poore people in want to be enriched with such a treasure But saith N. D. Wardw. pag. 14. If the translator do not put downe the words of Scriptures sincerely in his vulgar translation then the simple reader that cannot discerne will take mans word for Gods word Secondly he saith that if a false sence should be gathered out of Scripture then the reader should sucke poison in stead of wholesome meate But these reasons make no more against reading Scriptures in vulgar tongues and translating them into those tongues then against reading Scriptures in the Latin and translating them into Latine For as well may the Latine Interpreter erre as he that translateth scriptures into vulgar tongues and aswell may a man draw a peruerse sence out of the Latine as out of the English If then these reasons conclude not against y t Latin translation they are too weak to conclude against vulgar translations Againe if it be hurtfull to follow a corrupt translation and to gather a contrarie sence out of scriptures we are not therefore to cast away scriptures but rather to séeke for the most sincere translations and the most true sence and meaning of the holy Ghost reuealed in holy Scriptures Thirdly he alleageth these words out of the Apostle 2. Cor. 3. The letter killeth but the spirit quickneth against reading of scriptures in vulgar tongues But these words do no lesse touch them that follow the letter in the Hebrew Gréek thē in the vulgar tongs And yet Robert Parsons wil not deny but y t it is lawfull to reade scriptures in Hebrew and Gréeke albeit he if it were vnlawfull would neuer be guiltie of this fault being most ignorant of these tongs Fourthly he asketh how vnlearned readers will discerne things without a guide As if lay-men because they haue teachers might not also reade the books from whence the principles of Christian doctrine are deriued This therefore seemeth to be all one as if Geometricians and other teachers of arts should debarre their schollers from reading Euclide and other authors that haue written of arts Furthermore albeit somethings without teachers cannot of rude learners be vnderstood yet all things that pertaine to faith and manners are plainely set downe in scriptures In ijs quae apertè in scripturis posita sunt inueniuntur illa omnia saith S. Augustine lib. 2. de doctr Chr. c. 9. Quae continent fidem moresque vivendi Fiftly he alleageth that the vnderstanding of Scriptures is a particular gift of God But that notwithstanding no man is forbidden to reade scriptures in Hebrew Greeke or Latine And yet if Robert Parsons vnderstand them at all he vnderstandeth them better in the vulgar English then in these tongues Furthermore albeit to vnderstand Scriptures be a peculiar gift of God yet no man is therefore to refraine from reading of scriptures but rather to reade thē diligently and to conferre with the learned and to beséech God to giue him grace to vnderstand them The which is proued by the example of the Eunuch Act. 8. who read the scriptures and threw them not away albeit he could not vnderstand all without the help of a teacher Sixthly he vseth the examples of Ioane Burcher a pudding wife as some suppose and qualified like his mother the Blacke-smiths wife and of Hacket William Geffrey and other heretickes In his Warne-word Encontr 1. cap. 8. he addeth George Paris Iohn More certaine Anabaptists and other heretikes and insinuateth that all these fell into heresies by reading of scriptures in vulgar languages But his collectiō is false and shamelesse and derogatorie to scriptures and contrary both to them and to fathers Our Sauior speaking of the Sadduceis Mat. 22. saith they erred for that they knew not the scriptures Erratis nescientes scripturas The Apostle talking of reading of scriptures saith they are profitable to instruct men vnto saluation and not hurtfull or the cause of any mans destruction The ignorance of scriptures saith Chrysostome ho. de Lazaro hath brought forth heresies Scripturarum ignoratio haereses 〈◊〉 And againe Barathrum est scripturarum ignoratio that is the ignorance of scriptures is a bottomlesse gulfe Finally to obscure the glorie of this benefite of reading scriptures in vulgar tongues in his out-wortie Warne-word Encont 1. c. 8. he saith that such as vnderstand Latin or haue licence of the Ordinary to reade scriptures in vulgar tongues haue no benefit by this generall permission of reading scriptures as if euery one that vnderstandeth Latin durst reade vulgar translations without licence or as if the Church