you to proue Forsooth that his aduersaries do confesse all the olde fathers to be on their side and to haue erred with them as Fulke doth of S. Ambrose Austen Tertullian Origen Chrysostom Gregorie and Bede by name with most reprochefull and contemptuous words against them This is spoken generally as though we confesse all the doctors to bee on their side in euery controuersie which we doe not acknowledge to be true in any one although many of the later sort do in some part fauour one or two errours of theirs among an hundreth But let vs examine his prooues which seeme to be verie plentifull yet of nine quotations I must needes strike out two page 306. and 279. because in them is not one syllable of my writing but all of Allens In the pages 315. 316. is nothing more contained touching this matter than I haue alreadie declared There remaineth nowe page 349. where I say touching a rule of S. Augustine which hee giueth to trie faith and doctrine of the Church onely by the scripture that if he had as diligently followed it in examining the common error of his time of prayer for the dead as he did in beating downe the schisme of the Donatistes or the heresie of the Pelagians hee woulde not so blindly haue defended that which by holy scripture he was not able to maintaine as he doeth in that booke De Cura pro mortuis agenda and else where What most reprochefull or contemptuous wordes are here against S. Augustine Seeing the holie scripture is a light shining in a darke place as S. Peter sayeth who so goeth without it must walke blindly which I say in commendation of the light of the scripture not in contempt of Augustines reason whome as I may not honour with contempt of the trueth so when he is a patrone maintainer of the truth I honour him from my heart Likewise page 78. Saint Ambrose is named but nothing acknowledged to fauour any popish errour Augustine is againe noted speaking of the amending fire whereof he hath no ground but in the common errour of his time and whereof he affirmeth sometimes that it is a matter that may bee doubted of sometimes that there is no third place at all Wherefore this place hath neither reprochful wordes nor confession of any constant opinion of Augustine inclining to your errours Then let vs passe to the next place which is page 435. where concerning this matter I haue written thus I denie that any of the auncient fathers in Christs time or scholers to his Apostles or within one or two hundreth yeares after Christ except one that had it of Montanus the heretike as he had more things beside in any one word maintained your cause for purgatorie or prayers for the dead Secondly of them that maintained prayers for the dead the most confessed they had it not out of the scriptures but of tradition of the Apostles and custome of the church therefore they are not to be compared vnto vs in better vnderstanding of the scriptures for that point which they denyed to be receiued of the scriptures Thirdly those of the auncient fathers that agreed with you in any part of your assertion for none within 400. yeares was wholly of your errour notwithstanding manie excellent gifts that they had yet maintained other errors beside that and about that diffented one from another and sometime the same man from himselfe and that is worst of all from manifest truth of the holy scriptures Therefore neither is their erronious interpretation in this matter to be receiued nor M. Allens wise iudgement of vs to bee regarded Here also I appeale to the iudgement of indifferent readers what confession I haue made of the fathers to be on their side or what reprochefull or contemptuous wordes I haue vsed against them for dissenting from vs. The next place is quoted page 247. where I say against Allen boasting of auncient testimonies for prayer for the dead I will not denie but you haue much drosse and dregges of the later sort of doctors the later the fuller of drosse But bring me any worde out of Iustinus Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus or any that did write within one hundreth yeares after Christ that aloweth prayer or almes for the dead I will say you are as good as your word Here except he will cauil that I acknowledge much drosse and dregs to be in the later sort of doctors I knowe not what hee findeth that hath any shadowe of his slander But the trueth must be confessed that the pure waters of life are to be founde onely in the worde of God and beside that the best and purest liquors that are to bee seene are not cleare from all dregges and drosse of humane error and frailtie In the next page Origen deliuered from the shamefull mangling of Allens allegation is shewed plainly to be an enimie of purgatorie prayer for the dead in that he affirmeth the day of a Christian mans death to be the ende of all sorrowe and the beginning of all felicitie There remaineth nowe the last place quoted page 194. where I acknowledge that Gregorie Bernard Bede vpon the text Matth. 12. are of opinion that sinnes not remitted in this world may be remitted in the world to come But how happeneth it say I that Chrysostome Ieronyme which both interpreted that place could gather no such matter although they otherwise allowed prayer for the dead The reason must needes be because the errour of purgatorie growing so much the stronger as it was neerer to the full reuelation of Antichrist Gregorie and Bede sought not the true meaning of Christ in this scripture but the confirmation of their plausible error Here is all the confessions most reprochefull contemptuous wordes that are conteined in so manie of those places as he hath quoted in which I will not tarrie to rehearse how manie vntruthes he hath vttered against mee but wish the indifferent reader to consider that if he be so bolde to slander mee concerning a booke printed in English by which he may be conuinced of euerie simple reader what dare he not aduouch of matters done and past at Rome whither none may trauell to trie out his tretcherie but he is in manifest danger neuer to returne the answere of his message From this Popish Parson whatsoeuer his name be I must passe to another gentleman namelesse in deede but not blamelesse yea much more blame worthie than the other who among so manie and so great flanders as it is wonder howe they could bee conueyed into so small a booke against our prince her lawes her councellors her iudges her officers the nobilitie the comminaltie the church the gouernors the pastors the people thereof against all states persons of the land in whome there is religion towardes God ioyned with dutie towarde their prince and countrie hath founde yet some emptie corners where he might place me in particular And
therefore in controuersie with other of the same sort are sometimes called Hagiographa holy writings as of S. Hierom praefat in lib. Tobiae sometime Ecclesiastica Ecclesiastical writings and so are they called of Ruffinus Because sayth he they were appointed by our Elders to be read in the Churches but not to be brought forth to confirme authoritie of faith but other Scriptures they named Apocryphall which they would not haue to be read in the Churches So sayth S. Hierom in praefat in Prouerb Euen as the Church readeth in deede the bookes of Iudith Tobias and the Machabees but yet receaueth them not among the Canonical Scriptures so let it read these two bookes of Ecclesiasticus and wisedom for the edifying of the people not for the confirmation of the authoritie of Ecclesiastical doctrines These auncient writers shal answer for our seruice booke that although it appoint these writings to be read yet it doth not appoint them to be read for Canonicall Scriptures Albeit they are but sparingly read by order of our seruice booke which for the Lordes day other festiuall daies commonly appointeth the first lesson out of the Canonicall Scriptures And as for superstition although M. Whitaker say that some one thing sauoreth of I know not what superstition he doth not by and by condemne the whole booke for superstitious and altogither vnworthy to be read neither can he thereby be proued a Puritane or a disgracer of the order of dayly seruice MART. 10. As for partes of bookes doe they not reiect certaine peeces of Daniel and of Hester because they are not in the Hebrew which reason S. Augustine reiecteth or because they were once doubted of by certaine of the fathers by which reason some part of S. Marke and S. Lukes Gospell might nowe also be called in controuersie specially if it be true which M. Whitakers by a figuratiue speech more than insinuateth That he can not see by what right that which once was not in credit should by time winne authoritie Forgetting him selfe by by in the very next lines admitting S. Iames epistle though before doubted of for Canonicall Scriptures vnles they receiue it but of their curtesie so may refuse it when it shall please them which must needes be gathered of his wordes as also many other notorious absurdities contradictions and dumbe blanckes Which onely to note were to confute M. Whitakers by him selfe being the answerer for both Vniuersities FVLK 10. As for peeces of Daniel of Hester we reiect none but only we discerne that which was written by Daniel in deede from that which is added by Theodotion the false Iew that which was written by the spirit of God of Esther from that which is vainly added by some Greekish counterfecter But the reason why we reiect those patches you say is because they are not in the Hebrew which reason S. Augustine reiecteth Here you cite S. Augustine at large without quotation in a matter of controuersie But if we may trust you that S. Augustine reiecteth this reason yet we may be bold vpon S. Hieroms authoritie to reiect whatsoeuer is not found in the canō of the Iewes written in Hebrew or Chaldee For whatsoeuer was such S. Hierom did thrust through with a spit or obeliske as not worthy to be receyued Witnes hereof S. Augustine him selfe Epist. ad Hier. 8. 