saith to walke in them and dothe by his grace cause vs to doe them and hath promised lyfe euerlasting for them and telleth vs in all his holy Scriptures that to doe them is the waye to heauen therefore not presuming vpon our owne workes as our owne or as of our selues but vpon the good workes wrought through Gods grace by vs his seely instruments wee haue great confidence as the Apostle speaketh and are assured that these workes proceeding of his grace be so acceptable to him that they are esteemed and be worthie and meritorious of the kingdome of heauen Against which truth let vs see further their hereticall corruptions FVLK 7. If you would abide by your first protestation we should not neede to contend much aboute this question But after you haue in the beginning magnified the grace and mercy of God and abased your owne merites you come backe againe with a subtill compasse to establish your owne free will the worthinesse of your workes and your merite of the kingdome of heauen First you say God telleth vs in all his holy Scriptures that to doe good workes is the way to heauen In deede to fulfill the lawe is to deserue heauen But who so euer is guiltie of sinne must seeke an other way than by good workes to come to heaueÌ„ namely to Iesus Christ who is the onely way to heauen the truth and the life by whose bloud when he is purged from his sinne and reconciled vnto God and the kingdome of heauen purchased for him then he hath the way of good workes appointed him to walke in towarde the same Secondly you say you presume not vpon your owne workes as your owne or as of your selues but vpon the good workes wrought by Gods grace by you his seely instrumentes you haue great confidence Thus while you would seeme to flie from Pelagiaâ—isme you fall into flatte Pharisaisme For you trust that you are righteous in your selues though not as of your selues Suche was the Pharisee of whom Christe telleth the parable which ascribing all his workes to the grace of God had confideÌ„ce in them that he was iust before God by them God I thaÌ„ke thee saith the Pharisee He acknowledgeth the grace of God as author of all his workes yet against such as he was Christe telleth that parable And whereas you call the Apostle Heb. 10. to witnesse of your errour you doe him great wrong for he speaketh not of any confidence to bee had vpon good workes wrought by the grace of God by vs but in the newe couenant of remission of sinnes by the sacrifice of Christes death by whom we haue accesse to God that we may be acceptable to him not for any meritorious workes wrought by vs but by the only oblation of his bodie once for all by which he hath made perfect for euer those that are sanctified CHAP. IX Hereticall translation against MERITES or MERITORIOVS WORKES and the REVVARDE for the same Martin WHen they translate Rom. 8. 18. thus I am certainly perswaded that the afflictions of this time ARE NOT VVORTHIE OF THE GLORIE which shall be shewed vpon vs doe they not meane to signifie to the Reader must it not needes so sound in his eares that the tribulations of this life be they neuer so great though suffered for Christ yet doe not merite nor deserue the heauenly glorie but in the Greeke it is farre otherwise I will not stand vpon their first wordes I am certainely perswaded which is a farre greater asseueration than the Apostle vseth and I maruell how they could so translate that Greeke worde but that they were disposed not onely to translate the Apostles wordes falsly against meritorious workes but also to auouch and affirme the same lustily with much more vehemencie of wordes than the Apostle speaketh Well let vs pardon them this fault and examine the wordes following Where the Greeke sayth not as they translate with full consent in all their English Bibles The afflictions are not worthy of the glorie c. but thus The afflictions of this time are not equall correspondent or comparable to the glorie to come because the afflictions are short the glorie is eternall the afflictions small and few in comparison the glorie great and aboundant aboue measure Fulke ALthough an inuincible argument against merites and desert of good workes may be drawen out of this text yet the meaning of the translators is to shewe no more than the Apostle saith that the heauenly glorie is incomparably greater than all the tribulations of this life And this the Apostle speaketh not doubtiÌ„gly as our english word I suppose doth signifie when a man may be deceaued in his supposel but he auoucheth it coÌ„stantly as a thing which being wel considered with the reasons thereof he concludeth of it with certaintie And so doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie in this place and in diuerse other by the iudgement of better Grecians than Gregorie Martin will be these seuen yeares as Rom. 3. 28. where the Apostle hauing discussed the controuersie of iustification by faith or workes concludeth as of a certaintie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we determine therefore that a man is iustified by fayth without the workes of the lawe Likewise Rom. 6. v. 11. after he hath proued that sanctification is necessary to all them that shal or haue put on the iustice of Christ he sayth with great asseueration vnto the Romanes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Make you ful account therefore that you are dead to sinne not vncertainly thinke or suppose it so to be Therefore for the translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place we wil accept no pardon of you it is better translated than your wit or learning serueth you to vnderstand Now let vs come to the other wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are not worthy of the glorie Where you say it should be not equall correspondent or comparable to the glorie Verily those words we vse haue none other sense in this place than the wordes which you supply vs withall but our wordes doe expresse the moste vsuall signification of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen as your vulgar Latine doth calling it in the same sense condignae which you in your owne translation dare not render equall correspondent or comparable but condigne lest following the sense you might be accused to forsake the word euen so we thinke it best where the vsuall signification of the word will beare the sense in our English to reteine the same and not to change it MART. 2. This is the Greeke phrase and the Apostles meaning which we neede not greatly to proue because their owne Doctors Caluin and Beza doe so interprete it and therefore wonder it were that the Geneua English Bibles also should forsake their maisters and follow the errour of the other English Bibles but that they thought the more voices the better In the meane time the people
as the cause shall require More examples might I bring but for tediousnesse to conuince the bolde rashnesse of this quarreller but these may suffice all indifferent Readers and aunswere sufficiently for vs within the newe Testament we translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinaunces or statuts seeing it is proued both by the Septuaginta which calleth the same Hebrewe worde not onely iustifications but often commaundements statuts precepts iudgements by the vulgar Latine Interpretor which commonly calleth it ceremonies or precepts MART. 2. But be it that you may controll them in the Hebrew which none but fooles will graunt vnto you in the newe Testament what pretense haue you doe you there also translate the Hebrew worde or rather the Greeke the Greeke vndoubtedly you should translate What reason then can you haue why you doe not none other surely than that which Beza giueth for him selfe saying that he reiected the word iustifications notwithstanding it expressed the Greeke worde for worde notwithstanding the seuentie Greeke Interpreters vsed it to signifie the whole lawe and in Latine it be commonly translated iustificationes notwithstanding all this for this onely cause sayth he did I reiect it to auoide the cauillations that might be made by this word against iustification by faith As if he should say This word truly translated according to the Greeke might minister great occasion to proue by so many places of scripture that mans iustification is not by faith only but also by keeping the law and obseruing the commaundements which therefore are called according to the Greeke and Latine iustifications because they concurre to iustification and make a man iust as by S. Lukes wordes also is well signified which haue this allusion that they were both iuste because they walked in all the iustifications of our Lord. Which they of purpose suppresse by other wordes FVLK 2. None but fooles considering what I haue brought of the vsage of that worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wil iudge that it signifieth onely iustifications and all wise men may see that we haue good warrant to translate it otherwise in the Greeke Testament where it must needes haue an other signification The concurrence of workes with faith to iustificatioÌ„ before God which the Apostle doth exclude Rom. 3. we may not admit But iustification by workes as Saint Iames teacheth we doe acknoweledge I hope you will not saye that your Latine translator against iustification by workes translated the worde so often ceremonies or that ceremonies of the lawe doe concurre to iustification by faith The commaundements in deede are called iustifications because the workes of the lawe if a man keepe it wholy are able to iustifie Not that euery ceremonie or obseruation of any peece of the law is a iustification â—or maketh a man iust which you may better say vpon the etymologie of the worde than that euery particular obseruation of the lawe or good worke doth concurre with faith vnto iustification MART. 3. And hereof also it riseth that when he can not possibly auoyd the word in his translation as Apoc. 19. 