sayd Quod pro vobis funditur his wordes are not so but that those wordes if we looke to the construction can not be referred to the bloud but to the cuppe which in effect is as much as you say His iudgement in deede is of these wordes as they are now redde that either it is a manifest Soloecophanes or else an addition out of the margent into the text And as for the word Soloecophanes you vnderstand him that he meaneth a plaine soloecisme fault in grammar and so doth M. Whitakers Howe you vnderstand him it is not materiall but how he is to be vnderstood in deede M. Whitakers whom you call to witnesse doth not so vnderstand him but sheweth that if he had called it a plaine Soloecisme he had not charged S. Luke with a worse fault than Hieronyme chargeth S. Paule But what reason is there that you or any man should vnderstand Beza by Soloecophanes to meane a plaine soloecisme Think you he is so ignorant that he knoweth not the difference of the one from the other or so negligent of his termes that he would confound those whome he knoweth so much to differ But Maister Fulke say you saith that he meaneth no such thing but that it is an elegancie and figuratiue speech vsed of moste eloquent auctors and it is a world to see and a Grecian muste needes smyle at his deuises striuing to make Saint Lukes speeche here as he construeth the wordes an elegancye in the Greeke tongue Thus you write but if I giue not all Grecians and Latinistes iust occasion before I haue done with you to laugh at your prowde ignorance and to spit at your malitious falshood let me neuer haue credit I say not of a Grecian or learned man which I desire not but not so much as of a reasonable creature Ah sir and doth M. Fulke saye that this speech of S. Luke is an elegancie in the Greeke tongue I pray you where sayth he so you answer me quickly Against D. Saunders Rocke pag. 308. I tremble to heare what wordes you haue there to charge me withall In deede in that page I begin to speake of that matter against Saunder who chargeth Beza as you doe moreouer affirmeth that Beza should teach that S. Luke wrore false Greeke because he sayth that here is a manifest Soloecophanes But that neither you shall quarrell that I chose some peece of my saying for my purpose nor any man doubt how honestly you charge me I will here repeate whatsoeuer I haue written touching that matter in the place by you quoted But the Protestants doe not onely make them selues Iudges of the whole bookes but also ouer the very letter sayth he of Christes Gospell finding fault with the construction of the Euangelists and bring the text it selfe in doubt Example hereof he bringeth Beza in his annotatioÌ„s vpon Luke 22. of the words This cup is the new Testament in my bloud which is shed for you In which text because the word bloud in the Greeke is the datiue case the other word that followeth is the nominatiue case Beza supposeth that S. Luke vseth a figure called Soloeâ—ophanes which is appearaunce of incongruitie or else that the last word which is shed for you might by error of writers being first set in the margent out of Mathew and Marke be remoued into the text Herevpon M. Sander out of all order and measure â—ayleth vpon Beza and vpon all Protestants But I pray you good sir shall the onely opinion of Beza and that but a doubâ—full opinion indite all the Protestants in the world of such high treason against the word of God For what gaineth Beza by this interpretation For sooth the Greeke text is contrary to his Sacramentarie heresie For thus he should translate it This cuppe is the newe Testament in my bloud which cuppe is shed for you Not the cuppe of gold or siluer sayth he but the liquor in that cuppe which is not wine because wine was not shed for vs but the bloud of Christ. Why then the sense is this This bloud in the cuppe which is shed for you is the new Testament in my bloud What sense in the worlde can these wordes haue By which it is manifest that the words which is shed for you cannot be referred to the cuppe but to his bloud For the cuppe was the new Testament in his bloud which was shed for vs which sense no man can deny but he that will deny the manifest word of God Neither doth the vulgar Latine translation giue any other sense although M. Sander is not ashamed to say it doth The vulgar Latine text is this Hic est calix nouum Testamentum in sanguine meo qui pro vobis fundetur What grammarian in construing would referre qui to calix and not rather to sanguine Againe Erasmus translateth it eueÌ„ as Beza Hoc poculum nouum Testamentum per sanguinem meum qui pro vobis effunditur Nowe touching the coniecture of Beza that those words by errour of the scriuener might be remoued from the margent into the text is a thing that sometime hath happened as most learned men agree in the 27. of Mathew where the name of Ieremie is placed in the text for that which is in Zachary yet neither of the Prophets was named by the Euangelist as in most auncient records it is testified The like hath bene in the first of Marke where the name of Esay is set in some Greeke copies followed in your vulgar translation for that which is cited out of Malachie which name was not set downe by the Euangelist but added by some vnskilfull writer is reproued by other Greeke copies But this place you say is not otherwise found in any olde copie as Beza confesseth then remaineth the second opinion that S. Luke in this place vseth Soloecophanes which is an appearance of incongruitie yet no incongruitie Wherein I can not maruaile more at your malice M. Sander than at your ignorance which put no difference betwene Soloecisinus Soloecophanes but euen â—s spitefully as vnlearnedly you affirme that Beza should teach that S. Luke wrote false Greeke whereas Soloecophanes is a figure vsed of the most eloquent writers that euer tooke penne in hand euen Cicero Demosthenes Greeke and Latine prophane and diuine and euen of S. Luke him selfe in other places whereof for examples I referre you to Budaeus vpon the worde Soloecophanes The apparance of incongruitie is that it seemeth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the nominatiue case should agree with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the datiue case whereas in deede 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is vsed as a relatiue for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as it is often and the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which wanteth is vnderstoode as it is commonly in the Greeke tongue and so the translation must be hoc poculum nouum Testamentum est in sanguine meo qui pro vobis
image of their idolls For they worshippe not an idoll but for varietie of their doctrine they adore diuerse Gods And he put in very well which you made to your selues for they receiued them not of God but forged them of their owne minde And of the idoll of Samaria he sayth we alwayes vnderstand Samaria and the idoll of Samaria in the person of Heretikes the same Prophet saying WOE BE TO THEM THAT DESPISE SION AND TRVST IN THE MOVNT OF SAMARIA For Heretikes despise the Churche of God and trust in the falshood of their opinions erecting them selues against the knowledge of God and saying when they haue diuided the people by schisme we haue no part in Dauid nor inheritance in the sonne of Isay. FVLK 29. Not these onely but the idols of the Simonists Valentinians Gnostici Carpocratits Collyridians and such like made with handes of Christ and his mother of Paule and Simon and Selene and Pythagoras c. and such other were idolls of false Christians since the idolatrie of the Gentiles gaue place by the iudgement of Irenaeus Epiphanius and other auncient doctors And whatsoeuer you cite or can cite out of Saint Hierom against the idolls of heresies agreeth most aptly to your selues the Papistes who worship not onely idols made with handes but also the idols of your braines which are abhominable heresies MART. 30. Thus the Reader may see that the holye Scriptures which the aduersaries falsly translate against the holy images of our Sauiour Christ and his Saincts to make vs Idolaters doe in deede concerne their idolls and condemne them as idolaters which forge newe opinions to them selues such as the auncient fathers knewe not and adore them and their owne sense and interpretation of Scriptures so farre and so vehemently that they preferre it before the approued iudgement of all the generall councels and holy doctors and for maintenance of the same corrupt the holy scriptures at their pleasure and make them speake according to their fansies as we haue partly shewed and now are to declare further FVLK 30. Thus the Reader may see that when you haue cauilled quarrelled falsified and slaundered as much as you can to charge vs with false translation of the Scripture concerning images you can finde nothing worth the nothing but if some small ouersight through negligence or perhaps the Printers fault hath escaped you make a great matter of it although it be corrected by our selues in other translations and when all other matter faileth you returne to your accustomed veine of rayling and reuiling which in no wise mans iudgement deserueth any aunswer because it is so generall CHAP. IIII. The ECCLESIASTICALL vse of wordes turned into their ORIGINAL and PROFANE signification Martin WE spake a litle before of the double signification of wordes the one according to the originall propertie the other according to the vsuall taking thereof in all vulgar speech and writing These wordes as by the way we shewed before vpon occasion of the Aduersaries graunt are to be translated in their vulgar and vsuall signification not as they signifie by their originall propertie As for example Maior in the originall signification is greater But when we say The Maior of London now it is taken and soundeth in euery mans eare for such an Officer and no man will say The greater of London according to the originall propertie of it Likewise Episcopus a Greeke word in the originall sense is euery ouerseer as Tullie vseth it and other profane writers but among Christians in Ecclesiasticall speech it is a Bishop And no man will say My Lord ouerseer of London for my Lord Bishop Likewise we say Seuen Deacons S. Steuen a Deacon No man will say Seuen Ministers S. Steuen a Minister Although that be the originall signification of the word Deacon But by Ecclesiasticall vse and appropriation being taken for a certaine degree of the Clergie so it foundeth in euery mans eare and so it must be translated As we say Nero made many Martyrs not Nero made many witnesses and yet Martyr by the first originall propertie of the word is nothing else but a witnesse We say Baptisme is a sacrament not washing is a sacrament Yet Baptisme and washing by the first originall propertie of the word is all one Fulke WE haue also aunswered before that words must not be alwaies translated according to their originall and generall signification but according to such signification as by vse they are appropried to be taken We agree also that words taken by custome of speech into an Ecclesiasticall meaning are not to be altered into a straunge or profane signification For such vanities and nouelties of wordes the Apostle prohibiteth wherof the popish translatiō of the new Testament is fraught full Notwithstanding our meaning is not that if any Greeke termes or words of any other language haue of long time bene vsurped in our English language the true vnderstanding of which is vnknowen at this day to the common people but that the same termes may be either in translation or exposition set out plainly to enforme the simplicitie of the ignorant by such wordes as of them are better vnderstoode Also when those termes are abused by custome of speech to signifie some other thing than they were first appointed for or else be taken ambiguously for diuers things we ought not to be superstitious in these cases but to auoide misvnderstanding we may vse words according to their originall signification as they were taken in such time as they were written by the instruments of the holy Ghost As for example if a Bishop be mistaken by the people either for such an idoll as the Papistes vsed to make of their S. Nicolas bishops or else for a great Lord onely that rideth about in a white rochet they may be told that the name of a Bishop describeth his office that is to be an ouerseer of the flocke of Christ committed to his charge Likewise if the word Deacon be taken for such an one as at a popish masse standeth in a disguised tunicle holding a patten or some other Idolatrous bable vsed of them the people must be taught that this name signifieth a minister which was ordeined not to serue the Popish altar but the poore mens tables that is to prouide for the poore and to see the Churches almes bestowed vpon them Also if the name of Martyrs be not vnderstood but taken onely for them that are tormented and rent in bodie as the common speach is to say of men beasts that they are martyred whē their bodies are woūded and mangled here it is needefull to shewe that the Saincts that suffered for Christe had their name of their witnesse or testimonie not of their paines torments The name of Baptisme is so common to Christians that it neede not to be changed into washing but yet it may and ought to be explicated vnto the vnlearned what this worde doth signifie which is no prophane
should not haue bene so straunge a matter vnto you to heare that our Sauiour Christ with great astonishment and terrour of mind was afraid of death where he vseth the wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which was not for bodilye paine or bodily death which not onely thousands of holy Martyrs haue ioyfully embraced but infinite wicked persons haue contemned but for the feeling of Gods wrath which was infinitely more heauy vpon his soule than any torments were vpon his bodie MART. 42. Yea Beza sayth further to this purpose much more against his skill in the Greeke tongue if he had any at all that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the preposition can not beare this sense For which or in respect whereof and therefore he translateth the Greeke into Latine thus Exauditus est ex metu he was heard from feare not for feare or for his reuerence And because from feare is a hard speech and darke that seemeth to be the cause why our English translators say In that which he feared farre from Beza in word but agreeably in sense FVLK 42. When Beza hath shewed his skill in the Greeke tongue not onely in his translation and annotations but also in diuers Greeke Epigrams which he hath set forth who but one starke mad with malice blind with conceit of his owne slender skil would doubt whether Beza had any skill at all in the Greeke tongue As for that he sayth of the signification of the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he speaketh in respect of the propertie of the Greeke tongue for yet you bring no examples but Hebraisms out of the Scripture for that signification of the preposition MART. 43. But for this matter we send them to Flaccus Illyricus a Captaine Lutherane who disputeth this very point against the Caluinistes and teacheth them that no thing is more common than that signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For proofe whereof we also referre them to these places of the holye scripture Mat. 13. Luc. 22. and 24. Act. 12. Psal. 87. And Machab. 5. 21. where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a genitiue and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with an accusatiue signifie all one which Beza denieth Gentle Reader beare with these tedious grammatications fitter to be handled in Latine but necessary in this case also good for them that vnderstand for the rest an occasion to aske of them that haue skill in the Greeke tongue whether we accuse our aduersaries iustly or no of false translating the holy Scriptures FVLK 43. And we by the same authoritie sende you to Bezaes answer in his last edition of his annotations And yet the Reader must know that Beza did not simply deny that the preposition might haue such sense But he sayde Non facile mihi persuaserim I can not easily perswade my selfe that any example can be brought wherein 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so vsed And in all these examples that you haue brought it signifieth rather prae which is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than propter 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as your vulgar translator obserueth the difference 2. Mac. 5. verse 27. translating prae superbia and propter elationem mentis But Beza requireth an example of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 taken for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that may aunswer to the vulgar Latine pro reuerentia For who would translate in Saint Mathew 13. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro gaudio propter gaudium or secundum gaudium or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 pro dolore and so of the rest but of these let Beza him selfe giue account As for these tedious grammatications which you confesse to haue bene fitter to be handled in Latine it seemeth you vttered in English for that of many ignorant you might be thought to bringe some great learning out of the Hebrewe and Greeke tongues against vs whereas the learned if you had written in Latine of other nations as well as ours might haue bene witnesses of your fonde trifling and quarrelling against our translations As for the necessarye cause you pretende that the vnlearned may aske them that haue skyll in Greeke is very ridiculous For neyther can they haue at hande alwayes such as be able to resolue them neither if they be of your faction wil they aske any indifferent mans iugement but onely such as will auouch before the ignorant that all which you write is good and perfect MART. 44. And we beseech them to giue vs a good reason why they professing to followe precisely the Greeke doe not obserue truely the Greeke points in such place as concerneth this present controuersie For the place in the Apocalypse which they alledge of our Sauiour Christes suffering from the beginning thereby to inferre that the iust men of the olde Testament might enter heauen then as well as after his reall and actuall death according to the Greeke points sayth thus All that dwell vpon the earth shall worship him the beast whose names haue not bene written in the booke of life of the Lambe slayne from the beginning of the worlde Where it is euident that the Greeke text sayth not the Lambe slaine from the beginning but that the names of those Antichristian Idolaters were not written in Gods eternall booke of predestination from the beginning as it is also most plaine without all ambiguitie in the 17. chapter v. 8. If in a place of no controuersie they had not bene curious in pointes of the Greeke they might haue great reason sometime to alter the same FVLK 44. How faine would you obscure the light of that excellent testimonie euen contrarye to your owne vulgar Latine translation that you might not haue such a faithfull witnesse against your Limbus patrum You require a reason whye wee keepe not the Greeke pointes Apoc. 13. I aunswer we keepe those pointes which the most auncient written copies haue which the Complutensis Ediâ—iâ— hath and which the beste Greeke printes nowe haue If you would knowe a reason why we followe not them that point otherwise I aunswer you the composition of the wordes is against that pointing For except Saint Iohn had meant that the Lambe was slayne from the beginning of the world he would not haue placed those wordes from the beginning of the worlde next to those wordes the Lambe which is slayne but next the worde written And therefore Aretus that could not vnderstande howe the lambe was slaine from the beginning of the world is forced to imagine Hyperbaton in this text where none needeth the sense being good and plaine without it as the wordes doe lye Whose names are not written in the booke of life of the lambe that hath bene slaine since the beginning of the worlde And although it be true that the names of the Antichristian Idolaters were not written in Gods eternall booke of predestination from the beginning as it is said Apoc. 17. v. 8. Yet is that no reason why this also shoulde
Greeke text of the Psalmes which nowe we haue is none of the Seuenties translation as euen Lindanus might teach you de opt gen l 3. ◠6. MART. 25. And to this purpose perhaps it is for other cause I can not gesse that you make such a maruelous transposition of wordes in your translation Mat. 19. saying thus When the sonne of man shall sit in the throne of his maiestie ye that haue followed me in the regeneration shal sit also vpon twelue scates Whereas the order of these wordes both in Greeke and Latine is this You that haue followed me in the regeneration when the Sonne of man shall sit in his maiestie you also shall sit vpon twelue seates To follow Christ in the regeneration is not easily vnderstood what it should meane but to sit with Christ in the regeneration that is in the resurrection vpon twelue seates that is familiar and euery mans interpretation and concerneth she great reward that they shall then haue which here followe Christ as the Apostles did FVLK 25. You looke for faultes very narrowly that can espye but a comma wanting although it be no impious sense to follow Christ in the regeneration for the worlde by Christ was after a sort renewed when the cause of the restauration thereof was performed as for the reward of which you haue such a seruile care is expressed in sitting vpon twelue seates to iudge the tribes of Israell Wherefore there was no neede that you shoulde feare the losse of your rewarde by this transposition MART. 26. The like transposition of wordes is in some of your Bibles Heb. 2. v. 9. thus We see IESVS crowned with glorie and honour which was a litle inferior to the Angels through the suffering of death Whereas both in Greeke and Latine the order of the wordes is thus Him that was made a litle inferior to Angels we see IESVS through the passion of death crowned with honour and glorie In this later the Apostle sayth that Christ was crowned for his suffering death and so by his death merited his glorie But by your translation he saith that Christ was made inferiour to Angels by his suffering death that is saith Beza For to suffer death and taking it so that he was made inferiour to Angels that he might die then the other sense is cleane excluded that for suffering death he was crowned with glorie and this is one place among other whereby it may very well be gathered that some of you thinke that Christ him selfe did not merite his owne glorie and exaltation So obstinatly are you set against merites and meritorious workes To the which purpose also you take away mans free will as hauing no habilitie to worke toward his owne saluation FVLK 26. Whether we say Christ was crowned for his suffering or Christ was made inferiour to the Angels through his suffering the sense of either of both is good and godly and may stande with the place neither doth the one of them exclude the other although but one only can be the sense of the place And if this be the place by which you may gather that some of vs thinke that Christ merited not his owne glorie it is not worth a straw We hold that Christ for him selfe needed not to merite because he was the Lorde of glorie but that he merited for vs to be exalted in our nature for our saluation it is so farre off that we deny that our whole comfort resteth in his merites and in his glorie which he hath deserued for vs we hope to be glorified for euer When you make your transition to the next chapter you say we take away mans free wil as hauing none abilitie to worke by which it seemeth that you doe not onely allowe to man the freedome of his will but also power to worke whatsoeuer he will so that he shall not only haue a free will but also a strength by the same to worke towardes his owne saluation CHAP. X. Hereticall translation against FREE VVILL Martin AGAINST free will your corruptions be these Ioh. 1. 12. where it is said As many as receiued him he gaue them power to be made the sonnes of God some of your translations say he gaue them prerogatiue to be the sonnes of God Beza dignitie Who protesteth that whereas in other places often he translated this Greke word power and authoritie here he refused both in deede against free will which he sayeth the Sophistes would proue out of this place reprehending Erasmus for following them in his translation But whereas the Greeke word is indifferent to signifie dignitie or libertie he that will translate either of these restraineth the sense of the holy Ghost and determineth it it to his owne fansie If you may translate dignitie may not we as well translate it libertie Yes surely For you know it signifieth the one as well as the other both in profane and Diuine writers And you can well call to minde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whence they are deriued and that the Apostle calleth a mans libertie of his owne will 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Now then if potestas in Latine and power in Englishe be wordes also indifferent to signifie both dignitie and libertie translate so in the name of God and leaue the text of the Scripture indifferent as we doe and for the sense whether of the two it doth here rather signifie or whether it doth not signifie both as no doubt it doth the fathers so expounde it let that be examined otherwise It is a common fauls with you and intolerable by your translation to abridge the sense of the holy Ghost to one particular vnderstanding to defeate the exposition of so many fathers that expounde it in another sense and signification As is plaine in this example also folowing Fulke SEeing you confesse that the Greeke worde signifieth not onely power but also dignitie and that in this place it signifieth both it can be no corruptiō but the best and truest interpretation to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dignitie for that includeth power whereas power may be seuered from dignitie Where you woulde haue vs vse a word that is ambiguous whē the sense is cleare by your owne confession you bewray your owne corrupt affection which desire to haue the Scriptures so ambiguously or doubtfully translated that the ignorant might receiue no benefite of certaine vnderstanding by them When a worde hath diuerse significations a wise translater must weigh which of them agreeth with the text in hand that to vse but not to seeke ambiguous words that may bring the matter in doubt when the meaning to him is certaine As here you say there is no doubt but it signifieth both and yet you quarrell at our translation which comprehendeth both and vrge the word of power from which dignity may be seuered whereas frō dignity power or ability or licence can not be
whose womb if it be ful of wind she is in great tormentes But you aske vs whether there be anie thing in the Hebrue that hindreth vs to say we haue coÌ„ceiued and as it were traueled and haue brought forth the spirit Yea verily the coÌ„text of the Hebrue words wil not beare that translation for the worde chemo quasi as it were is placed before the word ialadhenu which signifieth bringing foorth and not before chalnu which signifieth trauailing in paine Therfore the text is worde for word as wee haue translated it And the word following wee coulde make no helpe to the lande or there was no help in the earth declareth a continuance of their miserie and cannot agree with that sense whiche you woulde haue because they which haue receiued the holy Ghost haue founde helpe and are able to helpe Beside that it is a monstrous phrase that the godly shoulde saye they haue conceiued trauailed and brought foorthe the holie Ghost by which they are borne againe to bee the children of God rather than that they haue conceiued or brought forth Gods spirite And therfore howsoeuer Hierom like your interpretation it agreeth neither with the words of the Hebrue nor with the circuÌ„stance of the place it is scarce tollerable to make such a conceptioÌ„ and generation of Gods spirite in men That seruile feare is to be reprooued in the children of God whych shoulde feare him as sonnes and not as slaues wee are content to acknowledge with Luther But what place is this for vs to meane any thing against seruile feare whâ— there is no mention of feare in the Hebrewe texte and the Greeke hathe suche licentious additions that Hierome is faine to strike them through with a spitte and note them to be wiped out MART. 3. But to saye wee haue broughte foorthe winde can admit no suche interpretation but euen as if a meere Iew should translate or vnderstand it who hath no sense of Gods spirite so haue you excluded the true sense which concerneth the holie Ghost and not the colde terme of winde and whatsoeuer naked interpretation thereof And it is your fashion in al such cases where the richer sense is of Gods holie spirite there to translate winde as Psal. 147. v. 1â— as you number the psalmes FVLK 3. We must say in english as the prophet hath said before vs in Hebrue and so truly translate the scripture that neuer a Iewe in the world may haue iust cause to accuse our falshode or partialitie And how cold soeuer the terme of winde seeme to your crooked minde and how naked soeuer the interpretation be thought of your cloaked hypocrisie it is the worde of the euerliuing God and the true sense thereof as it is expressed by the Prophet Likewise Psalme 147. the Prophet sheweth who doth execute the commandement of God in thawing dissoluing the frost namely the wind which being southerly wee see the effect of it what neede wee here to cause the holie ghost to be sent to melt the ice MART. 4. And it is not vnlike to this that you wil not translate for the Aungels honor that carried Abacuâ— He sette him into Babilon ouer the lake by the force of his spirite but thus through a mightie winde so attributing it to the winde not to the Aungels power and omitting cleane the Greeke pronoune 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his which sheweth euidently that it was the Angels spirite force and power FVLK 4 That we haue translated in the storie of Abacuks taking vp that it was through a mighty winde it hath good probabilitie by the circumstance of the place and the signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is a force with with a noise is more apt to the winde than to the spirite And in other writers 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is taken for the vehement noise of windes but the pronoune I confesse should not haue bene omitted and then it may be referred either to the winde or spirite of God whose Angell this is sayd to be rather than to the Angel For the Angell being nothing but a spirite it is not so conuenient to saye by his spirite as by his owne force againe the pronoune is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereof you made great difference as in deede there is difference in another case MART. 5. Againe where the Prophets speake most manifestly of Christ there you translate cleane an other thing as Esa. 30. v. 20. When S. Hierom translateth thus the church hath alwayes redde accordingly Non faciet auolare à te vltra Doctorem tuum erunt oculi tui videntes praeceptorem tuum that is And our Lord shall not cause thy Doctors to flie from thee any more and thine eyes shall see thy Maister Which is all one in effect with that which Christ sayth I will be with you vnto the eâ—de of the word there you translate thus Thy raine shall be no more kept back but thine eyes shall see thy raine So likewise Ioel 2. v. 23. where the holy Church readeth Reioyce you children of Sion in the Lord your God because he hath giuen you the Doctor of iustice there you translate the raine of righteousnesse Doth the Hebrue word force you to this you Iewes theÌ„selues partly vnderstaÌ„d it of Esdras partly of Christs Diuinitie Why are you more profane I will not say more Iudaicalâ— than the Iewes themselues why might not S. Hierom a Christian Doctor and lacking no skill in the Hebrue as you well know satisfie you who maketh no doubt but the Hebrue in these places is Doctor Maister Teacher Who also in Psal. 84. 7. translateth thus With blessings shall the Doctor be araied meaning Christ. Where you with the later Rabbines the enemies of Christ translate The raine coâ—ereth the pooles What cold stuffe is this in respect of that other translation so clearly pointing to Christ out Maister doctor FVLK 5. I haue told you in the beginning of this chapter we must not neither is it safe for the strengthening of our faith to drawe places of Scripture vnto Christ which by the holy Ghost had an other meaning so shall the Iewes laugh vs to scorne and the faith of the ignorant which is grounded vpon such translation if it shall be opened vnto them that it is vntrue shall be mightily shaken and brought in doubt of all other places of Scripture applyed to the like ende God be thanked there be plaine and euident testimonies of Christ in the Scripture which no malice of Iewish or Heathenish enemies can wrest out of our handes which are sufficient for instruction and confirmation of our faith Now concerning those places where you would haue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie a Doctour Teacher or Maister first it seemeth you haue your Hebrew but from hande to mouth for chapter 3. sect 25. whereas we translate moreh shaker a teacher of lyes Abacuc 2. you saye wee
speach but either writtē by Barnabas as Tertullian holdeth or by Luke the Euangelist as some men thinke or by Clemens that after was B. of the Romane church whom they say to haue ordered adorned the sentēces of Paul in his own speach or els truly bicause Paule did write vnto the Hebrews because of the enuie of his name amōg thē he cut of the title in the beginning of the salutation These things cōsidered what neede those tragical exclamations in so trifling a matter Doth not the title tell it is S. Paules why strike they out S. Paules name what an hereticall peeuishnesse is this For lacke of good matter you are driuen to lowde clamors against vs but I will euen conclude in your owne wordes I reporte me to all indifferent men of common sense whether we do it to deminish the credite of the epistle which of al S. Paules epistles we might least misse when we come to dispute against your Popish sacrifice sacrificing priesthood or whether you do not craftily moue a scruple in the mindes of simple persons to make thē doubt of the auctoritie of that epistle whose double cannon shot you are not able to beare whē it is thūdred out against you vnder colour that it is not of sound credit among our selues that vse it against you Which of al the lies that euer Satan inuented taught you to vtter is one of the most abhominable MART. 12. I know very well that the authoritie of Canonicall Scripture standeth not vpon the certaintie of the author but yet to be Paules or not Paules Apostolicall or not Apostolicall maketh great difference of credite and estimation For what made S. Iames epistle doubted of sometime or the second of S. Peter and the rest but that they were not thought to be the epistles of those Apostles This Luther sawe very well when he denied S. Iames epistle to be Iames the Apostles writing If titles of bookes be of no importāce then leaue out Matthew Marke Luke and Iohn leaue out Paule in his other epistles also and you shall much pleasure the Manichees and other old Heretikes if the titles make no difference vrge no more the title of the Apocalypse S. Iohn the Diuines as though it were not S. Iohns the Euangelistes and you shall much displeasure some Heretikes now a daies Briefly most certaine it is and they know it best by their owne vsual doings that it is a principall way to the discredite of any booke to denie it to be that authors vnder whose name it hath bene receiued FVLK 12. If you know so well that the auctoritie of the Canonical scripture standeth not vpō the certaintie of the auctor as in deede it doth not For the bookes of Iudges of Ruth of Samuel the later of the Kings c. who can certainly affirme by whom they were written with what forehead do you charge vs to doubte of the auctoritie of this epistle because we reporte out of the auncient writers the vncertaintie of the auctor or leaue out that title whiche is not certainely true But yet you say to be Paules or not Paules apostolicall or not apostolicall maketh great difference of credite and estimation If by apostolicall you meane of apostolicall spirite or auctoritie I agree to that you say of apostolical or not apostolicall If you meane apostolicall that only which was writtē by some Apostle you will make great difference of credite estimatiō betweene the Gospell of Marke Luke and the Actes of the Apostles from the gospels of Mathew and Iohn But which of vs I pray you that thinketh that this epistle was not writtē by S. Paul once doubteth whether it be not of Apostolicall spirite and auctoritie Which is manifest by this that both in preaching and writing wee cite it thus the Apostle to the Hebrewes And if it were written by S. Luke or by S. Clement which both were Apostolike men seing it is out of controuersie that it was written by the spirite of God it is doubtlesse Apostolicall and differeth not in credite and estimation from those writings that are knowen certainly to haue bene writtē by the Apostles But I maruel greatly why you write that to be Paules or not Paules maketh great difference of credite estimation Those epistles that are Peters and Iohns are not Paules yet I thinke their is no great difference of credite estimation betweene them Paules What you thinke I know not but you write very suspitiously You aske what made S. Iames epistle or the second of Peter and the rest to be sometimes doubted of but that they were not thought to be the epistles of those Apostles Yes something else or else they doubted vainely of them and without iuste cause as I thinke they did But when their were two Apostles called Iames he that doubteth whether the epistle was written by Iames the brother of Iohn is persuaded it was written rather by Iames the sonne of Alphaeus doubteth nothing of the credit auctoritie estimation of the epistle No more doe wee which doubt whether the epistle to the Hebrewes were written by S. Paule seeing we are perswaded it was written either by S. Barnabas or by S. Luke or by S. Clement as the auncient writers thought or by some other of the Apostles or Euangelists we make no question but that it is Apostolicall and of equall auctoritie with the rest of the holy scriptures But Eusebius denied the epistle of S. Iames because he was perswaded that it was written by no Apostle or Apostolike man and therefore saith plainly that it is a bastard or counterset and so belike was Luther deceiued if euer he denied it as you say he did But if titles of bookes be of no importance say you then leaue out Matthew Marke Iohn and Paule in his other Epistles What nede that I pray you Is there no difference betwene leauing out a title whereof there hath bene great vncertaintie and diuersitie in Gods church and which in some Greeke copies both written and printed is left out and in leauing out those titles that neuer were omitted nor neuer any question or controuersie moued of them by any of the auncient catholike fathers But you will vs to vrge no more the title of the Apocalypse of S. Iohn the Diuine as though it were not S. Iohn the Euangelistes we shall please I know not what heretikes of our time except it be the Papistes whom it would most concerne that the reuelation of S. Iohn in which their Antichrist of Rome is so plainly described were brought out of credit But if you had read Bezaes preface before the Apocalypse you should finde that euen by that title he gathereth a probable argument that it was written by Iohn the Euangelist because it is not like that this excellent name THE DIVINE coulde agree to any Iohn in the Apostles time so aptly as to Sainct Iohn the Euangelist beside the consent of al antiquitie
saye it is examined and tryed by the Scriptures And the Scriptures them selues where they are so obscure that neither by cōmon sense knowledge of the original tongue Grammer Rhetorike Logike storye nor any other humane knowledge nor iudgement of any writers olde or new the certaine vnderstanding can be found out they are either expounded by conference of other plainer textes of Scripture according to the analogie of faith or els they remaine stil in obscuritie vntill it shall please God to reueile a more cleere knowledge of thē But none so like the familie of loue as you Papists are which reiect councels fathers interpretation of the most auncient Catholike Church yea manifest Scripture it self except it be agreable to the iudgement of your P. M. Pontifex Max. the Pope as those familiar diuels submit all things to the sentence authoritie of their H. N. Shame you nothing therefore to quote Whitaker pag. 17. 120. as though he affirmed that we our selues will be iudges both of Councels Fathers whether they expound the Scriptures well or no because he writeth percase that we ought to examine al mens writings by the word of god Doth the Apostle make euery man iudge of all thinges when he willeth euery man to examine all things and to hold that which is good If any youth vpon confidence of his wit or knowledge presume too much in diuine matters we count it rashnesse But that any youth among vs vpon confidence of his spirit will saucily controwle all the fathers cōsenting togither against his fantasie except it be some Schismatike or Heretike that is cast out from amongest vs I doe vtterly denye neither are you able to proue it of any that is allowed among vs. MART. 15. Wherevpon it riseth that one of them defendeth this as very wel said of Luther That he esteemed not the worth of a rushe a thousande Augustines Cyprians Churches against him selfe And an other very finely figuratiuely as he thought against the holy Doctor Martyr S. Cyprian affirming that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith saith thus Pardon me Cyprian I woulde gladly beleue thee but that beleeuing thee I should not beleeue the Gospell This is that which S. Augustine saith of the like men dulcissimè vanos esse non peritos sed perituros nec tam disertos in errore quà m desertos à veritate And I thinke verily that not onely we but the wiser men among them selues smile at such eloquence or pitie it saying this or the like most truly Prodierunt oratores noui stulti adolescentuli FVLK 15. Why shoulde you not at your pleasure vpon your false assumption generall inferre one or two slaunders particular M. Whitaker defendeth that it was well said of Luther That he esteemed not the worth of a rush a thousand Augustines Cyprians Churches against himselfe Woulde God that euery Papist would reade his owne words in the place by you quoted that he might see your impudent forgerie For I hope there is no Christian that will imagine that either Luther would so speake or any man of honestie defend him so speaking For Luther was not so senselesse to oppose his owne person but the truth of his cause grounded vpon the holy Scriptures not only against one thousand of men holding the contrary but euen against tenne thousand of Angels if they should oppose them selues against the truth of God But I am too blame to deale so much in M. Whitakers cause who ere it be long will displaye the falshoode of Gregorie Martin in a Latine writing to his great ignominie The next cauil is vpon M. Rainoldes words in his preface to his sixe positions disputed vpon at Oxford where against Cyprian affirming that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith he sayth Pardon me Cyprian I would gladly beleeue thee but that in beleeuing thee I shoulde not beleeue the Gospel These wordes you confesse that he spake figuratiuely and finely as he thought but that he vsed the figures of Ironve and concession you will not acknowledge but all other men may easily see For first he no where graunteth that S. Cyprian affirmeth that the Churche of Rome can not erie in fayth But immediatly before the wordes by you translated after he had proued out of the eleuēth to the Romans that the particular Church of Rome may be cut of as well as the Church of the Israelites which were the naturall braunches he asketh the question Quid Cypriano secus est visum What And did it seeme otherwise to Cyprian Pardon me Cyprian c. His meaning is plaine that Cyprian thought not otherwise than S. Paule hath written or if he did it was lawfull to dissent from Cyprian As a litle after he sayth Quare si Romanam Ecclesiam errare non posse c. Wherefore if Cyprian thought that the Church of Rome could not erre in that point by the sentence of the Papistes he him selfe is to be condemned of errour for diuerse Papistes whome he nameth confesse that euery particular Church may erre and Verratus one of them affirmeth that the Church of Rome is a particular Church which the rest can not deny And in deede that which Cyprian writeth is about certaine runneagate Heretikes that flying out of the Church of Carthage sought to be receiued of the particular Church of Rome All this while here is no graunt that Cyprian affirmeth that the Church of Rome cannot erre in faith And if Cyprian had so affirmed contrary to the scripture it might haue bene iustly replied vnto him which S. Augustine saith when he was pressed with his authoritie Contra Crescon lib. 2. cap. 31. Nos nullam Cypriano facimus iniuriam We do Cyprian no wrong when we distinguish any writings of his from the Canonical authoritie of the diuine Scriptures And in truth the wordes which M. Rainolds before cited out of S. Cyprian lib. 1. ep 3. ad Cornel. are spoken of no matter of faith but in a matter of discipline Neither doth Cyprian say that the Church of Rome can not erre in faith but that those Heretikes which brought letters from schismatikes profane persons did not consider that they are Romans whose faith is praised by the cōmendation or preaching of the Apostle to whom perfidia falshood or false dealing can haue none accesse Meaning that the Romans so long as they cōtinue in that faith which was praised by the Apostle cā not ioyne with Heretikes and Schismatikes that are cast out of other Catholike Churches For that he could not meane that the Pope or Church of Rome cannot erre in faith as the Papistes affirme it is manifest for that in a question of religion he dissented both from the Bishop and Church of Rome as all learned men knowe he did which he would neuer haue done if he had beleeued they could not erre And that his meaning was not that the Bishop of Rome could not erre in matters of
translation receaued that errour But the more part of best Greeke copies leaue out the name of Esay Howe these corruptions should come into the text except it be out of the margent if you can finde a better coniecture we shall be content with more patience to heare you than you can abide to heare Beza MART. 18. He biteth sore at the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luc. 1. v. 7â— and will not translate that but the Hebrue word of the old Testament but at 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 2. v. 24. much more and at 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 7. v. 14. exceedingly but yet after he hath said all that he could against it he concludeth that he durst not and that he had a conscience vpon coniecture to change any thing And therefore all this is gnawing only But in the 3. of Luke he maketh no conscience at all to leaue out these wordes vers 36. Qui fuit Cainan not onely in his owne translation but in the vulgar Latine which is ioyned therewith saying in his Annot. Non dubitauimus expungere that is We doubted not to put it out and why by the authoritie of Moyses Gen. 11. Whereby he signifieth that it is not in the Hebrue Gen. 11. where this posteritie of Sâ—m is â—eckened and so to maintaine the Hebrue veritie as they call it in the old Testament he careth not what become of the Greeke in the newe Testament which yet at other times against the vulgar Latine text they call the Greeke veritie and the pure fountaine and that text whereby all translations must be tried FVLK 18. His biting as you call it at the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Luk. 1. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Ast. 2. and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 9. Seeing they concerne no controuersie might haue bene contained in the section next before especially seing you confesse he sayth he durst not and that he had a conscience vpon coniecture to chaunge any thing But in the 3. of Luk. vers 36. He maketh no conscience at all to leaue out the words Qui fuit Cainan saying in his annotations that he doubted not to put it out by authoritie of Moyses Gen. 11. A sore charge to diminish any part of the holy Scripture But if he haue only corrected an errour of the scribe which by all likelihoode tooke vpoÌ„ him to adde vnto S. Luke out of the Greeke text of the 70 that which is not in the Hebrue verily I see not what offense he hath committed For first he can meane no fraude in coÌ„cealing those words wherof he doth admonish the reader and of the cause of his leauing them out Secondly he winneth no aduantage against his aduersaries or to his own cause by omitting to say that Sala was the sonne of Cainan whom Moyses affirmeth to be the sonne of Arphaxad And seeing Moyses Gen. 11. hath no such Cainan the sonne of Arphaxad it is not like that S. Luke who borrowed that parte of his genealogie out of Moises woulde adde any thing which Moises had omitted But you say that Beza to maintaine the Hebrue verity of the old Testament eareth not what become of the Greke in the new Testament You should haue made your antitheton more ful wherein it seemeth you pleased your selfe not a litle if you had sayed that Beza to maintaine the Hebrue veritie of the olde Testament careth not what becommeth of the Greeke corruption in the newe Testament and so you shoulde haue spoken both more eloquently and more truly But at other times you say against the vulgar Latine text they call the Greeke text the Greeke veritie and the pure fountaine and that whereby all translations must be tried We say in deede that by the Greeke text of the newe Testament all translations of the newe Testament must be tried but we meane not by euerie corruption that is in any Greeke coppie of the newe Testament and muche lesse that the Hebrue text of the olde Testament should be reformed after the Greeke of the newe where it is vncorrupted and least of all where any copie is guiltie of a manifest errour as in this place nowe in question MART. 19. But if he haue no other way to reconcile both Testaments but by striking out in the Greeke of the new all that agreeth not with the Hebrue of the old Testament then let him alter and chaunge so many wordes of our Sauiour him selfe of the Euangelistes and of the Apostles as are cited out of the olde Testament and are not in Hebrue Which places they know are verie many and when neede is they shall be gathered to their handes Let him strike out Mat. 13. v. 14. 15. Act. 28. v. 26. 27. the wordes of our Sauiour and S. Paule cited out of Esay because they are farre otherwise in the Hebrue Strike out of the Epistle to the Galathians these wordes vpon a tree because in the Hebrue it is only thus Cursed is he that is hanged Deut. 21. in finc Yea strike out of Dauids Psalmes that which concerneth our redemption vpon the crosse much neerer They haue pearced my handes and my feete Psal. 21. because in the Hebrue there is no suche thing Let theÌ„ controule the Apostle Eph. 4. for saying dedit he gaue gifts because it is both in the Hebrue and Greeke Psal. 67. Accepisti thou tookest giftes and Hebr. 10. for corpus aptasti let them put aures perforasti because it is so in the Hebrue Psalm 40. To be short if all must be reformed according to the Hebrue why doth he not in S. Steuens sermon cut off the number of siue soules from seuentie fiue because it is not in the Hebrue FVLK 19. If you had read Beza his workes as diligently to learne the truth out of them as you haue pried here there busily howe to espie some fault or errour in them you shoulde easily haue founde that he hath other waies to reconcile both the Testaments the difference that seemeth to be in the allegatioÌ„s than by striking out of the Greeke in the newe all that agreeth not with the Hebrue of the olde Testament And therefore vainly you bid him alter so many words as are cited in the new Testament out of the old which are not in the Hebrue and strike out of Matth. 13. v 14. 15. and Act. 28. v. 26. 27. the words of our Sauiour and S. Paule cited out of Esay because they are otherwise in the Hebrue Beza knoweth that Christ and his Apostles alwaies kepe the sense of the Hebrue verity although they do not alwaies rehearse the verie wordes But whereas you bid him out of Gal. 3. 13. strike out these words vpon a tree because in the Hebrue it is only thus Cursed is he that is hanged You shew either grosse ignoraunce or intolerable frowardnesse for these words vpon a tree are in that verse in the next before For thus the Hebrue text is 22. When
vnderstanding of the Scriptures But let vs see what be the absurdities that you gather of our defending the originall texts of both the tongues First we must needes reiect the Greeke of the olde Testament called septuaginta as false because it differeth frō the Hebrew Where it is not onely different in wordes but also contrary in sense Why should we not but if it reteine the sense and substance although it expresse not the same wordes we neede not reiect it S. Hierom who was required by Paula and Eustochium to expounde the Prophetes not onely according to the truth of the Hebrew but also after the translation of the Septuaginta whereof he diuerse tymes complayneth vppon the first of Nahum sayth expresly that it was against his conscience alwaies to follow the same Ignoscite prolixitati c. Pardon me that I am so long For I can not following both the storie and the tropologie or doctrine of maners comprehend both briefly most of all seeing that I am so greatlye tormented or troubled with the varietie of the translation and against my conscience sometimes I am compelled to frame a consequence of the vulgar edition which was the Septuaginta This was Sainct Hieroms opinion of the Septuagintaes translation But vpon reiection of that translation say you it followeth that wheresoeuer those places so disagreeing from the Hebrue are cited by Christ or the Euangelistes and Apostles there also they must be reiected because they disagree from the Hebrue and so the Greeke text of the newe Testament is not true and consequentlye the wordes of our Sauiour and writinges of his Apostles speaking according to the Septuaginta must at leaste bee reformed It is an olde saying and a true that one inconuenience being graunted manye doe followe and so you may heape vp an hundred after this manner But for aunswere I say that neyther our Sauiour nor his Apostles citing any place out of the olde Testament doe bring any thing disagreeing in sense and substance of matter the purpose for which they alleage it considered from the truth of the Hebrue text Therefore there is no neede that the 70. in those places should be reiected Althogh our Sauiour Christ speaking in the Syrian tōgue is not to be thoght euer to haue cited the text of the 70. which is in Greeke And his Apostles and Euangelists vsing that text regard the substance of the sentence not the forme of words For many times they cite not the very wordes of the Greeke 70. neither S. Hierom in Catalogo script Eccles. which is set as a Preface to S. Mathewes Gospell telleth you expresly that in the Hebrew example of S. Mathew which he had wheresoeuer the Euangelist S. Mathew either in his owne person or in the person of our Lorde and Sauiour vseth the testimonies of the olde Testament he followeth not the authoritie of the 70. translators but the Hebrew of which these are two places Out of Egypt haue I called my sonne And he shall be called a Nazarite See you not what a perilous perplexitie we are are in by defending both the Hebrue text of the olde Testament and the Geeke of the Newe when neither are contrarie to the other MART. 21. All which must needes followe if this be a good cōsequence I find it not in Moises nor in the Hebrue therefore I strooke it out as Beza doth and saith concerning the foresaid words Qui fuit Cainan This consequence therefore let vs see how they will iustifie and withall let them tell vs whether they will discredit the newe Testament because of the Septuaginta or credit the Septuaginta because of the new Testament or how they can credit one and discredit the other where both agree and consent togither or whether they will discredit both for credit of the Hebrue or rather whether there be not some other way to reconcile both Hebrue Greeke better than Bezaes impudent presumption Which if they will not maintaine let them flatly cōfesse that he did wickedly not as they doe defend euery word and deede of their maisters be it neuer so hainous or salue it at the least FVLK 21. No whit of that doth followe by striking out qui fuit Cainan Because it is not foūd in Moises therfore we haue nothing to do to iustifie your vaine consequence grounded vpon an absurdity of your owne deuising But we must tell you whether we will discredite the new Testament because of the Septuaginta no not for a thousand millions of Septuagintaes nor for all the worlde will we credite the Septuaginta against the truth of the old Testament But what soeuer is cited out of the 70. in the new is not contrarie to the Hebrew in the old and therefore the way of reconciliation is easily found without discrediting both or either of both in those places And in this place which is a meere corruption borrowed out of the corruption of the Septuagintaes or a Iudaical additiō Gen. 11. I think there is no better way of reconciling than to strike it cleane out as Beza hath done whiche generation neither is in the Hebrew veritie nor in your owne vulgar Latin translation either Gen. 11. or 1. Par. 1. Beside that it maketh a foule errour in the computation of time adding no lesse than 230. yeares betweene Arphaxad and Sala more than the Hebrew veritie or the vulgar Latin agreeing therewith doth number And therefore he was more presumptuous that out of the corrupt and false text of the Septuaginta added the same vnto the Genealogie in S. Luke than Beza which by the authoritie of Moses remoued the same If you will still persist to defende the authoritie of the Septuaginta against the Hebrew veritie which like an Atheist you deride at leastwise defende your owne vulgar Latine translation of the old Testament and deliuer your selfe out of that perplexitie in which you would place vs betweene the Hebrew of the old and the Greeke of the new Testament Seing no lesse doubts intangleth you betweene the Latine of the new and the Latine of the olde differing altogither a like as the Greeke and the Hebrew do MART. 22. Alas how farre are these men from the modestie of the auncient fathers and from the humble spirite of obedient Catholikes who seeke all other meanes to resolue difficulties rather than to do violence to the sacred Scripture and when they finde no way they leaue it to God S. Augustine concerning the difference of the Hebrue the Greeke saith often to this effect that it pleased the holy Ghost to vtter by the one that which he would not vtter by the other And S. Ambrose thus Wee haue founde many thinges not idly added of the 70. Greeke interpreters S. Hierom though an earnest patrone of the Hebrue not without cause beyng at that time perhaps the Hebrue veritie in deede yet giueth many reasons for the differences of the Septuaginta and concerning the foresaide places of S.
