absolutè perfectos in fule stabili fully instructed in faith and charitie and I haue knowen you absolutely perfect in a stedfaste faith Chrysostome and Theodoret because you vouch at large I know not what you would shew out of them In Theophylact I finde that he speaketh against all hesitation doubtfulnesse of faith but against the certaine persuasion thereof neuer a worde Ne aliquam inducas in animum tuum haesitationem neque pendeas animi dubij quiddam cogitans Bring not into thy minde any staggering neither be incertaine of thy mind thinking any doubtfull thing But for the signification of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 S. Basil may bee a sufficient witnesse who commonly vseth it for assured and certaine persuasion â—◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 26. Euery worde and deede must be proued byâ—â—â— testimonie of the holy Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the full and certaine persuasion of the goâ—â—â— to the shame of the wicked Againe desin 80. what is the propertie of a faithfull man 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. By such assured persuasioÌ„ to be disposed c. EueÌ„ so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the certaine persuasioÌ„ of godlinesse c. and so in other places And you your selfe confesse as much where you say the Greeke fathers expound it of the full assured faith c. which is enough to iustifie our traÌ„slation Now if the fathers vnderstood this full assured faith only of an historicall faith as you say not of trust and confidence in God it is an other controuersie Our translation is not false although we had a false meaning if it be answereable to the words Neither doth Chrysostome speake of an historicall faith only by certaintie whereof we haue accesse vnto God but also of coÌ„fidence which remissioÌ„ of our sinnes doth cause and that we are made coheires with Christ that we enioy so great loue neither doth he proue that the ProtestaÌ„ts only faith is not sufficient to iustisie But the Apostle sheweth saith he that not faith alone but also a vertuous life is required that a man be not guiltie to him self of malitiousnes For these holy places doe not receiue those men with certaine assuraÌ„ce which are not made such This iudgmeÌ„t of Chrysostome the Protestants do allow of better thaÌ„ the Papists for we know that a godly life is necessarie in them that beleeue to iustification without which they can haue no assurance of faith no nor faith in deede but that which is by aequiuocation called faith such saith as the Deuil and the reprobate may haue MART. 3. Yet do these termes please them exceedingly in so much that for the chosen gift of faith Sap. 3. 14. they translate THE SPECIAL gift of faith and Rom. 8. 38. â—â—ni sure that nothing can separate vs from the loue of God 〈◊〉 though the Apostle were certaine and assured not onely of h 〈…〉 wne saluation but of other mens For to this sense they doe 〈◊〉 translate here whereas in other places out of controuersie they translate the same worde as they should doe I am persuaded they are persuaded c. For who knoweth not that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 importeth onely a probable persuasion They will say that I am sure and I am perswaded is al one Beeing well meant they may indeede signifie alike as the vulgare Latine interpreter doth commonly translate it but in this place of controuersie whether the Apostle were sure of his saluation or no whiche you saye he was yea without reuelation we say he was not here why woulde you translate I am sure and not as in other places I am perswaded but in fauour of your errour by insinuating the termes of sure and assurance and such like as elsewhere you neglect the termes of iuste and iustification In which your secrete things of dishonesties craftinesse as the Apostle calleth it we caÌ„not alwaies vse demonstratioÌ„s to conuince you but yet euen in these things we talke with your coÌ„science and leaue the consideration thereof to the wise reader FVLK 3. Seeing they accompt the booke of Wisdome to be of no authoritie to establish the certaintie of doctrine it is not like they coulde haue any such respecte as you malitiously surmise And yet the translation good and true For what is the choice gifte of faith but a speciall