8. Bissinum enim iustificationes sunt sanctorum The silke is the iustifications of Sainctes there he helpeth the matter with this coÌ„mentarie That iustifications are those good workes which be the testimonies of a liuely faith But our English translatours haue an other way to auoyd the worde euen in their translation For they say here the righteöusnes of Sainctes because they coulde not saye ordinances of Saincts and they would not say iustifications of Saincts knowing very well by Bezaes owne commentarie that this word includeth the good workes of saincts which workes if they should in translating call their iustifications it would goe sore against iustification by onely faith Therefore doe they translate in steede thereof ordinances and statutes where they can which are termes furthest of from iustification and where they can not there they say righteousnesse making it also the plurall number whereas the more proper Greeke worde for rightuousnesse is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dan. 6 22. which there some of them translate vngiltinesse because they wil not translate exactly if you would hire them FVLK 3. When 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Apoc. 19. are translated iustificationes they signifie iuste works as I haue already proued the significatioÌ„ of the word to beare beside that it is so vsed by Aristotle in his Ethicks who of iustificatioÌ„ before God whereof wee speake vnderstoode neuer a whit Therefore if in steede of rightuousnesse which is the singular number it were translated rightuous or iust workes it were not amisse in mine opinion Although by rightuousnesse in that place is nothing meant but good or rightuous workes as Bezaes note doth tel you MART. 4. And therefore as for iustice and iustifications they say righteousnesse so for iuste they translate righteous and by this meanes Ioseph was a righteous maÌ„ rather than a iust man and Zacharie and Elisabeth were both righteous before God rather than iust because when a man is called iust it soundeth that he is so in deede and not by imputation onely as a wise man is vnderstoode to be wise in deede and not only so imputed Therefore doe they more gladly and more often say righteous men rather than iust men when they doe say iust men as sometime they doe least they might sâ—eme wilfull inexcusably there they vnderstande iust by imputation not in deede as is to be seene in Bezaes Annotations vpon the Epistle to the Romanes Note also that they put the word iust when faith is ioyned withall as Rom. 1. The iust shal liue by faith to signifie that iustification is by faith But if workes be ioyned withall and keeping the commaundementes as in the place alleaged Luc. 1. there they say righteous to suppresse iustification by workes FVLK 4. This is a maruelous difference neuer heard of I thinke in the English toÌ„gue before betwene iust righteous iustice righteousnes I am sure there is none of our translatours no nor any professer of iustification by faith onely that esteemeth it the worth of one haire whether you say in any place of Scripture iust or righteous iustice or righteousnesse and therefore freely they haue vsed sometimes the one worde sometimes the other Therefore it is a monstrous falshoode that you fain them to obserue this distinction that they ioyne iust with faith and righteous with workes Doe they not translate Rom. 2. ver 13. the hearers of the lawe are not righteous before God but the doers of the lawe shall bee iustified Haue you not again the righteousnesse of God is made manifest without the law c. by the faith of Iesus Christ. And where you reade the iust shall liue by faith haue you not immediatly the righteousnesse of God is reuealed from faith to faith as it is written the iust shall liue by faith Who then but the Diuell which hath his name of sclaundering woulde here inuent
denie but the equitie of the same lawes doth still remaine although not euery one that erreth obstinately ought to bee delt with so extremely Also pag. 82. of that booke I say that all protestantes are one in God and Christ their redeemer from which vnitie dissention about ceremonies cannot separate them and yet I except such schismatikes as delight in contention The controuersie betweene Luther and vs doth not hinder vs from this vnitie although Luther and other of preposterous zeale of godlinesse do otherwise account of vs which errour is of infirmitie and not of malice The pag. 23. of the same aunswere there is another charge where I say that text Vow ye and render your vowes to the Lorde is a text that pertaineth to the old Testament meaning that it must haue the exposition according to the lawe of such thinges as God did allowe and were in mens power to perfourme For what if a man vowed to sacrifice a dogge What say wee to Iepthes rash vowe To the vowe of them that vowed to kill Paul Our censurer reporteth my wordes that this text belongeth onely to the olde Testament as though I sayde there was no vse of it in the newe Testament There is one lie by addition In the same place to the text If thou wilt bee perfect goe and sâ—ll what thou hast c. I say it is a singular triall to that one person Fâ—â— euery man is not bounde so to doe yet our censurâ—â— cauileth that so all the other wordes spoken to that young man may be restrained and made singular as whatsoeuer else was spoken to any singular person As though my reason were that therefore it was singular because it was spoken to one man As if wee had not generall lawes and rules to knowe what is enioyned to all men what to some men and what to a singular person In the next pag. 24. hee quarelleth at my exposition of the saying of S. Iames cap. 2. that a man is iustified of workes and not of faith onely Where I say workes are not denyed to iustifie before men and onely faith without workes is thought to iustifie before God Rom. 3. This he calleth a poore deuise because Saint Iames talking of faith without workes sayth it cannot saue a man Nay rather this is a poore cauill For S. Iames talketh of another kinde of faith as well as of an other kind of iustification when his saying seemeth to be contradictory to Saint Paule And that in the place in question hee meaneth iustification before men as in the other place a fayth voyde of good works it is manifest both by his owne wordes Shewe me thy faith by thy workes and also by the example of Abrahams tryall which was not to enforme God of his iustification but to giue testimony before men Pag. 25. to shewe how protestants deny all fathers he bringeth me for an example in many places First he sayth the consent of ancient fathers is alleaged attributing superioritie to Peter vpon that text Math. 16. Thou art Peter c. This he sayth I auoyde very lightly saying that diuerse of the auncient fathers were deceiued in opinion of Peters prerogatiue As for the consent of all which he would seeme to make for it is false but this is not all mine answere but that this prerogatiue appeareth not in the scriptures which was heuier than the answerers penne could beare or if he thinke it doeth let him prooue by syllogisme out of the scriptures if he can But vntill he can I will say this is a lie by detraction Secondly where I say those ancient fathers that expounde the text Iohn 5. I came in my fathers name c. of antichrist haue no grounde of their exposition I proue it by example of Theudas the Aegyptian Cocabus and other that deceiued the Iewes in their owne name yet none of them was antichrist Thirdly where he sayth Ierome with all the ecclesiasticall writers are alleaged for the interpretation of the wordes of Daniel cap. 7. which interpretation I do not admit because it hath no direction out of the scriptures hee maketh a lie by multiplication for onely Ierome with such ecclesiasticall writers out of whom he gathered his interpretation is alleaged Fourthly he slandereth me when he chargeth mee to say Austine doth wrongfully interprete the place for I allowe of Augustines sayinges to be true but I say hee speaketh it vppon a text wrongly interpreted that is falsly translated He hath