receiued no benefite vnlesse euery particular member were partaker of that benefite This therefore is a most ridiculous conceit and likely to procéed from such an idle head Further the same might be alleaged against Latine translations And yet Robert Parsons will not deny but the Church receiueth benefite by Latine translations albeit the Gréekes and such as vnderstand Hebrew and not Latin receiue no benefite by the Latine translation If then Robert Parsons meane hereafter to barke against the reading of scriptures that are commended vnto vs as light medicine food armes and things most necessary he must alleage vs better reasons then these lest he be taken for an hereticall or rather lunaticall fellow that spendeth his wit in the defence of fond senselesse and impious positions CHAP. VI. Of publike Prayers and administration of Sacraments and other parts of the Church liturgie and seruice in vulgar tongues LIke wise the Papists to take from Christians the effect and fruite of their prayers set cut most of their prayer bookes in Latine and closely forbid the common seruice and liturgie of the Church to be said in vulgar languages In the 22. session of the Conuenticle of 〈◊〉 where they anathematise them that hold that the Masse should be celebrated in vulgar tongues their meaning is to establish the rites of the Romish Church and the Latine seruice and to prohibit the vse of vulgar tongues in publike liturgies And this is also proued by the practise of the synagogue of Rome that alloweth the prayers of such as pray in Latine albeit like Parrots they vnderstand not what they prattle and by the testimonie of 〈◊〉 Bellarmine and others writing vpon that argument But this practise is most barbarous fruitlesse and contrary to the custome of Christ his Church in auncient time Sinesciero virtutem vocis saith the Apostle 1. Cor. 14. ero ei cui loquor barbarus quiloquitur mihi barbarus that is If I vnderstand not the meaning of the words I vtter I shall be to him to whom I speake barbarous and he that speaketh shal be barbarous vnto me And againe If I pray in a strange tongue my spirit prayeth but mine vnderstanding is without fruite And a little after I will pray with the spirit but I will pray with the vnderstanding also I wil sing with the spirit but I wil sing with the vnderstanding also Else when thou blessest with the spirit how shall he
Sunia sayth that in the old testament we are to haue recourse to the Hebrew text In his 〈◊〉 in 4. Euang. he sheweth that there is great variety of Latine bookes and that in correcting of errors and finding the truth we are to returne to the 〈◊〉 originals Si veritas est quaerenda saith he cur non ad Graecam originem reuertentes ea quae 〈◊〉 ab 〈◊〉 reddita vel addita vel mutata corrigimus Augustine also in his second booke De doctr Christ. cap. 10. saith That to correct Latine copies we are to haue recourse to the Hebrew and Greeke bookes of Scripture Ad exemplaria Hebraea Graeca saith he à Latinis recurratur And in the same booke chap. 15. Latinis emendandis Graeci adhibeantur codices Latine bookes of Scripture are to be mended by the Greeke originals The aduersaries also themselues are ashamed sometimes to say that either the old Latine vulgar translation is to be preferred before the originall Text of Scripture or that the same is authenticall The 〈◊〉 glossing vpon the 〈◊〉 vt veterum dist 9. affirme that where the Copies varie the originall is to be exhibited and that the Latine of the old Testament is to be corrected by the Hebrew and the Latine of the new Testament by the Greeke bookes Isidore Clarius Caietane Pagninus Forerius Oleastrius Erasmus and diuers others haue noted diuers faults in the old Latine vulgar translation Sixtus Senensis lib. 8. Biblioth sanct confesseth that diuers faults barbarismes solecismes and transpositions are found in the Latine translation And saith that the Church was moued by diuers iust causes to dissemble them Finally reason teacheth vs that the determination of the Romish Church that preferreth the Latin vulgar 〈◊〉 before the Hebrew and 〈◊〉 text is most absurd For if the Latine bookes were to be preferred before the Hebrew and Greeke text or else to be 〈◊〉 authenticall then were we either to preferre or to giue like credit to Hierome and other authors that translated the old vulgar Latine bookes and to the holy Prophets and Apostles Againe transumpts and copies might by like reason be preferred before the originall instruments Thirdly the old Latine translation is proued false by diuers witnesses by comparing of places for that one edition of y e old vulgar translation doth differ from another Non potest verum esse quod dissonat that cannot be true that is repugnant and contrarie to it selfe as Hierome saith in Praefat. in Iosuam in Praefat. in 4. Euang. But the edition of the vulgar translation set out by Clement the eighth doth much differ from that which Sixtus Quintus set out before Iosue 11. 