than a hundred times in the Bible and vnto the storie of Bell we attribute so small credit that we will take no testimonie from thence to proue or disproue any thing MART. 12. If at the beginning of their heresie whē sacred images were broken in peeces altars digged downe the Catholike Churches authoritie defaced the king made supreme head then their translation was made accordingly and if afterwarde when these errours were well established in the realme and had taken roote in the peoples hartes all was altered and changed in their later translations and now they could not finde that in the Greeke which was in the former translation what was it at the firste but wilfull corruption to serue the time that then was See chap. 3. 5. chap. 17. numb 15. chap. 15. num 22. FVLK 12. For images altars the Catholike Churches authoritie the kings supremacie nothing is altered in the later translations that was falsely translated in the former except perhaps the Printers fault be reformed Neither can any thing be proued to maintaine the popish images altars churches authoritie or Popes supremacie out of any translation of the Scriptures or out of the originall itselfe Therefore our translations were not framed according to the time but if any thing were not vttered so plainly or so aptly as it might why should not one translation helpe an other MART. 13. If at the first reuolt when none were noted for Heretikes and Schismatikes but themselues they did not once put the names of Schisme or Heresie in the Bible but in steede thereof diuision and secte in so much that for an Heretike they sayd an author of Sectes what may we iudge of it but as of wilfull corruption See chap. 4. numb 3. FVLK 13. Yes reasonable men may iudge that they did it to shew vnto the ignorant people what the names of schismatike and heretike doe signifie rather than to make them beleue that heresie and schisme was not spoken against in the Scripture That they translated heresie secte they did it by example of your vulgar Latine Interpreter who in the 24. of the Actes translateth the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sectae In which chapiter likewise as he also hath done they haue translated the same word heresie MART. 14. If they translate so absurdly at the firste that them selues are driuen to change it for shame it muste needes be at the first wilfull corruption For example when it was in the first Temple and in the later Altar in the first alwaies Congregation in the later alwaies Church in the first To the King as chiefe head in the later To the King as hauing preeminence So did Beza first translate carcasse and afterward soule Which alteration in all these places is so great that it could not be negligence at the first or ignorance but a plaine hereticall intention See chap. 17. numb 15. chap. 5. numb 4. 5. chap. 15. numb 22. chap. 7. numb 2. FVLK 14. Nay it may be an ouersight or escape of negligence or the Printers fault as it is manifest in that quarrell you make of temple for altar for in Thomas Mathews translation the first that was printed in English with authoritie there is altar in both places 1. Cor. 9. 10. For the terme Congregation changed into Church it was not for shame of the former which was true but because the other terme of Church was nowe well vnderstood to shewe that the word of Scripture agreeth with the worde of our Creede or perhaps to auoid your fōd quarrel not now first picked to the terme Congregation Wheras the former was To the King or chiefe head the later saying the King as hauing preeminence doth nothing derogate vnto the former and the former is contained vnder the later For I hope you will graunt that the King is chiefe head of his people or if the word head displease you because you are so good a french man tell vs what chiefe doth signifie but an head Now this place of Peter speaketh not particularly of the Kings authoritie ouer the Church or in Church matters therfore if it had bene translated Supreme head we could haue gained no greater argument for the supremacie in question than we may by the word preeminēce or by the word extolling which you vse That Beza altered the word Cadauer into Animam I haue shewed he did it to void offēce because the later is more proper to the Greeke although the Hebrew worde which Dauid doth vse may doth signifie a dead body or carcase MART. 15. If they will not stand to all their translations but flie to that namely which now is redde in their Churches if that which is now redde in their Churches differ in the points afore sayd from that that was redde in their Churches in King Edwards time if from both these they slie to the Geneua Bible from that againe to the other afore sayd what shall we iudge of the one or the other but that all is voluntarie and as they list See chap. 3. num 10. 11. 12. chap. 10. num 12. FVLK 15. If of three translations we preferre that which is the best what signe of corruption is this If any fault haue either of ignorance or negligence escaped in one which is corrected in an other and we preferre that which is corrected before that which is faultie what corruption cā be iudged in either Not euery fault is a wilful corruption much lesse an heretical corruptiō The example that you quote out of your 3. chapiter concerning the translation of Idolum is no flying from our trāslation to an other but a confuting of Howlets cauill against our Church seruice because this word is therein redde translated an image 1. Ioan. 5. wheras in that Bible which by authority is to be red in the church seruice the word in the text is idols not images yet wil we iustifie the other to be good true which readeth Babes keepe your selues from images as your vulgare Latine text is à simulachris wherein you flie from your owne authentical text to the Greeke which except you thinke it make for your purpose you are not ashamed to count falsified and corrupted MART. 16. If they gladly vse these wordes in ill part where they are not in the originall text Procession shrines deuotions excommunicate images and auoide these wordes which are in the originall Hymnes grace mysterie Sacrament Church Altar Priests Catholike traditions iustifications is it not plaine that they doe it of purpose to disgrace or suppresse the sayd things and speeches vsed in the Catholike Church See chap. 21. num 5. seq chap. 12. num 3. FVLK 16. Who would be so mad but blind malice to thinke they would disgrace or suppres the things or names of Catholike Church whereof they acknowledge thēselues mēbers of grace by which they confesse they are saued of hymnes which they vse to the praise of God of iustifications
a sacrament ioyned with the spirituall sacrifice of praise and thankes giuing Which sacrament being administred by the ministers thereto appoynted the sacrifice is common to the whole Church of the faithfull who are all spirituall priestes to offer vp spirituall sacrifices as much as the minister of the worde and sacraments MART. 3. To defeate all this and to take away all externall priesthood and sacrifice they by corrupt translation of the holy Scriptures make them cleane dumme as though they had not a word of any such Priestes or Priesthood as we speake of Their Bibles we graunt haue the name of Priestes very often but that is when mention is made eyther of the Priests of the Iewes or of the Priests of the Gentiles specially when they are reprehended blamed in the holy Scriptures and in such places our Aduersaries haue the name Priests in there translations to make the very name of Priest odious among the common ignorant people Againe they haue also the name Priests when they are taken for all maner of men women or children that offer internall and spirituall sacrifices whereby our Aduersaries would falsely signifie that there are no other Priestes as one of them of late freshly auoucheth directly against S. Augustine who in one briefe sentence distinguisheth Priests properly so called in the Church and Priests as it is a cōmon name to all Christians Lib. 20. de Ciuit. Dei cap. 10. This name then of Priest and Priesthood properly so called as S. Augustine saith which is an order distinct from the Laitie and vulgar people ordained to offer Christ in an vnbloudy maner in sacrifice to his heauenly father for vs to preach minister the Sacraments and to be the Pastors of the people they wholy suppresse in their translations in all places where the holy scripture calleth them Presbyteros there they neuer translate Priestes but Elders And that they doe obserue so duely and so warily and with so full and generall consent in all their English Bibles as the Puritans doe plainly confesse and M. Whit. gift denieth it not that a man would wonder to see how carefull they are that the people may not once heare the name of any such Priest in all the holy scriptures FVLK 3. Nowe you haue gotten a fine nette to daunce naked in that no ignorant blinde bussarde can see you The maskes of your nette be the ambiguous and abusiue significations of this worde Priest which in deede according to the originall deriuation from Presbyter should signifie nothing else but an Elder as we translate it that is one appoynted to gouerne the Church of God according to his word but not to offer sacrifice for the quicke and the deade But by vsurpation it is commonly taken to signifie a sacrificer such as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in Greeke and sacerdos in Latine by which names the ministers of the Gospell are neuer called by the holy Ghost After this common acception and vse of this word Priest we call the sacrificers of the olde Testament and of the Gentiles also because the Scripture calleth them by one name Cohanin or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but because the Scripture calleth the ministers of the newe Testament by diuerse other names and neuer by the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we thought it necessary to obserue that distinction which we see the holye Ghost so precisely hath obserued Therefore where the Scripture calleth them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we call them according to the etymologie Elders and not Priestes which worde is taken vp by common vsurpation to signifie sacrificers of Iewes Gentiles or Papistes or else all Christians in respect of spirituall sacrifices And although Augustine and other of the auncient fathers call the ministers of the newe Testament by the name of sacerdotes and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifie the ministers of the olde Testament yet the authoritie of the holy Ghost making a perfect distinction betweene these two appellations and functiōs ought to be of more estimation with vs. The Fathers were content to speake in Latin Greeke as the termes were taken vp by the common people newly conuerted from gentilitie but yet they retained the difference of the sacrificing priesthood of the one and the ministeriall office of the other This may suffice therefore to render a reason why we vse not the worde Priest for Ministers of the new Testament not that we refuse it in respect of the etymologie but in respect of the vse common signification thereof MART. 4. As for example in their translations When there fell a question about circumcision They determined that Paule and Barnabas should goe vp to Hierusalem vnto the Apostles and ELDERS about this question Act. 15. And againe They were receyued of the congregation and of the Apostles and ELDERS Againe The Apostles and Elders came togither to reason of this matter Againe Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders with the whole congregation to sende c. Againe The Apostles and Elders and brethren sende greeting c. Againe They deliuered them the decrees for to keepe that were ordained of the Apostles and ELDERS If in all these places they had translated Priests as in deede they should haue done according to the Greke word it had then disaduantaged them this much that men would haue thought both the dignitie of Priestes to be great and also their authoritie in Councels as being here ioyned with the Apostles to be greatly reuerenced and obeyed To keepe the people from all suche holy and reuerent cogitations of Priestes they put Elders a name wherewith our holy Christian forefathers eares were neuer acquainted in that sense FVLK 4. In al those places by you rehearsed Act. 15. and 16. your owne vulgar Latine text hath seniores which you had rather call auncients as the French Protestants call the Gouernours of their Churches than Elders as we doe That Popish Priestes should haue any dignitie or authoritie in Councels wee doe flatly denie but that the Seniors Auncients Elders or Priests if you wil of the new Testament should haue as much dignitie and auctoritie as Gods worde doth afford them we desire with all our hartes That our Christian Forefathers eares were not acquainted with the name of Elders it was because the name of Priest in their time soūded according to the etymologie and not according to the corruption of the Papistes otherwise I thinke their eares were as much acquainted with the name of Elders which we vse as with the name of Auncientes and Seniors that you haue newly taken vp not for that they differ in signification from Elders but because you woulde differ from vs. MART. 5. But let vs goe forward We haue heard often and of old time of making of Priestes and of late yeares also of making Ministers but did ye euer here in all England of making Elders Yet by these mens translations it hath bene in England a
shal rule in a rod of yron and from him Peter and the rest by his coÌ„mission giuen in the same word feede rule my sheepe Io. 21. yea and that in a rod of yron as when he stroke Ananias and Sapphîra to corporal death as his successors do the like offenders to spiritual destruction vnlesse they repent by the terrible rod of excoÌ„munication This is imported in the double significatioÌ„ of the Greeke word which they to diminish Ecclesiasticall authoritie they translate feede rather than rule or gouerne FVLK 21. That wee shoulde not meane any thing against the gouernement of Christe whome we wishe desire from our hearts that he alone mighte raigne and his seruants vnder him he himselfe is iudge to whome in this case we do boldely appeale But let vs see how we may be charged with false translation The Hebrewe and greek say you do signifie only a ruler or gouernor Mich. 5. And do not we translate a gouernor or captain which may answere there the Hebrew of the Prophet or the Greeke of the Septuaginta or of the Euangelist The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we translate sometime to gouerne sometime to feede is not in the Prophete but in the Euangelist and signifieth properly to feede as a sheepeheard and metaphorically to gouerne What cause haue you here to crie out false translation and to oppose the Hebrewe worde of the Prophet which is fully satisfied in the worde gouernour And the Greeke word which the Euangelist vseth hath his proper signification in some translations in other that which is figuratiue neither doth the one exclude the other But feeding doth import gouerning But it seemeth you would haue rule without feeding that you are so zealous for gouernement The worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 20. in some translations is rendred to rule in other to feede The more proper is to feede yet the greek word wil beare the other also But feeding as a sheephearde doeth his sheepe comprehendeth both The same word Ioan. 21. our Sauiour Christ limiteth rather to feeding as y e Euangelist reporteth his words vsing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 twise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 once For by lording ruling Peter shuld not so wel testifie his loue towards Christ as by painefull feeding And there your owne vulgar interpreter translateth Pasce and your selues feede though in the margent you woulde faine pray aide of the Greeke to establish your popes tyrannicall rule Yea you will giue him a rodde of yron which is the scepter of Christ yea an armie of souldiers to subdue Irelande and to wrest it out of the Queene of Englandes dominion that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 feed and rule my sheepe in your secret meaning and for that purpose you bring in the miraculous striking of Ananias and Sapheira for their hypocrisie pretending that you meane but spirituall destruction by the rodde of excommunication which howe terrible it is when it is duely exercised by theÌ„ that haue authoritie we neede not learne of you The other text Psalme the 2. Apoc. 2. v. 27. we translate alwaies rule And your vulgar interpretor Pet. 5. translateth the same worde pascite feede you the church of God c. and else where diuerse times Doth he so diminish ecclesiasticall authoritie c. MART. 22. To the diminishing of this Ecclesiasticall authoritie in the later ende of the reigne of king Henrie the â—ight and during the reigne of king Edwarde the sixt the onely translation of their English Bibles was submit your selues vnto all manner ordinance of man whether it be VNTO THE KING AS TO THE CHIEFE HEAD 1. Pet. 2. Where in this Queenes time the later translatours can not finde those wordes nowe in the Greeke but doe translate thus To the king as hauing preeminence or to the king as the Superiour Why so because then the King had first taken vpon him this name of Supreme heade of the Church and therefore they flattered both him and his sonne till their heresie was planted making the holie Scripture to say that the king was the chiefe head which is all one with supreme head but now being better aduised in that point by Caluine I suppose and the Lutherans of Magdeburge who doâ— ioyntly inueigh against such title and Caluine against that by name which was first giuen to king Henry the eight because they may be bolder with a Queene than with a king and because now they thinke their kingdome is well established therfore they suppresse this title in their later traÌ„slations would take it froÌ„ her altogether if they could to aduance their owne Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction whithout any dependence of the Queenes supreme gouernement of their church which in their conscience if they be true Caluinistes or Lutherans or mixâ— of both they doe and must mislike FVLK 22. Touching this text 1. Pet. 2. I haue answered before y t the word signifieth him that excelleth and therfore it is no corruption to translate it y e chiefe For the name of supreme heade in y e sense which Caluine other abroade did mislike it it was neuer allowed nor by authoritie graunted to the kings Henrie and Edward but in the same sense it is now graunted to Queene Elizabeth whom we acknowledge to haue the same authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall which her father and brother kinges before her had exercised to Gods glorie But as Steâ—en Gardiner vnderstoode y e title in conference with Bucer at Ratisbone we doe vtterly abhorre it and so did all godly men alwaies that a king should haue absolute power to do in religion what he will In what sense the popish clergie of England being cast in the premunire did first of all ascribe it to the king in their submission looke you vnto it we thinke it was rather of flatterie than of dutie wisedome or religion As for the ecclesiasticall gouernement which the scripture prescribeth may well stande which craueth the aide of a christian Prince which is y e Queenes authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall MART. 23. But howsoeuer that he let them iustifie their translation or confesse their fault And as for the kinges supremacie ouer the Church if they make any doubt let theÌ„ read S. Ignatius wordes who was in the Apostles time â—uen when S. Peter gaue the foresaide admonition of subiection to the king and knewe very wel how farre his preeminence extended and therefore saith plainely in notorious wordes that we must first honour God then the Bishop and then the king Because in all thinges nothing is comparable to God in the Chuch nothing greater then y e Bishop who is consecrated to God for the saluation of the whole worlde and among magistrates tempâ—rall rulers none is like the king See his other wordes immediatly folowing where he preferreth the Bishops office before the kings al other thinges of price among men FVLK 23. Howsoeuer those Epistles bee truely or vntruely
¶ A DEFENSE of the sincere and true Translations of the holie Scriptures into the English tong against the manifolde cauils friuolous quarels and impudent slaunders of GREGORIE MARTIN one of the readers of Popish diuinitie in the trayterous Seminarie of Rhemes By WILLIAM FVLKE D. in Diuinitie and M. of Pembroke haule in Cambridge Wherevnto is added a briefe confutation of all such quarrels cauils as haue bene of late vttered by diuerse Papistes in their English Pamphlets against the writings of the saide WILLIAM FVLKE AT LONDON Imprinted by Henrie Bynneman Anno. 1583. Cum gratia Priuilegio To the moste high and mightie Princesse Elizabeth by the grace of God Queene of England Fraunce and Irelande defender of the fayth c. AMONG THE inestimable benefits wherwith almightie God hath woonderfully blessed this your Maiesties most honourable and prosperous gouernement it is not to be numbred among the least that vnder your most gratious and Christian protection the people of your Highnes dominions haue enioyed the most necessarie and comfortable reading of the holy Scriptures in their mother tongue and natiue language Which exercise although it hath of long time by the aduersaries of Him that willeth the Scriptures to be searched especially those of our nation beene accompted little better than an haereticall practise And treatises haue bene written praetending to shew great inconvenience of hauing the holie Scriptures in the vulgar tongue Yet now at length perceiuing they can not preuaile to bring in that darâ—knesse and ignorance of Gods most sacred word and wil therin contained wherby their blind deuotioÌ„ the daughter of ignorance as they them selues professe was wont to make them rulers of the world they also at the last are become Translators of the Newe Testament into English In which that I speak nothing of their insincere purpose in leauing the pure fountaine of the original veritie to folow the croked streame of their barbarous vulgar Latin translatioÌ„ which beside al other manifeste corruptions is founde defectiue in more than an hundred places as your Maiestie according to the excellet knowledge in both the tongs wherwith God hath blessed you is verie well able to iudge And to omit euen the same Booke of their translation pestred with so many annotations both false and vnduetifull by which vnder colour of the authoritie of holie Scriptures they seeke to infecte the mindes of the credulous readers with haeretical and superstitious opinions and to alienate their harts from yelding due obedience to your Maiestie and your most Christian lawes concerning true Religion established And that I may passe ouer the verie Text of their translation obscured without anie necessarie or iust cause with suche a multitude of so strange and vnusuall termes as to the ignorant are no lesse difficult to vnderstande than the Latine or Greeke it self Yet is it not meete to be concealed that they which neither truely nor praecisely haue translated their owne vulgare Latin and only Authenticall text haue neuerthelesse bene bolde to set forth a seuerall Treatise in which most slanderously and vniustly they accuse all our English translations of the Bible not of small imperfections and ouersightes committed through ignorance or negligence but of no lesse than most foule dealing in partiall false translations wilfull and haereticall corruptions Against which most leude and vntrue accusation though easie to be iudged of by such as be learned in the tongues yet daungerous to disquiet the conscience of them that be ignorant in the same I haue written a short and necessarie Defense Which although not labored in words yet in matter I hope sufficient to auoide all the aduersaries cauilles I am most humbly to craue pardon that I may be bolde to dedicate vnto your most excellent Maiestie that vnder whose high Christian authoritie your people haue so many yeares enioyd the reading of the holie bookes of GOD in their natiue language to the euerlasting benefit of many thousand soules Vnder the same your most gratious roial protection they may reade also the Defense of the syncere and faithfull translation of those Bookes to the quieting of their consciences and the confusion of the aduersaries of Gods truth and holie religion By which they may be stirred vp more and more in all duetifull obedience not only to be thankeful vnto your Maiestie as it becommeth them but also to continewe their most earnest and hartie prayers to almightie God for this your moste godlie and happie regiment ouer them for many yeares forwarde to be prolonged The God of glorie which hitherto hath aduaunced your Maiesties throne aboue all Princes of this age in true honour and glorie vouchsafe to preserue the same with his dailie blessing to the perfection of that glorious reparation of his Church which you haue most happily taken in hande to the euerlasting praise of his mercie and the endelesse felicity of your Maiestie Your Maiesties most humble subiect and most bounden daylie orator WILLIAM FVLKE THE PREFACE CONTEINING FIVE SVNDRIE ABVSES or corruptions of holy Scriptures common to all Heretikes and agreeing specially to these of our time with many other necessarie aduertisements to the reader MARTIN AS it hath bene alwaies the fashion of Heretikes to pretend Scriptures for shew of their cause so hath it bene also their custome and propertie to abuse the saide Scriptures many waies in fauour of their errours FVLKE WHETHER these fiue abuses haue bene common to all heretikes whether it hath bene the fashion of all heretikes to pretende Scriptures for shewe of their cause though I will spare nowe to enquire of as a thing wherin learned men at the first sight may espie the great skil that Martin pretendeth to haue in discerning of heretikes and heresies yet will I shew by the grace of God that none of these fiue abuses are committed by vs or our Catholike translations that the popish heretikes are in some sort or other guiltie of them all MART. 1. One way is to denie whole bookes thereof or partes of bookes when they are euidently against them So did for example Ebion all S. Paules epistles Manicheus the Actes of the Apostles Alogiani S. Iohns Gospell Marcion many peeces of S. Lukes Gospell and so did both these and other heretikes in other bookes denying and allowing what they liste as is euident by S. Irenaeus S. Epiphanius S. Augustine and all antiquitie FVLK 1. First we denie no one booke of the Canonicall scripture that hath bene so receaued of the Catholike church for the space of 300. yeares more as it hath bene often proued out of Eusebius S. Ierome and other ancient authorities but the Papists in aduauncing Apocryphall bookes to be of equall credite with the Canonicall Scriptures do in effect deny theÌ„ all Besides that to adde vnto the word of God is as great a fault as to take away from it the one being forbidden vnder as heauie a curse as the other Those blasphemies of
other Catholike writers haue affirmed of that Epistle and therefore not sufficient to charge him and much lesse others with heresie but being not his simple affirmation yet because it hath bene offensiuely taken he him selfe hath put it out and giuen it ouer O what a sturre would they keepe if they had any weightie matter of truth to burthen him withall MART. 8. To let this passe Tobie Ecclesiasticus and the Machabees are they not most certainly reiected And yet they were allowed and receiued for Canonicall by the same authoritie that S. Iames Epistle was This Epistle the Caluinists are content to admit because so it pleased Caluine those bookes they reiect because so also it pleased him And why did it so please Caluine Vnder pretence forsooth that they were once doubted of and not taken for Canonicall But is that the true cause in deede Howe doe they then receiue S. Iames Epistle as Canonicall hauing before doubted of also yea as they say reiected FVLK 8. You may well let it passe for it is not worth the time you spend in writing of it and if you had bene wise you would vtterly haue omitted it But what say you of Tobie Ecclesiasticus and the Machabees most certainly by vs reiected They were allowed you say for Canonicall by the same authoritie that S. Iames Epistle was And thinke you that S. Iames Epistle was neuer allowed for Canonicall before the third Councell of Carthage For of the other it is certaine they were neuer receiued by the Church of the Israelits before Christ his coÌ„ming nor of the Apostolike and primitiue Church for more than 300. yeres after as both Eusebius out of Origines and the Councell of Laodicea Can. â—9 confirmed afterwarde by the sixt generall Councell of Constantinople sheweth for the Greeke Church and S. Ierome in prologo Galeato for the Latine Church As for the prouinciall Councell of Carthage holden by 44. Bishops of Africa if we were bound to receiue it for these bookes we must also acknowledge fiue bookes of Salomon which in the same Councell are authorised whereas the Church neuer knew but of three And although the booke of wisedom should be ascribed to SalomoÌ„ there could be but foure Againe how they vnderstand the word Canonical it may be gathered both out of the wordes of the same Canon where they giue none other reason of the approbatioÌ„ of all those books of Scripture but that they haue receiued them of their fathers to be read in the Church and also out of S. Augustine who was one present at the same CouÌ„cell which after he hath declared how a man should discerne the Canonicall Scriptures from other writings by following the authoritie of the Catholike Churches especially those that haue deserued to haue Apostolike sees and to receiue their Epistles he addeth further Tenebit igitur hunc modum in scripturis canonicis vt eas quae ab omnibus accipiuntur Ecclesijs Catholicis praeponat eis quas quaedaÌ„ non accipiunt In eis vero quae non accipiuntur ab omnibus praeponat eas quas plures grauiorèsque accipiunt eis quas pauciores minorisque authoritatis Ecclesiae tenent Si autem alias inuenerit à pluribus alias à grauioribus haberi quanquam hoc inuenire non possit aequalis tameÌ„ auctoritatis eas habeÌ„das puto Totus autem canon scripturarum in quo istam considerationem versandam dicimus his libris continetur He shall hold therfore this meane in the canonical Scriptures that he preferre those which are receiued of all catholike churches before those Scriptures which some Churches do not receiue But in those which are not receiued of all let him preferre those Scriptures which the greater number and grauer churches do receiue before those which churches fewer in number of lesse authority do hold But if he shal find some Scriptures to be had of fewer churches other some of grauer churches althogh you can not find this thing yet I thinke they are to be accoÌ„pted of equall authority Now the whole canoÌ„ of scriptures in which we say this consideration must be occupied is contained in these books Fiue books of Moises that is Genesis Exodus c. By this saying of Augustine it is manifest that he calleth canonicall Scriptures not only those bookes that ought of necessity to be receiued of al churches but also such as were receiued of some of some were not in which nuÌ„ber were these bookes of Tobie Ecclesiasticus the Machabees which by his owne rule were not to be receiued as of absolut soueraigne authority because the Apostolike churches of Asia Europa those of grauest authoritie among which was the church of Rome in that time did not receiue theÌ„ as witnesseth not only S. Hierome a Priest of Rome but also Ruffinus of Aquileia in symbolo who both declare what bookes were receiued in their churches as canonical of irrefragable authority to build principles of faith vpon them what books were admitted only to be read for instruction of maners And therfore according to the rule of Augustin testimony of the ancieÌ„t fathers because it coÌ„senteth with the rest of the scriptures not for Caluins pleasure we receiue the Epistle of S. Iames though it hath not bene alwaies and of all Churches receiued Concerning the name of Caluinists as of all other nicke names that it pleaseth you of your charity to bestow vpon vs it shall suffice to protest once for all that we acknowledge none other name of our profession but Christians Catholikes and that we haue neither receiued that Epistle nor reiected the other bicause it pleased Caluin so This may serue for a cleare demonstration that in the first English Bibles that were printed vnder the name of Thomas Mathew before Caluine wrote any word of the reiectioÌ„ of those bookes or of receiuing of the other they are called Apocrypha printed with other of that marke by theÌ„selues the Epistle of S. Iames without any question acknowledged to be one of the canonical Epistles wheras Caluines Institution was first printed An. 1536. his argument vpon S. Iames Epistle 1551. You may see what honest dealing the Papistes vse to bring the truth into discredit the professors thereof into hatred with the simple vnlearned people bearing theÌ„ in hand that we haue no cause to receiue or refuse bookes of Scripture but Caluines pleasure But the God of truth wil one day reward these impudeÌ„t liars shameles slaunderers Well let vs now see vnder what preteÌ„ce it pleased Caluine to reiect these bookes Vnder pretence forsooth sayth Martin that they were once doubted of and not taken for Canonical I pray you sir where doth Caluine pretend that only cause In his Instit. li. 3. c. 5 sect 8. He alleageth diuerse other causes touching the bookes of Machabees as euery maÌ„ that wil may read Shame you nothing to forge such manifest
vntruths that in such matters as you may be conuinced in them by ten thousand witnesses What credit shal be giuen to you in matters that cōsist vpon your owne bare testimonie when you force not to faine of other men that wherin euery man may reproue you And as for the only pretence you speake of Caluine doth so litle esteeme it that notwithstanding the same he doubteth not to receiue the Epistle of S. Iames because it is agreable to the whole body of the canonical Scripture as if you had read his argumēt vpon that Epistle you might easily haue perceiued MART. 9. Marke gētle reader for thy soules sake thou shalt find that heresie only heresie is the cause of their denying these books so farre that against the orders Hierarchies particular patronages of Angels one of them writeth thus in the name of the rest We passe not for that Raphael of Tobie neither do we acknowledge those seuē Angels which he speaketh of al this is farre from Canonical Scriptures that the same Raphael recordeth sauoureth I wote not what superstition Against free will thus I litle care for the place of Ecclesiasticus neither will I beleeue free will though he affirme an hundred times That before men is life death And against praier for the dead intercession of Saincts thus As for the booke of the Machabees I do care lesse for it thā for the other Iudas dreame cōcerning Omas I let passe as a dreame This is their reuerence of the scriptures which haue uniuersally bin reuerenced for canonical in the church of God aboue 1100 yeres Con. Cart. 3. particularly of many fathers long before Aug. de doct Christ. l 2. c. 8. FVLK 9. The mouth that lieth killeth the soule The reader may thinke you haue small care of his soules health when by such impudēt lying you declare that you haue so smal regard of your own But what shal he mark That heresy c. You were best say that Eusebius Hierom Ruffine al the churches in their times were heretiks that only heresie was the cause of their deniall of these bookes For such reasons as moued thē moue vs some thing also their authority But how proue you that only heresie moueth vs to reiect thē Because M. Whit. against the orders Hierarchies particular patronages of Angels writeth in the name of the rest That we passe not c. Take heede least vpon your bare surmise you belie him where you say he writeth in the name of the reste as in the next sectiō following you say he writeth in the name of both the vniuersities for which I am sure he had no cōmissiō frō either of thē althogh he did write that which may well be aduouched by both the vniuersities yet I knowe his modestie is such as he will not presume to be aduocate for both the vniuersities and much lesse for the whole church except he were lawfully called therto This is a cōmon practise of you Papists to beare the world in hand that whatsoeuer is writtē by any of vs in defense of the truth is set forth in the name of al the rest as though none of vs could say more in any matter than any one of vs hath writtē or that if any one of vs chaūce to slip in any smal matter though it be but a wrong quotatiō you might open your wide sclaunderous mouths against the whole church for one mans particular offense Now touching any thing that M. Whit. hath written you shal find him sufficient to maintaine it against a strōger aduersary thā you are therfore I wil medle the lesse in his causes And for the orders patronage or protection of Angels by Gods appointment we haue sufficient testimonie in the Canonical Scriptures that we neede not the vncertain report of Tobies booke to instruct vs what to thinke of thē But as for the Hierarchies patronage of Angels that many of you Papistes haue imagined written of neither the canonical Scriptures nor yet the Apocryphal bookes now in controuersie are sufficient to giue you warrātise The like I say of freewil praier for the dead intercession of Saincts But it grieueth you that those Apocryphal scriptures which haue bin vniuersally receiued for canonicall in the church of God aboue 1100. yeares should find no more reuerēce amōg vs. Stil your mouth rūneth ouer For in the time of the Canon of the coūcel of Carthage 3. which you quote these bookes were not vniuersally reuerenced as canonical And Augustine him selfe speaking of the booke of Machabees Cont. 2. G and. Ep. c. 23. cōfesseth that the Iewes accoūt it not as the law the Prophetes the Psalmes to which our Lord giueth testimonie as to his witnesses saying It behoueth that all things should be fulfilled which are writtē in the Law in the Prophets in the Psalmes cōcerning me but it is receiued of the Church not vnprofitably if it be soberly read or heard This writeth S. Augustine whē he was pressed with the authority of that booke by the Donatists which defended that it was lawful for them to kil themselues by exāple of Razis who is by the author of that booke commēded for that fact He saith it is receiued not vnprofitably immediatly after Especially for those Machabees that suffred paciently horrible persecution for testimony of Gods religiō to encourage Christians by their example Finally he addeth a condition of the receiuing it if it be soberly read or heard These speches declare that it was not receiued without all controuersie as the authenticall word of God for then should it be receiued necessarily because it is Gods word especially how soeuer it be read or heard it is receiued of the Church not only necessarily but also profitably Beside this euen the decree of Gelasius which was neare 100. yeares after that councel of Carthage alloweth but one booke of the Maccabees Wherfore the vniuersal reuerence that is bosted of can not be iustified But M. Whitaker is charged in the margent to condemne the seruice booke which appointeth these books of Toby Ecclesiasticus to be read for holy Scripture as the other And where finde you that in the seruice booke M. Martin Can you speake nothing but vntruths If they be appointed to be read are they appointed to be read for holy Scripture and for suche Scripture as the other canonicall bookes are The seruice booke appointeth the Letanie diuerse exhortations and praiers yea homelies to be read are they therefore to be read for holy canonicall Scriptures But you aske Do they read in their Churches Apocryphall and Superstitious bookes for holy Scripture No verily But of the name Apocryphall I must distinguish which somtimes is taken for all bookes read of the Church which are not canonicall sometime for such bookes onely as are by no meanes to be suffered but are to be hid or abolished These bookes
