of the lyuing not of the dead God is the god of AbrahaÌ„ Isaac Iacob ergo AbrahaÌ„ Isaac aÌ„d Iacob are a lyue christe coÌ„cludeth planely nothing els but that there is a lyfe aftir this whereyn the soulis departed lyue whiche coÌ„clusioÌ„ sith it is directly made ageynst the Saduces opinion it must nedis folow that thei denyed in this place that thinge whiche christe proued for christe was not so vncircuÌ„specte to proue one thing they denying another orels they myght haue well obiected saying Syr what is this answere to our questioÌ„ we aske the whose wyfe shall she be at the general resurreccion of their bodyes and thou answerest vs nothyng els nor prouest vs any thing els with this scripture but that there is a lyf after this wheryn the soulis departed nowe lyue so to be both spirits angels for that thei be lyke auÌ„gels If the Saduces here had denyed cheifely principally by that worde Resurrectio the generall resurreccioÌ„ criste wolde haue proued it theÌ„ by scriptures as well as he here proued them the lyfe of spirits separated froÌ„ their bodyes christe reÌ„dering the cause of his argumeÌ„t to coÌ„firme the same to declare the powr of god in so pÌ„seruing the dead a lyue saith Omnes emÌ„ illi viuuÌ„t all meÌ„ lyue in him or by hym luc 20. Also it is to be noted diligeÌ„tly how that saynt Marke for the inducyng of that autorite of Moses setteth before the thing that yt proueth in these wordis saying mar 12 CeteruÌ„ de mortuis ê™ resuscitant noÌ„ legistis in libro Mosi c. that is to saye But as touching the dead that thei ar resuscited or they ar all redy alyue he saith not that they shal be alyue or shall ryse agayne as T. in hys diligeÌ„t last correccioÌ„ turneth the presenteÌ„ce into the future aÌ„d the verbe passiue into a neuter to stablissh his errour thus corrupting the text And lyke wyse he plaith with the verbe in Luke in Marke he englissheth the verbe of the pretertence resurrexerint for the future So fayne wolde he wrest the wordê froÌ„ their natyue sence to serue for hys errour haue ye not red in exodo what Moses saith c so that he induceth the autorite to ê“ue that they ar a lyue nothing lesse then to proue the resurreccion of the flesshe I wouÌ„der wherfore T. flitteth froÌ„ the text in these places Here maye euery maÌ„ se that thê worde Resurrectio in this place as in dyuerse other places of scripture is takeÌ„ for the lyfe aftir this wheryn the soules now lyue tyl the resurreccioÌ„ of their bodies as testifyeth IoaÌ„ Resurrectio hath two significations apo 20 And Tin not knowyng this significacioÌ„ or not willing to se it is gretely to blame to write so belye sclauÌ„der me sayng That for because I thus geuing the worde in his place his very signification I do denye the resurreccion of the slesshe which I neuer doubted of but beleue it as coÌ„staÌ„tly as he I haue pÌ„ached taught it so interpÌ„ted it where it so signifyeth coÌ„fesse it openly as euery man maye se that read my workis as Tindals own coÌ„scieÌ„ce testifyeth the same For thoughe this place proueth not directly the resurreccioÌ„ of the bodies yet are there many places moo that proue it clerely as doth all the .xv. chapter of the first Pystle to the Corin. where I englisshe it Resurreccion in the article of our Credo but in Iohn aÌ„d in the .xj. cap. to the Hebrwes where the worde signifyeth the lyfe of the spirits departed there I englissh it as the very worde signifyeth to put the reder out of doubt to make it clere lest he be seduced erre with Tind beleuyng that the soulis slepe out of heueÌ„ when sleape in scripture is properly aÌ„d onely vnderstandeÌ„ of the bodye which shal be awaked and ryse ageyne A rekeninge is gyueÌ„ of my traÌ„slatioÌ„ For I did traÌ„slate thys worde Resurrectio in to the lyfe aftir thys in certayne placis for these two causes principally For two causes is this worde Resurrectio so traÌ„slated First because the latyn worde besidê that it signifieth in other places the Resurreccion of the bodye yet in these it signifieth the lyfe of the spirits or soulê departed as christis answere vnto the Saduceis aÌ„d Iohn declare mat 22 apo 10 SecoÌ„daryly because that agenst the Anabaptistis false opinioÌ„ agenst their errour whom Erasmus reproueth in hys exposicioÌ„ of the Credo which saye the resurreccioÌ„ of the soules to be this