Aduersaries themselues are not able to deny it 3. This to haue byn the doctrine of the auncient Church sufficiently appeareth by the words of S. Augustine The vnhappy Iewes sayth he more vnhappy Heretikes whilst they attend only to the sound of the â—etter as a body without a soule so they remayâ—â— dead and voyd of the spirit which quickneth And els where All Heretickes which receiue the Scriptures and their authority will seeme to follow them whereas indeed they follow rather their owne errors and are therefore Heretikes not because they coâ—ntemâ—e them but because they do not vnderstand them And before him S. Hilary that honour of the French Nation RemeÌ„ber saith he that there is not one of the heretikes which doth not say that he preacheth now according to the Scriptures euen those things in which he blasphemeth albeit he lieth in so saying And a little after All of them speake Scriptures without the true seÌ„ce meaning they preteÌ„d sayth without fayth indeed for the Scriptures consist not so much in the reading as in the vnderstaÌ„ding neyther are they vnderstood of such as go into preuarication but continue and abide in charity Moreouer S Hierome Let vs not thinke sayth he the Ghospell to be in the words of the Scripture but in the sense not in the out side but in the inside or marrow not in the leaues of the words but in the sappe pith or roote of reason And a little after otherwise euen the Diuell himselfe speaketh Scriptures and all heresies according to Ezechiel make vnto themselues pillowes which they may lay vnder the elbow of euery age 2. By that which hath byn sayd answere may be made to our Aduersaries when they obiect against vs that we affirme the Scripture to be imperfect obseure like a nose of wax which a man may writh which way he will and lastly the origen and spring in a manner of all heresies for we affirme this of the naked and dead letter alone destitute of the true sense or rather of the letter to which the Heretikes adde their owne peruerse sense and meaning neyther haue our Aduersaries any cause to wonder at this seeing S. Paul himselfe saith of the bare letter alone that is killeth and bringeth eternallâ— death and damnation But neuer any Catholike did euer attribute any such thing to the liuing letter which hath conioyned with it the true and natiue sense and which alone is truly and properly the word of God CHAP. IIII. How we are to seeke out the true sense and meaning of the holy Scripture THERE is a great contentioÌ„ betweene vs and our Aduersaries about the meanes how to finde out the true and naturall interpretation of the lettâ—er a thing to necessary to eternall saluation They teach diuers thinges concerning this matter but deliuer nothing that is certayne One assigneth more rules to this purpose another fewer but when they haue sayd all they confesse at last that there was neuer any which hath not at sometyme erred in seeking out the true interpretation of holy Scripture For they giue not their assent either to the ancient Fathers or to their owne Maisters in all thinges they teach or write nay they cannot assigne any one whom they acknowledge not to haue erred sometyme nor dare affirme to be free from error seeing as they say euery man is a lyar and so at last all thinges are left by them doubtfull and vncertayne 2. But the Catholikes proceed after another manner who teach that the certayne vndoubted sense of the Letter is not to be taken from the iudgment of any particuler man but from the vniforme consent of the ancient Fathers and especially from the iudgment and interpretation of the Catholike Church to whome it appertayneth to iudge of the sense and meaning of the holy Scriptures as the holy and Oâ—cumenicall Councell of TreÌ„t teacheth very well for there is no doubt but that it is nore safe to follow such an interpreter as cannot erre then such a oners erreth sometymes or at leastwise may erre but the Church cannot erre in her iudgment seeing that Christ and the holy Ghost remayne with her to teach her all truth wherof more herafter when we shall come to treat of the Church 3. It shall suffice to obserue and note here that according to the doctrine of our Aduersaries nothing either solide or certayne is contayned in the holy Scripture for wheras all dependeth of the true sense of the Letter and with them there is no certayne or sure meanes by which to finde out this sense it followeth that they call all into doubt which is in the Scripture wherby who seeth not how much they iniure them But contrariwyse according to the Catholike doctrine all thinges are euident and certayne which are contayned in the holy Scriptures appertayning eyther to faith or good manners the Catholikes hauing euer a certayne and faithful Interpreter to wit the Catholike Church And surely whosoeuer reiecteth the sense which the Church giueth and in place therof substituteth another altogeather repugnant to it doth all one with him who reiecting the holy Scripture should in place therof bring in a new Scripture of his owne forging the sense of the Scripture being no lesse a part of the word of God then the letter which in these few wordes Tertullian confirmeth out of the tradition of the auncient Church The sense adultered or falsified is no lesse repugnant to the truth then the letter or stile corrupted 4. And to conclude it may be inferred that saluation is to be found in the Roman Church only and none at all out of it which I proue thus Both the Scripture testifyeth all meÌ„ confesse that diuine fayth is necessary to saluation but such as forsake the RomaÌ„ Church cannot haue diuine â—aith which wholy relieth vpon the word of God only but meerly humane seeing their fayth is founded not in the word of God interpreted by the Church which cannot erre but in the word and interpretation of Luther Caluin or some other priuate man who as they themselues graunt may erre and be deceiued such an humane fayth then so doubtfull and vncertayne and only warranted by mans authority cannot iustify or bring a man to eternall saluation CHAP. V. How we may know which is the true letter of the holy Scripture ALL such as forsake the Roman Church and make little account of her authority are not only doubtfull vndertayne which is the true sense of the Scripture but they can haue no assurance at all eyther of the whole or of any part of the letter therof For whilst they goe about to call in question and make doubtfull certayne bookes only of the old Testament before they are aware they take away all authority from all other bookes both of the old and new Testament For whereas there is but one certaine and vndoubted Canon of these