10. in which he disswaded him from translating the Scriptures of the olde Testament out of the Hebrew tongue after the 70. Interpreters whose reasons as they were but friuolous so they are derided by S. Hierom who being learned in the Hebrew Chaldee tongues refused to be taught by Augustine that was ignorant in them what was to be done in translations out of them Also Hieronym him selfe testifieth that Daniel in the Hebrew hath neither the story of Susanna nor the hymne of the 3. children nor the fable of Bel the Dragon which we saith he because they are dispersed throughout the whole world haue added setting a spit before them which thrusteth them through lest we should seeme among the ignorant to haue cut of a great part of the booke The like he writeth of the vaine additions that were in the vulgar edition vnto the booke of Esther both in the Preface after the ende of that which he translated out of the Hebrew There are other reasons also beside the authoritie of S. Hierom that moue vs not to receiue them As that in the storie of Susanna Magistrats iudgement of life death are attributed to the Iewes being in captiuitie of Babylon which hath no similitude of truth Beside out of the first chapter of the true Daniel it is manifest that Daniel being a young man was caried captiue into Babylon in the dayes of Nebucadnezer but in this counterfect storie Daniel is made a young child in the time of Astyages which reigned immediatly before Cyrus of Persia. Likewise in the storie of Bel and the Dragon Daniel is said to haue liued with the same king Cyrus and after when he was cast into the lyons denne the Prophet Habacuck was sent to him out of Iurie who prophecied before the first comming of the Chaldees and therefore could not be aliue in the daies of Cyrus which was more than 70 yeares after The additions vnto the booke of Esther in many places bewray the spirite of man as that they are contrary to the truth of the story containing vaine repetitions amplifications of that which is contained in the true historie that which most manifestly conuinceth the sorgerie that in the epistle of Artaxerxes cap. 16. Haman is called a Macedonian which in the true storie is termed an Agagite that is an Amalekite whereas the Macedonians had nothing to doe with the Persians many yeares after the death of Esther Haman I omit that in the ca. 15. ver 12. the author maketh Esther to lie vnto the king in saying that his countenance was ful of all grace or else he lyeth him selfe v. 17. where he saith the king beheld her in the vehemēcy of his anger that he was exceding terrible As for other reasons which you suppose vs to follow because these parcels were once doubted of by certaine of the fathers it is a reason of your owne making and therefore you may confute it at your pleasure But if that be true which Maister Whitaker by a figuratiue speech doth more than insinuate parte of S. Markes and S. Lukes Gospell may also be called in controuersie Why what saith M. VVhitaker Marie that he can not see by what right that which once was not in credit should by tyme winne authoritie But when I pray you was any part of S. Marke or S. Luke out of credit if any part were of some person doubted of doth it follow that it was not at al in credit you reason profoundly and gather very necessarily As likewise that he forgetteth him selfe in the very next lines admitting
corruption But if it shall be euidently proued that they shrinke from the same also and translate an other thing and that wilfully and of full intention to countenaunce their false religion and wicked opinions making the Scriptures to speake as they list then we trust the indifferent reader for his owne soules sake will easily see and conclude that they haue no feare of God no reuerence of the Scriptures no conscience to deceiue their readers he will perceiue that the Scriptures make against them which they so peruert and corrupt for their purpose that neither the Hebrue nor Greeke text is for them which they dare not translate truly and sincerely that their cause is naught which needeth suche fâ—ule shiftes that they must needes knowe all this and therefore doe wilfully against their conscience and consequently are obstinate heretikes FVLK 39. We craue no pardon if it can be proued that wee haue wilfully translated an other thing than is contained in the Hebrue and Greeke to maintaine any false religion or wicked opinion Prouided alwayes that if any translatour or all the translatours haue ignorantly erred in misunderstanding any worde or phrase of the Hebrue or Greeke text that if it may be plainly shewed vnto them they acknowledging the fault they may not be charged with hereticall corruption from which it is certaine their intention was most free MART. 40. And the more to vnderstand their miserie and wretchednesse before we enter to examine their translations marke and gather of all that which I haue sayed in this Preface their manifolde flightes and iumpes from one shift to an other and howe Catholike writers haue pursued and chased them and followed them driuen them euen to this extreame refuge seely couert of false translation where also they must of necessitie yeeld or deuise some new euasion which we can not yet imagine FVLK 40. Hitherto I hope the indifferent reader will confesse that you haue driuen vs to no iumpes nor shiftes but onely vttered your owne malicious and vnlearned quarrels And howe Popishe writers haue pursued and chased vs to extreame refuge and seely couert of false translation let it appeare by the learned answeres of M. Iewell M. Horne M. Nowell M. Bridges M. Calfhill and others that I speake nothing of mine owne simple labours who being one of the meanest hauing confuted tenne or twelue of your Popishe treatises can receiue no replye of any man but onely of poore Bristowe to whome in this respecte I confesse my selfe more beholding than to all the Papistes beside sauing that I haue reioyned to him almost two yeares agoe and yet I heare not of his answere MART. 41. First we are wont to make this offer as we thinke most reasonable and indifferent that forasmuch as the Scriptures are diuersely expounded of vs of them they neither be tied to our interpretation nor we to theirs but to put it to the arbitrement iudgement of the auncient fathers of generall Councels of vniuersall custome of times and places in the Catholike Church No say they we will be our owne iudges and interpreters or follow Luther if we be Lutherans Caluin if we be Caluinists and so forth FVLK 41. For expounding of the Scriptures we will not refuse the arbitrement and iudgement of the auncient fathers of generall Councels of vniuersall custome of times and places in the Catholike church for this you say is your offer which was neuer refused of vs though you most falsely affirme that we say we will be our owne iudges and interpretours or followe Luther if we be Lutherans Caluine if we be Caluinistes c. Who euer sayed so you shamelesse sclauâ—derer What haue you differing from vs Wherein you haue the iudgement of the auncient fathers of generall Councels of vniuersall custome of times and places in the Catholike church Vnlesse perhappes you meane some wretched sophistrie by disioyning these that you here seeme to ioyne togither And if you so doe we must first aske you whether you your selues in all expositions of the Scriptures will stand to the arbitrement of euerie auncient father or of euerie generall Councell or of any custome in any time or place I knowe and you can not deny it that you will stande to nothing that is not allowed by your Pope though fathers councels custome time or place or all the world be against it yea the manifest Scripture which is so plaine that it needeth no exposition as the commaundement against images in religion Theodoret Gelasius Vigilius Chrysostome against transubstantiation Epiphanius against images the sixt councell of Constantinople for condemning the Pope of heresie the councels of Constance and Basil for deposing the Popes and decreeing that the councell is aboue the Pope many