you so malitious an enimie vnto him hauing spent all your inuention to seeke holes in his translation can finde nothing but such childish cauils as when they be discouered men will maruaile that you were not ashamed to moue them MART. 56. But after this generall vewe of their wilfull purpose and heretical intention let vs examine their false translations more particularly and argue the case with them more at large and presse them to answere whether in their conscience it be so or no as hitherto is saide and that by seuerall chapters of such CONTROVERSIES as their corruptions concerne and first of all without further curiositie whence to begin in cases so indifferent of TRADITIONS FVLK 56. The more particularly you examine our translations the freer I hope they shall be found from falsehoode wilfull corruption And the more at large you argue the case and presse vs to answere the more you shall make the case to appeare worse on your side and the truth clearer on our parte And as God is witnesse of our conscience and sinceritie in setting forth his word without adulteration or corruptiō so I appeale to the consciences of al indifferent readers whether hitherto you haue gotten any aduantage against vs in this whole chapter which yet you professe to be the abridgement and summe of your whole treatise CHAP. II. Hereticall translation of holy Scripture against Apostolicall TRADITIONS Martin THis is a matter of such importance that if they shoulde graunt any traditions of the Apostles and not pretende the written worde onely they know that by such traditions mentioned in all antiquitie their religion were wholy defaced and ouerthrowen For remedie whereof and for the defacing of all such traditions they bend their translations against them in this wonderfull maner Wheresoeuer the holy Scripture speaketh against certaine traditions of the Iewes partly friuolous partly repugnant to the law of God there all the English translations follow the Greeke exactly neuer omitting this word tradition Contrariwise wheresoeuer the holy Scripture speaketh in the commendation of Traditions to wit such traditions a◠the Apostles deliuered to the Church there all their sayd translations agree not to followe the Greeke which is still the selfe same word but for traditions they translate ordinaunces or instructions Why so and to what purpose we appeale to the worme of their conscience which continually accuseth them of an hereticall meaning whether by vrging the word traditions wheresoeuer they are discommended and by suppressing the word wheresoeuer they are commended their purpose and intent be not to signifie to the Reader that all traditions are naught and none good all reproueable none allowable Fulke TRaditions in deede is a matter of such importance as if you may be allowed whatsoeuer you will thrust vpon vs vnder the name of vnwritten traditions the written worde of God shall serue to no purpose at all For first as you plainly professe the holy Scripture shall not be accounted sufficient to teach all truth necessary to saluation that the man of God may be perfect prepared to all good works Secondly with the Valentinian heretikes you accuse the Scriptures of vncertaine vnderstāding without your traditions vnder pretense of which you wil bring in what you list though it be neuer so contrary to the holy Scriptures plaine wordes by colour of interpretatiō as you do the worshipping of images many other like heresies As for the mention that is made of Apostolicall traditions in diuerse of the auncient fathers some of thē are such as you your selues obserue not not for the tenth part of those that you obserue can you bring any testimony out of the ancient fathers as is proued sufficiently by so many propositiōs as were set downe by the Bishoppe of Sarisburie M. Iewel whereof you can bring no proofe for any one to haue bene taught within 600. yeres after Christ. Now concerning the traditions of the Apostles what they were who can be a better witnesse vnto vs than Ignatius the disciple of the Apostles of whom Eusebius writeth that when he was led towardes Rome where he suffred martyrdom he earnestly exhorted the Churches by which he passed to continue in the faith and against all heresies which euen then began to bud vp he charged thē to retaine fast the traditiō of the Apostles which by that time he protested to be committed to writing for by that time were al the books of the new Testament written The words of Eusebius concerning this matter are li. 3. c. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he exhorted thē straitly to kepe the tradition of the Apostles which testifying that it was now for assurance cōmitted to writing he thought necessary to be plainly taught Against this tradition of the Apostles which for certaintie assurance is contained in their holy vndoubted writings we say nothing but striue altogither for it But because the word traditions is by you Papistes taken to signifie a doctrine secretely deliuered by worde of mouth without authority of the holy Scriptures we do willingly auoide the word in our translations where the simple might be deceiued to think that the holy ghost did euer cōmēd any such to the church which he would not haue to be committed to writing in the holy Scriptures in steede of that word so commōly taken although it doth not necessarily signifie any such matters we doe vse such wordes as do truly expresse the Apostles meaning the Greke word doth also signifie Therfore we vse the words of ordināces or instructiōs or institutiōs or the doctrine deliuered all which being of one sense the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doeth signifie and the same doth tradition signifie if it be rightly vnderstoode but seing it hath bene commonly taken and is vrged of the Papistes to signifie only a doctrine deliuered beside the word of God written in such places where the holy Ghost vseth the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that sense we translate by that worde tradition where he vseth it for such doctrine as is groūded vpon the holy Scriptures our translatours haue auoyded it not of any hereticall meaning that all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 traditions are naught but that all such as haue not the holy Scripture to testifie of them and to warrant them are euill and to be auoyded of all true Christians which can not without blasphemie acknowledge any imperfection in the holy Scriptures of God which are able to make a man wise vnto saluation if they shoulde thinke any doctrine necessarie to saluation not to be cōtained therein MART. 2. For example Matt. 15. Thus they translate Why do thy disciples transgresse the TRADITION of the Elders And againe Why do you also transgresse the commaundement of God by your TRADITION And againe Thus haue you made the commaundement of God of no effect by your TRADITION Here I warrant you all the bels sound tradition and the word is neuer omitted
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
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
say A pagan idolater and a Christian idolater by one and the same Greeke woorde in one and the same meaning and they translate A pagan idolater and a Christian worshipper of images by two distinct words and diuerse meanings it must needes be done wilfully to the foresaid purpose See chap. 3. num 8. 9. FVLKE 6. We translate not only pagane Idolaters but also Iewes Idolaters nor Christians only worshippers of Images but Paganes also wherefore this is a foolish obseruation And if we do any where explicate who is an Idolater by translating him a worshipper of images both the word beareth it and it is not contrarie to the sense of the Scriptures in which we find the worshipping of images alwaies forbidden but neuer commaunded or allowed MART. 7. If they translate one and the same Greeke word Tradition whensoeuer the Scripture speaketh of euill traditions and neuer translate it so whensoeuer it speaketh of good and Apostolicall traditions their intention is euident against the authoritie of Traditions See chap. 2 numb 1. 2 3. FVLKE 7. This is aunswered sufficiently in confutation of the Preface Sect. 51. The English word Tradition sounding in the euill parte and taken by the Papistes for matter vnwritten yet as true and as necessarie as that which is contained in the holie Scriptures we haue vpon iust cause auoided in such places as the Greeke worde signifieth good and necessarie doctrine deliuered by the Apostles which is all contained in the Scriptures and yet haue vsed such English wordes as sufficiently expresse the Greeke word vsed in the originall text Doe not you your selues translate Tradere sometimes to betray and sometimes to deliuer MART. 8. Yea if they translate Tradition taken in ill parte where it is not in the Greeke and translate it not so where it is in the Greeke taken in good parte it is more euidence of the foresaid wicked intention See chap. 2. numb 5. 6. FVLK 8. Our intention can be no worse than your vulgar Latine Interpreters was who where the Greeke hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translateth it Traditions Act. 6. And the right vnderstanding of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Apostles meaning wil yeeld traditions as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place before mentioned MARTINE 9. If they make this a good rule to translate according to the vsuall signification and not the originall deriuation of wordes as Beza and Maister Whitakers doe and if they translate contrarie to this rule what is it but wilfull corruption So they doe in translating Idolum an Image Presbyter an Elder and the like See chap. 4. chap. 6. numb 6. 7. 8. c. numb 13. c. FVLKE 9. Neither Beza nor Maister Whitaker make it a perpetuall rule to translate according to the vsuall signification for sometimes a worde is not taken in the vsuall signification as Foenerator vsed by your vulgar Latine Interpreter Luke 7. vsuallye signifieth an Vserer yet doe you translate it a Creditor Likewise Stabulum vsed Luke 10. vsually signifieth a Stable yet you translate it an Inne So Nauis which vsually signifieth a Shippe you call it a Boate. Marke 8. and Nauicula which vsuallye signifieth a Boate you call a Shippe Luke 5. And yet I thinke you meant no wilfull corruption No more surelye did they whiche translated Idolum an Image and Presbyter an Elder whiche you can not deny But they followe the originall deriuation of the wordes whereas some of yours both goe from the vsuall signification and also from the originall deriuation MARTINE 10. If Presbyter by Ecclesiasticall vse bee appropriated to signifie a Priest no lesse than Episcopus to signifie a Bishoppe or Diaconus a Deacon and if they translate these two later accordingly and the first neuer in all the Newe Testament what can it be but wilfull corruption in fauour of this heresie That there are no Priestes of the Newe Testament See chap. 6. numb 12. FVLKE 10. The worde Priest by Popishe abuse is commonly taken for a Sacrificer the same that Sacerdos in Latine But the Holie Ghost neuer calleth the Ministers of the worde and Sacramentes of the Newe Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Sacerdotes Therefore the translatours to make a difference betwene the Ministers of the Olde Testament and them of the Newe calleth the one according to the vsuall acception Priestes and the other according to the originall deriuation Elders Which distinction seeing the vulgar Latine texte doth alwaies rightly obserue it is in fauour of your hereticall Sacrificing Priesthoode that you corruptly translate Sacerdos and Presbyter alwayes as though they were all one a Priest as though the Holie Ghost had made that distinction in vayne or that there were no difference betwene the Priesthoode of the Newe Testament and the Olde The name of Priest according to the originall deriuation from Presbyter wee doe not refuse but according to the common acception for a Sacrificer wee can not take it when it is spoken of the Ministerie of the Newe Testament And although many of the auncient Fathers haue abusiuelye confounded the termes of Sacerdos and Presbyter yet that is no warrant for vs to translate the Scripture and to confounde that which we see manifestly the spirit of God hath distinguished For this cause we haue translated the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Elder euen as your vulgar Latine translater doeth diuerse times as Actes 15. and 20. 1. Pet. 5. and else where calleth them Seniores or Maiores natu Which you commonly call the Auncientes or Seniors because you dare not speake Englishe and say the Elders Neither is Presbyter by Ecclesiasticall vse so approprietated to signifie a Priest that you woulde alwayes translate it so in the Olde Testament where your vulgar translatour vseth it for a name of Office and Gouernment and not for Priests at any time Neither do we alwayes translate the Greeke worde Episcopus and Diaconus for a Bishoppe and a Deacon but sometimes for an ouerseer as Act. 20. and a minister generally oftentimes The word Baptisma by Ecclesiasticall vse signifieth the holy Sacrament of Baptisme yet are you enforced Marke 7. to translate Baptismata washings Euen so doe we to obserue that distinction which the Apostles and Euangelistes alwaies doe keepe when we call Sacerdotes Priestes for difference we call Presbyteros Elders and not least the name of Priestes shoulde enforce the Popishe sacrifice of the Masse For this worde Presbyter will neuer cōprehend a sacrificer or a sacrificing Priesthoode MART. 11. If for Gods altar they translate Temple for Bels idololatrical table they translate altar iudge whether it bee not of purpose against our altars and in fauour of their communion table See chap. 17. numb 15. 16. FVLK 11. If there be any suche mistaking of one word for an other I thinke it was the fault of the Printer rather than of the Translator for the name of altar is more
it if in this case they will adde only to the very text is it not most horrible and diuelish corruption So did Luther whom our English ProtestaÌ„ts honor as their father in this heresie of only faith are his owne childreÌ„ See ch 12. FVLK 24. In the question of iustification by faith only where S. Iames saieth no we say no also neyther can it be proued that we adde this word only to the text in any translation of oures If Luther did in his translation adde the worde only to the texte it can not be excused of wrong translation in worde although the sense might well beare it But seing Luther doth him selfe confesse it he may be excused of frawde though not of lacke of iudgement But why should our translation be charged with Luthers corruption Because our English Protestants honour him as their father A very lewde slaunder for we call no man father vpon earth though you do call the Pope your father albeit in another sense Luther was a reuerende father of the Churche for his time But as touching the doctrine of only faith iustifying it hath more patrones of the fathers of the auncient primitiue Church than Martine can beare their bookes though he would breake his backe who in the same plaine wordes do affirme it as Luther doth that only faith doth iustifie And the Apostle which saieth that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law speaketh more plainely for iustification by faith only as we do teach it than if he had sayed a man is iustified by faith only Which text of Rom. 3. and many other are as expresse scripture to proue that we teach and beleeue as that S. Iames sayeth against iustification by faith only where he speaketh of an other faith and of an other iustification than S. Paule speaketh of and we vnderstand when we holde that a man is iustified by faith only or without workes of the law which is all one MART. 25. If these that account themselues the great Grecians and Hebricians of the world will so translate for the aduauntage of their cause as though they had no skill in the world and as though they knew neither the significatioÌ„ of words nor proprietie of phrases in the saide languages is it not to be esteemed shamelesse corruption FVLK 25. Yes but if it can not be proued that so they translate then is this an impudent slaunder as al the rest are and so it will proue when it coÌ„meth to be tried MART. 26. I will not speake of the German Heretikes who to mainteine this heresie that all our workes be they neuer so good are sinne translated for Tibi soli peccaui to thee only haue I sinned thus Tibi solùm peccaui that is I haue nothing else but sinned whatsoeuer I do I sinne whereas neither the Greeke nor the Hebrewe will possibly admit that sense Let these passe as Lutherans yet wilfull corrupters and acknowledged of our English Protestants for their good brethren But if Beza translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when we were yet of no strength as the Geneua English Bible also doth interprete it whereas euery young Grecian knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither without strength is not this of purpose to take away mans free will altogither See chap. 10. nu 13. FVLK 26. I knowe not what German heretikes those be which maintaine that heresie that al our works be they neuer so good are sinne except they be the Libertines with whom we haue nothing to do For we neuer say that good workes are sinne for that were al one to say that good were euill But that al our good workes are short of that perfection which the law of God requireth we do humbly confesse against our selues Or else what soeuer seemeth to be a good worke and is done of meÌ„ voyde of true faith is sinne For these assertions we haue the scripture to warraÌ„t vs. And if to proue the later any man hath translated those words of Dauid in the 51. Psalme Lecha Lebadecha Tibi solum or tantuÌ„modo tibi peccaui c. To the only or altogither to thee I haue sinned in respect of his naturall corruption which he doth expresse in the next verse he hath not departed one whitte from the Hebrewe wordes nor from the sense which the wordes may very wel beare which he that denieth rather sheweth him selfe ignorant in the Hebrew tongue than he that so translateth For what doth Lebad signifie but Solum or Tantum and therefore it may as well be translated Solum tibi as Soli â—ibi And the Apostle Rom. 3. prouing by the later end of that verse all men to be vniust that God only may be true and euery man a lier as it is written that thou mayest be iustified in thy wordes c. fauoreth that interpretation of Bucer or who soeuer it is beside But if Beza translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when wee were yet of no strength as the Geneua Englishe Bible doth also interprete it whereas euerye young Grecian knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither withoute strengthe is not this of purpose to take awaye mannes free wyll altogither Chapter tenth Number 13. Naye it is to shewe as the Apostles purpose is that wee haue no strength to fulfill the lawe of God without the grace of Christ euen as Christ him selfe sayth without me you can do nothing Ioan. 15. v. 5. But euery young Grecian saye you knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither with out strength And is there then any old Grecian that will proue that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alway signifieth him that is weake but not voide of strength Doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alwayes signifie him that hath some streÌ„gth Certaine it is that the Apostle speaketh here of those that were voide of strength for the same he calleth in the same verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vngodly or voide of religion for whom Christ died Howe say you then had vngodly persons any strength to be saued except Christ had died for them Therefore he that in this place translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 weake feeble infirme must needes vnderstand men so weake feeble and infirme as they haue no strength For how might it else be truely sayed what hast thou which thou hast not receiued 1. Cor. 4. v. 7. Yes say you we haue some peece of freewil at least some strength to clime to heauen euen without the grace of God without the death redemption of Christ. If you say no why cauill you at Bezaes translation and ours The Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as great a Grecian as you would make your selfe signifieth weake or infirme sometime that which yet hath some strength sometime that which hath no strength at all as I will giue you a plaine example out of S.
Beza cry out as lowd as you can there is neither fraude nor corruptioÌ„ malice nor partialitye but a prudent declining of that terme which might giue occasioÌ„ of error the Apostles meaning truly and faithfully deliuered To shewe that one word may be diuersly traÌ„slated especially wheÌ„ it signifieth diuers things to wise meÌ„ is needeles I haue said before you your selues translate or else you should be taken for mad men the Latine worde tradere of which tradition is deriued sometimes to deliuer sometimes to betray and yet the Greeke and Latine worde being all one in all the saide places MART. 4. Yea they doe else where so gladly vse this word tradition when it may tend to the discredit thereof that they put the sayd word in all their English Bibles with the like ful consent as before when it is not in the Greeke at all As when they translate thus If ye be dead with Christ from the rudimeÌ„ts of the world why as though liuing in the world ARE YE LEDDâ— WITH TRADITIONS and as an other English translation of theirs readeth more heretically Why are ye burdened with traditions Tell vs sincerely you that professe to haue skill in the Greeke and to translate according to the Greeke tell vs we beseech you whether this Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe signifie tradition and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be lead or burdened with traditions You can not be ignorant that it doth not so signifie but as a litle before in the same chapter and in other places your selues translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinaunces decrees so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must be as in the vulgar Latine it is Quid decernitis Why do you ordaine or decree or why are you ledde with decrees FVLK 4. It grieueth you that tradition shoulde be mentioned so often in the ill part as it is And it seemeth you would defend the Colossians against S. Paule who reproueth them because they were led with ordinaunces according to the precepts and doctrines of men But you seeme to make light of suche traditions and therefore you count that the more hereticall translation which sayth why are you burthened with traditions Wherfore I pray you is that more hereticall Doe you not thinke that such traditions as are the commaundements doctrines of men are burthenous to mens consciences But they that haue skill in the Greeke tongue must tell you sincerely whether this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe signifie tradition and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be led or burdened with traditions I answere you if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as you confesse signifie ordinances and decrees or doctrines and the worde tradition signifieth the same why shoulde not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie to be ledde or burdened with traditions as well as with ordinaunces customes or decrees These wordes differ much in sounde but not greatly in signification Dogmata Pythagoraea that might neuer be put in writing what were they but the traditions of Pythagoras Such were the Philosophicall decrees called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof Tullie speaketh in his booke de finibus which were dictata taught by worde of mouth which to set foorth among them was compted an heynous offence might not those rightly be called traditions MART. 5. Iustifie your translation if you can either out of Scriptures fathers or Lexicon And make vs a good reason why you put the worde traditions here where it is not in the Greeke and would not put it in the places before where you know it is most euidently in the Greeke Yea you must tell vs why you translate for tradition ordinance and contrarie for ordinance tradition so turning caâ—te in panne as they say at your pleasure and wresting both the one and the other to one end that you may make the very name of traditions odious among the people be they neuer so authenticall euen from the Apostles which your conscience knoweth and you shal answere for it at the dreadfull day FVLK 5. Firste out of Scripture I iustifie it thus Those dogmata against which the Apostle writeth were according to the precepts doctrines of men but such the Scripture calleth traditions Math. 15. Therfore these were traditions SecoÌ„dly out of the fathers Chrysostome vpon this place saith Traditiones graecorum taxat he reproueth the traditions of the Greekes saying all is but a humane doctrine Secondly S. Ambrose vpon this texte Loue not the world sayth he nor those errours Quos humana adinuenit traditio which the tradition of men hath inueÌ„ted And afterward Sagina enim carnalis sensus humana traditio est For the tradition of man is the pampering of carnal sense by which he saith men are so burthened that they cannot be ioyned to the head which is aboue Yet burthening with traditions is called of you the more heretical translation Say as much to Ambrose that he maketh an hereticall coÌ„mentarie The interpretor of Theodoret printed at Collen 1573. hath translated in the very text for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 traditiones hominum traditions of meÌ„ You see nowe this matter is not so voide of testimonie of the fathers as you supposed The reason you require vs to make is made often before Wee thought it not meete to expresse the Greeke worde in both places by the same english word because the english word as it is vsed by you is not so indifferent to signifie the doctrine of God deliuered out of the Scriptures as to signifie doctrines of men deuised beside the Scriptures If we must answere why we call tradition ordinance and ordinance tradition let your vulgar Latine interpreter answere vs or you for him why he calleth tradition precept and vsage or precept traditioÌ„ The one he doth 1. Cor. 11. v. 2. the other Act. 6. v. 14. where the Greeke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying there precepts or obseruations commauÌ„ded he translateth traditiones as in the other place the Greeke being 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he translateth praecepta If this be lawfull for him why should it be couÌ„ted corruptioÌ„ or false translation in vs seeing we are moued with as good reason as can be yeelded for him As for authentical and apostolicall traditions that are grounded vpon the doctrine of the Apostles expressed in their writings we shall be ready to receiue them when so euer they shal be brought soorth If they caÌ„not be proued by the Scriptures which are writteÌ„ that we might beleeue and beleeuing haue eternall life which are able to make vs wise vnto saluatioÌ„ we haue nothing to do with them we may wel spare them nay we dare not admit them least we should answer for blasphemie against the holy Scriptures in that dreadfull day if by admitting of such traditioÌ„s we should professe that the doctrine contained in the holy Scriptures is vnperfect or insufficient to saluation MART. 6. Somewhat more excusable it is but yet proceeding of the same hereticall humor and
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
childbed wee beleeue not because wee haue not read it That you say Lo M. Chark S. Augustine maketh it both a matter of faith and the doubting thereof to be blasphemie how will you auoid this It is easily auoyded for it is false in many respects first S. Augustine fayeth it not but some obscure man of much latter time lesse learning and authoritie as the barbarous stile in many places declareth secondly hee fayth not that it is a matter of faith to beleeue the perpetuall virginitie of Marie but that shee conceiued brought foorth and remained a virgine after her child-birth Thirdly he maketh not the doubting thereof to be blasphemie but the obstinate denying of Heluidius which saide shee was no virgine after her childbirth But how will you auoide that which S. Ierome writeth We refuse those things that are not written we beleeue not because wee haue not read in y e scripture anything hereof as necessarie to saluation Pag. 158. you do not see why you should beleeue a Charke or a Fulke comming but yester day from the grammar schole before a Cyprian a Tertullian a Basil a Ierom an Ambrose or an Augustine especially in a matter of fact as your case is seeing they liued more than twelue or thirteene hundred yeares nearer to the deede dooing than these ministers do Why sir I pray you who requireth you to beleeue any minister of these dayes before any of those auncient fathers in respect of the credite of the persons and not of the truth which they bring You knowe that Panormitane thinketh more credite is to be giuen to one lay man speaking the trueth according to scripture than to all men of all ages speaking contrarie to the trueth or beside the truth of the scriptures But it is a matter of fact you say whether such and such traditions came from Christ his Apostles or no and therefore they that liued neerer the time of the deede dooing by twelue or thirteene hundreth yeares are more like to knowe the trueth than wee I answere that all things that you pretende for traditions are not of one sort some are contrary to the word of God and are reproued by euidence of the holy scriptures other are beside the worde of God and therefore not necessarie to bee receiued because they are not found in the holie scriptures As for the prerogatiue of antiquitie cannot argue a certaine knowledge of the fact in these ancient fathers seeing in two or three hundreth yeares that was before their time and the time of the deede supposed to be done any fable might be obtruded vnder pretence of such tradition as we prooue that many were Yea when they that were neerest of all to the Apostles time as Polycarpus and Anicetus do not agree what was the Apostles traditioÌ„ which was not expressed in their writing it is manifest that they of much latter time coulde haue no certeintie thereof And that whatsoeuer ceremonie or practise the Apostles deliuered which was not expressed in the scripture was but temporall or arbitrarie in the power of the Church to vse or not vse as it might best serue for edifying Finally where you affirme that Fulk came but yesterday from the Grammar schole to make it seeme that he is but a yong grammatian either your dayes be neere as long as thirtie yeres or else your pen runneth beyond your knowledge of him or at leastwise your malice ouer reacheth your knowledge But yet to this extremitie of crediting one Charke or Fulke before so many auncient fathers you say you are driuen and bid men hearken a little howe D. Fulke handleth these men about traditions And first S. Cyprian alledging the tradition of Christ himselfe concerning the mingling of wine and water in the chalice but if Cyprian had beene well vrged faith Fulke he would haue better considered of the matter Thus you woulde make men beleeue that I oppose nothing but mine owne authoritie or credit against S. Cyprian But then you shamefully beelie me for this is the matter and these are my wordes which you haue gelded at your pleasure Whereas Cyprian ad Pompeiâ—â— calleth all traditions to the writinges and commandements of the Apostles Martiall cryeth out that Cyprian is slandered because he himselfe alleageth the tradition of Christ for mingling of water with wine If Cyprian breake his owne rule who can excuse him But if he had beene vrged as much for the necessitie of water as he was for the necessitie of wine in the sacrament he would haue better considered of the matter Who seeth not I suppose no lesse authoritie against Cyprian than of Cyprian himselfe and therefore I boast not of mine owne credite aboue his To proceede Tertullian is alleaged saying that the blessing with the signe of the crosse is an apostolike tradition Fulke Tertullians iudgement of tradition without scripture in that place is corrupt If I should search no further heere is a reason of Fulkes mislike of Tertullians iudgement added because he affirmeth tradition of the Apostles without the writing of the Apostles But in deede there is in the place by you noted other argumentes in these wordes Tertullians iudgement of tradition without scripture in that place is corrupt for Martiall himselfe confesseth that a tradition vnwritten should be reasonable and agreeable to the scriptures and so he sayth the tradition of blessing with the crosse is because the Apostles by the holy ghost deliuered it But who shall assure vs thereof Tertullian and Basill are not sufficient warrant for so worthy a matter seeing S. Paule leaueth it out of the vniuersall armour of God This last and inuincible argument in rehearsing my wordes you leaue out which because perhaps you could not see in sewe wordes I will set it more abroade The vniuersall spirituall armour of God is deliuered by S. Paule Eph. 6. blessing with the signe of the crosse is not there deliuered by S. Paul therefore blessing with the signe of the crosse is no part of the spirituall armour of God Nowe let vs see whether you will beleeue a Paule before a Tertullian or a Basill or a Fulke with S. Paule before a Basil with Tertullian without S Paule or against S. Paule But you goe forwarde S. Ierome is alleaged saying that lent fast is the tradition of the Apostles Fulke Ierome vntruely ascribeth that tradition to the Apostles My wordes are against Bristowes Mot. pag. 35. these Againe S. Ierome fayth it was a tradition of the Apostles to fast 40. dayes in the yeare If this be true then is the popish storie false that maketh Telesphorus bishoppe of Rome author of that lenten fast Eusebius sheweth y e great diuersitie of fasting before Easter li. 5. cap. 26. saying that some fasted but one day some two dayes some more some 40. houres of day and night This diuersitie prooueth that Ierome vntruely ascribeth that tradition to the Apostles which should haue beene kept vniformely if it had any institution
