Lorde the sacred cup. why or to what effect It followeth changing it by the holie spirite Where is signified the transmutation and consecration thereof into the bodie and bloud But in the other worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there may be some question because it signifieth properly to giue thankes therefore may seeme to be referred to God onely and not to the element and creature But this also we finde contrarye in the Greeke fathers who vse this worde also transitiuely saying panem calicem eucharistisatos or panem in quo gratiae actae sunt that is the bread and the cuppe made the Eucharist the bread ouer which thankes are giuen that is which by the worde of prayer and thankes-giuing is made a consecrated meate the fleshe and bloud of Christ as S. Iustine in fine 2. Apologo and Saint Irenaeus lib. 4. 34 in the same places expound it Whereas it may also signifie that for which thankes are giuen in that most solemne sacrifice of the Eucharist as S. Denyâ— in one place seemeth to take it Eccl. Hier c. 3. in fine Who in the selfe same chapter speaketh of the consecration thereof most euidently FVLK 4. That the creatures or elements are blessed and consecrated that by the working of Gods spirite they shoulde bee chaunged into the bodye and bloud of Christ after a diuine and spirituall manner vnto the worthye receyuers Beza and we agree with the Greeke Liturgies But that this blessing is performed by the worde of God prayer and thankes-giuing both Iustinus and Irenaeus doe most plainely testifie with Beza and vs. When the mixed cuppe and bread sayth Irenaeus receyueth the worde of God it is made the Eucharist c. The breade on which or for which thankes is giuen The bread which is of the earth receyuing the vocation or inuocation of God So sayth Iustinus the meate for which thankes are giuen by the worde of prayer which is receyued from him and speaking of the verie manner of the consecration vsed in his tyme. When the breade and wine with water is offered the chiefe Minister sendeth forthe prayers and thankes-giuing with all his might and the people consenteth saying Amen Then followeth the distribution and participation of those thinges for which thankes was giuen to euery one c. As for the Magicall mysteries of Dionyse although in this behalfe they make nothing againste vs we make not so great account of that we will stand to his iudgement any more than you to his practise MART. 5. Whereby we haue to note that the Heretikes in vrging the worde Eucharist as meere thankes-giuing thereby to take away blessing and consecration of the elements of bread and wine doe vnlearnedly and deceitfully because all the fathers make mention of both Saint Paule also calleth it blessing of the chalice which the Euangelistes call giuing of thankes Whose wordes Theophylacte explicateth thus THE CHALICE OF BLESSING that is of the Eucharist For holding it in our handes we blesse it and giue thankes to him that shedde his bloud for vs. See here both blessing and Eucharist blessing the chalice and thankes-giuing to Christ. Saint Iames and the Greeke fathers in their Liturgies put both wordes in the consecration of eche element saying thus giue thankes sanctifying breaking and giuing thankes blessing sanctifying and taking the cuppe giuing thankes sanctifying blessing filling it with the holy Ghost he gaue it to vs his Disciples Saint Chrysostome who in many places of his workes speaketh much of thankes-giuing in these holy mysteries doth he not as often speake of the blessing consecration yea and the transmutation thereof and that with what wordes and by what power it is done Doth not Saint Augustine saye of the same benedicitur sanctificatur it is blessed and sanctified who often speaketh of the solemne giuing of thankes in the sacrifice of the Church Doth not the Church at this daye vse the very same termes as in Saint Augustines time Gratias agamus Domino Deo nostro Let vs giue thankes to the Lord our God and Verè dignum iustum est semper vbique tibi gratias agere c. It is very meete and right alwayes and in all places to giue thee thanks Which the Greeke Church also in their Liturgies expresse most aboundantly yet doth there follow blessing and consecration and whatsoeuer Saint Ambrose describeth to be done in this holye sacrifice touching this poynt writing thereof moste excellently in his booke de ijs qui initiantur mysterijs c 9. FVLK 5. If it were to proue any thing that we deny you would be as bare and hungry as nowe you are franke and plentifull of your testimonies Theophylact sayth the same that Beza sayde out of Chrysostome and Oecumenius The Greeke Liturgies falsely intituled to Saint Iames Basil and Chrysostome haue no other thing nor any other author whome you name But your popish Church doth not either as the Greeke Liturgies or as the Churches in Ambrose and Augustines time For they holde that the elements are consecrared by prayer and thankes-giuing whereof although you vse some termes in your masse yet you holde that the consecration consisteth onely in a Magicall murmuration of the wordes Hoc est corpus meum ouer the bread by a Priest with intent of consecration wherefore you are farre from the iudgement that the auncient fathers had and we haue of the consecration of the bread and wine to be the sacraments of the bodye and bloud of Christ. MART. 6. Of all which this is the conclusion that the Eucharist is a solemne name taken of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so called because this sacrament and sacrifice is blessed and consecrated with prayer thankes-giuing as S. Iustine speaketh and because in this sacrifice so blessed and consecrated into the body and bloud of Christ him we offer vp a most acceptable oblation of thankes-giuing and a memorie of all Gods maruelous benefites towarde vs. In this sense the fathers and the