placed his Tabernacle in the sunne whereas the truth is He hath made in the heauens a Tabernacle for the sunne and so doth Hierome interprete it â—oâ—i posuit tabernaculum in eis Fifthly where he sayeth that S. Ambrose Ephrem and Bede are alleaged for interpretation of certaine scriptures he sayth he noteth not what for they are alleaged for memories of the dead which I say I will not deny but they were vsed before their times and prayer for the dead also but without warrant of Gods worde or autoritie of scriptures but such as is so pitifully wrested and drawen vnto them as euery man may see the holy ghost neuer meant any such thing as they gather of them This I speake not of these three but of such as would goe about to proue prayer for the deade out of the scripture as Chrysostome who followeth in the sixt place who in deede I say alleadgeth scripture for it but hee applieth it madly and yet hee often applyeth it to the same purpose belike it was the best he had for that purpose God sayth vnto Ezechias I will defende this citie for mine owne cause and for Dauid my seruantes sake Alas good man what maner of reason is this Be it as he sayth that the memorie of Dauid being a righteous man and not rather the truth of Gods promise made to Dauid moued him to defend the citie from the enemies doth it therefore followe that prayer and almes are auayleable for the dead c. If M. Censurer thinke Chrysostome haue applyed the scripture rightly let him gather his argument into a syllogisme and we will shape him another aunswere Seuenthly I will not denie but I sayde that those fathers whom Martiall coted did rather dally in trifling allegories than soundly prooue that the crosse was prefigured in such places of scripture as they alleadge As Augustine maketh the two stickes that the widowe of Sarepta gathered a figure of the crosse Augustine and Tertullian the lifting vp of Moses handes c. in which places yet they ment the vertue of Christs death rather than the holinesse of the signe Moreouer page 33. Master Fulk is charged to abuse the simple people in saying often times prayer for the dead is an heresie because the Montanistes which were heretikes helde it Nay sir because the Montanistes are the first that inuented prayer for the dead Purgatorie seeing neither in scripture nor doctor is any mention of either of both before Montanus therefore he
it if in this case they will adde only to the very text is it not most horrible and diuelish corruption So did Luther whom our English ProtestaÌ„ts honor as their father in this heresie of only faith are his owne childreÌ„ See ch 12. FVLK 24. In the question of iustification by faith only where S. Iames saieth no we say no also neyther can it be proued that we adde this word only to the text in any translation of oures If Luther did in his translation adde the worde only to the texte it can not be excused of wrong translation in worde although the sense might well beare it But seing Luther doth him selfe confesse it he may be excused of frawde though not of lacke of iudgement But why should our translation be charged with Luthers corruption Because our English Protestants honour him as their father A very lewde slaunder for we call no man father vpon earth though you do call the Pope your father albeit in another sense Luther was a reuerende father of the Churche for his time But as touching the doctrine of only faith iustifying it hath more patrones of the fathers of the auncient primitiue Church than Martine can beare their bookes though he would breake his backe who in the same plaine wordes do affirme it as Luther doth that only faith doth iustifie And the Apostle which saieth that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law speaketh more plainely for iustification by faith only as we do teach it than if he had sayed a man is iustified by faith only Which text of Rom. 3. and many other are as expresse scripture to proue that we teach and beleeue as that S. Iames sayeth against iustification by faith only where he speaketh of an other faith and of an other iustification than S. Paule speaketh of and we vnderstand when we holde that a man is iustified by faith only or without workes of the law which is all one MART. 25. If these that account themselues the great Grecians and Hebricians of the world will so translate for the aduauntage of their cause as though they had no skill in the world and as though they knew neither the significatioÌ„ of words nor proprietie of phrases in the saide languages is it not to be esteemed shamelesse corruption FVLK 25. Yes but if it can not be proued that so they translate then is this an impudent slaunder as al the rest are and so it will proue when it coÌ„meth to be tried MART. 26. I will not speake of the German Heretikes who to mainteine this heresie that all our workes be they neuer so good are sinne translated for Tibi soli peccaui to thee only haue I sinned thus Tibi solùm peccaui that is I haue nothing else but sinned whatsoeuer I do I sinne whereas neither the Greeke nor the Hebrewe will possibly admit that sense Let these passe as Lutherans yet wilfull corrupters and acknowledged of our English Protestants for their good brethren But if Beza translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when we were yet of no strength as the Geneua English Bible also doth interprete it whereas euery young Grecian knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither without strength is not this of purpose to take away mans free will altogither See chap. 10. nu 13. FVLK 26. I knowe not what German heretikes those be which maintaine that heresie that al our works be they neuer so good are sinne except they be the Libertines with whom we haue nothing to do For we neuer say that good workes are sinne for that were al one to say that good were euill But that al our good workes are short of that perfection which the law of God requireth we do humbly confesse against our selues Or else what soeuer seemeth to be a good worke and is done of meÌ„ voyde of true faith is sinne For these assertions we haue the scripture to warraÌ„t vs. And if to proue the later any man hath translated those words of Dauid in the 51. Psalme Lecha Lebadecha Tibi solum or tantuÌ„modo tibi peccaui c. To the only or altogither to thee I haue sinned in respect of his naturall corruption which he doth expresse in the next verse he hath not departed one whitte from the Hebrewe wordes nor from the sense which the wordes may very wel beare which he that denieth rather sheweth him selfe ignorant in the Hebrew tongue than he that so translateth For what doth Lebad signifie but Solum or Tantum and therefore it may as well be translated Solum tibi as Soli â—ibi And the Apostle Rom. 3. prouing by the later end of that verse all men to be vniust that God only may be true and euery man a lier as it is written that thou mayest be iustified in thy wordes c. fauoreth that interpretation of Bucer or who soeuer it is beside But if Beza translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when wee were yet of no strength as the Geneua Englishe Bible doth also interprete it whereas euerye young Grecian knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither withoute strengthe is not this of purpose to take awaye mannes free wyll altogither Chapter tenth Number 13. Naye it is to shewe as the Apostles purpose is that wee haue no strength to fulfill the lawe of God without the grace of Christ euen as Christ him selfe sayth without me you can do nothing Ioan. 15. v. 5. But euery young Grecian saye you knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither with out strength And is there then any old Grecian that will proue that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alway signifieth him that is weake but not voide of strength Doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alwayes signifie him that hath some streÌ„gth Certaine it is that the Apostle speaketh here of those that were voide of strength for the same he calleth in the same verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vngodly or voide of religion for whom Christ died Howe say you then had vngodly persons any strength to be saued except Christ had died for them Therefore he that in this place translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 weake feeble infirme must needes vnderstand men so weake feeble and infirme as they haue no strength For how might it else be truely sayed what hast thou which thou hast not receiued 1. Cor. 4. v. 7. Yes say you we haue some peece of freewil at least some strength to clime to heauen euen without the grace of God without the death redemption of Christ. If you say no why cauill you at Bezaes translation and ours The Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as great a Grecian as you would make your selfe signifieth weake or infirme sometime that which yet hath some strength sometime that which hath no strength at all as I will giue you a plaine example out of S.
