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
your authenticall vulgar Latine translation howe manye faultes bee in that which your Tridentine Councell hath authorised And here I will not charge it with the aduersaries thereof as you doe ours but with great friendes of it and your doctrine Lindanus Bishoppe of Ruremonde and Isidorus Clarius Monke of Casine and Bishoppe Fulginatensis of whiche the former writeth a whole booke discussing howe he woulde haue the errours vices corruptions additions detractions mutations vncertaynties obscurities pollutions barbarismes and soelecismes of the vulgar Latine translation corrected and reformed bringing manye examples of euerie kinde in seuerall chapters and sections The other Isidorus Clarius giuing a reason of his purpose in castigation of the sayed vulgar Latine translation confesseth that it was full of errours almost innumerable which if he shoulde haue reformed all according to the Hebrue veritie he could not haue set forth the vulgar edition as his purpose was Therefore in many places he retayneth the accustomed tanslation but in his annotations admonisheth the reader howe it is in the Hebrue And notwithstanding this moderation he acknowledgeth that about 8000. places are by him so noted corrected This Epistle the Deputies of the Councell of Trent could not abide and therefore in the later edition of this Bible set forth with obseruation of their censure 1569. it is cleane left out as also a godly collection of the same Isidorus of places of Scripture exhorting to the studie of holy Scripture and a like sound confession of those thinges which the Scriptures teach c. MART. 26. But I omit these as vnknowen to our countrie or to this age and will deale principally with the English translations of our time which are in euery mans handes within our country the corruptions whereof as they are partly touched here and there in the annotations vpon the late newe English Testament Catholikely translated and printed at Rhemes so by occasion thereof I will by Gods helpe to the better commoditie of the Reader and euidence of the thing lay them closer togither and more largely display them not counting the number because it were hard but esteeming the weight and importance of so many as I thought good to note specially in the new Testament Where I haue to aduertise the Reader of certaine speciall things which he must obserue FVLK 26. You should rather omit them as vntrue for albeit it can not be denied but some faults may escape the most faithfull and diligent translator yet so many heretical corruptions either in the Dutch or English are incredible and turne rather to the discredit of the accuser in all wise mens iudgement than to the parties so charged In like maner as Surius noteth no lesse than 11000. lyes in Sleidan more to his owne reproche than to the defacing of Sleidans credit You professe wisely therefore not to count the number but to esteeme the weight and importaunce of suche faultes as you thought good to note if there were as great faithfulnesse in your performance as there is wisedom in your profession But now to your nine aduertisements to the Reader MART. 27. First that in this booke he may not looke for the proofe or explication and deciding of controuersies Which is done in the Annotations vpon the new Testament but onely therefuting or controlling of their false translations concerning the said controuersies which is the peculiar argument of this â—reatise FVLK 27. I thinke their is no wise reader woulde loke for the deciding of so many coÌ„trouersies in so smal a booke he that shal seeke them in your Annotations shall find euen as litle to the purpose except he will take your determinatioÌ„ without proofe for a sufficieÌ„t decisioÌ„ As for the doctors you quote without iudgment fraudulently falsly truncately and otherwise abusiuely haue all or the most bene answered long agoe And if neede shal be with litle labour may be answered againe MART. 28. Secondly that we refuâ—e sometime one of their translations sometime an other and euery one as their falshood giueth occasio Neither is it a good defense for the falshood of one that it is truely translated in an other the reader being deceyued by any one because commonly he readeth but one Yea one of them is a condemnation of the other FVLK 28. That sheweth your malice rather than either wisedome or honestie For if we our selues in our later translations haue corrected some small and few errours that haue ouerslipped vs in our former traÌ„slatioÌ„s we haue shewed our sinceritie and care of setting out the truth by al meanes And where you say it is no good defence the reader being deceiued by any one because coÌ„moÌ„ly he readeth but one I answere you first there is not in the worst translation any fault escaped that may of it selfe lead him into a damnable errour Secondly he hath the word of God expounded by catechizing sermons lectures in which he may learne the substance of Christian religion Thirdly he hath at hand euery where learned Diuines vnto whose counsell he may resort if he be offended with any thing that he readeth in his Bible souÌ„ding contrarie to the publikely receiued doctrine of the Church In that you say the one of our translations condemneth the other it had bene sufficient to haue said reproueth which is only where there is a manifest error in the one for otherwise the diuersities of traÌ„slations as S. Augustin teacheth you may much profit the simple readers they that be diligent studeÌ„ts of the Scriptures in the English tongue will not satisfie them selues with euery translation but wil seeke for the best approued MART. 29. Thirdly that we speake indifferently against Protestants Caluinists Bezites and Puritans without any curious distinction of them being all among themselues brethren and pewfellowes sometime the one sort of them sometime the other more or lesse corrupting the holy Scriptures FVLK 29. A wise aduertisement But this is to be noted that now you acknowledge them to be all brethren among them selues and pewfellowes But when you list they shall be at deadly feude one against an other and no communitie or fellowship betwene them MART. 30. Fourthly that we giue but a taste of their corruptions not seeing so farre nor marking all so narrowly and skilfully as them selues know their owne subtilties meanings who will smile at the places which we haue not espied FVLK 30. He that considereth your quarrels pickt to words of one signification as Church Congregation iustice and righteousnes Elder and Priest Image and Idol workes and deedes and such like will not thinke that you haue past ouer any great matters worth the writing of but that you would set a vaine bragge of the case as though there were much worse matter than you haue witte to conceiue Yet you say confidently that we as guiltie of our owne subtilties and meanings will smile at the places which you haue not espied You are like to those southsayers mentioned