therefore in controuersie with other of the same sort are sometimes called Hagiographa holy writings as of S. Hierom praefat in lib. Tobiae sometime Ecclesiastica Ecclesiastical writings and so are they called of Ruffinus Because sayth he they were appointed by our Elders to be read in the Churches but not to be brought forth to confirme authoritie of faith but other Scriptures they named Apocryphall which they would not haue to be read in the Churches So sayth S. Hierom in praefat in Prouerb Euen as the Church readeth in deede the bookes of Iudith Tobias and the Machabees but yet receaueth them not among the Canonical Scriptures so let it read these two bookes of Ecclesiasticus and wisedom for the edifying of the people not for the confirmation of the authoritie of Ecclesiastical doctrines These auncient writers shal answer for our seruice booke that although it appoint these writings to be read yet it doth not appoint them to be read for Canonicall Scriptures Albeit they are but sparingly read by order of our seruice booke which for the Lordes day other festiuall daies commonly appointeth the first lesson out of the Canonicall Scriptures And as for superstition although M. Whitaker say that some one thing sauoreth of I know not what superstition he doth not by and by condemne the whole booke for superstitious and altogither vnworthy to be read neither can he thereby be proued a Puritane or a disgracer of the order of dayly seruice MART. 10. As for partes of bookes doe they not reiect certaine peeces of Daniel and of Hester because they are not in the Hebrew which reason S. Augustine reiecteth or because they were once doubted of by certaine of the fathers by which reason some part of S. Marke and S. Lukes Gospell might nowe also be called in controuersie specially if it be true which M. Whitakers by a figuratiue speech more than insinuateth That he can not see by what right that which once was not in credit should by time winne authoritie Forgetting him selfe by by in the very next lines admitting S. Iames epistle though before doubted of for Canonicall Scriptures vnles they receiue it but of their curtesie so may refuse it when it shall please them which must needes be gathered of his wordes as also many other notorious absurdities contradictions and dumbe blanckes Which onely to note were to confute M. Whitakers by him selfe being the answerer for both Vniuersities FVLK 10. As for peeces of Daniel of Hester we reiect none but only we discerne that which was written by Daniel in deede from that which is added by Theodotion the false Iew that which was written by the spirit of God of Esther from that which is vainly added by some Greekish counterfecter But the reason why we reiect those patches you say is because they are not in the Hebrew which reason S. Augustine reiecteth Here you cite S. Augustine at large without quotation in a matter of controuersie But if we may trust you that S. Augustine reiecteth this reason yet we may be bold vpon S. Hieroms authoritie to reiect whatsoeuer is not found in the canō of the Iewes written in Hebrew or Chaldee For whatsoeuer was such S. Hierom did thrust through with a spit or obeliske as not worthy to be receyued Witnes hereof S. Augustine him selfe Epist. ad Hier. 8. 10. in which he disswaded him from translating the Scriptures of the olde Testament out of the Hebrew tongue after the 70. Interpreters whose reasons as they were but friuolous so they are derided by S. Hierom who being learned in the Hebrew Chaldee tongues refused to be taught by Augustine that was ignorant in them what was to be done in translations out of them Also Hieronym him selfe testifieth that Daniel in the Hebrew hath neither the story of Susanna nor the hymne of the 3. children nor the fable of Bel the Dragon which we saith he because they are dispersed throughout the whole world haue added setting a spit before them which thrusteth them through lest we should seeme among the ignorant to haue cut of a great part of the booke The like he writeth of the vaine additions that were in the vulgar edition vnto the booke of Esther both in the Preface after the ende of that which he translated out of the Hebrew There are other reasons also beside the authoritie of S. Hierom that moue vs not to receiue them As that in the storie of Susanna Magistrats iudgement of life death are attributed to the Iewes being in captiuitie of Babylon which hath no similitude of truth Beside out of the first chapter of the true Daniel it is manifest that Daniel being a young man was caried captiue into Babylon in the dayes of Nebucadnezer but in this counterfect storie Daniel is made a young child in the time of Astyages which reigned immediatly before Cyrus of Persia. Likewise in the storie of Bel and the Dragon Daniel is said to haue liued with the same king Cyrus and after when he was cast into the lyons denne the Prophet Habacuck was sent to him out of Iurie who prophecied before the first comming of the Chaldees and therefore could not be aliue in the daies of Cyrus which was more than 70 yeares after The additions vnto the booke of Esther in many places bewray the spirite of man as that they are contrary to the truth of the story containing vaine repetitions amplifications of that which is contained in the true historie that which most manifestly conuinceth the sorgerie that in the epistle of Artaxerxes cap. 16. Haman is called a Macedonian which in the true storie is termed an Agagite that is an Amalekite whereas the Macedonians had nothing to doe with the Persians many yeares after the death of Esther Haman I omit that in the ca. 15. ver 12. the author maketh Esther to lie vnto the king in saying that his countenance was ful of all grace or else he lyeth him selfe v. 17. where he saith the king beheld her in the vehemēcy of his anger that he was exceding terrible As for other reasons which you suppose vs to follow because these parcels were once doubted of by certaine of the fathers it is a reason of your owne making and therefore you may confute it at your pleasure But if that be true which Maister Whitaker by a figuratiue speech doth more than insinuate parte of S. Markes and S. Lukes Gospell may also be called in controuersie Why what saith M. VVhitaker Marie that he can not see by what right that which once was not in credit should by tyme winne authoritie But when I pray you was any part of S. Marke or S. Luke out of credit if any part were of some person doubted of doth it follow that it was not at al in credit you reason profoundly and gather very necessarily As likewise that he forgetteth him selfe in the very next lines admitting
saye it is examined and tryed by the Scriptures And the Scriptures them selues where they are so obscure that neither by cōmon sense knowledge of the original tongue Grammer Rhetorike Logike storye nor any other humane knowledge nor iudgement of any writers olde or new the certaine vnderstanding can be found out they are either expounded by conference of other plainer textes of Scripture according to the analogie of faith or els they remaine stil in obscuritie vntill it shall please God to reueile a more cleere knowledge of thē But none so like the familie of loue as you Papists are which reiect councels fathers interpretation of the most auncient Catholike Church yea manifest Scripture it self except it be agreable to the iudgement of your P. M. Pontifex Max. the Pope as those familiar diuels submit all things to the sentence authoritie of their H. N. Shame you nothing therefore to quote Whitaker pag. 17. 120. as though he affirmed that we our selues will be iudges both of Councels Fathers whether they expound the Scriptures well or no because he writeth percase that we ought to examine al mens writings by the word of god Doth the Apostle make euery man iudge of all thinges when he willeth euery man to examine all things and to hold that which is good If any youth vpon confidence of his wit or knowledge presume too much in diuine matters we count it rashnesse But that any youth among vs vpon confidence of his spirit will saucily controwle all the fathers cōsenting togither against his fantasie except it be some Schismatike or Heretike that is cast out from amongest vs I doe vtterly denye neither are you able to proue it of any that is allowed among vs. MART. 15. Wherevpon it riseth that one of them defendeth this as very wel said of Luther That he esteemed not the worth of a rushe a thousande Augustines Cyprians Churches against him selfe And an other very finely figuratiuely as he thought against the holy Doctor Martyr S. Cyprian affirming that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith saith thus Pardon me Cyprian I woulde gladly beleue thee but that beleeuing thee I should not beleeue the Gospell This is that which S. Augustine saith of the like men dulcissimè vanos esse non peritos sed perituros nec tam disertos in errore quà m desertos à veritate And I thinke verily that not onely we but the wiser men among them selues smile at such eloquence or pitie it saying this or the like most truly Prodierunt oratores noui stulti adolescentuli FVLK 15. Why shoulde you not at your pleasure vpon your false assumption generall inferre one or two slaunders particular M. Whitaker defendeth that it was well said of Luther That he esteemed not the worth of a rush a thousand Augustines Cyprians Churches against himselfe Woulde God that euery Papist would reade his owne words in the place by you quoted that he might see your impudent forgerie For I hope there is no Christian that will imagine that either Luther would so speake or any man of honestie defend him so speaking For Luther was not so senselesse to oppose his owne person but the truth of his cause grounded vpon the holy Scriptures not only against one thousand of men holding the contrary but euen against tenne thousand of Angels if they should oppose them selues against the truth of God But I am too blame to deale so much in M. Whitakers cause who ere it be long will displaye the falshoode of Gregorie Martin in a Latine writing to his great ignominie The next cauil is vpon M. Rainoldes words in his preface to his sixe positions disputed vpon at Oxford where against Cyprian affirming that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith he sayth Pardon me Cyprian I would gladly beleeue thee but that in beleeuing thee I shoulde not beleeue the Gospel These wordes you confesse that he spake figuratiuely and finely as he thought but that he vsed the figures of Ironve and concession you will not acknowledge but all other men may easily see For first he no where graunteth that S. Cyprian affirmeth that the Churche of Rome can not erie in fayth But immediatly before the wordes by you translated after he had proued out of the eleuēth to the Romans that the particular Church of Rome may be cut of as well as the Church of the Israelites which were the naturall braunches he asketh the question Quid Cypriano secus est visum What And did it seeme otherwise to Cyprian Pardon me Cyprian c. His meaning is plaine that Cyprian thought not otherwise than S. Paule hath written or if he did it was lawfull to dissent from Cyprian As a litle after he sayth Quare si Romanam Ecclesiam errare non posse c. Wherefore if Cyprian thought that the Church of Rome could not erre in that point by the sentence of the Papistes he him selfe is to be condemned of errour for diuerse Papistes whome he nameth confesse that euery particular Church may erre and Verratus one of them affirmeth that the Church of Rome is a particular Church which the rest can not deny And in deede that which Cyprian writeth is about certaine runneagate Heretikes that flying out of the Church of Carthage sought to be receiued of the particular Church of Rome All this while here is no graunt that Cyprian affirmeth that the Church of Rome cannot erre in faith And if Cyprian had so affirmed contrary to the scripture it might haue bene iustly replied vnto him which S. Augustine saith when he was pressed with his authoritie Contra Crescon lib. 2. cap. 31. Nos nullam Cypriano facimus iniuriam We do Cyprian no wrong when we distinguish any writings of his from the Canonical authoritie of the diuine Scriptures And in truth the wordes which M. Rainolds before cited out of S. Cyprian lib. 1. ep 3. ad Cornel. are spoken of no matter of faith but in a matter of discipline Neither doth Cyprian say that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith but that those Heretikes which brought letters from schismatikes profane persons did not consider that they are Romans whose faith is praised by the cōmendation or preaching of the Apostle to whom perfidia falshood or false dealing can haue none accesse Meaning that the Romans so long as they cōtinue in that faith which was praised by the Apostle cā not ioyne with Heretikes and Schismatikes that are cast out of other Catholike Churches For that he could not meane that the Pope or Church of Rome cannot erre in faith as the Papistes affirme it is manifest for that in a question of religion he dissented both from the Bishop and Church of Rome as all learned men knowe he did which he would neuer haue done if he had beleeued they could not erre And that his meaning was not that the Bishop of Rome could not erre in matters of
so to doe if by later cogitations that often are wiser he finde any thing meete to be changed Doe not you Papistes vse the same Is Bristowes chapter of obedience in his motiues nothing altered from the high treason contained in the first edition Is nothing added taken away or changed in your Iesus Psalter in any of your editions or are you your selues ashamed of the former Or haue your schollers presumed to alter their maisters writings If you may haue an euasion in these cases I trust we are not so pente in but we may change our owne writings without shame of the former or corruption in the later As for the example of S. Iames Epistle denyed as you saye and faced out for Luthers credit will serue you for no proofe For so farre off is it that we or the world doe knowe that is was moste truly layed to his charge that nowe we knowe of a certaintie that it was a very slaunder as false as it was common seeing Luthers wordes of that Epistle are not absolute but in comparison as is confessed by you and founde by some of vs to be none otherwise in deede who haue not stoode vpon one onely booke or edition but vpon as many as they could come by both in the Latine and in the Dutch tongue MART. 34. Eightly in citing Beza I meane alwaies vnlesse I note otherwise his Latine translation of the new Testament with his annotations adioyned thereunto printed in the yeare 1556. FVLK 34. You were afraide lest they that vnderstoode not Latine for whose sake you wrote in English this treatise might take hurt by Bezaes translations and annotations in Latine And if he him selfe haue espied and corrected any thing of his first edition that was either faultie or offensiue in his two later editions with great equitie as though you were the onely man that had discouered his errours you muste let all the vnlearned in Englande knowe what shamefull corruptions you haue obserued in Bezaes translation or annotations MART. 35. Lastly and principally is to be noted that we will not charge them with falsifying that which in deede is the true and authenticall Scripture I meane the vulgar Latine Bible which so many yeares hath bene of so great authoritie in the Church of God and with all the auncient fathers of the Latine Church as is declared in the Preface of the newe Testament though it is much to be noted that as Luther onely in fauour of his heresies did wilfully forsake it so the rest followed and doe follow him at this daye for no other cause in the world but that it is against them And therefore they inueigh against it and against the holye Councell of Trent for confirming the authoritie thereof both in their speciall treatises thereof and in all their writings where they can take any occasion FVLK 35. In the margent You will not charge vs with forsaking the old approued Latine text though it be an ill signe and to our euident confusion S. Augustine though a meere Latine man whome you your selfe doe after confesse to haue vnderstoode but one tongue well and that was euen his mother tongue learned as he confesseth of his nurses is not so addicted to the Latine translation but that he would haue men to seeke to the Hebrew and Greeke fountaines which you like a blasphemous hypocrite deny to be the true and authenticall Scriptures in deede allowing onely the vulgar Latine translation as though neither the Churches of Greece Syria Armenia Aethiopia nor any other in the world which haue not the vulgar Latine had not the true and authenticall Scriptures And though your vulgar Latine hath for many yeares bene of great authoritie in the Latine Church from the time when the knowledge of the Hebrew and Greeke tongues haue decayed yet is it vtterly false that you say that it hath bene of great authoritie with all the fathers of the Latine Church whereas there is not one that liued within 400. yeares after Christ that knew it but almost euery one followed a seueral translation And S. Augustine in the place before cited telleth you that there were innumerable translations out of the Greeke into the Latine Againe that your vulgar Latin is full of many errours and corruptions I haue shewed by the confession of Isidorus Clarius and Lindanus two of your owne profession of which the one tooke paines by the Hebrue and Greeke to correct it the other shewed meanes how it should be corrected And where you say that Luther and his followers forsooke it for none other cause in the world but that it is against them it is vtterly vntrue For beside that they haue made cleare demonstration of many palpable errours therein which they that haue any forehead amongst you cānot denie they haue and do dayly conuince you of horrible heresies euen out of your owne corrupt vulgar translation Finally whosoeuer shall reade what Caluine and Kemnitius hane written against the Councell of Trent for auctorizing that translation shall plainely see that they had something else to alledge against it which nothing at all concerneth their opinions that be contrarie to the Popish heresie MART. 36. And concerning their wilfull and hereticall auoyding thereof in their newe translations what greater argument can there be than this that Luther who before alwaies had reade with the Cath. Church and with all antiquitie these wordes of S. Paul Haue not we power to leade about A WOMAN A SISTER as also the rest of the Apostles and in S. Peter these wordes Labour that BY GOOD WORKES you may make sure your vocation and election sodenly after he had contrarie to his profession taken a wife as he called her and preached that all other votaries might do the same and that faith only iustified good workes were not necessarie to saluation sodenly I say after he fell to these heresies he began to reade and translate the former Scriptures accordingly thus Haue not we power to lead about a SISTER A WIFE as the rest of the Apostles and Labour that you may make sure your vocation and election leauing out the other wordes by good workes And so do both the Caluinists abroade and our English Protestants at home reade and translate at this day because they holde the selfe same heresies FVLK 36. If their be no greater argument as you confesse there can be none that their auoyding of this vulgar Latine is wilfull and hereticall than this that Luther defended his mariage beyng a votarie by that texte of 1. Corinth 9. wherein the Apostle challengeth power to leade aboute with him a sister to wife whiche your texte hath Mulierem sororem a woman a sister And that to proue that faith only iustifieth and good workes are not necessarie to saluation he lefte out of the text of S. Peter good workes by which the Apostle exhorteth vs to make sure vnto our selues our vocatiō election there is none argument at all of
thought she is one of those last mentioned But if you say as the Geneua Bible doth but my doue is alone and my vndefiled is the onely daughter of her mother Nowe the church is excepted from all the rest of the Queenes concubines and damsels And where you say the Hebrue hath not that signification I pray you goe no further but euen to the same verse and tell me whether the sense be that she is one of her mothers daughters or the only daughter of her mother Here therefore as almost euery where you doe nothing but seeke a knot in a rush MART. 11. But we beseeche euerie indifferent Reader euen for his soules health to consider that one point specially before mentioned of their abandoning the name of Church for so many yeares out of their Englishe Bibles thereby to defeate the strongest argument that might and may possibly be brought against them and all other Heretikes to wit the authoritie of the Church which is so many wayes and so greatly recommended vnto all Christians in ho'y Scriptures Consider I pray you what a malitious intention they had herein First that the name Church shoulde neuer sound in the common peoples eares out of the Scriptures secondly that as in other things so in this also it might seeme to the ignoraunt a good argument against the authoritie of the Church to say We finde not this worde Church in all the holy Scriptures For as in other articles they say so because they finde not the expresse word in the holy Scripture so did they well prouide that the worde Church in the holy Scriptures should not stay or hinder their schismaticall and hereticall proceedings as long as that was the only English translation that was read and liked among the people that is so long till they had by preaching taken away the Catholike Churches credit and authorite altogither among the ignorant by opposing the Scriptures thereunto which them selues had thus falsely translated FVLK 11. We trust euerie indifferent Reader wil consider that they which translated the Greeke worde Ecclesia the congregation and admonished in the notes that they did by that worde meane the church and they which in the creede might haue translated Ecclesiam Catholicam the vniuersall congregation taught all children to say I beleue the Catholike churche coulde haue no such deuilish meaning as this malicious sclaunderer of his owne heade doeth imagine For who euer hearde any man reason thus This worde church is not found in the Scripture therefore the church must be despised c. Rather it is like beside other reasons before alleaged that those first translatours hauing in the olde Testament out of the Hebrue translated the wordes Cahal Hadath and such other for the congregation where the Papistes will not translate the church although their Latine text be Ecclesia as appeareth Act. 7. where they call it assembly thought good to retaine the word congregation throughout the newe Testament also least it might be thought of the ignoraunt that God had no church in the time of the olde Testament Howsoeuer it was they departed neither from the word nor meaning of the holy Ghost nor from the vsage of that word Ecclesia which in the Scripture signifieth as generally any assembly as the worde Congregation doeth in Englishe CHAP. VI. Hereticall translation against PRIEST and PRIESTHOODE Martin BVt because it may be they will stande here vpon their later translations which haue the name Church because by that time they sawe the absurditie of chaunging the name now their number was increased and them selues beganne to challenge to be the true Church though not the Catholike and for former times when they were not they deuised an inuisible Church If then they will stande vpon their later translations and refuse to iustifie the former let vs demaund of them concerning all their Englishe translation why and to what ende they suppresse the name Priest trāslating it Elder in all places where the holy Scripture would signifie by Presbyter and Presbyterium the Priestes and Priesthoode of the new Testament Fulke IF any errour haue escaped the former translations that hath bene reformed in the later all reasonable men ought to be satisfied with our owne corrections But because we are not charged with ouersights and small faults committed either of ignorāce or of negligence but with shamelesse trāslations wilful heretical corruptions we may not acknowledge any such crimes whereof our conscience is cleare That we deuised an inuisible church because we were few in number whē our translations were first printed it is a lewde sclaunder For being multiplied as we are God be thanked we holde still that the Catholike church which is the mother of vs all is inuisible and that the church on earth may at sometimes be driuen into suche streights as of the wicked it shall not be knowen And this we helde alwayes and not otherwise Nowe touching the worde Presbyter and Presbyterium why we translate them not Priest and Priesthoode of the new Testament we haue giuen sufficient reason before but because we are here vrged a freshe we must aunswere as occasion shall bee offered MART. 2. Vnderstand gentle Reader their wily pollicie therein is this To take away the holy sacrifice of the Masse they take away both altar and Priest because they know right well that these three Priest sacrifice and altar are dependentes and consequentes one of an other so that they can not be separated If there be an externall sacrifice there must be an external Priesthoode to offer it an altar to offer the same vpon So had the Gentiles their sacrifices Priestes and altars so had the Iewes so Christ him selfe being a Priest according to the order of Melchisedec had a sacrifice his bodie and an altar his Crosse vpon the which he offered it And because he instituted this sacrifice to continue in his Church for euer in commemoration and representation of his death therefore did he withall ordaine his Apostles Priests at his last supper there then instituted the holy order of Priesthoode and Priestes saying hoc faecite Do this to offer the selfe same sacrifice in a mysticall and vnblouddie maner vntill the worldes end FVLK 2. In denying the blasphemous sacrifice of the popish masse with the altar priesthood that therto belongeth we vse no wily policie but with open mouth at all times and in all places we cry out vpon it The sacrifices priestes and altars of the Gentiles were abhominable The sacrifices of the Iewes their priestes and altars are all accomplished and finished in the onely sacrifice of Christ our high Priest offered once for all vpon the altar of the crosse which Christ our Sauiour seeing he is a Priest according to the order of Melchisedech hath an eternall priesthood and such as passeth not by succession Heb. 7. Therefore did not Christ at his last supper institute any externall propitiatory sacrifice of his bodie and bloud but
Presbyter Doeth not Priest come of Presbyter as certainly and as agreeably as Deacon of Diaconus Doth not also the French and Italian word for Priest come directly from the same Will you alwaies followe fansie and not reason doe what you list translate as you list and not as the truth is and that in the holy Scriptures which you boast and vaunt so much of Because your selues haue theÌ„ whom you call Bishops the name Bishops is in your Englishe Bibles which otherwise by your owne rule of translation should be called an Ouerseer or Superintendent likewise Deacon you are content to vse as an Ecclesiasticall word so vsed in antiquitie because you also haue those whom you call Deacons Only Priests must be turned contemptuously out of the text of the holy Scriptures Elders put in their place because you haue no Priestes nor will none of them and because that is in controuersie betwene vs. And as for Elders you haue none permitted in EnglaÌ„d for feare of ouerthrowing your Bishops office and the Queenes supreame gouernment in all spiritual things and causes Is not this to followe the humour of your heresie by Machiauels politike rules without any feare of God FVLK 12. Here I must aunswere you that we haue no degree of Ministers distinct from Deacons but by vulgar and popular vse of speaking which we are not curious to controule Otherwise in truth we account Bishops Elders and Deacons all Ministers of the Church It is no more therefore but the common speache of men which vseth that worde which is common to all Ecclesiasticall persons as peculiar to the Elders or Priestes Why we keepe the name of Deacons in translating Diaconus rather than of Priestes in translating Presbyter I haue tolde you often before The name Priest being by long abuse of speache applied to signifie Sacrificers of the olde Testament called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we could not giue the same name to the Ministers of the new Testament except we had some other name whereby to call the Ministers of the olde Testament wherein we followe reason and not fansie for it is great reason we should retaine that difference in names of the Ministers of both the Testamentes which the holy Ghost doth alwaies obserue But you follow fansie altogither imagining that Priestes onely are put out of the text because we haue no Priestes Whereas we haue Priestes as well as we haue Bishops and Deacons and so are they called in our booke of common prayer indifferently Priestes or Ministers And where you say we haue no Elders permitted in Englande it is false for those that are commonly called Bishoppes Ministers or Priestes among vs be suche Elders as the Scripture commendeth vnto vs. And although we haue not suche a consistorie of Elders of gouernemente as in the Primitiue Churche they had and many Churches at this daye haue yet haue wee also Elders of gouernement to exercise discipline as Archbishoppes and Bishoppes with their Chauncellours Archedeacons Commissaries Officialles in whome if any defecte bee we wishe it may be reformed according to the worde of God MART. 13. Apostles you say for the most parte in your translations not alwayes as we doe and Prophetes and Euangelistes and Angels and such like wheresoeuer there is no matter of controuersie betwene you and vs there you can pleade verie grauely for keeping the auncient Ecclesiasticall wordes as your maister Beza for example beside many other places where he bitterly rebuketh his fellow Castalâ—ons translation in one place writeth thus I can not in this place dissemble the boldnesse of certaine men which would God it rested within the compasse of words only These men therefore concerning the worde Baptizing though vsed of sacred writers in the mystery or Sacrament of the new Testament and for so many yeares after by the secrete consent of all Churches consecrated to this one Sacrament so that it is now growen into the vulgar speaches almost of all nations yet they dare presume rashly to chaunge it and in place thereof to vse the word washing Delicate men forsooth which neither are moued with the perpetual authority of so many ages nor by the daily custom of the vulgar speach can be brought to thinke that lawfull for Diuines which all men graunt to other Maisters and professors of artes that is to retaine and holde that as their owne which by long vse and in good faith they haue truly possessed Neither may they preteÌ„d the authoritie of some auncient writers as that Cyprian sayeth TINGENTES for BAâ—PTIZANTES and Tertullian in a certaine place calleth SEQVESTREM for MEDIATOREM For that which was to those auncientes as it were newe to vs is olde and euen then that the selfe same words which we now vse were familiar to the Church it is euident because it is very seldome that they speake otherwise But these men by this noueltie seeke after vaine glorie c. FVLK 13. If in any place we vse not the name of the Apostles Prophetes Euangelists Angels and such like wee are able to giue as sufficient a reason why we translate those wordes according to their Generall signification as you for translating somtime Baptismata washings and not baptismes Ecclesia the assembly and not the Church with such like Therefore as Castaleo such other Heretikes are iustly reprehended by Beza for leauing without cause the vsuall Ecclesiasticall termes so when good cause or necessitie requireth not to vse them it were superstition yea and almost madnes sometimes in translating to vse them as to call the Pharisees washings Baptismes or the assembly of the EphesiaÌ„ Idolaters the Churche yet both in Greeke and Latine the wordes are Baptismata ecclesia MART. 14. He speaketh against Castaleon who in his newe Latine translation of the Bible changed all Ecclesiasticall wordes into profane and Heathenish as Angelos into genios Prophetas into Fatidicos Templum into fanum and so foorth But that which he did for foolish affectation of finenesse and stile do not our English Caluinistes the very same when they list for furthering their Heresies When the holy Scripture saith idols according as Christians haue alwayes vnderstood it for false goddes they come and tell vs out of Homer and the Lexicons that it may signifie an image and therfore so they translate it Do they not the like in the Greeke worde that by Ecclesiasticall vse signifieth penaunce and doing penaunce when they argue out of Plutarch and by the profane sense therof that it is nothing else but chaunging of the minde or amendment of life Whereas in the Greeke Church Poenitentes that is they that were in the course of penance and excluded from the Church as Catechumeni and Energumeni till they had accomplished their penance the very same are called in the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 FVLK 14. That Castaleo did for foolish affectatioÌ„ of finenesse you slauÌ„der vs to do for furthering of heresie
this Greeke worde by any other equiualent and more plaine to signifie this mixture FVLK 22. The authoritie of the holy Scriptures with vs is more woorth than the opinion of all the men in the world In the Scripture we finde the fruite of the vine water we find not therefore we account not water to be of any necessitie in the celebration of the Lordes supper In the primitiue Church we know water was vsed first of sobrietie then of ceremonie and at length it grew to be compted of necessitie The Armenians therfore are cōmendable in this point that they would neuer departe from the authoritie of the Scriptures to yeeld to the custome practise or iudgement of any men But against this mixture as you surmise we haue trāslated powred out or drawne I confesse our translators should more simply according to the worde haue saide mingled hir wine and the wine that I haue mingled but because that speach is not vsuall in the English tongue it seemeth they regarded not so much the propertie of the worde as the phrase of our tongue But that they had no purpose against the mixture of the wine with water in the Sacrament it is manifest by this reason that none of them did euer thinke that this place was to be interpreted of the Lordes supper but generally of such spirituall foode as wisedome giueth to mens soules Therefore it is certaine they had no meaning to auoide the worde of mixing for any such intent as you surmise MART. 23. Thus then the Greeke is neither drawing of wine nor powring out thereof as they translate but mingling But the Hebrew perhaps signifieth both or at the least one of the two either to draw or to poure out Gentle Reader if thou haue skill looke the Hebrew Lexicon of Pagnine esteemed the best if thou haue not skill aske and thou shalt vnderstande that there is no such signification of this worde in all the Bible but that it signifieth onely mixture and mingling A straunge case that to auoid this mingling of the cuppe being a most certaine tradition of the Apostles they haue inuented two other significations of this Hebrew word which it neuer had before FVLK 23. The Dictionaries are more sure to teach what a word doth signifie than what it doth not signifie I confesse Pagnine giueth none other signification of that roote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but miscuit But euen the worde miscuit may signifie a powring out when there is no respect of ioyning diuers things togither but of seruing one with the cuppe as Tullie vseth the word Qui alteri misceat mulsum ipse non sitiens He that serueth an other with sweete wine when he is not a thirst him selfe So is the Hebrew word vsed Esai 19. where the Prophet sayth The Lorde hath powred forth amonge them the spirite of errour Where the worde of mixture is not so proper Againe your owne vulgar Latine Interpretor Prouerb 23. translateth mimsach a worde deriued from the same roote not for any mixture but for drinking vppe or making cleane the cuppes student calicibus epotandis which study how to empty or drinke vp all that is in the cuppes In Hebrew it is which go to seeke strong wine or mingled wine And if a mixture be graunted in the place you require how proue you a mixture with water rather than with any thing else Verily the circumstance of the place if there must needes be a mixture requireth a mixture of spices hony or some such thing to make the wine delectable vnto which Wisedome doth inuite and allure all men to drinke it rather than of water onely to abate the strength of it As also in the text Prouerbes 23. the drunkards that continued at the wine and went to seeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 mingled wine went not to seeke wine mingled with water but some other delicate mixture And Esay 5. where woe is pronoūced to drunkards the same word is vsed woe be to them that are strong to drinke wine and men of might limsoch to mingle strong drinke not to mingle it with water for sobrietie but with some other delectible matter to prouoke drunkennesse as your vulgar Interpretor translateth it So that albeit the word did signifie to mingle neuer so properly and certainly you can make no good argument for mingling with water in that place Prouerbs 9. where either it signifieth simply to drawe broche or powre out or else to prepare with some other more pleasant mixture than of water onely CHAP. XVIII Hereticall translation against the honour of SAINCTS namely of our B. LADIE Martin LEt vs passe from Gods holy Sacraments to his honourable Saincts in heauen and we shall finde that these translations plucke from them also as much honour as they may In the Psalme 138. where the Catholike Church and all antiquitie readeth thus Nimis honorati sunt amici tui Deus c. Thy friendes O God are become exceeding honourable their princedome is exceedingly strengthened which verse is sung and sayd in the honour of the holy Apostles agreeably to that in an other Psalme Constitues cos principes super omnem terram Thou shalt appoint them Princes ouer all the earth what meane they in all their English Bibles to alter it thus Howe deare are thy counsels or thoughts to me O God O how great is the summe of them Doth not the Hebrew make more for the olde receiued Latine translation than for theirs because the Hebrew word is vsed more commonly for to signifie friendes than cogitations doth not S. Hierom so translate in his translation of the Psalmes according to the Hebrew doth not the great Rabbine R. Salomon Doth not the Greeke put it out of doubt which is altogither according to the sayd auncient Latine translation Fulke THe context of the verse going before also the verse following not any enuye against the Saincts of god haue moued our translators to depart from the vulgar translation which is neither so proper for the words altogither impertinent to the matter of the text For when the Prophet had in the verse going before celebrated the wonderfull worke of God in the framing of his body in his mothers womb in this verse he breaketh out into an exclamatiō to behold the maruelous vnsearchable wisedom of gods councels whose strength is aboue mans reach whose nūber is as the sand of the sea To answer R Salomō we haue R. Dauid Kimchi as great a Rabbine as he and a more sincere Interpretor that expoundeth the whole verse euen as we doe MART. 2. And you my Maisters that translate otherwise I beseech you is it in Hebrew How great is the summe of thē not rather word for word most plainly how are the heades of them strengthened or their Princedoms as in the Greeke also it is most manifest Why do you then hunt after nouelties forsake the troden path of the
