Answer unto a Crafy and Sophistical Cavillation, Debate · Confutation of book 3 · Section 46
Winchester.
The author bringeth in Theodoret a greek,Theodoretus. whom to discusse particularly, wer lōg & tedious: one notable place there is in him, which toucheth the poynt of the mater, which place Peter Marter alleageth in greek, and then translateth it into Latin, not exactly as other hauehave done to the truth, but as he hath done, I will write in here. And then will I wryte the same translated into english by one yt hath translated Peter Marters booke: and then will I adde the translation of this author, and finally the very truth of the Latine, as I will abide by, and ioyn an issue with this author in it, wherby thou reader shalt perceaue with what sinceritie thinges be handled.
Peter Marter hath of Theodoret this in Latin,P. Marter which the same Theodoret in a disputation with an Heritique maketh the catholique man to say. Captus es ijs quae tetenderas retibus. Neque enim post sancti ficationem, mistica simbola illa propria sua natura egrediuntur, manent enim in priori sua substantia, & figura, & specie, adeo que & videntur, & palpantur, quemadmodum & antea. Intelliguntur autem quae facta sunt, & creduntur, & adorantur tanquam ea existentia, quae creduntur. He that translateth Peter Marter in english, doth expresse these wordes thus. Lo thou art new caught in the same nette which thou haddest sette to catche me in. For those same misticall signes do not depart away out of their owne proper nature after the hallowing of them. For they remayne still in their former substance, and their former shape, and their former kind, and are euen as well seene and felte, as they were afore. But the thinges that are done, are vnderstanded, and are beleued, and are worshiped, euen as though they were in very deede the thinges that are beleued. This is the common translation into English of Peter Marters booke translated, which this author doth translate after his fashion, thus. Thou art taken with thine owne nette,, for the sacramentall signes go not from their owne nature after the sanctification, but continue in their former substance, forme and figure, and be seen, and touched as well as before. Yet in our mindes we do consider what they be made, and do repute and esteme them, and hauehave them in reuerence according to the same thinges, that they be taken for. Thus is the translation of this author. Myne English of this latine is thus.
Thou art taken with the same nettes thou diddest lay forth. For the misticall tokens after the sanctification go not away, out of their proper nature. For they abide in their former substance, shape and forme and so far forth, that they may be seene and felt as they might before. But they be vnderstanded that they be made, and are beleued, and are worshiped, as being the same thinges, which he beleued. This is my translation, who in the first sentence meane not to vary from the other translations touching the remayne of substance, shape, forme, or figure, I will vse all these names. But in the second parte where Theodoret speaketh of our beleefe what the tokens be made, and where he sayth those tokens be worshiped, as being the same thinges, which he beleued, thou mayst see reader how this author flieth the wordes (beleue) and (worship) which the common translation in english doth playnly and truly expresse, how soeuer the translator swarued by colour of the word (tanquam) which there, after the greeke, signifieth the truth and not the similitude onelyonly: like as saynt Paule (Vocat ea quae non sunt, tanquam sint) which is to make to be indeed, not as though they were. And the greeke is the foreign, as it is here foreign. And it were an absurditie, to beleue thinges otherwise then they be, as though they were, and very Idolatrie to worship wittingly that is not, as though it were in dede. And therfore in these two words that they beleued, that they be made and be worshiped, is declared by Theodoret, his fayth of the very true reall presence of Christs glorious flesh, wherunto the Deitie is vnited. Which fleshe, S. Augustine, consonantly to this Theodoret, sayd must be worshiped before it be receiued. The word worshiping put here in english is to expresse the word (Adorantur) put by Peter in latine, signifieng adoring, being the verbe in Greke of such signification, as is vsed to expresse godly worship with bowing of the knée. Now reader, what should I say by this author, that conueieth these two wordes, of beleuing, and worshiping, and in stede of them, cometh in with reuerence, taking, reputing, and esteming, wherof thou mayst esteme how this place of Theodoret pinched this author, who could not but see that adoring of the sacramēt signifieth the presence of the body of Christ to be adored, which els were an absurditie: and therfore the author toke payne to ease it with other wordes of calling, beleuing, reputing, and esteming, and for adoration, reuerence. Consider what prayse this author geueth Theodoret, which prayse condemneth this author sore. For Theodoret in his doctrine would hauehave vsus beleue the mistery,Adoration of the sacrament. and adore the sacrament, where this author after in his doctrine professeth there is nothing to be worshiped at all. If one should now say to me, Yea syr, but this Theodoret semeth to condemne transubstantiation, bicause he speaketh so of the bread. Therunto shall be answered when I speake of transubstantiation, which shallbe after the iij. and iiij. booke discussed. For before the truth of the presence of the substance of Christes body may appeare, what should we talke of transubstantiation? I will trauayle no more in Theodoret, but leaue it to thy iudgment reader, what credite this author ought to hauehave that handleth the mater after this sorte.