holye Church speake of the Eucharist including all the rest to wit sacrament sacrifice blessing consecration without which thiâ— were no more to be called Eucharist than any other common giuing of thanks as S. Irenaeus doth plainly signifie when he declareth that being before bread receiuing the inuocation of God ouer it now is no more coÌ„mon bread but the Eucharist coÌ„sisting of two things the earthly the heauenly So that it is made the Eucharist by circuÌ„stance of solemne wordes and ceremonies and therefore is not a meere giuing of thankes and further we learne that S. Iustines and S. Irenaus wordes before alledged Panis calix Eucaristisatus signifie the bread and chalice made the Eucharist and consequently we learne that the a 〈…〉 e thereof is by thankes-giuing to make the Eucharist a 〈…〉 â—ecause the other word of blessing and this of thankes-giuing are vsed indifferently one for an other in Christs action
children saying Increase and multiplie when hee blessed the children of Israel and they multiplyed exceedingly when hee blessed the latter things of Iob more than the first Iob. 42. Was this also a giuing of thankes and not an effectuall blessing vppon these creatures What will they say or what difference will they make As God blessed here so hee was God and man that blessed the loaues and fishes there If they will say hee did it as man and therefore it was a giuing of thankes to God his father to omit that hee blessed them as hee multiplyed them that is rather according to his diuine nature than humane we aske them when he blessed as man was it alwaies giuing of thankes he blessed the litle children he blessed his disciples when he ascended was this giuing thankes for them as Beza expoundeth his blessing of the loaues and fishes When we blesse the table or the meate vpon the table When S. Paul saith 1. Timoth. 4. all meate is lawefull that is sanctified by the worde and by praier is all this nothing but giuing thankes So sayeth Beza in expresse wordes FVLK 2. When I see those often most impudent inuectiues against Beza and other I muse with my selfe whether you haue read Beza and the other your selfe or whether you giue credit to some malicious cauiller who is set on worke to picke quarels out of other mens writings to serue your turne But when I consider all circumstances of euerie place and namely howe you obiect against Beza that which he sayth of the blessing or consecrating of our ordinary meates and drinkes I thinke it is not like but that you haue reade the places your selfe And then of all that euer I knewe I must esteeme you the furthest from synceritie honest dealing that so often so openly so confidently so purposedly commit so vile and shamefull forgerie Beza saith that our meate is sanctified by the worde of God and prayer and thankesgiuing For the 1. Tim. 4. the Apostle ioyneth both as heere Luke 9. we must ioyne both together For partly for the meate giuen to vs thankes is giuen to God partely petition is made that we may vse it purely and soberly that we may spende the rest of our life in the worshippe of God Heereof it commeth that Christians are saide to blesse the table and to consecrate the table whereas yet this blessing pertaineth not to the meates themselues but to God rather and them that shal be partakers of them But in the cuppe of blessing which we blesse as it is written 1. cor 10. v. 16. although the worde of blessing may bee expounded after the same manner yet the ende of the blessing is altogether diuerse as in due place wee shall expounde These are the wordes of Beza Is all this nothing but giuing of thankes MART. 3 Wee goe forwarde and prooue the contrarie yet more manifestly in the verie matter of the blessed Sacrament for the which they multiplie all the foresaide absurdities Wee tell them that Saint Paul sayeth thus The chalice of blessing which wee blesse is it not c. howe coulde hee speake more plainely that the chalice or cup meaning that in the cup is blessed Which S. Cyprian de Coen Dom. explicateth thus Calix solenni benedictione sacratus The Chalice consecrated by solemne blessing Oecumenius thus The Chalice which blessing wee prepare that is which wee blesse and so prepare for so it must signifie and not as Beza would haue it which with thankes giuing wee prepare and that I prooue by his owne wordes immediatly before where hee sayeth that the Greeke worde beeing vsed of the Apostle transitiuely that is with a case following cannot signifie giuing thankes Howe then can it so signifie in Oecumenius wordes who doeth interprete the Apostles meaning by the Apostles owne wordes and phrase yea that you may note a notorious contradiction how doeth Beza then in the place of Luke before alleaged where the same Greeke worde is a plaine transitiue as in this place expound is of giuing thanks for the bread and fishes A lyer they say must bee mindefull to make his tale agree in euerie point Hee that before forced the worde in euerie sentence to bee nothing else but thankes giuing euen when it was a plaine transitiue now confesseth that hee neuer read it in that signification when it is a transitiue and so wee haue that the blessing of the cup or of the bread is not giuing thankes as they either translate or interprete it FVLK 3. I must continue my admiration of your impudence for Beza saith expressely in this place 1. cor 10. that to blesse here is to sanctifie or consecrate because that the ordinance of God being rehearsed and set foorth the breade and wine are appointed to this holy vse that they should be the sacramentes of the true and naturall bodie and bloud of Christ that is the signes pledges thereof that in such sort y t the same thing which is signified is offred to vs to be receiued spi ritually And because this whole actiō is ioined with the praise of God solemne thanksgiuing therefore I esteeme y t S. Paul