I meane as despise the sense and consent of the holy Fathers yea and of the whole Catholike Church but to little ones and such as are humble who follow in al things the foresayd sense coÌ„sent it is manifest and perspicuous The testimony of our Lord is faythfull sayth the Psalmist giuing wisedome to the little ones that is to such as are humble and not proud and Christ our Lord sayth thou hast hidden these thinges from the wise and reuealed them to little ones that is to the humble The Scripture indeed is obscure to such as want fayth are destitute of the holy Ghost but easy playne to those which abide perseuere in the faith of the Church by that meanes are guided gouerned by the holy Ghost 4. The Word of God shineth brightly the Word of God I say not the word of men not the word of the Diuell for that only is the true Word of God which is in the true sense not in the bare letter for the letter depraued by a false seÌ„se is not the Word of God but the word of men or rather the word of the Diuell the word of God doth illuminate the eyes but the eyes of such as haue eyes to see and not their eyes whose mindes Satan hath blinded so as the light of the Ghospell cannot shine to them 5. In vaine therefore do our Aduersaries heape togeather so many places of Scripture in which it is said that the Word of God is said to be cleare ful of light perspicuous for this is not attributed by the Scripture to the bare letter but to the letter ioyned with the true sense which true seÌ„se cannot be had out of the Catholike Church 6. Neyther doth the Scripture say that the Word of God is manifest to all indifferently but to such only as being indued with the true fayth are humble oâ— hart and therefore inspired by the holy Ghost if therefore our Aduersaries will haue the Scripture to be full of light and easy to be vnderstood of them it is necessary that they returne againe to the true Church in which only is true faith 〈◊〉 humility the true sense of the Scripture the true spirit of God without whiâ—â— the holy Scripture will neuer be plaine cleare and manifest for it is great imprudency I will not say impudency to contend so eagerly and with such hostility about the plainenes and perspicuity of the holy Scripture and to haue no will to returne into that way the which only leadeth to that plainenes and perspicuity CHAP. XIII Whether the holy Scripture be to be translated into the vulgar tongue THAT we may briefly dispatch that which hath beene so largely treated of by many concerning this matter we will reduce all vnto foure generall assertions The first is There is not doubt but the Word of God is to be preached to the people in the vulgar tongue so as the question is only of the bare written letter 2. The second assertion is Neyther the example of Christ nor of the Primitiue Church do coÌ„uince that the Scripture is to be translated into the vulgar tongue but rather the contrary for Christ neuer commaunded the Iewes to translate the Scriptures out of the Hebrew tongue into the Syriac and yet in Christs tyme the auncient Hebrew tongue was to the Iewes as the Latin is to the French Italians and Spanyards and only the Syriac tongue was in vse amongst the common people which euen our Aduersaris confesse such I meane as are the more skillfull in the Syriac and Hebrew tongue as namely these Sebastian Munster in his preface before his Siriacal Chaldaâ—cal Grammer Francis Iunius in his preface before the new Testament in the Syriac tongue of Termelâ—â—â— Peter Martin Morentine of Nauarre in the preface of his Caldaicall Grammer printed at Rochell the yeare 1590. 3. Neyther did S. Paul write in Latin to the Romanes but in Greeke though not the Greeke tongue but the Latin was their vulgar tongue So S. Luke did write the actes of the Apostles at Rome in Greeke and not in Latin And euen to S. Augustines tyme foure hundred yeares after Christ the Byble was not extant but in the three learned tongues Hebrew Greeke and Latin no not in the tyme of Rabbanus Maurus who liued eight hundred yeares after Christ as himselfe testifyeth in expresse words 4. Neyther can our Aduersaries alleadge any authenticall example of the auncient Church for the translation of the Scripture into the vulgar tongue they tell vs indeed of one Vulphilas a Bishop of the Gothes who is said to haue translated the Scripture into the Gothish tongue but he was not a Catholike but an Arian Heretike as witnesse Theodoret Socrates Sozomenus and Cassiodorus 5. For as for that which certayne late writers alleadge of S. Chrysostome his translating of the Scripture into the Armenian tongue as also of S. Hierome his translating of the same into the Dalmatical toÌ„gue there can no certayne proofe be brought thereof And they who write this do not affirme that all the Scripture was translated by them but certayne partes only vsed of old to be read in the prayers of the Church as the Psalmes Epistles Ghospels and Lessons which were song publickely at Masse in the Canonicall houres which we read to haue byn graunted by Pope Iohn the eight of that name to the Morauianâ— at their first conuersion to the faith of Christ but this was 880. yeares after Christ and this custome was of no long continuance amongst them as appeareth by that which Pope Gregory the seauenth writeth to the Duke of Bohemia is to be seene in Cesar Baronius 6. The third assertion To translate the Scripture into the vulgar tongue is neyther in it selfe vnlawfull nor forbidden by any Ecclesiasticall law so it be truly translated Nay such a translation serueth Preachers to great vse who are to cite and expound the Scriptures to the people in the vulgar tongue Hereticall translations are indeed forbidden especially of the new Testament because in them many places of holy Scripture are by false translating corrupted 7. The fourth assertion It is not a thing profitable to all to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue yea to many it is rather pernicious for we are taught by the Apostle S. Peter that in the Scriptures are many thinges hard to be vnderstood which vnlearned and vnstayed persoÌ„s depraue to their owne destruction Many also there are vncapable of meate and solid sustenance who are therefore to be fed with milke as the Apostle speaketh and for such it is more wholesome to be fed by the sermons and instructions of their Pastors then to feede themselues with reading the Bible It was therefore great prudence of the Church to forbid that the Bible though translated and set forth by Catholikes should be read of all indifferently and without the approbation and leaue of the Bishop
