canonical scriptures And that this fault lye not altogether vpon Luther and the lutheraÌ„s VVolfg Musculus a famous wryter amongst the Zuinglians vpon lyke reason pronounceth lyke sentence They obiect vnto vs sayeth he the place of Iames. but he vvhatsoeuer he vvere though he speake othervvise then S. Paule yet may he not preiudice the truth And after he hath at large shewed the disagreemente betweene those two Apostles thus he breaketh forth into the open reproch of S. Iames. VVherefore he S. Iames alleageth the example of Abraham nothinge to the purpose vvhere he sayeth vvilte thou knovv ô vayne man that fayth vvithout vvorkes is dead Abraham our Father vvas he not iustified by vvorkes vvhen he offred his sonne Isaak He confoundeth the vvord fayth hovv much better had it bene for him diligently and playnely to haue distinguished the true and properlye Christian fayth vvhich the Apostle euer preacheth from that vvhich is common to Ievves and Christians Turks and Diuels then to confound them both and set dovvne his sentence so different from the Apostolicall doctrine vvhereby as concluding he sayth you see that a man is iustified by vvorkes and not by fayth alone vvhereas the Apostle out of the same place disputeth thus c. And after he hath made S. Paule speake as he thinketh best he inferreth Thus sayeth the Apostle of vvhose doctrine vve doubt not Compare me novv vvith this argument of the Apostle the conclusion of this Iames A man therfore is iustified by vvorks and not by fayth only and see hovv much it differeth vvhereas he should more rightly haue coÌ„cluded thus c. In which discourse the Reader may see that he not onely contemptuously refuseth to call him an Apostle and euer nameth him as opposite to the Apostle but also that he refuteth him as making false arguments and taketh vpon him to be his maister and as it were calling him ad ferulam checketh and controwleth him for a corrupter of scripture misapplying the word of God and wickedly pullinge downe that which S. Paule had so wel built vp All which beinge so plaine euident and manifest and the worde straminea found out at length acknowleged by M. VV. a man wold thinke all this matter ended and that egregious lye fathered vpon M. Campian turned vpon M. VV. head withall M. Campians first reason iustified wherein he burdened the Protestantes with denial of the holy scriptures And yet M. VV. yeldeth not but like a valiant soldiar is so farre from geuinge ouer that he pursueth his aduersarie still as though he had the better of him and whâ—e so or how can he possiblie defend him self forsoothe because Luther non plane 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stramineam appellauit Luther sayed not playnlye and simplye that it vvas stravven or made of stravve but in comparison of Sainte Peter and Sainte Paules Epistles I beleeue in deede Nether did F. Campian or M. Martine saye so or any wise man els for although he were as madde and shamelesse in his assertions as euer was heretike yet to haue termed that epistle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 stramineam simplye made of stravve or any otherwise then to haue signified the vnworthynes of the same in respect of holie scriptures and in that sort it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a worde of blasphemous contempt had bene as wonderful as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to haue affirmed that is was made of woode or morter And here in the verie fronte and beginning let the reader note in M.VV. the liuely paterne of a perfecte wrangler maintaininge a continuall bablinge vppon wordes and neuer drawing nigh to the pointe Father Campians and M. Martins charge vppon them beinge euidente that they contemne the written worde as is proued by Luther M.VV. knowinge not wel what to say runneth he knoweth not whether vp and downe and aboute forwarde and backward now grauntinge and by and by recalling so that in the compasse of one leafe in one plaine matter he hath more contrary windinges and turnings then a graue and sober man could be driuen vnto in the wryting of a large volume First there is no suche thinge and F. Campian lyeth egregiously nowe him selfe hath founde it out then there was neuer a worde chaunged in Luthers preface now the later editions differ much from the former againe Luther calleth it not simpliciter stramineam but in respect of S. Paules epistles and S. Peters If this serue not the turne then I require you saith he to bring forth the other wordes that folow arida tumida contentiosa or els this of straminea is no great matter yet one fetche more Although I vvil not defend this of Luthers yet you haue iniuried him in saying that he called it omnino stramineam altogether made of stravv looke saith M. Martin in Illyricus and there you shall finde the matter graunted I haue so done saith M.VV. let me be counted impudent yf you finde this vvord there Thus muche I graunt Illyricus saith that Luther rehearseth graue causes vvhy this epistle ought not to be esteemed for a vvriting of Apostolicall authoritye But vvhat is this to the purpose as though he that denieth the epistle to be apostolical termeth yt stramineam made of stravv This is a copie of M.VV. vayne in wryting first to deny the matter be it neuer so euident and wheÌ„ the matter is coÌ„fessed theÌ„ to cauil vpon syllables and when matter and forme the verie syllables are founde yet to yelde to nothing but to keepe the pen or tounge walking as though in this point lyke verball grammarians and ridiculous sophisters we principallie hunted after these syllables stra mi ne am which neuerthelesse are found and not as students searchers of truth in diuinitye soughte out first and cheeflie whether by these and the lyke contemptible speeches the aduersarie laboured to disgrace deface that Apostolical writing and so impiouslie to auoyde suche authoritie when he should be pressed therewith Wherefore to draw to some issue howsoeuer Luther 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 called it stramineam or called it not or whether he spake so in respect of the matter of the epistle or the forme or by way of comparison with S. Paule or whatsoeuer other quidditie M.W. ether now hath or hereafter shall deuise if Luther did yt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to deface the epistle which M.VV. denieth not and to dispossesse it of Canonicall authoritie as the thing it self speaketh if by his example the Germane Diuines churches altogether contemne it if vppon Luthers sentence Illyricus pronounce that Luther in his praeface rendereth great causes vvhy this epistle oughte in no case to be accounted for a vvriting of Apostolicall authoritie vnto vvhich reasons I thinke euerie godlie man and not geuen to contention ought to yeld if Pomerane say the vvriter thereof maketh a vvicked argument concludeth ridiculouslie if Vitus Theodorus thrust it cleane out of the booke if the Centuries affirme
Lutheran an Anabaptist a Suinkseldian say the like with as good countenance against other partes of scripture which stand as plainly against their conceaued heresies Is Beza to be allowed pronouncing peremptorily touching the storie of the aduouterous woman in the 8. of S. Iohn vpon the diuersitie which is in the greeke writers and testaments that so great difference he found in that narration that he doubteth altogether of the vvhole storie which is as much as to take from it vtterly al authoritie Canonical and is not euerie man els to be allovved vpon like vvarrant geuing like censure vpon other partes of scriptures Reade S. Hierom vvriting to Edibia and see vvhether a part of S. Markes gospel may not by like reason be called in question yea reade Bezaes notes vpon the sixt chapter the 18. and 19. of S. Iohn and 22. of S. Luke see vvhether that diuine sermon of our Sauiour and his very passion by such argument ought not so to be cut out of the testament The like is to be said of verie many places of S. Matthew and S. Paules epistles Then iudge thou Christian reader whether these meÌ„ be not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 bible-beaters or rather in deede bible murtherers For the first presupposeth the hauing of a bible whereas they haue none For that which they cal their bible and word of God is in deede no word of God no bible at al. For how can a maÌ„ cal that the bible and word of God vvhich hath in it so many foule and filthie corruptions so many vvicked Ethnical and Iudaical errors as I before haue noted in their bible by confessionâ— of their ovvne brethren Is that the bible of God vvhich hath in it so many places maliciously peruerted against the eternal truth and testameÌ„t of God Can vve call him a man vvhom vve see to lacke head hand foote hart and other principal and essential partes of humane nature and hovv then is that a bible that lacketh for canonical the vvritinges of so many Prophetes Apostles and Euangelistes S. Luke S. Paule S. Iames S. Peter S. Iohn S. Iude some of which no bible euer vvanted since Christs time nor can vvant remaining a bible The rest vvere euer true scriptures though not euer in al places so accouÌ„ted as nether was the Godhead of our Sauiour the dignitie and office of his Apostles of al and alwaies at first acknowledged But al haue bene so accounted for these thousand yeres and more by general prouincial councels the great and Apostolike councel of Nice of Laodicea of Carthage by the supreme pastors of Christs church by the general consent of the same Catholike Church in most times ages These meÌ„ therefore good reader folowing the steppes of their old fathers Marcion Cerdon Carpocrates the Arrians and Manichees despising and reiecting so many bookes of sctipture are in deede not beaters but maÌ„glers and defacers and extreme murtherers of the bible And that not only for this plaine and euident reason now geuen but also for their prophane irreligious varietie of translations whereof now in the last part I haue to speake CHAP. XIIII That to leaue the ordinarie translation of the Bible appointed by the Church to appeale to the hebrevv greeke and such nevv diuers translations as the protestants haue made is the very vvay to Atheisme Infidelitie IN this later parte this haue I to shew that whosoeuer taketh to him self that libertie which the heretiks geue here M.W. most busily striueth for that is to refuse the latin and appeale to the greeke and hebrew and these new translations which as they beare vs in hand are framed according to the greeke and hebrew he taketh the high way to denial of al faith to Apostasie from Christ and plaine Atheisme This to do the fittest way were historically to declare how certaine knowen Sects of the Protestants principally vpon this very reason of pretending the greeke and hebrew veritie and therefore running to infinite varietie of diuers translations and resting in no one haue fallen to despise al Bibles Scriptures and concluded as a most assured Euangelical veritie that nothing is certaine but euerie man is to be left to his owne fansie to beleeue as he list Such is the sect of the Swinkfeldians Anabaptists and Academikes and it is the very drifte of Castalio so much commended of many in the preface of his Bible to King Edvvarde the sixte although he beate pretily vpon an other point much of like effect vz that the Messias promised in the law is not yet come but vvil come hereafter according to the Iewes expectation Thus vvriteth he Profecto si verum fateri volumus est adhuc nostrum soeculum in profundis ignorantiae tenebris demersum cuius rei certissimuÌ„ testimonium sunt tam graues tam pertinaces taÌ„ perniciosae dissensiones tam multi et irriti coÌ„uentus de hisce controuersiis c. Truely if vve vvil confesse the truth this our age is as yet drowned in extreme darknes ignoraÌ„ce a most assured proofe vvhereof are these so greuous so obstinate and so pernicious dissensions so many and the same so vnprofitable meetinges about these controuersies so great number of bookes euery day sett out and the same differing one from an other so far as heauen differeth from earth And prosecuting this his plaine and irrefutable argument vvhereby he proueth the Protestants notvvithstanding al their latin greeke and hebrevv to be most ignorant in true diuinitie and matters spiritual thus he addeth For if the spirit of God be one truth one it must of necessitie folovv in vvhoÌ„ that one spirite one truth is that they also be one amoÌ„g theÌ„ selues of one iudgment in matters spiritual And if the day of the most cleare truth of the gospel shined vnto vs vve vvould neuer lighten so many darkesome obscure candles of bookes and vvritinges The vvhich reason concluding this euangelical state and age to be ful of ignorance grosse grosse againe Crassa crassa inquaÌ„ saecuâ—um tenet ignorantia and that there is no certaine vvay to find out the truth and come to an end of these controuersies hereof he inferreth that euery man is to be leaft to his ovvne iudgement suffered to beleeue as he list Thus he speaketh addressing his wordes to the king Cum haec it a sint o rex et cum aetas nostra in tanta adhuc ignorantiae caligine caecutiat c. VVhereas these things are so O king vvhereas our age as yet is blinded in so great darkenes of ignorance I thinke vve ought to vse maruelous diligence lest by error vve offend And if there be any controuersies in the case of religion as there are verie many in these I thinke it good that vve folovv the exaÌ„ple of Iudas Machabeus his felovves vvho vvhen they knevv not vvhat to determine touching the altar
groundes of disputation such as are vsed ether in our church or in their owne and how far these men be groweÌ„ to a headstroÌ„g desperatnes beyond the maner of al the auÌ„cient heretikes For when S. Austin and the old fathers had to dispute with such as Donatistes ArriaÌ„s Manichees Pelagians and others they vrged them with the authoritie of Gods Church with the iudgement of the Sea Apostolike the Succession of bishops in the same with the determination of general Councels finally with the name Catholike and that which was so called of al men and the heretikes seemed to be moued therewith and acknowledge such maner of argument But the heretikes of our time conteÌ„ning impudently al these Church Sea Apostolike Succession of bishops general Councels and whatsoeuer els may be inuented are come so far that they now despise and treade vnder foote the name Catholike which the Apostles by diuine wisdome found out and by their Creede sanctified appropriated to true ChristiaÌ„s members of Christs only Catholike and Apostolike Church in so much that in the sinode holdeÌ„ at Altemburg betwene the Diuines of the Palsgraue of Rhene and the Duke of VVirtemberg when one part brought forth a text of Luther against the aduersaries they perusing the place at large and finding there the word Catholike streightwaies reiect the whole as corrupt and counterfaite because Luther was neuer vvont to vse that vvord Ista verba catholicè intellecta non sapiunt phrasin Lutheri say they and vpon this only reason conclude that booke not to haue bene made by him And yet would to God our aduersaries could be content to yelde to the very scriptures them selues such peeces I meane and bookes as they leaue vnto vs and hetherto with vs acknowledge for Canonical VVouâ—d to Gâ—d they could frame them selues humbly to admitte such scriptures when of theÌ„ selues they are playne for vs against them For so surely buâ—ldâ—d is the Catholike cause that by such helpe she is able sufficiently to defend her selfe and confound the aduersaries But whereas besides the reâ—usal of al the forenamed witnesses both of our church and of their owne as though none euer besydes them selues in particular no Saint or man ether in heaueÌ„ or earth had wit learning or grace whereas I say besides al this they expound the same scriptures by plaine partialitie fantasie frensye whereas they make them selues the only arbiters both what bookes are Canonical what Apocriphal and which is the true sense of them whereas in examining the sense they runne sometime from greeke to latin sometime from lâ—tin to greeke sometimes vrge one or other greeke example against innumerable latin sometimes prosse one or other fathers reading against al greeke commonly corrupt the sense both of latin and greeke sticke only to certaine heretical versions made by their maisters in fauour of their seueral heresies whereas they are groweÌ„ to such extreme folly hardnes impudency it may seeme nothing els but wast of vvords to deale vvith men whom contention pride ignorance malice and obstinacie against the Church and her pastors hath so pitifully blinded Novv if I may vvith the readers patience descend from this vvhich I speake generally of the English protestants to apply the same more specially vnto the party vvhose booke I haue to examine it shal both iustifie more clearly that which hetherto hath bene said touching their irreligion want of faith and withal set forth the practise of those proud and arrogant rules of answering which I before haue noted and besides shew what stuffe is contained in his booke of Antichrist wherein he so vainely and insolently triumpheth It hath bene an old disease of auncient heretikes first of al to inuade the cheefe pastors of the church that they being remoued from the gouernment them selues might more freely spoyle the flocke as witnesseth S. Cyprian And for like reason their maner hath bene more malitiously to barke at the Sea Apostolike as saith S. Austin In this as in many other mad partes the heretikes of our age haue not only matched but also far surmounted the heretikes of auncient time For when as vpon their first breach from the church spreading of this new heresie they were reproued by their cheefe pastor and gouernor vpon malice and spite and desire of reuenge they brast forth into this rayling to cal him Antichrist not meaning for al that to cal him Antichrist in such a seÌ„se as the church and faith of Christian men vnderstandeth vvhen vve speake of Antichrist vvhich shal come in the end of the vvorld and of vvhom S. Paule to the Thessalonians and the scriptures in some other places specially do meane but in such a general sense as S. Iohn intendeth wheÌ„ he saith that novv there are many Antichristes and vvho so denieth Christ to haue come in flesh he is Antichrist But the later Protestants going beyond their maisters as commonly it fareth in euery heresie to make their cause more plausible and iustifie their schismatical departure from the church more assuredly haue taken vp the proposition in the more extreme and desperate sense and now hold the Pope of Rome to be that singular Antichrist of whom S. Paule and some other of the Apostles fore-prophecied This wicked and shameles assertion being refuted at sundry times and of sundry men namely of D. Sanders not only as false vnprobable but also as heathenish vnpossible M. Whitaker hath now taken vpon him to make a reply against his argumentes and maintaine that former assertion of his brethren but after such a sort as partly argueth in him want of al religioÌ„ and conscience partly declareth him to haue deepely impressed in his harte a vvonderful pride and coÌ„tempt of al others a principal note and marke of Antichrist And to beginne vvith the later I vvil shortly runne ouer one or tvvo of the first demonstrations and M. W. ansvveres framed there vnto First of al D. Sanders disputeth that the succession of the Romane bishops can not be Antichrist because Antichrist is one man vvhich he confirmeth by sundrie good testmonies of scripture vvherevnto he ioyneth the vniuersal consent of al the auncient fathers His vvordes are Denique omnes sancti patres Graeci Latini Syri quiper tot saecula vel in Oriente vel in Occidente vel in Aquilone vel in Meridie vixerunt secundùm fidem traditionem ab Apostolâ—s acceptaÌ„ de Antichristo locuti sunt velut de homâ—ne vno Briefly al the holy fathers Greeke Latin Syrian vvho for so many ages liued ether in the East or VVest or North or South according to the faith and tradition receaued from the Apostles haue spoken of Antichrist as of one man VVhat is M. VV. answere to this After certaine cauils made to the places of scripture thus at a clappe he dischargeth the fathers writing according to the faith
no wiser then they who in so shorte space haue falleÌ„ out with your self altered your iudgmeÌ„te and now esteeme that for apocriphal which then was to yow canonical that is now iugde that to be the moone which then you thought to be the sunne Our lorde geue his people grace to thinke of you as you proue your selues that is so fantastical inconstant that you know not what to say and whyles you seeke to keepe your selfe aloofe from the Catholike churche the sure piller grouÌ„de of truâ—he you plunge your selues ouerhead and eares in such foule absurdities as neuer did heretikes before you For what is the reason of al this because besydes the written word or scripture yow wil not acknowledge any traditioÌ„ of the Church wherevnto by this question yow are enforced of necessitie For if we are bound to beleeue certaine bookes as for example the Gospel of S. Matthew S. Marke S. Iohn and S. Paules Epistles to be Canonical that is heaueÌ„ly and peÌ„ned by diuine inspiration and yet the same can not be proued by scripture theÌ„ cleare it is that we are bound to beleeue somewhat which by scripture caÌ„ not be proued and so the tradition of the Church is established And marueyle it is that yow perceaue not how grosly yow ouerthwart your self and plainly refel that which yow would seeme most earnestly to confirme For if yow march your beleefe of scripture with knowledg of the Sunne and Moone and such like as are knowen by only sense the light of nature then you deny it to be any article of your faith For these two are directly opposite and the apostle confirmeth this reason wheÌ„ he defineth faith to come by hearing and hearing by the vvord of God ergo fides ex auditu auditus per verbuÌ„ Dei And therefore if you beleeue not with humaine faith as yow beleeue Tusculanes questions to haue bene written by Cicero but with Christian diuine faith as yow beleeue Christ to be your sauiour if thus you beleeue the Gospel which beareth S. Matthews name as likewise that of S. Marke and S. Iohn to haue bene written by them then yow beleeue so because so yovv haue heard it preached and so yovv haue receaued and consequently by the Apostles authoritie that verie matter so preached vnto yow is the vvord of God which word of God whereas yow find not in the scriptures hereof it foloweth manifestly that somewhat is the vvord of God which is not scripture and therefore yow and your fellowes beleeuing only scripture beleeue not al the vvord of God but only a peece thereof and so did the worste heretikes that euer were yea so do at this day the verie Turkes and Mahometanes But to end this special matter with yow M. VV. touching your distinction betweene S. Iames and Tobias Iudith the Machabees c. where you make this to be the difference that S. Iames vvas refused but of a fevv and the other generally of the vvhole Churche tota Ecclesia repudiauit say you for declaration of your truth herein I referre you to the moste euident testimonies of the same auncient Churche S. Augustine setting downe the Canonicall scriptures as they were read and beleeued in his time placeth S. Iames I coÌ„fesse in order with the Gospels Pauls epistles yet not excludiÌ„g those other but in the selfe same place numbringe Tobie Iudith and the Machabees with the bookes of Moses and the Prophetes his saith he 44. libris veteris testameÌ„ti terminatur authoritas In these fourtie and foure bookes is concluded the authoritie of the old testament Likewise the Councel of Carthage approueth for Canonicall S. Iames but in the same CanoÌ„ it approueth as far the other forenamed and teacheth of them as directlie as of the other that they are Canonicall scriptures Somewhat before S. Augustines daies they were not by publike decree of the Church receaued as appeareth by S. Hierome and the Councel of Laodicea but then when there was as greate doubte of S. Iames epistle S. Paule to the Hebrewes and the Apocalyps touchinge the first it is manifest by that which hath bene said by you and your felowes Of the secoÌ„d there was more question then of the first and S. Hierome seldome citeth it but he geueth a note signifyinge that it was not in his time taken for Canonical In the Epistle to the Hebrevves vvhich the custome of the Latine Church receaueth not saith he it is thus vvritten Againe the blessed Apostle in his Epistle to the Hebrevves although the custome of the Latin Church receaueth it not amongst Canonicall scriptures Againe this authoritie the Apostle Paule vsed or vvhosoeuer he vvere that vvrote that Epistle In catalogo he saith that euen vnto his time it vvas not accounted the vvritinge of Paule and that Caius an auncient writer denyeth it to be his and in his epistle to Paulinus sette before the Bible he saith that a plaerisque extra numerum ponitur of the more part it is put out of the nuÌ„ber of Paules vvritinges The like might be declared by S. CipriaÌ„ Lactantius Tertullian Arnobius and S. Austine if it were needefull and the Apocalyps was yet more doubtful then ether of these two as wee see by the Councel of Laodicea leafte oute of the rolle of Canonicall writinges when both the other of S. Iames and S. Paule were put in Wherefore as false that is which M.VV. constantlie auoucheth of the auncient Church touchinge the seueringe of these sacred volumes so hath he not yet nor euer shalbe able with reason to satisfie M. Martins demaund why they of England haue coÌ„desceÌ„ded to admit the one rather then the other And here the reader may consider esteeme as it deserueth of that glorious 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which in fine he singeth to him self settinge the crowne of triumphe vppon his owne head and his felowes Nothing saith he is novv more vulgar then the Papists arguments against vs. Quicquid afferri a quoquam potuit vidimus diluimus protriuimus vvhat so euer could be said of anie of them al vve haue seene it refelled it and trode it vnder foote he may consider I saie how like this man and his companions are to worke such maisteries who as yet knowe not what those weapons are which they should vse in atchiuing such conquests For whereas they vaunt to doe this by the written worde yet are not resolued amoÌ„gest them selues what that written word is and how farre it extendeth it is as fantastical a parte to bragge of victorie as if a mad man should ruÌ„ne into the field to slea his enemie and when he commeth there knoweth not with what weapon to begin the fight Wherefore wel may he and his felowes heare and see the Catholike doctrine as Esai speaketh of the Iewes concerninge the doctrine of Christ hearing shal you heare shall not vnderstand and seeing shal yovv
of my opinion and thinke the sense which I geue to be the onely true and yours to be the false shal he be so bold to shut out yours and thrust in his owne with like necessitie restraynt as you haue done if so then you know the Lutherans thinke as I say For thus writeth Illyricus and he writeth as it may seeme directlie against your Beza Some vnderstand this place that Christ is receaued or coÌ„teyned of the heauen vvhich sentence is against the scope of the Apostle and should set forth rather the infirmitie then the glorie povver of Christ For so of angels yea of deuils it may be sayd that they are receaued or coÌ„teyned of heaueÌ„ because the vvorde coeluÌ„ sometime in the scripture signifieth the ayer A goodlie matter he vvho by vvitnes â—o the scripture filleth al thinges vve vvil say is receaued or conteyned in a certen place almost as it vvere in a prison Secondarily what wicked and vncoÌ„scionable dealing is this in spending so many wordes not to speake any one worde to the purpose whereunto you should speake al or els hold your peace speake nothing Was not that the point of his reprehension not because you gaue a passiue for an actiue or deponent but because you did it in this place and did it to this end that so you might seeme by scripture to exclude Christ froÌ„ the sacrament For this reason Beza geueth and for this reason M. Martin reproueth Beza Bezaes corruption and of this M.W. speaketh not a worde or if he do it is a manifest falsitie For if M. Whit. sayng that Beza did it for that only cause to auoyde doubtful speach oppose him selfe to M. Martin in this it can not be excused froÌ„ a playne lye for so much as in Bezaes behalfe he auoucheth that to be true which Beza him selfe protesteth to be false They so conclude Christ in heaueÌ„ saith M. Martin that he can not be on the altar and Beza protesteth that he so translateth of purpose to kepe Christes presence thence Yet a third faulte you haue committed besides in iustifying this smal demie sentence and that is whereas M. Martin for the better strengthning of his reason against you ioyned to it the authoritie of Illyricus and Caluin you omit them bothe This translation of Beza is so far from the Greke saith M. Martin that not onely Illyricus the Lutherane but Caluin him selfe doth not like it Which wodes if you had ioyned to the rest if you had but named those men your slender reasoÌ„s in the eyes of your reader would forthwith haue appeared contemptible And wel he might haue marueyled how you durst defend such a translation which not only Illyricus a famous LutheraÌ„ but also Caluin a prince amongst the ZuingliaÌ„s in plaine speach reprehendeth whereby a man may see that you seeke not for truth but only to talke on and serue the tyme abuse the reader And yet once againe vnder preteÌ„ce of a litle simplicitie and most rude and simple sophistrie a fourth fault haue you made worse then the former running first from one sense to an other and then from one worde to an other and so in fine whiles you would seeme to make S. Peter speake clearly and plainly you make him speake falsly heretically whereof forthwith I shal haue occasion to treate The place which you cite out of Nazianzene oportet Christum a coelo recipi maketh no more for you then doth the article of our Creede ascendit ad coelos or sedet ad dexteram patris and I marueile what Catholike beleeueth the contrarie and therefore I let it passe As ye proceede the reason beginneth to appeare why you would so fayne haue that forged interpretation of Beza to stand for good For now you beginne to frame against the real presence argumeÌ„ts drawen from natural and mathematical conditions of a bodie whereby the reader may learne the more to detest and abhorre the whole race of your heretical translators For as our Sauiour saith in the field of his Catholike church in the night vvhen men vvere a slepe his enemie came and ouersovved cockle among the vvheate and vvent his vvay and some time passed before the cockle thus sowen appeared in like maner these feedemen of the same aduersarie wicked corrupters of the good feede and worde of Christ first fall a traÌ„slating of the scripture with many goodlie and plausible pretenses of gods honor the peoples commoditie and publishing gods blessed booke c. And so while no man thinketh amisse of them as it were in the night and darknes being espied of none among the good seede of god they mingle sow their owne wicked and abhommable darnel which at first is not seene but in tyme sheweth it selfe For when M.W. so smoothly went away with the matter and found fault with M. Martins ignorance for dislyking so plaine a thing when he told vs of actiues and passiues that there was no difference betwene the first quem oportet coelum capere and this second quem oportet coelo capi but that this later is more cleare and perspicuous who would haue supposed any great mischeefe to haue bene hidden therein But now euen thereof he frameth his principal argument to spoyle the church of Christes real presence VVith like sinceritie translate the Lutherans for their Lutherish the Brentians for their Vbiquitarie the Trinitaries of Pole for their Arian and Sebastianus Castalio for his Academical heresie sprinkling heare and there many drops of poyson with which symple soules are daungerously infected before the mischeuous practyse be of many discouered But let vs heare M. W. argument drawen as he would haue vs suppose from the former falsified text of scripture but in deede from Aristotle and Euclide If Christes body sayth he be natural and of the same substance that ours is then can it be conteyned but in one place and if it be in heauen it is not in the sacrament But Christs body is such a body consubstantial to ours in al things sauing glorie and immortalitie and that body of Christ is novv conteyned in heauen as Peter saith therefore it is not in the Sacrament much lesse in infinite Sacraments This argument feareth not your forces For if Christs body be together in heauen and in the sacrament then Christ hath a double body or rather infinite bodies but this is false ergo that Furthermore if Christs bodie be circumscribed vvith some certaine place in heauen and reteyneth all properties of a true body the selfe same in the sacrament be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 incircumscript inuisible c. then contradictories maye be verified of the same bodye But this can not be therefore the other is vnpossible Of this kinde of reasoning which may be enlarged as far and amplified by as many circumstances as ether Geometrie or Philosophie or any sense seing hearing tasting handling or humaine reason or
