Defense of the Translations of the Scriptures into the English Tongue, Treatise · Chapter 5
CHAP. V.
Hereticall translation against the CHVRCH.
Martin.
AS they suppresse the name, Catholike, 1euen 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 obiectiō against their schismaticall proceedings, and it stucke much in the peoples consciences, that they forsooke the Church, and that the Church condemned them. Wherupō very wi…ily they suppressed the name Church in their English translation, so, that in all that Bible so long red in theirBib. 1562. 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,1. which the holy Scripture neuer vseth, as for the name of Church, I hauehave 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 vsus: 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, VponUpon this Rocke I willMat. 16. build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not preuaile against it. They make him to say, Vpō this rocke I wil buildMat. 18. 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 hauehave altered the worde Church in the Epistle to the Ephesians? their English translationEph. 5. for many yeares red thus, Ye husbands louelove your wiues as Christ loued the congregation, and clensed it to make it vntounto 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 house1. Tim. 3. 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 hisEp. 1. Heb. 12. v. 23. 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, vponupon this rock, that is, as saith S. Augustin, vponupon 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. AugustineIn ps. 81. in initio. telleth them, that the Iewes Synagogue, was a congregation: theforeign. Church, a conuocation: and that a congregation, is of beasts also: a conuocation, of reasonable creatures onelyonly: 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 hauehave 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 hauehave before cōfuted: shewing that in eueryevery Bible it is either in the text, or in the notes. But S. Augustin telleth vsus (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 vsus, and Augustine telleth vsus 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 vsus, that the Apostles neuer called the church congregation. It is a worlde to see what foolishe fetches you hauehave, 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 vntounto Christ foreign, 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 foreign, 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 moreConsut. of M. Hovvlet sol. 35. 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 hauehave 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 confession of any grosse faulte herein cōmitted, except you will count it a grosse fault in S. Luke, to vse the worde foreign without any scrupulositie for all three, as the translator doth the worde congregation, and you in two significations the worde assemblye. Neither can your heathenish and barbarous burning of the holy Scriptures so translated, nor your blasphemie in calling it the deuils worde, be excused, for any fault in translation, which you hauehave discouered as yet, or euer shall be able to descrye. That stinking cauill of leauing out of the Bible this worde Church altogither, being both foolish and false, I hauehave aunswered more than once alreadye. It is not left out altogither, that in contents of bookes and chapiters, and in notes of explication of this worde congregation is set downe. Neither could there be any purpose against the Catholike Churche of Christe in them that translated and taught the Creede in English, professing to beleeue the holy Catholike Church. As for our hatred of the malignant Antichristian Church of Rome, we neuer dissembled the matter, so that wee were afrayed openly to professe it, what neede had wee then after suche a fantasticall manner (as is fondly imagined) to insinuate it.
MART. 5. But, my Maisters, if you would confesse the former faults and corruptions neuer so plainely, is that inough to iustifie your corrupt dealing in the holy Scriptures? Is it not an horrible fault so wilfully to falsifie and corrupt the worde of God written by the inspiration of the holy Ghost? May you abuse the people for certaine yeares with false translations, and afterward say, Loe we hauehave amended it in our later translations?See his nevve Test. in Latine of the yere 1556, printed by Robert Steuen in fol. Act. 2. v. 27. Then might the Heretike Beza be excused for translating in steede of Christes soule in hell, his carcas in the graue. And because some friend told him of that corruption, & he corrected it in the later editions, he shoulde neuerthelesse in your iudgement, be counted a right honest man. No (be ye sure) the discrete Reader can not be so abused, but he will easily see, that there is a great difference in mending some ouersights which may escape the best men: & in your grosse false translations, who at the first falsifie of a prepensed malice, and afterwardes alter it for verie shame. Howbeit, to say the truth, in the chiefest & principal place that concerneth the Churches perpetuitie & stability, you hauehave not yet altered the former translation, but it remaineth as before and is at this day red in your Churches thus, VponUpon this RockeMat. 16. v. 18. Bib. 1577. I will build my congregation. Can it be without some hereticall subtiltie, that in this place specially and (I thinke) only you chaunge not the worde congregation into Church? GiueGive vsus a reason and discharge your credit.