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
speach but either writtē by Barnabas as Tertullian holdeth or by Luke the Euangelist as some men thinke or by Clemens that after was B. of the Romane church whom they say to haue ordered adorned the sentēces of Paul in his own speach or els truly bicause Paule did write vnto the Hebrews because of the enuie of his name amōg thē he cut of the title in the beginning of the salutation These things cōsidered what neede those tragical exclamations in so trifling a matter Doth not the title tell it is S. Paules why strike they out S. Paules name what an hereticall peeuishnesse is this For lacke of good matter you are driuen to lowde clamors against vs but I will euen conclude in your owne wordes I reporte me to all indifferent men of common sense whether we do it to deminish the credite of the epistle which of al S. Paules epistles we might least misse when we come to dispute against your Popish sacrifice sacrificing priesthood or whether you do not craftily moue a scruple in the mindes of simple persons to make thē doubt of the auctoritie of that epistle whose double cannon shot you are not able to beare whē it is thūdred out against you vnder colour that it is not of sound credit among our selues that vse it against you Which of al the lies that euer Satan inuented taught you to vtter is one of the most abhominable MART. 12. I know very well that the authoritie of Canonicall Scripture standeth not vpon the certaintie of the author but yet to be Paules or not Paules Apostolicall or not Apostolicall maketh great difference of credite and estimation For what made S. Iames epistle doubted of sometime or the second of S. Peter and the rest but that they were not thought to be the epistles of those Apostles This Luther sawe very well when he denied S. Iames epistle to be Iames the Apostles writing If titles of bookes be of no importāce then leaue out Matthew Marke Luke and Iohn leaue out Paule in his other epistles also and you shall much pleasure the Manichees and other old Heretikes if the titles make no difference vrge no more the title of the Apocalypse S. Iohn the Diuines as though it were not S. Iohns the Euangelistes and you shall much displeasure some Heretikes now a daies Briefly most certaine it is and they know it best by their owne vsual doings that it is a principall way to the discredite of any booke to denie it to be that authors vnder whose name it hath bene receiued FVLK 12. If you know so well that the auctoritie of the Canonical scripture standeth not vpō the certaintie of the auctor as in deede it doth not For the bookes of Iudges of Ruth of Samuel the later of the Kings c. who can certainly affirme by whom they were written with what forehead do you charge vs to doubte of the auctoritie of this epistle because we reporte out of the auncient writers the vncertaintie of the auctor or leaue out that title whiche is not certainely true But yet you say to be Paules or not Paules apostolicall or not apostolicall maketh great difference of credite and estimation If by apostolicall you meane of apostolicall spirite or auctoritie I agree to that you say of apostolical or not apostolicall If you meane apostolicall that only which was writtē by some Apostle you will make great difference of credite estimatiō betweene the Gospell of Marke Luke and the Actes of the Apostles from the gospels of Mathew and Iohn But which of vs I pray you that thinketh that this epistle was not writtē by S. Paul once doubteth whether it be not of Apostolicall spirite and auctoritie Which is manifest by this that both in preaching and writing wee cite it thus the Apostle to the Hebrewes And if it were written by S. Luke or by S. Clement which both were Apostolike men seing it is out of controuersie that it was written by the spirite of God it is doubtlesse Apostolicall and differeth not in credite and estimation from those writings that are knowen certainly to haue bene writtē by the Apostles But I maruel greatly why you write that to be Paules or not Paules maketh great difference of credite estimation Those epistles that are Peters and Iohns are not Paules yet I thinke their is no great difference of credite estimation betweene them Paules What you thinke I know not but you write very suspitiously You aske what made S. Iames epistle or the second of Peter and the rest to be sometimes doubted of but that they were not thought to be the epistles of those Apostles Yes something else or else they doubted vainely of them and without iuste cause as I thinke they did But when their were two Apostles called Iames he that doubteth whether the epistle was written by Iames the brother of Iohn is persuaded it was written rather by Iames the sonne of Alphaeus doubteth nothing of the credit auctoritie estimation of the epistle No more doe wee which doubt whether the epistle to the Hebrewes were written by S. Paule seeing we are perswaded it was written either by S. Barnabas or by S. Luke or by S. Clement as the auncient writers thought or by some other of the Apostles or Euangelists we make no question but that it is Apostolicall and of equall auctoritie with the rest of the holy scriptures But Eusebius denied the epistle of S. Iames because he was perswaded that it was written by no Apostle or Apostolike man and therefore saith plainly that it is a bastard or counterset and so belike was Luther deceiued if euer he denied it as you say he did But if titles of bookes be of no importance say you then leaue out Matthew Marke Iohn and Paule in his other Epistles What nede that I pray you Is there no difference betwene leauing out a title whereof there hath bene great vncertaintie and diuersitie in Gods church and which in some Greeke copies both written and printed is left out and in leauing out those titles that neuer were omitted nor neuer any question or controuersie moued of them by any of the auncient catholike fathers But you will vs to vrge no more the title of the Apocalypse of S. Iohn the Diuine as though it were not S. Iohn the Euangelistes we shall please I know not what heretikes of our time except it be the Papistes whom it would most concerne that the reuelation of S. Iohn in which their Antichrist of Rome is so plainly described were brought out of credit But if you had read Bezaes preface before the Apocalypse you should finde that euen by that title he gathereth a probable argument that it was written by Iohn the Euangelist because it is not like that this excellent name THE DIVINE coulde agree to any Iohn in the Apostles time so aptly as to Sainct Iohn the Euangelist beside the consent of al antiquitie
there shal be in any person a sinne to be adiudged to death he shal be deliuered to death if thou shalt hang him vpoÌ„ a tree 23. Let not his carcase tarie all night vpon that tree but in any case thou shalt burie him the same day for accursed to God is he that is hanged The word tree being twise named before who would be so madde to say that S. Paule hath added it beside the Hebrue text Likewise where you bidde vs strike out of the Hebrue Psal. 21. that which concerneth our redemption on the crosse They haue pearced my handes and my feete because in the Hebrue there is no suche thing you say most vntruely for there is nothing else in the Hebrue no not in the common readings as Iohannes Isaake a Popishe Iewe will teache you who hath confuted the cauils of Lindanus against the Hebrue texte of whom you borrowed this exam le where if you had not beene blinde with mallice you mighte haue seene that Sainct Hierome did reade without controuersie Fixâ—runt they haue pearced as also that the most auncieÌ„t copie of the Hebrue Psalmes supposed to haue pertained to Sainct Augustine of CaÌ„terburie hath Charu they haue pearced though you had bene ignoraunt what is written concerning this word in the Masoreth and what Isaac also writeth of that word as it is commonly redde that it can not signifie as you fantasie sicut leo like a lion And therefore the Chalde paraphrast turneth it As a lion they pearced my handes and my feete But of this matter more hereafter as occasion shall be giuen As for the Apostle Ephes. 4. saying that Christ gaue giftes whereas of Dauid it is sayd he receiued giftes speaketh nothing contrarie to the Hebrue but sheweth wherefore Christ hath receiued gifts namely to bestow vpon his church Except you will say that Christ gaue of his owne and receiued none and so the Apostle doth shewe the excellencie of the trueth aboue the figure Christ aboue Dauid Likewise where the Psalmist sayeth in the Hebrue Thou hast opened mine eares the Apostle doth rightly collect that Christ had a bodie which in his obedience was to be offered vnto the father Last of all you would haue fiue soules cut from 75. in Sainct Stephens Sermon because it is not in the Hebrue but you are deceiued For Sainct Stephen gathereth the whole number of them that are named in the fortie sixt chapter of Genesis Namely the two sonnes of Iuda that were deade and Iacobes foure wiues to shewe howe greate his familie was at the vttermost before he went downe into Aegypt and howe greatly God did multiplie him afterwarde What is there in any of these examples like to Qui fuit Cainan about whiche you make so muche a doe MART. 20. Must such difficulties diuersities be resolued by chopping and changing hacking and hewing the sacred text of holy Scripture Sec into what perplexities wilfull heresie and arrogancie hath driuen them To discredit the vulgar Latine translation of the Bible and the fathers expositions according to the same for that is the originall cause of this and besides that they may haue alwaies this euasion It is not so in the Hebrue it is otherwise in the Greeke and so seeme iolly fellowes and great clerkes vnto the ignorant people what do they they admit onely the Hebrue in the old Test. and the Greeke in the newe to be the true and authenticall texte of the Scripture Wherevpon this foloweth that they reiect and must needes reiect the Greeke of the old Test. called the Septuaginta as false because it differeth from the Hebrue Which being reiected therevpon it foloweth againe that wheresoeuer those places so disagreeing from the Hebrue are cited by Christ or the Euangelists and Apostles there also they must be reiected because they disagree from the Hebrue and so yet againe it foloweth that the Greeke text of the new Testament is not true because it is not according to the Hebrue veritie consequently the wordes of our Sauiour and writings of his Apostles must be reformed to say the least because they speake according to the Septuaginta and not according to the Hebrue FVLK 20. Who alloweth or who can abide chopping and changing or hacking and hewing the sacred text of holy Scriptures As for the perplexities wherevnto you faine that wilfull heresie and arrogancie hath driuen vs is of your weauing for God be praised we can wel inough with good conscience sound knowledge that may abide the iudgement of all the learned in the world defend both the Hebrew text of the olde Testament and the Greeke text of the new Not of purpose to discredit the vulgar Latine translation and the expositions of the fathers but to fetch the truth vpon which the hope of our saluation is grounded out of the first fountaines and springs rather than out of any streames that are deriued from them And this we doe agreeable to the auncient fathers iudgements For who knoweth not what fruitfull paines S. Hierom tooke in translating the Scripture out of the originall tongue neither would he be disswaded by S. Augustine who although he misliked that enterprise at the first yet afterward he highly commended the necessitie of the Greeke Hebrue tongues for Latine men to find out the certaine truth of the text in the infinite varietie of the Latine interpretations for thus he writetth De doct Christ. lib. 2. cap. 11. Contra ignota signa propria magnum remedium est linguarum cognitio Eâ— latinae c. Against vnknowen proper signes the knowledge of tongues is a great remedie And truly men of the Latine tongue whom we haue now taken in hand to instruct haue neede also of two other tongues vnto the knowledge of the diuine Scriptures namely the Hebrue the Greeke that recourse may be had vnto the former copies if the infinite varietie of the Latine interpreters shal bring any doubt although we find ofteÌ„times in the bookes Hebrue words not interpreted as Amen Alleluia Racha Osanna c. and a litle after Sed noÌ„ propter haec pauca c. But not for these few wordes which to marke and inquire of it is a very easie thing but for the diuersities as it is said of the interpreters the knowledge of those tongues is necessarie For they that haue interpreted the scriptures out of the Hebrue toÌ„gue into the Greke tong may be nuÌ„bred but the Latine interpreters by no means can be numbred For in the first times of the faith as a Greeke booke came into euery mans hand he seemed to haue some skill in both the tongues he was bold to interpret it Which thing truly hath more helped the vnderstanding than hindred if the readers be not negligeÌ„t for the looking vpon many bookes hath often times made manifest sundry obscure or darke sentences This is S. Augustines sound iudgement of the knowledge of tongues and diuersitie of interpretations for the better
an hare beefore the houndes suche mightie hunters you are and wee suche fearefull hares before you I am not skilful in the termes of hunting but in plaine Englishe I wil speake it that if al the traiterous wolues and foxes that bee in the kennell at Rhemes woulde doe their beste to saue your credit in this section nay in this whole preface they shall neuer be able to maintaine their owne with anye indifferent reader MART. 47. Wel then doth it like you to reade thus according to Bezaes translation Thou shalt not leaue my carcasse in the graue No we are content to alter the word carcas which is not a seemely word for our sauiors bodie and yet wee are loath to say soule but if we might we would say rather life person as appeareth in the margent of our Bibles but as for the Hebrue word that signifieth Hel though the Greke Latin Bible throughout the Greke and Latin fathers in al theyr writings as occasion serueth doe so reade it and vnderstande it yet wil we neuer so translate it but for Hel we wil say graue in al such places of scripture as might infer Limbus patrum if we shoulde translate Hel. These are their shifies and turnings and windings in the olde Testament FVLK 47. I haue shewed you before that in the newe Testament we like better to translate according to the proper and vsual signification of the Greke word But the Hebrewe worde in the olde Testament may bee translated according to the circumstaunce of the place life person selfe yea or dead bodie and in some place perhaps carcase You folow vs very neare to seeke aduantage of the English worde carcase which commonly is taken in contempt therfore we would not vse it speaking of the bodie of our Sauiour Christe when it was dead But you hunt your selfe out of breath when you woulde bring the same contempt to the Latine worde Cadauer which Beza vsed For Cadauer signifieth generally a dead bodie of man or beast and by your vulgar Latine translator is vsed for the dead bodies of sacrifices of Saincts and holy men as indifferently as for carion of beastes or carcases of euill men Namely in Iob. 39. v 33. wheresoeuer the dead body is thether will the Eagle resort which similitude our Sauiour Christe applieth to him selfe Math. 24. v. 28. wheresoeuer the dead bodie is thether wil the Eagles be gathered where he compareth him selfe to the dead body and the faithfull to the Egles Now concerning the other Hebrue worde which you say signifieth hell because the Greeke and vulgar Latine interpretor do so translate it When iust occasion shal be giuen afterwarde Cap. 7. I will shew that it properly signifieth a graue pit or place for dead bodies and that in this place of the 16. Psalme it muste needes so signifie not onely the later part of the verse expressing in other wordes that which was saide in the former but also the Apostles prouing out of it the resurrection of Christe doe sufficiently declare If you haue no place therefore in the Scriptures to proue your Limbus patrum but where the holy Ghost speaketh of the death and buriall of the fathers no maruaile though you must straine the Hebrue worde which properly signifieth graue and the Greeke worde which properly signifieth a darke place and especially the Latine whiche signifieth generally a lowe place none of all the three wordes signifying hel as wee commonly vnderstande the worde hell properly and onely but by a figure where mention is made of the death of the vngodly whose rewarde is in hell These be the poore shiftes turninges and windings that you haue to wreath in those fables of Limbus patrum Purgatorie which the Church of God from the beginning of the worlde vnto the comming of Christ neuer heard of nor many hundreth yeares after Christe vntill the MoÌ„tanists or such like hethenish heretikes brought in those fantasies MART. 48. In the newe Testament wee aske them will you be tried by the auncient Latine translation which is the texte of the fathers and the whole Churche No but wee appeale to the Greeke What Greeke say wee for there bee sundrie copies and the beste of them as Beza confesseth agree with the saide auncient Latine For example in Saint Peters wordes Labour that by good workes you may make sure your vocation and election Duth this Greeke copie please you No say they wee appeale to thaâ— Greeke copie which hath not those wordes by good workes for otherwise wee shoulde graunt the merite and efficacie of good workes towarde saluation And generally to tell you at once by what Greeke we will be â—ried we like best the vulgar Greeke texte of the new Testament which is most common and in euery mans handes FVLK 48. Wee neede not appeale to the Greeke for any thing you bring out of the vulgar Latine against vs. As for that text 2. Pet. 1. Labour that by good works c. I haue answeared before in the 36. Section Wee like well the Latine or that Greeke copie which hath those wordes by good workes for we must needes vnderstand them where they are not expressed and therefore you do impudeÌ„tly beelie vs to say they do not please vs. Caluin vpon that text saith Nonnulli codices habent bonis operibus sed hoc de sensu nihil mutat quia subaudiendum est etiaÌ„ si non exprimatur Some bookes haue By good works but this chaungeth nothing of the sense for that must be vnderstoode although it be not expressed The same thing in effect saith Beza that our election and vocation must be confirmed by the effects of faith that is by the fruites of iustice c. therefore in some copies wee finde it added by good workes So farre of is it that Beza misliketh those wordes that hee citeth them to proue the perpetuall connection of Election Vocation Iustification and Sanctification This is therefore as wicked a slaunder of vs as it is an vntrue affirmation of the vulgar Latine that it is the texte of the fathers and the whole Churche whereby you shewe your selfe to be a Donatiste to acknowledge no Churche but where the Latine texte is occupied So that in Greece Syria Armenia Aethiopia and other partes of the worlde where the Latine texte is not knowen or vnderstood there Christ hath no Churche by your vnaduised assertion That we like best the most common Greeke text I am sure that we doe it by as good reason if not by better than you in so great diuersities of the Latine texte who like best of that which is most common and in euery mans handes MART. 49. Well say we if you will needes haue it so take your pleasure in choosing your text And if you will stande to it graunt vs that Peter was chiefe among the Apostles because your owne Greeke text saith The first Peter No saith Beza we will graunt you no such thing for these wordes were added
to the Greeke text by one that fauoured Peters primacie Is it so then you will not stande to this Greeke texte neither Not in this place saith Beza FVLK 49. In graunting Peter to be the firste wee neede not graunt him to be the chiefe and if we graunt him to be the chiefe it followeth not that he is chiefe in auctoritie But if that were graunted it is not necessarie that he was head of the Church And albeit that were also graunted the Bishop of Rome could gaine nothing by it But what saith Beza where the texte saith the firste Peter If wee muste beleeue you hee saith No wee will graunt you no suche thing for these wordes were added to the Greeke texte by one that fauoured Peters primacie I praye you Martin where hath Beza those wordes will you neuer leaue this shamefull forgerie Beza in the tenth of Mathew doth only aske the question Quid si hoc vocabulum c. what if this worde were added by some that would establish the Primacie of Peter for nothing followeth that may agree with it This asketh Beza but as an obiectioÌ„ which immediatly after he answeareth concludeth that it is no addition but a naturall word of the text found in all copies confessed by Theophylact an enimie of the Popes primacie and defendeth it in the third of Marke where it is not in the common Greeke copies nor in the vulgar Latine against Erasmus who finding it in some Greeke copies thought it was vntruely added out of Mathew But Beza saith Ego verò non dubito quin haec sit germana lectio But I doubte not but this is the true and right reading of the texte and therefore hee translateth Primâ—inâ— Simonem the firste Simon out of the fewe copies Erasmus speaketh of Therefore it is an abhominable slaunder to charge him with following the common receyued texte where it seemeth to make against you when hee contendeth for the truth against the common text yea and against your owne vulgar Latine to giue you that which you make so great accompte of that Peter in the Cataloge of the Apostles was firste So greatly hee feareth to acknowledge that Peter was called first And so true it is that you charge him to say No wee will graunt you no such thing for these wordes were added to the Greeke texte by one that fauoured Peters primacie I hope your favourers seeing your forgerie thus manifestly discouered will giue you lesse credite in other your shamelesse slaunders at the leastwise this in equitie I trust all Papistes will graunt not to beeleue your report against any mans writing except they reade it thoÌ„selues Now â—â—at this worde the first argueth no primacie or superioritie beside those places quoted by Beza Act. 26. 20. Rom. 1 8. 3 2. You may read 1. Par. v 23 24. where the posteritie of Leui and Aaron are rehearsed as they were appointed by Dauid in their orders or courses Subuel primus Rohobia primus sors prima Ioiarib c. where least you should thinke of any headship or principalitie because the Hebrue is somtime 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you may see that Subuel is called primus of the sonnes of Gerson when there is no more mentioned more expresly Rohobia is called primus of the sonnes of Eleazer of whome it is sayd that he had no more sonnes that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth here the first in order it appeareth by those generations where the second third or fourth is named as in the sonnes of Hebron and of Oziel Also in the sonnes of Semei where Iehoth is counted the first Ziza the second Iaus and Beria becaused they increase not in sonnes were accounted for one familie In all which there is no other primacy than in the first lot of Ioiarib where the Hebrew worde is harishuon and so follow the restâ—n order vnto foure and twenty courses Therefore there is no cause why we should not stand to the Greeke text in that place neither did Beza euer deny to stande to it MART. 50. Let vs see an other place You must graunt vs saywe by this Greeke text that Christes very bloud which was shed for vs is really in the chalice because S. Luke sayth so in the Greeke text No sayth Beza those Greeke wordes came out of the margem into the text and therefore I translate not according to them but according to that which I thinke the truer Greeke text although I finde it in no copies in the world and this his doing is maintained iustified by our English Protestants in their writings of late FVLK 50. Still Beza speaketh as you inspire into him while he speaketh through your throte or quil The truth is Beza sayth that either there is a manifest Soloecophanes that is an appearance of incongruitie or els those wordes which is shed for you seeme to be added out of S. Mathew or els it is an errour of the writers placing that in the nominatiue case which should be in the datiue For in the datiue case did Basil read them in his morals 21. definition Neuertheles all our olde bookes sayth Beza had it so written as it is commonly printed in the nominatiue case Here are three seuerall disiunctions yet can you finde none but one proposition that you set downe as though it were purely and absolutely affirmed by Beza Likewise where you speake of no copies in the world you say more than Beza who speaketh but of such copies as he had who if he were of no better conscience than you would haue him seeme to be might faine some copie in his owne handes to salue the matter But the truth is that since he wrote this he found one more auncient copie both in Greeke and Latine which nowe is at Cambridge where this whole verse is wanting But of this matter which somewhat concerneth my selfe particularly I shall haue better occasion to write in the places by you quoted cap. 1. num 37. and cap. 17. num 11. where I will so iustifie that which I haue written before touching this place as I trust all learned and indifferent Readers shall see how vainely you insult against me where you bewray grosser ignorance in Greeke phrases than euer I woulde haue suspected in you being accounted the principall Linguist of the Seminarie at Rhemes MART. 51. Well yet sayewe there are places in the same Greeke text as plaine for vs as these now cited where you can not say it came out of the margent or it was added falsely to the text Aâ— Stand and hold fast the traditions c. by this text we require that you graunt vs traditions deliuered by word of mouth as wel as the written word that is the Scriptures No say they we know the Greeke word signifieth tradition as plaine as possibly but here and in the like places we rather translate it ordinances instructions and what els soeuer Nay Sirs
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