for except one onely Bristowe who obseruing no good order of replying but gathering here and there at his pleasure whatsoeuer he thought himself best able to reproue hath made a shew of defence of Allens Articles and Purgatorie none other haue as yet set foorth any iust replication to the rest of my writings And as for Bristow he hath my reioynder vnto his reply these two yeares in his hand to consider vpon the other that of late haue set forth Popish treatises haue indeuoured themselues almost cuery one of them to haue a snatch or two at some one od thing or other in my bookes wherin they would seeme to haue aduantage that belike they would haue their simple readers thinke to be a sufficient confuration of al that euer I haue written against them I haue thought good therefore as neere as I can to gather all their cauils together and briefely to shape an answere to euery one of them that the indifferēt reader may see iudge what sound matter they haue brought against me wher with in shewe of wordes they would haue it seeme as though they had confuted me First Master Allen in his late Apologie fol. 63. accusing the Protestants to feigne an appellatiō vnto the iudgement of the most auncient fathers of the primitiue Church and yet not to abide by it not esteeming them better than the present gouernment of the Popish Church but as of men deceiued as of humane traditions c. As in their writings saith he it is most euident where from Peters time downward they make the chiefest fathers the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist For this euidence he quoteth Beza in 2. Thess. 2. Retentiue p. 248. How vniustly Beza is slandered to be a witnesse of this accusation they that vnderstande y ◠Latine tongue may see in the places quoted But touching my selfe the booke which he quoteth hauing scarse halfe so many pages I might intreat him for a new quotation but that I gesse he meaneth a place in my confutation of Sanders booke which he calleth the Rocke of the church which was printed with the Retentiue and continueth the number of pages from it In that booke pag. 248. there is nothing that soundeth toward such a matter except it be these wordes As for Leo and Gregorie bishops of Rome although they were not come to the full pride of Antichrist yet the mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that seat neere fiue or sixe hundred yeres before them and then greatly increased they were so deceiued with the long continuance of error that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellow Apostles than the holy scriptures of God against which no continuance of errour can prescribe doth either allowe or beare withall Wherefore although he haue some shew out of the old writers yet hath he nothing directly to prooue that Peter did excell the other Apostles in bishoplike authoritie and out of the worde of God no one iote or title that Peter as a bishop excelled the other Apostles not as Apostles but as bishops First it is manifest euen to the eye that Allens slander is not expressed in these wordes Then let vs see if it may be imployed The mysterie of iniquitie did worke in the see of Rome from the Apostles time taking increase by litle litle vntill sixe hundred yeares and more after Christ when Antichrist began to be openly shewed and manie of the ancient fathers not espying the subtiltie of Sathans secret purpose were deceiued to thinke something more of Peters prerogatiue of the bishops of Romes dignitie than by the worde of God was granted to either of them this is in effect as much as I affirme but here of it followeth not that I make them the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist For those are the ministers and furtherers of Antichrist which willingly lend all their power to maintaine and vphold his kingdom after he hath inuaded the tyrannie The auncient fathers meant nothing lesse by admitting of the bishops of Romes prerogatiue vnder colour of Peters successour than to serue him or aduance him into the throne of Antichrist Not euerie one whome Satan hath seduced that he might prepare a way for the aduauncement of his tyrannie is a minister and furtherer of Satan or his tyrannie for then should all men be counted ministers or furtherers of Satan seeing the kingdome of sinne is increased by the frailtie of all men which by temptation of the diuell fall into sinne Beside that manie of the auncient fathers openly resisted the vsurped power of the bishops of Rome when it began onely to budde vp and was yet farre off from Antichristian tyrannie although it tended somewhat toward the same So did the bishops of the East churches countermaund Victor bishop of Rome contending about the celebration of Easter So did Irenaeus Polycrates and many other godly fathers in publike writings openly reprehend him So did Cyprian in diuerse Epistles expostulate with the bishops of Rome for medling with causes that pertained to his iurisdiction So did all the bishops of Aphrica make decrees against the vsurped authoritie and titles of the bishops of Rome denying all appeales vnto the sea of Rome excōmunicating all them that would appeale to any place beyond the sea discouering also the forged Canon of the Nicen Councel by which the bishops of Rome challenged that prerogatiue So that M. Allen by this his slander hath done iniury to mee and hurt to himselfe while men by this example may iudge of his synceritie in other matters Next commeth in the discouerie of I. Nicols denying that they make the Catholike religion locall or of one prouince as he chargeth mee with some scornefull termes of reproche to affirme in my bad answere to Howlet I said in deede that S. Augustine De vnit Eccles Cap. 4. doth cleare vs of schisme who willingly communicate with all the whole bodie of Christs Church dispersed ouer the world and charge the Popish faction both of schisme heresie of schisme because they maintaine the Church to be onely in a part of Europe as the Donatistes did in Aphrica c. And what iniury haue I done to the Papistes in so saying The Donatists sayd the Church was perished out of all the worlde remained only in Aphrica not assigning any place of Aphrica whereunto the Church must be regardant as the Papistes do the citie of Rome but affirming that true Catholikes remained onely in Aphrica being consumed out of all other partes of the earth And what say the Papistes of all the Oriental churches of Greece of Asia of Aphrike that acknowledge not the Popes authoritie Doe they not accompt them all for heretikes or schismatikes Then it followeth that they acknowledge the Church to remaine only in those partes of Europe that are subiect to the Pope and Church of Rome But perhaps they wil alledge their newly founded Churches
Pighius Eccius the one calling the holy Scripture a nose of waxe and a dumbe iudge the other terming the Gospel written to be a blacke Gospell and an ynkie Diuinitie and that of Hosius acknowleging none other expresse word of God but onely this one worde Ama or dilige loue thou what other thing do they import but a shamelesse deniall of all bookes of the holy Scripture in deede how soeuer in worde they will seeme to admitte them MART. 2. An other way is to call into question at the least and make some doubt of the authoritie of certaine bookes of holy scriptures therby to diminish their credite so did Manicheus affirme of the whole new Testamēt that it was not writtē by the Apostles and peculiarly of S. Matthewes Gospell that it was some other mās vnder his name therfore not of such credit but that it might in some part be refused So did Marcion the Ariās deny the epistle to the Hebrues to be S. Paules Epiph. li. 2. haer 69. Euseb. li. 4. hist. c. 27 Alogiani the Apocalypse to be S. Iohns the Euāgelist Epiph. August in haer Alogianorii FVLK 2. We neither doubt of the authoritie of anie certaine booke of the holy Scriptures neither cal we any of them into question but with due reuerence do acknowledge thē all euery one to be of equall credit authority as being al inspired of god giuē to the church for the building vp thereof in truth and for the auoiding of fables heresies But the Papists arrogating to their Pope authoritie to allowe or refuse any booke of holy Scripture affirming that no Scripture hath authoritie but as it is approued by their church do bring al bookes of the holy Scripture into doubting vncertaintie with such as wil depend vpō their Pope popish churches authoritie which they affirme to be aboue the holy Scriptures saying they might as wel receaue the gospel of Nicodemus as of S. Marke by the same authoritie reiect the Gospell of S. Matthew as they haue done the Gospel of S. Bartholomew These blasphemous assertions although some of them would couler or mitigate with gentle interpretations yet their is no reasonable man but seeth into what discredite and vncertaintie they must needes bring the authoritie of the Canonicall bookes of holy Scripture with the simple and ignorant MART. 3. An other way is to expound the Scriptures after their owne priuate conceite and phantasie not according to the approued sense of the holy auncient fathers and Catholike Church so did Theodorus Mopsuestites Act. Synod 5. affirme of all the bookes of the Prophets and of the Psalmes that they spake not euidently of Christ but that the auncient fathers did voluntarily draw those sayings vnto Christ which were spoken of other matters so did all heretikes that would seeme to ground their heresies vpon Scriptures and to auouch them by Scriptures expounded according to their owne sense and imagination FVLK 3. We expound not the Scriptures after our owne priuate conceite and fantasie but as neere as God giueth vs grace according to the plaine and natural sense of the same agreable vnto the rule or proportiō of faith which bene approued by the auncient fathers and Catholike church of Christ in al matters necessarie to eternall saluation Not bringing a newe and straunge sense which is without the Scriptures to seeke confirmation thereof in the Scriptures as the manner of heretikes is rightly noted by Clemens but out of the Scriptures thēselues seeke we the exposition of such obscure places as we find in them being perswaded with S. Augustine that nothing in a manner is founde out of those obscure and darke places which may not be found to be most plaine ly spoken in other places And as for the approued sense of the holy auncient Fathers and Catholike Church of the eldest and purest times if the Papists durst stand vnto it for the deciding of many of the most waightie controuersies that are betweene vs there is no doubte but they should soone and easily be determined as hath bene shewed in diuerse and many treatises written against them In which if any thing bee brought so plainely expounding the Scripture against their popish heresies as nothing can be more expresse nor cleare then they are driuen to seeke newe and monstrous expositions of those Fathers interpretations or else they answere they are but those Fathers priuate expositions appealing to the Catholike churches interpretation which is nothing else but their owne priuate conceipte and fansie hauing no recorde to proue that Catholike Churches interpretation but the present hereticall opinions of this late degenerated Antichristian congregation And whē they haue discoursed neuer so much of the Catholike churches interpretation they reduce and submitte all mens iudgements to the determinatiō of their Councels the decrees of the Councels to the approbation of their Pope which as he is oftentimes a wicked man of life so is he ignorant and vnlearned in the Scriptures to whose most priuate cēsure the holy Scriptures themselues and al sense and exposition of them is made subiect vnder colour that Christ praying for Peter that his faith should not fayle in temptation gaue all Popes suche a prerogatiue that they could not erre in faith though they were wicked of life voyde of learning ignorant in the Scriptures destitute of the spirite of God as is proued moste inuincibly by example of diuerse Popes that haue bene heretikes and mainteyners of such errours as are not now in controuersie betweene vs least they should say we begge the principle but of the secte of the Arrians Monothelites Eutychians Saduces and such other MART. 4. An other way is to alter the very originall text of the holy Scripture by adding taking away or changing it here and there for their purpose So did the Arians in sundry places and the Nestorians in the first epistle of S. Iohn and especially Marcion who was therefore called Mus Ponticus the mouse of Pontus because he had gnawen as it were certaine places with his corruptions whereof some are sayd to remaine in the Greeke text vntill this day FVLK 4. The originall text of the holie Scripture we alter not either by adding taking away or changing of any letter or syllable for any priuate purpose which were not only a thing most wicked and sacrilegious but also vaine and impossible For seeing not only so many auncient coppies of the original text are extant in diuers places of the worlde which we can not if we woulde corrupt and that the same are multiplied by printing into so many thousande examples wee shoulde bee rather madde than foolishe if we did but once attempt such a matter for maintenaunce of any of our opinions As also it is incredible that Marcion the mouse of Pontus coulde corrupt all the Greeke coppies in the world as Lindanus of whome you borrowed that conceite imagineth in those places in which he
is charged by Tertullian For Marcions heresie was not so generally receiued by the Greeke Churche that all men would yeeld vnto him neither was Tertullian so souÌ„d of iudgement in the Latine Church that whatsoeuer he iudged to be a corruption in Marcion must of necessity be so taken But if adding and detracting from the Scripture be proper notes of heretikes who can purge Stephen Gardiner Gregorie Martine The one for adding vnto a the verse of the Psalme this pronowne se him selfe to proue the carnall presens citing it thus Escam se dedit timentibus eum He gaue himselfe to be meate to them that feare him whereas the words of the Prophet according to the Hebrue Greeke and Latine are no more but Escam dedit He hath giuen meat c. The other in his fond booke of schisme citing this text out of 1. Cor. 10. as many Papistes doe against the certaintie of Faith Qui stat videat ne cadat He that standeth let him take heede he fall not Whereas not only the truth of the Greeke but euen the vulgar Latin translation hath Qui se existimat stare He that thinketh or supposeth that he standeth let him take heede that he fall not But of such additions and detractions vsed by the Romishe rattes farre worse than the myse of Pontus we shall haue more occasion to speake hereafter MART. 5. Another way is to make false translations of the Scriptures for the maintenaunce of errour and heresie so did the Arians as S. Hierome noteth in 26. Esa. reade and translate Prouerb 8. Dominus creauit me in intio viarum suarum that is The Lord created mein the beginning of his waies so to make Christ the wisedom of God a mere creature S. Augustin also lib 5. cont Iulian. c. 2. noteth it as the interpretation of some Pelagian Gen. 3. Fecerunt sibi vestimenta for perizómata or campestria that is They made them selues garments Whereas the word of the Scripture is bâ—eeches or aprons proper and peculiar to couer the secretparts Againe the selfe same heretikes did read falsely Rom. 5. Regnauit mors ab Adam vsque ad Moysen etiam in eos qui peccauerunt in similitudinem praeuaricationis Adae that is Death reigned from Adam to Moyses euen on them that sinned after the similitude of the preuaricatioÌ„ of Adam to maintaine their heresie against originall sinne that none were infected therewith or subiect to death damnation but by sinning actually as Adam did Thus did the old heretiks FVLK 5. As touching false and hereticall translations which is the chiefe argument of this booke I doubt not but by the grace of god to cleare our english translators from any wilfull corruptions for the maintenance of any errour or heresie such as were those of the Arrians Pelagians which Gregorie Martin as though he vttered some great peece of skill doth so diligently expresse I shall haue occasion also to shew that the Papistes them selues of our times maintaining their corrupt vulgar translation against the truth of the originall textes of Greeke and Hebrew are most guiltie of such corruption and falsification whereof although they be not the first authors yet by obstinate defending of such errors they may proue worse than they which did first commit them For the authors of that vulgar translation might be deceiued either for lacke of exact knowledge of the tongues or by some corrupt and vntrue copies which they followed or else perhaps that which they had rightly translated by fault of the writers negligence of the times might be peruerted but these men frowardly iustifying all errours of that translation howsoeuer they haue bene brought in do giue plaine testimony that they are not led with any coÌ„scieÌ„ce of Gods truth but wilfully carried with purpose of maintaining their owne errours least if they did acknowledge the errour of the Romish church in that one point they should not bee able to defende any one iote of their heresie whose chiefe colour is the credit and authoritie of that particular and false church rather than any reason or argument out of the holy Scriptures or testimonie of the most auncient Christian and Catholike church MART. 6. What these of our daies is it credible that being so wel warned by the condeÌ„nation detestation of theÌ„ they also would be as mad and as impious as those Heretikes gentle Reader be alwayes like Heretikes and howsoeuer they differ in opinions or names yet in this point they agree to abuse the Scriptures for their purpose by all meanes possibly I will but touch foure points of the fiue before mentioned because my purpose is to stay vpon the last onely and to discipher their corrupt translations But if I would stand vpon the other also were it not easie to shew the maner of their proceeding against the Scriptures to haue bene thus to deny some whole bookes and partes of bookes to call other some into question to expound the rest at their pleasure to picke quarrels to the very originall and Canonicall text â—o fester and infect the whole bodie of the Bible with cancred translations FVLK 6. It is very true that so many Heretikes as pretend the authoritie of the holy Scriptures abuse the same to their owne destruction and no Heretikes worse than the Antichristians or Papistes As partly hath bene seene already in euery one of your fiue markes more may appeare in those foure pointes which you will handle in the Preface because the argument of your whole booke is the fift so that in the ende you shal be proued no wiser with your fiue pointes than he that came forth with his fiue egges neuer a good of them all But you aske if it were not easie for you to shew if you would stand vpon them that the Protestants vse all the said siue meanes of defacing the Scripture I answer no and that shal you see when demonstratioÌ„ is made how vainly you haue laboured in the last point which howsoeuer you would haue it appeare to be a sudden writing of small trauail by interlacing a few lines here there against M. Whitaker against me some other yet it is euident both by Bristowes threatning and Campions promise that it hath bene a work of some yeares vnto you wherin beside that you are beholding much to Lindanus for diuers quarrels against Caluin and to sir Thomas More for many cauillations against W. Tyndals translation there is litle worthy of so long study and large promises as haue gone before this diligent discouerie so that if you will make the like triall in the rest you shall finde them as hard to proue as this last MART. 7. Did not Luther deny S. Iames epistle so contemne it that he called it an epistle of strawe and not worthy of an Apostolicall spirit must I proue this to M. Whitakers who would neuer haue denied it so vehemently in the superlatiue degree for
shame if he had not thought it more shame to graunt it I neede not goe farre for the matter Aske M. Fulke and he will flatly confesse it was so Aske Caluin in arg ep Iacobi Aske Flaccus Illyricus in argum ep Iacobi and you shall perceiue it is very true I will not send you to the Catholike Germans and others both of his owne time and after that wrote against him in the question of iustification among whome not one omitteth this being a thing so famous and infamous to the confusion of that Arch heretike FVLK 7. I know not whether euer Luther denied S. Iames epistle as vnworthy of an Apostolical spirit but I beleue you may take a twelue monethes daye more to proue it as also that he did so contemne it that he called it an epistle of straw But M. Whitaker which denied it so vehemently must aske of me who moste slatly confesse sayth M. Martin that it was so I pray you sir vrge me not to confesse more than I know or euer knew But you haue confessed it already in two printed bookes Retent pag. 32. Disc of the Rock pag 307. In the place first cited ther are these words But to proceed LVTHER DENIETH THE EPISTLE OF S. IAMES BECAVSE IT IS AGAINST HIS HERESIE OF IVSTIFICATION BY FAITH ONELY We allow not Luther neither did he allow him selfe therein for he retracteth it afterward First those wordes of Luthers denyall being printed in a diuerse letter may testifie sufficiently to euery reasonable man that they are the obiection of Bristow and not the confession of Fulke who not simplye admitteth them as true but by concession proueth that if they were true yet Luthers opinion against which he him selfe hath written ought not to preiudice him and much lesse all other men that neuer held that opinion In the later cited place are these wordes And as touching the epistle of S. Iames it is a shamelesse slaunder of him to say that the Protestants reiect it but we must heare his reason First Luther calleth it a strawen epistle So Luther called the Pope supreame head of the Church and the masse a sacrifice propitiatorie If Protestants be charged to holde whatsoeuer Luther sometime helde and after repented c. Who seeth not in these words that I rehearse the obiection of Saunder which is common to him with many other Papistes which not discussing whether it be true or no but supposing it were as Saunder and the rest of the Papistes doe affirme I shewe that it is no good consequence to charge all Protestants with Luthers priuate opinion which perhaps he helde sometime and after retracted more than to charge vs with all opinions of Papistrie which de did hold before God opened his eyes to see the absurditie of them And yet if he had helde that opinion and neuer retracted the same he were not in worse case than Eusebius who in playne wordes affirmeth that the same epistle is a counterfet or bastard epistle lib. 2. cap. 23. Doe you not see nowe how flatly Maister Fulke confesseth that it was so Such confessions as these are nowe than extorted out of the auncient fathers writings which are not liuing to expounde their meanings But I had thought Maister Martin could haue discerned betwene a suppose or concession and an absolute assertion or a flat confession especially of one whose writing is plaine enough and beside is aliue to interprete himselfe if any ambiguitie were therein But be it that Maister Martin either would not or could not see in my writing any thing else but a flat confession of Luthers denying of S. Iames epistle and calling it an epistle of strawe of what forehead proceedeth it that he willeth Maister Whitaker to aske Caluin in argum Epist. Iacobi whether Luther so speake of that epistle in which argument Luther is not once named by Caluin so farre is it that he doth testifie any such thing against Luther Onely he sayth that some there are in these dayes which thinke that epistle not worthy of authoritie which could not be vnderstood of Luther who long before Caluin wrote that argument had forsaken that opinion if euer he helde any such as all those Dutche Bibles and Testaments of Luthers translation in which those wordes so muche bayted at and so much sought for are omitted doe giue sufficient testimonie What Flaccus Illyricus reporteth who perhaps helde that opinion him selfe and woulde father it vppon Luther I haue neither opportunitie to seeke nor care to knowe But howe great a matter it is that all the Popish Germans and other who haue written against Luther doe so spitefully gnawe vpon I haue learned at length by relation of Maister Whitaker whome you send to aske of me who after long search and many editions turned ouer at the length lighted vpon a Dutch Testament by likehood one of the first that Luther did sette forth in the German tongue in which he findeth neither deniall of S. Iames epistle to be Canonicall nor affirmation that it is vnworthy of an Apostolicall spirit no nor that whereof there hath bene so much babling of all the Papistes that he calleth it an epistle of strawe simply and in contempt but onely in comparison of the epistles of Paule and Peter and other bookes of the newe Testament the excellencie of which one aboue an other after he hath shewed in sundry degrees at last he sayth the epistle of Iames in comparison of these is strawye or like straw Which he sayth not in respect of the credit or authority thereof but in regarde of the argument or matter handled therein which all wise and godly men will confesse to bee not so excellent and necessary as the matter of the holye Gospels and Epistles of some other of the Apostles namely of Paule Peter and Iohn Our Sauiour Christ himself Ioh. 3. 12 calleth the doctrine of regeneration in such plaine maner as he vttered it to Nicodemus earthly things in comparison of other greater mysteries which he coulde haue expressed in more heauenly spirituall sort If I haue spoken to you sayth he of earthly things and you haue not beleued how if I shoulde speake to you of heauenly things will you beleue Were not he an honest and a wise man that vpon these words of Christ spoken in comparison would conclude by his authoritie that regeneration were a contemptible matter a thing not spirituall not heauenly but simply and altogither earthly And yet with as good reason for ought I see or can learne of Luthers wordes concerning this matter he might so inferre as the Papists doe inforce the like against Luther Wherefore it is nothing else but a famous and infamous cauillation to the confusion of all the Papistes which write against Luther that no one of them omitteth vpon so false and friuolous a ground to sclaunder him so haynously and to charge all Protestantes with his assertion so enuiously which if it were his should not be so euill as
say we you can not so answer the matter for in other places you translate it duely and truely tradition and why more in one place than in another They are ashamed to tell why but they must tell and shame both thom selues and the deuill if euer they thinke it good to answer this treatise as also why they changed congregation which was alwaies in their first translation into Church in their later translations and did not change likewise ordinances into traditions Elder◠into Priestes FVLK 51. That the Thessalonians had some parte of Christian doctrine deliuered by word of mouth that is by the Apostles preaching at such time as he did write vnto them and some part by his Epistles the text enforceth vs to graunt and we neuer purposed to denye But that the Church at this daye or euer since the newe Testament was written had any tradition by worde of mouth of any matter necessary to saluation which was not contayned in the olde or newe Testament we will neuer graunt neither shall you euer be able out of this text or any text in the Bible to proue Make your Syllogismes when you dare and you shall be aunswered But we knowe you saye that the Greeke word signifieth tradition as plaine as possibly but here and in like places we rather translate it ordinances instructions and what else soeuer We knowe that it signifieth tradition constitution instruction precept also mancipation treatise treason For al these the Greeke Dictionaries do teach that it signifieth Therefore if in any place we haue translated it ordinaunces or instructions or institutions we haue not gone from the true signification of the worde neither can you euer proue that the worde signifieth such a doctrine onely as is taught by worde of mouth and is not or may not be put in writing But in other places you can tell vs that we translate it duely and truly tradition and you will know why more in one place than in another affirming that we are shamed to tell why For my part I was neuer of counsaile with any that translated the Scriptures into English and therefore it is possible I can not sufficiently expresse what reason moued the translators so to varie in the exposition of one and the same worde Yet can I yeelde sufficient reason that might leade them so to doe which I thinke they followed The Papistes doe commonly so abuse the name of tradition which signifieth properly a deliuerie or a thinge deliuered for such a matter as is deliuered onely by worde of mouth and so receaued from hande to hande that it is neuer put in writing but hath his credite without the holye Scriptures of God as the Iewe had their Cabala and the Scribes Pharisees had their traditions beside the lawe of God and the Valentinian Heretikes accused the Scriptures as insufficient of authoritie and ambiguously written and that the truth could not be found in them by those that knewe not the tradition which was not deliuered by writing but by worde of mouth iumpe as the Papists doe This abusing of the word tradition might be a sufficient cause for the translators to render the Greeke worde where it is taken for such doctrine as is beside the commaundement of God by the name of tradition as the worde is commonly taken But where the Greeke worde is taken in the good parte for that doctrine which is agreeable with the holy Scriptures they might with good reason auoide it as you your selfe doe not alwayes translate tradere to betray but sometimes to deliuer So did the translators giue these words ordinances instructions institutions or doctrine deliuered which doe generally signifie the same that tradition but haue not the preiudice of that partiall signification in which the Papistes vse it who wheresoeuer they find tradition straight way imagine they haue found a sufficient argument against the perfection and sufficiencie of the holy Scripture and to bring in all riffe raffe and trishe trashe of mans doctrine not onely beside but also contrarye to the manifest worde of God conteined in his most holy and perfect Scriptures To the shame of the deuill therefore and of all popish maintainers of traditions vncommaunded by God this reason may be yelded Nowe to aunswer you why Ecclesia was first translated congregation and afterward Church the reason that moued the firste translators I thinke was this the worde Churche of the common people at that tyme was vsed ambiguously both for the assemblie of the faythfull and for the place in which they assembled for auoyding of which ambiguitie they translated Ecclesia the congregation and yet in their Creede and in the notes of their Bibles in preaching writing they vsed the word Church for the same the later translators seing the people better instructed able to discerne when they read in the Scriptures the people from the place of their meeting vsed the worde Church in their translations as they did in their preaching These are weightie matters that wee muste giue accompt of them Why we chaunge not ordinances into traditions and Elders into Priests wee will answere when we come to the proper places of them In the meane season wee thinke there is as good cause for vs in translating sometime to auoide the termes of traditions and prieste as for you to auoid the names of Elders calling them auncients and the wise men sages as though you had rather speake French than English as we do Like as you translate Conside haue a good hart after the french phrase rather than you would say as we do be of good comforte MART. 52. The cause is that the name of Church was at the first odious vnto thē because of the Catholike Church which stoode against them but afterward this name grewe into more favour with them because of their English Church so at length called and termed But their hatred of Priests and traditions continueth still as it first began and therefore their translation also remaineth as before suppressing the names both of the one and of the other But of all these their dealings they shal be told in their seuerall chapiters and places FVLK 52. I pray you who translated first the creed into the English tongue and taught it to the people for that cause were accounted heretikes of the Antichristian Romish rable If the name of Churche were odious vnto them why didde they not suppresse that name in the creede whyche they taught to yong and olde and in steede of Catholike Church call it the vniuersal congregation or assembly Wel Dauus these things be not aptely diuided according to their times The firste translation of the Bible that was printed in the english tong in very many places of the notes vseth the name Church most notoriously in the song of Salomon where before euery other verse almost it telleth which is the voice of the Church to Christ her spous◠which no reasonable man would thinke the translators would