FVLK 5. You are very hardly, & in very deede maliciously bent against vsus, that you will accept no confession of faults escaped, neuer so plainly made. As for corrupt dealing in the holy Scriptures, and falsifying of the word of god▪ you are not able no not if you would burst your selfe for malice, to conuict vsus. And therefore looke for no confession of any such wickednes, whereof our conscience is cleare before God, and doth not accuse vsus. As for Bezaes correction of his formen translation, Act. 2. v. 27. if your dogged stomach will not accept, he shall notwithstanding with all godly learned men, be accoū ted, as he deserueth, for one who hath more profited the Church of God, with his sincere translation, and learned annotations, than all the popish Seminaries, and Seminarists, shall be able to hinder it, iangle of grosse & false translations, as long as you will. But the chiefest & principall place that concerneth the Churches perpetuitie, is not yet reformed to your minde. For in the Bible 1577. we reade still Math. 16. vponupon this rocke I will build my congregation. If Christ hauehave a perpetuall congregation, builded vponupon the foundation of the Prophets, and Apostles, him selfe being the corner stone, his Church is in no daunger euer to decay. Yet you aske, whether it can be without some hereticall subtiltie, that in this place specially, and (as you thinke) onelyonly, the word congregation, is not chaunged into Church. It is an homely, but a true prouerbe: the good wife would neuer hauehave sought her daughter in the ouen, had she not bene there first her selfe. You are so full of hereticall subtilties, and traiterous deuises, that you dreame of them in other mens doinges, whatsoeuer commeth into your handes: yea, where you your selfe can hauehave no probable imagination what to suspect. And therefore we must giuegive you a reason, in discharge of our credit For my part, I knowe not with what speciall reason the translator was moued, but I can giuegive you my probable coniecture, that he thought it all one, (as in deede it is.) to say my congregation, or my Church. For what is Christes congregation, but his Church? or what is Christes Church, but his congregation? And yet to put you out of all feare, the Geneua translation hath the worde Church, that you make so great account of, as though it were not an indifferent word to the true Church, of true Christians, and the false Church of malignant Heretikes: being vsurped first to signifie the congregation of Christians, by a Metonymie of the place containing, for the people contained. For the etymologie thereof is from the Greeke word foreign, which was vsed of Christians for the place of their holy meetings, signifying the Lordes house, therefore in the northren, which is the more auncient English speech, is called by contraction Kyrke, more neare to the sound of the Greeke word.
MART. 6. What shal I say of Beza, whom the English Bibles also follow, translating actiuely that Greeke word, (which in common vse, and by S. Chrysostoms, and the Greeke doctors exposition, is a plaine passiue:) to signifie, as in his annotations is cleare, that Christ may be without his Church, that is, a head without a body. The words be these in the heretical translation, He gaue him to be the heade ouer all thinges to theEph. 1. v. 2…. 23. Church, which (Church) is his body, the fulnes of himforeign. that filleth all in all. S. Chrysostom. saith Beza, (he might hauehave said, all the Greeke & Latine auncient fathers) taketh it passiuely, in this sense, that Christ is filled all in all, because all faithfull men as members, & the whole Church as the bodie, cō curre to the fulnes & accomplishment of Christ the head. But this (saith he) seemeth vntounto me a forced interpretation. Why so Beza?
FVLK. 6. That Beza translateth the participle, foreign, actiuely, it is plaine, both in the text of his translation, & in his annotations. But that he doth it to signifie, that Christ may be without his Church, that is a head without a body, it is a shameles slaūder. His words, vponupon which you weaue this cobweb, are these. Omninò autem hoc addidit Apostolus, vt sciamus Christum per se non indigere hoc supplemento: vt 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 vntounto 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 merciemercy, 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, vponupon the worde foreign, which he calleth complementum siue supplementum, a fulfilling or supplying. Is enim est Christi in Ecclesiam amor, &c. For such is the louelove of Christ toward his Church, that whereas he performeth all thinges, to all men, vntounto the full: yet he esteemeth him selfe as an vnperfect head, & maymed of the members, vnlesse he hauehave 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 vsus 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 hauehave 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 foreign, but in respect of the grammar, that foreign should be put absolutely without any word to gouerne it, seeing the participle of the meane verbe, may be taken actiuely, and gouerne foreign, 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 onelyonly they, but their scholers for the most part, can not be ignorant, that the vse of this word, & the like, is passiue, thoughforeign. 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, foreign: and, The wine filleth the cuppe, foreign. Aske them that hauehave 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, foreign, 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 foreign, 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 foreign calleth for it, which otherwise is lefte at randon, without any gouernment? Seeing therefore we hauehave 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 foreign 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 vponupon Theophlyactes translation, by him corrected, sayth vponupon this place foreign 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 ipse agit in omnibus, vel per omnes homines haec implet membra. Siue pleni…udinem & complementum omne suum habet ipsa ecclesia ab illo, qui omnia in omnibus adimplet. That is the fulnesse of him\] for by all the members the bodie of Christ is filled, because he filleth all in all, while he worketh in all, or throughout all men filleth these members. Or else the Church hir selfe hath all hir fulnesse and accōplishment of him, which filleth al in al. These mē both Papists, were as good Grecians (I warrant you) as M. Gregorie Martin is, or euer will be, by whom if he will not be controlled, it were folly to presse him with the iudgement of our Greeke readers, which he requireth.