that is to weet when thei shal be called out of their preuey lurking places in whiche they had ben hyd froÌ„ the tyme of their departyng vnto the resurreccion of their bodies because I saye that agenste these erroneouse opinions these places thus truely traÌ„slated make so myche aÌ„d so planely that at thys worde Resurrectio the lyfe of the spiritê aftir this their false opinion falleth is vtterly condempned The confutacion of Tindals opinion Here it is 〈◊〉 to the grunde of our cause Surgo to ryse Maneo to abyde or endure And if Tin wolde loke beter vpon his booke folow not so miche his owne witte he shulde fynde that the hebrew worde which comonly is traÌ„slated into this vbe Surgo the same some tyme saynt Ierome translated into Maneo as in Isaye VerbuÌ„ dnÌ„i manet in eternuÌ„ The worde of the Lorde endureth for euer some tyme into theise vbis sto or coÌ„sto as Isaye xlvj And some tyme into theis vbis Pono coÌ„stituo excito facio stare in vita vel seruo in vita as in exo cap. ix of Pharao Et ê“fecto ideo posui te vl excitauite seruaui te in vita vel feci te stare superstiteÌ„ te volui esse plagis meis vt ostendaÌ„ in te fortitudineÌ„ meaÌ„ c. that is to saye Doutlesse or verely for this cause yet haue I set and coÌ„stitute the or stered the vp pÌ„serued the alyue to receyue my plages to declare my strength vpoÌ„ the aÌ„d to shewe that my name myght be knowne thorowte all the worlde of the which verbe there cometh Surrectio so Resurrectio whose rote original sith it hath these so many dyuerse significacioÌ„s it must nedis folow that the nowne diriuyed oute therof haue as many so to signifye that permaneÌ„t verye lyfe or the preseruing of them styll a lyue which significacioÌ„ agreeth in all these placis of these thre euaÌ„gelistis for thei all tel one the same storye Resurrectio hath mo significations then one If T. will englisshe thys verbe Resurgo euery where to ryse agayne in bodye so shal he traÌ„slate it falsely corruppe the text bringe the reder into no small errour as once did one preacher in a sermoÌ„ expownyng this verse of the first psalm Ideo noÌ„ resurgeÌ„t impij in iudicio c. englysshing yt thus
the faithful were in heueÌ„ there shulde be no resurreccioÌ„ of their bodies whiche incoÌ„uenience to avoide he laith them down to slepe out of heueÌ„ as do the Anabaptists tyl domes daye but here I meruell that Tin is so scleÌ„derly lerned in the forme of arguyng that he se not howe his antecedeÌ„ce may be true coÌ„sequeÌ„ce false ¶ Thana baptistys opinioÌ„ off the soulis departed seyng that the coÌ„trary of his coÌ„sequeÌ„ce is necessary that is to weit there shal be the resurreccioÌ„ of the flesshe 1. corinthio 15 Paule thus prouing it If Christ be preached to haue rysen how happeneth that some of you saie thee is no resurreccioÌ„ Tyndals argumeÌ„t is proued false As who shuld thê° argew Christe our head is rysen wherfore yt must nedes folowe that his bodye which is his chirche shall ryse ageyn For wherfore shuld the beyng in heuen of the soulis of Peter Paule of all saintê let the resurreccioÌ„ of their bodies more then the being in heuen of Christis soule those iij. dayes did let his resurreccioÌ„ Tin wil saye They be al redy in ioye aÌ„d therfore there nedeth no resurreccioÌ„ And I saye so was christis spirit yet he rose agayn And I denye T. argumeÌ„t For were they in neuer so greate ioye yet must their bodies ryse agayn or els he wil make christe a lyer his doctryne false Mat. 5 Heuen erthe shal soner passe away then one iote of god dis worde shal passe vnfulfilled The verite hath sayd it aÌ„d wryteÌ„ it coÌ„cluding that our bodies shal ryse agein wherfore ther caÌ„ no coÌ„dicionall anÌ„cedeÌ„ce of T. nor yet of any angel in heueÌ„ make this ê¯clusioÌ„ false But let vs exameÌ„ the text se the Saduceis opinion vnto the whyche Christe answereth so directly and so confuteth yt vtterly The Saduceis as wryteth that aunciauÌ„t historiograph Iosephus beinge himself a iew in his .xviij. boke the .ij. ca. sayd that the soule of maÌ„ was mortal and dyed with the bodie The Saduceis opinion acto 23 aÌ„d Paule coÌ„firming the same to be their opinion addeth that thei said ther were nether spirits nor angels ¶ Paule declareth the saduceis opinion so that to saye there is nether spirit spirit properly is the soule departed nor aungel