say A pagan idolater and a Christian idolater by one and the same Greeke woorde in one and the same meaning and they translate A pagan idolater and a Christian worshipper of images by two distinct words and diuerse meanings it must needes be done wilfully to the foresaid purpose See chap. 3. num 8. 9. FVLKE 6. We translate not only pagane Idolaters but also Iewes Idolaters nor Christians only worshippers of Images but Paganes also wherefore this is a foolish obseruation And if we do any where explicate who is an Idolater by translating him a worshipper of images both the word beareth it and it is not contrarie to the sense of the Scriptures in which we find the worshipping of images alwaies forbidden but neuer commaunded or allowed MART. 7. If they translate one and the same Greeke word Tradition whensoeuer the Scripture speaketh of euill traditions and neuer translate it so whensoeuer it speaketh of good and Apostolicall traditions their intention is euident against the authoritie of Traditions See chap. 2 numb 1. 2 3. FVLKE 7. This is aunswered sufficiently in confutation of the Preface Sect. 51. The English word Tradition sounding in the euill parte and taken by the Papistes for matter vnwritten yet as true and as necessarie as that which is contained in the holie Scriptures we haue vpon iust cause auoided in such places as the Greeke worde signifieth good and necessarie doctrine deliuered by the Apostles which is all contained in the Scriptures and yet haue vsed such English wordes as sufficiently expresse the Greeke word vsed in the originall text Doe not you your selues translate Tradere sometimes to betray and sometimes to deliuer MART. 8. Yea if they translate Tradition taken in ill parte where it is not in the Greeke and translate it not so where it is in the Greeke taken in good parte it is more euidence of the foresaid wicked intention See chap. 2. numb 5. 6. FVLK 8. Our intention can be no worse than your vulgar Latine Interpreters was who where the Greeke hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translateth it Traditions Act. 6. And the right vnderstanding of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Apostles meaning wil yeeld traditions as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place before mentioned MARTINE 9. If they make this a good rule to translate according to the vsuall signification and not the originall deriuation of wordes as Beza and Maister Whitakers doe and if they translate contrarie to this rule what is it but wilfull corruption So they doe in translating Idolum an Image Presbyter an Elder and the like See chap. 4. chap. 6. numb 6. 7. 8. c. numb 13. c. FVLKE 9. Neither Beza nor Maister Whitaker make it a perpetuall rule to translate according to the vsuall signification for sometimes a worde is not taken in the vsuall signification as Foenerator vsed by your vulgar Latine Interpreter Luke 7. vsuallye signifieth an Vserer yet doe you translate it a Creditor Likewise Stabulum vsed Luke 10. vsually signifieth a Stable yet you translate it an Inne So Nauis which vsually signifieth a Shippe you call it a Boate. Marke 8. and Nauicula which vsuallye signifieth a Boate you call a Shippe Luke 5. And yet I thinke you meant no wilfull corruption No more surelye did they whiche translated Idolum an Image and Presbyter an Elder whiche you can not deny But they followe the originall deriuation of the wordes whereas some of yours both goe from the vsuall signification and also from the originall deriuation MARTINE 10. If Presbyter by Ecclesiasticall vse bee appropriated to signifie a Priest no lesse than Episcopus to signifie a Bishoppe or Diaconus a Deacon and if they translate these two later accordingly and the first neuer in all the Newe Testament what can it be but wilfull corruption in fauour of this heresie That there are no Priestes of the Newe Testament See chap. 6. numb 12. FVLKE 10. The worde Priest by Popishe abuse is commonly taken for a Sacrificer the same that Sacerdos in Latine But the Holie Ghost neuer calleth the Ministers of the worde and Sacramentes of the Newe Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Sacerdotes Therefore the translatours to make a difference betwene the Ministers of the Olde Testament and them of the Newe calleth the one according to the vsuall acception Priestes and the other according to the originall deriuation Elders Which distinction seeing the vulgar Latine texte doth alwaies rightly obserue it is in fauour of your hereticall Sacrificing Priesthoode that you corruptly translate Sacerdos and Presbyter alwayes as though they were all one a Priest as though the Holie Ghost had made that distinction in vayne or that there were no difference betwene the Priesthoode of the Newe Testament and the Olde The name of Priest according to the originall deriuation from Presbyter wee doe not refuse but according to the common acception for a Sacrificer wee can not take it when it is spoken of the Ministerie of the Newe Testament And although many of the auncient Fathers haue abusiuelye confounded the termes of Sacerdos and Presbyter yet that is no warrant for vs to translate the Scripture and to confounde that which we see manifestly the spirit of God hath distinguished For this cause we haue translated the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Elder euen as your vulgar Latine translater doeth diuerse times as Actes 15. and 20. 1. Pet. 5. and else where calleth them Seniores or Maiores natu Which you commonly call the Auncientes or Seniors because you dare not speake Englishe and say the Elders Neither is Presbyter by Ecclesiasticall vse so approprietated to signifie a Priest that you woulde alwayes translate it so in the Olde Testament where your vulgar translatour vseth it for a name of Office and Gouernment and not for Priests at any time Neither do we alwayes translate the Greeke worde Episcopus and Diaconus for a Bishoppe and a Deacon but sometimes for an ouerseer as Act. 20. and a minister generally oftentimes The word Baptisma by Ecclesiasticall vse signifieth the holy Sacrament of Baptisme yet are you enforced Marke 7. to translate Baptismata washings Euen so doe we to obserue that distinction which the Apostles and Euangelistes alwaies doe keepe when we call Sacerdotes Priestes for difference we call Presbyteros Elders and not least the name of Priestes shoulde enforce the Popishe sacrifice of the Masse For this worde Presbyter will neuer cōprehend a sacrificer or a sacrificing Priesthoode MART. 11. If for Gods altar they translate Temple for Bels idololatrical table they translate altar iudge whether it bee not of purpose against our altars and in fauour of their communion table See chap. 17. numb 15. 16. FVLK 11. If there be any suche mistaking of one word for an other I thinke it was the fault of the Printer rather than of the Translator for the name of altar is more
you so malitious an enimie vnto him hauing spent all your inuention to seeke holes in his translation can finde nothing but such childish cauils as when they be discouered men will maruaile that you were not ashamed to moue them MART. 56. But after this generall vewe of their wilfull purpose and heretical intention let vs examine their false translations more particularly and argue the case with them more at large and presse them to answere whether in their conscience it be so or no as hitherto is saide and that by seuerall chapters of such CONTROVERSIES as their corruptions concerne and first of all without further curiositie whence to begin in cases so indifferent of TRADITIONS FVLK 56. The more particularly you examine our translations the freer I hope they shall be found from falsehoode wilfull corruption And the more at large you argue the case and presse vs to answere the more you shall make the case to appeare worse on your side and the truth clearer on our parte And as God is witnesse of our conscience and sinceritie in setting forth his word without adulteration or corruptiō so I appeale to the consciences of al indifferent readers whether hitherto you haue gotten any aduantage against vs in this whole chapter which yet you professe to be the abridgement and summe of your whole treatise CHAP. II. Hereticall translation of holy Scripture against Apostolicall TRADITIONS Martin THis is a matter of such importance that if they shoulde graunt any traditions of the Apostles and not pretende the written worde onely they know that by such traditions mentioned in all antiquitie their religion were wholy defaced and ouerthrowen For remedie whereof and for the defacing of all such traditions they bend their translations against them in this wonderfull maner Wheresoeuer the holy Scripture speaketh against certaine traditions of the Iewes partly friuolous partly repugnant to the law of God there all the English translations follow the Greeke exactly neuer omitting this word tradition Contrariwise wheresoeuer the holy Scripture speaketh in the commendation of Traditions to wit such traditions a◠the Apostles deliuered to the Church there all their sayd translations agree not to followe the Greeke which is still the selfe same word but for traditions they translate ordinaunces or instructions Why so and to what purpose we appeale to the worme of their conscience which continually accuseth them of an hereticall meaning whether by vrging the word traditions wheresoeuer they are discommended and by suppressing the word wheresoeuer they are commended their purpose and intent be not to signifie to the Reader that all traditions are naught and none good all reproueable none allowable Fulke TRaditions in deede is a matter of such importance as if you may be allowed whatsoeuer you will thrust vpon vs vnder the name of vnwritten traditions the written worde of God shall serue to no purpose at all For first as you plainly professe the holy Scripture shall not be accounted sufficient to teach all truth necessary to saluation that the man of God may be perfect prepared to all good works Secondly with the Valentinian heretikes you accuse the Scriptures of vncertaine vnderstāding without your traditions vnder pretense of which you wil bring in what you list though it be neuer so contrary to the holy Scriptures plaine wordes by colour of interpretatiō as you do the worshipping of images many other like heresies As for the mention that is made of Apostolicall traditions in diuerse of the auncient fathers some of thē are such as you your selues obserue not not for the tenth part of those that you obserue can you bring any testimony out of the ancient fathers as is proued sufficiently by so many propositiōs as were set downe by the Bishoppe of Sarisburie M. Iewel whereof you can bring no proofe for any one to haue bene taught within 600. yeres after Christ. Now concerning the traditions of the Apostles what they were who can be a better witnesse vnto vs than Ignatius the disciple of the Apostles of whom Eusebius writeth that when he was led towardes Rome where he suffred martyrdom he earnestly exhorted the Churches by which he passed to continue in the faith and against all heresies which euen then began to bud vp he charged thē to retaine fast the traditiō of the Apostles which by that time he protested to be committed to writing for by that time were al the books of the new Testament written The words of Eusebius concerning this matter are li. 3. c. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he exhorted thē straitly to kepe the tradition of the Apostles which testifying that it was now for assurance cōmitted to writing he thought necessary to be plainly taught Against this tradition of the Apostles which for certaintie assurance is contained in their holy vndoubted writings we say nothing but striue altogither for it But because the word traditions is by you Papistes taken to signifie a doctrine secretely deliuered by worde of mouth without authority of the holy Scriptures we do willingly auoide the word in our translations where the simple might be deceiued to think that the holy ghost did euer cōmēd any such to the church which he would not haue to be committed to writing in the holy Scriptures in steede of that word so commōly taken although it doth not necessarily signifie any such matters we doe vse such wordes as do truly expresse the Apostles meaning the Greke word doth also signifie Therfore we vse the words of ordināces or instructiōs or institutiōs or the doctrine deliuered all which being of one sense the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doeth signifie and the same doth tradition signifie if it be rightly vnderstoode but seing it hath bene commonly taken and is vrged of the Papistes to signifie only a doctrine deliuered beside the word of God written in such places where the holy Ghost vseth the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that sense we translate by that worde tradition where he vseth it for such doctrine as is groūded vpon the holy Scriptures our translatours haue auoyded it not of any hereticall meaning that all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 traditions are naught but that all such as haue not the holy Scripture to testifie of them and to warrant them are euill and to be auoyded of all true Christians which can not without blasphemie acknowledge any imperfection in the holy Scriptures of God which are able to make a man wise vnto saluation if they shoulde thinke any doctrine necessarie to saluation not to be cōtained therein MART. 2. For example Matt. 15. Thus they translate Why do thy disciples transgresse the TRADITION of the Elders And againe Why do you also transgresse the commaundement of God by your TRADITION And againe Thus haue you made the commaundement of God of no effect by your TRADITION Here I warrant you all the bels sound tradition and the word is neuer omitted
the publike seruice of God suche thinges are not lawefull for daunger of idolatrie nor in priuate places to be abused as they are of Papistes but rather though they were as auncient and as goodly monuments as the brasen serpent was which no images at this daye can be it is to the great honour of God that they shoulde be despised defaced burned and stamped to powder as that was which sometyme was erected by the commaundement of God by which not onely great miracles were wrought but the wonderfull mysterie of our saluation through faith in Christ was prefigured MART. 12. And as concerning the Bible that at this daye is redde in their Churches if it be that of the yeare 1577. it is worse sometyme in this matter of images than the other For where the other readeth Couetousnes which is worshipping of idolls there this later where vnto they appeale readeth thus Couetousnes which is worshipping of images and Ephes. 5. it readeth as absurdly as the other A couetous man which is a worshipper of images Loe this is the English Bible which they referre vs vnto as better translated and as correcting the fault of the former But because it is euident by these places that this also is partly worse and partly as ill as the other therefore this great confuter of Maister Iohn Houlet fleeth once more to the Geneua English Bible saying Thus we reade and so we translate to wit A couetous person which is an Idolater Where shall we haue these good fellowes and howe shall we be sure that they will stande to any of their translations from the first redde in their Churches they flee to that that is nowe redde and from this againe to the later Geneua English Bibles neither redde in their Churches as we suppose nor of greatest authoritie among them and we doubt not but they will as fast flee from this to the former againe when this shall be proued in some places more false and absurd than the other FVLK 12. It pleaseth you worse perhaps that lesse fauoureth your pelting distinction of images and idols but it is neuer the worse to be liked of them that be wise and learned which know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greeke doe signifie the same thing which you can not deny And where you say in your scornefull moode loe this is the Bible which they referre vs vnto as better trāslated and as correcting the fault of the former you follow your accustomed vaine of lying For I acknowledge no fault of the former in this point of images but confute the frowardnes of that foolish reason which accuseth our seruice of reading the Bible in shamelesse translations in that text 1. Iohn 5. whereas in the Bible appointed for the seruice it is not as he sayth but euen as he would haue vs to saye I flye not therefore as it pleaseth your wisedom to say from that translation also to the Geneua Bible neither doe I alledge the Geneua trāslation for that cause you pretend but to shew that albeit we translate in such words as you can not mislike yet your venemous slaundering pennes and tongues can neuer giue ouer your peeuish quarrelling In the place by you quoted I defend both as true and answerable to the Greeke and of one sense and meaning where the sound of words onely is diuers the signification of matter one and the same And yet you must haue your foolish florish in roperipe termes Where shall we haue these good fellowes c You shall haue vs by the grace of God ready to iustifie all our translation from shamelesse falsification and hereticall corruptions which is your impudent charge against vs. And if in matter of lesser moment you can descry the least errour in any or in all of our translations we shall be willing to confesse the same and ready to reforme it For truth is deerer to vs than credit although we thinke it better credit to reforme a fault than being admonished wilfully to cōtinue it or defend it MART. 13. But what matter is it howe they reade in their churches or how they correct their former translations by the later when the olde corruption remaineth still being set of purpose in the top of euery dore within their churches in these wordes Babes keepe your selues from images Why remaineth that written so often and so conspicuously in the wals of their churches which in their Bibles they correst as a fault their later Bibles say Keepe your selues from idols their church walles say Keepe your selues from images S. Iohn speaking to the lately conuerted Gentiles biddeth them beware of the idols from whence they were conuerted they speaking to the olde instructed Christians bid them beware of the sacred image of Christ our Sauiour of the holy Crucifixe of the Crosse of euerie such representation and monument of Christes passion and our redemption And therefore in the verie same place where these holy monumentes were wont to stande in Catholike times to witte in the roode loft and partition of the Church and chauncell there nowe standes these wordes as confronting and condemning the foresayd holy monumentes Babes keepe your selues from images Which wordes whosoeuer esteemeth as the wordes of Scripture and the wordes of Sainct Iohn spoken against Christes image is made a verie babe in deede and sottishly abused by their scribled doores and false translations to count that idolatrie which is in deede to no other purpose than to the great honour of him whose image and picture it is FVLK 13. Still you harpe on the olde vntuneable string that the former is a corruption which saith Babes kepe your selues from images which sentence sore grieueth you to be written in the toppe of church dores or in place where the Roode loft stoode And you aske why it remaineth on the wals which we correct as a fault in the Bibles But who tolde you that they correct it as a fault in the Bibles Is euery alteration with you a correction The one explicateth the other that idols of which S. Iohn speaketh be images abused in religion Not that all images be idols as the worde idoll in the Englishe speach is taken nor that al idols be images but as images that are worshipped But S. Iohn you say speaking to the conuerted Gentiles biddeth them beware of the idols from whence they were conuerted That is true but not onely from them but from all other idols Except perhappes you thinke that Christians by that texte shoulde not abhorre the images of Simon Magus and Selene and the images of the Valentinians and Gnostikes and other heretikes which worshipped the image of Christ and of Sainct Paule as Irenaeus and Epiphanius doe testifie And it seemeth you so thinke in deede For you say soone after whosoeuer esteemeth those wordes as the wordes of Scripture if images be put for idolls spoken against Christes image is made a verie babe Suchs babes were Irenaeus
Images is vaine for this purpose for all Images that are vsed in religion are false and teachers of falshood which you with Gregorie say are Laye mens bookes but what shall they teache saith Abacuc and Ieremie but lies and vanitie where note that Ieremie calleth the Image woodde by Synecdoche signifying all Images made with hands of any matter Againe he saith euery artificer is confounded in his Image because it is false which he hath made and there is no breath in it In whiche verse it is to be obserued that hee vseth firste the worde Pesel saying Mippasel and afterward Nifco for the same Image made by the artificer without distinction of grauing or melting at leastwise for the sense though the wordes be diuerse Euen so your vulgar Latin translator vseth Sculptile conflatile imaginem simulachrum for one and the same thing The Scripture therfore telling vs that all Images are false because they being voyde of life are sette vp to represent the liuing it is not our fantasie but the auctoritie of Gods worde that causeth vs to reiect your fantasticall distinction of true and false Images MART. 26. Wherein you proceede so farre that when Daniel sayde to the King I worshippe not idolls made with handes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you make him saye thus I worshippe not thinges that be made with hands leauing out the worde idolls altogither as though he had sayd nothing made with hand were to be adored not the Arke the propitiatorie no nor the holy crosse it selfe that our Sauiour shed his bloud vpon As before you added to the text so here you diminish and take from it at your pleasure FVLK 26. That thing is put for idoll I confesse it to be a fault in some translations but in the Geneua Bible it is reformed Contempt of the authoritie of that Apocryphall chapiter as it seemed did breede that negligence Where you write that he should by saying I worshippe not thinges made with handes haue denyed the Arke and the propitiatorie to be worshipped it is very true for neither of both was to be worshipped as they were made with handes but God was to be worshipped where they were and those thinges to be reuerently esteemed as the sacraments of Gods presence As for the crosse whereon Christ dyed I see no cause why it shoulde be worshipped if it were to bee had but rather if it were worshipped it shoulde bee serued as the brasen serpent was None of the Apostles made anye accounte of it Nicodemus and Ioseph of Arimathia if there had beene any matter of religion in it might haue preserued it and not haue suffered it to be buried in the earth with the two other crosses as the storie of the inuention sayeth if it be true At the finding whereof Helena as Sainct Ambrose writeth Regem adorauit non lignum vtique quia hic gentilis est error vanitas impiorum She worshipped the King not the tree verily for this is an Hethenishe errour and vanitie of vngodly men De obit Theodosij MART. 27. But concerring the worde image which you make to be the English of all the Latine Hebrew and Greeke wordes be they neuer so many and so distinct I beseeche you what reason had you to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 images Sap. 15. verse 13. doth the Greeke worde so signifie doth not the sentence following tell you that it shoulde haue bene translated grauen idolls for thus it sayth They iudged all the idolls of the nations to be Gods Loe your images or rather loe the true names of the Pagans gods which it pleaseth you to call images images FVLK 27. I thinke you are not able to proue that we make image the English to all the Hebrewe wordes though you boldly affirme it But in the place by you mentioned I suppose they translated the Greeke worde grauen or carued images rather than idoll because the writer in that place Sap. 15. 13. speaketh of the first framing and fashioning of those images which though the purpose of the workeman be neuer so wicked yet can not properly be called idolls before they be abused by them that worship them MART. 28. But to conclude this point you might it would haue well becommed you in translating or expounding the foresayd wordes to haue followed S. Hierom the great famous translator and interpreter of the holy Scriptures who telleth you two senses of the foresaid wordes the one literall of the Idols of the Gentiles the other mysticall of Heresies errours Sculptile sayth he conflatile I take to be peruerse opinions which are adored of the authors that made thē See Arius that graued to him selfe this idoll that Christ was onely a creature and adored that which he had grauen Behold Eunomius howe he molted and cast a false image and bowed to that which he had molten Suppose he had exemplified of the two condemned heretikes Iouinian Vigilantius also had he not touched your idols that is the olde condemned heresies which you at this day adore FVLK 28. It becommeth vs best in translation to follow the originall text and as neare as we can the true meaning of the holy Ghost As for the two senses which Hieronym telleth stand whole and vntouched for our translation There is a difference betwene a translation and a commentarie In commenting vpon the text they that see it conuenient may apply the idolls of the Gentiles the worship of them to the heresies of our times of the Papistes Anabaptistes Libertines and such like as the Apostle doth by similitude to couetousnes As for olde condemned heresies which you charge vs to worship as idols you are able to proue none whatsoeuer you bable of Vigilantius and Iouinian neither of both doe we follow in any error much lesse in any heresie MART. 29. These onely I meane heresies and heretikes are the idols and idolaters by the ancient Doctors iudgement which haue bene among Christians since the idolatrie of the Gentiles ceased according to the Prophets Therefore S. Hierom sayth againe If thou see a man that will not yeeld to the truth but when the falshoode of his opinions is once shewed perseuereth still in that he began thou mayst aptly say Sperat in figmento suo and he maketh dumme or deafe idolls And againe All Heretikes haue their gods and whatsoeuer they haue forged they adore the same as Sculptile and Constantile that is as a grauen and molten idoll And againe He sayth well I haue found vnto my selfe an idoll For all the forgeries of heretikes are as the idolls of the Gentiles neither doe they much differ in impiety though in name they seeme to differ And againe Whatsoeuer according to the letter is spoken against the idolatrie of the Iewes doe thou referre al this vnto them which vnder the name of Christ worship idols and forging to them selues peruerse opinions carye the tabernacle of their king the deuill and the
Epistle of Iames of Peter c. As if a man shoulde say in his Creede I beleeue the general Churche because hee would not say the Catholike Churche as the Lutheran Catechismes say for that purpose I beleeue the Christian Church So that by this rule when S. Augustine telleth that the maner was in cities where there was libertie of religion to aske Qua itur ad Catholicam Wee muste translate it Which is the way to the General And when Sainct Hierome sayth If we agree in faith with the B. of Rome ergo Catholici sumus we must translate it Then we are Generals Is not this good stuffe Are they not ashamed thus to inuert and peruert all wordes against common sense and vse and reason Catholike and Generall or vniuersall we knowe is by the originall propertie of the word all one but according to the vse of both as it is ridiculous to say A Catholike Councell for a Generall Councell so is it ridiculous and impious to say Generall for Catholike inderogation thereof and for to hide it vnder a bushell FVLK 4. I doe not knowe where the name of Catholike is once expressed in the text of the Bible that it might be suppressed by vs which are not like to beare malice to the Catholike Church or religion seeing we teache euen our young children to beleue the holy Catholike Church But not finding the word Catholike in the text you runne to the title of the seuen Epistles called as commonly Canonicall as Catholike or Generall But Eusebius belike testifieth that they haue bene so called euer since the Apostles time lib. 2. cap. 22. I maruell you are not ashamed to auouch suche an vntruth Eusebius speaking of his owne time saith they are so called but that they haue bene so called euer since the Apostles time he sayth not And so farre off he is from saying so that he pronounceth the Epistle of S. Iames in the same place to be a bastarde and speaketh doubtfully of the Epistle of S. Iude. But whereas in one translation we vse the worde Generall for Catholike you make a greate may game of it shewing your witte and your honestie both at once For these 5. of Iames 2. of Peter one of Iude and the first of Iohn which are properly rightly so intituled haue that title because they are not sent to any particular Church or persons but to all in general as the Greeke scholiast truly noteth And OEcumenius before the Epistle of S. Iames sayth expressely Catholicae id est vniuersales dicuntur hae c. These Epistles are called Catholike that is to say Vniuersall or General because not distinctly to one nation or citie as S. Paule to the Romanes or Corinthians this companie of our Lords disciples doth dedicate these Epistles but generally to the faithfull or to the Iewes that were dispersed as also Peter or else to all Christians liuing vnder the same faith For otherwise if they should be called Catholike in respect of the souÌ„dnes of the doctrine coÌ„tained in theÌ„ what reason were there more to call them so than to call all the Epistles of S. Paule Wherefore in this title which yet is no part of the holy Scripture it is rightly traÌ„slated general The other translatours seeing seuen to be called general where only fiue are so in deede and seeing them also called canonicall which should seeme to be a controulling of S. Paules Epistles left out that title altogither as being no part of the text and word of God but an addition of the stationers or writers MART. 5. Is it because they would followe the Greeke that they turne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 generall euen as iust as when they turne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 image 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instruction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissension 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secrete and such like where they goe as farre from the Greeke as they can and will be glad to pretende for aunswere of their worde sect that they followe our Latine translation Alas poore shift for them that otherwise pretende nothing but the Greeke to be tried by that Latine which them selues condemne But we honour the sayd text and translate it Sects also as we there find it and as we doe in other places followe the Latine text and take not our aduantage of the Greeke text because we knowe the Latine translation is good also and sincere and approued in the Church by long antiquitie it is in sense all one to vs with the Greke but not so to them who in these daies of controuersie about the Greeke and Latine text by not following the Greeke which they professe sincerely to follow bewray them selues that they doe it for a malitious purpose FVLK 5. It is because we woulde haue the Greeke vnderstood as it is taken in those places when we turne Catholike generall Idolum image 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instruction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinaunce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secret and such like And where you say we woulde be glad for our word sect to pretend to follow your Latine translation it is a fable For in translating sect we follow the Greeke as truely as your Latine translation doeth which if it be true and sincere as you confesse what deuilish madnesse possesseth your malicious mind to burthen vs with such purposes as no reasonable man would once imagine or thinke of that we should vse that terme in fauour of heresie and heretikes whome we thinke worthie to suffer death if they will not repent and cease to blaspheme or seduce the simple CHAP. V. Hereticall translation against the CHVRCH Martin AS they suppresse the name Catholike euen so did they in their first English Bible the name of Church it selfe because at their first reuolt and apostasie from that that was vniuersally knowen to be the only true Catholike Church it was a great obiectioÌ„ against their schismaticall proceedings and it stucke much in the peoples consciences that they forsooke the Church and that the Church condemned them WherupoÌ„ very wiâ—ily they suppressed the name Church in their English translation so that in all that Bible so long red in their congregations we can not once finde the name thereof Iudge by these places which seeme of most importaunce for the dignitie preheminence and authoritie of the Church Fulke HOwe can wee suppresse the name Catholike which the holy Scripture neuer vseth as for the name of Church I haue alreadie shewed diuerse times that for to auoyd the ambiguous taking of that terme it was at the first lesse vsed but neuer refused for doubt of any obiection of the Catholike Church against vs the profession of which being contained in our Englishe creede howe could we relinquish or not acknowledge to be contained in the Scripture in which we taught that all articles
hāds least as we haue laughed at in some men the secrete imprecation of the voyce should ordaine Clerkes being ignorant thereof And so proceedeth to inueigh against the abuse of them that would ordaine Clerkes of their basest officers and seruitours yea at the request of foolish women By which it is manifest that his purpose is not to tell what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 properly doth signifie but that imposition of handes is required in lawfull ordination which many did vnderstand by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 although in that place it signified no such matter And therefore you muste seeke further authoritie to proue your Ecclesiasticall etymologie that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth putting foorth of the handes to giue orders The places you quote in the margent out of the titles of Nazianzens sermons are to no purpose although they were in the texte of his Homilies For it appeareth not although by Synecdoche the whole order of making Clerkes were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that election was excluded where there was ordination by imposition of handes As for that you cite out of Ignatius proueth against you that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 differeth from imposition of hands because it is made a distinct office from 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that signifieth to lay on handes and so 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by your owne author doe differ MART. 8. But they are so profane and secular that they translate the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in all the new Testament as if it had the old profane signification still were indifferent to signifie the auncients of the Iewes the Senatours of Rome the elders of Lacedemonia and the Christian Clergie In so much that they say Paul sent to Ephesus and called the Elders of the Church Act. 20. and yet they were such as had their flockes and cure of soules as foloweth in the same place They make S. Paul speake thus to Timothee Neglect not the gift so they had rather say than grace lest holy orders should be a Sacrament giuen thee with the laying on of the handes of the Eldership or by the authoritie of the Eldership 1. Tim. 4. What is this companie of Eldership Somewhat they woulde say like to the Apostles worde but they will not speake plainly least the worlde might heare out of the Scriptures that Timothee was made Priest or Bishop euen as the vse is in the Catholike Churche at this day Lette the fourth Councell of Carthage speake for bothe partes indifferently and tell vs the Apostles meaning A Prieste when hee taketh his orders the Bishoppe blessing him and holding his hande vppon his head let all the Priestes also that are present holde their handes by the Bishops hand vpon his head So doe our priestes as this daye when a Bishop maketh priests and this is the laying on of the handes of the companie of Priests which S. Paule speaketh of which they translate the companie of the Eldership Onely their former translation of 1562. in this place by what chaunce or consideration we know not let fall out of the penne by the authoritie of Priesthood FVLK 8. We desire not to be more holy in the englishe termes than the holye Ghost was in the Greeke termes Whome if it pleased to vse such a word as is indifferent to signifie the auncients of the Iewes the Senators of Rome the Elders of Lacedemonia and the Christian Cleargie why shoulde we not truely translate it into English But I pray you in good sadnes are we so profane and secular Act. 20. in calling those whome Saint Paule sent for out of Ephesus Elders What shall we saye then of the vulgar Latine text which calleth them Maiores natu as though they obtayned that degree by yeares rather than by any thing else and why doe you so profanely and secularly call them the Auncients of the Church Is there more profanenesse and secularitie in the Englishe worde Elders than in the Latine worde Maiores natu or in your Frenchenglishe terme Auncients Surely you doe nothing but play with the noses of such as be ignorant in the tongues and can perceiue no similitude or difference of these wordes but by the sounde of their eares But nowe for the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsed by Saint Paule 1. Tim. 4. which we call the Eldershippe or the companye of Elders I haue shewed before howe it is vsed by Saint Luke in his Gospell cap. 22. and Act. 22. You saye we will not speake playnely lest the worlde shoulde heare that Timothie was made Priest or Bishop euen as the vse is in the Catholike Church at this day And then you tell vs out of the Councell of Carthage 4. cap. 3. that all the Priestes present shoulde laye their handes on the heade of him that is ordayned togither with the Bishoppe We knowe it well and it is vsed in the Church of England at this daye Onely the terme of Eldership displeaseth you when we meane thereby the companye of Elders But whereas the translators of the Bible 1562. call it Priesthood eyther by Priesthood they meant the same that we doe by Eldershippe or if they meant by Priesthood the office of Priestes or Elders they were deceiued For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth a companie of Elders as it is twise vsed by S. Luke and oftentimes by the auncient writers of the Church both Greekes and Latines MART. 9. Otherwise in all their English Bibles all the bells ringe one note as The Elders that rule well are worthye of double honour And Against an Elder receiue no accusation but vnder two or three witnesses 1. Tim. 5. And If any be diseased among you let him call for the Elders of the Church and let them pray ouer him and annoynt him with oyle c. Iacob 5. Wheras Saint Chrysostom out of this place proueth the high dignitie of Priestes in remitting sinnes in his booke entituled Of Priesthood vnlesse they will translate that title also Of Eldershippe Againe they make S. Peter saye thus The Elders which are among you I exhort which am also an Elder feedeye Christes flocke as much as lyeth in you c. 1. Pet 5. FVLK 9. In these three textes you triumphe not a litle because your vulgar Latine text hath the Greeke worde Presbyter The high dignitie of Priestes or Elders in remitting sinnes we acknowledge with Chrysostom in his booke entitled of Priesthood which seing it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we will neuer translate Eldershippe But we may lawfully wishe that both Chrysostom and other auncient writers had kept that distinction of termes which the Apostles and Euangelists did so precisely obserue In the last text 1. Pet. 5. your vulgar Latine sayth Seniores and Consenior your selues in English seniors and fellow senior What trespasse then haue we committed in saying Elders fellow Elder or an Elder also MART. 10.