signifie to take order for a funerall So likewise Luc. 10. Paeniterent they had done penaunce But to answere for our owne doings Io 5. v. 36. where Christe saith I haue a greater witnesse than Iohns witnesse why may not the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be referred rather to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is of necessitie to be vnderstood than to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the other place 1. Iohn 2. v. 2. the worde sinnes muste needes be vnderstoode in the pronoune adiectiue ours In the thirde texte where you accuse the translators of hereticall purpose the sense is all one whether you adde the article or no. For when the Apostle sayeth by Christe we haue boldnesse and entrance with confidence by faith howe can you vnderstand confidence by workes and whether there be confidence by workes or no there can none be proued by this place Where Beza vnderstandeth an article Rom. 8. whom our English translation doth follow it is only to make that plaine which otherwise is necessarily to be vnderstoode For there is no differeÌ„ce betwene these sayings The law of the spirit of life in Christ Iesus this The lawe of the spirit of life which is in Christ Iesus hath deliuered me from the lawe of sinne and death The article or relatiue therefore declareth no more but that the lawe of the spirit of life is in Christ Iesus which deliuereth vs. For both the text sayth in Christ Iesus and it can not be in any other to deliuer vs. For he sayeth not The lawe of the spirite of life in vs but in Christe Iesus and the nexte verse following doeth manifestly confirme the same as euerie man may see that will consider it Likewise Iames the seconde wilt thou knowe O thou vaine man that faith without workes is deade If you say the faith which is without good workes is deade is not that the meaning of the Apostle Where he addeth immediatly that Abraham was iustified by such a faith as was fruitefull of good workes And when he bringeth example of Deuils faith is it not manifest he speaketh of suche a faith as is vtterly voyde of all good workes Where you say that Beza putteth the article into the text and translateth it accordingly you do most shamefully belye him For to the original text he addeth none of his owne collection but in his translation onely where he iudgeth that according to the sense of the place it must of necessitie be vnderstood which if it be a fault in articles it must be so in other wordes also for like cause added Then answere to your owne translations where beside those that I haue noted before which seeme to proceede of some Popish purpose you haue added to your Latine authenticall texte As in these examples Mat. 8. Quid nobiâ— tibi what is betweene vs Cap. 9. Confidâ— haue a good hart Cap. 22. Malâ— pâ—rdet he wil bring to naught Marc. 2. Post dios after some dayes Accumberet he satte at meate Luc. 17. Ab illo more than he Io. 12. Discumbentibus them that satte at the table Non quia de egenis pertinebat ad eum not because he cared for the poore Act. 9. Ecce ego Domine Loe here I am Lorde cap. 10. gustare to take somewhat cap. 17. colentibus that serued God Nobiliores eorum qui sunt Thessalonicae more noble than they that are at Thessalonica Rom. 1. Vocatis sanctis called to be Saincts c. MART. 4. But you will say in the place to the Corinthians there is a Greeke article therfore there you do well to expresse it I aunswere first the article may then be expressed in translation when there can be but one sense of the same secondly that not onely it may but it must be expressed when we can not otherwise giue the sense of the place as Mat. 1 6. Ex ea quae fuit Vriae Where you see the vulgar interpreter omitteth it not but knoweth the force and signification thereof very well Mary in the place of S. Paul which we now speake of where the sense is doubtfull and the Latine expresseth the Greeke sufficiently otherwise he leaueth it also doubtful and indifferent not abridging it as you doe saying the grace of God which is with me nor as Caluin gratia quae mihi aderat nor as Illyricus gratia quae mihi adest Which two later are more absurd thaÌ„ yours because they omit neglect altogither the force of the preposition cum which you expresse saying with me But because you say which is with me you meane heretically as they doe to take away the Apostles cooperation and labouring togither with the grace of God by his free will which is by the article and the preposition most euidently signified FVLK 4. You take vpoÌ„ you to prescribe rules of traÌ„slatioÌ„ as though you were Prince of the Critici or Aeropâ—gitae But al reasonable men will coÌ„fesse that the article is so ofteÌ„ to be expressed as it may maketh any thing to the sense and vnderstanding of the place But as for your rule that it is not to be expressed in traÌ„slatioÌ„ when there may be more senses than one of the same is so good a rule that by the same reason and by equitie thereof when so euer any worde commeth in the text that may haue more senses than one we must skippe it ouer and not translate it at all and so wee shal leaue out fiue hundred wordes in the new Testament A better rule I take it to be in all such cases to examine what is most agreeable to the common phrase of the tongue and the scope of the text in hand according to which I say the verbe substantiue is both more vsuall and also more probable to be vnderstoode in this text 1. Cor. 15. than the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 MART. 5. And here I appeale to all that haue skill in Greeke speaches and Phrases whether the Apostles wordes in Greeke sounde not thus I laboured more aboundantly than all they yet not I but the grace of God that laboured with mee Vnderstanding not the participle of Sum but of the verbe going before as in the like case when our Sauiour saith It is not you that speake but the holy Ghost that speaketh in you If he had spoken short thus but the holy Ghost in you you perhaps would translate as you doe here the holy Ghost WHICH IS IN YOV But you see the verbe going before is rather repeated Not you speake but the holy Ghost THAT SPEAKETH IN YOV Euen so Not I laboured but the grace of God labouring with me or WHICH LABOVRED WITH ME. So praieth the wise man Sap. 9 10. Sende wisedome out of thy holy heauens that she may be with me and labour with me as your selues translate Bib. 1577. FVLK 5. And I likewise appeale not onely to all that haue skill in Greeke speaches and phrases but to al
declare that there is no way to enter into life by doing but onely by doing of Gods commaundements For the man that doth them shall liue by them But if he were asked which is the way to eternall life as he was by Thomas he will aunswer I am the way the truth and the life Those textes therfore declare not howe a man that is a transgressor of the lawe may be saued but that to obtayne saluation by workes it is necessary for a man to keepe the whole lawe and commaundements of God or else he is accursed MART. 8. Againe touching continencie and the chast single life you translate thus All men can not receiue this saying Mat. 19. v. 11. Now you wot well that our Sauiour sayth not All men can not but all men doe not receiue it and that therefore as S. Augustine sayth because all will not But when our Sauiour afterward sayeth He that CAN receiue it let him receiue it he addeth an other Greeke word to expresse that sense Whereas by your fonde translation he might haue said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And againe by your translation you should translate these his later wordes thus He that can or is able to receiue it let him be able to receiue it For so you translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before as though it were all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doe you not see your follie and fashoode and boldnesse to make the reader beleeue that our Sauiour shoulde say Euerie man can not liue chast it is impossible for them and therefore no man should vowe chastitie because he knoweth not whether he can liue so or no FVLK 8. The Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie to be able to hold or containe and so it is vsed Mar. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which you translate so that there was no place no not at the dore Doe you not meane that the place about the dore was not able to hold that multitude Your vulgar Latin is Ita vt non caperet neque ad ianuam in barbarous words but in sense as I haue sayd before So Iohn 2. the sixe pottes when they were emptie are sayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 able to receiue euerie one of them two or three measures Likewise Iohn 22. where the worde is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you your selues translate not able to containe Seeing the worde therefore signifieth not onely to receiue but also to be able to receiue it is rightly translated Matth. 19. and according to the meaning of our Sauiour Christ all men can not receiue this saying but they to whom it is giuen which he doth after euidently confirme when he addeth the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that is able to receiue it let him receiue it Which were vainly said if all men were able that would and if it were giuen to all that would for then he should say all men doe not receiue this saying but they that will let them receiue it Where you call Augustine to witnesse of your foolishe glose you doe him shamefull iniurie for he sayeth not all men doe not because all will not but these are his wordes in the place by you quoted Non omnes capiunt verbum hoc sed quibus datum est quibus enim non est datum aut nolunt aut non implent quod volunt quibus autem datum est sic volunt vt impleant quod volunt All men receiue not this word but they to whom it is giuen for they to whom it is not giuen either they will not or else they fulfill not that which they will but they to whome it is giuen doe so will that they fulfill that which they will Augustine is plaine to the contrarie that it is not in euerie man that wil to be continent but it is the speciall gift of God that any both will and be able to performe it for which he citeth also the saying of the wise man Sap. 8. which with you is Canonicall Scripture When I knewe that otherwise I coulde not be continent except God should giue it and this same was wisedom to know whose gift it is I went vnto the Lorde and prayed to him These things considered our translation is iustified both according to the word which signifieth sōetime to be able to receiue and according to the sense which here must needes require that it shoulde be so translated Wherefore it is vnpossible for any man to liue chast except he haue the gift of God whereof vnlesse a man be certayne he doeth foolishly and presumptuously to vowe that which he knoweth not whether he shall be able to performe MART. 9. Againe in some of your Bibles Gen. 4. v. 7. where God saith plainely that Caine should receiue according as he did well or euil because sin was subiect vnto him and he had the rule and dominion thereof euidently declaring his free will you translate it thus If thou doest well shalte thou not be accepted and if thou doest not wel sinne lieth at the doore and also vnto thee HIS desire shall be subiecte and thou shalt rule ouer HIM By which relatiues falsly put in the masculine gender you exclude the true antecedent sinne and referre them to Abel Caines brother as though God had saide not that sinne should be in his dominion or subiect vnto him but his brother Abel But that this is most false and absurd we prooue many waies Firste S. Augustine saith directly the contrarie Tu dominaberis illius nunquid Fratris absit cuius igitur nisi peccati Thou shalte rule saith he ouer what ouer thy brother Not so ouer what then but sinne S. Hierome also explicateth this place thus Because thou haste free wil I warne thee that sinne haue not dominion ouer thee but thou ouer sinne Moreouer the text it selfe if nothing else is sufficient to conuince this absurditie For where this worde sinne goeth immediately before in the same sentence and not one worde of Abel his brother in that speach of God to Cain howe is it possible or what coherence can there be in saying as you translate Sin lyeth at the dore and thou shalt haue dominion ouer him that is thy brother But if we say thus Sinne lieth at the dore and thou shalte haue dominion thereof it hath this direct and plaine sense If thou doest ill sinne lyeth at the dore readie to condemne thee because it is in thee to ouer rule it FVLK 9. The relatiues be the masculine gender in the Hebrue tongue and therefore referred to Abel and not to sinne which is of the foeminine gender Againe sinne hath no appetite to Cain but rather Cain to it therefore euen as it was sayed to Eue thy appetite shall be to thy husbande so it is sayed of Abel his appetite shall be to thee Sainct Augustine followeth the corrupt translation of the Septuaginta which for appetite reade conuersion and therefore there is the
againe as in al Churches they doe which bee called POENITENTES For of such penance spake S Paule 2. Cor. 12. 21. saying THAT I LAMENT NOT MANY OF THEM WHICH BEFORE HAVE SINNED AND HAVE NOT DONE PENANCE FOR THEIR VNCLEANNESSE We haue also in the Actes that Simon Magus being baptized was admonished by Peter TO DO PENANCE for his grieuous sinne There is also in maner a dayly Penance of the good and humble beleeuers in which wee knocke our breasts saying FORGIVE VS OVR DETTES For these veniall and dayly offences fastes and almes and praiers are watchfully vsed and humbling our soules we cease not after a sort to do dayly penance FVLK 8. That all the Latine Church and the glorious doctors thereof haue alwaies redde as the vulgar Latin interpretor translateth you proue by an example of S. Augustine In which also it is manifest that S. Augustine vnderstādeth the phrase not only for the exercise of publike poenitentes but also for the inwarde repentance of the hart But because you challenge all the doctors of the Latin Church for the vse of this word poenitentia I pray you cōsider what Tertullian writeth against Marcion who cauilled about the repenting ascribed in Scripture to God In Graeco sono c. In the Greeke sounde the name of repentance is made not of confession of an offence but of changing of the mind And in his booke De Poenitentia where hee treateth euen of publike repentance citing the testimonie of Iohn Baptiste hee saith Non tacet Iohannes poenitentiam initote dicens Iohn holdeth not his peace saying beginne repentaunce Hilarius also sheweth what Poenitentiae dothe signifie when hee saith Peccati poenitentia est ab eo quod poenitendum intellexeris destitisse Repentance of sinne is to haue ceased from that whiche you haue vnderstoode that it muste bee repented of Likewise agaynste the Nouatians that denie repentance Cum ad Poenitentiam per quam à peccatis desistitur when vnto repentance by whiche menne cease from sinnes the doctrine of the Lawe Prophetes Gospels Apostles exhorteth them that haue sinned And euen your vulgar interpreter in Sainct Marke sayth Poenitemini for that hee saith in Mathew Agite poenitentiam by whiche it is certaine that hee meaneth one thing in bothe namely repentance of harte and no satisfaction of worke MART. 9. In these wordes of S. Augustine it is plaine that hee speaketh of painefull or penitentiall workes for satisfaction of sinnes that is penance againe that there are three kindes of the same one before Baptisme an other after Baptisme for great offences greater and longer the other dayly for common and litle veniall saultes which the best men also commit in this fraile nature Againe that the two former are signified and spoken of in the three places of Scripture by him alleaged Where we see that he readeth altogither as the vulgar interpreter translateth and expoundeth all three places of penance for sinne and so approueth that signification of the Greeke worde Yea in saying that for veniall sinnes we knocke our breast fast giue almes and pray and so cease not Quotidianam agere poenitentiam what doth he meane but daily penance and satisfaction Reade also S. Cyprian beside other places epist. 