haue done if the name of the Church had bene odious vnto them or that they thought the Catholike church stood against theÌ„ Looke Thomas Mathewes Bible in the Canticles of Salomon vpon the 16. of S. Mathewes Gospell the 18. verse the wordes of Christ to Peter Therfore your senseles imaginations shewe no hatred of the Catholike Church in our translators but cancred malice and impudent follie in your selues MART. 53. To conclude as I began concerning their shiftes and iumpes and windings and turnings euery way from one thing to an other till they are driuen to the extreme refuge of palpable corruptions and false translations consider with me in this one case onely of traditions as may be likewise considered in all other controuersies that the auncient fathers councels antiquitie vniuersalitie and custom of the whole Church allowe traditions the Canonicall Scriptures haue them the Latine text hath them the Greeke text hath them onely their translations haue them not Likewise in the olde Testament the approued Latine text hath such and such speeches that make for vs the renowmed Greeke text hath it the Hebrewe text hath it onely their translations haue it not These are the translations which we call heretical and wilful and which shal be examined and discussed in this Booke FVLK 53. By what windings and turnings I pray you are we driuen to that miserable refuge of palpable corruptions and false translations for hitherto you haue shewed none but such as shewe your owne ignoraunce or malice Neither I hope you shal be able to shewe any though you sweat neuer so sore at your work Yes I weene this one case only of traditions for so you seeme to say if it be considered wil discouer no lesse It is meruaile if for your sake al the Greeke Dictionaries in the world must not be corrected taught to say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 caÌ„ signifie nothing but a tradition that is not written But yet you rolle in your accustomed rhetorike saying that the antieÌ„t fathers couÌ„cels antiquitie vniuersalitie custome of the whole Church allow traditioÌ„s so do we so many as be good agreeable to the holie scripturs but that there be traditioÌ„s of matter necessarie to saluatioÌ„ not contained in the holie scripturs wheÌ„ you bring your fathers Councels c. you shal receiue an answere to them That the canonical scripture alloweth any traditions contrary to the doctrine therof or to supply any want or imperfection therof as though al things required to make the man of God perfecte prepared to all good workes were not conteyned in the Scriptures you shall neuer be able to proue although for spite against the perfection of the Canonicall Scripture you should braste a sunder as Iudas did which betrayed the auctor of the Scripture Finally what so euer you say out of the old Testament without proofe or shew of proofe it is as easily denied by vs as it is affirmed by you When you bring but only a shadow of reason it shall sone be chased away with the light of truth The Argumentes of euerie chapter with the page where euery chapter beginneth CHAP. 1. THat the ProtestaÌ„ts translate the holie Scripture falsly of purpose in fauor of their heresies throughout al controuersies page 1. 2 Against Apostolical Traditions pag. 73. 3 Against sacred Images pag. 88. 4 The Ecclesiastical vse of words turned into their original and profane significations pag. 131. 5 Against the CHVRCH pag. 139. 6 Against Priest and Priesthoode Wheremuch also is saide of their profaning of Ecclesiastical wordes pag. 157. 7. Against Purgatorie Limbus Patrum and Christes descending into Hell pag. 196. 8. Concerning Iustification and Gods iustice in rewarding good workes pag. 252. 9 Against Merites meritorious workes and the reward for the same pag. 263. 10 Against Free will pag. 300. 11 For Imputatiue iustice against true inherent iustice pag 328. 12 For Speciall faith vaine securitie and onely faith pag. 342. 13 Against Penance and Satisfaction pag. 355. 14 Against the holy Sacraments namely Baptisme and Confession pag. 379. 15 Against the Sacrament of Holy Orders and for the Mariage of Priestes and Votaries pag. 390. 16 Against the Sacrament of Matrimonie pag. 423. 17 Against the B. Sacrament and Sacrifice and altars pa. 429. 18 Against the honour of Saincts namely of our B. LADY pa. 460. 19 Against the distinction of Dulîa and Latrîa pag. 474. 20 Adding to the text pag. 483. 21 Other hereticall treacheries and corruptions worthy of obseruation pag. 493. 22 Other faults Iudaical profane meere vanities follâ—es and nouelties pag. 507. ¶ A Discouerie of the manifolde corruptions of the holie Scriptures by the Heretikes of our dayes specially the English Sectaries of their foule dea ling herein by partiall and false Translations to the advantage of their heresies in their English Bibles vsed and authorized since the time of Schisme CHAP. 1. That the Protestantes translate the holie Scriptures falsly of purpose in fauour of their heresies MARTIN THOVGH this shall euidently appeare thorough out this whole Booke in euery place that shall be obiected vnto them yet because it is an obseruation of greatest importaunce in this case which stigeth theÌ„ sore toucheth their credit exceedingly in so much that one of them setting a good face vpon the matter sayth confidently that al the Papists in the worlde are not able to shew one place of Scripture mistranslated wilfully of purpose therfore I wil giue the reader certein brief obseruations and euident markes to know wilfull corruptions as it were an abridgement and summe of this Treatise FVLKE ALTHOVGH this trifling treatise was in hand two or three yeares ago as by the threatning of Bristow and Howlette it may appeare yet that it might seeme new and a sudden peece of worke compyled with small studie you thought good by carping at my confutation of Howlet last made and of M. Whitakers work set forth later than it as it were by setting on newe eares vpon your olde potte to make it seeme to be a newe vessell And first of all you would seeme to haue taken occasion of my confident speech in my confutation of Howlets nyne Reasons in reâ—earsing wherof you vse such fidelitie as commonly Papistes vse to beare towardes God the Churche your Prince and your Countrie For what face soeuer I set vpon the matter with a whorish forehead and a brasen face you make reporte of my saying which beeing testified by a thousande copies printed as it were by so many witnesses doth crie out vpon your falshode and iniurious dealing For my wordes out of the place by you quoted against Howlet are these That some error may bee in translation although by you it can not be shewed I will not denye but that any shameles translations or wilfull corruptions can be found of purpose to draw the Scriptures to any hereticall opinion all the Papistes in the world shall neuer be able to make demonsiration This
is often taken or constitutions as Beza calleth them which before God and the worlde are not of suche difference that you shoulde charge him with wilfull corruption for translating that word constitutions which you confesse signifieth very often commaundements Wherefore here appeareth no hereticall purpose except you will say that iustification by faith which S. Paule so often so diligently and so purposedly doth teach is an heresie MART. 51. Againe when he had reiected this translation Act. 2. verse 27. Non derelinques animam meam in inferno Thou shalt not leaue my soule in Hel because as he sayth herevpon grewe the errours of Christes descending into Hell of Limbus and of Purgatorie atlength he concludeth thus Whereas the doubtfull interpretation of one or two wordes hath brought forth so many mōsters I chose rather simply for soule to say carkasse for hel graue than to foster these foule errours FVLK 51. Beza sheweth that because the doubtfull interpretation of the Hebrew worde Sheol into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which doth not properly signifie hell but a darke place such as the pit is wherein the deade are put and of the Poets is taken for hell had bredde such monsters as Limbus patrum Purgatorie and Christes descending into them therefore he did plainly translate that verse as it is ment of the raysing vp of Christes bodie out of the graue which if he had translated out of Hebrew as he did out of Greeke had not bene offensiue nor vntrue as I haue shewed in aunswere to your Preface sect 46. and of this chapter sect 32. But seeing Beza him selfe hath altered that translation and it was neuer followed of our English translators what demonstration is this that we are wilfull corrupters of the holy Scriptures MART. 52. Againe when he had translated for Whome heauen must receiue thus who must be contayned in heauen he sayth whereas we haue vsed the passiue kinde of speech rather than the actiue which is in the Greeke we did it to auoyd all ambiguitie For it is very expedient that there should be in the Church of God this perspicuous testimonie against them that for ascending by faith into heauen so to be ioyned to our head obstinately maintaine that Christ must be called againe out of heauen vnto vs. Meaning his presence in the ◠Sacrament and inueying no lesse against the Lutherans than the Catholikes as the Lutherans doe here against him for this wilfull interpretation and that by Caluines owne iudgement who thinketh it a forced translation FVLK 52. True it is that he meant concerning the maner of Christes presence in the blessed sacrament and that so he translated to exclude the carnall maner of presence which the Papistes haue inuented but all this while the translation is true and warranted by Gregorie Nazianzene as I haue shewed before sect 36. of this chapter For he that sayth Heauen must receiue Christ as you doe can not deny except he be mad but that Christ must be receiued of heauen So that Beza doth none otherwise translate than you doe Qui daemonia habebant which is actiuely thus to be translated those who had deuils and you saye which were possest of diuels that is were had of diuels That the Lutherans finde fault with Bezaes translation it proueth it not to be false he hath iustified it sufficiently in his answere to Selneccerus and the Diuines of Iena Neither doth Caluine as you saye vntruly thinke it a forced translation but not weying the sentence sufficiently supposeth that the wordes are placed ambiguously for that it seemeth to be doubtfull whether we shoulde save that heauen must receiue Christ or that Christ must receiue heauen But if it be once graunted as it is of you that heauen must receiue Christ there is neyther Caluine nor Illyricus nor any man that beareth the face but of a young Grammarian yea of a reasonable man which can deny that conuersion by the passiue Christe muste be receiued of heauen Therefore if you had any respect of your credite with men of vnderstanding you would not for shame rehearse this quarrell so often which hath not so muche as any colour or shewe of reason to maintayne it but that you abuse the names of Illyricus and Caluine as mislykinge it whose argumentes by no meanes will serue your turne because that which is denied by them or doubtfull to them is plaine and confessed by you MART. 53. But Beza goeth forwarde still in this kinde Rom. 5. verse 18. whereas Erasmus had put propagatum est indifferently both of Adams sinne which made vs truely sinners and of Christes iustice which maketh vs truly iust he reiecting it amonge other causes why it displeased him sayth That olde errour of the Sophists meaning Catholikes which for imputatiue iustice put an inherent qualitie in the place is so great so execrable to all good men that I thinke nothing is so much to be auoided as it FVLK 53. A manifest ecclipsis or want of wordes being in that verse for which Erasmus hath put propagatum est which word is ambiguous and may giue occasion of error for men to thinke that the righteousnes of Christ commeth by propagation as the guiltines of Adam doth Beza thought good to supply the lacke rather by such wordes as are warranted by the text verse 12. 15. and 16. and can giue no occasion of errour And therefore thus he rendreth that verse Nempe igitur sicut per vnam offensam reatus venit in omnes homines ad condemnationem ita per vnam iustificationem beneficium redimdauit in omnes homines ad iustificationem vitae Nowe therefore as by one offence guiltinesse came vpon all men vnto condemnation so by one iustification the benefite abounded toward all men vnto iustification of life In this verse these words guiltinesse came and the benefite abounded are added for explication sake and are taken out of the verses going before in which the Apostle speaketh of the same matter Therefore Beza to auoyde occasion of the heresie of the Papistes of iustice inherent among other causes which he rehearseth refuseth that worde by which Erasmus supplyed the text and vseth suche wordes for that purpose as the Apostle him self in the verses precedent doth offer for this necessarye supplye which seeing it must be made that there may be a sense and vnderstanding who can mislike that it should be made by the Apostles owne wordes or who cā suppose that the Apostle would leaue any other words to be vnderstood than such as he him selfe had before expressed And as for the heresie of inherent iustice can haue no hold in this verse except some suche worde be added for supplie as the Apostle neuer vsed in this case That Christes iustice doth make vs as truly iust as Adams sinne made vs truly sinners there is no question but by what meanes we are made iust wee say as the Scripture teacheth vs to speake that iustice is imputed to
vs through faith Rom. 4. The Papistes say it is a qualitie inherent within vs for which wordes and matter they haue no warrant in the holy Scripture MART. 54. These few examples proue vnto vs that the Scriptures translated verbatim exactly and according to the proper vse and signification of the wordes do by the Heretikes confession make for the Catholikes and therefore Beza saith he altereth the wordes into other and I thinke it may suffice any indifferent reader to iudge of his purpose and meaning in other places of his translation and consequently of theirs that either allow him or follow him which are our English Caluinists and Bezites Many other waies there are to make mosta certaine proofe of their Wilfulnesse as when the translation is framed according to their false and hereticall commentarie and When they will auouch their translations out of prophane writers Homer Plutarch Plinie Tullie Virgil and Terence and reiect the Ecclesiastical vse of wordes in the Scriptures and Fathers which Beza doth for the most part alwaies But it were infinite to note all the markes and by these the wise reader may conceiue the rest FVLK 54 These examples proue nothing lesse For to runne ouer them all briefly the first two we translate verbatim A man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law and repent and repētance we say for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What make these for Poperie If Luc 1. v. 6. we should call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustifications what should Poperie gaine but a vaine cauill when you your selues cōfesse that those iustifications are often vsed for commandements Act. 2. v. 27. all our English translations are as you would haue them Thou shalt not leaue my soule in hell nor suffer thy holy one to see corruption by which verse no descent into Limbus but the resurrection from death can be proued If wee translate as you do Act. 3. v. 21. whome heauen must receaue wee will easily conuince that Christe muste be receaued of heauen In the laste example the question is not howe the worde is to be translated but by what worde the want of the texte is to be supplied whiche wee supplie not with wordes of our owne but with the Apostles owne wordes Haue you not gayned greatly by translating verbatim exactly and according to the proper vse and signification of the wordes I lyke well that euery indifferent Reader may iudge by these examples of Bezaes purpose in other places of his translation But you haue two other wayes to make certaine proofe of their wilfulnesse The firste is when the translation is framed according to their hereticall commentarie A reasonable man would thinke rather that the commentarie were framed according to the texte than the texte to the commentarie But to iustifie the truth of those translations for the firste texte you quote it is handled sect 26. of this chapter and so consequently Cap. 7. The seconde is answered sect 46. the other two concerning tradition sect 23. of the preface and in the chapiter following The second waye of proofe is when they will auouch their translations out of prophane writers I thinke there is no better waye to know the proper or diuerse signification of wordes than out of auncient writers though they be neuer so prophane who vsed the wordes most indifferently in respect of our controuersies of which they were altogither ignorant As for the ecclesiasticall vse of wordes in the Scripture and the Fathers which Beza you say doth for the most part reiect it is vntrue except there be good and sufficient cause why he should so do warranted by the Scripture it selfe or necessarie circumstances of the places which he doth translate For if the Scripture haue vsed a worde in one signification sometimes it is not necessarie that it should alwaies vse it in the same signification when it is proued by auncient writers that the worde hath other significations more proper to the place and agreeable to the rule of fayth which perhaps the vsuall signification is not As for example the Scripture vseth very often this worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a boy or seruaunt but when the same worde is applied to our Sauiour Christ in the prayer of the Apostles Act. 4. 27. Who woulde not rather translate it childe or sonne as the worde doth sometime but more seldome signifie Howe the Fathers of the Churche haue vsed wordes it is no rule for translators of the Scripture to followe who oftentimes vsed wordes as the people did then take them and not as they signified in the Apostles tyme. As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a publicke testification of repentaunce which wee call penaunce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for imposition of handes and suche like in whiche sense these wordes were neuer vsed before the Apostles times and therefore it is not lyke that they woulde beginne a newe vse of them without some manifest explication of their meaning without the whiche no man could haue vnderstoode them as they haue done in the vse of these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and such like It is not a faulte therefore prudently to seeke euen out of prophane writers what is the proper signification of wordes and howe many significations a woorde may haue and reuerently to iudge which is moste apte for the place to be translated and moste agreeable with the holy ghostes meaning in that texte and not alwaies to bee tyed to the vsuall signification of wordes as they are sometimes taken in Scripture and much lesse as they are vsed of the auncient Fathers MART. 55. But would you thinke that these men could notwithstanding speake very grauely and honestly against voluntarie and wilfull translations of Scripture that so notoriously offend therein them selues Harken what Beza saith against Castaleo and the like The matter saith he is now come to this point that the translatours of Scripture out of the Greeke into Latin or into any other tōgue think that they may lawfully doe any thing in translating Whom if a man reprehend he shall be answered by and by that they do the office of a translatour not that translateth worde for worde but that expresseth the sense So it commeth to passe that whiles euery man will rather freely folow his own iudgement than be a religious interpreter of the Holy Ghost he doth rather peruert many things than translate them Is not this well said if he had done accordingly but doing the cleane contrarie as hath ben◠proued he is a dissembling hypocrite in so saying and a wilfull Heretike in so doing and condemned by his owne iudgement FVLK 55. No wise man doubteth but they could both speake very grauely and auoyde most religiously al voluntarie wilful translations of scripture that might tende to maintaine any errour And the rather they will be perswaded that Beza hath auoyded that lewde kinde of translatiō for which he reproueth Castaleo when they shall see that
on your parte that should exactly folow the Greeke falsely translated when you translate in S. Peters Epistle thus You were not redeemed with corruptible things froÌ„ your vaine conuersation receiued by the tradition of the fathers Where the Greeke is thus rather to be translated froÌ„ your vaine conuersation deliuered by the fathers But your fingers itched to fâ—â—st in the word tradition and for deliuered to say receiued because it is the phrase of the Catholike Church that it hath receiued many things by tradition which you woulde here controll by likenesse of wordes in this false translation FVLK 6. I maruaile why you should compte it an heretical humor to vse the worde traditions in the euill part which the holy ghost so vseth and your owne vulgar translator also but that you are more partial in allowing the traditions of meÌ„ than we in auoiding the terme somtimes only for doubt lest traditioÌ„s of meÌ„ should creepe into the place of Gods coÌ„mandemeÌ„ts But how is it falsly translated on our part that professe to folow the Greke which is truly translated in your vulgar Latin text which professeth to translate the Greeke as well as we belike because we say receiued by the tradition of the fathers which according to the Greeke should be deliuered by the fathers but that our fingers itched to foyst in the word tradition What I pray you hath your vulgar traÌ„slator foisted in that word did his fingers itch against such catholike phrases that he would coÌ„trol theÌ„ by a false traÌ„slation do you not perceiue that while you raile vpoÌ„ vs you reuile your owne vulgar Latin translatioÌ„ which hath the same word traditioÌ„ for which you storme against vs But for deliuered we haue said receiued See whether frowardnes driueth you the Apostle saith they were deliuered froÌ„ the vaine coÌ„uersation of their fathers traditioÌ„ Do you then vnderstaÌ„d that it was deliuered by the fathers but not receiued by their sonnes Certainely they were deliuered from that vaine conuersation which they had receyued For receyuing doth necessarily importe deliuering And because you called for a Lexicon in the next section before Scapula will teach you that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie as indifferently A patre traditus as à patre acceptus deliuered by the father and receyued by the father What wrangling then is this about the moone shine in the water to crie out false translation foysting itching fingers and I know not what MART. 7. But concerning the worde tradition you will say perhaps the sense thereof is included in the Greeke worde deliuered We graunt But would you be content if we should alwayes expresly adde tradition where it is so included then should we say 1. Cor. 11. 2. I praise you that as I haue deliuered you by tradition you keepe my precepts or traditions And againe v. 23. For I receiued of our Lord which also I deliuered vnto you by tradition c. And Luc. 1. v. 2. As they by tradition deliuered vnto vs which from the beginning sawe c. and suche lyke by your example wee should translate in this sorte But we vse not this licentious maner in translating holy Scriptures neither is it a translators parte but an interpreters and his that maketh a commentarie neither doth a good cause neede other translation than the expresse text of the Scripture giueth FVLK 7. We will say it is contained in the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth receaued by tradition or deliuerie froÌ„ the Fathers not in the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth otherwise many times thaÌ„ simply to deliuer when it signifieth to deliuer it doth not alway signifie to deliuer by word of mouth without writing as you vnderstand tradition but as well by writing as by preaching As when S. Paule saith I receaued of the Lord that which I deliuered vnto vou speaking of the institution of the supper he meaneth that which the Euangelists had written he him selfe doth write So 2. Thess. 2. when he willeth theÌ„ to hold the traditioÌ„s which they had learned of him he speaketh not only of such as they learned by his preaching but such also as they learned by his Epistle Wherefore if you should expresly adde the worde tradition in your partiall signification wheresoeuer you finde the word deliuered you shoulde not onely translate ridiculously but also heretically and falsly Wordes in deriuation and composition doe not alwaies signifie according to their primitiue MART. 8. And if you will yet say that our vulgar Latine translation hath here the worde tradition we graunt it hath so and therefore we also translate accordingly But you professe to translate the Greeke and not the vulgar Latine which you in England condemne as Papisticall and say it is the worst of all though Beza your maister pronounce it to be the very best and will you notwithstanding followe the sayde vulgar Latine rather than the Greeke to make traditions odious Yea such is your partialitie one way and inconstancie an other way that for your hereticall purpose you are content to followe the olde Latine translation though it differ from the Greeke and againe another time you will not follow it though it be all one with the Greeke most exactly as in the place before alledged where the vulgar Latine translation hath nothing of traditions but Quid decernitis as it is in the Greeke you translate Why are ye burdened with traditions FVLK 8. You may be sure we will saye that we know to be true and sufficient to discharge our translation from your foolish and malicious quarrelling But we professe you saye to translate the Greeke and not the vulgar Latine And I pray you what doth your vulgar Latine Interpreter professe to translate but the Greeke if he then translating out of Greeke could finde tradition in the Greeke worde why shoulde not we finde the same especially being admonished by him who if he translated truly why are we blamed for doing as he did if his translation be false why is it allowed as the onely authenticall text We follow not therefore the Latine translation but ioyne with it wheresoeuer it followeth the Greeke as we doe in ten thousand places more than this and willingly depart not from it but where it departeth from the Greeke or else vseth such wordes as would be offensiue if they were translated into English or occasion of errour as you doe likewise when you depart from the proper and vsuall signification of wordes which your Latine translator vseth as when you call foenerator a creditor which signifieth an vsurer Luc. 7. Stabulum an Inne and stabularius an host Luc. 10. Vna Sabathi the first of the Sabaoth Iohn 2. Ecclesia the assembly Act. 7. Baptismata washings Marc. 7. and such like But we in England you say condemne the Latine translation as papisticall We accuse it as not true in many places we saye it is the worst of all though
least he might shewe vs the mantilltree of a chimney and a brasse pot hanging ouer the fire and demaund further whether Esay in this text spake of them and all such things as they are But it is most euideÌ„tly false you say that Sculptile and Image are all one and this appeareth to our great coÌ„fusion Abacuc the second c. But I say to your shame it will appeare by this verie texte that Pesel and Massecah signifie one and the same thing and that most euidently For thus the textis What profiteth the Image Pesel for his maker iotsâ—ro hath made it or as you will haue it hath grauen it Pesalo what followeth nowe but Massecah an Image you had rather say Conflatile a molten Image But then you muste remember that the maker of it by grauing made it a molten Image whiche is a straunge peece of worke excepte you will saye that first he did caste it and then he did graue it but saye whiche way you will the same Image is called Pesel and Massecah without difference The last wordes are vmoreh shaker and a teacher of lies For which wordes your translation hath Imaginem falsam a false Image whereas Moreh neuer signifieth an Image But of that afterwarde MART. 24. I woulde euery common Reader were able to discerne your falsehood in this place Firste you make Sculpere sculptile no more than to make an image Which beyng absurde you knowe because the painter or embroderer making an image can not be sayde Sculpere sculptile might teach you that the Hebrue hath in it no signification of image no more than Sculpere can signifie to make an image and therefore the Greeke and the Latine precisely for the most part expresse neither more nor lesse than a thing grauen but yet meane alwaies by these wordes a grauen idol to whiche signification they are appropriated by vse of holy Scripture as Simulacrum idolum conflatile and sometime imago In which sense of signifying Idols if you also did repeate images so often although the translation were not precise yet it were in some parte tolerable because the sense were so but when you doe it to bring all holy images into contempt euen the image of our Sauiour Christe crucified you may iustly be controlled for false and hereticall translatours FVLK 24. I would euery common reader were able to discerne your foolishe malice in this place For firste while you cauill at the Etymologie of the words which the Prophete regardeth not you make him say that the â—â—â—hâ—oâ—er thereof hath grauen a grauen thing a â—â—clâ—ea thing Secondly where you say that the Hebrue word Pesâ—â— hath no signification of an image in it leaning to the bare deâ—â—â—â—tion from the verbe Pasal you controule the onely vse of it which is to signifie an image or idoll whether it be grauen or molten or by what workemanship soeuer it be made which you confesse to be the sense of it But when we doe it you say to bring all holy images into contempt we may iustly be controuled for false and hereticall translatours First we knowe no holy images made with handes at this time so accompted but they are all prophane and abhominable idols Secondly if the translatours purpose were euill yet so long as the wordes and sense of the originall tongue will beare him he can not iustly be called a false and hereticall translatour albeit he haue a false and hereticall meaning As you Papistes haue in your late translation of the newe Testament yet where you translate either according to the wordes or according to the sense no equitie can condemne you for false translatours MART. 25. As in this verie place which is an other falshoode like to the other conflatile you translate image as you did sculptile and so here againe in Abacucke as before in Esay is noted for two distinct words ech signifying an other diuerse thing from image you translate images images Thirdly for imaginem falsam a false image you translate an other thing without any necessarie pretense either of Hebrue or Greeke auoiding here the name of image because this place telleth you that the holy Scripture speaketh against false images or as the Greeke hath false phantasies or as you translate the Hebrue such images as teach lies representing false gods which are not as the Apostle saith Idolum nihil est And Non sunt Dij qui manibus fiunt Which distinction of false and true images you will not haue because you condemne all images euen holy and sacred also and therefore you make the holy Scriptures to speake herein accordingly to your owne faasie FVLK 25. Seing the Prophet regardeth not the Etymologie of the wordes but vseth both for one and the same Image no nor regardeth the matter whereof it is made as appeareth in the nexte verse where he calleth this Idoll wodde and stone which cannot be molten euery reasonable man may see that the worde Massecah doth in this place signifie generally an Image which is made to be a teacher of lies And whereas you repeate that the two wordes doc signifie each an other diuerse thing from Image because the one signifieth a grauen thing the other a molten thing you speake with out all shame and sense of honestie for Pesel signifieth not euery grauen carued or hewen thing but onely an Image For who would say that a morter or a gutter of hewen stone were in Hebrue to be signified by the word Pesel or a pewter pot or a dishe by the worde Massecah Seing the vse of the Hebrue tongue therefore hath appropried these names onely to Images it is great frowardnesse no learning to quarell about the etimologie or deriuation of them As this name building in English is taken only for houses as when we say here are goodly buildings which if a man would extende according to the deriuation shewing nothing else but walles of bricke or other matter prayse them for goodly buildings he should be thought to speake straungly in our tongue yet according to the deriuation building may signifie any thing that is builded But for Imaginem falsam a false image you charge vs to translate an other thing without any necessary pretence either of Hebrew or Greeke Such affirmations will make vs thinke meanly of your knowledge in the Hebrew tongue For what I pray you els caÌ„ Moreh in this place signifie but a teacher or where is it euer taken for an image as your Latine text hath or a fantasie as the Greeke readeth Turne ouer your dictionarie and Hebrew concordance and see if you can find it vsed for an image or an idoll At least wise giue credit to Isidorus Clarius who thus writeth in his notes vpon the text Quod ait imaginem falsam in Heb. est docenâ— vel annuncians mendacium That he saith a false Image in the Hebrue it is teaching or shewing foorth a lie The distinction you make of true and false