other like matters beside in which you goe clearely from the consent of all antiquitie for 600. yeares as the Bishoppe of Sarum hath made plaine demonstration and you are not able to replie MART. 42. This being of it selfe a shamelesse shift vnlesse it be better coloured the next is to say that the Scriptures are easie and plaine and sufficient of them selues to determine euerie matter and therefore they will be tried by the Scriptures onely We are content because they will needes haue it so and we alleage vnto them the bookes of Tobie Ecclesiasticus Machabees No say they we admit none of these for Scripture Why so are they not approued Canonicall by the same authoritie of the Church of auncient Councels and fathers that the other bookes are No matter say they Luther admitteth them not Caluine doth not allow them FVLK 42. That the Scriptures are plaine and easie to be vnderstoode of them that vse the ordinary meanes to come to it for all doctrine necessarie to be knowen and sufficient to determine euerie matter the holie Ghost him selfe doth testifie 2. Tim. 3. and some of the auncient fathers also doe beare witnesse as Augustine de doct Christ. lib. 2. Chrysost. in Gen. hom 13. de verb. Esai Vidi dâ—minum c. hom 2. If therefore you had the spirite of the auncient fathers you would be content to be tryed by the Scriptures for reuerence you ought to Gods most holye and perfect writings and not because we will haue it so who are content in many controuersies to be tryed by the iudgement of the auncient fathers or general Councels or vniuersall custom of times and places and in all controuersies wherein all the auncient fathers all Councels and vniuersall custom of all times and places doe consent if any think such things can be brought against vs as it is falsly and sophistically bragged But whereas we refuse the bokes of Tobie Ecclesiasticus Machabees for Canonicall Scripture it is not as you say ridiculously because Luther and Caluine admitteth them not but because they are contrary to the Canonicall Scriptures and were neâ—er receiued of the Church of Israel for Canonicall nor of the Catholike Church of Christ for more than 400. yeares after
say we you can not so answer the matter for in other places you translate it duely and truely tradition and why more in one place than in another They are ashamed to tell why but they must tell and shame both thom selues and the deuill if euer they thinke it good to answer this treatise as also why they changed congregation which was alwaies in their first translation into Church in their later translations and did not change likewise ordinances into traditions Elder◠into Priestes FVLK 51. That the Thessalonians had some parte of Christian doctrine deliuered by word of mouth that is by the Apostles preaching at such time as he did write vnto them and some part by his Epistles the text enforceth vs to graunt and we neuer purposed to denye But that the Church at this daye or euer since the newe Testament was written had any tradition by worde of mouth of any matter necessary to saluation which was not contayned in the olde or newe Testament we will neuer graunt neither shall you euer be able out of this text or any text in the Bible to proue Make your Syllogismes when you dare and you shall be aunswered But we knowe you saye that the Greeke word signifieth tradition as plaine as possibly but here and in like places we rather translate it ordinances instructions and what else soeuer We knowe that it signifieth tradition constitution instruction precept also mancipation treatise treason For al these the Greeke Dictionaries do teach that it signifieth Therefore if in any place we haue translated it ordinaunces or instructions or institutions we haue not gone from the true signification of the worde neither can you euer proue that the worde signifieth such a doctrine onely as is taught by worde of mouth and is not or may not be put in writing But in other places you can tell vs that we translate it duely and truly tradition and you will know why more in one place than in another affirming that we are shamed to tell why For my part I was neuer of counsaile with any that translated the Scriptures into English and therefore it is possible I can not sufficiently expresse what reason moued the translators so to varie in the exposition of one and the same worde Yet can I yeelde sufficient reason that might leade them so to doe which I thinke they followed The Papistes doe commonly so abuse the name of tradition which signifieth properly a deliuerie or a thinge deliuered for such a matter as is deliuered onely by worde of mouth and so receaued from hande to hande that it is neuer put in writing but hath his credite without the holye Scriptures of God as the Iewe had their Cabala and the Scribes Pharisees had their traditions beside the lawe of God and the Valentinian Heretikes accused the Scriptures as insufficient of authoritie and ambiguously written and that the truth could not be found in them by those that knewe not the tradition which was not deliuered by writing but by worde of mouth iumpe as the Papists doe This abusing of the word tradition might be a sufficient cause for the translators to render the Greeke worde where it is taken for such doctrine as is beside the commaundement of God by the name of tradition as the worde is commonly taken But where the Greeke worde is taken in the good parte for that doctrine which is agreeable with the holy Scriptures they might with good reason auoide it as you your selfe doe not alwayes translate tradere to betray but sometimes to deliuer So did the translators giue these words ordinances instructions institutions or doctrine deliuered which doe generally signifie the same that tradition but haue not the preiudice of that partiall signification in which the Papistes vse it who wheresoeuer they find tradition straight way imagine they haue found a sufficient argument against the perfection and sufficiencie of the holy Scripture and to bring in all riffe raffe and trishe trashe of mans doctrine not onely beside but also contrarye to the manifest worde of God conteined in his most holy and perfect Scriptures To the shame of the deuill therefore and of all popish maintainers of traditions vncommaunded by God this reason may be yelded Nowe to aunswer you why Ecclesia was first translated congregation and afterward Church the reason that moued the firste translators I thinke was this the worde Churche of the common people at that tyme was vsed ambiguously both for the assemblie of the faythfull and for the place in which they assembled for auoyding of which ambiguitie they translated Ecclesia the congregation and yet in their Creede and in the notes of their Bibles in preaching writing they vsed the word Church for the same the later translators seing the people better instructed able to discerne when they read in the Scriptures the people from the place of their meeting vsed the worde Church in their translations as they did in their preaching These are weightie matters that wee muste giue accompt of them Why we chaunge not ordinances into traditions and Elders into Priests wee will answere when we come to the proper places of them In the meane season wee thinke there is as good cause for vs in translating sometime to auoide the termes of traditions and prieste as for you to auoid the names of Elders calling them auncients and the wise men sages as though you had rather speake French than English as we do Like as you translate Conside haue a good hart after the french phrase rather than you would say as we do be of good comforte MART. 52. The cause is that the name of Church was at the first odious vnto thē because of the Catholike Church which stoode against them but afterward this name grewe into more favour with them because of their English Church so at length called and termed But their hatred of Priests and traditions continueth still as it first began and therefore their translation also remaineth as before suppressing the names both of the one and of the other But of all these their dealings they shal be told in their seuerall chapiters and places FVLK 52. I pray you who translated first the creed into the English tongue and taught it to the people for that cause were accounted heretikes of the Antichristian Romish rable If the name of Churche were odious vnto them why didde they not suppresse that name in the creede whyche they taught to yong and olde and in steede of Catholike Church call it the vniuersal congregation or assembly Wel Dauus these things be not aptely diuided according to their times The firste translation of the Bible that was printed in the english tong in very many places of the notes vseth the name Church most notoriously in the song of Salomon where before euery other verse almost it telleth which is the voice of the Church to Christ her spous◠which no reasonable man would thinke the translators would
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.