52. num 6. Where his citatiōs of Scripture are according to the old Latin interpreter and his exposition according of doing penāce and making satisfaction for sinnes committed But I neede not proceede further in alleaging either S. Cyprian or other auncient fathers for this purpose because the Aduersaries graunt it Howbeit in what termes they graunt it and how malapertly they accuse all the auncient fathers at once for the same it shall not be amisse here to put downe their wordes FVLK 9. S. Augustine speaketh nothing of satisfaction for sinnes but as I haue said of such exercises as were appointed by the Church to testifie their repētāce The occasion of all these wordes was of one that was a Nouatian who said that Peter was not baptized whē he was receyued into repentance after his deniall And where he vsed this worde Egisse poenitentiam S. Augustine denieth that he did open penance as they that we properly called poenitentes Quod autem dicitur Petrum egisse poenitentiam But where it is saide that Peter did penance wee muste beware that hee bee not thought so to haue done it as they do it in the Church which are properly called Poenitentes And who can abide this that wee shoulde thinke that the chiefe of the Apostles is to be numbred among such poenitents For it repēted him that he denied Christ which thing his tears doe shewe These words declare that Agere poenitentiam with Augustine signifieth to be inwardly repentant as well as to doe those externall workes which are tokens of repentance Also that teares fastings and such like are arguments and signes of repentance before God and not any parte of that repentance in deede and much lesse any satisfaction for sinnes Of this penance or repentance of S. Peter S. Ambrose saith Lachrymas eius lego satisfactionem non lego I reade of his teares I reade not of his satisfaction In that Augustine vseth the wordes of the olde interpretor it is no matter for he vseth also his meaning But this vsage of his proueth not the antiquitie of the vulgar Latine translation but contrari wise it is certaine that S. Augustine followed an other translation for in the text 2. Cor. 12. where your vulgar Latine hath Super immunditia fornicatione impudicitia quam gesserunt S. Augustine readeth Super immunditia luxuria fornicatione quam egerunt That S. Cyprian vseth the terme Agere poenitentiam and satisfaction also speaking of publike repentance it shall be easily graunted but in none other sense than I haue often declared But where you say that his citations are according to the Latine interpretor it is false For Apoc. 2. your vulgar text is Memor esto itaque vnde excideris age poenitentiam prima opera fac But Cyprians citation is Memento vnde cecideris age poenitentiam fac priora opera Likewise Psalm 88. you reade in your vulgar Latine Visitabo in virga iniquitates eorum in verberibus peccata eorum But Cyprian citeth thus Visitabo in virga facinora eorum in flagellis delicta eorum But that his exposition is of any other penance than of open penance or of any other satisfaction than of satisfaction to the Church your aduersaries will not graunt you although they may graunt you that he ascribed too much vnto such externall tokens of repentance MART. 10. Whereas the reuerend godly and learned Father Edmund Campion had obiected in his booke the Protestants accusation of S. Cyprian for the matter of penance the good man that aunswereth for both Vniuersities sayth thus to that point But whereas Magdeburgenses Lutheran writers of that citie complaine that he depraued the doctrine of
of the lawe did neuer erre For proofe of this saide I more like a blocke than a man he bringeth such places of Scripture as either shewe what the priestes duetie should be but affirme not what their knowledge was or else prophecie a reformation of the corrupt state of the clergie from ignorance to knowledge Last of all I say what drunken flemming of Doway would reason thus as Stapleton doeth The Scribes and the Pharisees sate in Moses chaire therfore the Synagogue did neuer or not then erre Whereas the false doctrine of the Scribes and Pharisees concerning adulterie murther swearing the worship of God not onely the person but also the qualitie of Messias his kingdome our Sauiour Christ him selfe so often and so sharply doeth reproue Thus haue I set downe the occasions of as many of these speaches as I could finde except I should haue read ouer the whole bookes that the indifferent reader may see when they be in their proper places they sound not so hardly to prooue mee a rayler as they seeme for the most part by extreme malice impudence ignorance vngodlines disdainfulnes of the aduersaries to haue beene rather wrested from mee than of any vncharitable affection vttered by mee But in common ciuilitie as our stately Censurer iudgeth I should haue forborne these learned and reuerend men which in manie respects to say the least may be counted my equals seeing these or the like termes were not vsed amongst the Gentiles nor of any honest or Christian writer since I answere ciuilitie is to be vsed with citizens but not with traytors learning and other good qualities to be respected in Christian Catholikes or at the leastwise in them that are no professed enimies of Christian Catholike religion not in malicious heretikes For equalitie in learning I will not contende with them but for superioritie in trueth And yet as vnlearned as I am let the proudest of them all or this Censurer whome in pride and disdainfulnes I thinke to passe them all attaint mee of such ignorance as I conuince these learned principall pillers of Poperie in their seuerall printed bookes in so manie books as I haue written against them and then let mee iustly beare the reproche that I shall be proued to deserue Where he saith these termes were not vsed among the Gentiles I will adde with approbation of Christians nor of any honest or Christian writer since his penne runneth before his memorie if he haue read or before his wit and modestie if he haue not read what both Gentiles against traytours and Christians against heretikes and traytours haue written And if this issue might bee tryed in presence I would not doubt but make his blushing countenance bewray his guiltie conscience But of this ministers scurrilitie against manie men he saith he might repeate a great deale more I would hee might come foorth and shewe what bull hee hath to rayle and vse scurrilitie against all men and yet condemne whome it pleaseth him of rayling scurrilitie But because this minister answereth many men forsooth one saide well of him that he is the common posthorse of the Protestants to passe you any answere without a baite against any Catholike booke which commeth in his way This is euen as good as because this Censurer slaundereth manie men another might say of him he is the cōmon packhorse of the Papistes to carrie any fardell of lyes deuised against any Christian man or booke that commeth in his way and the rather because he weareth a paire of winkers ouer his eyes like a milhorse being ashamed to shewe either his face or his name And more truely than of mee for with what speede soeuer I passe no mans answere but mine owne where as hee taketh vp the bundell of slanders deuised by Staphylus Eccius Cocleus Lindanus Bolsec and a number of other beside But mine answeres are not passed in such hast as the replyes are returned with laisure it seemeth the beastes that should bring them are afraide of stumbling Yet Martials epithetes remaine to be examined who being a person so vile and absurde to rayle so vnmeasurably and continually against that godly learned man M. doctor Calfhil of learned and Christian memorie I was bolde in my Reioynder against him to handle in part according to his vertues In the beginning which is page 121. of the volume in consideration of his intollerable ignorance arrogancie impudencie which appeareth throughout all his booke I say that whereas he termeth himselfe to bee a bachiler of the lawe he is more like a wrangling pettifogger in the lawe than a sober student in diuinitie which also he professeth to be for he doth in a manner nothing else but cauil quarel and scolde Likewise in the verie ende of my booke exhorting the Papistes for their credits sake to make out a better champion hereafter I tell them as the trueth is that in this his replie he doth nothing in a maner but either construe like an Vsher as he was sometimes of Winchester schoole or quarell like a dogbolt lawyer To the same purpose page 128. where master Calfehil said If an Angel from heauen teache otherwise than the Apostles haue preached vnto vs be he accursed Martiall the quarelling lawyer findeth fault with his translation because Euangelizamus may be