And here againe with lothsomnes you repeate your rotten quarrell of idols translated images which was to discouer your abhominable idolatrie cloked vnder a blind false distinction of images and idols The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we translate repentance as you doe sometimes when you can not for shame vse your Popishe terme penance by which you vnderstande satisfaction for sinne which in diuerse places you are enforced to giue ouer in the plaine fielde and to vse the terme repentance as in the fift of the Actes This Prince and Sauiour God hath exalted with his right hand to giue repentance to Israell and remission of sinnes likewise Act. 11. where the Scripture speaketh of God giuing repentaunce to the Gentils And when you speake of Iudas you say also repenting him so that the repentance of Iudas and that which God gaue to Israell and to the Gentils is vttered in one terme whereas else you haue almost euerie where penance and doing of penance Where you say we make repentance nothing but chaunging of the minde or amendment of life you speake vntruely for not euerie chaunging of the minde is godly repentance neither is only amendment of life all repentance but there must be contrition and sorowe for the life past That in the Greeke Church they that were Catechumeni and Energumeni were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 such as are in repentance it maketh nothing against the true vse of the Greeke word as it is vsed in the Scriptures We know the discipline of the Churche appointed an outwarde exercise of praying fasting and other humbling for a trial and testimonie of true and hartie repentance which was some times called by the name of repentaunce by a Metonymia signi whiche hee that will enforce by that name to bee partes of true and inwarde repentaunce is as wise as hee that will contend the Iuy bushe to be a parte of wine because some men seing it hang ouer the house will say loe here is wine MART. 15. They therefore leauing this Ecclesiasticall signification and translating it according to Plutarch doe they not much like to Castaleo Doe they not the same agaynst the famous and auncient distinction of Latrîa and Dulîa when they tell vs out of Eustathius vpon Homer and Aristophanes the Grammarian that these two are all one Whereas wee proue out of S. Augustine in many places the seconde Councell of Nice Venerable Bede and the long custome of the Churche that according to the Ecclesiasticall sense and vse deduced out of the Scriptures they differ very much Doe they not the like in Mysterium and Sacramentum which they translate a Secrete in the profane sense whereas they know how these wordes are otherwise taken both in Greeke and Latine in the Church of God did they not the like in the worde Ecclesia when they translated it nothing else but congregation Doe they not the like in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they translate ordaining by election as it was in the profane court of Athens whereas S. Hierons telleth them that Ecclesiasticall writers take it for giuing holy orders by imposition of hands Do they not the like in many other wordes wheresoeuer it serueth their hereticall purpose And as for profane translation is there any more profane than Beza him selfe that so often in his annotations reprehendeth the olde translation by the authoritie of Tullie and Terence Homer and Aristophanes and the like profane authors yea so fondly and childishly that for Olfactum which Erasmus vseth as Plinies word he will needes say odoratum because it is Tullies word FVLK 15. In translating the Scripture we vse the worde repentance in the same signification that the scripture vseth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In other Ecclesiasticall writers we can neuerthelesse vnderstand it as they meane it Concerning that vnlearned distinction of Latria and Dulia we doe rightly to shewe out of profane writers that it is vaine and that the termes signifie all one and you your selfe confesse in your marginall note that sometimes in the Scripture 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe not signifie the seruice and honour that is proper to God as for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in more than an hundred places vsed for the seruice honour proper to God S. Augustine you confesse afterward knew wel but one tōgue therfore he is no meete iudge of distinction of Greeke wordes Bede followeth Augustines error The idolaters of the 2. Nicene councel were glad of a cloke for the raine cōtrary to the property of their tongue As is proued by Eustathius Aristophanes Xenophon Suidas and by later writers no Protestants Laurentius Valla and Ludouicus Viues Mysterium we translate a secret or a mysterie indifferently the word signifying no more an holy secret than a prophane and abhominable secrete as the mysterie of iniquitie the mysterie of Babylon For the wordes Ecclesia and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we haue sayd sufficiently and very lately To vse Tullies words when they answer the Greeke as properly as any barbarous wordes or lesse commendable wordes I knowe not why it shoulde be counted blame worthy in Beza or in any man except it be of such a Sycophant as liketh nothing but that which sauoureth of his owne spittle MART. 16. But to returne to our English translatours doe not they the like to profane Castaleo and doe they not the very same that Beza their Maister so largely reprehendeth when they translate Presbyterum an Elder Is it not all one fault to translate so and to translate as Castaleo doth Baptismum washing Hath not Presbyter bene a peculiar and vsual word for a Priest as long as Baptismus for the Sacrament of regeneration which Castaleo altering into a cōmon and profane worde is worthily reprehended We will proue it hath not for their sake who know it well enough but for the Readers sake whom they abuse as if they knew it not FVLK 16. If it be as great a fault in vs to translate Presbyterum an Elder as for Castaleo to translate Baptismum washing your vulgar translatour must be in the same faulte with vs which so often translateth Presbyteros seniores or maiores natu which signifie Elders and not Priestes it is a vaine thing therefore that you promise to proue that Presbyter hath bene a peculiar and vsual word for a Priest as long as Baptismus for the Sacrament of regeneration For peculiar you can neuer proue it seeing it is vsed in the Scripture so often for such Elders Ancients as you your selfe would not cal Priests So that if you did translate the whole Bible out of your owne vulgar Latine you must translate Presbyter thrice an Elder or Auncient for once a Priest MART. 17. In the first and second Canon of the Apostles we reade thus Episcopus à duobus aut tribus Episcopis ordinetur Presbyter ab vno Episcopo ordinetur Diaconus alij Clerici that is
Let a bishop be consecrated or ordained by two or three Bishops Let a Priest be made by one Bishop See in the 4. Councel of Carthage the diuerse maner of coÌ„secrating Bishops Priests Deacons c. Where S. Augustine was present and subscribed Againe Si quis Presbyter conteÌ„nens Episcopum suum c. If any Priest contemning his Bishop make a seueral congregation and erect another altar that is make a Sehisme or Heresie let him be deposed So did Arius being a Priest against his Bishop AlexaÌ„der Againe Priests and Deacons let them attempt to do nothing without the Bishop The first Councell of Nice saith The holy Synode by all meanes forbiddeth that neyther Bishop nor Priest nor Deacon c. haue with them any forren woman but the mother or sister c. in whom there is no suspicion Againe It is told the holy Councel that in certaine places cities Deacons giue the Sacraments to Priests This neither rule nor custome hath deliuered that they which haue not authoritie to offer the sacrifice should giue to them that offer the body of Christ. The 3. Councel of Carthage wherein S. Augustine was and to the which he subscribed decreeth That in the Sacraments of the body bloud of Christ there be no more offered than our Lord him selfe deliuered that is bread and wine mingled with water Whiche the sixth generall Councell of Constantinople repeating and confirming ad doth If therefore any Bishop or Priest doe not according to the order giuen by the Apostles mingling water with wine but offer an vnmingled sacrifice let him be deposed c. But of these speaches all Councelles be full where wee would gladly know of these new Translatours how Presbyter must be translated eyther an Elder or a Priest FVLK 17. I thinke you haue cleane forgotten your promise so lately made that this word Presbyter hath alwaies bin peculiar for a Priest you bring many testimonies some counterfaite some autenticall in which the name of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Presbyter is found but that in all them it is peculiar for a Priest you shew not at all Some colour it hath of that you say in the 14. Can. of the Nicene Councell Carth. 3. c. 24. repeated Const. 6. where mention is made of sacrifice and offering for so they did vnproperly call the administration of the Lordes supper in respect of the sacrifice of thanks giuing that was offered therein After which phrase also they called the Ministers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Sacerdotes sacrificers So they called that which in deede was a table of wood an altar and the inferior ministers Leuites by which it appeareth they did rather allude to the names vsed in the old TestameÌ„t than acknowledged a sacrificing Priesthood that might as properly be so called as the Priesthood after the order of Aaron was Sometime they vsed the name of sacrifice Sacerdos generally for religious seruice the minister of religion as the Gentils did And hereof it is that wee read often of the sacrifices of bread and wine and in the Canon of Carthage by you cited Nec amplius in sacrificijs offeratur quà m de vuis frumentis And let no more be offered in the sacrifices thaÌ„ that which is made of grapes and corne This was bread and wine not the naturall body and bloud of Christe Wherefore these vnpropre speaches proue not a sacrificing priesthood whereby the naturall body and bloud of Christ should be offered in the Masse which is the marke you shoote at MART. 18. Do not all the fathers speake after the same maner making alwaies this distinction of Bishop and Priest as of the first and second degree S. Ignatius the Apostles scholer doth he not place Presbyterium as he calleth it and Presbyteros Priests or the College of Priests next after Bishops and Deacons in the third place repeating it no lesse than thrice in one Epistle and coÌ„mending the dignitie of all three vnto the people doth not S. Hierom the very same saying Let vs honour a Bishop do reuerence to a Priest rise vp to a Deacon And when he saith that as Aaron his sonnes the Leuites were in the Temple so are Bishops Priests and Deacons in the Church for place and degree And in an other place speaking of 〈…〉 ages done by the Vandals and such like Bishops were 〈…〉 Priestes slaine and diuerse of other Ecclesiastical oâ—â—ers Churches ouerthrowen the altars of Christe made stables for horses the relikes of Martyrs digged vp c. When he saith of Nepotian fit Clericus per solitos gradus Presbyter ordinatur he becommeth a man of the Clergie and by the accustomed degrees in m 〈…〉 at a Priest or an Elder when he saith Mihi ante Presbyâ—â—â—uÌ„ sedere non licet c. doth he meane he could not sit aboue an Elder or aboue a Priest him self as then being not Priest When he Vincentius as S. Epiphanius writeth of reuerence to the degree were hardly induced to be made Presbyteri did they refuse the Eldership What was the matter that Iohn the B. of Hierusalem seemed to be so much offended with Epiphanius S. Hierom was it not because Epiphanius made Pauliamus S. Hieroms brother Priest within the said Iohns Diocese FVLK 18. Before the blasphemous heresie of the Popish sacrifice of the Masse was established in the world the fathers did with more libertie vse the termes of sacrifice and sacrificing Priestes which improper speaches since they haue giuen occasion in the time of ignorance to maintain that blasphemous heresie there is good reason that we should beware how we vse any such termes especially in translatioÌ„ of the Scriptures Al the rest of the authorities you cite in this section 500. moe such as they are speake of Presbyter or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which wordes we embrace but of the English word Prieste as it is coÌ„monly taken for a sacrificer or against this word Elder they speake nothing for in all those places we may truly translate for Presbyter an Elder MART. 19. When all antiquitie saith Hieronymus Presbyter Cecilius Presbyter Ruffinus Presbyter Philippus Iâ—â—encus Hesychius Beda Presbyteri and when S. Hierom so often in his Cataloge saith Such a man Presbyter is it not for distinction of a certaine order to signifie that they were Priests and not Bishops namely when he saith of S. Chrysostom Ioannes Presbyter Antiochenus doth he not meane he was as then but a Priest of Antioche Would he haue said so 〈…〉 had written of him after he was Bishop of Constantinopl 〈…〉 FVLK 19. Al this while here is nothing for the English word Priest in that respect we auoid it in traÌ„slatioÌ„ nor against the worde Elder which we vse by which we meane 〈…〉 other thing than the Scripture doth giue vs to vn 〈…〉 d by the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As for the distinction of
Episcopus Presbyter which came in afterward you your selfe confessed as we heard of late that it is not obserued in the Scriptures but the same men are called Episcopi which before were called Presbyteri And according to that distinctioÌ„ you can allow but one Bishop of one citie at once yet the Scripture in diuerse places speaketh of many Bishops of one citie as Act. 20. the Bishops of Ephesus called before Presbyteri Elders also he saluteth the Bishops and Deacons of Philippi Phil. 1. where your note saith that In the Apostles time there were not obserued alwaies distinct names of either function of B. Priest Would you haue vs to translate the Scripture with distinction of names which the holy ghost maketh not nor your vulgar Latin obserueth nor you your selfe for shame can obserue And if we should haue translated for Elders Priests that distinction taken vp after the Apostles times or the writing of the Scripture had bene neuer the more confirmed MART. 20. But of al other places we would desire these gay translatours to translate this one place of S. Augustine speaking of him self a Bishop and S. Hierom a Priest Quanquam enim secunduÌ„ honoruÌ„ vocabula quae iam Ecclesiae vsus obtinuit Episcopatus Presbyterio maior fit tamen in multis rebus Augustinus Hieronymo minor est Is not this the English therof For although according to the titles or names of honour which now by vse of the church haue preuailed the degree of Bishoppe be greater than Priesthood yet in many things Augustine is lesse than Hierom. Or doth it like them to translate it thus The degree of Bishop is greater than Eldership c Againe against Iulian the heretike when he hath brought many testimonies of the holy doctors that were all Bishops as of S. Cyprian Ambrose Basil Nazianzene Chrysostome at length he commeth to S. Hierom who was no Bishop and sayth Nec sanctum Hieronymum quia Presbyter fuit contemnendum arbitreris that is Neither must thou thinke that S. Hierom because he was but a priest therfore is to be contemned whose diuine eloqueÌ„ce hath shined to vs from the East euen to the West like a lampe and so forth to his great commendation Here is a plaine distinction of an inferiour degree to a Bishop for the which the Heretike Iulian did easily contemne him Is â—ot S. Cyprian full of the like places is not all antiquitie so full that whiles I proue this me thinketh I proue nothing els but that snow is white FVLK 20. Of all other importune and vnreasonable iudges you are one of the worst that would enforce vs to translate the Scriptures which you confesse obserueth not the distinction of Bishops and Priestes according to the fathers which doe almost alwayes obserue it If we should translate those sentences of S. Augustine we might vse the word Priest for Presbyter and priesthood for presbyterium and if we vse the words Elder and Eldership what offence I pray you were it when by these names we vnderstand nothing but the same function minister which Augustine doth That Episcopus a Bishop was of very olde time vsed to signifie a degree Ecclesiasticall higher than Presbyter an Elder or Priest we did neuer deny we knowe it right well We knowe what S. Hierom writeth vpon the epistle to Titus cap. 1. idem est â—rgo Presbyter qui Episcopus The same man is Presbyter or an Elder or Priest which is Episcopus a Bishop And before that by the instinct of the deuill factions were made in religion and it was sayd among the people I am of Paule I of Apollo and I of Cephas the Churches were gouerned by common councell Presbyterorum of the Elders But afterwarde when euery one thought those whome he had baptised to be his owne and not Christes it was decreed in the whole worlde that one de Presbyteris of the Elders being elected should be set ouer the reste to whome all the care of the Churche should pertaine and the seedes of schismes shoulde be taken away This and much more to this effect writeth Saint Hieronyme of this distinction in that place and in diuerse other places which nothing proueth that we are bounde to translate Presbyter in the Scripture a Priest and least of all that we are bound in termes to keepe that distinction which the Scripture maketh not and the Papistes them selues can not obserue in their most partiall translation MART. 21. In all which places if they will translate Elder and yet make the same a common name to all Ecclesiastical degrees as Beza defineth it let the indifferent Reader consider the absurd confusion or rather the impossibilitie thereof if not but they will graunt in all these places it signifieth Priest and so is meant then we must beate them with Bezaes rodde of reprehension against Castaleon that we can not dissemble the boldnesse of these men which woulde God it rested within the custome of words onely and were not important matter concerning their heresie These men therefore touching the word Priest though vsed of sacred writers in the mysterie of the newe Testament and for so many yeares after by the secret consent of all Churches consecrated to this one Sacrament so that it is now growen to be the proper vulgar speeche almoste of all nations yet they dare presume rashly to change it and in place thereof to vse the word Elder delicate men forsooth yea worse a great deale because these do it for heresie not for delicacy which neither are moued with the perpetuall authoritie of so many ages nor by the daily custome of the vulgar speech can be brought to thinke that lawful for diuines which all men graunt to other maisters professors of artes that is to reteyne hold that as their owne which by long vse in good faith they haue truely possessed Neither may they pretend the authoritie of any auncient writer as that the old Latine translator sayth Senior Seniores for that which was to them as it were newe to vs is olde euen then that the selfe same wordes which we now vse were more familiar to the Church it is euident because it is very seldom that they speake otherwise FVLK 21. I see no impossibilitie but that in all places where we reade Presbyter we may lawfully translate Elder as well as Priest and make it stil in Scripture a common name to all Ecclesiasticall degrees at least to as many as the Scripture maketh it common without any absurditie or confusion And albeit in the fathers we should translate it Priest because they vnderstood by the name Presbyter a distinct degree from Episcopus yet the saying of Beza against Castaleo could not by any wise man be applyed to vs. For Castaleo changed the name of the Sacrament Baptismus by which both the Scriptures and the fathers vniformely did vse to signifie one and the same Sacrament whereas the name of
bene accounted is it credible that the holy Ghost would neuer haue called them 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as well yea and rather than the Sacrificers of the olde Testament Seeing therefore the holy Ghost had made such a broade difference betwene their names and offices those auncient fathers that confounded those names which the spirit of God would haue to be distinct can not be excused although they neuer dreamed of the mischiefe that followed that the altar of the crosse being ouerthroweÌ„ the only sufficient sacrifice which Christ our high Sacrificer offered once for all being iudged imperfect a new altar a newe sacrifice and a new sacrificing Priesthoode shoulde be set vp in the steede of it Wherefore the vnproper speaches of the auncient writers are no warrant for vs either to translate the Scripture according to their vnproper speaking or to set vp a newe sacrifice and function of sacrificing contrarie to their meaning They named sacrifice and offering but they meant not propitiatorie sacrifiee but only of prayers or praises and giuing of thankes They named 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Sacerdotes but they meant according to the generall etymologie of those wordes suche as were occupied in distributing holy things not suche as shoulde verily sacrifice the bodie of Christ againe to his father but offer the sacrifice of thankes giuing in the Sacrament of the Lordes supper which after a certaine manner as Sainct Augustine sayeth is called the bodie of Christ when in deede it is the Sacrament of the bodie and bloude of Christ. And it is called the sacrificing of the bodie of Christ not in trueth of the thing but a signifying mysterie as Gracian citeth out of Hierome MART. 25. Likewise when Sainct Ambrose sayth The consecration of the bodie of Christ with what wordes is it and by whose speache Of our Lord Iesus For in the rest that is said there is praise giuen to God prayer made for the people for Kings and others but when it commeth that the venerable Sacrament must be consecrated now the Priest vseth not his owne words but he vseth the wordes of Christ. And S. Chrysostome in very many places saith The sacred oblation it selfe whether Peter or Paul or any meaner Priest whatsoeuer offer it is the verie same that Christ gaue vnto his disciples and which now the Priestes doe make or consecrate Why so I pray thee because not men doe sanctifie this but Christ him selfe which before consecrated the same And againe It is not man that maketh the bodie and bloud of Christ but he that was crucified for vs Christ the wordes are vttered by the Priestes mouth and by Gods power grace are the things proposed consecrated For this sayth he is my bodie With this worde are the things proposed consecrated FVLK 25. These testimonies are heaped vp without any neede for the vnproper vsage of these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Sacerdos in the auncient writers we doe acknowledge but in the holy Scripture you are not able to bring one place where Presbyteri of the newe Testament are called Sacerdotes or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Wherefore of the vnproper applying of these names to the Ministers of the newe Testament can followe no consequence of externall sacrifice or altar which you vrge except sacrifice and altar be likewise vsed vnproperly as where the table is called an altar the bread wine a sacrifice as in Irenaeus lib. 4. cap. 32. where also he saith that the sacrifices do not sanctifie the man but the coÌ„science of the man being purâ— sanctifieth the sacrifice and causeth God to accept it as of a friende cap 34. Which can not in any wise be true of the naturall bodie of Christ. MART. 26. And so be these places where them selues translate Sacerdos a Priest they may learne also how to translate Presbyteros in S. Hierome saying the verie same thing that at their praiers the bodie and bloud of our Lord is made And in an other place that with their sacred mouth they make our Lordes bodie Likewise when they read S. Ambrose agaist the Nouatians that God hath grauÌ„ted liceÌ„câ— to his Priests to release forgiue as well great sinnes as litle without exception in the Ecclesiastical history how the Nouatian Heretikes taught that such as were fallen into great sinnes should not aske for remission of the Priest but of God onely they may learne howe to translate Presbyteros in S. Hierom and in the Ecclesiasticall historie where the one sayth thus Episcopus Presbyter cùm peccatorum audierit varietates scit qui ligandus sit qui soluendus and the other speaketh de Presbytero Poenitentiario of an extraordinarie Priest that heard confessions and enioyned penance who afterward was taken away and the people went to diuerse ghostly fathers as before And especially Saint Chrysostome â—ill make them vnderstand what these Presbyteri were and how they are to be called in English who telleth them in their owne word that Sacerdotes the Priestes of the newe lawe haue power not onely to know but to purge the filth of the soule therefore whosoeuer despiseth them is more worthy to be punished than the â—ebell Dathan and his complices FVLK 26. Where S. Hierom vseth the worde Presbyteri we wil make no great curtesie to translate Priests knowing that when he sayth at their prayers the bodie and bloud of Christ is made he meaneth the Sacrament of the bodie and bloud of Christ as he him selfe sayth in an other place Dupliciter sanguis Christi â—arâ— intelligitur The bloud and flesh of Christ is vnderstoode two maner of wayes either that spirituall and diuine whereof he him selfe sayde my flesh is meate in deede and my bloud is drinke in deede and except yee shall eate my fleshe and drinke my bloud you shall not haue eternall life or else the flesh and bloud which was crucified and which was shedde by the speare of the souldier This and such other places teach vs to vnderstand S. Hierome if he speake any where obscurely or vnproperly of the mysterie of our Lordes supper We graunt with Ambrose that God hath giuen auctoritie to all the ministers of the worde to remit all sinnes that be remissible But this do not you graunt for you reserue some to the Bishops and some to the Pope alone to remitte wherein you goe cleane against Ambrose who fauoureth you not so much by the terme Sacerdos which you say he vseth as he condemneth your partiall Popish reseruation of cases when he alloweth euery Priest to forgiue as well great sinnes as litle without exception S. Hierom you cite at large as it seemeth to insinuate auricular coÌ„fession But the whole saying you liked not because it sheweth how they forgiue sinnes It is writteÌ„ in Math. lib. 3. cap. 16. vpoÌ„ those wordes spoken to Peter Vnto thee will I giue the keies of the kingdome of
not complaine of the singularitie of this exaÌ„ple although you require but one I wil adde out of the Psalme 141. where the Prophet saith our bones are scattered at the very brinke or mouth of sheol the graue Howe can you vnderstand him to speake of hel For the graue and not hell is a place for dead mens bones as he speaketh of the faithfull by the wicked compted as good as dead rotten consumed to the bones By these and many other examples it is manifest that the proper signification of sheol in English is a graue and not hell MART. 22. And therefore Beza doth strangely abuse his Reader more than in one place saying that the Hebrue word doth properly signifie graue beyng deduced of a verbe that signifieth to craue or aske because it craueth alwayes newe coarses As though the graue craued moe than Hel doth or swallowed moe or were more hardly satisfied and filled than Hell for in all such places they translate graue And in one such place they say The graue and destructioÌ„ can neuer be ful Whereas them selues a litle before translate the very same wordes Hel destructioÌ„ and therefore it might haue pleased them to haue said also Hel and destructioÌ„ can neuer be ful as their powfellowes do in their translation and againe We shal swalow them vp like Hel. The Diuel we reade goeth about continually like a roaring lion seeking whom he may deâ—ouâ— Who is called in the Apocalypse Abaddon that is destruction And so very aptly Hel and destruction are ioyned togither and are truly said neuer to be filled What madnesse and impudencie is it then for Beza to write thus Who is ignorant that by the Hebrue worde rather is signified a graue for that it seemeth after a sorte to craue alwaies new câ—rcasses FVLK 22. Beza doth not abuse his reader to tel him that sheol is deriued of a verbe that signifieth crauing or asking but you doe vnhonestly abuse Beza as you doe euery man when you take in hand to affirme that he standeth onely vpon the etymologie of sheol to proue that it signifieth the graue MART. 23. And againe coÌ„cerning our Sauiour Christs descending into hell and deliuering the fathers from thence it is maruel fâ—iâ—lr Beâ—a that the most parte of the auncient fathers were in this errour whereas with the Hebrues the word SHEOL signifieth nothing else but GRAVE Before he pleaded vpon the etymologie or nature of the worde now also he pleadeth vpon the authoritie of the Hebrues themselues If he were not knowen to be very impudent and obstinate wee woulde easily mistrust his skill in the Hebrue saying that among the Hebrues the worde signifieth nothing else but graue FVLK 23. Beza sayth that the worde Sheol properly signifieth nothing but the graue neuerthelesse hee saith it is taken figuratiuely for tribulation whiche is neere to extreeme destruction yea and sometime for the bottomlesse pitte of hell MART. 24. I would gladly knowe what are those Hebrues doth not the Hebrue text of the holy Scripture best tell vs the vse of this word Do not themselues translate it Hel very often do not the Septuaginta alwaies If any Hebrue in the world were asked how he would turne these wordes into Hebrue Similes estis sepulchris dealbatis you are like to whited graues And Sepulchrum eius apud vos est His graue is among you would any Hebrue I say translate it by this Hebrue worde which Beza saith among the Hebrues signifieth nothing else but graue Aske your Hebrue Readers in this case and see what they will answere FVLK 24. The best of the Hebrues that either interpreted Scriptures or made Dictionaries Iewes or Christians do acknowledge that sheol doth properly signifie the graue That the Septuaginta do alwaies traÌ„slate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it proueth not that it alwaies signifieth hel for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth not alwaies hell as in the place of NuÌ„b. 16. As for the turning of Latin into Hebrue is not our coÌ„trouersie but of translating Hebrue into English sheol may signifie the graue the hole the pit as Fâ—â—ea though it be not all one with the Latine worde Sepulchrum And yet Rabbi Salomon whome you boldly cite in the 27. Section saith plainely that the true and proper interpretation of Sheol is Keber whiche you say is as proper for graue as Lac is for milke MART. 25. What are those Hebrues then that Beza speaketh of forsooth certaine Iewes or later Rabbines which as they doe falsely interprete all the holy Scriptures agaynst our Sauiour Christ in other points of our beleefe as against his Incarnation Death and Resurrection so do they also falsely interprete the holy scriptures against his descending into Hell which those Iewish Rabbines deny because they looke for another Messias that shal not die at al and consequeÌ„tly shal not after his death go downe into Hel deliuer the fathers expecting his comming as our sauiour Christ did And therfore those Iewish Rabbines hold as the heretikes do that the fathers of the old Testament were in heauen before our sauiour Christs Incarnation these Rabbines are they which also peruert the Hebrue word to the significatioÌ„ of graue in such places of the holy scriptures as speake either of our Sauiour Christes descending into hel or of the fathers going downe into Hell euen in like maner as they peruert other Hebrew wordes of the holy scripture as namely alma to signifie a young woman not a virgin against our Sauiours birth of the B. Virgin Marie FVLK 25. Beza speaketh of the holy men of God which did write the Scriptures and so vse that word Sheol as it can not be taken to signifie any thing properly but the graue or pit And as for the Iewish RabbiÌ„s what reason is there why we should not credite them in the interpretatiou of wordes of their owne tongue rather than any auncient Christians ignorant of the Hebrewe tongue And although they doe sometimes frowardly contend about the significatioÌ„ of a word or two against the truth of the Gospell that is no sufficient cause why they should be discredited in all words But beside them Beza hath also the best Hebritians that haue bene in this laste age among the Christians not onely Protestants but Papistes also namely Pagninus and Masius in their Dictionaries MART. 26. And if these later Rabbines be the Hebrewes that Beza meaneth and which these gay English translators followe we lament that they ioyne themselues with such companions being the sworne enemies of our Sauiour Christ. Surely the Christian Hebrewes in Rome and elsewhere which of great Rabbines are become zealous Doctors of Christianitiâ— and therefore honour euery mysterie and article of our Christian faith concerning our Sauiour Christ they dispute as vehemently against those other Rabbines as we doe against the Heretikes and among other things they tell them thus Saul sayd Raise me vp Samuel
Greeke text of the Psalmes which nowe we haue is none of the Seuenties translation as euen Lindanus might teach you de opt gen l 3. ◠6. MART. 25. And to this purpose perhaps it is for other cause I can not gesse that you make such a maruelous transposition of wordes in your translation Mat. 19. saying thus When the sonne of man shall sit in the throne of his maiestie ye that haue followed me in the regeneration shal sit also vpon twelue scates Whereas the order of these wordes both in Greeke and Latine is this You that haue followed me in the regeneration when the Sonne of man shall sit in his maiestie you also shall sit vpon twelue seates To follow Christ in the regeneration is not easily vnderstood what it should meane but to sit with Christ in the regeneration that is in the resurrection vpon twelue seates that is familiar and euery mans interpretation and concerneth she great reward that they shall then haue which here followe Christ as the Apostles did FVLK 25. You looke for faultes very narrowly that can espye but a comma wanting although it be no impious sense to follow Christ in the regeneration for the worlde by Christ was after a sort renewed when the cause of the restauration thereof was performed as for the reward of which you haue such a seruile care is expressed in sitting vpon twelue seates to iudge the tribes of Israell Wherefore there was no neede that you shoulde feare the losse of your rewarde by this transposition MART. 26. The like transposition of wordes is in some of your Bibles Heb. 2. v. 9. thus We see IESVS crowned with glorie and honour which was a litle inferior to the Angels through the suffering of death Whereas both in Greeke and Latine the order of the wordes is thus Him that was made a litle inferior to Angels we see IESVS through the passion of death crowned with honour and glorie In this later the Apostle sayth that Christ was crowned for his suffering death and so by his death merited his glorie But by your translation he saith that Christ was made inferiour to Angels by his suffering death that is saith Beza For to suffer death and taking it so that he was made inferiour to Angels that he might die then the other sense is cleane excluded that for suffering death he was crowned with glorie and this is one place among other whereby it may very well be gathered that some of you thinke that Christ him selfe did not merite his owne glorie and exaltation So obstinatly are you set against merites and meritorious workes To the which purpose also you take away mans free will as hauing no habilitie to worke toward his owne saluation FVLK 26. Whether we say Christ was crowned for his suffering or Christ was made inferiour to the Angels through his suffering the sense of either of both is good and godly and may stande with the place neither doth the one of them exclude the other although but one only can be the sense of the place And if this be the place by which you may gather that some of vs thinke that Christ merited not his owne glorie it is not worth a straw We hold that Christ for him selfe needed not to merite because he was the Lorde of glorie but that he merited for vs to be exalted in our nature for our saluation it is so farre off that we deny that our whole comfort resteth in his merites and in his glorie which he hath deserued for vs we hope to be glorified for euer When you make your transition to the next chapter you say we take away mans free wil as hauing none abilitie to worke by which it seemeth that you doe not onely allowe to man the freedome of his will but also power to worke whatsoeuer he will so that he shall not only haue a free will but also a strength by the same to worke towardes his owne saluation CHAP. X. Hereticall translation against FREE VVILL Martin AGAINST free will your corruptions be these Ioh. 1. 12. where it is said As many as receiued him he gaue them power to be made the sonnes of God some of your translations say he gaue them prerogatiue to be the sonnes of God Beza dignitie Who protesteth that whereas in other places often he translated this Greke word power and authoritie here he refused both in deede against free will which he sayeth the Sophistes would proue out of this place reprehending Erasmus for following them in his translation But whereas the Greeke word is indifferent to signifie dignitie or libertie he that will translate either of these restraineth the sense of the holy Ghost and determineth it it to his owne fansie If you may translate dignitie may not we as well translate it libertie Yes surely For you know it signifieth the one as well as the other both in profane and Diuine writers And you can well call to minde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence they are deriued and that the Apostle calleth a mans libertie of his owne will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now then if potestas in Latine and power in Englishe be wordes also indifferent to signifie both dignitie and libertie translate so in the name of God and leaue the text of the Scripture indifferent as we doe and for the sense whether of the two it doth here rather signifie or whether it doth not signifie both as no doubt it doth the fathers so expounde it let that be examined otherwise It is a common fauls with you and intolerable by your translation to abridge the sense of the holy Ghost to one particular vnderstanding to defeate the exposition of so many fathers that expounde it in another sense and signification As is plaine in this example also folowing Fulke SEeing you confesse that the Greeke worde signifieth not onely power but also dignitie and that in this place it signifieth both it can be no corruptiō but the best and truest interpretation to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dignitie for that includeth power whereas power may be seuered from dignitie Where you woulde haue vs vse a word that is ambiguous whē the sense is cleare by your owne confession you bewray your owne corrupt affection which desire to haue the Scriptures so ambiguously or doubtfully translated that the ignorant might receiue no benefite of certaine vnderstanding by them When a worde hath diuerse significations a wise translater must weigh which of them agreeth with the text in hand that to vse but not to seeke ambiguous words that may bring the matter in doubt when the meaning to him is certaine As here you say there is no doubt but it signifieth both and yet you quarrell at our translation which comprehendeth both and vrge the word of power from which dignity may be seuered whereas frō dignity power or ability or licence can not be