Pastor or Ghostly Father 8. Our Aduersaries obiect certayn places of S. Chrysostome and S. Hierome in which they exhort to the reading of the Scripture but they should haue obserued that those Fathers speake of reading the Scripture in the Greeke tongue then extant or in the Latin according to the old edition which was neuer forbidden to any by the Church whereas our Controuersy is about the translations of the holy Scripture out of the Hebrew Greek and Latin into the vulgar tongue which are all for the most part corrupted 9. And it is worth the nothing that our Aduersaries spend their tyme in vayne in gathering togeather arguments by which to perswade men that it is necessary for them to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue to the end they may learne out of them what they must necessarily know if they wil be saued for how truly or plainly soeuer they be translated no man shall euer recevue any fruite by them vnlesse he first belieue aright and be guided by the holy Ghost to whome it appertayneth to guide vs into the right land to make knowne vnto vs the way in which we are to walke to teach vs the will of God which we are to fulfill VVhich is manifestly to be seene in the Iewes who vnderstaÌ„d the Hebrew text much better then Christians in which there is so ample and cleare mention of Christ and yet for all that they do not belieue in Christ-Our Aduersaries therefore haue little reason to keepe such a do about the wordes of Scripture or the translation of them let them first imbrace the true Faith which is in the Church only let them seeke after the holy Ghost who is not to be found out of the Church let them seeke out the true sense of the Letter which the Church only conserueth vncorrupted and it will easily be graunted vnto them to haue the Scriptures in what tongue soeuer they will so they be truly and vncorruptedly translated and that they vse them to their owne saluation and not to their destruction as many do wherof we haue for witnesses not only the Scripture but dayly experience and this shall suffice concerning the translatioÌ„ of the Scripture into the vulgar toÌ„gue 10. For of the prayers in Latin eyther priuately made by the people or publikely offered by the Priest at masse and in the administratioÌ„ of the SacrameÌ„ts we wil treat hereafter in their proper places CHAP. XIIII That our Aduersaries vse many sleightes in corrupting the Word of God OVR Aduersaries often require vs to proue all that which we say out of the written Word of God but when we cite the same in expresse tearmes they haue many wayes by which they depraue it Wherfore before I make an end of this Controuersy concerning the written Word it shall not be from the purpose briefly to detect such their corruptions partly to the end that no man be deceaued by them and partly that euery man may vnderstand nothing to be so plainely and clearely set downe in the written VVord which by the Commentaries of crafty and subtile wittes may not be weakned and made of little force if no regard be had to the authority and iudgment of the Church And that no man may thinke that I herin calumniate them or deale lesse sincerely with them I will set downe out of their owne writings some one or two exaÌ„pls of each manner of corrupting wherof many exaÌ„ples will occure in each Controuersy 2. The first manner of shifting of places alleadged out of the written Word is to say that the originall text is corrupted and what is alleadged crept out of the margent into the text whereof see many examples in the 12. and 18. Chapter of the Latin Edition of this CoÌ„trouersy 3. Their second shift is to reiect the vulgar translation and instead thereof to cite some new and corrupt translation of their owne It is euident inough that Luther in his first version of the new Testament into the Germane tongue set forth in the yeare 1522. hath more then a thousaÌ„d errors as many haue obserued amoÌ„gst which neyther the last nor the least is his presuming to ad to the text of S. Paul the 3. Chapter and 28. verse the particle alone thereby the stronglier to establish his doctrine that Fayth alone iustifieth for this place of the Apostle VVe thinke a man is iustifyed by fayth he traÌ„slateth by fayth alone when a certaine friend of his to whome the same was obiected by a Catholike asked the cause why he so translated it he no lesse ridiculously then proudly answereth in a certayne little booke set forth by him in the yeare 1530. vnder this title A certaine information or answere made to two questions proposed by a certayne good friend concerning the translation of Scripture and the inuocation of Saints In which he aduiseth his friend to answere the Catholikes obiection after this manner D. Martin Luther will haue it so and saâ—â—h that a Papist and an Asse is all one thing so I will so I command let my will stand for a reason for we will not be the Papists schollers but their Iudges Luther will haue it so he saith that he is a Doctor aboue all the Popes Doctors So Luther concluding at last that the word alone shal remayne in his new Testament though it should make all his Aduersaries mad and he addeth further that he is only sory that he had not added two wordes more to the text and translated it after this manner we are iusâ—ifyed by only faith without any workes of any law 4. Zwinglius also who first in our age endeauored to perswade many that the body of Christ is not really contayned in the Sacrament of the Eucharist the better to establish this his error goeth about to proue that those words of Christ this is my body are very well translated thus this signifieth my body with this his new translation he is so rauished as if he had receaued the same from heauen for these are his wordâ— So therefore hath Luke with whome we content our selues without citing any other Euangelist And hauing taken bread he gaue thankes brake it and gaue it them saying this signifyeth my body which is giuen for you do this in remembrance of me Thou seest O faithfull soule but yet wrapped in absurd opinions how all thinges heere agree and nothing inviolently eyther taken away or added so as thou hast cause to wonder that thou hast not byn alwayes of this opinion and much more that any dare so boldly teare and rent the body of this speach so well ioyned togeather So Zwinglius in the praise of his new translation wherein he arrogates more authority to himselfe theÌ„ is due so as that of Cicero in his booke de diuinatione may well be applyed to him I neuer saw any man arrogate greater authority to himselfe and in the end say iust nothing 5. Moreouer concerning Caluins and