signification but a true and general vnderstanding of the word which is vsed of the Euangelist for other washings than the Sacrament of Baptisme and so you are inforced to translate it Marc. 7. MART. 2. Now then to come to our purpose such are the absurde translations of the English Bibles and altogither like vnto these Namely when they translate congregation for Churche Elder for Priest Image for Idol dissension for schisme Generall for Catholike secrete for Sacrament ouer-seer for Bishop messenger for Angel embassadour for Apostle minister for Deacon and such like to what other end be these deceitfull translations but to conceale and obscure the name of the Church and dignities thereof mentioned in the holy Scriptures to dissemble the worde schisme as they do also Heresie and Heretike for feare of disgracing their schismes and Heresies to say of Matrimonie neither Sacrament which is the Latin nor mysterie which is the Greeke but to goe as farre as they can possibly from the common vsuall and Ecclesiastical wordes saying This is a great secrete in fauour of their heresie that Matrimonie is no Sacrament FVLK 2. Absurde traÌ„slations of the English Bibles you say are congregation for Churche Elder for Priest Image for Idoll and such like The word Church being ambiguously taken of the people for the place of assembly the assembly it selfe it was as lawful for vs to cal congregation as for you to call it assembly Actes 7. This worde Priest commonly taken for a sacrificer and the same that Sacerdos and so by you translated there was good occasion to vse the worde Elder for which you vse Senior or auncient in your translation which is a name of auctoritie as ouerseer is of diligeÌ„ce minister of seruice pastor of feeding all which names set foorth a true Bishop Pastor and Elder and if you will needes haue it of a true Prieste Of Image for Idoll is sayde inough in the nexte Chapiter before Schisme I knowe not how English men should vnderstand except it were englished by dissension diuision rending or some such like Of general for Catholike we shal speake anon Secrete for Sacrament we vse because wee would retaine the ecclesiasticall vse of this worde Sacrament which is to signifie the seales of Gods promises and not confounde it with euery holy or vnholy secrete thing The Greeke worde mysterie which you would enioyne vs to vse was in the time of the firste translation more vnknowen than that wee could well haue vsed it except wee would haue followed your veine in vanitie and noueltie of termes Praepuâ—e neophyte gratis depositum c. or else made generall and common the proper vse of this Ecclesiasticall terme Sacrament to euery mysterie and called the Sacrament of preaching of publishing the Gospel to the Gentils of the seuen starres as you do and yet in the Sacrament of the whore of Babylon you leaue it and call it mysterie Apoc. 17. v. 7. as you shoulde be enforced to doe if you would translate the old Testament out of Latine Dan. 2. diuerse times except you would call Nabuchadonosors dreame a Sacrament and Dan 4. where the king sayth that to Daniell no secrete is impossible meaning vnknowen or not vnderstood you would say no Sacrament Tob. 12. you would translate Sacramentum regis abscondere bonum est It is a good thing to hide the kings Sacrament where you should say secrete and where the English phrase would hardly beare you to say the kings mysterie Of the other termes in the places by you quoted it shal be sufficient to speake But I haue rendred reasonable causes of these termes hitherto so that no maÌ„ but madde with malice would thinke we conceale the name of Church dignities therof in hatred of them or do dissemble the names of schisme heresie in fauour of those abhominations which are as wel set forth to their detestatioÌ„ in the terms of dissention and sectes as for the name Sacrament we find not in the Greeke but mysterium we traÌ„slate a secrete or a mysterie as the worde signifieth which nothing fauoureth the pretended Sacrament of Matrimonie MART. 3. S. Paul saith as plaine as he can speake I beseech you brethren that you all say one thing and that there be no schismes among you They translate for schismes dissentions which may be in profane and worldly things as well as in matters of religion But schismes are those that diuide the vnitie of the Church whereof they know them selues guilty S. Paule saith as plainely as is possible A man that is an Heretike auoide after the first and second admonition They translated in their Bible of the yeare 1562 A man that is an author of Sectes And where the Greeke is Heresie reckened among damnable sinnes they say Sectes fauouring that name for their owne sakes and dissembling it as though the holy Scriptures spake not against Heresie or Heretikes Schisme or Schismatikes FVLK 3. S. Paule in deede speaketh plainely in Greeke but if you speake English say schismes fortie thousand of the people in England will sweare they vnderstande you not But schismes you say are those that deuide the vnitie of the Churche dissentions may be in prophane and worldly things Verily all schismes deuide not the Church for they were not al the Church of whom it is sayde in S. Iohn 9. There was a schisme among them for I thinke the best of the Pharisees were scarse good members of the Churche Againe where S. Paule doth say least there should bee a schisme in the bodie 1. Cor. 12. He speaketh of the natural bodie whervnto he compareth the Churche S. Paule also sayth as plainely as he canne speake in Greeke 1. Cor. 11. v. 18. I heare that there be schismes among you yet your vulgar Latine translatour is bolde to saye Scissuras cuttings or rendings where you are bold to goe from your Latine texte and call them schismes And for explicating the Greeke name of heresie by sectes why should wee be more blamed than the vulgar Latine translator who commonly translateth it Sectas and namely Gal. 5. 2. Pet. 2. Actes 24. diuerse times 26. and 28 in all which places you your selues translate sectes Is it because he or you fauour heresies and heretikes will you neuer leaue this foolish wrangling which alwaies turneth you to the greater discredite MART. 4. As also they suppresse the very name Catholike when it is expresly in the Greeke for malice towarde Catholikes and Catholike religion because they know them selues neuer shall be called or knowen by that name And therefore their two English Bibles accustomed to be reade in their Churche therefore by like moste authenticall leaue it cleane out in the title of all those Epistles which haue bene knowen by the name of Catholicae Epistolae euer since the Apostles time and their later English Bible dealing somewhat more honestly hath turned the worde Catholike into General saying The Generall
phrase of Scripture this thirtie yeare but it must needes be verie straunge that this making of Elders hath not all this while bene practised and knowen no not among them selues in any of their Churches within the realme of Englande To Titus they make the Apostle say thus For this cause left I thee in Creta that thou shouldest ordaine ELDERS in euerie citie c. Againe of Paule and Barnabas When they had ordained Elders by Election in euerie congregration Act. 14. If they had sayed plainely as it is in the Greeke and as our forefathers were wont to speake and the truth is Titus was leâ—t in Creta to ordaine Priestes in euerie citie and Paule and Barnabas made Priestes in euerie Church then the people would haue vnderstoode them they know such speaches of old it had bene their ioy comfort to heare it specified in holy Scriptures Now they are tolde an other thing in suche newnesse of speaches and wordes of Elders to be made in euery citie congregation and yet not one citie nor congregation to haue any Elders in all Englande that we know not what is prophane noueltie of wordes which the Apostle willeth to be auoided if this be not an exceeding profane noueltie FVLK 5. When you haue gotteÌ„ a bable you make more of it than of the towre of London for you haue neuer done playing with it It must needes be a clarkely argument that is drawne from the vulgar speaches of making Priests and making Ministers Those Priests or Ministers that are made among vs are the same Elders that the Scripture in Greeke calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and the Bishops letters of orders testifying of their ordination call them by none other name but by the name of Presbyteri which the Scripture vseth which terme though in English you sounde it Priests Elders Auncients Seniors or Ministers which is the common peoples worde it is the same office which is described by the holy ghost Tit. 1. and in other places of Scripture As for the prophane noueltie wherewith this worde Elder is changed we will consider of it in the next section MART. 6. That it is noueltie to all English Christian eares it is euident And it is also profane because they do so English the Greeke worde of ordaining for of the worde Presbyter we will speake more anone as if they should translate Demosthenes or the lawes of Athens concerning their choosing of Magistrates which was by giuing voices with lifting vp their handes So do they force this worde here to induce the peoples election and yet in their Churches in England the people elect not ministers but their Bishop Whereas the holy Scripture saith they ordained to the people and what soeuer force the word hath it is here spoken of the Apostles and pertaineth not to the people and therefore in the place to Titus it is another worde which cannot be forced further than to ordaine and appoint And they might know if malice and Heresic would suffer them to see and confesse it that the holy Scriptures and fathers and Ecclesiasticall custome hath drawen this and the like words from their profane and common signification to a more peculiar and Ecclesiasticall speach as Episcopus an ouerseer in Tulite is a Bishop in the new Testament FVLK 6. The name Elders vsed in our translation is neither more nouell to English eares nor more prophane to godly eares than the name Auncients which your translation vseth And yet I thinke the Apostle 1. Tim. 6. spake not of noueltie to English eares but of that which was newe to the eares of the Churche of God But the worde Elders I weene muste be prophane because we English the Greeke worde of ordeining as if wee should translate Demosthenes or the Lawes of Athens concerning the choosing of Magistrates Doth not this cauill redounde more against the holy Ghost to accuse his stile of prophanenesse which vseth the same wordes for the ordeining of Priestes that Demosthenes or the lawes of AtheÌ„s might vse for choosing of their Magistrates But this worde we enforce you say to enduce the peoples election and yet the Bishop not the people elect our ministers We meane not to enforce any other election than the worde doth signifie Neyther doth our Bishops if they doe well ordeine any Ministers or Priestes without the Testimonie of the people or at leastwise of such as be of moste credite where they are knowne Where you vrge the pronowne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to them as though the people gaue no consent nor testimonie it is more than ridiculous and beside that contrarie to the practise of the primitiue Churche for many hundreth yeares after the Apostles as also that you would inforce vpon the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsed by S. Paule Tit. 1. as though that worde of constitution did exclude election That the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by the Fathers of the Church since the Apostles hath bene drawne to other signification than it had before it is no reason to teach vs howe it was vsed by the Apostles Election is an indifferent thing the election of Bishops Elders or Priestes is an holy thing the holynesse whereof is not included in the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in the holy institution of Christ and authoritie by appointment deliuered by imposition of the handes of the Eldership MART. 7. And coÌ„cerning 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which we now speake of S. Hierom telleth them in c. 58. Esai that it signifieth Clericorum ordinationem that is giuing of holy orders whiche is done not onely by praier of the voice but by imposition of the hande according to S. Paul vnto Timothee Manus citò nemini imposueris Impose or put hands quickly on no man That is be not hastie or easie to giue holy orders Where these great etymologistes that so straine the originall nature of this worde to profane stretching forth the hand in elections may learne an other Ecclesiasticall erymologie thereof as proper and as well deduced of the worde as the other to wit putting forth the hand to giue orders and so they shall finde it is all one with that which the Apostle calleth imposition of hands 1. Tim. 4 2. Tim 1 and consequently for ordaining Elders by election they should haue sayd ordaining or making Priests by imposition of handes as else where S. Paule 1. Tim. 5. and the Actes of the Apostles Act. 6. and 13. do speake in the ordaining of the seuen Deacons and of S. Paul and Barnabas FVLK 7. The testimonie of S. Hierome whom you cite you vnderstand not for speaking there of the extension of the finger which the septuaginta translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and God requireth to be taken away he saith Many of our interpreters do vnderstande it of the ordination of Clerkes which is performed not onely at the imprecation of voice but also at the imposition of
hāds least as we haue laughed at in some men the secrete imprecation of the voyce should ordaine Clerkes being ignorant thereof And so proceedeth to inueigh against the abuse of them that would ordaine Clerkes of their basest officers and seruitours yea at the request of foolish women By which it is manifest that his purpose is not to tell what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly doth signifie but that imposition of handes is required in lawfull ordination which many did vnderstand by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although in that place it signified no such matter And therefore you muste seeke further authoritie to proue your Ecclesiasticall etymologie that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth putting foorth of the handes to giue orders The places you quote in the margent out of the titles of Nazianzens sermons are to no purpose although they were in the texte of his Homilies For it appeareth not although by Synecdoche the whole order of making Clerkes were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that election was excluded where there was ordination by imposition of handes As for that you cite out of Ignatius proueth against you that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 differeth from imposition of hands because it is made a distinct office from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that signifieth to lay on handes and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by your owne author doe differ MART. 8. But they are so profane and secular that they translate the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in all the new Testament as if it had the old profane signification still were indifferent to signifie the auncients of the Iewes the Senatours of Rome the elders of Lacedemonia and the Christian Clergie In so much that they say Paul sent to Ephesus and called the Elders of the Church Act. 20. and yet they were such as had their flockes and cure of soules as foloweth in the same place They make S. Paul speake thus to Timothee Neglect not the gift so they had rather say than grace lest holy orders should be a Sacrament giuen thee with the laying on of the handes of the Eldership or by the authoritie of the Eldership 1. Tim. 4. What is this companie of Eldership Somewhat they woulde say like to the Apostles worde but they will not speake plainly least the worlde might heare out of the Scriptures that Timothee was made Priest or Bishop euen as the vse is in the Catholike Churche at this day Lette the fourth Councell of Carthage speake for bothe partes indifferently and tell vs the Apostles meaning A Prieste when hee taketh his orders the Bishoppe blessing him and holding his hande vppon his head let all the Priestes also that are present holde their handes by the Bishops hand vpon his head So doe our priestes as this daye when a Bishop maketh priests and this is the laying on of the handes of the companie of Priests which S. Paule speaketh of which they translate the companie of the Eldership Onely their former translation of 1562. in this place by what chaunce or consideration we know not let fall out of the penne by the authoritie of Priesthood FVLK 8. We desire not to be more holy in the englishe termes than the holye Ghost was in the Greeke termes Whome if it pleased to vse such a word as is indifferent to signifie the auncients of the Iewes the Senators of Rome the Elders of Lacedemonia and the Christian Cleargie why shoulde we not truely translate it into English But I pray you in good sadnes are we so profane and secular Act. 20. in calling those whome Saint Paule sent for out of Ephesus Elders What shall we saye then of the vulgar Latine text which calleth them Maiores natu as though they obtayned that degree by yeares rather than by any thing else and why doe you so profanely and secularly call them the Auncients of the Church Is there more profanenesse and secularitie in the Englishe worde Elders than in the Latine worde Maiores natu or in your Frenchenglishe terme Auncients Surely you doe nothing but play with the noses of such as be ignorant in the tongues and can perceiue no similitude or difference of these wordes but by the sounde of their eares But nowe for the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsed by Saint Paule 1. Tim. 4. which we call the Eldershippe or the companye of Elders I haue shewed before howe it is vsed by Saint Luke in his Gospell cap. 22. and Act. 22. You saye we will not speake playnely lest the worlde shoulde heare that Timothie was made Priest or Bishop euen as the vse is in the Catholike Church at this day And then you tell vs out of the Councell of Carthage 4. cap. 3. that all the Priestes present shoulde laye their handes on the heade of him that is ordayned togither with the Bishoppe We knowe it well and it is vsed in the Church of England at this daye Onely the terme of Eldership displeaseth you when we meane thereby the companye of Elders But whereas the translators of the Bible 1562. call it Priesthood eyther by Priesthood they meant the same that we doe by Eldershippe or if they meant by Priesthood the office of Priestes or Elders they were deceiued For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a companie of Elders as it is twise vsed by S. Luke and oftentimes by the auncient writers of the Church both Greekes and Latines MART. 9. Otherwise in all their English Bibles all the bells ringe one note as The Elders that rule well are worthye of double honour And Against an Elder receiue no accusation but vnder two or three witnesses 1. Tim. 5. And If any be diseased among you let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray ouer him and annoynt him with oyle c. Iacob 5. Wheras Saint Chrysostom out of this place proueth the high dignitie of Priestes in remitting sinnes in his booke entituled Of Priesthood vnlesse they will translate that title also Of Eldershippe Againe they make S. Peter saye thus The Elders which are among you I exhort which am also an Elder feedeye Christes flocke as much as lyeth in you c. 1. Pet 5. FVLK 9. In these three textes you triumphe not a litle because your vulgar Latine text hath the Greeke worde Presbyter The high dignitie of Priestes or Elders in remitting sinnes we acknowledge with Chrysostom in his booke entitled of Priesthood which seing it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we will neuer translate Eldershippe But we may lawfully wishe that both Chrysostom and other auncient writers had kept that distinction of termes which the Apostles and Euangelists did so precisely obserue In the last text 1. Pet. 5. your vulgar Latine sayth Seniores and Consenior your selues in English seniors and fellow senior What trespasse then haue we committed in saying Elders fellow Elder or an Elder also MART. 10.
Episcopus Presbyter which came in afterward you your selfe confessed as we heard of late that it is not obserued in the Scriptures but the same men are called Episcopi which before were called Presbyteri And according to that distinctioÌ„ you can allow but one Bishop of one citie at once yet the Scripture in diuerse places speaketh of many Bishops of one citie as Act. 20. the Bishops of Ephesus called before Presbyteri Elders also he saluteth the Bishops and Deacons of Philippi Phil. 1. where your note saith that In the Apostles time there were not obserued alwaies distinct names of either function of B. Priest Would you haue vs to translate the Scripture with distinction of names which the holy ghost maketh not nor your vulgar Latin obserueth nor you your selfe for shame can obserue And if we should haue translated for Elders Priests that distinction taken vp after the Apostles times or the writing of the Scripture had bene neuer the more confirmed MART. 20. But of al other places we would desire these gay translatours to translate this one place of S. Augustine speaking of him self a Bishop and S. Hierom a Priest Quanquam enim secunduÌ„ honoruÌ„ vocabula quae iam Ecclesiae vsus obtinuit Episcopatus Presbyterio maior fit tamen in multis rebus Augustinus Hieronymo minor est Is not this the English therof For although according to the titles or names of honour which now by vse of the church haue preuailed the degree of Bishoppe be greater than Priesthood yet in many things Augustine is lesse than Hierom. Or doth it like them to translate it thus The degree of Bishop is greater than Eldership c Againe against Iulian the heretike when he hath brought many testimonies of the holy doctors that were all Bishops as of S. Cyprian Ambrose Basil Nazianzene Chrysostome at length he commeth to S. Hierom who was no Bishop and sayth Nec sanctum Hieronymum quia Presbyter fuit contemnendum arbitreris that is Neither must thou thinke that S. Hierom because he was but a priest therfore is to be contemned whose diuine eloqueÌ„ce hath shined to vs from the East euen to the West like a lampe and so forth to his great commendation Here is a plaine distinction of an inferiour degree to a Bishop for the which the Heretike Iulian did easily contemne him Is â—ot S. Cyprian full of the like places is not all antiquitie so full that whiles I proue this me thinketh I proue nothing els but that snow is white FVLK 20. Of all other importune and vnreasonable iudges you are one of the worst that would enforce vs to translate the Scriptures which you confesse obserueth not the distinction of Bishops and Priestes according to the fathers which doe almost alwayes obserue it If we should translate those sentences of S. Augustine we might vse the word Priest for Presbyter and priesthood for presbyterium and if we vse the words Elder and Eldership what offence I pray you were it when by these names we vnderstand nothing but the same function minister which Augustine doth That Episcopus a Bishop was of very olde time vsed to signifie a degree Ecclesiasticall higher than Presbyter an Elder or Priest we did neuer deny we knowe it right well We knowe what S. Hierom writeth vpon the epistle to Titus cap. 1. idem est â—rgo Presbyter qui Episcopus The same man is Presbyter or an Elder or Priest which is Episcopus a Bishop And before that by the instinct of the deuill factions were made in religion and it was sayd among the people I am of Paule I of Apollo and I of Cephas the Churches were gouerned by common councell Presbyterorum of the Elders But afterwarde when euery one thought those whome he had baptised to be his owne and not Christes it was decreed in the whole worlde that one de Presbyteris of the Elders being elected should be set ouer the reste to whome all the care of the Churche should pertaine and the seedes of schismes shoulde be taken away This and much more to this effect writeth Saint Hieronyme of this distinction in that place and in diuerse other places which nothing proueth that we are bounde to translate Presbyter in the Scripture a Priest and least of all that we are bound in termes to keepe that distinction which the Scripture maketh not and the Papistes them selues can not obserue in their most partiall translation MART. 21. In all which places if they will translate Elder and yet make the same a common name to all Ecclesiastical degrees as Beza defineth it let the indifferent Reader consider the absurd confusion or rather the impossibilitie thereof if not but they will graunt in all these places it signifieth Priest and so is meant then we must beate them with Bezaes rodde of reprehension against Castaleon that we can not dissemble the boldnesse of these men which woulde God it rested within the custome of words onely and were not important matter concerning their heresie These men therefore touching the word Priest though vsed of sacred writers in the mysterie of the newe Testament and for so many yeares after by the secret consent of all Churches consecrated to this one Sacrament so that it is now growen to be the proper vulgar speeche almoste of all nations yet they dare presume rashly to change it and in place thereof to vse the word Elder delicate men forsooth yea worse a great deale because these do it for heresie not for delicacy which neither are moued with the perpetuall authoritie of so many ages nor by the daily custome of the vulgar speech can be brought to thinke that lawful for diuines which all men graunt to other maisters professors of artes that is to reteyne hold that as their owne which by long vse in good faith they haue truely possessed Neither may they pretend the authoritie of any auncient writer as that the old Latine translator sayth Senior Seniores for that which was to them as it were newe to vs is olde euen then that the selfe same wordes which we now vse were more familiar to the Church it is euident because it is very seldom that they speake otherwise FVLK 21. I see no impossibilitie but that in all places where we reade Presbyter we may lawfully translate Elder as well as Priest and make it stil in Scripture a common name to all Ecclesiasticall degrees at least to as many as the Scripture maketh it common without any absurditie or confusion And albeit in the fathers we should translate it Priest because they vnderstood by the name Presbyter a distinct degree from Episcopus yet the saying of Beza against Castaleo could not by any wise man be applyed to vs. For Castaleo changed the name of the Sacrament Baptismus by which both the Scriptures and the fathers vniformely did vse to signifie one and the same Sacrament whereas the name of
heauen c. IstuÌ„ locuÌ„ episcopi presbyteri noÌ„intelligentes c. This place Bishops Priests not vnderstanding take vpon them somewhat of the pride of the Pharizees so that they thinke they may eyther condemne the innocentes or lose the guiltie persons whereas with God not the sentence of the Priests but the life of the persons accused is inquired of Wee read in Leuiticus of the Lepers where they are coÌ„maunded to shewe them selues to the Priestes and if they haue the Leprosie then by the Priest they are made vncleane Not that Priestes make Lepers and vncleane persons but that they may haue knowledge of him that is a Leper and him that is no Leper and may discerne who is cleane or who is vncleane Therefore euen as the Prieste doth there make the Leper cleane or vncleane So here also the Bishop and Prieste doth binde or lose not them that be innocent or guiltie but according to his office when he shall heare the varietie of sinners he knoweth who is to be bound and who is to be loosed But where you saye the people went to diuerse ghostly fathers as before when that extraordinarie penitentiarie Priest was taken away for the adulterie of a Deacoâ— at ConstaÌ„tinople you speake beside the booke to make the ignorant beleeue that the people went to auricular shrift For in Constantinople where this priuie confession was taken away the people were left to their owne consciences At Rome the same time great offenders did open penance neither were there any such diuerse ghostly fathers as you speake of That Chrysostom sayth lib. 3. de sacerdotio we receiue it being so vnderstood as iâ— be not contrary to that I cited euen nowe our of Hie 〈…〉 But what maketh all this against translating Presbyter an Elder MART. 27 Nowe then to conclude this point seeing we haue such a cloud of witnesses as the Apostle speaketh euen from Christes time that testifie not onely for the name but for the very principall functions of externall Priesthood in offering the sucrifice of Christs bodie bloud in remitting sinnes and so forth what a peâ—â—ish malicious and impudent corruption is this for the defacing of the testimonies of the holy scriptures tending therevnto to seeke to scratch aduantage of the â—ord Presbyter and to make it signifie an Elder not a Priest Presbytenum Eldership rather than Priesthoode as if other new fangled companions that would forge an Heresie that there were no Apostles shoulde for that purpose translate it alwaies legates or that there were no Angels should translate it alwaies Messengers that Baptisme were but a Iudaical ceremony should translate it washing which Castalio did much more tolerably in his traÌ„siatioÌ„ than any of these should if he did it only of curiosity folly And if to take away al distinction of clergie laiâ—y the Protestantes should alwayes translate clerum lotte or lotterie as they do translate is for the same purpose parish and heritage might not Beza him selfe controule them saying that the auncient fathers transferred the name clerus to the Colledge of Ecclesiastical Ministers FVLK 27. A cloude of testimonies in deede you haue heaped togither not as the Apostle did to vpholde the certainty of faith but to obscure the light of truth For our traÌ„slation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Elder is true cleare plaine without ambiguity Insomuch as the vulgar Latin interpreter who as it semeth was a GreciaÌ„ therfore vseth gladly many Greeke termes doeth yet translate this woâ—d almost twise as ofteÌ„ senior or maior natu as he doth Presbyter wheÌ„ he speaketh of the ministers of the gospel How the ancieÌ„t writers applied vnto theÌ„ improperly the name of sacrificer as vnto the sacrameÌ„t the name of oblation or sacrifice I haue spoken already sufficiently Our translation therefore is nothing lyke your vai 〈…〉 supposall of of new fangled companions which to 〈…〉 Apostles Angels and Baptisme would turne the wordes into Legates Messengers washing Whereas we haue no purpose to denie any office or function of the Churche appointed by Christ but to distinguish in name as his spirite in the Scriptures doth alwaies the sacrificers of the old Testament from the Ministers of the new TestameÌ„t The worde Clerus 1. Pet. 5 which we translate parishe or heritage your selues in your notes of that place confesse to comprehende in signification all Christians whiche you are not able to proue that in S Peters time it was transferred vnto the college of ecclesiasticall ministers as Beza saith it was afterwarde wherefore it is one of your accustomed slauÌ„ders to say we traÌ„slate it so of purpose to take away all distinction of Cleargie and Laitie when al men know that wheresoeuer our Churches are established we retaine the distinction and so thinke it necessarie alwayes MART. 28. But alâ—s the effect of this corruption and heresie concerning Priestes hathe it not wrought within these fewe yeares such contempt of al Priestes that nothing is more odious in our countrey than that name which before was so honourable venerable now is among all men If ministery or Eldership were growen to estimation in steede thereof somwhat they had to say but that is yet more contemptible and especially Elders and Eldership for the Queenes Maiestie and her Counsailours wil permit none in gouernement of anie Churche in Englande and so they haue brought all to nothing else but profane laiâ—ie And no maruel of these horrible inconueniences for as the Sacrifice and Priesthoode goe togither and therfore were both honourable togither so when they had according to Daniels prophecie abolished the daily sacrifice out of the churche what remained but the contempt of Priestes and Cleargie and their offices so farre foorth that for the holy Sacrifice sake Priestes are called in great despite Massing Priestes of them that litle consider or lesse care what notable holy learned fathers of all ages since Christes time this their reproch toucheth and concerneth as by the testimonies before alleaged is manifest and whereof the Reader may see a peculiar Chapter in the late Apologie of the English Seminaries FVLK 28. A meruaylous corruption for vs to cal them Elders whom you in your translation call Auncients and the vulgar Latine before vs both called Seniores But what is come to passe I pray you by this wonderfull corruption The name of Popish Priestes is so contemptible that nothing is more odious in England And good cause why both for their blasphemie against God and traiterous practises against the honourable state of the realme and our most gratious Queene But Elders and Eldership you weene is more contemptible because the Queenes Maiestie her Counsailors will permit none in gouernment of any Churches in England and so they haue brought all to nothing else but prophane Laitie This trayterous slaunder of yours is as true as all the rest For although the Queenes Maiestie and the Counsaile do not
