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
in Tullie of whom one sayd that he maruailed if when they mette togither one of them did not smile vppon another because they deluded the cittie got themselues much honour with such vaine superstitions So you beyng newly become subtill and partial translaters thinke other men to be like your selfes But euen as the head of your Church once iested with his Cardinall how great wealth honour that fable of Christ so the beast called the Christian religion had brought them euen so you his lewde limmes make sporte among your selfe of the holy worde of God which you haue corrupted somewhat with your blinde translatioÌ„s but much more with your hereticall Annotations So said your great friend Campion in open audience that he could make as good sport vpon the incarnation of Christ. According to your owne affection therefore you iudge of vs and not according to the truth as the day will trie when the secretes of all hartes shall be made manifest MART. 31. Fifthly that the very vse and affectation of certaine termes and auoiding other some though it be no demonstration against them but that they may seeme to defend it for true translation yet was it necessarie to be noted because it is and hath bene alwayes a token of hereticall meaning FVLK 31. When our translation is true I doubt not but we shall defende the vse of some termes and the auoiding of other some by as good reason as you shall defende the like in your translations especially where you affect new termes vnused or not vnderstoode and auoide common and vsuall termes of the same signification as Euangelizing for preaching the Gospel adueÌ„t of Christ for the coÌ„ming of Christ scandalizing for offending scandale for offense c. Which if it be as you say alwayes a token of hereticall meaning first plucke your selfe by the nose and then see if we can not defend our doings MART. 32. Sixtly that in explicating these things we haue endeuoured to auoide as much as was possible the tediousnesse of Greeke and Hebrue wordes which are only for the learned in these tongues and which made some litle doubt whether this matter which of necessity must be examined by them were to be written in Englishe or no. But being perswaded by those who them selues haue no skill in the sayd tongues that euerie reader might reape commoditie thereby to the vnderstanding and detesting of such false Hereticall translations it was thought good to make it vulgar and common to all our deere countrie men as the newe Testament it selfe is common whereof this Discouerie is as it were a handmaide attending therevpon for the larger explication and proofe of corruptions there brieâ—ly touched and for supply of other some not there mentioned FVLK 32. He that seeth your margent painted with Greeke and Hebrewe wordes in so many places may guesse whether it were possible for you to haue auoided the tediousnesse of them when in diuerse places the Greeke and Hebrew wordes are set without all neede of them and sometimes where there is no controuersie about them as in the 5. section of this Preface where you shew the corruptions of the Arrians and Pelagians and in the 19 section where you would shew the difference of the new Testament from the olde in citing of testimonies But the Hebrewe word in the Psalme 21. or 22. which you falsly say signifieth no such thing as pearcing you set not downe lest your falshood by them that haue skill might be conuinced And if you had cared as much to finde out the truth as to shewe your skill in both the tongues you would haue written in Latine especially against Beza which neuer wrote in English And vaine it is that you pretend to make the matter common to your deare countrimen that be vnlearned for the iudgement muste reste in them that haue knowledge in the tongues albeit you had written in Latine It is all one therefore to the vnlearned as if you had onely said there are many faults or corruptions which in a Latine booke shall be discouered to the iudgement of the learned seeing the ignorant can not vnderstand your demoÌ„stratioÌ„s MART. 33. Seuenthly that all the English corruptions here noted and refuted are either in all or some of their English Bibles printed in these yeares 1562. 1577. 1579. And if the corruption be in one Bible not in an other commonly the sayd Bible or Bibles are noted in the margent if not yet sure it is that it is in one of them and so the Reader shall find it if he find it not alwaies in his owne Bible And in this case the Reader must be very wise and circumspect that he thinke not by and by we charge them falsly because they can shew him some later edition that hath it not so as we say For it is their common and knowen fashion not onely in their translations of the Bible but in their other bookes and writings to alter and change adde put out in their later editions according as either them selues are ashamed of the former or their scholers that print them againe dissent and disagree from their Maisters So hath Luthers Caluins and Bezaes writings and translations bene changed both by them selues and their scholers in many places so that Catholike men when they confute that which they find euident faults in this or that edition feare nothing more than that the Reader hath some other edition where they are corrected for very shame and so may conceiue that there is no such thing but that they are accused wrongfully For example Call to minde the late pretended conference in the Tower where that matter was denied and faced out for Luthers credit by some one booke or edition of his which them selues and all the world knoweth was most truly layd to his charge FVLK 33. First this is vntrue for some you haue noted in the new Testament printed 1580. Secondly it is vncertaine for two of these translations might be printed in one yeare and so I thinke they were Therefore I know not well which you meane but I guesse that the Bible 1562. is that which was of Doctor Couerdales translation most vsed in the Church seruice in King Edwards time The Bible 1577. I take to be that which being reuised by diuerse Bishops was first printed in the large volume and authorized for the Churches about tenne or twelue yeares agoe That of 1579. I knowe not what translation it be except it be the same that was first printed at Geneua in the beginning of the Queenes Maiesties Raigne And this coniecture as the fittest I can make I must followe seeing your note of distinction is as good as that fond fellowes that would know his maisters horse by the bridle But it is a common and knowen fashion you say vsed of vs that not onely in translations but in other bookes and writings of ours we alter and change adde and put to in our later editions And who vseth not