and it is very well and honesty translated for so the Greeke worde doth properly signifie But nowe on the other side concerning good traditions let vs see their dealing The Apostle by the selfe same worde both in Greeke and Latine sayth thus Therefore brethren stand and hold fast the TRADITIONS which you haue learned either by worde or by our Epistle And againe Withdraw your selues from euerie brother walking inordinately and not according to the TRADITION which they haue receiued of vs. And againe according to the Greeke which they professe to folow I praise you brethren that in all things you are mindefull of me and as I haue deliuered vnto you you keepe my TRADITIONS FVLK 2. No maruell though you can not abide the bels sounding against mans traditions which sound must nedes pearce your coÌ„science more than it offendeth your eares seeing you know that many of those things which you defend vnder the name of traditions against the holy scriptures haue not God for their auctor which forbiddeth to be worshipped in such sorte but man or rather Sathan which hath inspired such things vnto meÌ„ thereby to dishonor God and to discredite his holy and most certaine written worde Yet you say it is well and honestly translated God knoweth how faine you would there were no such text extaÌ„t in the Gospel against your superstition and will worshipping But now let vs see our craftie dealing as you compte it against good traditions In the first text 2. Thessal 2. v. 15. You may see your vnderstanding of traditions quite ouerthrowen For the Apostle speaketh of such traditions as were deliuered to them partly by preaching partly by his Epistle Therfore tradition doth not signifie a doctrine deliuered by worde of mouth onely But yet you will say it signifieth here a doctrine deliuered by word of mouth also which is not written How proue you that because all that the Apostle preached was not conteyned in his Epistles to the Thessalonians therefore was it no where written in the Scriptures what the tradition was in the second text 2. Thess. 3. v. 6. is expressed by and by after that he which will not labour must not eate Was this doctrine neuer written before when God commaundeth euery man to labour in his vocation As for the third place 1. Cor. 11. 2. your owne vulgar Latine translater both teacheth vs how to translate it and also dischargeth our translation of heresie and corruption for he calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that place praecepta precepts or instructions or commauÌ„dements or ordinances I see no great difference in these wordes By which his translation he sheweth that in the other places 2. Thes. 2. 3. He meaneth the same thing by traditiones traditions that we doe by ordinances or instructions and might as well haue vsed the word praecepta in those two places as he did in this one if it had pleased him MART. 3. Here we see plaine mention of S. Paules traditions and consequently of Apostolicall traditions yea and traditions by worde of mouth deliuered to the saide Churches without writing or Scripture In all whiche places looke gentle reader and seeke all their English translations and thou shalt not once finde the worde tradition but in steede thereof ordinances instructions preachings institutions and any worde else rather than tradition In so much that Beza their maister translateth it traditam doctrinam the doctrine deliuered putting the singular number for the plural adding doctrine of his owne So framing the text of holy Scripture according to his false commentarie or rather putting his commentarie in the text making it the text of Scripture Who would thinke their malice and partialitie against traditions were so great that they should all agree with one consent so duely and exactly in these and these places to conceale the worde which in other places do so gladly vse it the Greeke worde being all one in all the saide places FVLK 3. There is no question but the Apostles by word of mouth that is by preaching teaching deliuered the doctrine of the Gospel to the Churches but that they preached taught or deliuered any doctrine as necesarie to saluation which they proued not out of the holy Scriptures and which is not contained in the new TestameÌ„t or the old this is not yet proued neither euer can it be proued Such matters of ceremonies order discipline which are mutable no man denies but they might did deliuer but yet in them nothing but agreeable to the generall rules set downe in the Scripture But in all these places the word tradition can not once be founde Yet M. Fulke saith it is fouÌ„d Yea doth where saith he so You answere pag. 153 against D. Saunders Rocke Therfore if he giue not an instaunce let him giue him selfe the lie But he that chargeth Fulke to say it is found lieth the more For so he saith not read the place who wil. He speaketh against Saunder who affirmed that the very name of tradition vsed in the better part can not be suffered to be in the Englishe Bible as though there were some decree of the Synode or Act of Parliament against it and sayth it may be and is suffered in that sense which the holy Ghost vseth it but not to bring prayer for the deade or any thing contrarie to the Scripture vnder the name of traditions Apostolike By which wordes I meane that there is no prohibition or edict to the contrarie but if any man will vse the worde tradition in translation of the Bible he is permitted so to doe I doe not affirme it is so founde But as if I shoulde say The Papistes in Englande are suffered to liue as becommeth good subiectes I affirme not that they are or shall be founde so to liue But to omit this foolishe quarrell Beza our Maister is sayed to haue translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the doctrine deliuered putting the singular number for the plurall and adding doctrine of his owne What an hainous matter here is the word doctrine is a collectiue comprehending many precepts or traditions and in the next chapiter the Apostle vseth the same word in the singular number Againe the 1. Thes. 4. v. 2. he calleth the same 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 precepts or documents which worde signifieth the same that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 witnes your vulgar latin traÌ„slator which giues one word for both praecepta 1. Cor. 11. 1. Thes. 4. And that the word doctrine is added to the text it is a fonde cauil for the word doctrine is coÌ„tained in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth a deliuerie but whereof â—f not of doctrine Our Sauiour Christ also Math. 15. v. 9. by the testimony of Esay reproueth the traditioÌ„ of the Pharisees teaching the doctrines precepts of meÌ„ which testimonye of Esay could take no hold of theÌ„ if traditioÌ„s were not doctrines precepts So that in this traÌ„slatioÌ„ of
permitte such consistories of Elders for onely discipline and gouernment as be in some other Churches yet doe they not only permit but also mainteyne and reuerence such Elders being signified by the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as are necessarie for the gouernment of the Church in doctrine Sacraments and discipline to the saluation of Gods people The dayly sacrifice mentioned in Daniell was the Morning and Euening sacrifice of the old Lawe wherevnto your blasphemous sacrifice of the Masse hath no resemblaunce You may not therefore looke to recouer the credite of Massing Priestes by that sacrifice which being once instituted by God was at length taken away by the onely sacrifice of Christes death Against which all the Apologies in the worlde shall neuer be able to defende your Massing Priesthood As for the chapter of Allens Apologie wherevnto you refer vs conteyneth certaine quotations a few sentences of the auncient writers which haue bene answered an huÌ„dreth times to iustifie massing Priests but all in vaine for neuer shall he proue that any one from the Eldest which he nameth vnto Beda which is the yongest was such a Massing Prieste in all pointes as those traytours are which by the Queenes lawes and edict are proscribed and prohibited I meane not for their manners but for their Masse and all opinions incident therevnto CHAP. VII Hereticall translation against PVRGATORIE LIMBVS PATRVM CHRISTS DESCENDING INTO HEL Martin HAVING now discouered their corrupt translations for defacing of the Churches name and abolishing of Priest and Priesthood let vs come to another point of very great importance also and which by the wonted consequence or sequele of errour includeth in it many erroneous branches Their principall malice then being bent against Purgatorie that is against a place were Christian soules be purged by suffering of temporall paines after this life for surer maintenaunce of their erroncous deniall hereof they take away and denie all third places saying that there was neuer from the beginning of the worlde any other place for soules after this life but onely two to witte heauen for the blessed and hell for the damned And so it foloweth by their hereticall doctrine that the Patriarches Prophetes and other good holy men of the old Testament went not after their deaths to the place called Abrahams bosome or Limbus patrum But immediatly to heauen so againe by their erroneous doctrinâ— it foloweth that the fathers of the old Testament were in heauen before our sauiour Christe had suffered death