MART. 8. Yet (saith Beza) this is a forced interpretation, because Xenophon forsooth and Plato (once perhaps in all their whole workes) vse it otherwise. O hereticall blindnesse or rather stubburnnesse, that calleth that forced, which is moste common and vsuall: and seeth not that his owne translation is forced, because it is against the common vse of the worde. But no maruel. For he that in other places thinketh it no forced interpretation, to translate foreign, to be conteined, Which neytherRecipere. Xenophon, nor Plato, nor any Greeke author will allow him to do, & foreign carcas, & foreign. prouidence, & foreign,Animam. them that amēd their liues, may much more in this place dissemble…raescientiam. his forced interpretatiō of foreign. But why he shouldPoenitentiam. call S. Chrysostoms interpretation forced, which is the cōmon and vsuall interpretation, that hath no more reason, than if a very theefe should say to an honest man, Thou art a theefe, and not I.
FVLK. 8. I hauehave shewed how it is inforced, because in taking the participle passiuely, you must either be enforced to admitte a playne soloecisme, where none needeth: or else you must hardly vnderstande the preposition foreign to gouerne, the accusatiue foreign, as Montanus telleth you in Theophylact, and as Oecumenius doth, & the sense wil be no more than is contained in the worde Complemenium. Whereas by taking it actiuely, the wonderfull goodnesse of Christ shineth toward his Church, who although he needeth nothing to make him perfect, as Chysostome saith, but supplieth al things in al things, yet it is his gratious pleasure, to accoumpt him selfe imperfect without his Church, which he hath vnited to him as his bodie, in which he is not perfect without all his members.
As for your vayne and tedious repetition, lyke the Cuckowes songe, of Bezaes misprisions, I will not stand so often to answere, as you are disposed to rehearse thē: Only I must admonish the reader, of a piece of your cunning, that in repeating the participle, you chaunge the temps, and for foreign, you say foreign, as though it were the preterperfect temps, whiche can not bee taken, but only passiuely. I know the Printer shall beare the blame of this ouersight, but in the meane time it maketh a litle shew, to a yong Grecian, that considereth it not.
MART. 9. Is it forced Beza, that Christe is filled all in all by the Church? doth not S. Paul in the very next wordes before, call the Churche the fulnesse of Christ, saying, WhichEph. 1. is the fulnesse of him that is filled all in al? If the Church be the, fulnesse of him, then is he filled or hath his fulnesse of the Church, so that he is not a maymed head without a bodie. This would S. Paule say, if you would giuegive him leaue, and this he doth say, whether you will or no. But what is the cause that they will not suffer the Apostle to say so? because (saith Beza) Christe needeth no such complement. And if he needeth it not, then may he be without a Church, and consequently it is no absurditie, if the Church hath bene for many yeares not only inuisible, but also not at all. Would a man easily at the first imagine or conceiue that there were such secrete poison in their translation?
FVLK. 9. You should vrge Beza with a Latine Epistle, seeing you are so earnest in the matter. I hauehave tolde you that the sense of Chrysostome is true, but not flowing easily from the wordes of S. Paule. That Christ hath his fulnesse of the Churche, it is graunted by Beza vponupon the worde Plenitudo or Complemenium, as you can not be ignorant, if you hauehave redde Bezaes Annotations, as you pretende. But you charge Beza to say, that Christ needeth no such complement. Bezaes wordes are as I hauehave sett hem downe before, Vt sciamus Christum per se, non indigere hoc supplemento, that wee may knowe that Christe of him selfe, needeth not this supplie. Is this al one, with that you report him to say? No his saying was too long for your theeuish bedde, and therefore you cut of Perse of him selfe, or by him selfe. What say you? Dare you affirme that Christe of him selfe in respect of his diuine nature, hath neede of any complement? That Christe hath had alwaies a Churche since the beginning of the worlde, and shall hauehave to the ende, Beza dothe plainely in an hundreth places confesse: neither can it be otherwise proued by this translation, nor vet (by Bezaes wordes that Christe of him selfe is perfect and needeth no supply) but that it pleaseth him to become the head of the Churche, as of his bodie, whiche his diuine and mercifull pleasure, seeing it is immutable, Christe can not be without his Churche, nor the Churche without him. Yea as Beza in plaine wordes affirmeth, this is our whole hope and consolation, that Christ esteemeth him selfe an vnperfect head, and maymed of his members, excepte he hauehave his Churche adioyned to him as his bodie.