sanctus in omnibus operibus suis Which verse in hebrew should haue begun with that letter which of al the alphabete only misseth So as most certaine it is that the hebrew is faultie And thus to end this matter of the hebrew fountaines originals I wil gather that which I haue said in to a fevv conclusions vvithal ansvvere M.VV. allegations The first is that this opinion of the Protestants detracting so much from the latin bibles and yelding so much to the hebrevv is Iudaical iniurious to the Church to the holy Ghost and state of the nevv testameÌ„t as vvhereby they professe to thinke more religioÌ„ care of Gods word to haue bene resident in the Iewish synagoge theÌ„ in al the Kingdomes Princes Pastors Prouinces of Christianitie for these thovvsaÌ„d yeres The second that albeit S. Hierom in his tyme so soone after the great persecutions the Church being troubled vvith that most busye terrible and potent heresie of the Arrians against the diuinitie of Christ and the holy Ghost vvhen as yet the Canon it selfe comprehending the sacred bookes of scriptures by general authoritie vvas not confirmed and receaued vvheÌ„ as saith S. Austin there vvas inâ—umerable varietie of latin traÌ„slations Qui ex hebraeâ— lingua scripturas in graecam verterunt numerari possunt latini autem interpretes nullo modo and they infinitely differing among them selues as in the same place he noteth when for these causes there vvas not nor vvel could be any one vniforme translation approued although at this tyme S. Hierom might iustly appeale from them al to the hebrew as in coÌ„parison being most pure incorrupt yet nether then were the hebrew copies simpliciter faultles as hath bene shevved by playne examples and demonstrations by the very ProtestaÌ„te bibles and by confession of the best learnedst among them and S. Hâ—erom though M. W. seeme to ground him self most vpoÌ„ him acknovvledgeth so much For examining tvvo places of Deuteronomie vrged by the Apostle S. Paule in his epistles both differing in that point vvhich he most presseth froÌ„ the hebrew bibles extant in S. Hieroms daies he resolueth in fine that the hebrew vvas corrupted othervvise then the Apostle read it The one place is Scriptum est Maledictus omnis qui pendet in ligno It is vvritten Cursed is euerie one that hangeth on tree in vvhich short place compared vvith the original in Deuteronomie there is somevvhat to much and somevvhat to litle To much because here is omnis euery one and in ligno on tree which are not now found in the Hebrew though both in the Greeke of the Septuaginta To litle because there is in the hebrew Elohim which wanteth in S. Paule maledictus Deo or Dei cursed of God is euerie one so hanged S. Hierom answereth thus My iudgement herein is this ether that the old bookes of the Hebrevves had othervvise then they haue novv or that the Apostle put the sense of the scripture not the vvordes or vvhich I rather suppose after the passion of Christ both in the Hebrevv and in our bookes the name of God vvas added by some maÌ„ that he might make vs more infamous vvho beleeue in Christ accursed of God The other place is this Scriptum est Maledictus omnis qui noÌ„ permanserit in omnibus quae scripta sunâ— in libro legis vt faciat ea Cursed is euerie one that abideth not in al thinges vvhich are vvritten in the booke of the lavv to do them Where the Apostles argument hanging principally vpon the two wordes omnis and in omnibus euerie one and in al thinges both which are in the Septuaginta 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 nether in the hebrew he thus answereth the matter I am vncertayne vvhether the Septuaginta added omnis homo and in omnibus or vvhether it vvere so in the old hebrevv and aftervvard put out by the Ievves Thus tâ— suppose I am moued for this reason because the vvordes omnis and in omnibus al and in al as necessary to proue that they be al accuâ—sed vvho are of the vvorkes of the lavv the Apostle skilful in the hebrevv tonge and mâ—st cunning in the lavv vvould neuer haue so sett dovvne had it not bene so in the hebrevv VVherefore I perusing the hebrevv volumes of the Samaritanes found there vvritten the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as much to say as omnis siue omnibus al or in al and so that to agree vvith the Septuaginta In vayne therefore haue the Ievves razed that out lest they should seeme to be accursed vvhereas the more auncient examples of an other nation testifie that it vvas vvritten so Thus S. Hierom. Thirdly this I gather that since S. Hieroms time much more haue the hebrew bookes bene corrupted and that not in smale indâ—fferent matters which might better be borne but in very hye pointes touching the diuinitie and humanitie of our Sauiour touching his passion and the redemption of the world And therefore when S. Hierom speaking of the puritie of the bibles before his birth is applied to iustifie the copies written so many ages after his death and so consequently to iustifie al their new English FleÌ„mish and Germane interpretations made according to some hebrew copies as they pretend this is as iust as Germanes lippes according to our english prouerbe whose hartes mindes religions we see to differre infinitely This is to answere of chalke when the question is proposed of cheese Next this we see that the condition of the hebrew tonge is such that errors are very soone coÌ„mitted therein by reasoÌ„ of smale points of distinctioÌ„s of letters so nighly resembling one an other Wherevnto ioyne we the malice of the Rabbines their hatred of the Christians and Christian religion whom Luther confesseth to be as very crucifiers of the word of Christ especially such places as most appertaine to him as they were of Christ him selfe and that they employe their studie herevnto And if we consider withal how in time of the law thorough their default they lost whole bookes volumes of their diuine Prophetes we shal fynde smal reason to moue vs to beleeue that since Christ they should become so holy and deuout watchful circumspect as M.VV. by commending their fountaines and originals would make them Finally al this hath bene declared not only by plaine reasons factes examples demonstrations but also by plaine confession of those whom our aduersaries principally reuerence and honour and in this matter were most skilful by Munster by Pellicane by Sebastianus Castalio by Luther and such others And hereof may the reader easely learne an answer to that questioÌ„ which many frame as a matter of intricate difficultie wheÌ„ these corruptions should come in to the hebrew bibles whether before Christs time or betwene that and S. Hieroms or from S. Hieroms time to vs. Not the first say they because
side against the other and his precisenes and religious vprighâ—nes is often times singularly commended by the aduersaries them selues Vetus interpres saith Beza videtur summa religione sacros libros interpretatus The old interpreter seemeth to haue inteepreted the holy bookes vvith marueâ—ous sinceritie and religioÌ„ And Molineus I gerrimè a vn gari consuetaque lectione recedo quam etiam enixè defendere soâ—eo I can verie hardly depart from the vulgar and accustomed reading vvhich also I am vvont verie earnestly to defend And â—o vse one domestical vvitnes D. Humfrey thus speaketh of him Proprietati verborum satis videtur addictus vetus interpres et quidem nâ—mis anxiè quod tamen interpretor religione quadam fecisse non gnorantia The old interpreter seemeth sufficiently bent â—olovv the proprietie of vvords and he doth it in deede to carefully vvhich notvvithstanding I suppose him to haue done not of ignorance but of religion and conscience Hereby is vvel and perfitly iustified the sincere and vpright dealing of our interpreter vvhose fault ether is none or if it be any it is this that in folowing the exact signification of the greeke word he was to scrupulous and carefull to full of conscience and religion which is a very good fault if it must be called a fault and commended and iustified els where by D. Humfrey him self Liberius saith he in aliis prophanis licet expatiari degredi a verbis in canonica scriptura nulla licentia est tolerabilis non enim concessum est homini dei linguam mutare In prophane vvritings a man may range abrode more freely depart from the vvords in canonical scripture no such licence is tolerable for man may not alter the tonge of God Against this man so learned hauing good greeke copies folowing them exactly and vvith such religion let now any Protestant oppose any of his nevv translators whom by manifold reasoÌ„s trials and experiments I can not disproue and plainly shevv that for one error of our interpreter he hath at least a score And in reason hovv can it be othervvise vvhereas they al being hereâ—ikes and ech addicted to some peculiar sect sauing Erasmus vvho notvvithstanding vvas far out of the vvay and therefore full of pride arrogancie selfvvil and geuen to that partial humor vvhereof his heresie most consisted drew al places especially indifferent to serue that veyne Luthers excellencie in interpreting is of the greatest number of ProtestaÌ„ts thought very singular so as not only the Lutherans but euen the Zuinglians geue him great praise as vve learne by Sleidan Habemus sacra biblia saith Brentius in the Apologie of the Wirtenberg CoÌ„fession a Luthero in Germanicam linguam diuino beneficio taÌ„ perspicue coÌ„uersa c. vve haue the holy bibles through the great bènefite of God turned by Luther in to the Germain tonge so clearely that his translatioÌ„ yeldeth to none ether greeke or latin Yet hovv elegaÌ„t and sincere a translator he vvas vve may coniecture by Emserus vvho gathered out of his translation Fourteene hundred fovvle lyes and falsifications But because the authoritie of this man being a catholike vvayeth not much with M.W. and to vvrite out those lyes vvere to fil vp a good booke vvhich I am not disposed to do at this time to make short worke both in this the rest I wil stay my self vpon the authoritie of such men as I knovv M. VV. honoreth for singular instruments of the Lord in setting forth the gospel such as he vvel knovveth speake not of partialitie but of conscience And vvho can iudge of Luther better then his coapostle Zuinglius vvho is so far of from approuing his translation that he accounteth him a fovvle corrupter and horrible falsifier of scripture to make them serue his heretical fansies and in that kinde reckeneth him for a very Arrian and Marcionite Thus he vvriteth Thou doest corrupt Luther adulterate the vvord of God folovving herein the Marcionites and Arrians vvho of old vvere vvont commoÌ„ly to raze out of the scriptures such places as seemed to be against their doctrine This fault he exemplifieth in Luthers translation thus VVhereas these vvords of Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iohn 6. he should haue translated thus That flesh profiteth nothing there he leaft out the Germane article das that ansvvering the greeke article â— to the intent those vvordes should not precisely and determinately be referred to the self same flesh of vvhich Christ had spoken a litle before and spake of stil for thus he translated it c. And after many vvordes spent against Luther for his malitious vvickednes he thus concludeth See hovv thy case standeth Luther that in the eyes of al men thou art seene to be a manifest and common corrupter and peruerter of the holy scripture vvhich thing thou canst neuer denie before any creature Hovv much are vve ashamed of thee vvho hetherto haue esteemed thee beyonde al measure and novv trye thee to be such a false fellovv Betvvene vvhich tvvo most excellent Apostles of the english congregation thus chiding I knovv not who is of vs more to be abhorred and detested whether Luther vvho plaieth the part of an Arrian and Marcionite in mangling defacing the scriptures or Zuinglius vvho so eagerly striueth to proue that the flesh and humanitie and consequently the incarnation of our most blessed Sauiour is vvorth nothing But to let that passe and proceede to talke of our translators M. W. because he is a Zuinglian therefore by likelihode reckeneth theÌ„ for more exquisite in geuing forth their testameÌ„ts Graunt that be so in the iudgment of him and his companions hovv can vve be induced so to thinke of them vvhereas Luther their common father holdeth them for most ignorant and foolish to vse his ovvne vvords as senselesse and brutish as is any stocke or beast in geuing the true sense of the scripture who calleth them commonly touching dâ—uinitie and matters theological stultos srolidos stupiâ—os stipites asinos truncos antichristos impostâ—res stipites asinino intellectu and so forth many like raylinges vnworthy to be heard amoÌ„gst the vilest creatures that liue much lesse amongst two such Arch apostles had they in them any parcel I wil not say of Apostolike or Christian but of ciuil or humaine grauitie But I wil discend vnto some of their particular Testaments set forth by Zuinglians to find out if it may be one whicâ— may be preferred before our commoÌ„ That which was set forth by Oecolampad us as I suppose and the Diuines of Basiâ—e is of many vvel allovved And vvil you haue vs refuse our old aâ—d take that but Beza chargeth vs in any case not to do so and geueth his reaâ—on because that Basile trâ—nslatioâ— is in multis locis impia a spiritus sancti sententia prorsâ—s discrepans In many places vvicked and altogether
pag. 598.603.604.605 See D. Hum. iudgement after in the 14. chap. Carlile in his booke that Christ went not downe to hel fol. 144. The English translations draw men to thinke that Christs soule perished Ibid. fo 117. O singular puritie of the English Bibles Against the immortalitie of the soule Ibid. fo 120. So translateth the Bible of the yere 1579. The English translations leade men to detestable errors Ibid fo 116. Bezaes true iudgment what harme is like to ensue by abusing ecclesiastical words Beza in Act. c. 10. ver 46. edit anno 1556. He or the printer hath altered some part of these words in the later editioÌ„ an 1565. Chaunge of words induceth chauÌ„ge of fayth The summe of such foule and ethnical corruptions as by reason are proued and by confession of the aduersaries are grauÌ„ted to be in the â—nglish translatioÌ„s The sect of Libertines far spread Beza de haereticis a ciuili magistratu punieÌ„dis pa 41. Right Gospellers These shew vs what is the true meaning of only faith iustifying Concil Trident sessio 4. 3. thinges to be noted in this question M.W. discourse most against him self Discou in prefat nu 39. The greeke and hebrew more aduantageable to the Catholike cause then the latin Pag. 15. In prefa noui testamen M.W. reasons for preferring the hebrew and greeke before the latin Pag. 15. If the latin testament be not the word of god whose word are their vulgar translations An assertioÌ„ both foolish and impious The Apostles and Euangelists cited scripture not according to the hebrew Rom. 10. v. 18. Linea coruÌ„ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Anno 1575. Act. 13. v. 41. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. in gentibus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Iac. 4. v. 6. Prouerb ca. 3. ver 34. Caluin in Iacob ca. 4. Caluin maÌ„gleth S. Iames epistle 1. Pet. ca. 2.3 5. Beza in Ioh. c. 19. v. 37. Ireneus l. 3. cap. 25. Hier. prefat in Tobiam Iudith li. Regum S. Mat. wrote the Gospel in Hebrew a Apud Euseb l 3. c. 33 Irene li. 3. ca. 1. Euseb lib. 2. ca. 18. b li. 5. c. 19. c l. 6. c. 19. d in argumeÌ„t in Mat c. in catal e Mt. gospel in hebrew set forth by Munster and Quinquarboreus Pag. 15. It had bene valiantly done of M. W. by one example to haue made this conquest ouer vs. S. Hierom author of our commoÌ„ edition of the new testament and that by the Popes appointement In catal in fine praef in nouum testamentum The old testament Aug. de doctrina Christian li. 2. ca. 13. epi. 10 ad Hieron 4. things haÌ„deled in this questioÌ„ That M. W. speaketh neuer a word to the purpose More probable that the hebrew is corrupt theÌ„ the latin The church warranted that she should euer keepe the word of God Esaie 59. Ioan. 14. 16. Praise of the Romaine Church for holding fast the true doctrine once deliuered Caluin inst l. 4. c. 6. ¶ 26. a Vnto this reason drawen from humane wisedome set the ChristiaÌ„ reader adde Christes prayer Luc. 22. v. 32 I haue prayed c. that thy fayth faile not Doctrinae semel traditae suit aliis omnibus tenacior The Greeke church not comparable to the Romane Math. â—5 Pag. 20. That the hebrew bibles are in some places corrupted Esa 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luth. tom 4. enarration Esa cap. 9. The Iewes corrupters and crucifieis of such places of scripture as appertaine to Christ a Scriptura eius 4. Reg. 19. Luth. in Esa ca. 53. v. 11. fol. 282. Lyra. proba diuinitatis humanitatis Christi contra Iudaeos in fine glos noui testamenti 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 TranslatioÌ„s truer then the original text Ierem. 23. v. 5.6 Hier. in Ier. ca. 23. v. 6. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Lyra vbi supra The Iewes corrupt the letter of the scripture Al bibles corrupt in this place Esa 53. v. 8. Hierom. in Esa ca. 53. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Bib. 1577. 1579. Bib. 1562. The English translations adde to the text Luther to 4. in Esa c. 53. The Iewes corrupt the scripture in despite of Christians â— maners of corruption Rom. 9. v. 5. Sixtus Senensis in bibliotheca sancta lib. 8. pag. 646. General reasons why the hebrue text can not be so sincere as the aduersarie would pretend Deut. 52. v. 9 Exod. 19. v. 6 Act. 14. v· 15. a Num. 21. v. 14. b Iosue 10. ver 13. 2. Reg. 1. v. 18. c 2. Paral. 20 v. 34. d ibid. 12. ver 15. e 1. Reg. 10. vers 25. f 2. Paral. 9. vers 29. The Iewes haue lost many whole volumes of their Prophetes much more may they leese or alter points letters and syllables Most vnreasonable absurditie and contradiction Whit. pag. 9. Whit. pa. 15. Similitude of letters Hieron in Osee c. 2. Psal 109. v. 3 Marlorate in Psal 110. Of the yere 1579. Of the yere 1577. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hebr. 1. v. 5. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Psal 58. v. 10 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Genes 3. v. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 1. Cor. 2. v. 9. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pretie aÌ„sweeres interpretations Luther in Esa ca. 64. Illyric in 1. Cor. ca. 2. v. 9 Martyr in 1. Cor. ca. 2 fo 46. S. Paule missed in reading Hebrue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza in 1. Cor. ca 2. v. 9. The Protestantes attribute more to the Iewish scribes then to S. Paule the Apostle Act. 22. Castalio defens suae traÌ„slatio pag. 227. M.W. opinion touching the Hebrew vncorrupt is luysh Humfre lib. 1. de rat interpre pag. 178. Lib. 2. pag. 219. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pellican to 4. in psal 85. vers 9. The Iewes at al tymes negligeÌ„t in conseruing the scriptures Idem ibideÌ„ in psal 108. vers 11. In vulgo legend is legis suae translationibus The Protestants Iewes resemble one the other in many pointes both of fayth and maners Munster in Gen. ca. 27. Where is now becom the canon of Carthage Counsel 4. cap. 47. so much vrged by M. Iewel that nothing should be read or sung in the church beside Canonical scripture Bad time worse reasoÌ„ Great varietie in the Hebrew bibles Munster in praefat bib â—omi primi ps 144. ps 33. The Hebrew bibles vnperfit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The protestants opinioÌ„ iniurious to the holy Ghost Although S. Hierom appealed from the latin to the Hebrew yet the like reason is not for vs now August de doctr Christiana lib 2. ca. 11. S. Hierom thought the hebrew bibles to be in some places corrupt and faultie Gal. â— v. 1â— Deuter. 21. v. 23. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hiero. in â—al c. 3. Gal. â— v. 10. Deutron 27. v. 26. Hier. in Gal. cap. 3. The Iewes conuicted by S.
shaken Alleage the auncient fathers not one or other but al together affirming one and the self same thing they answere If you argue from the vvitnesse of men be they neuer so learned and auncient vve yelde no more to their vvordes in cause of faith and religion then vve perceaue to be agreable to scripture Nether thinke you your self to haue proued any thing although you bring against vs the vvhole consent and svvarme of fathers except that vvhich they say be iustified not by the voice of men but of God himself And it is their common maner as to make smale accompt of any author that is against them so least of al of the old auncient fathers whom some of them are not ashamed in most despiteful sort to cal Pillorie doctors But this their behauiour towards the auncient fathers and Doctors that be of our Church may seeme in the iudgement of many to stand with reason For why may it be said should they be bound to our Austins HieroÌ„s and Cyprians more then we wil be bound to their Luthers Caluins and Melanchthons At the least then say we they ought to be ruled by doctors of their owne such as they cal and honour for Apostles Euaâ—geâ—istes of their new church and beleefe Yet when the authoritie of such is pressed against them it weigheth no deeper then of those other whom they cal pillorie doctors For how freely contemne they Martin Luther how freely reiect they Hulderike Zuinglius VVe receaue M. Caluin saith T.C. and vveigh of him as of the notablest instrument that the lord hath stâ—rred vp for the purging of his churches and restoring of the playne and sincere interpretation of the scriptures vvhich hath bene since the Apostles time And yet vve do not so reade his workes that vve beleeue any thing to be true because he saith it but so far as vve caÌ„ esteeme that that vvhich he saith doth agree vvith the Canonical scriptures The very self same answere geueth the contrary part wheÌ„ the same mans iudgement is obiected against him I reuerence M. Caluin saith D.W. as a singular man and a vvorthy instrument in Christes church But I am not so vvholy addicted vnto him that I vvil contemne other mens iudgmentes in diuers points not fully agreing vvith him c. vvhen as in my opinion they come neerer to the true meaning and sense of scripture then he doth And because the course of this new diuinitie is now brought to rest most of al on the credit of these reuereÌ„d fathers and doctors and in steede of the auncient forme of alleaging T. us saith S. Chrysostom thus S. Augustin thus S. Basil the fashion is now to alleage Thus saith M. Caâ—uin thus M. Bucer thus M. Bullinger therefore thorough varietie somewhat to avoyde tediousnes and not greue to much the eares of their auditors by flat denyal diuers wayes and reasons haue they to passe ouer when they please the authoritie of such their owne doctors and maisters One way and the same very playne is to refuse them because they were men As for example If you presse me vvith M. Martyrs and M. Bucers authoritie I first say they vvere men and therefore though othervvise very vvatchful yet such as slept somtymes A second way is because they had some other error as M. Bucer you say allovveth priuate baptisme and consequently the baptisme by vvomen It may be that as M. Bucer although othervvise very learned hath other grosse absurdities so he may haue that A third because some other doctor of as good credite and estimation is of a contratie opinion as M. Musculus a learned man is of your iudgement and M. Caluin as learned as he and diuers other are of that iudgment that I haue alleaged This is no great profe on your side nor reprofe of ours A fourth and the same most sure is to chalenge the libertie of the gospel and therefore not to admitte their verdict but at pleasure as Touching M. Bucers M. Bullingers Illyricus allovvance of holy daies if they allovv them in such sort as M. Doctor vrgeth then that good leaue vvhich they geue the Churches to dissent from theÌ„ in that point I do take it graunted vnto me being one of the same church Although as touching M. Bullinger it is to be obserued that since the time he wrote so there are aboue 35 yeres since vvhich time although he hold stal that the feastes dedicated vnto the lord as of the Natiuitie Easter and Pentecost may be kept yet he denieth flatly that it is lavvful to keepe holy the dayes of the Apostles If these serue not the turne a man would thinke their martyrs those who were so ful of the spirite that they willingly shead their bloud and suffered death by fier for confâ—irmation of their faith these mens testimonie should be irrefragable for iustifying of those pointes especially for which they lost their liues But nether want they their old ordinary meanes to shift of the authoritie of these martyrs were they neuer so glorious For although they vvere excellent personages say they yet their knovvledge vvas in part and although they brought many thinges to light yet they being sent out in the morning or euer the sunne of the gospel vvas risen so high might ouersee many thinges vvhich those that are not so sharpe of sight as they vvere may see c. And if they had died for this or that article yet the authoritie of their martyrdome could not take avvay from vs this libertye that vve haue to enquire of the cause of their death Martyrs may not be said to seale their errors vvith their bloud or vvith the glory of their martirdome preiudice those which vvrite or speake against their errors For this is to oppose the bloud of men to the bloud of the sonne of God What remayneth now for the last cast but the maiestie not of one or other doctor or of a few martyrs but of great and ample reformed churches as of France of Germany of Zurike or Geneuâ— yet euen these also passe with like maner of answere And they haue as general a rule to reiect such as they haue the poorest doctor that commeth in their way As for exaple when other reformed churches are brought to reforme the disorders of the English church To vvhich reformed church saith the ansvverer vvil you haue the church of England framed or vvhy should not other reformed churches as vvel frame them selues vnto vs For vve are as vvel assured of our doctrine and haue as good groundes reasons for our doing as they haue except you vvil bring in a nevv Rome appoint vs an other head church and create a nevv Pope by vvhom vve must be in al thinges directed And againe I haue told you and novv I tel you againe that there is no cause vvhy this church of England