19. Clement readeth quae se traderet Sixtus readeth quite contrarie quae se non traderet 2. Reg. 16. 1. Clement hath vtre vini Sixtus readeth duobus vtribus Ioan. 6. 65. Clement readeth qui essent non credentes Sixtus qui essent credentes And so it may appeare by diligent collation that there are notable differences throughout the whole Bible Lastly if the Latine text were more authenticall then the Hebrew or Greeke why do not our aduersaries shew that the auncient Fathers or some learned men of late time at the least haue corrected the Hebrew and Greeke according to the Latine and not rather contrariwise The fourth foundation of Romish religion is the determination of the Pope in matters of faith The Conuenticle of Trent teacheth that it belongeth to the holy mother the Church to iudge of the true meaning of Scriptures Now for as much as no man knoweth more certainely what is the holy mother Churches meaning then the Papists holy Father the Pope therefore they do hereof conclude that the Pope is to determine principally of the true sence and meaning of Scriptures In the Rubrike of the decrées cap. in canonicis dist 19. we find that the Popes decretals are to be reckened among canonicall Scriptures Bellarmine lib. 3. de verbo Dei cap. 3. saith that the Spirit of God he should say of the diuell is in the Pope and that he together with a Councell is chiefe Iudge in matters of controuersie of religion And in the same booke cap. 4. he holdeth that no man may recede from his iudgement or determination Stapleton in his booke of doctrinall Principles or 〈◊〉 of his religion goeth about to prooue that the Popes sentence and determination is infallible And so much do these good fellowes rely vpon their holy Mothers and holy Fathers interpretation that they receiue the same without any long inquisition though neuer so foolish and contrarie to Scriptures Our Sauiour in the institution of the holy Eucharist said Take eate but they 〈◊〉 the Pope that saith 〈◊〉 and gaze but take not nor eate but rather hang vp the Sacrament He said Bibite ex hoc omnes that is 〈◊〉 all of this but the Pope saith Drinke not all of this and they 〈◊〉 the Pope The Apostle saith It is better to marrie then to burne and that mariage is honorable among all men But the Pope doth interpret these words so as if he had said It is better to burne then to marrie and that mariage is reprochfull and vnlawfull to Priests and Papists 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Pope So do they likewise in 〈◊〉 false interpretations But that the Popes interpretations and sentences shold be the foundation of religion is a matter contrarie to religion and reason The Apostle Ephes. 2. saith that the Church is built vpon the foundation of the Apostles and Prophets Iesus Christ being the corner stone And therefore it is said to be built vpon them because both of them preach Christ. Apostolos habemus authores c. we haue the Apostles for authors of our doctrine saith Tertullian lib. de praescript aduers. haeret He saith also It lyeth not in mans power to determine any thing in matters of faith of his owne head Quamuis sanctus sit aliquis post Apostolos c. Howsoeuer holy or eloquent a man be saith Hierome in Psalm 86. yet comming after the Apostles he deserueth no authenticall credit The Lord declareth in Scriptures Augustine in his second Epistle to Hierome sheweth that no mans writings are comparable to holy Scriptures And this the Canonists themselues confesse in their glosses vpon the Chapter Nolimeis and Ego solis dist 9. Are not the 〈◊〉 then most miserable that build their 〈◊〉 vpon the Popes Decretals that are contrarie to Scriptures to Fathers one to another and oftentimes void of truth wit learning religion or honestie The last foundation of Romish faith is the preaching of Masse-priests and Friars Quomodo Christus eiusque doctrina saith Stapleton Christianae 〈◊〉 fundamentum est sic 〈◊〉 nunc à Christo missi eorúmue doctrina praedicatio determinatio fundamentii apud me 〈◊〉 locum habehunt As Christ and his doctrine is the foundation of Christian religion so others now sent of Christ and their doctrine preaching and determination shall in my