MART. 10. Againe, it commeth from the same puddle of Geneua, that in their Bibles so called, the English BezitesBib 1579. translate against the vnitie of the Catholike Church. For whereas them selues are full of sectes and dissensions, and the true Church is knowen by vnitie, and hath this marke giuen her by Christe him selfe, in whose person Salomon speaking saith, Vna est columba mea, that is, One is my doue, or, My Cant. 6. v. 8.doue is one. Therefore in steede hereof, the foresayed Bibleforeign. sayeth, My doue is alone: Neither Hebrue nor Greekeforeign worde hauing that signification, but being as proper to signifie one, as Vnus in Latine.
FVLK. 10. He that hath any nose may smel, that this censure commeth from the stinking puddle of Popish malice. For he that sayth my doue is alone. Cant. 6. 8. doth a great deale more strongly aduouche the vnitie of the Church, than he that sayeth my doue is one. For whereas Salomon sayeth in the verse going immediatly before. There are three score Queenes, and foure score concubines, and of the damsels without number, if you adde thereto my doue is one: it may bee thought she is one of those last mentioned. But if you say as the Geneua Bible doth, but my doue is alone, and my vndefiled is the onelyonly daughter of her mother: Nowe the church is excepted from all the rest of the Queenes, concubines, and damsels. And where you say, the Hebrue hath not that signification, I pray you goe no further, but euen to the same verse, and tell me whether the sense be, that, she is one of her mothers daughters, or the only daughter of her mother? Here therefore (as almost eueryevery where) you doe nothing, but seeke a knot in a rush.
MART. 11. But we beseeche euerie indifferent Reader, euen for his soules health to consider that one point specially before mentioned of their abandoning the name of Church for so many yeares out of their Englishe Bibles: thereby to defeate the strongest argument that might and may possibly be brought against them and all other Heretikes: to wit, the authoritie of the Church which is so many wayes and so greatly recommended vntounto all Christians in ho'y Scriptures. Consider (I pray you) what a malitious intention they had herein. First, that the name Church shoulde neuer sound in the common peoples eares out of the Scriptures: secondly, that as in other things, so in this also it might seeme to the ignoraunt a good argument against the authoritie of the Church, to say, We finde not this worde (Church) in all the holy Scriptures. For as in other articles they say so, because they finde not the expresse word in the holy Scripture, so did they well prouide, that the worde (Church) in the holy Scriptures should not stay or hinder their schismaticall and hereticall proceedings, as long as that was the only English translation, that was read and liked among the people: that is, so long till they had by preaching taken away the Catholike Churches credit and authorite altogither, among the ignorant by opposing the Scriptures thereunto, which them selues had thus falsely translated.
FVLK. 11. We trust euerie indifferent Reader wil consider, that they which translated the Greeke worde Ecclesia, the congregation, and admonished in the notes that they did by that worde meane the church, and they which in the creede might hauehave translated Ecclesiam Catholicam, the vniuersall congregation, taught all children to say, I beleue the Catholike churche, coulde hauehave no such deuilish meaning as this malicious sclaunderer, of his owne heade doeth imagine. For who euer hearde any man reason thus. This worde church is not found in the Scripture, therefore the church must be despised, &c. Rather it is like (beside other reasons before alleaged) that those first translatours, hauing in the olde Testament out of the Hebrue translated the wordes Cahal Hadath, and such other for the congregation (where the Papistes will not translate the church, although their Latine text be Ecclesia, as appeareth, Act. 7. where they call it assembly) thought good to retaine the word congregation, throughout the newe Testament also, least it might be thought of the ignoraunt, that God had no church in the time of the olde Testament. Howsoeuer it was, they departed neither from the word, nor meaning of the holy Ghost: nor from the vsage of that word Ecclesia, which in the Scripture signifieth as generally, any assembly, as the worde Congregation doeth in Englishe.