be most populous and of al nations sundry shal ioyne them selues vnto it abundantly VVherefore let the Ievves be ashamed vvhich thinke them selues alone to be the sonnes of Abraham Avvay with the Montanistes vvhich say that they alone haue receaued the holy Ghost Confounded be the Donatistes c. hovv much should vve vvithdravv and take from the church catholike if vve beleeued these men And againe vpon Ieremie God here speaketh of the eternitie of Christes kingdome and svveareth that as his league is stedfast with the sunne and moone vvith sommer and vvynter vvith day and night so also he vvil performe that vvhich he promised to Christ that he shal haue kinges and priestes and that for euer and that not a fevv but as the starres of heauen and the sand of the sea both for their dignitie and puritie and also for their multitude The like wordes he hath and confirmeth the same by sundry places of scripture in Isai ca. 64 v 13. Daniel ca. 2. v. 44. Zachar ca. 2. v. 1.2.3 et ca. 7. v. 13.14.15 et ca. 12. v. 6.7 And Illyricus gathereth very wel out of the first chap. of S. Matth. that the true church in the middest of al persecutâ—oÌ„s destructions of cities CoÌ„mon welthes and peoples is not only preserued miraculously by gods special ayde protection but also Ostendit ista series saith he ecclesiam et religionem veraÌ„ habere certas historias suae originis et progressus This genealogie proueth that the true church and religion hath assured historyes of her beginning and encrease I passe ouer very many places of these and other learned Protestantes Brentius Lauatherus Luther Bullinger who in their Commentaries vpon the scriptures refel this sauage opinion of our english Protestants by infinite and the same very euident places of scripture And wonder it were if any thing were wonderful in men forsaken of God and geuen ouer to their ovvne sense hovv these men do not perceaue yea and feele the most sensible contradiction which disputing of this question and of Christes real presence in the sacrament they runne into For here they charge vs that we take from Christ the truth of his body and deny his incarnation because we say it is inuisible and not circumscribed with a certaine place which they say are proprieties so essential to humane nature that the very glorified body of our Sauiour remayneth not a body if it wante them Of this argument M. VV. insulteth and triumpheth in this booke Hoc argumentum saith he to M Martin impetus tuos non pertimescit This argument feareth not your forces Yet talking of the Church militant which consisteth of a number of bodies by nature mortal by essential proprietie visible and bound to a certaine place by Christes ordinance dispersed thorough al quarters of the world this Church they say was a true church and yet inuisible consisted of Emperours Priests nations and peoples and yet circumscribed with no certaine place appearing in no certaine citie prouince or kingdome so tying most ethnically the glorious celestial deified and supernatural body of Christ to the base rules of corruptible philosophie from which they exempt the mortal bodies of men which by the law of God and nature are subiect therevnto But to returne to the fal of the vniuersal Church vpoÌ„ the ruines whereof M.W. booke in particular this new congregation in general is buylt and standeth the issue of that doctrine is no other nether possibly can be but a flat abnegation of Christ Christianitie as the writings of our aduersaries ioyned with their practise declare abundantly to al those who lyst to open their eyes and take a litle paines to learne that which so deepely it importeth them to know And to this purpose notable is the storie of Dauid George the Hollander who being expelled from the low countries for the Sacramentarie heresie and for the same cause honorably receaued and intertained by them of Basile being then of the same religion and many yeres wel esteemed of in that citie after proceeded so far in the gospel that he tooke to him self the name and office of Christ and accompted our Sauiour for a seducer and deceauer and secretly drew many to his opinion For which cause three yeres after his death the rulers of that Citie tooke the body out of his graue and burned it and withal set out the whole storie of his life fayth and death and the rest appertaining to his condemnation and their owne defence This man by what reason principally was he lead into that Turkish madnes forsooth his cheefe reason was this as in the same booke appeareth If that Christ had bene the true Christ then the Church erected by him should haue continued for euer But now we see and it is manifest that the Romish bishop that Antichrist hath surpressed and ouerthrowen many hundred yeres since the church which that Christ erected Hereof it foloweth that he was not the true Messias but a lying maister and a false prophet And Sebastianus Castalio in the preface of his bible dedicated to king Edward what doth he els but closely deny Christ to be the true Messias when vpon this very ground of the churches fal he thus discourseth First he laieth for a foundation the excellencies and prerogatiues of the church which should be established by the Messias as her quietnes and vnitie in religion described by Michaeas cap. 4. That the earth should be so replenished vvith the knovvledge of our Lord as the sea is vvith vvaters Esai 11. And againe cap. 60. VVhereas thou were forsaken enuied and vnfrequented I vvil make the saith God to arise into an euerlasting height so as thou shalt sucke the milke of other nations and the brestes of princes and thou shalt knovv that I thy God am thy sauiour and defender Thy sunne shal no more go dovvne nor thy moone leese her light for our lord shal be thy light which euer shal coÌ„tinue After this sort much more he hath touching the churches happy estate and continuance as before hath bene noted Then looking to the effect and accomplishment of these promises according to Protestantes learning and iudgement he protesteth expressely that this excellencie and felicitie promised to the church of Christians by the coÌ„ming of Messias the more he considereth the scriptures the lesse he findeth the same as yet to haue bene performed howsoeuer a man vnderstand those places alleaged Whereof he frameth this argument Equidem aut haec sutura esse fateÌ„dum est aut iam fuisse aut deus accusandus mendacit Quod si quis fuisse dicet quaeram ex eo quaÌ„do fuerint Si dicet Apostolorum tempore quaeram cur nec vndiquaque perfecta fuerit et tam cito exâ—leuerit dei cognitio ac pietas quae et aeterna et marinis vndis abundantior fuerat promissa Truly vve must confesse ether
triple Antichrists I come now to speake of the secōd part vz the want of religion and conscience which M. W. sheweth in this his answere wherein I must be the shorter because I haue stayd somewhat long in the first His want of cōscience as in sundry other pointes so in this I note especially that whereas he pretendeth to set downe M. D. Sanders arguments fully and entierly and so to frame his answere accordingly he in many and the same of best moment performeth nothing lesse then that which he most pretendeth M. Iewel amongst many false practises vsed this as one very apt to beguile the simple and whereby I thinke at this present very many learned men are deceaued That is frō the discourse of his aduersary he would cut out remoue frō the sight of the reader the principal strength were it Scripture Councels Fathers or reasō whereby the aduersary iustified his cause after shufle vp some od talke impertinent allegatiōs against the rest For exāple let the Defence of the Apologie of the English church serue vvhere there is no matter seriously handled from the first beginning to the last line of the booke but the very pith and most forcible partes as it vvere the ioyntes and sinevves are thus taken avvay and left out of the booke sometime vvhole and many pages together sometime half pages sometime fovver or fiue lines in a side sometime vvhole sentences or peeces of sentēces according as he thought requisite for the bettering of his cause and disgracing of his aduersarie yet notvvithstanding he peeceth and patcheth vp the rest as though it vvere the ful and perfite discourse of D. Harding This is as much as if some bragging Thraso appointed to combat vvith his enemy should at the time of fight cause his enemy to be tied vp in prison and shevve his chiualry vpon a man made of cloutes this is in steede of a body to fight with a shadovv I vvil not exemplifie this by any particularitie because I can assure the reader by certaine experiēce let him in that booke fal vpon vvhat place he list he shal hardly misse an example This very practise hath M.W. learned of him and putteth it in vre in this his answere to D. Sanders demonstrations For wheresoeuer D.S. disputeth most firmely out of scriptures and reasons grounded there on multitude of fathers agreing in the exposition of the scriptures wheresoeuer he preuēteth the cauils of the aduersaries and forestoppeth the common arguments which they make for the cōtrary parte there M. W. diligently and carefully taketh order to cut and leaue out al such peeces that he may haue the more libertie to runne at randon and talke his pleasure of the rest So for example in the seuenth demonstration he leaueth out in the middle almost halfe a side of D. Sanders a pece of very good importance for the fortifying of his argument In the tenth demonstration where D. Sanders preuenteth and answereth their obiections and where in deede he fully cōfuteth before hand the substance of M. W. replie there a whole page is leaft out And the self same part he plaieth in the thirtenth demonstration leauing out almost two entier pages where in like maner his replie was before hand thoroughly discharged So in the sixtenth demonstration he omitteth almost a side of the argument where D. Sanders conuinceth the Protestants of contradiction to them selues and proueth them to play the part of Antichrists for corrupting the verie letter of scripture at their pleasure And to passe by the like false demeanure in other places and to make a litle stay vpon one only example in the 36 demonstratiō he so wickedly behaueth him selfe as the reader can neuer otherwise iudge of him then that he is a mā wicked vnconscionable without al feare of God or regard of man geuen only to continue talke and serue the time without any care to search out the truth D. Sanders there disputeth thus Christ instituted a true real sacrifice at his last supper This he proueth by scriptures reasons drawen out of the scriptures fathers interpreting the scriptures This sacrifice Antichrist shal abrogate take avvay This he proueth also by fathers expoūding the scriptures and gathering so much of Daniels Prophecie These be the parts of which he concludeth the Pope not to be Antichrist who taketh not away that sacrifice but defendeth wel alloweth it Nowhere wōderful it is to note what mangling and defacing and peecing and patching he vseth in setting downe this demōstratiō In the first paragraph of D. Sanders fiue lines he leaueth out wherein is compared the state of the Iewes and Christians touching the law and sacrifice Then shufling in fower lines he furthwith leaueth out almost a whole side of a leafe where D.S. by good reasons conference of Scriptures and fathers proueth the Masse to be the sacrifice of the new testament and then putting in one line of S. Ireneus cited by D.S. and leauing out many lines folowing of the same author and pertaining as much to the matter omitting withal D.S. discourse therevpon he furthwith ioyneth an other place of S. Ireneus cited likewise by D.S. but after his maner cutting of at the least the one halfe and omitting D.S. argument therevpon as also a notable place of Hippolitus the Martyr writing that in the time of Antichrist the holy churches shal be like vnto poore cottages and the pretious body and bloud of Christ shal not be extant in those daies the Masse shal be abolished c. al which he saith is nothing to the purpose whereas D. S. bringeth in a large place of S. Hierom he setteth downe one peece of a line and leaueth out ten times as much ensuing and the same most to the purpose And finally vsing the like treachery tovvards S. Chrysostom cited as the rest by D. S. from vvhom he croppeth the greater part and the most necessary thus he maketh vp his ansvvere to the 36. demonstration And that the reader imagine not the places of those fathers S. Ireneus S. Hierom S. Chrisost to be ydle needeles let him know that they are such as whereby D. Sanders proueth directly one of his principal propositions that Antichrist shal abrogate take away the sacrifice of the nevv testament according to the prophecie of Daniel Finally in the 38 demonstration where the argument is framed that the best princes haue alwaies fauoured the Sea of Rome as Constantinus Magnus Theodosius Martianus Carolus Magnus Ludouicus Pius c. persecutors tyrannes and wicked princes haue most dishonoured it as Constantius Iulianus Valens Anastasius Theodoricus c. the answere is made by cutting away al this out of the booke and thrusting in a tale of a tub that Cardinals bishops be kings who much honour the Pope This maner of answering is not to search out the truth as becometh Diuines or to bring men
that it svvarueth from the Apostolicall doctrine and teacheth cleane contrarie to S. Paule and all scriptures if Luther flatly expresly deny it to be Apostolical and affirme it to conteyne no one title or letter of such matter as the Apostels are wont to haÌ„dle if WolfgaÌ„gus Musculus vse him so contemptuouslie as though he were some poore rascall not worth the naming and teache him what he should say and sette him to schole this being euident then F. Campions conclusion standeth strong that Luther with his complices contemne that parte of scripture howsoeuer he calleth it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 strawen or wodden And therefore ether let M. VV. lyke a good childe confesse with Luther vvhom gladlie he vvorshippeth as his father and vvith the Lutherans vvhom he embraceth as his most deere brethren in Christ that this epistle is no more worth then his father and brethren make of it or if he mislike such consanguinitie as sure I am they abhorre him let him then detest them as profane and wicked men who so impiouslie reiecte the written worde of God that is the foundation as they say whereon is buylte their newe congregation and so may the reader note downe one more capital and substantiall point of dissension betwene those two churches lutheran zuinglian then heâ—herto he hath consâ—dered although nether can he so doe precisely but rather note it as a diuision amonge the zuinglians also for so muche as it appeareth by Musculus that the Zuinglians of SuitzerlaÌ„d no lesse then the LutheraÌ„s of Germanye disagree from the Englishe churche in their Canon of scripture yea the Englishe church within it self as shal appeare in the nexte chapiter CHAP. II. Of the Canonical scriptures and that the English cleargie in accepting some and refusinge others are ledde by no learning or diuinitie but by mere opinion and fantasie AFTER S. Iames foloweth a questioÌ„ proposed by M. Martin how it chauÌ„ceth that the English church doth admit S. Iames epistle which sometime was not admitted and yet wil refuse Tobias Ecclesiasticus the books of Machabees which were no farther disproued then that of S. Iames. The reason in truth is the same in effecte geuen by M.VV. because these later contayne such proofe of the Catholyke religion as by no sophisticatioÌ„ can be eluded S. Iames they thinke is not so flat but shifts they haue to ridde their handes of him well inough So much writeth Caluin Some there are that thinke this epistle not vvorthie of authoritie but I because I see no sufficiente cause vvhy it should be reiected gladly vvithout controuersie embrace it for vvhereas the doctrine of free iustification semeth to be refuted in the second chapiter in his place I shall easelie ansvvere that matter As if he had sayd that therefore he admitted it because he had found out a quidditie to auoide that hard obiection agaynst only faith which answere notwithstaÌ„ding because it is false peeuish sophistical and cannot abide the tryall as wel proueth Illyricus Pomerane Musculus they therfore thought the other way more cleanlie rather vppoÌ„ preteÌ„ce of some doubte made in the primitiue churche cleane to shake it of with the rest then vppon a vaine toy which must in fine shame it selfe make hazard of their solifidian iustificatioÌ„ which must needes come to the grounde if this Apostle retaine his old credite This I say in deede is the reason but because thus to haue spoken plainlie had geuen a sure demonstratioÌ„ to the reader that they make no more account of scriptures then of fathers no more reckning of Iames or Peter then of Gregorie or Austin if they be against their conceaued heresies therefore M. VVhit semeth to shape a more cleanlie answere and this yt is All the church saith he reproued not the epistle of Iames and they that reproued it vvere moued so to doe by no sure reasons but these bookes vvhich you name Tobias Ecclesiasticus the Machabees the vvhole churche of old reiected nether vvere they vvritten in the Hebrevv tounge vvhereas no bookes of the old testament vvere Canonicall but onlie those vvhich the lord commended to the old churche Two reasoÌ„s he seemeth to geue the first that no bookes in the olde TestameÌ„t are Canonicall but such as were written in the Hebrew the proofe wherof consisting onlie in M.VV. authoritie without ether reason or probabilitye or Doctor or Councell if I oppose against him S. Augustine with the catholike churche of that age I trust the reader wil not greatlie stagger which syde he ought to take and if this reason hold I marueile what shall become of Daniel a great parte wherof is held of them for Canonical yet is not writteÌ„ in the Hebrew His other argument is of more force that the vvhole primitiue church refused the bookes of Machabees Iudith Tobie but certaine onlv that vppon no good reason refused S. Iames. These two partes if he proue and shew this difference he sayth somewhat I wil be of iudgement as he is if not whereof I assure my self then as before so here styll lust and fantasie ruleth them in mangling thus the scriptures not reason diuinytie let vs see how he proueth that the whole churche reiected the former S. Hierom sayth the church readeth the bookes of Iudith Tobias the Machabees but reckeneth theÌ„ not amongst canonicall scriptures This for them how may we fynd now that not the whole churche but some particuler men and they not vppon any good reason refused S. Iames For this part we must credit M.VV. vppon his worde for besyde his worde reason or coniecture he yeldeth none but coÌ„trariwise to disproue this his distinction and approue that without reason or conscience he and his fellowes haue made choyse of the one with condemnation of the other thus to do M.VV. him selfe ministreth vs mattet abundant for thus he wryteth in his first booke in iustifiynge frier Luther against S. Iames. Luther vvas not ignorante vvhat the aunciente church iudged of Iames his epistle Eusebius doubted not to vvrite of that epistle expresslie I vvold have all men to knovv that the epistle vvhich is ascribed to Iames is a bastarde epistle vvhat could be writteÌ„ more plainly but perhaps Eusebius pleaseth you not geue me a reasoÌ„ vvhy heare then Hierome vvhom you knovv to have bene a Priest of the Romane Church The epistle of Iames is auouched to have bene set forth by some other in his name the one affirmeth it to be a counterfeite the other saith it is supposed to have bene published not by the Apostle but by some other vvhy then are you angrie vvith Luther vvhom you see not suddenlie or rashlie first to have begon to doubâ—e of that epistle but therein to folovve the iudgement â—â—stimonie of the auncient Church Let vs now ioyne together these two proofes of M. VV. with consideration what thence
Stinckfâ—ldius and their scholer vvhether they be at Zuruke or in vvhat place else soeuer vnder the sâ—nne Thus Luther If you know this Maister Whitaker as you wil seeme to be ignorant of nothing what maketh you so busily to defend Luthers barbarous and proude vauntes as though he were such a piller without whom your church could not stande But belyke it is sufficient that he was an Apostata frier as were the founders of your gospel that he with you agreed in rayling at the Pope and Sea of Rome and so for his agreeing with you in these smaler toyes you care not for his disagreeing from you in those weightie matters Wel be it as you liste and perhaps you haue more reason then I perceaue otherwise you shall neuer be able to iustifie this demeanure in the sight of any man endued with common sence Let vs heare how conningly you cure this stinking sore for nothing stinketh more before the face of God and man then a poore contemptible wretch so Lucifer-lyke to prefer him selfe before inumerable excellent learned and glorious Saintes of God What distinction haue you to saue Luthers honestie Forsooth this In certaine cases Luther might more esteeme of his ovvne iudgement then of Austine Ciprian or a thousand Churches For if that vvhich Luther taught vvere agreable to Gods vvord then Luthers iudgment vvas to be preferred before the contrarie iudgment of al men and Churches Here M. VV. thinketh he hath spoken much to the purpose and therefore aduaunceth him selfe alofte Scripturam Lutherus protulit cuinullus mortalis resistit quaeque tandem Pontificiis decretis pesteÌ„ atque exitium afferet Luther brought vvith him scripture vvhich no mortall man can vvithstand and vvhich at length shall be the bane and distruction of the Popish decrees That I may the better conceaue this distinction and ether yelde to it if it stand with reason or discouer the vanitie of it if it fal out to be but a peeuish battologie of wordes as I trowe it will proue let me require a playner explication of that parte Luther might vvell prefer his iudgment before a thousand Austines Ciprianes and Churches if he spake vvith scripture Is this the meaning that in case and controuersie of religion if a thousand Ciprians that is all the Fathers teach vs one thing and bringe scriptures for them and one father Luther teach vs the contrarie and bringe scriptures for him may Luther in this case preferre his owne iudgement before al those Fathers if so as the speach it selfe is so monstrous execrable as the deuil him selfe can not open his mouth into more horrible pride so what heresie what Apostasie what Atheisme in the church can euer be coÌ„trouled if this rule be made currante why shoud Arrius yelde to the Councel of Nice Nestorius to the Councel of Ephesus Macedonius to the CouÌ„cel of Constantinople seinge they brought scriptures for them and by this rule ought to haue preferred their priuate iudgment before those byshops as Luther his offpringe doe theirs before the Councel of Trente or will he say that if perhaps a thousand Austines and Churches teache some doctrine without the writteÌ„ worde of God that is citing no text for it Luther against the same bring the written worde that is some texte of the scripture after his seÌ„se in this case he may better esteeme of himselfe then of al the rest But first he can neuer geue instance that ether the auncient fathers did so in their tymes or that we do so now for howsoeuer in the Councels of Nice of Ephesus of Chalcedon the byshops stoode much vppoÌ„ the traditioÌ„ of their elders ea que sunt patrum teneantur say they sic credere à sanctis patribus edocti sumus let vs hold fast the fayth and decrees of our fathers thus to beleeue vve haue bene taught by our holye fathers yet they waÌ„ted not scriptures as nether did the fathers in the Councel of Trent nor we at this day in our controuersies with the protestantes And if those auncient fathers had alleaged no direct euident place against Arrius Nestorius Eutyches yet notwithstanding the Christian people were bound to beleeue them grounding them selues only vpoÌ„ the Catholike vniuersal fayth of the churches which were before them as they did in the question of our B. Ladies perpetual virginitie And albeit the heretike brought some clauses of scripture for the coÌ„trary part yet ought al faithful men to yeld no more credit thereto theÌ„ to the deuil when he alleaged scripture against our sauiour because as the deuil so al heretikes may vse scripture against the true sense and meaning thereof the vniuersal church caÌ„ neuer teach or beleeue so as by Christ him self we are assured And this case in effect coÌ„meth to one issue with the former for geue this scope to an heretike that all the Bishops Churches Fathers may erre he alone if he can alleage a text may therefore rightly contemne al other in respecte of him selfe as euery Sectmaister doth and hath done where is the Churches quietnes what order is there for coÌ„tinuance of fayth to what ende was the comminge of Christ to what vse the sendinge of the holy Ghost Or perhaps M. W. wil say posito per impossibile that all the Churches fathers teach against scripture Luther alone teache with scripture then lo Luther maye thinke him selfe a better man then they all and this is true this I graunte as in like maner I confesse that if the heauen shoulde falle we knowe what woulde folow And yet of these two suppositions the Spirit of God putteth the later to be more possible that the course of heauen shal soner alter then the Catholike Churche of the new TestameÌ„te fal frome Christe to Apostasie But it may be M.VV. wil say I scanne his wordes to narrowlie his meaning is plaine that whereas Luther bringeth scriptures against vs that is against all the Austines and Ciprianes of the Catholike Church all the Byshops now liuinge he maye well truste his owne iudgmente if this be the meaning yet stil al commeth to one ende and whie may Luther so do more then Caluine whie Caluine more then Muncerus whie a ZwingliaÌ„ more then a Puritane Anabaptiste or Trinitarian Or what assurance hath he more then those other But if Luthers iudgment bringinge scriptures with him be so forcible against vs may not we trow you Lutherize a litle after your example and say the same against you As for example Luther hath made a booke entituled defensio 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 verborum coenae accipite comedite hoc est corpus meum contra fanaticos SacramentarioruÌ„ spiritus In that booke not very longe or large yet contayninge more substaÌ„ce then some whole volumes of his do his principal conclusion risinge vpon this texte of scripture and grounded vpon many texts of scripture beside is that he and his vvill
and maye retaine external peace and ciuil concord vvith the Zuinglians in matters temporal but quoad spiritum eos ad extremum vsque halitum deuitabimus arguemus damnabimus pro idololatris verbi Dei corruptoribus blasphemis deceptoribus c. touchinge the soule and matters spiritual vve vvil auoide thē as long as vve haue a day to liue vve vvil reproue and condemne them for idolaters corrupters of Gods vvorde blasphemers and deceauers and of them as enemies of the Gospel vve vvill sustaine persecution and spoile of our goods vvhat-soeuer they shal do vnto vs so lōge as God vvill permitte And in the same leafe it foloweth immediatelye aptlye may vve say to these men offeringe vs peace as Christe saide to Iudas in the garden Iudas vvith a kysse betrayest thou the sonne of man So this is the very peace and kisse of Iudas for offeringe vs their friendship they vvoulde vvithal obtaine of vs to holde our peace and in silence beholde the fyers and slaughters vvhereby they thrust headlong infinite thousandes of soules dovvne to hell Here is Luthers iudgmente and that with scripture for againste al communion with the Zuinglians he in this place vrgeth the wordes of our sauiour Math. 10. vers 34. Luk. 14. v. 26.2 Cor. 6. v. 14. Eph. 4. v. 5. May Luther now prefer his iudgmente thus qualified before a thousande Caluines a thousand Peter Martyrs or who-soeuer els be the greatest doctors of your congregatiōs before all Zuinglian churches Or if Luther may so do may not we do the like and thinke of you as he doth and that by vvarrante geuen vs from your ovvne mouthe Maye vve not saye to you vpon like grounde Scripturam Lutherus protulit cui nullus mortalis resistit c. Luther hath brought scripture vvhich no man can vvithstand and vvhich at lenght shal be the bane and ouerthrovve of all the Zuinglian and Caluinistical opinions Now if which is the extreme refuge you wil say that Luthers iudgmēt against you is not agreable to scripture and therfore not so deepely to be accompted of then see I beseeche you how finely and suttely you haue fet this matter about for now the sense of your distinctiō is that whē Luther affirmeth any thing agreable to the scriptures by iudgment of your selfe he ought to esteeme more of it thē of a thousand Austines a thousād Ciprianes an innumerable cōpany of catholike churches And thus whiles you first geue Luther power to iudge ouer al Fathers Doctors and Councels and then make your self iudge ouer Luther to approue reproue him as you please who seeth not that in fine you make your self supreme iudge of altas before of scriptures so now of Fathers and Councels old and new Catholike and heretike no lesse of your owne doctors then the auncient fathers and doctors of Christes church which is in deede the verie last refuge and extreme resolution of all your new diuinitie Finally because it greeueth me to spēde time in such vnreasonable pelfe may it please you at your better leysure to consider the sense of this parcel to put it downe somewhat more intelligiblie and if you can so do and saue your selfe from the note of much foly for from beinge an heretike by Luthers iudgment what soeuer the answere be you shall neuer saue your selfe you shal performe a matter of more difficultie then perhaps you are aware of In the meane season as it standeth it carieth with it grosse faultes as manie welnie as it hath lines whether you oppose Luther to the auncient primitiue Churche as it seemeth and as doubtlesse he meante or to the catholike churche of our time whiche you woulde inferre or to your owne deuided Zuinglian congregation which by like sequele doth folow or whether you consider Luther in this case only as one principal author of your Gospel so make this priuiledge common to him with other or rather consider him singularly by himselfe because he was the first that brake the yse and opened the waye to this soule Apostasie which is now so far spread or finally whether you thus aduaūce Luther but euer holdinge the raynes in your owne handes which I weene must be your laste refuge and final determination CHAP. IIII. Of priesthode end the sacrifice continued after Christ in the state of the nevv testament and that it derogateth nothing from Christ THE difference betwene you M. Martin aboute priestes is no priuate but a general controuersie betweene all Catholiks and Protestants your minister like termes of Baalites and Antichristian sacrificers I cōtemne am cōtente to dissemble many breaths more stronge and ranke then this we muste gladly abide or els we are not such as by Goddes mercy we hope professe our selues Comfortably saith our sauiour the disciple is not aboue his maister nor the seruante aboue his lorde if they haue called the goodman of the house Beelzebub hovv much more them of his housholde therefore feare ye them not For to comforte our selues withal if we be Baalites and Antichristians in respecte of oure priesthode then certainly Christe is the capitaine Baal Antichriste from whom our priesthode descendeth And that will I proue in few principally and first by your owne wordes secondarilye by manifeste deduction out of the scriptures A priest you define thus Sacerdotes ii verè propriè sunt qui sacrificia faciunt qualis fuit Aaron Aaronis filii Melchisedechus quem illi adumbrabant Christus Priestes truly and properly are they that offer sacrifices such as vvas Aaron and the sonnes of Aaron Melchisedech and Christe vvhom they prefigured Those that offer sacrifice you acknowledge to be priestes truly and properly not onlye by abuse of speeche as in this place againste S. Austine you falsly cauille In the number of such priestes that offered sacrifice you reckē Melchisedec after him Christe of vvhom Melchisedec vvas a figure This you woulde neuer haue said had you bene skilful ether in your owne diuinitie or in the faith of the Catholike Church for although hetherto we haue many wayes laboured and vsed all possible meanes of proufe that Melchisedec offered sacrifice yet we could neuer obtaine so much of your brethren because they wel saw that therein was included the manifest confirmatiō of the Catholike faithe touching priesthod the vtter ruine of your Geneuiā Ministerye For if Melchisedec sacrificed then was it in bread and wine for other sacrifice of his neuer man imagined and the scripture proueth it inuincibly which mencioneth that no other nor by worde sillable or title geueth the leste insinuation of any besides Then how necessarilie it muste folow that Christe sacrificed in like maner and how from him power to do the same is deriued vnto priestes of the new testament this shal be shewed hereafter First of all that of Melchisedecs sacrifice beinge most certaine of you graunted and of vs beleeued