signified this whole matter in the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So y t in my iudgemēt Oecumenius hath plainly briefely expounded 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is which w t praise thanksgiuing we prepare Which I admonish lest any man should think y t by the terme of consecration we meane any magical incantatiō That you would proue by Bezaes words y t he hath not iustly explicated y e mea ning of Oecumenius it is too too beyond all measure of impudēce For Beza not contrarying y t which he said before sheweth how the cup is blessed sanctified consecrated namely by prayer praise of God thanksgiuing For which he cyteth Chrysostō who expoundeth these words of S. Paul which we blesse to mean which we receiue with thanksgiuing As for y c place of S. Luke 9. Beza himself cyteth it manie other like to prooue that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 w t an accusatiue case signifieth to blesse to sanctifie to consecrate as also in y t place Luke 9. he expoundeth it And yet you wil make him a lier forgetting what tale he told before In deed y t rule you giue is meet for a craftie lyer that hath some care to maintaine his credite But such an impudent lyer shamelesse forger as you are hath no regarde of any thing but to deceiue them whose ignorance and simplicitie is such as they neither can nor care to examine your slanders MART. 4 And surely in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 this is most euident that it signifieth in this case the blessing consecration of the creature or element in so much that S. Basil S. Chrysostom in their Liturgies or Masses say thus by the same Greek word Blesse o Lord the sacred bread Blesse o
and not copulatiue wee were driuen to the wall But seeing the Hebrue coniunction copulatiue must be expounded according to the sense you do very vnskilfully to coÌ„clude the sense which is in controuersie vpon the coniunction which is indefinite and wee without partialitie haue translated the coniunction copulatiue as it doth most commonly and ordinarily signifie MART. 14. Wherein the reader may see their exceeding partialitie and wilfulnesse For besides infinite like places of Scripture whereby we do easily shew that this Hebrue particle is vsed to giue a reason or cause of a thing themselues also in an other place proue it for vs and that by the authoritie of Theophylact and allegation of examples out of the Scripture and translate accordingly thus Blessed art thou among women because the fruite of thy wombe is blessed Let them giue vs a reason why the sayd coniunction is here by their translation quia or enim where it was neuer so translated before and it must not be in any case in the other place of Genesis where it hath bene so translated and generally receiued euen in the Primitiue Church In other places of Scripture also which Theophylact alledgeth and many moe may be alledged they coÌ„fesse and like very well it should so signifie onely in the place of Genesiâ— they can not abide any such sense or translation thereof but He brought forth bread and wine and he was the Priest c. not because he was the Priest What is the cause of this their dealing None other vndoubtedly and in all these cases I knocke at their consciences but that here they would auoide the necessarie sequele of Melchisedecks sacrifice vpon such translation which typicall sacrifice of bread wine if it should be graunted then would follow also a sacrifice of the newe Testament made of bread and wine aunswering to the same and so we should haue the sacrifice of the altar and their bare communion should be excluded FVLK 14. Because we will not falsly translate to maintaine a colour of your popish sacrifice we shewe great partialitie Wherein I praye you The coniunction copulatiue we knowe may often be resolued into the causall where the sense so requireth But it neuer hath any force in it selfe to breede such a sense or to conclude suche a sense by it It is agaynste all reason therefore that you woulde vrge vs to translate contrarie to that whyche in our consciences beefore GOD wee take to bee the sense Where you say that the sacrifice of Melchisedech if it were graunted woulde bring in your Masse and exclude oure communion it is altogither vntrue For none of the auncient fathers who were deceiued to imagine a sacrifice where the Apostle seeking al things pertaining to Melchisedechs priesthoode coulde find none doth allow your propitiatorie sacrifice but contrariewise by those onely speeches that they vse aboute Melchisedechs oblation of breade and wine wee are able to prooue that they didde speake of a sacrifice of thankesgiuyng onely And your sacrifice in whyche you say is neither bread nor wine should hardly resemble Melchisedechs oblation made of bread and wine MART. 15. For whiche purpose also their partiall translation aboute altare and table is notorious For the name of altare as they know verie wel both in the Hebrue and Greeke and by the custome of al peoples both Iewes and Pagans implying and importing sacrifice therfore we in respect of the sacrifice of Christs bodie and bloud say altar rather than table as all the auncient fathers Chrys. ho. 53. ad po Antioch and ho. 20. in 2. Cor. and in Demonst. ê™ Christus sit Deus to 5. Nazianz. de Gorgonia sorore Basil. in Liturg Socrat. li. 1. Hist. c. 20. 25. Theodoret. hist. li. 4. c. 20. Theophyl in 23. Mat. Cypr. epist. 63. Optat. cont Parm. Aug. ep 86. li. 9. Confess c. 11. 