Epistle of Iames of Peter c. As if a man shoulde say in his Creede I beleeue the general Churche because hee would not say the Catholike Churche as the Lutheran Catechismes say for that purpose I beleeue the Christian Church So that by this rule when S. Augustine telleth that the maner was in cities where there was libertie of religion to aske Qua itur ad Catholicam Wee muste translate it Which is the way to the General And when Sainct Hierome sayth If we agree in faith with the B. of Rome ergo Catholici sumus we must translate it Then we are Generals Is not this good stuffe Are they not ashamed thus to inuert and peruert all wordes against common sense and vse and reason Catholike and Generall or vniuersall we knowe is by the originall propertie of the word all one but according to the vse of both as it is ridiculous to say A Catholike Councell for a Generall Councell so is it ridiculous and impious to say Generall for Catholike inderogation thereof and for to hide it vnder a bushell FVLK 4. I doe not knowe where the name of Catholike is once expressed in the text of the Bible that it might be suppressed by vs which are not like to beare malice to the Catholike Church or religion seeing we teache euen our young children to beleue the holy Catholike Church But not finding the word Catholike in the text you runne to the title of the seuen Epistles called as commonly Canonicall as Catholike or Generall But Eusebius belike testifieth that they haue bene so called euer since the Apostles time lib. 2. cap. 22. I maruell you are not ashamed to auouch suche an vntruth Eusebius speaking of his owne time saith they are so called but that they haue bene so called euer since the Apostles time he sayth not And so farre off he is from saying so that he pronounceth the Epistle of S. Iames in the same place to be a bastarde and speaketh doubtfully of the Epistle of S. Iude. But whereas in one translation we vse the worde Generall for Catholike you make a greate may game of it shewing your witte and your honestie both at once For these 5. of Iames 2. of Peter one of Iude and the first of Iohn which are properly rightly so intituled haue that title because they are not sent to any particular Church or persons but to all in general as the Greeke scholiast truly noteth And OEcumenius before the Epistle of S. Iames sayth expressely Catholicae id est vniuersales dicuntur hae c. These Epistles are called Catholike that is to say Vniuersall or General because not distinctly to one nation or citie as S. Paule to the Romanes or Corinthians this companie of our Lords disciples doth dedicate these Epistles but generally to the faithfull or to the Iewes that were dispersed as also Peter or else to all Christians liuing vnder the same faith For otherwise if they should be called Catholike in respect of the souÌ„dnes of the doctrine coÌ„tained in theÌ„ what reason were there more to call them so than to call all the Epistles of S. Paule Wherefore in this title which yet is no part of the holy Scripture it is rightly traÌ„slated general The other translatours seeing seuen to be called general where only fiue are so in deede and seeing them also called canonicall which should seeme to be a controulling of S. Paules Epistles left out that title altogither as being no part of the text and word of God but an addition of the stationers or writers MART. 5. Is it because they would followe the Greeke that they turne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 generall euen as iust as when they turne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 image 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instruction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissension 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secrete and such like where they goe as farre from the Greeke as they can and will be glad to pretende for aunswere of their worde sect that they followe our Latine translation Alas poore shift for them that otherwise pretende nothing but the Greeke to be tried by that Latine which them selues condemne But we honour the sayd text and translate it Sects also as we there find it and as we doe in other places followe the Latine text and take not our aduantage of the Greeke text because we knowe the Latine translation is good also and sincere and approued in the Church by long antiquitie it is in sense all one to vs with the Greke but not so to them who in these daies of controuersie about the Greeke and Latine text by not following the Greeke which they professe sincerely to follow bewray them selues that they doe it for a malitious purpose FVLK 5. It is because we woulde haue the Greeke vnderstood as it is taken in those places when we turne Catholike generall Idolum image 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instruction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinaunce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secret and such like And where you say we woulde be glad for our word sect to pretend to follow your Latine translation it is a fable For in translating sect we follow the Greeke as truely as your Latine translation doeth which if it be true and sincere as you confesse what deuilish madnesse possesseth your malicious mind to burthen vs with such purposes as no reasonable man would once imagine or thinke of that we should vse that terme in fauour of heresie and heretikes whome we thinke worthie to suffer death if they will not repent and cease to blaspheme or seduce the simple CHAP. V. Hereticall translation against the CHVRCH Martin AS they suppresse the name Catholike euen so did they in their first English Bible the name of Church it selfe because at their first reuolt and apostasie from that that was vniuersally knowen to be the only true Catholike Church it was a great obiectioÌ„ against their schismaticall proceedings and it stucke much in the peoples consciences that they forsooke the Church and that the Church condemned them WherupoÌ„ very wiâ—ily they suppressed the name Church in their English translation so that in all that Bible so long red in their congregations we can not once finde the name thereof Iudge by these places which seeme of most importaunce for the dignitie preheminence and authoritie of the Church Fulke HOwe can wee suppresse the name Catholike which the holy Scripture neuer vseth as for the name of Church I haue alreadie shewed diuerse times that for to auoyd the ambiguous taking of that terme it was at the first lesse vsed but neuer refused for doubt of any obiection of the Catholike Church against vs the profession of which being contained in our Englishe creede howe could we relinquish or not acknowledge to be contained in the Scripture in which we taught that all articles
in India and America which vaine brag I will not stand to confute but seeing this enlargement is but newe begun in our graundfathers dayes before those partes of the earth were discouered by nauigation òf the Portingals and Spaniardes where was the Romish church pope thereof acknowledged but onely in a piece of Europe If yet they will alledge the submission of any Patriarkes or Prelates of the Aethiopian or Armenian churches made to the Pope by some wandring pilgrimes which are of no credit among wisemen yet all men may knowe that those Christians continuing to this day in the same religion rites and ceremonies that they did before such pretended submissions holding and doing manie things contrarie to the Romish religion and custome which argueth plainly that they neither were nor meane to become members of the church of Rome and subiects to Popish religion which they refuse to receiue in as manie points as euer they did Wherefore the Popish church remaineth still shut vp within the streites of Europe for any accession of them And what enlargement so euer it hath in the newe world it is rather by colonies of Portingals Spaniardes than by conuersion of those barbarous nations For as for them that were for feare of death compelled to receiue baptisme as manie of the barbarous people haue been no true Catholike can acknowledge for good and Catholike Christians who as occasion alwayes serued them spared not to giue sufficient testimonie of their counterfeit conuersion whereby it appeared that the sacrament of baptisme was in them prophaned rather than that they by it were sanctified As for my bad answere to Howlet as it