lesse account to be made of his authoritie being also ignoraunt in the Hebrue tongue and not regarding the Greeke relatiue to be also of the masculine gender Hierome also in that place interpreteth not appetite but societie and fantasie ththat chataoth is the masculine gender and not the foeminine Whereas it is neuer read but in the foeminine gender out of this place of controuersie But the text it selfe you say is sufficient to conuince this absurditie because in this speache of God to Cain there is no word of Abel It is somwhat that you say if this that Moises reporteth were all that God sayd to Cain but seeing it is certaine that God at large discoursed wyth him of the cause of his enuie againste his brother wee may easily vnderstande in this speach two arguments to reproue Caines enuie the one of the person of God the other of the person of Abel For God doth reprooue his enuie by his owne iustice and by Abels innocencie Which latter argumēt your false translation doth vtterly suppresse But that a Relatiue is referred to an Antecedent whiche in the same verse is not expressed it is no strange thing to them that reade the scripture Examples I will giue you Iob 26. v. 6. 11. 12. and cap. 27. v. 9. 10. yea it is verye vsuall when the antecedent maye bee easily vnderstoode as heere both by the gender and also by manner of speache whiche beeing the same that was spoken of Eues infirmitie subiection to hir husband must needes here haue the same sense of Abel towarde Caine his elder brother MART. 10. Now if against the coherence of the texte and exposition of the holy Doctours and of the whole Churche of God you pretend the Hebrewe grammar forsooth as not bearing such construction not to trouble the common reader that cannot iudge of these things and yet fully to satisfie euerye man euen of common vnderstanding we request here the Aduersaries themselues to tel vs truely according to their knowledge skill whether the Hebrewe construction or point of grammar be not al one in these wordes Sinne LYETH at the doore and in these the desire THEREOF shall be subiect to thee and thou shalt rule ouer IT If they say as they must nedes that the Hebrewe construction or Syntaxis is al one then wil it folow that the Hebrewe beareth the one as wel as the other and therefore when the selfe same translation of theirs maketh no scruple of Grammar in the former but trāslate as we do Sinne lieth at the doore a blinde man may see that in the latter wordes also the Hebrue is but a foolishe pretence and that the true cause of translating them otherwise proceedeth of an hereticall humour to obscure and deface this so plaine and euident Scripture for mans free wil. FVLK 10. I haue shewed before the cause of the change of the gender in the worde robets to be for that by sinne is meant here the punishment of sinne Sanctes Pagninus taketh the worde sinne for an oblation for sinne And for the punishment of sinne it is taken Zach. 14 19. The Septuaginta also doe plainly referre these relatiues vnto Abel and therefore they are in the masculine gender 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the cōuersion of him pertaineth to thee and thou shalt rule ouer him MART. 11. And as for the Hebrewe grammar in this point were it not for troubling the Reader we could tell thē that the word sinne in Hebrew is not here of the foeminine gender as they suppose but of the masculine so sayth S. Hieror expresly vpon this place who had as much knowledge in the Hebrew tongue as all these new Doctors Aben Ezra also the great Rabbine in his Hebrew commentaries vpon this text sayth it is a meere forgerie and fiction to referre the masculine relatiue otherwise than to the word sinne which though elsewhere it be the feminine gender yet here it is a masculine according to that rule of the Grammarians that the doubtfull gender must be discerned by the verbe adiectiue pronoune or participle ioyned with the same as the sayd Hebrew Doctor doth in the word paradise Gen. 2. which there by the pronounes he pronounceth to be a feminine though elsewhere a masculine Lastly if the worde sinne were here and alwayes only a feminine and neuer a masculine yet they haue litle skill in the Hebrue tongue that thinke it straunge to matche masculines and feminines togither in very good and grammaticall construction Whereof they may see a whole chapter in Sanctes Pagninus with this title Foeminea masculeis iuncta that is Feminines ioyned with masculines FVLK 11. Not only the Hebrue Grammar but the same phrase vsed before maketh plainely for our translation That S. Hierome saith the Hebrue is of the masculine gender as great an Hebritian as he was he may not carrie the matter away with his authoritie except he bring an instance where it is of the masculine gender The Iewish Rabbins patrones of free will as ignorant of the grace of God erre in this place as they doe in a thousand more and are forced to inuent straunge applications of the worde appetite to make their sense probable How the gender of Hebrew wordes may be found out we are not now to learne which because you haue but lately learned you thinke all men ignorant thereof but your selfe By the chapter of Pagninus where he sheweth that feminines are ioyned to masculines you might learne that chataoth is the feminine gender although it be ioyned with a participle of the masculine gēder Who also might haue taught you the difference of nounes ending in he praecedente camets to be this that feminines haue the accent in the last syllable masculines in the last saue one and therefore chataoth in this place hauing the accent in the last syllable notwithstanding the participle which is masculine must needes be of the feminine gender MART. 12. Now for the last refuge if they will say all this needed not because in other their Bibles it is as we woulde haue it we tell them they must iustifie and make good all their translations because the people readeth all and is abused by all and al come forth with priuiledge printed by the Queenes Printer c. If they will not let them confesse the faultes and call them in and tell vs which translation or translations they will stand vnto In the meane time they must be content to heare of all indifferently as there shall be cause and occasion to touch them FVLK 12. We tel you that wee may not iustifie any fault committed in our translations but we haue reformed them if any were espied in the later Neuerthelesse those faults are not so great that we neede call in al the Bibles in which is any fault it is sufficiēt that we admonish the reader in our later editions of such faults as are escaped in the former especially when the faults
why is not this confessioÌ„ a Sacrament where them selues acknowledge forgiuenesse of sinnes by the Minister These contradictions and repugnance of their practise and translation if they can wittily and wisely reconcile they may perhaps in this point satisfie the reader But whether the Apostle speake here of Sacramentall confession or no sincere translators should not haue fledde from the proper and most vsuall word of confession or confessing consonant both to the Greeke and Latine and indifferent to what soeuer the holy Ghost might meane as this word acknowledge is not FVLK 7. Of the word of penance and therevpoÌ„ to wring in satisfaction we haue heard more than enough but that penance is a Sacrament wee haue heard neuer a worde to proue it But what say wee against confession Forsooth Iames 5. wee translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acknowledge your selfes Why sir dothe acknowledging signifie any other thing than confessing you want then nothing else but the sounde of confession which among the ignoraunt woulde helpe you litle whiche terme your Popishe acknowledging rather shrifte than confession It is maruaile then that you blame vs not because wee say not shriue your selues one to an other A miserable Sacrament that hath neede of the sounde of a worde to helpe it to bee gathered But how I pray you should the reader gather your auricular shrifte or Popishe confession if the worde confesse your selues were vsed by vs I weene because the Priests are called in a little before It is more than mough if you might gaine your Sacrament of anealing by their comming in But shrifte commeth to late after extreeme vnction Well admitte the Apostle forgotte the order and placed it after which shoulde come before must wee needes haue Priestly confession proued out of that place doth not S Iames say coÌ„fesse your selues one to an other as he saith pray one for an other Then it followeth that the Lay man muste shriue the Prieste as well as the Prieste muste shriue the Laye man And the Priest muste confesse him selfe to the people as well as the people muste pray for the Prieste But you haue an obiection out of the Communion booke to proue confession to be a Sacrament which appointeth that the sicke person shal make a speciall confession to the minister and he to absolue him c. Will you neuer leaue this shamelesse cogging and forging of matters against vs The Communion booke appointeth a speciall confessioÌ„ only for them that feele their conscience troubled with any waighty matter that they may receiue counsaile and comforte by the minister who hath aucthoritie in the name of God to remitte sinnes not only to them that be sicke but also to them that be whole and dayly dothe pronounce the absolution to them that acknowledge confesse their sinnes humbly before God But hereof it followeth not that this confession is a Sacrament for by preaching the people that beleeue are absolued froÌ„ their sinnes by the ministerie of the Preacher yet is not preaching a Sacrament A Sacrament must haue an outward element or bodily creature to represent the grace of remission of sinnes as in Baptisme and in the Lordes supper But where you conclude that sincere translators should not haue fledde the proper and moste vsuall worde of confession you speake your pleasure for the worde of acknowledging is more proper and vsuall in the English tongue than is the worde of confessing And if you can proue any Sacrament out of that texte beholde you haue the Greeke and Latine vntouched and the English answereable to both make your Syllogisme out of that place to proue Popish shrift when you dare CHAP. XV. Hereticall translation against the Sacrament of HOLY ORDERS and for the MARIAGE OF PRIESTS and VOTARIES Martin AGAINST the Sacrament of Orders what can they doe more in translation than in all their Bibles to take away the name of Priest and Priesthood of the new Testament altogether and for it to say Elder and Eldership Whereof I treated more at large in an other place of this booke Here I adde these fewe obseruations that both for Priestes and Deacons which are two holy orders in the Catholike Church they translate Ministers to commend that newe degree deuised by themselues As when they say in all their Bibles Feare the Lord with all thy soule and honour his ministers In the Greeke it is plaine thus and honour his Priests as the word alwayes signifieth and in the very next sentence themselues so translate Feare the Lorde and honour the Priestes But they would needes borowe one of these places for the honour of Ministers As also in the Epistle to Timothee where S. Paul talketh of Deacons and nameth them twise they in the firste place translate thus Likewise muste the Ministers be honest c. And a litle after Let the Deacons be the husbaÌ„ds of one wife Loe the Greeke worde being one and the Apostle speaking of one Ecclesiasticall order of Deacons and Beza so interpreating it in both places yet our English translators haue allowed the first place to their Ministers and the second to Deacons and so because Bishops also went before they haue found vs out their three orders Bishops Ministers and Deacons Alas poore soules that can haue no place in Scripture for their Ministers but by making the Apostle speake three things for two Fulke FOR the names of Priest and Elder wee haue spoken heretofore sufficiently as also for the name of Minister which is vsed for the same that Elder and Prieste althoughe the word signifie more generally That the worde Ministers is put for Priests I take it rather to bee an ouersight of the firste translatour whome the rest folowed because that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commeth immediatly after than any purpose against the order of Priest or to dignifie the name of Ministers For seeing Syrachs sonne speaketh of the Priests and Ministers of the â—awe his saying can make nothing to or froe for the names of the Ministers Priestes or Elders of the new Testament That some translatioÌ„s in 1. Tim. 3. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reÌ„der Ministers it is because they supposed the Greeke word to be taken there in the generall sense as it is in manye other places not to make three degrees of twoo as you do fondly cauil For the orders of Bishops Elders or as you cal them Priests and as they be commonly called Priests and Ministers is all one in authoritie of ministring the word the Sacraments The degree of Bishoppes as they are taken to be a superiour order vnto Elders or Priestes is for gouernment and discipline specially committed vnto them not in authoritie of handling the worde and the sacraments MART. 2. There are in the Scripture that are called Ministers in infinite places and that by three Greeke wordes commonly but that is a large signification of minister attributed to al that minister waite serue or attend to doe any
their doctrine But what is their prastise in the regiment of their Churche cleane contrarie For in the order of the communion booke where it is appointed what the Minister shall do it is indifferently said Then shall the Prieste do or say this and that and Then shal the Minister c. Whereby it is euident that they make Priest a proper and peculiar calling applied to their Ministers and so their practise is contrarie to their teaching and doctrine FVLK 7. I haue satisfied your desire before if you list to knowe our translation must be as neere as it can to expresse the true signification of the originall words so it is in that place of the Acts. 14. v. 23. which being graunted by them that denie the necessitie of â—at forme of election to continue alwaies giueth no more aduauntage to the aduersaries than they woulde take out of the signification of the Greeke word how soeuer it were translated Your example of Maister Whitakers denying the name of Prieste to be applied to the ministers of the Gospel to proue that wee must mainteine our Ecclesiasticall state how soeuer we translate is very fonde and ridiculous as also the contradiction that you would make betweene him and the seruice booke touching the name of Prieste there vsed and allowed Maister Whitakers writing in Latine speaketh of the Latine terme Sacerdos the Communion booke of the English worde Priest is not this a goodly net for a foole to daunce naked in and thinke that no body can see him MART. 8. Nowe concerning imposition or laying on of handes in making their Ministers which the Puritans also are forced to allow by other wordes of Scripture howsoeuer they dispute and iangle againste 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 none of them all make more of it than of the like Iudaicall ceremonie in the olde Law not acknowledging that there is any grace giuen withall though the Apostle say there is in expresse termes but they will aunswer this text as they are wont with a fauourable translation turning grace into gift As when the Apostle saith thus Neglect not THE GRACE that is in thee which is giuen thee by prophecie with impositioÌ„ of the hands of Priesthood they translate Neglect not the GIFT and Beza most impudently for by prophecie translateth to prophecie making that onely to be this gift and withall adding this goodly exposition that he had the gift of prophecie or preaching before and now by imposition of hands was chosen onely to execute that function But because it might be obiected that the Apostle sayth Which was giuen thee with the imposition of handes or as he speaketh in an other place by imposition of handes making this imposition of handes an instrumentall cause of giuing this grace he sayth that it did onely confirme the grace or gift before giuen FVLK 8. Though we finde that by or with imposition of handes many rare and extraordinary giftes of prophecie of tongues and such like were giuen in the Apostles time yet we finde no where that grace is ordinarily giuen by that ceremonie vsed alwayes in the Church for ordination of the ministers therof But whether there be or not our translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into gift is true and proper to the worde For albeit the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be taken not onely for the fauour of God but also for his gracious giftes yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is neuer taken in the Scripture but for a free gift or a gift of his grace That Beza referreth the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the ende of the gifte he hath the nature of the worde to beare him out which may well abide that sense and yet he doth not reiect the other common interpretation by prophecie that by appoyntment of the holye Ghost vttered by some of the Prophets But where you wrangle about the gift of prophecie as though he were vtterly voyde thereof before he receyued imposition of handes I knowe not what you meane Woulde you haue vs thinke that he was ordayned Prieste or Elder or to anye office of the Church without competent giftes meete to discharge his office That the gifte of prophecie as well as of speakinge with tongues might be giuen by and with imposition of hands Beza doubteth not But it is out of doubte that to an office none was chosen or admitted by the Apostle and the reste of the Presbyterie of Ephesus but such as had sufficient giftes to answere that office MART. 9. Thus it is euident that though the Apostle speake neuer so plaine for the dignitie of holy Orders that it giueth grace and consequently is a Sacrament they peruert all to the contrarie making it a bare ceremonie suppressing the worde grace which is much more significant to expresse the Greeke worde than gifte is because it is not euery gifte but a gratious gifte or a gifte proceeding of maruelous and mere grace At when it is saide To you it is giuen not onely to beleeue but also to suffer for him The Greeke worde signifieth this much To you this grace is giuen c. So when God gaue vnto S. Paule all that sayled with him this Greeke worde is vsed because it was a great grace or gratious gifte giuen vnto him When S. Paule pardoned the incestuous person before due time it is expressed by this worde because it was a grace as Theodorete calleth it giuen vnto him And therefore also the almes of the Corinthians 1. Cor. 16. v. 3. are called their grace which the Protestants translate liberalitie neglecting altogither the true force and signification of the Greeke wordes FVLK 9. Here is no euidence at al that the order of Priesthoode is a Sacrament or gyueth grace but that God by the ceremonie of laying on of handes did giue wonderfull and extraordinarie giftes of tongues and prophecying in the beginning and firste planting of the Churche But that grace should alwayes follow that ceremonie there is no proofe to bee made out of the holie Scriptures And experience sheweth that hee which was voide of giftes beefore hee was ordered Priest is as verye an asse and Dogbolte as hee was beefore for anye encrease of grace or gratious giftes althoughe hee haue authoritie committed vnto hym if hee bee ordained in the Church though vnworthily with great sinne both of him that ordaineth and of him that is ordained But wee suppresse the worde grace you say bicause charisma signifieth at least a gratious gift See how the bare sounde of tearmes delighteth you that you mighte therein seeke a shadowe for your singlesolde sacrament of popishe orders The worde signifieth a free or gratious gifte and so will euerie man vnderstande it whiche knoweth that it is giuen by God As also in all places where mention is made of Gods giftes wee must vnderstande that it proceedeth freely from him as a token of his fauoure and grace But that the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
calleth meritorum 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the encrease and augmenting of Iohns merites or priuiledges that in Malachie he is called an Angell and Saint Gregoriâ— sayth he which came to bring tidings of Christ him selfe was worthily called an Angell that in his very name there might be a dignitie and all the fathers and all witte and reason conceiue a greate excellencye in this name onely our profane Protestants that thinke of all diuine things and persons most basely translate accordingly euen in the foresayd Gospell also making our Sauiour to say that Iohn was more than a Prophet because he was a Messenger Yea where our Sauiour him selfe is called Angelus Testamenti the Angell of the Testament there they translate the messenger of the couenant FVLK 18. It is not safe to translate alwayes the messenger of God by the name of an Angell which is commonly taken to signifie a spirite not a bodily creature therefore our translators thought good to expresse the signification of the Hebrew and Greeke worde in English and to vse the terme of Messenger as the worde doth signifie nothing derogating from the dignitie of the persons or office of them of whome it is vttered which consisteth in the addition following of God of the Lorde of the Church For the name of Angell of it selfe is no name of dignitie seeing there be Angells of the deuill and of darkenes as well as of God of light And Isidorus Clarius interpreteth the word in this place of Malachie Legatus the Ambassador or Messenger It is not therefore of any profane minde that for Angell we say Messenger Your owne vulgar Interpretor Agg. 1. v. 13. translateth Maleach Iehouah nuncius domini the Lords Messenger and so diuerse times where mention is made of Gods Messengers This is therefore a vayne contention about termes when the matter is not in question That the name of Angels soundeth more honorably as Hierom and other thinke it is no rule to binde translators but expounders may as occasion is offered obserue it MART. 19. If S. Hierome in all these places had translated nuntium then the English were messenger but translating it angelum and the Church al antiquitie so reading and expounding it as a terme of more dignitie and excellencie what meane these base coÌ„panions to disgrace the very eloqueÌ„ce of the Scripture which by such termes of amplification would speake more significantly and emphatically what meane they I say that so inuey against Castaleo for his profanenesse them selues to say for Angell Messenger for Apostle Legate or Embassadour and the like Are they afraid lest by calling meÌ„ Angels it would be mistaken as though they were Angells in deede by nature then S. Paule spake daungerously when he sayd to the Galathians As Gods Angel you receiued me as Christ Iesus But to proceede FVLK 19. The verye eloquence of the Scripture is best expressed when the wordes are translated as they signifie in the originall tongue And although some words be appropried to certaine callings which it is not conuenient to turne into the generall signification yet is neither the Hebrew nor the Greeke word that signifieth Messengers in the Scripture so restrayned but that it is vsed for all Messengers indifferently of God and men yea of God and the deuill Wherefore there is no cause why we should vse the Greeke worde Angell rather than the English worde Messenger And where you aske whether we be afrayd lest by calling men Angels it would be mistaken as though they were Angels in nature we may well feare lest the ignorant vnlearned might so be deceiued when Bristow so great a Doctor writer among you is so fondly disguised that he mistaketh the Angell of the Church of Philadelphia for an Angell by nature and alledgeth that which God promiseth that his enimies the Iewes shall worship before his feete to proue the inuocation and worship of heauenly Angels Neither spake Paule daungerously when he said the GalathiaÌ„s receiued him as an Angel of God as Christe Iesus For the worde Angell in the Greeke tongue signifieth a messenger it was easie to vnderstand that the messenger or embassadour of a Prince is receiued as the Prince him selfe without confounding the persons of the Prince and his messenger MART. 20. It is much for the authoritie and dignitie of Gods Priests that they do bind and loose and execute al Ecclesiasticall functioÌ„â—â— in the person and power of Christ whose ministers they are So Saint Paule saieth 2. Cor. 2. v. 10. that when hee pardoned or released the penaunce of the incestuous Corinthian he did it in the person of Christe That is as Saint Ambrose expoundeth it in the name of Christe in his steede as his Vicar and deputie But they translate it In the sight of Christ. Where it is euident they can not pretende the Greeke and if there be ambiguitie in the Greeke the Apostle him selfe taketh it away interpreting himselfe in the very same case when he excommunicateth the said incestuous person saying that he doth it in the name and with the vertue of our Lord Iesus Christe so expounding what he meaneth also in this place FVL. 20. That the Bishops Elders or Priests of gods Church do bind and lose as in the person and power of Christ in his name by his authority is acknowledged by vs But when we translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the sight of Christ we respect what the Greeke phrase doth more properly require yea what the Hebrewe phrase mipenei doth signifie wherevnto it is like that the Apostle doth allude Otherwise Beza in his annotations vpoÌ„ the place doth not mislike the sense and interpretation of Ambrose whereof he maketh mention but preferreth the other as more simple and agreeable to the meaning of the Apostle in that place and to the nature of the Greke and Hebrew phrase MART. 21. And it may bee that for some suche purpose they change the antient and accustomed reading in these words of S. Mathew Ex te enim exiet dux qui regat populuÌ„ meum Israel translating thus Out of thee shal come the gouemour that shall feede my people Israel for that shall rule my people Israel This is certaine that it is a false translation because the Prophets wordes Mich. 5. cited by Saint Mathew both in Hebrewe and Greeke signifie onely a ruler or Gouernour and not a Pastor or feeder Therefore it is either a great ouer sight which iâ— a smal matter in coÌ„parison of the least corruption or rather because they do the like Act. 20. v. 28. it is done to suppres the signification of ecclesiastical power gouernement that concurreth with feeding first in Christ and from him in his Apostles and Pastâ—rs of the Church both which are here signified in this one Greeke word to wit that Christ our Sauiour shall rule and feede Ps. 2. Apoc. 2. v. 27. yea he
readeth FVLK 4. If the Apostle had meant nothing by the preposition he might and would as it is most like haue left it cleane out yea if he had meant no more but the adoration of Iosephs scepter what needed he to haue added the toppe or the extremitie or why was the top of his scepter more to be adored than all the other length of it But certayne it is the Apostle would expresse the Hebrewe preposition which muste needes haue some signification And where you aske them that haue skill in the Hebrewe whether there be any force in the preposition in those sayings out of the Psalme that speake of worshipping or falling downe before his footestoole his holye hill c. I aunswere yea there is great force for the hill was not to be worshipped but he whose tabernacle or temple was on it But you obiect that we our selues neglect the preposition Psal. 96. and say worship the Lord. The fault is the lesse because the worship is referred to none but the Lorde yet the precise translation in that place should be bowe downe or fall ye downe before the Lorde in the glorious sanctuarie And where you say we shunne the worde of adoration which the Hebrew and Greeke duely doe expresse by termes applyed for the most part signifie adoring of creatures You haue packed vp a great number of vntruthes togither as it were in a bundell First that we shunne the terme of adoring for doubt of your Dulia which is vtterly vntrue for it is auoyded partly because it is more Latine than English partly because it doth not expresse either the Greeke or the Latine termes which the Scripture vseth Secondly you auouch that both the Hebrew lishtachauoth and the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereas all that be learned in both the tongues doe know that the Hebrew worde doth signifie properly to bowe downe and therefore is vsed of such bowing downe as is not to the ende of adoration as Psalme 42. v. 5. 6. Why art thou cast downe O my soule and in diuers other places The Greeke word also signifieth to vse some gesture of bodie in worshipping sometimes to fall downe as Herodotus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they must worship the King falling downe before him Finally where you say they are applied to the adoring of creatures if you cal it adoration which is vsed in ciuil manner to Princes and other persons of authoritie I graunt it is often so applyed but if you meane of religious adoration it is expresly forbidden to any creature or Image of creature by the second commaundemēt in the Hebrue terme and by the wordes of our Sauiour Christ to the Deuill Math. 4. In the Greeke worde Thou shalt worship the Lorde thy God and him onely shalt thou serue Where Sathan desired not to bee worshipped as God with diuine honour but that our Sauiour Christe would fal downe before him and worship him as an excellēt minister of God to whom the dispositiō of all the kingdomes of the world as he falsly said were by God committed Luk. 4. v. 6. which vtterly ouerthroweth your bold distinction of Dulia and Latria seeing it was that which you call Dulia that the Deuill required but our Sauiour Christe telleth him that all religious worship and seruice pertaineth onely to God Touching the adoration of Gods footestoole I haue spoken sufficiently before Cap. 1. Sect. 41. MART. 5. This being most manifest to all that haue skill in these tongues it is euident that you regard neither Hebrue nor Greeke but only your heresie and that in S. Paules place aforesaid of adoring Iosephs scepter you alter it by your owne fansie and not by S. Augustines authoritie whom I am sure you will not admit reading in the Psalme Adore yee his footestoole and so precisely and religiously reading thus that he examineth the case and findeth thereby that the B. Sacrament must be adored and that no good Christian doth take it before he adore it Neither will you admitte him when he readeth thus of Dauid He was caried in his owne handes and interpreteth it mystically of Christ that he was caried in his owne handes when he gaue his body and bloud to his Disciples Yet are S. Augustines interpretations how so euer you like or mislike thē very good as also that aboue named of Iacobs leaning vpō his staffe adoring may be one good sense or cōmētarie of that place but yet a cōmentarie one Doctors opiniō not the sacre text of Scripture as you wold make it by so trāslating FVLK 5. Let Pagnine for the Hebrew word the Greeke Lexicons for the other be iudge betwene vs. For you are the most impudent aduoucher I thinke that euer became a writer That we leane to Augustines iudgement in this case it is not because we make him an author of truth but a witnesse of the same against such venemous tongues and pennes as yours is that call euery thing hereticall that sauoureth not of your owne drowsie dreames of antichristian heresie Neither is it reason that by vsing the testimonie of Augustine where he beareth witnesse to the truth we should be bound to euery interpretation of his when he declineth therefro Where you say that by adoring the footestoole of God he findeth that the blessed Sacrament must be adored you say vntruly he gathereth that Christes humanitie or body must be adored but not the blessed Sacrament thereof Likewise when he sayth vpon a feeble ground of a false interpretation that Christ was carried in his owne hands in the Sacrament he affirmeth it not so absolutely as you alledge it but quodam modo after a certaine maner he bare himselfe in his handes when he saide this is my bodie Yea in that place Augustine as in many other declareth his iudgement that he acknowledged not the corporall maner of presence and eating of Christes bodie in the sacrament for whych you Papistes so greatly contend that you ate content to make so many senses of the scripture it declareth that you acknowlege none certaine and so derogate al credite and authoritie from the word of God which may haue so many meanings as there be diuers doctors that haue commented vppon it Whereas diuers interpretations may haue al a true sense but it is impossible that they should al be senses of the same Scripture MART. 6. And if S. Hierome like not the Greke doctors interpretation in this place of adoring Ioseph and his scepter yet he also saith that Iacob adored toward Iosephs rodde or toward the beddes heade and not leaning vpon his staffe hee adored which you make the texte of Scripture And thoughe he thinke that in this place is not meant any adoration of Ioseph yet I am sure for adoration of holie things namely Reliques the holie lande and al the holie places and monuments of Christs being and doing vpon the earth you wil not bee tryed by S. Hierome And againe why S. Paule should say that by faith