13. alibi saepe are wont to speake and write namely when S. Hierom calleth the bodies or bones of S. Peter and Paule the altars of Christ because of this sacrifice offercd ouer and vpon the same though in respect of eating and drinking the body and bloud it is also called a table so that with vs it is both an altar and a table whether it be of wood or of stone But the Protestants because they make it only a communion of bread and wine or a supper and no sacrifice therefore they call it table onely and abhorre from the worde altar as Papistical For the which purpose in their firste translation Bible an 1562. when altares were then in digging downe throughout England they translated with no lesse malice than they threwe them downe putting the word temple in steede of altare which is so grosse a corruption that a man woulde haue thought it had beene done by ouersight and not of purpose if they hadde not doone it thrice immediately wythin twoo Chapiters 1. Cor. 9. and 10. saying Know you not that they whiche waite of the TEMPLE are partakers of the TEMPLE and Are not they whiche eate of the sacrifice partakers of the TEMPLE in al which places the Apostles worde in Greeke is altare and not temple and see here their notorious peeuishnesse where the Apostle saith temple there the same translation saith sacrifice where the Apostle saith altar there it saith temple FVLK 15. That the ancient fathers vsed the name of altar as they did of sacrifice sacrificer leuite and such like improperly yet in respect of the spirituall oblation of prayse and thankes gyuyng whyche was offered in the celebration of the Lordes supper wee doe easilye graunte as also that they doe as commonly vse the name of table and that it was a table indede so standing as menne mighte stande round about it and not against a wall as your popishe altares stande it is easie to prooue and it hathe oftentimes bene prooued and it seemeth you confesse as muche but that it is with you bothe an altare and a table with vs indeede it is as it is called in the scripture only a table That we make the Sacrament a communion of bread and wine it is a blasphemous slaunder when wee beleeue as the Apostle taught vs that it is the communion of the bodie and bloud of Christe and the Lordes supper as for the corruption you pretend I cannot thinke as I haue aunsweared before it was any thing else but the first Printers ouersight For why shoulde the name of altare mislike vs in that place more than in an hundreth other places when it is certaine wheresoeuer it is vsed in the scriptures in the proper sense it signifieth the altares of the Iewes or of the Gentiles and neuer the communion table or that at whyche the Lordes supper is prepared and receiued MART. 16. Thus we see howe they suppresse the name of altare where it shoulde be now let vs see howe they putte in their translation where it shoulde not bee this also they
doe thrice in one chapiter and that for to saue the honour of their communion table namely in the storie of Bel where we haue it thrice called the table of that idol vnder which Bels Priestes had made a priuie entraunce and that the king looked vpon the table and that they did eate vppe such things as were vpon the table these wicked translators fearing least the name of Bels table might redounde to the dishonour of their communion table translate it altare in al these places Wherin I cannot but pitie their follie and wonder exceedingly howe they coulde imagine it any disgrace either for table or altare if the idols also had their tables and altares whereas S. Paule so plainely nameth both togither The table of our Lorde and the table of Diuels If the table of Diuels why not the table of Bel if that be no disgrace to the table of our Lorde why are you afraide of Bels table leaste it shoulde disgrace yours Or if you had no such feare then you must tel vs some other good reason of your vnreasonable translation in this place why you traÌ„slate altare for table that is chalke for cheese FVLK 16. That the authours of the firste translation in the fabulous storie of Bel for table translated altare as I cannot excuse them of erroure so I dare discharge them of any partialitie or fauour of the communion table For in King Henry the eights time when that translation was first printed there was neuer a communion table in any Churche of Englande It is like therefore they respected similitude of the placing thereof so as a priuie doore mighte bee vnder it which coulde not bee conueyed in tables of suche formes as nowe adayes are in vse The Bible 1577. in the margent placeth the word table which is in the Greeke signifying that there is no greate matter whether word you vse And that storie beeing of no credite the translatoures coulde haue no purpose either to prooue or improoue by authoritie thereof MART. 17. And heere by the way the Reader may note an other exceeding follie in them that thinke the name of table maketh againste altare and sacrifice their owne translation heere condemning them where they call Bels table an altare and Saint Paule hauing saide to the Corinthians the table of oure Lorde saith to the Hebrewes of the selfe same we haue an altare and againe he saith the table of Diuels whych I am sure they wil not denie to haue bene a true altar of Idololatrical sacrifice and Malach. 1. v. 7. in one sentence it is called both altare table whereupon the Iewes offered their externall and true sacrifices and all the fathers bothe Greeke and Latine speaking of the sacrifice of the newe Testament call that wherevppon it is offered both altare and table but the Greekes more often table the Latine fathers more often altare and why or in what respectes it is called both this and that we haue before declared and here might ad the very same out of S. Germanus Arch. B. of Constantinople in his greke coÌ„mentaries called mystica theoria on the Liturgies or masses of the Greke fathers but to procede FVLK 17. It were an infinite matter to note not onely all the follies that you commit but also the impudent assertions that you make vpon your owne surmise without all proofe Who made you so priuie of our thought that you affirme vs to thinke the name of table maketh againste altar and sacrifice We know the