WHETHER these fiue abuses haue bene common to all heretikes , & whether it hath bene the fashion of all heretikes to pretende Scriptures for shewe of their cause : though I will spare nowe to enquire of , as a thing wherin learned men at the first sight may espie the great skil that Martin pretendeth to haue in discerning of heretikes and heresies ; yet will I shew ( by the grace of God ) that none of these fiue abuses are committed by vs , or our Catholike translations , & that the popish heretikes are in some sort , or other guiltie of them all .

FVLK . 1. First we denie no one booke of the Canonicall scripture that hath bene so receaued of the Catholike church , for the space of 300. yeares , & more , as it hath bene often proued out of Eusebius , S. Ierome , and other ancient authorities : but the Papists in aduauncing Apocryphall bookes to be of equall credite with the Canonicall Scriptures , do in effect deny them all . Besides that to adde vnto the word of God , is as great a fault as to take away from it , the one being forbidden vnder as heauie a curse , as the other . Those blasphemies of Pighius & Eccius , the one calling the holy Scripture a nose of waxe and a dumbe iudge , the other terming the Gospel written , to be a blacke Gospell , and an ynkie Diuinitie , and that of Hosius acknowleging none other expresse word of God , but onely this one worde Ama , or dilige , loue thou : what other thing do they import , but a shamelesse deniall of all bookes of the holy Scripture in deede , how soeuer in worde they will seeme to admitte them .

FVLK . 2. We neither doubt of the authoritie of anie certaine booke of the holy Scriptures , neither cal we any of them into question , but with due reuerence do acknowledge them all , & euery one to be of equall credit & authority , as being al inspired of god ▪ giuen to the church for the building vp thereof in truth , and for the auoiding of fables , & heresies : But the Papists arrogating to their Pope , authoritie to allowe or refuse , any booke of holy Scripture , & affirming that no Scripture hath authoritie , but as it is approued by their church , do bring al bookes of the holy Scripture into doubting , & vncertaintie , with such as wil depend vpon their Pope , & popish churches authoritie : which they affirme to be aboue the holy Scriptures , saying they might as wel receaue the gospel of Nicodemus as of S. Marke , & by the same authoritie reiect the Gospell of S. Matthew , as they haue done the Gospel of S. Bartholomew . These blasphemous assertions although some of them would couler , or mitigate with gentle interpretations : yet their is no reasonable man but seeth , into what discredite and vncertaintie they must needes bring the authoritie of the Canonicall bookes of holy Scripture with the simple and ignorant .

FVLK . 3. We expound not the Scriptures after our owne priuate conceite , and fantasie : but as neere as God giueth vs grace , according to the plaine and natural sense of the same , agreable vnto the rule or proportion of faith , which bene approued by the auncient fathers , and Catholike church of Christ , in al matters necessarie to eternall saluation . Not bringing a newe and straunge sense which is without the Scriptures , to seeke confirmation thereof in the Scriptures ( as the manner of heretikes is rightly noted by Clemens ) but out of the Scriptures themselues seeke we the exposition of such obscure places as we find in them , being perswaded with S. Augustine , that nothing in a manner is founde out of those obscure and darke places , which may not be found to be most plaine ly spoken in other places . And as for the approued sense of the holy auncient Fathers , and Catholike Church of the eldest and purest times , if the Papists durst stand vnto it , for the deciding of many of the most waightie controuersies , that are betweene vs , there is no doubte , but ▪ they should soone and easily be determined , as hath bene shewed in diuerse and many treatises , written against them . In which if any thing bee brought , so plainely expounding the Scripture against their popish heresies , as nothing can be more expresse nor cleare , then they are driuen to seeke newe and monstrous expositions of those Fathers interpretations : or else they answere , they are but those Fathers priuate expositions , appealing to the Catholike churches interpretation , which is nothing else but their owne priuate conceipte and fansie , hauing no recorde to proue that Catholike Churches interpretation , but the present hereticall opinions , of this late degenerated Antichristian congregation . And when they haue discoursed neuer so much of the Catholike churches interpretation , they reduce and submitte all mens iudgements to the determination of their Councels , & the decrees of the Councels to the approbation of their Pope , which as he is oftentimes a wicked man of life : so is he ignorant and vnlearned in the Scriptures , to whose most priuate censure , the holy Scriptures themselues , and al sense and exposition of them is made subiect , vnder colour that Christ praying for Peter , that his faith should not fayle in temptation , gaue all Popes suche a prerogatiue , that they could not erre in faith ▪ though they were wicked of life , voyde of learning , ignorant in the Scriptures , destitute of the spirite of God , as is proued moste inuincibly by example of diuerse Popes , that haue bene heretikes , and mainteyners of such errours , as are not now in controuersie betweene vs ( least they should say we begge the principle ) but of the secte of the Arrians , Monothelites , Eutychians , Saduces , and such other .