Hebrue Bible into Greeke Is not their credit I say in determining and defining the signification of the Hebrue worde farre greater than yours No. Is not the authoritie of all the auncient fathers both Greeke and Latine that followed them equiualent in this case to your iudgement No say they but because we finde some ambiguitie in the Hebrue we will take the aduantage and we will determine and limit it to our purpose FVLK 45. S. Hieronym aboundantly aunswereth this cauill denying that supposed inspiration and deâ—iding the fable of their 70. celles which yet pleased Augustine greately yea calling in question whether anye more were translated by them than the fiue bookes of Moses because Aristaeus a writer in Ptolomees time and after him Iosephus make mention of no more The same cause therfore that moued S. Hierome to translate out of the Hebrewe mooueth vs whose translation if we had it sounde ande perfect might much further vs for the same purpose Althoughe for the signification of the Hebrewe wordes we require no more credite than that which al they that be learned in the Hebrewe tongue must be forced to yeelde vnto vs. And seeing your vulgare Latine departeth from the Septuagintaes interpretation euen in the bookes of Moses whiche if anie bee theirs may most rightly be accounted theirs because it is certaine they translated them although it be not certaine whether they translated the rest with what equity do you require vs to credite them which your owne vulgare translation affirmeth to haue translated amisse as I haue shewed before in the example of Canans generation An other example you haue in the 4 of Genesis Nonne si bene egeris recipies c. If thou shalt do wel shalt thou not receiue but if thou shalt doe euill straighte-way thy sinnes shall be present in the doores The greke texte hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. not if thou haste rightly offered but thou hast not rightly diuided hast thou sinned be stil. Where your translation commeth muche nearer to the Hebrue as might be shewed in verie many examples As for the auncient fathers credit of the greeke Church and the Latine that folowed them if our iudgement alone be not aequiualent vnto them yet let these auncient fathers Origene and Hierome that thought them not sufficient to be followed and therefore gathered or framed other interpretations let theyr iudgement I say ioining with ours discharge vs of this fonde and enuious accusation MART. 46. Againe we condiscend to their wilfulnes and say what if the Hebrewe be not ambiguous but so plaine and certaine to signifie one thing that it can not bee plainer As Thou shalt not leaue my soule in Hel whiche prooueth for vs that Christ in soule descended into Hell Is not the one Hebrewe worde as proper for soule as anima in Latine the other as proper and vsual for hel as infernus in Latine Heere then at the least wil you yeeld No say they not here neither for Beza telleth vs that the word which commonly and vsually signifieth soule yet for a purpose if a man wil straine it may signifie not onely bodie but also carcase and so he translateth it But Beza say we being admonished by his friendes corrected it in his later edition Yea say they he was content to change his translation but not his opinion concerning the Hebrewe worde as himselfe protesteth FVLK 46. You haue chosen a text for example wherein is least colour except it bee with the vnlearned of an hundred For whereas you aske whether Nephesh be no not as proper for soule as anima in Latin Sheol for Hel as infernus in Latine I vtterly deny both the one and the other For nephesh is properly the life and Sheol the graue or pit though it may sometimes be taken for Hel which is a consequent of the death of the vngodly as nephesh is taken for person or ones selfe or as it is sometimes for a dead carcase Yea there be that hold that it is neuer taken for the reasonable immortall soule of a man as anima is specially of Ecclesiasticall writers That Beza translated the Greeke of the newe Testament after the signification of the Hebrewe wordes althoughe it was true in sense yet in mine opinion it was not proper in wordes and therefore he himselfe hath corrected it in his latter editions as you confesse hee hathe not chaunged hys opinion concerning the Hebrewe the reason is because it is grounded vppon manifest textes of Scripture whiche hee citeth Leuit. 19. verse 27. cap. 21. verse 1. and 11. Num. 5. verse 2. and 9. verse 10. In the firste place your owne vulgare Latine translation for la nephesh turneth mortuo you shall not cut your flesh for one that is dead In the second place your vulgare Latine hathe Ne non contaminetur sacerdos in mortibus and Ad omnem mortuum non ingredietur omnino Lette not the Priest bee defiled with the deathes of his countreymen and The highe Priest shall not enter into any dead bodie at all where the Hebrue is lenephesh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the thirde place your vulgare Latine readeth polluiusque est super mortuo they shall caste out him that is polluted by touching a dead carcase where the Hebrewe is lanephesh In the first place your vulgare Latine hathe indede anima but in the same sense that it had before mortuo for the text is of him that is vncleane by touching any dead bodie which in Hebrue is nephesh How say you nowe is the Hebrewe worde as proper for soule as anima in Latine except you wil say the Latine worde anima dothe properly signifie a dead bodie hathe not Beza good reason to retaine his opinion concerning the Hebrewe worde when hee hathe the authoritie of youre owne vulgare translation You that note such iumps and shiftes in vs whether wil you leape to saue your honestie will you saye the Hebrewe texte is corrupted since your translation was drawen out of it The seauentie interpretours then will crie out againste you for they with one mouth in all these places for the Hebrewe worde nephesh render the vsuall signification 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 adding in the 21. of Leuit. v. 11. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which either you muste translate a deade bodie or you shall call it absurdly a dead soule Woulde any man think to haue founde in you eyther suche grosse ignoraunce or shamefull negligence or intollerable malice against the trueth that Beza sending you to the places eyther you woulde not or you coulde not examine them or if you dydde examine them that you woulde notwythstanding thus malitiouslye agaynste youre owne knowledge and conscience raile against him you make vs to saye if a manne will straine the worde it may signifie not onely bodie but also carcase What saye you did Moses straine the worde to that signification You saide beefore that wee were at the iumps and turnings of
say A pagan idolater and a Christian idolater by one and the same Greeke woorde in one and the same meaning and they translate A pagan idolater and a Christian worshipper of images by two distinct words and diuerse meanings it must needes be done wilfully to the foresaid purpose See chap. 3. num 8. 9. FVLKE 6. We translate not only pagane Idolaters but also Iewes Idolaters nor Christians only worshippers of Images but Paganes also wherefore this is a foolish obseruation And if we do any where explicate who is an Idolater by translating him a worshipper of images both the word beareth it and it is not contrarie to the sense of the Scriptures in which we find the worshipping of images alwaies forbidden but neuer commaunded or allowed MART. 7. If they translate one and the same Greeke word Tradition whensoeuer the Scripture speaketh of euill traditions and neuer translate it so whensoeuer it speaketh of good and Apostolicall traditions their intention is euident against the authoritie of Traditions See chap. 2 numb 1. 2 3. FVLKE 7. This is aunswered sufficiently in confutation of the Preface Sect. 51. The English word Tradition sounding in the euill parte and taken by the Papistes for matter vnwritten yet as true and as necessarie as that which is contained in the holie Scriptures we haue vpon iust cause auoided in such places as the Greeke worde signifieth good and necessarie doctrine deliuered by the Apostles which is all contained in the Scriptures and yet haue vsed such English wordes as sufficiently expresse the Greeke word vsed in the originall text Doe not you your selues translate Tradere sometimes to betray and sometimes to deliuer MART. 8. Yea if they translate Tradition taken in ill parte where it is not in the Greeke and translate it not so where it is in the Greeke taken in good parte it is more euidence of the foresaid wicked intention See chap. 2. numb 5. 6. FVLK 8. Our intention can be no worse than your vulgar Latine Interpreters was who where the Greeke hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 translateth it Traditions Act. 6. And the right vnderstanding of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 according to the Apostles meaning wil yeeld traditions as well as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the place before mentioned MARTINE 9. If they make this a good rule to translate according to the vsuall signification and not the originall deriuation of wordes as Beza and Maister Whitakers doe and if they translate contrarie to this rule what is it but wilfull corruption So they doe in translating Idolum an Image Presbyter an Elder and the like See chap. 4. chap. 6. numb 6. 7. 8. c. numb 13. c. FVLKE 9. Neither Beza nor Maister Whitaker make it a perpetuall rule to translate according to the vsuall signification for sometimes a worde is not taken in the vsuall signification as Foenerator vsed by your vulgar Latine Interpreter Luke 7. vsuallye signifieth an Vserer yet doe you translate it a Creditor Likewise Stabulum vsed Luke 10. vsually signifieth a Stable yet you translate it an Inne So Nauis which vsually signifieth a Shippe you call it a Boate. Marke 8. and Nauicula which vsuallye signifieth a Boate you call a Shippe Luke 5. And yet I thinke you meant no wilfull corruption No more surelye did they whiche translated Idolum an Image and Presbyter an Elder whiche you can not deny But they followe the originall deriuation of the wordes whereas some of yours both goe from the vsuall signification and also from the originall deriuation MARTINE 10. If Presbyter by Ecclesiasticall vse bee appropriated to signifie a Priest no lesse than Episcopus to signifie a Bishoppe or Diaconus a Deacon and if they translate these two later accordingly and the first neuer in all the Newe Testament what can it be but wilfull corruption in fauour of this heresie That there are no Priestes of the Newe Testament See chap. 6. numb 12. FVLKE 10. The worde Priest by Popishe abuse is commonly taken for a Sacrificer the same that Sacerdos in Latine But the Holie Ghost neuer calleth the Ministers of the worde and Sacramentes of the Newe Testament 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Sacerdotes Therefore the translatours to make a difference betwene the Ministers of the Olde Testament and them of the Newe calleth the one according to the vsuall acception Priestes and the other according to the originall deriuation Elders Which distinction seeing the vulgar Latine texte doth alwaies rightly obserue it is in fauour of your hereticall Sacrificing Priesthoode that you corruptly translate Sacerdos and Presbyter alwayes as though they were all one a Priest as though the Holie Ghost had made that distinction in vayne or that there were no difference betwene the Priesthoode of the Newe Testament and the Olde The name of Priest according to the originall deriuation from Presbyter wee doe not refuse but according to the common acception for a Sacrificer wee can not take it when it is spoken of the Ministerie of the Newe Testament And although many of the auncient Fathers haue abusiuelye confounded the termes of Sacerdos and Presbyter yet that is no warrant for vs to translate the Scripture and to confounde that which we see manifestly the spirit of God hath distinguished For this cause we haue translated the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an Elder euen as your vulgar Latine translater doeth diuerse times as Actes 15. and 20. 1. Pet. 5. and else where calleth them Seniores or Maiores natu Which you commonly call the Auncientes or Seniors because you dare not speake Englishe and say the Elders Neither is Presbyter by Ecclesiasticall vse so approprietated to signifie a Priest that you woulde alwayes translate it so in the Olde Testament where your vulgar translatour vseth it for a name of Office and Gouernment and not for Priests at any time Neither do we alwayes translate the Greeke worde Episcopus and Diaconus for a Bishoppe and a Deacon but sometimes for an ouerseer as Act. 20. and a minister generally oftentimes The word Baptisma by Ecclesiasticall vse signifieth the holy Sacrament of Baptisme yet are you enforced Marke 7. to translate Baptismata washings Euen so doe we to obserue that distinction which the Apostles and Euangelistes alwaies doe keepe when we call Sacerdotes Priestes for difference we call Presbyteros Elders and not least the name of Priestes shoulde enforce the Popishe sacrifice of the Masse For this worde Presbyter will neuer cōprehend a sacrificer or a sacrificing Priesthoode MART. 11. If for Gods altar they translate Temple for Bels idololatrical table they translate altar iudge whether it bee not of purpose against our altars and in fauour of their communion table See chap. 17. numb 15. 16. FVLK 11. If there be any suche mistaking of one word for an other I thinke it was the fault of the Printer rather than of the Translator for the name of altar is more
to deny that which is affirmed without certaine proofe MART. 20. If the English Geneua Bibles them selues dare not follow their Maister Beza whom they professe to translate because in their opinion he goeth wide and that in places of controuersie how wilfull was he in so translating See chap. 12. num 6. 8. chap. 13. num 1. FVLK 20. It is a very impudent slaunder The Geneua Bibles doe not professe to translate out of Bezaes Latine translation but out of the Hebrew Greeke if they agree not alwaies with Beza what is that to the purpose if they agree with the truth of the originall text Beza often times followeth the purer phrase of the Latine tongue which they neither woulde nor might follow in the English If in dissenting from Beza or Beza from them they or he dissent from the truth it is of humane frailtie not of hereticall wilfulnes The places being examined shall discouer your vanitie MART. 21. If for the most part they reprehend the olde vulgar translation and appeale to the Greeke and yet in places of controuersie sometime for their more aduantage as they thinke they leaue the Greeke and followe our Latine translation what is it else but voluntarie and partiall translation See chap. 2. num 8. chap. 6. nu 10. 21. chap. 7. nu 39. chap. 10. nu 6. FVLK 21. We neuer leaue the Greeke to followe your vulgar translation as in the places by you quoted I will proue manifestly but I haue already proued that you leaue the Latine and appeale to the Greeke in translating Simulachra Idols both Col. 3. 1. Iohn 5. MART. 22. If otherwise they auoid this world iustifications altogither yet translate it when they can not choose but with a coÌ„meÌ„tarie that it signifieth good works that are testimonies of a liuely faith doth not this hereticall commentarie shew their heretical meaning when they auoide the worde aliogither See Chap. 3. Nu. 1. 2. 3. FVLK 22. To auoyde the worde altogither and yet sometime to translate it I see not how they can stand togither for he that doth sometimes translate it doth not altogither auoyde it But you will say they do altogither auoyde it in all such places where they doe not translate it That is altogither false for the Geneua translation Luc. 1. telleth you that the Greeke worde signifieth iustifications and yeeldeth a reason why it doth in that place otherwise translate it and if to translate the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 otherwise than iustificatioÌ„ must needes shew an hereticall meaning then must you needs say that your vulgar Latine translater had an hereticall meaning for in the second place by you quoted namely Rom. 2. v. 26. he tranâ—lateth it Iustitias likewise Ro. 1. v. 32. Iustitiam so likewise Rom. 5. v. 18. And if it be an hereticall commentarie to say that good workes are a testimonie of a liuely faith you will also condemne the Apostles of heresie which teach it to be impossible to please God without faith Heb. 11. and that what soeuer is not of faith is sinne Rom. 14. If there be any good workes that are not testimonies of a liuely faith But it is sufficient for you to call what you wil heresie and hereticall falsification and corruption for your disciples are bounde to beleeue you though you say the Gospell be heresie and the Apostles themselues heretikes Gregorie Martine calleth this an heretical commentarie what neede you seeke other proofe MART. 23. When by adding to the text at their pleasure they make the Apostle say that by Adams offence â—inne came on all men but that by Christs iustice the benefite only abounded toward all men not that iustice came on all whereas the Apostle maketh the case a like without any such diuers additions to wit that we are truely made iuste by Christ as by Adam we are made sinners is not this most wilfull corruption for their heresie of imputatiue and phantasticall iustice See Chap 11. Nu. 1. FVLK 23. The Verse by you quoted Rom. 5. v. 18. is a manifest eclipsis or defectiue speach to make any sense wherof there must needes be added a Nominatiue case and a Verbe Now by what other Nominatiue case and Verbe may the sense be supplied but by that which the Apostle him selfe giueth before Verse 15. Vnto which all that followeth must be referred for explication Where he saieth as you your selues traÌ„slate it If by the offeÌ„ce of one many died much more the grace of God the gift in the grace of one man Iesus Christ hath abounded vpoÌ„ many Seing therfore that defectiue speach must be supplied for vnderstanding in this probation what is so apt as that which the Apostle him self hath expressed before in the proposition Although you in your translatioÌ„ are not disposed to supplie it bicause you had rather the text should be obscure woÌ„dred at than that it should be plaine easie or able to be vnderstood albeit in other places you sticke not to adde such wordes as be necessarie for explication of the texte as euery translater must do if he will haue any sense to be vnderstood in his traÌ„slation For that defectiue speach which in some tongue is well vnderstood in some other is altogither voide of sense and must be explicated by addition of that which is necessarily or probably to be vnderstoode So you translate Math. 8. Quid nobis What is betweene vs Mark 2. Post dies after some daies Accumberet he satte at meate and many such like But where you charge our translation to say the benefite only abouÌ„ded toward all men not that iustice came on all you do shamefully adde to our translation for the worde onely is of your owne slaunderous addition and the rest is your malitious colection For we meane not to extenuate the benefite of Christes redemption but by all meanes to set it forth to the vttermost as the worde abounded doth shew if you do not blemish the light of it by your blockish addition of this worde only And that we are truely made iust by Christ and yet by imputation as wee are truly made sinners by Adam and yet partly by imputation as we are actually by corruptioÌ„ we do at all times and in al places most willingly confesse for the iustice of Christ which is imputed vnto vs by faith is no false or phantasticall iustice as you do no lesse blasphemously than phantastically affirme but a true and effectuall iustice by which we are so truly made iust that we shall receiue for it the crowne of iustice which is eternall life as the Apostle proueth at large Rom. 4. and 5. whom none but an hellhound will barke against that he defendeth imputatiue and phantasticall iustice MART. 24. But if in this case of iustification when the question is whether onely faith iustifie and wee say no hauing the expresse wordes of S. Iames they say yea hauing ne expresse scripture for
it if in this case they will adde only to the very text is it not most horrible and diuelish corruption So did Luther whom our English ProtestaÌ„ts honor as their father in this heresie of only faith are his owne childreÌ„ See ch 12. FVLK 24. In the question of iustification by faith only where S. Iames saieth no we say no also neyther can it be proued that we adde this word only to the text in any translation of oures If Luther did in his translation adde the worde only to the texte it can not be excused of wrong translation in worde although the sense might well beare it But seing Luther doth him selfe confesse it he may be excused of frawde though not of lacke of iudgement But why should our translation be charged with Luthers corruption Because our English Protestants honour him as their father A very lewde slaunder for we call no man father vpon earth though you do call the Pope your father albeit in another sense Luther was a reuerende father of the Churche for his time But as touching the doctrine of only faith iustifying it hath more patrones of the fathers of the auncient primitiue Church than Martine can beare their bookes though he would breake his backe who in the same plaine wordes do affirme it as Luther doth that only faith doth iustifie And the Apostle which saieth that a man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law speaketh more plainely for iustification by faith only as we do teach it than if he had sayed a man is iustified by faith only Which text of Rom. 3. and many other are as expresse scripture to proue that we teach and beleeue as that S. Iames sayeth against iustification by faith only where he speaketh of an other faith and of an other iustification than S. Paule speaketh of and we vnderstand when we holde that a man is iustified by faith only or without workes of the law which is all one MART. 25. If these that account themselues the great Grecians and Hebricians of the world will so translate for the aduauntage of their cause as though they had no skill in the world and as though they knew neither the significatioÌ„ of words nor proprietie of phrases in the saide languages is it not to be esteemed shamelesse corruption FVLK 25. Yes but if it can not be proued that so they translate then is this an impudent slaunder as al the rest are and so it will proue when it coÌ„meth to be tried MART. 26. I will not speake of the German Heretikes who to mainteine this heresie that all our workes be they neuer so good are sinne translated for Tibi soli peccaui to thee only haue I sinned thus Tibi solùm peccaui that is I haue nothing else but sinned whatsoeuer I do I sinne whereas neither the Greeke nor the Hebrewe will possibly admit that sense Let these passe as Lutherans yet wilfull corrupters and acknowledged of our English Protestants for their good brethren But if Beza translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when we were yet of no strength as the Geneua English Bible also doth interprete it whereas euery young Grecian knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither without strength is not this of purpose to take away mans free will altogither See chap. 10. nu 13. FVLK 26. I knowe not what German heretikes those be which maintaine that heresie that al our works be they neuer so good are sinne except they be the Libertines with whom we haue nothing to do For we neuer say that good workes are sinne for that were al one to say that good were euill But that al our good workes are short of that perfection which the law of God requireth we do humbly confesse against our selues Or else what soeuer seemeth to be a good worke and is done of meÌ„ voyde of true faith is sinne For these assertions we haue the scripture to warraÌ„t vs. And if to proue the later any man hath translated those words of Dauid in the 51. Psalme Lecha Lebadecha Tibi solum or tantuÌ„modo tibi peccaui c. To the only or altogither to thee I haue sinned in respect of his naturall corruption which he doth expresse in the next verse he hath not departed one whitte from the Hebrewe wordes nor from the sense which the wordes may very wel beare which he that denieth rather sheweth him selfe ignorant in the Hebrew tongue than he that so translateth For what doth Lebad signifie but Solum or Tantum and therefore it may as well be translated Solum tibi as Soli â—ibi And the Apostle Rom. 3. prouing by the later end of that verse all men to be vniust that God only may be true and euery man a lier as it is written that thou mayest be iustified in thy wordes c. fauoreth that interpretation of Bucer or who soeuer it is beside But if Beza translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 when wee were yet of no strength as the Geneua Englishe Bible doth also interprete it whereas euerye young Grecian knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither withoute strengthe is not this of purpose to take awaye mannes free wyll altogither Chapter tenth Number 13. Naye it is to shewe as the Apostles purpose is that wee haue no strength to fulfill the lawe of God without the grace of Christ euen as Christ him selfe sayth without me you can do nothing Ioan. 15. v. 5. But euery young Grecian saye you knoweth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is weake feeble infirme and not altogither with out strength And is there then any old Grecian that will proue that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alway signifieth him that is weake but not voide of strength Doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 alwayes signifie him that hath some streÌ„gth Certaine it is that the Apostle speaketh here of those that were voide of strength for the same he calleth in the same verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vngodly or voide of religion for whom Christ died Howe say you then had vngodly persons any strength to be saued except Christ had died for them Therefore he that in this place translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 weake feeble infirme must needes vnderstand men so weake feeble and infirme as they haue no strength For how might it else be truely sayed what hast thou which thou hast not receiued 1. Cor. 4. v. 7. Yes say you we haue some peece of freewil at least some strength to clime to heauen euen without the grace of God without the death redemption of Christ. If you say no why cauill you at Bezaes translation and ours The Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as great a Grecian as you would make your selfe signifieth weake or infirme sometime that which yet hath some strength sometime that which hath no strength at all as I will giue you a plaine example out of S.
Paule 1. Cor. 15. v. 43. The dead bodie is sowen 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in weakenesse it riseth againe in power Doth not weakenesse here signifie priuation of all strength It is maruaile but you will say a dead bodie is not altogither voide of strength Beza telleth you out of S. Paule Rom. 8. v. 6. That the wisedome of the flesh without Christ is death it is enmitie against God it is neither subiect vnto the law of God neither can it be where is the strength of free will that you complaine to bee taken away by our translation Beza doth also tell you that S. Paule calleth all the ceremonies of the lawe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as they are separated from the spirit of Christ the weake and beggerly elementes Galaâ— 4. Are they not voide of strength riches which are voide of Christs grace and spirit But your purpose was only to quarrell and seeke a knot in a rush therefore you regarded not what Beza hath written to iustifie his translation MART. 27. If Caluine translate Non ego sed gratia Dei quae mihi aderat may not meane Graecians controle him that he also translateth falsely against free will because the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth require some other participle to be vnderstoode that shoulde signifie a cooperation with free will to wit 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which laboured with me See chap. 10. numb 2. FVLK 27. The Greeke is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the grace of God which is with me A meane Graecian will rather vnderstande the verbe substantiue than the participle as you doe and then must needes againe vnderstand the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 hath laboured For thus the sense must be if your participle be vnderstood I haue laboured more than they all yet not I but the grace of God which labored with me hath labored Who would commit such a vaine tautologie The sense is therefore plaine which the Apostles words do yeeld in the iudgement of better Graecians than euer G. Martine was or will be I haue not labored more than the rest of the Apostles of mine owne strength or will but the grace of God which is in me or with me hath giuen me greater strength ability to trauel in the Gospell than to them But you are afraid least it should be thought that the Apostle had done nothing like vnto a block forced only a blockish feare a forced collection For when the Apostle first saith he hath labored after denieth saith I haue not laboured what sensible man will not gather that in the former he labored as a man indued with life sense and reason and in the later that he laboured not by his owne strength or vertue but by the grace of God to which he attributeth all that he is in such respect By the grace of God I am that I am saith he which manifestly excludeth naturall free will to that which is good appertaining to the glorie of God For which cause he denieth that he laboured more than the rest not I but the grace of God which was present with me MART. 28. If when the Hebrue beareth indifferently to say Sinne lieth at the dore and vnto thee the desire thereof shall be subiect thou shalt rule ouer it the Geneua English Bible translate the first without scruple the later not because of the Hebrue Grammar is not this also most wilfull against free will See chap. 10. numb 9. FVLK 28. I graunt this to bee done willingly against free will but yet no false nor corrupt translation For in the participle Robets which signifieth lying is a manifest Enallage or chaunge of the gender to declare that in Chataoth which word being of the feminine gender signifieth sinne is to bee vnderstoode Auon or some such worde as signifieth the punishment of sinne which may agree with the participle in the masculine gender that the antithesis may be perfect If thou doest well shall there not be reward or remission if thou doest euill the punishment of thy sinne is at hand But that the later end of the verse can not be referred to sinne but vnto Cain not only the Grammar but also the plaine wordes and sense of the place doth conuince For that which is sayd of the appetite must haue the same sense which the same wordes haue before of the appetite of Eue towardes her husband Adam that in respect of the law of nature and her infirmitie she should desire to be vnder his gouernment that he should haue dominion ouer her So Abel the yonger brother should be affected toward his elder brother Cain to whom by the law of nature he was louing and subiect and therefore no cause why Cain should enuy him as he did Otherwise it were a straunge meaning that sinne which is an insensible thing shoulde haue an appetite or desire towarde Cain who rather had an appetite to sinne than sinne to him But you are so greedie of the later parte that you consider not the former I knowe what the Iewisne Rabbines fauourers of Hethenish free will absurdly doe imagine to salue the matter but that which I haue said may satisfie godly Christian MART. 29. If Caluine affirme that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 can not signifie propter reuerentiam because 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not so vsed Beza auoucheth the same more earnestly and the English Bible translateth accordingly which may be confuted by infinite examples in the Scripture it selfe is coÌ„futed by Illyricus the Lutheran is it not a signe either of passing ignorance or of most wilfull corruption to maintaine the blasphemie that hereupon they conclude See chap. 7. numb 42 43. FVLKE 29. If Beza Caluine the English translations be deceiued about the vse of the Preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it proueth not that they are deceiued in the translation of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is the matter in question They haue other reasons to defend it than the vse of the preposition although you sclaunder Caluine in saying he affirmeth that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not vsed for propter For he sayth no more but that the preposition is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or some such like that may designe a cause quae causam designet that is that certainly may point out a cause can not otherwise be taken Likewise Beza saith Atqui non facile mihi persuaserim proferri posse vllum exemplum in quo 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ita vsurpeâ—ur But I can not easily persuade my selfe that any example may be brought forth in which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so vsed that is for propter or secundum for which 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 were more proper and vsuall Now if Illyricus haue helped you with a few examples where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is so taken what say Beza or
when they see and will bee blinde for certaine it is and I appeale to their greatest Graecians that howsoeuer it be taken for good in their diuinitie it will be esteemed most false in their Greeke scholes both of Oxford and Cambridge and howsoeuer they may presume to translate the holy Scriptures after this sort surely no man no not them selues would so translate Demosthenes for sauing their credit and estimation in the Greeke tongue See chap. 17. numb 7. 8. 9. FVLK 36. Beza translateth quem oportet caelo capi Act. 3. v. 21. You say Heauen must receiue Christ. Beza sayth Christ must be receiued of heauen Call you this turning of actiues into passiues and passiues into actiues Or will you deny vs the resolution of passiues into actiues or actiues into passiues What difference is there in sense betwene these propositions Your purse containeth money and money is contained in your purse The Church must receiue all Christians or all Christians must be receiued of the Church But Caluine you say misliketh this translation and the Geneua Bible is afrayed to followe it Yet neither of them both misliketh this sense nor can for it is all one with that which you translate whome heauen must receiue Caluine only saith the Greeke is ambiguous whether heauen must receiue Christ or Christ must receiue heauen But when you graunt that heauen must receiue Christ you can not deny for shame of the worlde but Christ must bee receiued of heauen wherefore you vnderstande neither Caluine nor Illyricus who speake of the other sense that Christ must receiue heauen And Maister Whitaker not of Bezaes translation but of the text and euen of your owne translation may proue that Christes naturall bodie is contayned in heauen And as for your appeale to the greatest Graecians and the Greeke schooles both of Oxforde and Cambridge is vaine and friuolous for the least Grammarians that be in any countrie schooles are able to determine this question whether these propositions be not all one in sense and signification Ego amo te and Tu amaris à me I loue thee or thou art loued of me But it is straunge Diuinitie that Christ shoulde bee contayned in heauen Verily howe straunge so euer it seemeth to Gregorie Martine it was not vnknowen to Gregorie Nazianzen as good a Graecian and as great a Diuine as he is For in his seconde Sermon 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 not farre from the beginning he writeth thus of our Sauiour Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 For he must raigne vntill then and bee receiued or contayned of heauen vntill the times of restitution Here you see Nazianzen citing this verie place of Sainct Peter Actes 3. For the meane verbe of actiue signification doubteth not freely to vse the passiue verbe in the same sense that Beza translateth the place against which you declaime so tragically And if you thinke it to bee suche an haynous offence to render passiuely in the same sense that which is vttered actiuely in the text so that no man for his credite woulde so translate Demosthenes as Beza doeth Sainct Luke I pray you what regarde had you of your credit and estimation When Matth. the 4. you translate out of Latine Qui daemonia habebant suche as were possest and Luke the seconde Vt profiterentur to bee enrolled Belike you haue a priuiledge to doe what you list when other men may not doe that which is lawfull MART. 37. But there is yet worse stuffe behinde to wit the famous place Luke 22. where Beza translateth thus Hoc poculum nouum testamentum per meum sanguinem qui pro vobis funditur whereas in the Greeke in all copies without exception he confesseth that in true Grammaticall construction it must needes bee sayd quod pro vobis funditur and therefore he sayth it is either a plaine soloecophanes according to that presumption he boldly trsÌ„lateth or a corruption crept out of the margent into the text And as for the word Soloecophanes we vnderstand him that he meaneth a plaine soloecisme and fault in Grammar and so doth M. Whitakers but M. Fulke saith that he meaneth no such thing but that it is an elegancie and figuratiue speech vsed of most eloquent authors and it is a world to see and a Grecian must needes smile at his deuises striuing to make S. Lukes speech here as he construeth the wordes an elegancie in the Greeke tongue He sendeth vs first to Budees commentaries where there are examples of Soloecophanes and in deede Budee taketh the word for that which may seeme a soloecisme and yet is an elegancie and all his examples are of most fine and figuratiue phrâ—ses but alas how vnlike to that in S. Luke And here M. Fulke was very fowly deceiued thinking that Beza and Budee tooke the word in one sense and so taking his marke amisse as it were a counter for gold where he found Soloecophanes in Budee there he thought all was like to S. Lukes sentence that which Beza meant to be a plaine soloecisme he maketh it like to Budees elegancies Much like to those good searchers in Oxford as it is sayd masters of arte who hauing to seeke for Papisticall bookes in a Lawyers studie and seeing there bookes with red letters cryed out Masse bookes Masse bookes whereas it was the Code or some other booke of the Ciuill or Canon lawe FVLK 37. This must needes be a famous place for the reall presence of Christes bloud in the sacrament that neuer one of the auncient or late writers obserued vntill within these fewe yeares But let vs see what fault Beza hath committed in translation The last word in the verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath so translated as it must be referred to the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifying bloud with which in case it doth not agree That is true but that he confesseth that all Greeke copies without exception haue it as it is commonly redde it is false onely he saith Omnes tamen vetusti nostri codices ita scriptum habebant All our old Greeke copies had it so written He speaketh onely of his owne or such as he had and not of all without exception for since he wrote this note there came to his hands one other auncient copie both of Greeke and Latine in which this whole verse of the second deliuerie of the cup is cleane left out For immediatly after these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth follow so in the Latine Veruntamen ecce manus qui tradet me c. Moreouer Beza telleth you that Basil in his Ethicks 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 citing this whole text of S. Luke readeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the datiue case agreeing with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the word next before By which it is manifest that in S. Basils time the reading was otherwise than now it is in most copies Againe where you say he confesseth that in true grammaticall construction it must needes be
effunditur or effusus est So that this is nothing else but an impudent and vnskilfull quarrelling against Beza whereas you Papistes defende against the manifest institution of the cuppe and the practise of the primitiue Church the communion in one kinde of bread onely Conâ— Const. Sess. 13. 21. Where finde you that I affirme S. Lukes speache here to be an elegancie in the Greeke tongue Yea or Soloecophanes to be nothing else but an elegancie and figuratiue speach A figure in deede I say that it is but are all figures elegancies or all figuratiue speaches elegancies of speach Some figures I trowe serue to excuse similitudes of faultes in speach But I saie Soloecophanâ—s is vsed of the most eloquent writers Very well dothe it thereof followe that it is alwayes an elegancie Haue not the most eloquent authors vsed Hyperbatons Perissologies and other figures that are counted faultes of speech and not elegancies and fine speeches But all the examples of Budee you saye to whose commentaries I sende you are of moste sine and figuratiue phrases If they be suche they doe the better proue that for which I called him to warrantize namely that Soloecophanes is not a Soloecisme or false Greeke wherewith Sander accuseth Beza to charge S. Luke But where you vtter your foolish pitie in saying Alas howe vnlike they are to that in S. Luke I thinke the case is not so cleare as you make it for I suppose those examples that he bringeth of the figure of the whole construction changed after a long Hyperbaton or Parenthesis may well be taken for figuratiue speeches but not for elegancies and fine figuratiue phrases as againe those popular sayings which being taken out of the common peoples speech Budaeus sayeth the moste eloquent Oratours haue translated into their finest writinges Peraduenture as Musitians vse sometime a discorde to set forth the hâ—rmonye of concordes so they by hardly auoyding of a Soloecisme woulde shewe the grace of congruitie and elegancie But of this whole matter let the iudgement be with them that are learned and eloquent in both the tongues It is sufficient for me that he which vseth Soloecophanes in Greeke committeth not a Soloecisme or speaketh false Greeke as Saunder termeth it But where you say that Maister Fulke was fouly deceyued and tooke his markes amisse as it were a counter for golde to thinke that Beza and Budee tooke the worde in one sense you saye your pleasure but you shall well knowe that Maister Fulke is not so younge a babe to take a counter for golde as you are a bolde bayarde to pronounce of all mens meaninges what you list For howe are you able to proue that Beza by Soloecophanes meaneth a plaine Soloecisme Thinke you that Beza is so simple a childe also to terme copper by the name of golde If hee had meant a Soloecisme coulde hee not haue sayde so But you muste playe Procustes parte for neyther my saying nor Beza his meaning were large enough for you to frame your sclaunderous cauill against the trueth and therefore with a lowde lye you muste lengthen my saying and with prowde and false presumption you muste stretche out his meaning These bee your artes this is your eloquence these are the sinnewes of youre accusations What those good searchers in Oxford were which being maisters of Art could not discerne betweene masse bookes and lawe bookes for my parte I neuer heard but I thinke it to be a matter of as good credite as that you report of me and Beza MART. 38. This was lacke of iudgement in M. Fulke at the least and no great signe of skill in Greeke phrases and he must no more call D. Sanders vnlearned for not vnderstanding Bezaes meaning but him selfe who in deed vnderstood him not For if Beza meant that it was an elegancie vsed of the finest authors and such as Budee doth exemplifie of why doth he say that he seeth not why Luke should vse soloecophanes but thinketh rather it is a corruption crept into the margent Tell vs M. Fulke we beseech you whether is the better and honester defense to say that it is an elegancie and fine phrase in S. Luke or to say it is a fault in the text it came out of the margent the Gospell is here corrupted Thinke you Beza such a foole that he would rather stande vpon this later if he might haue vsed the former and had so meant by soloecophanes yea what needed any defense at all if it had bene an vsuall and knowne elegancie as you would proue it FVLK 38. I had rather it should be compted want of iudgement in me so it were by a man of iudgement than to be taken so often with falsification and lacke of truth For my skill in Greeke phrases although I neuer professed any yet I see nothing brought by you to change mine opinion of Saunders vnlearned slaunder in rayling against Beza for saying that S. Luke should write false Greeke And if Soloecophanes do differ as much from Soloecismus as golde doth from copper as you seeme to say when you write that I take a counter for golde I might thinke my selfe very vnlearned in deede if I did vnderstand Beza speaking of Soloecophanes as though he spake of Soloecismus But you demaund why Beza sayeth that he seeth not why S. Luke should vse Soloecophanes if he meant that it was an elegancie vsed of the finest authores Still you thrust in your lie in euery corner who sayeth he meant it was an elegancie Beza sayeth he seeth no cause why S. Luke should vse Soloecophanes that is departe from the vsuall and ordinarie construction and therefore passeth to an other coniecture But you speake me fayre to tell you whether is the better honester defense to say that it is an elegancie and fine phrase or to say it is a faulte in the texte it came out of the margent the Gospell is here corrupted First I answere you that Beza affirmeth neither but rather translateth as Basill did reâ—d Secondly I say there is no dishonestie in either of both coniectures for this Soloecophanes though it be no elegancie yet may be defended from Soloecisme or false Greeke And certaine it is that some woordes haue crept out of the margent into the texte as the name of Ieremye in all copies that are extant Math. 27. and of Esay in many Marc. 1. And yet we say not the Gospell is corrupted which fowle phrase it seemeth you haue great pleasure in not withstanding you your self out of Lindanus charge all the Greeke copies of the epistle to the Corinthians to be corrupted by Marcion the mischieuous mouse of PoÌ„tus You aske further whether I thinke Beza such a foole to stande rather vpon the later if he might haue vsed the former and had so meant by Soloecophanes Nay rather thinke you Beza such a foole that he would meane a plaine Soloecisme and call it only an appearaunce of Soloecisme what he rather stoode vpon his translation doth best
in 25. Eidyll 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And in the 24. Edyll. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 From Theocritus let vs passe to Hesiodus out of whome it were ouer tedious to cite how often he vseth the article prepositiue for the relatiue and not agreeing in case with the antecedent but an example or two shall serue where the verbe substantiue is vnderstood and not expressed nor any other verbe to gouerne the relatiue yet not agreeing in case with the Antecedent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Againe in 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Here me thinkes I heare you grudge against poetrie and poeticall licence as doubtlesse you would quarrell against profane authorities if I should bring you any like examples out of Prosaicall writers We must see therefore whether we are not able to bring examples of the like phrase out of the holy Scriptures First that Soloecophanes is found in S. Luke I wil referre you to the first cap. of his Gospell v. 74. and cap. 6. v. 4. Likewise Actes 27. v. 3. and act 13. v. 6. But for the like Soloecophanes to this in question Luc. 22. I will sende you first to S. Paule Col. 1. v. 26. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In this verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 must needes be the accusatiue case as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is by apposition then is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for all the world as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the nominatiue case signifying Quod absconditum fuit which the later part of the verse 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth most plainly declare For what else should be the nominatiue case to the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and euen so your vulgar Latine text hath it translated vt impleam verbum Dei mysterium quod absconditum fuit à saeculis generationibus nunc autem manifestatum est sanctis eius But because this is not so euident for that the nominatiue case the accusatiue of the neuter gender be of one termination I will bring you yet more plaine examples out of the reuelation of S. Iohn cap. 1. v. 4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Grace to you and peace from him or from God as some copies haue which is and which was which is to come Would not your grammer say it is a plaine Soloecisme because he saith not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 what haue you here to quarrel Is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the same phrase that is in Luke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Well let vs goe a litle further to the next verse of the same chapter where we reade thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And from Iesus Christ which is a faithfull witnesse the first borne from the dead and Prince ouer the kinges of the earth The more vsuall construction would require that he should haue sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But that hevseth the same Soloecophanes which S. Luke doth ca. 22. If the reading be not altered where the article prepositiue is put in the place of the subiunctiue and agreeth not in case with the antecedent as often it doth but being the nominatiue case commeth before the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is not expressed but must needes be vnderstoode as euen your vulgar translator doth acknowledge rendring it in both verses thus ab eo qui est qui erat qui venâ—urus est and à Iesu Christo qui est testis fidelis c. These examples I doubt not but they are sufficient to satisfie any reasonable man to shew that I haue not inuented a newe construction that neuer was heard of to saue Bezaes credit and whereof I am able to giue not so much as one example But that I may ouerthrow M. Martines vaine insultation with a whole cloude of examples I wil yet adde one or two more In the same reuelation ca. 8. v. 9. Thus we read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and there dyed the thirde of all creatures which are in the sea which had liues Your vulgar Latine text turneth it thus Et mortua est â—ertia pars creaturae eorum quae habebant animas in mari And there dyed the thirde parte of the creatures of those thinges which had life in the sea In which translation although the order of the wordes which Saint Iohn vseth is somewhat inuerted yet the sense remayneth the same and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is translated quae habebant which agreeth not with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in case as euerye childe that can declyne a Greeke noune doth knowe where otherwise the moste common construction were to haue sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Therefore the phrase and construction is the same which is Luke 22. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What can fine M. Gregorie which carpeth at my skill that speake so barbarously and rustically of Greeke elegancies what can Maister Gregorie Martin I saye the great linguist of the Seminarie of Rhemes alledge why these phrases are not alike or rather changinge the wordes in figure the very same And if he haue any thing to cauill against this example as I see not what he can haue yet haue I an other out of the same booke cap. 3. v. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And I will write vppon him the name of my God and the name of the cittye of my God the newe Ierusalem which descendeth out of heauen from my God The vulgar Latine translation differeth not from this which sayth Et scribam super eum nomen dei mei nomen ciuitatis dei mei nouae Ierusalem quae descendit de coelo à deo meo Here the antecedent is of the genitiue case the relatiue of the nominatiue which commeth before the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vnderstoode in the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as in Luc. 22. it is in the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 By these examples in seeking whereof I promise you I spent no great time you may learne to be wiser hereafter not to condemne all men beside your self out of your readers chaire at Rhemes of ignorance vnskilfulnes barbarusnes rusticity yea wilfulnes madnes where you your self deserue a much sharper censure through your immoderat insultation the matter thereof being both more false and forged than we might iustly haue borne if we had bene ouertaken with a litle grammatical ignorance By these examples I trust you see or if you will needes be blinde all the young Grecians in England may see that as in the Latine translation you confesse the relatiue standeth more likely to be referred to the word Sanguine than to the word Calix so in the Greeke there is no help to remoue it from the next manifest necessary antecedent to a worde further of with which the signification of the participle can not agree For who would say that a cup is shed for vs And though you make a metonymye of the cup for that which is in the cup
what is that I pray you Not wine you wil say I am sure but the bloud of Christ. If you so resolue it then followeth that vaine nugation which I haue noted against Saunder This bloud in the cuppe which bloud is shed for you is the new Testament in my bloud Is that bloud in the cuppe diuerse from that bloud in which the new Testament is confirmed If it be the same how often was â—t shed If it were shed in the cuppe how holdeth your vnbloudie sacrifice Or howe can you saye that it was shed in the cup where by your rule of concomitans it is not separated from the body as it was in his passion If it were not separated as certainly his bloud was not separated from his bodye in the supper howe can that which was in the cup be his bloud that was shed for vs for the word of shedding signifieth separation Wherefore it can not be referred to that in the cup but to his bloud which was shed on the crosse for vs so that there is a manifest enallage or change of the temps The present being put for the future as it is manifest by the other Euangelists where the word of shedding can be referred to nothing els but to his bloud shedde vpon the crosse wherfore the Greeke text can here resolue you of no ambiguity as in the place you cite act 14. Neither was there euer any auncient writer that stumbled vpon this ambiguitie but al with one consent referre the word of shedding to his bloud and not to the cuppe or the content thereof so many as speake of it MART. 40. And this is one commoditie among others that we reape of the Greeke text to resolue the ambiguitie that is sometime in the Latine whereas you neyther admit the one nor the other but as you list neither doth the Greeke satisfie you be it neuer so plaine and infallible but you will deuise that it is corrupted that there is a soloecisine that the same soloecisme is an elegancie and there vpon you translate your owne deuise and not the worde of God Which whence can it proceede but of most wilfull corruption See chap. 17. nu 10 11. 12. FVLK 40. This is nothing but generall rayling impudent slaundering as in the particular sections before is proued For we neither deuise that the text is corrupted to alter any thing of the text no not where it is vndoubtedly corrupted as in the name of Ieremie Math. 27. Neyther deuise wee a Soloecisme when wee admonish that there is a Soloecophanes which of no Papist that euer I heard of was before obserued Neither make we a Soloecisme to be an elegancie when we say against them that confound a Soloecisme with Soloecophanes that Soloecophanes is a figure vsed sometimes of most eloquent writers neither is it streight way a vertue or elegancie of speache what so euer eloquent writers sometimes haue vsed wherefore we translate nothing of our owne deuise but we translate the worde of God without any wilfull corruption MART. 41. If in ambiguous Hebrue woords of doubtfull signification where the Greeke giueth one certaine sense you refuse the Greeke and take your aduantage of the other sense what is this but wilfull partialitie so you doe in Redime eleemosynis peccata tua Dan. 4. and Inclinaui cor meum ad faciendas iustificationes tuas propter retributionem and Nimis honorati sunt amici tui Deus c. and yet at an other time you folow the determination of the Greeke for an other aduantage as Psal. 98. Adore his footestoole because he is holy Whereas in the Hebrue it may be as in our Latin because it is holy See chapt 13. num 18. chapt 9. num 23 24. chapt 18. num 1. 2. So you flee from the Hebrue to the Greâ—ke and from this to that againe from both to the vulgar Latine as is shewed in other places and as S. Augustine saith to Faustus the Manichee You are the râ—le of truth whatsoeuer is for you is true whatsoeuer is against you is not true FVLK 41. If Hebrue wordes be ambiguous wee take that sense whiche agreeth with other places that are playne and with out all ambiguitie and this is no partialitie but wisedome and loue of the truthe not to grounde any newe doctrine vppon suche places onely where the Hebrue worde is ambiguous and may haue diuerse significations As you do the redemption of sinnes by almesse vpon that place of Daniel 4. Where you confesse that the Hebrue worde is ambiguous are not able to bring any one plain text for it where the wordes are not ambiguous But wee ground our refusal vpon a hundred plaine textes that acribe the whole glorie of our raunsome redemption froÌ„ sinnes to the onely mercy of God But as well this text as the other two that you cite in the chapters by you quoted shall be throughly diseussed to see if you can haue any aduauÌ„tage at our translators of the same But on the coÌ„trarie side you say that at an other time we follow the determination of the Greeke for an other aduantage as in that texte Psalm 89. Adore his foote stoole because he is holy whereas in the Hebrue it may be as in your Latine because it is holy I answer that we follow not the determination of the Greeke as moued by the onely authoritie thereof for any aduantage but because wee learne our interpretation out of the verie Psalme it selfe For whereas the Prophet in the 5. verse hath sayed Exalt â—e the Lorde our God and worshippe at the foote stoole of his feete for he is holy in the laste verse of the same he repeateth againe the like exhortation Exalt ye the Lorde our God and worshippe him in his holy hill for the Lorde our God is holy In this verse for his foote stoole he placeth the holy hill which expresseth where his foote stoole was namely the holy Aâ—ke and for Cadhosh hu holy is he now he sayeth Cadosh Iâ—houa holy is the Lorde our God which putteth the other verse out of ambiguitie Wherefore if wee take testimonie of the Greeke we flie not to the Greeke from the Hebrue but shewe that the Hebrue may so bee vnderstoode hauing other more certaine arguments than the testimonie of the Greeke Againe it is vtterly false that you saie we flie from both Hebrue and Greeke to the Latine for wee neuer flie from the Hebrue but acknowledge it as the fountaine and spring from whence wee must receyue the infallible truth of Gods worde of the olde Testament following the Latine or Greeke so farre as they followe the truth of the Hebrue texte and no farther As for the saying of S. Augustine to Faustâ—s the Manichee You are the rule of truth doth moste aptly agree to you Papistes and to your Pope for you will not aforde vnto the Scriptures them selues any authoritie or certaintie of truth but vpon your approbation and interpretation