gift Or dare you say that faith is not a speciall gift of God They say not a special faith but a speciall gift of faith The other quarrel of the translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I am sure is so brutish that when you confesse the vulgare Latine interpreater commonly to translate it Certus sum and that in the end you can vse no demonstration to conuince vs yet stil neuerthelesse you charge our conscience with the secreate thinges of dishonestie That the Apostle was sure of his owne saluation by the testimonie of Gods spirite which is giuen to al his children wee doubt not and that he was sure of the saluation of all Gods elect of whiche it is vnpossible that any should perish And seing the same spirit of adoptiō is giuē to al the children of God which is the earnest of the heauēly inheritance we cā not affirme without blasphemie against Gods truth that any mā ought to discredite the promises of God or the testimonie of his spirite MART. 4. You holde also in this kinde of contronersie that a man must assure himself that his sinnes be forgiuen but in the booke of Eccle. c. 5. v. 5. We reade thus Of thy sin forgiuē be not without feare or as it is in the Greke Of forgiuenes propitiation bee not without feare to heape sin vpon sins Which you translate falsly thus Because thy sin is forgiuen thee be not therfore without feare Is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because thy sin is forgiuen thee You knowe it is not but that wee shoulde bee afraid of the very forgiuenes thereof whether our sin be forgiuen or no or rather whether our sinne shall be forgiuen or no if we heape one sinne vppon an other Whiche seemeth to bee the truest sense of the place by the wordes following as though he should say Be not bold vpon forgiuenes to heap sin vpō sin as thogh God wil easly forgiue c. FVLK 4. We hold that a man when he is truly penitent ought to assure himself that his sins bee forgiuen him because God hath so promised in an hūdred places without iniurie of whose credit we cannot doubt of the performance of his promise But that which the sonne of Syrach speaketh of propitiatiō is meant of the shadowie propitiation by the sacrifices of the lawe which can not assure anie man of the forgiuenesse of his sins by themselues much lesse them that heape sin vpon sin which are neuer truely repentant For vnto true repentaunce is required an hatred of sin a desire purpose of amendment Our translation is as your vulgar Latine not precise to the words of the Greeke but iuste vnto the meaning for the words are concerning propitiation be not without feare and your Latin is De propitiato peccato of sin forgiuen And if you wil reprooue your Latin aswel as our English and say we must be afraid of the very forgiuenes I haue told you that the forgiuenes of God testified by the sacrifices pertained vnto them that be truly penitent and not to hypocrites And where you make it a doubt whether sin shall bee forgiuen or no in them that heape one sin vpon an other we are out of doubte that sin shall neuer bee forgiuen to suche as so continue without true conuersion vnto God MART. 5. I touched before vpon another occasion how you adde to the text making the Apostle say thus Ephes. 3. By whom we haue boldnes and entrance with THE CONFIDEHCE WHICHE Is by the faith of him or as in an other Bible which is al one in the confidence by faith of him The learned and skilful among you in the Greke tong know that this translation is false for twoo causes the one is because the Greeke in that case shoulde be thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an other cause is the point after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that the very simple sincere translation is this wee haue affiaunce and accesse with confidence by the faith of him euen as elsewhere it is said wee haue confidence if our hart reprehend vs not we haue confidence by keping the commaundements by tribulations and afflictions and al good workes hope also giueth vs great confidence Against all which your translation is preiudiciall limiting and defining our confidence toward God to be faith as though wee had no confidence by workes or otherwise FVLK 5. For vnderstanding of the article I haue answered alreadie meane not here to repeate it The point you misse in the Bible 1577. is obserued in that boke which I haue of Richard lugs printing By whom we haue boldenesse and entrance in the confidence by faith of him But it cannot be the confidēce you think but confidence because the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not put before the worde that signifieth confidence But al Englishemen know that our English the may be put and sometime must be put before nounes without any article either in Greeke or Latine And in this place I would not giue a rush to choose whether it be in or out for anye sense that it chaungeth What confidence we haue by a good conscience by suffring tribulation and by al good workes it skilleth not for this question so it be determined that we haue no confidence in the merites of a good conscience of suffering of al good works that we can do to haue boldenesse and entrance