FVLK . 4. The originall text of the holie Scripture we alter not , either by adding , taking away , or changing of any letter , or syllable , for any priuate purpose , which were not only a thing most wicked and sacrilegious , but also vaine , and impossible . For , seeing not only so many auncient coppies of the original text are extant in diuers places of the worlde , which we can not , if we woulde , corrupt , and that the same are multiplied by printing into so many thousande examples , wee shoulde bee rather madde than foolishe , if we did but once attempt such a matter , for maintenaunce of any of our opinions . As also it is incredible , that Marcion the mouse of Pontus , coulde corrupt all the Greeke coppies in the world , as Lindanus , of whome you borrowed that conceite , imagineth , in those places in which he is charged by Tertullian . For Marcions heresie was not so generally receiued by the Greeke Churche , that all men would yeeld vnto him , neither was Tertullian so sound of iudgement in the Latine Church , that whatsoeuer he iudged to be a corruption in Marcion ▪ must of necessity be so taken . But if adding , and detracting from the Scripture , be proper notes of heretikes , who can purge Stephen Gardiner , & Gregorie Martine ? The one for adding vnto a the verse of the Psalme , this pronowne se , him selfe , to proue the carnall presens , citing it thus . Escam se dedit timentibus eum . He gaue himselfe to be meate ▪ to them that feare him , whereas the words of the Prophet , according to the Hebrue , Greeke , and Latine are no more but ▪ Escam dedit . He hath giuen meat , &c. The other in his fond booke of schisme , citing this text out of 1. Cor. 10. as many Papistes doe against the certaintie of Faith . Qui stat , videat ne cadat . He that standeth let him take heede he fall not . Whereas not only the truth of the Greeke : but euen the vulgar Latin translation hath . Qui se existimat stare , He that thinketh or supposeth that he standeth , let him take heede that he fall not . But of such additions and detractions , vsed by the Romishe rattes , farre worse than the myse of Pontus , we shall haue more occasion to speake hereafter .

FVLK . 5. As touching false and hereticall translations , which is the chiefe argument of this booke , I doubt not , but by the grace of god to cleare our english translators from any wilfull corruptions , for the maintenance of any errour , or heresie : such as were those of the Arrians & Pelagians , which Gregorie Martin , as though he vttered some great peece of skill , doth so diligently expresse . I shall haue occasion also to shew , that the Papistes them selues of our times , maintaining their corrupt vulgar translation , against the truth of the originall textes of Greeke , and Hebrew , are most guiltie of such corruption , and falsification , whereof although they be not the first authors , yet by obstinate defending of such errors , they may proue worse than they which did first commit them . For the authors of that vulgar translation , might be deceiued , either for lacke of exact knowledge of the tongues , or by some corrupt , and vntrue copies which they followed , or else perhaps that which they had rightly translated , by fault of the writers , & negligence of the times might be peruerted : but these men frowardly iustifying all errours of that translation , howsoeuer they haue bene brought in , do giue plaine testimony , that they are not led with any conscience of Gods truth , but wilfully carried with purpose of maintaining their owne errours : least if they did acknowledge the errour of the Romish church in that one point they should not bee able to defende any one iote of their heresie , whose chiefe colour is the credit and authoritie of that particular and false church , rather than any reason or argument out of the holy Scriptures , or testimonie of the most auncient Christian and Catholike church .