〈◊〉 which the vulgar Latine and Erasmus translate Agite poenitentiam Repent or Doe penance This interpretation sayth he I refuse for many causes but for this especially that many ignorant persons haue taken hereby an occasion of the false opinions of SATISFACTION wherewith the Church is troubled at this day Loe of purpose against satisfaction he will not translate the Greeke worde as it ought to be and as it is proued to signifie both in this booke and in the annotations vpon the newe Testament A litle after speaking of the same worde he sayth why I haue changed the name poenitentia I haue tolde a litle before protesting that he will neuer vse those wordes but resipiscere and resipiscentia that is amendment of life because of their heresie that repentance is nothing else but a meere amendment of former life without recompense or satisfaction or penance for the sinnes before committed See chap. 13. FVLK 49. Of purpose against the heresie of satisfaction Beza will not translate the Greeke worde as the vulgar Latine translator dothe but yet as the Greeke worde ought to be translated Erasmus finding the vulgar Latine vnsufficient hath added Vitae prioris that is repent yee of your former life Neither dothe Beza finde faulte with the English worde repent but with the Latine Agite paenitentiam when you translate it do penaunce meaning thereby paine or satisfaction for sinnes passed to be a necessarie parte of true repentance which is not conteyned in the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth changing of the mind that is not onely a sorrow for the sinne past but also a purpose of amendment which is beste expressed by the Latine worde Resipiscere which is alwaies taken in the good parte as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is in the Scripture where as the Latine wordes paenitere and Paenitentia are vsed in Latine of sorrowe or repentance that is too late As paenitere and paenitentia may be saide of Iudas grief of minde which caused him to hang him selfe but not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or resipiscere and resipisscentia and therefore the Holye Ghoste speakinge of his sorrowe vseth an other worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And this is the cause why Beza refused the worde Paenitentia hauing a Latine worde that more properlye doeth expresse the Greeke worde as wee might lawefullye doe in Englishe if wee had an other Englishe worde proper to that repentaunce whiche is alwayes ioyned with faith and purpose of amendmente for wante whereof wee are constrayned to vse the wordes repente and repentaunce whiche maye bee taken in good parte or in euill For wee saye repentaunce too late and Iudas repented too late but there is no 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that can bee called too late But where you saye that resipiscere and resipiscentia is nothing but amendement of life and that repentaunce in our heresie is nothing else but a meere amendment of former life you speake vntruly for those words do signifie not only amendment of life but also sorrow for the sinnes past although without recompēce or satisfactiō which you call penance for the sinnes before cōmitted for we know no recompence or satisfactiō made to God for our sinnes but the death of Christ who is the propitiation for our sinnes 1. Iohn 1. Neither hath your blasphemous satisfaction any grounde in the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but onely a foolish colour by the Latine translation Agite poenitentiam which it is like your Latine interpreter did neuer dreame of and therefore he vseth the worde Resipiscere 2. Tim. 2. Of them to whom God should giue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 repentaunce to the acknowledging of the truth Et resipiscant and so they may repent or as you translate it recouer themselues from the snare of the Diuell Seyng therefore repentance is the gifte of God it is no recompence or satisfaction made by vs to God to answere his iustice but an earnest and true griefe of minde for our transgression of Gods lawe and offending against his maiestie with a certaine purpose and determination of amendment so neere as God shall giue vs grace Hetherto therefore we haue no demonstration of any wilfull corruption but a declaration of the cause that moued Beza to vse a more exact translation and such as commeth nearer to the originall worde than that which the vulgar translation hath vsed vpon which occasion of a great blasphemie hath bene taken and is yet mainteyned MART. 50. Againe concerning the worde Iustifications which in the Scripture very often signifie the commaundements he saith thus The Greeke interpreters of the Bible meaning the Septuaginta applieth this worde to signifie the whole Lawe of God and therefore commonly it is wont to be translated worde for worde Iustificationes which interpretation therefore only I reiected that I might take away this occasion also of cauilling against iustification by faith and so for iustificationes he putteth constituta Tullies worde forsooth as he saith Can you haue a more playne tèstimonie of his heretic all purpose FVLK 50. Concerning the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which Beza translateth Constitutionibus constitutions and you confesse that in Scripture it doth very often signifie the commaundements He sayth first that as the whole Lawe of God is diuided into three partes Morall Ceremoniall and Iudiciall so the Hebrewes haue three seuerall words to expresse the seueral precepts of those lawes For the Hebrew word which signifieth the Ceremoniall precepts the Greekes vse to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 So the sense is that Zacharie and Elisabeth were iust walking in all the Morall commaundements and obseruing the holy rites and ceremonies as much as concerned them but the thirde worde which signifieth Iudgements S. Luke doth not adde because the exercise of Iudiciall cases did not belong vnto them being priuate persons After this he saith that the Greeke Interpreters of the Bible transferred this worde vnto the whole lawe of God and especially to the holy ceremonies so verily exceedingly commending the law that it is a certaine rule of all iustice And therefore men are wont commonly in respect of the worde to turne it Iustifications And this worde in this place Beza in deede confesseth that he refused to vse for auoyding of cauillations against iustification by fayth seeing he hath none other worde neither woulde he for offence seeke any newe worde to expresse iustification by faith whereas the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this text Luc. 1. verse 6. signifieth not that by which they were made iust but the commaundements or precepts of God by walking in which they were declared to be iust For by the workes of the lawe such as Saint Luke here speaketh of no fleshe shall be iustified before God Therefore 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place must haue an other sense than iustifications namely commaundements as you saye it
is often taken or constitutions as Beza calleth them which before God and the worlde are not of suche difference that you shoulde charge him with wilfull corruption for translating that word constitutions which you confesse signifieth very often commaundements Wherefore here appeareth no hereticall purpose except you will say that iustification by faith which S. Paule so often so diligently and so purposedly doth teach is an heresie MART. 51. Againe when he had reiected this translation Act. 2. verse 27. Non derelinques animam meam in inferno Thou shalt not leaue my soule in Hel because as he sayth herevpon grewe the errours of Christes descending into Hell of Limbus and of Purgatorie atlength he concludeth thus Whereas the doubtfull interpretation of one or two wordes hath brought forth so many mōsters I chose rather simply for soule to say carkasse for hel graue than to foster these foule errours FVLK 51. Beza sheweth that because the doubtfull interpretation of the Hebrew worde Sheol into 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which doth not properly signifie hell but a darke place such as the pit is wherein the deade are put and of the Poets is taken for hell had bredde such monsters as Limbus patrum Purgatorie and Christes descending into them therefore he did plainly translate that verse as it is ment of the raysing vp of Christes bodie out of the graue which if he had translated out of Hebrew as he did out of Greeke had not bene offensiue nor vntrue as I haue shewed in aunswere to your Preface sect 46. and of this chapter sect 32. But seeing Beza him selfe hath altered that translation and it was neuer followed of our English translators what demonstration is this that we are wilfull corrupters of the holy Scriptures MART. 52. Againe when he had translated for Whome heauen must receiue thus who must be contayned in heauen he sayth whereas we haue vsed the passiue kinde of speech rather than the actiue which is in the Greeke we did it to auoyd all ambiguitie For it is very expedient that there should be in the Church of God this perspicuous testimonie against them that for ascending by faith into heauen so to be ioyned to our head obstinately maintaine that Christ must be called againe out of heauen vnto vs. Meaning his presence in the ◠Sacrament and inueying no lesse against the Lutherans than the Catholikes as the Lutherans doe here against him for this wilfull interpretation and that by Caluines owne iudgement who thinketh it a forced translation FVLK 52. True it is that he meant concerning the maner of Christes presence in the blessed sacrament and that so he translated to exclude the carnall maner of presence which the Papistes haue inuented but all this while the translation is true and warranted by Gregorie Nazianzene as I haue shewed before sect 36. of this chapter For he that sayth Heauen must receiue Christ as you doe can not deny except he be mad but that Christ must be receiued of heauen So that Beza doth none otherwise translate than you doe Qui daemonia habebant which is actiuely thus to be translated those who had deuils and you saye which were possest of diuels that is were had of diuels That the Lutherans finde fault with Bezaes translation it proueth it not to be false he hath iustified it sufficiently in his answere to Selneccerus and the Diuines of Iena Neither doth Caluine as you saye vntruly thinke it a forced translation but not weying the sentence sufficiently supposeth that the wordes are placed ambiguously for that it seemeth to be doubtfull whether we shoulde save that heauen must receiue Christ or that Christ must receiue heauen But if it be once graunted as it is of you that heauen must receiue Christ there is neyther Caluine nor Illyricus nor any man that beareth the face but of a young Grammarian yea of a reasonable man which can deny that conuersion by the passiue Christe muste be receiued of heauen Therefore if you had any respect of your credite with men of vnderstanding you would not for shame rehearse this quarrell so often which hath not so muche as any colour or shewe of reason to maintayne it but that you abuse the names of Illyricus and Caluine as mislykinge it whose argumentes by no meanes will serue your turne because that which is denied by them or doubtfull to them is plaine and confessed by you MART. 53. But Beza goeth forwarde still in this kinde Rom. 5. verse 18. whereas Erasmus had put propagatum est indifferently both of Adams sinne which made vs truely sinners and of Christes iustice which maketh vs truly iust he reiecting it amonge other causes why it displeased him sayth That olde errour of the Sophists meaning Catholikes which for imputatiue iustice put an inherent qualitie in the place is so great so execrable to all good men that I thinke nothing is so much to be auoided as it FVLK 53. A manifest ecclipsis or want of wordes being in that verse for which Erasmus hath put propagatum est which word is ambiguous and may giue occasion of error for men to thinke that the righteousnes of Christ commeth by propagation as the guiltines of Adam doth Beza thought good to supply the lacke rather by such wordes as are warranted by the text verse 12. 15. and 16. and can giue no occasion of errour And therefore thus he rendreth that verse Nempe igitur sicut per vnam offensam reatus venit in omnes homines ad condemnationem ita per vnam iustificationem beneficium redimdauit in omnes homines ad iustificationem vitae Nowe therefore as by one offence guiltinesse came vpon all men vnto condemnation so by one iustification the benefite abounded toward all men vnto iustification of life In this verse these words guiltinesse came and the benefite abounded are added for explication sake and are taken out of the verses going before in which the Apostle speaketh of the same matter Therefore Beza to auoyde occasion of the heresie of the Papistes of iustice inherent among other causes which he rehearseth refuseth that worde by which Erasmus supplyed the text and vseth suche wordes for that purpose as the Apostle him self in the verses precedent doth offer for this necessarye supplye which seeing it must be made that there may be a sense and vnderstanding who can mislike that it should be made by the Apostles owne wordes or who cā suppose that the Apostle would leaue any other words to be vnderstood than such as he him selfe had before expressed And as for the heresie of inherent iustice can haue no hold in this verse except some suche worde be added for supplie as the Apostle neuer vsed in this case That Christes iustice doth make vs as truly iust as Adams sinne made vs truly sinners there is no question but by what meanes we are made iust wee say as the Scripture teacheth vs to speake that iustice is imputed to
vs through faith Rom. 4. The Papistes say it is a qualitie inherent within vs for which wordes and matter they haue no warrant in the holy Scripture MART. 54. These few examples proue vnto vs that the Scriptures translated verbatim exactly and according to the proper vse and signification of the wordes do by the Heretikes confession make for the Catholikes and therefore Beza saith he altereth the wordes into other and I thinke it may suffice any indifferent reader to iudge of his purpose and meaning in other places of his translation and consequently of theirs that either allow him or follow him which are our English Caluinists and Bezites Many other waies there are to make mosta certaine proofe of their Wilfulnesse as when the translation is framed according to their false and hereticall commentarie and When they will auouch their translations out of prophane writers Homer Plutarch Plinie Tullie Virgil and Terence and reiect the Ecclesiastical vse of wordes in the Scriptures and Fathers which Beza doth for the most part alwaies But it were infinite to note all the markes and by these the wise reader may conceiue the rest FVLK 54 These examples proue nothing lesse For to runne ouer them all briefly the first two we translate verbatim A man is iustified by faith without the workes of the law and repent and repētance we say for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 What make these for Poperie If Luc 1. v. 6. we should call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustifications what should Poperie gaine but a vaine cauill when you your selues cōfesse that those iustifications are often vsed for commandements Act. 2. v. 27. all our English translations are as you would haue them Thou shalt not leaue my soule in hell nor suffer thy holy one to see corruption by which verse no descent into Limbus but the resurrection from death can be proued If wee translate as you do Act. 3. v. 21. whome heauen must receaue wee will easily conuince that Christe muste be receaued of heauen In the laste example the question is not howe the worde is to be translated but by what worde the want of the texte is to be supplied whiche wee supplie not with wordes of our owne but with the Apostles owne wordes Haue you not gayned greatly by translating verbatim exactly and according to the proper vse and signification of the wordes I lyke well that euery indifferent Reader may iudge by these examples of Bezaes purpose in other places of his translation But you haue two other wayes to make certaine proofe of their wilfulnesse The firste is when the translation is framed according to their hereticall commentarie A reasonable man would thinke rather that the commentarie were framed according to the texte than the texte to the commentarie But to iustifie the truth of those translations for the firste texte you quote it is handled sect 26. of this chapter and so consequently Cap. 7. The seconde is answered sect 46. the other two concerning tradition sect 23. of the preface and in the chapiter following The second waye of proofe is when they will auouch their translations out of prophane writers I thinke there is no better waye to know the proper or diuerse signification of wordes than out of auncient writers though they be neuer so prophane who vsed the wordes most indifferently in respect of our controuersies of which they were altogither ignorant As for the ecclesiasticall vse of wordes in the Scripture and the Fathers which Beza you say doth for the most part reiect it is vntrue except there be good and sufficient cause why he should so do warranted by the Scripture it selfe or necessarie circumstances of the places which he doth translate For if the Scripture haue vsed a worde in one signification sometimes it is not necessarie that it should alwaies vse it in the same signification when it is proued by auncient writers that the worde hath other significations more proper to the place and agreeable to the rule of fayth which perhaps the vsuall signification is not As for example the Scripture vseth very often this worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a boy or seruaunt but when the same worde is applied to our Sauiour Christ in the prayer of the Apostles Act. 4. 27. Who woulde not rather translate it childe or sonne as the worde doth sometime but more seldome signifie Howe the Fathers of the Churche haue vsed wordes it is no rule for translators of the Scripture to followe who oftentimes vsed wordes as the people did then take them and not as they signified in the Apostles tyme. As 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for a publicke testification of repentaunce which wee call penaunce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for imposition of handes and suche like in whiche sense these wordes were neuer vsed before the Apostles times and therefore it is not lyke that they woulde beginne a newe vse of them without some manifest explication of their meaning without the whiche no man could haue vnderstoode them as they haue done in the vse of these wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and such like It is not a faulte therefore prudently to seeke euen out of prophane writers what is the proper signification of wordes and howe many significations a woorde may haue and reuerently to iudge which is moste apte for the place to be translated and moste agreeable with the holy ghostes meaning in that texte and not alwaies to bee tyed to the vsuall signification of wordes as they are sometimes taken in Scripture and much lesse as they are vsed of the auncient Fathers MART. 55. But would you thinke that these men could notwithstanding speake very grauely and honestly against voluntarie and wilfull translations of Scripture that so notoriously offend therein them selues Harken what Beza saith against Castaleo and the like The matter saith he is now come to this point that the translatours of Scripture out of the Greeke into Latin or into any other tōgue think that they may lawfully doe any thing in translating Whom if a man reprehend he shall be answered by and by that they do the office of a translatour not that translateth worde for worde but that expresseth the sense So it commeth to passe that whiles euery man will rather freely folow his own iudgement than be a religious interpreter of the Holy Ghost he doth rather peruert many things than translate them Is not this well said if he had done accordingly but doing the cleane contrarie as hath ben◠proued he is a dissembling hypocrite in so saying and a wilfull Heretike in so doing and condemned by his owne iudgement FVLK 55. No wise man doubteth but they could both speake very grauely and auoyde most religiously al voluntarie wilful translations of scripture that might tende to maintaine any errour And the rather they will be perswaded that Beza hath auoyded that lewde kinde of translatiō for which he reproueth Castaleo when they shall see that
you so malitious an enimie vnto him hauing spent all your inuention to seeke holes in his translation can finde nothing but such childish cauils as when they be discouered men will maruaile that you were not ashamed to moue them MART. 56. But after this generall vewe of their wilfull purpose and heretical intention let vs examine their false translations more particularly and argue the case with them more at large and presse them to answere whether in their conscience it be so or no as hitherto is saide and that by seuerall chapters of such CONTROVERSIES as their corruptions concerne and first of all without further curiositie whence to begin in cases so indifferent of TRADITIONS FVLK 56. The more particularly you examine our translations the freer I hope they shall be found from falsehoode wilfull corruption And the more at large you argue the case and presse vs to answere the more you shall make the case to appeare worse on your side and the truth clearer on our parte And as God is witnesse of our conscience and sinceritie in setting forth his word without adulteration or corruptiō so I appeale to the consciences of al indifferent readers whether hitherto you haue gotten any aduantage against vs in this whole chapter which yet you professe to be the abridgement and summe of your whole treatise CHAP. II. Hereticall translation of holy Scripture against Apostolicall TRADITIONS Martin THis is a matter of such importance that if they shoulde graunt any traditions of the Apostles and not pretende the written worde onely they know that by such traditions mentioned in all antiquitie their religion were wholy defaced and ouerthrowen For remedie whereof and for the defacing of all such traditions they bend their translations against them in this wonderfull maner Wheresoeuer the holy Scripture speaketh against certaine traditions of the Iewes partly friuolous partly repugnant to the law of God there all the English translations follow the Greeke exactly neuer omitting this word tradition Contrariwise wheresoeuer the holy Scripture speaketh in the commendation of Traditions to wit such traditions a◠the Apostles deliuered to the Church there all their sayd translations agree not to followe the Greeke which is still the selfe same word but for traditions they translate ordinaunces or instructions Why so and to what purpose we appeale to the worme of their conscience which continually accuseth them of an hereticall meaning whether by vrging the word traditions wheresoeuer they are discommended and by suppressing the word wheresoeuer they are commended their purpose and intent be not to signifie to the Reader that all traditions are naught and none good all reproueable none allowable Fulke TRaditions in deede is a matter of such importance as if you may be allowed whatsoeuer you will thrust vpon vs vnder the name of vnwritten traditions the written worde of God shall serue to no purpose at all For first as you plainly professe the holy Scripture shall not be accounted sufficient to teach all truth necessary to saluation that the man of God may be perfect prepared to all good works Secondly with the Valentinian heretikes you accuse the Scriptures of vncertaine vnderstāding without your traditions vnder pretense of which you wil bring in what you list though it be neuer so contrary to the holy Scriptures plaine wordes by colour of interpretatiō as you do the worshipping of images many other like heresies As for the mention that is made of Apostolicall traditions in diuerse of the auncient fathers some of thē are such as you your selues obserue not not for the tenth part of those that you obserue can you bring any testimony out of the ancient fathers as is proued sufficiently by so many propositiōs as were set downe by the Bishoppe of Sarisburie M. Iewel whereof you can bring no proofe for any one to haue bene taught within 600. yeres after Christ. Now concerning the traditions of the Apostles what they were who can be a better witnesse vnto vs than Ignatius the disciple of the Apostles of whom Eusebius writeth that when he was led towardes Rome where he suffred martyrdom he earnestly exhorted the Churches by which he passed to continue in the faith and against all heresies which euen then began to bud vp he charged thē to retaine fast the traditiō of the Apostles which by that time he protested to be committed to writing for by that time were al the books of the new Testament written The words of Eusebius concerning this matter are li. 3. c. 35. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And he exhorted thē straitly to kepe the tradition of the Apostles which testifying that it was now for assurance cōmitted to writing he thought necessary to be plainly taught Against this tradition of the Apostles which for certaintie assurance is contained in their holy vndoubted writings we say nothing but striue altogither for it But because the word traditions is by you Papistes taken to signifie a doctrine secretely deliuered by worde of mouth without authority of the holy Scriptures we do willingly auoide the word in our translations where the simple might be deceiued to think that the holy ghost did euer cōmēd any such to the church which he would not haue to be committed to writing in the holy Scriptures in steede of that word so commōly taken although it doth not necessarily signifie any such matters we doe vse such wordes as do truly expresse the Apostles meaning the Greke word doth also signifie Therfore we vse the words of ordināces or instructiōs or institutiōs or the doctrine deliuered all which being of one sense the Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doeth signifie and the same doth tradition signifie if it be rightly vnderstoode but seing it hath bene commonly taken and is vrged of the Papistes to signifie only a doctrine deliuered beside the word of God written in such places where the holy Ghost vseth the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that sense we translate by that worde tradition where he vseth it for such doctrine as is groūded vpon the holy Scriptures our translatours haue auoyded it not of any hereticall meaning that all 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 traditions are naught but that all such as haue not the holy Scripture to testifie of them and to warrant them are euill and to be auoyded of all true Christians which can not without blasphemie acknowledge any imperfection in the holy Scriptures of God which are able to make a man wise vnto saluation if they shoulde thinke any doctrine necessarie to saluation not to be cōtained therein MART. 2. For example Matt. 15. Thus they translate Why do thy disciples transgresse the TRADITION of the Elders And againe Why do you also transgresse the commaundement of God by your TRADITION And againe Thus haue you made the commaundement of God of no effect by your TRADITION Here I warrant you all the bels sound tradition and the word is neuer omitted
on your parte that should exactly folow the Greeke falsely translated when you translate in S. Peters Epistle thus You were not redeemed with corruptible things froÌ„ your vaine conuersation receiued by the tradition of the fathers Where the Greeke is thus rather to be translated froÌ„ your vaine conuersation deliuered by the fathers But your fingers itched to fâ—â—st in the word tradition and for deliuered to say receiued because it is the phrase of the Catholike Church that it hath receiued many things by tradition which you woulde here controll by likenesse of wordes in this false translation FVLK 6. I maruaile why you should compte it an heretical humor to vse the worde traditions in the euill part which the holy ghost so vseth and your owne vulgar translator also but that you are more partial in allowing the traditions of meÌ„ than we in auoiding the terme somtimes only for doubt lest traditioÌ„s of meÌ„ should creepe into the place of Gods coÌ„mandemeÌ„ts But how is it falsly translated on our part that professe to folow the Greke which is truly translated in your vulgar Latin text which professeth to translate the Greeke as well as we belike because we say receiued by the tradition of the fathers which according to the Greeke should be deliuered by the fathers but that our fingers itched to foyst in the word tradition What I pray you hath your vulgar traÌ„slator foisted in that word did his fingers itch against such catholike phrases that he would coÌ„trol theÌ„ by a false traÌ„slation do you not perceiue that while you raile vpoÌ„ vs you reuile your owne vulgar Latin translatioÌ„ which hath the same word traditioÌ„ for which you storme against vs But for deliuered we haue said receiued See whether frowardnes driueth you the Apostle saith they were deliuered froÌ„ the vaine coÌ„uersation of their fathers traditioÌ„ Do you then vnderstaÌ„d that it was deliuered by the fathers but not receiued by their sonnes Certainely they were deliuered from that vaine conuersation which they had receyued For receyuing doth necessarily importe deliuering And because you called for a Lexicon in the next section before Scapula will teach you that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie as indifferently A patre traditus as à patre acceptus deliuered by the father and receyued by the father What wrangling then is this about the moone shine in the water to crie out false translation foysting itching fingers and I know not what MART. 7. But concerning the worde tradition you will say perhaps the sense thereof is included in the Greeke worde deliuered We graunt But would you be content if we should alwayes expresly adde tradition where it is so included then should we say 1. Cor. 11. 2. I praise you that as I haue deliuered you by tradition you keepe my precepts or traditions And againe v. 23. For I receiued of our Lord which also I deliuered vnto you by tradition c. And Luc. 1. v. 2. As they by tradition deliuered vnto vs which from the beginning sawe c. and suche lyke by your example wee should translate in this sorte But we vse not this licentious maner in translating holy Scriptures neither is it a translators parte but an interpreters and his that maketh a commentarie neither doth a good cause neede other translation than the expresse text of the Scripture giueth FVLK 7. We will say it is contained in the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth receaued by tradition or deliuerie froÌ„ the Fathers not in the verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth otherwise many times thaÌ„ simply to deliuer when it signifieth to deliuer it doth not alway signifie to deliuer by word of mouth without writing as you vnderstand tradition but as well by writing as by preaching As when S. Paule saith I receaued of the Lord that which I deliuered vnto vou speaking of the institution of the supper he meaneth that which the Euangelists had written he him selfe doth write So 2. Thess. 2. when he willeth theÌ„ to hold the traditioÌ„s which they had learned of him he speaketh not only of such as they learned by his preaching but such also as they learned by his Epistle Wherefore if you should expresly adde the worde tradition in your partiall signification wheresoeuer you finde the word deliuered you shoulde not onely translate ridiculously but also heretically and falsly Wordes in deriuation and composition doe not alwaies signifie according to their primitiue MART. 8. And if you will yet say that our vulgar Latine translation hath here the worde tradition we graunt it hath so and therefore we also translate accordingly But you professe to translate the Greeke and not the vulgar Latine which you in England condemne as Papisticall and say it is the worst of all though Beza your maister pronounce it to be the very best and will you notwithstanding followe the sayde vulgar Latine rather than the Greeke to make traditions odious Yea such is your partialitie one way and inconstancie an other way that for your hereticall purpose you are content to followe the olde Latine translation though it differ from the Greeke and againe another time you will not follow it though it be all one with the Greeke most exactly as in the place before alledged where the vulgar Latine translation hath nothing of traditions but Quid decernitis as it is in the Greeke you translate Why are ye burdened with traditions FVLK 8. You may be sure we will saye that we know to be true and sufficient to discharge our translation from your foolish and malicious quarrelling But we professe you saye to translate the Greeke and not the vulgar Latine And I pray you what doth your vulgar Latine Interpreter professe to translate but the Greeke if he then translating out of Greeke could finde tradition in the Greeke worde why shoulde not we finde the same especially being admonished by him who if he translated truly why are we blamed for doing as he did if his translation be false why is it allowed as the onely authenticall text We follow not therefore the Latine translation but ioyne with it wheresoeuer it followeth the Greeke as we doe in ten thousand places more than this and willingly depart not from it but where it departeth from the Greeke or else vseth such wordes as would be offensiue if they were translated into English or occasion of errour as you doe likewise when you depart from the proper and vsuall signification of wordes which your Latine translator vseth as when you call foenerator a creditor which signifieth an vsurer Luc. 7. Stabulum an Inne and stabularius an host Luc. 10. Vna Sabathi the first of the Sabaoth Iohn 2. Ecclesia the assembly Act. 7. Baptismata washings Marc. 7. and such like But we in England you say condemne the Latine translation as papisticall We accuse it as not true in many places we saye it is the worst of all though
the publike seruice of God suche thinges are not lawefull for daunger of idolatrie nor in priuate places to be abused as they are of Papistes but rather though they were as auncient and as goodly monuments as the brasen serpent was which no images at this daye can be it is to the great honour of God that they shoulde be despised defaced burned and stamped to powder as that was which sometyme was erected by the commaundement of God by which not onely great miracles were wrought but the wonderfull mysterie of our saluation through faith in Christ was prefigured MART. 12. And as concerning the Bible that at this daye is redde in their Churches if it be that of the yeare 1577. it is worse sometyme in this matter of images than the other For where the other readeth Couetousnes which is worshipping of idolls there this later where vnto they appeale readeth thus Couetousnes which is worshipping of images and Ephes. 5. it readeth as absurdly as the other A couetous man which is a worshipper of images Loe this is the English Bible which they referre vs vnto as better translated and as correcting the fault of the former But because it is euident by these places that this also is partly worse and partly as ill as the other therefore this great confuter of Maister Iohn Houlet fleeth once more to the Geneua English Bible saying Thus we reade and so we translate to wit A couetous person which is an Idolater Where shall we haue these good fellowes and howe shall we be sure that they will stande to any of their translations from the first redde in their Churches they flee to that that is nowe redde and from this againe to the later Geneua English Bibles neither redde in their Churches as we suppose nor of greatest authoritie among them and we doubt not but they will as fast flee from this to the former againe when this shall be proued in some places more false and absurd than the other FVLK 12. It pleaseth you worse perhaps that lesse fauoureth your pelting distinction of images and idols but it is neuer the worse to be liked of them that be wise and learned which know that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Greeke doe signifie the same thing which you can not deny And where you say in your scornefull moode loe this is the Bible which they referre vs vnto as better trāslated and as correcting the fault of the former you follow your accustomed vaine of lying For I acknowledge no fault of the former in this point of images but confute the frowardnes of that foolish reason which accuseth our seruice of reading the Bible in shamelesse translations in that text 1. Iohn 5. whereas in the Bible appointed for the seruice it is not as he sayth but euen as he would haue vs to saye I flye not therefore as it pleaseth your wisedom to say from that translation also to the Geneua Bible neither doe I alledge the Geneua trāslation for that cause you pretend but to shew that albeit we translate in such words as you can not mislike yet your venemous slaundering pennes and tongues can neuer giue ouer your peeuish quarrelling In the place by you quoted I defend both as true and answerable to the Greeke and of one sense and meaning where the sound of words onely is diuers the signification of matter one and the same And yet you must haue your foolish florish in roperipe termes Where shall we haue these good fellowes c You shall haue vs by the grace of God ready to iustifie all our translation from shamelesse falsification and hereticall corruptions which is your impudent charge against vs. And if in matter of lesser moment you can descry the least errour in any or in all of our translations we shall be willing to confesse the same and ready to reforme it For truth is deerer to vs than credit although we thinke it better credit to reforme a fault than being admonished wilfully to cōtinue it or defend it MART. 13. But what matter is it howe they reade in their churches or how they correct their former translations by the later when the olde corruption remaineth still being set of purpose in the top of euery dore within their churches in these wordes Babes keepe your selues from images Why remaineth that written so often and so conspicuously in the wals of their churches which in their Bibles they correst as a fault their later Bibles say Keepe your selues from idols their church walles say Keepe your selues from images S. Iohn speaking to the lately conuerted Gentiles biddeth them beware of the idols from whence they were conuerted they speaking to the olde instructed Christians bid them beware of the sacred image of Christ our Sauiour of the holy Crucifixe of the Crosse of euerie such representation and monument of Christes passion and our redemption And therefore in the verie same place where these holy monumentes were wont to stande in Catholike times to witte in the roode loft and partition of the Church and chauncell there nowe standes these wordes as confronting and condemning the foresayd holy monumentes Babes keepe your selues from images Which wordes whosoeuer esteemeth as the wordes of Scripture and the wordes of Sainct Iohn spoken against Christes image is made a verie babe in deede and sottishly abused by their scribled doores and false translations to count that idolatrie which is in deede to no other purpose than to the great honour of him whose image and picture it is FVLK 13. Still you harpe on the olde vntuneable string that the former is a corruption which saith Babes kepe your selues from images which sentence sore grieueth you to be written in the toppe of church dores or in place where the Roode loft stoode And you aske why it remaineth on the wals which we correct as a fault in the Bibles But who tolde you that they correct it as a fault in the Bibles Is euery alteration with you a correction The one explicateth the other that idols of which S. Iohn speaketh be images abused in religion Not that all images be idols as the worde idoll in the Englishe speach is taken nor that al idols be images but as images that are worshipped But S. Iohn you say speaking to the conuerted Gentiles biddeth them beware of the idols from whence they were conuerted That is true but not onely from them but from all other idols Except perhappes you thinke that Christians by that texte shoulde not abhorre the images of Simon Magus and Selene and the images of the Valentinians and Gnostikes and other heretikes which worshipped the image of Christ and of Sainct Paule as Irenaeus and Epiphanius doe testifie And it seemeth you so thinke in deede For you say soone after whosoeuer esteemeth those wordes as the wordes of Scripture if images be put for idolls spoken against Christes image is made a verie babe Suchs babes were Irenaeus
as properly as of the second MART. 21. This being a thing so plaine as nothing more in al the holy Scriptures yet your itching humour of deceite falfehood for the most part doth translate still images images when the Latine and Greeke and Hebrue haue diuers other wordes and very seldome that which answereth to image For when it is image in the Latin or Greeke or Hebrue textes your translation is not reprehended for we also translate sometimes images when the text of the holy Scripture requireth it And we are not ignorant that there were images which the Pagans adored for their gods we know that some idols are images but not al images idols But when the holy Scriptures call thē by so many names rather than images because they were not onely images but made idols why do your translations like cuckoes birds sound continually images images more than idols or other wordes equiualent to idols which are there meant FVLK 21. In deede there is nothing more plaine in all the holy Scriptures thā that the worshipping of Images of al sortes is forbidden but that our itching humor of deceit and falshood as it pleaseth you to speake hath corrupted the text to establish any false opinion of the vse of Images it is not yet proued But now you set vpon vs with 13. Hebrue wordes and 9. Greeke words at ones which we for the most parte doe translate still Images Images and you say we sounde with Cuckowes birdes continually Images Images more than Idols or other wordes equiualent to Idols How many times the word Image is sounded I neuer had care to seeke and now I haue no leysure to number but I am sure Idols and Idolatrie in that translation in which least are named aboue fortie or fiftie times But to a conscience guiltie of worshipping of Images contrary to the expresse commaundement of God the very name of Images must needes sounde vnpleasantly That wee haue no greater chaunge of wordes to answere so many of the Hebrue tongue it is of the riches of that tongue and the pouertie of our mother language which hath but two wordes Image and Idoll and them both borowed of the Latine and Greeke As for other wordes equiualent wee know not any and we are loth to make any new wordes of that signification excepte the multitude of Hebrue words of the same sense cōming togither do sometimes perhaps seeme to require it Therfore as the Greeke hath fewer wordes to expresse this thing than the Hebrue so hath the Latine fewer than the Greeke and the English fewest of all as will appeare if you would vndertake to giue vs English wordes for the 13. Hebrue wordes Except you would coyne such ridiculous inkhorne termes as you do in the new Testement Azymes Prepuce Neophyte Scandale Parasceue and such like MART. 22. Two places onely wee will at this time aske you the reason of first why you translate the Hebrue and Greeke that answeareth to Statua image so often as you doe Whereas this word in the said tongues is taken also in the better part as when Iacob set vp a stone and erected it for a title powring oile vpon it and the Prophet saith Our Lordes altar shal be in Aegipt and his title beside it So that the word doth signifie generally a signe erected of good or euill and therefore might very well if it pleased you haue some other English than image Vnlesse you will say that Iacob also set vp an image Our Lords image shall be in AEgipt which you will not say though you might with more reason than in other places FVLK 22. Seeing you aske why we translate the Hebrue word Matsebah so often an image It had bene reason you shoulde haue tolde vs howe often we doe so or at least noted some place where it can not signifie an image We knowe the word being deriued of the verbe Iatsab that signifieth to stande may be taken for some thing erected that is no image but a pillour or as your Latine text calleth it a title in both the places by you noted Gen. 28. Esai 19. and else where Gen. 25. 2. Sam. 18. But when soeuer we translate it an image the circumstaunce of the place so requireth as 2. Reg. 10. where it is sayed that Baals images were taken out of his temple broken and burnt For they were images of Baal that were worshipped in his temple and not titles or pillours Likewise 2. Reg. 17. where it is sayd that the Ismaelites made vnto them selues Statuas images and groues vnder euerie high hil and vnder euery thicke tree as appeareth by Ezechiel 6. where they be called Gillulim idols which had the similitude of men as Baalim and suche other MART. 23. Secondly we demaund why your verie last Englishe Bible hath Esa. 30. 22. For two Hebrue wordes which are in Latine Sculptilia and Conflatilia twise images images neither worde being Hebrue for an image no more than if a man would aske what is Latine for an image and you would tell him Sculptile Whereuppon he seeing a faire painted image in a table might happily say Ecce egregium sculptile Which euerie boy in the Grammar schoole woulde laugh at Which therefore we tell you because we perceiue your translations endeuour and as it were affectate to make Sculptile and image all one Which is most euidently false and to your great confusion appeareth Abac. 2. v. 13. Where for these wordes Quid prodest sculptile quia sculpsit illud fictor suus conflatile imaginem falsam Which is according to the Hebrue and Greeke your later English translation hath What profiteth the image for the maker thereof hath made it an image and a teacher of lies FVLK 23. If it had said the grauen images of siluer and the molten or cast images of gold I know not what aduauntage it had bene to you or losse to vs. But neither word you say is Hebrue for an image Alacke this is poore sophistrie when all the worlde of Hebricians know they are Hebrue for nothing else but for grauen or cast images and by the figure Synecdoche are taken generally for images of what making or matter soeuer they be And the question is not by what art images are made but to what vse and howe they be vsed that they may be condemned for vnlawefull This I take to be the cause why the interpretour neglected the difference of the Hebrue words which sometimes is not obserued in English vnpossible alwaies vnprofitable to be kept As for your owne conceite whereat you thinke boyes might laugh I leaue it to your selfe For if we were asked what is Latine for an image we coulde aunswere somewhat else than Sculptile But if a boy shoulde aske Pesilim or Massecath in this place of Esay doth signifie we woulde not aunswere a grauen thing or a molten thing
least he might shewe vs the mantilltree of a chimney and a brasse pot hanging ouer the fire and demaund further whether Esay in this text spake of them and all such things as they are But it is most euideÌ„tly false you say that Sculptile and Image are all one and this appeareth to our great coÌ„fusion Abacuc the second c. But I say to your shame it will appeare by this verie texte that Pesel and Massecah signifie one and the same thing and that most euidently For thus the textis What profiteth the Image Pesel for his maker iotsâ—ro hath made it or as you will haue it hath grauen it Pesalo what followeth nowe but Massecah an Image you had rather say Conflatile a molten Image But then you muste remember that the maker of it by grauing made it a molten Image whiche is a straunge peece of worke excepte you will saye that first he did caste it and then he did graue it but saye whiche way you will the same Image is called Pesel and Massecah without difference The last wordes are vmoreh shaker and a teacher of lies For which wordes your translation hath Imaginem falsam a false Image whereas Moreh neuer signifieth an Image But of that afterwarde MART. 24. I woulde euery common Reader were able to discerne your falsehood in this place Firste you make Sculpere sculptile no more than to make an image Which beyng absurde you knowe because the painter or embroderer making an image can not be sayde Sculpere sculptile might teach you that the Hebrue hath in it no signification of image no more than Sculpere can signifie to make an image and therefore the Greeke and the Latine precisely for the most part expresse neither more nor lesse than a thing grauen but yet meane alwaies by these wordes a grauen idol to whiche signification they are appropriated by vse of holy Scripture as Simulacrum idolum conflatile and sometime imago In which sense of signifying Idols if you also did repeate images so often although the translation were not precise yet it were in some parte tolerable because the sense were so but when you doe it to bring all holy images into contempt euen the image of our Sauiour Christe crucified you may iustly be controlled for false and hereticall translatours FVLK 24. I would euery common reader were able to discerne your foolishe malice in this place For firste while you cauill at the Etymologie of the words which the Prophete regardeth not you make him say that the â—â—â—hâ—oâ—er thereof hath grauen a grauen thing a â—â—clâ—ea thing Secondly where you say that the Hebrue word Pesâ—â— hath no signification of an image in it leaning to the bare deâ—â—â—â—tion from the verbe Pasal you controule the onely vse of it which is to signifie an image or idoll whether it be grauen or molten or by what workemanship soeuer it be made which you confesse to be the sense of it But when we doe it you say to bring all holy images into contempt we may iustly be controuled for false and hereticall translatours First we knowe no holy images made with handes at this time so accompted but they are all prophane and abhominable idols Secondly if the translatours purpose were euill yet so long as the wordes and sense of the originall tongue will beare him he can not iustly be called a false and hereticall translatour albeit he haue a false and hereticall meaning As you Papistes haue in your late translation of the newe Testament yet where you translate either according to the wordes or according to the sense no equitie can condemne you for false translatours MART. 25. As in this verie place which is an other falshoode like to the other conflatile you translate image as you did sculptile and so here againe in Abacucke as before in Esay is noted for two distinct words ech signifying an other diuerse thing from image you translate images images Thirdly for imaginem falsam a false image you translate an other thing without any necessarie pretense either of Hebrue or Greeke auoiding here the name of image because this place telleth you that the holy Scripture speaketh against false images or as the Greeke hath false phantasies or as you translate the Hebrue such images as teach lies representing false gods which are not as the Apostle saith Idolum nihil est And Non sunt Dij qui manibus fiunt Which distinction of false and true images you will not haue because you condemne all images euen holy and sacred also and therefore you make the holy Scriptures to speake herein accordingly to your owne faasie FVLK 25. Seing the Prophet regardeth not the Etymologie of the wordes but vseth both for one and the same Image no nor regardeth the matter whereof it is made as appeareth in the nexte verse where he calleth this Idoll wodde and stone which cannot be molten euery reasonable man may see that the worde Massecah doth in this place signifie generally an Image which is made to be a teacher of lies And whereas you repeate that the two wordes doc signifie each an other diuerse thing from Image because the one signifieth a grauen thing the other a molten thing you speake with out all shame and sense of honestie for Pesel signifieth not euery grauen carued or hewen thing but onely an Image For who would say that a morter or a gutter of hewen stone were in Hebrue to be signified by the word Pesel or a pewter pot or a dishe by the worde Massecah Seing the vse of the Hebrue tongue therefore hath appropried these names onely to Images it is great frowardnesse no learning to quarell about the etimologie or deriuation of them As this name building in English is taken only for houses as when we say here are goodly buildings which if a man would extende according to the deriuation shewing nothing else but walles of bricke or other matter prayse them for goodly buildings he should be thought to speake straungly in our tongue yet according to the deriuation building may signifie any thing that is builded But for Imaginem falsam a false image you charge vs to translate an other thing without any necessary pretence either of Hebrew or Greeke Such affirmations will make vs thinke meanly of your knowledge in the Hebrew tongue For what I pray you els caÌ„ Moreh in this place signifie but a teacher or where is it euer taken for an image as your Latine text hath or a fantasie as the Greeke readeth Turne ouer your dictionarie and Hebrew concordance and see if you can find it vsed for an image or an idoll At least wise giue credit to Isidorus Clarius who thus writeth in his notes vpon the text Quod ait imaginem falsam in Heb. est docenâ— vel annuncians mendacium That he saith a false Image in the Hebrue it is teaching or shewing foorth a lie The distinction you make of true and false
