The Defense of the Nonconformists Plea for Grace, Part · Chapter 25
CHAP. XXV.
§ 1. THe next is, Whether we may assent to the Preface for justifying all that was in the Book before.
You say that It was not the intent of the Book to bind any Man to approve the Errors of Translators and Printers, nor to use the Forms in the Liturgy so as to contradict one another.
Ans. 1. Printers Errors indeed are not the Convocations, nor the Books as made by them: Did I instance in any of them. But if Translators Errors also be excepted, our difficulty of understanding the Imposition still increaseth. Then it seems as to the Psalms, Epistles and Gospels, we Assent and Consent only to the Original Text, and so much as we judge well Translated. I thought it the Book by ill Translation had grosly contradicted, or depraved the Scripture, it had been one of the worst sort of Errors. I told you where it directly contradicteth the Text. What Heresie may not be brought in by a false Translation? We thank God for the worst, as a great Mercy to the Church; and by them that will not receive a better in the Psalms, we are thus commanded to justifie even that which was worst, lest they should be thought to have needed any amendment. And you make your self their Expositor without their Authority, and tell us that the intent of the Book is not to bind us to approve the Errors of Translators: And I believe you as the Book is distinguished from the Authors, and so hath no intent at all. But if the Translaton hath done, as Heylin saith the King's Printer did, that put [Thou shalt commit Adultery,] for [Thou shalt not,] and I were commanded to approve of all things contained in the Book; whatever you shall say or do, I would have done as Iohn Fox the Martyrologist did, saith Heylin, who brought a Greek Testament (supposing the Hebrew. old Testament) and said to them, [I am ready to subscribe this: If that will not serve your turn, take my Prebendship of Salisbury, which is all the Preferment that ever I had of you, and much good may it do you.]
§ 2. And you tell us without proof, that when at Christmas we are bid say [As on this day Christ was born] for divers Days, it intends not that we shall use the words [this Day,] but on one Day (and so at Whitsuntide, &c.) That is, It expresly imposeth the very words that we shall read, forbidding us by the Canon to alter or diminish, and yet it meaneth not that we should use them. May you not then say what you list, which you think should have been commanded you, and suppose it the meaning of the Command? You say, This is but a favourable interpretation: You should have said truly, [It was their oversight, which if they had seen they had amended.] And I do not say that they meant amiss: But if they speak amiss, and our humble Prelates that are Servi servorum Dei, come after them, and command me on pain of Silence to Assent, Consent to, and Approve the words, they shall take my Liberty and Life if they will; but I will not Approve them. It is all things in the Book that we must Consent to, whatever was in their Minds. If they bid me Approve the saying, that [Christ's Body and Blood is really present, under the forms of Bread and Wine,] and mean as well by it as Cousins, Heylin, &c. did, I will not Approve it, though you should. Though Luther de Conciliis, & Dav. Derodon say, that Nestorius meant soundly, yet the Councils condemned him for a Heretick, and owned not his words, whatever he meant.
§ 3. But you say, [It is not that the old Book was faultless, but that They were fully persuaded in their judgments that it was so.]
Ans. You think this but a [favourable Interpretation] too. But by your leave, [If they had said that we are fully persuaded in our judgment, that the Council of Trent hath nothing contrary to the Word of God,] and then required me to declare my Assent and Consent to all things contained in that Book, I should not have done it. If you understand the words so, others will not.