FVLK . 6. It is very true , that so many Heretikes as pretend the authoritie of the holy Scriptures , abuse the same to their owne destruction : and no Heretikes worse than the Antichristians , or Papistes . As partly hath bene seene already in euery one of your fiue markes , & more may appeare in those foure pointes which you will handle in the Preface , because the argument of your whole booke is the fift : so that in the ende you shal be proued no wiser with your fiue pointes , than he that came forth with his fiue egges , & neuer a good of them all . But you aske , if it were not easie for you to shew ( if you would stand vpon them ) that the Protestants vse all the said siue meanes of defacing the Scripture ? I answer no , and that shal you see when demonstration is made , how vainly you haue laboured in the last point : which howsoeuer you would haue it appeare to be a sudden writing , of small trauail , by interlacing a few lines here & there , against M. Whitaker , against me , & some other : yet it is euident both by Bristowes threatning , and Campions promise , that it hath bene a work of some yeares vnto you : wherin beside that you are beholding much to Lindanus , for diuers quarrels against Caluin , and to sir Thomas More , for many cauillations against W. Tyndals translation : there is litle worthy of so long study , and large promises , as haue gone before this diligent discouerie : so that if you will make the like triall in the rest , you shall finde them as hard to proue as this last .

FVLK . 7. I know not whether euer Luther denied S. Iames epistle as vnworthy of an Apostolical spirit , but I beleue you may take a twelue monethes daye more to proue it , as also that he did so contemne it , that he called it an epistle of straw . But M. Whitaker which denied it so vehemently ▪ must aske of me , who moste slatly confesse ( sayth M. Martin ) that it was so . I pray you sir , vrge me not to confesse more than I know , or euer knew . But you haue confessed it already in two printed bookes , Retent . pag. 32. Disc of the Rock , pag 307. In the place first cited , ther are these words But to proceed : LVTHER DENIETH THE EPISTLE OF S. IAMES , BECAVSE IT IS AGAINST HIS HERESIE OF IVSTIFICATION BY FAITH ONELY . We allow not Luther , neither did he allow him selfe therein , for he retracteth it afterward . First those wordes of Luthers denyall being printed in a diuerse letter , may testifie sufficiently to euery reasonable man , that they are the obiection of Bristow , and not the confession of Fulke , who not simplye admitteth them as true , but by concession , proueth that if they were true , yet Luthers opinion , against which he him selfe hath written , ought not to preiudice him , and much lesse all other men , that neuer held that opinion . In the later cited place , are these wordes . And as touching the epistle of S. Iames , it is a shamelesse slaunder of him to say that the Protestants reiect it , but we must heare his reason . First Luther calleth it a strawen epistle . So Luther called the Pope supreame head of the Church , and the masse a sacrifice propitiatorie . If Protestants be charged to holde whatsoeuer Luther sometime helde , and after repented . &c. Who seeth not in these words , that I rehearse the obiection of Saunder , which is common to him with many other Papistes , which not discussing whether it be true or no , but supposing it were as Saunder and the rest of the Papistes doe affirme . I shewe that it is no good consequence , to charge all Protestants with Luthers priuate opinion , which perhaps he helde sometime , and after retracted , more than to charge vs with all opinions of Papistrie , which de did hold , before God opened his eyes to see the absurditie of them . And yet if he had helde that opinion , and neuer retracted the same , he were not in worse case than Eusebius , who in playne wordes affirmeth , that the same epistle is a counterfet or bastard epistle , lib. 2. cap. 23. Doe you not see nowe how flatly Maister Fulke confesseth that it was so ? Such confessions as these , are nowe & than extorted out of the auncient fathers writings , which are not liuing to expounde their meanings . But