Images is vaine for this purpose for all Images that are vsed in religion are false and teachers of falshood which you with Gregorie say are Laye mens bookes but what shall they teache saith Abacuc and Ieremie but lies and vanitie where note that Ieremie calleth the Image woodde by Synecdoche signifying all Images made with hands of any matter Againe he saith euery artificer is confounded in his Image because it is false which he hath made and there is no breath in it In whiche verse it is to be obserued that hee vseth firste the worde Pesel saying Mippasel and afterward Nifco for the same Image made by the artificer without distinction of grauing or melting at leastwise for the sense though the wordes be diuerse Euen so your vulgar Latin translator vseth Sculptile conflatile imaginem simulachrum for one and the same thing The Scripture therfore telling vs that all Images are false because they being voyde of life are sette vp to represent the liuing it is not our fantasie but the auctoritie of Gods worde that causeth vs to reiect your fantasticall distinction of true and false Images MART. 26. Wherein you proceede so farre that when Daniel sayde to the King I worshippe not idolls made with handes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you make him saye thus I worshippe not thinges that be made with hands leauing out the worde idolls altogither as though he had sayd nothing made with hand were to be adored not the Arke the propitiatorie no nor the holy crosse it selfe that our Sauiour shed his bloud vpon As before you added to the text so here you diminish and take from it at your pleasure FVLK 26. That thing is put for idoll I confesse it to be a fault in some translations but in the Geneua Bible it is reformed Contempt of the authoritie of that Apocryphall chapiter as it seemed did breede that negligence Where you write that he should by saying I worshippe not thinges made with handes haue denyed the Arke and the propitiatorie to be worshipped it is very true for neither of both was to be worshipped as they were made with handes but God was to be worshipped where they were and those thinges to be reuerently esteemed as the sacraments of Gods presence As for the crosse whereon Christ dyed I see no cause why it shoulde be worshipped if it were to bee had but rather if it were worshipped it shoulde bee serued as the brasen serpent was None of the Apostles made anye accounte of it Nicodemus and Ioseph of Arimathia if there had beene any matter of religion in it might haue preserued it and not haue suffered it to be buried in the earth with the two other crosses as the storie of the inuention sayeth if it be true At the finding whereof Helena as Sainct Ambrose writeth Regem adorauit non lignum vtique quia hic gentilis est error vanitas impiorum She worshipped the King not the tree verily for this is an Hethenishe errour and vanitie of vngodly men De obit Theodosij MART. 27. But concerring the worde image which you make to be the English of all the Latine Hebrew and Greeke wordes be they neuer so many and so distinct I beseeche you what reason had you to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 images Sap. 15. verse 13. doth the Greeke worde so signifie doth not the sentence following tell you that it shoulde haue bene translated grauen idolls for thus it sayth They iudged all the idolls of the nations to be Gods Loe your images or rather loe the true names of the Pagans gods which it pleaseth you to call images images FVLK 27. I thinke you are not able to proue that we make image the English to all the Hebrewe wordes though you boldly affirme it But in the place by you mentioned I suppose they translated the Greeke worde grauen or carued images rather than idoll because the writer in that place Sap. 15. 13. speaketh of the first framing and fashioning of those images which though the purpose of the workeman be neuer so wicked yet can not properly be called idolls before they be abused by them that worship them MART. 28. But to conclude this point you might it would haue well becommed you in translating or expounding the foresayd wordes to haue followed S. Hierom the great famous translator and interpreter of the holy Scriptures who telleth you two senses of the foresaid wordes the one literall of the Idols of the Gentiles the other mysticall of Heresies errours Sculptile sayth he conflatile I take to be peruerse opinions which are adored of the authors that made thē See Arius that graued to him selfe this idoll that Christ was onely a creature and adored that which he had grauen Behold Eunomius howe he molted and cast a false image and bowed to that which he had molten Suppose he had exemplified of the two condemned heretikes Iouinian Vigilantius also had he not touched your idols that is the olde condemned heresies which you at this day adore FVLK 28. It becommeth vs best in translation to follow the originall text and as neare as we can the true meaning of the holy Ghost As for the two senses which Hieronym telleth stand whole and vntouched for our translation There is a difference betwene a translation and a commentarie In commenting vpon the text they that see it conuenient may apply the idolls of the Gentiles the worship of them to the heresies of our times of the Papistes Anabaptistes Libertines and such like as the Apostle doth by similitude to couetousnes As for olde condemned heresies which you charge vs to worship as idols you are able to proue none whatsoeuer you bable of Vigilantius and Iouinian neither of both doe we follow in any error much lesse in any heresie MART. 29. These onely I meane heresies and heretikes are the idols and idolaters by the ancient Doctors iudgement which haue bene among Christians since the idolatrie of the Gentiles ceased according to the Prophets Therefore S. Hierom sayth againe If thou see a man that will not yeeld to the truth but when the falshoode of his opinions is once shewed perseuereth still in that he began thou mayst aptly say Sperat in figmento suo and he maketh dumme or deafe idolls And againe All Heretikes haue their gods and whatsoeuer they haue forged they adore the same as Sculptile and Constantile that is as a grauen and molten idoll And againe He sayth well I haue found vnto my selfe an idoll For all the forgeries of heretikes are as the idolls of the Gentiles neither doe they much differ in impiety though in name they seeme to differ And againe Whatsoeuer according to the letter is spoken against the idolatrie of the Iewes doe thou referre al this vnto them which vnder the name of Christ worship idols and forging to them selues peruerse opinions carye the tabernacle of their king the deuill and the
Epistle of Iames of Peter c. As if a man shoulde say in his Creede I beleeue the general Churche because hee would not say the Catholike Churche as the Lutheran Catechismes say for that purpose I beleeue the Christian Church So that by this rule when S. Augustine telleth that the maner was in cities where there was libertie of religion to aske Qua itur ad Catholicam Wee muste translate it Which is the way to the General And when Sainct Hierome sayth If we agree in faith with the B. of Rome ergo Catholici sumus we must translate it Then we are Generals Is not this good stuffe Are they not ashamed thus to inuert and peruert all wordes against common sense and vse and reason Catholike and Generall or vniuersall we knowe is by the originall propertie of the word all one but according to the vse of both as it is ridiculous to say A Catholike Councell for a Generall Councell so is it ridiculous and impious to say Generall for Catholike inderogation thereof and for to hide it vnder a bushell FVLK 4. I doe not knowe where the name of Catholike is once expressed in the text of the Bible that it might be suppressed by vs which are not like to beare malice to the Catholike Church or religion seeing we teache euen our young children to beleue the holy Catholike Church But not finding the word Catholike in the text you runne to the title of the seuen Epistles called as commonly Canonicall as Catholike or Generall But Eusebius belike testifieth that they haue bene so called euer since the Apostles time lib. 2. cap. 22. I maruell you are not ashamed to auouch suche an vntruth Eusebius speaking of his owne time saith they are so called but that they haue bene so called euer since the Apostles time he sayth not And so farre off he is from saying so that he pronounceth the Epistle of S. Iames in the same place to be a bastarde and speaketh doubtfully of the Epistle of S. Iude. But whereas in one translation we vse the worde Generall for Catholike you make a greate may game of it shewing your witte and your honestie both at once For these 5. of Iames 2. of Peter one of Iude and the first of Iohn which are properly rightly so intituled haue that title because they are not sent to any particular Church or persons but to all in general as the Greeke scholiast truly noteth And OEcumenius before the Epistle of S. Iames sayth expressely Catholicae id est vniuersales dicuntur hae c. These Epistles are called Catholike that is to say Vniuersall or General because not distinctly to one nation or citie as S. Paule to the Romanes or Corinthians this companie of our Lords disciples doth dedicate these Epistles but generally to the faithfull or to the Iewes that were dispersed as also Peter or else to all Christians liuing vnder the same faith For otherwise if they should be called Catholike in respect of the souÌ„dnes of the doctrine coÌ„tained in theÌ„ what reason were there more to call them so than to call all the Epistles of S. Paule Wherefore in this title which yet is no part of the holy Scripture it is rightly traÌ„slated general The other translatours seeing seuen to be called general where only fiue are so in deede and seeing them also called canonicall which should seeme to be a controulling of S. Paules Epistles left out that title altogither as being no part of the text and word of God but an addition of the stationers or writers MART. 5. Is it because they would followe the Greeke that they turne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 generall euen as iust as when they turne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 image 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instruction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinance 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissension 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secrete and such like where they goe as farre from the Greeke as they can and will be glad to pretende for aunswere of their worde sect that they followe our Latine translation Alas poore shift for them that otherwise pretende nothing but the Greeke to be tried by that Latine which them selues condemne But we honour the sayd text and translate it Sects also as we there find it and as we doe in other places followe the Latine text and take not our aduantage of the Greeke text because we knowe the Latine translation is good also and sincere and approued in the Church by long antiquitie it is in sense all one to vs with the Greke but not so to them who in these daies of controuersie about the Greeke and Latine text by not following the Greeke which they professe sincerely to follow bewray them selues that they doe it for a malitious purpose FVLK 5. It is because we woulde haue the Greeke vnderstood as it is taken in those places when we turne Catholike generall Idolum image 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 instruction 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ordinaunce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 dissention 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sect 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 secret and such like And where you say we woulde be glad for our word sect to pretend to follow your Latine translation it is a fable For in translating sect we follow the Greeke as truely as your Latine translation doeth which if it be true and sincere as you confesse what deuilish madnesse possesseth your malicious mind to burthen vs with such purposes as no reasonable man would once imagine or thinke of that we should vse that terme in fauour of heresie and heretikes whome we thinke worthie to suffer death if they will not repent and cease to blaspheme or seduce the simple CHAP. V. Hereticall translation against the CHVRCH Martin AS they suppresse the name Catholike euen so did they in their first English Bible the name of Church it selfe because at their first reuolt and apostasie from that that was vniuersally knowen to be the only true Catholike Church it was a great obiectioÌ„ against their schismaticall proceedings and it stucke much in the peoples consciences that they forsooke the Church and that the Church condemned them WherupoÌ„ very wiâ—ily they suppressed the name Church in their English translation so that in all that Bible so long red in their congregations we can not once finde the name thereof Iudge by these places which seeme of most importaunce for the dignitie preheminence and authoritie of the Church Fulke HOwe can wee suppresse the name Catholike which the holy Scripture neuer vseth as for the name of Church I haue alreadie shewed diuerse times that for to auoyd the ambiguous taking of that terme it was at the first lesse vsed but neuer refused for doubt of any obiection of the Catholike Church against vs the profession of which being contained in our Englishe creede howe could we relinquish or not acknowledge to be contained in the Scripture in which we taught that all articles
of faith necessarie to saluation are comprehended But we are content to be iudged by those places which seeme of most importance for the dignity preheminence authoritye of the Church MART. 2. Our Sauiour saith Vpon this Rocke I will build my Church and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it They make him to say Vpō this rocke I wil build my congregation Againe If he heare not them tell the Church if he heare not the Church let him be to thee as an Heathen and as a publicane they say Congregation Againe who woulde thinke they woulde haue altered the worde Church in the Epistle to the Ephesians their English translation for many yeares red thus Ye husbands loue your wiues as Christ loued the congregation and clensed it to make it vnto him selfe a glorious congregation without spot or wrinkle And This is a great secrete but I speake of Christ of the cōgregation And to Timothee The house of God which is the cōgregation of the liuing God the pillar and grounde of truth Here is no worde of Churche which in Latine Greeke is Ecclesia Dei viui columna firmamētum veritatis Likewise to the Ephesians againe He hath made him heade of the congregation which is his bodie And to the Hebrues they are all bolde to translate The congregation of the first borne where the Apostle nameth heauenly Hierusalem the citie of the liuing God c. FVLK 2. In the first English Bible printed where it was thus translated Math. 16. vppon this rocke I will build my congregation the note in the margent is thus vpon this rock that is as saith S. Augustin vpon the confession which thou hast made knowledging me to be Christ the sonne of the liuing God I will build my congregation or Church Was not this translator thinke you sore afraid of the name of the Church What other thing should he vnderstand by the word congregation in al places by you noted or in any like but the church as he doth here expound him selfe And this translation almost worde for worde doth the Bible you call 1562. follow MART. 3. So that by this translation there is no more Church militant and triumphant but congregation and he is not head of the Church but of the congregation and this congregation at the time of the making of this translation was in a few new brethren of England for whose sake the name Church was left out of the English Bible to commend the name of congregation aboue the name of Church Whereas S. Augustine telleth them that the Iewes Synagogue was a congregation the Church a conuocation and that a congregation is of beasts also a conuocation of reasonable creatures onely and that the Iewes congregation is sometime called the Church but the Apostles neuer called the Church Congregation Doe you see then what a goodly chaunge they haue made for Church to say congregation so making themselues a very Synagogue that by the property of the Greeke word which yet as S. Augustine telleth them most truely signifieth rather a conuocation FVLK 3. A strange matter that the Church militant and triumphant should be excluded by vsing the word congregation when by it nothing is signified but the congregation or Church militant and triumphant and that Christ should no more be head of the Churche when he is head of the congregation where the differēce is only in sound of words not in sense or meaning Your vaine and ridiculous surmise why the name of Church shuld be left out of the Bible I haue before cōfuted shewing that in euery Bible it is either in the text or in the notes But S. Augustin telleth vs say you that the Iewes synagoge was a congregation the church a cōuocation that a congregation is of beasts also a conuocation of reasonable creatures only But S. Luke in the person of S. Stephen telleth vs and Augustine telleth vs as much that the synagoge of the Iewes is called also Ecclesia which signifieth the church and congregation That Congregatio the Latin word may be of beasts also it skilleth not for the church of Christ is called also a flocke and sheepe of his pasture But he that should say in English a cōgregation of beastes might be taken for as wise a man as he that said an audiēce of sheepe And wheras S. Augustine telleth you that the Iewes congregation is somtime called the church what is the cause that you doe translate it the assembly Act. 7. euen as you do the congregation of the Idolatrous Ephesians Act. 19 But further you say Augustine telleth vs that the Apostles neuer called the church congregation It is a worlde to see what foolishe fetches you haue to deceiue the ignoraunt Augustine sayeth the Apostles neuer called our assembly Synagoga but alwaies Ecclesia and yet he is a litle deceiued for S. Paul calleth our gathering togither vnto Christ 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but Congregatio a cōgregation he saith not And although he make a nice distinction betwene the wordes Congregation Conuocation yet all men which know the vse of these words will confesse no necessitie of a Iewish synagoge to be implied in the word cōgregation more than in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which of the holy Ghost is vsed for an assembly or gathering togither either of Iewes Christiās or Gentils And therfore it seemeth the translatour vsed the word congregation which is indifferent for all euen as the worde Ecclesia is vsed both in the Greeke and vulgar Latine MART. 4. If they appeale here to their later translatiōs we must obtaine of them to condemne the former and to confesse this was a grosse fault cōmitted therein And that the Catholike Church of our coūtrie did not il to forbid burne such bookes which were so translated by Tyndal and the like as being not in deede Gods booke worde or Scripture but the Diuels worde Yea they must confesse that the leauing out of this worde Church altogither was of an hereticall spirite against the Catholike Romane Church because then they had no Caluinisticall Church in any like forme of religion gouernement to theirs now Neither will it serue them to say after their maner And if a man should translate Ecclesiam congregation this is no more absurdity than in steede of a Greeke word to vse a Latin of the same signification This we trow will not suffise them in the iudgement of the simplest indifferent Reader FVLK 4. Wee neede not to appeale to the later translations for any corruption or falsification of the former no nor for any mistranslation For seing the spirite of God as I haue said before vseth the word Ecclesia generally for a companie of Christians Iewes and Gentils the translator hath not gone from the truth and vse of the Scriptures to vse the word cōgregation which signifieth indifferently all three Wherefore there needeth no condemnation nor
qui efficia◠omnia in omnibus reuera nedum vt suppleatur à quoquam nisi quatenus pro immensasua bonitate Ecclesiam dignatur sibi quasi corporis instar adiungere This the Apostle hath added altogither for this end that we may know that Christ of him selfe hath no neede of this supplye as he which worketh in truth all things in al so far it is that he should be supplied by any body but that of his infinite goodnes he vouchsafeth to adioine his Church vnto him selfe as his body Who but the deuil would finde fault with this godly Catholike saying wherein it is affirmed that Christ which according to the perfection of his diuine nature needeth no supply yet of his infinite mercie vouchsafeth to become head of his Church as of his body so that he wil not be counted perfect without it Is this to say Christ may be a head without a bodie or is it for his benefite or the benefite of his Church that he is the head thereof But the more to laye open this malicious slaunder and impudent falsifying of Bezaes wordes and meaning I will set downe his saying going immediatly before vpon the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which he calleth complementum siue supplementum a fulfilling or supplying Is enim est Christi in Ecclesiam amor c. For such is the loue of Christ toward his Church that whereas he performeth all thinges to all men vnto the full yet he esteemeth him selfe as an vnperfect head maymed of the members vnlesse he haue his Church adioyned to him as his bodye Hereof it commeth that Christ is taken sometime collectiuely for the whole Church adioyned to her heade as 1. Cor. 12. v. 12. 13. and Gal. 3. 16. Hereof commeth also that phrase in Christ so often repeated which signifieth something more expresly than with Christ or by Christ. Hereof that voice of Christ Saul Saul why doest thou persecute me whether also pertaineth that which is written Col. 1. v. 24. Finally hereof proceedeth all our hope and consolation How thinke you is not this man willing to separate the Church from Christ the head frō the body O mōstrous malices of godlesse Papists His exposition of the place being such as you see let vs nowe examine what can be sayde against his translation For a man must not translate falsly to make a true sense It is alledged against him that Chrysostome and all the Greeke and Latine fathers take the participle passiuely Beza confesseth it of Chrysostome whome the later Greeke writers commonly doe followe But the participle being deriued of the meane verbe may haue either passiue or actiue signification But why doth Beza say that the exposition of Chrysostom is forced which taketh it passiuely he saith not in respect of Chrysostomes sense which he him selfe followeth and it is contained in the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but in respect of the grammar that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should be put absolutely without any word to gouerne it seeing the participle of the meane verbe may be taken actiuely and gouerne 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being the accusatiue case MART. 7. Marke his Doctors whom he opposeth to the fathers both Greeke Latine Because Xenophon sayth he in such a place Plato in such a place vse the sayd Greeke word actiuely I omit this miserable match and vnworthy names of Xenophon and Plato in triall of S. Paules wordes against all the glorious Doctors this is his common custome I aske him rather of these his owne Doctors how they vse the Greeke word in other places of their workes how vse they it most commonly yea how doe all other Greeke writers either profane or sacred vse it What say the Greeke readers of all Vniuersities Surely not onely they but their scholers for the most part can not be ignorant that the vse of this word the like is passiue though sometime it may also signifie actiuely but that is so rare in comparison of the other that no man lightly will vse it I am well assured it would be counted a fault some lacke of skill if one now in his writings that would expresse this in Greeke God filleth all thinges with his blessing shoulde saye 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and The wine filleth the cuppe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aske them that haue skill and controule me Contrariwise if one would saye passiuely All thinges are filled with Gods blessing The cuppe is filled with wine Such a prophecie is fulfilled What meane Grecian would not say as S. Chrysostome here expoundeth this word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 vsing it possiuely FVLK 7. Marke howe malice carieth this man almost into madnesse For who but a madde man woulde thinke that Beza opposeth prophane writers to Ecclesiasticall doctours for vnderstanding of the Scripture The meane verbe 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the meanest Grammarian in the world knoweth to be taken both actiuely passiuely by the Grammar rule De verbo medio Beza proueth out of Xenophon and Plato that it is and may be vsed actiuely Why not therfore in this place of S. Paule where bothe the sense requireth it that one thing be not repeated twise without necessary cause and the construction of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 calleth for it which otherwise is lefte at randon without any gouernment Seeing therefore we haue the common rule of Grammar and the example of eloquent writers for vse I maruaile what M. Martine meaneth to waste so many wordes about so cleare a matter No man that knoweth any thing doubteth but that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be and is often taken passiuely But seing it is also found to be a verbe meane who neede to be afraide to vse it actiuely hauing Xenophon and Plato for his warrant yea euen in those examples you put of Gods blessing filling all things or the wine filling the cuppe if any man would speake so But if because the worde is more vsually taken passiuely men would refraine so to speake yet why should we thinke that S. Paule did not vse it actiuely when the actiue signification is more agreeable both with his wordes and with his meaning But least you shoulde thinke Beza is alone which taketh it actiuely what say you to Philippus Montanus one of your owne profession which in his animaduersions vpon Theophlyactes translation by him corrected sayth vpon this place 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 qui adimplet vel adimpletur verbum enim est medium passiuè autem videtur accipere Theophylactus Which filleth or which is filled for it is a verbe of indifferent signification actiue or passiue but Theophylact seemeth to take it passiuely What say you to Isidorus Clarius who although in his text he readeth passiuely yet in his note cōfesseth it may be takē either passiuely or actiuely For this is his note Plenitudo eius\ per omnia enim membra adimpletur corpus Christi quia omnia in omnibus implet dum
Presbyter Doeth not Priest come of Presbyter as certainly and as agreeably as Deacon of Diaconus Doth not also the French and Italian word for Priest come directly from the same Will you alwaies followe fansie and not reason doe what you list translate as you list and not as the truth is and that in the holy Scriptures which you boast and vaunt so much of Because your selues haue theÌ„ whom you call Bishops the name Bishops is in your Englishe Bibles which otherwise by your owne rule of translation should be called an Ouerseer or Superintendent likewise Deacon you are content to vse as an Ecclesiasticall word so vsed in antiquitie because you also haue those whom you call Deacons Only Priests must be turned contemptuously out of the text of the holy Scriptures Elders put in their place because you haue no Priestes nor will none of them and because that is in controuersie betwene vs. And as for Elders you haue none permitted in EnglaÌ„d for feare of ouerthrowing your Bishops office and the Queenes supreame gouernment in all spiritual things and causes Is not this to followe the humour of your heresie by Machiauels politike rules without any feare of God FVLK 12. Here I must aunswere you that we haue no degree of Ministers distinct from Deacons but by vulgar and popular vse of speaking which we are not curious to controule Otherwise in truth we account Bishops Elders and Deacons all Ministers of the Church It is no more therefore but the common speache of men which vseth that worde which is common to all Ecclesiasticall persons as peculiar to the Elders or Priestes Why we keepe the name of Deacons in translating Diaconus rather than of Priestes in translating Presbyter I haue tolde you often before The name Priest being by long abuse of speache applied to signifie Sacrificers of the olde Testament called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we could not giue the same name to the Ministers of the new Testament except we had some other name whereby to call the Ministers of the olde Testament wherein we followe reason and not fansie for it is great reason we should retaine that difference in names of the Ministers of both the Testamentes which the holy Ghost doth alwaies obserue But you follow fansie altogither imagining that Priestes onely are put out of the text because we haue no Priestes Whereas we haue Priestes as well as we haue Bishops and Deacons and so are they called in our booke of common prayer indifferently Priestes or Ministers And where you say we haue no Elders permitted in Englande it is false for those that are commonly called Bishoppes Ministers or Priestes among vs be suche Elders as the Scripture commendeth vnto vs. And although we haue not suche a consistorie of Elders of gouernemente as in the Primitiue Churche they had and many Churches at this daye haue yet haue wee also Elders of gouernement to exercise discipline as Archbishoppes and Bishoppes with their Chauncellours Archedeacons Commissaries Officialles in whome if any defecte bee we wishe it may be reformed according to the worde of God MART. 13. Apostles you say for the most parte in your translations not alwayes as we doe and Prophetes and Euangelistes and Angels and such like wheresoeuer there is no matter of controuersie betwene you and vs there you can pleade verie grauely for keeping the auncient Ecclesiasticall wordes as your maister Beza for example beside many other places where he bitterly rebuketh his fellow Castalâ—ons translation in one place writeth thus I can not in this place dissemble the boldnesse of certaine men which would God it rested within the compasse of words only These men therefore concerning the worde Baptizing though vsed of sacred writers in the mystery or Sacrament of the new Testament and for so many yeares after by the secrete consent of all Churches consecrated to this one Sacrament so that it is now growen into the vulgar speaches almost of all nations yet they dare presume rashly to chaunge it and in place thereof to vse the word washing Delicate men forsooth which neither are moued with the perpetual authority of so many ages nor by the daily custom of the vulgar speach can be brought to thinke that lawfull for Diuines which all men graunt to other Maisters and professors of artes that is to retaine and holde that as their owne which by long vse and in good faith they haue truly possessed Neither may they preteÌ„d the authoritie of some auncient writers as that Cyprian sayeth TINGENTES for BAâ—PTIZANTES and Tertullian in a certaine place calleth SEQVESTREM for MEDIATOREM For that which was to those auncientes as it were newe to vs is olde and euen then that the selfe same words which we now vse were familiar to the Church it is euident because it is very seldome that they speake otherwise But these men by this noueltie seeke after vaine glorie c. FVLK 13. If in any place we vse not the name of the Apostles Prophetes Euangelists Angels and such like wee are able to giue as sufficient a reason why we translate those wordes according to their Generall signification as you for translating somtime Baptismata washings and not baptismes Ecclesia the assembly and not the Church with such like Therefore as Castaleo such other Heretikes are iustly reprehended by Beza for leauing without cause the vsuall Ecclesiasticall termes so when good cause or necessitie requireth not to vse them it were superstition yea and almost madnes sometimes in translating to vse them as to call the Pharisees washings Baptismes or the assembly of the EphesiaÌ„ Idolaters the Churche yet both in Greeke and Latine the wordes are Baptismata ecclesia MART. 14. He speaketh against Castaleon who in his newe Latine translation of the Bible changed all Ecclesiasticall wordes into profane and Heathenish as Angelos into genios Prophetas into Fatidicos Templum into fanum and so foorth But that which he did for foolish affectation of finenesse and stile do not our English Caluinistes the very same when they list for furthering their Heresies When the holy Scripture saith idols according as Christians haue alwayes vnderstood it for false goddes they come and tell vs out of Homer and the Lexicons that it may signifie an image and therfore so they translate it Do they not the like in the Greeke worde that by Ecclesiasticall vse signifieth penaunce and doing penaunce when they argue out of Plutarch and by the profane sense therof that it is nothing else but chaunging of the minde or amendment of life Whereas in the Greeke Church Poenitentes that is they that were in the course of penance and excluded from the Church as Catechumeni and Energumeni till they had accomplished their penance the very same are called in the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 FVLK 14. That Castaleo did for foolish affectatioÌ„ of finenesse you slauÌ„der vs to do for furthering of heresie
Presbyter in the Scripture signifieth one thing and in the fathers an other For in the Scripture it is taken indiffereÌ„tly for Episcopus and Episcopus for Presbyter but in the fathers these are two distinct degrees Therfore he is worthy to be beaten in a Grammar schole that can not see manifest difference betwene the vse of the worde Baptismus which being spoken of the Sacrament in the Scriptures and fathers is alwayes one and of Presbyter which in the Scriptures is euery Ecclesiasticall gouernor in the fathers one degree onely that is subiect to the Bishop MART. 22. Thus we haue repeated Bezaes wordes againe onely changing the word Baptisme into Priest because the case is all one and so vnwittingly Beza the successor of Caluin in Geneua hath giuen plaine sentence against our English Translatours in all such cases as they goe from the common receiued and vsuall sense to another profane sense and out of vse as namely in this point of Priest and Priesthood Where we must needes adde a word or two though we be too long because their follie and malice is too too great herein For whereas the very name Priest neuer came into our English tongue but of the Latine Presbyteâ— for therevpon Sacerdos also was so called onely by a consequence they translate Sacerdos Priest and Presbyter not Priest but Elder as wisely and as reasonably as if a man should translate Praetor Londini Maire of London Maior Londini not Maire of London but Greater of London or Academia Oxoniensis the Vniuersitie of Oxford and Vniuersitas Oxoniensis not the Vniuersitie but the Generalitie of Oxford and such like FVLK 22. Bezaes words agree to vs as well as Germans lippes that were nine myle asunder For if this english word Priest by custom of speech did signifie no more than the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we would no lesse vse it in our translations than Bishops and Deacons which offices though they be shamefully abused by the Papistes yet the abuse of the wordes maketh no confusion betwene the ministers of the lawe and of the Gospell as this worde Priest doth by which the Iewish sacrificers are rather vnderstoode than preachers of the Gospell and ministers of the Sacraments But whereas the etymologie of this English worde Priest commeth from Presbyter you charge vs with great follie and malice that for Sacerdos we translate Priest and for Presbyter Elder To this I aunswere we are not Lordes of the common speeche of men for if we were we woulde teache them to vse their termes more properly but seeing we can not chaunge the vse of speeche we followe Aristotels councell which is to speake and vse wordes as the common people vseth but to vnderstande and conceaue of thinges according to the nature and true propertie of them Althoughe for my parte I lyke well of the Frenche translation which for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Sacerdotes alwaies translateth sacrificateurs sacrificers and for Presbyteri where they signifie the Ministers of the word and Sacramentes Prestres Priests But this diuersitie being only of words and not of matter or meaning reasonable men wil take an aunswere fooles and quarrellers will neuer acknowledge any satisfaction MART. 23. Againe what exceeding folly is it to thinke that by false and profane translation of Presbyter into Elder they might take away the externall Priesthoode of the new Testament whereas their owne word Sacerdos which they do and must needes translate Priest is as common and as vsuall in all antiouitie as Presbyter and so much the more for that it is vsed indifferently to signifie both Bishoppes and Priestes which Presbyter lightly doth not but in the new Testament As when Constantine the Great sayed to the Bishoppes assembled in the Councell of Nice Deus vos constituit sacerdotes c. God hath ordained you Priests and hath giuen you power to iudge of vs also And Sainct Ambrose When diddest thou euer heare most clement Prince that lay men haue iudged Bishoppes Shall we bende by flatterie so farre that forgetting the right of our Priesthoode we should yeld vp to others that which God hath commended to vs And therefore doeth Sainct Chrysostome entitle his sixe bookes De Sacerdotio Of Priesthoode concerning the dignitie and calling not only of mere Priestes but also of Bishoppes and S. Gregorie Nazianzene handling the same argument sayth that they execute Priesthoode togither with CHRIST And S. Ignatius sayth Do nothing without the Bishoppes for they are Priests but thou the Deacon of the Priests And in the Greeke Liturgies or Masses so often 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Then the Priest saith this and that signifying also the Bishoppe when he sayth Masse and S. Denys sayeth sometime Archisacerdotem cum sacerdotibus The high Priest or Bishoppe with the Priests whereof come the wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the auncient Greeke fathers for the sacred function of Priesthoode and executing of the same MART. 24. If then the Heretikes coulde possibly haue extinguished Priesthoode in the word Presbyter yet you see it would haue remained still in the wordes Sacerdos Sacerdotium which themselues translate Priest and Priesthoode and therefore we must desire them to translate vs a place or two after their owne maner first Sainct Augustine speaking thus Qâ—is vnquam audiuit sacerdotem ad altare stantem etiaÌ„ super reliquias Martyrum dicere offero tibi Petre Paule vel Cypriane Who euer hearde that a PRIEST standing at the altar euen ouer the relikes of the Martyrs said I offer to thee Peter and Paule or Cyprian So we trow they must translate it Againe Nos vni Deo Martyrum nostro sacrificium immolamus ad quod sacrificium sicut homines Dei suo loco ordine nominantur non tamen à sacerdote inuocantur Deo quippe non ipsis sacrificat quamuis in memoria sacrificet eoruÌ„ quia Dei sacerdos est non illoruÌ„ Ipsum verò sacrificium corpus est Christi We thinke they will and must translate it thus We offer sacrifice to the only God both of Martyrs and ours at the which Sacrifice as men of God they Martyrs are named in their place order yet are they not inuocated of the Priest that sacrificeth For he sacrificeth to God and not to them though he sacrifice in the memorie of them because he is Gods Priest and not theirs And the sacrifice it selfe is the body of Christ. FVLK 23. 24. Nay what exceeding follie is it to thinke that an externall sacrificing office can be established in the new Testament which neuer calleth the Ministers thereof Sacerdotes or 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because men of later time haue vnproperly transferred those termes vnto the Elders or Priests of the new TestameÌ„t Certainly among so many names as the Scripture giueth them if sacrificing for the quicke and the deade had bene the principall parte of their function as by you Papistes hath
alleageth it thus the holy Euangelist S. Luke in the Acts of the Apostles cap. 2. recordeth it and for this S. Augustine calleth him an infidel that denyeth it yet all this would not suffise to make Beza translate it so because of certaine errours as he heretically termeth them which he would full gladly auoide hereby namely the Catholike true doctrine of limbus patrum and Purgatorie What neede we say more he translateth animam a Carcase so calling our Sauiour Christes bodie irreuerently and wickedly he translateth infernum graue FVLK 2. That many of the Christian fathers helde this error that the godly of the old Testament were not in heauen before Christes death it is no cause why we should be afraid to confesse the truth reuealed to vs out of the holy Scriptures to the glorie of God And if the wrong or ambiguous translation of one Hebrue word Sheol deceiued them that were for the most parte ignoraunt of the Hebrue tongue what reason were it that we shoulde not in translation reforme that errour But as for Bezaes first translation of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 deade bodie and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 graue I haue aunswered at large Cap. 1. sect 31. where also it is shewed howe vainely you take hold of the English worde carcase to charge Beza with vnreuerent calling of our Sauiour Christes bodie when it was deade because he calleth it in Latine Cadauer MART. 3. Neede we take any great labour to proue this to be a foule corruption or that it is done purposely whē he confesseth that he thus translateth because else it woulde serue the Papistes Which is as much to say as the word of God if it be truly and sincerely translated maketh in deede for them For the first part we will not stand vpon it partly because it is of it selfe most absurd and they are ashamed of it partly because it shall susfise to confute Beza that two other as famous heretikes as he Castalio and Flaccus Illyricus write against him in this point and confute him partly also because we speake not here vniuersally of all hereticall translations but of the English corruptions specially therfore we may only note here how gladly they also would say somwhat else for soule euen in the text if they durst for shame for in the margent of that English trāslation they say or life or person thereby aduertising the Reader that he may reade thus if it please him Thou shalt not leaue my life in the graue or Thou shalt not leaue my person As though either mans soule or life were in the graue or anima might be translated person which the selfe same Englishe Bible doeth not no not in those places where it is euident that it signifieth the whole person For though this worde soule by a figure is sometime taken for the whole man yet euen there they doe not nor must not translate it otherwise than soule beause our tongue beareth that figure as well as Latine Greeke or Hebrue but here where it can not signifie the whole person it is wicked to translate it so FVLK 3. If you take more labour than you are wel able to beare yet shall you proue it no hereticall corruption As Castaleo and Illyricus the one an heretike the other a schismatike haue inueyed against Beza so hath he sufficiently confuted them But to our English translation where in the margent they say life or person when in the text they say soule what doeth this offende you They render the vsuall English word for the Greke word but they admonish the reader that the word soule in this place signifieth not the soule separated from the bodie but either the life or the whole person Because that although the bodie onely be layed in the graue yet according to vulgar speache and sense the whole man is sayed to be buried and his life seemeth to be inclosed in the graue according to which popular and humane conceyt the Prophet in that Psalme speaketh as appeareth in the later parte of that verse which is all one in sense with the former Neither wilt thou giue thy holy one to see corruption where corruption which is proper onely to the bodie is there spoken generally of the whole man If this expositiō please you not yet you haue no cause to finde fault with the translation which in that place is according to the cōmon and ordinarie signification of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 soule Which as it is somtime taken for the whole person as you note Act. 7. 14. So is it here as the later parte of the verse doth most plainly declare MART. 4. But as for the worde graue that they put boldly in the text to signifie that howsoeuer you interprete soule or whatsoeuer you put for it it is not meant according to S. Augustine and the faith of the whole Catholike Church that his soule descended into Hell whiles his bodie was in the graue but that his soule also was in the graue howsoeuer that is to be vnderstoode So making it a certaine and resolute conclusion that the holy Scripture in this place speaketh not of Christs being in Hell but in the graue and that according to his soule or life or person or as Beza will haue it His carcase or bodie and so his soule in Hell as the holy Scripture speaketh shall be his bodie in the graue as Beza plainly speaketh the Bezites couertly insinuate white shall be blacke and chaulke shall be cheese and euery thing shall be any thing that they will haue it And all this their euident false translation must be to our miserable deceiued poore soules the holy Scripture and Gods word FVLK 4. The Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wel beareth to be translated in some places a graue here the later part of the verse speaketh of corruption which can not be vnderstoode to be but in the graue so doth S. Peter vnderstand it saying that Dauid the Patriarch died and was buried and his sepulchre remayneth with vs vnto this day and S. Paule vpon the same verse of the Psalme saith he saw corruption Both the Apostles therfore interpreting this verse of the resurrection of Christ we thinke it in deede a resolute conclusion that the Scripture in this place speaketh not of Christs being in hell which we acknowledge in the article of our Creede but of his buriall and resurrection Your trifling of white and blacke chaulke and cheese may seeme pleasaunt Rhetorike to grosse eares whom you seeke to fill with such vanities But the wiser sort that are acquainted with figuratiue speaches wil thinke it nothing straunge if words be not alwaies taken in their vsual proper signification That the Hebrue worde Nephesh which the Prophet in that verse of the Psalme vseth is taken diuerse times in the Scripture for a deade bodie I haue before proued more plainly than euer you shall
coniecturall opinions and peraduentures Also how he taketh Infernum for any lower place in so much that he calleth this worlde Infernum Wherefore much more may Infernum signifie the graue and be so sometimes translated MART. 10. His wordes be these in effect If a man wil say vnto me that Lazarus was seene in Abrahams bosome and a place of refreshing euen before Christs comming true it is but what is that in comparison Quid simile infernus regna caelorum What hath hell and heauen like As if he should say Abraham in deede and Lazarus and consequently many other were in place of rest but yet in hel till Christ came and in such rest as hath no comparison with the ioies of heauen And S. Augustine disputing this matter sometime doubting whether Abrahams bosome be called hel in the Scripture and whether the name of hell be taken at any time in the good parte for of Christes descending into hel and of a third place where the Patriarches remained vntil Christs cōming not heauen but called Abrahams bosome he doubted not but was most assured the same holy doctour in an other place as being better resolued doubted not vpon these wordes of the Psalme Thou hast deliuered my soule from the lower hell to make this one good sense of this place that the lower hel is it wherin the damned are tormented the higher hell is that wherein the soules of the iust rested calling both places by the name of hell FVLK 10. I haue set downe his very words in deed which being well weighed make nothing so clearly for your phātasied Limbus as you wold haue mē weene You say Augustine doubteth whether Abrahams bosome in the Scripture be called hell Ep. 99. de gen ad lit lib. 12. ca. 33. But there he doth vtterly denie it in Ps. 85. as by his wordes cited before appeareth he doubteth So that where he flatly denieth with you he doubteth where he doubteth with you he is better resolued Wherefore this matter of Abrahā the faithful being in hell is no article of faith except you will say that S. Augustine was not resolued in the articles of our faith who touching the thirde place whatsoeuer at diuerse times he speaketh doubtingly in his Hypognosticon he affirmeth resolutely that he findeth in the scriptures that there is none MART. 11. And surely of his maruelous humilitie and wisedome he would haue bene much more resolute herein if he had heard the opinion of S. Hierom whom he often consulted in such questions and of other fathers who in this point speake most plainely that Abrahams bosome or the place where the Patriarkes rested was some part of hell Tertullian Li. 4. aduers Marcion Saith I knowe that the bosome of Abraham was no heauēly place but only the higher hel or the higher part of hell Of which speach of the fathers rose afterwarde that other name Limbus patrum that is the very brimme or vppermost and outmost parte of hell where the fathers of the olde Testament rested Thus we see that the Patriarches themselues were as then in hell though they were there in a place of rest in so much that S. Hierom saith againe Ante Resurrectionem Christi notus in Iudaea Deus ipsi qui nouerant eum tamen ad inferos trahebantur that is Before the Resurrection of Christ God was knowne in Iurie and they themselues that knewe him yet were drawen vnto hell S. Chrysostome vpon that place of Esay I will breake the brasen gates and bruse the yron barres in pieces and will open the treasures darkened c. So he calleth hell saith he for although it were hell yet it helde the holy soules and pretious vessels Abraham Isaac and Iacob Marke that he saith though it were hell yet there were the iust men at that time till our sauiour Christ came to deliuer them from thence FVLK 11. As wise humble as he was he was not readie to yeeld to euery opinion of Hierom as his Epistles writtē to Hierom do declare Neither was Hierome sore solute in this matter whereof he speaketh vnder a cloude and in an Allegorie as it is playne where he saith the bodies that were raised at the resurrection of Christ were seene in the heauenly Ierusalem whereas it is certaine they were seene only in the earthly Ierusalem actually But he meaneth the effect of Christes redemption was acknowledged either in the Catholike Churche which is Ierusalem aboue in one sence or else that they shal be seene in the new Ierusalem blessed felicitie of the godly at the worldes end whereof a testimonie was giuen in that sight of their appearing and particuler resurrection knowen at Ierusalem on earth But you cite an other place out of Tertullian lib. 4. aduersus Marcionē and in the margent you say Loco citato but I wote not where And these be Tertullians wordes if you be an honest man I knowe that the bosome of Abraham was no heauenly place but onely the higher hell or the higher parte of hell I see you will bee as bolde with the auncient doctours workes as you are with my poore writinges whome you make to saye euen what you liste In the last Section before you sayde S. Augustine Epistol 99. de gen ad lit Lib. 12. Cap. 33. Doubted whether Abrahams bosome were called hell Quod si nusquam c. If it bee neuer reade in the holy Scriptures scilicet that hell is taken in the good parte verily that bosome of Abraham that is the habitation of a certaine secrete reste is not to bee beleeued to be any parte of hell And againe by reason of the infinit Chaos Satis vt opinor appareat It may appeare as I thinke sufficiently that the bosome of that so greate felicitie is not a certaine parte and as it were a member of hell In the other place he speaketh to the same effect vpon the same ground that he neuer findeth in the Scriptures hell taken in good parte and cap. 34. where he proueth that paradise is heauen he sayth Quanto magis ergo How much more then may that bosome of Abraham after this life be called paradise This sayth Augustine and much more to this purpose wherein I thought to haue forborne you but that you come vpon vs still with newe forgeries Tertullian in the booke by you quoted pag. 274 of Frob. printed 1550 thus writeth Sed Marcion aliorsum cogit c. But Marcion driueth it another way so forsooth that he determineth both the rewardes of the Creator either of torment or of refreshing to be layd vp for them in hel which haue obeyed the law and the Prophets But of Christ and his God he defineth an heauenly bosome and heauen We will answer and euen by this selfe same Scripture conuincing his blindnesse which against hel discerneth this Abrahams bosom to the poore man For one thing is hell as I thinke and
ouer hell or ouer the graue that is ouer death and so the Prophet should say death twise and Hell not at all FVLK 16. S. Hierom whom you quote in the margent to proue that all the Catholike Doctors vnderstoode this text of Osee of Christes descending into hell and thereby reproue our translation which for hell sayeth graue after he hath repeated the wordes of the Apostle 1. Cor. 15. vpon this text thus he concludeth Itaque quod ille in resurrectionem interpretatus est Domini noâ— aliter interpretari nec possumus nec audemus Therefore that which the Apostle hath interpreted of our Lordes resurrection we neither can nor dare interprete otherwise You see therefore by Hieromes iudgement that in this text which is proper of Christes resurrection it is more proper to vse the word of graue than of hell How vainly the same Hierome interpreteth the last wordes of this chapter of spoiling the treasure of euerie vessell that is desireable of Christs deliuering out of hel the most precious vessells of the Saincts c. I am not ignoraunt but we speake of translation of the 14. verse which being vnderstoode of Christes resurrection it argueth that the graue is spoken of rather than hell As for the repetition of one thing twise for vehemencie and certainties sake is no inconuenient thing but commonly vsed in the Scriptures MART. 17. Why my Maisters you that are so wonderful precise translatoures admit that our sauiour Christ descended not into Hel beneath as you say yet I thinke you will grant that he triumphed ouer Hell and was conquerer of the same Why then did it not please you to suffer the Prophet to say so at the least rather than that he had conquest only of death and the graue You abuse your ignorant reader very impudently your owne selues verie damnably not onely in this but in that you make graue and death all one and so where the holy Scripture often ioyneth togither death and Hell as things different and distinct you make them speake but one thing twise idly and superfluously FVLK 17. For our faith of Christs triumphing ouer hell I haue spoken alreadie sufficiently but of the Prophetes meaning beside the wordes them selues the Apostle is best expounder who referreth it to the resurrection and his victorie ouer death which he hath gayned not for him selfe alone but for all his elect Where you say we make graue and death all one it is false We knowe they differ but that one may â—e signified by the other without any idle or superfluous repetition in one verse I referre me to a whole hundred of examples that may be brought out of the Psalmes the Prophetes and the Prouerbes where wordes of the same like or neere significatioÌ„ are twise togither repeated to note the same matter which none but a blasphemous dogge will say to be done idly or superfluously MART. 18. But will you know that you should not confound them but that Mors Infernus which are the wordes of the holy Scripture in all tongues are distinct heare what S. Hierome sayth or if you will not heare because you are of them which haue stopped their eares let the indifferent Christian Reader harken to this holy Doctor and great interpreter of the holy Scriptures according to his singular knowledge in all the learned tongues Vpon the foresaid place of the Prophet after he had spoken of our Sauiour Christes descending into hell and ouercomming of death he addeth Betwene death and hell this is the difference that death is that whereby the soule is separated from the body Hell is the place where soules are included either in rest or else in paines according to the qualitie of their deserts And that death is one thing and Hell is another the Psalmist also declareth saying THERE IS not in death that is mindfull of thee but in Hell who shall confesse to thee And in another place Let death come vpon them and let them goe downe into Hell aliue Thus farre S. Hierom. FVLK 18. He that by the graue vnderstandeth a place to receiue the bodies of the dead and figuratiuely death doth no more confound the wordes of death and the graue then he that by a cup vnderstandeth a vessell to receiue drinke properly and figuratiuely that drinke which is contayned in such a vessell Therefore that you cite out of Hierome maketh nothing against vs for hee him selfe although deceyued by the Septuagintes or rather by the ambiguitie of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which they vse in the signification of the Hebrue worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet by Infernus vnderstandeth them that be In inferno and the dead as wee doe by the worde graue oftentimes As for his opinion of the godly soules in happie hell before Christes death or his interpretation of any other parte of Scripture wee professe not to followe in our translations but as neere as wee can the true significatioÌ„ of the words of holy Scripture with such sence if any thing be doubtfull as the proper circumstances of euery place will lead vs vnto that wee may attayne to the meaning of the holy Ghost MART. 19. By which differences of death and Hell whereof wee must often aduertise the Reader are meant two things death and the going downe of the soule into some receptacle of Hell in that state of the olde Testament at what time the holy Scriptures vsed this phrase so often Now these impudent translators in all these places translate it graue of purpose to confound it and death togither and to make it but one thing which S. Hierom sheweth to be different in the very same sense that we haue declared FVLK 19. The difference of Mors Infernus which Hierome maketh can not alwaies stand as I haue shewed of the hoare heades of Iacob Ioab and Shemei which none but madde men will say to haue descended into a receptacle of soules beside other places of Scripture where Sheol must of necessity signifie a place for the bodie And euen those places of the Psalmes that S. Hierom calleth to witnesse do make against his error For where Dauid sayth Psal. 6. In hell who shall confesse vnto thee How can it be true of the soules of the faithfull being in that holy hell Abrahams bosome Did not Abraham confesse vnto God acknowledge his mercie Did not Lazarus the same did not all the holy soules departed confesse God in Abrahams bosome Were all those blessed soules so vnthankefull that being carried into that place of rest and comfort none of them would coÌ„fesse Gods benefits It is plaine therefore to the confusion of your error that Sheol in that place of Dauid must nedes signifie the graue in which no man doth confesse praise or giue thanks vnto God of whom in death there is no remembraunce Therefore he desireth life and restoring of health that he may praise God in his Church or congregation Likewise in the Psal. 54.