is as miche to saye as the soule is mortall no lyfe to be aftir this and the Saduceis in denying the lyfe aftir this denied by the same denye but onely those two that is bothe spirit and angell for if they had denyed by that worde Resurrectio the generall Resurrection to in that place so had thei denied thre distiÌ„cte thingis but Paule addyng Pharisei auteÌ„ vtraque coÌ„fitentur but the pharises graunt them bothe two declareth manifestly that thei denyed but onely two thingis that is to saye bothe spirit angell for aftir this present life tyl domes daye there is no lyfe of eny creature but of these two creatures spirits aungels And if by this worde Resurrectio Paule had vnderstoÌ„deÌ„ as T. doth the resurrection of the flesshe he wolde not haue sayd the pharyses grauÌ„t them bothe but all thre For this worde vtraque as euery latyne maÌ„ knoweth is spokeÌ„ but of two thingis only but as for this my mynde I leaue it vnto the iugemeÌ„t of the lerned And nowe shall I proue yt by christis owne answer that the Saduceis in those places of Math. Mark Luke denied that there is any lyfe aftir this mat 22 mar 12 luc 20. aÌ„d so nether to be spirit nor angel whiche is as miche to saye as towching the soule it to be mortall For yf it shuld lyue aftir the departing thei thought to haue had takeÌ„ christe in this trappe with their questioÌ„ of those .vij. brethreÌ„ that they now being all a lyue aftir their dethe shuld haue al seueÌ„ togither that one wyfe at once for thei sayd that al these .vij. had hir here But christe answerde them directly accordyng to their opinion aÌ„d not aftir Tin opinion of this worde resurrectio telling them that thei erred being ignoraÌ„t of the scriptures aÌ„d also of the power of god whiche powr christe declareth to consist in the pÌ„seruing the dead a lyue for because out of god the father aÌ„d christe the sone being that vere lyfe all lyfe floweth ye that into the dead id 5.12 1. ioaÌ„ 5 whiche power to coÌ„firme into the confutacioÌ„ of their opinion their own coÌ„fusion he alleged these scriptures exodi .iij. But first he tolde them of the present state of the soulis departed saynge that in the tother lyfe aftir this they nether marye nor ar maried but thei ar as the aungels of god in heueÌ„ Tindal In his expositioÌ„ of S. Ihon Pystle And yet saith Tindal this doctryne was not then in the worlde what is done with the soulis departed the scripture make no mencioÌ„ but it is a secrete saith he layd vp in gods tresury Ioye It is verely a depe secrete to him that is ignoraÌ„t so many playne scriptures whiche I shall here aftir brynge in prouyng their state in heuen Here is also to be noted that christe in describing their present state saith in the present tence Thei mary not nor ar maryed but ar lyke auÌ„gels ye egall vnto auÌ„gels the sonnes of god saith Luke cap. xx But yet yf Tindal wyll saye that the present tence is here takeÌ„ for the future playe boo pepe withe the tencis as he englissheth resuscitaÌ„tur shal ryse agen not are reuiued or resuscited yet must I aske hym whether that the childreÌ„ of that lyfe worthy that worlde as Luke calleth them be not now more lyke aungels then they shal be aftir the resurreccion of their bodies mar 12 luc 20. me thinketh that in thys poynt that they nether marye nor are maryed auÌ„gels aÌ„d the spirits be now bothe a lyke aÌ„d the chyldreÌ„ of the lyfe or the worlde where now the blessed lyue with Christe are now more lyke auÌ„gels then they shal be aftir the resurrectioÌ„ of their bodyes for now they ar substances incorporal immortal intellectuall and so be auÌ„gels but then they shal be bodely substances hauyng very flesshe and bones which the aungels neuer had nor neuer shall haue The text is declared But nowe let vs heare the scryptures wherwith christe coÌ„futeth their opinion ê“ueth the same thynge that the saduceis denyed The text is her expended Crist coÌ„sidering what thing thei denied sayd vnto them De resurrectione vero mortuoruÌ„ noÌ„ legistis qd vobis dictuÌ„ est a deo qui ait Ego sum deê° AbrahaÌ„ c That is to saye As coÌ„cernyng the lyfe of them that be dead haue ye not red what is tolde you of god saying I am the God of AbrahaÌ„ the god of Isaac and the god of Iacob God is not the God of the deade but of the lyuinge By this argumeÌ„t god is the god