Latine Churche there to follow the other sense not so generally receiued and approoued as in Saint Iames epistle where the common reading is Deus intentator malorum est God is no tempter to euil they translate Gad cannot be tempted with euil which is so impertinent to the Apostles speach there as nothing more But why wil they not say God is no tempter to euill as wel as the other is it because of the Greeke word which is a passiue Let them see their Lexicon and it will tell them that it is both an actiue and passiue so say other learned Grecians Interpreters of this place so sayth the very circumstance of the words next going before Let no man say that he is tempted of God Why so Because God is not tempted with euill say they is this a good reason nothing lesse howe then Because God is no tempter to euill therefore let no man say that he is tempted of God FVLK 2. You haue a fashion common to you with many of your fellowes to snatch all occasions that you can get to make a shew for your hainous slauÌ„ders wherwith you seeke to ouerwhelme the Saincts of God and especially those whose labors haue bene most fruitful to his Church Whereof you giue vs an euident example in this translation which you follow with such egernes in three large sections that the ignorant Reader which can not examine the matter might thinke you had great and vrgent cause so to doe The Greeke of S. Iames 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we translated passiuely as the word signifieth as words of that forme doe signifie God is not or can not be tempted with euill But against this translation you oppose the Lexicon which following the iudgement of the vulgar Interpretor that hath translated it actiuely doth in deede make it indifferent to both significatioÌ„s but exaÌ„ple giueth none thereof but this now in controuersie You alleage further learned Grecians interpretors of this place namely Gagneius a late writer to whom I may oppose Hentenius who translating Oecumenius vpoÌ„ S. Iames turneth this place of Scripture thus Deus enim malis tentari nequit And Oecumenius in his coÌ„mentarie is plaine of the same iudgement for repeting the text as before he saith Iuxta eum qui dixit quanquaÌ„ externus sit à nobis à fide aliemis diuina beataque natura neque molestias sustinet neque alijs praebet God cannot be tempted with euil according to him which said although he be a foriner from vs a straunger from the faith the diuine and blessed nature neither suffereth griefes nor offereth to other And this iudgement of Oecumenius is collected out of a great nuÌ„ber of Greeke doctors But the very circuÌ„stance of the wordes next before say you doth require it should be taken actiuely A good interpretor will consider the circuÌ„stances of the words following as wel as of the wordes going before For the wordes following declare that it must be taken passiuely or els the Apostle speaketh one thing twise togither without any cause why Wheras the passiue taking of that word agreeth to the circuÌ„stance as well going before as following after The whole context is this Let no man say wheÌ„ he is tempted I am tempted of God for God cannot bee tempted of euilles neither doth he tempt any man The meaning is plain god is so far froÌ„ tempting vnto euil as his diuine nature is vncapable of any temptation of euil For teÌ„ptation to euil could not come froÌ„ God except it were first in God but seing it caÌ„not be in God it cannot procede froÌ„ him so doth Oecum interprete the place MART. 3. This reason is so coherent and so necessary in this place that if the greke word were only a passiue as it is not yet it might beseme Beza to translate it actiuely who hath turned the actiue into a passiue without scrupulositie as him selfe confesseth and is before noted against the real presence Much more in this place might he bee bolde to translate that actiuely whych is both an actiue and a passiue specially hauing such an exaÌ„ple and so great authoritie as is al the ancient Latin church til this day But why would he not surely because he would fauor his and their heresie which saith clean contrarie to these wordes of the Apostle to wit that God is a tempter to euil Is that possible to be proued yea it is possible and plain Bezaes words be these Inducit Dominus in tentationeÌ„ eos quos Satanae arbitrio permittit aut in quos potius Satanam ipsum indueit vt cor eorum impleat vt loquitur Petrus Act. 5. v. 3. that is The Lorde leadeth into tentation those whome hee permitteth to Satans arbitrement or into whom rather he leadeth or bringeth in Satan himself to fil their heart as Peter speaketh Marke that he saith God bringeth Satan into a man to fill his heart as Peter said to Ananias Why hath satan filled thy heart to lie vnto the holie Ghost So then by this mans opinion God brought Sathan into that mans heart to make him lie vnto the holy Ghost and so led him into tentation being authour and causer of that hainous sinne FVLK 3. How necessarie the coherens is with the former wordes that it maketh an absurde repetition in the wordes following I haue noted beefore And therefore there is no cause that shoulde driue Beza to translate a worde of passiue signification actiuely as you slaunder him to haue translated an actiue passiuely against the reall presence for that you meane of Act. 3. he translateth not passiuely so as the passiue is opposite to the actiue but as the one may be resolued into the other the same sense remaining which euery childe in the Grammar schoole knoweth Ego amo â—e â—â— amaris à me I loue thee thou art loued of me and not as they may disagree I loue thee but I am not loued of thee But Beza you say would not followe the vulgar Interpretor whose antiquitie I haue shewed for vniuersall receauing not to haue bene aboue fiue hundreth yeares seeing Bernard which liued a thousand and one hundred yeares after Christ vseth it not alwayes And why did Beza leaue the vulgar translation in this place surely in fauour of our heresie that God is a tempter to euill The Lord him selfe be iudge whether we abhorre not that heresie Yet you say it is both possible and plaine to be proued by Bezaes owne wordes In his later edition an 1565. his wordes are these vpon that petition of the Lordes prayer Leade vs not into temptation Iâ—ducit autem Dominus in tentationem eos quos Satanae arbitrio permistit vt cor eorum impleat sicut loquitur Petrus Act. 5. The Lord leadeth into temptation them whom he permitteth to the will of Satan that he may fill their hart as Peter speaketh These wordes declare that God leadeth some men into temptation and howe he leadeth them
translate another thing without any necessary pretence of Hebrewe or Greeke and here you would haue it of the necessitie of the Hebrew that we should translate a teacher yet Pagnine in the roote 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherevnto you referre vs saith that Esay the 30. verse 20. this word is taken either for raine or for a teacher Ioel the 2. hee maketh no question but it signifieth raine sauing that some thinke it to be the name of a place In the thirde place Psalme 84. after he hath tolde you how Hierome translateth it hee telleth you how R. Dauid and other doe translate it for raine as wee doe and in al these places the sense is more proper for raine than for a teacher sauing that in Esay perhappes it may signifie more aptly a teacher and so the Geneua translation noteth it In Ioel where the Prophet before hadde threatened famine through drought nothing is so conuenient to bee vnderstoode as seasonable raine In the Psalm 84. where the Prophet commendeth the courage of the people that trauailed to Ierusalem through the drie desarts and places that wanted water it is moste apte to vnderstand that God filleth their pits with raine for their comfort This how cold soeuer it is counted of you that care not whereon faith shoulde be grounded yet is it an hundred times more comfortable to a godly conscience that desireth to bee established in trueth than anye violent wresting of the Scripture from the true and naturall sense to anye other interpretation how good in shew soeuer it be MART. 6. And againe where S. Hierom translateth and the Church readeth and all the fatheâ—s interprete and expound accordingly There shal be faith in thy times to expresse the maruelous faith that shall be then in the first Christians specially euen vnto death and in all the rest concerning the hidden mysteries of the newe Testament there you translate There shal be stabilitie of thy times The Prophete ioyneth togither there iudgement iustice faith wisedome knowledge the feare of our Lord you for a litle ambiguitie of the Hebrue worde turne faith into stabilitie FVLK 6. The word stabilitie Esai 33. v. 6. excludeth not faith but sheweth wherein faith is grounded And therefore this is as all the reste a fonde quarrel without any good grounde at all Seing our translation may stande with the truth of the wordes and of the matter and comprehendeth as much as you would haue and more also Yea it sheweth that faith is setled vpon stabilitie and stedfastnesse of truth which shall flourish in the time of Christ. MART. 7. If I should burden you with translating thus also concerning Christ Cease from the man whose breath in his nostrels for wherein is he to be esteemed You would say I did you wrong because it is so pointed now in the Hebrue Wheras you know very wel by S. Hieroms commentarie vpon that place that this is the Iewes pointing or reading of the worde against the honour of Christe the true reading and translation being as he interpreteth it for he is reputed high and therefore beware of him Otherwise as S. Hierom saith what a consequence were this or who would commend any man thus Take heede ye offende not him who is nothing esteemed yet that is your translation Neyther doth the Greeke helpe you which if the accent be truely put iâ— thus because he is reputed for some body or some thing as S. Paule speaketh of the chiefe Apostles and it is our phrase in the commendation of a man FVLK 7. So long as you acknowledge wee haue translated truely according to the Hebrue texte that we reade there is no reason that you should burden vs with false interpretation The Septuaginta as Hierome confesseth did reade as we doe and plaine it is not oneliâ— by the vowels but also by the contexte that so it muste be read For the Prophet disswadeth the people from putting affiance in any mortall man for God wil bring downe the pride of all suche as they truste moste in as it followeth in the next chapiter whereof this verse should be the beginning The dismembring whereof by the ill diuision of the Chapiter deceiued Hierome to think the Prophet spake of Christe when he spake of a prowd man whose breath was in his nostrels and therefore he was of no strength euen as Dauid vseth the same argument Psalme 146. for the purpose The Chaldee Paraphrase also did reade euen as the Septuaginta MART. 8. The like excuse you woulde haue by alleadging the Hebrue vowels if you were told that you much obsâ—ure a notable saying of the prophet concerning Christ or rather the speach of Christe himselfe by his prophete saying I haue spoken by the Prophets and I haue multiplied vision and in the hand of the Prophets that is by the Prophets haue I beene resembled Which later words do exceedingly expresse that al the Prophets spake of Christ as oâ—r Sauiour himself declareth beginning from Moyses and al the Prophetes to interprete vnto the two disciples the things that concerned him as S. Petâ—r saith in these words Al the prophets from Samuel and that spake after him didde tell of these daies This prophecie then being so consonant to these speaches of the â—ewe Testament the Greeke also being word for word so the Hebrewe by changing one little pricke whyche the latter Iewes haue added at their owne pleasure being fully so as wee â—eade with the Catholike Church why pretend you the Iewes authoritie to maintaine an other lesse Christian translation whiche is thus I vse similitudes by the ministerie of the Prophetes as though there were nothing there concerning Christ or the second person peculiarly FVLK 8. Seeing our Sauiour Christ hath promised that neuer a pricke of the lawe shall perishe wee may vnderstande the same also of the Prophets who haue not receiued the vowels of the latter Iewes but euen of the Prophets themselues howsoeuer that heathenish opinion pleaseth you and other Papistes MART. 9. You wil also perhaps alleadge not onelye the later Iewes but also some later Catholike men that so translate the Hebrewe But the difference betweene them and you is that they with reuerence and preâ—erment alwaies of S. Hiâ—roms and the Churches aâ—â—â—ient translation tel vs how it is nowe in the Hebrewe you with derogation and disanulling the same altogâ—ther set downe your owne as the onlie true interpretation according to the Hebrewe aâ—ouching the Hebrewe that nowe iâ— and as now it is printed to be the only authenti cal truth of the olde Testament Where you can neuer answere vs howe that in the Ps. 22. As a lion my hand and my feete as now it is in the Hebrewe can be the true and old authentical Hebrewe whiche none of the fathers knewe the auncient Rabbines condemne as a corruption your selues translate it not but after the olde accustomed reading They haue pierced my handes my feete
daughter of Hierusalem hath shakeÌ„ her head at thee All are the foeminine gender and spoken of Sion literally and of the Church spiritually triumphing ouer Assur and all her enemies you translate all as of the masculine gender and apply it to Assur insulting against Hierusalem c. I can not coÌ„ceiue what this translation meaneth and I would gladly know the reason and I would haue thought it some grosse ouersight but that I find it so in all your English Bibles and not onely in this place of Esay but also in the bookes of the kings 4. Reg. 19. where the same words are repeated And it is no lesse maruell vnto vs that know not the reason of your doings why you haue left out Alleluia nine times in the sixe last Psalmes being in the Hebrew nine times more than in your translation specially when you knowe that it is the auncient and ioyfull song of the Primitiue Church See the new English Testament Annot. Apoc. 19. FVLK 13. It seemeth that our translators followed too much the iudgement of the Tigurine translator who what reason moued him so to translate I know not it seemeth they weyed not well the Hebrew in that place but such is mans frailtie that he is apt and easie tâ—â—b deceaued if he be not very vigilant and attentiue in those cases And the example of one mans errour that is of credite soone draweth other men into the same by countenance of his authoritie Neuerthelesse two of our translations the Bishops Bible and Couerdales Bible translate the very same words according to the Hebrew 2. Reg. 19. referring the saying against Senacherib despised and laughed to scorne by Ierusalem And therefore you say vntruly that is is in all our English Bibles 4. Reg. 19. Where you maruaile why we haue left out Alleluia nine times in the sixe last Psalmes I maruaile as much why you should so saye for in the Bishops Bible which I haue and which you call Bib. 1577. It is tenne times in the fiue last Psalmes and tenne times there is in the translation Praise ye the Lord. In the 145. it is not in the Hebrew But in the other fiue Psalmes it is both in the beginning and in the ende of euery one of them MART. 14. Againe you translate thus Many which had seene the first house when the foundation of this house was layd before their eyes wept c. Looke well to your Hebrew and you shall find it according both to the Greeke and the Latine thus Many which had seene the first house in the foundation thereof that is yet standing vpon the foundation not destroyed and this temple before their eyes wept You imagined that it should be meant they saw Salomons temple when it was first founded which because it was vnpossible therefore you translated otherwise than is in the Hebrew Greeke and Latine But yet in some of your Bibles you should haue considered the matter better and translated accordingly FVLK 14. The Hebrew is indifferent Ezra 3. to either of both translations and the sense is all one whether beiasedho be referred to the first house named before or to this house before their eyes which followeth And therefore your coniecture of our imagination as in other places is no more bold than vaine MART. 15. And surely why you shoulde translate 4. Reg. 23. v. 13. On the right hand of mount Oliuete rather than as it is in the vulgar Latine and why Ye abiect of the Gentiles Esa. 45. v. 20. rather than ye that are saued of the Gentiles you belike know some reason we doe not neither by the Hebrew nor the Greeke FVLK 15. The Geneua Bible hath according to the Hebrew the mount of corruption which was in deed the Mount Oliuet as is proued by 1. Reg. 11. v. 7. and 2. Sam. 15. v. 30. and of the fruitfulnes of oyle was called Mischethith but in this place in detestation of the idolatrie is called Maschith signifying corruption as Bethel was called Bethauen Osec 4. v. 15. In Esai 45. two of our translations haue according to the vsuall signification of the Hebrewe worde pelitei you that escaped of the people but that the worde also signifieth an abiect you might haue learned by Pagnine and so ceased to haue maruailed why the Geneua Bible translateth you abiects of the Gentiles As your owne vulgar translation Ier. 44. traÌ„slateth it of them that fled or fugitiues MART. 16. Howbeit in these lesser things though nothing in the Scripture is to be counted litle you might perhaps more freely haue taken your pleasure in following neither Hebrew nor Greeke but when it concerneth a matter no lesse than vsurie there by your false translation to giue occasion vnto the Reader to be an vsurer is no small fault either against true religion or against good maners This you doe most euidently in your most authenticall translations saying thus Thou shalt not hurt thy brother by vsurie of money nor by vsurie of corne nor by vsurie of any thing that he may be hurt withall What is this to say but that vsurie is not here forbidden vnles it hurt the partie that boroweth which is so rooted in most mens hartes that they thinke such vsurie very lawfull and daily offend mortally that waye Where Almightye God in this place of holy Scripture hath not a word of hurting or not hurting as may be seene by the Geneua Bibles but sayth simply thus Thou shalt not lend to thy brother to vsurie vsurie of money vsurie of meate vsurie of any thing that is put to vsurie MART. 17. Marke the Hebrew and the Greeke and see and be ashamed that you straine and peruert it to say for Non foenerabis fratri tuo which is worde for worde in the Greeke and Hebrew Thou shalt not hurt thy brother by vsurie If the Hebrew word in the vse of holy Scripture doe signifie to hurt by vsurie why doe you in the very next words following in the selfe same Bibles translate it thus vnto a straunger thou mayst lend vpon vsurie but not vnto thy brother Why sayd you not A straunger thou mayst hurt with vsurie but not thy brother Is it not all one word phrase here and before And if you had so translated it here also the Ieâ—es woulde haue thanked you who by forcing the Hebrewe word as you doe thinke it very good to hurt any straunger that is any Christian by any vsurie be it neuer so great FVLK 16. 17. You saye well that in the Scripture nothing is to be counted litle and therefore euen in these litle thinges we haue endeuoured to follow the Hebrew and haue so well followed it that though you say much yet you can proue litle against vs. But concerning this text of vsurie whereof you would make vs great patrones it is maruell that you can not finde in your Dictionaries that the verbe nashach signifieth to
were committed to safe keeping in Wisbich castell to direct their letters to the Bishoppe of Elye in whose diocesse and castle the prisoners were kept requiring him to prouide that they might haue conference if they would admit any and be called vppon to come to the Church and heare the preaching there whereupon the Bishoppe making choise of me among other whom he purposed to sende vnto them desired mee by his Chauncellor M. Doctor Bridgewater to repayre vnto him into the Isle from whence he sent me with a gentleman of his house to signifie to them that had the charge of those prisoners the cause of my comming Whereupon ensewed that speeche in the presence of certaine honest men specially called and required to be witnesses besides a number of other of good credite the summe wherof as it was written at the present time by three or foure that came with mee of which one is a learned preacher was collected to certifie the Bishop as neere as could be what communication had passed betweene vs without any further purpose of publishing the same But the copie thereof comming into the handes of a friende of mine at London and by him communicated to some other of his friendes at last came into a printers hande who sodenly set it abroade vnknowing to my friende and me Which how well it was liked of me my friende some of the best of the companie of Stationers can testifie by that meanes was made to haue the printer punished and hadde not Campions proude and vaine chalenge come euen in the nicke I could not haue beene perswaded by my friendes to haue suffered the partie to goe so cleare as he did This is the whole truth euery part thereof which if this dainty orator durst shew his face in any honest preseÌ„ce in England may be prooued by such sufficient witnesse and euidence as no reasonable person coulde refuse Notwithstanding let vs see what a rhetorical lier without feare of God or shame of the worlde without knowledge of the matter or meanes to haue intelligence can deuise to publish in the face of the world to bolster the obstinacie of those wilfull recufants and to deface the honest indeuour of them that seeke first to reforme them and if that can not be to take away excuse of ignorance from them There is a certaine minister sayth he great in his owne opinion but in other mens opinion but meane c. Marke how boldly euen in the beginning he blusheth not to affirme that which it is impossible for him to knowe For albeit I were as great in mine owne opinion as he reporteth me to be yet howe coulde hee bee priuie to my concept who though he knowe my person yet is he not acquainted with my maners that hee might make coniecture by them Neither is it like he can heare it by report of other men For I trust they which knowe me most familiarly cannot report that my behauiour argueth any such great opinion of my selfe But he gathereth it perhaps either by my preaching or by my writing What skill I haue in any thing God knoweth best and then they with whom I liue And that I make as litle shewe of that I knowe as any man in such cases may conueniently I answere they that haue most cause to vnderstand what I am will not refuse to testifie That he sayth I am meane in other mens opinions it greeueth me nothing rather I am afraide least a great number accept me to be better than I deserue But to omitte this matter by which yet you may gather what likelihoode of trueth is in the rest of his assertions he proceedeth to accuse me that for hope of a litle vaineglorie by contending with noble men cum magnatibus so the honest subiect calleth Watson the Bishop and Fecknam the Abbot so long since by lawefull authoritie depriued of those dignities I crept secretly into the castle vnlooked for But if my comming were of hope to winne glorie why did I not rather come openly or cause them to be brought into the Church before the whole multitude Well admit I was so blinde with desire of vaineglorie that I could not see which way I might best come to it Why should he say that I crept into the castle as it were by stealth Belike because I came without authoritie for so he sayth afterwarde the papistes sawe that I came to offer them conference by no publike authoritie If that had beene so howe coulde this stande which he sayth Sisti iubet omnes ad sâ—â—m conspectum he commandeth them all to be brought into his presence Did he commaund them by his priuate authoritie or were they which had them in custody so simple that they would obey an vnknowne person a meane man of small or no account comming without authoritie or commanding in his owne name or pretending the name of them that had authoritie without sufficient warrant or rather was it not well saide that a lyer in a large tale is the best confuter of himselfe Although in verie truth I gaue no commandement for their appearance before me onely the bishoppes will was declared by the gentleman his seruant vnto their keeper But what should I stande to rippe vp those vanities All reasonable conditions of bookes time and order for the conference were offered them To conclude I am certainely perswaded that something perhaps the disdaine of my person but more the feare of the weakenesse of their cause stayed them that they would not aduenture their credit in triall by disputation For if the contempt of my lightnesse and rashnesse as their proctor sayeth had beene the onely cause of their refusall why did they not yeelde to dispute in the vniuersitie in which are many of more grauitie or learning yea why did they conclude in the ende that all disputation in matters of faith was vnprofitable alleaging examples of the disputation in the conuocation house in the beginning of the Queenes maiesties raigne and the conference at Westminster in presence of almost all the learned and wise of the realme in the beginning of her maiesties reigne For the publishing of the report and the certeinty of the contents thereof I haue shewed sufficiently as the truth of the matter was and as I will be able to iustifie by good witnesse whatsoeuer this impudent lier hath aduouched to the coÌ„trarie The same is also sufficient to confute the same slander repeted by the confuter of Maister Charke in Epist. pa. 9. concerning my onely looking into Wisbich castle and printing a pamphlet in mine owne praise where if I had fained matter for my prayse I might as well haue faigned howe valiantly I had vanquished mine enemies For small praise is gotten where there is no victory victory can be none where there is no battell The like slander he hath but with more wordes of reproch pag. 2. of his defense where beside his ruffianlike rayling which is a greater fault in him that
consider that nothing but an ignorant person is noted thereby as also pag. 88. where hee is called a blinde bayarde and blockheaded asse because he disdainefully vpbraydeth all our doctors and vniuersities of much ignoraunce and lacke of learning and Caluine he sayth erred about the trinitie through ignorance with such odious comparisons as in so vaine and vnlearned a fellowe as Bristowe sheweth himselfe to be is intollerable To note his bolde ignorance also I sayd pag. 74. The more beastly is the blundring of this Bristowe who dreameth that the councell of Constantinople the first which made this confession by the Apostolike Church did not onely meane the Romaine Church but also none other but the Romaine church whereas the councell knowing well the catholike church of the worlde from the particular Church of Rome gaue like priuiledges of honor to the Church of Constantinople to those which Rome had reseruing onely senioritie to old Rome beside many other reasons they alleadged to prooue that they acknowledged no such authoritie of the Church at Rome as the papistes nowe defende Likewise pag. 89. I call him blundring Bristowe for charging M. Iewell with ignoraunce for affirming Christ to be a priest according to his deitie of which assertion I shal haue occasion to speake afterward against the last slander And pag. 75. where Bristowe sayth that in all innouations both great and small that euer by heretikes were attempted they can shewe vnder what pope they chanced what tumultes rising in the world thereon what doctors withstande it what councels accursed it c. I reply thus What an impudent lyer is this Bristowe to bragge of that which at this day is vnpossible to be done by any man liuing in the worlde For of so many heretikes as are rehearsed by Epiphanius and Augustine not the one halfe of them can bee so shewed as Bristowe like a blinde bayarde boasteth they can doe Yet more touching his ignorance pag. 43. I say Hierome was not so grosse to count walking about the citie to be a peregrination But what is so leaden or blockish which these doltish papistes will not aduouch for the mainteinance of their trumperie This I write because Bristowe would haue Hierome by often entering into the cryptes or vaultes of the Churches at Rome to signifie that he went on pilgrimage Where the collector of the phrases doeth me some wrong to say I call Bristowe leaden blockish and doltish Papist where I say those doltish papistes which auouch any thing neuer so leaden or blockish Onely I require the indifferent reader to consider whether I haue iust cause to charge him with ignorance and impudence as for the termes I will not stande either to iustifie them or to reuoke them but referre them to euery reasonable mans censure Furthermore pag. 48. I say that proude scoffe of parliament religion which Bristowe vseth bewrayeth the stomacke of a vanteparler and not the spirite of a diuine or good subiect Heare I thinke the terme of vantparler was too milde for such a knowne trayterous Papist as commendeth open rebelles for martyres as affirmeth that the Queenes subiectes are lawfully discharged of the othe of obedience giuen to her maiestie as derideth the religion established by parliament pag. 51. I say the Papistes like impudent dogges yelpe and barke against vs that the fathers are all on their side because they haue sucked out of their writinges a fewe dregges of a great quantitie of good liquor conteined in their vessels hauing the fathers in the most and greatest matters wholly against them And pag. 55. I say that Bristowe quarelling with D. Humfrey yelpeth like a litle curre against a great lion and snatching peeces of his sentences gnawen from the rest squeleth out as though hee had hearde some meruelous straunge soundes c. If this allegorie be too base for Bristowes dignitie let him humble himselfe and craue pardon of his treasons for I will doe no reuerence to a traytour that openly bewrayeth himselfe in a printed booke as he and other of his complices haue doone A proude hypocrite priest of stinking greasie antichristian and execrable orders I cannot finde where I haue termed him except I should reade ouer the whole booke but if I haue vsed such speeches I thinke they are no woorse than his wicked behauiour popish sacrificing priesthoode deserue to haue Blasphemous heretike he giueth mee often occasion to call him and namely pag. 81. where I reprooue him for calling the blessed sacrament his Lorde and God which although transubstantiation were graunted yet because the Papistes affirme that this sacrament consisteth of accidentes as the signe or externall part thereof seeing accidentes are neither God nor in God it could not be saide without blasphemie that the sacramentis Lorde and God Next followe reprochfull termes vsed against Allen. The first brasen face and yron foreheade I doe not yet finde but it signifieth nothing but notable impudence which is noted pag. 23. where I call him impudent blasphemer because he had sayde of vs That to such as make no store of good workes they cast onely faith vnder their elbowes to leane vpon where as none of vs did euer teach that such a faith as is not liuely fruitfull of good workes did euer profite any man but to the encrease of his damnation Againe pag. 24. I note him to passe impudencie it self in shamelesse lying where he sayth Commit what you lyst omit what you list your preachers shall praise it in their wordes and practise it in their workes Also pag. 147. I charge him with an impudent lye where he saieth that M. Caluine doeth expounde the oyle whereof Saint Iames speaketh cap. 5. for a medicinable salue or oyntment to ease the sicke mans sore when it is manifest that Caluine vtterly reiecteth and confuteth that exposition Likewise pag. 259. I conuince him of impudent lying because he doth wilfully falsifie the decrees of two councels at a clappe saying they excommunicate all such as in any wise hinder the oblations for the departed when both the councelles Vase and Carthage speak of them that detaine the oblations or bequestes of the dead giuen to the church for the vse of the poore These and many like shamelesse assertionâ— doe prooue that he hath a brasen face and Iron foreheade which shameth not to put in print such monstrous vntruthes and wilfullyes But let vs passe to other points Where this impudent marchant Allen had rayled intollerably against the reuerende father M. Iewell calling him the English bragger one that in summer games might winne two games of cracking lying with like shamelesse stuffe I sayde and doe not a whitrepent me Howe M. Iewell hath aunswered his challenge his owne learned labours doe more clearely testifie vnto the worlde than that it can be blemished by this sycophants brainelesse babling Moreouer pag. 343. where Allen had called that learned father M. Pilkington a mocke Bishoppe I said If he be a mocke Bishoppe which beside his
Apostles which it is sufficient that it is receiued of the doctrine of the Apostles Ruffinus in deede expositione in symbolum sayeth it was an opinion receiued from the elders that the Apostles before their dispersion made this briefe forme of beliefe which is called their Creede And I acknowledge the opinion hath some probabilitie but that it is to be beleeued of necessitie of saluation neither Ruffinus sayeth nor if he did were he able to prooue it Ambrose Ep. 81. Syricio to prooue that Marie in the birth of Christ was a virgine sayeth Credatur symbolo Apostòlorum quod Ecclesia Romana iteratum semper custodit seruat Let credit bee giuen to the Apostles Creede which being repeted often the Church of Rome doth alwayes keepe and obserue That this Creede is called the Apostles symbole or Creede it may well be because it containeth the summe of the Apostles doctrine although it had not beene compiled by them The testimonie of Augustine which you quote Serm. 118. De tempore must needes be some yonger mans because he repeteth the verie wordes of Ruffinus which Augustine liuing almost in his time woulde not repete as his owne You might as well and more for your purpose haue quoted Serm. 115. De tempore where euery Apostle maketh an Article which is the absurde opinion of the late Papistes but neuer was credited by Augustine himselfe howsoeuer these sermons haue gotten vnder the shadow of his name To conclude as some of the auncient fathers thinke the Creede was of the Apostles making so none of them affirmeth that it is damnable to doubt thereof so a man doubt not of the doctrine contained therein whereof the holy ghost is author as it is proued by the holie scriptures whether the Apostles or their successours did gather this short summe or forme of beliefe which we call the Apostles Creede For the obseruation of the Easter day which is the seconde point wherein you dare Master Charke I dare affirme that seeing it is not commaunded in the scripture the obseruation thereof is not necessarie to saluation That Eusebius calleth it an Apostolike tradition it is not materiall seeing that verie contention which he reporteth was about the obseruation of Easter according to the Apostolike tradition by the immediate successors of the Apostles Anicetus and Polycarpus doe plainly testifie what credit is to bee giuen to the traditions of the Apostles without the warrant of the Apostles writings Euseb. lib. 5. Cap. 26. For while Anicetus pretendeth the tradition of S. Peter and Polycarpus S. Iohn and neither would yeelde to other they teache vs what to esteeme of traditions apostolical not contained in the holy scriptures Namely that in these dayes there can bee no certeintie of them when they which might see and heare the Apostles themselues could not agree about them Last of all which you make the greatest matter the perpetuall virginitie of the mother of Christ after his birth although for my part I do beleeue it and wish all men so to doe yet dare I affirme that it is not damnable not to beleeue it except it can be prooued that the scripture hath taught it But you obiect against mee first the condemnation of Heluidius testified by Sozomenus Whereto I aunswere that he was iustly condemned not because he beleeued not but because he did obstinately denie it troubled the peace of the church about an vnnecessary question But you aske vs if wee remember not the solemne curse for this matter of so many holy bishops recorded and confirmed by S. Ambrose Ep. 81. 79. It seemeth you remember it not your selfe for that curse contained in the ende of the Ep. 81. was against them that like Manichees denyed that our Sauiour Christ tooke flesh of a virgine And Ep. 79. he reprooueth them which did contende that the virgine Marie had more sonnes than our Sauiour Christ which to affirme is a great errour and conuinced by the authoritie of the scripture seeing as Ambrose well noteth our Sauiour Christ committed his mother to Iohn the Euangelist which had not beene needefull if shee had naturall sonnes of her owne which might take care of her But you will stoppe our mouthes if you can as you say with these wordes of Saint Augustine Integra fide credendum est c. Wee must beleeue with a sounde faith blessed Marie the mother of Christ to haue conceiued in virginitie to haue brought foorth her sonne in virginitie and to haue remained a virgine after her childbirth neither must wee yeeld to the blasphemie of Heluidius Your author goeth on and telleth what that was Qui dixis fuit virgo ante partum non virgo post partum Who sayd shee was a virgine before her child-birth shee was no virgine after her childbirth But where shall wee finde this saying in Saint Augustine Your quotation directeth vs to Augustine in Encherid Cap. 34. where in deede some mention is of Maries virginitie namely that she conceiued in virginitie but nothing of Heluidius or his heresie Wherefore it secmeth that out of Canisius or some other mans collection your common places of the doctors sayings are borowed and not taken out of your owne reading Therefore howsoeuer you haue mistaken the matter the saying you alledge is in the bastarde booke De dogmatibus Ecclesiasticis Cap. 69. which may as easily be knowen from Augustines writing as a goose from a swanne And yet if it were of as good authoritie as Augustines owne writing it were not sufficient to stop our mouth when wee heare that wee are slaundered For wee dare not say with Heluidius which is the blasphemie noted by that writer that the virgine Marie was no virgine after her childbirth although wee say that it is no article of faith necessarie to saluation except it haue demonstration out of the holy scriptures neither doth your author say it is blasphemie to doubt of it but to denye it although for my part I do neither denie it nor doubt of it but beleeue it as I do manie other truethes not expressed in the scripture but yet not as articles of Christian faith necessarie to saluation I will conclude with a saying of Saint Ierome and stoppe your mouth if I can which concerning this verie question in controuersie against Heluidius to shewe what a man is bound to beleeue vpon necessitie of saluation euen that which is contained in the scriptures and that which is not coÌ„teined that he is not bound vpon losse thereof to beleeue thus writeth Sed vt haec quae scripta sunt non negaâ—ius ita â—a quae non sunt scripta renuimus Natum Dâ—â—â— esâ—e de virgine credimus quia legimus Mariam â—â—psisse post partum non credimus quia non legimus But as wee do not deny those things that are written so we do refuse those things that are not written That God was borne of a virgin wee beleeue because we haue read it that Marie vsed marriage after her