name of table prooueth no sacrifice but that the fathers call the same both a table and an altare we do neuer deny vnto you Yet that the Apostle to the Hebrues 12. calleth that same an altare whiche Sainct Paule to the Corinthians nameth a table you shall neuer bee able to prooue Howsoeuer Oecumenius and Haimo twoo late writers doate vpon that place whiche is euident euen by the texte to bee vnderstoode of the onely sacrifice of Christes death vpon the Crosse. That the people whome the Prophete Malachie reproueth called the Lordes altare his table is no sufficient proofe that it might bee called by the one name as wel as the other And althoughe in respecte of the meate offerings and drinke offerings it was also a table at whiche God vouchsafed to bee entertained by the people as theyr familiar friende But what is this to the purpose of anie controuersie betweene vs. The altare was called a table in the olde Testament but the table is neuer called an altare in the newe Testament although by the aâ—ntient fathers oftentimes MART. 18. There are also some places lesse euident yet such as sâ—ach of the like heretical humor against the B. Sacrament In the prophet Iâ—re c. 11. v. 17. wee reade thus according to the Latin and the Greke Let vs cast wood vpon his bread that is saith S. Hierome in comment huius loci the crosse vpon the bodie of our Sauior For it is he that saide I am the breade that descended from heauen Where the Prophete so long beefore saying bread and meaning his bodie alludeth prophetically to his bodie in the B. Sacrament made of breade and vnder the forme of breade and therefore also called breade of the Apostle So that bothe in the Prophete and Apostle his breade and his bodie is alone and leaste wee shoulde thinke that the breade onely signifieth his bodie he saith Let vs put the Crosse vpon his breade that is vppon his verie natural bodie whyche hung on the Crosse. Nowe for these wordes of the Prophete so vsual and well known in the Church and al antiquitie how thinke you do these newe Maisters translate in one Bible thus Let vs destroy the tree with the fruite thereof Another wee wil destroy his meate with wood or as they shoulde haue saide rather the wood with his meate Doe you see how properly they agree whiles they seeke nouelties and forsake the auncient vsuall translation FVLK 18. The phrase or manner of speach which the Prophete Ieremie vseth beeing somewhat obscure and vnusuall hathe bredde dyuerse translations The most simple meaning and agreable vnto the Hebrue is this Lette vs destroye him wyth woodde in steede of breade that is lette vs famishe hym in a close prison or in the stockes c. and so maye the Greeke and vulgare Latine be expounded lette vs giue hym woodde for breade rather than that violent exposition of Saint Hierome is to be admitted whiche referreth it to his crucifying where beside it were an intollerable figure in that place to vnderstand his body by bread it is cleane contrarie to that you saide For the Crosse was not putte vppon Christe but Christe vppon the Crosse. Suche wresting of the Scripture where no neede is maketh the Christians ridiculous to the Iewes And yet it is more farre fetched to drawe it to the sacrament which is called bread is not bread Neither doth Saint Hierome extend his interpretation so farre MART. 19. They wil say the first Hebrewe word can
where he prophesieth vnto the wicked a sodaine death such as befell to Chore Dathan Abiram which went downe quicke into the graue Not into hell whether come no bodies of men liuing but the soules of men that are dead MART. 20. But alas is it the very nature of the Hebrew Greeke or Latine that forceth theÌ„ so much to English it graue rather than hel we appeale to all Hebricians Grecians Latinists in the world first if a man would aske what is Hebrew or Greeke or Latine for Hell whether they would not answer these three words as the very proper words to signifie it euen as panis signifieth bread secondly if a man would aske what is Hebrew or Greeke or Latine for a graue whether they would answer these words and not three other which they know are as proper words for graue as lac is for milke FVLK 20. The very nature of the Hebrew worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is most properly to signifie a graue or receptacle of dead bodies as all that be learned in that tongue doe knowe About the Greeke and Latine termes is not our question and therefore you deale deceitfully to handle them all three togither Although neither 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nor Infernus are so proper for hel but that they may be taken also sometimes for the graue and so perhaps were meant by the Greeke and Latine translators in diuerse places You speake therefore as one voyd of all shame to say they are as proper for hell as panis for breade Where you aske what is Hebrew Greeke or Latine for hell you must vnderstand that if you speake of a proper word for those inuisible places wherein the soules departed are either in ioy or torments I answer there is no proper word for those places either in Hebrew Greeke or Latine For that which of all these tongues is translated heauen is the proper word for the sensible skye in which are the Sunne Moone and Starres and by a figure is transferred to signifie the place of Gods glorie in which he reigneth with the blessed spirits of Angels and men aboue this sensible world Paradise and Abrahams bosome who is so childish not to acknowledge them to be borrowed wordes and not proper So fo◠〈…〉 of the reprobate soules in the Hebrue tongue Tâ—pheâ—â— or Gehinnom which properly are the names of an abhominable place of Idolatry are vsed Sheol somtimes figuratiuely may signifie the same In Greeke Latin Gâ—henna is vsed for the same which is borrowed of the Hebrue Sometimes also the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greeke