Selected quad for the lemma: scripture_n

Word A Word B Word C Word D Occurrence Frequency Band MI MI Band Prominent
scripture_n wonder_n word_n world_n 90 3 4.2924 3 false
View all documents for the selected quad

Text snippets containing the quad

ID Title Author Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication) STC Words Pages
A10352 A refutation of sundry reprehensions, cauils, and false sleightes, by which M. Whitaker laboureth to deface the late English translation, and Catholike annotations of the new Testament, and the booke of Discouery of heretical corruptions. By William Rainolds, student of diuinitie in the English Colledge at Rhemes Rainolds, William, 1544?-1594. 1583 (1583) STC 20632; ESTC S115551 320,416 688

There are 5 snippets containing the selected quad. | View lemmatised text

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
that these thinges shal be performed hereafter or haue bene already or God is to be accused of lying If a man ansvvere me that they haue bene performed I vvil demaund of him vvhen If he say in the time of the Apostles I vvil demaund hovv it chaunceth that nether thē the knovvledge of God and true religion vvas altogether perfite and aftervvardes in so short a space vanished avvay vvhich vvas promised to be eternal and more abundant then the fluddes of the sea Which argument of his if we marke wel and euery part thereof it is easely perceaued that he concludeth those thinges not to haue bene performed in the Church of the new testamēt which al prophetes foretold should be performed at the comming of the Messias For whereas he driueth the summe of al to one of these three necessary consequentes ether that God is a lyer ether that the Church erected by Christ should euer stand in the sight of the world and euer florish with most abundāt knowledge of the wil of God or that such a Church shal be founded hereafter by the Messias and then remoueth the first which the nature of euery man abhorreth to heare then denieth the second according to the general scope of the protestants doctrine which affirmeth the Church for these thousand yeres passed to haue bene drowned in palpable darkenes superstition and idolatry what remaineth but to approue the third vz that the things foretold to be wrought by the Messias are not yet accomplished but shal be hereafter which is as much as in euidēt termes to say that the Messias is not yet come or Christ is not the true Messias who hath performed nothing of that which was his part and office according to the oracles of the Prophetes This if I would prosequute at large by shewing into vvhat straightes and shameful and miserable shiftes some principal Protestants for example Caluin and Luther disputing vvith the Iewes haue bene brought by reason of this detestable supposition that the church so many hundred yeres hath failed the reader could not but abhorre and detest euen to the gates of hel this damnable heresie which vpon pretense of reforming the church and making al thinges pure and perfite doth in deede ioyne with the Turkes and Iewes and thrust men headlong to the very denial of Christes Incarnation And most certaine it is we can neuer against the Iewes maintayne Christ to be the true Messias if we put this paradox of the Protestants to be true that Christes church within so few yeres after his departure was suppressed trode vnder foote by the Pope And this one reason to passe by al other wil iustifie the same to their eternal confusion that whereas by the incarnation and cōming of Christ the church of Christians should be enlarged infinitely in al kingdomes prouinces and cities aboue the sinagoge of the Iewes which after that time should be narrow contemptible remayning in a few and nothing comparable to that other by the Protestants faith this is turned cleane contrarie For in any age or time of these later thovvsand yeres it is easie to shew by sufficient authoritie of cronicles histories that the Ievves haue had their knovven and visible sinagoges in the most notable places and prouinces of the vvorld in Greece in Constantinople in Germanie in Mantua in Venice in Paris in England in Spaine in Portugal vvhereas for many ages they can not name vnder the cope of heauen any kingdome prouince citie tovvne village house or sheepecote where the church of christ hath appeared if we esteeme the same according as they now by their preaching and writing describe it And therefore whereas M. W. obiecteth commonly that Doctor Sanders denying the Pope to be Antichrist and defending that an other shal come hereafter withdraweth men from consideration of the true Antichrist to a false and fayned one on the contrary side let the reader take this for a veritie as certaine and sure as the Gospel that he and his vpon such pretense of a false and imagined Antichrist of late daies conceaued and brought forth in the fātastical braines of a few heretical miscreantes vpon pretense of bringing men a neerer way to heauen then euer their forefathers went vpon pretense of framing a church more pure more sincere more perfite Apostolical then was in the world before I say vpon these false and lying reasons they withdraw men frō the only true auncient Catholike Apostolike church wherein they