seemeth was so sufficient that neuer a Papist these two yeares can finde time to confute it Although if they thought it too bad to confute there hath beene since a better set forth with more aduise by master Wyborne but the replie we shall haue at greater leasure the Howlet as I gesse being otherwise occupied in defence of his Censure for that his proude stomack had rather play the Iudge than the defendant The next quarell followeth in the thirde lease after where he approueth I. Nicols affirming as he sayeth that Purgatorie prayer for the dead and inuocation of Saints are late inuentions of Popes Papists Whereas his owne companions namely Fulke in his late answere to doctor Allen and doctor Bristowe confesseth that all these three errours were receiued in the church aboue 1200. yeares that is in the times of Augustine Ierome Ambrose and vpwarde and that these fathers with other beleeued them also If to those three doctors which he named he had not added vpward I must haue abated one hundred yeres at least of his account But now let vs see what I haue confessed of these doctors and vpward First against Purgatorie page 306. But whosoeuer shall vouchsafe to turne the booke to that page shall finde neuer a word of my writing good or bad but onely the first section of the ninth Chapter of Allens second booke Wel this may be the printers fault peraduenture it is page 106. because it is not like that 306. should come before 115. the next quotation that followeth but neither is there any thing to this purpose Then let vs see what may be founde page 115. euen as much as in page 306. for there is neuer a worde of my writing in that page but all is Allens 8. chapter of the first booke Then come we to the thirde quotation page 316. and there in deede is something sounding toward this matter touching prayer for the dead which Augustine did allowe but of purgatorie there is nothing Of inuocation of Saints there is mention but no affirmation that Augustin did beleeue it for in the next page followeth a discourse to prooue that S. Augustine as he declareth in his booke De cura pro mortuis c. was not certaine how the Saints departed should knowe any thing that is done in this worlde although he inclined to that opinion that they might haue knowledge by relation of dead men or of Angels or else hee knoweth not howe and so doth plainly confesse From hence we must passe to page 320. where in deede I doe confesse that Ambrose alloweth prayer for the dead as it was a common error of his time but not sacrifice of the masse in that sense that Papistes do Last of all Ar◠page 39. I denie that for 200. yeares after Christ it can be prooued that any Catholike writer doth allow praier for the dead or inuocation of Saints and that the later error was not confirmed 400. yeares after Christ namely in Saint Augustines time in that small helpe was acknowledged by Chrysostome to come to the dead by prayers made for them In all those places S. Ierome is not once named nor purgatorie confessed to bee receiued whereof S. Augustine the laste of the three sometime doubteth sometime vtterly denyeth any third place neither did I euer cōfesse that any of those three errors were holden by these auncient fathers in all respects as they are by the Papistes nor that purgatorie was euer beleeued of any of them onely Augustine sometimes speaketh of it as of a doubtful matter which he sayeth may be inquired whether there be any such place or no and yet confuted those interpretations of the scriptures which the Papistes make their chiefest groundes of it By this you may see how liberall this Iesuite is in extending my confession further than euer it was made or meant by mee or can be proued by him or any Papist of them all The third leafe againe after this he saieth that Nicols by citing a place of Augustine woulde haue men thinke that S. Augustine disallowed prayer to Saints which is contrarie to Fulkes opinion who confesseth Augustine to haue defended this superstition as hee termeth it and rayleth on him for it For this is quoted Purg. pag. 315. 316. 317. Howe hee gathereth what Nicols would haue men thinke let other men iudge And what mine opinion is of Augustines allowing of prayer to Saints I haue before expressed out of the places quoted but where he sayeth I raile on him for it that is but a fryers report which seldome differeth from a lie For this is all I say of him for it By such places as I haue in those pages cited out of Augustine it is proued that although Augustine were willing to maintaine the superstition that was not throughly confirmed in his time about burials and inuocation of Saints yet he hath nothing of certeintie out of the worde of God either to perswade his owne conscience or to satisfie them that moued the doubtes vnto him Whether in these wordes I haue rayled I submit my selfe to the iudgement of the reader that will weigh what I haue cited out of S. Augustine in the pages mentioned In the same leafe and the next page the margent is painted with quotations out of my booke against Purgatorie But what thinke
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
memorie of the fact when afterward the people going astray began to worship as an idoll Ezechias the king seruing God with religious power with great praise of his pietie brake in peeces Here it is certaine that Augustine as most Ecclesiasticall writers vseth the word Idolum for an image abused But that the people began to adore it as God he sayth not for they onely worshipped God by it falsly in deede and superstitiously but yet not beleuing that image to be God him selfe but a holy representation of his power which was shewed by it in the dayes of Moses That Ezechias by religious or Ecclesiasticall power and authoritie did put downe idolatrie you passe it by as though you saw it not in S. Augustine But you bring an other example to proue that images except they be worshipped as gods be no idols In truth seeing all religious worship is due onely to God although the idolaters intend not to worship their images as gods yet by worshipping of them they make vnto them selues gods of them and so offende both against the first and second commaundementes Yet how proue you that the Israelites made a god of their calfe Because they sayed these are thy gods ô Israel that brought thee out of the land of Aegipt But euen by that same speach it is manifest that they worshipped not the calfe as beleuing it to be God but contrariwise protested thereby that they meaned not to chaunge their God but to worshippe the same God which brought thē out of the land of Aegipt by that image which they could not be ignorant that it was made but yesterday of their earings and therefore could not thinke it was the same god that brought them out of the lande of Aegipt but that they would worship God by that visible shape which they sawe before them And Aaron by his proclamation cōfirmeth the same To morow saith he shal be holy daie to Iehoua that is to the only true God whom they dishonored pretending to worship him by that Image so hainous a thing it is to make Images to represent God and to worship them for his honour although the worshipper do not beleeue them to be Gods Therefore where wee haue in some translations 1. Cor. 10. called those Idolaters worshippers of Images we haue not erred for an Image it was they worshipped thinking to worshippe God thereby But if either Image or Idoll worshippers of Images or Idolaters would please you wee haue both in our translations the one expressing what wee meane by the other that these cauillations