alleageth it thus the holy Euangelist S. Luke in the Acts of the Apostles cap. 2. recordeth it and for this S. Augustine calleth him an infidel that denyeth it yet all this would not suffise to make Beza translate it so because of certaine errours as he heretically termeth them which he would full gladly auoide hereby namely the Catholike true doctrine of limbus patrum and Purgatorie What neede we say more he translateth animam a Carcase so calling our Sauiour Christes bodie irreuerently and wickedly he translateth infernum graue FVLK 2. That many of the Christian fathers helde this error that the godly of the old Testament were not in heauen before Christes death it is no cause why we should be afraid to confesse the truth reuealed to vs out of the holy Scriptures to the glorie of God And if the wrong or ambiguous translation of one Hebrue word Sheol deceiued them that were for the most parte ignoraunt of the Hebrue tongue what reason were it that we shoulde not in translation reforme that errour But as for Bezaes first translation of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deade bodie and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 graue I haue aunswered at large Cap. 1. sect 31. where also it is shewed howe vainely you take hold of the English worde carcase to charge Beza with vnreuerent calling of our Sauiour Christes bodie when it was deade because he calleth it in Latine Cadauer MART. 3. Neede we take any great labour to proue this to be a foule corruption or that it is done purposely whē he confesseth that he thus translateth because else it woulde serue the Papistes Which is as much to say as the word of God if it be truly and sincerely translated maketh in deede for them For the first part we will not stand vpon it partly because it is of it selfe most absurd and they are ashamed of it partly because it shall susfise to confute Beza that two other as famous heretikes as he Castalio and Flaccus Illyricus write against him in this point and confute him partly also because we speake not here vniuersally of all hereticall translations but of the English corruptions specially therfore we may only note here how gladly they also would say somwhat else for soule euen in the text if they durst for shame for in the margent of that English trāslation they say or life or person thereby aduertising the Reader that he may reade thus if it please him Thou shalt not leaue my life in the graue or Thou shalt not leaue my person As though either mans soule or life were in the graue or anima might be translated person which the selfe same Englishe Bible doeth not no not in those places where it is euident that it signifieth the whole person For though this worde soule by a figure is sometime taken for the whole man yet euen there they doe not nor must not translate it otherwise than soule beause our tongue beareth that figure as well as Latine Greeke or Hebrue but here where it can not signifie the whole person it is wicked to translate it so FVLK 3. If you take more labour than you are wel able to beare yet shall you proue it no hereticall corruption As Castaleo and Illyricus the one an heretike the other a schismatike haue inueyed against Beza so hath he sufficiently confuted them But to our English translation where in the margent they say life or person when in the text they say soule what doeth this offende you They render the vsuall English word for the Greke word but they admonish the reader that the word soule in this place signifieth not the soule separated from the bodie but either the life or the whole person Because that although the bodie onely be layed in the graue yet according to vulgar speache and sense the whole man is sayed to be buried and his life seemeth to be inclosed in the graue according to which popular and humane conceyt the Prophet in that Psalme speaketh as appeareth in the later parte of that verse which is all one in sense with the former Neither wilt thou giue thy holy one to see corruption where corruption which is proper onely to the bodie is there spoken generally of the whole man If this expositiō please you not yet you haue no cause to finde fault with the translation which in that place is according to the cōmon and ordinarie signification of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 soule Which as it is somtime taken for the whole person as you note Act. 7. 14. So is it here as the later parte of the verse doth most plainly declare MART. 4. But as for the worde graue that they put boldly in the text to signifie that howsoeuer you interprete soule or whatsoeuer you put for it it is not meant according to S. Augustine and the faith of the whole Catholike Church that his soule descended into Hell whiles his bodie was in the graue but that his soule also was in the graue howsoeuer that is to be vnderstoode So making it a certaine and resolute conclusion that the holy Scripture in this place speaketh not of Christs being in Hell but in the graue and that according to his soule or life or person or as Beza will haue it His carcase or bodie and so his soule in Hell as the holy Scripture speaketh shall be his bodie in the graue as Beza plainly speaketh the Bezites couertly insinuate white shall be blacke and chaulke shall be cheese and euery thing shall be any thing that they will haue it And all this their euident false translation must be to our miserable deceiued poore soules the holy Scripture and Gods word FVLK 4. The Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wel beareth to be translated in some places a graue here the later part of the verse speaketh of corruption which can not be vnderstoode to be but in the graue so doth S. Peter vnderstand it saying that Dauid the Patriarch died and was buried and his sepulchre remayneth with vs vnto this day and S. Paule vpon the same verse of the Psalme saith he saw corruption Both the Apostles therfore interpreting this verse of the resurrection of Christ we thinke it in deede a resolute conclusion that the Scripture in this place speaketh not of Christs being in hell which we acknowledge in the article of our Creede but of his buriall and resurrection Your trifling of white and blacke chaulke and cheese may seeme pleasaunt Rhetorike to grosse eares whom you seeke to fill with such vanities But the wiser sort that are acquainted with figuratiue speaches wil thinke it nothing straunge if words be not alwaies taken in their vsual proper signification That the Hebrue worde Nephesh which the Prophet in that verse of the Psalme vseth is taken diuerse times in the Scripture for a deade bodie I haue before proued more plainly than euer you shall
for Lazarus was there comforted Thirdly there is a great Chaos whiche signifieth an infinite distance betwene Abraham and the riche glutton which vtterly ouerthroweth that dreame of Limbus which signifying a border or edge supposeth that place to be harde adioyning to the place of torments Last of all if the Article of our fayth had bene of Limbus Patrum or of Abrahams bosome we shoulde haue bene taught to saye he descended into Limbo patrum or he descended into Abrahams bosome which all Christian eares abhorre to heare The worde Sheol vsed in the olde Testament for a common receptacle of all the dead signifieth properly a place to receiue their bodies and not their soules and therefore most commonly in our translations is called the graue MART. 7. As when Iacob sayth Descendam ad filium meum lugens in infernum I will goe downe to my sonne into Hell mourning they translate I wil go downe into the graue vnto my sonne mourning as though Iacob thought that his sonne Ioseph had bene buried in a graue whereas Iacob thought and sayd immediatly before as appeareth in the holy Scripture that a wild beast had deucured him and so could not be presumed to be in any graue or as though if Ioseph had bene in a graue Iacob would haue gone downe to him into the same graue For so the wordes must needes import if they take graue properly but if they take graue unproperly for the state of deade men after this life why doe they call it graue and not Hell as the word is in Hebrew Greeke and Latine No doubt they doe it to make the ignorant Reader beleeue that the Patriarch Iacob spake of his bodie onely to descend into the graue to Iosephes bodye for as concerning Iacobs soule that was by their opinion to ascend immediatly after his death to heauen and not to descend into the graue But if Iacob were to ascend forthwith in soule how could he say as they translate I will goe downe into the graue vnto my sonne As if according to their opinion he should say My sonnes bodie is deuoured of a beast and his soule is gone vp into heauen well I will goe downe to him into the graue FVLK 7. A proper quidditie you haue found out of Iacob supposing his sonne to be deuoured of wilde beastes yet sayth I wil goe downe vnto him mourning which you thinke can not be into the graue because he did not thinke he was buried But you must remember it is the common manner of speech when men saye in mourning they will goe to their friendes departed they meane they will dye although their friendes perhaps were drowned in the sea or their bodies burned or perhaps lye in desolate places vnburied So Iacobs descending to the graue signifieth no more but death by which he knewe he shoulde be ioyned to his sonne in soule though he were not in bodie The name of graue is vsed because it is vsuall that dead men are buried though it be not vniuersall And that the graue is taken commonly for death it appeareth by that phrase so often vsed in the Scriptures He slept with his fathers and was buried which being spoken indifferently of good men and euill can not be vnderstood of one place of their soules but of death which is common to all and is proper to the bodie not vnto the soule for the soules of the departed sleepe not The like is to be sayde of the phrase vsed in Gen. of Ismael as well as of the godly Patriarkes he was laid vp to his people And lest you should please your selfe too much in your childish conceit of Iosephes being deuoured whereof yet his father was not certaine You shall heare howe Isydorus Clarius translateth the same place in his Bible censured by the Deputies of Trent Councell Descendam ad filium meum lugens in sepulchrum I will goe downe to my sonne mourning into the graue This is one of the places which he thought meere to be corrected according to the Hebrew and in other places where he is content to vse the old word Infernus he signifieth in his notes that he meaneth thereby Sepulchrum the graue And in deede this word Infernus signifieth generally any place beneath as the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Greeke translators vsed for Sheol the Hebrue worde signifieth a place that is darke and obscure where nothing can be seene such as the graue or pitte is in which the dead are layde which therefore of Iob is called the land of darkenesse and the shadow of death MART. 8. Gentle Reader that thou mayst the better conceiue these absurdities and the more detest their guilefull corruptions vnderstand as we began to tell thee before that in the old Testament because there was yet no ascending into heauen the way of the holies as the Apostle in his epistle to the Hebrues speaketh being not yet made open because our sauiour Christ was to dedicate and begin the enteraunce in his owne person and by his passiō to open heauen therfore we say in the old Testament the common phrase of the holy Scripture is euen of the best men as well as of others that dying they went downe ad inferos or ad infernū to signifie that such was the state of the old Testament before our sauiour Christs Resurrection and Ascension that euery man went downe and not vp descended and not ascended by descending I meane not to the graue which receiued their bodies only but ad inferos that is to hel a common receptacle or place for their soules also departed as wel of those soules that were to be in reste as those that were to be in paines and torments All the soules both good and bad that then died went downeward and therefore the place of both sortes was called in all the tongues by a worde answereable to this worde hel to signifie a lower place beneath not onely of torments but also of rest FVLK 8. Where you reason that there was no ascēding into heauen because the way of the holies was not yet made open when the firste tabernacle was standing you abuse the Reader and the Scripture For the Apostles meaning is in that verse to shewe that to the great benefite of Christians that firste tabernacle is fallen because that nowe we haue more familiar accesse vnto God by Iesus Christ. For whereas the High Priest onely but once in the yeare and then not without bloud entred into the second moste holye Tabernacle because the way of the Holyes that is vnto the Holyest or sancta sanctorum was not then opened nowe our Sauiour Christ hauing once entred into the holiest place by his owne bloud and founde eternall redemption we haue by him without any ceremonies sacrifices or mediation of any mortall Priest free accesse vnto the throne of grace euen into the holye place by the newe and liuing waye which he hath
with infinite paine but because it is a sinne committed against the maiestie of the eternall God and therefore is worthy of eternall punishment For the sinne is to be measured after the excellencie of the person against whome it is committed Therefore that word which being spoken against a poore man is a light fault as to say he is a knaue the same being spoken against a Lorde is an hainous offence and deserueth the pillorie hut being spoken against a King is high treason and is worthy of death Seeing therefore the eternall maiestie of God is contemned in euery sinne that sinne doth iustly deserue eternall torments Fourthly it is true that the Apostle doth exhort vs cheerefully to abide the small and momentarie afflictions of this life in respect that they shall be rewarded with incomparable glorie But hereof it followeth not that the glorie is deserued by short and small sufferings but is giuen of the bountifull liberalitie of God to them that for his sake patiently suffer such small afflictions Therefore if it be an incouragement for a man to labour to heare that he shall be payd his hyre as much as his worke deserueth it is a much greater incouragement for him to heare that he shal receiue a thousand times more than his labour deserueth The words you adde you are neuer the nearer heauen onely beleeue are yours and none of ours for we say with the Apostle we must suffer with Christ if we will reigne with him and the patient suffering of the faithful is nothing repugnant to the iustification before God by faith onely To the last argument of the Apostles authoritie I aunswer our patient suffering worketh infinite weight of glorie not by the worthinesse merite or desert of our suffering but by the bountifull liberalitie of God who hath promised so incomparable rewarde to small tribulation suffered for his sake Wherefore all your fiue reasons notwithstanding our translation is sounde and true MART. 7. See you not a comparison betwene short and eternall light tribulation and exceding weightie glorie and yet that one also worketh the other that is causeth purchaseth and deserueth the other For like as the litle seede being not comparable to the great tree yet causeth it and bringeth it forth so our tribulations and good workes otherwise incomparable to eternall glorie by the vertue of Gods grace working in vs worketh purchaseth and causeth the sayd glorie For so they knowe verie well the Greeke worde importeth though here also they translate it most falsely prepareth Bib. an 1577. FVLK 7. We see the comparison well but we see not that worketh or causeth is all one with purchaseth and deserueth Your comparison of seede and tribulation is not like For in the seede is the formall cause of the greate tree so is not the formall cause of eternall glorie in our tribulation But as if an Emperour for one dayes valiant seruice in warre doe giue vnto his sonne one of his kingdomes we may truly say that dayes seruice wrought him this great rewarde or caused him to be aduaunced to this kingdome but we can not say truely it purchased or deserued a kingdome for then euery one that serued as well as he deserued the like rewarde so is the rewarde of eternall life whiche is the gift of God incomparably greater than our tribulatiō not by the desert of the sufferer but by liberalitie of the giuer That translation that vseth the worde of preparing is not so proper according to the worde but it differeth not muche in sense shewing howe those afflictions do worke or cause namely by preparing making vs conformable to the sufferings of Christ. MART. 8. Lastly for moste manifest euidence that these present tribulations and other good workes are meritorious and worthie of the ioyes to come though not comparable to the same you shal heare the holy Doctors say both in one passage or sentence S. Cyprian thus O what maner of day shal come my brethren when our Lord shal recoūt the MERITES of euery one and paie vs the rewarde or stipend of faith and deuotion Ep. 56. here are merites and the rewarde for the same It foloweth in the saide Doctor What glorie shall it be and how great ioie to be admitted to see God so to be honoured that thou receiue the ioy of eternall life with Christe thy Lorde God to receiue there that which neither eie hath seen nor eare hath heard nor hath ascended into the hart of man for that we shall receiue greater things than here eyther wee doe or suffer the Apostle pronounceth saying The passions of this time are not condigne or comparable to the glorie to come Here we see that the stipend or reward of the merits aforesayd are incomparably greater than the sayd merits FVLK 8. For lacke of Scriptures you flye to the Doctors to finde merits in whome neuerthelesse being Catholike and sound Doctors you shall sooner find the word Meritum than your meaning of it The place of Cyprian I maruell why you geld except it be to ioyne the reward that he speaketh of with the worde merites which he vseth either generally for workes as it is often vsed in the auncient writers or if he meane thereby deserts he speaketh but of examination onely of all mens deserts that he may giue to the wicked that they haue deserued and to the godly that which he hath promised therefore he calleth it the rewarde of their faith and deuotion His wordes are these O diesille qualis quantus aduenies fratres dilectissimi cum caeperit populum suum dominus recensere diuinae cognitionis examine singulorum meritum recognoscere mittere in gehennam nocentés persecutores nostros flammae paenalis perpetuo ardore damnare nobis verò mercedem fidei deuotionis exoluere O that day what manner a one and how great shall it come my deerest beloued brethren when the Lorde shall beginne to recount his people and by examination of his diuine knowledge consider the merites of euery one to sende into hell fire the guiltie and to condemne our persecutors with perpetuall burning of penall flame but vnto vs to pay the reward of faith and deuotion The rewarde of faith is not that which beliefe deserueth but which it looketh for according to Gods promise wherevnto it leaneth For in respect of deserte of Gods fauour he saith and bringeth diuerse textes for proofe Fidem tantum prodesse tantum nos posse quantum credimus That faith only doth profite and that so much wee can doe how much we beleeue Wherfore we see not in Cyprian the incomparable glory to be a reward of desertes MART. 9. Likewise S. Augustine The exceeding goodnesse of God hath prouided this that the labours should soone be ended but the rewardes of the MERITES should endure without ende the Apostle testi fying THE PASSIONS OF THIS TIME ARE NOT COMPARABLE c. For wee shal receiue greater blisse
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometimes Gladius sometimes Enâ—iâ— it were no faulte no more than it is in vs to vse the wordes iustice and righteousnesse workes and deedes fayth and beliefe truste and confidence c. And you your selues in suche wordes doe often vse the same libertie MART. 21. But will you not yet see merite and meritorious workes in the Scripture I maruell your skill in the Greeke teacheth you nothing in this point S. Iohn saith Looke to your selues that you lose not the things which you haue wrought but that you may receiue a full reward Me thinketh in these wordes the equiualent of merite is easily seene of any man that is not wilfully blinde But you should see further thaÌ„ the coÌ„mon sorte For you know that the Greeke here signifieth not only that which we worke but that which we worke for At in the Greeke phrase of working for a mans liuing and as you translats Io. 6. v. 27. LABOVR NOT FOR THE MEATE that perisheth but for that meate which endureth vnto life euerlasting Such labourers God hired to worke in his vineyard the workeman is worthie of his hire So that the Apostle in the former wordes exhorteth to perseuerance that we lose not the reward or pay for which we worke and which by working we merite and deserue FVLK 21. You fare with vs as a mery fellow did with his friendes of whom Erasmus telleth who affirming that he sawe in the skie a fiery dragon with often asking them if they did not see it he induced them at length euery one to coÌ„fesse they saw it least they should haue bene thought to be purblind But in good earnest in my conscience I see no more merite in the Scriptures than I did before Yea I haue this argument more to persuade mee that it is not founde in the Scriptures because the chiefest patrones thereof hauing taken such paynes to finde it are nowe as farre from it as euer they were But to the matter I say there is no merite included in the saying of S. Iohn although you rehearse it in the seconde person after the vulgar Latine translation and not after the Greeke whiche is in the firste person and may be referred to the rewarde of the Apostles which shall be full if they whom they haue conuerted to the faith doe perseuere vnto the ende But make it as strong for your parte as you can the full rewarde is giuen according to the moste bountifull promise of God to our good workes of his meere mercie and grace and not by deserte of our workes And the parable of the labourers whom God hired into his vineyarde declareth moste euidently that the rewarde is of grace not of merite For if it were of merite they that came first earely in the morning should haue receyued more as their labour was greater than they whiche came at the laste houre Where our Sauiour Christe sayeth the workeman is worthie of his hire hee teacheth his Disciples that they maye lawfully take meate and drinke of them to whome they preach according to that common saying or Prouerbe But thereof it followeth not that euery one which worketh in Gods vineyarde is worthie for his workes sake and by deserte of his labour of eternall glorie for he promiseth greater rewarde to his workemen a thousande folde and more than their labour doth deserue So that yet wee see not that wee merite and deserue by working although we receyue rewarde for our work or according to our workes Vnde mihi tantum meriti saith a godly father cui indulgentia est pro coronâ— whence should I haue so greate merite when pardon or mercie is my crowne MART. 22. Againe Beza telleth vs that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth mercedem quae meritis respondet that is a rewarde answereable to the merites And wee finde many wordes in the Scripture like vnto this 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which are on Gods parte who is the rewarder and recompenser And on our parte wee haue as the Apostle saith Hebr. 10. and 4. greate confidence confidence saith Photius a notable Greeke father of our works confidence of our faith of our tentations of our patience c. Yea wee haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Scripture whiche muste needes signifie as much as Bezaes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By the one is said In keeping thy commaundementes is greate rewarde Againe You shall receyue THE RETRIBVTION of inherimunce Col. 3. v. 24. And 2. Thessal 1. v. 6. Gods repaying iust and reiribution of Hell or Heauen for good and euill deserâ—es is expressed by the same worde And by the other is said I haue inclined my hart to keepe thy iustifications or commaundements alwaies FOR REWARD FVLK 22. If you can finde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Scripture you conuince vs of merite by Bezaes iudgement Therefore tell vs I pray you in what booke and chapter wee shall finde it First you tell vs that you finde many wordes like vnto it Yea but neyther the same nor any that is aequiualent For rendring of rewarde which all your wordes doe signifie may be according to promise by grace and not by desert The confidence of our workes that Photius speaketh of muste be vnderstood as they are testimonies of Gods sanctifying spirit or else it is contrary to the Scripture The parable tolde against them that trusted in themselues that they are righteous whereas we must confesse that we are vnprofitable seruants in all our obedience and beste workes that we doe Yea but you haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Scripture which must needes signifie as much as Bezaes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Who will yeelde to this necessitie If a man promise a laborer 20. shillings for euery dayes worke the rendring of this wages may be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and yet no man will say that a daies labour deserueth twentie shillings That there is great rewarde promised for them that keepe Gods coÌ„maundements wee confesse but this rewarde is eyther of merite if they perfectly keepe all Gods commaundements which no man doth or of mercie if being iustified by faith through remission of their sinnes they endeuour according to the measure of Gods grace giuen vnto them to keepe Gods commaundements in some parte as God giueth strength In the testimonie of S. Paule the worde of inheritaunce following immediatly after the worde of rewarde or retribution excludeth merites for the inheritaunce dependeth of Gods free adoption by which he maketh vs his sonnes that he may giue vs that inheritaÌ„ce which we can neuer deserue In the other place the Apostle promiseth reward of glory to them that suffer for Christes name which God hauing promised of his meere mercie to giue vs and the same being purchased for