referred as well to the disciples as to the Apostles so that the disciples preaching are to bee credited as well as the Apostles No doubt say I if they preach the doctrine of the Apostles of which the controuersie is and not of the persons that preached But these quarels sir Bachiler are more meete for the bumcourts where perhaps you are a prating proctor than for the schooles of diuinitie In this saying if the terme of bumcourts seeme too light I yeeld vnto the censure of graue and godly men Page 138. where Martiall citeth Constantinus for the commendation of his crosse I say he sheweth him selfe an egregious ignorant person For the signe which the Emperour commended to be a healthfull signe and true token of vertue was the name of Christ expressed in the Charecter which he sawe And page 154. where he maketh this syllogisme to prooue that in time of the Eliberin Councell pictures were worshipped which he sayeth followeth necessarily vpon the words of the Canon thus That was worshipped that was forbidden to be painted on the walles but pictures were forbidden to be painted on the walles ergo pictures were worshipped Answere master Calfe Hereunto I reioyne Who would haue thought that an vsher of Winchester and student in Louaine that teacheth vs as he said an olde lawyers point would also teach vs a newe Logike point to conclude affirmatiuely in the second figure that all vpon particulars Answere master Calfe quod Martiall Nay aunswere goose to such an argument And reason who will with such an asse any longer about this matter for I will hearken to his law seeing his Logike is no better If sir Censurer will defende this syllogisme
signification which being compounded in like maner as the other what doth it signifie any thing els but infirmitie and feeblenes Yea it is so farre from signifying no strength that the greatest Grecians say it is not spoken properly of him that for weakenes keepeth his bed which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but of him that is il disposed and distempered in body Yet the etymologie is all one with that worde which these men will haue to signifie him that hath no strength And if they will needes vrge the etymologie we tell them that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie robur that is great strength such as is in the strongest and stoutest champions and so the etymologie may take place to signifie a man of no great strength not of no strength But M. Whitaker putteth vs in good hope they will not stand vpon etymologies FVLK 13. This cauill is fully aunswered cap. 1. sect 26. therefore I wili not spende many wordes here about it The worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we knowe signifieth weake that is of small strength and sometimes so weake that there is no strength As Gal. 4. where Saint Paule calleth the ceremonies of Moses lawe nowe exspired the weake and beggerly elements that is voyd of all strength and riches Likewise the Apostle to the Hebrewes cap. 7. saith the commundement of the Aaronicall priesthood is abolished 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it was weake and vnprofitable without Christ as vnprofitable is void of profit so is weake voyd of strength S. Paule 1. Cor. 15. saith our dead bodie is sowed in weaknes Is there any streÌ„gth of a dead body Moreouer Rom. 8. that which was vnpossible by the law 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by meanes it was weake is not that voide of strength to saue vs which hath no possibilitie to doe any thing These instances may serue to proue that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may signifie that which is so weake that it hath no strength Vpon the etymologie alone we stand not But where you say that man was wounded in free will by the sinne of Adam not slayne altogither grounding your assertion vpon a fond false allegorie of him that fell among theeues which is no parable of a man in this case but of man in necessitie to be helped by right of neighbourhood I praye you howe came man to be dead altogither in sinnes Eph. 2. Col. 2. in many other places of the Scripture Beside is there any freedom of wil to godlines remaining in them that are altogither dead in sinne But we are not now to handle coÌ„trouersies but translations as you doe wel admonish vs. MART. 14. When they haue bereaued and spoyled a man of his free will and left him without all strength they goe so farre in this point that* they saye the regenerate them selues haue not free will and abilitie no not by and with the grace of God to keepe the commaundements To this purpose they translate 1. Io. 5. 3. thus His commauÌ„dements are not grieuous rather than thus His commauÌ„dements are not heauye for in saying they are not heauye it would followe they might be kept and obserued but in saying they are not grieuous that may be true were they neuer so heavy or impossible through pacience As when a man can not doe as he would yet it grieueth him not being pacient wise because he is content to doe as he can is able Therefore doe they choose to translate that the commaundements are not grieuous where the Apostle sayth rather they are not heauy much more agreeably to our Sauiours wordes My burden is light to the wordes of God by Moyses Deut. 30. This commaundement which I commaund thee this day is not aboue thee that is beyond thy reache but the word is very neare thee in thy mouth in thy hart that thou mayst doe it and to the common signification of the Greekeword which is heauy Beza would saye somewhat in his commentarie howe the commaundements are heauy or light but his conclusion is against free will and that there can be no perfection in this life inâ—cying against them that woulde proue it out of this place which is as much to say but he is ashamed to speake plainely that we can not keepe the commaundements which the holy Doctors haue long since condemned and abhorred as most absurd that God should commaund that vnder paine of damnation which is impossible to be done FVLK 14. Seeing our English word grieuous coÌ„meth of the Latine word graue which is not only weightie but also troublesom It better aunswereth both the Greeke and the Latine than heauye which is properly that which is of great weight and the same worde being both in Greeke and Latine 2. Cor. 10. you your selues translate sore his epistles are sore and vehement but in effect there is no great difference We acknowledge that his commaundemeÌ„ts are not heauy to him that is borne of God which ouercometh the world by faith otherwise the yoke of the lawe as the Apostle confesseth is such a burtheÌ„ as neither we nor our fathers were able to beare but beleeue to be saued by the grace of our Lord Iesus Christ who hauing taken away the curse of the lawe and satisfied for our transgressions of the law hath also giuen vs grace to loue the law and commaundements of God and in some weake measure to obserue them So that the curse being taken away our transgressions aunswered in Christ and our harts framed by his grace to loue his commaundements and some strength giuen vs to keepe them they are not heauy they are not burdenous or grieuous That which God speaketh Deut. 30. is of the knowledge of the law which was plainely reuealed and not of the strength that men haue to keepe it and therefore is by the Apostle referred vnto faith for the obseruation thereof Rom. 10. for by faith in Christ which hath fulfilled the lawe for vs we are accounted to haue fulfilled it in him Beza speaketh plainely enough if you had grace to vnderstand him and therefore is nothing ashamed to saye that we can not keepe the commaundements of God not onely without the grace of God but neyther hauing the grace of God in such measure as God giueth it to no man but that he sinneth Otherwise what grace God is able to giue we doubt not but what he doth and will giue to any man in this life wee speake That God should commaunde vnder paine of damnation that which is impossible to be done is no absurditie seing for them whom God will haue to be saued he prouided an other way of their saluation than by keeping the lawe namely the redemption of Christ. As for the reprobate voyde of Gods grace say you if you dare that they are able to keepe the lawe without grace or without grace haue so much as any will to desire to haue grace MART. 15.