were needelesse but that malice against the truthe incenseth you to picke quarrels and that translation whiche vseth the termes of Idols and Idolaters was then in printing at Geneua when Images were in pulling downe in Englande namely the firste and seconde yeares of the Queenes raigne beyng finished the 10. of April 1560. whiche notably confuteth the fonde purpose that you slaunder our translators to haue had MART. 5. We see then that the Iewes had images without sinne but not idols Againe for hauing idols they were accounted like vnto the Gentiles as the Psalme saith They learned their workes and serued their grauen idols But they were not accounted like vnto the Gentiles for hauing images which they had in Salomons Temple and in the brasen serpent S. Hierom writeth of the Ammonites and Moabites who were Gentiles and Idolaters that comming into the Temple of Hierusalē seeing the Angelicall images of the Cherubins couering the Propitiatory they sayd Lo euē as the Gentils so Iuda also hath idols of their religion These men did put no differēce betwene their owne idols and the Iewes lawfull images And are not you ashamed to be like to these They accused Salomons Temple of idols because they sawe there lawefull images you accuse the Churches of God of idolatrie because you see there the sacred images of Christ and his Saincts FVLK 5. We knowe that the Iewes had images without sinne and so haue we but to haue images in any vse of religion without Gods expresse commaundement neither is it lawfull for thē nor vs because we haue a generall commaundement to the contrary They were accounted like the Gentils therefore for hauing images contrarie to Gods commaundement of their owne appointment worshipping them not for hauing images appointed by God which yet it was not lawful for thē to worship But the Protestāts you say are like to the Ammonits and Moabits of whom S. Hierom writeth that comming into the temple and seeing the Cherubins couering the propitiatorie they said loe euen as the Gentiles so Iuda also hath idols of their religion as we accuse the church of God of idolatrie because we see there the sacred images of Christ and his Saincts This that you say S Hierom writeth he onely reporteth it as a ridiculous fable of the Iewes Ridiculam verò in hoc loco Haebrei narrant fabulam The Hebrewes in this place tell a ridiculous fable But fables are good enough to bolster false accusations Secondly he reporteth them to say Sicut cunctae gentes colunt simulachra ita Iuda habes suae religionis Idola As all nations worshippe images so hath Iuda also idols of their religion By which wordes you see that he calleth images and idols the same thinges For simulachrum to be taken as largely as Imago I haue proued before in so much that man is called Simulachrum Dei the image not the idoll of God as idoll is taken in the euill parte But neither are you like to Iuda nor we to Ammon and Moab in this case For Iuda had Gods commaundement to warrant their images so haue not you but his commaundement against your images Againe Moab and Ammon if the tale were true had idolatrous images of their owne so haue not we MART. 6. But tell vs yet I pray you do the holy Scriptures of either Testament speake of all maner of images or rather of the idols of the Gentiles your conscience knoweth that they speake directly against the idols and the idolatrie that was among the Pagans and Infidels from the which as the Iewes in the old Testament so the first Christians in the new Testament were to be prohibited But will you haue a demonstration that your owne conscience condemneth you herein and that you apply all translation to your heresie What caused you being otherwise in all places so ready to translate images yet Esai 31. and Zachar. 13. to translate idols in all your Bibles with full consent Why in these places specially and so aduisedly No doubt because God saith there speaking of this time of the new Testament In that day euery man shall cast out his idols of siluer and idols of God And I will destroy the names of the idols out of the earth so that they shall no more be had in remembrance In which places if you had translated images you had made the prophecie false because images haue not
bene destroyed out of the world but are and haue bene in Christian countries with honour and reuerence euen since Christes time Mary in the idols of the Gentiles we see it verified which are destroyed in all the world so farre as Gentilitie is conuerted to Christ. FVLK 6. Verily the commaundement of God being a cōmaundement of the first table vnto which what soeuer is said in the Scriptures of images or the worship of them forbidden must be referred speaketh generally of all maner of images made by the deuise of man for any vse of religion whether they be of Iewes Pagans or false Christians But we are offred a demonstration that our owne conscience condemneth vs herein and that we applie all translation to our heresie And that is this In Esai 31. and Zacha. 13. with one consente all translate Idols because God speaketh of the time of the newe Testament where if they had translated Images they had made the prophecie false because Images in Christian countries are with honour but Idols of the Gentiles are destroyed out of the worlde so farre as gentilitie is conuerted to Christe A goodly demonstration I promise you That the translators had no such respect it is plaine for that they do not vnderstād the 31. of Esay of the time of Christe but of the reformation made by Ezechias But in Esay 44. whiche is a manifest prophesie of the Church of Christ they all vse the worde Image also Micheas the 5. and in diuerse other places where the destruction of Idolatrie is prophesied by the religion of Christ which is verified onely in true Christians for otherwise both the Idolatrie of Pagans and of false Christians hath remained in many places and yet remaineth to this day MART. 7. And what were the Pagans idols or their idolatrie S. Paule telleth vs saying They changed the glorie of the incorruptible God into the similitude of the image of a corruptible man of birdes and beasts and creeping thinges and they serued or worshipped the creature more than the creator Doth he charge them for making the image of man or beast Your selues haue hangings and clothes full of such paintings and embroderings of imagirie Wherewith then are they charged with giuing the glorie of God to such creatures which was to make them idols and them selues idolaters FVLK 7. That the Paganes changed the glory of God into the similitude of the Image of man c. it was the extremitie of their madnesse but that they made Images of man or beaste If you will not confesse that Iupiter Mars c. were men and Isis a cowe or beast yet remember that they made Images of their Emperours and committed Idolatrie to them otherwise to make Images out of religiō was not the offence of Idolatrie in them nor vs that haue them in hangings and paintings and other lawfull Images MART. 8. The case being thus why do you make it two distinct things in S. Paul calling the Pagans idolaters and the Christians doing the same worshippers of images and that in one sentence whereas the Apostle vseth but one and the selfe same Greeke worde in speaking both of Pagans and Christians It is a maruelous and wilfull corruption and well to be marked and therefore I will put downe the whole sentence as it is in your English translation I wrote to you that you shoulde not companie with fornicators and I meant not at all of the fornificators of this world either of the couetous or