resurreccioÌ„ for so myght his antecedeÌ„ce be true his ê¯seqÌ„nce false for admitted that as T. allegeth hiÌ„ there were no resurreccion yet foloweth it not that the electe nowe departed beinge as now at laste he is coÌ„pelled to graunt in no worse case theÌ„ christê spirit was froÌ„ his deth tyl he rose agen be most miserable of al meÌ„ for they that be yet a lyue they that be dead not receyued iÌ„to AbrahaÌ„s bosom but in hel in tormeÌ„tis be miche more miserable But what saith T. to his own argumeÌ„t for Paul made it not verely eueÌ„ thê° Nay Paule thou art vnlerned Go to m. More lerne a new waye Tindal We be not most miserable thoughe we ryse not agene for oure soulis go to heuen as sone as we be dead Ioye This saith Tin yroniously in a mok as though it were false that oure soulis as sone as we be dead shulde go to heuen Tindal And ar there in as grete ioye as Christ that is rysen agayne In heuen dare I saye that thei be Ioye ye that in ioye if they dye in the lorde but whether in as grete ioye as christ hiÌ„selfe let More T. dispute it Tindal And I meruel saith T. that Paule had not counforted the ThessaloniaÌ„s wyth that dotryne if he had wist it that the soulis of their dead had bene in ioye as he dyd wyth the resurreccion that their dead shuld ryse agen Neuer meruel at it Tindale for Paule thought this present coÌ„solacion sufficieÌ„t and could haue couÌ„forted them then with many mo as with this of Christ. Ioye IoaÌ„ v. that who so here my worde beleue in hym that hath sent me hath lyfe euerlastinge shall not come into coÌ„deÌ„pnacioÌ„ but is passed ouer froÌ„ dethe to lyfe whiche coÌ„solacioÌ„ because in that place aÌ„d at that tyme Paule spake it not is it a good argumeÌ„t that ther was non siche ye must beware syr how ye argew a negatiuis for siche kynde of argumeÌ„ts be the worste feblest that ye caÌ„ make It is a naughty argumeÌ„ Paule dyd not ê¯fort theÌ„ with that doctrine but with another as good ergo that doctrine was false or was not in the world ye may not iuge Paule as ignoraunt as you be in it because he did not then there expresse it for in other places he declareth techeth that doctrine plenteously ynoughe Crij lief the secoÌ„de syde Now reade Tinda wordis in hys answere to M. Moris fourth boke aÌ„d loke whether he grauÌ„teth not playnly that the soulis sleap tyll domes daye aÌ„d whether he calleth not the doctryne that they shulde lyue euer heythen aÌ„d flesshly doctryne of the Philosophers ioyned wyth the popis doctrine And agayn in the .cxviij. leif where vnto he remitted the reader in his table withe thys sentence Soulis sleap belying Christe and hys Apostles saynge that they taughte nonother And yet bothe there Crviii leif in his answers and in his exposition vpon Iohns Pystle apon this text And now lytle chyldreÌ„ abyde in him that when he shall apeare c. He sayth yt is a depe secrete layd vp in gods tresury And yet a lytle before vpoÌ„ thys text Tindals wordes fyght agenst theÌ„selfe And he is the satisfaccion He bryngeth in Paule tellynge a longe tale in hys sleap yf Tin doctryne be trew aÌ„d maketh Paule at laste to coÌ„fesse that he himself with other sayntis be in heueÌ„ contrary to hys own saynge read the .xvj. lyne the fyrste syde of the .xij. leif of the expocicyon of that text And he is the satisfaccioÌ„ And ther shalt thou se how Tindals wordis fight agenst them selfe Finally yf yt be so depe a secrete no scripture to make mencion of their state I wounder what made Tindale so bolde to saye and to wryte yt to that thei sleap that thei be not in heuen now at last to thinke thei be in no worse case then was cristis spirit aftir his dethe vntil his resurreccioÌ„ Aftir I had sene theise places and known Tindals erroneouse opinion I resoned wyth hym as we walked togither in the feeld more then once or twyse bryngyng ageynst him siche textis as mâ— thought proued playnely agenst hym as when christe answerde the theif hangyng by his crosse saying Luc. 23 This daye thou shalt be with me in paradyse where I sayd It is manifest that if christe had that daye coÌ„mended hys spirit into hys fathers haÌ„dis in heueÌ„ as he dyd in deed ê“mysed that the spirit of the theif shuld be with his spirit for their bodies were not togither it must nedys folow that hys spirit was with cristê spirit in heueÌ„ And to