A TREATISE OF THE VVRITTEN VVORD OF GOD. COMPOSED In Latin by the Reuerend Father Iames Gordon Huntley of Scotland Doctour of Diuinity of the Society of IESVS And translated into English by I. L. of the same Society The first Part of the first Controuersy Permissu Superiorum M. DC X IV. THE FIRST CHAPTER Of the Scope and Methode of this Treatise ALL the Controuersies of this time may be reduced to two heades for eyther they are certayne generall principles foundations of our faith and religion or they are particuler questions appertayning to the same Amongst other generall principles there are two about which there is greatest contention at this day the one is the Word of God the other the Church we will first speake of the word of God and afterwardes of the Church and lastly we will examine euery particuler Controuersy if God shall â—raunt vs life and health Two thinges there are which now adayes hold many in error The one is a 〈◊〉 opinion that many haue who thinke it a matter of little importance whether they giue credit or no to many things taught by the Roman Church which daungerous perswasion may be taken out of the mindâ—s of all faithfull people by that which we shall deliuer coÌ„cerning the Word of God and the Church for thereby it shall euidently appeare that al thinges are firmely to be belieued which the Roman Church belieueth and that without this faith no man can hope to be saued The other is that such as deâ—ire to find out the true faith in euery particuler CoÌ„trouersy are oftentimes so hindred by the sleights and falshoods of our aduersaryes as it will be very hard for them to discerne that which is true from that which is false Wherfore we will endeauour in euery particuler Controuersy to set downe the true state of the question Afterward we will lay open the foundation of the Catholike doctrine And lastly we will plainly and briefly answere the chiefe obiections of our Aduersaries whether they be drawne out of the Scriptures or taken from the Fathers 2. And because our Aduersaries euermore boast and brag of the written Word of God pretending out of it only to proue their doctrine impugne ours our chiefe care shal be to shew that the Catholike and Roman faith is both euidently and strongly to be confirmed out of the written Word of God and the doctrine of our Aduersaries hath no foundation at all in the holy Scriptures but is manifestly opposite repugnant therunto yet so as we will set downe the vniforme conseÌ„t of the auncient Church to be agreeing with vs in euery Controuersy leauing the more ample search of antiquity vnto others to whome we will referre the Reader setting downe their particuler names so loath we are that this booke of ours should grow too great and for the same reason we haue thought good to omit many arguments which might be drawne out of the holy Scriptures for confirmation of the Catholike faith contenting our selues to set downe only the more solide and euident proofes because we are resolued to be as briefe as we may CHAP. II. Of the Word of God in generall THE word of God if we speake of it in generall may be considered two wayes either for that One Eternall and Infinite Word which contayneth perfectly in it selfe whatsoeuer is in the mind of Almighty God which is the same with the Sonne of God and Word of the Father of whome S. Iohn speaketh in his Ghospell saying In the beginning was the VVord but of this Word we are to say nothing heere but the Word of God may be other wise coÌ„sidered and taken for that Word which was not alwayes nor contayneth all thinges which are in the mind of God but a small part only of them to wit such thinges as God would haue vs know and belieue and of the Word of God in this sense we speake now For this Word is the proper and complete obiect of our faith 2. Moreouer this Word hath two conditions or properties the one is that the same be reuealed vnto vs for there are innumerable verities in the mind of God the which because they are not reuealed to vs do not appertayne to this Word The other is that it be immediatly reuealed by God for such thinges as God manifesteth vnto vs by naturall reason appertayne not to this word of God called therfore by the Deuines the reuealed Word of God 3. Of this Word of God so vnderstood there is no Controuersy betwene vs and our Aduersaries but only in wordes for wheras our Aduersaries say that Catholikes affirme that we must with diuine fayth belieue the words of men or which is worse rather belieue the words of men then the Word of God it is a meere slaunder for there is no Catholike so ignorant but he knoweth that the Theologicall vertue Faith relieth astogeather vpon the pure sincere and certayne Word of God alone according to that of S. Paul when you had receiued of vs the word of the heating of God you receaued it not as the word of men but as the VVord of God as indeed it is Neyther can any man doubt but that the reuealed word of God is partly the written Word contayned in the Canonicall bookes of the old and new Testament partly vnwritten and deliuered by tradition and preaching of which vnwritten word the Scripture maketh mention in many places but we will first treat of the written Word CHAP. III. Of the written Word of God THE written Word of God consisteth of two parts of the Letter which euery man may read in the books themselues and in the true seÌ„se of the Letter which is as it were the very soule and life thereof without which the Letter alone rather killeth theÌ„ quickneth or giueth life as we see euidently by experience in the Iewes Arians c all other heretikes as well new as old for the Iewes hold theÌ„selues stiffely to the Letter of the old TestameÌ„t the Arians as also in a manner all other heretikes receiue eyther altogeather or for the greatest part the Letter of the new but because they will not acknowledge the true sense of the Letter Iewes they are Heretikes they are Catholikes they are not And surely the Letter alone without the true sense cannot truly and properly be called the Word of God no more then a body without a soule can truly and properly be called a man wherefore they which spoile the Letter of the true sense may be compared to them who bereaue a man of his soule and life 2. But whosoeuer do substitute another contrary sense and meaning in place of the true do no otherwise then they who not only kill a man but by Art Magick bring into the body of the man killed some other diabolicall spirit by which the dead body is so moued and stirred as it seemeth to many to bealiue all this is so manifest a truth as our