Greeke text of the Psalmes which nowe we haue is none of the Seuenties translation as euen Lindanus might teach you de opt gen l 3. ◠6. MART. 25. And to this purpose perhaps it is for other cause I can not gesse that you make such a maruelous transposition of wordes in your translation Mat. 19. saying thus When the sonne of man shall sit in the throne of his maiestie ye that haue followed me in the regeneration shal sit also vpon twelue scates Whereas the order of these wordes both in Greeke and Latine is this You that haue followed me in the regeneration when the Sonne of man shall sit in his maiestie you also shall sit vpon twelue seates To follow Christ in the regeneration is not easily vnderstood what it should meane but to sit with Christ in the regeneration that is in the resurrection vpon twelue seates that is familiar and euery mans interpretation and concerneth she great reward that they shall then haue which here followe Christ as the Apostles did FVLK 25. You looke for faultes very narrowly that can espye but a comma wanting although it be no impious sense to follow Christ in the regeneration for the worlde by Christ was after a sort renewed when the cause of the restauration thereof was performed as for the reward of which you haue such a seruile care is expressed in sitting vpon twelue seates to iudge the tribes of Israell Wherefore there was no neede that you shoulde feare the losse of your rewarde by this transposition MART. 26. The like transposition of wordes is in some of your Bibles Heb. 2. v. 9. thus We see IESVS crowned with glorie and honour which was a litle inferior to the Angels through the suffering of death Whereas both in Greeke and Latine the order of the wordes is thus Him that was made a litle inferior to Angels we see IESVS through the passion of death crowned with honour and glorie In this later the Apostle sayth that Christ was crowned for his suffering death and so by his death merited his glorie But by your translation he saith that Christ was made inferiour to Angels by his suffering death that is saith Beza For to suffer death and taking it so that he was made inferiour to Angels that he might die then the other sense is cleane excluded that for suffering death he was crowned with glorie and this is one place among other whereby it may very well be gathered that some of you thinke that Christ him selfe did not merite his owne glorie and exaltation So obstinatly are you set against merites and meritorious workes To the which purpose also you take away mans free will as hauing no habilitie to worke toward his owne saluation FVLK 26. Whether we say Christ was crowned for his suffering or Christ was made inferiour to the Angels through his suffering the sense of either of both is good and godly and may stande with the place neither doth the one of them exclude the other although but one only can be the sense of the place And if this be the place by which you may gather that some of vs thinke that Christ merited not his owne glorie it is not worth a straw We hold that Christ for him selfe needed not to merite because he was the Lorde of glorie but that he merited for vs to be exalted in our nature for our saluation it is so farre off that we deny that our whole comfort resteth in his merites and in his glorie which he hath deserued for vs we hope to be glorified for euer When you make your transition to the next chapter you say we take away mans free wil as hauing none abilitie to worke by which it seemeth that you doe not onely allowe to man the freedome of his will but also power to worke whatsoeuer he will so that he shall not only haue a free will but also a strength by the same to worke towardes his owne saluation CHAP. X. Hereticall translation against FREE VVILL Martin AGAINST free will your corruptions be these Ioh. 1. 12. where it is said As many as receiued him he gaue them power to be made the sonnes of God some of your translations say he gaue them prerogatiue to be the sonnes of God Beza dignitie Who protesteth that whereas in other places often he translated this Greke word power and authoritie here he refused both in deede against free will which he sayeth the Sophistes would proue out of this place reprehending Erasmus for following them in his translation But whereas the Greeke word is indifferent to signifie dignitie or libertie he that will translate either of these restraineth the sense of the holy Ghost and determineth it it to his owne fansie If you may translate dignitie may not we as well translate it libertie Yes surely For you know it signifieth the one as well as the other both in profane and Diuine writers And you can well call to minde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence they are deriued and that the Apostle calleth a mans libertie of his owne will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now then if potestas in Latine and power in Englishe be wordes also indifferent to signifie both dignitie and libertie translate so in the name of God and leaue the text of the Scripture indifferent as we doe and for the sense whether of the two it doth here rather signifie or whether it doth not signifie both as no doubt it doth the fathers so expounde it let that be examined otherwise It is a common fauls with you and intolerable by your translation to abridge the sense of the holy Ghost to one particular vnderstanding to defeate the exposition of so many fathers that expounde it in another sense and signification As is plaine in this example also folowing Fulke SEeing you confesse that the Greeke worde signifieth not onely power but also dignitie and that in this place it signifieth both it can be no corruptiō but the best and truest interpretation to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dignitie for that includeth power whereas power may be seuered from dignitie Where you woulde haue vs vse a word that is ambiguous whē the sense is cleare by your owne confession you bewray your owne corrupt affection which desire to haue the Scriptures so ambiguously or doubtfully translated that the ignorant might receiue no benefite of certaine vnderstanding by them When a worde hath diuerse significations a wise translater must weigh which of them agreeth with the text in hand that to vse but not to seeke ambiguous words that may bring the matter in doubt when the meaning to him is certaine As here you say there is no doubt but it signifieth both and yet you quarrell at our translation which comprehendeth both and vrge the word of power from which dignity may be seuered whereas frō dignity power or ability or licence can not be
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
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 do the alwaies import the grace or fauour of God none eyther wise or learned wil affirme neither doth your vulgar interpretor expresse the word of grace in those places that you bring for example Phi. 1. v. 29. he saith plainly donatum est it is giuen and so your selues translate it Why I pray you do you suppres the word grace or why do you thus trifle againste vs When Saint Paule appealed to Caesar Acts. 25. affyrming that no manne coulde gyue him into the handes of his aduersaries he vseth the same worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So when Festus telleth Agrippa that he aunswered the Iewes that it was not the custome of the Romaines to giue any man to destruction c Saint Luke vseth the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were not he a mad translator or interpretor either that woulde expounde this worde of the grace of God which is spoken of the fauor of menne So when the Apostle 1. Cor. 16. calleth the almes of the Corinthians their grace is it not better englishe to say their liberalitie for althoughe their liberalitie proceeded of Gods gift yet the Apostle adding the pronoune 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 meaneth the free gifte of the Corinthians not the grace of God MART. 10. But concerning the sacrament of orders as in the firste to Timothee so in the seconde also they suppresse the worde Grace and call it barely and coldely Gift saying I put thee in remembrance that thou stirre vp the gift of God which is in thee by the putting on of my handes Where if they had sayd the grace of God which is in thee by the putting on of my handes then were it plaine that S. Paule by the ceremonie of imposing hands vpon Timothee in making him Priest or Bishop gaue him grace and so it should be a very Sacrament of holy Orders for auoiding whereof they translate otherwise or els let them giue vs an other reason therof specially the Greeke word much more signifying grace than a bare gift as is declared FVLK 10. These colewoorts were sodden enough once before that they neede not be set on againe The worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if you finde it an hundreth times signifieth no more but a free gift or a gift that is freely giueÌ„ euen as the English word gift doth wherof the Prouerbe is what is so free as gift Wherfore if we had said the grace of God we had translated amisse otherwise than the Greeke word doth signifie But where you trifle in your termes of a bare gifte and we call it barely and coldly a gifte you doe nothing but bewray your owne shame Can the gift of God be called a bare gift or doth he speake barely and coldly that saith the gift of God Doth the Apostle Ephes. 2. speaking of our saluation and your vulgar interpretor and you your selues speake of a bare gifte and call it barely and coldly the gifte of God When you say you are saued through faith and that not of your selues for it is the gift of God not of workes c. See you not that while you seeke to rase our skinne you strike your selfe to the harte Be wiser therefore and spare your owne credite find no fault with that which you caÌ„not amend which if it were a fault you your selues commit as much as we MART. 11. The more to prosane this sacred order wherevnto continencie single life hath bene alwaies annexed in the newe Testament for the honour and reuerence of the functions therevnto belonging to profanâ— the same I say and to make it mere laicall and popular they will haue all to be maried men yea those that haue vowed the contrarie and it is a great credite among them for our Priests Apostataes to take wiues This they would deduce from the Apostles custome but by most false and impudent translation making S. Paul say thus as of his owne wife and the other Apostles wiues Haue not we power to lead about a wife being a sister as well as the rest of the Apostles Whereas the Apostle saith nothing else but a woman a sister that is a Christian woman meaning such holy women as folowed Christ and the Apostles to find and mainteine them of their substance So doth S. Hierom interprete it S. Augustine both directly prouing that it cannot be translated wife but womaÌ„ and the Greeke fathers most expresly And as for the Greeke word if they say it is ambiguous S. Augustine telleth them that as the Apostle hath put it downe with al the circuÌ„stances there is no ambiguitiâ— at al that might deceiue any man Yea let vs set a part the circumstances and consider the Greeke word alone in it selfe and Beza will tell vs in other places that it signifieth a woman rather than a wife reprehending Erasmus for translating it wife because there is no circumstance annexed why it shoulde so signifie thereby declaring that of it selfe it signifieth woman and therfore much more when the circumstance also as S. Augustine saith maketh it certaine that so it doth signifie FVLK 11. If matrimonie be a holy Sacrament as you say an holy ordinance of God as we both coÌ„fesse how should the sacred order of Priesthood be prophaned thereby That coÌ„tinence and single life hath alwaies bene annexed to the Ecclesiasticall functions in the new Testament it is so manifest an vntruth that I wil not staÌ„d to confute it As where you say that we make the order meere laycal popular that we will haue all men to be maried yea those that haue vowed the contrarie these be most impudent assertions Though it be free for all men to marrie yet no man is willed otherwise than he shall finde cause in him selfe And for Priests that come from you it is more credite to marrie than out of mariage to liue incontinently otherwise they are of as great credit that be vnmaried as they that be maried What the custome of the Apostles was for hauing wiues keeping coÌ„panie with theÌ„ not only the Scripture of the Apostles but also Clemens Alexandrinus a most auncient writer is witnesse for vs against your impudent assertion alledging euen this texte of 1. Cor. 9. To proue that they did lead their wiues about with them Pâ—r quas etiam in Gynecaum c. By meanes of whom the doctrine of our Lord might enter into the closet of womeÌ„ without any reprehension or euill suspition By which our translation is proued to be good true as I haue more at large declared before Cap. 1. Sect. 18. Nether is there here any new matter which is not there sufficiently answered MART. 12. Wherefore great must the impudencie of Beza be and of the English Bâ—zites that knowing this and protesting it else where in his Annotations yet here translateth soroâ—em vxorem a sister a wife and saying after his lordly manner I doubted not so to translate it disputing
sundrie places againe if one be restrained from the larger signification peculiarly applyed signifie the Sacramentes of the Church the other also As the Sacrament of the bodie and bloud of Christ or the Mysterie of the bodie and bloud of Christ and the Caluinists in their Latine and Greeke Catechisme say two Sacramentes or two Mysteries FVLK 2. The English worde secret signifieth fully as much as the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in which we must seeke no holinesse as papistes doe in vaine sounde of wordes but in the matter annexed which plainely expresseth that it is a great secret of great holines whereof the Apostle speaketh And it is verie false that you say that the Latine worde sacramentum is equiualent to the Greeke for both it signifieth an oth which y e Greke word doth not and also it includeth holinesse which the Greeke worde doth not Or else why sayth not your vulgar translator and you the sacrament of iniquitie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 therefore signifieth euerie secrete sacramentum onely an holy sacrament as when you say Apoc. 17. the sacrament of the woman the meaning is the secret to be reuealed concerning her is an holy thing else in the same chapter you haue not a sacrament written in her forheade but a mysterie or secret Babylon the mother of abhominations That the sacramentes are called mysteries we confesse but that whatsoeuer is called a mysterie may also be called a sacrament that doe we vtterly denie MART. 3. This being so what is the fault of their translation in the place aforesaide this that they translate neither Sacrament nor Mysterie As for the worde Sacrament they are excused because they translate not the Latine but translating the Greeke why sayde they not Mysterie which is the Greeke worde heere in the Apostle I meane why sayde they not of matrimonie This is a great Mysterie No doubt there can be no other cause but to auoide both those wordes which are vsed in the Latin and Greeke Church to signifie the Sacramentâ—s For in the Greeke Church the Sacrament of thâ— bodie bloud it self is called but a mystery or mysteries which yet the ProtestaÌ„ts themselues call a true Sacrament Therfore if they shold haue called Matrimonie also by that name it might easily haue sounded to be a Sacrament also But in saying it is a great secret they put it out of doubt that it shall not be so taken FVLK 3. Seeing the word secrete y t we vse signifieth wholy as much as mysterie we hope all reasonable men wil allow y e same also Sacrament without preiudice to y e trueth we could not translate and mysterie for the better vnderstanding of the people we haue expressed in the English worde secrete Out of which if it haue any force of argument in it you may proue matrimonie to be a sacrament as well as out of the Greeke worde mysterie But it is the sounde of an vnknowen worde that you had rather play vpon in the eares of the ignorants then by any sound argument out of y e scripture to bring them to the knowledge of the trueth MART. 4. They will say vnto mee Is not euerie sacrament mysterie in english a secrete Yes as Angel is a messenger Apostle one that is sent But when the holy Scripture vseth these words to signifie more excelleÌ„t diuine things then those of the common sort doth it become translators to vse baser termes in steede therof so to disgrace the writing meaning of the holy Ghost I appeale to themselues when they translatâ— this word in other places whether they say not thus And wtout doubt great was y t MYSTERIE of godlines God was shewed manifestly in y e flesh c. againe The MYSTERIE which haue bin hid since y e world began but now is opened to his saincts againe I shew you a MYSTERIE we shal not al sleep but we shal all be changed And the like Where if they should traÌ„slate secret in steed of mysterie as the Bezites do in one of these places saying I wil shew you a secret thing what a disgracing debasing were it to those high mysteries there signified And if it were so in these is it not so in matrimonie which the Apostle maketh such a mysterie that it representeth no lesse mater then Christ his Church whatsoeuer is most excellent in that coniunctioÌ„ Noâ—then if in all other places of high mysterie they translate it also mysterie as it is in the Greeke only in Matrimonie do not so but say rather This is a great secret vsing so base a terme in so high excellent a mysterie must we not needs thinke at no dout it is that they do it because of their heretical opinioÌ„ against the SacrameÌ„t of Matrimony for their base estimation therofâ— FVLK 4. Nowe you flie to your old shift of y e ecclesiastiall vse of termes which you cannot proue to be like of this English word mysterie which is coÌ„moÌ„ly as prophanely secularly vsed as any other word For what is more coÌ„mon among artificers thaÌ„ their science or mystery of weauing of dying such like And yet the word may be vsed of the highest secrets of Christian ReligioÌ„ as it is of our translators And wheresoeuer they haue said a mysterie they might as truely haue saide a secret where they say a secrete they might haue said a mysterie But wher you say y t in al other places of high mystery they translate y e word mysterie it is false For Mat. 13. Mark the 4. Luk. the 8. where all y e mysteries of the kingdome of God are spokeÌ„ of they translate mysteria the secrets of y e kingdome of heauen 1. cor 4. where the sacraments al other secrets of Christian Religion are spokeÌ„ of they translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stewards of y e mysteries of God Wherefore it is a shamefull and senselesse slander that heere only we vse this word secret to shew our base estimation of matrimonie MART. 5. But they wil yet reply againe aske vs what we gaine by translating it either Sacrament or mysterie Doth that make it one of the Sacramentes properly so called to wit such a Sacrament as Baptisme is no surely but howsoeuer wee gaine otherwise at least we gaine the coÌ„mendation of true translators whether it make with vs or against vs. For otherwise it is not the name that maketh it such a peculiar Sacrament For as is said before Sacrament is a generall name in Scripture to other thinges Neither do we therefore so translate it as though it were foorthwith one of the seuen Sacraments because of the name but as in other places wheresoeuer we finde this word in the Latine we translate it Sacrament as in the Apocalipse the sacrament of the woman so finding it heere we doe heere also so translate it and as for the diuerse taking of it heere and else where that
he adored in respect of things to come it is not otherwise easie to vnderstād but that he partly for saw the kingdō of Ephraim the posteritie of Ioseph partly the kingdome of Christ prefigured in Ioseph then Prince of Aegypt and so by faith adored his scepter or toward his scepier which is all one as the Greeke fathers for the most part expound it But let vs hasten towà rd an end FVLK 6. S. Hierom in deede denieth that Iacob did worship his staffe or his scepter or toward the toppe of his Sonnes scepter but onely towardes the beds head as the Hebrue text is For reuerent estimation of reliques the Holy land and the monuments of Christs doing and being as he sometime vpon contention perhaps was immoderate so for adoration of such things after such Idolatrous manner as is vsed in the popish Church he was farre off yea he saith expresly that hee dothe not allowe the adoration of any creature and that to adore any creatures is plaine idolatrie Has autem non dico martyrum reliquias c. But we doe worshippe and adore I saye not the reliques of martyres but neither the sunne truly nor the moone c. not Aungelles not Archaungels not Cherubin not Seraphin or any name that is named in this worlde or in the worlde to come least we should serue the creature rather than the creator whiche is blessed for euer But we honour the reliques of martyres that wee might adore him whose martyres they are Doe you not heare how Hierome alloweth the adoring of creatures I see no cause therefore why wee may not be tryed by his iudgement for adoration of holie things and namely reliques and whatsoeuer you will name beside seeing he maketh adoration proper onelie to God Finally the Apostle saith not that Iacob adored in respecte of things to come but that by faith he blessed his sonne concerning things to come and worshipped God whome no man can worshippe truely but by faith And Iacobs faith was the more commendable that being neere his ende and in that infirmitie of bodie he both beleeued the promises of God made to him concerning his sonnes and also gaue thankes vnto God for those benefites whyche hee shoulde neuer taste of in the flesh but was assured by them as tokens of Gods fauour towards him to the attainement of the lande of eternall life whereof the lande of Canaan was but a holie figure and sacrament CHAP. XX. Hereticall translation by ADDING TO THE TEXT Martin BEcause in the last corruption I spake of adding to the texte thoughe i◠bee their common and vniuersal fault in euerie controuersie as is to bee seene in euerie chapiter of this booke yet here I wil adde certaine places not yet mentioned As The reste of the actes of Iehoakim and his abhominations whych he did and CARVED IMAGES THAT VVERE LAID TO HIS CHARGE BEHOLDE THEY ARE VVRITTEN c these words carued images laid to his charge are more than is either in the Greeke or the Hebrewe Fulke YOu forget your self in the first place wherof made mention Chap. 3. sect 9. where I haue aunsweared that our firste translators added that which is the common interpretation and supply of them that write vpon this place but because that hadde beene better in the note than in the texte it is corrected in twoo later translations MART. 2. Againe Saule confounded the Iewes proouing by conferring one Scripture with an other that this is very Christe These wordes by conferring one Scripture with another are added more than is in the greeke texte in fauour of their presumptuous opinion that conference of scriptures is ynough for any man to vnderstand them and so to reiecte bothe the commentaries of the Doctours and exposition of holy Councels and Catholike Churche it is so muche more I saye than is in the Greeke text and a notorious corruption in their Bible read daily in their churches as most authenticall See the rest of their Bibles and thou shalte finde no more for al those wordes but affirming or confirming and the selfe same Bible in the first epistle to the Corinthians translateth the same Greeke worde thus Who shal instruct And indeede that is the true and vsuall signification of the word both in the olde Testament and in the newe as Deut. 4. Thou shalt teach them thy children And Esay 40. Who shal instruct our Lord The Hebrewe worde also in both places signifying no more but instructing and teaching And so doth the Apostle cite i◠to the Corinthians out of Esay and he vseth i◠to the Coloss c. 2. v. 2. in the same signification as the Churche readeth and expoundeth it and so consequently S. Luke in the place whereof we nowe treate saith nothing else but that S. Paule earnestly taught or instructed them that Iesus is Christe And yet our newe translators without respect of Hebrewe or Greeke haue coined a new signification of conferring one scripture with an other So ignorant they are in the signification of Greke wordes or rather so wilfully malitious FVLK 2. Either you make aloude lie or else some one print whych you haue of the Bishops Bible whiche you cal Bib. 1577. hath put that into the line that should be the note in the margent For of four translations that I haue neuer a one hath that addition The Bishoppes Bible hathe that 22. verse Chap. 9. this But Saule increased the more in strength and confounded the Iewes which dwelt at Damascus affirming that this was very Christe The Geneua Bible thus But Saule increased the more in strength and confounded the Iewes that dwelt at Damascus confirming that this was the Christ where the note in the margent vppon the word confirming is this proouing by the conference of the scriptures Thomas Mathews Bible translateth that verse thus But Saule increased in strength and confounded the Iewes which dwelt at Damascus affirming that this was verie Christe Maister Couerdales Bible 1562. hatla it thus But Saule increased the more in strength and confounded the Iewes whiche dwelte at Damascus affirming that this was verie Christ. Thus are al our translations without that addition which although it is not to be borne in the text yet is no hereticall addition excepte you counte it heresie to prooue a thing by conference of Scriptures MART. 3. Againe in the firste epistle of Saint Peter they translate thus The worde of the Lorde indureth euer and this is the word which by the gospel was preached vnto you where these wordes by the Gospel are added deceitfully and of il intent to make the reader thinke that there is no other word of God but the written word for the common reader hearing this word Gospel conceiueth nothing else But indeede al is the gospell whatsoeuer the Apostles taught either by writing or by tradition and word of mouth a◠S. Paul speaketh 2. Thess. 2. and S. Peter saith nothing else in the place alleadged but This
is the word which is preached among you as the Geneua Bibles translate or more significātly which is Euangelized amōg you as we translate for though there be greater significancie in the Greeke worde than is expressed by bare preaching or telling a thing as hauing a goodly relation allusion to the word Euangeliū Gospel yet neither do they in any other place neither can they translate it to preach by the gospel but simply to preach to tel to shewe as preaching peace by Iesus Christe Act. 10. vers 39. so themselues translate it Psalm 95 or 96. v. 2. Be telling of his saluation from daye to daye Whiche in other places is spoken by other Greeke wordes that haue no signification at all of Gospell as immediately in the said Psalme 95 or 96. v. 3 and Psalme 104. or 105. v. 1. and Act. 13. v. 5. and c. 17. v. 23. and Io. 1. v. 3. FVLK 3. The other before is not a more lewde slaunder than this is a foolishe cauill The Greeke word signifieth not simply to preach the gospel or good tydings whych both may and ought to bee expressed where the phrase of our tongue wyll abide it And therfore the Geneua translation is imperfect in this place rather than the other When you say Euangelized you do not translate but faine a newe worde which is not vnderstoode of meere Englishe eares as you do in an hundreth places beside to make the scripture darke and vnprofitable to the ignorant readers And if the word signifieth no more but to preach to tell to shewe as you would seeme to proue by a nūber of quotations why do you vse that newe word Euangelize which if it were vnderstoode and in vse is more than simply to preache to tell to shewe But of all other your madde surmises this is the most monstrous that this is added to make the reader thinke that there is no other worde of God but the written worde Doth Gospel I praye you signifie the written worde The common hearer you saye hearing this worde Gospell conceiueth nothing else I am persuaded there is no such reader in England except it bee some of your viperous broode that thinketh the Gospell to bee nothing but the storie written by the foure Euangelistes whereas all true Christians knowe the Gospel to be contained not onely in those stories but also in other writings of the Apostles and that the Gospel is preached whensoeuer a good sermon teaching the way vnto saluation is preached Howsoeuer the Septuaginta vsed the worde Euangelizo in the olde Testament we are not to learne the signification thereof out of their translation but out of the Scribes of the holie ghost in the newe Testament MART. 4. All which wordes signifie only to tell to shew to declare and are vsed indifferently for and with the other worde which they here only translate to preach by the Gospel Whereas in all others places when they will translate it most significantly they expresse it by bringing glad tidings and in some places where it should be expressed most significantly in respect of euangelizing or preaching the Gospel there they translate it barely preachers and preaching Only S. Peters place aforesaid must be stretched to signifie The word preached by the Gospel to insinuate and vphold their heresie of the written Gospel only or only written worde against Apostolicall traditions not written If this be not their meaning let them giue vs a good reason why they translate it so in this one place only FVLK 4. When we varie about the signification of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or in deede when we varie not in substāce though you must brabble about it for a countenance what meane you to teach vs the significatiō of other words except you would make folke beleeue that we know nothing but what we learn of you I say again if in the new Testament we haue not fully expressed the significatiō of the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 either it is because our English phrase could not expresse it or else it is a fault of negligēce But in the old Testamēt where we haue not that worde because we translate out of Hebrue what reason is there that you should exact the significancie of that word when we do not translate it The insenslesse insinuation that you dreame of I am sure was farre from the translators mindes seeing we haue manifest and ineuitable Scriptures to confound your hereticall blasphemie of the imperfection and insufficiencie of the word Gospel of God written vnto eternall saluation And if the worde Gospell when it is added to the text out of the verbe of Euangelizing do insinuate the heresie of the written Gospell only why do you Math. 11. v. 5. translate Pauperes Euangelizantur to the poore the Gospell is preached Would you thinke it were an honest surmise of me to say you auoyde the name of the Gospell so often as you expresse it not in translating that worde for hatred you beare the Gospell And yet it hath more likelihood than many that you haue inuented and prosecuted against vs. MART. 5. It is written of Luther that he for the selfe same heresie in his first translation into the Germane tongue left out these wordes of S. Peter altogither This is the worde which is euangelized or preached to you Why so because S. Peter doth here define what is the word of God saying that which is preached to you and not that only which is written which false dealing of Luther is no small presumptiō against the like hereticall meaning of our English Protestants who I am sure in this point of controuersie of the worde written and vnwritten will not denie that they agree with the Lutherans FVLK 5. That any such sentence was vpō any purpose leste out by Luther in his translation for my part I beleeue it not neither vpon your report nor vpon your author Lindanus credite If the Printer did omit a line yet what reason were it to thinke that Luther did it vpon such a cause which were to no purpose for him except he should haue left out all those textes of Scripture where preaching of the Gospel or word of God is mentioned What you haue left out I haue noted before and yet I haue not pronounced the cause why so confidently as you do of that omission which you know not whether it be so or no. MART. 6. Againe in the epistle of S. Iames they adde the word Scripture into the text saying But the Scripture offereth more grace Where the Apostle may say as wel and indifferently The Spirit or holy Ghost giueth more grace and it is much more probable and is so expounded of many Let the good reader see the circumstance of the place and abhorre their saucinesse in the text of holy Scripture FVL. 6. The nominatiue case in the Greeke is wanting which is expressed in the verse before and in this