Thus hauing taken away free will to doe good and possibilitie to keepe the commaundementes and all merite or valure and efficacie of good workes their nexte conclusion is that we haue no true iustice or righteousnesse in vs but an imputatiue iustice that is Christes iustice imputed to vs be wee neuer so foule and filthie in our soules so that wee beleeue onely and by faith apprehend Christes iustice For this purpose they corrupt the Scriptures in their English Bibles thus FVLK 15. The iustice whereby wee are accompted iuste in the sight of God is not inherent in vs but in Christe which is the Lord our righteousnesse Ierem. 23. Not withstanding it is the onely true iustice and we are truely iuste by it And yet wee are not voyde of the spirite of sanctification whiche is a fruite and consequent of iustification by which we haue grace to withstand sinne and to worke righteousnesse not whereby we should be made righteous before God but whereby wee are declared to be righteous in parte vntill the body of sinne being abolished wee shall be wholy renewed according to the image of God CHAP. XI Hereticall translation for IMPVTATIVE IVSTICE against true inherent iustice Martin ONE place might suffise in steede of many where Beza doth protest that his adding or alteration of the texte is specially against the execrable errour of inherent iustice which he saith is to be auoided as nothing more His false translation thuâ— our English Bezites and Caluinists folowe in their Bibles Likewise then as by the offense of one the faulte came on all men to condemnation so by the iustifying of one the benefite abounded towarde all men to the iustification of life Where there are added to the text of the Apostle sixe wordes and the same so wilfully and voluntarily that by the three first they make the Apostle say sinne came on all men by Adam and they were made sinners in deede by the three later they make him say not that iustice or righteousnesse came likewise on all men by Christe to make them iust in deede but that the benefite of Christes iustice abounded towards them as being imputed forsooth vnto them Whereas if they woulde needes adde to the texte whiche yet is intollerable so muche and in so doubtfull a case they shoulde at the least haue made the case equall as the Apostle him selfe teacheth them to doe in the very nexte sentence saying thus For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many also be made righteous So they translate rather than be made iust For they are the lothest men in the world to say that we are made iust for feare of iustice inherent in vs though the Scripture be neuer so plaine As here wee see the Apostle maketh the case like that we are made iust by Christ as wee were made sinners by Adam Fulke THis one place is deliuered from your vaine cauillation Cap. 1. Sect. 23. when the sentence is ecclipticall or defectiue they that will translate to haue it vnderstoode muste needes supply the woordes that are wanting And where shall they finde what wordes are lacking but in the same place and in the treatie of the same matter It appeareth you had rather the texte had no sense than that it mighte seeme to make against your blasphemie of iustice inherent As for that fonde quarrell of yours that they be not iust in deede to whom the iustice of Christe whiche you like an helhound doe scorne at is imputed deserueth no answere For who is such a blocke to say or thinke that those whom God doth iustifie are not made iuste in deede Was not Abraham iust in deede when God imputed his faith vnto iustice Is not he made riche in deede which is made rich by an other mans gifte Christe is giuen vnto vs of God to be iustice wisedome sanctification in him we are iust wise and holie not in our owne righteousnesse wisedome or holinesse As for adding to the text God knoweth how we abhorre it but adding of words which do explicate the sense of the holyghost is no additioÌ„ forbiddeÌ„ for then all preaching were accursed which is or ought to be nothing els but an explaining settiÌ„g forth of the worde of God in more words the matter wherof though in fewerwords is coÌ„teined in the scripture And if we speake of adding of wordes in translation haue I not shewed before that you haue added many some in deede vpon necessarie cause some without necessitie What needed you to say for Poeniterent they had done penance Luc. 10. for In omnibus bonis in all his goodes Gen. 6. for separamini separate your selues 2 Cor. 6. c. To say wee are iustified and to say we are made iuste is all one and therefore I meruayle why you thinke vs loth to say the one rather than the other Is any man so senselesse to thinke wee can say a man is made righteous and dare not say he is made iuste I tell you plainely we defie the heresie of righteousnesse inherent as much as of iustice inherent We are iuste we are righteous in the sight of God not by the iustice or righteousnesse of our workes but by the iustice or righteousnesse of Christe imputed to vs through faith And we are made iuste by Christe as wee were made sinners by Adam in some respect but not in euery respect for the Apostle maketh a broade difference betweene the transgression and the benefite Rom. 5. v. 15. and other differences there be which none but a Pelagian will denie Nay Pelagius will not say that we are iust by Christ according to propagation but according to faith MART. 2. And it is a worlde to see how Beza shifteth from one signification of the word iustified or made iust to an other Sometime to be iustified is to be pronounced quiâ—â—e from all sinne or declared iust before Gods indgement seate and so â—e â—raÌ„slateth it in the text Act. 13. v. 39. and as though his guilty conscience were afraide of a blowe he saith he fleeth not the terme of iustifying or iustification because he vseth it in other places He doth so in deede but theÌ„ his coÌ„mentarie supplieth the â—urne as Ro. 2. v 13. Not y t hearers of y e law are RIGHTEOVS before God so they delight to translate rather than IVST before God but the doers of the Lawe shall be IVSTIFIED that is saith Beza shal be pronouÌ„ced iust The Apostle must needes say by the coherence and consequence of his words noâ— the hearers are iust but the doâ—rs shall be iuste or iustified Beza wil in no case haue it so but either in text or coÌ„meÌ„tarie make the Apostle say as him self imagineth Yet in an other place he protesteth very solemnely that to be iustified is not to be pronounced or accounted iuste but rather to be iuste in deede and that he prooueth out of S.