and that the woman sayd I see Gods ascending out of the earth and An olde man is ascended or come vp and that Samuel sayd Why hast thou disquieted me that I should be raysed vp and To morow thou and thy sonnes shall be with me And the booke of Ecclesiasticus sayth that Samuel died and afterward lifted vp his voice out of the earth c. All which the holy Scripture would neuer haue thus expressed whether it were Samuel in deede oâ— not if Saul and the Iewes then had beleeued that their Prophets and Patriarches had bene in heauen about And as for the Hebrew worde they make it as euery boye among the Iewes doth well know as proper a word for Hell as panis is for bread and as vnproper for a graue though so it may be vsed by a figure of speech as Cymba Charontis is Latine for death FVLK 26. If we followed the Iewes in exposition of the Scriptures against Christ we were not so much to be pitied as to be abhorred but if we be content to learne the proprietie of Hebrew wordes of the learned Rabbinsi as Hierom was glad to doe of his Rabbin who as it appeareth by his scholler in some places was not excellently learned there is no cause why any man should pitie vs but them rather that to cloke their ignorance in the Hebrewe tongue pretende as if it were more vnlawfull to learne Hebrew of the Hebrew Rabbins than Latine of Quintilian or Priscian and Greeke of Gaza Suidas and such like That you tell vâ— of the Romishe Rabbins conuerted from Iudaiâ—me to Papistrie is not worth a straw For their argument of Saules and a witches opinion that the deade might be raysed proueth nothing in the worlde that they were in Hell And the sonne of Syrach sheweth him selfe not to be directed by the spirite of God which affirmeth Samuel did lift vp his voice after his death out of the earth contrarye to the iudgement of Catholike Doctors of the Church For that the Scripture speaketh of Samuel raysed by the witche is meant of a wicked spirite counterfetting the shape and similitude of Samuel For the soules of the faithfull and holy Prophets be not at the commaundements of witches but at rest with God where they can not be disquieted As for the authoritie of those vnknowen authors that teach boyes to say Sheol is as proper for hell as panis for bread we may esteeme it to be of as good credit as Charons boate Plutoes pallace and Cerberus three heads c. MART. 27. But what speake I of these doe no the greatest and most auncient Rabbines so to call them the Septuaginta alwayes translate the Hebrew word by the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which is properly hell doe not the Talmudistes and Chaldee paraphrases and Rabbi Salomon Iarhi handling these places of the Psalmes He will deliuer my soule from the hande of Sheol interprete it by Gehinum that is Gehenna hell and yet the Caluinists bring this place for an example that it signifieth graue Likewise vpon this place Let all sinners be turned into SHEOL the foresayde Rabbines interprete it by Gehinum Hell Insomuch that in the Prouerbs and in Iob it is ioyned with Abaddon Where Rabbi Leui according to the opinion of the Hebrewes expoundeth Sheol to be the lowest region of the world a deepe place opposite to heauen whereof it is written If I descended into Hell thou art present and so doth Rabbi Abraham expounde the same worde in chap. 2. Ionâ— FVLK 27. Although the Septuaginta doe alwayes translate Sheol by the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 yet doe they not thereby alwayes vnderstand hel as it is manifest in all those places where the Scripture speaketh of a receptacle of dead bodies But now you will beare vs downe with Rabbins Talmudists and Chaldee paraphrases And firste you saye that all these handling that verse of the 49. Psalme He will deliuer my soule from the hand of Sheol interprete it by Gehinnom that is hell I graunt that Rabbi Ioseph vsing the libertie of a Paraphrast rather than a translator interpreteth the worde by Gehinnom that signifieth hell fire and so the sense is true For God deliuered Dauid from eternall damnation But Rabbi Dauid Chimchi expounding the same place according to the proper signification of Sheol sayeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. The Prophet sayde when he sawe the destruction of the soules of the wicked in their death In the day in which my bodie shall goe downe to Sheol the graue God shall deliuer my soule from the hande of Sheol the graue that my soule shall not perishe with my bodie You see therefore that all the Rabbines be not of your side no nor Rabbi Salomon Iarchi whom you cite For vpon 37. of Genesis verse 35. where Iacob sayth he will goe downe to the graue mourning thus he writeth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Mourning to Sheol according to the plaine and literall sense the interpretation thereof is the grane in my mourning I will be buried and I will not be comforted all my dayes but after the Midrash or exposition not according to the letter it is hell This signe was deliuered by handes or by tradition from the mouth of his power that is from a diuine oracle if not one of my sonnes shall dye in my life time I had confidence that I should not see hell By this saying it is manifest that this Rabbine acknowledged the true and proper translation of this worde Sheol was to the graue although after figuratiue and sometimes fond expositions it was interpreted for hell Likewise you say but vntruly of this verse Psal. 9. v. 18. Let all sinners be turned to Sheol for there the Chaldee Paraphrast retaineth the worde Sheol and doth not giue any other word for it Dauid Chimchi interpreteth it according to the literall sense 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Let the wicked be turned into the graue which is so straung with you to be aunswerable to Sheol although as R. Salomon he sayth it may be vnderstoode of their buriall in hell That Sheol in the Prouerbs Iob is ioyned with abaddoÌ„ it hindreth it not to signify the graue where is the destru ction and consumption of the body And Prou. 15. v. 11. the Chaldee Paraphrast retaineth Sheol which Kabuenaki expoundeth thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. It is sayd of Sheol and Abaddon that Sheol is the graue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and Abaddon is hell which is deeper than the graue c. And although in Iob Rabbi Leui and others expound Sheol for a secret place about the center of the earth which should seeme to be hell yet they say not that this is the proper signification of the word Sheol For in the 21. of Iob. v. 13. the Chaldee Paraphrast for Sheol interpreteth Kebureta the graue and in the 14. verse 13. beith kebureta the house of the graue and 17. v. 12. and
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall not giue honour to God where it is certaine that by that worde is meant the graue seeing the soules of the righteous that were in Abrahams bosome did praise God and moreouer he maketh it plaine that he speaketh of the deade bodies when he sayth their spirite is taken out of their bowels MART. 32. And for the Latine worde it is the like case for all the worlde and if a man will aske but his childe that commeth from the Grammar what is Infernus he will say Hell and not graue what is Latine for graue He will aunswere Sepulchrum or monumentum But neuer Infernus vnlesse one of these Caluinisticall translatours taught him so to deceiue his father FVLK 32. I hope they that be wise will beleeue S. Augustine rather than you that the worde Inferi which is the same that Infernus hath diuerse and manifolde vnderstandings in the Scripture as I haue declared before sect 21. But with the Latine word Infornus we haue litle to doe which translate not out of Latine but out of Hebrue or Greeke MART. 33. Nowe then to drawe to a conclusion of this their corruption also in their Englishe translation whereas the Hebrue and Greeke and Latine wordes doe most properly and vsually signifie Hell and both Greeke and Latine interpreters precisely in euerie place vse for the Hebrue worde that one Greeke worde and that one Latine worde which by all custome of speaking writing signifie Hell it had bene the part of sincere and true meaning translatours to haue translated it also in English alwayes by the word Hell and afterward to haue disputed of the meaning thereof whether and when it is to be taken for Hell or graue or lake or death or any such thing As i◠one place they haue done it very exactly indifferently namely when Ionas sayth c. 2. v. 2. out of the Whales belly Out of the belly of hell cryed I and thou heardest my voice So all translate it and well whatsoeuer it signifie in this place They thinke that Hell here signifieth nothing else but the Whales belly and the affliction of Ionas and so the worde may signifie by a Metaphoricall speech as when we say in English It is a hell to liue thus and therefore no doubt they did here translate it so to insinuate that in other places it might as well signifie graue as here the Whales belly FVLK 33. Your conclusion is as good as your premisses because the Greeke and Latine Interpretors had before vs translated amisse which gaue occasion to diuerse errours therefore we also knowing the true signification of the worde muste haue followed them in wrong and doubtfull translation and afterward debated the meaning of the seuerall places But in the margent you tell vs that such Catholikes as haue translated the word Sheol for a graue haue also done amisse Pardon vs M. Martin we take you for no such learned Hebritian that you should controll Pagninus Isidorus Clarius and all other Hebritians of this time vpon suche slender sleeuelesse reasons as you haue brought hetherto And you shewe an intollerable proude stomake that being a man so litle seene in the Hebrue tongue as you shewe your selfe to be you should condemne such graue and learned persons of your owne side of rashnesse or ignorance For you make them in the case of chaunce medley that haue translated sheol a graue Thinke you the deputies of the Councell of Trent had no more discretion in perusing Isidorus Clarius correctiō of the Bible than to suffer him to chaunge life safetie into chance medly and manslaughter you may in time to come if you apply your studie proue learned in that language wherin as yet you are but a smatterer not worthy to be heard against so many so learned so famous professors of the Hebrew tongue Iewes and Christians Protestants and Papistes authors of Grammars Dictionaries and translations But in the second of Ionas it pleaseth you well that our Geneua Bible translateth this word Hell out of the bellie of hell c. but you like not that they shoulde interprete it a metaphoricall Hell or the extremitie of affliction whereinto the Prophet was brought where you make it no doubt what they would insinuate you shew your selfe more bold to affirme than ready or able to proue MART. 34. But then they shoulde haue translated it also hell in other places as they did in this and afterward haue interpreted it graue in their commentaries and not presumptuously to straiten and limite the word of the holy Ghost to their priuate sense and interpretation and to preiudice the auncient learned holy fathers which looke farremore deepely and spiritually into this prophecie than to Ionas or the Whale our Sauiour himselfe also applying it to his owne person and to his being in the hart of the earth three dayes and three nights And therefore S. Hierome sayth This belly of Hell according to the storie is the Whales bellye but it may much better be referred to the persō of Christ which vnder the name of Dauid singeth in the Psalme Thou shalt not leaue my soule in Hell Who was in Hel aliue and free among the dead And that which our Sauiour saith The Sonne of man shall be in the harte of the earth he doth interprete of his soule in hell For as the hart is in the middes of the body so is Hel said to be in the middes of the earth FVLK 34. They haue in other places trāslated it according to the proprietie of the word if in this place they had done so likewise I see not what faulte they had committed Certaine it is that the whales belly did rather resemble a graue wherein Ionas seemed to be buried than hell the receptacle of separated soules It is the office of a translator not so much to regarde what other haue written vpon the place he translateth be they auncient be they godly be they learned as what sense the interpretation of the wordes will beste beare Without preiudice therefore of any mans credite the truth in this case must be sought out That you report out of Hierom vpon this place sheweth that both the Hebrue word sheol and the Latin infernus are not proper peculiar for hel as in other places you tell vs. That S. Hierom interpreteth the saying of Christ Math. 12. v. 40. of his being in the harte of the earth to be meant of his being in hel which is said to be in the middest of the earth it is confuted by the wordes of our Sauiour Christ who sayeth that he shall be there three dayes and three nightes that is all the time of his death which is true of his bodie in the graue but not of his soule in hell for both he sayde he would be that day in Paradise and you your selues holde that he made no tariaunce in hell Beside that it is a phantasticall opinion to limit hell
into the middest of the earth which is rather a place without the sensible worlde than any dungeon within the earth MART. 35. Thus then presupposing as we must that Ionas speaketh in the person of our Sauiour Christ the principall sense is not of the whales belly but of that hell whether our Sauiour Christ descended and from whence he deliuered the fathers of the old Testament him selfe ascending into heauen as their King and generall capitaine before them and opening the way of heauen vnto them as is signified in an other Prophet and was the first that entred heauen FVLK 35. That which Ionas spake was first true of his owne person and then of Christ as Ionas was in this a resemblaunce of him But by this similitude of Christ remaining so many daies and nightes in the harte of the earth as Ionas did in the whales bellie it is manifest that he speaketh of his bodie remaining in the graue not of his soule tarying in hell Wherfore the descending of Christ into Limbus patrum hath no manner of hold eyther of the saying of Christ in the Gospell Math. 12. or of Ionas in his praier Ion. 2. MART. 36. Against all which truthes and euery point thereof these translatours are so watchefull and warie that where the Apostle saith Christ began and dedicated vnto vs the way into heauen they say in their English translations with full consent nothing else bus He prepared Why are they falsâ—â— here than their Maisters Caluin Beza Illyricus who reade Dedicauit Is there nothing in the Greeke word but bare preparation where be these etymologistes now that can straine and wring other wordes to the vttermost aduantage of their heresie and here are content for the like aduantage to dissemble the force of this word which by all vse and propertie signifieth to make new to begin a thing to be the first author to dedicate as S. Augustine might haue taught them and their Lexicons and the Scriptures in many places This translation no doubt is not done sincerely and indifferently of them but for their owne deceitfull purpose as is all the rest When Sainct Paule speaketh of preparation onely they knowe right well that he vseth the vsuall word to prepare as He hath prepared them a city and wheresoeuer is signified preparation onely let them bring vs one example where it is expressed by the other Greeke word which now we speake of FVLK 36. I grauÌ„t the translations had bene more proper and agreable to the Greeke worde to haue said which he hath dedicated or by dedication prepared But here is no fraude against any trueth or errour of yours For the Apostle speaketh not of the way by which we ascend immediatly to heauen but of the way by which we haue free accesse to God through faith without the vailes and ceremonies of the law as it is manifest by his exhortation And whereas you said before that Christ ascending into heaueÌ„ to those whom he had brought out of hell you must tell vs then where they remained all those fortie dayes that were betwene his resurrection and ascention except you will make two ascensions of Christ into heauen one in soule alone the other in bodie soule which hath not bene heard of in the church before For that his soule was first receyued into heauen or Paradise immediatly after his death it proueth not an ascension seeing the same was common to him with other saincts Againe seing the mysterie of our redeÌ„ptioÌ„ is diuided into the death resurrectioÌ„ of Christ and that by his death wee are deliuered from sinnes by his resurrection wee are iustified if you will not allowe his death to haue purchased equall redemption to the fathers of the old Testament and vs but measure the vertue therof by the instance of time in which it was actually performed you must stay your prisoners from entring into the kingdome of heauen at least vntill his resurrectioÌ„ For none can enter into the kingdome of heauen but iustified persons Seing therefore that iustification dependeth vpon his resurrection you must eyther graunt that it was communicated to the fathers in their time before his incarnation or else you must stay them from entring into heauen before they were iustified by his resurrection The place of Micha 2 that you quote is nothing to the purpose of Christes ascending For there the Prophete threateneth the Israelites with the violence of their enimies the Chaldees whome God him selfe would prosper against them to haue the victorie and to driue them into captiuitie MART. 37. But it is of more importaunce which foloweth and appartâ—yning altogither to this controuersie Hebr. 5. v 7. your trauslation is thus in the very English Bible that nowe is reade in your Churches Which in daies of his flesh offered vp prayers with strong crying vnto him that was able to saue him from death and was heard in that which he feared Is the Greeke here In that whiche he feared You know that no Grammar nor Lexicon doth allowe you this translation But eyther thus for reuerence or as one of your owne English Bibles hath it because of his reuerence FVLK 37. Your first quarrel against the truest translation of that word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 5. is that it sayeth in that which he feared whereas the Greeke is from feare or out of feare which afterwarde you confesse though distant in worde yet to be agreeable in sense The second that in the margent our traÌ„slation is against Christes descending into hell How so I pray you doe you according to your translation expound that worde of Christes descending into hell no verily But we doe expounde it of his descending into hell therefore our translation is to proue Christes descending into hell and if our exposition were not true yet euen your opinion of Christes descent were nothing hindred thereby you wil say that by our expositioÌ„ we exclude his descent after his death we do in deede in such sort as your errour teacheth altogither without the Scripture For if there had bene an historie of Christs going into hell deliuering the Patriarkes and others the faithfull from thence al the EuaÌ„gelists would not haue omitted so notable a matter and that also an article of our beleefe MART. 38. Howe is it then that in your later English Bibles you chaunged your former translation froÌ„ better to worse or who taught you so to translate it for sooth the Heretike Beza whose translation you folow for the most parte in your later Bibles though here in sense rather than in worde And who taught Beza he saith Caluin was the first that euer found out this interpretation And why surely for defense of no lesse blasphemie than this that our Sauiour IESVS Christe vpon the Crosse was horribly afraid of damnation that he was in the very sorrowes and torments of the damned and that this was his descending into
not be true that the lambe was slaine since the beginning of the worlde seeing without violence you can not distract 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 from the lambe slaine whom it doth immediatly follow MART. 45. But if in points of controuersie betweene vs they will say diuers pointing is of no importance they knowe the contrarie by the example of auncient heretikes which vsed this meane also to serue their false hereticall purpose If they say our vulgar Latine sense pointeth it so let them professe before God and their conscience that they doe it of reuerence to the saide auncient latine text or because it is indifferent and not for any other cause and for this one place we wil admit their answere FVLK 45 We say that wrong pointing may greatly alter the sense but good composition and placing of wordes in a sentence is a good rule to direct pointing where it is either lacking or falsly signed Wee refuse â—ot the testimonie of the vulgar Latine where it agreeth with the truth of the Greeke or Hebrewe yea before God our consciences we reuerence it as a monument of some antiquitie from which wee neither doe nor are willing to dissent except the same dissent from the originall text Otherwise the truth of this assertion that Christ was slaine from the beginning of the world hath not only testimonie of the ancient fathers but also may bee confirmed out of the Scripture For by the obedience of Christ Saint Paule Rom. 5. teacheth that many are iustified meaning all the elect of God who except Christes death had bene effectuall to them before he suffered actually on the crosse must haue gone not into Limbâ— patrum but into hell Diabolorum which is the place appointed for all them that are not iustified freely by the grace of God through the redemption of Christ Iesus whom God before hath set foorth to be a propitiatorie in his bloud Rom. 3. v. 24. c. The title of this chapter threatneth a discouerie of heretical translations against Purgatorie especially but in the whole discourse thereof which is shamefull long one containing 45. sections there is not one place noted against Purgatorie Amphora coepit institui currenâ—e rota cur vrceus exit CHAP. VIII Hereticall translation concerning IVSTIFICATION Martin ABout the article of iustification as it hath many branches and their errours therein bee manifolde so are their English translations accordingly many wayes false and hereticall First against iustification by good workes and by keeping the commaundements they suppresse the very name of iustification in all such places where the woorde signifieth the commandements or the Lawe of God which is both in the olde and newe Testament most common and vsuall namely in the bookes of Moses in the Psalme 118. that beginneth thus Beati immaculati in the Psalme 147. ver 19. 1. Mach. 1. ver 51. and cap. 2. v. 21. Luke 1. v. 6. Rom. 2. v. 26. In all which places and the like where the Greeke signifieth iustices and iustifications most exactly according as our vulgar latine traÌ„slateth iustitias iustificationes there the English translations say iointly with one coÌ„sent ordinances or statuts For example Rom. 2. If the vncircumcision keepe the ORDINANCES of the lawe shall it not bee counted for circumcision And Luc. 1 6. They were both righteous before God walking in all the commaundementes and ORDINANCES of the Lord blamelesse Why translate you it ordinances and auoide the terme iustifications is it because you would followe the Greeke I beseech you is not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iust 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to be iustified 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 iustifications or iustices In the old Testament you might perhappes pretend that you follow the Hebrue word and therefore there you translate statutes or ordinances But euen there also are not the seuentie Greeke interpreters sufficient to teache you the signification of the Hebrue word who alwaies interprete it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in English iustifications Fulke THese matters were driuen so thinne in the first chapter that you shall sooner presse out bloud than any more probable matter For the olde Testament which we translate out of the Hebrue you your selfe doe set foorth our aunswere that we giue the Englishe of Chukim when we say ordinaunces or statutes and not of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which of the Septuaginta is vsed in the same sense for preceptes and commaundementes as you your selfe confesse cap. 1. sect 50. that verie often in the Scripture it signifieth commaundementes But the Septuaginta you say are sufficient to teache vs the interpretation of the Hebrewe worde who alwaies interprete it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 If they had alwayes interpreted it so it is not sufficient to teache vs then there needed none other translation but according to theirs then must you depart from your vulgar translation which in many things departeth from them But where you say they alwaies interprete the Hebrue word Chukim by 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is false For Exod. 18. v. 20. they translate it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Praecepta which your vulgar translation calleth Ceremonias ceremonies as it doeth also Gen. 26. v. 5. where the Septuaginta translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 by which you see that iustification is not alwayes the Englishe for the Greeke worde which the Septuaginta doe vse Also Num. 9. v. 3. for Chukoth they translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the lawe which the vulgar Latine calleth Ceremonias ceremonies and for the Hebrewe worde Misphatim they giue 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 comparation the vulgar Latin iustification by which you may see how your traÌ„slatour vseth euen the Latin word that you make so much a do about Likewise in the foureteenth verse of the same Chapter the Septuaginta translate Chukath twise togeather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and that which the vulgar Latine calleth iustification of the passeouer the Greeke calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the order of the pascall Deut. 4. your vulgar Latine turneth Chukim thrise Ceremonias ceremonies And Deut. 5. twise and Deut. 6. twise Deut. 7. once and so commonly almost in euerie chapter But in the chap. 11. v. 32. the Greeke for Chukim hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 where as in the beginning of the chapter he had 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latine in both Ceremonias ceremonies By which it is euident what the Greekes and Latines meant by those wordes chap. 20. for this Hebrue word and in an other the Greeke hath nothing but 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commaundementes So hath he 1. Reg. 2. v. 3. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 coÌ„mandements Also 1. Reg. 8. v. 58. for Chukim he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and for Misphatim he hath 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 as he hath it twise in the nexte verse where Salomon prayeth that God will defende his cause and the cause of his people Israell
a distinction of iust and righteous MART. 5 And certaine it is if there were no sinister meaning they would in no place auoide to say iust iustice iustification where both the Greeke and Latine are so woorde for word as for example 2. Tim. 48. In all their Bibles Henceforth there is laid vp for me a crowne of RIGHTEOVSNES which the Lorde the RIGHTEOVS iudge shall GIVE mee at that day And againe 2. Thess. 1. Reioyce in tribulation which is a token of the RIGHTEOVS IVDGEMENT of God that you may be counted worthie of the kingdome of God for which yee suffer For it is a RIGHTEOVS THING with God to recompence tribulation to them that trouble you and to you that are troubled rest with vs in the reuelation of our Lorde IESVS from heauen And againe Heb 6. 10. God is not VNRIGHTEOVS to forget your good woorke and labour c. These are very pregnant places to discouer their false purpose in concealing the worde iustice in all their Bibles For if they will say that iustice is not an vsuall English word in this sense and therefore they say righteousnesse yes I trow iust and vniust are vsuall and well knowen Why theÌ„ would they not say at the least in the places alleadged God the IVST iudge A token of the IVST IVDGEMENT of God It is a IVST thing with God God is not VNIVST to forget c Why is it not at the least in one of their English Bibles â—eeing so both in Greeke and Latine FVLK 5. Certaine it is that no Englishman knoweth the difference betweene iust and righteous vniust vnrighteous sauing that righteousnesse righteous are the more familiar English wordes And that we meane no fraude betweene iustice and righteousnesse to apply the one to faith the other to workes reade Rom. 10. v. 34. 5. and 6. of the Geneua translation where you shall see the righteousnesse of the law the righteousnesse of faith Reade also against this impudent lie in the same translatioÌ„ Luc. 1. Zacharie and Elizabeth were both iust Cap. 2. Simeon was iust Mathew the firste Ioseph a iust man and else where often times and without any difference in the worlde from the worde righteous Who euer heard a difference made betweene a iuste iudge and a righteous iudge this trifling is too too shameful abusing of mens patience that shall vouchsafe to reade these blotted papers MART. 6. Vnderstand gentle Reader and marke well that if S. Paules wordes were truely translated thus A crowne of IVSTICE is laid vp for me which our Lord the IVST iudge will RENDER vnto me at that day and so in the other places it would inferre that men are iustly crowned in heauen for their good workes vpon earth and that iâ— is Gods iustice so to do and that he wil do so because he is a iust iudge and because he wil shew his IVST IVDGEMENT and he wil not forget so to do because he is not vniust as the auncient fathers namely the Greeke doctors S. Chrysostom Theodorete and Oecumenius vpon these places do interprete and expound In so much that Oecumenius saith thus vpon the foresaid place to the Thessalonians 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 c. See here that to suffer for Christ procureth the kingdome of heaueÌ„ according to IVST IVDGEMENT and not according to grace Which least the Aduersarie might take in the worse parte as though it were onely Gods iustice or iuste iudgement and not his fauour or grace also S. Augustine excellently declareth how it is both the one and the other to witte his grace and fauour and mercie in waking vs by his grace to liue and beleeue well and so to be worthy of heauen his iustice and iust iudgement to render and repaye for those workes whiche him selfe wrought in vs life euerlasting Which he expresseth thus How should he render or repay as a iust iudge vnlesse he had giuen it as a merciful father Where S. Augustine vrgeth the wordes of repaying as due and of being A IVST IVDGE therefore Both which the said translatours corrupt not onely saying righteous iudge for iust iudge but that he will giue a crowne whiche is of a thing not due for that which is in the Greeke He will render or repay whiche is of a thing due and deserued and hath relation to workes going before for the which the crowne is repaied He saide not saith Theophylacte vpon this place hee will giue but hee will render or repay as a certaine deâ—te For he being iust will define and limite the reward according to the labours The crowne therefore is due debte because of the iudges iustice So saith he FVLK 6. What so euer you may cauill vpon the wordes iuste and iustice you may doe the same with as great aduauntage vppon the wordes righteous and righteousnesse That God as a iust iudge rewardeâ—â— good workes of them that are iustified freely by his grace by fayth without workes with a crowne of iustice it proueth not eyther iustification by workes or the merite or worthinesse of mennes workes but all dependeth vppon the grace of God who promiseth this rewarde of his meere mercie and of the worthinesse and merites of Christe whiche is our iustice whereby wee beyng iustified before God our workes also whiche hee hath giuen vs are rewarded of his iustice yet in respecte of Christes merites and not in respecte of the worthinesse of the workes Againe God is not vnmindefull of his promise to rewarde our workes for then he should be vniuste he is iuste therefore to performe what so euer he hath promised though wee nothing deserue it Neyther hath Chrysostome or Theodorete any other meaning That you cite out of Oecumenius a late writer in comparison is blasphemous against the grace of God neyther is S. Augustine that liued 500. yeares before him a sufficient interpreter of his saying to excuse him With Augustine we say God crowneth his giftes not our merites And as he acknowledgeth Gods mercie and also his iustice in rewarding our workes so do we Where 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is translated he wil giue I confesse it had bene more proper and agreeable to the Greeke to haue saide hee will render or repaie which yet is wholy of mercie in respecte of vs or our deseruing but of iustice in respecte of his promises and of Christes merites vnto which is rendred and repayed that whiche hee deserued for vs. The crowne therefore is due debte because it is promised to vs for Christes sake not because any workes of ours are able to purchase it MART. 7. Whiche speaches beyng moste true as beyng the expresse wordes of holy Scripture yet wee know howe odiously the Aduersaries may and doe misconster them to the ignoraunt as though wee chalenged heauen by our owne workes and as though wee made God bounde to vs. Whiche wee doe not God forbidde But because he hath prepared good workes for vs as the Apostle
saith to walke in them and dothe by his grace cause vs to doe them and hath promised lyfe euerlasting for them and telleth vs in all his holy Scriptures that to doe them is the waye to heauen therefore not presuming vpon our owne workes as our owne or as of our selues but vpon the good workes wrought through Gods grace by vs his seely instruments wee haue great confidence as the Apostle speaketh and are assured that these workes proceeding of his grace be so acceptable to him that they are esteemed and be worthie and meritorious of the kingdome of heauen Against which truth let vs see further their hereticall corruptions FVLK 7. If you would abide by your first protestation we should not neede to contend much aboute this question But after you haue in the beginning magnified the grace and mercy of God and abased your owne merites you come backe againe with a subtill compasse to establish your owne free will the worthinesse of your workes and your merite of the kingdome of heauen First you say God telleth vs in all his holy Scriptures that to doe good workes is the way to heauen In deede to fulfill the lawe is to deserue heauen But who so euer is guiltie of sinne must seeke an other way than by good workes to come to heaueÌ„ namely to Iesus Christ who is the onely way to heauen the truth and the life by whose bloud when he is purged from his sinne and reconciled vnto God and the kingdome of heauen purchased for him then he hath the way of good workes appointed him to walke in towarde the same Secondly you say you presume not vpon your owne workes as your owne or as of your selues but vpon the good workes wrought by Gods grace by you his seely instrumentes you haue great confidence Thus while you would seeme to flie from Pelagiaâ—isme you fall into flatte Pharisaisme For you trust that you are righteous in your selues though not as of your selues Suche was the Pharisee of whom Christe telleth the parable which ascribing all his workes to the grace of God had confideÌ„ce in them that he was iust before God by them God I thaÌ„ke thee saith the Pharisee He acknowledgeth the grace of God as author of all his workes yet against such as he was Christe telleth that parable And whereas you call the Apostle Heb. 10. to witnesse of your errour you doe him great wrong for he speaketh not of any confidence to bee had vpon good workes wrought by the grace of God by vs but in the newe couenant of remission of sinnes by the sacrifice of Christes death by whom we haue accesse to God that we may be acceptable to him not for any meritorious workes wrought by vs but by the only oblation of his bodie once for all by which he hath made perfect for euer those that are sanctified CHAP. IX Hereticall translation against MERITES or MERITORIOVS WORKES and the REVVARDE for the same Martin WHen they translate Rom. 8. 18. thus I am certainly perswaded that the afflictions of this time ARE NOT VVORTHIE OF THE GLORIE which shall be shewed vpon vs doe they not meane to signifie to the Reader must it not needes so sound in his eares that the tribulations of this life be they neuer so great though suffered for Christ yet doe not merite nor deserue the heauenly glorie but in the Greeke it is farre otherwise I will not stand vpon their first wordes I am certainely perswaded which is a farre greater asseueration than the Apostle vseth and I maruell how they could so translate that Greeke worde but that they were disposed not onely to translate the Apostles wordes falsly against meritorious workes but also to auouch and affirme the same lustily with much more vehemencie of wordes than the Apostle speaketh Well let vs pardon them this fault and examine the wordes following Where the Greeke sayth not as they translate with full consent in all their English Bibles The afflictions are not worthy of the glorie c. but thus The afflictions of this time are not equall correspondent or comparable to the glorie to come because the afflictions are short the glorie is eternall the afflictions small and few in comparison the glorie great and aboundant aboue measure Fulke ALthough an inuincible argument against merites and desert of good workes may be drawen out of this text yet the meaning of the translators is to shewe no more than the Apostle saith that the heauenly glorie is incomparably greater than all the tribulations of this life And this the Apostle speaketh not doubtiÌ„gly as our english word I suppose doth signifie when a man may be deceaued in his supposel but he auoucheth it coÌ„stantly as a thing which being wel considered with the reasons thereof he concludeth of it with certaintie And so doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie in this place and in diuerse other by the iudgement of better Grecians than Gregorie Martin will be these seuen yeares as Rom. 3. 28. where the Apostle hauing discussed the controuersie of iustification by faith or workes concludeth as of a certaintie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we determine therefore that a man is iustified by fayth without the workes of the lawe Likewise Rom. 6. v. 11. after he hath proued that sanctification is necessary to all them that shal or haue put on the iustice of Christ he sayth with great asseueration vnto the Romanes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Make you ful account therefore that you are dead to sinne not vncertainly thinke or suppose it so to be Therefore for the translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place we wil accept no pardon of you it is better translated than your wit or learning serueth you to vnderstand Now let vs come to the other wordes 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are not worthy of the glorie Where you say it should be not equall correspondent or comparable to the glorie Verily those words we vse haue none other sense in this place than the wordes which you supply vs withall but our wordes doe expresse the moste vsuall signification of the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 euen as your vulgar Latine doth calling it in the same sense condignae which you in your owne translation dare not render equall correspondent or comparable but condigne lest following the sense you might be accused to forsake the word euen so we thinke it best where the vsuall signification of the word will beare the sense in our English to reteine the same and not to change it MART. 2. This is the Greeke phrase and the Apostles meaning which we neede not greatly to proue because their owne Doctors Caluin and Beza doe so interprete it and therefore wonder it were that the Geneua English Bibles also should forsake their maisters and follow the errour of the other English Bibles but that they thought the more voices the better In the meane time the people
speache proceeding of the sayed Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Omnis ponderatio non est digna continentis animae Which the Englishe Bibles thus There is no weight to be compared vnto a minde that can rule it selfe or with a continent minde FVLK 4. You can not vse the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but it will include a comparison whether it be with a Genitiue case as in the examples you bring or with an Accusatiue as in this text of S. Paule And euen so the Englishe word worthie doth comprehende an equalitie in good or euill Wherefore the sense is all one whether you say in this text equall or worthie but that the vsuall signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is worthie as no man will deny that is not past all shame MART. 5. And if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 with a genitiue case signifie a comparison and them selues so translate it in all their Bibles should not 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the Apostles phrase much more be so translated I appeale to their owne consciences Againe if here in Ecclesiasticus they say not according to the Greeke wordes There is no weight worthie of a continent mind because they would by an Englishe phrase expresse the comparison is it not more than euident that when they translate the Apostle by the very same wordes Worthie of the glorie c. they know it can not and they meane it should not signifie a comparison I can not sufficiently expresse but only to the learned skilful reader their partiall and hereticall dealing Briefly I say they translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not to be compared with a continent mind being in Greeke word for word Not worthie of a continent minde and contrariwise they translate in S. Paule 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Not worthie of the glorie to come being in the Greeke Not to be compared to the glorie to come according to the verie like Latine phrase by dignus Eccl. 6. Amico fideli nulla est comparatio non est DIGNA ponderatio auri argenti CONTRA BONITATEM FIDEI that is according to their owne translation A faithfull friende hath no peere weight of golde and siluer is not to be compared to the goodnesse of his faith FVLK 5. If the Englishe word worthy did not signifie a cōparison as wel as the Greke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it were somwhat that you say but seeing one signifieth as much as the other there is no more sauour in your disputatiō than in an egge without salt When we say there is no weight of gold to be cōpared to a continent minde it is all one as if we said worthy of a continent minde for we meant to be compared in goodnes price excellency c. And therefore you speake out of measure falsely impudentlye when you say we meane not that the worde worthie in this text of S. Paule should signifie a comparison for it is not possible that it shoulde signifie otherwise Doth not the Geneua note in the margent say or of like valure If you be so blinde that you can not see a comparison in the worde worthie at the least shore vp your eyes and beholde it in those wordes of like or equall value For all comparison is either in quantitie or qualitie And where you say that you can not expresse your conceite but onely to the learned there is none so meanely learned but they may well laugh at your foolish and vnlearned trifling MART. 6. Nowe if they will say though their translation of Sainct Paules words be not so exact and commodious yet the sense and meaning is all one for if these present afflictions be not equall or comparable to the glorie to come then neither are they worthie of it nor can deserue or merite it let the Christian Reader marke the difference First their Beza and Caluine telleth them that the Apostle speaketh of the one and not of the other Secondly the passions and afflictions that Christ our Sauiour suffered all his life were not comparable to the eternall glorie which he obtained thereby yet did he thereby deserue and merite eternall glorie not only for him selfe but for all the worlde yea by the least affliction he suffered did he deserue all this Vnlesse you will deny also that he merited and deserued his glorie which your opinion a man might verie well gather by some of your false translations but that you would thinke vs too suspicious which perhappes we wil examine hereafter Thirdly the present pleasure of aduoutrie during a mans life is not comparable to the eternall tormentes of hell fire and yet it doth merite and deserue the same Fourthly the Apostle by making an incomparable difference of the glorie to come with the afflictions of this time doth as Sainct Chrysostom sayth exhort them the more vehemently and moue them to sustaine all things the more willingly but if he sayd as they trāslate The afflictions are not worthie of heauen you are neuer the nearer heauen for them onely beleeue this had not bene to exhorte them but to discourage them Fiftly the Apostle when he will else where encourage them to suffer sayeth plainely Our tribulation which presently is for a moment and light WORKETH aboue measure exceedingly an eternall weight of glorie in vs. FVLK 6. We say our translation both in word and sense is the same in Englishe that S. Paule did write in Greeke As for the argument against merite or desert which doeth followe thereof we affirme that it is as necessarily gathered of the wordes equall or comparable or correspondent as of the word worthie But to ouerthrow this argument you haue fiue reasons The first is of the authoritie of Beza and Caluine which you say telleth vs that the Apostle speaketh of the one and not of the other To this I aunswere that they both affirme the consequence against merits out of this text although it be not the Apostles direct purpose to abase the merite of workes by comparison of the excellencie of the glorie To your seconde argument I aunswere that though the afflictions that Christ our Sauiour suffered were not comparable in respect of the length of time with the eternall glorie that he obtayned thereby yet in respecte of the excellencie of his person and the perfection of his obedience they were comparable and of equall value tó deserue eternall glorie according to the iustice of God by which one mans disobedience was sufficient to eternall condemnation Rom. 5. What the least of his afflictions separated from all the rest was in valure I haue not learned out of the Scripture onely I thinke he suffered nothing superfluously nor lesse than was needefull to aunswer the iustice of God Your other fonde surmises I omitte vntill you expresse them To your third argument I saye that one acte of adulterie is worthy of damnation and deserueth eternall torment not by comparison of the short pleasure
with infinite paine but because it is a sinne committed against the maiestie of the eternall God and therefore is worthy of eternall punishment For the sinne is to be measured after the excellencie of the person against whome it is committed Therefore that word which being spoken against a poore man is a light fault as to say he is a knaue the same being spoken against a Lorde is an hainous offence and deserueth the pillorie hut being spoken against a King is high treason and is worthy of death Seeing therefore the eternall maiestie of God is contemned in euery sinne that sinne doth iustly deserue eternall torments Fourthly it is true that the Apostle doth exhort vs cheerefully to abide the small and momentarie afflictions of this life in respect that they shall be rewarded with incomparable glorie But hereof it followeth not that the glorie is deserued by short and small sufferings but is giuen of the bountifull liberalitie of God to them that for his sake patiently suffer such small afflictions Therefore if it be an incouragement for a man to labour to heare that he shall be payd his hyre as much as his worke deserueth it is a much greater incouragement for him to heare that he shal receiue a thousand times more than his labour deserueth The words you adde you are neuer the nearer heauen onely beleeue are yours and none of ours for we say with the Apostle we must suffer with Christ if we will reigne with him and the patient suffering of the faithful is nothing repugnant to the iustification before God by faith onely To the last argument of the Apostles authoritie I aunswer our patient suffering worketh infinite weight of glorie not by the worthinesse merite or desert of our suffering but by the bountifull liberalitie of God who hath promised so incomparable rewarde to small tribulation suffered for his sake Wherefore all your fiue reasons notwithstanding our translation is sounde and true MART. 7. See you not a comparison betwene short and eternall light tribulation and exceding weightie glorie and yet that one also worketh the other that is causeth purchaseth and deserueth the other For like as the litle seede being not comparable to the great tree yet causeth it and bringeth it forth so our tribulations and good workes otherwise incomparable to eternall glorie by the vertue of Gods grace working in vs worketh purchaseth and causeth the sayd glorie For so they knowe verie well the Greeke worde importeth though here also they translate it most falsely prepareth Bib. an 1577. FVLK 7. We see the comparison well but we see not that worketh or causeth is all one with purchaseth and deserueth Your comparison of seede and tribulation is not like For in the seede is the formall cause of the greate tree so is not the formall cause of eternall glorie in our tribulation But as if an Emperour for one dayes valiant seruice in warre doe giue vnto his sonne one of his kingdomes we may truly say that dayes seruice wrought him this great rewarde or caused him to be aduaunced to this kingdome but we can not say truely it purchased or deserued a kingdome for then euery one that serued as well as he deserued the like rewarde so is the rewarde of eternall life whiche is the gift of God incomparably greater than our tribulatiō not by the desert of the sufferer but by liberalitie of the giuer That translation that vseth the worde of preparing is not so proper according to the worde but it differeth not muche in sense shewing howe those afflictions do worke or cause namely by preparing making vs conformable to the sufferings of Christ. MART. 8. Lastly for moste manifest euidence that these present tribulations and other good workes are meritorious and worthie of the ioyes to come though not comparable to the same you shal heare the holy Doctors say both in one passage or sentence S. Cyprian thus O what maner of day shal come my brethren when our Lord shal recoūt the MERITES of euery one and paie vs the rewarde or stipend of faith and deuotion Ep. 56. here are merites and the rewarde for the same It foloweth in the saide Doctor What glorie shall it be and how great ioie to be admitted to see God so to be honoured that thou receiue the ioy of eternall life with Christe thy Lorde God to receiue there that which neither eie hath seen nor eare hath heard nor hath ascended into the hart of man for that we shall receiue greater things than here eyther wee doe or suffer the Apostle pronounceth saying The passions of this time are not condigne or comparable to the glorie to come Here we see that the stipend or reward of the merits aforesayd are incomparably greater than the sayd merits FVLK 8. For lacke of Scriptures you flye to the Doctors to finde merits in whome neuerthelesse being Catholike and sound Doctors you shall sooner find the word Meritum than your meaning of it The place of Cyprian I maruell why you geld except it be to ioyne the reward that he speaketh of with the worde merites which he vseth either generally for workes as it is often vsed in the auncient writers or if he meane thereby deserts he speaketh but of examination onely of all mens deserts that he may giue to the wicked that they haue deserued and to the godly that which he hath promised therefore he calleth it the rewarde of their faith and deuotion His wordes are these O diesille qualis quantus aduenies fratres dilectissimi cum caeperit populum suum dominus recensere diuinae cognitionis examine singulorum meritum recognoscere mittere in gehennam nocentés persecutores nostros flammae paenalis perpetuo ardore damnare nobis verò mercedem fidei deuotionis exoluere O that day what manner a one and how great shall it come my deerest beloued brethren when the Lorde shall beginne to recount his people and by examination of his diuine knowledge consider the merites of euery one to sende into hell fire the guiltie and to condemne our persecutors with perpetuall burning of penall flame but vnto vs to pay the reward of faith and deuotion The rewarde of faith is not that which beliefe deserueth but which it looketh for according to Gods promise wherevnto it leaneth For in respect of deserte of Gods fauour he saith and bringeth diuerse textes for proofe Fidem tantum prodesse tantum nos posse quantum credimus That faith only doth profite and that so much wee can doe how much we beleeue Wherfore we see not in Cyprian the incomparable glory to be a reward of desertes MART. 9. Likewise S. Augustine The exceeding goodnesse of God hath prouided this that the labours should soone be ended but the rewardes of the MERITES should endure without ende the Apostle testi fying THE PASSIONS OF THIS TIME ARE NOT COMPARABLE c. For wee shal receiue greater blisse
than are the afflictions of all passions what soeuer Thus wee see plainely that short tribulations are true merites of endlesse glorie though not comparable to the same which truth you impugne by your false and hereticall translation But let vs see further your dealing in the selfe same controuersie to make it plainer that you bende your translations against it more than the text of the Scripture doth permit you FVLK 9. A man may see you are driuē to extreme shiftes when you will seeke Praemia meritorum in S. Augustine can finde it no where but among the Sermones de sanctis which beare no credite of Augustines workes but of some later gatherer The true Augustine in Ps. 70. Con. 1. thus writeth Nihil es per te deum inuoca tua peccaia sunt merita dei sunt supplicium tibi debetur cum praemium venerit sua dona coronabit non merita tua Thou art nothing by thy selfe call vpon God thine are the sinnes the merites are Gods to thee punishment is due and when the rewarde shal come he will crowne his giftes not thy merites Finally Augustine in nothing is more earnest than in denying the reward which is of grace to be due in respect of merite or worthinesse of workes MART. 10. In the booke of wisedome where there is honorable mention of the merites of Saincts and their rewardes in heauen you translate the holy Scripture thus God hath proued them and findeth them MEETE FOR HIM SELFE To omitte here that you vse the present tense whereas in the Greeke they are preter tenses God knoweth why only this wee knowe that it is no true nor sincere translation but to wincke at smaller faultes why say you here in all your Bibles that God findeth his Saincts and holy seruants meete for him selfe and not worthie of him selfe See your partialitie and be ashamed FVLK 10. The booke of wisedome writtē by Philo the Iewe as S. Hierome thinketh is no holy Canonical Scripture to cōfirme the credite of any article of beliefe Therefore whether he thought that mens merites were worthy of the fauour and grace of God the reward of eternall life or no it is not materiall But somewhat it is that you say that our translators for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 haue not translated worthie but meete For my parte I wishe they had reteyned the vsuall signification of that worde and said worthie of him selfe onely to take away your cauill For otherwise in the sense there is no difference if that he saith be true none is meete for God but they that are worthie of him which are not meete or worthie of thē selues but made such by grace not for merite of their workes but by the righteousnesse of Christe imputed to them by faith This if the wiseman meaneth not but that their vertues were such as deserued Gods fauour and eternall life we may boldely reiect him as going against the wisedome of God reuealed in the Canonicall Scriptures MART. 11. In the Apostles places before examined you saide negatiuely that the afflictions of this time were NOT WORTHIS OF the glorie to come the Greeke not bearing that translation but here when you should say affirmatiuely and that word for word after the Greeke that God found them WORTHIE OF HIM SELFE there you say MEETE FOR HIM SELFE auoiding the terme worthie because merite is included therein So that when you will in your translatiō denie merites then condignae ad signifieth worthie of when you should in your translation affirme merites then Dignus with an ablatiue case doth not signifie worthie of No maruell if such wilfulnesse wilnot see the worde merite or that whiche is equiualent thereto in all the Scripture For when you do see it should trāslate it you suppresse it by another word But this is a case worthie of examination whether the Scripture haue the worde merite or the equiualent thereof For we will force them euen by their owne translations to confesse that it is founde there and that they should translate it accordingly often when they doe not yea that if wee did not see it in the vulgar Latine translation yet they must needes see it and finde it in the Greeke FVLK 11. In the Canonicall Scripture it seemeth the translators had a religious care to keepe bothe the propertie of the wordes and the true meaning of the holy Ghost In the Apocryphall bookes they had a wise consideration to translate them according to the beste meaning that their wordes would beare Now whether you say worthie of God or meete for God you must vnderstand this meetenesse or worthinesse to be of grace and not of merite or else the saying is blasphemous against the grace of God For merite is not necessarily included in worthinesse The Kings sonne is worthie to succeede his father by right of inheritance not by merite of vertue alwayes A straunger may bee worthie of the kinges seruice which neuer deserued the kings entertainement but for such good qualities as are in him But after this tedious trifling it would somwhat awake our spirites if you could as you threaten in the margent proue the merite of good workes plainely by the Scriptures eyther by the worde merite which you can neuer doe or by any thing that is equiualent vnto it and to force vs by our owne translations to cōfesse that it is founde there if not in the vulgar Latine yet in the Greeke MART. 12. First when they translate the foresaid place thus The afflictions of this time are not worthie of the glorie to come they meane this deserue not the glorie to come for to that purpose they do so translate it as hath bene declared Againe when it is said The workemā is worthy of his hire or wages What is meant but that he deserueth his wages And more plainely Tob. 9. they translate thus Brother Azarias if I should giue my self to be thy seruaunt I shal not DESERVE thy prouidence And such like If then in these places both the Greeke and the Latine signifie to be worthie of or not to be worthie of to deserue or not to deserue then they must allow vs the same signification and vertue of the same wordes in other like places Namely Apoc. 5. of our Sauiours merites thus The lambe that was killed IS WORTHY to receyue power and riches c. What is that to say but DESERVETH to receiue For so I trust they will allowe vs to say of our Sauiour that he in deede deserued Againe of the damned thus Thou hast giuen them bloud to drinke for they ARE WORTHY or THEY HAVE DESERVED is it not all one lastly of the elect thus They shall walke with me in white because they are worthie Apocal. 3. that is because they deserue it And so in the place before by them corrupted God founde them worthie of him that is such as deserued to bee with him in eternall
glorie Thus by their owne translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and dignus are plainely deduced worthinesse desert and merite of saincts out of the Scriptures FVLK 12. Your first foundation is false therefore all your building falleth to the groūd For when we trāslate that text thus The afflictions of this time are not worthy of the glory to come we meane not thus deserue not the glory to come but euen as you do they are not equal or comparable but thereof it followeth that they deserue not for to deserue is to doe a thing equall vnto the reward the afflictions be not equal therefore they deserue not But when it is said the workeman is worthy of his hyre wee acknowledge that he deserueth his wages yet we should not doe well to translate it that he deserueth his hyre because worthinesse may be where there is no desert Gold is worthy to be esteemed before siluer and yet there is no merite or deserte of golde if we speake properly That of Tob. 9. is not in the Greeke but in some Bibles translated out of Latine according to the vsuall phrase of Englishe rather than to the propertie of the worde where it is sayd Apoc. 5. The Lambe that was killed is worthye to receiue power and riches though we will not contende of the deserts of Christ yet we may be bold to say that in respect of the godhead he was worthy of all honour and glorie from euerlasting before he had created any thing and therefore worthines doth not alway import desert as no worthines doth no desert Likewise when it is said of the wicked Apoc. 16. they are worthy to drinke bloud it is true that they deserued that plague because their cruell workes were iustly recompensed with that punishment but yet some may be worthy of their punishment that haue not deserued it The sonne of a traytor is worthy to beare the punishment of his fathers attainder yet he hath not alwayes deserued it by his owne deedes Therefore it is not all one they are worthy and they haue deserued The infants of the reprobate as soone as they haue life are worthy of eternall damnation and yet they haue not deserued the same by their owne deedes Therfore where it is sayd of the elect They shall walke with me in white because they are worthy it is not meant that they haue deserued by their owne workes to walke with Christ but because they are made worthye by Christ who hath giuen them grace not to defile their garments who also shall giue them the rewarde of white garments that is of innocencie which no man can deserue because no man is cleare from sinne but onely by forgiuenes of sinnes in the bloud of Christ. Therefore you haue performed nothing lesse than your promise which was to proue the equiualent of merite out of the Scripture and to force vs by our translation to confesse the same Fos worthines doth not alwayes argue or enforce desert as desert doth worthines worthines being a more generall word than merite or desert MART. 13. But to proceede one steppe further we proue it also to be in the Scriptures thus Them selues translate thus Heb. 10. 29. Of howe much sorer punishment shall he be worthy which treadeth vnder foote the sonne of God though one of their Bibles of the yeare 1562. very falsly and corruptly leaueth out the wordes worthy of saying thus How much sorer shall he be punished c Fearing no doubt by translating the Greeke word sincerely this consequence that now I shall inferre to wit If the Greeke worde here by their owne translation signifie to be worthy of or to deserue being spoken of paines and punishment deserued then must they graunt vs the same worde so to signifie elsewhere in the newe Testament when it is spoken of deseruing heauen and the kingdome of God as in these places Luc. 21. Watch therefore all times praying that you MAY BE WORTHIE to stande before the sonne of man and c. 20. THEY THAT ARE WORTHY to attayne to that worlde and to the resurrection from the deade neyther marye nor are maried and 2. Thess. 1. That you may BE WORTHYE of the kingdome of God for which also ye suffer FVLK 13. You thinke to haue great aduauntage at our translation of the worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Heb. 10. shall be worthye which is true according to the sense but not so proper for the worde which signifieth rather to be iudged or accounted worthye whether he be worthye in deede or not And so it shoulde haue bene translated if the nature of the worde had bene exactly weighed But the translators looked rather to the purpose of the Apostle which is by all meanes to terrifie such contemners and backeslyders of whome he speaketh The Greeke worde therefore doth not signifie to deserue but to be iudged worthye although it is true that those of whome the Apostle there speaketh deserued extreame paynes of damnation And euen so it signifieth in all other places as Luc 20. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they that shall be counted worthye to attayne to that worlde and Luc. 21. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that you may be counted worthye and 2. Thess. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that you may be counted worthye And so the word doth signifie in other places without controuersie as Luc. 7. the Centurion sayd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I accounted not my selfe worthye and 1. Tim. 5. The Elders that gouerne well 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 let them be counted worthy of double honour For it is the imperatiue mode therefore it is a fault in our translations to make it the indicatiue For we can not saye let them be worthye or let them be made worthy but let them be iudged reputed or accounted worthy MART. 14. Thus you should translate in all these places according to your translation of the former place to the Hebrewes or at the leastwise you should haue this sense meaning as the olde vulgar Latine hath translating in all these places counted worthy but meaning worthy in deede as when it is sayd Abraham was reputed iust it is meant he was iust in deede If you also haue this meaning in your translations which here follow the vulgar Latine then we appeale to your selues whether to be counted worthy and to be worthy and to deserue and to merite be not all one and so here also Merite is deduced But if you meane according to your heresie to signifie by translating counted worthy that they are not in deede worthy then your purpose is hereticall and translation false and repugnant to your translating the same word in other places as is declared and now further we will declare FVLK 14. I haue shewed you howe we shoulde translate that word in any place wheresoeuer it is redde euen as the vulgar Latine hath in the places by you noted and in those three textes Luc. 20. 21. 2. Thess. 1. We
meane not falsely counted worthye but worthye in deede as when it is sayde that Abraham was reputed iust we acknowledge that he was truely so reputed and that he was iuste in deede But where you appeale to our consciences whether to be counted worthy and to be worthy and to deserue and to merite be not all one I answer you plainly and according to my conscience they be not But euen as Abraham was reputed iuste and was iuste in deede not by deserte but by faith so in those three texts the faithful are coūted worthy and are worthy in deede not by their merit and desert but for Iesus Christes sake For herein your heresie is greatly deceaued to imagine that he which is iust by Christ by faith or by imputation is not truely iust or not iust in deed For Christ faith and imputation are not contrary or opposed to truth but to merit or desert of the party that is iust by Christ by faith or by imputation and so we say of them that are accounted worthy for Christes sake and not for their owne merits MART. 15. They whome God doth make worthy they are truely and in deede worthy are they not but by your owne translation of the same word in the actiue voice God doth make them worthy Therefore in the passiue voice it must also signifie to be made or to be in deede worthy For example 2. Thess. 1 11. You translate thus we also praye for you THAT OVR GOD MAY MAKE YOV VVORTHY of this calling According to which translation why did you not also in the selfe same chapter a litle before translate thus That you MAY BE MADE VVORTHY and so be worthy of the kingdome of God for which also you suffer You knowe the case is like in both places and in the Greeke Doctors you specially should knowe by your ostentation of reading them in Greeke that they according to this vse of holy Scripture very often vse also this word both actiuely and passiuely to make worthy and to be made or to be worthy See the Greeke Liturgies FVLK 15. They must needes be worthye whome God maketh worthy but then are they not worthye by their merits or deserts but by his grace in Iesus Christ so our translators meane when they say 2. Thess. 1. 11. that our God may make you worthy of this calling although the clearer translation had bene that God may account you worthy as the vulgar Latine hath vt dignetur For dignor is not to make worthy but to vouchsafe or to account worthy Wherefore you doe vainely here snatch at a word contrary to the meaning both of the translator and of the text For those whom God maketh worthie are not worthie by their desert but by his grace accepting them How the Greeke Doctors vse the word it is not now the question but how it signifieth in the Scripture although I see not how you proue that the doctors vse it to make worthye or to be made worthie by desert MART. 16. Which Sainct Chrysostome to put all out of doubt explicateth thus in other wordes That he make vs worthie of the kingdome of heauen Ser. 1. de orando Deo And vpon the Epistle to Titus cap. 3. in the same sense passiuely God graunt we may all BE MADE VVORTHY or be worthie of the good things promised to thē that loue him And in an other place of the sayed Doctor it must needes signifie to be worthie as when he sayeth In Colos 1. No man liueth such a trade of life that he is worthie of the kingdome but all is his gift For to say thus No man so liueth that he can be counted worthie of the kingdom of heauen is false is against the Protestants owne opinion which say they are coūted worthy that are not Againe to say No man so liueth that he can be made worthie is false because God can make the worst man worthy It remaineth then to say No man so liueth that he is worthie Which a litle before he declareth thus No man by his owne proper merites obtaineth the kingdom of heauen that is as his owne and of him selfe without the grace of God And yet we must shewe further out of the Scriptures that God maketh vs worthie and so we are in deede worthie and here also we must conuince you of false and partiall interpretation FVLK 16. Sainct Chrysostome putteth not the matter any whit out of doubt for your side For he doth not expound this text of 2. Thess. 1. But only in the later end of his Sermon prayeth that God hauing mercie vpon vs all will make vs worthie of his kingdome Where you might haue seene if you had not bene blind with frowardnesse that God maketh vs worthie by his mercie not by our merites That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in his prayer vpon the 3. to Titus is taken to be made worthie rather than to be accounted worthie you haue no proofe but your owne authoritie although for God to make worthy by his mercy to account worthie is all one in effect The third place in Epist. ad Col. cap. 1. is altogither against you Where he sayth no man liueth such a trade of life that he may be iudged or accounted worthie of that kingdome but all is the gift of God Is not his meaning plaine that no man can be accounted worthie by workes or merites but altogither by the grace and gift of God With this distinction therefore which is plaine euen by those wordes which you cite that Chrysostome maketh 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 without any inconuenience may signifie in this place to be accounted worthie No man by his owne proper merites obtaineth the kingdom of heauen saith he but euen as a lot is rather by happe chaunce so it is here meaning that God giueth his kingdome no more according to mans desertes than lottes doe fall to men by chaunce which yet God disposeth as it pleaseth him Finally the whole discourse of the Doctor being against mans merites vsing the worde in the same place so often of Gods dignation vouchsafing or accounting worthie you had great scarsitie of examples out of the Doctors that bring this place to proue that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to be made worthie by merit and not by meere mercie MART. 17. The Greeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I pray you what doth it signifie ◠you must aunswere that it signifieth not onely meete but also worthie For so Beza reacheth you and so you translate Mat. 3. 11. cap. 8. 1. Cor. 15. 9. I am not worthie in all three places And why I pray you did you not likewise followe the olde Latine interpreter one steppe further saying Giuing thankes to God the father THAT HATH MADE VS VVORTHIE but translating rather thus Which hath made vs meete to be partakers of the inheritance of the Saincts in light Here was the place where you should haue