verse is supplied by the translators yet printing it so in another letter that the reader may know it is not in the Greeke as they do in 500. places beside where a verbe or a nowne or a pronowne or any other worde must of necessity be vnderstood to fil vp the sense which you in your precise trāslatiō obserue not whē you adde any such thing beside many imperfect sentēces that you make because you will not seeme to adde that which in translation is no addition but a true trāslation But here you say the Apostle may as well vnderstande the holy Ghost as the Scripture When there is a nominatiue case before that agreeth with the verbe the sense it is farre fetcht to vnderstād a nominatiue case of him that is not spoken of I will set downe the whole text that the reader may iudge what perilous addition is here cōmitted by our translators Doe you thinke that the Scripture saith in vaine the spirite that dwelleth in vs lusteth after enuie But the Scripture or it giueth more grace and therefore saith God resisteth the prowde and giueth grace to the humble In Grāmar schooles they vse to examine it thus who or what giueth who or what saith doth not the Scripture mētioned immediatly before answere to these questiōs most aptly yet mē must abhorre our saucinesse or rather your spitefull malitiousnesse MART. 7. One addition of theirs I would not speake of but onely to knowe the reason why they doe it because it is very strange and I know not what they should meane by it This I am sure if they doe it for no purpose they doe it very folishly and forgetfully contrarie to themselues In the Gospell of S. Marke in the reckening of the Apostles they adde these wordes And the first was Simon more than is in their Greeke text Which addition they learned of Beza whose contradictions in this point are worthie nothing In S. Matthew where these wordes are he suspecteth that first was added by some Papist for Peters primacie here where the word is not he auoucheth it to be the true text of the Gospell and that because Matthew readeth so There he alleaged this reason why it could not be said the first Simon because there is no consequence nor coherence of second third fourth c. here he saith that is no impediment because there be many examples of such speach and namely in the said place of S. Matthew There he saith it is not so though al Greeke copies haue it so here it must needes be so though it be only found in certaine odde Greeke copies of Erasmus which Erasmus him selfe as Beza confesseth allowed not but thought that these wordes were added in them out of S. Matthew What these contradictions meane I know not and I would learne the reason thereof of his scholers our English trāslators who by their Maisters authoritie haue made the selfe same addition in their English translation also FVLK 7. It seemeth you like the addition well enough because it importeth a shadow of Peters primacie but yet your malice is so great against Beza whose sinceritie in this case you shoulde rather commende if there were any sparke of honest equitie in you that you cannot passe it ouer without quarrelling and cauilling But your pretense is to know the reason why they do it I haue some maruaile that you should be ignorant of such things as are compted so materiall for the maintenance of the Popes primacie Especially sith Beza telleth you so plainly the reason of it True it is that the cōmon printed bookes haue not that addition But Beza taketh Erasmus to witnesse that in diuerse Greeke copies these words are expressed because they agree best with the context Beza translateth them out of those copies For except you so read saith Beza the next verse beginning of the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall haue no worde at all with which it may be knit But in S. Mathew you say he suspecteth that the worde first was added by some Papist for Peters primacie He onely obiecteth what if it were so answereth the obiection him self out of S. Marke as vpon S. Marke for the coherence with that which followeth wherfore it is not without great and malicious impudēce that you charge him with cōtradiction where there is none and where he saith more towarde your cause than any of you could say for your selues MART. 8. There is also an other addition of theirs either proceeding of ignorance or of the accustomed humor whē they translate thus If ye continue stablished in the faith and be not moued away from the hope of the Gospel which ye haue heard how it was preached to euery creature or whereof ye haue heard how that it is preached or whereof ye haue heard and which hath bene preached to euery creature c. For all these varieties they haue and none according to the Greeke text which is word for word as the vulgar Latine Interpretor hath most sincerely translated it Vnmoueable from the hope of the Gospell which you haue heard which is or hath bene preached among all creatures c. So that the Apostles exhortation is vnto the Colossians that they continue grounded and stable in the faith and Gospell which they had heard and receyued of their first Apostles as in the epistle to the Romanes and to the Galatians and to the Thessalonians and to the Hebrewes and to Timothee and S. Iohn in his first Epistle c. 2. v. 24. and S. Iude v. 3. 20. all vse the like exhortations FVLK 8. Here is no addition of any worde that may not be comprehended in the Greeke For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being the genitiue case signifieth not onely which but also whereof or of which and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that hath bene or which hath bene preached Here is onely the poore word how which is a superfluous word euen in our English for the sense is all one if you leaue it out Vnmoueable from the hope of the Gospell of which you haue heard that it hath bene preached among or to all creatures Here is therefore no addition to the text but a sense differing from that which pleaseth you best and yet your vulgar Latine may well beare that sense which our translators doe follow MART. 9. But this doth not so well like the Protestants which* with Hymenaeus and Alexander and other olde Heretike◠haue fallen from their first faith and therefore they alter the Apostles plaine speech with certaine wordes of their owne and they will not haue him say Be vnmoueable in the faith and Gospell which you haue heard and receiued but whereof you haue heard howe that it is preached as though he spake not of the Gospell preached to them but of a Gospell which they had onely heard of that was preached in the world Certaine it is these wordes whereof you haue heard how it was preached
for except one onely Bristowe who obseruing no good order of replying but gathering here and there at his pleasure whatsoeuer he thought himself best able to reproue hath made a shew of defence of Allens Articles and Purgatorie none other haue as yet set foorth any iust replication to the rest of my writings And as for Bristow he hath my reioynder vnto his reply these two yeares in his hand to consider vpon the other that of late haue set forth Popish treatises haue indeuoured themselues almost cuery one of them to haue a snatch or two at some one od thing or other in my bookes wherin they would seeme to haue aduantage that belike they would haue their simple readers thinke to be a sufficient confuration of al that euer I haue written against them I haue thought good therefore as neere as I can to gather all their cauils together and briefely to shape an answere to euery one of them that the indifferēt reader may see iudge what sound matter they haue brought against me wher with in shewe of wordes they would haue it seeme as though they had confuted me First Master Allen in his late Apologie fol. 63. accusing the Protestants to feigne an appellatiō vnto the iudgement of the most auncient fathers of the primitiue Church and yet not to abide by it not esteeming them better than the present gouernment of the Popish Church but as of men deceiued as of humane traditions c. As in their writings saith he it is most euident where from Peters time downward they make the chiefest fathers the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist For this euidence he quoteth Beza in 2. Thess. 2. Retentiue p. 248. How vniustly Beza is slandered to be a witnesse of this accusation they that vnderstande y ◠Latine tongue may see in the places quoted But touching my selfe the booke which he quoteth hauing scarse halfe so many pages I might intreat him for a new quotation but that I gesse he meaneth a place in my confutation of Sanders booke which he calleth the Rocke of the church which was printed with the Retentiue and continueth the number of pages from it In that booke pag. 248. there is nothing that soundeth toward such a matter except it be these wordes As for Leo and Gregorie bishops of Rome although they were not come to the full pride of Antichrist yet the mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that seat neere fiue or sixe hundred yeres before them and then greatly increased they were so deceiued with the long continuance of error that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellow Apostles than the holy scriptures of God against which no continuance of errour can prescribe doth either allowe or beare withall Wherefore although he haue some shew out of the old writers yet hath he nothing directly to prooue that Peter did excell the other Apostles in bishoplike authoritie and out of the worde of God no one iote or title that Peter as a bishop excelled the other Apostles not as Apostles but as bishops First it is manifest euen to the eye that Allens slander is not expressed in these wordes Then let vs see if it may be imployed The mysterie of iniquitie did worke in the see of Rome from the Apostles time taking increase by litle litle vntill sixe hundred yeares and more after Christ when Antichrist began to be openly shewed and manie of the ancient fathers not espying the subtiltie of Sathans secret purpose were deceiued to thinke something more of Peters prerogatiue of the bishops of Romes dignitie than by the worde of God was granted to either of them this is in effect as much as I affirme but here of it followeth not that I make them the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist For those are the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist which willingly lend all their power to maintaine and vphold his kingdom after he hath inuaded the tyrannie The auncient fathers meant nothing lesse by admitting of the bishops of Romes prerogatiue vnder colour of Peters successour than to serue him or aduance him into the throne of Antichrist Not euerie one whome Satan hath seduced that he might prepare a way for the aduauncement of his tyrannie is a minister and furtherer of Satan or his tyrannie for then should all men be counted ministers or furtherers of Satan seeing the kingdome of sinne is increased by the frailtie of all men which by temptation of the diuell fall into sinne Beside that manie of the auncient fathers openly resisted the vsurped power of the bishops of Rome when it began onely to budde vp and was yet farre off from Antichristian tyrannie although it tended somewhat toward the same So did the bishops of the East churches countermaund Victor bishop of Rome contending about the celebration of Easter So did Irenaeus Polycrates and many other godly fathers in publike writings openly reprehend him So did Cyprian in diuerse Epistles expostulate with the bishops of Rome for medling with causes that pertained to his iurisdiction So did all the bishops of Aphrica make decrees against the vsurped authoritie and titles of the bishops of Rome denying all appeales vnto the sea of Rome excōmunicating all them that would appeale to any place beyond the sea discouering also the forged Canon of the Nicen Councel by which the bishops of Rome challenged that prerogatiue So that M. Allen by this his slander hath done iniury to mee and hurt to himselfe while men by this example may iudge of his synceritie in other matters Next commeth in the discouerie of I. Nicols denying that they make the Catholike religion locall or of one prouince as he chargeth mee with some scornefull termes of reproche to affirme in my bad answere to Howlet I said in deede that S. Augustine De vnit Eccles Cap. 4. doth cleare vs of schisme who willingly communicate with all the whole bodie of Christs Church dispersed ouer the world and charge the Popish faction both of schisme heresie of schisme because they maintaine the Church to be onely in a part of Europe as the Donatistes did in Aphrica c. And what iniury haue I done to the Papistes in so saying The Donatists sayd the Church was perished out of all the worlde remained only in Aphrica not assigning any place of Aphrica whereunto the Church must be regardant as the Papistes do the citie of Rome but affirming that true Catholikes remained onely in Aphrica being consumed out of all other partes of the earth And what say the Papistes of all the Oriental churches of Greece of Asia of Aphrike that acknowledge not the Popes authoritie Doe they not accompt them all for heretikes or schismatikes Then it followeth that they acknowledge the Church to remaine only in those partes of Europe that are subiect to the Pope and Church of Rome But perhaps they wil alledge their newly founded Churches
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
the difference betweene a storie at large and an abridgement c. If you be able to defende that booke to be Canonicall answere my reasons prepare your selfe to answere as many â—â—re as may bee alledged to conuince the vanitie and falshod of that stories and so I leaue you to a better minde if it be Gods will to giue it you I finde also that in the Popish annotations vpon the new Testament printed at Rhemes my writings are carped at in two places the former vpoÌ„ 2. Thes. 2. where my wordes against Saunders Rocke page 248. page 278. are rehearsed In which I say that Leo Gregorie bishops of Rome although they were not come to the full pride of Antichrist yet the mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that seate neere fiue or sixe hundred yeares before them and then greatly increased they were so deceiued with the long continuance of errour that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellowe Apostles than the holy scriptures of God against which no continuance of errour can prescribe doeth either allowe or bearâ— withall Againe the testimonies of Leo Gregorie bishops of Rome as alwayes so nowe I deeme to bee vnmeete to be heard in their owne cause though otherwise they were not the worst men yet great furtherers of the authoritie of Antichrist which soone after their dayes tooke possession of the chayre which they had helped to prepare for him For this I am called a malepeart scholer of Bezaes impudent schoole But by what reason For placing the mysterie of Antichrist as woorking in the see of Rome euen in S. Peters time That the mysterie of Antichrist did worke in S. Peters time the text of S. Paul is plaine That it did worke in Rome where Antichrist should be openly shewed S. Iohn is plaine in the Reuelation Ca. 17. ver 9. 18. yea the Papists confessing that S. Peter called Rome Babylon must needes grant as much this onely then remaineth in controuersie whether in the sea or church of Rome the mysterie of iniquitie did worke from the Apostles time vntill Antichrist was openly shewed Seeing it wrought at Rome it wrought either in the church or altogether out of the church but it wrought not altogether out of the church therefore it wrought in the church That the mysterie of iniquitie preparing for that Antichrist wrought not altogether out of the church it is manifest because the seat of Antichrist is prophesied to bee in the Temple and Church of God Without the Church was not the mysterie of iniquitie against Christ but open wickednesse and persecution of Christes Church Therefore within the Church that mysterie did worke By what meanes first it is not certaine because it was a secrete not reuealed by the Apostle Some coniecture that it was by preferring one bishop before all the clergie of elders or priests which at the first were equall Some thinke that such factions began at Rome as afterwarde were at Corinth one holding of Cephas that is Peter another of some other How euer it was the challenge made to Peters chayre and from the dayes of Victor diuerse bishops of Rome creeping vp by litle and litle pretending authoritie ouer other Churches other churches reuerencing that see for many good respects were abused by Satan to set forwarde his purpose in aduauncing the throne of Antichrist And where I saide that Leo Gregorie were great furtherers of the authoritie of Antichrist my meaning was not that they did wittingly willingly prepare a seat for Antichrist but that the dâ—uel by Gods permission because he was to send the efficacie of error into the world tooke hold in the time appointed of that authoritie which the bishops for the dignitie of their see and as they thought for the benefite of the church did labour so greatly to maintaine encrease Neither write I any thing contrarie to the challenge of that reuerend father the bishop of Sarum as they charge mee who saide at Paules crosse O Gregorie O Leo if we be deceiued you haue deceiued vs For his meaning was not thereby to allow whatsoeuer they had done or written but that in some such matters as are in controuersie betweene the Papistes and vs euen Gregorie and Leo are witnesses against them A great accusation is in the note vpon Heb. 5. ver 6. in these wordes You must beware of the wicked heresie of the Arrians and Caluines except in these latter it be rather an error proceding of ignorance that stick not to say that Christ was a priest or did sacrifice according to his godhead which is to make Christ God the fathers priest and not his sonne and to do sacrifice and homage to him as his lorde and not as his equall in dignitie and nature Therefore S. Augustine sayeth in Psal. 109. That as he was man he was priest as God he was not priest And Theodoret in Psal. 109. As man he did offer sacrifice but as God he receiued sacrifice And againe Christ touching his humanitie was called a priest and hee offered none other host but his owne bodie c. Dâ—m 1. circa med Some of our newe masters not knowing so much did let fall out of their pennes the contrarie and being admonished of the error and that it was verie Arrianisme yet they persist in it of meere ignorance in the grounds of diuinitie First note the intollerable pride of these Popish interpreters that challenge to themselues all learning and knowledge in diuinitie condemning all other men of ignorance meere ignorance in the groundes of diuinitie So playeth Bristowe with the bishop of Sarum whome in the place by them quoted I reproued in these words The like impudent cauil he bringeth against M. Iewel whoÌ„ no man I thinke without laughter can read to be charged with ignorance by blundering Bristowe for affirming Christ to be a priest according to his deitie whom the Apostle expressely sayeth by his eternall spirite to haue offered himselfe Heb. 9. ver 14. But that you may the better vnderstand this controuersie betweene vs we denie not that Christ was a priest according to his humanitie but wee affirme that whole Christ is a priest as he is both God and man For in the office of priesthood two things must be considered a ministerie and an authoritie In respect of the ministeriall part our Sauiour Christ perfourmed that office as man but in respect of authoritie of entring into the holiest place reconciling vs to God presenting vs vnto God which was the principall part of his priesthood hee did perfourme it as the sonne of God as Lorde and maker of the house and not as a seruant but as God which hath created all things Heb. 3. vers 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Against this sound doctrine let vs examine what the heretikes alledge First they charge it most odiously with Arrianisme but without all â—parke of reason seeing wee distinguish plainly
Ios. 7. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 1â—1 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 98. 13◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 95. or 96. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal. 98. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Praef. in Ps. 33. 1. 2. Paral. 36. v. 8. in Bib. 1562. Against Images 1. Act. 9. v. 22. Bib â—577 For conference of Scriptures against fathers Councels c. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. 2. v. 16. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â— Pet. â— v. 35. Bib. 1562. 1577. Against traditions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euangelizo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luc. 2. v. 10. Act. 13. v. 32. Gal. 3. 8. Dominus dabit verbum euangelizantibus Qui Euangelizas Hierusalem Ps. 67. Isa. 40. â—ind Dubit pag. 88. Ia 4. v. 6. Marc. 3. v. 16. Bibl. 1579. Mat. 10. v. 2. Col. 1. v. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 16. Gal. c. 1. 2 2. Thess. 2. Heb. 13. 1. Tim. 6. 2. Tim. 1. 2 1. Tim. 1. 6. 1. 2 Pet. 3. Corruption coÌ„cerning the easines of the scriptures Beza in Annos 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Test. Gr. Crisp. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Corruption to make God the Author of sinne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gagneius Annot. No. Test an 1556. Mat. 6. verse 1â— See Beza An. not in Rom. c. 1. v. 24. Act 2. v. 23. Wâ—â—it ad rat Camp pag. 139. 145. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 2. v. 23. Corruption in abusing Catholike vvordes 2. Mach. 6. v. 7. Bib. 1570. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Procession Bib. 1562. 1577 Founded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Shrines 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Deuotions 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Excommunication Aposynagogum sacere Altarâ— Images Traditions Mat. 23. A heaâ—e of corruptions Demosth. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rom. 11. Act. 20. 1. 1. Esay 26. v. 18. Ambr. li. 2. de interpel c. 4. Chryso in Ps. 7. prope finem See S. Hierome vpon this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bib. 1579. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 See 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 â—yrain 30. Esa. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Esa. 5â— Esa. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Gal. 2. v. 6. Osee. 12. 10. â—uc 24. v. 27. Acts. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The Hebrevve text is no certaine rule to interpreate by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Faultes in the Hebrevv text * Bib. 1579. Bib. 1579. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the preface of the neâ—ve Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Esay 37. v. 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1 Bib. 1577. Alleluia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bib. 1562. 1577. Deut. 23. v. 19. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. ibid. v. 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Cant. Cantic c. 8. v â—2 â—ab 2579. Isa. 7. v. 11. Mat. 14. v22 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bib. 1577. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Tim. 3. Mar. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 2. v. ◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aâ— 1562. Mat. 22. 1 Mat. 24. 2 Mar. 5. 3 Mat. 25. Eph. 3. Tit. 1 1 Deut. 33. * 4. Reg. 23. 2 Ierem. 50. Hamanim Esa. 17. Gillulim Ier. 50. Miphlet seth 3. â—o 15. Fib 1579. Demosth. 2. Par. 36. r. 6. c. 32. Fol. 172. 173. Fol. 160. Epistle to the Queene Bibl. 1562. 4. Reg. c. 15. 16. Calâ—iâ— Prafat in Esa. Iehouah 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ad Victor lib. 4. cap. 1. Euseb. lib. 5 ca. 25. 26 Conc. Carth. 3. ca. 26. Gratian dist 99. Mileuit ca. 22. Conc. Aph. ad Celestin. De oct Dulcit quest q. 1. De fid op c. 16. ser. in mont lib. 1. The epistle â—f persecution Def. pa. 13. Trip. hist. li. 6. Cap. 6. Against the Rocke p. 291 Against the Foretresse pag. 52. Against pur gatorie p. 262. Pag. 237. Against Martiall P. 146. pag. 333. Against Brist Mâ—t. pag. 19. Against Stap pag. 1. Gal. Mon. Against Mot. p 6. 8. Against Mart. p. 170 Against Mart. p. 178. Ephes. 6. In diuerse proude and foolish questions Ag. Brist Mâ—t. p. 36. Reâ—em p. 89
so to doe if by later cogitations that often are wiser he finde any thing meete to be changed Doe not you Papistes vse the same Is Bristowes chapter of obedience in his motiues nothing altered from the high treason contained in the first edition Is nothing added taken away or changed in your Iesus Psalter in any of your editions or are you your selues ashamed of the former Or haue your schollers presumed to alter their maisters writings If you may haue an euasion in these cases I trust we are not so pente in but we may change our owne writings without shame of the former or corruption in the later As for the example of S. Iames Epistle denyed as you saye and faced out for Luthers credit will serue you for no proofe For so farre off is it that we or the world doe knowe that is was moste truly layed to his charge that nowe we knowe of a certaintie that it was a very slaunder as false as it was common seeing Luthers wordes of that Epistle are not absolute but in comparison as is confessed by you and founde by some of vs to be none otherwise in deede who haue not stoode vpon one onely booke or edition but vpon as many as they could come by both in the Latine and in the Dutch tongue MART. 34. Eightly in citing Beza I meane alwaies vnlesse I note otherwise his Latine translation of the new Testament with his annotations adioyned thereunto printed in the yeare 1556. FVLK 34. You were afraide lest they that vnderstoode not Latine for whose sake you wrote in English this treatise might take hurt by Bezaes translations and annotations in Latine And if he him selfe haue espied and corrected any thing of his first edition that was either faultie or offensiue in his two later editions with great equitie as though you were the onely man that had discouered his errours you muste let all the vnlearned in Englande knowe what shamefull corruptions you haue obserued in Bezaes translation or annotations MART. 35. Lastly and principally is to be noted that we will not charge them with falsifying that which in deede is the true and authenticall Scripture I meane the vulgar Latine Bible which so many yeares hath bene of so great authoritie in the Church of God and with all the auncient fathers of the Latine Church as is declared in the Preface of the newe Testament though it is much to be noted that as Luther onely in fauour of his heresies did wilfully forsake it so the rest followed and doe follow him at this daye for no other cause in the world but that it is against them And therefore they inueigh against it and against the holye Councell of Trent for confirming the authoritie thereof both in their speciall treatises thereof and in all their writings where they can take any occasion FVLK 35. In the margent You will not charge vs with forsaking the old approued Latine text though it be an ill signe and to our euident confusion S. Augustine though a meere Latine man whome you your selfe doe after confesse to haue vnderstoode but one tongue well and that was euen his mother tongue learned as he confesseth of his nurses is not so addicted to the Latine translation but that he would haue men to seeke to the Hebrew and Greeke fountaines which you like a blasphemous hypocrite deny to be the true and authenticall Scriptures in deede allowing onely the vulgar Latine translation as though neither the Churches of Greece Syria Armenia Aethiopia nor any other in the world which haue not the vulgar Latine had not the true and authenticall Scriptures And though your vulgar Latine hath for many yeares bene of great authoritie in the Latine Church from the time when the knowledge of the Hebrew and Greeke tongues haue decayed yet is it vtterly false that you say that it hath bene of great authoritie with all the fathers of the Latine Church whereas there is not one that liued within 400. yeares after Christ that knew it but almost euery one followed a seueral translation And S. Augustine in the place before cited telleth you that there were innumerable translations out of the Greeke into the Latine Againe that your vulgar Latin is full of many errours and corruptions I haue shewed by the confession of Isidorus Clarius and Lindanus two of your owne profession of which the one tooke paines by the Hebrue and Greeke to correct it the other shewed meanes how it should be corrected And where you say that Luther and his followers forsooke it for none other cause in the world but that it is against them it is vtterly vntrue For beside that they haue made cleare demonstration of many palpable errours therein which they that haue any forehead amongst you cānot denie they haue and do dayly conuince you of horrible heresies euen out of your owne corrupt vulgar translation Finally whosoeuer shall reade what Caluine and Kemnitius hane written against the Councell of Trent for auctorizing that translation shall plainely see that they had something else to alledge against it which nothing at all concerneth their opinions that be contrarie to the Popish heresie MART. 36. And concerning their wilfull and hereticall auoyding thereof in their newe translations what greater argument can there be than this that Luther who before alwaies had reade with the Cath. Church and with all antiquitie these wordes of S. Paul Haue not we power to leade about A WOMAN A SISTER as also the rest of the Apostles and in S. Peter these wordes Labour that BY GOOD WORKES you may make sure your vocation and election sodenly after he had contrarie to his profession taken a wife as he called her and preached that all other votaries might do the same and that faith only iustified good workes were not necessarie to saluation sodenly I say after he fell to these heresies he began to reade and translate the former Scriptures accordingly thus Haue not we power to lead about a SISTER A WIFE as the rest of the Apostles and Labour that you may make sure your vocation and election leauing out the other wordes by good workes And so do both the Caluinists abroade and our English Protestants at home reade and translate at this day because they holde the selfe same heresies FVLK 36. If their be no greater argument as you confesse there can be none that their auoyding of this vulgar Latine is wilfull and hereticall than this that Luther defended his mariage beyng a votarie by that texte of 1. Corinth 9. wherein the Apostle challengeth power to leade aboute with him a sister to wife whiche your texte hath Mulierem sororem a woman a sister And that to proue that faith only iustifieth and good workes are not necessarie to saluation he lefte out of the text of S. Peter good workes by which the Apostle exhorteth vs to make sure vnto our selues our vocatiō election there is none argument at all of