vnto God But of merites we haue spoken before in their proper place MART. 6. For this confidēce by faith only Beza translateth so wilfully peruersly that either you were ashamed to folow him or you lacked a cōmodious English word correspondēt to his Latine If I haue all faith saith the Apostle and haue not charitie I am nothing totam fidem saith Beza I had rather translate than omnem fidem because the Apostle meaneth not al kind of faith to witte the faith that iustifieth but he meaneth that if a man haue the faith of Christs omnipotencie or of any other article of the Creede or of al wholy entirely perfectly that is nothing without charitie This is Bezaes tota fides whole faith thinking by this translation to exempt frō the Apostles words their special iustifying faith and wrastling to that purpose in his annotatiōs against Pighius and other Catholike Doctours Whereas euery man of smal skil may see that the Apostle nameth al faith as he doth al knowlege and al mysteries comprehending al sortes of the one and of the other al kinde of knowledge al kind of mysteries al faith whatsoeuer Christian Catholike historical or special which two later are Heretical termes newely deuised FVLK 6. When your spightfull and dogged malice cannot reprooue our English translation then wee muste aunsweare for Bezaes Latine who hath sufficiently aunswered for himselfe to them that vnderstande and liste to reade him In the place mentioned by you hee chooseth to say totam fidem rather than omnem
because it apeareth by the effects that he speaketh of faith as it was a speciall gift of working of myracles of which effectes he nameth one remouing of mountaines And that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so taken namely for the perfection of one kynde not the vniuersall comprehension of al kindes he bringeth you example Ro. 7. v. 8. and elsewhere oftentimes But if it shoulde be taken as you say all knowledge all mysteries is generally to be taken yet he telleth you this separation is but vppon an impossible supposition for iustifying faith can neuer bee separated from charitie but if it might be separated it shoulde not profite to iustifie The Angels of heauen can not preach an other gospel but if they did preach an other gospel they should be accursed A great argument I promise you against iustification by faith onely that a solitarie dead or barraine faith doth not iustifie MART. 7. And I woulde haue anye of the Bezites giue me a sufficient reason why hee translated totam fidem and not also totam scientiam vndoubtedly there is no cause but the heresie of speciall and onely faith And againe why he translateth Iaco. 2. 22. Thou seest that faith was administra a helper of his workes and expoundeth it thus Faith was an efficient cause and fruitful of good workes Wheras the Apostles wordes be plaine that faith wrought togither with his workes yea and that his fayth was by workes made perfecte This is impudent handling of Scripture to make workes the fruite onely and effecte of fayth which is your heresie FVLK 7. If you dare draw foorth your pen against Beza and demande an answere of himselfe although he hath already giuen you a sufficiēt reason to induce that the Apostle speaketh not of faith as generally as of knowledge because by an example of remouing mountaines he restraineth it to one kinde of faith As for the other question why he translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iam. 2. v. 22. was an helper me thinke you should make best answere your selfe who not long since by force of that word woulde needes prooue that men were helpers of God chap. 10. sect 6. Haue you so soone forgotten your own voice and is this impudent handling of the scripture to translate as you your selfe in an other case thoughe impertinently did contend the word to signifie But works you wil not haue to be the fruit only and effect of faith because the Apostle saieth that faith wrought togither with his workes and by workes his faith was made perfite as thoughe apples are not the fruite of the tree because the tree doth beare them and by them if they be good the tree is made a good tree MART. 8. Which heresie also must needes be the cause that to suppresse the excellencie of charitie which the Apostle giueth it aboue faith or any other gift whatsoeuer in these wordes And yet I shew you a more excellent way 1. Cor. 12. v. 31. he in one edition of the new Testament in the yeare 1556. translateth thus Behold moreouer also I shew you a way most diligently What cold stuffe is this howe impertinent In an other edition an 1565. he mended it thus And besides I shew you a way to excellencie In neither of both expressing the comparison of preeminence excellencie that charitie hath