to the Greeke text of the new perswading themselues by this meanes to attayne to the true and proper sense of the letter wherefore somthing is to be sayd in this place of the Hebrew Greeke text both which appertayne to the Letter of the holy Scripture 2. VVe grant indeed that when the Latin translation is either ambiguous oâ— lesse playne the Hebrew text is well and profitably looked into as also that diuers mystâ—ries which lye hidden in the Hebrew text and cannot sufficiently be explicated in Latin wordes may be the better vnderstood And lastly that we may the more fully attayne vnto the force and Emphasis of that holy tongue 3. But as for the Hebrew text now extant we do not acknowledge it to be of so great either authority or perspicuity as our Aduersaries pretend and we further deny that the vulgar EditioÌ„ wherinsoeuer it differeth from it is to be corrected by it and that for two reasons The first is for that the Hebrew text though neuer so incorrupt further then it is approued by the authority of the Church is much more doubtfull and vncertayne then the Latin The other reason is for that the Hebrew text which is now in vse is in many places corrupted and depraued in which the vulgar Edition is entire and vncorrupted Both these reasons shal be confirmed in the ensuing â—hapters which the learned Reader may see in the Latin edition from the seauenth Chapter to the 14. all which I haue omitted to put into English because I intend to help the lesse learned who are not so capable of that so profouÌ„d and learned a discourse CHAP. VII Of our Aduersaries new Translations of the Bible THE Catholike Church of Christ not without good cause doth reiect and condemne our Aduersaries new Translations of the Bible and that for many reasons The first and most iust reason is because such their translations are replenished with errors which haue byn inuented eyther by Iewes or Heretikes of which see many examples in the precedent Chapters of the Latin edition but we in this Chapter will set downe three other causes or origens from whence these errors spring wherby it shall further appeare that our Aduersaries can set out no transâ—ation which shall not be found full of many great errors 2. The first cause is for that our Adâ—ersaries eyther contemne or make little account of the translations and interpretations of the Fathers and imploy all their labour in finding out all the versions and interpretations and expositions of the Iewes which they highly extoll commend so as in their Commentaries vpon the old Testament you shall see them cite Thargus Rabins and such other Thalmudicall fictions but especially Rabbi Dauid Kimâ—i whom sometimes they call learned sometymes the most learned among the Hebrewes But of the auncient Fathers no mention at all for if there be it is for the most part eyther to taxe or manifestly to oppugne or euen to corrupt their writings 3. Now what can be more vnreasonable or absurd then to begge the true sense of the Scripture of the Iewes who lacke faith and who haue a veyle ouer their hartes when they read the old Testament with whome God is not pleased and who are Aduersaries to all men vpon whom the Angel of God is come to the end who peruert all the oracles of the Prophets that appertayne to Christ and lastly who are the most malicious enemies of Christians And on the other side to despise the excellent Doctors of Christs Church who euen in the iudgment of our Aduersaries were indued with the true faith full of the holy Ghost raysed by God and placed in the Church to the end we should not be carried about with euery wind of doctrine who haue defended the faith against all heresies who haue sincerely instructed the faithfull people in the mysteries of the Christian faith who haue faithfully sent downe to posterity the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures which they receaued froÌ„ the Apostles 4. Moreouer wheras no man can rightly interprete the Scriptures who hath not receaued from God the gift of the interpretation which is not giuen but to the members of Christ and his Church only it is apparent inough how much more safe it is to follow such holy Doctors then the impiouâ— Iewes which are wrapt in the snares of the Diuell and held captiue at his will And seeing that saying of Christ is most true if the blind lead the blind they both fall into the ditch it cannot be but our Aduersaries blind and destitute of the light of faith and led by the blind Iewes must needes fall downe headlong and breake their neckes 5. Hereâ—hence it is that our Aduersaries do insert into the new translations almost all the places of Scripture corrupted by the Iewes and that they deny togeather with the Iewes many oracles of the Prophets to be vnderstood of Christ and many wayes wrest euen those oracles which they caÌ„not deny to be vnderstood of Christ from that true sense in which they are cited in the new Testament by the Apostles Euangelists and Christ himselfe to prophane impious senses lately inuented by the Iewes out of their hatred to Christ. 6. The second cause is that they desire nothing more then in their translations to depart from the vulgar edition the which seeing it is most sincere and correct they which almost in all thinges leaue it must needes fall into many errors 7. The third cause is the malicious intention of our Aduersaries who set forth new translations of the Scripture for no other end then by them to oppugne the Catholike doctrine and to establish and confirme their owne errors and heresies and therefore when any plain text occurreth which maketh manifestly against their erroneous doctrine they seeke to make obscure the true and proper sense by their peruerse translation but if they light vpon any place somewhat obscure which may seeme to fauour their doctrine they so depraue it by their new translation that the Scripture it selfe may seeme to confirme what they falsely teach and so by this meanes they must needes stuffe their translations with infinite corruptions for these three reasons therfore not without great reason do we reiect our Aduersaries translaâ—ions which so swarme with corruptions Many other reasons are both learnedly and largely set downe by Iames Gretser which we for breuity sake omit CHAP. VIII Of the Latin vulgar Edition OVR Aduersaries conuinced by the truth it selfe confesse sometymes that the vulgar Edition not only is to be preferred before all other latin Editions but euen before the Greeke text of the new Testament and the Hebrew text of the old for in many places reiecting them they follow our vulgar translation as may be seene in the Latin edition in the Chapters 8. 9. 10. 13. notwithstanding that in many other places they exceedingly inueigh against it and with great hostility oppugne it partly for that