bloud of the holy virgin framed him selfe flesh vvithout the seede of man can not he in the sacrament make of bread his ovvne body and of vvine vvater his bloud No mary can he not saith M.W. for that is against reason and so he should haue tvvo bodies one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the one 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the other 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. But S. Damascene conteÌ„ning such ethnical ioyes proceedeth coÌ„cludeth that as god in the beginning said let the earth bring forth greene hearbes and hetherto being holpen and strengthened by that precept it so doth so god said this is my body and this is my bloud and doe this in commemoration of me and by his omnipotent coÌ„maundement it is vvrought vvhich thing onely faith can conceaue Hovv shal this be done saith the B. Virgin the Archangel Gabriel ansvvered the holy Ghost shal come vpon thee and the povver of the most high shal ouershadovv thee And novv demauÌ„dest thou hovv bread is made the body of Christ and vvine and vvater his bloud I ansvvere in like maner that the holy Ghost commeth vpon it vvorketh that vvhich passeth the capacitie of reason and reach of vnderstanding Whereby you see that hovv soeuer circumscript remained circumscript and visible visible S. Damascene neuer intended by such visible folies so to circumscribe our fâ—â—th or subiecte our religion to humaine reason that Christes presence should be excluded out of the sacrament or the sacrameÌ„t should be esteemed a Zuinglian figure vvhich to induce you take much paine but to very smale effect CHAP. IX VVherein is refelled M. VV. ansvvere to certaine places of S. Chrysostome touching the real presence and sacrifice IN the last chapter vve had an example hovv sufficiently you are vvont to coÌ„firme your ovvne faith by scripture reason fathers here you geue vs an example hovv substantially you ansvvere the fathers vvhich vve vse for confirmation of our faith Tvvo places M. Martin obiected out of S. Chrysostom against your geometrical opinion of Christes body in one place you auoyde them so as you geue out plaine demonstration that you neuer coÌ„sidered them in the author him selfe but only tooke the answere at deliuery from M. Iewel without any farther search Thus you write To Chrysostom teaching that Christ both leaft his flesh vvith vs and ascended hauing the same vvith him I ansvvere that Christ placed his flesh in heauen and neuerthelesse leaft vs a sacrament of that flesh And our fayth enioyeth the same euermore present For the verie substance of his flesh Christ no more leaft in earth then Elias leaft his body vvhen he ascended in to heauen For so Chrisostom vvrote a litle before that Elias vvas aftervvardes double there vvas an Elias aboue and there vvas an Elias beneath Tell me I pray you M. Martyn vvas that Elias body in earth vvhen he leaft his cloke to Elizeus you vvill not say so So true it is vvhich Chrisostome vvriteth that Christ hath left his flesh vnto vs symbolically and yet hath caried the same in to heauen corporally This is your answere which I say you rather allow vs as may be thought because Maister Iewell applieth the same to the selfe same place albeit in my opinion els-where he geueth you a better For labouring to answere the place of S. Ciprian de caena Domini Panis iste quem dominus c. This bread vvhich our lord gaue to his disciples being changed not in shape but in nature by the almightie povver of the vvord of Christ is made flesh after a number of phrases alleaged against the other partes of this senteÌ„ce coÌ„ming to the last is made flesh he sheweth that nether this proueth the real preseÌ„ce that hystore of lyke phrases For S. Aust saith nos Christi facti sumus vve are made Christes Leo saith Corpus regenerati fit caro crucifixi the body of the man that is regenerate is made the flesh of Christ that vvas crucified Beda saith nos ipsi corpus Christi effecti sumus vve our selues are made the body of Christ Origen saith in like maner of speach spiritus sanctus non in turturem vertitur sed coluÌ„ba fit the holy ghost is not changed into a turtell but is made a doue Thus if you had answered that Christ departing tooke his flesh with him really leaft his flesh behinde him allegorically that is the Christian people his church which S. Paul many times calleth his bodye that had bene more probable more to S. Chrisostoms discourse you see what doctors you might alleage for it theÌ„ to say that Christ tooke away with him his flesh really leaft the same with vs symbolically that is bread and wyne which when we receaue at the supper we remember perhaps that Christe had flesh But because it was ether your chaunce or choise to geue vs the other let vs see how handsomly you frame it vnto S. Chrisostoms text The summe of your answere is that as Helias ascendinge leaft his cloke which for certeine reasons was called Elias so our Sauiour ascending leaft vs bread wyne which is a signe of his body for some reasoÌ„s is likewise called by the name of his body but was no more his body theÌ„ the cloke was Elias And are ye not ashamed thus to dally abuse the reader Or can your ignoraÌ„ce be so grosse as to thinke that this is S. Chrisost meaning Or caÌ„ your reader otherwise deeme of you then as of a man altogether rechlesse what you say if euer he reade the place in S. Chrisostome him self For so far of is it that S. Chrisostome hath any such thing that contrarywise he ouerthroweth most stroÌ„gly this your folly and vehemently vrgeth the cleane contrary First touching Elias he hath some of those wordes which you alleage As a great inheretance saith he Elizeus receaued the cloke and truly it vvas a verie great inheritance And aftervvardes that Elias vvas double There vvas an Elias aboue and there vvas an Elias beneath meaning as it is plaine that he was taken vp in body soule and remained beneath in power and operation for so much as by the cloke Elizeus wrought strange myracles such as Elias him selfe did before And so S. Chrisostome saith expresly propterea in coelum ascendens nihil aliud quaÌ„ melotem discipulo reliquit Therefore Elias ascending in to heaueÌ„ leaft to his disciple nothing els but his cloke And would he make a like comparison and say the same of our Sauiour Let vs heare his wordes Thus he coÌ„meth to speake of Christ quid igitur si vobis demonstrauero quid aliud quod illo multo maius c. vvhat then vvil you say if I shevv you an other maner of thing much greater theÌ„ that vvhâ—ch al vve haue receaued vvho so euer haue bene made partakers of the holy misteryes Elias in deed leaft his cloke
that taketh avvay the sinnes of the vvorlde Call S. Iohn to M. VVhitakers consistorie he wil â—â—â—ke him recant his speach For first Christ is no lambe because he hath no woll on his backe It is the self same reason which here is vsed against S. Luke about the meâ—â—all of the chalice Then being driuen from that the adsurditie of tautologia still remaineth Behold this lambe is the lambe of God what an idle speache is this what is this double lambe therfore sende it to Geneua to be cast a new in Bezaes forge The Catholiks of old time to proue distinction of persons in the deitie vsed that place of Genesis pâ—uit dâ—miâ—â—â— aâ— domino our Lord rayned from our Lord to proue the Trinity of persoÌ„s they vsed the place of the psalme Benedicat nos Deus Deus noster benedis at nos Deus God our God blesse vs our God blesse vs. This to a Trinitarian is absurda sententia and induceth a pluralitie of Gods vvhereas S. Paule saith vnus Deus vnus Domâ—nus oâ—â— God one Lord what remaineth theÌ„ but that according to the arrest of this supreme arbiter we fall to newe casting of the scripture and so in short space no doubt we shal growe to perfectioÌ„ that is to the Turks Alcoran if we be not come so farre already The scriptures are full of such absurdities which neuerthelesse are absurdities only to carnal cogitatioÌ„s to Sathan Sathans ministers but to theÌ„ that haue learned in the schole of the holy Ghost to subiect their vnderstanding to the obedience of faith they are nothing so And M.W. if he had in him any droppe of religion fayth he should thus thinke Howsoeuer I can reconcile two or three Gods with one the bloud shedd on the crosse with that which was in the chalice were it bloud or wine let Christs wordes stande as he spake them and the Euangelist wrote them and let vs afterward in the name of God be we Lutherans Zuinglians Caluinists Trinitaries or Anabaptists eche according to his priuate spirite search for the sense as wel as we can Christes soule went downe to hell saith our Creede and S. Luke It is absurde sayth Beza and papisticall and therefore for soule I haue translated carcas and for hell graue whom in so doing the English congregation approueth That Christ ascended into heauen it is a fansie of Aristotle and Mahomet sayth Brentius and to the Lutherans it is absurda sententia shal they now leaue out that word and put in the text for ascendit euanuit or disparuit he vanyshed out of sight in steede of he ascended which to them is the true and only sense of the place and which they may and ought to do by like reason and authoritie But S. Basil you say readeth as you translate graunt he did so but what translate you S. Basil or S. Luke if S. Basil you haue done wel to folovv your greeke copye If S. Luke then do you vvickedly to alter S. Luke vpon coniecture of one greeke doctor all greeke copies and doctors being to the contrarie And vvhat if S. Basil in an other place reade otherwise shal we not make a vvise patching of scripture if vpon euerie particular doctors citation vve alter the holie text S. Aug. in many places S. Bernard and other good men dravv exhortatioÌ„s for their frends or monks or people and commonly they do it in the verie phrase of scripture yet because they knitte together many sentences of scriptures that be in diuers places they must of necessitie adde some words or parcels of their owne Nether is it material if ofteÌ„times they leaue out one worde or a fewe words But if by such authoritie we should alter our text we should in short space haue so many texts that in deed we should haue no text because we should haue no certaine text whereunto we might trust And why remember you not that which in this self same place M. Martin tolde you out of Beza who noteth it to be the custome of the auncient fathers in citing scriptures to alleage the sense not to sticke precisely vpoÌ„ the words And that therefore how soeuer they reade that is no certaine rule to reforme or alter the vvordes of scripture But here you make your aduantage of M. Martins words and say if Basil cited not the vvords but the sense of the scripture theÌ„ Beza vvhen he so traÌ„slated missed nothing of the sense so M. Martin doth novv plainly acquite Beza vvhoÌ„ before he accused For if Basils vvords geue a true sense and the interpretation of Beza and ours all agree vvith Basils vvords then your accusation is false that vve had corrupted the sense of the scripture Somewhat you saye and this hath some appearance more then any thing that you haue sayde hitherto yet you reache not home and you are ouer hasty in your conclusion S. Basil geueth a true sense I confesse whether you respecte the particular matter whereunto he applyeth the place or the generall doctrine of the catholike church For his wordes are sufficieÌ„t for the one and the other And so are the wordes in our vulgar Latin and English and may well be taken as agreing with S. Basil hic est calix nouum testamentum in sanguine meo qui pro vobis fundetur This is the chalice the nevv testament in my bloud vvhich shall be shedde for you And whosoeuer readeth and taketh these later wordes as referring them to the bloud of Christ shedde on the crosse he thinketh very well and truly and no man would euer finde fault with such a sense or citation if it stayd there For this nothing impayreth the other truth whereof we speake that the same bloud is in the chalice But when there riseth vp a new heresie by one truth ouerthrowing an other and by one part of the sentence destroyng an other as it fareth betwixt vs this circumstance so farre altereth the case that the old father alleaging the text without any thought or imagination of heresie did well and christianlike the new heretike enforcing the same in defence of heresie doth nâ—ughtely sacrilegrously as for example If some good man as S. Basil or S. Bernard to induce his auditors to the loue of Christ had vsed this sentence of the Apostle In this appeared the benignitie of our lord sauiour tovvards vs that not by the vvorkes of iustice vvhich vve did but of his infinite mercie he saued vs. This place according to the sense had bene well trulye cited For albeit infinite is not in the text yet that is no hinderance to the meaning and although I name not Christ god yet nether that worde hindereth any thing because in a Christian audience it is all one to say our lord and sauiour Christe or our god and sauiour Christe But if there rose vp some Nestorian heretike that should diuide Christ from god and make two
persons of this one sauiour from which heresie Beza was not farre as you know now this heresie maketh that citatioÌ„ though otherwise good and sound yet not so perfect and absolute as it had bene to put in the worde god Because in this tyme and against such an heritike the place thus alleaged is more forcible S. Bernard erred not in citing the first but this heretike playeth the verie heretike in pressing it against the later Take an other example to make the thing more manifest In S. Luke we reade that the angel thus speaketh to our blessed Ladie Spiritus sanctus superueniet in te etc. ideoque quod nascetur ex te sanctum vocabitur filius dei The holy Ghost shall come vpon thee c. and therefore that vvhich of thee shall be borne holy shall be called the sonne of god who doubteth but S. Bernard or S. Thomas and some auncient copies albeit they leaue out the wordes ex te of thee neuertheles meane the true and perfecte sense of the place that our Ladie through the power of the holy Ghost coÌ„ceaued of her body and brought forth the sonne of god Now ryse your frindes the Ana baptistes and amongest other heresies spreade this that Christ brought his flesh from heauen and tooke it not of our blessed Lady but passed thorough her as water thorough a cundit pipe or according to your auncient comparison when you first began your gospel Christ was so in her as saffron in a saffron bagge And they being pressed with this place answere as you aÌ„swere for Beza that the true reading is to leaue out those two syllables ex te and so the place proueth nothing And this they would proue by better argument then you pretend any hauing for them some auncient copies both greeke and latin besides the reading of more fathers then one Can not you in this case easily conceaue how those fathers and writers gaue a true sense and far from the Anabaptisticall heresie and yet the Anabaptists are wicked heretiks in vrging this correction of the text why so because the fathers spake truly and meant entierly the full truth although the sense be not so full and absolute to all purposes and in euerie respecte namely of this new heresie whereof these fathers neuer dreamed as is the text it selfe in his naturall strength and force put downe in those words and syllables as it was first by the holy Euangelist the Anabaptistes speake falsly and meane detestably when by that alteration they will seeme to confirme their heresie take from the Catholike church so good a grouÌ„d refelling the same which those other fathers neuer entended This is your very case and so S. Basil meant truly and simply and as a Sainte and a Christian though Beza and you deale in the selfe same matter falsely and subtilly and as it becommeth heretikes And yet one step farther vvhen you haue done spoke al al that ye doe speake is nothing to the purpose For suppose ye sinâ—e many Basils and many greeke copies reading as you vvould haue it yet shall you be neuer for al that able to iustifie Beza because he coÌ„fesseth vvhen he so translated he neuer savv any and therefore vvas not moued by any such reading And therfore your pâ—ying searching for fyg-leaues to couer his filthines can no more serue the turne then if a man should excuse Iudas for betrayng Christ by reason of the good vvhich came thereby to the redemption of mankinde Because vvhatsoeuer vvas the euent of that actioÌ„ he sinned thâ—rin damnably vvho regarded no such matter but only for malice and gayne of xxx pence sold his lord and maister and the selfe same is to be saide of this Iudas vvhose honestie you vvould so fayne sane For vvhatsoeuer may be the successe of your labours in this argument he certainely plaid therein the parte of a damnable corruptor of gods holy vvord vvho for malice against the truth and loue of his heresie vvithout any such knovvledge committed so sacrilegious an acte And the reason vvhich you make helpeth the matter neuer a vvhit but so muche the more discouereth your folly Thus you argue If by the cuppe you vnderstande not the cuppe it selfe but the bloud of Christe in the cuppe is not this a trope vvhy then are you offended vvith vs vvhen you your selues graunt that there is a trope in these vvords Is it lavvfull for you to inuent tropes is it vnlavvfull for vs to appoint one necessarie trope Whereunto I ansvvere first that this is also from the purpose For be your Zuinglian heresie most true as it is moste false it furthereth you nothing nor abbettereth his rashnes in altering the text For vve may not make the scripture speake euerie truth in euerie place much lesse may vve make it speake vile heresie in any place Then the forme of your reasoning is so lose that if a man vvould studie for an argument to make sport vvithall he could not deuise one more fond and ridiculous We allovv of a trope vvhen vve interprete the cuppe to be the bloud or the thing conteyned in the cuppe Ergo vve ought to allovv your trope in the other parte of the sentence that the bloud shed for vs should signifie a cuppe of vvine What vvit reason probabilitie or sense induceth you so to talke vvhence riseth the coherence and connexion of this consequent Is it this because in one part of the seÌ„tence there is a trope or figure therefore the other part is figuratiue also as for example S. Paule sayth by the lavv I am dead to the lavv vvith Christ I am nayled to the crosse and agayne VVe that are baptised are buried together by baptisme in to death vvith Christ in vvhich sentence the Apostle ioyneth tvvo seuerall truthes in the first Christ vvas nayled to the crosse and I am nayled to the crosse vvith him in the next Christ vvas buried and vve that are baptised are buried vvith him Novv is this your argument S. Paule vvas nayled to the crosse mystically and this a trope ergo Christ vvas nayled to the crosse in such maner and that is also a trope vvhen the baptised are sayd to be buried vvith Christ it is a figure ergo that Christ vvas buried is likevvise a figure If this be the knitting of your argumeÌ„t you see vvhat pith is in it Or is it because of one particular figure you may infer an other then also you haue your aunsvvere geuen you partly in that vvhich is hovv sayd partly before by your father Luther that it is as substantiall a reason as if I should saie Peter vvas an Apostle ergo Pilate vvas an Apostle the blessed virgin brought forth and remained a virgin ergo Sara did so Or meane you that your trope hath as good reasoÌ„ to support it as hath ours if so vve geue you infinite difference because vpon our trope to vvitte that the
there is no more daūger in such alteration then if a man should in translating of Plato or Zenophon vse the like libertie and turne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 gratiarum actio or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a secret let him learne of Beza vvhom he so aduaūceth what daunger ensueth of such noueltie Beza much detesting in others that fantastical and impious vanitie though he could not perceaue the same in him selfe thus vvriteth against thē The vvorld is novv come to that passe that not they only vvho vvrite their ovvne discourses refuse the familiar accustomed wordes of scripture as obscure vnsauery out of vse but also those that trāslate the scripture out of greeke in to latin challenge vnto them selues the like libertie So as vvhiles euerie man vvil rather freely folovv his ovvne iudgemēt then religiously behaue him selfe as the holy Ghosts interpreter many things they do not conuert but peruert For vvhich licentiousnes and boldnes except remedy be prouided in tyme ether I am notablie deceaued or vvithin fevv yeres in steede of Christians vve shal become Ciceronians that is Gentiles and by litle and litle shal leese the possession of the thinges them selues In these vvordes Beza teacheth yovv that this vvanton noueltie of placing secretes for sacraments and messengers for angels and ambassadours for Apostles and vvashing for Baptisme and thankesgeuing for Eucharist and so forth vvil come to this end that in fine yovv vvil vvith the vvordes take avvay the thinges signified Sacraments Baptisme Eucharist Angels Apostles and al Apostolical doctrine and so in steede of Christians make vs againe Pagans Whereof besides his vvarning the vvorld hath to much experience already And if our deare countrymen would iudge of thinges to come by trial and euent of thinges past they must in their owne memorie finde and feele this to be true which Beza here telleth them For looke what old words you haue vpon newfanglednes as it might seeme altered and taken out of the Bible by the working of Satan those verie thinges you haue remoued from the hartes of men and cast out of the churches which you haue inuaded With the name priest went away the office of priest with the altar that which was the proper seruice of God done at the altar with taking away the word penance you haue withdrawen the people from al doyng of penance and in altering the word church you haue cut them cleane from the church more estraunged them from the communion of it then some barbarous and faithles nations that neuer heard of Christ And so likewise for thinges to come when they see you pricke at the name of angels and begin to leaue out that and for Christ to geue them the anointed and for Apostles Ambassadours and for hel a graue let them assure them selues that your purpose is to extinguish in them al faith and memorie of Angels Christ Apostles Heauen Hel and to bring thē in to the same lamentable state wherein their aūcesters were when by blessed S. Gregory then Pope and S. Austin our Apostle they were first conuerted Wherefore seing reason both humaine and diuine proueth that to be true which I haue said touching their notorious rashnes in corrupting the scriptures seing not only reason but also plaine experience confirmeth the same seing farther the thing is so cleere by reason and experience and al learning that the verie heretikes confesse it whereas their owne brethren by plaine argumēts proue their ttanslatiōs to be most vvicked as vvhich labour to peruert the sentence of the holy Ghost to detort the scriptures from the right sense to preferre darknes before light falshode before truth to deceaue the simple to induce the mortalitie of the sovvle to make men thinke that the sovvle of Christ vvas inclosed in the graue and so buried vvith his body to plant detestable errors to ouerthrovv Gods eternal predestination to take avvay the beleefe of hel and cōsequently of heauen of the extreme iudgment and of God him selfe to make vs of Christians Ciceronians that is Ethnikes and Infidels with alteration of wordes to take from vs al our faith whereas this is euident and confessed and yet for al this M.VV. cometh and saith al this is nothing these be no faultes if the Papistes can find fault vvith no other thing but such toyes and trifles I loued our translations vvel before but novv shal I loue them much better haec et istiusmodi nugae nostra crimina sunt these the like trifles be our faultes I can not otherwise iudg of him but that he is a very Atheist a plaine Sadducee without any feeling and regard of faith and consciēce as it may very wel be thought of the profession of the sect of Libertines Academikes who of late are so far enlarged to whom are ioyned very many of the finest and most elegant Sacramentaries of whom he may reade in Beza who thinke al these questions of Christ his office of his cōsubstancialitie vvith the father of the Trinitie of predestination of freevvill of God of Angels of the Supper of baptisme of the being of mens sovvles after this lyfe who thinke I say al these thinges to be but trifles thinges indifferent and not necessarie to iustification vvhich is obteyned by fayth For these good Gospellers haue a faith and a iustifiyng faith whereby they apprehend eternal life without father sonne and holy Ghost without Christ and his passion or any of these other matters which are rather suttle pointes of the papists historical faith then of the lyuelie iustifying faith wherewith these Euangelical brethren in al securitie are warranted of the certayne fauour of God in this life and assured glory in the next CHAP. XII M. VV. reasons against the latin bible are ansvvered and the same bible is proued to be in sundrie places more pure and sincere then the hebrue novv extant HERE M. VV. draweth to that which is his principal scope in this preface that is to deface the late Translation of the new Testament set forth in this Colledge For although he spend more wordes against M. Martins Discouerie yet he sheweth far more stomake against this whereof before I come to speake order requireth that I examine his disputation against the decree of the Tridentine Councel which for veritie and sinceritie iustifieth approueth as autentical the old common latin edition Against which decree M.VV. thinketh him self to haue good aduantage and much honor he speaketh of the fountaines the greeke and hebrew originals and much he disgraceth our latin translation translator for differing so much ftom those originals First of al before I come to his arguments I request the reader to carye in mind three thinges touching this controuersie vvhereby he shal the more vprightly skilfully iudge betvvene vs and our aduersaries One is that M. VV. discourse in this common place of praising the fountaines maketh against
him self and his brethren more then against vs. For vvhereas they pretend to translate after the greeke and hebrue as vve do not and yet in sundrie places svvarue from the greeke hebrue this his long idle talke conuinceth vs of no faulte but it condemneth him and his brethren of greate and inexcusable corruption vvho pretending reuerence to the greeke and hebrevv yet at their pleasure depart frō both And this is that vvhereof M. Mar. reproueth them in a great part of his Discouerie Example vvhereof see thou in his preface Num. 16.17.18.23.43.44.45.46.47.48.49.50 51. and after in euerie chapter of the booke vvelnie and so much M. Mar. protested to them in the beginning in plaine termes sayng And if they folovv sincerely their greeke and hebrevv text vvhich they professe to folovv and vvhich they esteeme the only autentical text so far vve accuse them not of heretical corruption but if it shal be euidently proued that they shrinke from that also and translate an other thing and that vvilfully and of intention to countenance their false religion and vvicked opinions making the scriptures speake as they list then vve trust c. And of this first riseth a second note which I wish likewise to be remembred that their deflecting from the greeke is alwaies in matter of controuersie and so discrieth their malicious wilfulnes If there be any in the latin it is no such thing but in matters for any cōtrouersie mere indifferent and so quiteth the translatour of malice and euil meaning and iustifieth his vpright and plaine sinceritie And hereof ensueth the third touching our simple and plaine dealing in folowing the latin that we decline not from the greeke or hebrue because it more harmeth our cause then the latin as the aduersaries gladly pretend and M. W. verie confidently auoucheth but only in respect of the truth it self And thus much also was he told in the preface of the new testament to wit that as for other causes vve prefer the latin so in this respect of making for vs or against vs vve allovv the greeke as much as the latin yea in sundrie places more then the latin being assured that they haue not one and that vve haue many aduantages in the greeke more then in the latin And this is there manifested by sundrie and verie euident examples touching traditions priesthode iustification by workes the real presence fasting freewil the mystical sacrifice and against their only faith and assurance of saluation wherein the greeke is more pregnant for vs then the latin Contrarywise let M. VV. frame against the Catholike religion or any part thereof one argument out of the scriptures which we refuse to stand vnto vpon this pretence because it is in the greeke and not in the latin and I am content to excuse him here of a lye Otherwise he can neuer saue him self from a lye and a lye in sight to obiect that vnto vs which nether he nor any of his can proue and we before hand haue in precise termes warned him of it and professed and proued the contrarie And therefore although in truth reader whatsoeuer he saith a great deale more is answered verie sufficiently and abundantly alreadie in the preface of the Testament as thow wilt confesse if it shal please thee with diligence to pervse it and I accompt it a peece of our miserie in this time to be matched with such blunt aduersaries whose maner of writing is now to cloy vs with crābe recocta cole vvorts tvvise yea tē times sodden nether thē selues can bring any new stuffe nor scoure more brightlie or otherwise mend vp their old nor refel our answeres confutations made to them but dissembling any such matter as though it had neuer bene treated of before vse to runne idelly and ministerlike vpon a cōmon place as M. VV. doth here which is more against them selues then against vs yet because it is my lotte to deale with him now the first time and therefore am loth to pretermit any thing wherein him self seemeth to put any force I wil take his argumētes as new and suppose that he neuer read the preface of the Testament against which he writeth and therefore will likewise hereafter borow some part of my answere thence Two argumentes he maketh against our latin translation and consequently against vs for folowing the same in our English The first is that the fountaines vz the greeke and hebrew are more pure thē the latin which he proueth by certaine sentences of S. Hierō S. Austin and S. Ambrose The other is one particular fault wherein as he sayth the vulgar translation is vniuersallie false the greeke contrarie is true Before his arguments he premitteth certaine interrogatories wherein he seemeth to auouch if I vnderstand him that only to be the word of god which is written in the lāguage wherein first the holy Ghost by the Prophets and Apostles vttered it That I misreporte him not I will set downe his wordes Thus he opposeth vs. Quid interpretandum suscepistis nonne scripturas Quaenam vero sunt scripturae quis nescit dei verbum scriptum illud esse c. VVhat tooke you in hand to interprete not the scriptures and vvhat are the scriptures vvho is ignorant but that is the vvritten vvord of god vvhich the lord committed to his church in bookes and letters and those oracles of god vvere they vttered by the holy Ghost in latin or can they better or more diuinely be declared in any tonge then that vvhich the holy Ghost vvould vse where vnto I answere that if his questions haue such meaning sense as the wordes beare and may stand ful wel with his skil and knowledge then are they not so much fantastical as phrenetical For accounteth he nothing the vvritten vvord of god but that vvhich is in hebrevv and greeke and vvas vvritten by the prophetes and Apostles in that language Then vvhat meaneth he and the rest of his Euāgelical confraternitie so perpetuallie to brag that they haue geuen vs nothing but the pure vvord of the lord vvho haue geuen vs nothing but their ovvne contaminated translations in English French Flēmish Dutch and such vulgar languages Is this the word of God M. W vttered the holy Ghost his oracles euer in Flēmish or English why inscribe yow your English testamente The testamente of our Lord Iesus Christ if nothing but the greeke or hebrue be the written word and testament of god But let this passe for an example of his singular foolishnes speaking he knoweth not what See we herein an other example of his notable impietie Our Sauiour Christ the Euangelistes and Apostles when they cited places of the old testament not according to the fountaines hebrue but according to the Septuaginta cited they not scripture In omnem terram saith the apostle Paule exiuit sonus eorum Their sound is gone forth in to al the vvorld whereas in the hebrew