in the Apostles words and in all the chapter following Wherein you did well for your credite not to followe him no not your Bezites them selues but to translate after our vulgar Latine interpreter as it hath alwayes bene read vnderstoode in the Church FVLK 8. The rarenesse of the phrase 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. as al indifferēt men wil iudge rather than any mind to suppresse the excellencie of charitie caused Beza to giue dyuerse interpretations of that place of whiche yet the latter more commendeth the excellencie of charitie than the vulgar Latin or our Eaglishe translation whiche expoundeth it as the Latine doth for if charitie be the way to excellencie it is a greater commendation thereof than to saye it is a more excellent waye than other giftes whereof he spake last as of healing of tongues of interpretations c. MART. 9. Luther was so impudent in this case that because the Apostle spake not plà inely ynough for onely faith he thrust only into the text of his translation as himself witnesseth you durst not hitherto presume so farre in this question of onely faith though in other controuersies you haue done the like as is shewed in their places But I wil aske you a smaller matter which in words shew you may perhaps easily answer but in your conscience there wil remaine a gnawing worme In so many places of the Gospell where our Sauiour requireth the peoples faith when he healed them of corporall diseases only why do you so gladly translate thus Thy faith hath saued thee rather than thus thy faith hath healed thee or made thee whole is it not by ioyning these wordes togither to make it sound in English eares that faith saueth or iustifieth a man in so much that Beza noteth in the margent thus fides saluat that is faith saueth your Geneua Bibles in that place where it can not be taken for faith that iustifieth because it is not the parties faith but her fathers that Christ required there also trāslate thus Beleeue only she shall be saued Which translation though very false and impertinent for iustifying faith as you seeme to acknowledge by translating it otherwise in your other Bibles yet in deede you must needes mainteine and hold it for good whiles you alleage this place for onely faith as is euident in your writings FVLK 9. That which Luther might wel do as an interpretor or expounder it was much boldnesse for him to doe as a translator but seeing he him selfe hath redressed his owne offence wee haue lesse to say for him and you against him For our additions except suche as the necessitie of our English phrase dothe require for vnderstanding you slaunder vs to say that wee haue in any controuersies done the like The question you aske is not worthy any answere why wee translate thy faith hath saued thee c. seing wee vse all these wordes indifferently healing making safe and making whole as in S. Iames we say Can faith saue him And it is al one to say thy faith hath saued thee and thy fayth hath made thee whole But you say wee alledge this place for onely faith iustifying citing the answeres of Maister Gough M. Tomson against Feckenham I thinke you lie as in other places very commonly And yet an argument though not a plaine testimonie may be taken out of these places for only faith iustifying Seing Christ was not a phisition for the body but to teach mē that he was a Physition for the soule and as he healed the diseased in bodie onely by faith so hee cureth the sickuesse of
the soule by the same instrument of faith onely which by other places may be more directly prooued and here also in some sorte is insinuated MAR. 10. This then you see is a fallacie wheÌ„ faith only is required to the helth of the body as in many such places thogh not in all there by translation to make it sounde a iustifying faith as thogh faith only were required to the helth of the soule Wheras that faith was of Christes omnipotencie onely and power which Beza confesseth may be in the diuels themselues and is farre from the faith that iustifieth If you saye the Greeke signifieth as you translate it doth so in deede but it signifieth also very commonly to bee healed corporally as by your owne translation in these places Marc. 5. v. 28. Marc. 6. v. 36. Luc. 8. v. 36. v. 51. Where you translate I shal be whole They were healed Hee was healed She shal bee made whole And why do you here translate so because you know to be saued importeth rather an other thing to wit saluation of the soule and therefore when faith is ioyned withall you translate rather saued than healed though the place be meant of bodilie health onely to insinuate by all meanes your iustification by only faith FVLK 10. It is no fallacie from the health of the bodie to ascende higher to the