extortioners either the idolaters c. but that ye cōpanie not togither if any that is called a brother be a fornicator or couetous or A WORSHIPPER OF IMAGES or an extortioner In the first speaking of Pagans your translator nameth idolater according to the text but in the later part speaking of Christians you translate the very self same Greeke word worshipper of images Why so forsooth to make the reader thinke that S. Paule speaketh here not only of Pagan idolaters but also of Catholike Christians that reuerently kneele in praier before the Crosse the holy Roode the images of our Sauiour Christ and his Saincts as though the Apostle had commaunded such to be auoided FVLK 8. The reason is because we compt Idolaters and worshippers of Images to be all one But it is a maruelous wilfull corruption that in one sentence 1. Cor 5. we call the Paganes Idolaters and the Christians worshippers of Images and yet the same Greeke worde in both If this were a faulte it were but of one translation of the three for the Geneua Bible hath Idolater in both the other worshipper of Idolls in the later place And wee thinke the later to be vnderstoode of Idolatrous Papists which worship Idols made with handes of men as Crosses Roodes and other Images to as great dishonor of God and daunger of their soules as Pagans did So that if it had bene worshippers of Images in both the translation had not bene amisse MART. 9. Where if you haue yet the face to denie this your malitious and heretical intent tell vs why all these other wordes are translated and repeated alike in both places couetous fornicators extortioners both Pagans and Christians and only this word idolaters not so but Pagans idolaters and Christians worshippers of images At the least you can not denie but it was of purpose done to make both seeme all one yea and to signifie that the Christians doing the foresaid reuerence before sacred images which you call worshipping of images are more to be auoided than the Pagan idolaters Whereas the Apostle speaking of Pagans and Christians that committed one and the selfe same heynous sinne what soeuer commaundeth the Christian in that case to be auoyded for his amendement leauing the Pagan to him selfe and to God as hauing not to doe to iudge of him FVLK 9. I thinke the cause was that Christians might vnderstand who was an Idolater what the word Idolater signifieth which was vsed in the former parte of the sentence And if the translators purpose was by this explication to dissuade the readers from worshipping of popish Images I see not what cause he hath to be ashamed thereof seeing the Greeke word signifieth as much as he saith not as though Idols were proper onely to the Gentiles and Images to Christians for in other places he vseth the name of Images speaking both of the Pagans and the Christians 1. Cor. 8. Although for my parte I could wishe he had vsed one worde in both places either called them both Idolaters or both worshippers of Images MART. 10. But to this the answere belike will be made as one of them hath already answered in the like case that in the English Bible appointed to be read in their Churches it is otherwise and euen as we would haue it corrected and therfore saith he it had bene good before we entred into such hainous accusations to haue examined our grounds that they had bene true As
no such thing in the Hebrew or Greeke as in that notorious example 2. Par. 36. Bib. 1562. Carued images that were layd to his charge Againe Rom. 11. To the image of Baal and Act. 19 The image that came downe from Iupiter Where you are not content to vnderstand image rather than idoll but also to thrust it into the text being not in the Greeke as you knowe very well FVLK 19. Three places you note where the word Image is thrust into the text being neither in the Hebrew nor Greeke The first 2. Par. 36. bib 1562. which I confesse is a fault but I maruell how it crept in For Thomas Mathewes bible which was printed before it hath not that worde Carued images It is reformed also in both the translations that followed The second Rom. 11. is no corruption for seeing you acknowledge that a substantiue must be vnderstoode to beare vp the feminine article what reason is there why we should not vnderstand 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rather than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 seeing it is certaine Baal had an image that was worshipped in his temple 2. Reg. 10. The third place is Actes the 19. where the worde Image is necessarily to be vnderstoode which fell downe from Iupiter as it was fayned Herevnto Plinie beareth witnesse lib. 16. cap. 40. sheweth by whom it was made of what matter of the like speaketh Herodianus And the similitude of this Image is yet to be seene in those auncient Coygnes that yet remaine which were called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 temples Wherefore your vulgar translation which turneth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iouis prolis is not right and therefore is corrected by Isidorus Clarius a Ioue delapsi simulachri with the consent of the deputies of the Councell of Trent MART. 20. Of this kinde of falsification is that which is crept as a leprosie through out all your Bibles translating Sculptile and conflatile grauen image molten image namely in the first commaundement where you know in the Greeke it is idoll and in the Hebrue such a worde as signifieth onely a grauen thing not including this worde image and you know that God commaunded to make the images of Cherubins and of oxen in the Temple and of the brasen serpent in the desert and therfore your wisedomes might haue considered that he forbadde not all grauen images but such as the Gentiles made and worshipped as Goddes and therefore Non facies tibi sculptile concurreth with those wordes that goe before Thou shalte haue none other gods but me For so to haue an image as to make it a God is to mke it more than an image and therefore when it is an Idoll as were the Idols of the Gentiles then it is forbid by this commaundement Otherwise when the Crosse stood many yeares vpon the Table in the Queenes Chappell was it against this commaundement or was it idolatrie in the Queenes Maiestie and her Counsellers that appointed it there being the supreme head of your Churche Or do the Lutherans your puefellowes at this day commit idolatrie against this commaundement that haue in their Churches the crucifixe and the holy Images of the mother of God and of S. Iohn the Euangelist Or if the whole storie of the Gospell concerning our sauiour Christ were drawen in pictures and Images in your Churches as it is in many of ours were it trow you against this commaundement fie for shame that you should thus with intolerable impudencie and deceite abuse and bewitch the ignorant people against your owne knowledge and conscience For wot you not that God many times expresly forbade the Iewes both mariages and other conuersation with the Gentiles least they might fall to worship their idols as Salomon did and as the Psalme reporteth of them This then is the meaning of the commaundement neither to make the idols of the Gentiles nor any other like vnto them and to that end as did Ieroboam in Dan and Bethel FVLK 20. This is a sore complaint that we haue falsified the Scripture as it were with a Leprosie in translating sculptile and conflatile a grauen and a molten Image and namely in the first commaundement where there is no worde of Image or Imagrie but in deede in the second commaundement wee translate the Hebrue worde Pesel a grauen Image You say it