now it is far othervvise and othervvise your selues translate it in your later bible their line is gone forth although in the bible of the yeare 1577. ye leaue the hebrew and folovv vs. Take heede saith the same Apostle lest that fal vpon you vvhich is spoken in the Prophetes See ye contemners and vvonder and perish which wordes in the hebrew are nothing so Shal we saie this is not scripture and the Apostle abused his audience and according to M. VV. diuinitie must needes tel them a lye when he telleth them this saith the Prophete this saith Esaie this Ieremie c. because he citeth the wordes not according to the original but according to the translation of the 70. which many times much varieth from that which we find now in the original The Apostle S. Iames reprouing the prowde and loftie mindes of some bringeth this text of scripture against them deus superbis resistit humilibus autem dat gratiam translated in your English testaments thus The scripture offereth more grace and therefore saith God resisteth the proude and geueth grace to the humble vvhich vvordes are taken out of the Prouerbes of Salomon but not according to the hebrevv but after the 70. vvhich Caluin cut cleane avvay and leaft out of his translation ether for this reason vvhich you geue or because belike they agreed not vvel vvith his proude and disdainful stomake notvvithstanding they remaine in the greeke testaments printed at Geneua But by your argument he doth wel therein and saueth S. Iames from a manifest lie who affirmeth the scripture to speake so whereas by yow it is no scripture And then it were wel done of yow to mend your testaments at the next edition and leaue out this so cleare a falshode except yow retaine it of policie that at a neede yow may haue one more reason to refuse this epistle which we see graueleth yow so sore I wil not multiplie exāples because it is a thing most euident and he knoweth litle that knoweth not this to be the common maner both of some Euangelists of S. Peter and S. Paule generallie to cite the scripture in this sort VVhereof S. Paules epistle to the Hebrues in euerie chapter almost geueth proofe as likewyse doth the first of S. Peter and Beza graunteth the same of the Euangelists the auncient fathers affirme both the one the other And what neede I to presse M. W. with sentences whereas I may dispute against him out of whole chapters and bookes For let vs suppose some part of the old testament to haue bene written first in hebrew or chaldee as is a part of Daniel and to haue bene translated into greeke or latin afterwardes the chaldee or hebrue to perish the greeke or latin to remaine as for example we see in the bookes of Tobie Iudith and one booke of the Machabees The two first of which S. Hierom translated out of the chaldee the third he found though he translated it not written in hebrue And the like is thought verie probably of the songe of the three children Shal we now be so fond as to imagine that as so one as the hebrue or chaldee was lost we lost our scriptures then what saie you to S. Matthewes gospel which certainly was written by him in hebrue as witnesseth Papias Ireneus Eusebius Pātenus Origenes Sophronius S. Hierom and al antiquitie Haue we not S. Matthewes gospel because vve haue not his hebrue text nay presuppose that a gospel of S. Matthevv in hebrue may be found as you knovv such a one is extant and setting aside the authoritie of the Church vvhich to yovv is nothing no reason can be brought but yovv ought as vvel to admit that for the original as the greeke of S. Luke and S. Iohn yet dare yovv prefer that before the greeke and count that the more autētical reforme the greeke according to that hebrue this one example if M. VV. had the grace to consider and the ground hereof it vvere sufficient to ansvvere vvhatsoeuer he saith in his idle discourse in praise of the greeke hebrue for defacing the latin But let vs examine his reason vvherein lieth the pith of this questiō Thus he declaimeth for the puritie of the greeke and hebrue VVhereas vve couet to attaine the meaning of the holy Ghost hovv shal vve do this more assuredly then if vve heare the holy Ghost speaking in his ovvne vvordes This is so cleare that the Papistes them selues confesse it to be necessarie if so be the first original copies vvere pure vncorrupt For now they crie that the old testament in the hebrue fountaine and the nevv testament in the greeke is most corrupt vvhy so vvhat causeth our Papistes so to refuse the hebrue and greeke fountaine and to hunt after the litle riuer of the latin edition vvho doubteth but it is done for that only reason because they find the fountaines to be not so commodious for them For if they had the fountaines fauorable inough they vvould rather take thence then from the diches and dregges of a corrupt translation Novv because they knovv that certaine destruction hangeth ouer their heads if they be called to the fountaines therefore are they constrained not only to auoyde the spring of the purest and most holesome vvaters but also they labour to proue that the litle riuers are purer then the fountaines Here Reader thou hast many wordes and litle matter much a doe and smale reason much craking and boasting of the pure fountaines by one who from his infancie neuer dranke but of the stinking puddles of Geneua lake In which discourse of his three thinges may be learned First that he confesseth of vs that we refuse not the fountaines but because we thinke them to be corrupt Wherein he saith truly and whereby thou maist note that in folowing the latin as we doe we are lead not as they are by fansie and panges but by conscience and iudgment The second is that he affirmeth it as a thing without al doubt that thus we say because the foūtaines be not so cōmodious for vs. once againe because the fountaines are not fauorable inough vnto vs. and yet once againe because vve knovv there is no vvay vvith vs but death and destruction if vve he called to the fountaines whereof because I haue spokē alreadie I wil say no more only this may serue for an example what a lustie courage they can shew in bragging and what a pretie feate they haue in so few lynes to varie a lye so many wayes And if M. W. had geuen but one example wherein he by his hebrue greeke text could so plage vs and bring vs certam perniciem assured destruction he had done somewhat like a professor of this new diuinitie and it were a readie way to end al these controuersies Because he doth not and I dare warrant him
hebrue nor yet the hebrue bible true by which she might once againe mende and correct the latin And here let the reader waigh whether we thinking of the Church as we doe thinking of Christes promise and the assistance of the holy Ghost as christian faith teacheth vs whereby we are most assuredly perswaded that she neuer erreth nor euer can erre damnably whether we I say haue not great reason to support our opinion which here we defend Caluin in his Institutions recounting certaine causes why the auncient writers speake so reuerently and yeld so much to the Romane church amongst other putteth this for one That vvhereas the churches of the East part and of Greece as also of Africa vvereful of tumultes and dissensions amonge them selues the Romane church vvas more quits then other and lesse troublesome For as the vvesterne people are lesse sharp quick of vvit then they of Asia and Africa so much lesse desyrous are they of nouelties This therefore added very much authoritie to the Romane church that in those doubtful times she vvas not so vnquiet as vvere the other and the doctrine once deliuered to her she held and retayned more fast then did all the rest This grace of constancy in the faith and truth once receaued when as the aduersaries yeld to the Romane church and reproue the Oriental and greeke church for lightnes inconstancie mutabilitie in the same kind we who beleeue the same grace of god to haue stil remained haue iust occasion to thinke that she was as tenax as constant in preseruing the truth of the bibles as of other parts of religiō wherein by Caluines verdite she excelled al churches vnder the sunne And if the greeke churches then in that prime flower were so mutable and incōstant and so far inferior to the latin in this respect especiallie of holding fast matters of religion once deliuered vnto them with what iudgement or conscience can we magnifie the later ages of those Greekes who much more haue deflected from the Catholike Apostolike faith haue more decayed in learning vertue and al good qualities haue degenerated almost in to a barbarisme and are now fallen in to such miserie ignorance and slauery as euerie man seeth much lesse can we mention in this comparison the Iewes Synagog who hauing the maledictiō of god vpō them as many times our Sauiour foretold in the gospel are not only quite destitute of the graces of god but also for the most part seeme altogether void of the giftes of nature of vvit iudgement policie and ordinarie humane discourse But al this vvil M.W. say is but coniecture and as probablie he disputeth against it for the contrarie part that in the hebrue and greeke there is no corruption For if it be so that the Ievves and heretikes haue laboured so much herein vvho can doubt but they haue attempted this especially in these places and sentences of scriptures vvhich the Church of Christ most vsed for confirmation of her faith and religion There are most euident testimonies of scriptures by vvhich the Ievves and all heretikes are refuted tel vs vvhat in them haue those men peruerted but that they remaine vnto vs safe and sound Neuer vvould other Ievv or heretike corrupt the scriptures except he thought that might be to him some vvaie commodious for the mainteining of his monstruous opinions VVherefore seing those places are safe by vvhich the Ievves are refelled and the heretikes of al times are killed this must needes seeme a fained tale vncredible and false vvhich you bring that the fountaines are corrupted To satisfie M.W. longing who would so faine know wherein the Iewes or heretikes haue falsified the bibles I wil seuerally geue him examples some sithence S. Hieroms tyme and some before and acknovvledged by S. Hierom him self from whom M. W. taketh most in commendation of the hebrue fountaines And that those fountaines are somewhat infected and degenerated from that puritie which they had in S. Hieroms time and before I proue by euident reason manifest experimentes plaine confessions of our more learned aduersaries First touching the hebrue S. Hierom read and translated according to the ordinarie reading and pointing of his time Esaie 9. Puer datus est nobis et filius natus est nobis et vocabitur nomen eius admirabilis consiliarius Deus fortis pater futuri saeculi princeps pacis A child is geuen to vs and a Sonne is borne to vs and he shalbe called Admirable a Counseller God Strong Father of the vvorld to come Prince of peace And in his commentarie expressing euerie word he maketh no doubt of any other reading Forsake the latin and go to your Iewes and their hebrue fountaines now and what find you pro thesaur◠carbones Thus. Puer datus est nobis et filius natus est nobis et vocabit nomen eius qui est admirabilis consiliarius deus fortis et pater aeternitatis vel futuri seculi principem pacis VVhereby is taken from Christ as principal a testimonie of his diuinitie as any we find in the old testament And whence cōmeth this alteratiō but from the iniquitie of the Iewes who haue altered the passiue vocabitur into the actiue vocabit geuē other pointes then were vsed or read in S. Hieromes time And this Luther confesseth manifestly Totus hic textus miserè sceleratè saith he a Iudaeis est crucifixus c. This vvhole text is miserably and vilanouslly crucified depraued and corrupted by the Ievves For as the child him self vvas crucified of them so by the same men both this place and his scripture or scripture appertayning to him is daily crucified The prophete attributeth six names to the child and sonne the Ievves reade the first fiue in the nominatiue case the sixt in the accusatiue and they al expound it of Ezechias vnder whom God gaue that great victorie against Sēnacherib And in the same place The text seemeth to haue bene corrupted by those that put to the points The letters vvhether ye reade them vvith pointes or vvithout pointes are alone and the grammer doth beare it vvel but the Ievves most pestilent men oft tymes corrupte sentences of the prophetes by their pointes distinctions But let it suffice vs that the Chaldee interpreter and the 70. thinke as vve do Thus Luther condemning of vile corruption on your pure originals geuing withal this general rule that the Iewes most pestilent men haue no conscience in that foule abusing and altering and crucifying the scriptures no more then they had in crucifying Christ and that therefore he preferreth the Septuaginta and Chaldee interpreter before al the hebrew copies VVhich reason touching Luther and the Protestantes is nothing at al. For the Chaldee interpreter is no more the hebrevv original then is Luthers translation And the translatiō of the 70. which is now extant besides that it is ful of diuersitie
not of the Catholikes esteemed to be altogether autentical is much more of Luther and the Protestants condemned For of them thus he writeth in the same commentarie 70 interpretes digni sunt odio c. The 70. interpreters are vvorthie of hatred for I can not beleeue it is false that they translated and turned the bible by the holy Ghost for there appeareth in them manifest vanitie impietie studie to corrupt it Thus Luther VVhere in though he rayle to fowly yet hereof appeareth how much he esteemeth of the 70. And the true ground whereby both Luther and the Protestants hold this so singular a peece of scripture against the Iewes is nether the Chaldee interpreter nor the 70. as Luther pretendeth nor the hebrew fountaine which is worse but that whereby we retaine al scriptures that is the churches authoritie and warrant who testefieth vnto vs that this is the letter of the prophete as Lyra from whom Luther borowed his answere teacheth Thus he writeth In this place of Esaie is proued the humanitie and diuinitie of Christ but the Ievves ansvvere sayng it is not in the hebrue He shal be called but he shal cal and so that vvhich directly expresseth the diuinitie is not referred to the child borne but to the true god calling him and the name of the child is put in the end of the place that is Principem pacis prince of peace But they that thus say corrupt the text therefore vve must run to the translations And first that this is false is proued by the 70. vvho translate vocabitur he shal be called and by S. Hierom. And thus it is read in the office of the masse vpon Christemas daie and that office for the most part folovveth the traÌ„slation of the 70. And by this translation it is cleare that the hebrue should not be vocabit but vocabitur as these vvil haue it corrupting the text And the same is proued by the Chaldee translation VVhere the churches authoritie is the supreme grouÌ„d staye for in deede the other coÌ„uince nothing as shal better appeare heareafter An other example of like corruption and in as high and great a point as this against the diuinitie of our Sauiour I geue you Ierem. 23. where S. Hierom did reade and translate according to the hebrew thus Ecce dies veniunt dicit dominus et suscitabo Dauid germeÌ„ iustum er regnabit rex et sapiens erit et hoc est nomen quo vocabunt eum dominus iustus c. as in our vulgar translation Behold the daies come sayth our lord and I vvil raise to Dauid a iust branch and he shal raigne as a king and shal be vvise this is the name by vvhich they shal cal him Our iust lord or the lord our iustice where the name Tetragrammaton attributed to our incarnate Sauiour proueth that he is the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or lord god of Israel wherein the two natures diuine and humane appeare most euidently S. Hierom in the text putteth a double reading one after the hebrew an other after the 70. Vpon the place in his commentarie he writeth thus If vve reade according to the 70 Vocauerit euÌ„ Dominus the sense is he shal be called Iosedech a iust lord if according to the hebrue nomen eius vocabunt then the sense is He shal be called the lord our iustice The thing which I note is the word vocabunt they shal cal him which in S. Hieromes time was the hebrevv reading and touching Christ his diuinitie is of that consequence as hath bene said In the hebrew text now it is cleane otherwise and vpon one point and letter chaunged thus it is to be translated God 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvho is our iustice shal cal him whereby is lost al the proofe of Christs diuinitie which that so pregnant a place otherwise should yeld And that this fault is likewise committed by the like malice of the Iewes and the true reading is to be taken from our latin translation Lyra in the place aforesaid sheweth in these wordes Other names of God are communicable vvith creatures but the name Teâ—ragrammaton is not so vvhich signifieth the diuine essence pure simple in it selfe vvithout relation to external vvorks or creatures and therefore vvhereas Christ is called by this name in the place of Ieremie it folovveth that he is true God But the Ievves ansvvere by corrupting the letter sayng that thus it is in the hebrevv Et hoc est nomen eius qui vocabit eum Dominus iustus noster And this is the name of him that shal cal him Our iust lord so that the name TetragraÌ„maton vvhich in our translatioÌ„ is turned Dominus is not referred to Messias the sonne of Dauid but to the true God who called Messias to deliuer his people And how goeth Lyra against this distinction saith he the Iewes are honest men haue kept their bibles pure and vncorrupted and in respect of them al the latin bibles are most contaminate after the paterne of M. VV Nay far otherwise notwithstanding he knew the hebrew bibles and tong in an other maner of degree and perfection as being him selfe a natural borne Iewe then M. W. or any of his great clearkes who vaunt so much of a litle yet he replieth thus Contra istam solutionem non potest argui c. Against this solution a man can not argue but by shevving them that here they corrupt the true letter and deny the truth because they vvil deny Christs diuinitie And this might best be done by old bibles vvhich vvere not corrupt in this passage and in others in vvhich mentioÌ„ is made of Christs diuinitie if a man could come by any such And thus our forefathers disputed against them out of this place and the like And although I neuer yet savv any bible of the Ievves vvhich is not corrupted in this place yet I haue heard of men vvorthie of credit by reason of their life conscience and knovvledge vvho haue svvorne that they haue seene it so in old bibles as it is in S. Hieroms translation But if a man can not get any such bibles vncorrupt then must vve runne to other traÌ„slations vvhich the Ievves vvith reason caÌ„ not deny And the 70. reade as doth S. Hierom as appeareth by our Ecclesiastical office Here againe M. W. may see the foule monstruous corruptioÌ„ of the Iewes in these fountaines and originals vniuersally in al their hebrew bibles Vniuersally I say for if in our daies some one or other print be corrected that correction hath bene made in respect of the latin Church which hath kept the truth of doctrine therefore preserued the true letter not in respect of the Iewes vvho altogether as witnesseth Lyra corrupted the true letter because they vvould deny Christs diuinitie One exaÌ„ple more I geue him in an other kynd which neuertheles importeth vs as much as
States Princes and nations who withstoode the bishop Sea of Rome as they do now Nullis temporibus defueruÌ„t sayth he nec Episcopi nec Presbyteri nec Imperatores nec populi c. There neuer vvanted at any time nether Bishops nether Priestes nor Emperours nor nations nor Priuate men vvhich had not rather be condemned of your church for heretikes then to mainteine the Catholike communion of your Apostasie wherefore hauing so large a scope let him repayre to that his owne church and succession of Protestantes and of them seeke for the true written bible of whom he receaueth the sense and meaning of the same not to our church and succession of Catholikes whom he chiefly condemneth for erring in the true sense and then reproueth as bitterly for corrupting the true text The conclusion of al is this if as a Christian as an obedient child of the Church and willing to learne if thus he demauÌ„d of the Church for true bibles she can serue him with more varietie of such in mo languages then it wil stande with his ease to reade If he demaund this as an heretike as a rebellious Apostata as to picke quarels and maintaine strife the Church hath nought to do with him She answereth as our sauiour answered the Pharisees Quid me tentatis hypocritae as he taught his Apostles Nolite dare sanctum canibus She sendeth him to his owne scattered and diuided coÌ„gregation in to whose communion he hath thrust him selfe vnder whose false banner he fighteth against her vvhom the vniuersal Christian vvorld in al times and ages vntil our daies hath acknovvleged for the only true catholike apostolike church of Christ And hitherto of the hebrevv fountaines and originals vvherein I haue staâ—ed somevvhat the longer first of al that the reader may see that not vvithout iust cause I charge M.W. vvith a manifest lie in saing vve flee the hebrevv for that vve knovv it to containe the assured bane and destruction of our cause He may here perceaue in part vvhat reason vvhat argument vvhat conscience moueth the Church thus to prescribe and vs to folovv the Churches ordinance herein That vve nether feare nor contemne nor refuse it but for the vnderstaÌ„ding of the true sense studie and honour it as much as he though vve hange not our faith vpon it so as if the Ievves depraue a text touching Christs diuinitie vve therefore vvil denie him to be God and if they raze out the only text that foreshevveth the maner of his passion and crucifying vve vvil not for al that geue ouer our faith that in such sort he vvas crucifyed for vs. Secondarely thus I haue done to satisfie M· VV. dâ—maund who chalengeth vs so confidently to shevve any error in the originals vvho affirmeth so peremptorily those places to be safe and vntouched which appertaine to the proofe of our Christian religion Which how true it is he now seeth if he wil beleeue ether reason or his owne maisters Besides that his argument is ouer slender when he wil conclude those originalles to be pure because there is no corruption in matters of coÌ„trouersie as though there could be no errors but those which proceede of wilfulnes and malice against Christian religion as though the Iewes could not erre by negligence ignorance and other humane infirmitie by which Caluine Beza the rest of that knot can imagine very many and the same very grosse errors to haue crepte in to our latin bibles But true is the old prouerbe Graculus graculo Like wil to like as I haue said Of the Iewes for neare alliance and brotherhode they iudge so diuinely as though they were halfe goddes who neuer erred ether of malice ether of wilfulnes or ignorance or slowthfulnes or want of due consideration or thorough any kind of like ether sinne or imbecillitie But of the Christian Catholike Church of the Bishops and Pastors by whom they haue that peece of Christianitie which yet they retaine they deeme most wickedly them they accompt more dissolute more irreligious more careles negligent in matters diuine then the worst people that liue vnder the cope of heauen These in the same kind haue erred both of malice and of wilfulnes and of contempt and of negligence by al maner of faulting voluntarie inuoluntarie wherevnto a man may possibly fal Thirdly some reason mouing me thus to doe was because nether M. Martin in his Discouerie much lesse the preface of the new testament handling only such thinges as were incideÌ„t to that booke that is geuing reason why in that translatioÌ„ the latin vulgar edition vvas folowed before the common greeke testamentes had any occasioÌ„ to treate of this matter For albeit M. Martin proueth errors in matters historical to be in our coÌ„mon hebrew bibles yet he maketh no stay therein but rather presupposing the hebrew text to be altogether true as the aduersaries pretend he so much the more discouereth their wilfulnes and peruersitie who in their translations depart sundrie times froÌ„ those hebrew originalls which they seeme to magnifie as altogether faultles and vnspotted One principal corruption of great moment and importance he obiecteth out of the 21. psalme where the prophet saith in the person of Christ They haue pearced my handes and feete which by the Iewes being maliciously altered by mutation of one or other letter in to As a lyon my hands and feete without wit reason or common sense whereby is euacuated the best and clearest prophecie in the whole body of scripture touching the maner and fashion of Christs crucifying who besides M. W. would so blindly haue dissembled it yet stil sing vs the old song of the pure fountaines It is written that not long sithence certaine euangelical Anabaptistes lately conuerted from Iudaisme reading that place of S. Peter in Castalios translation Iesum Nazarenum scelestis manibus comprehendistis et ad palum alligatum sustulistis Iesus of Nazareth you haue apprehended and binding him to a post or stake so made him avvay vpon this text fel to a great and daungerous contention among them selues in their congregations whether Christ were pearced hand and foote with nailes as the Church beleeueth or were only bound hand and foote to a gibbet as the fashion among the Turkes is now a daies as the other two theeues were done to death which were crucifyed with him And remoue the traditioÌ„ of the Church which these good felowes care not for and this place of Dauid and certainly out of the old testament it can not perhaps nether out of the new be clearely proued to a contentious heretike that he was crucified in such sort as the truth is and we beleeue For as the heretikes now a daies at home in our couÌ„trie gladly abhorre the name of the crosse al signes or memories there of both in priuate talking publike preaching and writing rather vse the name of
steede of because she doth loue much And plaine it is that Christ spake not greeke or latin but hebrevv Therefore vvhereas Christ said Many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her he proueth it by that which folovveth because she loueth much as if he had said That she loueth me much it is no maruel she hath good occasion so to do For many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her So vve say that he hath obtained that vvhich he desired because he is mery laugheth he is verie hūgrie because he eateth much c. I wil not bestow time in examining this answere who told him that Christ vsed the preterperfect-tense for the present whereas S. Luke so flatly affirmeth the contrarie or that S. Luke in this phrase so strāgely affected the Dorical lāguage with the rest of his bold assertion but wanting al reason of reasonable coniecture to support them this only I wish thee to consider whether thou didst euer see a litle sentence so racked and torne as this is For cōparing this sentēce as it is novv fashioned by them with the same sentence as it was first pronounced by our Sauiour not one word of any momēt remaineth in such sort as Christ vttered them Christ said Many sinnes are forgeuen her because she hath loued much now with their correction thus it is Many sinnes haue bene forgeuen her For she loueth much Where first they rent in sonder make that two which Christ ioyned and spake as one Then they wrest one of Christs words bringe it to a Dorical phrase of speach And by and by backe againe they make the next which signifieth a thing past in greeke to signifie a thing present by the hebrewe maner of speach which hath no present tenses the cleane contrarie whereof is auouched in the other Dorical word going immediatly before Afterwards they enforce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not to signifie a cause antecedent but a signe or effect consequent And finally in al and euery of these tricks S. Lukes authoritie is vnder foote and lieth dead For nether Beza nor Musculus in this tossing and turning euer consider what S. Luke wrote what sense the Apostolical Church gaue and the holy Ghost in the same hath alwaies continued what the very letter of the greeke requireth as now it standeth but how it may possibly be wrested if a man wil folow the spirit of contention if he will fetch the pointing of the sentence from Geneua the meaning of one word from Dorica in one corner of the world of an other frō Hierusalem of a third from Swytzerlād the entier summe of al from the deepe pit of hell For excepte the deuil him self stoode by thē suggested to them such construction I thinke the nature of man hauing some regarde of honestie of learning of modestie of Christ his Euāgelists could neuer breake forth into so much monstruous absurditie Of al which this I conclude that allowing men this libertie vnto which now by this libertine-gospel they are driuen I say there is no possibilitie to conteine men in faith or to reduce men to faith or to proue any parcel of Christiā faith For setting aside church Doctors Custome Councels and resting in the only Scriptures priuate exposition of the same this one example geueth vs a paterne to care nothing for al scriptures For it is a maruelous flat text which a man of meane learning by one of these shiftes may not auoide ether by refusing it as not Canonical because it is reiected novv of Protestants in these daies or hath bene doubted of by Catholikes in old time vvhich cutteth of a number of bookes or by obiecting some one or other greeke example in vvhich the vvords vvant vvhich is easie to finde heretiks of diuers sects hauing novv the printing of most greeke testamēts and euery one being content to fauour his proper gospel and heresie or by producing some false translation and sticking to that vvith store of vvhich euerie prouince is pestered or by hunting out diuers significations of the greeke vvord and taking that vvhich maketh most for his aduantage or if that serue not then by corrupting one word by conferring an other with the greeke of this or that dialect a third with the Iewes or Chaldees or Suitzers maner of speaking and so patching vp a sense partly Christian partly Germane partly Ethnical and partly Iudaicall and finally which is al in al reseruing euer to him selfe supreme iudgement of al senses interpretations scriptures and languages As in this verie place whereof I speake Zuinglius folowing nether the words of the Euāgelist nor sense of the Church nor Cōmentarie of the auncient fathers nor inuention of Beza nor any of those manyfold shiftes of Musculus willeth vs rather for dilexit to put credidit for charitie faith and then geueth vs the meaning of Christs words thus Quoniā dilexit multum Ego puto dilectionem hic pro fide accipi quòd tantum mihi fidit tantum peccatorū ei remittitur Nam poste a dicit sides tua te saluam sec it Because she loued much I suppose that loue is here put for faith because she hath so great affiāce in me so many sinnes are forgeuē her for he saith afterwards thy faith hath saued thee that is hath deliuered and absolued the from thy sinnes which one distinction answereth al the places that in this controuersie vve bring out of the scriptures to refel their only faith By these fevv heretical sleights M. Whitaker knovveth his brethren haue many other as bad as these vsed in one particular controuersie any man may gesse hovv likely it is to tye an heretike hauing some vvitt and learning and sight in tonges vvith any text that gainsaith his opinion Hovv true vve finde by experience that vvhich Tertullian so many ages agoe spake of the heretikes of his time and prophecied as it may seeme of the heretikes of our time Ista haeresis non recipit quasdam scripturas c. These Zuinglian Lutheran Puritan Anabaptist Trinitarian c. heretikes admitt not some bookes of scriptures and those vvhich they doe admit by adding to taking from they peruerte to serue their purpose And if they receaue some bookes yet they receaue thē not intierly or if they receaue thē entierly after some sort neuerthelesse they marre them by deuising diuers interpretatiōs In this case vvhat vvil you do that thinke your selfe most skilful in the scriptures vvhē as that which you defend the aduersarie denieth that vvhich you deny the aduersarie defendeth Et tu quidem nihil perdes nisi vocem de contentione nihil consequeris nisi bilem de blasphematione And thou truely shalt leese nothing but thy vvordes in so contentious a brauling thou shalt gaine nothinge but greefe and anger in seinge an heretike so to blasphene And novv if I should shevv the like in the hebrevv and by examples manifest the same I should trouble my selfe