is taken for the place of the damned and the kingdome of darkenesse The Latine word Infernus is any lowe place Wherefore I can not maruaile sufficiently at your impudencie which affirme these three words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Infernus to be as proper for our English worde hell as Panis is for bread That there be other wordes beside these in all the three tongues to signifie a graue I maruaile to what purpose you tell vs except you would haue ignorant folke suppose that there cannot be two Hebrue Greeke or Latine wordes for one thing MART. 21. Yea note and consider diligently what wee will say Let them shewe me out of all the Bible one place where it is certaine and agreed among all that it must needes signifie graue let them shewe me in any one such place that the holy Scripture vseth any of those former three wordes for graue As when Abraham bought a place of burial whether he bought Infernum or when it is said the kings of Israel were buried in the monuments or sepulchers of their fathers whether it say in infernis patrum suorum So that not onely Diuines by this obseruation but Grammarians also and children may easily see that the proper and naturall signification of the said wordes is in English Hel and not graue FVLK 21. We note wel your foolish subtiltie that will haue vs to shewe you one place where it is oertaine and agreed among al that sheol muste needes signifie graue I am perswaded that you and such as you are that haue sold your selues to Antichrist to maintaine his heresies with all impudencie will agree to nothing that shall be brought though it be neuer so plaine and certaine that it must needes so signifie I haue already shewed you three places where the hoare head is sayd to goe down into sheol that is into the graue For whether shold the hoare head goe but into the graue Nothing can be more plaine to him that will agree to truth that sheol in all such places is taken for the graue But to omit those places because I haue spoken of them all readie what say you to that place Numb 16 where the earth opened her mouth swallowed vp the rebelles with their tents and all there substaunce of cattaile and what soeuer they had where the text sayeth They went downe and all that they had aliue sheolah into the pitte or graue God made a great graue or hole in the earth to receiue them all Where no man will saie that evther the bodies of these men or their substaunce of Tentes cattaile and stuffe went into hell as it is sure their soules wente into torment And if authoritie do way more with you than good reason heare what S. Augustine writeth vpon the same texte and how he taketh your inferos or infernum which in the Hebrue is sheol Quest. super Num. lib. 4. c. 29. Et descenderunt ipsi omnia quaecunque sunt eis viuentes ad inferos Notandum secundum locum terreniâ—m dictos esse inferos hoc est c. And they themselues descended and all that they had aliue vnto Inferas the lower partes It is to be noted that Inferi are spoken of an earthly place that is in the lowe partes of the earth For diuersly and vnder manifold vnderstaÌ„ding euen as the sense of things which are in hand requireth the name of Inferi is put in the Scriptures especially it is wont to be taken for the dead But for asmuch as it is saide that those descended aliue ad inferos by the very narration it appeareth sufficiently what was done it is manifest as I said that the lower partes of the earth are termed by this word inferi in comparison of this vpper part of the earth in which we liue Like as in comparison of the higher heauen where the dwelling of the holy Aungels is the Scripture saith that the sinful Angels being thrust downe into the darknesse of this ayre are reserued as it were in prisons of a lower part or hel to be punished S. Augustine here doth not only vnderstand this place of the graue or receptacle of bodies but also sheweth that the Latin word inferi or infernus doth not alwaies signifie hel as you made it of late as proper for hel as Panis for bread But bicause you shal
wee examine otherwise by circumstance of the text and by the Churches and Doctors interpretation and we finde that heere it is taken for a Sacrament in that sense as we say seuen Sacramentes not so in the other places FVLK 5. No reasonable man can charge vs to be false translators when we turne the Greeke worde into that which it doth generally properly and alwaies signifie And for al your bragging of syncere translating if you should translate Tob. 12. I am perswaded you would not say it is a good thing to hide the kinges sacrament Yet is the Latine worde in that place Sacramentum and the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But it is sufficient for you to haue a shadow of somthing to find your selfe occupied rather than you would be saying of nothing MART. 6. As when we reade this name Iesus in Scripture common to our Sauiour and to other men we translate it alwaies alike Iesus but when it is IESVS Christ when some other Iesus we knowe by other circumstances Likewise presuppose Baptisme in the Scripture were called a sacrament yet the Protestantes themselues would not nor could thereby conclude that it were one of their two Sacraments Yet I trow they would not auoyde to translate it by the worde sacrament if they found it so called euen so wee finding Matrimonie so called do so translate it neither concluding thereby that it is one of the Seuen nor yet suppressing the name which no doubt gaue some occasion to the Church and the holy doctors to esteem it as one of the Seuen They contrariwise as though it were neuer so called suppresse the name altogether calling it a secrete to put it out of all question that it is no Sacrament which they would not haue done if the Scripture had sayde of Baptisme or the Eucharist This is a great Sacrament So