which thing is excellently declared by S. Augustin for hauing said that he thought Moyses intended diuers senses in his words he correcteth himselfe saying that without all doubt God who is the principall author of the Scriptures did so O â—ord sayth he seeing thou art God and not flesh and bloâ—d if man be short sigâ—ted can it be hidden from the spirit which will lead me into the right land whatsoeuer thoug mast in those words to reueate to posterity howsoeuer he by whome they were spâ—ken though per adueenture but of one seme only 〈…〉 many other no lesse true so S. Augustinâ— seeing thereâ—orâ— there are diuers litterall semeâ— of one and the same place one interpreter may follow one sense and another 〈◊〉 another so long as neyther of them do say any thing not agreeable to the word of God but both the one sense and the other is godly and conformable to other places of Scripture and this maketh much for the dignity of the Scriptures and profit of the Church according to that which S. Augustin writeth elsewhere How could God sayth he better commend vnto vs the plentifull fruit of his Deuine wordes then by so disposing as the same words may be vnderstood diuers wayes 7. Nay we see moreouer the holy Scripture it selfe to shew very manifestly that there are diuers senses of the same wordes For there is no doubt but that commaundment oâ— Deuteroâ—omy Thou shalâ— not tye the mouth of the Oxe that thresheth according to the litterall sense doth signify that the mouth of an oxe is not to be tyed whilst he treadeth forth the corne in the floare for so according to the Letter the Iewes obserued it as indeed they were bound to do Neuerthâ—les S. Paul manifeâ—â—ly reacheth that God the proper Author of the holy Scripture inteÌ„ded chieâ—ly another sense Is God sayth he so carefull of Oxen or doth he not so say in regard of vs for indeed these things are written for vs hâ—therto it also apperâ—ayneth that in the Hebrew tongue one word hath many â—ignifications as hath beene shewed in the seaueÌ„th Chapter in the Latin Edition 8. Out of this ground we affirme that there is no repugnance betweene the Septuagint Interprters and the Hebrew text and betweene the Hebrew text and the vulgar Edition or lastly betweene the interpretation of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament and that of the new how much soeuer the same wordes are diuersly translated to wit otherwise of the Sâ—ptuagint and otherwise of the vulgar Latine interpreter or otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament and otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the new where in both places the same wordes are cited for the same places of Scripture are oftentymes otherwise cited by the Apostles in the new Testament then hath the Hebrew text of of the old But here is diuersity without any repugnance or contrariety And this hath place especially in the Hebrew text because in the Hebrew tongue there is so different reading of one and the same word See examples hereof in the Latine Edition of this Controuersy in this Chapter 9. It wil be easy out of that which hath byn said to answere that which our Aduersaries obiect against diuers places of the vulgar edition For albeit there be diuersity betweene it and the Hebrew text there is no repugnance or contrariâ—ty and if our Aduersaries think otherwise it proceedeth from their ignorance of the Hebrew tongue which hath many wordes subiect to ambiguity and very many phrases much different from the Latin and Greeke phrase as in the Chapters that follow may be seene in the Latin Edition from the 16. to the 20. CHAP. IX The place of Genesis she shall breake thy head is shewed to be well translated IT wil be too long and little to my purpose to examine all the places of the vulgar Edition to which our Aduersaries take exception for many of them differ little or nothing from the Hebrew text of the old Testament or from the Greeke of new we will handle some few of greatest difficulty and which our Aduersaries do most often and with great bitternes vrge against vs that by them iudgment may be giuen of the rest which are of lesse importance 2. The first place which they say is depraued and or which they often and eagerly complaine is that of the third of Genesis v. 15. Ipsa conteret caput tuum for it is not ipsa in the Hebrew but ipsum as if it were spoken of the seed of the womaÌ„ and not of the woman her selfe The Lutherans crie out of great iniury done thereby to Christ as to whome alone it appertayneth to bruze the head of the Diuel which we attribute to another to wit to the Blessed Virgin 3. Caluin also affirmeth that we haue found out a sacrilegious exposition whilst we accommodate that to the holy Mother of Christ which was spoken of the seed Christ himselfe And as for the Lutherans we haue lesse cause to blame theÌ„ for reprehending our version seeing they stoutly mantayne that by the seed of the woman Christ only is meant 4. But as for Caluin he sheweth the greedy appetite he hath to calumniate wheÌ„ he calleth our version a sacrilegious exposition for he conuinced by the truth coÌ„fesseth that by the seed of the woman not only Christ is meant but all his memberâ— yea euen all mankind It is therefore woÌ„derfull that he saith it is a sacrilegious exposition to apply to the Blessed Virgin Mary that which was spoken of the seed vnlesse he will not that the Blessed Virgin be any meÌ„ber of Christ or to appertaynâ— any thing to mankind For seeing that the promise of bruzing SathaÌ„s head appertayneth to Chrisâ— and euery member of his as Caluin writeth in expresse wordes it must doubtlesse principally appertayne to the Blessed Virgin as who next after Christ hath most strongly crushed Satans head VVherfore euen the Lutherans themselues obserue that Caluin haâ—h no reason to obiect this vnto the Catholikes 5. But to the end we may the better vnderstand whether it be any fault at all that we retayne in the vulgar version the particle ipsa we are first to declare the literall sense of this place and to examine after whether it be any error that we retayne the particle ipsa in our version For it was not out of any ignorance or drowsy carelesnes that the feminine gender crept in heere insteed of the masculine or neuter as Caluin calumniateth but it was done of purpose and for iust cause as shal be shewed CHAP. X. Of the true sense of these wordes Ipsa conteret c. THAT we may find out the true sense of these wordes we must first reâ—ute the fâ—lse expositions of our Aduersaries The LutheraÌ„s by the seed of the womaÌ„ will needes haue Christ only to be meanâ— we confesse indeed that he is principally meant therby and that therefore the place may