for their redemption and also by their erroneous doctrine it foloweth that our sauiour Christ was not the first man that ascended and entred into heauen and moreouer by their hereticall doctrine it foloweth that our sauiour Christe desâ—ended not into any such third place to deliuer the fathers of the olde Testament out of their prison and to bring them triumphantly with him into heauen because by their erroneous doctrine they were neuer there â— and so that article of the Apostles Creede concerning our sauiour Christ his descending into hell must either be put out by the Caluinists as Beza did in his Confession of his faith printed An. 1564. or it hath some other meaning to wit either the lying of his bodie in the graue or as Caluine and the purer Caluinists his schollers will haue it the suffering of hell paines distresses vpon the Crosse. Loe the consequence and coherence of these errours and heresies Fulke WE may be bolde to say with S. Augustine We beleeue according to the auctoritie of God that the kingdome of heauen is the first place appointed for Gods elect and that hell is the seconde place where all the reprobrate such is be not of the faith of Christe shall suffer eternall punishment Tertium penitus ignoramus imo nec esse in scripturis sanctis inuenimus The thirde place we are vtterly ignorant of yea and that it is not wee finde in the holy Scriptures But hereof it followeth say you that the godly of the olde Testament went not after their deathes to Abrahams bosome or Limbus patrum but immediately to heauen Of Limbus patrum which is a border of the Popes hel I grauÌ„t it followeth but of Abrahams bosome it followeth none otherwise than if I should say Gregorie Martin went into Chepeside Ergo he went not to London That the fathers of the old Testament were in Heauen before our Sauiour Christ had suffered death for their redemption it is no incoÌ„uenience for his death was as effectuall to redeeme them that liued before he suffered actually as them that liue since because in Gods sight hee is the Lambe that was slaine from the beginning of the world And the fathers that were iustified by faith in his bloud receyued the same crowne and rewarde of rightuousnesse that we do beyng iustified by the same meanes And yet our Sauiour Christe was the first man that in his whole manhood ascended and entred into heauen into the fulnesse and perfection of glory which is prepared for all Gods elect to be enioyed after the generall resurrection That our Sauiour Christe descended into no prison after his death we verily beleeue and yet we do also constantly beleeue the article of our Creede that he descended into hel by suffering in soule the paynes due to Gods iustice for the sinnes of all whome hee redeemed and by vanquishing the Deuill and all the power of hel in working the redemption of all the children of God If Beza in his confession had cleane left out that article whiche is vntrue hee had bene no more to bee blamed than the auctors of the Nicene Creede and many other Creedes in which it is not expressed because it is partly conteyned vnder the article of his sufferings partly it is in parte of the effect and vertue of his death and redemption MART. 2. These nowe being the hereticall doctrines which they meane to auouch and defende what soèuer come of it first they are at a point not to care a rushe for all the auncient holy Doctours that write with full consent to the contrarie as themselues confesse calling it their common errour secondly they translate the holy Scriptures in fauour thereof most corruptly and wilfully as in Bezaes false translation who is Caluines successor in Geneua it is notorious for he in his newe Testament of the yeare 1556. printed by Robertus Stephanus in folio with Annotations maketh our Sauiour Christ say thus to his father Non derelinques cadauer meuÌ„ in sepulchro Thou shalt not leaue my carcasse in the graue Act. 2. For that which the Hebrue and the Greeke and the Latine and S. Hierome according to the Hebrue say Non derelinques animam meam in inferno as plainly as we say in English Thou shalt not leaue my soule in hell Thus the Prophet Dauid spake it in the Hebrue Psal. 15. Thus the Septuaginta vttered it in Greeke thus the Apostle S. Peter
I speake of your affectation of the worde Iehôua for so it pleaseth you to accent it in steede of Dominus the Lord whereas the auntient fathers in the verie Hebrewe texte did reade and sounde it rather Adonai as appeareth both by S. Hieromes translation and also his commentaries and I woulde knowe of them the reason why in the Hebrewe Bible whensoeuer this word is ioined with Adonai it is to be read Elohim but only for auoiding Adonai twice togither This I say wee might iustly demaunde of these that take a pride in vsing this word Iehôua so ofte both in Englishe and Latin though otherwise we are not superstitious but as occasion serueth only in the Hebrue text we pronounce it and reade it Againe we might aske them why they vse not aswel Elohim in steede of Deus God and so of therest changing al into hebrue that they may seeme gay fellowes and the people may wonder as their wonderful and mystical diuinitie FVLK 23. In our Englishe translation Iehoua is very seldome vsed in other speache no wise man vseth it oftner than there is good cause why And when there is cause we haue no superstition in pronouncing it as we are not curious in acceÌ„ting it Although perhaps you quarrel at our accent because you can not discerne betweene time and time The middle syllable wee knowe to be long whether it be to be eleuated wee make no question wee know where the accent is in the Hebrue but we thinke not that all accents be sharpe and eleuate that syllable in which they are It is a great matter that you demaunde the reason why ioygned to Adonai it is to bee redde Elohim you should rather demaunde why it is otherwise pointed when it is ioygned with Adonai for being pointed as it is I see not why it shoulde not bee read according to the vowels Adonai Iehouih Many other questions might bee moued about the names of God in pronouncing or writing of which we know the Iewes were reuerente euen to superstition and therefore in bookes that shoulde come in all mennes handes made other alterations than you speake of and yet retayned in other authenticall copies the true letters and pointes If any desire vaine gloriously to vtter his skill in the tongues when hee should edifie the people of all them that be wise and learned he is misliked for so doing MART. 24. To conclude are not your scholers thinke you muche boundâ— vnto you for giuing them in steede of Gods blessed worde and his holy Scriptures such translations heretical Iudaical profane false negligent phantasticall newe naught monstrous God open their eyes to see and mollifie your hartes to repent of all your falshood and treacherie both that which is manifestly conuinced against you and can not be denied as also that which may by some shewe of answer be shifted of in the sight of the ignorant but in your consciences is as manifest as the other FVLK 24. Happy and thrise happy hath our English nation bene since God hath giuen learned translators to expresse in our mother tongue the heauenly mysteries of his holy worde deliuered to his Church in the Hebrew and Greeke languages Who although they haue in some matters of no importance vnto saluation as men bene deceiued yet haue they faithfully deliuered the whole substaunce of the heauenly doctrine conteyned in the holy Scriptures without any hereticall translations or wilfull corruptions And in the whole Bible among them all haue committed as fewe ouersights for any thing that you can bring and of lesse importance than you haue done onely in the newe Testament Where beside so many omissions euen out of your owne vulgar Latine translation you haue taken vpon you to alter that you founde in your texte and translate that which is onely in the margent is redde but in fewe written copies As for Italia you say Aâ—talia noted before Heb. 13. for placuerunt you translate latuerunt 2. Pet. 2 for coinquinationis which is in the text you translate coinquinationes which was founde but in one onely copie by Hentenius as the other but in one or two of thirtie diuerse copies most written FINIS A briefe table to direct the Reader to such places as Martin in this boke cauilleth to be corrupted in diuers translations of the Englishe Bibles by order of the bookes chapters verses of the same with some other quarels against Beza and others for their Latine translations with the aunsweares of W. Fulke Genesis CHap. 4. v. 7. pag. 31. numb 28. and pag. 316. num 9. chap. 14. v. 18. p. 55. numb 42. and pag. 447. chap. 34. v. 35. p. 206. num 7. chap. 42. v. 38. p. 216. num 12. 4. of the Kings Chap. 29. v. 5. p. 501. numb 6. 2. Paralipomenon Chap. 28. v. 19. p. 518. nu 10. chap. 38. v. 8. p. 116. num 19. and p. 4â—3 num 1. 1. Esdras Chap. 9. v. 5. p. 373. num 16. Psalmes Psal. 48. v. 16. p. 252. psal 84. v. 7. p. 511. psal 85. v. 13. p. 218. num 13. and p. 59. num 46. psal 89. v. 48. p. 219. num 14. psal 95. v. 6. p. 478. psal 98. v. 5. ibidem psal 131. v. 7. ibid. psal 138. v. 17. p. 460. psal 147. v. 19. p. 252. and â— 18. p. 516. num 3. Prouerbes Chap. 1. v. 12. p. 22â— numb 22. chap. 9. v. 2. p. 456. nu 21. cum sequent chap. 27. v. 20. p. 228 chap. 30. v. 16. ibid. Cantica canticorum Chap. 6. v. 8. p. 155. num 10 chap. 8. v. 6 p. 29. num 46. see p. 508. numb 2 Of Wisdome Chap. 3. v. 14. p. 346. num 3 chap. 15. v. 13. p. 127. num 27 Ecclesiasticus Chap. 5. v. 5. p. 348. numb 4 chap. 7. v. 31. p. 390 Esay Chap. 2. p. 513. numb 7 chap. 26. v. 18. p. 508 chap. 30. v. 22. p. 121. num 23 and v. 20. p. 511. num 5 chap. 33. p. 513. num 6 Hieremie Chap. 7. v. 18. p. 467. num 9 chap. 11. v. 19. p. 453. num 18 chap. 44. v. 19. p. 467. num 9 Daniel Chap. 4. v. 24. p. 375. numb 18 chap. 6. v. 22. p. 256. num 3 chap. 10. v. 12. p. 372. num 15 chap. 14. v. 4. p. 126. num 26 and v. 12. 17. 20. pâ— 451. num 16 Osee. Chap. 12. v. 10. p. 514. num 8 chap. 13. v. 14. p. 159 num 46 and p. 221. num 16 Ioel. Chap. 2. v. 23. p. 511 Habacuc Chap. 2. v. 18. p. 122. num 23 see p. 510. num 4 Malachie Chap. 2 v. 7. p. 412. num 17 chap. 3. v. 1. p. 414. num 18 and v. 14. p. 374. num 17 1. Machabees Chap. 1. v. 51. p. 252. chap. 2. v 21. ibid. 2. Machabees Chap. 6. v. 7. p. 501. num 5 S. Matthew Chap. 1. v. 19. p. 257. num 4 and v. 25. p. 470 chap. 2. v. 6. p 417 chap. 3. v. 8. p. 355. chap. 16. v. 18. p. 140. numb