partiall they are to their owne opinions FVLK 6. Except you thought you had to doe with verie ignorant persons or else esteemed too much of your lately professed diuinitie you would neuer comber the reader with such childish trifles of the name of Iesus of the bare name of sacrament which could not proue baptisme or the Lords supper to be sacramentes c. and what we would do if wee found them so called c. I haue alreadie told you what we haue done where not onely the sacraments but all other pretious Iewels of Christs church committed to the dispensation of his ministers are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and translated secretes without any abasement of the dignitie of them or with out any intent to suppresse any of the honor and reuerence which is due vnto them Wherefore vsing y e word secret in this text wee had no purpose to derogate any thing from the worthines of matrimonie much lesse from the spiritual mysterie which the Apostle offereth to be considered by it in Christ his Church CHAP. 17. Hereticall translations against the blessed Sacrament and Sacrifice and Altar NOW let vs see concerning the Eucharist which they allow for a Sacrament how they handle the matter to the disgracing and defacing of the same also They take away the operation and efficacie of Christes blessing pronounced vpon the bread and wine making it onely a thankesgiuing to God and to this purpose they translate more gladly thanks-giuing then blessing as Mat. 26. the Greeke wordes being two the one signifying properly to blesse the other to giue thanks they translate both thus when he had giuen thanks Likewise Marc. 14. in the Bible printed 1562. And when they translate it blessing they meane nothing else but giuing thankes as Beza telleth vs in his Annotations Mat. 26. ver 26. Wee reply and by most manifest Scripture prooue vnto them that the former Greeke woorde doeth not signifie thankes giuing properly but blessing and a blessing of creatures to the operation of some great effect in them as when Christ tooke the fiue loaues and two fishes to multiply them he blessed them Luc. 9. What say they to this thinke you Doth not the Greeke worde here plainly signifie blessing of creatures No saith Beza no doubt but here also it signifieth giuing thankes Howe Beza he addeth Not as though Christ had giuen thankes to the bread for that were too absurd but wee must mollifie this interpretation thus that he gaue thankes to God the father for the loaues and the fishes Is not this a notable exposition of these wordes benedixit eis FVLK 1 THE Sacrament of the bodie bloud of Christ beeing a matter of some great weight controuersie between vs you might not omit but note our false translations against it But because wee haue dealt so syncerely as malice hath nothing to blame therein you must fayne a quarrell and forge a controuersie where none is betweene vs namely that we take away Christes blessing pronounced vpon the bread and wine making it onely a thanksgiuing vnto God which is a false and impudent slander as in that which followeth concerning this matter most plainly shall appeare euen by testimonie of him whom you doe most slaunder in this case But let vs see what fault is in our translation Math. 26. and Ma◠14. two of our translations for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 say when he had giuen thankes To this I answere that Beza telleth you that in seuen Greeke copies the word is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth giuing of thankes without controuersie as also 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth but not onely so expressing rather the Hebrue worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth both to blesse and to giue thankes But seeing Saint Luke and S. Paul reporting the institution of the supper doe vse the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth giuing of thankes wee count them the best interpretors of the other two Euangelists which plainly teache vs that by blessing they meane giuing of thankes or that the Greeke worde doeth here signifie giuing of thankes as in manie other places The place Luke 9. where Christ blessed the loaues is also interpreted by S. Iohn who reporting the same miracle as Beza sheweth vseth the word which signifieth only thankes giuing but because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in Luke vsed as a verbe transitiue which cannot signifie thanks giuing or prayer made to the creatures wee must vnderstand that hee blessed the loaues that is he gaue thankes to God for them and with all prayed that so small a quantitie of bread and fish might feede so great a multitude and that this whole feast might be referred to the glorie of God This is Bezaes interpretation which because it was too long for your quarrell you cut off the better part of it and like a grinning hypocrite scoffe at a piece as though it were the whole exposition of these words henedixit eis he blessed them MART. 2. Wee aske him in the like cases when God blessed Adam and Eue Gen. 1. 9. Noe and his