opinion haue the force and place of a foundation saith he And afterward he declareth that those whom the Pope sendeth are sent by Christ and the men which he meaneth But if this be the foundation of their religion then is the same built vpon old wiues fables 〈◊〉 traditions lying legends philosophicall subtilties scholasticall disputes popish Decretals humane inuentions and such like principles For of thē consisteth y e greatest part of these fellowes sermons as both experience diuers Friars idle Homilies which euery man may sée do plainely testifie Furthermore if these be the foundations of popish Religion then is the same built vpon man and not vpon God vpon humane deuises and not vpon the 〈◊〉 word of God vpon sand and not vpon a rocke Such also as these foundations are such is the building that is weake false and erronious such is the Romish religion which the Pope and his adherents by force of armes treasons murthers empoysonments lyes 〈◊〉 flatterie and all meanes possible would thrust vpon vs and such are the conclusions that are built on these foundations Finally seeing no man can be saued that buildeth his 〈◊〉 vpon men vpon vnwritten traditions vpon vncertaine grounds and lying reports let the Papists consider with themselues in what miserable state they stand and returne to the true faith in time lest like the foolish man in the Gospell they build their house on sand and be ouerwhelmed with the fall thereof CHAP. IIII. Of diuers other blasphemous ridiculous and absurd points of popish Religion TRue Religion is most true venerable and respectiue of Gods true seruice If then popish Religion containe any vntrue or ridiculous vaine and blasphemous doctrine then is it not true or Apostolicall or Christian nor can it stand with Christian Religion séeing no man can serue God and Baal nor Dagon could stand before the arke of God But notorious it is that popish Religion containeth many blasphemous ridiculous and absurd points First concerning the flesh of our Lord and Sauior Christ Jesus they teach falsly and blasphemously and say that a mouse or dog or hog may eate the body of Christ. Nay they are not ashamed to affirme that his most holy body may be cast out vpon a dunghill or into any vncleane place Prima opinio saith Alexander Hales part 4. sum q. 53. m. 2. quae dicit quod corpus Christi defertur quocunque species deferunt vt in ventrem canis vel suis vel in alia lo ca immunda videtur vera And again p. 4. sum q. 45. m. 1. si canis aut porcus deglutiat hostiam consecratam non video quare corpus Christi non simul traijceretur in ventrem canis vel porci If a dog or hog should swallow a consecrate host saith he I see no reason why the body of Christ should not withall passe into the belly of a dog or hog Thomas Aquinas likewise although made a saint by the Pope yet shameth not to hold this prophane and vnholy opinion part 〈◊〉 q. 80. art 3. And in his comment in 4. sent dist 9. q. 2. The same is also stiffely maintained by Brulifer in 4. sent dist 13. quest 5. And this is the common opinion of schoolemen That the priest is able to make his Creator they make no question Bonner counted this among the prerogatiues of priesthood in his absurd spéech which he made in the Conuocation house in the beginning of Quéene Maries reigne And Innocentius in the mysteries of the Masse lib. 4. cap. 19. holdeth the same very confidently Panis in Christum transubstantiatur saith he it a in creatorem Sic ergo 〈◊〉 quotidiè fit creator Bread is transubstantiate into Christ and so into the creator and therfore a creature euery day is a creator The like sayings are to be found in the booke called Stella clericorum and diuers other authors Neither do these men doubt but that the communicants do eate their Maker But this is most absurd and 〈◊〉 to the Turkes and heathen that Christians should be sayd to eate vp their God and for this cause Auerroes said that of all other Religions that of the Papists was most ridiculous It is absurd also to say that man can make God or the creature his Creator They affirme also that Christ at his last supper did truly and really eate vp his owne body whole and entire As if Christ had come into the world not onely to be eaten carnally of others but also to deuoure and eate vp himselfe a matter most absurd and clearely repugnant to scriptures fathers and sense For Scriptures and Fathers teach that Christ took bread and called it his body And sense and reason teacheth