to maintaine any cause of ours by plaine syllogismes onely In the meane time to finde you occupieâ— â—here hath beene a booke called syllogisticon set fooâ—th by maister Foxe more than twentie yeares agoe let vs see in a sheete of printed paper what ye haue to answere those syllogismes whether you will finde them defectiue in forme or matter or else there is no reason but you should graunt their conclusion Pag. 146. to prooue that protestantes are lordes of the scripture to make them say what they list D. Fulkes wordes to maister Bristowe are cited For the diuision of parishes excommunication suspension publike solemnizing of mariages with the lawes thereof and punishing of heretikes by death they are all manifestly prooued out of the scripture This I say alleaging no one place of scripture to prooue it sayth our censurer I say as much of holding of councels which Bristowe with the rest wil haue vs as apes to haue borrowed of the popish church Whereas I affirme they are proued out of the scriptures if Bristow wil reply denie y t such things may be proued out of the scriptures it shall be no harde matter to do it Yet in the meane time if you thinke I haue sayde more than I can shewe I will giue you this tast For diuision of Churches or parishes Act. 14. v. 23. Elders in euerie church and Tit. 1. v. 5. elders in euerie citie or towne Holding of councelles Act. 15. excommunication where the partie cast out is to be taken for an heathen or publicane Math. 18. v. 17. separation or suspension where the partie separated is to be taken as a brother 2. Thess. 3. publike solemnizing of mariage Mat. 1. v. 18. where betrothing and publike comming together are expressed Example Ioan. 2. for punishment of heretikes I haue cited before What the Puritans will grant I care not although I thinke there are none of them that are so called will denie any of these except he be some madde schismatike and for the last which you say was for a long time denied by our selues till nowe we haue burned some for religion in Englande you should haue tolde howe long For we haue not now first of all consented to the burning of heretikes The Arrians and Anabaptistes burned in king Edwardes dayes for thirtie yeares agoe can beare witnesse But you may say your pleasure I knowe few in other countries but heretikes themselues that denie it to be lawful to punish blasphemous obstinate heretikes by death If any haue any priuate opinion what haue we to doe wich it or to bee charged by it If I shoulde note your phrase when you say that protestantes doe now reigne in Englande as though there were more kinges than one you would say perhaps I were ouer captious Well let it passe But such thinges sayde I as are not euidently conteined in the worde a Christian is not absolutely bounde to beleeue them In plaine dealing you should haue bestowed a note in your margent where I haue so sayde as well as placed there hereticall audacitie of your papisticall charitie The saying I confesse or the like yet the circumstances of the place where it was vttered would perhaps haue bewrayed some part of your vsuall and honest dealing But what cause haue you to criâ—â—ut so loude Behoulde the last refuge of a proude hereticall spirite in breaking where he cannot otherwise get out Call you it proude heresie to holde that nothing is to be credited vpon necessitie of saluation which hath not authoritie of the holy scripture which are able to make a man wise to saluation which are written that beleeuing we might be saued which are able to make the man of God perfect prepared to euerie good worke And why doe yee dare M. Charke to aâ—ouch that which I haue affirmed I knowe he dare affirme and is able to defend this truth but there is no reason that he should be dared with my assertioÌ„s I dare affirm to your face if you dare shewe it that a christian man is not bounde to beleeue that the common creede was made by the Apostles after that fabulous maner that you papistes doe teach Namely that Peter made one peece Andrewe another and so of the rest yet I doubt not but it is gathered out of the doctrine and writinges of the Apostles But you haue ancient doctors which affirme that it was made by the Apostles Origen Terâ—llian Ierome Ruffinus Ambrose Austen and all the primitiue church doe so constantly affirme to be their doingâ—s Let vs consider then in order First Origen in proâ—â— lib. de princip testifieth that the Apostles by their preaching did most plainely deliuer y e summe of faith according to the capacitie of the most simple whereof hee maketh a rehearsall contayning in deede some articles of the creed but neither al nor any one in such forme of words as our creede doth expresse them And before he beginneth the rehearsall of them thus he sayeth Species verò eoruÌ„ quae per praedicationem ApostolicaÌ„ manifesté traduntur istae sunt These are the particulars of those thinges which by the preaching of the Apostles are manifestly deliuered Which wordes doe shewe that the Apostles in deede taught the doctrine yet prooue not that they made this creede rather than the Nicen creede or Athanasius Creede Tertullian against Praxeas much after the same maner yet more neere the wordes of the creede rehearseth the articles pertaining to the three persons of the deitie and then he addeth Hâ—â—c regulam ab initio euangelii de cucurrisse etiam ante priores quosque haereticâ—s nedum ante Praxeam hesternum probabis â—â—â— ipsa posteritaâ— omnium hâ—â—â—â—icorum quà m ipsa nouellitas Praxeae hesterni That this rule hath runne downe from the beginning of the gospell euen before all former heretikes not onely before Praxeas a yesterdayes birde as wel the later spring of all heretikes shall prooue as the verie noueltie of Praxeas one that came but yesterday That the rule of faith contained in the Creede is as auncient as the preaching of the Gospel I alwayes agreed with Tertullian but that the Apostles made the Creede I heare him yet say neuer a worde Ierom ad Pammachium against the errours of Iohn of Ierusalem sayth In symbolo fidei spei nostrae quod ab Apostolis traditum non scribitur in charta atramento sed in tabulis cordis carnalibus post confessioneÌ„ trinitatiâ— vnitatem ecclesiae omne Christiani dogmatis sacramentâ—m carnis resurrectione includitur In the symbole of our faith and hope which being deliuered from the Apostles is not written in paper and ynke but in the fleshie tables of our hearts after the confession of the Trinitie and the vnitie of the Church all the mysterie of Christian doctrine is inclosed in the resurrection of the flesh Although it be graunted that Saint Ierome here speaketh of our common Creede yet it followeth not that hee affirmeth it to bee made by the
Apostles which it is sufficient that it is receiued of the doctrine of the Apostles Ruffinus in deede expositione in symbolum sayeth it was an opinion receiued from the elders that the Apostles before their dispersion made this briefe forme of beliefe which is called their Creede And I acknowledge the opinion hath some probabilitie but that it is to be beleeued of necessitie of saluation neither Ruffinus sayeth nor if he did were he able to prooue it Ambrose Ep. 81. Syricio to prooue that Marie in the birth of Christ was a virgine sayeth Credatur symbolo Apostòlorum quod Ecclesia Romana iteratum semper custodit seruat Let credit bee giuen to the Apostles Creede which being repeted often the Church of Rome doth alwayes keepe and obserue That this Creede is called the Apostles symbole or Creede it may well be because it containeth the summe of the Apostles doctrine although it had not beene compiled by them The testimonie of Augustine which you quote Serm. 118. De tempore must needes be some yonger mans because he repeteth the verie wordes of Ruffinus which Augustine liuing almost in his time woulde not repete as his owne You might as well and more for your purpose haue quoted Serm. 115. De tempore where euery Apostle maketh an Article which is the absurde opinion of the late Papistes but neuer was credited by Augustine himselfe howsoeuer these sermons haue gotten vnder the shadow of his name To conclude as some of the auncient fathers thinke the Creede was of the Apostles making so none of them affirmeth that it is damnable to doubt thereof so a man doubt not of the doctrine