health of the soule but that direct and plaine way by whiche Christe himselfe would be knowne to be sauiour of the worlde not of the bodie onely but of the bodie and soule togither And commonly his bodily cures were ioyned with forgiuenesse of sinnes whych are causes of al maladies and with health of their soules whose bodies were made safe As for iustification by faith only we meane none otherwise to insinuate it in this place than Christ him self doth by doing miracles in giuing health of the bodie to testifie that he is the onely authour of the saluation of mens soules CHAP. XIII Heretical translation against PENANCE and SATISFACTION Martin VPon the heresie of onely faith iustifying and sauing a man followeth the deniall of all penance and satisfaction for sinnes Which Beza so abhorreth Annot. in Mat. 3. v. 2 that he maketh protestation that he auoydeth these termes Poenitentia and Poenitentiam agere of purpose and that he will alwayes vse for them in translating the Greeke wordes resipiscentia and resipiscere Which he doth obserue perhaps but that sometimes he is worse than his promise translating most falsely and heretically for resipiscentia resipiscentes so that your English Bezites them selues are ashamed to translate after him Who otherwise followe his rule for the most part translating resipiscentia amendement of life and resipiscite amende your liues and the other English Bibles when they translate best say repentance and repent but none of them all once haue the wordes penance and doe penance Which in most places is the very true translation according to the verye circumstance of the text and vse of the Greeke word in the Greeke Church and the auncient Latine translation thereof and all the fathers reading thereof and their expositions of the same Which foure pointes I thinke not amisse briefly to proue that the Reader may see the vse and signification of these wordes which they of purpose will not expresse to auoyd the termes of penance and doing penance Fulke IF by penance you meane satisfaction for sinnes by any suffering of ours we abhorre your penance as an horrible blasphemy against the bloud of Christ. And for that cause Beza as hath bene shewed before vseth the worde resipiscentia rather than poenitentia because the Greeke word signifieth not onely a sorow for sinne but also a purpose of amendment of life We in English vse the worde repentance or amendment of life which worde of repentance you vse also sometimes when it pleaseth you or when you can not for shame vse your popish terme of doing penance The cause why we neuer vse that word penance is for that you meane not thereby that which the Scripture calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but a certaine punishment taken vpon men for satisfaction of their sinnes vnto God which is abhominable for all Christian eares to heare which acknowledge that the bloud of Christ onely purgeth vs from all sinne But in foure pointes you will proue if you can that we should translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to do penance MART. 2. First that the circumstance of the text doth giue it so to signifie we reade in S. Mathew cap. 11. v. 21. If in Tyre and Sidon had bene wrought the miracles that haue bene wrought in you they had done penance in hairecloth or sackecloth and ashes long agoe And in S. Luke cap. 10. v. 13. they had done penance fitting in sackcloth and ashes I beseech you these circumstances of sackecloth and ashes adioyned doe they signifie penance and affliction of the bodye or onely amendement of life as you would haue the word to signifie S. Basil sayth in Psal. 29. Sackcloth maketh for penance For the fathers in olde time sitting in sackcloth and ashes did penance Vnlesse you will translate S. Basil also after your fashion whome you can not any way translate but the sense must needes be penance and doing penance Againe S. Paule sayth You were made sorie to penance or to repentance say which you will and The sorowe which is according to God worketh penance or repentance vnto saluation Is not sorow and bitter mourning and affliction partes of penance Did the incestuous man whome Saint Paule excommunicated and afterward absolued him because of his exceeding sorow and teares for feare lest he might be ouerwhelmed with sorow did he I say change his mind onely or amend his life as you translate the Greeke worde and interprete repentance did he not penance also for his fault enioyned of the Apostle when Saint Iohn the Baptist sayth and Saint Paule exhorteth the like Doe fruites worthy of penance or as you translate meete for repentance Doe they not plainly signifie penitentiall workes or the workes of penance which is the very cause why Beza rather translated