I had thought Maister Martin could haue discerned betwene a suppose or concession , and an absolute assertion , or a flat confession , especially of one whose writing is plaine enough , and beside is aliue to interprete himselfe , if any ambiguitie were therein . But be it that Maister Martin either would not , or could not see in my writing any thing else but a flat confession of Luthers denying of S. Iames epistle , and calling it an epistle of strawe , of what forehead proceedeth it , that he willeth Maister Whitaker to aske Caluin in argum . Epist. Iacobi , whether Luther so speake of that epistle ? in which argument Luther is not once named by Caluin , so farre is it , that he doth testifie any such thing against Luther . Onely he sayth , that some there are in these dayes , which thinke that epistle not worthy of authoritie , which could not be vnderstood of Luther , who long before Caluin wrote that argument , had forsaken that opinion , if euer he helde any such , as all those Dutche Bibles and Testaments of Luthers translation , in which those wordes so muche bayted at , and so much sought for are omitted , doe giue sufficient testimonie . What Flaccus Illyricus reporteth ▪ who perhaps helde that opinion him selfe , and woulde father it vppon Luther , I haue neither opportunitie to seeke , nor care to knowe . But howe great a matter it is , that all the Popish Germans , and other , who haue written against Luther , doe so spitefully gnawe vpon , I haue learned at length by relation of Maister Whitaker . whome you send to aske of me : who after long search and many editions turned ouer , at the length lighted vpon a Dutch Testament , by likehood one of the first that Luther did sette forth in the German tongue , in which he findeth neither deniall of S. Iames epistle to be Canonicall , nor affirmation that it is vnworthy of an Apostolicall spirit , no nor that whereof there hath bene so much babling of all the Papistes , that he calleth it an epistle of strawe simply , and in contempt , but onely in comparison of the epistles of Paule and Peter , and other bookes of the newe Testament , the excellencie of which one aboue an other , after he hath shewed in sundry degrees , at last he sayth , the epistle of Iames in comparison of these , is strawye , or like straw . Which he sayth not in respect of the credit or authority thereof , but in regarde of the argument or matter handled therein , which all wise and godly men will confesse to bee not so excellent and necessary , as the matter of the holye Gospels and Epistles of some other of the Apostles , namely of Paule , Peter , and Iohn . Our Sauiour Christ himself , Ioh. 3. 12 ▪ calleth the doctrine of regeneration , in such plaine maner as he vttered it , to Nicodemus , earthly things in comparison of other greater mysteries , which he coulde haue expressed in more heauenly & spirituall sort . If I haue spoken to you ( sayth he ) of earthly things , and you haue not beleued , how if I shoulde speake to you of heauenly things , will you beleue ? Were not he an honest and a wise man , that vpon these words of Christ spoken in comparison , would conclude by his authoritie , that regeneration were a contemptible matter , a thing not spirituall , not heauenly , but simply and altogither earthly . And yet with , as good reason , for ought I see or can learne of Luthers wordes concerning this matter , he might so inferre , as the Papists doe inforce , the like against Luther . Wherefore it is nothing else but a famous and infamous cauillation , to the confusion of all the Papistes which write against Luther , that no one of them omitteth vpon so false and friuolous a ground , to sclaunder him so haynously , and to charge all Protestantes with his assertion so enuiously : which if it were his , should not be so euill as other Catholike writers haue affirmed of that Epistle , and therefore not sufficient to charge him , and much lesse others with heresie : but being not his simple affirmation , yet because it hath bene offensiuely taken , he him selfe hath put it out , and giuen it ouer . O what a sturre would they keepe , if they had any weightie matter of truth to burthen him withall ?