were baptised to their manifold scattered diuided apostatical congregations they leade men out of the way where only saluarion is to be looked for and place them there where remaining they are most certaine and assured of euerlasting damnation of body and soule Yea as appeareth by the course of their doctrine the drift of their preaching and writing and experiment of their brethren vnder the veile and shadow of this their Antichristian doctrine they induce mē to beleeue that al scripture is false that the prophetes were lyers that the Apostles were deceauers that Christ was a false teacher and seducer not the Messias described by the prophetes that Iudaisme standeth vpon better groundes then Christianisme which conclusion they can neuer avoyde except first they abandon and reuoke this their doctrine of Antichrist suppressing the Church as false and execrable And as for the Popes of Rome whom this man wil needes haue to be Antichrist this I dare say boldly and stand to the arbitrement of any reasonable and indifferent Protestant that by experience knoweth Rome and England the demeanure of the bishops who of late haue gouerned there as for example Pius 4. Pius 5. and Gregorius 13. and our Superintendents who in the same tyme haue ruled in England Let Antichrist be described in such sort and with such qualities as the scripture describeth him Afterward let there be laid in equal balance that which the world knoweth by publike vew and experience to haue bene in the foresaid bishops their feare of Gods iudgement testified by their whole order of life their much praier their infinite almes their iustice towards al their singular care to remedie the vvoundes of the Christian vvorld and gather into one the scattered flocke of Christ vvherein they haue spared no trauail or charges Lay vvithal the publike and knovven losenes in many of our English Superintēdents the contempt of Gods iudgementes so much as may be gathered by their external behauiour maner of liuing their oppressiō of the poore their infinite auarice their few prayers their lightnes their carnalitie and whatsoeuer els is better knowen to the people where they liue then to me let these thinges I say be weighed by the iudgement of any reasonable Protestant and I doubt not but he wil conf●sse that if in the tyme of the forenamed Popes the Sea of Rome was possessed of Antichrist in the same season many bishops Seas in England were possessed of double and
In the nevv Testament S. Lukes Gospel The Epistle to the Hebrewes The Epistle of Saint Iames. The 2. of S. Peter The 2. 3. of S. Iohn S. Iude. The Apocalyps Vnto these partly your selues in your common bibles partly your brethren ioyne certayne other peeces both of the olde Testament and of the new as The prayer of Manasses Paralip lib. 2. The songe of the three children The story of Bel. Canticum canticorum and a parte of S. Iohns Gospel some of these held for canonicall these fiftene hundred yeares some these twelue hundred all aboue a thousand Nexte your distinction of the vvhole Church and some of the Church were it true as it is most false is vtterly refuted by these your owne doctors for by their sentence whatsoeuer hath bene doubted of not onely in the whole Church but in a part for they goe not about to proue that these were doubted of in the whole Church and leaste of all S. Lukes Gospell that may you doubte of and number amongst the bookes Apocriphal and both you and they proue as substantially that S. Iames was doubted of as you proue the same of Iudith Hester the Machabees or any other sauing that they fowly ouerreach them selues when they affirme that S. Lukes Gospell with those other was leaft out and not receaued for Canonical in the Prouincial Councel of Laodicea and the same confirmed by a general Councel afterward Then commeth to my remembrāce your profoūd argumēt against M. Campian in defence of Luther Luther despiseth S. Iames his epistle saith M. Campian you answere Bene habet crimen hoc omne Iacobi epistolam attingit c. That goeth vvell All this fault toucheth only Iames epistle Luther doth not in a vvorde violate Matthevv Marke Luke or Iohn nor Paule nor Peter only he somevvhat shaketh vppe Iames epistle A deepe reason as though S. Iames beinge canonical scripture were not to be esteemed as honorably and violated as litle as S. Peter or any of the other and as though he in so writing and you in so defendinge doe not lay the way open to shake of and violate all the reste as wel as that For now if a man burden you with the refusal of S. Luke your defence is already prouided bene habet al goeth vvel Al this faulte toucheth only S. Luke Our doctors doe not in a vvorde violate Matthevv Marke Iohn nor Paule nor Peter only vve somevvhat shake vp Lukes Gospel and so peece-meale til none be leafte you may and will shake out one after an other stil Bene habet all goeth vvell vntill you fall to open profession of Atheisme in the broade way whereof you are farre wel gone already Fourthlye because in the end of your preface yow bragge so much of your forefathers that they haue euer vāquished ours here you put vs in mind what forefathers those are Hetherto your forefathers were knowen to be Aerius in denying prayer sacrifice for the dead