in those places Doe the fruites meete for them that amend their liues or giue vs some other good cause Oye Bezites why your maister doth so foâ—ly falsifie his translation FVLK 2. Such is your malicious frowardnes that you will not vnderstande resipiscentia repentance or amendement of life a sorow or griefe of mind for the life past which is testified sometimes by outward signes of sackcloth and ashes fasting and humbling of mens bodies as in the texts of Math. 11. and Luc. 10. and diuerse other is expressed But shew vs that the wearing of sackcloth and ashes is a satisfaction for the life past or any part of amends to Gods iustice or else you do but trifle and waste the time But S. Basil sayth that sackcloth maketh for penance c.
prooue it to be good and lawfull I will reuoke my termes Page 142. where he sayeth that bread and wine of the sacrament haue no promise I tell him he lyeth like an arrogant hypocrite for bread and wine haue as good promise in the one sacrament as water in the other Pag. 178. where M. Calfebill had distinguished traditions into some necessarie some contrary to the worde some indifferent I say Martiall like an impudent asse calleth on him to shewe in what scripture doctor or councell he findeth this distinction of traditions As though a man might not make a true distinction in disputation but the same must bee founde in so many wordes in scripture doctor or councell when he himselfe cannot denie but the distinction is true and euery part to be founde in the scriptures doctors and councelles Pag. 133. I call Martiall blockeheade and shamelesse asse because he would proue that the spirite of God is not iudge of the interpretation of the scriptures because Paule and Barnabas in the controuersie of circumcision went not to the worde and spirit but to the Apostles and elders at Ierusalem Also pag. 213. I call him asseheade because he sayth that M. Calfehill condemneth his doctrine of only faith iustifying when he affirmeth that outwarde profession is necessarie for euery Christian man Likewise pag. 215. where Martiall would learne whether M. Calfehill kneeling downe before his father to aske him blessing did not commit Idolatrie I say hee is an asse that can not make a difference betweene ciuill honour and religious worship Pag. 202. I call not onely Martiall but all Papistes shamelesse dogges and blasphemous Idolaters which mainetaine and make vowes to Images which trauell to them and offer vp both prayers and sacrifices of candels money Iewels and other thinges vnto Images Whose Idolles haue giuen answeres haue wagged their heades and lippes Pag. 198. I say he rayleth vpon Caluine like a ruffion and slandereth him like a deuill because hee sayeth a shippe would not carrie the peeces of the crosse that are shewed in so many places which yet is confirmed by testimonie of Erasmus Pag. 170. where Martiall goeth about to proove that the sacramentes are no helpes of our fayth I said Did you euer heare such a filthy hogge grunt so beastly of the holie sacramentes that they should be no helpes of our faith These are as many of the speeches noted by the censurer as I can finde wherein I trust the indifferent reader weighing vpon what cause they were vttered will not so lightly condemne me for a rayler seeing to rayle is of priuate malice to reuile them that deserue no reproch and not of zeale in defence of truth to vse vehement and sharpe speeches as all the prophets and the mildest spirited men that euer were haue vsed against the aduersaries thereof But the most heynous accusation is behinde that I call Staphylus a counsellor to an Emperour rascall I might answere as S. Paul did when hee was reprooued for calling the high priest painted wall Brethren I knewe not y t he was an Emperors counsellor or in very deede I know nothing in him worthy to be an honest mans counsellour But seeing it pleased an Emperour to accept him it is as great a fault as if an enemie of meane condition should call an English counsellour rascall So sayth our sharpe censurer But if he meane those that be of the Queenes maiesties priuie counsell I will not say he playeth the rascall but either the ignorant foole or the malicious vile person to coÌ„pare y â— Apostata Staphylus euen in his counsellership with the meanest of their honors For they that knowe the maner of the princes of Germanie and of other foreine princes can testifie that personages of meane estate only being learned in y e lawes are accepted of the Emperour and other states as their counsellours whose counsell perhapes they neuer vse but may if it please them as of counsellors at lawe So that one man is counseller to the Emperour and to many other princes As for example Lutolphus Schraderus doctor of both lawes was ordinary professor in the Vniuersitie of Frankeforde and counsellour of the Emperor of the Elector Marquis of Brandeburge of the dukes of Brunswich Luneburge Megelburge and of many other princes of Germanie This was a very great and wise man but Cassanaeus in Cat. glor â—â—â—di part 10. Consid. 