A
TREATISE
OF
THE
WRITTEN
WORD
OF
GOD
.
COMPOSED
In
Latin
,
by
the
Reuerend
Father
Iames
Gordon
Huntley
of
Scotland
,
Doctour
of
Diuinity
,
of
the
Society
of
IESVS
.
And
translated
into
English
,
by
I.
L.
of
the
same
Society
.
The
first
Part
of
the
first
Controuersy
.
Permissu
Superiorum
,
M.
DC
.
X
IV.
THE
FIRST
CHAPTER
.
Of
the
Scope
and
Methode
of
this
Treatise
.
ALL
the
Controuersies
of
this
time
may
be
reduced
to
two
heades
,
for
eyther
they
are
certayne
generall
principles
&
foundations
of
our
faith
and
religion
,
or
they
are
particuler
questions
appertayning
to
the
same
.
Amongst
other
generall
principles
there
are
two
,
about
which
there
is
greatest
contention
at
this
day
:
the
one
is
the
Word
of
God
,
the
other
the
Church
:
we
will
first
speake
of
the
word
of
God
,
and
afterwardes
of
the
Church
,
and
lastly
we
will
examine
euery
particuler
Controuersy
,
if
God
shall
●raunt
vs
life
and
health
.
Two
thinges
there
are
which
now
adayes
hold
many
in
error
.
The
one
is
a
〈◊〉
opinion
that
many
haue
,
who
thinke
it
a
matter
of
little
importance
,
whether
they
giue
credit
or
no
to
many
things
taught
by
the
Roman
Church
,
which
daungerous
perswasion
may
be
taken
out
of
the
mind●s
of
all
faithfull
people
,
by
that
which
we
shall
deliuer
concerning
the
Word
of
God
,
and
the
Church
,
for
thereby
it
shall
euidently
appeare
,
that
al
thinges
are
firmely
to
be
belieued
,
which
the
Roman
Church
belieueth
,
and
that
without
this
faith
no
man
can
hope
to
be
saued
.
The
other
is
,
that
such
as
de●ire
to
find
out
the
true
faith
in
euery
particuler
Controuersy
,
are
oftentimes
so
hindred
by
the
sleights
and
falshoods
of
our
aduersaryes
,
as
it
will
be
very
hard
for
them
to
discerne
that
which
is
true
from
that
which
is
false
.
Wherfore
we
will
endeauour
in
euery
particuler
Controuersy
,
to
set
downe
the
true
state
of
the
question
.
Afterward
we
will
lay
open
the
foundation
of
the
Catholike
doctrine
.
And
lastly
we
will
plainly
and
briefly
answere
the
chiefe
obiections
of
our
Aduersaries
whether
they
be
drawne
out
of
the
Scriptures
,
or
taken
from
the
Fathers
.
2.
And
because
our
Aduersaries
euermore
boast
and
brag
of
the
written
Word
of
God
,
pretending
out
of
it
only
to
proue
their
doctrine
&
impugne
ours
:
our
chiefe
care
shal
be
to
shew
,
that
the
Catholike
and
Roman
faith
is
both
euidently
and
strongly
to
be
confirmed
out
of
the
written
Word
of
God
,
and
the
doctrine
of
our
Aduersaries
hath
no
foundation
at
all
in
the
holy
Scriptures
,
but
is
manifestly
opposite
&
repugnant
therunto
,
yet
so
,
as
we
will
set
downe
the
vniforme
consent
of
the
auncient
Church
to
be
agreeing
with
vs
in
euery
Controuersy
,
leauing
the
more
ample
search
of
antiquity
,
vnto
others
,
to
whome
we
will
referre
the
Reader
,
setting
downe
their
particuler
names
;
so
loath
we
are
that
this
booke
of
ours
should
grow
too
great
:
and
for
the
same
reason
we
haue
thought
good
to
omit
many
arguments
which
might
be
drawne
out
of
the
holy
Scriptures
for
confirmation
of
the
Catholike
faith
,
contenting
our selues
to
set
downe
only
the
more
solide
and
euident
proofes
,
because
we
are
resolued
to
be
as
briefe
as
we
may
.
CHAP.
II.