Bezas errors in translating or rather peruerting the holy Scriptures whole books are extant as also of the corruptions of the Geneua Bylles which are euery yeare increased but this shall much more commodiously be declared heerafter in the particuler CoÌ„trouersies We will only heere set downe one example of a corruption to be found in Caluins Bezas and all the Geneua Bybles And this corruption is forged a purpose by them to confirme a new and notable blasphemy against Christ and himselfe by some apparent testimony of Scripture for they reach in many places that Christ when he praied in the Garden was seized with an extreme feare least God being angry with him for our sinnes for which he had taken vpon him to satisfy should inflict vpon him eternall damnation neyther did Christ feare without cause for they say he suffered vpon the Crosse the paynes of a damned person the torments of hell for these are the impions words of Caluin Christ suffered in his soule the torments of a forlorne and damned man and Beza sayth at what tyme Christ hang vpon the Crosse he was in the middest euen of the torments of hell which is as much as to say that God himselfe was not only afraid of the torments of hell but that he suffered and endured them for it is euident that Christ was true God But against these absurd paradoxes we are to dispute heerafter It shall suffice heere to shew that they haue depraued the holy Scripture to 〈◊〉 this their impious assertion for wheras it is written in the fifth to the Hebrewes and 7. v. that Christ was heard of God for his reuerence Caluin first and after Beza and all the Geneua Bybles make the text to say Christ was heard by reason of his feare or because he was afraid but that in the last Edition Beza hath added more words to the text making it sound thus His prayers being heard he was deliuered froÌ„ this feare Moreouer Caluin in his commentaris and Beza in his annotations seeke to proue out of this text that Christ feared eternall damnation that he was deliuered out of this feare by his prayers which he offered with teares true it is that in the French Bybles lately printed at Geneua the yeare 1â—05 they haue put in the margent vel pro sua reuerentia where inforced by truth they manifestly contradict Caluin and Beza who plainly deny that this place is so to be traÌ„slated yet least their inconstancy should be noted they leaue the former words in the text ayant esté exaucé 〈◊〉 qu'il craignoit that is in latin exauditus est eo vel in eo quod timuit 6. But all others as well Catholikes as their Aduersaries who haue written before Caluin translate prosua reuerentia vel propietate sua as Erasmus Bucer the Tiguriues in their bibles of the yeare 1542. Nay Sebastian Castalio for this cause sharply reprehendeth Beza who glorieth that Caluin was the first that found out this new explication in a note of his vpon this 7. v. se his editions of the yeare 1560. 1565. 7. The third shift is their false exposition of the text though neuer so truly translated for by diuers commentaries and little notes in the margent they goe about to perswade the Readers the cleane contrary to that which is expressely in the text see examples hereof in this Chapter in the latin edition CHAP. XV. The fourth fift and sixt shift that our Aduersaries vse in deprauing the Word of God THE fourth shift of our Aduersaries is to fly to figuratiue and metaphoricall speaches for it is most true that was witâ—â—ly obserued by S. Augustine If sayth he the mind be preoccupated with any erroneous opinion whatsoeuer the Scripture saith to the contrary men take to be a figuratiue speach And surely there is no kind of figuratiue speaking to which our Aduersaries at one tyme or another haue not recouse but there are three figures of which our Aduersaries doe oâ—tenest serue themselues in deprauing the holy Scriptures which are these Meâ—onymia Hyperbole and Ironia Metonymia is a figure very familiar with Caluin for by it he peruerteth many places of Scripture yea euen those playne words of Christ this is my body for hauing disputed long about the sense of those words at last he concludeth thus I omit sayth he Allegories and Parables least any man should thinke that I seeke euasions aâ—d to go from the matter in hand I say it is a Metonymicall speach So Caluin 2. By the figure Hyperbole our Aduersaries shift of all those so euident testimonies by which wee proue that remisof sinnes is obtayned of God by good works as are these Almes deliuereth from all sinne and death and suffereth not the soule to go into darknes And againe Almes deliuereth froÌ„ death it is that that purgeth sinne maketh vs find mercy life euerlasting Moreouer water putteth out a burning fier and Almes resisteth sinne for the Lutherans say that all these are Hyperbolicall speaches Beza also seeketh to extenuat by the figure Hyperbole that which the Apostle writeth in the praise of the Roman Church when he sayth your haith is preached all ouer tse world Caluin in like manner by the same figure not only depraueth many places of the auncient Fathers but will needes force Christ himselfe without any need at all to speake Hyperbolically And finally Philip Melancthon goeth about by the figure Ironia to delude those manifest wordes of Christ that which remayneth giue Almes and behold all thinges are cleane vnto you For Philip contendeth that Christ spake not those words in earnest but in iest which he tooke from Erasmus as he did many other things but Caluin and Beza confesse that this is a foolish Ironia Albeit they also peruert the same wordes another way for they restrayne the word omnia only to meate 3. The fift shift is when Catholiks alledge plaine places of Scripture which admit no figure to say that the Scripture yea euen Christ himselfe did speake exactly but after a grosse and popular manner the meaning is that he speaketh only probably and not solidly For example sake when wee proue that the Sacrament of the Eucharist excelleth the Manna of the Iewes by these wordes of Christ your Fathers indeed haue eaten Manna and are dead this is the bread descending from heauen that if any man eate of it he dye not Caluins answere is that Christ accommodated his speach to the grosse conceipt or opinion of the Iewes When we proue the Exorzismes of the Church by which she casteth out diuells to be holy because Christ sayth one Diuell will not cast out another Caluin answereth we must remember sayth he that when Christ vseth such prouerbes as are in vse among the people he vseth them only as probable coniectures and not as solid proofes So he No meruaile therfore if