that Christ suffreth him selfe to be broken for vs in the oblation which he suffred not on the crosse where no bone of his was broken Which none but a madde man would take otherwise than spiritually to be done as he is present after a spirituall manner MART. 11. But what pertaineth this to the English heretikes who translate which is shed so indiffereÌ„tly that it may signifie which cuppe or which bloud is shed Thus farre it pertaineth because they do not only defend this translation by al meanes but they tel vs plainely namely Fulke that they referre which to the word bloud and not to the worde cuppe â—ueÌ„ as Beza doth asking vs what Grammarian would referre it otherwise In which question he sheweth him self a very simple GraÌ„marian in the Greeke or a madde Heretike that either knoweth not or will not know that in the Greeke it can not be so referred and consequently neither in Latine nor English which in true translation must folow the Greeke But of these and other their foule and manifold shifâ—es to auoide this place I haue spoken in an other place of this booke FVLK 11. As you haue placed your crimination in the first chapiter to be sure that it should be redde of euery man that taketh your booke in hand So haue I. obseruing your order answered you in the same place and in such sort I hope discharged my selfe that you shall haue little lust hereafter to insult against mine ignorance before you be able to weigh the matter your selfe with sounder knowledge MART. 12. Onely M. Whitakers to say truely hath brought somewhat to the purpose to wit that S. Basil readeth the Greeke as they translate But he doth wel to make light of it because it is euident that S. Basil cited not the text of the Euangelist but the sense which Beza noteth to be the custome of the auncient fathers telling vs withall that therfore the reading of the fathers is no certaine rule to reforme or alter the words of Scripture according to the same and it is very like that if Beza or Fulke his aduocate had thought S. Basils reading of any importaÌ„ce they would haue vsed it long since rather than so many other shiftes and so absurde as they do vnlesse we may thinke they knew it not and therefore could not vse it But for S. Basill according to the sense he citeth it very truely for whether wee say the Cuppe that is shed or the bloud that is shed both signifieth the bloud of Christ shed for vs as S. Basil citeth it The difference is that referring it to the cuppe as S. Luke hath it it signifieth the bloud both present in the cuppe and also then shed in a Sacrament at the last supper but referring it to the word bloud as S. Basil doth and as they translate it may signifie the bloud shed on the crosse also yea as these traÌ„slatours meane and would haue it only that on the Crosse not considering that the Greeke worde is the present tense and therfore rather signifieth the present shedding of his bloud then in mysticall sacrifice than the other visible shedding therof which was to come in the future tense Lastly they translate S. Lukes Gospel and not S. Basil and therefore not folowing S. Luke they are false translators how soeuer S. Basil readeth FVLK 12. The reading of S. Basil whereof Beza maketh mention in his Annotation vpon this texte of S. Luke is also handled before As the reading of the Doctours is no perpetuall rule to reforme the texte of the Scripture by so is it not to bee neglected but that sometimes also the present reading may be corrected thereafter True it is that Beza supposeth it rather to haue bene added out of the margent and I as I haue before declared doe thinke that either it is to be read as Basil did reade it or else that the verbe substantiue is to be vnderstood and the article taken for the relatiue as it is often bothe in prophane writinges and in the new Testament it self as by sundry examples I haue made it manifest MART. 13. As this falshood is both against Sacrament and Sacrifice so against the Sacrifice also of the altar it is that they controule S. Hieroms translation in the olde Testament concerning the sacrifice of Melchisedec Who brought forth bread and wine Gen. 14. v. 18. that is offered or sacrificed bread and wine which we proue to be the true sense and interpretation and that this bringing forth of bread and wine was sacrificing thereof not onely by all the fathers expositions that write of Melchisedeks priesthood Cypr. epist. 63. Epiph. haer 55. 79. Hiero. in Mat. 26. in epist. ad Euagrium and by the Hebrew word which is a word of sacrifice Iud. 6. v. 18. and by the greatest Rabbines and Hebricians that a riâ—â— thereof but we proue it also by these wordes of the very text it selfe He brought forth bread and wine for he was the Priest of God most high Which reason immediatly following Because he was Gods Priest proueth euidently that he brought it not forth in coÌ„moÌ„ maner as any other maÌ„ might haue done but as Gods Priest whose office is to offer sacrifice This consequence is so plaine that for auoiding thereof the aduersaries will not haue it translated in any wise For hee was the Prieste as thoughe the Scripture gaue a reason why hee brought forth bread and wine but and he was a Priest c. Wrangling aboute the signification of the Hebrew coniunction FVLK 13. That S. Hieronyme was author of the vulgar Latine interpretation of the olde Testament it is more boldly affirmed than euer it can be sufficiently proued by you But what do we controll your vulgar interpreter saith that Melchisedech brought forth bread and wine and so say we Which how sent Hierom other vnderstaÌ„deth I haue before declared Cap. 1. Sect. 42. Against all the Fathers that expound that bringing forth of bread and wine to pertayne to his Priesthood I oppose the Apostle to the Hebrues who could not haue omitted it if it had bene so That the Hebrue word is a worde of sacrifice it is most impudently affirmed of you For Iud. 6. it signifieth no more to offer than heare although there Gedeon desire the Angell to stay vntill he returne and bring from his house with him a gift or oblation But if you will contende that what so euer is brought forth where soeuer this Hebrue worde is vsed is a sacrifice you shall make an hundreth sacrifices more than euer God ordeyned Neither will Galatinus or Gerebrardus for their credite once affirme that it signifieth to offer sacrifice Though it may bee vsed in bringing foorth of Sacrifices as well as of all other thinges that are brought foorth But the coniunction causall maketh it cleare that this bringing forth was in respect of his Priesthood In deed if the Hebrue coniunction were causall
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