signifieth a grauen thing not including the worde Image I answere you are not able to bring a place in the Bible where it signifieth any other grauen thing but onely an Image yet it is deriued of a verbe that signifieth to graue or hewe as the worde Pisilim Iud. 3. taken for quarries of stone doth declare Beside this the worde nexte following signifying a similitude or Image sufficiently sheweth that it is not taken generally for any grauen worke but for such wherein the likenesse or similitude of God or any creature is meante to be resembled and the same doth also the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 testifie as for the Cherubins Oxen Brasen serpent or any thing which God commaundeth is not forbidden by this precept but that whiche man maketh of his owne head to honour as God or to worship God by it Wherefore very absurdely to cloake suche abhominable Idolatrie you say that this commaundement Non facies sculptile doth concurre with those words Thou shalt haue none other Gods but me By which not only two seuerall cōmaundements are confounded but also a vaine tautologie cōmitted or els that added for interpretatiō which is more obscure than the text interpreted Touching the crosse that stoode sometimes in the Queenes chappel whereof you speake your pleasure as also of hir Maiesties Councellours it is not by and by Idolatrie what soeuer is against that commaundement neither is the hauing of any Images in the Churche which are had in no vse of religion contrarie to this commaundement And although wee will not accuse the Lutherans of Idolatrie neither can wee because they worship no Images yet will we not excuse them for suffering of Images to be in their Churches whereof may ensue daunger of Idolatrie but that in some parte they goe against this commaundement deceyued in their iudgement and of vs not to be defended in their errour After you haue railed a fitte with fie for shame and suche like Rhetorike you seeme to make the prohibition of Images none other but such as the prohibition of mariage and other conuersation with the Gentiles which was only for feare of Idolatrie But when you can shewe the like absolute commaundement to forbid mariage and conuersation with the Heathen as this is for Images in religion and worshipping of them we may haue some regarde of your similitude otherwise the meaning of this commaundement is generally to forbid all Images of God and of his creatures to honour God by them for to honour them as Gods is a breach of the first commaundement
of faith necessarie to saluation are comprehended But we are content to be iudged by those places which seeme of most importance for the dignity preheminence authoritye of the Church MART. 2. Our Sauiour saith Vpon this Rocke I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it They make him to say Vpō this rocke I wil build my congregation Againe If he heare not them tell the Church if he heare not the Church let him be to thee as an Heathen and as a publicane they say Congregation Againe who woulde thinke they woulde haue altered the worde Church in the Epistle to the Ephesians their English translation for many yeares red thus Ye husbands loue your wiues as Christ loued the congregation and clensed it to make it vnto him selfe a glorious congregation without spot or wrinkle And This is a great secrete but I speake of Christ of the cōgregation And to Timothee The house of God which is the cōgregation of the liuing God the pillar and grounde of truth Here is no worde of Churche which in Latine Greeke is Ecclesia Dei viui columna firmamētum veritatis Likewise to the Ephesians againe He hath made him heade of the congregation which is his bodie And to the Hebrues they are all bolde to translate The congregation of the first borne where the Apostle nameth heauenly Hierusalem the citie of the liuing God c. FVLK 2. In the first English Bible printed where it was thus translated Math. 16. vppon this rocke I will build my congregation the note in the margent is thus vpon this rock that is as saith S. Augustin vpon the confession which thou hast made knowledging me to be Christ the sonne of the liuing God I will build my congregation or Church Was not this translator thinke you sore afraid of the name of the Church What other thing should he vnderstand by the word congregation in al places by you noted or in any like but the church as he doth here expound him selfe And this translation almost worde for worde doth the Bible you call 1562. follow MART. 3. So that by this translation there is no more Church militant and triumphant but congregation and he is not head of the Church but of the congregation and this congregation at the time of the making of this translation was in a few new brethren of England for whose sake the name Church was left out of the English Bible to commend the name of congregation aboue the name of Church Whereas S. Augustine telleth them that the Iewes Synagogue was a congregation the Church a conuocation and that a congregation is of beasts also a conuocation of reasonable creatures onely and that the Iewes congregation is sometime called the Church but the Apostles neuer called the Church Congregation Doe you see then what a goodly chaunge they haue made for Church to say congregation so making themselues a very Synagogue that by the property of the Greeke word which yet as S. Augustine telleth them most truely signifieth rather a conuocation FVLK 3. A strange matter that the Church militant and triumphant should be excluded by vsing the word congregation when by it nothing is signified but the congregation or Church militant and triumphant and that Christ should no more be head of the Churche when he is head of the congregation where the differēce is only in sound of words not in sense or meaning Your vaine and ridiculous surmise why the name of Church shuld be left out of the Bible I haue before cōfuted shewing that in euery Bible it is either in the text or in the notes But S. Augustin telleth vs say you that the Iewes synagoge was a congregation the church a cōuocation that a congregation is of beasts also a conuocation of reasonable creatures only But S. Luke in the person of S. Stephen telleth vs and Augustine telleth vs as much that the synagoge of the Iewes is called also Ecclesia which signifieth the church and congregation That Congregatio the Latin word may be of beasts also it skilleth not for the church of Christ is called also a flocke and sheepe of his pasture But he that should say in English a cōgregation of beastes might be taken for as wise a man as he that said an audiēce of sheepe And wheras S. Augustine telleth you that the Iewes congregation is somtime called the church what is the cause that you doe translate it the assembly Act. 7. euen as you do the congregation of the Idolatrous Ephesians Act. 19 But further you say Augustine telleth vs that the Apostles neuer called the church congregation It is a worlde to see what foolishe fetches you haue to deceiue the ignoraunt Augustine sayeth the Apostles neuer called our assembly Synagoga but alwaies Ecclesia and yet he is a litle deceiued for S. Paul calleth our gathering togither vnto Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Congregatio a cōgregation he saith not And although he make a nice distinction betwene the wordes Congregation Conuocation yet all men which know the vse of these words will confesse no necessitie of a Iewish synagoge to be implied in the word cōgregation more than in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which of the holy Ghost