shewed your sinceritie haue said that God maketh vs worthie of heauenly blisse Because you know if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be worthie then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to make worthie But you are like to Beza your Maister who as though all interpretation of wordes were at his commaundement sayeth here and here and so forth I haue followed the old Latine interpreter translating it worthie but in such and such a place meaning this for one I choose rather to say MEETE But that both he you should here also haue translated worthie the Greeke fathers shall teache you if we be not worthie or able to controule so mightie Grecians as you pretend to be when you crowe vpon your owne dunghill otherwise in your translations shewing small skill or great malice FVLK 17. If you be not able to draw merit out of word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifieth worthie you shall haue somewhat a doe to wring it out of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which properly signifieth apt or meete and sometime sufficient according to which later signification Beza in three places translateth dignus because sufficiens is no Latine worde in that sense to be vsed But nowe you aske why we went not a steppe further to translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Collos. 1. v. 12. which hath made vs worthy I aunswere you first there is no reason that a worde which hath diuerse significatiōs should alwaies be translated after one Secōdly when a word hath one most vsuall signification and two or three other significations not so vsuall by translating it once or twise according to the sense of the place after one of the best vsuall significations we are not bounde to giue ouer the most common and vsuall signification when the sense of the place requireth it Thirdly when a verbe is deriued of a nowne that hath diuerse significations it signifieth most commonly after the most vsual signification as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 sometime signifieth cheape we must not thereof conclude that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to make cheape So 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth sometime greate or muche you may as well say that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to magnifie to make greate or to multiplie which none but a madde man woulde say and yet you thinke you haue made a great argument when you say if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be worthie then 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to make worthie It remaineth therefore that seeing the most vsuall signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is apt or meete the true and best signification of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is to make apt or meete which we haue followed in our translation But if you will still contende that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 then you must tell vs as you require vs often whether 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be as good Greeke as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 if you woulde say worthie of death Beza therefore followeth not his pleasure where he chooseth to say for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Idoneum but the nature of the worde and the vsuall signification thereof compared with the sense of the place And if we shoulde followe your vulgar Latine translation and say that God hath made vs worthie to be partakers of the inheritaunce of the Sainctes in light you are neuer the narre for your merites For God maketh vs worthie by his grace and by the righteousnesse and holinesse of Christ which is imputed to vs being incorporated to him and made liuely members of his mysticall bodie Howe vainely you charge the translatours with bragging vnskilfulnesse and malice they that are learned can iudge and God will one day reuenge it MART. 18. The Greeke fathers I say interprete the Apostles word here 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is hath made vs worthie and giuen vs the grace to be worthie And S. Basil in orat Liturg. making both Greeke wordes all one saith THOV HAST MADE VS VVORTHIE to be ministers of thy holy altar And anone after MAKE VS VVORTHY for this ministerie And Sainct Chrysostome vpon the Apostles place God doeth not onelye giue vs societie with the Sainctes but maketh vs also worthie to receiue so greate dignitie And here is a goodly consideration of the goodnesse of God towarde vs that doeth in deede by his grace make◠vs worthy of so great thinges who otherwise are most vnworthy vile and abiect Which making of vs worthy is expressed by the sayd Greeke wordes more than by the Latine mereri because it declareth whence our merite and worthines proceedeth to wi◠of God Both which S. Chrysostom expresseth excellently thus When he brought in Publicans to the kingdom of heauen he defamed not the kingdom of heauen but magnified it also with great honours shewing that there is such a Lord of the kingdom of heauen which hath made euen vnworthy persons to be so much better that they should deserue euen the glorie of that dignitie And Oecumenius sayth that it is Gods glorie TO MAKE HIS SERVANTS VVORTHY of such good things and that it is their glorie TO HAVE BENE MADE VVORTHY of such things in 2. Thess. 1. FVLK 18. If the Greeke fathers did so interprete the Apostles wordes yet your merit is to seeke as I haue sayd For I will not contend whether God make vs worthye but whether he make vs worthye by desert of our good works or by his mercie grace in the redēption of his sonne But let vs see what the fathers saye to the matter First Oecumenius words are flat against you if they be truely translated 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he hath counted vs worthy and hath freely graunted vnto vs to be meete See you not that all our worthines and meetenes dependeth of his grace and free acceptation The Liturgie intituled of Basill although it haue a much younger author maketh neuer a whit more for you The minister prayeth that God would accoumpt him worthy or make him meete for the ministerie And if you should in both places translate that God maketh worthy you cā not proue merite thereby but contrarywise it soundeth against merite for God maketh vs not worthy by our desertes but by the worthinesse of Christ. Chrysostome also as I haue shewed before vpon this place doth vtterly condemne your opinion of merites for he saith Suche are the things that are giuen that he hath not onely giuen them but also made vs able to receiue them Againe he hath not onely giuen vs the honour but also strength to embrace it What is our strength what is our abilitie to receiue the giftes of God but fayth in the merites of Christ The place of Chrysostome Hom. de cruce latrone is not be be vnderstoode of deseruing by works but by the grace of God and remission of their sinnes which maketh men meete and worthye of his glorye as the example of the
signifie to take order for a funerall So likewise Luc. 10. Paeniterent they had done penaunce But to answere for our owne doings Io 5. v. 36. where Christe saith I haue a greater witnesse than Iohns witnesse why may not the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be referred rather to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is of necessitie to be vnderstood than to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 In the other place 1. Iohn 2. v. 2. the worde sinnes muste needes be vnderstoode in the pronoune adiectiue ours In the thirde texte where you accuse the translators of hereticall purpose the sense is all one whether you adde the article or no. For when the Apostle sayeth by Christe we haue boldnesse and entrance with confidence by faith howe can you vnderstand confidence by workes and whether there be confidence by workes or no there can none be proued by this place Where Beza vnderstandeth an article Rom. 8. whom our English translation doth follow it is only to make that plaine which otherwise is necessarily to be vnderstoode For there is no differeÌ„ce betwene these sayings The law of the spirit of life in Christ Iesus this The lawe of the spirit of life which is in Christ Iesus hath deliuered me from the lawe of sinne and death The article or relatiue therefore declareth no more but that the lawe of the spirit of life is in Christ Iesus which deliuereth vs. For both the text sayth in Christ Iesus and it can not be in any other to deliuer vs. For he sayeth not The lawe of the spirite of life in vs but in Christe Iesus and the nexte verse following doeth manifestly confirme the same as euerie man may see that will consider it Likewise Iames the seconde wilt thou knowe O thou vaine man that faith without workes is deade If you say the faith which is without good workes is deade is not that the meaning of the Apostle Where he addeth immediatly that Abraham was iustified by such a faith as was fruitefull of good workes And when he bringeth example of Deuils faith is it not manifest he speaketh of suche a faith as is vtterly voyde of all good workes Where you say that Beza putteth the article into the text and translateth it accordingly you do most shamefully belye him For to the original text he addeth none of his owne collection but in his translation onely where he iudgeth that according to the sense of the place it must of necessitie be vnderstood which if it be a fault in articles it must be so in other wordes also for like cause added Then answere to your owne translations where beside those that I haue noted before which seeme to proceede of some Popish purpose you haue added to your Latine authenticall texte As in these examples Mat. 8. Quid nobiâ— tibi what is betweene vs Cap. 9. Confidâ— haue a good hart Cap. 22. Malâ— pâ—rdet he wil bring to naught Marc. 2. Post dios after some dayes Accumberet he satte at meate Luc. 17. Ab illo more than he Io. 12. Discumbentibus them that satte at the table Non quia de egenis pertinebat ad eum not because he cared for the poore Act. 9. Ecce ego Domine Loe here I am Lorde cap. 10. gustare to take somewhat cap. 17. colentibus that serued God Nobiliores eorum qui sunt Thessalonicae more noble than they that are at Thessalonica Rom. 1. Vocatis sanctis called to be Saincts c. MART. 4. But you will say in the place to the Corinthians there is a Greeke article therfore there you do well to expresse it I aunswere first the article may then be expressed in translation when there can be but one sense of the same secondly that not onely it may but it must be expressed when we can not otherwise giue the sense of the place as Mat. 1 6. Ex ea quae fuit Vriae Where you see the vulgar interpreter omitteth it not but knoweth the force and signification thereof very well Mary in the place of S. Paul which we now speake of where the sense is doubtfull and the Latine expresseth the Greeke sufficiently otherwise he leaueth it also doubtful and indifferent not abridging it as you doe saying the grace of God which is with me nor as Caluin gratia quae mihi aderat nor as Illyricus gratia quae mihi adest Which two later are more absurd thaÌ„ yours because they omit neglect altogither the force of the preposition cum which you expresse saying with me But because you say which is with me you meane heretically as they doe to take away the Apostles cooperation and labouring togither with the grace of God by his free will which is by the article and the preposition most euidently signified FVLK 4. You take vpoÌ„ you to prescribe rules of traÌ„slatioÌ„ as though you were Prince of the Critici or Aeropâ—gitae But al reasonable men will coÌ„fesse that the article is so ofteÌ„ to be expressed as it may maketh any thing to the sense and vnderstanding of the place But as for your rule that it is not to be expressed in traÌ„slatioÌ„ when there may be more senses than one of the same is so good a rule that by the same reason and by equitie thereof when so euer any worde commeth in the text that may haue more senses than one we must skippe it ouer and not translate it at all and so wee shal leaue out fiue hundred wordes in the new Testament A better rule I take it to be in all such cases to examine what is most agreeable to the common phrase of the tongue and the scope of the text in hand according to which I say the verbe substantiue is both more vsuall and also more probable to be vnderstoode in this text 1. Cor. 15. than the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 MART. 5. And here I appeale to all that haue skill in Greeke speaches and Phrases whether the Apostles wordes in Greeke sounde not thus I laboured more aboundantly than all they yet not I but the grace of God that laboured with mee Vnderstanding not the participle of Sum but of the verbe going before as in the like case when our Sauiour saith It is not you that speake but the holy Ghost that speaketh in you If he had spoken short thus but the holy Ghost in you you perhaps would translate as you doe here the holy Ghost WHICH IS IN YOV But you see the verbe going before is rather repeated Not you speake but the holy Ghost THAT SPEAKETH IN YOV Euen so Not I laboured but the grace of God labouring with me or WHICH LABOVRED WITH ME. So praieth the wise man Sap. 9 10. Sende wisedome out of thy holy heauens that she may be with me and labour with me as your selues translate Bib. 1577. FVLK 5. And I likewise appeale not onely to all that haue skill in Greeke speaches and phrases but to al
This is Bezaes iudgement not cōtrary to the common translation and ours but agreeing in the sense thereof and comprehending a further matter whereof the Apostle in that chapter speaketh But our translators thought best to followe the plaine and common vnderstanding not for shame of Beza or his translation but for desire of sinceritie and plainenesse Contrariwise where your vulgar translator is sometimes so barbarous that his phrase hath no sense according to the text it may wel be thought you were ashamed to follow him lest you should haue bene ridiculous to all men As you translate Timoratus religious oftētimes Non quia de egenis pertinebat ad eum which in English is not because of the poore it pertained to him but you haue trāslated not because he cared for the poore Vna sabbathi the first of the Sabboth Sabbati habens iter hauing the iourney of a Sabboth you translate distant a Sabbats iourney Yea you are bold to correct your text and for Italia to say Attalia Ad abluenda crimina which is to washe away the crimes you say to cleare him selfe of the crime Cum multa ambitione which is with much ambition you saye with great pompe Exhortentur which is a deponent you translate may be exhorted ad reuerentiam vobis which is for reuerence to you you saye to your shame and such like I doe not blame you that you are ashamed to follow your vulgar Latine text in these phrases but that you are not ashamed to allowe that translation as the onely authentical text which no man for shame will follow in many places To conclude our meaning for free will is that we confesse it at all times to be free from cōstreint but neuer free to embrace that which is good in deede but only when it is reformed by the grace of God who also in all good thinges that we take in hande doth not onely make vs willing but also giueth all the strength we haue to performe them If this be your meaning as I am afrayde it is not by your termes of working and helping and directing as though it coulde goe alone with a litle helpe and direction we ioyne with you but if you thinke you can doe any thing that good is without the grace of God like to Pelagius Celestius and other like Heretikes of the deuils blacke gard we leaue you MART. 7. You saye moreouer in some of your Bibles thus So lyeth it not then in a mans will or running but in the mercie of God Whatsoeuer you meane you knowe this translation is very dissolute and wide from the Apostles wordes and not true in sense for saluation is in willing and running according to that famous saying of Saint Augustine He that made thee without thee will not iustifie thee without thee that is against thy will or vnlesse thou be willing and the Apostle sayth No man is crowned vnlesse he fight lawefully and againe So runne THAT YOV MAY obtayne and againe The doers of the Lawe shall be iustified And our Sauiour If thou wilt enter into life keepe the commaundements We see then that it is in willing and running and doing but to will or runne or doe are not of man but of Gods mercye and so the Apostle speaketh It is not of the willer nor runner but of God that hath mercie And it is much to be marueled why you sayde not It lyeth not in the willer nor in the runner which is neare to the Apostles wordes but so farre of in a mans will and running FVLK 7. The translation you reprehend I graunt is not proper for the words and therefore is reformed in the later translations yet in sense it is all one for saluation lyeth not in the will or running of man but in the mercie of God euen as S. Iohn saith the children of God are not made of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but they are borne of God But thus you reason against it We are not saued except we will and runne ergo saluation lyeth in willing and running I denye your argument which is as good as this we are not saued from sinne except we haue committed sinne ergo saluation from sinne lyeth in committing sinne The famous place of Augustine is a famous corruption of Papistes to establish the strēgth of free will cleane cōtrary to S. Augustines minde where a point interrogatiue is chaunged into a periode for in auncient written copies it is redde with interrogation Qui ergo fecit te sine te non te iustifica◠sine te He therefore that made thee without thee doth he not iustifie thee without thee And the whole discourse of that father both before and after requireth that reading For thus he writeth Si hominem te fecit Deus iustum tu te facis melius aliquid facis quam fecit Deus sed sine te fecit Deus Non enim adhibuisti aliquem consensum vt te faceret Deus Quo modo consentiebas qui non eras Qui ergo fecit te sine te non te iustificat sine te Ergo fecit nescientem iustificat volentem tamen ipse iustificat ne su iustitia tua If God haue made thee a man and thou makest thy selfe a iust man thou makest some better thing than God hath made but God made thee without thee for thou gauest no consent that God shoulde make thee howe diddest thou consent which wast not He therefore that made thee without thee doth he not iustifie thee without thee Therefore he hath made thee not knowing but he iustifieth thee being willing yet it is he that doth iustifie thee that it should not be thy iustice The meaning of Saint Augustine is that we haue no more free will to be iustified before we be preuented by the grace of God than we had will to be created For it is Gods grace that maketh vs willing to be iustified and saued not the strength of mans free will as he proueth at large throughout the whole Homilie Nowe to the textes of Scripture which you cite I aunswere there is not one that proueth any strength or swaye of mans free will towarde the true goodnesse before of an vngodlye man and enimie of God he be reconciled by the grace and mercie of God and made an obedient childe in some parte willing to doe the will of his father First those textes of fighting and running proue that fighting and running is necessary for them that are exhorted thereto but not that fighting or running are in the free will of man or that saluation lyeth in them Eating and drinking are necessarie for the life of man yet the life of man lyeth not in eating and drinking Where the Apostle sayth the doers of the lawe shall be iustified he meaneth them that fullfill the lawe and doth our Sauiour Christ aunswering to the question of him that asked what she should doe to obtaine life
declare that there is no way to enter into life by doing but onely by doing of Gods commaundements For the man that doth them shall liue by them But if he were asked which is the way to eternall life as he was by Thomas he will aunswer I am the way the truth and the life Those textes therfore declare not howe a man that is a transgressor of the lawe may be saued but that to obtayne saluation by workes it is necessary for a man to keepe the whole lawe and commaundements of God or else he is accursed MART. 8. Againe touching continencie and the chast single life you translate thus All men can not receiue this saying Mat. 19. v. 11. Now you wot well that our Sauiour sayth not All men can not but all men doe not receiue it and that therefore as S. Augustine sayth because all will not But when our Sauiour afterward sayeth He that CAN receiue it let him receiue it he addeth an other Greeke word to expresse that sense Whereas by your fonde translation he might haue said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And againe by your translation you should translate these his later wordes thus He that can or is able to receiue it let him be able to receiue it For so you translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 before as though it were all one with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Doe you not see your follie and fashoode and boldnesse to make the reader beleeue that our Sauiour shoulde say Euerie man can not liue chast it is impossible for them and therefore no man should vowe chastitie because he knoweth not whether he can liue so or no FVLK 8. The Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie to be able to hold or containe and so it is vsed Mar. 2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Which you translate so that there was no place no not at the dore Doe you not meane that the place about the dore was not able to hold that multitude Your vulgar Latin is Ita vt non caperet neque ad ianuam in barbarous words but in sense as I haue sayd before So Iohn 2. the sixe pottes when they were emptie are sayed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 able to receiue euerie one of them two or three measures Likewise Iohn 22. where the worde is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 you your selues translate not able to containe Seeing the worde therefore signifieth not onely to receiue but also to be able to receiue it is rightly translated Matth. 19. and according to the meaning of our Sauiour Christ all men can not receiue this saying but they to whom it is giuen which he doth after euidently confirme when he addeth the participle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 he that is able to receiue it let him receiue it Which were vainly said if all men were able that would and if it were giuen to all that would for then he should say all men doe not receiue this saying but they that will let them receiue it Where you call Augustine to witnesse of your foolishe glose you doe him shamefull iniurie for he sayeth not all men doe not because all will not but these are his wordes in the place by you quoted Non omnes capiunt verbum hoc sed quibus datum est quibus enim non est datum aut nolunt aut non implent quod volunt quibus autem datum est sic volunt vt impleant quod volunt All men receiue not this word but they to whom it is giuen for they to whom it is not giuen either they will not or else they fulfill not that which they will but they to whome it is giuen doe so will that they fulfill that which they will Augustine is plaine to the contrarie that it is not in euerie man that wil to be continent but it is the speciall gift of God that any both will and be able to performe it for which he citeth also the saying of the wise man Sap. 8. which with you is Canonicall Scripture When I knewe that otherwise I coulde not be continent except God should giue it and this same was wisedom to know whose gift it is I went vnto the Lorde and prayed to him These things considered our translation is iustified both according to the word which signifieth sōetime to be able to receiue and according to the sense which here must needes require that it shoulde be so translated Wherefore it is vnpossible for any man to liue chast except he haue the gift of God whereof vnlesse a man be certayne he doeth foolishly and presumptuously to vowe that which he knoweth not whether he shall be able to performe MART. 9. Againe in some of your Bibles Gen. 4. v. 7. where God saith plainely that Caine should receiue according as he did well or euil because sin was subiect vnto him and he had the rule and dominion thereof euidently declaring his free will you translate it thus If thou doest well shalte thou not be accepted and if thou doest not wel sinne lieth at the doore and also vnto thee HIS desire shall be subiecte and thou shalt rule ouer HIM By which relatiues falsly put in the masculine gender you exclude the true antecedent sinne and referre them to Abel Caines brother as though God had saide not that sinne should be in his dominion or subiect vnto him but his brother Abel But that this is most false and absurd we prooue many waies Firste S. Augustine saith directly the contrarie Tu dominaberis illius nunquid Fratris absit cuius igitur nisi peccati Thou shalte rule saith he ouer what ouer thy brother Not so ouer what then but sinne S. Hierome also explicateth this place thus Because thou haste free wil I warne thee that sinne haue not dominion ouer thee but thou ouer sinne Moreouer the text it selfe if nothing else is sufficient to conuince this absurditie For where this worde sinne goeth immediately before in the same sentence and not one worde of Abel his brother in that speach of God to Cain howe is it possible or what coherence can there be in saying as you translate Sin lyeth at the dore and thou shalt haue dominion ouer him that is thy brother But if we say thus Sinne lieth at the dore and thou shalte haue dominion thereof it hath this direct and plaine sense If thou doest ill sinne lyeth at the dore readie to condemne thee because it is in thee to ouer rule it FVLK 9. The relatiues be the masculine gender in the Hebrue tongue and therefore referred to Abel and not to sinne which is of the foeminine gender Againe sinne hath no appetite to Cain but rather Cain to it therefore euen as it was sayed to Eue thy appetite shall be to thy husbande so it is sayed of Abel his appetite shall be to thee Sainct Augustine followeth the corrupt translation of the Septuaginta which for appetite reade conuersion and therefore there is the
lesse account to be made of his authoritie being also ignoraunt in the Hebrue tongue and not regarding the Greeke relatiue to be also of the masculine gender Hierome also in that place interpreteth not appetite but societie and fantasie ththat chataoth is the masculine gender and not the foeminine Whereas it is neuer read but in the foeminine gender out of this place of controuersie But the text it selfe you say is sufficient to conuince this absurditie because in this speache of God to Cain there is no word of Abel It is somwhat that you say if this that Moises reporteth were all that God sayd to Cain but seeing it is certaine that God at large discoursed wyth him of the cause of his enuie againste his brother wee may easily vnderstande in this speach two arguments to reproue Caines enuie the one of the person of God the other of the person of Abel For God doth reprooue his enuie by his owne iustice and by Abels innocencie Which latter argumēt your false translation doth vtterly suppresse But that a Relatiue is referred to an Antecedent whiche in the same verse is not expressed it is no strange thing to them that reade the scripture Examples I will giue you Iob 26. v. 6. 11. 12. and cap. 27. v. 9. 10. yea it is verye vsuall when the antecedent maye bee easily vnderstoode as heere both by the gender and also by manner of speache whiche beeing the same that was spoken of Eues infirmitie subiection to hir husband must needes here haue the same sense of Abel towarde Caine his elder brother MART. 10. Now if against the coherence of the texte and exposition of the holy Doctours and of the whole Churche of God you pretend the Hebrewe grammar forsooth as not bearing such construction not to trouble the common reader that cannot iudge of these things and yet fully to satisfie euerye man euen of common vnderstanding we request here the Aduersaries themselues to tel vs truely according to their knowledge skill whether the Hebrewe construction or point of grammar be not al one in these wordes Sinne LYETH at the doore and in these the desire THEREOF shall be subiect to thee and thou shalt rule ouer IT If they say as they must nedes that the Hebrewe construction or Syntaxis is al one then wil it folow that the Hebrewe beareth the one as wel as the other and therefore when the selfe same translation of theirs maketh no scruple of Grammar in the former but trāslate as we do Sinne lieth at the doore a blinde man may see that in the latter wordes also the Hebrue is but a foolishe pretence and that the true cause of translating them otherwise proceedeth of an hereticall humour to obscure and deface this so plaine and euident Scripture for mans free wil. FVLK 10. I haue shewed before the cause of the change of the gender in the worde robets to be for that by sinne is meant here the punishment of sinne Sanctes Pagninus taketh the worde sinne for an oblation for sinne And for the punishment of sinne it is taken Zach. 14 19. The Septuaginta also doe plainly referre these relatiues vnto Abel and therefore they are in the masculine gender 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the cōuersion of him pertaineth to thee and thou shalt rule ouer him MART. 11. And as for the Hebrewe grammar in this point were it not for troubling the Reader we could tell thē that the word sinne in Hebrew is not here of the foeminine gender as they suppose but of the masculine so sayth S. Hieror expresly vpon this place who had as much knowledge in the Hebrew tongue as all these new Doctors Aben Ezra also the great Rabbine in his Hebrew commentaries vpon this text sayth it is a meere forgerie and fiction to referre the masculine relatiue otherwise than to the word sinne which though elsewhere it be the feminine gender yet here it is a masculine according to that rule of the Grammarians that the doubtfull gender must be discerned by the verbe adiectiue pronoune or participle ioyned with the same as the sayd Hebrew Doctor doth in the word paradise Gen. 2. which there by the pronounes he pronounceth to be a feminine though elsewhere a masculine Lastly if the worde sinne were here and alwayes only a feminine and neuer a masculine yet they haue litle skill in the Hebrue tongue that thinke it straunge to matche masculines and feminines togither in very good and grammaticall construction Whereof they may see a whole chapter in Sanctes Pagninus with this title Foeminea masculeis iuncta that is Feminines ioyned with masculines FVLK 11. Not only the Hebrue Grammar but the same phrase vsed before maketh plainely for our translation That S. Hierome saith the Hebrue is of the masculine gender as great an Hebritian as he was he may not carrie the matter away with his authoritie except he bring an instance where it is of the masculine gender The Iewish Rabbins patrones of free will as ignorant of the grace of God erre in this place as they doe in a thousand more and are forced to inuent straunge applications of the worde appetite to make their sense probable How the gender of Hebrew wordes may be found out we are not now to learne which because you haue but lately learned you thinke all men ignorant thereof but your selfe By the chapter of Pagninus where he sheweth that feminines are ioyned to masculines you might learne that chataoth is the feminine gender although it be ioyned with a participle of the masculine gēder Who also might haue taught you the difference of nounes ending in he praecedente camets to be this that feminines haue the accent in the last syllable masculines in the last saue one and therefore chataoth in this place hauing the accent in the last syllable notwithstanding the participle which is masculine must needes be of the feminine gender MART. 12. Now for the last refuge if they will say all this needed not because in other their Bibles it is as we woulde haue it we tell them they must iustifie and make good all their translations because the people readeth all and is abused by all and al come forth with priuiledge printed by the Queenes Printer c. If they will not let them confesse the faultes and call them in and tell vs which translation or translations they will stand vnto In the meane time they must be content to heare of all indifferently as there shall be cause and occasion to touch them FVLK 12. We tel you that wee may not iustifie any fault committed in our translations but we haue reformed them if any were espied in the later Neuerthelesse those faults are not so great that we neede call in al the Bibles in which is any fault it is sufficiēt that we admonish the reader in our later editions of such faults as are escaped in the former especially when the faults
are such about which meÌ„ are not agreed as in this place you should rather coÌ„mend our equity that suffer such traÌ„slations to be in the peoples handes in which is some colour of maintaining your errors against vs. But if you be so rigorous that a booke of Scripture may not be red in which there is any fault I charge you call in your translation of the new Testament for therein are shamefull faults and such as you can not defend or excuse except it be by the fault of the Printer whereof yet you haue not admonished the reader I will giue you a tast of some and let all men iudge whether they be not intolerable faultes For they are no lesse than detracting and taking away from the word of God As 1. Cor. 14. v. 38. where both the Greeke and the Latine is If they will learne Your translation is If they learne any thing Likewise Actes 5. v. 4. where bothe the Greeke and Latine is Festus answeared that Paule is kepte at Caesarea you translate Festus answered that Paule is in Caesarea leauing out the worde kepte as before you lefte out the worde will or desire whiche altereth the sense very much But in a place of greater moment and in a matter of some controuersie of Gods particuler preordination and fore appointment you leaue out a whole clause Act. 10. v. 41. For where it is bothe in the Greeke and in the Latine that God made the resurrection of his sonne manifest not to all the people but to the witnesses chosen before of God to vs which did eate and drinke with him c. Your English translation hath no more but thus Not to all the people but to vs who did eate and drinke with him c. Leauing cleane out that which is in your Latine text Testibus praeordinatis à Deo Also in the Epistle to the Hebrues cap. 7. v. 28. where bothe the Greeke and your vulgar Latine hath The law appointeth Priests men that haue infirmitie your translation is the lawe appointeth Priests them that haue infirmitie leauing out Homines a word very material in this place to obserue the oppositioÌ„ betweene the Priesthood of meÌ„ the Priesthood of the sonne of God These faultes in the new Testament being some of them whiche I by no diligent reading haue obserued nowe you be admonished of them we shall see whether you will call in your translation or coÌ„maunde your disciples to burne their bookes If you will not I pray you be good maister to vs and let our Bibles goe abroad stil for any faults we haue our selues amended and admonished all diligent Readers thereof by our later translations And because you cracke so much of the exposition of the Doctors and of the whole Churche of God against vs I muste let the Reader vnderstand that the whole Greeke Churche which for the most parte knewe none other text but the Septuaginta must needes expound the place of Abel as we do because the Greeke text is manifestly in the Masculine gender And so doth Chrysostome in Gen. Hom. 18. expound the place in these words Ne putes inquit licet tuum auersatus sim sacrificium ob prauam meÌ„tem fratrisque oblationem acceptam habuerim ob sanam intentionem quod ideo primatu te destituam primogeniturae dignitatem à te auferam Nam licet honore ego illum prosecutus fuerim acceptaque fuerint illius dona c. Thinke not sayeth he that although I haue refused thy sacrifice for thy naughtie minde and haue receiued thy brothers oblation for his good and sound meaning that therefore I will depriue thee of the primacie and take away from thee the dignitie of the birthright For although I haue vouchsafed him of honour that his gifts haue bene receiued yet vnto thee belongeth his conuersion and thou shalt rule ouer him And this I permit after thy sinne that thou mayest enioy the priuiledges of thy birthright and I commaund him to be vnder thy power and dominion You were best now to rayle vpon Chrysostome and charge him with heresie and schismaticall exposition contrarie to the holy Doctors and the whole Church of God against freewill of man Which because it is your quarrell you haue S. Ambrose also your enemie De Caine Abel lib. 2. cap. 7. Who although as he redde it in Latine did thinke it must be referred to him and not to his brother yet he expoundeth it not of the strength of free wil but chargeth Came to be author of his owne errour Culpae ipsius ad â—e conuersio est The coÌ„uersion of the fault it selfe is vnto thee For his brother is not added to him but errour is ascribed whereof he him selfe is author to him selfe The crime sayth he will returne vpon thee which began of thee Thou hast not whereby to accuse necessitie more than thyne owne minde The wickednesse is retorted backe vpon thee thou art Prince of it He sayth well thou art Prince of it for impietie is the mother of sinnes c You see therefore that if you could obtaine that these relatiues were referred to him yet your free will were not by and by to be builded vpon the place and that all be not heretikes which drawe that text to an other exposition than standeth with your good liking MART. 13. Againe they translate in some of their Bibles agaynst free wil thus Christ when we were yet OF NO STRENGTH died for the vngodly Rom. 5. v. 6. The Apostles word doth not signifie that we had nostrength but that we were weake seeble infirme Man was wounded in free will by the sinne of Adam as he that in the Gospell went downe from Hierusalem to Iericho which is a parable of this thing he was not slayne altogither But I stande not here or in any place to dispute the controuèrsie that is done else where This onely I say because* they falsely holde that free will was altogither loste by Adams sinne therefore they translate accordingly When we had no strength But the Greeke worde is well knowen both in profane authors and Ecclesiasticall and specially in the newe Testament it selfe throughout to signifie nothing else but weake feeble sicke infirme Looke me through the newe Testament wheresoeuer infirmitie feeblenesse languishing and the like are spoken of there is founde this Greeke worde to expresse it What Grecian knoweth not be he but simply acquainted with phrases and nature of wordes what 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doe signifie When the Apostle sayth Quis infirmatur ego non vror Who is weake and infirme and I am not much grieued shall we translate who is of no strength c. or let them giue vs an instance where it is certaine that this word must needes signifie of no strength Will they pretend the etymologie of the word a ridiculous and absurd euasion we aske them of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a worde of the very same
Thus hauing taken away free will to doe good and possibilitie to keepe the commaundementes and all merite or valure and efficacie of good workes their nexte conclusion is that we haue no true iustice or righteousnesse in vs but an imputatiue iustice that is Christes iustice imputed to vs be wee neuer so foule and filthie in our soules so that wee beleeue onely and by faith apprehend Christes iustice For this purpose they corrupt the Scriptures in their English Bibles thus FVLK 15. The iustice whereby wee are accompted iuste in the sight of God is not inherent in vs but in Christe which is the Lord our righteousnesse Ierem. 23. Not withstanding it is the onely true iustice and we are truely iuste by it And yet wee are not voyde of the spirite of sanctification whiche is a fruite and consequent of iustification by which we haue grace to withstand sinne and to worke righteousnesse not whereby we should be made righteous before God but whereby wee are declared to be righteous in parte vntill the body of sinne being abolished wee shall be wholy renewed according to the image of God CHAP. XI Hereticall translation for IMPVTATIVE IVSTICE against true inherent iustice Martin ONE place might suffise in steede of many where Beza doth protest that his adding or alteration of the texte is specially against the execrable errour of inherent iustice which he saith is to be auoided as nothing more His false translation thuâ— our English Bezites and Caluinists folowe in their Bibles Likewise then as by the offense of one the faulte came on all men to condemnation so by the iustifying of one the benefite abounded towarde all men to the iustification of life Where there are added to the text of the Apostle sixe wordes and the same so wilfully and voluntarily that by the three first they make the Apostle say sinne came on all men by Adam and they were made sinners in deede by the three later they make him say not that iustice or righteousnesse came likewise on all men by Christe to make them iust in deede but that the benefite of Christes iustice abounded towards them as being imputed forsooth vnto them Whereas if they woulde needes adde to the texte whiche yet is intollerable so muche and in so doubtfull a case they shoulde at the least haue made the case equall as the Apostle him selfe teacheth them to doe in the very nexte sentence saying thus For as by one mans disobedience many were made sinners so by the obedience of one shall many also be made righteous So they translate rather than be made iust For they are the lothest men in the world to say that we are made iust for feare of iustice inherent in vs though the Scripture be neuer so plaine As here wee see the Apostle maketh the case like that we are made iust by Christ as wee were made sinners by Adam Fulke THis one place is deliuered from your vaine cauillation Cap. 1. Sect. 23. when the sentence is ecclipticall or defectiue they that will translate to haue it vnderstoode muste needes supply the woordes that are wanting And where shall they finde what wordes are lacking but in the same place and in the treatie of the same matter It appeareth you had rather the texte had no sense than that it mighte seeme to make against your blasphemie of iustice inherent As for that fonde quarrell of yours that they be not iust in deede to whom the iustice of Christe whiche you like an helhound doe scorne at is imputed deserueth no answere For who is such a blocke to say or thinke that those whom God doth iustifie are not made iuste in deede Was not Abraham iust in deede when God imputed his faith vnto iustice Is not he made riche in deede which is made rich by an other mans gifte Christe is giuen vnto vs of God to be iustice wisedome sanctification in him we are iust wise and holie not in our owne righteousnesse wisedome or holinesse As for adding to the text God knoweth how we abhorre it but adding of words which do explicate the sense of the holyghost is no additioÌ„ forbiddeÌ„ for then all preaching were accursed which is or ought to be nothing els but an explaining settiÌ„g forth of the worde of God in more words the matter wherof though in fewerwords is coÌ„teined in the scripture And if we speake of adding of wordes in translation haue I not shewed before that you haue added many some in deede vpon necessarie cause some without necessitie What needed you to say for Poeniterent they had done penance Luc. 10. for In omnibus bonis in all his goodes Gen. 6. for separamini separate your selues 2 Cor. 6. c. To say wee are iustified and to say we are made iuste is all one and therefore I meruayle why you thinke vs loth to say the one rather than the other Is any man so senselesse to thinke wee can say a man is made righteous and dare not say he is made iuste I tell you plainely we defie the heresie of righteousnesse inherent as much as of iustice inherent We are iuste we are righteous in the sight of God not by the iustice or righteousnesse of our workes but by the iustice or righteousnesse of Christe imputed to vs through faith And we are made iuste by Christe as wee were made sinners by Adam in some respect but not in euery respect for the Apostle maketh a broade difference betweene the transgression and the benefite Rom. 5. v. 15. and other differences there be which none but a Pelagian will denie Nay Pelagius will not say that we are iust by Christ according to propagation but according to faith MART. 2. And it is a worlde to see how Beza shifteth from one signification of the word iustified or made iust to an other Sometime to be iustified is to be pronounced quiâ—â—e from all sinne or declared iust before Gods indgement seate and so â—e â—raÌ„slateth it in the text Act. 13. v. 39. and as though his guilty conscience were afraide of a blowe he saith he fleeth not the terme of iustifying or iustification because he vseth it in other places He doth so in deede but theÌ„ his coÌ„mentarie supplieth the â—urne as Ro. 2. v 13. Not y t hearers of y e law are RIGHTEOVS before God so they delight to translate rather than IVST before God but the doers of the Lawe shall be IVSTIFIED that is saith Beza shal be pronouÌ„ced iust The Apostle must needes say by the coherence and consequence of his words noâ— the hearers are iust but the doâ—rs shall be iuste or iustified Beza wil in no case haue it so but either in text or coÌ„meÌ„tarie make the Apostle say as him self imagineth Yet in an other place he protesteth very solemnely that to be iustified is not to be pronounced or accounted iuste but rather to be iuste in deede and that he prooueth out of S.
Paule Ro. 5. v. 19. who maketh it all one to be iustified and to be made iust And againe by this reason that it shoulde bee manifestly repugnant to Gods iustice to account him for iuste that is not iuste and therfore that man in deede is made iust Thus Beza Woulde you not thinke hee were come to bee of our opinion but hee reuolteth againe and interpreateth all these goodly wordes in his olde sense saying Not that any qualitie is inwardly giuen vnto vs of which wee are named iust but because the iustice of Christe is imputed to vs by faith freely By faith then at the least we are truly iustified Not so neither but faith sayth he is an instrument wherewith we apprehende Christ our iustice So that we haue no more iustice in vs than we haue glorie for glorie also we apprehend by faith FVLK 2. Al learned meÌ„ I hope do see that you haue no regarde how vainely you cauil so you may seeme to the ignorant to say somthing against theÌ„ that be godly and learned Act. 13. v. 39. Beza translateth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 absolui that is saith hee to bee declared iust or absolued and giueth this reason why he vseth not the worde iustificaâ—i in that place which he vseth elsewhere Ne quis illud ab omnibus perinde acciperet ac si casus esset modi aut instrumenti per quod iustiâ—icemur id est iustifiamus ac pronunciemur aut pro iustis habeamur hoc quidem loco malui absolueÌ„di verbum vsurpare vt magis perspicua esset oratio Least anie man should take this worde of the texte ab omnibus as though it were the case of the meane or instrument by which we are iustified that is made and pronounced iust or accounted for iuste In this place I chose rather to vse the worde of absoluing that the sentence mighte bee more cleare The Latine ab omnibus may signifie by all things or from all things Therefore leaste anye manne shoulde mistake the Apostle as thoughe hee saide wee are iustified by all those thinges where hee meaneth wee are iustified from all thinges Beza in this place vseth the worde of absoluing or acquitting in the same sense that he doth iustifying in other places where hee speaketh of the same matter and sayeth as plainely as a man can speake that to be iustified and to be made iuste or pronounced or accompted iust beefore God is all one Yet our Momus findeth faulte with him for expounding to be iustified Rom. 2. v. 13. to bee pronounced iuste as thoughe God will pronounce anye man iuste whiche is not iuste indeede But Beza hee saith elsewhere protesteth that to be iustified is not to be pronounced or accompted iuste but rather to be iust indeede If Martin hadde not beelyed Beza we shoulde haue hadde Bezaes wordes sette downe bothe in Latine and Englishe But in truth Beza hath no suche words yet in sense he hath thus muche that to be iustified before God is to be iuste indeede and not to bee onely pronounced or accompted iuste when hee is not so in deede But that wee are made truely iust indeede by the iustice of Christe whiche is imputed vnto vs freely by faith And as for that newe life or iustice whiche is called inhereÌ„t in vs it is not the cause but the witnes of that iustice by imputation of whiche wee are saued folowing him that is iustified and not going before iustification and faith indede is the instrument by which we apprehend Christ our iustice Neither doth Beza say that we are not truely iustified by faith but that faith is not the principall efficient cause which is the mercie of God but the instrumentall cause by whiche wee take holde of the mercie of God in Christe In al this Beza hath said nothing contrarie to himself nor to the truth And it is no absurditie to say that the iustice of Christe by which we are iustified is no more inherent in vs than his glorie And yet both assured vnto vs by faith As for that iustice whiche is an effect of Gods sanctifying spirite and a fruite of our iustification beefore God by whiche also we are iustified or declared iuste beefore men as S. Iames teacheth is inhereÌ„t in vs as also the first fruits of glorification by that peace of coÌ„science ioy that we haue in God being reconciled to vs by Christ. MART. 3. For this purpose bothe hee and the Englishe Bibles translate thus Abraham beleeued God and it was reputed to him FOR IVSTICE Rom. 4. v. 3. 9. Where he interpreateth for iustice to be nothing else but. in the steede place of iustice so also taking away true inherent iustice euen from Abraham himselfe But to admit their translation whiche notwithstanding in their sense is moste false must it nedes signifie not true inherent iustice because the Scripture saith it was reputed for iustice Do such speaches import that it is not so in deede but is onely reputed so Then if wee say This shall be reputed to thee for sinne for a greate benefite and so foorth it shoulde signifie it is no sinne indeede nor great benefite But let them call to mind that the Scripture vseth to speake of sinne and of iustice alike It shal be sinne in thee or vnto thee as they translate Bibl. 1577 or as S. Hierome translateth It shall bee reputed to thee for sinne Deut. c. 23. 24. as themselues translate it shall be righteousnesse vnto thee before the Lord thy God And againe Deut. c. 6. This shall bee our righteousnes before the Lord our God if we kepe al the commaundements as he hath commaunded vs. If then iustice onely be reputed sinne also is onely reputed if sin bee in vâ— indeede iustice is in vs indeede FVLK 3. Our translation taketh not from Abraham true iustice nor yet iustice inherent but declareth that he was not iustified before God by workes that is by iustice inherent but by faith whyche apprehendeth the iustice of Christ whych is altogyther without vs. And therefore you cauil in your olde rotten quarrell when you goe aboute to make reputed to bee contrarie to truthe or indeede Faith was reputed by God to Abraham for iustice indeede but not as iustice inherent And AbrahaÌ„ was truly iustified by faith as by an instrumentall cause not that faith was the iustice by which he was iust in the sight of God excluding all other causes but there was nothing in AbrahaÌ„ but faith which God accompted for iustice But Abrahams faith embraced the mercie of God in the promised seede in whiche as well hee as all the tribes of the earth should be blessed The places of scripture that you cite speaking of sinne iustice alike be not contrary to the imputation of iustice vnto them in which it is not inherent For in neither of both places the holy ghost vseth the word of imputation howsoeuer S. Hierome translateth
it but the verbe substantiue And the meaning is plaine It shal be sinne in thee for sinne is indeede inherent as perfecte iustice also shoulde bee if wee coulde obserue all the commaundements of God as Moses sayeth Deut. 6. and we shoulde be iustified thereby But by one iuste acte whereof Moses speaketh Deut. 24. thoughe it proceede of iustice that is in vs the scripture neuer saith that wee shall be iustified To conclude wee confesse that bothe sinne and iustice are in the children of God but not that iustice whereby they are reputed iuste or iustified or made iuste beefore God but an effecte or fruite thereof MART. 4. Againe the Greeke fathers make it plaine that to be reputed vnto iustice is to be true iustice in deede interpreating S. Paules worde in Greeke thus Abraham obtained iustice Abraham was iustified For that is say they It was reputed him to iustice Doth not S. Iames say the like cap. 2. verse 23. testifying that in that Abraham was iustified by faith and workes the Scripture was fulfilled that saith it was reputed him to iustice Gen. Cap. 15. verse 6. In whiche wordes of Genesis where these wordes were firste written by Moyses in the Hebrewe there is not for iustice or in steede of iustice whiche Beza pleadeth vppon by the Hebrewe phrase but thus He God reputed it vnto him iustice though heere also the Englishe Bibles adde for Whiche precisely translating the Hebrewe they shoulde not do specially when they meane it was so counted or reputed for iustice that it was not iustice indeede FVLK 4. I knowe not against whome you fight but against your owne shadow For we say that to be iustified and be reputed iust and to obtaine iustice is all one in this case But where S. Iames sayth that Abraham was iustified by workes he meaneth that he was declared iust before men euen as he sayth shewe me thy faith by thy workes for Abraham was not iustified by a dead faith but by a working faith and yet he was not iustified before God by workes but the Scripture was fulfilled which sayd Abraham beleued God and it was reputed to him for iustice which is as S. Paule expoundeth it Abraham was iustified before God by faith and not by workes But in Gen. 15. v. 6. there is not the preposition for or in steede but simply iustice therefore it should be translated he reputed it to him iustice And will you then controule both the Apostles Paule and Iames for adding the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth vnto or for Or will not common sense inforce the same vnderstanding that both the Apostles doe giue it He reputed it to him as iustice or for iustice Must not such particles in translation be alwayes expressed to make the sense plaine which in English without the particle hath no sense or vnderstanding To translate precisely out of the Hebrew is not to obserue the number of wordes but the perfect sense and meaning of them in fewer or more wordes as the phrase of our tongue will serue to be vnderstood or else 2. Cor. 8. qui multum why do you translate he that had much and qui modicum non minorauit he that had litle wanted not you should haue said which much which little not lessed if you would haue giuen word for word and not added any word for explication Againe 2. Cor. 1. Supra virtutem aboue our power why adde you our which is not in the text and in deede not necessarie to be added in the translation Againe 1. Cor. 13. Euacuaui quae erant paruuli I did away the things that belonged to a litle one Here for foure Latine wordes you haue giuen tenne or eleuen English wordes which no reasonable man can greatly mislike if you were not such a quarreller at other mens doing without all cause or wise colour but onely to bleare the eyes of the ignorant MART. 5. But as for either the Hebrew or Greeke word that is here vsed to repute or account they are then vsed wheÌ„ it must needes signifie that the thing is so in deed and not onely so reputed as Psal. 118. octonario SAMEC I haue reputed or accounted all the sinners of the earth preuaricators or transgressors praeuaricantes reputaui So did the Septuaginta take the Hebrew word and read it And S. Paule So let a man repute or account vs as the Ministers of Christ. Let them goe now and say that neyther they were sinnâ—rs in deede nor these Christes ministers in deede because they were reputed for such let them saye the children of the promise were not the seede of Abraham because the Apostle sayth Rom. 9. v. 8. they are reputed for the seede But howsoeuer it be the Protestants will haue it so to be taken at the least in the matter of iustification FVLK 5. Silence were the beste aunswer to these tedious repetitions It were sufficient once to saye among reasonable men When faith is reputed by God or accounted for iustice faith is truely and in deede the instrumentall cause of iustification or apprehending the iustice of Christ by which we are accounted and made iust in the sight of God It is therefore a most ridiculous cauill of the difference betwene reputing iust and being iust in deede For God when he iustifieth the vngodly doth both repute him and make him iust in deede by the iustice of Christ of his owne meere mercye and not of the mans merits or by iustice inherent For what iustice can be in an vâ—godly man and such is euery one of vs whome God doth iustifie and then giue vs his holy spirit to sanctifie vs in newnesse of life to set forth his glorie in our holye and blamelesse conuersation MART. 6. Againe where Saint Paule sayth 2. Cor. 5. That wee mighte bee made the iustice of God in him they in their firste translations intolerably corrupte iâ— thus That wee by his meanes should bee that righteousnesse which BEFORE GOD IS ALLOWED Who â—aught them to translate so dissolutely Iustitia Dei the righteousnesse which before God is allowed did not their errour and heresie which is that God reputeth and accounteth vs for iuste though wee bee in deede moste foule sinners and that our iustice beyng none at all in vs yet is allowed and accepted before him for iustice and righteousnesse FVLK 6. There is no texte in all the Bible more cleare against iustification by iustice inhaeâ—ent than this 2. Corinth 5. wherein not altogither causelesse you reproue our firste interpreters to translate dissolutely There it is certaine they had no suche purpose as you ascribe vnto them For their translation dothe rather obscure than sette out our iustification by the iustice which is not in vs but in Christ. The texte is therefore playne him that knewe no sinne he made sinne for vs that wee might become the iustice of God in him that is in Christ and not in our selâ—es For though
gift Or dare you say that faith is not a speciall gift of God They say not a special faith but a speciall gift of faith The other quarrel of the translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I am sure is so brutish that when you confesse the vulgare Latine interpreater commonly to translate it Certus sum and that in the end you can vse no demonstration to conuince vs yet stil neuerthelesse you charge our conscience with the secreate thinges of dishonestie That the Apostle was sure of his owne saluation by the testimonie of Gods spirite which is giuen to al his children wee doubt not and that he was sure of the saluation of all Gods elect of whiche it is vnpossible that any should perish And seing the same spirit of adoptiō is giuē to al the children of God which is the earnest of the heauēly inheritance we cā not affirme without blasphemie against Gods truth that any mā ought to discredite the promises of God or the testimonie of his spirite MART. 4. You holde also in this kinde of contronersie that a man must assure himself that his sinnes be forgiuen but in the booke of Eccle. c. 5. v. 5. We reade thus Of thy sin forgiuē be not without feare or as it is in the Greke Of forgiuenes propitiation bee not without feare to heape sin vpon sins Which you translate falsly thus Because thy sin is forgiuen thee be not therfore without feare Is that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because thy sin is forgiuen thee You knowe it is not but that wee shoulde bee afraid of the very forgiuenes thereof whether our sin be forgiuen or no or rather whether our sinne shall be forgiuen or no if we heape one sinne vppon an other Whiche seemeth to bee the truest sense of the place by the wordes following as though he should say Be not bold vpon forgiuenes to heap sin vpō sin as thogh God wil easly forgiue c. FVLK 4. We hold that a man when he is truly penitent ought to assure himself that his sins bee forgiuen him because God hath so promised in an hūdred places without iniurie of whose credit we cannot doubt of the performance of his promise But that which the sonne of Syrach speaketh of propitiatiō is meant of the shadowie propitiation by the sacrifices of the lawe which can not assure anie man of the forgiuenesse of his sins by themselues much lesse them that heape sin vpon sin which are neuer truely repentant For vnto true repentaunce is required an hatred of sin a desire purpose of amendment Our translation is as your vulgar Latine not precise to the words of the Greeke but iuste vnto the meaning for the words are concerning propitiation be not without feare and your Latin is De propitiato peccato of sin forgiuen And if you wil reprooue your Latin aswel as our English and say we must be afraid of the very forgiuenes I haue told you that the forgiuenes of God testified by the sacrifices pertained vnto them that be truly penitent and not to hypocrites And where you make it a doubt whether sin shall bee forgiuen or no in them that heape one sin vpon an other we are out of doubte that sin shall neuer bee forgiuen to suche as so continue without true conuersion vnto God MART. 5. I touched before vpon another occasion how you adde to the text making the Apostle say thus Ephes. 3. By whom we haue boldnes and entrance with THE CONFIDEHCE WHICHE Is by the faith of him or as in an other Bible which is al one in the confidence by faith of him The learned and skilful among you in the Greke tong know that this translation is false for twoo causes the one is because the Greeke in that case shoulde be thus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 an other cause is the point after 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that the very simple sincere translation is this wee haue affiaunce and accesse with confidence by the faith of him euen as elsewhere it is said wee haue confidence if our hart reprehend vs not we haue confidence by keping the commaundements by tribulations and afflictions and al good workes hope also giueth vs great confidence Against all which your translation is preiudiciall limiting and defining our confidence toward God to be faith as though wee had no confidence by workes or otherwise FVLK 5. For vnderstanding of the article I haue answered alreadie meane not here to repeate it The point you misse in the Bible 1577. is obserued in that boke which I haue of Richard lugs printing By whom we haue boldenesse and entrance in the confidence by faith of him But it cannot be the confidēce you think but confidence because the article 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is not put before the worde that signifieth confidence But al Englishemen know that our English the may be put and sometime must be put before nounes without any article either in Greeke or Latine And in this place I would not giue a rush to choose whether it be in or out for anye sense that it chaungeth What confidence we haue by a good conscience by suffring tribulation and by al good workes it skilleth not for this question so it be determined that we haue no confidence in the merites of a good conscience of suffering of al good works that we can do to haue boldenesse and entrance vnto God But of merites we haue spoken before in their proper place MART. 6. For this confidēce by faith only Beza translateth so wilfully peruersly that either you were ashamed to folow him or you lacked a cōmodious English word correspondēt to his Latine If I haue all faith saith the Apostle and haue not charitie I am nothing totam fidem saith Beza I had rather translate than omnem fidem because the Apostle meaneth not al kind of faith to witte the faith that iustifieth but he meaneth that if a man haue the faith of Christs omnipotencie or of any other article of the Creede or of al wholy entirely perfectly that is nothing without charitie This is Bezaes tota fides whole faith thinking by this translation to exempt frō the Apostles words their special iustifying faith and wrastling to that purpose in his annotatiōs against Pighius and other Catholike Doctours Whereas euery man of smal skil may see that the Apostle nameth al faith as he doth al knowlege and al mysteries comprehending al sortes of the one and of the other al kinde of knowledge al kind of mysteries al faith whatsoeuer Christian Catholike historical or special which two later are Heretical termes newely deuised FVLK 6. When your spightfull and dogged malice cannot reprooue our English translation then wee muste aunsweare for Bezaes Latine who hath sufficiently aunswered for himselfe to them that vnderstande and liste to reade him In the place mentioned by you hee chooseth to say totam fidem rather than omnem
the soule by the same instrument of faith onely which by other places may be more directly prooued and here also in some sorte is insinuated MAR. 10. This then you see is a fallacie wheÌ„ faith only is required to the helth of the body as in many such places thogh not in all there by translation to make it sounde a iustifying faith as thogh faith only were required to the helth of the soule Wheras that faith was of Christes omnipotencie onely and power which Beza confesseth may be in the diuels themselues and is farre from the faith that iustifieth If you saye the Greeke signifieth as you translate it doth so in deede but it signifieth also very commonly to bee healed corporally as by your owne translation in these places Marc. 5. v. 28. Marc. 6. v. 36. Luc. 8. v. 36. v. 51. Where you translate I shal be whole They were healed Hee was healed She shal bee made whole And why do you here translate so because you know to be saued importeth rather an other thing to wit saluation of the soule and therefore when faith is ioyned withall you translate rather saued than healed though the place be meant of bodilie health onely to insinuate by all meanes your iustification by only faith FVLK 10. It is no fallacie from the health of the bodie to ascende higher to the health of the soule but that direct and plaine way by whiche Christe himselfe would be knowne to be sauiour of the worlde not of the bodie onely but of the bodie and soule togither And commonly his bodily cures were ioyned with forgiuenesse of sinnes whych are causes of al maladies and with health of their soules whose bodies were made safe As for iustification by faith only we meane none otherwise to insinuate it in this place than Christ him self doth by doing miracles in giuing health of the bodie to testifie that he is the onely authour of the saluation of mens soules CHAP. XIII Heretical translation against PENANCE and SATISFACTION Martin VPon the heresie of onely faith iustifying and sauing a man followeth the deniall of all penance and satisfaction for sinnes Which Beza so abhorreth Annot. in Mat. 3. v. 2 that he maketh protestation that he auoydeth these termes Poenitentia and Poenitentiam agere of purpose and that he will alwayes vse for them in translating the Greeke wordes resipiscentia and resipiscere Which he doth obserue perhaps but that sometimes he is worse than his promise translating most falsely and heretically for resipiscentia resipiscentes so that your English Bezites them selues are ashamed to translate after him Who otherwise followe his rule for the most part translating resipiscentia amendement of life and resipiscite amende your liues and the other English Bibles when they translate best say repentance and repent but none of them all once haue the wordes penance and doe penance Which in most places is the very true translation according to the verye circumstance of the text and vse of the Greeke word in the Greeke Church and the auncient Latine translation thereof and all the fathers reading thereof and their expositions of the same Which foure pointes I thinke not amisse briefly to proue that the Reader may see the vse and signification of these wordes which they of purpose will not expresse to auoyd the termes of penance and doing penance Fulke IF by penance you meane satisfaction for sinnes by any suffering of ours we abhorre your penance as an horrible blasphemy against the bloud of Christ. And for that cause Beza as hath bene shewed before vseth the worde resipiscentia rather than poenitentia because the Greeke word signifieth not onely a sorow for sinne but also a purpose of amendment of life We in English vse the worde repentance or amendment of life which worde of repentance you vse also sometimes when it pleaseth you or when you can not for shame vse your popish terme of doing penance The cause why we neuer vse that word penance is for that you meane not thereby that which the Scripture calleth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but a certaine punishment taken vpon men for satisfaction of their sinnes vnto God which is abhominable for all Christian eares to heare which acknowledge that the bloud of Christ onely purgeth vs from all sinne But in foure pointes you will proue if you can that we should translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to do penance MART. 2. First that the circumstance of the text doth giue it so to signifie we reade in S. Mathew cap. 11. v. 21. If in Tyre and Sidon had bene wrought the miracles that haue bene wrought in you they had done penance in hairecloth or sackecloth and ashes long agoe And in S. Luke cap. 10. v. 13. they had done penance fitting in sackcloth and ashes I beseech you these circumstances of sackecloth and ashes adioyned doe they signifie penance and affliction of the bodye or onely amendement of life as you would haue the word to signifie S. Basil sayth in Psal. 29. Sackcloth maketh for penance For the fathers in olde time sitting in sackcloth and ashes did penance Vnlesse you will translate S. Basil also after your fashion whome you can not any way translate but the sense must needes be penance and doing penance Againe S. Paule sayth You were made sorie to penance or to repentance say which you will and The sorowe which is according to God worketh penance or repentance vnto saluation Is not sorow and bitter mourning and affliction partes of penance Did the incestuous man whome Saint Paule excommunicated and afterward absolued him because of his exceeding sorow and teares for feare lest he might be ouerwhelmed with sorow did he I say change his mind onely or amend his life as you translate the Greeke worde and interprete repentance did he not penance also for his fault enioyned of the Apostle when Saint Iohn the Baptist sayth and Saint Paule exhorteth the like Doe fruites worthy of penance or as you translate meete for repentance Doe they not plainly signifie penitentiall workes or the workes of penance which is the very cause why Beza rather translated in those places Doe the fruites meete for them that amend their liues or giue vs some other good cause Oye Bezites why your maister doth so foâ—ly falsifie his translation FVLK 2. Such is your malicious frowardnes that you will not vnderstande resipiscentia repentance or amendement of life a sorow or griefe of mind for the life past which is testified sometimes by outward signes of sackcloth and ashes fasting and humbling of mens bodies as in the texts of Math. 11. and Luc. 10. and diuerse other is expressed But shew vs that the wearing of sackcloth and ashes is a satisfaction for the life past or any part of amends to Gods iustice or else you do but trifle and waste the time But S. Basil sayth that sackcloth maketh for penance c.