vs that it is vnnatural for one man to eate vp another and impossible for the same man to eate vp himselfe For then there should be no difference 〈◊〉 the termes of relation and the same man should be the eater and the thing eaten the thing containing and contained and the same person should be a relatiue to himselfe which is against all rules of Logicke sense and common reason While they say that Christians do really and carnally eate Christs flesh and drink his blood they make them Canibals and 〈◊〉 then the barbarous Scythians and Sarmatians that drunke their horses blood For it is more inhumane to drinke mans blood then horses blood and Canibals are nothing else but barbarous eaters of mans flesh Neither can they defend themselues by the words of our Sauior Iohn 6. who sayth vnlesse we eate his flesh and drink his bloud that we cānot haue life in vs. For he addeth that the spirit quickneth and the flesh profiteth nothing condemning the Capernaites that imagined that his flesh was to be torne with téeth and his blood swallowed downe into the belly carnally as the Papists also imagine and reprouing all carnall and literall interpretations of his words Haec inquam omnia carnalia mysticè spiritualiter intèlligenda sunt All these carnall things sayth Chrysostome hom 46. in Ioan. are to be vnderstood mystically and spiritually Likewise Origen in Leuit. 7. sayth that the literall vnderstanding of these words Vnlesse ye eate the flesh of the son of man c. killeth Augustine also teacheth that these words are to be vnderstood sacramentally and that being spiritually vnderstood they quicken But what should I speake of the Fathers of the Church séeing Homer and Virgil talking of Polyphemus do condemne the eating of mans flesh as a thing both barbarous and monstrous Concerning Christ his 〈◊〉 they teach strangely saying that he being borne of the virgin Mary did no otherwise passe out of the womb then as the Sun beames do passe through the substance of the glasse their words are Vt solis radij concretam vitri substantiam penetrant which do plainely ouerthrow the mystery of his natiuity For how was he true man if neuer man passed through his mothers womb as the sun passeth through glasse or how was he
vs. If of ceremonies it is not necessary that al churches shold agrée in all points Furthermore if the aduersaries had not calmniously layed diuers imputations of heresies vpon them which they neuer held the variation wold not haue séemed so great as they pretend Wherfore if Robert Parsons séeke no better it is not like that he wil find a Cardinals hat which as his friends charge him he hath long sought This is the 〈◊〉 of that which is materiall in Robert Parsons his treatise of thrée conuersions The rest is nothing else but froth of the mans fury and foolery and containeth only certaine idle inuectiues against M. Fox that good man against M. Bale other honest Christians together with certaine fond tales of king Alphreds dreames S. Cutberts apparitions such like woodden popish stuffe drawne out of lying legends He forgot not also to raile against our noble Quéene lately deceased and to call her old persecutor and to lay an aspersion of slaunder vpon the State as if the same did persecute Papists for religion a matter of which the secular Masse-priests are ashamed and sticke not to cleare those whom this conuertible Proteus most vniustly chargeth Finally his fardle of wast papers containeth diuers corruptions and deprauations of holy Scriptures miss-allegations of Fathers weake collections grosse errors rebellious positions notorious lies and calumiations which in a large treatise herafter are to be discouered K. Kellisons Suruey if any man list to suruey and peruse a certaine slaunderous and railing companions libell entituled Caluinoturcismus and with hatred more then Turkish to christian religiō set out by Gifford of Lile wil be found to be wholy stolne out frō thence albeit he yéeldeth no thanks to those from whence he borowed or rather stole his inuention This Plagiary therefore néedeth no other answer then that which is already made to Giffords Turky worke called Caluinoturcismus It séemeth y t man is at a stand For albeit Gifford hate religion like a Turk yet he answereth no more then if by vertue of Parsons his thrée conuersions he were turned into a mute Turbot This K. also of his owne hath added a glozing and flattering Epistle to the King a certaine preface concerning inanimate and vnreasonable creatures percase like the Arcadian beasts of