41. sayth that euery simple aduocate did vse to call him selfe the kinges counseller of Fraunce before order was taken that none should vsurpe that title except he were called vnto some office in the courtes And speaking of such as were counsellers in office in his time of whose dignity hee writeth much he complayneth that they were promoted vnto that dignitie in parliamentes by meanes of money or some other vnknowen meanes part 7. Conf. 13. Such a noble counseller was Staphylus hauing some knowledge in the lawes being preferred to that title by the Papists of fauour more than of worthinesse to giue him some shadowe of countenaunce when hee became an Apostata from true religion and from those Christian princes and noble men by whom he was before vpholden And yet in trueth if the printer had not mistaken my writing I called him Renegate and not rascall as before I called him beastly Apostata Perhaps the censurer will say I mende the matter well to call an Emperors counseller a beastly Apostata But so might I haue done though he had beene an Emperour himselfe for what else was Iulian the Emperor but a beastly Apostata or Renegate from Christian religion which once he professed Yea such an Apostata is worse than a beast for he declareth himselfe thereby to bee a reprobate Therefore the Christians in his time whereas the church had alwayes vsed to pray for heathen tyrantes that helde the empyre and made hauocke of the church by persecution contrariwise prayed against this Apostata that God would confound him and shorten his time Yea the godly constant Bishops did openly inueigh against him as Mares Bishop of Chalcedon which openly called him impious Atheist Apostata And when Iulian counterfaiting mildenes did nothing but reuile him by his blindenesse saying the Galilean thy God cannot cure thee he answered I thanke my God Christ that I am blinde that I might not see one so voyde of godlinesse as thou art Therefore Staphylus being but an Emperours counseller as he was â—â—y endure to heare worse for his Apostasie than I haue spoken against him The quarell of wordes being ended it is time to goe to the matter First pag. 14. of his aunswer to Maister Charkes preface he noteth that D. Fulke against Bristowes Mot. pa. 98. findeth that it is euident by scripture that heretikes may bee burned against Luther That blasphemous heretikes are to be put to death I finde in scripture by the lawe of blasphemers Leu. 24. and by the lawe of false prophetes Deut. 13. neither doth Luther I thinke
of the Apostles Among so many argumentes and authorities cited for proofe you can finde nothing but Fulke faith bluntly Ierome vntruely ascribeth that tradition to the Apostles Sed perge mentiri S. Chrysostome is alleâ—ged saying that the Apostles decreed that in the sacrifice of the â—â—â—tar there should be made prayer for the departed Fulke where he sayth it was decreed by the Apostles c. he must pardon vs for crediting him because he cannot shewe it out of the actes and writinges of the Apostles If I had added none other argument this had beene sufficient for vs to for beare crediting any thing of the Apostles whereof we haue not the holy ghost in their writinges to be witnesse But you shall heare what I oppose against Chrysostome beside this Against pag. 303. it followeth immediatlie vpon these wordes noted by M. Censurer And wee will be bolde to charge him with his owne saying Hom. de Adam Heus Sâ—â—is sufficere c. Wee thinke it suffiseth ynough what soeuer the writinges of the Apostles haue taught vs according to the foresay de rules insomuch that we count it not at all catholike whatsoeuer shall appeare contrarie to the rules appointed And againe in Gen. H. 58. Vides in quantam c. Thou seest into howe great absurditie they fall which will not followe the canon of holy scripture but permitte all thinges to their owne cogitations But if we be further vrged we will alleadge that which hee sayeth in Euang. Ioan. H. 58. Quisacra c. he that vseth not the holy scripture but clymeth another way that is by a way not allowed is a theefe We may be as bolde with Chrysostome as hee sayd he would be with Paule himselfe in 2. ad Tim. Hom. 2. Plus aliquid dicam c. I will say somewhat more we must not be ruled by Paule himselfe if he speake anie thing that is his owne and any thing that is humane but we must obey the Apostle when he carrieth Christ speaking in him Wherefore seeing it is