contained therein whereof the holy ghost is author as it is proued by the holie scriptures whether the Apostles or their successours did gather this short summe or forme of beliefe which we call the Apostles Creede For the obseruation of the Easter day which is the seconde point wherein you dare Master Charke I dare affirme that seeing it is not commaunded in the scripture the obseruation thereof is not necessarie to saluation That Eusebius calleth it an Apostolike tradition it is not materiall seeing that verie contention which he reporteth was about the obseruation of Easter according to the Apostolike tradition by the immediate successors of the Apostles Anicetus and Polycarpus doe plainly testifie what credit is to bee giuen to the traditions of the Apostles without the warrant of the Apostles writings Euseb. lib. 5. Cap. 26. For while Anicetus pretendeth the tradition of S. Peter and Polycarpus S. Iohn and neither would yeelde to other they teache vs what to esteeme of traditions apostolical not contained in the holy scriptures Namely that in these dayes there can bee no certeintie of them when they which might see and heare the Apostles themselues could not agree about them Last of all which you make the greatest matter the perpetuall virginitie of the mother of Christ after his birth although for my part I do beleeue it and wish all men so to doe yet dare I affirme that it is not damnable not to beleeue it except it can be prooued that the scripture hath taught it But you obiect against mee first the condemnation of Heluidius testified by Sozomenus Whereto I aunswere that he was iustly condemned not because he beleeued not but because he did obstinately denie it troubled the peace of the church about an vnnecessary question But you aske vs if wee remember not the solemne curse for this matter of so many holy bishops recorded and confirmed by S. Ambrose Ep. 81. 79. It seemeth you remember it not your selfe for that curse contained in the ende of the Ep. 81. was against them that like Manichees denyed that our Sauiour Christ tooke flesh of a virgine And Ep. 79. he reprooueth them which did contende that the virgine Marie had more sonnes than our Sauiour Christ which to affirme is a great errour and conuinced by the authoritie of the scripture seeing as Ambrose well noteth our Sauiour Christ committed his mother to Iohn the Euangelist which had not beene needefull if shee had naturall sonnes of her owne which might take care of her But you will stoppe our mouthes if you can as you say with these wordes of Saint Augustine Integra fide credendum est c. Wee must beleeue with a sounde faith blessed Marie the mother of Christ to haue conceiued in virginitie to haue brought foorth her sonne in virginitie and to haue remained a virgine after her childbirth neither must wee yeeld to the blasphemie of Heluidius Your author goeth on and telleth what that was Qui dixis fuit virgo ante partum non virgo post partum Who sayd shee was a virgine before her child-birth shee was no virgine after her childbirth But where shall wee finde this saying in Saint Augustine Your quotation directeth vs to Augustine in Encherid Cap. 34. where in deede some mention is of Maries virginitie namely that she conceiued in virginitie but nothing of Heluidius or his heresie Wherefore it secmeth that out of Canisius or some other mans collection your common places of the doctors sayings are borowed and not taken out of your owne reading Therefore howsoeuer you haue mistaken the matter the saying you alledge is in the bastarde booke De dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis Cap. 69. which may as easily be knowen from Augustines writing as a goose from a swanne And yet if it were of as good authoritie as Augustines owne writing it were not sufficient to stop our mouth when wee heare that wee are slaundered For wee dare not say with Heluidius which is the blasphemie noted by that writer that the virgine Marie was no virgine after her childbirth although wee say that it is no article of faith necessarie to saluation except it haue demonstration out of the holy scriptures neither doth your author say it is blasphemie to doubt of it but to denye it although for my part I do neither denie it nor doubt of it but beleeue it as I do manie other truethes not expressed in the scripture but yet not as articles of Christian faith necessarie to saluation I will conclude with a saying of Saint Ierome and stoppe your mouth if I can which concerning this verie question in controuersie against Heluidius to shewe what a man is bound to beleeue vpon necessitie of saluation euen that which is contained in the scriptures and that which is not coÌ„teined that he is not bound vpon losse thereof to beleeue thus writeth Sed vt haec quae scripta sunt non negaâ—ius ita â—a quae non sunt scripta renuimus Natum Dâ—â—â— esâ—e de virgine credimus quia legimus Mariam â—â—psisse post partum non credimus quia non legimus But as wee do not deny those things that are written so we do refuse those things that are not written That God was borne of a virgin wee beleeue because we haue read it that Marie vsed marriage after her
called And for your Ouerseers he sayth Episcopos and not Superintendentes Which he might as well haue sayde as you Ouerseers But to saye the truth though he be too too profane yet he doth much more keepe and vse the Ecclesiasticall receiued termes than you doe often protesting it and as it were glorying therein against Castaleon especially As when he sayth Presbyterum where you saye Elder Diaconum where you saye Minister and so forth Where if you tell me that howsoeuer he translate he meaneth as profanely as you I beleeue you and therefore you shall goe togither like Maister like Schollers all false and profane translators for this Beza who sometime so gladly keepeth the name of Apostle yet calleth Epaphroditus legatum Philippensium Philip. 2. verse 15. Whereupon the Englishe Bezites translate your Messenger for your Apostle As if S. Augustine who was our Apostle should be called our Messenger FVLK 4. You can not leaue your olde byas in wresting mens sayings farre beyond their meaning Therefore you alledge against vs the saying of Beza for the terme of Apostles to be retained where meÌ„tion is made of the Apostles of Christ not onely those that are specially so called but also all the ministers of the worde But what is this to terme them by the honourable name of Apostles which are not sent by God but by men about some ciuil or Ecclesiastical busines For both he we cal Epaphroditus the Messenger and not the Apostle of the Philippians because he was sent by the Philippians vnto Paule and not by Christ vnto them As for that Augustine which was sent by Gregorie might better be called Gregories Apostle than our Apostle for he was not sent by vs but to vs not immediatly from God as an Apostle should but from Gregorie and by Gregorie Touching the termes of Bishops Elders Ministers Priestes c. enough hath bene sayd already Our translators haue done that which they thought best to be done in our language as Beza did in the Latine tongue MART. 5. As also when you translate of S. Matthias the Apostle that he was by a common consent counted with the eleuen Apostles Act. 1. v. 26. what is it else but to make onely a popular election of Ecclesiasticall degrees as Beza in his annotations would haue vs to vnderstande saying that nothing was done here peculiarly by Peter as one of more excellent dignitie than the rest but in common by the voyces of the whole Church though in an other place vpon this election he noteth Peter to be the chiefe or Corypheus And as for the Greeke worde in this place if partialitie of the cause would suffer him to consider of it he shoulde finde that the proper signification thereof in this phrase of speache is as the vulgar Latine Interpreter Erasmus and Valla all which he reiecteth translate it to wit He was numbred or counted with the eleuen Apostles without all respect of common consent or not consent as you also in your other Bibles doe translate FVLK 5. The election of Matthias to be an Apostle was extraordinarily and therefore permitted to the lot the maner whereof as it is not to be drawen into example so the proper election can not be proued thereby yet hath both Beza and the English translator faithfully expressed the Greeke worde which S. Luke there vseth although neyther Erasmus nor Valla beside your vulgar Interpretor did consider it Neither doth that common consent in accepting Mathias for an Apostle whome the lotte had designed more proue a popular election or derogate from the singularitie of Peter than that by common consent of the whole brotherhood two were chosen and set vp that the Apostleshippe should be layd vpon one of them MART. 6. Which diuersitie may proceede of the diuersitie of opinions among you For we vnderstand by Maister Whitegifts bookes against the Puritanes that he and his fellowes deny this popular election and giue preeminence superioritie and difference in this case to Peter and to Ecclesiasticall Prelates and therefore he proueth at large the vse and Ecclesiasticall signification of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to be the giuing of voices in popular elections but to be the Ecclesiasticall imposing of handes vpon persons taken to the Churches ministerie Which he sayth very truely and needeth the