expresse the place more playnly christe added saying In paradyse which is not els then in heuen paradyse is taken for heueÌ„ 2 cor 12. whych one autorite albe it it had bene sufficieÌ„t for any mane that wolde haue admytted receyued the sengle aÌ„d playn veryte of cristê worde yet I brought forthe christes wordis agayn describing the state of the faithful vnfaithful aftir this lyfe saying Math. viij I tell you verely that many shal come froÌ„ the east west aÌ„d shal sit down to eat with Abraham Isaac and Iacob in the kyngdoÌ„ of heueÌ„ that is to saye shal be associated vnto AbrahaÌ„ aÌ„d Isaac to be parte takers of their ioye and fruicyon in heuen but the chyldren of the kyngdoÌ„ of the deuyl shal be cast forth into extreme derknesses where shal be wepinge gnasshing of tethe This sitting downe at table with AbrahaÌ„ is not els but AbrahaÌ„s bosome into which all that resembled AbrahaÌ„ in faith aftir their departinge were receyued as ye maye se of Lazarus AbrahaÌ„s bosom Luke .xvj. where the state of the electe of the reprobated immediatly after their deth is described thelecte to be borne of aungels into Abrahams bosome as was Lazarus the reprobated to be caste into hell into tormeÌ„tis wyth the ryche glotoÌ„ Then alleged I Paule saying 2. Cor. 5 Erthy â—abernacle oure corruptible bodye Heuenly tabernacle is that ioye gloriouse presence of God For we knowe that yf oure erthye tabernacle where in we dwell were destroyed yet haue we a perpetual maÌ„sion not made with handis in heueÌ„ of these mansioÌ„s all redy prepared of christe yt is wryteÌ„ IoaÌ„ xiiij And at last Paule affirmeth that to be absent from the bodye is to be present with god saying we haue coÌ„fydence aproue thys to be beter that is to weit to be absent froÌ„ the bodye and to be present wyth god which saying is spoken of the state of soulis now beyng with god absent frome theyr bodyes yet a sleape in the erthe tyll thei be awaked raised vp at the general iugemeÌ„t Sleap is onely apê“priated to the bodyes Vnto this pertayneth his sayingis also vnto the Philippians affirming that dethe is to himself more
aduauÌ„tage then here to lyue Phi. 1. therfore he desired to be losed from his bodye that he might be with criste his life this state to be miche beter then the lyfe of this worlde Then I alleged Iohn in the Apocalipse describiÌ„g the states bothe of the dampned also of the blessed that dye in the lorde heÌ„ce forthe apo 14 which sith they be blessed froÌ„ their dethe forth it must nedis folow that thei be in blysse in heueÌ„ apo 20 And Iohn repetyng the same state describyng it almost withe the same wordê saith those soulis were alyue raigned with crist M. yere c. calleth that lyfe of the soulis primaÌ„ resurrectionem the first resurreccioÌ„ The first resurreccioÌ„ is the lyf of the soulis hym blessed holy which hath his parte in the fyrste resurreccioÌ„ here is it playn that this worde Resurrectio is not euery where taken a lyke as T. saith and Iohn describeth the state of the secoÌ„de resurreccioÌ„ immediatly in the same cap. calleth the state of the daÌ„pned the secoÌ„de dethe by whiche correlatiuis calling it the first resurreccioÌ„ in respecte of the secoÌ„de those antithesis aÌ„d puttyng one coÌ„trary agenst a nother euery reader maye gather whiche is the first lyf the firste dethe whiche is the secoÌ„de dethe secoÌ„de resurreccioÌ„ But these playn testimonyes of the scripture wolde take no place with Tindal for he wrested writeth them coÌ„trary to his own doctryne out of their proper pure sence with fayned gloses to shift and seke holes he aftir his wont disdaynful maner agenst me fylipt them forth betwene hys fynger his thombe what disdaynfull aÌ„d obprobrious wordis he gaue me for so resoning agenst hym I wyll not now reherce lest I shuld minysshe the good opinioÌ„ that some men haue in him Also ther is a playne descripcioÌ„ of the state where vnto the soulis departed in crist he ar receyued Hebr. xij ye ar not come vnto the hill Sinai which none might touche but ye are come vnto the mouÌ„te zion the cite of the lyuing god the heueÌ„ly Ierusalem vnto the innumerable coÌ„pany of auÌ„gels vnto the coÌ„gregacioÌ„ of our former first begoteÌ„ fathers writen togither in heueÌ„ to god the iuge of al men vnto the spiritê of the pure iuste aÌ„d vnto Iesus criste