certaine that by testimonie of Iustinus Martyr that there was no mention of the dead in the celebration of the Lordes supper for more than an hundred yeares after Christ we must not beleeue Chrysostome without scripture affirming that it was ordeyned so by the Apostles As though this place had not beene sufficient to conuince your impudent lying you goe forwarde and say that page 362. and 363. of the same booke I aunswere to diwerse fathers alleaged together beside Chrysostome for the same purpose Who is witnesse that this is the tradition of the Apostles you will say Tertullian Cyprian Austen Ierome and a great many more But I would learne why the Lorde would not haue this set forth by Matthew Marke Luke and Paule Why they were not chosen scribes hereof rather then Tertullian Cyprian Ierome Austen and other such as you nâ—me But this is a counterfaite institution and fained tradition Heere you note in the margent a proude question which is not so right as if I should note against it a proude censure For it is a question that may be demaunded in humilitie why the Lord if it were his pleasure that the dead should be prayed for at the communion as a thing necessarie for them and dutifull for vs would not reueale so much by those witnesses that are aboue all exception rather than by such as are all manifestly conuicted of errors as you Papistes cannot denie But because neuera Papist of you all is able to answere this question to the satisfaction of any mans doubtfull conscience you thinke best to reiect it and say it is a proude question As though it were pride for any man to seeke confirmation of his faith against so iust a cause of doubt But in truth my wordes are more full than you alleage them against the pretended institution If it be lawfull for me once to pose the Papists as you doe often the protestantes I woulde learne why the Lorde would not haue this doubtlesse institution and as you take it the most necessarie vse of the sacrament plainely or at the leastwise obscurely set foorth by Matthewe Marke Luke or Paule which all haue set foorth the storie of the action of Christ the institution of the sacrament and the ende or vse of the same If it were not meete at all to be put in writing why was it disclosed by Tertullian Cyprian Augustine c If it were meete to be put in writing why were not those chosen scribes Matthew Marke Luke and Paul worthy of all credite rather appointed for it than Tertullian Cyprian Augustine and such as you name But against this counter faite institution and fayned tradition S. Paule cryeth with open mouth vnto the Corinthians 1. Cor. 11. That which I deliuered to you I receiued of the Lorde c. which wrote to that effect Last of all you say that being vrged by the like I discredite all antiquitie saying It is a common thing with the ancient writers to defende euerie ceremonie which was vsed in their time by tradition of the Apostles In deede the wordes are mine the occasion as of all â—he rest frandulently and falsely omitted For vpon occasion of Chrysostome alleaged to proue that mention of the dead was made at the coÌ„munion by tradition of the Apostles for which I remit him to mine answere of Allen lib. 2. ca. 5. I ad moreouer these wordes If we should admit all thinges to be ordeyned of the Apostles which some of the olde writers doe ascribe to their traditions we should receiue many thinges which euen the Papistes themselues do not obserue As that it is a wicked thing to fast on sunday or to pray kneeling that oblations are to be made for mens birth dayes c. Which with diuerse other superstitions Tertullian fathereth vppon the tradition of the Apostles as well as oblations for the dead De cor Mil. Hearing therefore such manifest vnthruthes are fathered vpon the Apostles tradition by most ancient writers what certainety can we haue of their tradition without their writing By this the reader may see howe honestly and truely you say there are set before you a payre of balances with Charke and Fulke in one ende and Cyprian Origen Tertullian Basill c. in an other ende And Fulke opposeth himselfe against them all Wheâ—â—as in euerie place by you noted hee opposeth either the holy scriptures or other auncient writers or the same writers themselues or euident and manifest reason to proue that such thinges are vntruly fathered vpon the Apostles tradition Last of all for your farewell you charge D. Fulke to affirme that the booke of the Maccabees was written with a prophane and Ambitious spirite Against purg pag. 209. In deede in that place among many other reasons which I bring to prooue that storie not to bee the Canon of the scriptures I say that hee maketh a verie prophane preface ambitiously commending his trauels and shewing