wilful needlesse or hereticall aâ—oyding For although the mariage of ecclesiasticall ministers generally is proued by that Scripture yet the mariage of votaries specially is nothing confirmed And for the mariage of Bishops Priestes and Deacons your owne translation of 1. Tim. 3. and Tit. 1. both Latine and English will warrant them to be the husbandes of one wife so that euery childe may see that he needed not for that purpose to corrupt the texte 1. Cor. 9. And as for the other texts 2. Pet. 1. although this worde by good workes is not expressed in the moste Greeke copies yet the whole circumstance of the place giueth it necessarily to be vnderstoode and yet it maketh nothing agaynst iustification by fayth only For our election which is most certaine immutable in Gods determinatioÌ„ is made certainly knowen vnto vs by good workes the fruites of iustifying faith euen as the effectes doe necessarily proue the cause gone before And so dothe Thomas Mathewes Bible note likewise the Bishops Bible and the Geneua Bible for so I had rather call them than by the yeares in whiche they were once printed whiche haue bene often printed and perhaps all in some one yeare Couerdales Bible also addeth these wordes by good workes whiche is redde in some Greeke copies So true it is that you say wee leaue it out because wee holde the selfe same heresie As likewise that you slaunder vs to hold that good workes are not necessarie to saluation whereas we beleeue that good workes are as necessarie to saluation as fayth in all them that are iustified by faith onely But because you are not able to withstand the truth which we beleeue you faine odious Monsters as Dragons Centaures Hydraes to fight withall before the people that you might gette the prayse of glorious conquerours like S. George on horsebacke that in a pageant vanquisheth an hideous dragon made of paper or painted clothes MART. 37. So do they in infinite places alter the olde text which pleased them well before they were Heretikes and they do it with brasen faces and playne protestation hauing no shame nor remorse at all in fleeing from that which all antiquitie with one consent allowed and embraced vntill their vnhappie daies Which though it be an euident condemnation of their nouelties in the sight of any reasonable man that hath any grace yet as I began to admonish thee gentle Reader we will not charge them for altering the auncient approued Latin translation because they pretend to folowe the Hebrue and Greeke and our purpose is not here to proue that they should not folowe the Hebrue and Greeke that now is before the auncient approued Latine text which is done briefly already in the preface to the new Testament FVLK 37. You were afrayde belike to be ouermatched in rayling and therefore you thought to beare vs downe at once with a whole floud of reprochfull slaunders and that you vtter euen with the same face with which you affirme that al antiquitie with one consente allowed and embraced your vulgar Latine texte for what else you shoulde meane I cannot coniecture seing you say afterwarde you will not charge vs for altering the auncient approued Latine translation What say you Martin doth all antiquitie with one consent allowe and imbrace your vulgar Latine translation What is the cause then that the most of all antiquitie of the Latine Church vsed not your vulgar Latine text or dare you ioyne issue with me that all the Latine doctors for 400 yeares after Christe vsed none other Latine translation but that or that they all knewe your vulgar Latine translation you are neuer able to proue it The 70. translation in deede was greatly esteemed and almost generally receyued in the Greeke and Latine Churches and out of it were innumerable Latine versions as S. Augustine affirmeth But your vulgar Latine followeth it not in many places as it were easie to shewe if time and occasion serued and I suppose you will not denie As for the reasons you bring in the Preface to the newe Testament to proue that we should not followe the Hebrue and Greeke that now is before that auncient approued text when they come to be considered it shall appeare how vayne and friuolous they are But as for the Hebrue and Greeke that now is may easilie be proued to be the same that alwaies hath bene neither is their any diuersitie in sentence how soeuer some copies eyther through negligence of the writer or by any other occasion do varie from that which is commonly and most generally receyued in some letters syllables or wordes MART. 38. Neither will we burden them for not folowing the vulgar Latine texte when the same agreeth with most auncient Greeke copies which notwithstanding is great partialitie in them must needes be of an heretical wilful humor that among the Greeke copies themselues they reiect that which moste agreeth with the vulgar Latine text in places of controuersies Yet will wee not I say neither in this case lay falsehood and corruption to their charge because they pretend to translate the common Greeke text of the newe Testament that is one certaine copie But here at the least lette them shewe their fidelitie and that they be true and exact translatours For here onely shall they be examined and called to account FVLK 38. In translation we follow the common vsuall and printed coppies as you doe in your translation and yet you know there be as many yea ten times as many diuerse readings in the Latine as are in the Greeke witnesse hereof the Bible printed at Antwerpe by Christopher Plantine 1567. of Hentenius castigation where the margents almost of euerie leafe be full of diuerse readings obeliskes asterisks stigmates signifying the variety that is in many copies by adding detracting chaunging The same is confessed by Arias Montanus Lindanus likewise acknowledgeth as much Of that which you say we reiect that which best agreeth with the vulgar Latine in places of controuersie you bring none example But that among your diuerse readings you reiect that which agreeth best with the Hebrue and with the Greeke in places of controuersie I will giue you an example Gen. 3 v. â—5 where the Hebrue truth teacheth that the seede of the woman shall breake the serpentes heade and the Greeke translateth the pronoune in the masculine gender he meaning Christ and some auncient copies of your vulgar Latine haue ipse you neuerthelesse followe that blasphemous corruption that in these later times hath bene receiued in your vulgar Latine Bibles and reade still in your texte ipsa she which though you would wrest blasphemously to the virgin Marie which is proper to Christ can not by the circumstance of the place be aptly referred to any but to Eue. MART. 39. And if they followe sincerely their Greeke and Hebrue text which they professe to followe and which they esteeme the onely authenticall texte so farre we accuse them not of hereticall
a distinction of iust and righteous MART. 5 And certaine it is if there were no sinister meaning they would in no place auoide to say iust iustice iustification where both the Greeke and Latine are so woorde for word as for example 2. Tim. 48. In all their Bibles Henceforth there is laid vp for me a crowne of RIGHTEOVSNES which the Lorde the RIGHTEOVS iudge shall GIVE mee at that day And againe 2. Thess. 1. Reioyce in tribulation which is a token of the RIGHTEOVS IVDGEMENT of God that you may be counted worthie of the kingdome of God for which yee suffer For it is a RIGHTEOVS THING with God to recompence tribulation to them that trouble you and to you that are troubled rest with vs in the reuelation of our Lorde IESVS from heauen And againe Heb 6. 10. God is not VNRIGHTEOVS to forget your good woorke and labour c. These are very pregnant places to discouer their false purpose in concealing the worde iustice in all their Bibles For if they will say that iustice is not an vsuall English word in this sense and therefore they say righteousnesse yes I trow iust and vniust are vsuall and well knowen Why theÌ„ would they not say at the least in the places alleadged God the IVST iudge A token of the IVST IVDGEMENT of God It is a IVST thing with God God is not VNIVST to forget c Why is it not at the least in one of their English Bibles â—eeing so both in Greeke and Latine FVLK 5. Certaine it is that no Englishman knoweth the difference betweene iust and righteous vniust vnrighteous sauing that righteousnesse righteous are the more familiar English wordes And that we meane no fraude betweene iustice and righteousnesse to apply the one to faith the other to workes reade Rom. 10. v. 34. 5. and 6. of the Geneua translation where you shall see the righteousnesse of the law the righteousnesse of faith Reade also against this impudent lie in the same translatioÌ„ Luc. 1. Zacharie and Elizabeth were both iust Cap. 2. Simeon was iust Mathew the firste Ioseph a iust man and else where often times and without any difference in the worlde from the worde righteous Who euer heard a difference made betweene a iuste iudge and a righteous iudge this trifling is too too shameful abusing of mens patience that shall vouchsafe to reade these blotted papers MART. 6. Vnderstand gentle Reader and marke well that if S. Paules wordes were truely translated thus A crowne of IVSTICE is laid vp for me which our Lord the IVST iudge will RENDER vnto me at that day and so in the other places it would inferre that men are iustly crowned in heauen for their good workes vpon earth and that iâ— is Gods iustice so to do and that he wil do so because he is a iust iudge and because he wil shew his IVST IVDGEMENT and he wil not forget so to do because he is not vniust as the auncient fathers namely the Greeke doctors S. Chrysostom Theodorete and Oecumenius vpon these places do interprete and expound In so much that Oecumenius saith thus vpon the foresaid place to the Thessalonians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. See here that to suffer for Christ procureth the kingdome of heaueÌ„ according to IVST IVDGEMENT and not according to grace Which least the Aduersarie might take in the worse parte as though it were onely Gods iustice or iuste iudgement and not his fauour or grace also S. Augustine excellently declareth how it is both the one and the other to witte his grace and fauour and mercie in waking vs by his grace to liue and beleeue well and so to be worthy of heauen his iustice and iust iudgement to render and repaye for those workes whiche him selfe wrought in vs life euerlasting Which he expresseth thus How should he render or repay as a iust iudge vnlesse he had giuen it as a merciful father Where S. Augustine vrgeth the wordes of repaying as due and of being A IVST IVDGE therefore Both which the said translatours corrupt not onely saying righteous iudge for iust iudge but that he will giue a crowne whiche is of a thing not due for that which is in the Greeke He will render or repay whiche is of a thing due and deserued and hath relation to workes going before for the which the crowne is repaied He saide not saith Theophylacte vpon this place hee will giue but hee will render or repay as a certaine deâ—te For he being iust will define and limite the reward according to the labours The crowne therefore is due debte because of the iudges iustice So saith he FVLK 6. What so euer you may cauill vpon the wordes iuste and iustice you may doe the same with as great aduauntage vppon the wordes righteous and righteousnesse That God as a iust iudge rewardeâ—â— good workes of them that are iustified freely by his grace by fayth without workes with a crowne of iustice it proueth not eyther iustification by workes or the merite or worthinesse of mennes workes but all dependeth vppon the grace of God who promiseth this rewarde of his meere mercie and of the worthinesse and merites of Christe whiche is our iustice whereby wee beyng iustified before God our workes also whiche hee hath giuen vs are rewarded of his iustice yet in respecte of Christes merites and not in respecte of the worthinesse of the workes Againe God is not vnmindefull of his promise to rewarde our workes for then he should be vniuste he is iuste therefore to performe what so euer he hath promised though wee nothing deserue it Neyther hath Chrysostome or Theodorete any other meaning That you cite out of Oecumenius a late writer in comparison is blasphemous against the grace of God neyther is S. Augustine that liued 500. yeares before him a sufficient interpreter of his saying to excuse him With Augustine we say God crowneth his giftes not our merites And as he acknowledgeth Gods mercie and also his iustice in rewarding our workes so do we Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is translated he wil giue I confesse it had bene more proper and agreeable to the Greeke to haue saide hee will render or repaie which yet is wholy of mercie in respecte of vs or our deseruing but of iustice in respecte of his promises and of Christes merites vnto which is rendred and repayed that whiche hee deserued for vs. The crowne therefore is due debte because it is promised to vs for Christes sake not because any workes of ours are able to purchase it MART. 7. Whiche speaches beyng moste true as beyng the expresse wordes of holy Scripture yet wee know howe odiously the Aduersaries may and doe misconster them to the ignoraunt as though wee chalenged heauen by our owne workes and as though wee made God bounde to vs. Whiche wee doe not God forbidde But because he hath prepared good workes for vs as the Apostle
saith to walke in them and dothe by his grace cause vs to doe them and hath promised lyfe euerlasting for them and telleth vs in all his holy Scriptures that to doe them is the waye to heauen therefore not presuming vpon our owne workes as our owne or as of our selues but vpon the good workes wrought through Gods grace by vs his seely instruments wee haue great confidence as the Apostle speaketh and are assured that these workes proceeding of his grace be so acceptable to him that they are esteemed and be worthie and meritorious of the kingdome of heauen Against which truth let vs see further their hereticall corruptions FVLK 7. If you would abide by your first protestation we should not neede to contend much aboute this question But after you haue in the beginning magnified the grace and mercy of God and abased your owne merites you come backe againe with a subtill compasse to establish your owne free will the worthinesse of your workes and your merite of the kingdome of heauen First you say God telleth vs in all his holy Scriptures that to doe good workes is the way to heauen In deede to fulfill the lawe is to deserue heauen But who so euer is guiltie of sinne must seeke an other way than by good workes to come to heaueÌ„ namely to Iesus Christ who is the onely way to heauen the truth and the life by whose bloud when he is purged from his sinne and reconciled vnto God and the kingdome of heauen purchased for him then he hath the way of good workes appointed him to walke in towarde the same Secondly you say you presume not vpon your owne workes as your owne or as of your selues but vpon the good workes wrought by Gods grace by you his seely instrumentes you haue great confidence Thus while you would seeme to flie from Pelagiaâ—isme you fall into flatte Pharisaisme For you trust that you are righteous in your selues though not as of your selues Suche was the Pharisee of whom Christe telleth the parable which ascribing all his workes to the grace of God had confideÌ„ce in them that he was iust before God by them God I thaÌ„ke thee saith the Pharisee He acknowledgeth the grace of God as author of all his workes yet against such as he was Christe telleth that parable And whereas you call the Apostle Heb. 10. to witnesse of your errour you doe him great wrong for he speaketh not of any confidence to bee had vpon good workes wrought by the grace of God by vs but in the newe couenant of remission of sinnes by the sacrifice of Christes death by whom we haue accesse to God that we may be acceptable to him not for any meritorious workes wrought by vs but by the only oblation of his bodie once for all by which he hath made perfect for euer those that are sanctified CHAP. IX Hereticall translation against MERITES or MERITORIOVS WORKES and the REVVARDE for the same Martin WHen they translate Rom. 8. 18. thus I am certainly perswaded that the afflictions of this time ARE NOT VVORTHIE OF THE GLORIE which shall be shewed vpon vs doe they not meane to signifie to the Reader must it not needes so sound in his eares that the tribulations of this life be they neuer so great though suffered for Christ yet doe not merite nor deserue the heauenly glorie but in the Greeke it is farre otherwise I will not stand vpon their first wordes I am certainely perswaded which is a farre greater asseueration than the Apostle vseth and I maruell how they could so translate that Greeke worde but that they were disposed not onely to translate the Apostles wordes falsly against meritorious workes but also to auouch and affirme the same lustily with much more vehemencie of wordes than the Apostle speaketh Well let vs pardon them this fault and examine the wordes following Where the Greeke sayth not as they translate with full consent in all their English Bibles The afflictions are not worthy of the glorie c. but thus The afflictions of this time are not equall correspondent or comparable to the glorie to come because the afflictions are short the glorie is eternall the afflictions small and few in comparison the glorie great and aboundant aboue measure Fulke ALthough an inuincible argument against merites and desert of good workes may be drawen out of this text yet the meaning of the translators is to shewe no more than the Apostle saith that the heauenly glorie is incomparably greater than all the tribulations of this life And this the Apostle speaketh not doubtiÌ„gly as our english word I suppose doth signifie when a man may be deceaued in his supposel but he auoucheth it coÌ„stantly as a thing which being wel considered with the reasons thereof he concludeth of it with certaintie And so doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie in this place and in diuerse other by the iudgement of better Grecians than Gregorie Martin will be these seuen yeares as Rom. 3. 28. where the Apostle hauing discussed the controuersie of iustification by faith or workes concludeth as of a certaintie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we determine therefore that a man is iustified by fayth without the workes of the lawe Likewise Rom. 6. v. 11. after he hath proued that sanctification is necessary to all them that shal or haue put on the iustice of Christ he sayth with great asseueration vnto the Romanes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Make you ful account therefore that you are dead to sinne not vncertainly thinke or suppose it so to be Therefore for the translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place we wil accept no pardon of you it is better translated than your wit or learning serueth you to vnderstand Now let vs come to the other wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are not worthy of the glorie Where you say it should be not equall correspondent or comparable to the glorie Verily those words we vse haue none other sense in this place than the wordes which you supply vs withall but our wordes doe expresse the moste vsuall signification of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen as your vulgar Latine doth calling it in the same sense condignae which you in your owne translation dare not render equall correspondent or comparable but condigne lest following the sense you might be accused to forsake the word euen so we thinke it best where the vsuall signification of the word will beare the sense in our English to reteine the same and not to change it MART. 2. This is the Greeke phrase and the Apostles meaning which we neede not greatly to proue because their owne Doctors Caluin and Beza doe so interprete it and therefore wonder it were that the Geneua English Bibles also should forsake their maisters and follow the errour of the other English Bibles but that they thought the more voices the better In the meane time the people
They wil say the first Hebrewe word can not be as Saint Hierome translateth and as it is in the Greeke and as all antiquitie readeth but it muste signifie Let vs destroy They say truely according to the Hebrewe word which now is But is it not euident thereby that the Hebrewe worde nowe is not the same which the Septuaginta translated into Greekeâ— and S. Hierom into Latine and consequently the Hebrue is altered and corrupted from the originall copie which they had perhaps by the Iewes as some other places to obscure this prophecie also of Christes Passion and their crucifying of him vpon the Crosse. Such Iewish Rabbines and new Hebrue words do our newe maisters gladly folow in the translation of the olde Testament whereas they might easily conceyue the old Hebrue worde in this place if they would employ their skill that way and not onely to nouelties For who seeth not that the Greeke Interpreters in number 70. and al Hebrues of best skill in their owne tongue S. Hierom also a great Hebrician did not reade as now wee haue in the Hebrue Nashchîta but Nashitha or Nashlîcha Againe the Hebrue worde that now is doth so litle agree with the wordes folowing that they cannot tell how to translate it as appeareth by the diuersitie and difference of their translations thereof before mentioned and transposing the wordes in English otherwise than in the Hebrue neither of both their translations hauing any commodious sense or vnderstanding FVLK 19. If we shoulde acknowledge the Hebrue word to be altered in so many places as the 70. departe from it we should not only condemne the Hebrue text that now is in many places but your vulgar Latine text also the translator whereof differing oftentimes from the Greeke followeth the truth of the Hebrue or at least commeth nearer vnto it Your argument of the number of the 70. interpreters al Hebrewes is very ridiculous childish Hierom him selfe will laugh you to skorne in it who acknowledged for certaintie no more than the bookes of the lawe translated by them And Lindanus proueth manifestly vnto you that some partes of the old Testament in Greeke which wee now haue are not the same that were counted the 70. translation in the auncient fathers time Whether Hierom in this place did consider the Hebrue text we know not for he doth not as his manner is shew the diuersitie of the Hebrue and the Septuaginta in this chapiter beside he professeth great breuitie intreating vpon so long a Prophete But whether a letter in this word haue bene altered or no or whether it were corrupt in the copie which the Greeke translater and Hierom did reade for the true or simple sense thereof there is no great difference No nor for that sense which Hierom bringes which although it seemeth to be farre from the Prophets meaning yet it may haue as good ground vpon the worde Naschita as vpon the worde Nashlicha MART. 20. But yet they will pretende that for the first worde at the least they are not to be blamed because they folow the Hebrue that now is Not considering that if this were a good excuse then might they as well folowe the Hebrue that now is Psal. 21. v. 18 and so vtterly suppresse and take out of the Scripture this notable prophecie They pearced my hands and my feete Which yet they do not neither can they doe it for shame if they will be counted Christians So that in deede to folow the Hebrue sometime where it is corrupt is no sufficient excuse for them though it may haue a pretence of true translation and we promised in the preface in such cases not to call it hereticall translation FVLK 20. To this cauill against the certaine truth of the Hebrue texte I haue sufficiently answered in my confutation of your preface Sect. 44. shewing that the true reading of this word as Felix PrateÌ„sis Ioannes Isaak Tremelius and other do acknowledge is still remayning and testified by the Mazzorites MART. 21. But concerning the B. Sacrament let vs see once more how truely they folow the Hebrue The holy Ghost saith S. Cyprian ep 63. nu 2. by Salomon foresheweth a type of our Lordes sacrifice of the immolated host of bread wine saying Wisedome hath killed her hostes SHE HATH MINGLED HER WINE INTO the cuppe Come ye eate of my bread and drinke the wine that I HAVE MINGLED for you Speaking of WINE MINGLED saith this holy doctor he foresheweth prophetically the cuppe of our Lorde MINGLED WITH WATER AND WINE So doth S. Hierom interprete this mixture or mingling of the wine in the chalice so doth the author of the commentaries vpon this place among S. Hieroms workes so doe the other fathers So that there is great importance in these propheticall wordes of Salomon She hath mingled her wine into the cuppe and the wine which I haue mingled as being a manifest prophecie of Christes mingling water and wine in the Chalice at his last supper which the Catholike Churche obserueth at this day and whereof S. Cyprian writeth the foresaide long epistle FVL. 21. It had bene to be wished that S. Cyprian when he goeth aboute to proue the necessitie of wine in the celebration of the Lordes supper agaynst the Heretikes called Aquarij that contended for onely water had retained the precise institution of Christe in wine onely which the Scripture mencioneth and not allowed them a mixture of water and for that purpose driuen him selfe to suche watrie expositions as this of Prouerbes 9. which without good warrant he draweth to represent the Lordes supper Where if hee had bene vrged by the aduersaries whereto the beastes slayne were referred in this Sacrament hee muste haue bene driuen to some violent comment But whereto tendeth this preparation MART. 22. But the Protestants counting it an idle superstitious ceremonie here also frame their translation accordingly suppressing altogither this mixture or mingling and in steede thereof saying Shee hath drawen her wine and drinke the wine that I haue drawen or as in other of their Bibles Shee hath powred out her wine and the wine which I haue powred out neither translation agreing either with Greeke or Hebrue Not with the Greeke which doth euidently signifie mingling and mixture as it is in the Latine and as al the Greeke Church from the Apostles time hath vsed this word in this very case whereof wee nowe speake of mingling water and wine in the chalice S. Iames and S. Basil in their Liturgies expresly testifying that Christ did so as also S. Cyprian in the place alleaged S. Iustine in the end of his second Apologie calling it of the same Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is according to Plutarche wine mingled with water likewise S. Irâ—neus in his fifth booke neere the beginning See the sixth generall Councell most fully treating hereof and deducing it from the Apostles and auncient fathers and interpreting
this Greeke worde by any other equiualent and more plaine to signifie this mixture FVLK 22. The authoritie of the holy Scriptures with vs is more woorth than the opinion of all the men in the world In the Scripture we finde the fruite of the vine water we find not therefore we account not water to be of any necessitie in the celebration of the Lordes supper In the primitiue Church we know water was vsed first of sobrietie then of ceremonie and at length it grew to be compted of necessitie The Armenians therfore are cōmendable in this point that they would neuer departe from the authoritie of the Scriptures to yeeld to the custome practise or iudgement of any men But against this mixture as you surmise we haue trāslated powred out or drawne I confesse our translators should more simply according to the worde haue saide mingled hir wine and the wine that I haue mingled but because that speach is not vsuall in the English tongue it seemeth they regarded not so much the propertie of the worde as the phrase of our tongue But that they had no purpose against the mixture of the wine with water in the Sacrament it is manifest by this reason that none of them did euer thinke that this place was to be interpreted of the Lordes supper but generally of such spirituall foode as wisedome giueth to mens soules Therefore it is certaine they had no meaning to auoide the worde of mixing for any such intent as you surmise MART. 23. Thus then the Greeke is neither drawing of wine nor powring out thereof as they translate but mingling But the Hebrew perhaps signifieth both or at the least one of the two either to draw or to poure out Gentle Reader if thou haue skill looke the Hebrew Lexicon of Pagnine esteemed the best if thou haue not skill aske and thou shalt vnderstande that there is no such signification of this worde in all the Bible but that it signifieth onely mixture and mingling A straunge case that to auoid this mingling of the cuppe being a most certaine tradition of the Apostles they haue inuented two other significations of this Hebrew word which it neuer had before FVLK 23. The Dictionaries are more sure to teach what a word doth signifie than what it doth not signifie I confesse Pagnine giueth none other signification of that roote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but miscuit But euen the worde miscuit may signifie a powring out when there is no respect of ioyning diuers things togither but of seruing one with the cuppe as Tullie vseth the word Qui alteri misceat mulsum ipse non sitiens He that serueth an other with sweete wine when he is not a thirst him selfe So is the Hebrew word vsed Esai 19. where the Prophet sayth The Lorde hath powred forth amonge them the spirite of errour Where the worde of mixture is not so proper Againe your owne vulgar Latine Interpretor Prouerb 23. translateth mimsach a worde deriued from the same roote not for any mixture but for drinking vppe or making cleane the cuppes student calicibus epotandis which study how to empty or drinke vp all that is in the cuppes In Hebrew it is which go to seeke strong wine or mingled wine And if a mixture be graunted in the place you require how proue you a mixture with water rather than with any thing else Verily the circumstance of the place if there must needes be a mixture requireth a mixture of spices hony or some such thing to make the wine delectable vnto which Wisedome doth inuite and allure all men to drinke it rather than of water onely to abate the strength of it As also in the text Prouerbes 23. the drunkards that continued at the wine and went to seeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mingled wine went not to seeke wine mingled with water but some other delicate mixture And Esay 5. where woe is pronoūced to drunkards the same word is vsed woe be to them that are strong to drinke wine and men of might limsoch to mingle strong drinke not to mingle it with water for sobrietie but with some other delectible matter to prouoke drunkennesse as your vulgar Interpretor translateth it So that albeit the word did signifie to mingle neuer so properly and certainly you can make no good argument for mingling with water in that place Prouerbs 9. where either it signifieth simply to drawe broche or powre out or else to prepare with some other more pleasant mixture than of water onely CHAP. XVIII Hereticall translation against the honour of SAINCTS namely of our B. LADIE Martin LEt vs passe from Gods holy Sacraments to his honourable Saincts in heauen and we shall finde that these translations plucke from them also as much honour as they may In the Psalme 138. where the Catholike Church and all antiquitie readeth thus Nimis honorati sunt amici tui Deus c. Thy friendes O God are become exceeding honourable their princedome is exceedingly strengthened which verse is sung and sayd in the honour of the holy Apostles agreeably to that in an other Psalme Constitues cos principes super omnem terram Thou shalt appoint them Princes ouer all the earth what meane they in all their English Bibles to alter it thus Howe deare are thy counsels or thoughts to me O God O how great is the summe of them Doth not the Hebrew make more for the olde receiued Latine translation than for theirs because the Hebrew word is vsed more commonly for to signifie friendes than cogitations doth not S. Hierom so translate in his translation of the Psalmes according to the Hebrew doth not the great Rabbine R. Salomon Doth not the Greeke put it out of doubt which is altogither according to the sayd auncient Latine translation Fulke THe context of the verse going before also the verse following not any enuye against the Saincts of god haue moued our translators to depart from the vulgar translation which is neither so proper for the words altogither impertinent to the matter of the text For when the Prophet had in the verse going before celebrated the wonderfull worke of God in the framing of his body in his mothers womb in this verse he breaketh out into an exclamatiō to behold the maruelous vnsearchable wisedom of gods councels whose strength is aboue mans reach whose nūber is as the sand of the sea To answer R Salomō we haue R. Dauid Kimchi as great a Rabbine as he and a more sincere Interpretor that expoundeth the whole verse euen as we doe MART. 2. And you my Maisters that translate otherwise I beseech you is it in Hebrew How great is the summe of thē not rather word for word most plainly how are the heades of them strengthened or their Princedoms as in the Greeke also it is most manifest Why do you then hunt after nouelties forsake the troden path of the