and repentance were al one But you saye repentance Also Act. 11. God then to the Gentiles hath giuen repentance to life where the word is poenitentia in both places As also 2. Tim. 2. where you say least sometyme God giue them repentance to knowe the truth Of thys repentance which God giueth vnto life and remission of sinnes withal satisfaction is no parte of publike repentance so called when indeede it was a publike testification that God had giuen inward repentance we acknowledge satisfaction to the Church and to the iudgement of the gouernoures thereof to bee a parte MART. 5. Or I would also aske them whether in these places they will translate repentaunce and amendement of life where there is mentioned a prescript time of satisfaction for their fault by suche and suche penal meanes whether there be any prescript times of repentaunce or amendment of life to continue so long and no longer if not then muste it needes bee translated penaunce and dooing penaunce which is longer or shorter according to the faulte and the maner of dooing the same I maye repent in a moment and amende my life at one instant and this repentaunce and amendement oughte to continue for euer but the holie Councels and Fathers speake of a thing to be done for certaine yeares or dayes and to be released at the Bishoppes discreation this therefore is penaunce and not repentance only or amendment of life and is expressed by the foresaid Greeke wordes as also by * an other equiualent there vnto FVLK 5. I haue aunswered before we may in all these places vse the worde of repentaunce as well as this worde repent the noune as well as the verbe And if we woulde vse the same figure whych they doe that cal suche externall testimonies of repentaunce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wee might vse the worde of amendment of life also The prescripte time of satisfaction I haue said was to the church which was offended and slaundered by their open offences and to the iudgement of the Byshoppe and Elders whyche hadde the appointing or releasing of suche time of repentance The other Greeke word which you say is aequiualent to 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 namely 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to fal downe vnder or knele before one as Tertullian expresseth the phrase praesbyteris aduolui aris dei adgeniculari for one to be caste downe in humble manner before the Elders to kneele before the altars of God Herof 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is vsed for that submission whiche publique penitents did shewe to testifie their inward humilitie and by a metonymie of the signe is taken for that which it doth signifie namely humble and hartie repentaunce whiche is approued before men by such outward gestures and tokens of inwarde griefe and humilitie of minde So is publique fasting in token of repentaunce by Tertullian called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 because it is a signe token of humiliation and submission of minde whiche must of necessitie accompany true repentance Wherefore it is vntruly said that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is equiualent with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to change the minde frrm euil to good wheras the other expresseth but an outwarde gesture to signifie inward repentaunce and that in open repentaunce onely MART. 6. I omit that this very phrase to do penance is word for word expressed thus in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 And Ausonius the christian Poet whom I may as wel alleadge once vse it not as they do Virgil Terence the like very often vseth this Greeke worde so euidently in this sense that Beza saith he did it for his verse sake because another worde would not stande so well in the verse But the reader I trust seeth the vse and signification of these Greeke wordes by the testimonie of the Greeke fathers them selues moste auncient and approued FVLK 6. You may well omit that which beareth no credite of antiquitie The Liturgie is not so auncient as he whose name it beareth the Rubrike muche lesse That Beza saith of Ausonius vsing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in the sense you meane it seemeth you doe not vnderstande him For he saith that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is neuer vsed but in good parte So that in my iudgement Ausonius would haue said rather 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in that his knowen Epigram if the measure of his Pentametre verse would haue borne it MART. 7. Thirdly that the auncient Latine Interpreter doth commonly so translate these wordes through out the newe Testament that needeth no proofe neyther will I stande vpon it though it be greater authoritie than they haue any to the contrary because the Aduersaries know it and mislike it and for that and other like pointes it is belike that one of them saith it is the worst translation of all whereas Beza his Maister saith it is the best of all So well they agree in iudgement the Maister and the man FVLK 7. The Latine interpretor as it appeareth in many places had no perfect vnderstanding of the Greeke tongue but in the Latine it is manifest that hee was very rude in so much that Lindanus thinketh hee was a Grecian rather than a Latinist Yea hee hath a whole chapter thus intituled That the Autors of the vulgar translation of the Psalter and the newe Testament were Grecians Nec latine satis eruditos and not sufficiently learned in the Latine tongue By whiche testimonie it may bee gathered what credite is to bee giuen to the Latine termes that he vseth differing from the Latine phrase vsed by them that are learned in that tongue I could bring example of many termes and phrases that you your self are ashamed to follow which pretende so precise a translation out of the vulgar Latine What my mislike is of that translation and howe contrarie to that which Beza saith thereof I haue opened else where to your shame Onely here I muste tell you that albeit in respect of learning I disdaine not to acknowledge my selfe Bezaes scholler of whom neuerthelesse I haue learned very litle yet I would you should know I am no strangers man though you and such traitors as you are had rather be the Popes men than true seruants to the Queene of England MART. 8. I come to the fourth proofe which is that all the Latine Churche and the glorious Doctors thereof haue alwaies reade as the vulgar Latine interpreter translateth these wordes and expound the same of penance and doing penance To name one or twoo for an example S. Augustines place is very notable which therefore I set downe and may be translated thus Men doe penance before Baptisme of their former sinnes yet so that they be also baptized Peter saying thus DOE YE PENANCE AND LET EVERY ONE BE BAPTISED Men also doe penance if after Baptisme they do so sinne that they deserue to be excommunicated and reconciled
euident absurditie thereof FVLK 13. Maister Whitaker is not so inconsiderate to play fast and loose as you are intemperate and vntrue in accusing him Howbeit there is no doubt but he will meete you and handle you according to your vertues But seeing you giue such high commendation to Campions pamphlet as that you call it a learned booke wherein beside a litle ranke Rhetorike more meete for a boye that learneth to practise his figures than for a graue Diuine to vse in so serious a cause there is nothing that any learned man may thinke worthy of any aunswere we may well perceiue what you count learning what be the pillers of your popish religion The bookes are both in print let the worlde iudge of both indifferently MART. 14 But to leaue M. Whitakers who is a simple companion to sit in iudgement vpon all the auncient Doctors and to condemne them of hainous errour in the matter of penance I trust the Reader seeth by the former discourse the vsuall Ecclesiasticall signification and consequently both the true and false translation of the foresayd Greeke wordes Not that they must or may alwayes be translated penance or doing penance For in the scriptures God is sayd Poenitentiam agere who can not be sayd to doe penance no more than he can be said to amend his life as the Protestants commonly translate this word Therefore I conclude that this word being spoken of God in the Scriptures is no more preiudice against our translation of doing penance than it is against theirs of amendment of life Likewise when it is spoken of the reprobate and damned in hell who as they can not doe penance properly so much lesse amende their liues FVLK 14. Maister Whitaker taketh not vpon him to sit in iudgement of all the Doctors although he may note some errour or other in euery one of them whose writings of any substance doe remaine with vs. But after all this brabling about poenitentiaÌ„ agere you come home and confesse that it must not alwayes be translated doing of penance because God him selfe after your vulgar translation is sayd agere poenitentiam which with the Septuaginta is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 No man could better haue confuted your vaine quarreling than you haue done your selfe for by this it is manifest that the vulgar Interpreter did not meane by agere poenitentiam any more than we doe by repentance And therefore the best and the most simple translation is to vse the wordes repent and repentance And the Greeke word as Tertullian telleth you signifieth changing of mind which may be without acknowledging of errour Although it can not vet be properly said of God that he changeth his mind when he is sayd to repent As likewise it is not necessary that they which be in hel should amend their liues when it is said they repent Neither doe we translate the worde simply amendment of life but shewe that amendement of life must necessarily follow in them that truely repent as the Scripture teacheth vs. MART. 15. Moreouer it is purposely against penance that they translate amisse both in Daniel and Esdras whose voluntary mourning fasting afflicting of them selues for their owne sinnes and the peoples is notoriously set forth in their bookes There they make the Angell say thus to Daniel From the first day that thou didst set thyne hart TO HVMBLE thy selfe What is this humbling him selfe can we gather any penance thereby none at all but if they had sayd according to the Hebrew Greeke and Latine from the first day that thou didst set thine hart TO AFFLICT thy selfe we shoulde easily conceiue workes of penance and it would include Daniels mourning fasting from flesh wine and other meates abstaining from ointments the space of the dayes mentioned in the beginning of the same chapter FVLK 15. The word humbling doth as wel comprehende all those exercises of fasting and mourning which the holy men did vse to testifie their repentance to prouoke them selues to hartie repentance for their sinnes the sinnes of the people as the word afflicting Another translation calleth it chastening the Hebrewe word signifieth to bring lowe or cast downe therefore it is spoken of women that are carnally knowne which is without affliction But when it is vsed of such godly exercises it declareth for what ende they serue namely to humble and bring low our proude rebellious nature and to be signes of humiliation as S. Basil sayth of sackcloth and ashes not to be by punishment satisfaction for our sinnes Your owne vulgar Latine interpretor traÌ„slateth the same word Gen. 16 v. 19. humiliare humble thy selfe or submit thy selfe vnder thy mistres hand and often times in that sense And euen in this sense of humbling by signes of repentance he vseth the word humiliaâ—us speaking of Achab 2. Reg. 21. v. 29. where the Hebrew word is otherwise And Psalme 35. v. 13. the same worde â—innethi he translateth humiliaham And in their sickenes I put on sackcloth and humbled my soule with fasting So doth he often times when such bodily chastisement is signified thereby Wherefore this as all the rest is a false and vnreasonable quarrell against our translation as though by it we meant to denye the vse of afflicting or chastening the body with fasting mourning and other like exercises of repentance MART. 16. Againe in all their Bibles of the yeares 1562. 1577. 1579. they make Esdras c. 9. 5. after his exceeding great penance say onely this About the euening sacrifice I arose vp from my HEAVINESSE neither translating the Hebrew which is the same word that in Daniel nor the Greeke which signifieth affliction and humiliation FVLK 16. First your Greeke text of Esdras confirmeth our translation of Daniel Secondly I say that by this heauines they meane all that humiliation and affliction whereof he spake before which is easie for euery man to vnderstand that is not blinded with malice and what other thing is affliction but heauines griefe and sorow whereof the holy man spake twice before I thinke no wise man can tell MART. 17. Againe in the Prophet Malachie c. 3. 14. they translate thus Ye haue sayde It is but vaine to serue God and what profit is it that we haue kept his commaundements and walked HVMBLY before his face What is this same humbly when we say in English he goeth humbly we imagine or conceiue no more but this that he is an humble man and behaueth him selfe humbly but they know very well the Prophet speaketh of an other thing and if it had pleased them to haue translated the Hebrew word fully and significantly in the sense of the holy Ghost they might haue learned by conference of other places where the same Hebrewe word is vsed that it signifieth such heauines sadnes sorowfulnes and affliction as men expresse by blacke mourning garmeÌ„ts the nature of the word importing blacknesse darknesse lowring and the like Which is
farre more than walking humbly and which is wholy suppressed by so translating See the Psalme 34. v. 14. Ps. 37. v. 7. Ps. 41. v. 10. Where the Prophet vseth many wordes and speeches to expresse sorowfull penance and for that which in Latine is alwayes contristatus in Greeke a word more significant in Hebrew it is the same kind of worde that they translate humbly Whereas in deede this word hath no signification of humilitie properly no not of that humilitie I meane which is rather to be called humiliation or affliction as the Greeke wordes implye But it signifieth properly the very maner countenance gesture habite of a pensiue or sorlorne man if they will say that they so translate it in other places the more is their fault that knowing the nature of the worde they wil notwithstanding suppresse the force and signification thereof in any one place and so translate it that the reader must needes take it in an other sense and can not possibly conceiue that which the worde importeth for to walke humbly soundeth in all English eares the vertue of humilitie whyche thys worde doth neuer signifie and not humilitie or humiliation by affliction which it may signifie though secondarily and by deduction onely FVLK 17. What a many of vaine words are here spent to make a vaine cauil seeme to be of some value what the etymologie of the Hebrewe word is the translatours knewe beefore you were borne But what the worde signifieth heere Pagnine is sufficient to teache bothe you and them who thus interpreateth it in obscuro id est obscurè id est humiliter In the darke that is darkly that is humbly Your vulgare Latine translatour calleth it tristes whiche is as farre from your pretended penaunce as humilitie The Septuaginta translate the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whyche signifieth seruile or seruauntes Benedict Arias expoundeth it supplices humble And to put al out of quarrelling the Antithesis or opposition of the proud and arrogant in the next verse following proueth that in this verse they speake of humilitie whych is contrarie to pride and not of the tokens of repentaunce which are mourning apparell and such like MART. 18. Againe what is it else but against penance and satisfaction that they deface these vsual and known words of Daniel to the king Redime eleemosynis peccata tua Redeeme thy sinnes with almes altering and translating it thus Breake off thy sinnes by righteousnesse Firste the Greeke is against them whiche is worde for worde according to the vulgare and common reading Secondly the Chaldee worde whiche they translate Breake off by Munsters owne iudgement in lexico Chald. signifieth rather and more principally to redeeme Thirdely the other worde whiche they translate righteousnesse in the Scriptures signifieth also eleemosynam as the Greke interpreaters translate it Dent. 6. 24 it is most plaine in S. Mathew where our Sauiour saith Mat. 6. v. 1. Beware you do not your iustice before men Which is in other Greke copies your almes And S. Augustine prooueth it by the very text For saith he as though a maÌ„ might aske what iustice he addeth WHEN THOVDOST AN ALMES DEEDS He signified therefore that almes are the works of iustice And in the Psalme they are made one He distributed he gaue to the poore his iustice remayneth for euer and euer Which Beza translateth his beneficence or liberalitie remaineth c. Againe S. Hierome a sufficient Doctour to tel the signification of the Hebrue or Chaldee words both translateth iâ—so and expoundeth it so in his coÌ„mentarie Moreouer the wordes that immediatly folow in Daniel interprete it so vnto vs And thy iniquities with mercies to the pore Lastly Beza himself saith that by the name of iustice with the Hebrues is also signified beneficence or beneficialnes to the pore yea and that in this place of Daniel it is specially taken for almes So that wee see there is no impediment neither in the Chaldee nor Greeke why they might not haue saide as the Church of God alwayes hath saide Redeeme thy sinnes with almes and thy iniquities with mercies to the poore but their heresie wil not suffer them to speake after the Catholike maner that almes mercifull deeds are a redemption ransome and satisfaction for sinnes FVLK 18. Againste popishe penaunce and satisfaction there is no doubte but the translatours were vehemently affected yet in this translation they haue vsed no preiudice againste repentaunce and the true fruites thereof but rather more straightly haue vrged the same For firste whereas in the vulgare Latine texte there is no worde of repenting from sinnes or forsaking of sinnes our translatour vsing the terme of breaking off his sinnes signifieth that all almes and other apparant good deedes without repentaunce and breaking off the cause of the former sinfull lyfe are in vaine and vnprofitable Secondly where the vulgare translatour vseth the worde of redeeming or buying out whiche mighte bring the King into vaine securitie to thinke he might satisfie for his sinnes without repentance by giuing of almes whiche is a small penaunce for a King our translatours tell him that he must break off his sinnes before any thing that he doth be acceptable to God Thirdly whereas the vulgare interpretour requireth of him nothing but almes and mercie to the poore whiche was a verie easie thing for him to performe our translators enioine him righteousnesse which comprehendeth all vertues and is a thousande folde harder penaunce for suche a mightie monarch than giuing of almes and that to poore folks which he shoulde neuer feele Fourthly the wordes are plaine for our translation for pherak the Chaldee verb signifieth as properly and as principally to dissolue or breake off as to deliuer or redeeme Neither is Munsters iudgement otherwise although hee giue the other signification firste whyche is a miserable argument to proue that it signifieth rather and more principallye to redeme But if any signification were more principall than other it were more reason to saye that pherak signifieth rather more principally to breake or dissolue because the word signifieth so in the Hebrewe tongue from whence the Chaldee is deriued And indeede delyuering is a kinde of dissoluing or breaking from him to whome hee was beefore addicte or bounde So that the verbe helpeth you nothing but rather maketh more against you The other worde although verye seldome by synecdoche it be taken for almes yet euerie boy almoste in Cambridge knoweth that it signifieth properly and principally vniuersall iustice or all righteousnesse therefore the Chaldee texte is plaine for our translation and enforced for yours of almes Being agaynste all reason that the Prophete shoulde exhorte the Kyng to gyuing almes before hee hadde exhorted hym to repentaunce and forsakyng of hys sinnes Beside that it is contrarie to the whole scope of the scriptures to teache any other satisfaction or redemption from sinne than the death and passion
why is not this confessioÌ„ a Sacrament where them selues acknowledge forgiuenesse of sinnes by the Minister These contradictions and repugnance of their practise and translation if they can wittily and wisely reconcile they may perhaps in this point satisfie the reader But whether the Apostle speake here of Sacramentall confession or no sincere translators should not haue fledde from the proper and most vsuall word of confession or confessing consonant both to the Greeke and Latine and indifferent to what soeuer the holy Ghost might meane as this word acknowledge is not FVLK 7. Of the word of penance and therevpoÌ„ to wring in satisfaction we haue heard more than enough but that penance is a Sacrament wee haue heard neuer a worde to proue it But what say wee against confession Forsooth Iames 5. wee translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 acknowledge your selfes Why sir dothe acknowledging signifie any other thing than confessing you want then nothing else but the sounde of confession which among the ignoraunt woulde helpe you litle whiche terme your Popishe acknowledging rather shrifte than confession It is maruaile then that you blame vs not because wee say not shriue your selues one to an other A miserable Sacrament that hath neede of the sounde of a worde to helpe it to bee gathered But how I pray you should the reader gather your auricular shrifte or Popishe confession if the worde confesse your selues were vsed by vs I weene because the Priests are called in a little before It is more than mough if you might gaine your Sacrament of anealing by their comming in But shrifte commeth to late after extreeme vnction Well admitte the Apostle forgotte the order and placed it after which shoulde come before must wee needes haue Priestly confession proued out of that place doth not S Iames say coÌ„fesse your selues one to an other as he saith pray one for an other Then it followeth that the Lay man muste shriue the Prieste as well as the Prieste muste shriue the Laye man And the Priest muste confesse him selfe to the people as well as the people muste pray for the Prieste But you haue an obiection out of the Communion booke to proue confession to be a Sacrament which appointeth that the sicke person shal make a speciall confession to the minister and he to absolue him c. Will you neuer leaue this shamelesse cogging and forging of matters against vs The Communion booke appointeth a speciall confessioÌ„ only for them that feele their conscience troubled with any waighty matter that they may receiue counsaile and comforte by the minister who hath aucthoritie in the name of God to remitte sinnes not only to them that be sicke but also to them that be whole and dayly dothe pronounce the absolution to them that acknowledge confesse their sinnes humbly before God But hereof it followeth not that this confession is a Sacrament for by preaching the people that beleeue are absolued froÌ„ their sinnes by the ministerie of the Preacher yet is not preaching a Sacrament A Sacrament must haue an outward element or bodily creature to represent the grace of remission of sinnes as in Baptisme and in the Lordes supper But where you conclude that sincere translators should not haue fledde the proper and moste vsuall worde of confession you speake your pleasure for the worde of acknowledging is more proper and vsuall in the English tongue than is the worde of confessing And if you can proue any Sacrament out of that texte beholde you haue the Greeke and Latine vntouched and the English answereable to both make your Syllogisme out of that place to proue Popish shrift when you dare CHAP. XV. Hereticall translation against the Sacrament of HOLY ORDERS and for the MARIAGE OF PRIESTS and VOTARIES Martin AGAINST the Sacrament of Orders what can they doe more in translation than in all their Bibles to take away the name of Priest and Priesthood of the new Testament altogether and for it to say Elder and Eldership Whereof I treated more at large in an other place of this booke Here I adde these fewe obseruations that both for Priestes and Deacons which are two holy orders in the Catholike Church they translate Ministers to commend that newe degree deuised by themselues As when they say in all their Bibles Feare the Lord with all thy soule and honour his ministers In the Greeke it is plaine thus and honour his Priests as the word alwayes signifieth and in the very next sentence themselues so translate Feare the Lorde and honour the Priestes But they would needes borowe one of these places for the honour of Ministers As also in the Epistle to Timothee where S. Paul talketh of Deacons and nameth them twise they in the firste place translate thus Likewise muste the Ministers be honest c. And a litle after Let the Deacons be the husbaÌ„ds of one wife Loe the Greeke worde being one and the Apostle speaking of one Ecclesiasticall order of Deacons and Beza so interpreating it in both places yet our English translators haue allowed the first place to their Ministers and the second to Deacons and so because Bishops also went before they haue found vs out their three orders Bishops Ministers and Deacons Alas poore soules that can haue no place in Scripture for their Ministers but by making the Apostle speake three things for two Fulke FOR the names of Priest and Elder wee haue spoken heretofore sufficiently as also for the name of Minister which is vsed for the same that Elder and Prieste althoughe the word signifie more generally That the worde Ministers is put for Priests I take it rather to bee an ouersight of the firste translatour whome the rest folowed because that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 commeth immediatly after than any purpose against the order of Priest or to dignifie the name of Ministers For seeing Syrachs sonne speaketh of the Priests and Ministers of the â—awe his saying can make nothing to or froe for the names of the Ministers Priestes or Elders of the new Testament That some translatioÌ„s in 1. Tim. 3. for 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 reÌ„der Ministers it is because they supposed the Greeke word to be taken there in the generall sense as it is in manye other places not to make three degrees of twoo as you do fondly cauil For the orders of Bishops Elders or as you cal them Priests and as they be commonly called Priests and Ministers is all one in authoritie of ministring the word the Sacraments The degree of Bishoppes as they are taken to be a superiour order vnto Elders or Priestes is for gouernment and discipline specially committed vnto them not in authoritie of handling the worde and the sacraments MART. 2. There are in the Scripture that are called Ministers in infinite places and that by three Greeke wordes commonly but that is a large signification of minister attributed to al that minister waite serue or attend to doe any
their doctrine But what is their prastise in the regiment of their Churche cleane contrarie For in the order of the communion booke where it is appointed what the Minister shall do it is indifferently said Then shall the Prieste do or say this and that and Then shal the Minister c. Whereby it is euident that they make Priest a proper and peculiar calling applied to their Ministers and so their practise is contrarie to their teaching and doctrine FVLK 7. I haue satisfied your desire before if you list to knowe our translation must be as neere as it can to expresse the true signification of the originall words so it is in that place of the Acts. 14. v. 23. which being graunted by them that denie the necessitie of â—at forme of election to continue alwaies giueth no more aduauntage to the aduersaries than they woulde take out of the signification of the Greeke word how soeuer it were translated Your example of Maister Whitakers denying the name of Prieste to be applied to the ministers of the Gospel to proue that wee must mainteine our Ecclesiasticall state how soeuer we translate is very fonde and ridiculous as also the contradiction that you would make betweene him and the seruice booke touching the name of Prieste there vsed and allowed Maister Whitakers writing in Latine speaketh of the Latine terme Sacerdos the Communion booke of the English worde Priest is not this a goodly net for a foole to daunce naked in and thinke that no body can see him MART. 8. Nowe concerning imposition or laying on of handes in making their Ministers which the Puritans also are forced to allow by other wordes of Scripture howsoeuer they dispute and iangle againste 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 none of them all make more of it than of the like Iudaicall ceremonie in the olde Law not acknowledging that there is any grace giuen withall though the Apostle say there is in expresse termes but they will aunswer this text as they are wont with a fauourable translation turning grace into gift As when the Apostle saith thus Neglect not THE GRACE that is in thee which is giuen thee by prophecie with impositioÌ„ of the hands of Priesthood they translate Neglect not the GIFT and Beza most impudently for by prophecie translateth to prophecie making that onely to be this gift and withall adding this goodly exposition that he had the gift of prophecie or preaching before and now by imposition of hands was chosen onely to execute that function But because it might be obiected that the Apostle sayth Which was giuen thee with the imposition of handes or as he speaketh in an other place by imposition of handes making this imposition of handes an instrumentall cause of giuing this grace he sayth that it did onely confirme the grace or gift before giuen FVLK 8. Though we finde that by or with imposition of handes many rare and extraordinary giftes of prophecie of tongues and such like were giuen in the Apostles time yet we finde no where that grace is ordinarily giuen by that ceremonie vsed alwayes in the Church for ordination of the ministers therof But whether there be or not our translation of 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 into gift is true and proper to the worde For albeit the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 be taken not onely for the fauour of God but also for his gracious giftes yet 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is neuer taken in the Scripture but for a free gift or a gift of his grace That Beza referreth the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to the ende of the gifte he hath the nature of the worde to beare him out which may well abide that sense and yet he doth not reiect the other common interpretation by prophecie that by appoyntment of the holye Ghost vttered by some of the Prophets But where you wrangle about the gift of prophecie as though he were vtterly voyde thereof before he receyued imposition of handes I knowe not what you meane Woulde you haue vs thinke that he was ordayned Prieste or Elder or to anye office of the Church without competent giftes meete to discharge his office That the gifte of prophecie as well as of speakinge with tongues might be giuen by and with imposition of hands Beza doubteth not But it is out of doubte that to an office none was chosen or admitted by the Apostle and the reste of the Presbyterie of Ephesus but such as had sufficient giftes to answere that office MART. 9. Thus it is euident that though the Apostle speake neuer so plaine for the dignitie of holy Orders that it giueth grace and consequently is a Sacrament they peruert all to the contrarie making it a bare ceremonie suppressing the worde grace which is much more significant to expresse the Greeke worde than gifte is because it is not euery gifte but a gratious gifte or a gifte proceeding of maruelous and mere grace At when it is saide To you it is giuen not onely to beleeue but also to suffer for him The Greeke worde signifieth this much To you this grace is giuen c. So when God gaue vnto S. Paule all that sayled with him this Greeke worde is vsed because it was a great grace or gratious gifte giuen vnto him When S. Paule pardoned the incestuous person before due time it is expressed by this worde because it was a grace as Theodorete calleth it giuen vnto him And therefore also the almes of the Corinthians 1. Cor. 16. v. 3. are called their grace which the Protestants translate liberalitie neglecting altogither the true force and signification of the Greeke wordes FVLK 9. Here is no euidence at al that the order of Priesthoode is a Sacrament or gyueth grace but that God by the ceremonie of laying on of handes did giue wonderfull and extraordinarie giftes of tongues and prophecying in the beginning and firste planting of the Churche But that grace should alwayes follow that ceremonie there is no proofe to bee made out of the holie Scriptures And experience sheweth that hee which was voide of giftes beefore hee was ordered Priest is as verye an asse and Dogbolte as hee was beefore for anye encrease of grace or gratious giftes althoughe hee haue authoritie committed vnto hym if hee bee ordained in the Church though vnworthily with great sinne both of him that ordaineth and of him that is ordained But wee suppresse the worde grace you say bicause charisma signifieth at least a gratious gift See how the bare sounde of tearmes delighteth you that you mighte therein seeke a shadowe for your singlesolde sacrament of popishe orders The worde signifieth a free or gratious gifte and so will euerie man vnderstande it whiche knoweth that it is giuen by God As also in all places where mention is made of Gods giftes wee must vnderstande that it proceedeth freely from him as a token of his fauoure and grace But that the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉
shal rule in a rod of yron and from him Peter and the rest by his coÌ„mission giuen in the same word feede rule my sheepe Io. 21. yea and that in a rod of yron as when he stroke Ananias and Sapphîra to corporal death as his successors do the like offenders to spiritual destruction vnlesse they repent by the terrible rod of excoÌ„munication This is imported in the double significatioÌ„ of the Greeke word which they to diminish Ecclesiasticall authoritie they translate feede rather than rule or gouerne FVLK 21. That wee shoulde not meane any thing against the gouernement of Christe whome we wishe desire from our hearts that he alone mighte raigne and his seruants vnder him he himselfe is iudge to whome in this case we do boldely appeale But let vs see how we may be charged with false translation The Hebrewe and greek say you do signifie only a ruler or gouernor Mich. 5. And do not we translate a gouernor or captain which may answere there the Hebrew of the Prophet or the Greeke of the Septuaginta or of the Euangelist The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that we translate sometime to gouerne sometime to feede is not in the Prophete but in the Euangelist and signifieth properly to feede as a sheepeheard and metaphorically to gouerne What cause haue you here to crie out false translation and to oppose the Hebrewe worde of the Prophet which is fully satisfied in the worde gouernour And the Greeke word which the Euangelist vseth hath his proper signification in some translations in other that which is figuratiue neither doth the one exclude the other But feeding doth import gouerning But it seemeth you would haue rule without feeding that you are so zealous for gouernement The worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Act. 20. in some translations is rendred to rule in other to feede The more proper is to feede yet the greek word wil beare the other also But feeding as a sheephearde doeth his sheepe comprehendeth both The same word Ioan. 21. our Sauiour Christ limiteth rather to feeding as y e Euangelist reporteth his words vsing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 twise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 once For by lording ruling Peter shuld not so wel testifie his loue towards Christ as by painefull feeding And there your owne vulgar interpreter translateth Pasce and your selues feede though in the margent you woulde faine pray aide of the Greeke to establish your popes tyrannicall rule Yea you will giue him a rodde of yron which is the scepter of Christ yea an armie of souldiers to subdue Irelande and to wrest it out of the Queene of Englandes dominion that is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 feed and rule my sheepe in your secret meaning and for that purpose you bring in the miraculous striking of Ananias and Sapheira for their hypocrisie pretending that you meane but spirituall destruction by the rodde of excommunication which howe terrible it is when it is duely exercised by theÌ„ that haue authoritie we neede not learne of you The other text Psalme the 2. Apoc. 2. v. 27. we translate alwaies rule And your vulgar interpretor Pet. 5. translateth the same worde pascite feede you the church of God c. and else where diuerse times Doth he so diminish ecclesiasticall authoritie c. MART. 22. To the diminishing of this Ecclesiasticall authoritie in the later ende of the reigne of king Henrie the â—ight and during the reigne of king Edwarde the sixt the onely translation of their English Bibles was submit your selues vnto all manner ordinance of man whether it be VNTO THE KING AS TO THE CHIEFE HEAD 1. Pet. 2. Where in this Queenes time the later translatours can not finde those wordes nowe in the Greeke but doe translate thus To the king as hauing preeminence or to the king as the Superiour Why so because then the King had first taken vpon him this name of Supreme heade of the Church and therefore they flattered both him and his sonne till their heresie was planted making the holie Scripture to say that the king was the chiefe head which is all one with supreme head but now being better aduised in that point by Caluine I suppose and the Lutherans of Magdeburge who doâ— ioyntly inueigh against such title and Caluine against that by name which was first giuen to king Henry the eight because they may be bolder with a Queene than with a king and because now they thinke their kingdome is well established therfore they suppresse this title in their later traÌ„slations would take it froÌ„ her altogether if they could to aduance their owne Ecclesiasticall iurisdiction whithout any dependence of the Queenes supreme gouernement of their church which in their conscience if they be true Caluinistes or Lutherans or mixâ— of both they doe and must mislike FVLK 22. Touching this text 1. Pet. 2. I haue answered before y t the word signifieth him that excelleth and therfore it is no corruption to translate it y e chiefe For the name of supreme heade in y e sense which Caluine other abroade did mislike it it was neuer allowed nor by authoritie graunted to the kings Henrie and Edward but in the same sense it is now graunted to Queene Elizabeth whom we acknowledge to haue the same authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall which her father and brother kinges before her had exercised to Gods glorie But as Steâ—en Gardiner vnderstoode y e title in conference with Bucer at Ratisbone we doe vtterly abhorre it and so did all godly men alwaies that a king should haue absolute power to do in religion what he will In what sense the popish clergie of England being cast in the premunire did first of all ascribe it to the king in their submission looke you vnto it we thinke it was rather of flatterie than of dutie wisedome or religion As for the ecclesiasticall gouernement which the scripture prescribeth may well stande which craueth the aide of a christian Prince which is y e Queenes authoritie in causes ecclesiasticall MART. 23. But howsoeuer that he let them iustifie their translation or confesse their fault And as for the kinges supremacie ouer the Church if they make any doubt let theÌ„ read S. Ignatius wordes who was in the Apostles time â—uen when S. Peter gaue the foresaide admonition of subiection to the king and knewe very wel how farre his preeminence extended and therefore saith plainely in notorious wordes that we must first honour God then the Bishop and then the king Because in all thinges nothing is comparable to God in the Chuch nothing greater then y e Bishop who is consecrated to God for the saluation of the whole worlde and among magistrates tempâ—rall rulers none is like the king See his other wordes immediatly folowing where he preferreth the Bishops office before the kings al other thinges of price among men FVLK 23. Howsoeuer those Epistles bee truely or vntruely
ascribed to Ignatius which heere I wil not dispute there is nothing sayde in this that you cite of the Bishops preeminence aboue the king but wee acknowledge it to be true of y e meanest priest of Gods Church in matters properly belonging to his office which yet doth not exempt him from subiection to his prince but that in causes ecclsiasticall also he is to be commanded by his prince to doe his duetie and to be punished by him if he doe otherwise MART. 24. But in the former sentence of S. Peter though they haue altered their translation about the kings headshippe yet there is one corruption remaining still in these words Submit your selues VNTO AL MANER ORDINANCE OF MAN Whereas in the Greeke it is worde for worde as in the olde vulgar Latine translation omni humanae creaturae and as we haue translated to euerie humane creature meaning temporall Princes Magistrates as is plaine by the exemplification immediatly following of king and dukes and other sent or appointed by him But they in fauour of their temporall statutes actes of Parliament Proclamations and Iniunctions made against the Catholike religion doe translate all with one consent Submit vour selues to all maner ordinance of man Doth 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie ordinance or is it all one to be obedient to euery one of our Princes and to all maner ordinance of the saide Princes FVLK 24. The worde ordinance you doe violently drawe to euerie statute proclamation or iniunction which is vnderstood of the ordinance or appointment of magistrates in what forme soeuer they be created or at the worst cannot be referred but onely to such decrees as are not contrarie to the worde of God The worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 we knowe signifieth a creature or creation which speeches being not vsuall in our English tongue to signifie magistrates our interpretors haue expressed the same by the worde ordinance You your selues translate that which is in Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in Latine Creaturae mark 16. of the creation and in the same sense doe our translators vse the worde of ordinance MART. 25. A strange case and much to bee considered how they wring and wrest the holy scriptures this way and that way and euery way to serue their hereticall proceedinges For when the question is of due obedience to Ecclesiasticall canons and decrees of the Church and generall Councels where the holy Ghost by Christes promise is assistant and whereof it is saide if he heare not the Church let him be vnto thee as an heathen and Publicane and He that heareth you heareth me he that despiseth you despiseth mee there they cry out aloude odiously terme all such ordinances mens traditions and commaundementes of men and most despitefully contemne and condemne them But heere for obedience vnto temporall edictes and Parliament statutes daily enacted in fauour of their schisme and heresies they once malitiously forged and still wickedly retaine without alteration a text of their owne making the Apostle to commaunde submission vnto all manner ordinance of man whereof hath ensued the false crime of treason and cruell death for the same vpon those innocent men and glorious martyrs that chose to obey God and his Churches holy ordinances rather then mans statutes and lawes directly against the same FVLK 25. It is no strange case for an heretike and a raytor that hath solde his tongue to vtter slaunders against the Church of God and the christian magistrate protector of the same to deuise and surmise that which neuer was intended neuer was practised As y t against the godly and laweful decrees of the Church we should translate mens traditions commaundementes of men and to the maintenance of all temporall lawes be they neuer so wicked we should translate ordināce in steede of creature As for the crime of treason and iust execution of them that haue suffered of your viperous brood I referre to the try all of the lawes and iudgements that haue passed vpon them as no matter meete for mee to dispute of onely this all good subiectes knowe yea all the worlde may knowe that they which take part with the pope our princes open and professed enemie not in matters of religion onely but in cases concerning her crowne and dignitie her Realmes and Dominions can not beare dutiful obedient hearts to her maiesty Whose clemencie hitherto hath spared them that acknowledge her princely authoritie although in all other pointes of poperie they continue as obstinate as euer they were CHAP. XVI Hereticall translation against the Sacrament of Matrimonie BVT as they are iniurious translatours to the sacred order of Priesthoode so a man woulde thinke they should be very friendly to the sacramēt of Matrimonie For they would seeme to make more of Matrimonie then we do making it equall at the least with virginitie Yet the trueth is we make it or rather the Church of God esteemeth it as a holy sacrament they do not as giuing grace to the maried persons to liue together in loue concorde and fidelitie they acknowledge no such thing So that Matrimonie with them is highly esteemed in respect of the flesh or to say the best onely for a ciuill contract as it is among Iewes and Pagans but as it is peculiar to Christians and as S. Augustin◠sayth in the sanctification also and holinesse of a Sacrament they make no account of it but flatly denie it FVLK 1. VE make no more of matrimonie than the holy scripture doeth teach vs neither doe wee in all respectes make it equall with virginitie howe so euer you doe slander vs. But you so make it an holy sacrament that you thinke the holy order of priesthoode is prophaned by it Wee acknowledge that God giueth grace to them that bee faithfull to liue in loue concorde and fidelitie euen as he did to the fathers of the olde testament liuing in the same honorable estate which prooueth that matrimonie is no sacrament of the newe testament although it be an holie ordinance for Gods children to liue in and in it is contained a holy secret or mysterie of the spirituall coniunction of Christ and his church It is therefore nothing else but a diuelish slander to say that wee esteeme it but in respect of the flesh or for a ciuill contract MART. 2. And to this purpose they translate in the epistle to the Ephesians 5. Where the Apostle speaketh of matrimonie This is a great secret Whereas the Latine Church and all the Doctors thereof haue euer read This is a great Sacrament the Greeke Church and all the fathers thereof This is a great mysterie because that which is in Greeke mysterie is in Latine Sacrament and contrariwise the wordes in both tongue◠being equiualent so that if one be taken in the large signification the other also as Apoc. 17. I will shewe thee the sacrament of the woman And I will shewe thee the mysterie of the woman And so in
that if he pretended to interprete any thing out of Saint Basil it was altogither by artificiall coniecture either of the place which he knewe and had read in Latine or else by surmising of some one common worde hee gathered what the sense of the whole shoulde bee Indeede if hee hadde neuer knowne a word of Greeke althoughe hee had bene no meete man to chalenge a whole realme to disputation yet hee might haue beene an honest man and otherwise meanly learned so hee had not pretended knowledge when he was in a maner altogither ignorant For mine owne parte thoughe it please you to name mee with Maister Humfrey Maister Whitakers and others I neuer tooke vpon mee but a meane knowledge in the tongues neither desire I in comparison to be preferred before any learned manne whose trauailes haue bin profitable to the Churche althoughe he were ignorant in the tongues Yet this I muste freely say that he which shall professe to bee an absolute learned diuine without the knowledge of three tongues at the leaste may thinke wel of himselfe but hardely hee shall gette and retaine the credite hee seeketh amoung learned menne in this learned age And therefore Campion if disputation hadde beene meante rather than sedition for al his arrogance and impudence was an vnmeete Apostle to bee sente from Gregorie of Rome to chalenge all the wise and learned in England Neither do I say this as thoughe I measured all learning by knowledge of the tongues but wherein soeuer any Papist in the worlde shall bee bolde to chalenge the name of learning in anie knowledge that euer was or is accounted good learning God bee praysed there are many of Gods true Catholike Churche whereof we are members able to match them therein That I saye not to excell them And whereas you woulde make vs beholding to Papistes for suche knowledge as any of vs hathe in the Greeke Hebrewe Syriacke Chaldee Arabicke tongues c. It is well knowne the Papistes are more beholding to vs. And although I confesse that some Papistes of late dayes haue bestowed fruitefull paines in setting foorth some of the orientall tongues yet are they not the firste nor all that haue traueiled profitably that waiâ— But manye haue attained to competent skill in those languages many yeares beefore anye Papistes had written anye thing that mighte further them therein You were wont to beare ignoraunt menne in hande that we were a sight of English Doctors vnderstanding no languages but our mother tongue which hath enforced diuerse men to shewe their skill in the tongues which otherwise they would neuer haue openly professed But now that the worlde seeth to your shame how richly God hath blessed vs with the knowledge and interpretation of diuerse tongues you exprobrate to vs our knowledge in the tongues and traduce vs among the ignorant as though we esteemed all learning by knowledge of tongues and that we were but meare Grammarians often tell vs of that stale iest that the kingdome of Grammarians is paste as though it were but a little Grammar whereof we make a shew But for that generall muster which you threaten to driue vs vnto ere it be long if you come as learned men should do armed with bookes penne inke and paper I doubt not by the grace of God but you shall finde them that dare confront you and chase you out of the field also But if you come vnder the Popes banner with such blessing as he sente lately into Ireland I hope you shall be mette with all as those his champions were and finde that promotion for your good seruice whiche you haue long agoe deserued by your trauailes for vpholding of his kingdome MART. 9. But to returne to you M. Whitakers greater is your fault in diuinitie than in the tonges when you make your argument against the real presence out of this place as out of the Scripture and S. Peter whereas they are Bezaes wordes and not S. Peters Againe whether you take Bezaes wordes or S. Peters your argument faileth very much when you conclude that Christs natural body is not in the Sacrament because it is placed and conteined in heauen For S. Chrysostome telleth you that Christe ascending into heauen both lefte vs his flesh and yet ascending hath the same And againe O miracle saith he He that sitteth aboue with the Father in the same moment of time is handled with the handes of al. This is the faith of the auncient fathers M. Whitakers and this is the Catholike faith and this is I trow an other maner of faith and farre greater thus to beleeue the presence of Christ in both places at once because he is omnipotent and hath saidâ— the worde than your faith whereof you boaste so much which beleeueth no further than that he is ascended and that therefore he cannot be present vpon the altar nor dispose of his body as he list FVLK 9. Maister Whitaker is not so young a diuine but he knoweth that Chrysostome speaketh of the ineffable manner of Christs presence spiritually though he be absent corporally As in the place by you cited Desacerdoâ—io it is most manifest where he saith that wee may see the people dyed and made redde with the pretious bloud of Christe which as it is not with the eye of the bodie but with the eye of faith so is Christe that is corporally present in heauen spiritually present vnto the faith of the worthie receyuer MART. 10. Againe it is a very famous place for the real presence of the bloud which wee haue handled at large else where but here also must be briefly touched when our Sauiour saith Luc. 22. This is the Chalice the new Testament in my bloud which Chalice is shedde for you For so which must needes be referred according to the Greeke In which speach Chalice must needes be taken for that in the chalice and that in the chalice must needes be the bloud of Christ and not wine because his bloud only was shed for vâ— And so â—e do plainâ—ly proue the real presence according aâ— S. Chrysostome also said Hoc quod est in calice illud est quod â—â—â—xit delatere That which is in the Chalice is the same that gushed out of his side All which moste necessarie deduction Beza would defeate by saying the Greeke is corrupted in all the copies that are extant in the world and by translating thus cleane otherwise than the Greeke will beare This â—â—ppe is the newe Testament in my bloud which bloud is shedde for you FVLK 10. It is a famous place in deede that neuer a one of the auncient writers could coÌ„â—â—der for any reall presence to be drawne out of it How Beza hath traÌ„slated it I haue at large declared before Cap. 1. Sect. 37. 38. 39. That which Chrysostome saieth wee confesse to be most true after a spiritual heauenly manner and so he doth expound him selfe in the same place where he saith
They wil say the first Hebrewe word can not be as Saint Hierome translateth and as it is in the Greeke and as all antiquitie readeth but it muste signifie Let vs destroy They say truely according to the Hebrewe word which now is But is it not euident thereby that the Hebrewe worde nowe is not the same which the Septuaginta translated into Greekeâ— and S. Hierom into Latine and consequently the Hebrue is altered and corrupted from the originall copie which they had perhaps by the Iewes as some other places to obscure this prophecie also of Christes Passion and their crucifying of him vpon the Crosse. Such Iewish Rabbines and new Hebrue words do our newe maisters gladly folow in the translation of the olde Testament whereas they might easily conceyue the old Hebrue worde in this place if they would employ their skill that way and not onely to nouelties For who seeth not that the Greeke Interpreters in number 70. and al Hebrues of best skill in their owne tongue S. Hierom also a great Hebrician did not reade as now wee haue in the Hebrue Nashchîta but Nashitha or Nashlîcha Againe the Hebrue worde that now is doth so litle agree with the wordes folowing that they cannot tell how to translate it as appeareth by the diuersitie and difference of their translations thereof before mentioned and transposing the wordes in English otherwise than in the Hebrue neither of both their translations hauing any commodious sense or vnderstanding FVLK 19. If we shoulde acknowledge the Hebrue word to be altered in so many places as the 70. departe from it we should not only condemne the Hebrue text that now is in many places but your vulgar Latine text also the translator whereof differing oftentimes from the Greeke followeth the truth of the Hebrue or at least commeth nearer vnto it Your argument of the number of the 70. interpreters al Hebrewes is very ridiculous childish Hierom him selfe will laugh you to skorne in it who acknowledged for certaintie no more than the bookes of the lawe translated by them And Lindanus proueth manifestly vnto you that some partes of the old Testament in Greeke which wee now haue are not the same that were counted the 70. translation in the auncient fathers time Whether Hierom in this place did consider the Hebrue text we know not for he doth not as his manner is shew the diuersitie of the Hebrue and the Septuaginta in this chapiter beside he professeth great breuitie intreating vpon so long a Prophete But whether a letter in this word haue bene altered or no or whether it were corrupt in the copie which the Greeke translater and Hierom did reade for the true or simple sense thereof there is no great difference No nor for that sense which Hierom bringes which although it seemeth to be farre from the Prophets meaning yet it may haue as good ground vpon the worde Naschita as vpon the worde Nashlicha MART. 20. But yet they will pretende that for the first worde at the least they are not to be blamed because they folow the Hebrue that now is Not considering that if this were a good excuse then might they as well folowe the Hebrue that now is Psal. 21. v. 18 and so vtterly suppresse and take out of the Scripture this notable prophecie They pearced my hands and my feete Which yet they do not neither can they doe it for shame if they will be counted Christians So that in deede to folow the Hebrue sometime where it is corrupt is no sufficient excuse for them though it may haue a pretence of true translation and we promised in the preface in such cases not to call it hereticall translation FVLK 20. To this cauill against the certaine truth of the Hebrue texte I haue sufficiently answered in my confutation of your preface Sect. 44. shewing that the true reading of this word as Felix PrateÌ„sis Ioannes Isaak Tremelius and other do acknowledge is still remayning and testified by the Mazzorites MART. 21. But concerning the B. Sacrament let vs see once more how truely they folow the Hebrue The holy Ghost saith S. Cyprian ep 63. nu 2. by Salomon foresheweth a type of our Lordes sacrifice of the immolated host of bread wine saying Wisedome hath killed her hostes SHE HATH MINGLED HER WINE INTO the cuppe Come ye eate of my bread and drinke the wine that I HAVE MINGLED for you Speaking of WINE MINGLED saith this holy doctor he foresheweth prophetically the cuppe of our Lorde MINGLED WITH WATER AND WINE So doth S. Hierom interprete this mixture or mingling of the wine in the chalice so doth the author of the commentaries vpon this place among S. Hieroms workes so doe the other fathers So that there is great importance in these propheticall wordes of Salomon She hath mingled her wine into the cuppe and the wine which I haue mingled as being a manifest prophecie of Christes mingling water and wine in the Chalice at his last supper which the Catholike Churche obserueth at this day and whereof S. Cyprian writeth the foresaide long epistle FVL. 21. It had bene to be wished that S. Cyprian when he goeth aboute to proue the necessitie of wine in the celebration of the Lordes supper agaynst the Heretikes called Aquarij that contended for onely water had retained the precise institution of Christe in wine onely which the Scripture mencioneth and not allowed them a mixture of water and for that purpose driuen him selfe to suche watrie expositions as this of Prouerbes 9. which without good warrant he draweth to represent the Lordes supper Where if hee had bene vrged by the aduersaries whereto the beastes slayne were referred in this Sacrament hee muste haue bene driuen to some violent comment But whereto tendeth this preparation MART. 22. But the Protestants counting it an idle superstitious ceremonie here also frame their translation accordingly suppressing altogither this mixture or mingling and in steede thereof saying Shee hath drawen her wine and drinke the wine that I haue drawen or as in other of their Bibles Shee hath powred out her wine and the wine which I haue powred out neither translation agreing either with Greeke or Hebrue Not with the Greeke which doth euidently signifie mingling and mixture as it is in the Latine and as al the Greeke Church from the Apostles time hath vsed this word in this very case whereof wee nowe speake of mingling water and wine in the chalice S. Iames and S. Basil in their Liturgies expresly testifying that Christ did so as also S. Cyprian in the place alleaged S. Iustine in the end of his second Apologie calling it of the same Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that is according to Plutarche wine mingled with water likewise S. Irâ—neus in his fifth booke neere the beginning See the sixth generall Councell most fully treating hereof and deducing it from the Apostles and auncient fathers and interpreting