childbed wee beleeue not because wee haue not read it That you say Lo M. Chark S. Augustine maketh it both a matter of faith and the doubting thereof to be blasphemie how will you auoid this It is easily auoyded for it is false in many respects first S. Augustine fayeth it not but some obscure man of much latter time lesse learning and authoritie as the barbarous stile in many places declareth secondly hee fayth not that it is a matter of faith to beleeue the perpetuall virginitie of Marie but that shee conceiued brought foorth and remained a virgine after her child-birth Thirdly he maketh not the doubting thereof to be blasphemie but the obstinate denying of Heluidius which saide shee was no virgine after her childbirth But how will you auoide that which S. Ierome writeth We refuse those things that are not written we beleeue not because wee haue not read in y e scripture anything hereof as necessarie to saluation Pag. 158. you do not see why you should beleeue a Charke or a Fulke comming but yester day from the grammar schole before a Cyprian a Tertullian a Basil a Ierom an Ambrose or an Augustine especially in a matter of fact as your case is seeing they liued more than twelue or thirteene hundred yeares nearer to the deede dooing than these ministers do Why sir I pray you who requireth you to beleeue any minister of these dayes before any of those auncient fathers in respect of the credite of the persons and not of the truth which they bring You knowe that Panormitane thinketh more credite is to be giuen to one lay man speaking the trueth according to scripture than to all men of all ages speaking contrarie to the trueth or beside the truth of the scriptures But it is a matter of fact you say whether such and such traditions came from Christ his Apostles or no and therefore they that liued neerer the time of the deede dooing by twelue or thirteene hundreth yeares are more like to knowe the trueth than wee I answere that all things that you pretende for traditions are not of one sort some are contrary to the word of God and are reproued by euidence of the holy scriptures other are beside the worde of God and therefore not necessarie to bee receiued because they are not found in the holie scriptures As for the prerogatiue of antiquitie cannot argue a certaine knowledge of the fact in these ancient fathers seeing in two or three hundreth yeares that was before their time and the time of the deede supposed to be done any fable might be obtruded vnder pretence of such tradition as we prooue that many were Yea when they that were neerest of all to the Apostles time as Polycarpus and Anicetus do not agree what was the Apostles traditioÌ„ which was not expressed in their writing it is manifest that they of much latter time coulde haue no certeintie thereof And that whatsoeuer ceremonie or practise the Apostles deliuered which was not expressed in the scripture was but temporall or arbitrarie in the power of the Church to vse or not vse as it might best serue for edifying Finally where you affirme that Fulk came but yesterday from the Grammar schole to make it seeme that he is but a yong grammatian either your dayes be neere as long as thirtie yeres or else your pen runneth beyond your knowledge of him or at leastwise your malice ouer reacheth your knowledge But yet to this extremitie of crediting one Charke or Fulke before so many auncient fathers you say you are driuen and bid men hearken a little howe D. Fulke handleth these men about traditions And first S. Cyprian alledging the tradition of Christ himselfe concerning the mingling of wine and water in the chalice but if Cyprian had beene well vrged faith Fulke he would haue better considered of the matter Thus you woulde make men beleeue that I oppose nothing but mine owne authoritie or credit against S. Cyprian But then you shamefully beelie me for this is the matter and these are my wordes which you haue gelded at your pleasure Whereas Cyprian ad Pompeiâ—â— calleth all traditions to the writinges and commandements of the Apostles Martiall cryeth out that Cyprian is slandered because he himselfe alleageth the tradition of Christ for mingling of water with wine If Cyprian breake his owne rule who can excuse him But if he had beene vrged as much for the necessitie of water as he was for the necessitie of wine in the sacrament he would haue better considered of the matter Who seeth not I suppose no lesse authoritie against Cyprian than of Cyprian himselfe and therefore I boast not of mine owne credite aboue his To proceede Tertullian is alleaged saying that the blessing with the signe of the crosse is an apostolike tradition Fulke Tertullians iudgement of tradition without scripture in that place is corrupt If I should search no further heere is a reason of Fulkes mislike of Tertullians iudgement added because he affirmeth tradition of the Apostles without the writing of the Apostles But in deede there is in the place by you noted other argumentes in these wordes Tertullians iudgement of tradition without scripture in that place is corrupt for Martiall himselfe confesseth that a tradition vnwritten should be reasonable and agreeable to the scriptures and so he sayth the tradition of blessing with the crosse is because the Apostles by the holy ghost deliuered it But who shall assure vs thereof Tertullian and Basill are not sufficient warrant for so worthy a matter seeing S. Paule leaueth it out of the vniuersall armour of God This last and inuincible argument in rehearsing my wordes you leaue out which because perhaps you could not see in sewe wordes I will set it more abroade The vniuersall spirituall armour of God is deliuered by S. Paule Eph. 6. blessing with the signe of the crosse is not there deliuered by S. Paul therefore blessing with the signe of the crosse is no part of the spirituall armour of God Nowe let vs see whether you will beleeue a Paule before a Tertullian or a Basill or a Fulke with S. Paule before a Basil with Tertullian without S Paule or against S. Paule But you goe forwarde S. Ierome is alleaged saying that lent fast is the tradition of the Apostles Fulke Ierome vntruely ascribeth that tradition to the Apostles My wordes are against Bristowes Mot. pag. 35. these Againe S. Ierome fayth it was a tradition of the Apostles to fast 40. dayes in the yeare If this be true then is the popish storie false that maketh Telesphorus bishoppe of Rome author of that lenten fast Eusebius sheweth y e great diuersitie of fasting before Easter li. 5. cap. 26. saying that some fasted but one day some two dayes some more some 40. houres of day and night This diuersitie prooueth that Ierome vntruely ascribeth that tradition to the Apostles which should haue beene kept vniformely if it had any institution
the difference betweene a storie at large and an abridgement c. If you be able to defende that booke to be Canonicall answere my reasons prepare your selfe to answere as many â—â—re as may bee alledged to conuince the vanitie and falshod of that stories and so I leaue you to a better minde if it be Gods will to giue it you I finde also that in the Popish annotations vpon the new Testament printed at Rhemes my writings are carped at in two places the former vpoÌ„ 2. Thes. 2. where my wordes against Saunders Rocke page 248. page 278. are rehearsed In which I say that Leo Gregorie bishops of Rome although they were not come to the full pride of Antichrist yet the mysterie of iniquitie hauing wrought in that seate neere fiue or sixe hundred yeares before them and then greatly increased they were so deceiued with the long continuance of errour that they thought the dignitie of Peter was much more ouer the rest of his fellowe Apostles than the holy scriptures of God against which no continuance of errour can prescribe doeth either allowe or bearâ— withall Againe the testimonies of Leo Gregorie bishops of Rome as alwayes so nowe I deeme to bee vnmeete to be heard in their owne cause though otherwise they were not the worst men yet great furtherers of the authoritie of Antichrist which soone after their dayes tooke possession of the chayre which they had helped to prepare for him For this I am called a malepeart scholer of Bezaes impudent schoole But by what reason For placing the mysterie of Antichrist as woorking in the see of Rome euen in S. Peters time That the mysterie of Antichrist did worke in S. Peters time the text of S. Paul is plaine That it did worke in Rome where Antichrist should be openly shewed S. Iohn is plaine in the Reuelation Ca. 17. ver 9. 18. yea the Papists confessing that S. Peter called Rome Babylon must needes grant as much this onely then remaineth in controuersie whether in the sea or church of Rome the mysterie of iniquitie did worke from the Apostles time vntill Antichrist was openly shewed Seeing it wrought at Rome it wrought either in the church or altogether out of the church but it wrought not altogether out of the church therefore it wrought in the church That the mysterie of iniquitie preparing for that Antichrist wrought not altogether out of the church it is manifest because the seat of Antichrist is prophesied to bee in the Temple and Church of God Without the Church was not the mysterie of iniquitie against Christ but open wickednesse and persecution of Christes Church Therefore within the Church that mysterie did worke By what meanes first it is not certaine because it was a secrete not reuealed by the Apostle Some coniecture that it was by preferring one bishop before all the clergie of elders or priests which at the first were equall Some thinke that such factions began at Rome as afterwarde were at Corinth one holding of Cephas that is Peter another of some other How euer it was the challenge made to Peters chayre and from the dayes of Victor diuerse bishops of Rome creeping vp by litle and litle pretending authoritie ouer other Churches other churches reuerencing that see for many good respects were abused by Satan to set forwarde his purpose in aduauncing the throne of Antichrist And where I saide that Leo Gregorie were great furtherers of the authoritie of Antichrist my meaning was not that they did wittingly willingly prepare a seat for Antichrist but that the dâ—uel by Gods permission because he was to send the efficacie of error into the world tooke hold in the time appointed of that authoritie which the bishops for the dignitie of their see and as they thought for the benefite of the church did labour so greatly to maintaine encrease Neither write I any thing contrarie to the challenge of that reuerend father the bishop of Sarum as they charge mee who saide at Paules crosse O Gregorie O Leo if we be deceiued you haue deceiued vs For his meaning was not thereby to allow whatsoeuer they had done or written but that in some such matters as are in controuersie betweene the Papistes and vs euen Gregorie and Leo are witnesses against them A great accusation is in the note vpon Heb. 5. ver 6. in these wordes You must beware of the wicked heresie of the Arrians and Caluines except in these latter it be rather an error proceding of ignorance that stick not to say that Christ was a priest or did sacrifice according to his godhead which is to make Christ God the fathers priest and not his sonne and to do sacrifice and homage to him as his lorde and not as his equall in dignitie and nature Therefore S. Augustine sayeth in Psal. 109. That as he was man he was priest as God he was not priest And Theodoret in Psal. 109. As man he did offer sacrifice but as God he receiued sacrifice And againe Christ touching his humanitie was called a priest and hee offered none other host but his owne bodie c. Dâ—m 1. circa med Some of our newe masters not knowing so much did let fall out of their pennes the contrarie and being admonished of the error and that it was verie Arrianisme yet they persist in it of meere ignorance in the grounds of diuinitie First note the intollerable pride of these Popish interpreters that challenge to themselues all learning and knowledge in diuinitie condemning all other men of ignorance meere ignorance in the groundes of diuinitie So playeth Bristowe with the bishop of Sarum whome in the place by them quoted I reproued in these words The like impudent cauil he bringeth against M. Iewel whoÌ„ no man I thinke without laughter can read to be charged with ignorance by blundering Bristowe for affirming Christ to be a priest according to his deitie whom the Apostle expressely sayeth by his eternall spirite to haue offered himselfe Heb. 9. ver 14. But that you may the better vnderstand this controuersie betweene vs we denie not that Christ was a priest according to his humanitie but wee affirme that whole Christ is a priest as he is both God and man For in the office of priesthood two things must be considered a ministerie and an authoritie In respect of the ministeriall part our Sauiour Christ perfourmed that office as man but in respect of authoritie of entring into the holiest place reconciling vs to God presenting vs vnto God which was the principall part of his priesthood hee did perfourme it as the sonne of God as Lorde and maker of the house and not as a seruant but as God which hath created all things Heb. 3. vers 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. Against this sound doctrine let vs examine what the heretikes alledge First they charge it most odiously with Arrianisme but without all â—parke of reason seeing wee distinguish plainly
the authoritie of God the sonne which is equall with his father from the ministerie of y e man Iesu Christ inferior to his father as touching his manhood Secondly they charge vs that we sticke not to say Christ was a priest or did sacrifice according to his Godhead Wee say he was a priest and did offer sacrifice both according to his godhead according to his manhood And the same saâ—eth the Apostle in effect when he saith The bloud of Christ which by his eternal spirit offered himself vnreprouable to God shal purge your conscience c. Heb. 9. 14. For not y e bloud of beastes nor of any man though he had beene innocent but the bloud of that man which was God was the price of our redemption in which respect the Apostle Act. 20. ver 28. sayeth that God purchased his Church vnto him selfe by his owne bloud For by the eternall spirite is vnderstood that infinite power of the diuinitie vnited to the humanitie by which the sacrifice of Christ was consecrated that by the same liuely or quickening vertue by which he created vs he might also restore vs. Whereunto our Sauiour Christ had regard when he saide Ioh. 6. It is the spirite that giueth life the flesh profiteth nothing But this say the Papistes is to make Christ God the fathers priest not his sonne Nay rather this is to acknowledge Christ to be both his fathers sonne and his priest euen as the Apostle sayeth The law appointeth priestes men that haue infirmitie but the worde of the othe which is after the lawe the Sonne for euer perfected Heb. 7. v. 28. Where by the oppositioÌ„ of men hauing infirmitie with the Sonne perfected for euer it is most cleare that the worde of the othe maketh Christ as he is the Sonne of God a priest after the order of Melchisedech Where I cannot omitte the shamefull corruption of this text in the popish translation which to hide this opposition betweene men and God the sonne of God hath altogither left out this worde men although it be in the Latine expressed manifestly Lex enim homines constituit sacerdotes infirmitatem habentes which they translate thus For the law appointeth priestes them that haue infirmitie But to proceede Our accusers adde further that our assertion is to make Christ to doe sacrifice and homage to God his father as his Lorde and not as his equall in dignitie and nature I aunswere no more than when S. Paul sayeth that Christ when hee was in the forme of God and thought it no robberie to bee equall with God he made himselfe of no reputation tooke vpon him the shape of a seruant became obedient to the death euen the death of the crosse I haue sufficiently before distinguished that all partes of his priesthood that required obedience seruice homage ministerie subiection he perfourmed as man but the authoritie of reconciling men vnto God he wrought as God and man euen as the Apostle writeth God was in Christ reconciling the world to him selfe 2. Cor. 5. ver 19. That he might be a priest therefore able and worthie to make attonement with God he was God that his reconciliation and satisfaction might extende to men he was man and so beeing God and man he is â— perfect mediator betweene God and man and an high priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech All this notwithstanding they oppose against vs the authoritie of the fathers who doubtlesse had no other meaning than we to keepe this distinction First Augustine in Psal. 109. is produced to say that as hee was man he was priest as God he has not priest But Augustines wordes are somewhat otherwise vppon the text Iurauit Dominus c. Ad hoc enim natus ex vtero ante luciferum vt esses sacerdos in aeternum secundum ordineÌ„ Melchisedech Si natuÌ„ ex vtero de virgine intelligimus ante LuciferuÌ„ noctu sicut â—uangelia contestantur procul dubio inde ex vtero ante luciferuÌ„ vt esset Sacerdos in aeternuÌ„ secunduÌ„ ordinem Melchisedech Nam secundum id quod natus est de patre Deus apud Deum coaeternus gignenti non Sacerdos sed sacerdos propter carnem assumptam propter victimam quam pro nobis offerre◠á nobis acceptam The Lorde hath sworne c. For to this ende thou wast borne out of the wombe before the day starre that thou mightest be a priest for euer after the order of Melchisedech For according to that he is borne of God the father God with God toeternall with him that begetteth he is not a priest but a priest for his flesh assumpted for the sacrifice which being taken of vs he might offer for vs. In these words Augustines meaning is plaine ynough that Christ according to his diuine and eternall generation could not haue beene a priest for vs except hee had taken our flesh and beene borne a man which wee doe alwaies confesse But that our redemption by his sacrifice was the meere worke of his manhoode onely he sayth not but the contrarie if he be marked For he sayth that the sonne of God was a priest for the fleshe which he tooke of vs that he might offer for vs that sacrifice which he tooke of vs. Heere it is plaine that Christ as God offereth sacrifice but he offereth as a priest for to offer sacrifice pertayneth to a priest therefore Christ as God is a priest yet not as God only but as God and man Whereupon the same Augustine saith afterwarde O domine qui iâ—rasti c. O Lorde which hast sworne and sayde Thou arâ— a priest for euer after the order of Mâ—lchisâ—dech the same priest for euer is the Lorde on thy right hande the very same I say priest for euer of whom thou hast sworne is the Lorde on thy right hande because thou hast sayde to the same my Lorde Sit thou on my right hande vntill I make thine enemies thy footestoole Heere he affirmeth that the eternall God Dauids Lorde as he was God Dauids sonne as he was man is that eternall priest And to what ende but to perfourme those partes of a priest which were proper to God that is to reconcile vs vnto God to haue authoritie of himselfe and of his owne nature and worthynesse to come before God and to remaine in the fauour of God alwayes which no creature hath but through his worthinesse and gracious gift The next authoritie brought against vs is Theodoret in Psal. 109. who is cited thus As man he did offer sacrifice but as God he did receiue sacrifices verily we say as much and more also that he offered sacrifice as God also reconciling the world to himselfe But in truth the wordes of Theodoret are otherwise and to an other ende Sacerdos autem non est Christus qui ex Iuda secundum carnem ortus est non ipse aliquid offerens sed vocatur caput eorum qui offerunâ— quandoquidem eius corpus ecclesiam
vocat propterea sacerdotio fungitur vt homo recipis autem ea quae offeruntur vt Deus offeri verò ecclesia corporis eius sanguinis symbola omne fermentum per primitias sanctificans And Christ is nowe a priest which is sprung of Iuda according to the flesh not offering any thing himselfe but is called the head of them that offer seeing he calleth the church his bodie and therefore he exerciseth the priesthoode as a man and hee receiueth those thinges that are offered as God and the church truely doth offer the tokens of his bodie and bloud sanctifying euerie leauen by the first fruites In these wordes Theodoret speaketh not of the sacrifice that Christ offered himselfe but of the spirituall sacrifice of thankesgiuing which the church offereth to him in celebrating the memorie of his death Not of the priesthoode which Christ did exercise in earth but of the priesthoode that he doth exercise in heauen not now offering anie thing but as God receiuing oblations And where he sayth that nowe he exerciseth the priesthoode as man he denieth not but that he doeth exercise it as mediator God and man Which is more plaine in his exposition of the Epistle to the Heb. cap. 8. where he enquireth how Christ doth both sit at the right hande of maiestie and yet is a minister of the holy thinges Quonam enim munere sacerdotali fungitur qui seipsum semelobtuliâ— non offert amplius sacrificium Quomodo autem fieri potest vt idem sedeaâ— socerdotali officio fungatur Nisi fortè dixerit quispiam esse munus sacerdotale salutem quam vt dominus procurat Tabernaculum autem vocauit coelum cuius est ipse opifex quem vt hominem dixit Apostolus fungi sacerdotio For what priestly office doth he exercise which hath once offered vp himselfe and doth no more offer any sacrifice And howe can it be that the same person shoulde together both sit and exercise the priestly office Except perhaps a man will say that the saluation which he procureth as Lorde is a priestly office Neither hath he any other meaning Dialog prime where his purpose is to prooue that Christ had a body Si est ergo sacerdonum proprium offerre munera Christus autem quod ad humanit atem quidem attinet sacerdos appellatus est non aliam autem hostiam quam suum corpus obtuliâ— Dominus ergo Christus corpus habuiâ— If therefore it be proper for priestes to offer giftes and Christ as concerning his humanitie truely is called a priest and he offered none other sacrifice but his owne bodie therefore our Lorde Christ had a bodie He sayth not that Christ is a priest according to his humanitie onelie whereas the excellencie of his person being both God and man caused â—is sacrifice to be acceptable and auaileable for the redemption of man But to make the matter cleare beside that which the Apostle writeth to the Hebrues ca. 9. these argumentes may plainely be drawen out of the 7. cap. where he speaketh expresly of his priesthood after the order of Melchisedech Christ as he is without father and without mother is â— priest after the order of Melchisedech Christ as he is God and man is without father and without mother therfore Christ as he is God and man is a priest after the order of Melchisedech Againe Christ as he hath no beginning of his dayes nor ende of his life is a priest after the order of Melchisedech Christ according to his diuinitie hath no beginning of his daies nor ende of his life according to his whole person Therefore Christ according to his diuinitie and according to his whole person is a priest after the order of Melchisedech Againe except you vnderstand Christ to haue beene a priest according to his diuinitie he was tythed in the loynes of Abraham as well as Lcui but according to his diuinitie hee was not in the loynes of Abraham and therfore payde no tythe in Abraham as God though as man he was subiect to the law but receiued tythes of Abraham in his priest and figure Melchisedech For the priest receiueth tythes in the name of God as also he blesseth in the name of God Therefore if Christ giue priestly blessing in his owne name he giueth it as he is God and not as man onely Finally to say that that Christ was a priest only in respect of his manhood â—auoreth rankely of Nestorianisme whereas our assertion that Christ is an high priest both according to his deitie in which he is equall with his father and also according to his humanitie in which the father is greter than he is as farre from Arrianisme as the Papistes are from honestie and synceritie to charge vs with such open blasphemie God be praised Imprinted at London by George Bishop and Henrie Binneman 1583. D. Standish D. Heskins Heretikes fiue vvaies specially abuse the Scriptures â— Denying certaine bookes or parts of bookes 2 Doubting of their authoritie and calling theÌ„ into question 2 Voluntarie expositions according to euery ones fansie or heresie 4. Changing some vvordes or sentences of the very originall text Tertul. cont Marae cio li. â— in princ Tertul. lib. 5. False and heretical traÌ„slation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 possedi◠〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aug. ep 89. lib. 1. de pec mer. cap. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 That the Protestants Caluinists vse the foresaid fiue meanes of defacing the Scriptures * Cont. rat Edm. Camp pag. 18. Retent pag. 32. dist of the Rock pag. 307. Luther in noâ—o Test. Germa in Prefat Iacobi Conc. Cart. 3. can 47. * Argu. in epist. Iacob * Whitak p. 10. * Ibid. Lib. 6. cap. 18. De doct Christ. lib. 2. cap. 8. Anno. 1532. Anno. 1537. Ibid. pag. 17. M. VVhitaker by these vvords condemneth their ovvne Seruice booke vvhich appointeth these bookes of Tobie and Ecclesiasticus to be read for holy Scripture as the other Doe they read in their Churches Apocryphall superstitious bookes for holy Scripture or is he a Puritane that thus disgraceth their order of daily Seruice In expositione Symbolâ— pag. 10. M. VVhitakers booke In the argument Bib. an 1579. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Euseb. lib. 6. cap. â— Hieronim ad â—aâ—d Tom. 3. â—â—â—â—â—â— lib. 3. cap. 6. in EuaÌ„g Math. â—â— 5. cap. 26. Cyprianus aliâ— in Concilio Aphricano * Whitak pag. 17. 120. Ibid. pag. 101. Praef. ad 6. theses Oxon pag. 25. Lib. Confess 1. cap. 14. lib. 7. c. 20. Cicer. de Senect Beza the mouse of Geneua gnavveth the text of Scripture De ineam dom cap. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No. Test. an 1556. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza reconcileth the Greeke â—â—â—â— of the nevv TestameÌ„t vvith the Hebrevve text of the old by putting out of the Greeke text so much as pleaseth him Est. 6. 9. 10. Gal. 3. 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
about this Sacrament we learne vndoubtedly that when it is sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the meaning is blessing and giuing thankes he made the Eucharist of his bodye and bloud that is the Sacrament and Sacrifice of a singular thankes-giuing which as S. Augustine often is wont to say the faithfull onely doe knowe and vnderstand in the sacrifice of the Church and because the faithfull onely vnderstand therefore the Protestants and Caluinistes are so ignorant in this mysterie that to take away all the dignitie thereof they bend both their expositions and translations FVLK 6. That the elements are blessed and consecrated by prayer and thankes-giuing as Iustine Irenaeus and other auncient fathers write it is the thing that we contende for But you except you be a Schismatike from all other Papistes doe teache that they are consecrated by these wordes pronounced by a Priest this is my bodie which are wordes neyther of prayer nor of thankes giuing Neuerthelesse to pricke vs with a pinne you haue wounded your selfe with a sworde and saye the sacrament is blessed and consecrated with prayer and thankes giuing Except you haue some Sophisticall meaning that it is consecrated with them but not by them The signification of the actiue which you gather out of the passiue vsed by Iustinus sheweth what a learned Clerke you are Iustinus writeth to the Gentiles or Heathen men of whome he coulde not haue bene vnderstoode if he had not vsed the passiue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that signification that all other men did vse it in in that tyme. What we vnderstande of the mysterie of the Lordes supper and the sacrifice of prayer and thankes gyuing whiche is the onely sacrifice of Christians as Iustinus writeth the Churche of God dothe acknowledge thoughe the synagogue of Antichristian heretikes wil not confesse it MART. 7. After they haue turned blessing or consecration into bare thankes giuing which is one steppe towarde the denying of the real presence they come nearer and so include Christe in heauen that he cannot bee withall vpon the aultar translating thus Whome heauen muste containe vntil the times that al things be restored Acts. 3. v. 21. and yet Beza worse and he that alleadgeâ—h him M. Whitakers who muste be contained in heauen Which is so farre from the Greeke that not onely Illyricus the Lutheran but Caluin himselfe doth not like it Beza protesteth that he so translateth of purpose to keepe Christs presence from the altar and we maruel the lesse because we are wel acquainted with many the like his impudent Protestations M. Whitak only we do maruel at that he should be either so deceiued by an other mans translation or himself be so ouerseene in the Greeke worde that hee knoweth not a meere deponent and only deponent from a passiue FVLK 7. The aunsweare to this cauill is at large contained Cap. 1. sect 36. your owne translation is whom heauen must receiue If there bee nowe suche difference betweene receiuing and containing capere and recipere it is very strange to learned eares howsoeuer sottishe Papistes wil accept whatsoeuer proceedeth from you But forasmuche as this section with twoo other following are directed principally against Master Whitakers I shal need to say little seeing he hath fully answeared for him self This one thing I may say coÌ„cerning his knowledge in the Greeke tongue which you make to be so small that he knoweth not a deponent from a passiue he is wel knowne to bee so well learned therein that manye of your Seminarie maye maruaile at him as you saye but neither you nor any of you all is able to matche hym therein MART. 8. This doth not become hym that obiecteth ignoraunce of the Greeke to an other manne and that after hee hadde well tryed by publique conference that hee was not ignoraunte and so obiecteth it as thoughâ— hee knewe not three wordes in that tongue whereas hee hadde hearde hym reade and interpreate Saint Basil not the easiest of the Greeke Doctours This is palpable impudencie and a face that can not blushe and full of malice agaynste the sainctes of God who if they knewe not a worde in the Greeke tongue were neuer the worse nor the lesse learned but among fooles and children that esteeme learning by suche trifles whyche Grammarians knowe farre better than greate Diuines For were not hee awise manne that woulde preferre one Maiser Humfrey Maister Fulke Maister Whitakers or some of vs poore menne because wee haue a little smacke in the three tongues beefore Saint Chrysostome Saint Basil Saint Augustine saint Gregorie or saint Thomas that vnderstoode well none but one howbeeit if they esteeme learning by knowledge of the tongues they wil not I trowe compare with Catholikes eyther of former time or of these latter age specially since their newe Gospell beganne and if they will compare wyth vs herein for their simple credite wee maye perhappes giue them occasion ere it bee long to muster their menne all at once if they dare shewe their face beefore our campe of excellent Hebricians Grecians Latinistes of absolute linguistes in the Chaldee Syriake Arabike c. whome they muste needes confesse to haue beene and to be euen at this day their Maisters and teachers FVLK 8. It becommeth you that haue caste off all feare of God and duetie to your Prince to caste off all ciuill honestie and humaine modestie also If you speake of suche matters as you might not bee controlled in them yet if you forbeare the truth it were somewhat tollerable But when you speake of Campions learning in the Greeke tongue wherein you maye bee so manifestly conuicted by hundreths of witnesses you stoppe the waye from any credite to bee giuen you in other matters All Oxforde knewe that Campion was no Graecian when hee departed from that Vniuersitie His time spent in Ireland and other places where he trauailed woulde not yeelde him greate knowledge since his departure excepte hee hadde wholy applyed it whyche he coulde not doe nor any other serious studie in such sorte as he traueiled in diuerse places But admitte he might haue knowledge by extraordinarie meanes or myracle if you wil howe shall hee bee tried but by reading and vnderstanding that whyche greately concerneth his cause in disputation and conference You saide he didde reade and interprete Saint Basil not the easiest of the Greeke Doctours I was not present at that conference and therefore haue the lesse to saye But I my selfe making triall of hys skill by a place of Epiphanius both read it to him and offering him the booke he vnderstode no more the matter thereof than if I hadde cited it in the Arabicke or Persian language And therefore vpon the acknowledging of his dissembled ignorance with great laughter of the hearers I was content to expounde it to him in Englishe beefore I coulde receiue any aunsweare to the argument taken from that authoritie Wherefore I verily thinke and am certainely perswaded
that if he pretended to interprete any thing out of Saint Basil it was altogither by artificiall coniecture either of the place which he knewe and had read in Latine or else by surmising of some one common worde hee gathered what the sense of the whole shoulde bee Indeede if hee hadde neuer knowne a word of Greeke althoughe hee had bene no meete man to chalenge a whole realme to disputation yet hee might haue beene an honest man and otherwise meanly learned so hee had not pretended knowledge when he was in a maner altogither ignorant For mine owne parte thoughe it please you to name mee with Maister Humfrey Maister Whitakers and others I neuer tooke vpon mee but a meane knowledge in the tongues neither desire I in comparison to be preferred before any learned manne whose trauailes haue bin profitable to the Churche althoughe he were ignorant in the tongues Yet this I muste freely say that he which shall professe to bee an absolute learned diuine without the knowledge of three tongues at the leaste may thinke wel of himselfe but hardely hee shall gette and retaine the credite hee seeketh amoung learned menne in this learned age And therefore Campion if disputation hadde beene meante rather than sedition for al his arrogance and impudence was an vnmeete Apostle to bee sente from Gregorie of Rome to chalenge all the wise and learned in England Neither do I say this as thoughe I measured all learning by knowledge of the tongues but wherein soeuer any Papist in the worlde shall bee bolde to chalenge the name of learning in anie knowledge that euer was or is accounted good learning God bee praysed there are many of Gods true Catholike Churche whereof we are members able to match them therein That I saye not to excell them And whereas you woulde make vs beholding to Papistes for suche knowledge as any of vs hathe in the Greeke Hebrewe Syriacke Chaldee Arabicke tongues c. It is well knowne the Papistes are more beholding to vs. And although I confesse that some Papistes of late dayes haue bestowed fruitefull paines in setting foorth some of the orientall tongues yet are they not the firste nor all that haue traueiled profitably that waiâ— But manye haue attained to competent skill in those languages many yeares beefore anye Papistes had written anye thing that mighte further them therein You were wont to beare ignoraunt menne in hande that we were a sight of English Doctors vnderstanding no languages but our mother tongue which hath enforced diuerse men to shewe their skill in the tongues which otherwise they would neuer haue openly professed But now that the worlde seeth to your shame how richly God hath blessed vs with the knowledge and interpretation of diuerse tongues you exprobrate to vs our knowledge in the tongues and traduce vs among the ignorant as though we esteemed all learning by knowledge of tongues and that we were but meare Grammarians often tell vs of that stale iest that the kingdome of Grammarians is paste as though it were but a little Grammar whereof we make a shew But for that generall muster which you threaten to driue vs vnto ere it be long if you come as learned men should do armed with bookes penne inke and paper I doubt not by the grace of God but you shall finde them that dare confront you and chase you out of the field also But if you come vnder the Popes banner with such blessing as he sente lately into Ireland I hope you shall be mette with all as those his champions were and finde that promotion for your good seruice whiche you haue long agoe deserued by your trauailes for vpholding of his kingdome MART. 9. But to returne to you M. Whitakers greater is your fault in diuinitie than in the tonges when you make your argument against the real presence out of this place as out of the Scripture and S. Peter whereas they are Bezaes wordes and not S. Peters Againe whether you take Bezaes wordes or S. Peters your argument faileth very much when you conclude that Christs natural body is not in the Sacrament because it is placed and conteined in heauen For S. Chrysostome telleth you that Christe ascending into heauen both lefte vs his flesh and yet ascending hath the same And againe O miracle saith he He that sitteth aboue with the Father in the same moment of time is handled with the handes of al. This is the faith of the auncient fathers M. Whitakers and this is the Catholike faith and this is I trow an other maner of faith and farre greater thus to beleeue the presence of Christ in both places at once because he is omnipotent and hath saidâ— the worde than your faith whereof you boaste so much which beleeueth no further than that he is ascended and that therefore he cannot be present vpon the altar nor dispose of his body as he list FVLK 9. Maister Whitaker is not so young a diuine but he knoweth that Chrysostome speaketh of the ineffable manner of Christs presence spiritually though he be absent corporally As in the place by you cited Desacerdoâ—io it is most manifest where he saith that wee may see the people dyed and made redde with the pretious bloud of Christe which as it is not with the eye of the bodie but with the eye of faith so is Christe that is corporally present in heauen spiritually present vnto the faith of the worthie receyuer MART. 10. Againe it is a very famous place for the real presence of the bloud which wee haue handled at large else where but here also must be briefly touched when our Sauiour saith Luc. 22. This is the Chalice the new Testament in my bloud which Chalice is shedde for you For so which must needes be referred according to the Greeke In which speach Chalice must needes be taken for that in the chalice and that in the chalice must needes be the bloud of Christ and not wine because his bloud only was shed for vâ— And so â—e do plainâ—ly proue the real presence according aâ— S. Chrysostome also said Hoc quod est in calice illud est quod â—â—â—xit delatere That which is in the Chalice is the same that gushed out of his side All which moste necessarie deduction Beza would defeate by saying the Greeke is corrupted in all the copies that are extant in the world and by translating thus cleane otherwise than the Greeke will beare This â—â—ppe is the newe Testament in my bloud which bloud is shedde for you FVLK 10. It is a famous place in deede that neuer a one of the auncient writers could coÌ„â—â—der for any reall presence to be drawne out of it How Beza hath traÌ„slated it I haue at large declared before Cap. 1. Sect. 37. 38. 39. That which Chrysostome saieth wee confesse to be most true after a spiritual heauenly manner and so he doth expound him selfe in the same place where he saith