FVLK . 8. You may well let it passe , for it is not worth the time you spend in writing of it , and if you had bene wise , you would vtterly haue omitted it . But what say you of Tobie , Ecclesiasticus , and the Machabees most certainly by vs reiected ? They were allowed ( you say ) for Canonicall by the same authoritie that S. Iames Epistle was . And thinke you that S. Iames Epistle was neuer allowed for Canonicall before the third Councell of Carthage ? For , of the other it is certaine they were neuer receiued by the Church of the Israelits before Christ his comming , nor of the Apostolike and primitiue Church for more than 300. yeres after , as both Eusebius out of Origines , and the Councell of Laodicea Can. ●9 . confirmed afterwarde by the sixt generall Councell of Constantinople sheweth for the Greeke Church , and S. Ierome in prologo Lib. 6. cap. 18. Galeato for the Latine Church . As for the prouinciall Councell of Carthage holden by 44. Bishops of Africa , if we were bound to receiue it for these bookes , we must also acknowledge fiue bookes of Salomon , which in the same Councell are authorised , whereas the Church neuer knew but of three . And although the booke of wisedom should be ascribed to Salomon , there could be but foure . Againe , how they vnderstand the word Canonical , it may be gathered both out of the wordes of the same Canon , where they giue none other reason of the approbation of all those books of Scripture , but that they haue receiued them of their fathers to be read in the Church : and also out of S. Augustine , who was one present at the same De doct. Christ . lib. 2. cap. 8. Councell : which after he hath declared how a man should discerne the Canonicall Scriptures from other writings , by following the authoritie of the Catholike Churches , especially those that haue deserued to haue Apostolike sees , and to receiue their Epistles , he addeth further . Tenebit igitur hunc modum in scripturis canonicis , vt eas quae ab omnibus accipiuntur Ecclesijs Catholicis , praeponat eis quas quaedam non accipiunt . In eis vero quae non accipiuntur ab omnibus , praeponat eas , quas plures grauiorèsque accipiunt eis quas pauciores minorisque authoritatis Ecclesiae tenent . Si autem alias inuenerit à pluribus , alias à grauioribus haberi , quanquam hoc inuenire non possit , aequalis tamen auctoritatis eas habendas puto . Totus autem canon scripturarum in quo istam considerationem versandam dicimus , his libris continetur . He shall hold therfore this meane in the canonical Scriptures , that he preferre those which are receiued of all catholike churches , before those Scriptures which some Churches do not receiue . But in those which are not receiued of all , let him preferre those Scriptures which the greater number and grauer churches do receiue , before those which churches fewer in number & of lesse authority do hold . But if he shal find some Scriptures to be had of fewer churches & other some of grauer churches , althogh you can not find this thing , yet I thinke they are to be accompted of equall authority . Now the whole canon of scriptures in which we say this consideration must be occupied is contained in these books . Fiue books of Moises , that is Genesis , Exodus , &c. By this saying of Augustine , it is manifest , that he calleth canonicall Scriptures , not only those bookes that ought of necessity to be receiued of al churches : but also such as were receiued of some , & of some were not , in which number were these bookes of Tobie , Ecclesiasticus , & the Machabees , which by his owne rule , were not to be receiued as of absolut & soueraigne authority , because the Apostolike churches of Asia & Europa , & those of grauest authoritie , among which was the church of Rome in that time , did not receiue them , as witnesseth not only S. Hierome a Priest of Rome , but also Ruffinus of Aquileia , in symbolo , who both declare what bookes were receiued in their churches as canonical , & of irrefragable authority to build principles of faith vpon them , & what books were admitted only to be read for instruction of maners . And therfore according to the rule of Augustin & testimony of the ancient fathers , & because it consenteth with the rest of the scriptures , & not for Caluins pleasure we receiue the Epistle of S. Iames , though it hath not bene alwaies , and of all Churches receiued . Concerning the name of Caluinists , as of all other nicke names , that it pleaseth you of your charity to bestow vpon vs , it shall suffice to protest once for all , that we acknowledge none other name of our profession , but Christians , & Catholikes : and that we haue neither receiued that Epistle , nor reiected the other , bicause it pleased Caluin so . This may serue for a cleare demonstration , that in the first English Bibles that were printed vnder the name of Thomas Anno. 1532. Anno. 1537. Mathew , before Caluine wrote any word of the reiection of those bookes , or of receiuing of the other , they are called Apocrypha , & printed with other of that marke , by themselues , & the Epistle of S. Iames without any question acknowledged to be one of the canonical Epistles , wheras Caluines Institution was first printed An. 1536. & his argument vpon S. Iames Epistle 1551. You may see what honest dealing the Papistes vse , to bring the truth into discredit , & the professors thereof into hatred with the simple & vnlearned people , bearing them in hand , that we haue no cause to receiue or refuse bookes of Scripture , but Caluines pleasure . But the God of truth wil one day reward these impudent liars & shameles slaunderers .