Doway and certaine fragments old ends of diuers stale declamations made as it seemeth at the drinking out of a pot of Kenish wine His schollers I heare gape and wonder at his horrible eloquence But yet the wisest of thē see that they haue no affinitie with his purpose and onely serue to fringe his chapters like as mustie ends of mockado serue to stitch his lacket of perpetuana All the whole amounteth to nothing saue to declare the man to be a perpetuall railer and a most sottish declaimer The idle fellow in all his scuruy collection which he like a surueyor without commission hath made to lttle purpose doth neither shew wisedome nor modestie nor learning If the fellow had bene wise he would not haue touched any matter of noueltie or absurditie For therein he giueth his aduersaries iust occasion not onely to iustifie their religion to be most ancient and consonant to holy scriptures but also to declare his popish religion refused by vs to be a packe of nouelties and a masse of grosse absurdities For who knoweth not that the Komish Church consisting of a triple-crowned and crosse-slippard Pope with his guard of Suizzers a consistory of purple Cardinals that hath neare affinitie to the purple whore of Babylon a rabble of rakehellike masse-priests filthy monkes friars and nunnes with a people worshipping idols and beléeuing the decretaliue doctrine of Popes and the decrées of Trent is new and neuer séene before vntill of late Who doeth not vnderstand that both the grounds of popery the doctrine thereon built is new For neither can R. shew that the auncient Church was founded vpon the Pope and his decretals or vpon traditions allowed by the Church of Rome or that the Church was tied to such senses of scriptures as the Romish Church alloweth or bound to follow the old Latine translation of the Bible Neither can he proue either out of fathers or ancient writers that Christs true body is both in heauen and earth and in euery pixe at one and the same time or that his body is inuisible or impalpable or that there are iust seuen sacraments and neither more nor lesse and that Christians receiue Christs flesh with their téeth and mouth or that the Pope is the head and spouse of the Church or that he hath two swords or that any images are to be worshipped with latria or that diuels torment soules in purgatory or that the Popes indulgences deliuer soules frō those torments or such like points of popery Now what I pray you is more absurd then to beléeue that a man can eate himself as the Masse-priests say Christ did at his last Supper nay that a dogge or a hogge can eate Christs body or that a spider can be drowned in his bloud which saueth all destroyeth none that can receiue it Againe what is more senselesse then to adore crosses and dumbe images which neither see nor heare nor moue and whose honor is not séene or knowne of those saints to whō they belong for ought we know Thirdly what is more inconuenient then to make a blind Pope that is ignorant of all matters of religion for the most part supreme iudge of controuersies of religion Can blind men iudge of colours or ignorant atheists of religion Fourthly what is more blasphemous then to teach that the Scriptures to vs are not authenticall vnlesse the Pope consigne them vnto vs Shall not truth be truth vnlesse it please the Pope to say it Finally seeing faith ought to be most certaine and built vpon grounds most certaine the popish religion must néedes be an absurd faith and a false religion that is built vpon traditions as well as Scriptures of which traditions the papists can yéeld no certaine proofe but are driuen to alleage either lying legends or old motheaten missals or vncertain customes It were an easie thing to alleage infinite such like absurdities of which this surueying K. hath very foolishly offered vs occasion to discourse at large He doeth also very simply talke of the sacrifice of the Masse Suruey li. 4. c. 2. For if Papists say truly that Christs body and blood is really offered in the Masse and that euery externall sacrifice requireth a reall destruction then it followeth that these masse-mongers 〈◊〉 really destroy Christs body and blood Bellarmine lib. 1. de missa c. 2. sayth that an externall sacrifice doth require a reall destruction Requirit realem destructionem Was then this fellow wise trow you to talke of this braue sacrifice Further do we thinke him wise that in a booke offered to the king doth rayle on the kings religion saying That it leadeth vnto atheisme Finally it is a note of