because they generally though not in euery place haue folowed the cōmon points and vowels according to which they frame vs their common Gloses Commentaries and Dictionaries But this very pointe is a sea of disputation and writing and therefore for a final conclusion to shew that the Protestants appealing to the hebrew vvil shortly fal to very plaine Atheisme I demaund of M. Whit. this question whether he thinke it flat Atheisme and Turkerie to denie that Christ vvas borne of a virgin I trust he wil cōfesse vvith vs that this denial is the denial and abnegation of al Christianitie For though they care not greatly vvhether mē thinke our Lady to haue remained a virgin in Christs birth or after Christs birth yet they seeme to beleeue most assuredly that she vvas a virgin vvhen she conceaued him That being graunted that this denial is plaine apostasie I require of him vvhat scripture he hath to proue that veritie for church Traditiō Fathers such other I know he contemneth and vve are bound to beleue nothing say they but that which is in plaine scripture The only place that may serue the turne is the first of S. Matth. for the allegories of Ezechiel conuince not vvhere it is said Ecce virgo concipiet c. Behold a virgin shal cōceaue bring forth a sonne But this place proueth nothing by M. W. ovvne rule by Bezaes common kinde of scanning such citations and by the Protestants interpretation of this place ether because the translation is framed according to the 70. not the hebrevv and so it is no scripture by M. W. or if it be then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 virgin accordinge to the hebrew must signifie a yonge vvenche adolescētula siue virgo siue maritata by Beza his rules and so saith Munster as vvel virgin as not virgin or because the most precise Iudaical Protestants translate it so to put the matter out of doubt So for example translateth Oecolampadius in the bibles of Basile which Bullinger in the preface so much commēdeth Ecce adolesentula illa praegnans et partens filium Beholde that yonge vvenche great vvith childe and Munster precisely according to the hebrevv as he sayth Ecce virgo illa impraegnata Beholde that virgin gotten vvith childe And hovvsoeuer M. W. may cauil vpon the later the first is mere Iudaical no wayes Christian and the peruersion rather of a monster then of a man as Luther pronounceth against Erasmus for the like cause and yet I acknovvledge according to the heretical maner of examining citations the hebrevv vvord may beare that sense vvhich Oecolāp yeldeth so did those old renegates and enemies of our religion Aquila Ponticus and Theodotion translate that vvord vpon which translation aftervvards the beggerly Ebionites founded their beastly opinion touching the maner of Christs incarnation And here Christian reader I haue to request thee not so to interpreete me in any thing which I haue spoken as though I coueted to disgrace the study of greeke and hebrew as this man would haue thee to conceaue of vs condēned those languages which I cōfesse to be great helpes to the attaining of the true sense in sūdrie places of scripture condemne my selfe for knowing so litle as I do in ether of them both And manifest it is what paine the Catholiks haue taken in setting forth the bible most perfitly and diligently in the Hebrew Chaldee Greeke and Arabike languages what labour they haue taken about the Greeke translation of the Septuaginta How continually and at this present most honorable Prelates and Cardinals other men of great name employ them selues in the same kinde of study to the end they may procure al helpes so far as is possible for the perfite vnderstādinge of the sacred scriptures How in most Catholike Vniuersities mē excellent for skil in these languages florish and are maintained to the great aduauncemēt of the faith Church Catholike with the liste or cataloge of whose names I thinke it needeles to trouble the reade◠because otherwise they are wel knowen to the Christian world But this I say thou shalt finde it true when soeuer thou commest to examine these matters with that aduisednes and maturitie of iudgement as the thing it selfe requireth that who so wil goe about to picke his faith out of the greeke and hebrew testaments without a setled and constant forme of faith before and from which he must not be drawen by any pretense of greeke hebrew his greeke hebrew wil neuer make him a Christian wil neuer establish him in any true faith Aquila Ponticus first a Christian after a Iewe was very perfect in the hebrew and translated the bible so as S. Hierom calleth him to his praise Diligentissimum verborum hebraicorum interpretem A most diligent interpreter of the hebrevv vvords and yet howe good a Christiā he was is noted before The Arrians Trinitarians Anabaptistes and Lutherans of our time want they greeke or hebrew No dout their arrogancie and pride which for their greeke hebrevv they cōceaue is a great cause of their continual alteration from one heresie to an other as vve see in the stories of Melancthon Blandrata Bernardinus Ochinus c. Before vve vvere Grecians or Hebritians or in deede Englishmen or vnderstoode any letter of any lāguage first of al vve were Christiās we were graffed into the Catholike Church the mystical body of Christ and made members of the same and by solemne vowe we bound our selues to honor loue reuerence and cleaue to her as the piller firmament of truth the spouse of Christ our diuine mother the arke of Noe and kingedome of God without which there is no way but death and damnation Let vs hold this fast and then our greeke and hebrevv may doe vs some good Let vs depart from her talke vve so longe as vve list of our greeke and hebrevv as S. Peter sayd of Simon Magus money so that vvil be to vs In perditionem To our euerlastinge destruction it vvil neuer doe vs good And as S. Austin sayth in the meane season vvhile the vnlearned rise get possession of heauē Nos cū doctrinis nostris ecce vbi volutamur in carne et sanguine We vvith our greeke hebrevv vvhat other learning so euer shal alwaies be tumbling in flesh bloud in continual braules and contentions vvhich vvil set vs the right vvay to hell CHAP. XV. Hovv M.VV. inueigheth against the nevv testament lately set forth in this colledge vvith a cleare refutation of such faultes as he findeth in the translation thereof Here now is the place to speake of our late English trāslation set forth in this colledge For though M. W. vpon passion and heate disorderlye before he had spoken of the originals and in respect of them condemned our latin reproued vs for translating according to the latin
many new testameÌ„ts hath he perused and conferred with ours I trow not verie many And of the third and fourth thowsande yeres vnder the Prophets hath he seene any more or were there then extant any such testaments to conferre in comparison of which ours is so far abased by his amplification it should seeme yea yet of his wisedome I trust he wil say no except he list to shew him self as learned as his felow Iohn Keltridge preacher of the vvord in London who referreth vs for the true reading sense of the Aâ—e maria to the translation of the 70. But suppose he meant of the time since Christ what a mad kinde of spech is this as if two frindes who by some occasioÌ„ were separated some few yeres after by good hap meeting the one should thus gratulate that good day Blessed be God frind that now I see you whom I haue not seene these 5000 yeres whereas they perhaps had not liued one quarter of so many weekes Now let vs allow for good that Ab orbe condito since the creatioÌ„ of the vvorld may signify 4000 yeres after that is since the incarnatioÌ„ of Christ how many translatioÌ„s of the first thousand yeres after Christ caÌ„ he produce wherevpon he may colour this lying how many of the next 500 how many vntil this later 80 yeres wherein euery Sectmaster hath falleÌ„ in hand with tossing turning the scriptures But amoÌ„gest theÌ„ is there none worse then ours none set forth by the Trinitarians Seruetans Arians Anabaptistes Academiks How say you by such a traÌ„slation as abuseth the word of scripture against al auncient faith and religion against Catholikes against the Lutherans against the learnedst Caluinists agaâ—nst Caluin him self against the literal sense of the word whole drift of the place al this to make God the author and worker of sinne that is by Caluins expresse iudgment in his booke against the Libertines To transforme God into a deuil to make vs ChristiaÌ„s worship in steede of god an idol and such an idol Quod nobis execrabilius esse debet omnibus gentiuÌ„ idolis VVhich ought to seeme to vs Christians more abominable then al the idols of the Gentiles vvhat say you to such a translation And such translations of the new testament haue bene set forth within these 5000 yeres yea some within these 5 yeres that in EnglaÌ„d and that with authoritie yea with the Princes priuilege except the printers lye S. Peter saith of the Iewes that Christ is to them Petra scandali qui offendunt verbo nec credunt in quo et posti sunt 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the english testament of king Edward and the first of the Q. raigne translate it thus They beleeue not that vvhereon they vvere set This is vvel to be marked saith Illyricus least a man imagine that God him self did put them and as one he meaneth Beza against the nature of the greeke vvord doth traÌ„slate interprete it that God did create theÌ„ for this purpose that they should vvithstand him Erasmus Caluin referring this vvord to that vvhich goeth before interprete it not amisse that the Ievves vvere made or ordeined to beleeue the vvord of God and their Messias but yet that they vvould not beleeue him For to theÌ„ belonged the promises the testaments and the Messias him self as S. Peter saith Act. 2. et 3. and Paule Rom. 9. and to them vvere committed the oracles of God by vvitnes of the same Paule Rom. 3. thus Illyricus Here is geueÌ„ the true sense of this place according to the signification of the greeke word the same is proued by scripture by S. Peter and S. Paule The same is confirmed by Caluin and Erasmus and by Luther in his commentaries vpon this place more at large by Castalio in his annotatioÌ„s of the new testameÌ„t Only Beza against al these translateth it thus Sunt immorigeri ad quod etiam conditi fueruÌ„t They are rebellious vvhere vnto also they vvere created which wordes in his note therevpon he explicateth That men are made or fashioned framed sturred vp created or ordained not of them selues for that is absurd but of God to be scaÌ„dalized at him and his sonne our Sauiour Christus est eis offendiculo prout etiam ad hoc ipsum a Deo sunt conditi and discourseth at large bringeth many textes to proue this sense this translation which error being of such coÌ„sequence as Caluin graunteth that it maketh God no God but an idol and a deuil any man may boldly ptonounce of such a testament that it is the testament rather of Satan then of Christ So here is at least one translation worse then ours are there no more looke vpon your testaments of the later translators al in maner apes of Beza in one thus you reade Being disobediente vnto the vvhich thing they vvere ordeined in the next Being disobedieÌ„t vnto the vvhich thing they vvere euen ordeined this is a litle worse and with this word for word agreeth the later testament of the yere 1580 and the Scottish bible and this is altogether the first Geneua translation whom the French Geneua bible foloweth Sont rebelles a quoy aussi ils ont estè ordonneâ— They are rebels against Christ vvherevnto also they vvere ordayned Atqui si deus creauit aliquos ad contumaciam omnino author est eorum contumaciae quemadmodum si quos â—reâ—uit ad obedientiam omnino author est eoruÌ„ obedientiae saith Castalio against Beza But if God haue created some men to rebellion or disobedience he is author of their disobedience as if he haue created some to obedience he is truely author of their obedience And so by verdicte not only of catholikes but also of your owne great doctors such as are Luther Castalio Caluin c. and in deede by manifest reason here haue you 7. translations of the new testamente within these 500 yea within these 50 yeres worse then ours For finde your any one so wilful and horrible an Atheisme in ours and hardly set a fier on them al. Many moe examples could I geue but I wil not be troublesome nor enter new discourses For conuincing this so grosse and impudente a lye let the testimonie of that excellent man Beza so commended by M. W. suffice who accounteth our latine better then that of Luther then that of Basile then that of Erasmus then that of Castalio then any that euer he saw and consequently our english framed altogether according to that by M. W. owne iudgment can not be the worst The next three faultes are obiected only in wordes and proued by no example reason or coniecture or least argument in the world Mary that he his felowes are most guilty of them al both in the Discouerie and annotations of the testament it is in many places declared And iudge thou reader
euery day more and more misdoubt the ruine of their Atheistical gospel which dayly the more it is knovven the more it grovveth in horror and execration amonge honest natures not only such as are directed by the spirit of God but euen such as are somevvhat holpen vvith the assistance of natural wisedome and honest inclination But come vve to the particular crymes layde against vs and vvherevpon this dreadful inuectiue is properly builded vvhich is our corrupting the text or departing from our latin testament For as vve in examining their testament framed according to the greeke as they pretended reproued them not in their translation nor could so doe reasonably so long as precisely they kept them selues to their greeke for vvhether the greeke â—aâ—ere so to be folovved is an other question in like maner vve proposing to translate the latin vvhich to vs is as autentical as the greeke to them can not reasonabâ—y be blamed as false and corrupt translators but vvhere vve haue gone aside and leaft that original which vve pretended to translate And if herein vve haue erred vve gladly vvil acknovvledge our ouersight and are ready to ameÌ„d the same And here Reader hast thou specially to marke by what argument he verifieth that which he obiecteth Our prophane corruptions our outragâ—ous boldnes our more violence vsed to the holy testameÌ„t of Christ then euer vvas vsed by any kinde of heretike so notorious that al the world may iudge that our intent was To make the peopâ—e scorne and contemne the vvord of God how iustifieth â—e al this by what proofe for hitherto we haue wordes and nothing but wordes such as euery grammar-boy can picke out of the booke which he readeth and ioyne together But from M. W. the Q. Maiesties reader his auditors looke for sounder stuffe then such childish grammatical declaiming Many places saith he haue I noted vvherein you haue manifestly erred from that your vulgar latin edition that vvil I declare by one example the like vvhere of I could bring forth many Surely this is very weake to maintaine the greatnes of the accusation thundered out before And whereas you promise one example and geue vs two the reader may assure him self you would haue spared vs three if you had bene able But belyke these one or two are horrible monstrous faults and touch matters of maruelous great height Christs Diuinitie Humanitie Incarnation Heauen and Hel such as are the faults of these mens bibles and so these two may serue in steed of a number Let vs here them in M. W. owne words In the epistle to the Rom. ca. 13. v. 19. thus it is read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vvhich vvords the old interpreter turned thus Non vosmet ipsos desendentes but by you they are turned othervvise according to the greeke veritie Not reuenging your selues The like place is in Matth. 4. v. 16. vvhere these vvords 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the old interpreter turned The people vvhich vvalked in darkenes ambulauit in tenebris as also in Hierom vve reade but you folovving the greeke exemplat haue turned othervvise and more truly The people that sitteth in darknes Qui sedes in tenebris Thus M. VV. and this is al. And here first of al the reader may againe remeÌ„ber how iust cause I had to charge him with affected hypocrisie for exclaming so tragically vpon our testament wherein he findeth only these faultes which if they were faultes of what weight they are euery child may iudge But to passe that ouer let the reader see how blindly fovvly he is deceiued We haue left our latin folovved the greeke saith he in turning Defendentes Reuenging and why so hovv proueth he that vve leaue our latin he vvil ansvvere I suppose for reason him selfe yeldeth none because in al M. Coopers Dictionarie vve finde not that Defendere signifieth To reuenge If that be true then belike if vve vvere maister Coopers scholers the case vvould goe somvvhat hard vvith vs. But if he vvil vevv other Dictionaries as wel as M. Coopers he shal find both that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in greeke in latin is truely turned by Defendere and Defendere in latin is vvel and properly turned in English by Reuenge So the greeke dictionarie of Basile printed the yere 1557. teacheth vs. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 defendo vindico vlciscor in alicuius gratiam So the latin and french and latin greeke french dictionaries printed at Paris the yeres 1559.1575 1580. set forth by Sonnius Rob. Stephanus teach vs that Defendere signifieth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 defender garder et preseruer venger as vvel to reuenge as to defend gard preserue And which is to vs more then al the dictionarie of the Church that is the auncient ecclesiastical vse of this vvord in the scripture fathers teacheth vs somtimes in this place this to be his proper grammatical ense and so the auncieÌ„t fathers vsed this word So Tertullian Durum videbatur populo a deo expectare defensam edicendam postea per prophetam mihi defensam et ego defendam It seemed a hard thing for the Ievvish people in Moyses time to expect reuenge from God vvhich vvas aftervvards promised by the prophete saing To me reuenge and I vvil reuenge Where manifest it is that Defendere and defensa is graÌ„matically Reuenge To reuenge manifest it is that S. Ambrose doth not expound but grammatically take the word Defendere in the self same maner that is to signifie ReueÌ„ge eueÌ„ as S. Hier. put it or rather as I thinke leaft it being so vsed by the former traÌ„slator So doth Haymo so doth S. Bede and maketh no scruple at it but in his commentarie taken out of S. Augustine expresseth by Vindicare that which our interpreter vttered by Defendere And the same is most plaine by the traÌ„slatioÌ„ of the bible it self For whereas in other places for example in the storie of Holofernes the greeke is That he sware he would 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Reuenge him self of al the laÌ„ds that doth the old interpreter vtter by Defendere And in the 9. chap. where Iudith praiseth God saing according to the later English bible O Lord God of my father Symeon to vvhom thou gauest a svvord to take vengeance of the strangers the latin is Gladium ad defensioneÌ„ abienigenaruÌ„ the greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the English bible printed two yeres before traÌ„slateth A svvord for a defence against the enemies and putteth in the margent Or to reuengment The former bible vseth only Defence not ReueÌ„ge at al whereby it is cleare that those traÌ„slators hauing belike some more skil in the old vse of this word theÌ„ M.W. accoÌ„pted 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be wel turned ether by Reuenge which is more proper or by Defence which is also most true respecting the vse of the latin
for an old father reiecting S. Austin amongst the nevv maisters Thus saith Luther to Zuinglius and OecolaÌ„padius the rest of that sect thus he requesteth of them as we request of you being of the same order Obsecramus saith he obtestamur vos Sacramentarios c. VVe desire and beseech you Sacramentaries if hereafter you vvil needes rayle against the Lutherans or nevv papists as you cal vs yet abstaine from lying and fayne not nether vvrite of vs othervvise then vve publikely professe teach Nam ex his quae iam diximus patet nos non it a docere vt hactenus de nobis impudentissimè mentiti estis For by that vvhich hath bene spoken it is cleare that vve teach not so as hitherto you haue most impudently belyed vs. So Luther of the Zuinglians we leauing Luthers termes to him selfe request the like of our aduersaries If they tel vs of any fault coÌ„mitted in the haÌ„dling of Gods mysteries we are ready to acknowlegde and amend the same If we defend any point of doctrine erroneous in their iudgement let them refel it by Theological argument by Scriptures Fathers Councels or reasoÌ„ grounded vpon them and vve are in quiet and orderly sort ether to yeld to them or shew them their ouersight If they fal to scoffing scorning and making ridiculous boysh arguments of their owne then shew their profound wisedome in coÌ„futing the same and withal crye out vpon the Importunitie and Desperatnes of the papistes as we can not but tel them of their peeuishnes and laugh at such miserable shifts so we dare assure them that the wise wil neuer be moued to like wel of their ruinous gospel thorough such iesting trickes most vnfit for Diuines which are able to quayle and disgrace a good cause though it stoode vpon better grounds theÌ„ their gospel yet doth or I hope euer shal CHAP. XVII Of certaine blasphemies conteined in the Annotations As good orators according to the rules of their art reserue some chief and principal arguments vnto the end of purpose at parting to leaue a deepe impression in the minde of their auditors so doth M. VV. in this his inuectiue against vs. And increasing somewhat his accustomed style declaimeth terribly and laieth to our charge not errors or ouersights or meane corruptions as are our leauing the latin and folowing the greeke but horrible crimes euen blsaphemies blasphemies intolerable He presupposeth that wise men are somewhat moued by such reasons and perswasions as he hath vsed hetherto But it must needes be saith he that vvise men vvil be moued much more vvhen they consider the intolerable blasphemie of certaine places For answere whervnto we craue no pardon of him or the reader But if he proue his accusatioÌ„ let vs sustaine that iudgement as by the law of God and man to such Intolerable blasphemers is due Only of the reader we request indifferent audience and then we doubt not but this storme and tempest wil passe without any damage as quietly as the rest The first blasphemie is this The Apostle compareth together Christs priesthod and the priesthod of Melchisedech in the epistle to the Hebrues vvhere he maketh no mention at al of bread or vvine in which notvvithstanding they vvill Christ chiefly to haue bene like to Melchisedech Here these men vvrite flatly that of al those things vvhich are proposed by the Apostle it foloweth not that Christs priesthod is eternal and therefore that properly Christ is a priest after the order of Melchisedech because he instituted a sacrifice of his body to be continued for euer of his priests But this vvhich vvas principal the Apostle in that disputation omitted and brought those things vvhich proue not that vvhich he meant to proue But vvherein Christ vvas principally like vnto Melchisedech that must be learned not of the Apostle but of the Fathers vvho haue vvritten far more aptly and properly of Christs eternal priesthod then did the Apostle Of this he concludeth If they feare not to find some fault in the Apâ—stle and reprehend the holy ghost him selfe is it marueile if our doctrine displease them Thus M. VV. which if it be true if we thus disgrace the Apostle if we say he goeth about to proue a thing and proueth it not if we refuse to be taught of him and prefer the Fathers before him finally if we controle him so singular an instrument of the holy Ghost and reprehend the holy Ghost him selfe I can not blame M. W. if he crie out Intolerable blasphemie But if these things be so far of from al shevv of truth that there is no colour or pretence of so vnmeasurable lying vvhat should a man say but shame to the deuil and his ministers vvho novv are grovveÌ„ to such a passing impudencie that so they may haue licence to lye thâ—y care not hovv grosly and palpably they lye though they be takeÌ„ with the maner though it presently turne to their ovvne shame though the lyes which they inuent of others be most euidently and in truth only verified of them selues For vvho but they thus disgrace this Apostle and that in this epistle vvho but they find fault vvith the vvriter and reprehend the holy Ghost bearing vs in hand that this vvriting much differeth from other scriptures much from Christs preaching and the other Apostles therefore is to be reckened Prostipulis For stubble good for nothing els but for the fier for this vvould they signifie by that contemptible phrase And do not our english translators them selues in their Testaments leaue out S. Paules name in this epistle and plainly say It is not like that euer he was the author of it But let this passe vve vvil not vse this kinde of defence our vvords and sayings defend them selues sufficiently The vvords of vvhich he gathereth this Intolerable blasphemie stand thus Heb. 7. v. 17. A priest for euer Christ is not called a Priest for euer only for that his person is eternal or for that he sitteth on the right hand of God and perpetually praieth or maketh intercession for vs or for that the effect of his death is euerlasting for al this proueth not that in proper signification his Priesthod is perpetual but according to the iudgment of al the fathers grounded vpoÌ„ this deepe and diuine discourse of S. Paule and vpon the very nature definition and proprietie of Priesthod and the excellent act order of Melchisedec and the state of the nevv lavv he is a Priest for euer according to Melchisedecks order specially in respect of the sacrifice of his holy body and bloud instituted at his last supper and executed by his commission commaundement and perpetual concurrence vvith his priests in the formes of bread and vvine in vvhich things only the sayd high Priest Melchesedec did sacrifice For though S. Paule make no expresse mention hereof because of the depth of