Vigilantius of whom yow learned to condemne the inuocatiō of Saintes honor done to them in the Church Iouinian in breaking vowes of chastitie deliberatelye made to God and making the state of matrimonye touching merite equal in the sight of God with the state of virginitie continentie Which men notwithstanding were forced to yeld to our forefathers S. Epiphanius S. Hierom and S. Augustine as hetherto al Christendom is witnes and therefore were not such victorious capitaynes as you woulde make them In this place as though your purpose were to ouerbeare vs with number and make your armye so much the more stronge you multiplye and set in ranke againste vs more fathers For whereas you so blasphemouslye speake of the booke of Iudith that it is far vnvvorthy to be called scripture and yet match S. Luke and the Apocalyps with it whereas you saye most plainlye of these and al the forenamed bookes that yow are not bound to admit them but may refuse them that they be read for moral lessons not for matters of religion you simplye disallow for canonical those two bookes And who are your fathers herein but those auncient Archheretikes Marcion and Cerdon those other for ther brutishnes called Alogi or Bruti In which your doinge as the reader may easely perceaue how yow trotte forwarde to playne Apostasie from Christe by callinge now the verye Gospel into questiō so why we should number you amongest those olde Brutishe heretikes your selues yeald vs more abūdāt reasō thē our fathers had in calling them by that name For your self M.VV. cōfesse and proue your doctors and maisters to be the most sensles and brutishe creatures that euer wēt on the earth For to auoide directe answeringe to the question proposed you hovv you knovv the bookes vvhich you call scripture to be heauenlye and penned by diuine inspiration that is by vvhat testimonie you knovv those vvritinges to be canonical or holye vvhich be so called you say and I vvith as good reason vvill demaund of you hovv you knovve the sunne to be the sunne or hovv you assure your self that God is God for vve knovv as assuredlye that these are the holy scriptures cōmēded by God to his Church vvritten by the Prophetes and Apostles and deliuered by diuine authorytie as vve knovv the moone to be the moone or at a vvord any other thinge vvhatsoeuer vve comprehend by most certaine knovvledge and this ansvvere Caluine also geueth you And this answere I admitte from you and Caluine and hereof I conclude that you are more trulye called Alogi and brutishe then were those other auncient heretikes For was there euer in the worlde any so notable a Choraebus or Grillus hauinge the shape of man that fell at brawlinge disputinge with his friēdes whether the sunne which we see were the sūne or the moone the moone as you do against Luther your churches against the Lutheranes whether S. Iames epistle be canonical then yf you thinke right as I truste you wil speake wel of your selfe with the same breath you condemne your father Luther and your brethren the Lutheranes for the veriest sottes and stockes that euer liued for they know not the moone they know not the sunne which to you shineth so bright cleare And to oppose your self vnto your brethrē at home and to your owne self how say you to S. Luke to the epistles of S. Peter Iude Iohn the Apocalyps be they canonical or no yf you say yea as I thinke you will or at the lest that was your opinion in September laste as your booke sheweth then your doctors now denyinge the same you see what is to be concluded that one parte of you is as wise as those former who know not the sunne from the moone Yf you denie and be of their iudgmente as it may be very wel your faith beinge as mutable as is the moone yet so you proue your self
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
he can not for the contrarie part that the greeke is more cōmodious and fauorable to vs then to them see thou Christian reader the preface of the new testament and thou shalt find it iustified by sundrie manifest examples and touching the hebrue somewhat shal be spoken hereafter Thirdly wherein is the state of this questiō he telleth vs that the foūtaines are most pure and holesome the latin edition most corrupt and infected By the fountaines he meaneth the vulgar hebrue and greeke as they are now commonly printed which they pretend to folow By the latin edition that which is vsed in the Church of Rome and hath bene these thousand yeres and is approued by the general Councel of Trent To the end thou mayst the better iudge of that which shal be spokē thus much must I warne thee of before touching the historical knowledge of this cōtrouersie that whereas in S. Aug. S. Hieroms tyme there was maruelous varietie of new Testamentes in latin whereof rose some confusion and trouble in the Church that godly and learned man Damasus then Pope of Rome and ruler of the Church tooke order with S. Hierom that he should correct one before vsed which otherwise was least faultie which afterwardes should be commended to the Church by that supreme authoritie Thus much S. Hierom signifieth in diuers places especiallie in his preface before the new Testament dedicated to the same Pope Nouum opus saith he me facere cogis ex veteri c. You