lesse here to be spoken of specially beeing touched elsewhere in this booke FVLK 6. The diuersitie of the translation proceedeth of this that the former translators did not obserue the nature of the Greeke worde which Beza hath considered more absolutely than any interpretors before him Although it is not vnlike that Chrysostome did well acknowledge it when speaking of this election he vseth these words I am illud considera quam Petrus agit omnia ex communi discipuâ—orum sententia nihil authoritate sua nihil cum imperio Now also consider this thing how Peter doth all things by common consent of the Disciples nothing of his owne authoritie nothing with rule or commaundement And as for the popular election if you had redde those bookes you make mention of you might perceiue that neither of both parts allowe a meere popular election And that Maister Whitgift doth not so much contend what forme of election was vsed in the time of the Apostles and of the Primitiue Church as whether it be necessary that such forme of election as then was practised shoulde in all ages of the Church and in all places be of necessitie continued and obserued MART. 7. One thing onely we woulde knowe why they that pleade so earnestly against their brethren the Puritanes about the signification of this worde pretending herein onely the primitiue custome of imposition of handes in making their Ministers why I saye them selues translate not this worde accordingly but altogither as the Puritanes thus When they had ordayned them Elders by election in euerye Church Act. 14. verse 23. For if the Greeke worde signifie here the peoples giuing of voyces as Beza forceth it onely that way out of Tullie and the popular custome of olde Athens then the other signification of imposing handes is gone which Mayster Whitgift defendeth and the popular election is brought in which he refelleth and so by their translation they haue in my opinion ouershotte themselues and giuen aduantage to their brotherly Aduersaries Vnlesse in deede they translate as they thinke because in deede they thinke as heretically as the other but yet because their state of Ecclesâ—asticall regiment is otherwise they must maintaine that also in their writings howsoeuer they translate For an example They all agree to translate Elder for Priest and Maister Whitakers telleth vs a freshe in the name of them all that there are no Priestes nowe in the Church of Christ that is as he interpreteth himselfe This name Prieste is neuer in the New Testament peculiarly applied to the Ministers of the Gospell this is
their doctrine But what is their prastise in the regiment of their Churche cleane contrarie For in the order of the communion booke where it is appointed what the Minister shall do it is indifferently said Then shall the Prieste do or say this and that and Then shal the Minister c. Whereby it is euident that they make Priest a proper and peculiar calling applied to their Ministers and so their practise is contrarie to their teaching and doctrine FVLK 7. I haue satisfied your desire before if you list to knowe our translation must be as neere as it can to expresse the true signification of the originall words so it is in that place of the Acts. 14. v. 23. which being graunted by them that denie the necessitie of â—at forme of election to continue alwaies giueth no more aduauntage to the aduersaries than they woulde take out of the signification of the Greeke word how soeuer it were translated Your example of Maister Whitakers denying the name of Prieste to be applied to the ministers of the Gospel to proue that wee must mainteine our Ecclesiasticall state how soeuer we translate is very fonde and ridiculous as also the contradiction that you would make betweene him and the seruice booke touching the name of Prieste there vsed and allowed Maister Whitakers writing in Latine speaketh of the Latine terme Sacerdos the Communion booke of the English worde Priest is not this a goodly net for a foole to daunce naked in and thinke that no body can see him MART. 8. Nowe concerning imposition or laying on of handes in making their Ministers which the Puritans also are forced to allow by other wordes of Scripture howsoeuer they dispute and iangle againste 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 none of them all make more of it than of the like Iudaicall ceremonie in the olde Law not acknowledging that there is any grace giuen withall though the Apostle say there is in expresse termes but they will aunswer this text as they are wont with a fauourable translation turning grace into gift As when the Apostle saith thus Neglect not THE GRACE that is in thee which is giuen thee by prophecie with impositioÌ„ of the hands of Priesthood they translate Neglect not the GIFT and Beza most impudently for by prophecie translateth to prophecie making that onely to be this gift and withall adding this goodly exposition that he had the gift of prophecie or preaching before and now by imposition of hands was chosen onely to execute that function But because it might be obiected that the Apostle sayth Which was giuen thee with the imposition of handes or as he speaketh in an other place by imposition of handes making this imposition of handes an instrumentall cause of giuing this grace he sayth that it did onely confirme the grace or gift before giuen FVLK 8. Though we finde that by or with imposition of handes many rare and extraordinary giftes of prophecie of tongues and such like were giuen in the Apostles time yet we finde no where that grace is ordinarily giuen by that ceremonie vsed alwayes in the Church for ordination of the ministers therof But whether there be or not our translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into gift is true and proper to the worde For albeit the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be taken not onely for the fauour of God but also for his gracious giftes yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is neuer taken in the Scripture but for a free gift or a gift of his grace That Beza referreth the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the ende of the gifte he hath the nature of the worde to beare him out which may well abide that sense and yet he doth not reiect the other common interpretation by prophecie that by appoyntment of the holye Ghost vttered by some of the Prophets But where you wrangle about the gift of prophecie as though he were vtterly voyde thereof before he receyued imposition of handes I knowe not what you meane Woulde you haue vs thinke that he was ordayned Prieste or Elder or to anye office of the Church without competent giftes meete to discharge his office That the gifte of prophecie as well as of speakinge with tongues might be giuen by and with imposition of hands Beza doubteth not But it is out of doubte that to an office none was chosen or admitted by the Apostle and the reste of the Presbyterie of Ephesus but such as had sufficient giftes to answere that office MART. 9. Thus it is euident that though the Apostle speake neuer so plaine for the dignitie of holy Orders that it giueth grace and consequently is a Sacrament they peruert all to the contrarie making it a bare ceremonie suppressing the worde grace which is much more significant to expresse the Greeke worde than gifte is because it is not euery gifte but a gratious gifte or a gifte proceeding of maruelous and mere grace At when it is saide To you it is giuen not onely to beleeue but also to suffer for him The Greeke worde signifieth this much To you this grace is giuen c. So when God gaue vnto S. Paule all that sayled with him this Greeke worde is vsed because it was a great grace or gratious gifte giuen vnto him When S. Paule pardoned the incestuous person before due time it is expressed by this worde because it was a grace as Theodorete calleth it giuen vnto him And therefore also the almes of the Corinthians 1. Cor. 16. v. 3. are called their grace which the Protestants translate liberalitie neglecting altogither the true force and signification of the Greeke wordes FVLK 9. Here is no euidence at al that the order of Priesthoode is a Sacrament or gyueth grace but that God by the ceremonie of laying on of handes did giue wonderfull and extraordinarie giftes of tongues and prophecying in the beginning and firste planting of the Churche But that grace should alwayes follow that ceremonie there is no proofe to bee made out of the holie Scriptures And experience sheweth that hee which was voide of giftes beefore hee was ordered Priest is as verye an asse and Dogbolte as hee was beefore for anye encrease of grace or gratious giftes althoughe hee haue authoritie committed vnto hym if hee bee ordained in the Church though vnworthily with great sinne both of him that ordaineth and of him that is ordained But wee suppresse the worde grace you say bicause charisma signifieth at least a gratious gift See how the bare sounde of tearmes delighteth you that you mighte therein seeke a shadowe for your singlesolde sacrament of popishe orders The worde signifieth a free or gratious gifte and so will euerie man vnderstande it whiche knoweth that it is giuen by God As also in all places where mention is made of Gods giftes wee must vnderstande that it proceedeth freely from him as a token of his fauoure and grace But that the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