our Aduersaries say our arguments are not solid seeing they write so much of Christs owne arguments 4. Their sixt shift is to answere to such plaine testimonies as are alledged out of Scripture against their errors that the Scripture speaketh not simply that is to say not truly but according to the false opinion of them agâ—inst whom it hath to do which indeed is nothing els but to deny the Scripture This is an vsuall shift of Caluin who interpreteth to dispute by contention to be all one as to disput not according to our owne mind but according to their error and foolish affection who obscure the light of the Ghospell So as when we proue that our Sacraments excell the Sacraments of the old law because S. Paul sayth that the ceremonies of the Iewes were shaddows of things to come but Christ the body it selfe And againe that the Sacrifices of the law could not make perfect according to conscience but serued only to sanctification cleansing of the flesh and 〈◊〉 that they could not take away sinne To all these places Caluin answereth we are sayth he to obserue diligently that the Apostle S. Paul in all these places speaketh not simpliciter sed per contentionem which what it is to say we haue interpreted out of Caluin before CHAP. XVI Of the seauenth and eight shift THEIR seauenth shift is when they are vrged with expresse words of Scripture to say that they are to be vnderstood before men and not before God or in truth This shift Caluin and Beza vse often for thus they rid themselues of these places Euery branch that bringeth not forth fruite in me he will cut off Caluin hâ—â—re coÌ„tendeth that the euill which belieue in God are in Christ only in the estimation of men and not indeed whereof it followeth that the words of Christ are thus to be vnderstood to wit that the euill 〈◊〉 indeed to men to be in Christ but are not so in truth 2. That place also of S. Iames Man is iustified by workes and not by fayth alone is interpreted by Caluin and Beza and almost all other our Aduersaries of iustification only before men not before God See more exaÌ„ples in this Chapter in the latin edition 3. The eight shift is when they know not what to answere to say it is an improper speach and by this occasion to change the words of the Scripture into other words of their owne forging For when we câ—te the words of Christ in which a reward is promised to fasting and prayer Caluin turneth them of with this answere when Christ sayth he promiseth a reward from God 〈◊〉 fasting he speakes improperly as is sayd a litte before CoÌ„cerning prayer likewise wheâ— to proue free will we alledge those worâ—s of Christ to wit make the tree good Caluin aâ—swereth it is an improper speach CHAP. XVII Of the ninth and tenth shift THEIR ninth shift is when the words of Scripture are so playne and manyfest that they cannot otherwise escape they say at last that â—e Scripture commendeth vnto vs a thing impossiâ—e and to make this shift more probable â—hey corrupt the text by adding the partiâ—â— si as if the Scripture spake conditionally and not absolutely for when we cite the places of Scripture in which life euerlasting is promised to such as keepe Gods commandments as when Christ saith if thou wilt enter into life keepe the commandments And againe do this and thou shalt liue The answere of Caluin and Beza is that Christ in these words speaketh of a thing impossible Caluin vpoÌ„ the former place writeth thus Some of the auncieÌ„t Fatherâ— saith he haue interpreted this place amisse as do the Papists after them as if Christ should teach â—hat we cold deserue life euerlasting by keeping the law And a little after he concludeth saying This answere of Christ is according to the old law to wit that no man can be accounted iust before God but he who â—hall satify the law which is impossible And vpon the later place he writeth this it is impossible sayth he to fulfill what the law commaundeth yea it is a principall axione with Caluin a coÌ„moÌ„ aÌ„swere to al such â—laces A legal promise saith he aÌ„nexed to a condtion impossible proueth nothing thus with sâ—ch impossibilities he dallieth with vs wth the holy Scripture it selfe so far forth â—s they dare affirme that the Apostle in one Chapter auoucheth vnto vs seauen times thinges impossible for wheras the Apostle in the 2. cap. of the Ep. to the Rom. and 6. affirmeth first that God will render tâ— euery one according to his workes the interprete the place thus that God will indeed giue to meÌ„ according to their good works it there were any such but that no man can do any good worke before God Is there any man saith Beza that shal be able to bring these workes which the Apostle saith shal be rewardeâ— with eternall life And wheras in the seaueÌ„th v. the Apostle saith that God doth render life euerlasting to such as seeke the same by the patience of good works their answere is that he insinuateth a thing impossible and that no man can do any good worke before God no not the iustest man which is not worthy of eternall damnatioÌ„ VVhosoeuer saith Caluin haue made the greatest progresse before all others in the way of the Lord if they cast their â—yes vpon the Lord God what worke soeuer they attempt or go about they see into be accursed And surely â— for my part could easily belieue that such is the progresse of our aduersaries in the way of our Lord See the rest of the Apostles places in the latin edition 2. The tenth last shift is the wresting of diuers wordes to a wrong sense and to inuent sundrie different vnderstandings of the wordes to build vpon it many interpretations neuer heard of before and for a finall Conclusion to say the place is obscure and therfore proueth nothing For example heerof those most euident words of Christ this iâ— my 〈◊〉 with is giuen for you may suffice for some of theÌ„ wrest the pronowne hoc others the word est others the word corpus others the pronowne meum others the relatiue quod others the prepositiâ—n pro others the pronowne he vobis and others the Verbe datur and 〈◊〉 word they wrest diuers waies so as one more then thirty yeares ago hath gathered out of their writinges two hundred expositions of these few wordes of Christ of which 〈◊〉 Xainctes 〈◊〉 particularly 84. And that they are both many and different yea repugnant wherwith they labour to make obâ—cure these wordes of our Sauiour no man can doubt See another example in the latin edition And it is worthy of the noting that in all these shiâ—fs they serue themselues of other places of Scripture to proue what they say wherby it may appeare how