is vsed for an assembly or gathering togither either of Iewes Christiās or Gentils And therfore it seemeth the translatour vsed the word congregation which is indifferent for all euen as the worde Ecclesia is vsed both in the Greeke and vulgar Latine MART. 4. If they appeale here to their later translatiōs we must obtaine of them to condemne the former and to confesse this was a grosse fault cōmitted therein And that the Catholike Church of our coūtrie did not il to forbid burne such bookes which were so translated by Tyndal and the like as being not in deede Gods booke worde or Scripture but the Diuels worde Yea they must confesse that the leauing out of this worde Church altogither was of an hereticall spirite against the Catholike Romane Church because then they had no Caluinisticall Church in any like forme of religion gouernement to theirs now Neither will it serue them to say after their maner And if a man should translate Ecclesiam congregation this is no more absurdity than in steede of a Greeke word to vse a Latin of the same signification This we trow will not suffise them in the iudgement of the simplest indifferent Reader FVLK 4. Wee neede not to appeale to the later translations for any corruption or falsification of the former no nor for any mistranslation For seing the spirite of God as I haue said before vseth the word Ecclesia generally for a companie of Christians Iewes and Gentils the translator hath not gone from the truth and vse of the Scriptures to vse the word cōgregation which signifieth indifferently all three Wherefore there needeth no condemnation nor
seruice ecclesiastical or temporal sacred or prophane If the world bee restrained to any one peculiar seruice or function as one of the Greeke wordes is then doth it signifie Deacons onely Whiche if they know not or wil not beleeue me let them see Beza himselfe in his Annotations vpon Saint Mathew who protesteth that in his translation he vseth alwaies the word Minister in the generall signification and Diaconus in the speciall and peculiar Ecclesiasticall function of Deacons So that yet wee can not vnderstande neither can they tell vs whence their peculiar calling and function of Minister commeth which is their second degree vnder a Bishop and is placed in steede of Priestes FVLK 2. What the general worde of Minister signifieth howe it is taken both generally and specally we are not so ignorant that wee neede bee taught of you And yet al learned men are not agreed when the greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is restrained to the Minister of the poore and when it signifieth generally all the officers in the Churche As for the name of Minister by which Elders or Priestes are commonly called among vs I haue euen nowe and diuers times before shewed vppon what occasion it was taken vp so to be applied which yet generally signifieth all that serue in the Church and common wealth also MART. 3. Againe what can bee more against the dignitie of sacred orders and Ecclesiastical degrees than to make them profane and secular by their termes and translations For this purpose as they translate Elders and Eldershippe for Priests and Priesthode so do they most impudently terme S. Peter and S. Iohn lay men they say for Apostle Embassador and Messenger Ioh 13. v. 16. and for Apostles of the Churches Messengers of the same 2. Cor. 8. for Bishoppes ouerseers Act. 20. Why my maisters doth idiota signifie a lay man Suppose a lay man be as wise and learned as any other is he idiota or that one of your Ministers be as vnlerned ignorant as any shepheard is he not idiota so then idiota is neither Clearke nor lay man but euerie simple and ignoraunt man They that spake with miraculous tongs in the primitiue church were they not lay men many of them yet the Apostle plainely distinguisheth them from idiota So that this is more ignorantly or wilfully translated than Neophytus a young scholler in al your bibles FVLK 3. There can be no greater wrangling nor more vnprofitable than about wordes and tearmes But why I pray you shoulde the tearmes of Elder and Eldershippe be more prophane and secular in English than they bee in Greeke yea than the names of ancients and seniors which you your selues in your translation vse for the same office wil you neuer be ashamed of these vanities which turne alwaies to your owne reproche yet do they say you most impudently terme S. Peter and Iohn lay men And do not you dishonour them as much to say in your translation they were of the vulgare sorte what signifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a lay man but one of the vulgare sorte or common people Againe were they of that Cleargie whereof Annas and Caiphas were highe Priestes or were they not as perfectely distincte from that sacrificing Priesthode as any lay man at this day is from the christian cleargie yet you goe on whether the furie of your malice doth carry you and say that Idiota is neither Cleark nor lay man but euerie simple and ignorant maÌ„ If it be so then reforme your translation as wel in thys place of the Act. 4. as in 1. Cor. 14. where you cal idiota of the vulgar sorte or the vulgar and plucke your selfe first by the nose for false translating beefore you finde fault with vs. Againe if the high Priests did take the Apostles for vnlearned and lay men what impudencie is it to say that wee tearme them so And touching your signification of idiota although the Priests knew that they had not bin brought vp in studie of learning as they themselues were yet hearing their bold wise answere they coulde not take them for simple and ignoraunt menne therefore it followeth that they meant they were none of their cleargie rather than that they were ignoraunt and foolishe for simple in the good parte they woulde not acknowledge them to be As for the terme Embassadour and Messenger for the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Io 13 v. 16. may wel be vsed in that place seeing it is like he speaketh as generally of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he doeth of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a seruaunt The seruant is not greater than his Lord nor the embassadour than he that sent him And for the messengers of the Churches wheÌ„ those are vnderstoode by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whiche are sent on message from the Churches and not those that are sent by Christe to preach vnto the Churches no wise manne can blame the translation Acts. 20. where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are of vs translated ouerseers of you Bishoppes yet in your note you say or Priests as though the worde maye signifie Priestes whyche all menne of skill doe knowe to signifie ouerseers although the terme bee giuen to them whiche beefore are called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Elders or Priestes But it proceedeth of greate ignoraunce that Neophytus is translated in all our Bibles a young Scholler O what knowledge haue wee learned of you to translate Neophytus a Neophyte For before we did take Neophytus to signify one that is newly planted or lately â—ngraffed and by a Metaphor one that is a young and newe scholler in the mysteries of Christian religion But because your Pope vseth to make boyes and vnlearned young men Bishoppes and greate Prelates in your Churche you can not abide that a young scholler shoulde by Saint Paules rule be excluded from a Bishopricke and therefore you mocke the reader with a Neophyte Wee knowe that in the auntient Churche they were called Neophyti whyche were lately baptised but yet in the same sense because they were young schollers and therefore looke in the Homilies that are intituled ad Neophytos and you shal see they are directed and spente almost or altogither in teaching the principles of Christian religion plainely wherein they were but younge schollers not yet perfectly instructed MART. 4. Nowe for changing the name Apostle into Messenger though Beza doe so also in the foresayd places yet in deede he controuleth both him selfe and you in other places saying of the same word Apostles A man may say in Latine Legates but we haue gladly kept the Greeke word Apostle as many other wordes familiar to the Church of Christ. And not onely of the principall Apostles but also of the other Disciples he both translateth and interpreteth in his commentarie that they are notable Apostles and he proueth that all Ministers of the worde as he termeth them are and may be so