Well let vs now see vnder what pretence , it pleased Caluine to reiect these bookes . Vnder pretence forsooth ( sayth Martin ) that they were once doubted of , and not taken for Canonical . I pray you sir , where doth Caluine pretend that only cause ? In his Instit. li. 3. c. 5 sect. 8. He alleageth diuerse other causes touching the bookes of Machabees , as euery man that wil may read . Shame you nothing to forge such manifest vntruths , & that in such matters as you may be conuinced in them by ten thousand witnesses ? What credit shal be giuen to you in matters that consist vpon your owne bare testimonie when you force not to faine of other men , that wherin euery man may reproue you ? And as for the only pretence you speake of , Caluine doth so litle esteeme it , that notwithstanding the same , he doubteth not to receiue the Epistle of S. Iames because it is agreable to the whole body of the canonical Scripture as if you had read his argument vpon that Epistle you might easily haue perceiued .

FVLK . 9. The mouth that lieth killeth the soule . The reader may thinke you haue small care of his soules health , when by such impudent lying you declare that you haue so smal regard of your own . But what shal he mark ? That heresy , &c. You were best say that Eusebius , Hierom , Ruffine & al the churches in their times were heretiks , & that only heresie was the cause of their deniall of these bookes . For such reasons as moued them moue vs , & some thing also their authority . But how proue you that only heresie moueth vs to reiect them ? Because M. Whit. against the orders , & Hierarchies , & particular patronages of Angels writeth in the name of the rest . That we passe not , &c. Take heede least vpon your bare surmise you belie him where you say he writeth in the name of the reste , as in the next section following you say , he writeth in the name of both the vniuersities , for which I am sure he had no commission from either of them , althogh he did write that which may well be aduouched by both the vniuersities , yet I knowe his modestie is such , as he will not presume to be aduocate for both the vniuersities , and much lesse for the whole church , except he were lawfully called therto . This is a common practise of you Papists , to beare the world in hand that whatsoeuer is written by any of vs in defense of the truth is set forth in the name of al the rest , as though none of vs could say more in any matter , than any one of vs hath written , or that if any one of vs chaunce to slip in any smal matter , though it be but a wrong quotation ▪ you might open your wide sclaunderous mouths against the whole church for one mans particular offense . Now touching any thing that M. Whit. hath written , you shal find him sufficient to maintaine it against a stronger aduersary than you are , & therfore I wil medle the lesse in his causes . And for the orders & patronage or protection of Angels by Gods appointment , we haue sufficient testimonie in the Canonical Scriptures , that we neede not the vncertain report of Tobies booke to instruct vs what to thinke of them . But as for the Hierarchies , & patronage of Angels , that many of you Papistes haue imagined & written of , neither the canonical Scriptures , nor yet the Apocryphal bookes now in controuersie , are sufficient to giue you warrantise . The like I say of freewil , praier for the dead , & intercession of Saincts . But it grieueth you that those Apocryphal scriptures , which haue bin vniuersally receiued for canonicall in the church of God aboue 1100. yeares should find no more reuerence among vs . Stil your mouth runneth ouer . For in the time of the Canon of the councel of Carthage . 3. which you quote , these bookes were not vniuersally reuerenced as canonical . And Augustine him selfe speaking of the booke of Machabees , Cont. 2. G and. Ep. c. 23. confesseth that the Iewes account it not as the law , & the Prophetes , & the Psalmes , to which our Lord giueth testimonie as to his witnesses , saying . It behoueth that all things should be fulfilled which are written in the Law , & in the Prophets , & in the Psalmes concerning me : but it is receiued of the Church , not vnprofitably , if it be soberly read or heard . This writeth S. Augustine , when he was pressed with the authority of that booke by the Donatists , which defended that it was lawful for them to kil themselues , by example of Razis , who is by the author of that booke commended for that fact . He saith it is receiued not vnprofitably , & immediatly after . Especially for those Machabees that suffred paciently horrible persecution for testimony of Gods religion , to encourage Christians by their example . Finally , he addeth a condition of the receiuing it , if it be soberly read or heard . These speches declare , that it was not receiued without all controuersie , as the authenticall word of God : for then should it be receiued necessarily , & because it is Gods word especially , & how soeuer it be read or heard it is receiued of the Church , not only necessarily , but also profitably . Beside this , euen the decree of Gelasius , which was neare 100. yeares after that councel of Carthage , alloweth but one booke of the Maccabees . Wherfore the vniuersal reuerence that is bosted of , can not be iustified .