the mediatour of the newe couenant eueÌ„ vnto the bespreigned bloude Here is yt playne that in this heuenly Ierusalem ar now the coÌ„gregacion of our former fathers the spirites of the iuste men for aftir the generall resurreccion this coÌ„gregacion shal be no spiritis but the coÌ„pany of very meÌ„ hauyng flesshe aÌ„d bone whiche the spiritis haue not crist sayng to his disciples fele and touche me for a spyrit hath nether flesshe nor bones But at laste I remeÌ„ber that I made hym thys reason saynge Syr ye knowe that christe is our head we his members altogither hys bodye ye knowe also that christe is the firste frutis fore leader of them 1. cor 15 that sleap Then I argewed thus The bodye must nedis folow the head whother the head weÌ„t thither must the bodye folow for crist optayned of his father that wheresoeuer he shuld be there shulde his faithful be with him to se his glorie but christis spirit departed slept not oute of heueÌ„ but wente into the fathers haÌ„dis in heueÌ„ wherfore euen so shall ours aftir our dethe if we dye his meÌ„bres aÌ„d in the lorde ioaÌ„ 14 and. 17 This reason did so byght Tindal and stoke so faste vpon hym that he coude not shake it of but is now at laste thaÌ„ked be god coÌ„strayned to saye with me in hys goodly godly pistle ageÌ„st me that I thynke he dare not yet coÌ„staÌ„tly affyrme it the soulis departed in the faith of crist to be in no worse case then the soule of criste was froÌ„ the tyme he delyuered his spirit into the haÌ„dis of his father vntyll the resurreccion of hys bodye Tindal Ioye Here maye euery reader se that thoughe he thinketh now other wyse then he hathe wryteÌ„ in so many placis now thynketh the very same that I euer affirmed obiected agenste him yet had he leuer ageinst his owne conscience thus enuyously withe so many spightfull lyes aÌ„d sclauÌ„ders vnto my perpetuall infamy hauyng no respecte vnto the sclaunders and hurte mynistred vnto the congregacioÌ„ of Christe nor yet to the gaudye aÌ„d reioyse of our aduersaries to haue wryten agenst me then to refrayned his peÌ„ne aÌ„d aknowleged hys errour So prowd aÌ„d arrogaÌ„t are they that stonde so hyghly in their own coÌ„sayght aÌ„d falfe opinion pertinatly to defende it though thei se it right false rather then thei wolde seme conuicted especially of any simple and one that apereth not so wel lerned as thei be them selues The Apologie answere vnto Tindals pistle But let vs now here Tindals vncharitable pistle set before hys newe Testament thus tytled Tindal Vylliam Tindal yet once more to the Christen Reader Ioye Tindale shulde haue goten hym more honesty and lesse shame yf he had writen once lesse to the reader Tindal Thou shalt vnderstonde most dere reader when I had taken in hande to loke ouer the newe testament agayn and to compare it with the greke and to mende what so euer I coude fynde amysse and had almost fynesshed the laboure It was but loked ouer in deed nothinge performing his so large promyses added in the later ende of his first translacioÌ„ to the reader and I wouÌ„der how he coude compare yt with greke sith himselfe is not so exquysitely sene thereyn Ioye George Ioye secretly toke in hand to correct it also by what occasyon his coÌ„scyence knoweth Tindal preueÌ„ted me in so moch that his correccioÌ„ was printed in greate noumbre yer myne beganne When it was spyed and worde brought me though it semed to dyuers other that George Ioye had not vsed the offyce off an honest man seynge he knewe that I was in correctynge it myselfe nether dyd walke aftir the rules of the loue and softenes which Christe and hys disciples teache vs howe that we shulde do nothynge of stryfe to moue debate or of vayne glorie or of couetousnes Yet I toke the thinge in worth as I have done dyuers other in tymes past as one that haue more experience off the nature and disposicion off that mannes complexyon and supposed that a lytle spyse off couetousnes and vayne glorye two blynde goydes had bene the onlye cause that moued him so to do aboute which thinges I striue with no maÌ„ so folowed aftir corrected forth caused this to be printed without surmyse or lokynge on hys correctyon Ioye Lo good Reder here mayst thou se of what nature coÌ„plexion T. is so sodenly fyercely boldely to choppe in to any maÌ„nis coÌ„science so to vsurpe preuent the