Iesus it is more probable that S. Mathewe in this place meant of him rather than hir at the least it is no heretical translation to saye that Ioseph didde that which he was in fewe verses before commaunded to do and it was more ordinarie and vsuall that the man gaue the name rather than the woman although in this case the woman had more right than the man As for Elizabeths example prooueth nothing because shee spake when hir husband was dumbe MART. 11. Where by the way I must tel you and elsewhere perhappes more at large that it is your common fault to make some one Doctours interpretation the text of your translation and so to exclude al the rest that expound it otherwise which you know is such a fault in a traÌ„slator as caÌ„ by no means bee excused Secondly the reader may here obserue and learne that if they shal hereafter defend their translation of any place by some Doctours exposition agreable therevnto that will not serue nor suffice them because euerie Doctor may say his opinion in his coÌ„mentaries but that must not be made the texâ—e of Scripture because other Doctours expounde it otherwise and being in it selfe and in the original tongue ambiguous and indifferent to diuers senses it may not be restrained or limited by translation vnlesse there bee a meere necessitie when the translation cannot possibly or hardly expresse the ambiguitie and indifferencie of the originaltexte FVLK 11. The authoritie of one Doctour agreeing with the proprietie of the originall tongue is more worth than an hundreth againste it We neuer follow one Doctour as you falsly slaunder vs to make his interpretation the text but where that one Doctour did see the truth of the natural sense according to the â—ong that perhaps was hid from other Doctours whose wrytings we haue As for ambiguities and indifferences vnto diuerse senses are better reserued to commentaries and lectures vppon the Scriptures than that they eyther can or oughte to bee retained in the translations MART. 12. As for example in this controuersie concerning Sainctes S. Peter speaketh so ambiguously either that he wil remember them after his death or they shall remember him that some of the Greeke fathers gathered and concluded there vppon Oecum in Caten Gagneius in hunc locum that the Saincts in heauen remember vs on earth and make intercession for vs. Which ambiguitie both in the Greeke and the Latine shoulde be also kept and expressed in the Englishe translation and wee haue endeuoured as neere as we could possibly so to make it because of the diuers interpretations of the auncient fathers But it maye seeme perhaps to the reader that the saide ambiguitie cannot be kept in our English tongue and that our owne translation also can haue but one sense If it bee so and if there bee a necessitie of one sense then as I saide the translator in that respect is excused But let the good reader consider also that the Caluinistes in restraining the sense of this place followe not necessitie but their heresie that Saints pray not for vs. Which is euident by this that they restraine it in their Latine translations also where there is no necessitie at al but it might be as ambiguous and indifferent as in greke if it pleased them yea when they print the Greeke Testament onely wythout any translation yet here they put the Latine in the margent according as they wil haue it read and as thoughe it might be read no otherwise than they prescribe FVLK 12. Oecumenius who liued in a superstitious time telleth that some men vnderstoode thys saying of Peter by an hyperbaton c. meaning to shewe that the saincts eueÌ„ after their death do remember those things which they haue done here for them that are aliue But other handling this matter plainely c. doe giue the vsuall sense First Oecumenius counteth thys an enforced exposition because it cannot stand but by an hyperbaton Secondly he speaketh neuer a word of the intercession of Saincts for vs. Thirdly he preseâ—reth the common sense that al the fathers before him giuen of this text as plaine and simple and yet this must be sufficient for vs to change our iuterpretation although we were put in faulte immediately before as thoughe we made one doctors interpretation a sufficient ground of our translation Yet is not this an opinion approoued but reported onely by Oecumenius and Oecumenius himselfe a Doctour of as little authoritie as anye other in respect of the late season in whyche he liued As for Gagneius that came after him who seeth not how little we are to accompt of his credite that would wreste the deciding of an vnprofitable question out of this place whether Sainctes make intercession for vs whiche if it were graunted it foloweth not that wee must make intercession to them CHAP. XIX Hereticall translation againste the distinction of LATRIA and DVLIA Martin IN this restraining of the Scripture to the sense of some one Doctour there is a famous example in the epistle to the Hebrnes where the Apostle saith eyther Iacob adored the top of Iosephs scepter as many reade and expound or else that he adored toward the toppe of his scepter as other reade and interpreate and beside these there is no other interpretation of this place in al antiquitie but in S. Augustine onely as Beza confesseth yet are they so bolde to make his exposition onelye and his commentarie peculiar to him alone the texte of the scripture in their translation saying Iacob leaning on the ende of his staffe worshipped God and so excluding all other senses and expositions of al the other Fathers excluding and condemning their owne former translations adding twoo wordes more than are in the Greeke texte leaning God forcing 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whiche may be but is as rare as virgae eius for virgae suae turning the other wordes cleane out of their order and place and forme of construction whych they muste needes haue correspondent and aunswereable to the Hebrewe texte from whence they were translated whyche Hebrewe wordes themselues translate in this order He worshipped toward the beds head If he worshipped toward the beds head according to the Hebrewe then did hee worship toward the top of his scepter according to the Greeke the difference of bothe being only in these words scepter and bed because the Hebrue is ambiguous to bothe and not in the order or construction of the sentence Fulke THe restraining of simple men from errour is counted of you the restraining of the Scripture as though the Scripture were a nose of waxe as some of you haue called it which might be writhed euery waye and especially it pleaseth you when it may be wrested to some colour of your errour So haue you not one place of Scripture cleare on your side for any of your heresies but you are glad
to vphold ambiguities and diuersities of senses wheras if you had the truth you might haue texts of infallible certaintie whereof there could not be diuers interpretations without manifest violence offered vnto the wordes and true signification of them But concerning the place now in question your vulgar text omitting the preposition which is both in the Greeke and in the Hebrew hath committed a manifest errour in saying that Iacob worshipped the toppe of his rodde or staffe where S. Augustine hath rightly obserued the true sense of the place and sayth that Iacob as a weake olde man worshipped vpon the toppe of his staffe that is leaniÌ„g on his staffe The Hebrew is towards the beds head Although it is not vnlike that either the Apostle did reade the worde Mattah which we reade Mittah or els that Mittah signifieth a staffe as well as Mattah For it is not like as Beza sayth that Iacob kept his bed when Ioseph came first to him for after it was told Ioseph that his father was sicke That other translators obserued not this matter whereto shall it be imputed but to humane imperfection That we adde to the text it is false the wordes leaning and God are printed in the small letter to signifie that they are not of the originall text but added for plainnesse And yet the sense may stand without them and he worshipped vpon the ende or toppe of his staffe That 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 is forced to signifie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is a forgerie of you and no enforcement by vs for it is in a manner as commonly taken so as otherwise except there be an other antecedent to whome it may be referred then to auoyde ambiguitie it is 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 rather than 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 As Math. 4. his pathes his meate his hande Math. 5. his Disciples and else where in euery place MART. 2. To make it more plaine when the Prophet Dauid sayth Adorabo ad templum sanctum tuum Psal. 5. 137. is not the true translation and grammaticall sequele of the wordes thus I will adore toward thy holy temple Is it not a common phrase in the Scripture that the people of God adored toward Hierusalem toward his holy mount before the Arke toward the place where his feete stoode May any man be so bolde by adding and transposing to alter and obscure all such places of holye Scripture that there may appeare no maner of adoration toward or before a creature and for worshipping or adoring toward the thinges aforesayd and the like may we say leaning vpon those thinges to worshippe or adore God Were they afrayde lest thâ—se speeches of holye Scripture might warrant and confirme the Catholike and Christian maner of adoring our Sauiour Christ toward the holye Roode at or before his image and the crucifixe before the altar and so forth For had they not feared this why shoulde they translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 leaning vpon rather than towardes yea why in Genesis towardes his beds head and here not towards FVLK 2. You abound in leysure thus to trifle about nothing we allowe worshipping toward the temple the holye hill the footestoole the Arke of God and such like yea if you will haue it toward the beddes heade or the toppp of his staffe what gayne you for the worshipping of images forbidden by the seconde commaundemeÌ„t or before images for so you would creepe vpon poore mens consciences first to worshippe before images then to worshippe images thirdly to worship them with Dulia and not with Latria at last to worship the image of God of Christ of the Trinitie with Latria euen the same worshippe that is due to God him selfe MART. 3. And which is more when the auncient Greeke fathers Chrys. Oecum in Collectan Damase lib. 1. pro imaginibus Leont apud Damasc. put so litle force either in this preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or the other alledged that they expound all those speeches as if the prepositions were of phrase onely and not of signification saying Iacob adored Iosephs scepter the people of Israel adored the temple the Arke the holy mount the place where his feete stoode and the like whereby S. Damascene proueth the adoration of creatures named Dulia namely of the crosse and of sacred images if I say they make so litle force of the prepositions that they inferre not onely adoration towards the thing but adoration of the thing howe doe these goodly translators of all other wordes so straine and racke the litle particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie leaning vpon that it shall in no wise signifie any thing tending towards adoration FVLK 3. The worship that Chrysostom and Oecumenius speake of is a ciuill reuerence done to Ioseph or to his scepter in respect of the kingdom of Ephraim that should be set vp in his posteritie What Damascene gathereth hereof to maintaine idolatrie we regard not certaine it is that Iacob worshipped none but God and bowed him self either toward the beds head or leaning vpon his staffe as S. Augustin sayth That they which follow constrained expositions are inforced to neglect the prepositions it is no warrant for vs when we see how the sense may best stand without making the prepositions which the holy Ghost vseth idle or vnprofitable both in the Hebrew and in the Greeke And if 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 should signifie toward as it doth not properly but vpon your counterfet distinction of Dulia and Latria should neuer the sooner be receiued MART. 4. And if the Greeke Doctors suffise not to satisfie these great Grecians herein tell me you that haue skill in the Hebrew whether in the foresayd speeches cited out of the Psalmes there be any force in the Hebrew prepositions surely no more than if we should say in English without prepositions Adore ye his holye hill we will adore the place where his feete stoode Adore ye his footestoole For you knowe that there is the same preposition also when it is sayd Adore ye our Lord or as your selues translate worship the Lorde where there can be no force nor signification of the preposition And therefore in these places also your translation is corrupt and wilfull when you say thus We will fall downe before his footestoole fall ye downe before his footestoole before his holy mount or worshippe him vpon his holy hill Where you shunne and auoyde first the terme of adoration which the Hebrewe and Greeke duely expresse by termes correspondent in both languages throughout the Bible and are applied for the moste parte to signifie adoring of creatures Secondly you auoyde the Greeke phrase which is at the least to adore towards these holye thinges and places and much more the Hebrew phrase which is to adore the very thinges rehearsed to adore Gods footestoole is the Psalme sayth because it is holye or because he is holye whose footestoole it is as the Greeke
readeth FVLK 4. If the Apostle had meant nothing by the preposition he might and would as it is most like haue left it cleane out yea if he had meant no more but the adoration of Iosephs scepter what needed he to haue added the toppe or the extremitie or why was the top of his scepter more to be adored than all the other length of it But certayne it is the Apostle would expresse the Hebrewe preposition which muste needes haue some signification And where you aske them that haue skill in the Hebrewe whether there be any force in the preposition in those sayings out of the Psalme that speake of worshipping or falling downe before his footestoole his holye hill c. I aunswere yea there is great force for the hill was not to be worshipped but he whose tabernacle or temple was on it But you obiect that we our selues neglect the preposition Psal. 96. and say worship the Lord. The fault is the lesse because the worship is referred to none but the Lorde yet the precise translation in that place should be bowe downe or fall ye downe before the Lorde in the glorious sanctuarie And where you say we shunne the worde of adoration which the Hebrew and Greeke duely doe expresse by termes applyed for the most part signifie adoring of creatures You haue packed vp a great number of vntruthes togither as it were in a bundell First that we shunne the terme of adoring for doubt of your Dulia which is vtterly vntrue for it is auoyded partly because it is more Latine than English partly because it doth not expresse either the Greeke or the Latine termes which the Scripture vseth Secondly you auouch that both the Hebrew lishtachauoth and the Greeke 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 whereas all that be learned in both the tongues doe know that the Hebrew worde doth signifie properly to bowe downe and therefore is vsed of such bowing downe as is not to the ende of adoration as Psalme 42. v. 5. 6. Why art thou cast downe O my soule and in diuers other places The Greeke word also signifieth to vse some gesture of bodie in worshipping sometimes to fall downe as Herodotus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 they must worship the King falling downe before him Finally where you say they are applied to the adoring of creatures if you cal it adoration which is vsed in ciuil manner to Princes and other persons of authoritie I graunt it is often so applyed but if you meane of religious adoration it is expresly forbidden to any creature or Image of creature by the second commaundemēt in the Hebrue terme and by the wordes of our Sauiour Christ to the Deuill Math. 4. In the Greeke worde Thou shalt worship the Lorde thy God and him onely shalt thou serue Where Sathan desired not to bee worshipped as God with diuine honour but that our Sauiour Christe would fal downe before him and worship him as an excellēt minister of God to whom the dispositiō of all the kingdomes of the world as he falsly said were by God committed Luk. 4. v. 6. which vtterly ouerthroweth your bold distinction of Dulia and Latria seeing it was that which you call Dulia that the Deuill required but our Sauiour Christe telleth him that all religious worship and seruice pertaineth onely to God Touching the adoration of Gods footestoole I haue spoken sufficiently before Cap. 1. Sect. 41. MART. 5. This being most manifest to all that haue skill in these tongues it is euident that you regard neither Hebrue nor Greeke but only your heresie and that in S. Paules place aforesaid of adoring Iosephs scepter you alter it by your owne fansie and not by S. Augustines authoritie whom I am sure you will not admit reading in the Psalme Adore yee his footestoole and so precisely and religiously reading thus that he examineth the case and findeth thereby that the B. Sacrament must be adored and that no good Christian doth take it before he adore it Neither will you admitte him when he readeth thus of Dauid He was caried in his owne handes and interpreteth it mystically of Christ that he was caried in his owne handes when he gaue his body and bloud to his Disciples Yet are S. Augustines interpretations how so euer you like or mislike thē very good as also that aboue named of Iacobs leaning vpō his staffe adoring may be one good sense or cōmētarie of that place but yet a cōmentarie one Doctors opiniō not the sacre text of Scripture as you wold make it by so trāslating FVLK 5. Let Pagnine for the Hebrew word the Greeke Lexicons for the other be iudge betwene vs. For you are the most impudent aduoucher I thinke that euer became a writer That we leane to Augustines iudgement in this case it is not because we make him an author of truth but a witnesse of the same against such venemous tongues and pennes as yours is that call euery thing hereticall that sauoureth not of your owne drowsie dreames of antichristian heresie Neither is it reason that by vsing the testimonie of Augustine where he beareth witnesse to the truth we should be bound to euery interpretation of his when he declineth therefro Where you say that by adoring the footestoole of God he findeth that the blessed Sacrament must be adored you say vntruly he gathereth that Christes humanitie or body must be adored but not the blessed Sacrament thereof Likewise when he sayth vpon a feeble ground of a false interpretation that Christ was carried in his owne hands in the Sacrament he affirmeth it not so absolutely as you alledge it but quodam modo after a certaine maner he bare himselfe in his handes when he saide this is my bodie Yea in that place Augustine as in many other declareth his iudgement that he acknowledged not the corporall maner of presence and eating of Christes bodie in the sacrament for whych you Papistes so greatly contend that you ate content to make so many senses of the scripture it declareth that you acknowlege none certaine and so derogate al credite and authoritie from the word of God which may haue so many meanings as there be diuers doctors that haue commented vppon it Whereas diuers interpretations may haue al a true sense but it is impossible that they should al be senses of the same Scripture MART. 6. And if S. Hierome like not the Greke doctors interpretation in this place of adoring Ioseph and his scepter yet he also saith that Iacob adored toward Iosephs rodde or toward the beddes heade and not leaning vpon his staffe hee adored which you make the texte of Scripture And thoughe he thinke that in this place is not meant any adoration of Ioseph yet I am sure for adoration of holie things namely Reliques the holie lande and al the holie places and monuments of Christs being and doing vpon the earth you wil not bee tryed by S. Hierome And againe why S. Paule should say that by faith
verse is supplied by the translators yet printing it so in another letter that the reader may know it is not in the Greeke as they do in 500. places beside where a verbe or a nowne or a pronowne or any other worde must of necessity be vnderstood to fil vp the sense which you in your precise trāslatiō obserue not whē you adde any such thing beside many imperfect sentēces that you make because you will not seeme to adde that which in translation is no addition but a true trāslation But here you say the Apostle may as well vnderstande the holy Ghost as the Scripture When there is a nominatiue case before that agreeth with the verbe the sense it is farre fetcht to vnderstād a nominatiue case of him that is not spoken of I will set downe the whole text that the reader may iudge what perilous addition is here cōmitted by our translators Doe you thinke that the Scripture saith in vaine the spirite that dwelleth in vs lusteth after enuie But the Scripture or it giueth more grace and therefore saith God resisteth the prowde and giueth grace to the humble In Grāmar schooles they vse to examine it thus who or what giueth who or what saith doth not the Scripture mētioned immediatly before answere to these questiōs most aptly yet mē must abhorre our saucinesse or rather your spitefull malitiousnesse MART. 7. One addition of theirs I would not speake of but onely to knowe the reason why they doe it because it is very strange and I know not what they should meane by it This I am sure if they doe it for no purpose they doe it very folishly and forgetfully contrarie to themselues In the Gospell of S. Marke in the reckening of the Apostles they adde these wordes And the first was Simon more than is in their Greeke text Which addition they learned of Beza whose contradictions in this point are worthie nothing In S. Matthew where these wordes are he suspecteth that first was added by some Papist for Peters primacie here where the word is not he auoucheth it to be the true text of the Gospell and that because Matthew readeth so There he alleaged this reason why it could not be said the first Simon because there is no consequence nor coherence of second third fourth c. here he saith that is no impediment because there be many examples of such speach and namely in the said place of S. Matthew There he saith it is not so though al Greeke copies haue it so here it must needes be so though it be only found in certaine odde Greeke copies of Erasmus which Erasmus him selfe as Beza confesseth allowed not but thought that these wordes were added in them out of S. Matthew What these contradictions meane I know not and I would learne the reason thereof of his scholers our English trāslators who by their Maisters authoritie haue made the selfe same addition in their English translation also FVLK 7. It seemeth you like the addition well enough because it importeth a shadow of Peters primacie but yet your malice is so great against Beza whose sinceritie in this case you shoulde rather commende if there were any sparke of honest equitie in you that you cannot passe it ouer without quarrelling and cauilling But your pretense is to know the reason why they do it I haue some maruaile that you should be ignorant of such things as are compted so materiall for the maintenance of the Popes primacie Especially sith Beza telleth you so plainly the reason of it True it is that the cōmon printed bookes haue not that addition But Beza taketh Erasmus to witnesse that in diuerse Greeke copies these words are expressed because they agree best with the context Beza translateth them out of those copies For except you so read saith Beza the next verse beginning of the particle 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 shall haue no worde at all with which it may be knit But in S. Mathew you say he suspecteth that the worde first was added by some Papist for Peters primacie He onely obiecteth what if it were so answereth the obiection him self out of S. Marke as vpon S. Marke for the coherence with that which followeth wherfore it is not without great and malicious impudēce that you charge him with cōtradiction where there is none and where he saith more towarde your cause than any of you could say for your selues MART. 8. There is also an other addition of theirs either proceeding of ignorance or of the accustomed humor whē they translate thus If ye continue stablished in the faith and be not moued away from the hope of the Gospel which ye haue heard how it was preached to euery creature or whereof ye haue heard how that it is preached or whereof ye haue heard and which hath bene preached to euery creature c. For all these varieties they haue and none according to the Greeke text which is word for word as the vulgar Latine Interpretor hath most sincerely translated it Vnmoueable from the hope of the Gospell which you haue heard which is or hath bene preached among all creatures c. So that the Apostles exhortation is vnto the Colossians that they continue grounded and stable in the faith and Gospell which they had heard and receyued of their first Apostles as in the epistle to the Romanes and to the Galatians and to the Thessalonians and to the Hebrewes and to Timothee and S. Iohn in his first Epistle c. 2. v. 24. and S. Iude v. 3. 20. all vse the like exhortations FVLK 8. Here is no addition of any worde that may not be comprehended in the Greeke For 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 being the genitiue case signifieth not onely which but also whereof or of which and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that hath bene or which hath bene preached Here is onely the poore word how which is a superfluous word euen in our English for the sense is all one if you leaue it out Vnmoueable from the hope of the Gospell of which you haue heard that it hath bene preached among or to all creatures Here is therefore no addition to the text but a sense differing from that which pleaseth you best and yet your vulgar Latine may well beare that sense which our translators doe follow MART. 9. But this doth not so well like the Protestants which* with Hymenaeus and Alexander and other olde Heretike◠haue fallen from their first faith and therefore they alter the Apostles plaine speech with certaine wordes of their owne and they will not haue him say Be vnmoueable in the faith and Gospell which you haue heard and receiued but whereof you haue heard howe that it is preached as though he spake not of the Gospell preached to them but of a Gospell which they had onely heard of that was preached in the world Certaine it is these wordes whereof you haue heard how it was preached
bite at least wise you should haue regarded that your vulgar Latine Interpretor Num. 21. trāslateth it to strike or hurt as they were that were hurt or bitten by the fierie serpents The consent of all Hebritians also is that neshech the name of vsurie is deriued of biting and hurting wherefore the Bishops Bible meaning to expresse that all vsurie is hurtfull according to the etymologie of the word rather than to defend that any vsurie is lawful other than such as God him selfe alloweth And therfore it had bene well to haue translated also in the next verse a straunger mayst thou bite or hurt with vsurie howsoeuer the Iewes would take it whose abhominable vsurie vnder pretence of that place sure I am our translators purpose was not to defend MART. 18. What shall I tell you of other faults which I would gladly account ouersights or ignorances such as we also desire pardon of bus all are not such though some be As Two thousand written at length to them that keepe the fruite thereof In the Hebrew and Greeke two hundred Againe in the same booke c. 1. v. 4. As the fruites of Cedar in the Hebrew and Greeke Tabernacles And Aske a signe either in the depth or in the height aboue for in the depth of Hell And Great workes are wrought by him for doe worke in him as S. Paule vseth the same word 2. Cor. 4. v. 12. And To make ready an horse Act. 23. v. 24. in the Greeke beastes And. If a man on the Sabboth day receiue circumcision without breaking of the law of Moyses Io. 7. v. 23. For to the end that the lawe of Moyses be not broken And The sonne of man must suffer many things and be reproued of the elders Mar. 8. v. 31. For be reiected As in the Psalme The stone which the builders reiected we say not reprouing of the said stone which is Christ. And 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a yong scholer in all your translations falsely And Simon of Chanaan or Simon the Cananite who is called otherwise Zelotes that is Zelous as an interpretation of the Hebrue word Cananaeus which I maruell you considered not specially considering that the Hebrue worde for Zelous and the other for a Cananite beginne with diuers letters And least at any time we should let them slippe For least wee slippe or runne by and so be lost FVLK 18. The first in Can. 8. is doubtlesse the printers faulte who did reade in the written copie one Cypher to much That the second Can. 1. v. 5. was the printers fault which did reade fruites for tentes it is plaine by the note vpon the worde Kedar which is this Kedar was Ischmaels sonne of whom came the Arabians that dwelt in tentes In the thirde place Esai 7. there lacketh this worde beneath or towarde the pit downeward for Shealah is here opposite to Lemayelah aboue or vpward which omission I know not whether it is to be imputed to the negligence of the Printer or of the translators but not withstanding the sense is all one In the fourth texte also there is no difference for the meaning and some are of opinion that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 may be taken passiuely as 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Beza in Marc. 6. v. 14. other translations turne it actiuely In the fifte text Act. 23. if for an horse they had saide horses it had bene no faulte for it is not lyke they rodde vpon Asses or Camels The worde signifieth beasts that are possessed and of possession they be called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 but here it is certaine beastes meete for cariage of men are signified In the sixte Ioan. 7. v. 23. I thinke the translators were deceiued supposing that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 might be translated so that the lawe of Moses be not broken as perhaps it may but hereof I will not determine commonly 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifieth to the ende yet is there no vngodly sense conteyned in this translation The seuenth Mar. 8. v. 31. Is but a knot in a rushe for reproued in that place signifieth nothing but refused or reiected Your vulgar Latine sayth Reprobari which is plainely to be reproued and 1. Pet. 2. The stone which the builders reproued Reprobauerunt refused By reproued they do not meane reprehended or rebuked but vtterly refused and not accepted The eight Neophytus a young scholler as I haue shewed before is better Englished than a Neophyte which is neither Greeke Latine nor English The ninth is corrected in two translations and the Geneua Bible telleth you that for Cananite you may reade Zealous so that wee are not beholding to you for this correction as it seemeth you would haue vs. Touching the tenth texte Heb. 2. both those translations that say least at any time wee should let them slippe haue this note in the margent by which they declare they meane euen as you would haue them say least like vessels ful of chappes we leake and runne out on euery parte for vessels that do runne out do let goe or let slippe that licour that is put into them MART. 19. And as for the first Bible which was done in hast and not yet corrected but is printed still a freshe that saith With Herods seruants as though that were the onely sense that calleth idiotas lay men 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a ship 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wondering 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 are gone out 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 his substance and To know the excellent loue of the knowledge of Christ. For the loue of Christ that excelleth knowledge And of men that turne away the truth For that shunne the truth and turne away from it And Mount Sina is Agar in Arabia For Agar is mount Sina c. FVLK 19. The first Bible was not that you meane but not much differing from it neither was it done in hast but with as good cōsideratiō as god gaue for that time neither was it printed these 22. yeares for ought I know which you say is printed still a fresh In that Bible Herods seruaunts put for the Herodians was lacke of knowledge of what sect the Herodiās should be Idiotas Lay mē is no more faulte than of the vulgar sort which you say The shippe for the Arke is a smal fault seing that arke into which Noe entred was a ship or in steede of a shippe The wōdring for the tumult is a populer terme for so they call a great noyse made by a multitude The lampes are gone out or are quenched I know not what great difference may be in it His substaunce 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I know not where you meane except it bee Marke 13. where Erasmus noteth that he hath redde in some copie 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 substaunce which seemeth to agree aptly with the place In the texte Eph. 3. the true translation is as wee haue corrected it in the later
in India and America which vaine brag I will not stand to confute but seeing this enlargement is but newe begun in our graundfathers dayes before those partes of the earth were discouered by nauigation òf the Portingals and Spaniardes where was the Romish church pope thereof acknowledged but onely in a piece of Europe If yet they will alledge the submission of any Patriarkes or Prelates of the Aethiopian or Armenian churches made to the Pope by some wandring pilgrimes which are of no credit among wisemen yet all men may knowe that those Christians continuing to this day in the same religion rites and ceremonies that they did before such pretended submissions holding and doing manie things contrarie to the Romish religion and custome which argueth plainly that they neither were nor meane to become members of the church of Rome and subiects to Popish religion which they refuse to receiue in as manie points as euer they did Wherefore the Popish church remaineth still shut vp within the streites of Europe for any accession of them And what enlargement so euer it hath in the newe world it is rather by colonies of Portingals Spaniardes than by conuersion of those barbarous nations For as for them that were for feare of death compelled to receiue baptisme as manie of the barbarous people haue been no true Catholike can acknowledge for good and Catholike Christians who as occasion alwayes serued them spared not to giue sufficient testimonie of their counterfeit conuersion whereby it appeared that the sacrament of baptisme was in them prophaned rather than that they by it were sanctified As for my bad answere to Howlet as it seemeth was so sufficient that neuer a Papist these two yeares can finde time to confute it Although if they thought it too bad to confute there hath beene since a better set forth with more aduise by master Wyborne but the replie we shall haue at greater leasure the Howlet as I gesse being otherwise occupied in defence of his Censure for that his proude stomack had rather play the Iudge than the defendant The next quarell followeth in the thirde lease after where he approueth I. Nicols affirming as he sayeth that Purgatorie prayer for the dead and inuocation of Saints are late inuentions of Popes Papists Whereas his owne companions namely Fulke in his late answere to doctor Allen and doctor Bristowe confesseth that all these three errours were receiued in the church aboue 1200. yeares that is in the times of Augustine Ierome Ambrose and vpwarde and that these fathers with other beleeued them also If to those three doctors which he named he had not added vpward I must haue abated one hundred yeres at least of his account But now let vs see what I haue confessed of these doctors and vpward First against Purgatorie page 306. But whosoeuer shall vouchsafe to turne the booke to that page shall finde neuer a word of my writing good or bad but onely the first section of the ninth Chapter of Allens second booke Wel this may be the printers fault peraduenture it is page 106. because it is not like that 306. should come before 115. the next quotation that followeth but neither is there any thing to this purpose Then let vs see what may be founde page 115. euen as much as in page 306. for there is neuer a worde of my writing in that page but all is Allens 8. chapter of the first booke Then come we to the thirde quotation page 316. and there in deede is something sounding toward this matter touching prayer for the dead which Augustine did allowe but of purgatorie there is nothing Of inuocation of Saints there is mention but no affirmation that Augustin did beleeue it for in the next page followeth a discourse to prooue that S. Augustine as he declareth in his booke De cura pro mortuis c. was not certaine how the Saints departed should knowe any thing that is done in this worlde although he inclined to that opinion that they might haue knowledge by relation of dead men or of Angels or else hee knoweth not howe and so doth plainly confesse From hence we must passe to page 320. where in deede I doe confesse that Ambrose alloweth prayer for the dead as it was a common error of his time but not sacrifice of the masse in that sense that Papistes do Last of all Ar◠page 39. I denie that for 200. yeares after Christ it can be prooued that any Catholike writer doth allow praier for the dead or inuocation of Saints and that the later error was not confirmed 400. yeares after Christ namely in Saint Augustines time in that small helpe was acknowledged by Chrysostome to come to the dead by prayers made for them In all those places S. Ierome is not once named nor purgatorie confessed to bee receiued whereof S. Augustine the laste of the three sometime doubteth sometime vtterly denyeth any third place neither did I euer cōfesse that any of those three errors were holden by these auncient fathers in all respects as they are by the Papistes nor that purgatorie was euer beleeued of any of them onely Augustine sometimes speaketh of it as of a doubtful matter which he sayeth may be inquired whether there be any such place or no and yet confuted those interpretations of the scriptures which the Papistes make their chiefest groundes of it By this you may see how liberall this Iesuite is in extending my confession further than euer it was made or meant by mee or can be proued by him or any Papist of them all The third leafe againe after this he saieth that Nicols by citing a place of Augustine woulde haue men thinke that S. Augustine disallowed prayer to Saints which is contrarie to Fulkes opinion who confesseth Augustine to haue defended this superstition as hee termeth it and rayleth on him for it For this is quoted Purg. pag. 315. 316. 317. Howe hee gathereth what Nicols would haue men thinke let other men iudge And what mine opinion is of Augustines allowing of prayer to Saints I haue before expressed out of the places quoted but where he sayeth I raile on him for it that is but a fryers report which seldome differeth from a lie For this is all I say of him for it By such places as I haue in those pages cited out of Augustine it is proued that although Augustine were willing to maintaine the superstition that was not throughly confirmed in his time about burials and inuocation of Saints yet he hath nothing of certeintie out of the worde of God either to perswade his owne conscience or to satisfie them that moued the doubtes vnto him Whether in these wordes I haue rayled I submit my selfe to the iudgement of the reader that will weigh what I haue cited out of S. Augustine in the pages mentioned In the same leafe and the next page the margent is painted with quotations out of my booke against Purgatorie But what thinke
and yet with trueth sufficient ground of his owne writings For whereas in publike writing both he and some other of his complices haue professed their reuerent opinion of her maiesties singular vertues and other of high estate that are vnder her in his familiar letter to his worshipful friend he condemneth all persons of this time to be voide of all sense of vertuous life except these few popish gentlemen which he tearmeth precise in matters of religion and respectiue of their conscience whom he doth so ambitiously commend that he doth most slaunderously condemne all other that be friendes to religion and the state among whome there be God he praised great numbers to speake nothing of the prince and nobilitie who in godly life and precise walking in the feare of God and the obedience of his lawes may shame all the popish hypocrites in the world But it is best to set down Howlets owne wordes mine answere to them that the reader may iudge whether I haue flattered as the Censurer saith more palpably or Howlet slaundered more venemously It was no meane comfort vnto me sayth Howlet to consider that in those wicked and loose times of ours wherein there is no feeling or sense of vertue left but all men enwrapped in the loue of Gods professed enemie the worlde following with all force and fully sayle the vanities ambition of the same that there should be founde in Englande so many gentlemen both for their yeares liuinges and other abilities as fitte to be as vaine as the rest yet so precise in matters of religion and so respectiue to their consciences as that they will prefer their soule before their bodie c. Heereto I began to aunswere thus In deede syr you haue folowed your shamelesse slander with full sayle and haue had winde at will What say you Is there no sense or feeling of vertue left but all men enwrapped in the loue of Gods enemie except those few gentlemen the matter of your rare comfort In your familiar letters wee must suppose you write as you thinke and as to your deere and worshipfull friende Wherefore whatsoeuer you doe in common writinges professe of your reuerent opinion of her maiesties singular vertues and other of high estate that are vnder her executers of her christian lawes all is but dissimulation and hypocrisie fayned glosing and seruile flattery For you acknowledge not onely no vertue but not so much as any sense or feeling of vertue to be left in any other than those gentlemen recusantes all other men not allured nor intangled but inwrapped in the loue euen of Gods professed enemie the worlde not seduced and drawen thereby but following and that not slowely but with all force and full sayle vanities and ambitions of the same If this were true it would make a more miserable estate of Englande than you before imagined by imprisonment of a fewe good housekeepers And I would heartily wish that you falsely say of all might not be verified of some But that there is no sense or feeling of vertue but all men enwrapped in the loue of Gods professed enemie and that in so extreeme a degree except a small number of obstinately and wilfully blinded Papistes that is more than euer could be iustly sayde almost of any Heathenish or Turkish state in which the sense or feeling of vertue was neuer so wholy extinguished but some remained euen in thē that knewe not God nor serued him aright c. Beside this intollerable slander of the whole state and all the professers of the trueth from the prince to the poorest subiect I would the hypocrisie and flatterie of this Papist and other of his cote were knowen who in his publike epistle which he presumeth to dedicate to the Queenes maiestie not a litle extolleth her princely vertues with no small commendation of the nobilitie but heere in his familiar letter sent ouer sea to his friende bewrayeth that he hath no opinion in deede of any sense of vertue remaining in any person saue only in a fewe obstinate Papistes Wherefore let men of vnderstanding iudge whether he in his dedicatorie epistle or I in this reproofe of his familiar letter haue flattered so palpably and whether in this reply I haue played the parasite or the censurer in this malignant slander the shamelesse sycophant But let vs heare what reason he hath to conuince mee of flatterie When men accuse the times sayth he must they except Princes by name or else be accounted traytors As though Howlet accuseth the times onely and not the persons also Yea all men except the recusantes are with him vtterly voyde of all sense of vertue and in worse case also But why say you men must be accounted traytors I accused Howlet but of dissimulation and flatterie but belike you acknowledge such slaunder more meete to discry an heynous traytour than a dissembling flatterer I doe not altogether mislike your censure although for that matter my purpose was not to accuse him so deepely But you proceede and aske What Apostle what auncient fathers did euer so And I will aske you againe what Apostle what ancient father did euer in publike writing professe his reuerent opinion of any princes singular vertues and of other of high estate vnder him and yet neuerthelesse in a familiar letter condemne the whole state of that princes gouernement as Howlet doeth excepting no persons but such as are disobedient subiectes and the princes either priuie or professed enemies Beside that the comparison is verie odious betweene an Apostle and an Howlet a publike trumpet sounding against sinne and a birde of the night schriching in a secret and familiar letter And if you will say it was not meant that the letter should be priuate but publike as I can easily beleeue you if you doe affirme it I will answere that such Howlets come not from Athens as can no better obserue the measure and comelinesse of the person they pretende to be For to vse such hyperbolicall amplifications in a familiar epistle as by zeale could not honestly be excused in a publike sermon sauing your censure and his correction I take it to be but homely rhetorike But you pardon our necessitie because extreeme pouertie driueth vs to these shiftes You are a man of great consideration to beare with our infirmities yet I hope you shall finde fewe men so easie to beleeue as you are bolde to affirme that onely want of other reasons maketh vs flie to accusing of your persons of disloyalty and disobedience to the prince and state But if you will in deede discouer our pouertie answere our writinges throughly directly and orderly or else giuing ouer all preiudicate conceipt of former handling or mishandling any cause Take any question in controuersie and set foorth the riches of your arguments in plaine syllogismes trie whether we be able to answere you or else if you had rather answere vs let vs knowe your minde and you shall finde some readie
ascribing that Reuelation to Sainct Iohn the Euangelist and Apostle Last of all you say it is most certaine and we knowe best by our vsuall doings that it is a principall way to discredit any booke to deny it to be the authors vnder whose name it hath bene receyued Howe certaine it is with you whereof no man else but you can see any light of reason or necessitie of conclusion I knowe not but wee are not so voyde of witte if we lacked honestie that we would discredite Paules Epistle by saying it was Peters or Augustines sermon by saying it was Ambrose or Chrysostomes worke by saying it was Basils But if wee would bring any booke out of credite by denying the auctor whose title it hath borne wee would rather intitle it to some other writer of lesse credite or later tyme or by some other argumentes proue it vnworthie of credite not by onely denying it to be the auctors vnder whose name it hath hene receyued MART. 13. But I come to the thirde point of voluntarie expositions of the Scripture that is when euery man expoundeth according to his errour and Heresie This needeth no proofe for we see it with our eyes Looke vpon the Caluinistes and Puritanes at home the Lutherans Zuinglians and Caluinists abrode reade their bookes written vehemently one secte against an other are not their expositions of one and the same Scripture as diuerse and contrarie as their opinions differ one from an other Let the example at home be their controuersie about the distinction of Ecclesiasticall degrees Arch-bishop Bishop and minister the example abroade their diuerse imaginations and phantasies vpon these most sacred wordes Hoc est corpus meum FVLK 13. That euery one of vs expoūdeth the scripture voluntarily according to his errour or heresie you say it needeth no proofe for you see it with your eyes You haue very cleere sight to see a mote in other mens eies but can not see a beame in your owne You make your demonstration by the Caluinists and Puritans at home the Lutherans Zuinglians Caluinists abroad the one for the distinctiō of Ecclesiastical degrees Archbishop Bishop Minister the other for their diuerse imaginations phantasies of these wordes Hoc est corpus meum But I beseech you sir touching the domestical dissentiō what is the text or what be the texts of Scripture vpon which these voluntarie expositions are made for the distinction or confusion of Ecclesiastical degrees If they had bene as ready as Hoc est corpus meum they should haue bene set downe as well as that But I suppose they are yet to seeke for that controuersie as I take it standeth rather in collections than interpretations and in question whether the political gouernment of the Church be distinctly expressed in the scripture or no. As for the cōtention abroad I confesse to stand a great part in exposition of that text wherin although the one part doth erre is that a sufficient cause to condēne thē both The church of Africa and the Church of Rome and the two principall lights of them both Cyprian and Cornelius dissented about rebaptizing them that were baptized of Heretikes The Aphricans not in one text onely but in the exposition of many differed from the Romanes from the truth yet it were hard to condemne them both for Heretikes least of all them that held the truth S. Augustine and S. Hierom dissented about a text of S. Paule to the Galathians of Peters dissembling as their contrary epistles doe testifie The truth was of S. Augustines side yet was not the other an heretike following a wrōg interpretation And to come nearer home vnto you the Dominicans Franciscans Friers were at daggers drawing as we say yea at most sharpe and bitter contention betwene themselues and all the Popish Church was deuided about their brawling concerning the conception of the virgin Marie whether she were conceaued in sinne or no where many texts of Scripture must needes receiue voluntarie expositions if not of both partes yet at the least of one parte which of those will you say were heretikes If you say neither of both then must you haue stronger reasons to proue vs all heretikes than voluntarie expositions where parties be in diuerse opinions especially in matter not ouerthrowing the foundation of Christian religion And when you haue gathered the most voluntarie expositions you can finde yet shall you finde none so grosse so absurde so impertinent as you Papistes haue coyned for maintenaunce of your errours and heresies of which you your selfe are ashamed though otherwise you haue iron foreheads and brasen faces A few examples among a great many shall suffice God made man according to his owne image that is to say we must haue images in the Church No man lighteth a candell and putteth it vnder a bushell the meaning is that images must be set vpon the altar God made two great lightes the Sunne and the Moone that is the Pope to be aboue the Emperour Beholde here are two swordes that is the Pope hath power of both the swordes Put on the whole armour of God that is the Priest must put on all his vestiments before he saye Masse I am become as sownding brasse or as a tinckling Cymbal that is the bels in the steeple signifie preaching of Gods word I might fill many leaues yea a whole booke of such popish expositions as the Papistes in our dayes dare not for shame abide by MART. 14. And if you will yet haue a further demonstration this one may suffice for all They reiect Councels Fathers and the Catholike Churches interpretation vnlesse it be agreeable to Gods word and whether it be agreeable or no that Luther shall iudge for the Lutherans Caluin for the Caluinists Cartwright for the Puritans and an other for the Brethren of loue briefly them selues will be iudges both of Councels and Fathers whether they expound the Scriptures well or no and euery youth among them vpon confidence of his spirit and knowledge wil saucily controule not onely one but all the fathers consenting togither if it be against that which they imagine to be the truth FVLK 14. We had neede of a better demonstration than the former by which you your selues are proued Heretikes rather than we But let vs see how handsomly you begin They reiect say you Councels and Fathers and the Catholike Churches interpretation vnlesse it be agreeable to Gods word Thus farre you say wel We doe reiect not only those that you name but euen an Angel from heauen except his message be agreeable to Gods word But all the rest that you assume to the ende of this section is a starke staring lye except that you saye of H. N. for the brethren of loue which are more like to you than to vs. For neither Luther nor Caluin nor Cartwright is iudge among vs whether any thing be agreeable to the worde of God but whatsoeuer any of them doe
them whose eares are accustomed to reasonable speachs whether it be like that the Apostle would vnderstande that participle whereof perhaps there is no verbe for where shall we reade 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Secondly whether hee would vnderstand the participle of an other verbe adiectiue than wēt before for before he said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Thirdly whether hee were so desirous to set forth his owne cooperation with the grace of God that he woulde expresse it with two prepositions one in apposition the other in composition Fourthly whether he meant to attribute any thing to him selfe whē as it were correcting that which he saide of labouring he saith yet not I but the grace of God Fifthly whether he purposed to challenge any merite of the labour to him selfe or make his labour any thing separate or separable frō the grace of God when he said before by the grace of God I am that I am Laste of all whether his wordes being resolued if this participle be added they conteyne not a ridiculous tautologie or vaine repetition I haue laboured more than they all vet not I but the grace of God which laboured togither with mee hath laboured To conclude in your example which you faine Because you can finde none to answere your fansie if the wordes were as you suppose 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wee would and muste if wee did well translate it thus It is not you that speake but the holy Ghost which is in you and so vnderstand speaketh The saying of Philo or what so euer eloquent Iewe that was whiche gathered that booke of wisedome is not of such importaunce that wee neede to seeke any interpretation thereof although it is certaine that by wisedome hee meaneth not the Sonne of God the wisedome of the Father but diuine knowledge and vnderstanding which is a gifte of his spirite whereof hee speaketh by a rhetoricall Prosopopoea or fiction of person MART. 6. And so the Apostle calleth him selfe and his felow preachers Gods coadiutors collabourers or such as labour and worke with God which also you falsely translate Gods labourers to take away all cooperation and in some of your Bibles moste foolishly and peeuishly as though you had sworne not to translate the Greeke Wee togither are Gods labourers as well might you translate Ro. 8 17. that we togither be Christs heires for that which the Apostle saith coheires or ioynt heires with him the phrase and speach as you know in Greeke being al one So doth Beza most falsely translate Vna viuificauit nos per Christum for that which is plaine in the Greeke He hath quickned vs togither with Christ Where the English Bezites leaue also the Greeke and folow our vulgar Latin translation rather than Beza who goeth so wide from the Greeke that for shame they dare not folow him Fie vpon such hypocrisie and pretensed honour of God that you will not speake in the same termes that the holy Scripture speaketh but rather will teach the holy Ghost how to speake in not translating as he speaketh As though these phrases of scripture men are Gods coadiutors coworkers with his grace raised with Christ coheirs with him compartakers of glorie with him were all spoken to the dishonour of God and Christe and as though these being the speaches of the holy Ghost him selfe needed your reformatiō in your English translatiōs Otherwise if you meane well and would say as we say that what so euer good we doe we doe it by Gods grace and yet worke the same by our free will togither with Gods grace as the mouer and helper and directer of our will why do you not translate in the foresaide place of S. Paul accordingly FVLK 6. S. Paule saith 1. Cor. 3 9. that hee and Apollo are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 ioyned togither in the worke and businesse of God he saith not that they are helpers of God for God needeth no helpe A helper is of him that lacketh strength which is blasphemous to say of God Therefore euen Faber Stapulensis as Beza telleth you reproueth that terme adiutores which your vulgar translator vseth and you your selfe in fauour of your heresie of freewill doe not translate but flie to the Greeke worde 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and say Coadiutors which if you would expresse in English signifieth fellow helpers of God The word Cooperarij which S. Augustine vseth as Beza also telleth you may bee referred to the ioynt labour of the ministers in seuerall offices of planting and watering And although it be referred to God that he as the Lorde and Maister and they as the seruauntes altogither by his grace and strength doe worke togither the sense is not euill yet not proper for this place Because the Apostle doth not here sette out the dignitie of the ministers but abaseth their labour and submitteth all to God For hee had to doe with them that did attribute too much vnto the ministers worke with whome it was vnseasonable to extoll their labours and make them coadiutors or fellow helpers of God But contrariwise hee ascribeth the fruite of all their labours to God and to take away the Schismes that were among them by depending of one minister more than an other declareth that they altogither are Gods labourers Gods husbandmen c. In the other place 2. Cor. 6. v. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 it is more proper to say that the Apostles ioyned their labours vnto Christe offering his grace that it shoulde not bee receyued in vayne Where neuerthelesse the strength of mans free will is not auouched but the grace of God who worketh by his ministers giuing them strength to labour and fruite to their labours Nexte followeth an open outcrie against Beza for false translation our translators for being ashamed to follow him If we mislike Bezaes translation are wee by and by ashamed to followe him And if his translation be false as you affirme and we ashamed to folow him in falsehood do we deserue to be defied as hypocrits because we prefer the truth before the credite of our maister as you call him O how glad you are when you haue neuer so small an occasion to set abroad the sailes of your railing reuiling oration But let vs see whether Beza deserue so much blame as you charge him withall Beza hauing translated as he thought most neare to the Apostles meaning Eph. 2. v. 5. in his annotation vpon the place thus writeth Conuiuificauit c. The vulgar and Erasmus translate he hath quickened vs togither with Christ which sense I doe in no wise reprehend But yet nothing shall be detracted from the selfe same matter and perhaps it may be sayde more aptly that the preposition 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 in this place is vsed rather to declare the vniting togither of the Gentiles and Iewes in one Christ after which maner the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which signifieth to be builded togither is afterward vsed verse 22.