vvay though in part against our vvilles especially vvhen vve are prouoked by aduersaries so insolent and ful of brauerie in vvordes and the same most feeble impotent vnable to performe any thing in deedes and therefore lying verie open to receaue a blovv of any scholer be he neuer so meane and indifferent And albeit no heretical opinion can lightly be defended vvithout many foule shiftes and inconueniences yet M.VV. hath brought him self vvithin harder straightes thē any other by reason of most straunge paradoxes which he hath taken vpon him to maintayne for vvhat man bearing the name of a Christian vvere he othervvise as excellent as euer vvas Cicero or Demosthenes can possibly without increase of infinite absurdities defend Luther against the Apostle S. Iames Beza against the Euangelist S. Luke Illyricus against S. Cyprian and al fathers of the primitiue Church And which in truth is more false wicked more vnreasonable and vnpossible then the rest M Iewels Challenge made at Paules crosse against al men liuing which long since is knowē for a mere shameles proud lying vaunt to Catholike and Protestant Lutheran and Zuinglian learned and vnlearned lippis tonsoribus and in effect notified for such by publike proclamation of the prince and Realme And therefore if he finde in this treatise some wordes more sharpe rough thē he is vsed to heare let him attribute that not to hatred of his person whom I neuer saw and for whose good and amendmēt in Christ God is my witnes I would refuse no paynes how soone I may fall into his handes our Lord knoweth but to hatred of his heresie and his immoderate heate ostentatiō vttered to colour and saue such things as can neuer stand but with open iniurie of Christ disgrace of his Apostles and ruine of Christian religion Our aduersaries Christian reader are now proceeded beyond their ordinarie beyond that which at first they pretended They pleade not now for scripture against fathers for the liuelie word of the Lord against mans traditions which a few yeres sithence was their common songe they are gone far beyond that note and oppose them selues not against S. Hierom S. Austin S. Gregorie but against the self same scripture the self fame liuelie word which they seemed so to honor against S. Iames S. Paule S. Luke against the Apostles and Euangelistes against the verie Gospel of our Sauiour And what can be their next steppe but to cal Christ him self in question to doubt whether he be the true Messias and redeemer of the world And if any of their brethren do moue that doubt as infinite there be that do yea that denie it vtterly what way in the world remayneth for profe thereof al other authoritie besides the written word as the old Fathers Coūcels Tradition Church being by these men quite abandoned and novv the vvritten vvord it self being reiected as far and vvhat Christian talking of these matters and seing these horrible mischeefes not intended in thought surmises cogitations and secret vvhisperings but practised and put in vre by vvriting defenses publike bookes open disputations manifest violences and most vniust murtherings of those which withstand it who I say though he were as pacient as Iob and as voyd of galle as the doue but would be moued Scriptū est saith the Apostle credidi propter quod locutus sum et nos credimus propter quod et loquimur It is vvritten I haue beleeued and therefore I speake vve also beleeue constantly therefore we speake boldy And as saith S. Hierom Quod simpliciter creditur simpliciter confitendum est And if Spiridion that reuerend and auncient Bishop in a great assemblie of Bishops were wel allowed for that he sharply rebuked in publike audience an other in learning his superior in vocation his equall who in citing a text of the gospell altered of finenes and curiositie one only word and the same of no great moment grabatum into lectulum what rigor and vehemencie of speach deserue not they who in Sacramentes chief pointes of faith in the Sacrifice in Baptisme in Priestes in Bishops in Church in Apostles in Angels in Christ him self haue made most prophane innouations and reduced all to the first ethnical termes But of this hitherto The rest which remaineth is only touching Luther Caluin whom M. W. singularly commendeth wherevnto he addeth certain ordinarie wordes of course concerning him self and his felowes how heroically they haue alwaies gotten the victorie ouer vs our forefathers Of these matters somwhat hath bene spoken before and therefore here I wil not say much Luther and Caluin if they were such notable good men they finde it now the better they were the better it is for them if otherwise M.W. commendation standeth them in smale steede Neuertheles certain it is both can not be so excellent as he would make thē being continually in opinion faith in word and worke in the whole trade of their lyfe and maners so opposite so contrary such deadly enemyes as their bookes testifie the world knoweth And M.W. doth verie vnwysely so oft and so painfully to range abrode in praise of that man who is so far abhorring from him and his secte that if Luther be right they are surely out of the way if Luther be a restorer of the gospel they are enemies and destroyers of the gospel if Luther be in heauen they continuing as they do are certain of hel For so Luther euery where pronounceth of them As for the other I meane that vulgar bragging and boasting it proueth not much It is a common itching humour of most kind of heretikes Omnium haereticorum quasiregularis est ista teme ritas saith S. Austin And S. Peter long before gaue it as a general marke of them that they shal be superba vanitatis loquentes speaking provvde arrogant vaine thinges Howbeit it seemeth in our dayes more proper in some special sort to M. VV. sect then to any other as iudgeth that excellent man of whom we last spake Martin Luther who reporteth of them and that by experience that they wil say any thing boast of any thing confidently affirme any thing bur proue nothing by any sound reason or argument nisi gloriatione inani de certissima veritate saue only by friuolous craking of the most cleare truth And if once they fal in to that veyne then is there no ende In suis libris gloriandi finem et modum nullum faciunt But against al such kind of talkatiue vanitie he geueth a very general and resolute lesson vvhich if I professe to take from him and commend the same to others M. w. can not be offended because he extolleh the man for so peerles a maister And this it is Nemo eorum obtestationibus et iactationibus quicquam cred at saith he Nam eos mentiri et dupliciter mentiri certissimum est Let
of Protestāts pa. 411. M. W. inuectiue against the Annotations of the nevv Testament page 476. The summe thereof pa. 477. Annotations of the new Testament vvhat they cōteine pa. 484.485 what fault M.W. findeth in them 484.491 Blasphemie in the Annotations touching Christes Priesthod pa. 528.529 Ansvvered 530. vsque ad 542. blasphemie touching merite of vvorkes pa. 543. ansvvered 544 c. Hovv the Protestants fel to cal the Pope of Rome Antichrist in praef pa. 42. M. W. knovveth not vvel vvhat that Antichrist is against vvhom he vvriteth Ibid. pa. 4. The absurditie of that assertion Ibid. pa. 4. The impossibilitie of that opinion 52.53.54 The end of that doctrine 72.73 Arguments ridiculous made by M. W. and attributed to vs. pa. 497.498.499.502.504.510.511.513 such arguments tend to make a mockerie of al faith 516.517.521.522.523 S. Leo the great called Antichrist by Beza pa. 155. The first Apostles of our nation were Papistes and Massing priestes by the cōfession of our aduersaries p. 165.166 Auncient archheretikes the protestants forefathers in sundrie partes of their faith pa. 31.32 S. Athanasius called Sathanasius by the heretikes pa. 84. S. Austin called a blind bussard pa. 166 S. Austin most filthily abused and mangled by the Sacramentaries pa. 166.177 S. Austin a priest 65. S. Austin S. Hierom old papistes 121. B BEza a fierbrand of sedition pa. 231. VVriters against him pa. 232. He correcteth S. Luke and our Sauiour 233.234.236.241 and is defended by M. VV. in so doing 236.237 His reasons 238.239 Refuted ibid. et 240.241 Refuted long ago by Luther 257.258 how he correcteth the new Testament 260.261 Bezaes fault in excusable for ought M. VV. ether hath said or can say 250. He doubteth of a part of S. Iohns gospel 363.364 He furthereth the Anabaptistes against Christes incarnation of the B. virgin 368.369 See Translation of scripture Bible-beaters pa. 400. The Bible neuer so mangled by any as by the protestants 400.401 Their bible is no bible 404.405 See Scriptures Ceremonies in Baptisme pa. 504.505 C Catholike doctrine vnpossible to be ouercome by any heresie least of al by this of our time pa. 41. The name Catholike not applicable to the English religion praef 87.88 Caluin condemneth the auncient fathers for approuing Melchisedecs sacrifice pa. 60.61 Caluin for the real presence pa. 223. Carolostadius exposition of Christes wordes Hoc est corpus meum pa. 254. allovved by Zuinglius 255. Castalios translation of the Testament much commended by the protestants pa. 380. His discours that Christ is not the Messias praef pa. 67.68 The Church catholike after Christes time is euer populous and spread in many nations pa. 350. et praef pa. 62.63 She is the ground of al faith 442. built vpō a rocke vnmoueable 479. No good worke or martyrdom profiteth to saluation out of the Catholike Church 116.117 Infinite difference betvvene the Catholike cause and the Protestante pa. 556.557.558 No stay in faith out of the Catholike Church praef pa. 24. To say that the vvhole Church hath fayled is to deny Christes incarnation pref p. 56.57 58.59 to make him a lyer ib. 66.67 to deny him to be the true Messias ib. 68.69.70.71 The inuisible Church a poetical fansie pref pa. 60. refelled by Melanchton 60.61 by Caluin Oecolampadius and others 62.63.64 the Protestants sensibly cōtradict them selues in deuising it 64.65 The foundation of the English Protestant church pa 480.481.482 The antiquitie thereof 524. It is ful of Atheistes 410. S. Chrysostom for the real presence p. 188.208.215.217.218 his place comparing Christ vvith Elias pa. 207. It proueth inuincibly the real presence a pa. 204. vsque ad 214. S. Chrysost for the sacrifice pa. 214.215 He is almost as ful of lies as words by the protestants doctrine pa. 227. S. Ciril for the real presence p. 198.199.200 D S. Damascene for the real presence pa. 201.202 Dauid George vpon vvhat ground he denied Christ pref pa. 66. Defendere is vvel translated to reuenge pa. 464.465.466.467 The Doctors of the primitiue Church condemned by euery priuate sectarie in that vvherein they gain say his heresie pa. 82.83 by the Zuinglians for approuing the sacrifice of Melchisedech pa. 60. and Masse pa. 69.70.71.72 and for disallowing the mariage of priestes and votaries 83. by the Puritanes for allovving holydaies in the honour of Christ his Saintes 84. by the Trinitarians for acknovvledging the B. Trinitie 84. by the Lutherans for denying the Vbiquetie of Christs body 85. by M. W. for their doctrine of penance and vvorkes 82 11◠and for sayng that Antichrist is one man pref pa. 44.45 See vvorkes E Elias cloke the Zuinglians supper compared together pa. 212.213 Elias shal come before the day of iudgment pa. 494.495 English vvriters 478. their maner of vvriting 284.285.475 and disputing 477. more absurd then others pref pa. 6.7 Those of the English religion are not Protestants pref pa. 88. they are properly called Zuinglians or Sacramentaries ibi 89.90.91 by vvhat names they cal them selues praef pa. 91. hovv they are called by Acte of parlament ibi 21. F The true meaning of Only faith iustifying pa. 280.411.412 Libertinisme the end thereof 127.128 The nature of true Christian faith pa. 517.518.519 hovv one part of faith is applied to the confirmation of an other 521. Ecclesiastical maner of fasting commeth from Christ and his Apostles pa. 89.90 The Zuinglians figure in Christs wordes touching the sacrament pa 251. The figure of the Catholikes ib. infinite difference betvvene these tvvo 252.253.254.255 Freevvil pa. 509. G Grace hindereth nothing the merite of workes pag. 102.103 To say God is the author of synne is to say God is an Idol or a deuil pa 451. The protestants say so 451.453 454. S. Gregorie much praysed by the Protestantes pag. 158. much rayled at by the Protestantes 164. A booke written against him by Vergerius 165. S. Gregorie a priest without al reason made minister by M. Iewel 164. The Greeke Testament more aduantageable for the Catholikes then the common latin pa 283.284 Our common latin Testament more pure then the greeke now extant 361.362.363 The greeke Testament now differeth much from the old 363.364 Additions rashly made to the greeke 365.366.367 Parcels of importance left out of the greeke 367.368.369.370 H HEauen is of grace vvorkes pa. 104.105.106.107 544.545 Of mercy and iustice 105.106 107.108.109 Heauen must receaue Christ Act. 3. v 21 maketh nothing against Christs presence in the sacrament pa. 179.180.181.193 handled at large a pag. 170. vsque ad 175. S. Paule to the Hebrevves as much doubted of in the primitiue church as the epistle of S. Iames. pa. 38.39 The Apostles cited not scripture alwaies according to the hebrue pa. 287.288.289 Bookes of scripture written in hebrue lost 290. S. Hierom preferring the hebrue before the latin in his time iustifieth not the hebrue of our time pa. 297.337 More probable that the hebrue hath bene corrupted then the latin pa. 297.298.299.300 Corruptions in the hebrue pa. 302. in Isai against
Christs diuinitie 303. confessed by Luther 304. cōfessed by Lyra. 306. Item in Ieremie 307. confessed and proued by Lyra. 308.309 in Isai against Christs passion 310.311 confessed by Luther 312.313 item in the psalmes 355. folowed by the Tigurine Translators 358. and Bucer 357. item in Daniel 313. General reasons why the hebrue text can not be so sincere as the heretikes pretend 317.318 c. Many bookes of the Prophetes and histories of the old Testament lost pa. 317.318 Great difference in the hebrue by mistaking one letter for an other pa. 322.323.325 That the hebrue bibles are faultie confessed by Castalio pa. 326.327 by D. Humfrey 327. by Conradus Pellicanus 327. It is a Iewish opinion to thinke them altogether faultles 327. They haue great diuersitie of reading 331.332 somewhat wanteth in them 332.333 Although S. Hierom appealed from the latin to the hebrue yet the like reason is not now pa. 333.334 He confesseth and proueth the hebrue to be faultie 334.335.336 An argument commonly made for the puritie of the hebrue pa. 338.339 answered 339 340. c. S. Iustine proueth the Iewes to haue corrupted their bible pa. 341.342.343.344 Hebrue knowledge much aduaunced by Catholikes pa. 352.440 The hebrue tonge much subiect to cauilling pa. 431.432.433 See Rabbines A man must haue a setled faith before he confer greeke and hebrue textes pa. 441.442 best Hebritians are not best Christians pa. 441. our first Apostles planted perfite christianitie without hebrue pa. 345. Heretikes generally geuen to scorning pa. 511. S. Hierom condemned as ignorant of al diuinitie pa. 371. I S. Iames epistle refused by Luther Lutherans Zuinglians pa. 8.9.10.11.12 et 17.22.23 Caluin mangleth it 288.289 M. Ievvels challenge pa. 133.138 The true image thereof 133. vsque ad 138. It is grounded vpon no reason or learning 138.139.140.141 It cōtaineth in effect only three articles the primacie of the Sea Apostolike the real presence and the sacrifice 133.136.137.138 See of them in their seueral places M. Ievvels passing vanitie in bragging and lying pa. 460. his maner of ansvvering D. Harding pref 75.76 Reuerence done to the name of Iesus pa. 513.514.515 The Ievves corrupt the text of scripture pa. 304. in despite of Christians 314.329 negligent in conseruing their scriptures 328.329 their malice against the Sea of Rome 329.330 Very probable that Christ reprehended them for corrupting the scripture 339. See Hebrue S. Iohn Baptist liued a monastical life pa. 492. K That the vvise men vvhich came to worship Christ were kings pa. 485. vsque ad 489. that they vvere three 489. 490. their names 490.491 L S. Lukes gospel called in question pa. 27.28.29.32 Luthers vvorkes altered and corrupted by the Lutherans pa. 5 6.13 by the Caluinists 7. He denieth S. Iames epistle p. 11. his immoderate bragging 42. his extreme hatred of the Sacramentaries 43.44.45.46 his iudgment of their religion 52.53.483 he refuseth their bibles 45. singularly honoured by the English church 18.191 preferred by M. W. before al doctors 47. most absurdly 48.50 He derideth the Zuinglians fond arguments 258. Luther a shameful corrupter of scripture 377.378 Lucians true histories praef pa. 4.5 M Heretical martyrs damned pa. 117. S. Matthevv vvrote his gospel in hebrue pa. 290. the protestants hold the greeke translatiō more autentical 291. The protestants reason against the Machabees is as forcible against S. Luke S. Paul 506.507.508 Melchisedech did sacrifice pa. 57. graūted by M. W. denied by al other protestants pa. 58.59.60 acknovvleged by the auncient fathers 60. vvhy not expressed by the Apostle 61.537 c. Melanchthon for the real presence pa. 190. Merite of vvorkes See in Heauen and vvorkes N Noueltie of vvords daungerous in Christian religion pa. 266.267 exemplified 268.269 it induceth contempt of faith 270. and leadeth to paganisme 276.277.278 O Only faith See Faith P Penance what it is by the Protestants doctrine 86.90.91 It reiecteth external workes of fasting discipline ibid. which are required by the scripture 87.88.89 90. by S. Cypian and the primitiue church 124.125 the Catholike doctrine touching the value of them 92. the Protestantes contradictory argument against them 91. 93.94 S. Peters being at Roome denyed most absurdly pa. 130.131.132 his primacie 498.510 Pilgrimage to holy places pa. 502. 503.512.513 Primacie of the Romane Sea proued euidently by those fathers whom M. Iewel nameth his maisters to the contrary pa. 143. by Anacletus and Xystus 143.144 by S. Leo 146 147. S. Leo gouerneth in al partes of Christēdom 147.148.149 his authoritie ouer the bishop of Constantinople 148. he summoneth general Councels 152. he is head of them 153. no lawful Councel without his approbation 152. This primacie is grounded vpon Christes words and the Apostles ordinance 143.144.153 S. Gregorie accompteth the Romane Church head of al other pa. 156.158 his authoritie ouer the bishop of Constantinople 156. ouer the bishops of Europe Asia and Africa 156.157 158.162.163 The Protestants common obiection taken out of S. Gregorie answered pa. 159.160.161.162 the name vniuersal in what sort and sense disliked by S. Gregorie pa. 160.161.163 Priestes properly so called were appointed by Christ pa. 64. S. Austin such a priest 64.65.66 So was S. Leo and S. Hierom. 69. The church of Christ was neuer ruled but by such priests 67.68.69 Such were the orderers of our Ecclesiastical state and builders of our churches in England 68. S. Paules discourse of Christs eternall priesthod Hebr. 7. maketh nothing against the priesthod of the church pag. 74. vsque ad 79. The name of Protestants praef pa. 88.90 It agreeth not properly to our English gospellers ibi In their faith there is no stay or certaintie praef pa. 7.24.37 Exemplified by the Supremacie of princes ibid 9.10 by baptisme 11.12 Confirmation 13. Christs descending into hel 14. Christs diuinitie 14.15 Rebellion against princes 15.16 Regimēt of women 18. great difference in their Communion bookes 11.12.13 the diuers chaunges of religion in England since the time of schisme 20.21.22 In the Protestants vvriting and disputing there is no ground pref pa. 8. exemplified by their refusal of scriptures ibid. pa. 26. Apostolical Traditions and general Councels ibi Auncient fathers 27. Apostles Doctors of their owne 28.29.30 Martirs and whole Churches of their owne 30.31.32 They reduce al to priuate fansie 35.36.37.38 They passe the auncient heretikes in denial of al things pa. 38.39 their manifold Popes 33.34 The forefathers of the Protestants church pa. 349. of whom they must looke for the true scripture 348.351 a true confession of a principal protestant 407. their churches voyd of al truth and knowledge 407.408 they perswade Atheisme by scripture 408.409 al their preaching and writing tendeth therevnto 410.411.428 their vaunting of the cleare light of the gospel sensibly refuted 408. The Protestants maner of ansvvering the Catholikes pag. 412. They deny al Doctors 413. They deny sundry partes of scripture 413.414 They pretend the greeke 415. They falsely translate the greeke 416. They refuse the ordinary sense of the greeke
Hier. of corrupting of the scriptures S. Hierom praysing the hebrew bibles of his tyme nothing iustifieth these of our time An argumeÌ„t commonly made for the puritie of the hebrew bibles The answere Very probable that Christ noted the Iewes for corrupting the text of scripture IoaÌ„ 21. v. 25 Mat. 5. v. 22. v. 28. 32. 34. 38. 43. The whole law for many yeres together lost by the Iews 4 Reg. c. 22. Iustinus martyr tom 2. pag. 141. S. Iustine the Martyr conuinceth the Iewes of mangling the scriptures Esd â— Lactant. lib. 4. cap. 18. Ierem. ca. 11. Whole sentences cut out of the bibles by the Iewes The real presence Ihon 6. Mat. 26. Hierom. in Ieremi ca. 11. Tertul. in lib. contra Iudaeos Oecolamp in Ierem ca. 11. Psal 95. Iustinus vbi supra pa. 142 In quibusdaÌ„ exemplaribus August in Psal 9â— Our first preachers forefathers perfecte Christians without hebrew bibles pag. 19.20 The church hath faithfully coÌ„serued the scriptures notwithstaÌ„ding the corruption of the hebrew bibles â—he office of the true Church 1. Tim. 3. vers 15. Eph. 5. c. D. Whit. in the defense c. tract 2 pag. 87. tract 7. pag. 257.265.266.285.287.289 No more reason that euery particular man should prescribe the church in this then that euerie subiect should prescribe the prince how to rule his realme The protestantes can not possibly beleue any bible deliuered them by the Cath. Church in what language so euer August de vtil credendi ca. 14. Fox actes monumeÌ„tes edit 1563. pag. 44.45.91.101.102.103.108.141 140.235.251 The protestantes church and succession Whit. in the defens c. tract 8. chap. 6. pag. 465. Act. cap. â— How standeth this with the inuisibilitie general suppression of the Church which the Tower disputers so painfully labour to proue The second days conference Whit. coÌ„tra Sander p. 47 A short and true answer to M. W. demaund Such demaunders wil neuer be satisfied nether can they while they remain so mynded Mat. 22. v. 18. Mat. 7. v. 6. pag. 16. We honour esteeme of the hebrew bibles notwithstanding we alter not our fayth vpon pretence thereof The Protestants partial iudges for the Iewes against the Christians and Church Catholike Discouer c. 22 num 9.10.11.12 in the preface nu 39. In the preface to the reader nu 44. and c. 22. num 9. Act. 2. v. â—5 Sixtus â—enens in Bibliotheca sancta lib. â— pag. 648. The ProtestaÌ„ts secretly begin to disproue the Churches fayth touching the maner of Christs crucifying Calfh against the crosse Marlor in Psal 22. v. 17 Muscul io Maâ— cap. 27. Bucer in Psal 22. v. 17. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 IoaÌ„ 19. v. 36. Zuing. tom 3. in Eâ—chirid psalmorum Psa 21. The Tigurine translatioÌ„ wicked and Iuysh against the crucifying of Christ to like purpose is the translation of Leo Iudae Cinzit me â—cu leo manus meas c. Pag. 16. The conclusion The preface of the new testament Reasons to iustifie the latin testament in coÌ„parison of the Greeke Beza in praefat noui testamenti anno 1556. The greeke printes now in vse are not sufficieÌ„t to disproue the Latin testament Beza in IoaÌ„ ca. 7. v. 53. Veteres illi reiecerunt Beza doubteth of a part of S. Iohns gospel Bez. ad Eph. 3. vers 14. In graecis no extat Additions rashly made to the greeke Ioan. 8. v. 59 Beza in IoaÌ„ cap. 8. v. 59. Of the yere 1561. 1562. 1577. 1579. No certaintie in the English translations anno 1580. Scripture made Canonical not Canonical according to Bezaes fansie Of the yere 1556. Of the yere 1565. Eras in Annot Bulling decade 5. serâ— 5. Assuere suas nugaâ— Parcels of importance heretically leaft out of the greeke Before cap. 10. pa. 248 Luc. 1. v. 35. Carol. Molin in nou testament part 1. See the greeke testament of Basil print of the yere 1536. 1540. 1543. Zuriâ— 1547. Geneua 1565. 1576. Beza in testameÌ„t 1556. in Luc. 1. vers 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza furthereth the Anabaptistes against Christs incarnation of the blessed Virgin Câ—rol Mol. in testameÌ„t par 64. Mar. 11. v. 26 Beza in illuÌ„ locum Illyric in clau par 1. praefat If S Hier the Church in his time were destitute of these helpes is Illyricus the rest of that cruâ— furnished with them Religious sinceritie principally to be regarded in an interpreter of the scripture Our old interpreter had varietie choise of good greeke copies Pag. 362. Beza in Mar. ca. 1. vers 2. Hiero. de optimo genere interpretaÌ„di c. 3. Augu. quest 57. vet nou test Epiph. coÌ„tra haereses li. 2 Chrisost ca. 1. Marci Bez. in Luc. cap. 8. v. 54. The religious fidelitie sinceritie of our old interpreter Beza in 1. c. Lucae v. 1. Molin par 30. Humfred de ratione interp lib. 1. pag. 74 Humfred ibid. pa. 175. Protestant translators of the new testament al partial in fauour of their seueral heresies and so al false corrupt Sleid. li. 17. in fine Brent in Apolog conf Wirten cap. de horis canonicis Bey viertzâ—hin hundert ketzerlycher lugeÌ„ Lindan dubitant dial 1. pa. 79. Luthers traÌ„slation ful of corruption in fauour of Lutheranisme Zuing. to 2. ad Luther lib. de sacrameÌ„to fo 412 Ibid. fo 143 Manifestus publicus sacrae scripturae corruptor adulterator Two fitte Apostles for such a church as they erected No translation of scripture made by a Zuinglian can possibly be good Ibid. apud Zuingl fol. 388.389 Particular translations of diuers protestaÌ„tes The translation of Basile wicked Bez. in resp ad defens respoÌ„sio Castalion Humfred de rat interpret li. 1 pa 62 63.189 Gesner in Bibliotheca Sebastia Castalio Beza in test an 1556. in praefat in Mat. c. 3. 1. Cor 1. Mat. 4. Luc. 2. Act. 8. 10. The translation of Castalio Ethnical Caluin in his translatioÌ„ altereth and addeth to the text of the gospel Carol. Mol. in sua trans testam noui parte 11. fo 110. Bezaes traÌ„slation more disagreing from it self and worse then any of the rest Before c. 10. Carol. Moli in testam part 8 13.14 21.23 Part. 26.30.40.64 Part. 64.65.66.74.99 A prety way to rocoÌ„cile places that seeme to disagree Molin in Luc. 17. Our old translation better then al ProtestaÌ„t translations Carolus â—olincus Vide ibi in Ioan. 7. v. 35. Castalio in defens pag. 179 174.18â—.183.188.198.202.206.213 Castal defens trans pag. 176. Ibi. pag. 182 183. Bezaes innumerable corruptions in the new testament Before c. 10. Beza then especially corrupteth the text when he thereby may most dishonour Christ Rom. 6. v. 6. Castalio vbi sup pa. 192. English traÌ„slations set forth in schisme al faultie King Henries bibles King Edwardes Humfred de sat inter li. 3. pa. 523. The bibles set forth in our time The yere when it was printed is not put in the print Before c. 11. Not possible to put forth any translation more indifferent
1â—5 Damaso quaest 2. Many greate Grecians and HebraiciaÌ„s are wicked and detestable Christians First we must be sure of our fayth a Timoth. 3. vers 15. b Ephes 5. vers 25. c Gal. 4. v. 26. d 1. Pet. 3. vers 20.21 e Mat. 13. saepe f See before chap. 6. pag. 117. Act. 8. v. 20. Aug confes lib. 8. ca. 8. pag. 14.15 M. W. inuectiue against the late Catholike traÌ„slation of the new Testament Affected hypocrisie Before pag. 372.373.374.383 Our English translation folowing so precysely the old latin can not be so corrupt as M.W. imagineth Pag. 15. Mat. 27. Ioan. 11. v. 48. The end of the new gospel carnal libertie The true grace of this amplifying figure In his sermon printed fo 14. see the Discouerie pa. 178. A most absurd false amplification To say God is author of synne is to say that god is a deuil Caluin in instructio contra Libertinos ca. 14. Deum in diabolum transformaÌ„t English translatioÌ„s leade men to that opinion 1. Pet. 2. v. 8. Illyr glos in 1. Pet. c. 2. vers 8. Castalio defensio suae translatio pag 153.154.155 Beza in â— Pet. 2. v. 8. God createth men to sinne Beza Bible of the yere 1577. the yere 1579. The yere 1580. The yere 1579. Printed at Geneua the yere 1561. Cast defens suae translacions p. 155. Al these translations by verdicte of Caluin make god an idol a deuel M.W. in his last short sentence 6. refelleth gain sayeth whatsoeuer he hath sayd before The protestants more desyrous of nouelty of words then euer were any heretikes Oecolam Esa c. 1. v. 1. A far greater alteration and nouelty in articles of fayth The authors and writers of sundry bookes of scripture mocked scorned by the protestants a The tower disputatioÌ„s the 4 day b Zuingl to 1 art 57. fol. 100. c Idem to 3 in rhrenos Iere. fo 384. d Magdeb. see before pag 414. e Lutheranes and Zuinglianes see before chap 1. The new preaching a very mockery of scripture 1. Cor. 7. v. 9. see the annotations vpon that chap. Ephe. 5. v. 29 The protestants vse scripture for a veyle 〈◊〉 coueral filthynes 1. Tim. 5. v. 8 Pet. Mar de votis cael Iewel defence of the Apolog. part 6. ca. 8. ¶ 1. Incredible impudency in bragging and lying The particular faultes of our English translation A terrible accusation How weakely the same is iustified Vbi supra Marke the greuousnes of these 2. faultes Defendere is wel translated to reueng Tertullian contra Martionem li. 2 Ambros in Rom. ca. 12. Beda in Rom. 12. Iudith 1. v. 12. 2. v. 1. ca. 9. v. 2. The yere 1579. 1577. 1562. Ecclesiastici 30. v. 6. Of the yeres 1562.1577.1579 Ecclesiaâ—â—ici 48. v. 7. Great difference oft-times in the sense of a word as it is vsed by ecclesiastical writers prophane Iacob 3. v. 4. Rom. 4. v. 20. Mat. 11. v. 10.24 Rom. 12. v. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Defendentes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mihi vindicta A great and monstruous fault to traÌ„slate a thing more truly The vnconscionable demeanure of our aduersaries Esa 9. v. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza Illyricus Castalio Parturiuâ—â— montea Iuuenal Pag. 21. The incredible lying falsifications vsed by the English writers of our time are a great motiue to the Catholike fayth Pag. 22. Mat. 2. v. 11. mat 3. v. 12. Act. 7. v. 58. The summe of M W accusation The protestants maner of disputing Tower disputation Tiburne disputation See M. Fox martirologe in King Henries time Luc. 12. v. 48 English writers The Catholike Church built vpon a rocke Christ and therefore in al times constant vnmoueable The English church buâ—lt vpon the fauour of Lords Ladies gentlemen and gentlewemen and therefore euer tottering and variable Fox act and monumentes pag. 512 Desyre of reuenge Ibid. p. 592. Couetousnes Fox acts monumeÌ„ts in Henri 8. pa. 1295. postremae aeditionis Fox actes monumeÌ„ts in the end of king Henryes lyfe pag. 682. Continual chaunge of the English fayth Luthers iudgement of the Sacramentarie religion Luther tom 7. defensio verborum coenae fol. 381. Trepida coÌ„scientia Faultes historical Note In the preface fol. b. ii In Mat. 2. v. 11. Psal 71. Esa 60. Chrysost Theophil Cic. de diuinat Plin. lib. 20. Esther 1.13.14 Tob. 2.15 Ambro. 1. offic ca. 12. That the wise men were kingâ— Tertullian contra Marcionem l. 3. Ciprian ser de Bapt. numer 1. Chrys hom 1. ex variis in Mat. locis Hier. in psa 71. Tertull. coÌ„tra Iudaeos probatio natiuit Christi Aug. ser 43. ad fatres in Ere Claudian in EpigraÌ„a Isidorus Remigius apud D. Tho. in catena in Mat. 2. Theophi in Mat. 2. Ansel in Mat. ca. 2. Gesnerus in PaÌ„dectis Vniuersa lib. vltimo tit 2. fol. 29. Zuing. to 4. in Mat. ca. 2. That the wise men were three August ser 1 de epipha Leo sermo 2.3.4.5.6.8 Their names 2. Tim. 3. v. 8. Mat. 3. v. 1. Monastical life Magd. cent 5. c. 6. pag. 711. Cent. 1. li. 1. cap. 10. Cythraeus in 3. ca. Mat. â—ucerus ibi Bee Canis de verbi Dei corruptelis lib. 5. c. 2.3.4 An easy kind of answering Act. 7. v. 58. Relikes miracles in the honor of Martyrs Hebrew 9. vers 4. Mat. 17. v. 11 Apoc. c. 11. vers 3. Aug. de ciuit li. 20. cap. 29. Intolerable boldnes and arrogancie Faultes in making arguments Whit. pa. 22 ArgumeÌ„t 1. Mat. 14. v. 26 Real presence Mat. 14. v. 29 Ioan. 3. v. 14 cal 4. d Scripture made ridiculous wheÌ„ it commeth to the handling of prophane men Peters primacy Luc. 10. v. 35. Maâ— 17. v. 2. Mat. 22. v. 30 Scripture falsified CommunioÌ„ booke in the collect of Michelmas day The Saints heare our prayers Mat. 27. v. 59 S. Hiero. in hunc locum To. 1. Conc. Mat. 28. v. 1. Pilgrimage to holy places In epist 17. Paul Eusâ— ad Marcel tom 1. Esa 11. Mar. 16. v. 12 Christ body vnder diuers formes Mar. 7. v. 34. Mat. 27. v. 46 Aug. de Ecclesiasticis dogma c. 31 Idem de nuptâ—is concupis eÌ„â—â—a lib. 2 ca. 18. 29. Exorcismes and other ceremonies in baptisme Luc. 1. v. 3. Pag. 3. In the 4. daies conference The protestants reason against the Machabees is as forcible against S. Lukes gospel More arguments of humane spirit in S. Paules epistles theÌ„ in the booke of Machabees Rom. 25. v. 15. 1. Cor. 2. v. 3 Ibi. c. 11. v. 1.17 Ib. c. 12. v. 11 Rom. 15. v. 30. 2. Cor. 6.11 Ephe. 6. 19. Colos 4.3 Thes 5.25 Sacred writers and holy CouÌ„cels The second booke of the Machabees 1. Mach. 2. 15. Luc. 2. v. 14. This is M. W. glose added to the text Free wil. Luc. 5. v. 3. The Catholike Church Peters ship Gregor in Iob. li. 17. c. 14. See S Amb. in Luc lib. 4 cap. 5. Aug. quaest euaÌ„g l. 2.