cōstraine me to make a nevv vvorke of an old that I after so many copies of the scriptures dispersed thorough the vvorld should sit as a certaine iudge and determine vvhich of them agree vvith the true greeke And afterwardes shewing the difficultie of such a worke how daungerous it was and subiect to the reprehensions of many he comforteth him self principally with this That thou speaking to Damasus vvhich art the high priest doest commaūd it so to be done Tu qui summus es sacerdos fieri iubes This vvorke vvhen S. Hierom had accomplished and deliuered vp yet nether vvas his iudgment so absolutely and vniuersally in euery part folovved that vvithout farther search and trial it was by by approued But at length after due examination and some alteration of lesser pointes as we find by S. Hierom him self being approued by the Pope allowed by the Church it grew to a more general vsage and to be most frequented in publike writinges commentaries scholes and al places of Christian excercise This is that which we cal the common latin edition which albeit it haue some places translated obscurely some vnaptly some copies corrupted by false writing or printing c. yet comparing it with the greeke now extant we say it is far more pure and vncorrupt and nothing so subiect to cauilling wrangling by great diuersitie of different copies The like we say of the old testament a great part where of was translated by S. Hierom by order of the same Pope most of al corrected and brought in to ecclesiastical vse sauing the psalmes which could not be done so easely because thoroughout Christēdom the principal part of the Seruice in al churches consisted of them and therefore could not wel be altered without much trouble and scandal as we gather by S. Austin and which therefore we retaine stil as they were vsed in the primitiue church long before S. Hieroms time according to the version of the 70. Touching both these Testaments translated and corrected thus we say First that against them M. W. in his long discourse of allegations speaketh neuer a word and so speaketh neuer a word to the purpose Secondarely that they are purer thē are the fountaines which we now haue whereof this man speaketh so much and for ought may appeare vnderstandeth but litle Next that how so-euer some smale faultes may be found in them absolutely they haue no error touching ether doctrine or maners Last of al that to refuse them and appeale from them to the greeke and hebrue as the heretikes do is the high way to denial of all faith to Apostasie from Christ his religion and so to plaine Atheisme These foure pointes I wil brieflie touch in order The first is that M. VV. in al his long talke about the fountaines speaketh neuer a word to the purpose against vs but rather much al against him self For if the fountaines were so pure in the times of S. Hierom and S. Ambrose and the church then troubled vvith the great diuersitie of their latin bibles reformed one to the puritie of the fountaines and originals and vve novv find those fountaines and originals differing frō that reformed bible vvhy shal vve not conclude that the fountaines haue in the meane season bene corrupted not so saith M. W. but contraryvvise rather the latin bibles haue bene corrupted VVhat reason leadeth him thus to speake vvhat probabilitie moueth him to imagine that so many hundred yeres hebrue bookes could continue vvithout error being vvritten out by a fevv and they for the most part Iewes ignorant enemies of Christ and his Church destitute of the spirite of God men geuen ouer in to a reprobate sense rather then the latin publikely read expounded by thowsandes in euerie prouince of the Christian vvorld garded by infinite good men by Sainctes for life and full of the holy Ghost liuing in that church vvherein properly vvas fulfilled the prophecie of Esaie made by God to Christ his sonne to his Catholike Church in him This is my couenant vvith them saith our lord my spirit vvhich is in thee and the vvordes vvhich I haue put in thy mouth shal not depart from thy mouth and from the mouth of thy seede from the mouth of thy seedes seede saith our Lord from this tyme forth for euermore Wherein God promiseth the Church that she shal be a faithful and perpetual obseruer of his vvord and testament Which vvarrant you neuer find made in like sorte to the synagoge But this notwithstanding you perhaps prefer this synagoge before the Church and Iewes before the Christians that is in effect Moyses before Christ and therefore are content to speake and thinke more honorably of them vvith vvhom you ioyne more nylie and to vvhom you beare a better affection yet hovv soeuer your minde be therein S. Hierom cōmending the hebrue fountaines in his time maketh nothing in the world for you in these daies except he say that in al ages to come the hebrue should remaine stil pure and incontaminate and the latin should againe be corrupted and the Church though warned by the trouble which she susteined in his time about that matter yet afterwardes should cōtemne so pretious a thing as the written word of God is and runne in to a far greater inconuenience then before through extreme negligence nether haue the latin bible true which once was reformed and made agreable to the