you to proue Forsooth that his aduersaries do confesse all the olde fathers to be on their side and to haue erred with them as Fulke doth of S. Ambrose Austen Tertullian Origen Chrysostom Gregorie and Bede by name with most reprochefull and contemptuous words against them This is spoken generally as though we confesse all the doctors to bee on their side in euery controuersie which we doe not acknowledge to be true in any one although many of the later sort do in some part fauour one or two errours of theirs among an hundreth But let vs examine his prooues which seeme to be verie plentifull yet of nine quotations I must needes strike out two page 306. and 279. because in them is not one syllable of my writing but all of Allens In the pages 315. 316. is nothing more contained touching this matter than I haue alreadie declared There remaineth nowe page 349. where I say touching a rule of S. Augustine which hee giueth to trie faith and doctrine of the Church onely by the scripture that if he had as diligently followed it in examining the common error of his time of prayer for the dead as he did in beating downe the schisme of the Donatistes or the heresie of the Pelagians hee woulde not so blindly haue defended that which by holy scripture he was not able to maintaine as he doeth in that booke De Cura pro mortuis agenda and else where What most reprochefull or contemptuous wordes are here against S. Augustine Seeing the holie scripture is a light shining in a darke place as S. Peter sayeth who so goeth without it must walke blindly which I say in commendation of the light of the scripture not in contempt of Augustines reason whome as I may not honour with contempt of the trueth so when he is a patrone maintainer of the truth I honour him from my heart Likewise page 78. Saint Ambrose is named but nothing acknowledged to fauour any popish errour Augustine is againe noted speaking of the amending fire whereof he hath no ground but in the common errour of his time and whereof he affirmeth sometimes that it is a matter that may bee doubted of sometimes that there is no third place at all Wherefore this place hath neither reprochful wordes nor confession of any constant opinion of Augustine inclining to your errours Then let vs passe to the next place which is page 435. where concerning this matter I haue written thus I denie that any of the auncient fathers in Christs time or scholers to his Apostles or within one or two hundreth yeares after Christ except one that had it of Montanus the heretike as he had more things beside in any one word maintained your cause for purgatorie or prayers for the dead Secondly of them that maintained prayers for the dead the most confessed they had it not out of the scriptures but of tradition of the Apostles and custome of the church therefore they are not to be compared vnto vs in better vnderstanding of the scriptures for that point which they denyed to be receiued of the scriptures Thirdly those of the auncient fathers that agreed with you in any part of your assertion for none within 400. yeares was wholly of your errour notwithstanding manie excellent gifts that they had yet maintained other errors beside that and about that diffented one from another and sometime the same man from himselfe and that is worst of all from manifest truth of the holy scriptures Therefore neither is their erronious interpretation in this matter to be receiued nor M. Allens wise iudgement of vs to bee regarded Here also I appeale to the iudgement of indifferent readers what confession I haue made of the fathers to be on their side or what reprochefull or contemptuous wordes I haue vsed against them for dissenting from vs. The next place is quoted page 247. where I say against Allen boasting of auncient testimonies for prayer for the dead I will not denie but you haue much drosse and dregges of the later sort of doctors the later the fuller of drosse But bring me any worde out of Iustinus Martyr Irenaeus Clemens Alexandrinus or any that did write within one hundreth yeares after Christ that aloweth prayer or almes for the dead I will say you are as good as your word Here except he will cauil that I acknowledge much drosse and dregs to be in the later sort of doctors I knowe not what hee findeth that hath any shadowe of his slander But the trueth must be confessed that the pure waters of life are to be founde onely in the worde of God and beside that the best and purest liquors that are to bee seene are not cleare from all dregges and drosse of humane error and frailtie In the next page Origen deliuered from the shamefull mangling of Allens allegation is shewed plainly to be an enimie of purgatorie prayer for the dead in that he affirmeth the day of a Christian mans death to be the ende of all sorrowe and the beginning of all felicitie There remaineth nowe the last place quoted page 194. where I acknowledge that Gregorie Bernard Bede vpon the text Matth. 12. are of opinion that sinnes not remitted in this world may be remitted in the world to come But how happeneth it say I that Chrysostome Ieronyme which both interpreted that place could gather no such matter although they otherwise allowed prayer for the dead The reason must needes be because the errour of purgatorie growing so much the stronger as it was neerer to the full reuelation of Antichrist Gregorie and Bede sought not the true meaning of Christ in this scripture but the confirmation of their plausible error Here is all the confessions most reprochefull contemptuous wordes that are conteined in so manie of those places as he hath quoted in which I will not tarrie to rehearse how manie vntruthes he hath vttered against mee but wish the indifferent reader to consider that if he be so bolde to slander mee concerning a booke printed in English by which he may be conuinced of euerie simple reader what dare he not aduouch of matters done and past at Rome whither none may trauell to trie out his tretcherie but he is in manifest danger neuer to returne the answere of his message From this Popish Parson whatsoeuer his name be I must passe to another gentleman namelesse in deede but not blamelesse yea much more blame worthie than the other who among so manie and so great flanders as it is wonder howe they could bee conueyed into so small a booke against our prince her lawes her councellors her iudges her officers the nobilitie the comminaltie the church the gouernors the pastors the people thereof against all states persons of the land in whome there is religion towardes God ioyned with dutie towarde their prince and countrie hath founde yet some emptie corners where he might place me in particular And