c. 2 â—ed in Luc. cap. 5. Act. 4. v. 37. 2. Pet. 3. v. 3. Psal 1. Heretikes generally geuen to scorning mocking Vide Brentium contra Bullinger de mansionibus in caelo anno 1561. fol. 22.23.35 Carlile in his booke that Christ descended not in to hel fol. 35 36 37 38 96 97 98. Sleid. li. 17. pa. 311. 4. Reg. 4. v. 37. Luc. 8. v. 47. Luc. 7. v. 38. Act. 8. v. 27. Pilgrimage to holy places Phil. 2. v. â—0 D. Whit. defens tract 21. c. 7. pa. 743. M.W. taketh parte with Iewes and Infidels against Christians Why Christians do honour at the name of Iesus The Protestantes vse more deuotion and yelde more reuerence to the pictur of a dog and a lyon then to the name image or crosse of Christ. The Protestants wil haue no reuerence done at the name of Iesus How Catholikes honour the name of Iesus and other things pertaining to him Wherevnto the Protestants tenâ—t by such ridiculous coÌ„clusions Heb. 1. v. 1. Ibi. c 11. v. 1. Rom. 8. v. 24 The true nature of Christian faith Marc. 12. Mat. 22. 1. Cor. 15. How S. Paul proueth the resurrection Cor. 15. How one part or article of faith is applied to the confirmation of an other Before pa. 177.178 Whitg defeÌ„ce against M. Car. Trac 3. c. 6. ¶ 4. The English writers teach the way to scorne al Christian religion M. Iewel thoroughout his first booke against â— Harding Pag. 2â— Pag. 114. Annot. in Mat. cap. 10. v. 22. The antiquitie of the Protestants church Haddon in fine epist contra Osoriâ—â—â— Aug. de nupt et con cupis lib â— cap. 31. Luth. to 7. defens verboruÌ„ coenae fol. 400. Debacchari The Zuinglians notable lyers The pitiful shiftes of our aduersaries Pag. 23. Hebr. 7. v 17. The first blasphemy The answere Lye vpoÌ„ lye S. Paules epistle to the hebrewes reiected by the protestants Before pag. 414. 1. Cor. 3. v. 12 Bible of the yere 1579. in the preface of this epistle How Christ is a priest for euer Christs eternal priesthod consisteth in the perpetual sacrifice of his body bloud in the Church The protestants cauilling vpon particles against Melchisedecks sacrifice priesthod directly against the Apostle Christs eternal priesthod and sacrifice in the Church is proued out of the fathers Heretikes very blynd in the scripture though they crake much of their deepe insight in them Tit. 3. v. â— Rom. 1. v. 28 Luc. 8. v. 10. 2. Thess 2. v 11. See the Anotations in cap. 5. v. 11. 7. v. 11.12 c. 9.12.15.25 c. 10. v. 2. Multiplication of lyes 7. v. 4.11.23.9 v 12.15.10 v. 2.4.5.11 No time to talke of the Sacrifice of the church wheÌ„ the Sacrifice of the crosse is not first beleeued The auncient fathers speake more plainely of the church Sacrifice then doth S. Paule without any derogation to S. Paule Act. 2. v. 22. Ioan. c. 12.13 14.15.16.17 The councel of Nice expressed the consubstantialitie of Christ with his father more plainely then any Euangelist M.W. last obiection Answered Answered by him self before pag. 17. Answered by M. Iewel Iewel in his Replie art 1 ¶ 5. in M. W. translation pag. 9. Answered by Illyricus Illyric ad Heb. c. 7. v. â— Who euer saw such foly pride and partialitie Mat. 7. v. 3. The second and last blasphemie pag. 24. Rom. 6. v. 23 The principal of these Sorbonists after S. Paule is S. Austin Life euerlasting a stipend and yet grace Aug. epist 105. How eternal life is of grace yet the reward of iustice Let M W. marke this True it is Al the Prophetes Euangelists Apostles were Sorbonists by M. W. iudgment a Prou. 11. v. 18. c. 24. v. 12 Sap. 5.16 ca. 10.17 Ecclesia 16.12 c. 51.38 b Psal 61.12 c Esa 40.10 c. 62.11 d Ierem. 31.16 e 1. Peter 1.17 f 2. Ioan. 8. Apoc. 2.23 c. 22.12 g Rom. 2.6 1. Cor. 3.8 2. Cor. 5.10 2. Thess 1. v. 6.7 h Mat. 5.12 c. 6.1 c. 10.41 c. 16.27 c. 20.8 c. 25. Sorbone a famous College in Paris Shameful ignorance See before pag. 99.100 c. M. W. hath vndertaken hard matters to defend Chap. 1. Chap. 10. Chap. 5. M Iewels chalenge Chap. 7. The proceeding of our aduersaries Many of theÌ„ are proceeded thus far already See the prface pa. 65.66 c 2. Cor. 4. Hieron ad TheophiluÌ„ contra errores Ioannis Hieros Nicep li. 8. cap. 42. Mar. 2. v. 11. See before chap. 11. pag 31.32 If Luther be saâ—ed al they of English religion are damned See before chap. 3. Aug. epi. 56. 2. Pet. 2. v. 28 The ZuingliaÌ„s proue al thing by boasting Luther defens verborum caenae fol. 405. Ibi. fol. 381.382 Ibid. fo 394 406. No more reason to be a Zuinglian then a Lutheran or Arrian â—nfinite difâ—â—rence beâ—wene the Catholike â—ause and â—he proteâ—tantes Church of â—he tyme present Church of the tyme past Scriptures Preface pa. 35.36 Iudgment Neuer was there any common welth worse ordered theÌ„ the Church of Christ by the Protestants diuinitie No ground of the English religion See chap. 7. pag. 165. Chap. 4. pa. 69.70 c. c. 6. p. 121.122 Chap. 3. pag. 45. Chap. 1. 2.
Christians and Catholikes who could ether perceaue what I meant or who would not iudge that I did them great iniury in making them to write against Christians which none do but Iewes Turkes or against Catholikes vvhich none do but heretikes and Apostataes And marueil it is that the name of Protestātes is novv grovven into so great dislike vvhich hitherto hath bene so magnified in bookes pulpits and ordinarie phrase of talke and vvhich M. Fox in his huge volume of Actes and Monumentes alvvayes vseth as most proper to their gospel maketh it opposite sometimes to Papistes somtimes to Catholikes which he vseth for one But the truth is those that professe the English faith and religion ether haue no name at al to be knovven by but the common name of heretikes vvhich is to general and vvould be to odious or their most propre name is Zuinglians or Sacramentaries For to cal them Catholikes and Christians besides that it is false and ridiculous and may vvith like probabilitie be chalenged of euery other kind of secte Lutheran Brentian Arrian Puritan besides that their greatest vvriters mocke and scorne at the name Catholike as Popish and superstitious besides this I say it expresseth not that particular religion in vvhich they differre from the rest of the Christian vvorld for vvhich vve vvrite against them and for vvhich the Lutheranes oppose thē selues against them and vvhich by their name ought specially to be signified The name of Protestantes which commonly they vsurpe is wrongfully chalenged of them as which duely only belongeth to the Lutheranes who for opposing them selues against the decrees of the Empyre Emperour touching Catholike religion and protesting that they would stand in defence of their owne according to the Confession exhibited at Auspurg were first for their so doing and protesting named Protestantes as much to say as men that stood and protested against the Catholike faith for their priuate in such sort as hath bene noted From which Confession of theirs as likewise from al other communion those of the English religion vvere by the name of Zuinglians expresly excluded And briefly that no other name can be duely applied vnto them besides the name of Zuinglians by this reason it may playnely appeare When they brake from the rest of the Christian vvorld vvhich they say vvas couered vvith palpable darkenes and betooke them selues to that light of the gospel vvhereof novv they so much brag and boast vvho vvas their maister ringleader and Apostle therein but Huldericus Zuinglius So much they vvrite most euidently in the Apologie of their English church In the middest of that darknes say they those most excellent men Martin Luther and Hulderike Zuinglius sent from God to illuminate the vvhole vvorld first came to the Gospel Missi à Deo ad illustrandum terrarum orbem primū accesserunt ad Euangelium Now whereas them selues al other name those gospellers which folow Luthers sense and interpretation by the name of Lutherans they vvho prefer Zuinglius before Luther and professe them selues to haue receaued the light of the Gospel from him hovv should they be called but Zuinglians not only for like reason vvhich hath bene vsed in al times and ages from the first beginning of the primitiue Church vvhere the Secte-maisters haue geuen appellation to their after-commers as in Marcion Valentinus Carpocrates Nouatus the rest but much more and especially because them selues chalenge him for their maister in their particular faith and religion And therefore it can not be avoided but as Luthers scholers are called Lutherans so Zuinglius disciples ought of like right to be called Zuinglians And to end this quarel our aduersaries them selues who haue written of these matters shal serue to quite vs of al fault M. Fox in his storie when soeuer he speaketh of that sect vvhich him self best-liked ordinarily calleth them sometime Protestants sometime Hussites sometime at large men forward in promoting the proceedings of the gospel sometime more briefly Gospellers And writing precisely of the diuision betvvene Luther and Zuinglius he saith VVith Luther in the opinion of the Sacrament consented the Saxons vvith the other side of Zuinglius vvent the Heluetians and as time did grow so the diuision of these opinions increased in sides and spread in farther realmes and countries the one part being called of Luther Lutherans the other hauing the name of Sacramentaries So in Sleidan vve haue very common the name of Zuinglians and Sacramentaries as likewise he calleth the other part Lutherans and their religion Lutheranisme and euen so they termed them selues It were tedious to iustifie this out of Luther Zuinglius especially al historigraphers of our age And in truth it is much like as if a man should light a candle at noone-tide Wherefore in this we must desyre our aduersaries to beare with vs if we speake not only as al Catholikes but as al Protestants as Luther as Sleidan as M. Fox as generally al writers in their bookes and volumes are accustomed to speake and as the world of thē hath learned and as the aduersaries them selues by al reason induce vs to speake and as of necessitie we must speake if we wil speake and be vnderstoode Touching any other fault I shal be ready ether to defēd it or to correct it to correct it if it be noted against me iustly to defend it if it be obiected vndeseruedly this I protest not only in words as cōmonly do al Protestantes but in simplicitie of truth as meaning to performe the same And therefore willingly I submit what so euer I haue written to the iudgment of al Catholikes symply and with out exception to whom iudgment of these matters appertaineth to the iudgment of al Protestants euen of M. W. him selfe so far furth as he shal geue censure of it and refel it by the written word of God expounded according to the analogie of faith A TABLE OF THE CHAPTERS Chap. I. Of Luthers contemning S. Iames his Epistle and calling it stramineam Pag. 1. Chap. II. Of the Canonical scriptures and that the English cleargie in accepting some and refusing others are lead by no learning or diuinitie but by mere opinion fantasie Pa. 19. Chap. III. How M.W. defendeth Luther preferring his priuate iudgement before al auncient fathers and Doctors Pag. 42. Chap. IIII. Of priesthod and the sacrifice continued after Christ in the state of the new testament and that it derogateth nothing from Christ Pa. 56. Chap. V. Of Penance and the value of good workes touching iustificatiō and life eternal Pag. 82. Chap. VI. How vnreasonably M.W. behaueth him self in reprouing and approuing the auncient fathers for their doctrine touching good workes Pag. 114. Chap. VII Of M. Iewels challenge renewed by M. W. and the vanitie and falshod thereof Pag. 129. Chap. VIII Of Beza corruptly trāslating a place of scripture Act. 3. and of the real presence Pag. 169.
Chap. IX Wherein is refelled M.W. answere to certaine places of S. Chrysostom touching the real presence and sacrifice Pag. 203. Chap. X. Of the place in S. Lukes Gospel cap. 22. corrupted by Beza Pag. 231. Chap. XI M.W. general answere to the booke of Discouerie and of the notable impietie committed by the translators of the English Bibles Pag. 260. Chap. XII M. W. reasons against the latin bible are answered and the same bible is proued to be in sundrie places more pure sincere then the hebrue now extant Pag. 280. Chap. XIII Of the puritie of our latin testament in respect of the greeke copies now extant Item a comparison of our translator with other of this age with an answere to those obiections which M. W. deuiseth against him Pag. 360. Chap. XIIII That to leaue the ordinarie translation of the bible appointed by the Church and to appeale to the hebrue greeke and such new diuers translations as the protestants haue made is the very way to Atheisme and Infidelitie Pag. 406. Chap. XV. How M.W. inueigheth against the new testament lately set forth in this college with a cleare refutation of such faultes as he findeth in the translation thereof Pag. 443. Chap. XVI A defence of such faultes as are found in the Annotations of the new testament Pag. 474. Chap. XVII Of certaine blasphemies contained in the Annotations pag. 527. The Conclusion Pag. 548. A REFVTATION OF M. WHITAKERS REPREHENSION OF THE LATE ENGLISH TRANSLAtiō and Catholike Annotations of the new Testament and of the booke of Discouery of hereticall corruptions CHAP. 1. Of Luthers contemning S. Iames his Epistle and callinge it STRAMINEAM AMONG sundrie cōtrouersies raysed by the Protestants in our dayes one and that of greate weyght and consequence is the Canon of holy Scriptures that is what bookes are to be admitted into diuine and supreme authoritye and as certaynlye wrytten by inspiration of the holy Ghoste to be receaued without any doubte or contradiction In examininge which question the behauiour of our aduersaries deserueth diligent consideration For as in the beginning they much praysed the Fathers Church Councels of the firste fiue hundred yeares not for any respecte or reuerence they bare vnto them but by so doinge to discountenance and thrust out of credite the Fathers Church and Councels of the later thowsand by whom they saw most euidently their heresies to haue bene condemned so not long after for lyke purpose they made vaūt of the scriptures agaynst those very first and moste auncient Fathers not for any iuste honor or regarde which they had of the scriptures but by that meanes to disgrace the Fathers and ease them selues of answering their authoritye when soeuer they should be pressed therewith For that in deede they accompte not of the very scriptures more then of the Fathers but turne them ouer for vs to defende no lesse then the Fathers time and experience hath shewed their publike wrytinges professe as by that which hereafter ensueth shall manifestly appeare and M. Whitaker though in worde he would fayne dissemble the matter yet in facte and truth playnly declareth so much which being so let the Christian Reader as in other things so in this especially note the proceeding of that which these men call the gospell the grosse impietie wherevnto it tendeth and in to what open profession of infidelitie in a shorte space it is likely to breake out which in the compasse of so few yeares is growen to such a head that now already they dare as boldly call in question and deny partes of the holy scriptures as not long sithence they made the like quarels against the wrytings of the auncient Fathers Let the Christian Reader note I say not their wordes but their doinges not their coūterfeit dissimulatiō in speach pulpit sometyme vsed but their euident practise reasons asseuerations published in bookes confirmed by arguments deduced by necessarie coherence from their doctrine and many wayes expressed by them selues in sundry their Cōferences Institutions and disputations and he shall easely perceaue our aduersaries after denyall of the Fathers Councels Tradition and the authoritie of the Church Catholike now at this present to stand vpon lyke deniall of the written worde the Apostles Prophets so as they leaue no one ground whereupon a christian man can rest his fayth or stay him selfe Thus much I gather not onely by the writinges of sundry other Protestants whereof some I shall touch hereafter but euen of M. Whitakers discourse in defence of Luther about S. Iames Epistle whose words and reasons for this purpose and the Readers better intelligence I will sett downe and prosequute somewhat the more at large And firste of all concerning S. Iames his Epistle M. Martin reproueth M. Whitaker for denyinge that Luther called that Epistle stramincam and in so cleare a case charged Father Campian with a notorius lye It is easie to gesse sayth M.W. vvhat a fellovv vve shall fynde you in the reste vvho are not ashamed in the very beginning to lye so egregiously When F. Campian replyed that it was in some one of Luthers first editions though otherwyse altered in the later nether so sayth M.W. Praefationem illam purgatam esse dixisti quam tamen constat nullo vnquam verbo mutatam esse You saye that preface vvas corrected vvhereas it is certayne that there vvas neuer anye vvorde changed in it Now this being the faulte which M. Martin layeth to M. W. see how wel he defendeth himselfe First because after he had read ouer all Luthers prefaces vpon the new Testament as he sayth he found none such there of he inferreth He is not to be accounted impudent as you call me vvho denieth that to be true vvhich he knovveth not to be true but he that to deceaue others defendeth that as false vvhich he knovveth to be most true but I am so farre from acknovvledging this to be true that I neuer thought it to be more false then I thinke it novv I will not wrangle vpon the definition of impudency but whether this dealing be not moste shamelesse and detestable in a Christian let any man of indifferencie iudge First it can not be excused of grosse and insolente boldnesse and rashnesse vpon the vew of one onely edition to deny so peremptorily a thing obiected so often by so many learned men of name and for ought I coulde yet reade or heare neuer denyed by the Lutherans especially whereas withall nothing is more notorious then the manifold alteratiōs which Melanchton and those of VVittenberge haue made in Luthers works corrupting deprauing putting in and taking out so much and so far forth as pleased their chāgeable humor where of the zealous Lutherans in a synode holden at Altemburg by procurement of the Duke of Wirtemberg and Palsgraue of Rhene lamentably complayne Electorales say they Lutheri scripta enormiter quám faedissimé deprauant ita vt post obitū Lutheri c. The
downe in forme by M.W. the Minor is the conclusion of the last argumēt and so proued sufficiently alreadie then I hope the Conclusion will stand wherefore leauinge this matter for M. W. to scanne and to recorde with him selfe who is that Baal founder of the priesthode of the new testament now may we vew with better iudgment how substantially he answereth S. Austines place de Ciuitate dei where S. Austine doth distinguishe betweene all Christians vvho are vnproperly called priestes because of their mistical Chrisme and vnitie vvith Christe others qui proprie iam vocantur in ecclesia sacerdotes episcopi that properlie are novv called in the Church priestes and byshops and properlie such are they by M. W. definition which properly offer sacrifice M.W. āswereth that the name priest vvas of olde tyme after a more peculiar sorte applied to the pastors and ministers that handled the vvorde and sacramentes but there vvas an abuse in so speakinge then you agree not with S. Austine who teacheth that propriè in proprietie of speach they were so called who if they had then to execute no other priestly function then haue now the Englishe ministers as M. W. supposeth or wolde pretend I graunte the worde prieste could not be applied to them but as abusiuely as if one woulde cal a ciuil magistrate by that name or one of the Quenes Readers in the Vniuersities For preachinge of the worde ministringe of some one or other sacramente although in the Catholike Church it be done by priestes yet properlie that is not the reason why they are called by that name but the true reason is that which M.W. rendereth quia propriè offerunt sacrificia because properly they offer sacrifice Now that S. Austine meante of priestes in this sort that himselfe was such a prieste to passe ouer many pregnante and euidente places in him for breuities sake I refer you to the knowen story of his mothers death Where she firste of al in her death-bed requesteth that her sonne vvould remember her at the altar of God When after her death the corps beinge brought into the Churche and placed beside the graue before the tyme of burial prayers were sayd the sacrifice of our price and redemption offered for her when afterwarde S. Austine in his moste deuoute zelous praier made to God for her reckneth this to her singuler commendacion that at her departure she tooke no care for costlie maner of burial or sumptuous monumente but only desired to be remembred at thy altar ô Lorde from vvhence she knew vvas dispensed that holy sacrifice vvhereby vvas blotted out the handvvrittinge vvhich vvas againste vs vvhereby triumphe vvas obtained against Satan our eternal enemie straight waies inspire saith he ô Lorde my God inspire to thy seruants my brethren that vvho-soeuer of them shal reade this may haue remembrance at thy altar of Patricius and Monica my father and mother But againste this M.W. hath an obiection as common plaine to them that know oughte in diuinitie as Dunstable hye way answered before hāde abundantlie in the annotacions of the the new testamente Heb. ca. 7. v. 12. 17.23 his argument is I say there are no priestes of the new testamēt that offer sacrifice after Christ who is the eternal priest according to the order of Melchisedec obtaineth sacerdotiū 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an eternal priesthod he hath made an end of al sacrifices takē away the succession of priestes cōmitted his church to be ruled by pastors and doctors for euer To beginne with the laste where you ende if Christ abolished all priesthod and left his Church to be gouerned for euer by pastors and doctors which were no priestes had this appointemēt and ordinance of his effect yea or no if no beware what yow say for litle differ you from a Iew a man of Mahomets religion and weake is your faith in Christes godhead if you thinke that in so manie places of scripture he appointed such a regimente for his Church which after his departure neuer tooke effect if yea then shew vs where or when was his Church so gouerned was it a hūdred yeares ago before Frier Luther first of all in our memorie induced this kinde of gouernment you must needes say no. Ascend we then 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 and ten ages vntil S. Gregories time was it al this while gouerned by such pastors as you describe I wene as yet you wil say sure I am you should say no. For those pastors were styll priestes and that in proper sense as appeareth by al stories Suche were our first Apostles the conuerters of our nation those excellent men SS Augustine Paulinus Laurentius Melitus Iustus c. sacred by the Pope of Rome or other lawfull Bishops in obediēce of the Sea of Rome offering sacrifice liuing and dying as priestes as by the goodlie storie of Venerable Bede our coūtryman you may euerie where learne Such pastors and priests they were by whom and vnder whose regiment our Churches were first builded and the ecclesiastical state of our realme ordered as now vnder the regiment of them that cal thē selues pastors no priestes and are in deede no more the one then the other all is pulled downe and ouerthrowen And if in anie other countrie of Christendome the churches had any other regiment such as you pretēd now in England of pastors no priestes shew vs your bookes and we wil beleeue you But you wil say from S. Gregorie vpward all was smooth and iumpe as it is now in the English congregation Suppose that to be true how in the meane seasō can you iustifie your owne saing that Christ delyuered his Church to be gouerned for euer by suche maner of pastors Cā Christes decree be made frustrate for so many ages Can mans iniquitye as you in your Apologie commonlie but most bluntlie obiect stoppe the course of Christes omnipotent and eternal prouidence know you not how copiouslie S. Augustine hath confuted this self same slaūderous obiectiō in your forefathers the Donatistes But passe we on come we to the first fathers of the primitiue Churche were they lay ministers after the maner of the English congregation that is pastors no priestes how dare or can you say so seing in S. Austine manifestlie you see a sacrificing priesthod seing your self acknowledge Sainte Hierome to haue bene a priest of the Romane Church which neuer yet approued any such ministery as you haue inuented seing your greate Rabbine and synke of iniquitie Iohn Bale calleth S. Leo the great and first of that name in plaine termes an idolater for this cause seing your chiefe capitayne Apostle Caluine and after him P. Martir and before him Huldericke Zuinglius affirme in generall of the fathers in the primitiue Church that for maintenāce of the vnbloudy sacrifice they forced abused the
scriptures and Caluine more execrable then the rest addeth that the aūciēt Church expressed the verie forme and type of the Aaronical Leuitical sacrificing eo excepto quòd panis hostia loco animalis vtebantur sauing that insteed of a beast they vsed bread all which proueth that in propre maner of speache they sacrificed and therefore by your owne definitiō in propre speache were priestes And finallie doth not Illyricus with his companions confesse in worde proue by deede that sacrifices were ordinarelie offered to God in the flower of the primitiue Church in the middest of the persequutions for the soules departed in the honor of Saintes for general and particular necessities as is now vsed in the Churche of Rome Thus write they To this end S. Cyprian in his third booke and sixte epistle to the priestes of Rome willeth those dayes diligentlie to be noted wherein the martyrs departed this life In the same place he speaketh of oblations sacrifices obserued in the memories of martyrs Let vs be informed sayth Tertullian vvhat be those dayes vvherein our blessed brethren by glorious death passe to immortalitie that vve here may celebrate oblations and sacrifices in remēbrance of thē And there is verie cōmon mētion of oblations in Tertullian as in his booke de corona militis vve offer sacrifices yerelie for the dead and for byrthdayes S. Cyprian saith that oblations and sacrifices vvere yerelie made in the remembrance of martyrs lib. 3. epist 6. lib. 4. epist 5. li. 1. epis 9. he speaketh of sacrifice for the dead And to end with one sentēce of S. Cyprian by them alleaged thus they cite him Our lord Iesus Christe sayth S. Cipriā lib. 2. epist 3. be is the high priest of God the father and sacrifice to God the father he first offered and commaunded the same to be done in remembrance of him And that priest trulie executeth Christs steede or roome vvho doth imitate that vvhich Christ did and thē in the Church offereth he a true and full sacrifice to God the father if he begin so to offer as he seeth Christ himself to haue offered Thus ascēding from our time vp to the primitiue and most pure and vncorrupte age of the Church yet we finde not the performance of that promise order set by Christ that his Church should be gouerned by pastors that were not priests And here by the waye to put you in minde because in this preface so freshlie you prouoke M Martin now departed and renew M Iewels challenge may it please you being put a litle besides his byas of comparing phrases together which was the verie bones and marrow of M. Iew. diuinitie to waigh how wel you can make his challenge agree with the manifest confessions of these your own doctors and if it lyke you to vew Caluine in the booke before quoted yow shal there find fiue Doctors within M. Iewels compasse by name S. Ireneus Arnobius S. Athanasius S. Ambrose and S. Augustine not the least or meanest of the fathers ether for ātiquity or holines or learning reproued and checked by Caluin for this great ouersight forsooth because to proue the vnbloudie sacrifice of the church which they beleued els would they neuer haue applied the scripture to confirme it they misinterprete and falsly applie the scriptures ita vidiculè these are his wordes vt dissentire cogat ratio et veritas so ridiculously as both reasō and truth constraineth me to dissent from thē whereas if he had lyued vntil this time and had bene acquainted but with half those phrases which in the 17 article M. Iew. hath raked together of which benefite by your labours he might now haue bene partaker he neuer neded to haue runne into that desperate vaine of bidding plaine defiance to al the primitiue church And thus much being spoken by the way through occasion of M.I. challēg renewed by you let vs returne to conclude if it may be our former matter from this age vnto the primitiue church we find not as you see pastors without priests then it foloweth say we that Christ neuer appointed anye such For then surelie in some age yea in euerie age they would haue appeared And how you wil lose this knot I muche doute yet I feare you wil take Alexanders sworde and cut it a sunder and now applie that to your self which before you yelded to Luther that when your iudgment agreeth with scripture you set more therby then by a thousand Augustines a thousand Ciprians and al the churches If you thus say as I thinke you haue nothing els to say yet remember that besides these many Augustines and Ciprians and churches you haue one Christ standing against you who promised and apoīted as you confesse far otherwyse But passe we on what scripture haue yow against priestes S. Paule vvho saith that Christ is an eternal priest after the order of Melchisedec and hath his priesthode 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what gather you of this you leaue the word in greeke as though it were so much the more terrible and able to confounde al priestes then if it were in latin Our old interpreter translateth it sempiternum Beza perpetuum Caluin immutabile Castalio nunquam transiturum the Englishe bible of one yere vnchangeable of an other euerlastinge make the best of it and take which you list or all if ye please The sense of the Apostle is easie inough by the comparison which he there prosecuteth that as Christ had many excellent prerogatiues aboue the priestes or priesthode of Aaron so amonge many other this was one that whereas the priesthode of Aaron passed from one to an other from father to sonne by reason of death Christ neuer dying but euer lyuing neuer departeth from his priesthode but reteineth it for euer To make the reader better conceaue this which though it be many times read in your congregations yet is perhaps neuer or seldome wel vnderstoode of the minister himselfe the priesthode of Aaron is brieflie to be recalled to memorie In the booke of Numbers God thus speaketh vnto Moyses Take Aaron and his sonne vvith him and leade them into the mountaine Hor. And vvhen thou hast taken from Aaron his priestlie vesture thou shalt put it on Eleazarus and Aaron shal die there Moyses did as our lord commaūded c. And vvhen he had spoiled Aaron of his garments he put them on Eleazarus and Aaron died there In this short storie is noted the nature and state of the leuitical priesthode passing from father to sonne and ending in the first by death in lyke sort as any other facultie of life or bodie ciuil or naturall endeth But in Christ it is not so who euer liuing keepeth euer his priesthode as wel as his life neuer departing with it to anie other as did Aaron to Eleazarus he to Phinees and so one to an other in course of succession So