Ex. 32. in Ieroboams calues in the brasen serpent the wiser sort of the Gentils and Papists pretend to do in worshipping their images then it is a sinne against the second cōmaundement Thou shalt make to thy selfe no grauen images Thou shalt not fall downe to them nor worship thē By similitude therfore of thē that trusted in images as their gods so honored thē which were not able to helpe them the Apostle calleth the couetous man a worshipper of images couetousnes worshipping of images not properly but because their monie is to thē the same occasion of departing from God that the images was to the worshipper of thē So if we will speake vnproperly as the Apostle saith their belly is their God we may say it is their idoll or their image which they worship as God not that the belly or any such thing is God or an idol or an image properly but that it is so termed for that to such vile creatures is giuen that diuine honor which is due to God but by worshippers of idols and images is giuen to idols or images I confesse the vse of the English tongue in these speaches is rather to call thē idols than images and to extend the name idol which is alwaies taken in the euill parte to that which the word image can not so aptly signifie yet in trueth of the thing there is no difference betwene idol and image worshipping of idols and worshipping of images whether you speake of such as be idols images so properly called or of such as be onely by similitude figuratiuely so named If any of our Superintendēts be such as you speake of I wish them amended or else remoued For my parte I know none to be suche although I wish to the best encrease of Gods grace to despise the world to be more earnest in setting foorth Gods glorie As for the great difference you speake of betwixt S. Paules wordes and our translation I see none as yet MART. 3. Will you see more yet to this purpose In the English Bible printed the yeare 1562. you reade thus Howe agreeth the Temple of God with images Can we be ignorant of Satans cogitations herein that it was translated of purpose to delude the simple people to make them beleue that the Apostle speaketh against sacred images in the Churches which were then in plucking downe in Englande when this your translation was first published in print Whereas in very truth you know that the Apostle here partely interpreteth him selfe to speake of men as of Gods temples wherein he dwelleth partely alludeth to Salomons Temple which did very well agree with images for it had the Cherubins which were the representations of Angels the figures of oxen to beare up the lauatory but with idols it could not agree and therefore the Apostles words are these How agreeth the Temple of God with idols FVLK 3. We had neede to see more before we be conuicted of corruption for hitherto we haue seene nothing but a folish cauill groūded vpon the cōmon vse of the word idol in English in which speach it is takē only for vnlawful images although in the Greeke it signifieth as generally as Imago in Latin by Tully him selfe is vsed for the same But in the English Bible printed 1562. we read thus 2. Cor. 6. How agreeth the tēple of God with images Here you can not be ignorant of Satans cogitatiōs that it was translated of purpose to make the simple people beleue that the Apostle speaketh against sacred images in churches which were then in plucking downe in Englande when this translation was first published in print You are so cunning in Satans cogitations that he hath inspired into you a manifest vntrueth for this text was so translated printed nere 30. yeres before 1562. in King Henrie the eightes time when images were not in plucking downe And when it was printed againe 1562. which was the fifth yere of her Maiesties reigne God be thāked there was no neede to plucke downe images out of churches which were pluckt downe in the first and secōd yeres of her reigne Wherfore that purpose is vainly imagined of you for the trāslaters purpose was the same that the Apostles to shew that the religion of God hath nothing to do with images made by mans deuise to honor them as gods or to honor God by them And where you say that the Apostle alludeth to Salomons temple which did well agree with images but not with idols I answere you Salomons tēple did not agree with images made by the deuise of man to honour God by them or in thē For the Cherubins were not of mans deuise but of Gods commaundemēt the oxen to hold vp the lauatory the pomegranats other ornaments were not for any vse of religion to worship God in them or by them but for vse garnishing of the house appointed by God in his law and by direction of his spirit in Salomon For the commaundement Thou shalt not make to thy selfe is no restraint vnto God but vnto men of their owne braine or priuate intent to make images to serue in religion Therefore the Apostle speaking of suche images as were forbidden by Gods lawe is not otherwise to be vnderstoode and no more is our translation MART. 4. When Moises by Gods appointment erected a brasen serpent and commaunded the people that were stung with serpents to behold it thereby they were healed this was an image only and as an image was it erected kept vsed by Gods commaundement But when it grew to be an idol saith S. Augustine that is when the people began to adore it as God then king Ezechias brake it in peeces to the great cōmendation of his piety godly zeale So when the children of Israel in the absence of Moises made a caife said These are thy Gods ô Israel that brought thee out of Aegipt was it but an image which they made was that so hainous a matter that God would so haue punished them as he did No they made it an idol also saying These are thy gods ô Israel And therfore the Apostle saith to the Corinthians Be not idolaters as some of them Which also you translate most falsely Be not worshippers of images as some of them FVLK 4. The brasen serpent first and last was an image holy when it was commaunded by God to bee made as a sacrament of our redemption by Christ lawfull when it was reserued onely for memorie of that excellent miracle vnlawefull cursed and abhominable when it was worshipped and therefore iustly broken in peeces by the godly king Ezechias You cite Augustine as it pleaseth you to followe your owne context Quem sanè serpentem propter facti memoriam reseruatum cum posteà populus errans tanquam idolum colere cepisset Ezechias c. Which serpent truly being reserued for the
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.
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
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