Of
the
Word
of
God
in
generall
.
THE
word
of
God
,
if
we
speake
of
it
in
generall
,
may
be
considered
two
wayes
,
either
for
that
One
,
Eternall
and
Infinite
Word
which
contayneth
perfectly
in
it selfe
whatsoeuer
is
in
the
mind
of
Almighty
God
,
which
is
the
same
with
the
Sonne
of
God
,
and
Word
of
the
Father
,
of
whome
S.
Iohn
speaketh
in
his
Ghospell
saying
:
In
the
beginning
was
the
Word
,
but
of
this
Word
we
are
to
say
nothing
heere
▪
but
the
Word
of
God
may
be
other
wise
considered
and
taken
for
that
Word
which
was
not
alwayes
,
nor
contayneth
all
thinges
which
are
in
the
mind
of
God
but
a
small
part
only
of
them
,
to
wit
,
such
thinges
as
God
would
haue
vs
know
and
belieue
:
and
of
the
Word
of
God
in
this
sense
we
speake
now
.
For
this
Word
is
the
proper
and
complete
obiect
of
our
faith
.
2.
Moreouer
this
Word
hath
two
conditions
or
properties
,
the
one
is
,
that
the
same
be
reuealed
vnto
vs
,
for
there
are
innumerable
verities
in
the
mind
of
God
the
which
because
they
are
not
reuealed
to
vs
,
do
not
appertayne
to
this
Word
.
The
other
is
,
that
it
be
immediatly
reuealed
by
God
,
for
such
thinges
as
God
manifesteth
vnto
vs
by
naturall
reason
appertayne
not
to
this
word
of
God
,
3.
Of
this
Word
of
God
so
vnderstood
there
is
no
Controuersy
betwene
vs
and
our
Aduersaries
,
but
only
in
wordes
:
for
wheras
our
Aduersaries
say
that
Catholikes
affirme
,
that
we
must
with
diuine
fayth
belieue
the
words
of
men
,
or
which
is
worse
,
rather
belieue
the
words
of
men
then
the
Word
of
God
,
it
is
a
meere
slaunder
,
for
there
is
no
Catholike
so
ignorant
but
he
knoweth
that
the
Theologicall
vertue
Faith
relieth
astogeather
vpon
the
pure
,
sincere
,
and
certayne
Word
of
God
alone
,
according
to
that
of
S.
Paul
,
when
you
had
receiued
of
vs
the
word
of
the
heating
of
God
you
receaued
it
not
as
the
word
of
men
,
but
as
the
Word
of
God
,
as
indeed
it
is
.
Neyther
can
any
man
doubt
but
that
the
reuealed
word
of
God
is
partly
the
written
Word
contayned
in
the
Canonicall
bookes
of
the
old
and
new
Testament
,
partly
vnwritten
and
deliuered
by
tradition
and
preaching
,
of
which
vnwritten
word
the
Scripture
maketh
mention
in
many
places
,
CHAP.
III.
Of
the
written
Word
of
God
.
THE
written
Word
of
God
consisteth
of
two
parts
,
of
the
Letter
which
euery
▪
man
may
read
in
the
books
themselues
,
and
in
the
true
sense
of
the
Letter
,
which
is
as
it
were
the
very
soule
and
life
thereof
,
without
which
the
Letter
alone
rather
killeth
than
quickneth
or
giueth
life
:
as
we
see
euidently
by
experience
in
the
Iewes
,
Arians
,
&c
all
other
heretikes
,
as
well
new
as
old
:
for
the
Iewes
hold
themselues
stiffely
to
the
Letter
of
the
old
Testament
,
&
the
Arians
,
as
also
in
a
manner
all
other
heretikes
,
receiue
eyther
altogeather
,
or
for
the
greatest
part
the
Letter
of
the
new
;
but
because
they
will
not
acknowledge
the
true
sense
of
the
Letter
,
Iewes
they
are
Heretikes
they
are
,
Catholikes
they
are
not
.
And
surely
the
Letter
alone
without
the
true
sense
cannot
truly
and
properly
be
called
the
Word
of
God
,
no
more
then
a
body
without
a
soule
can
truly
and
properly
be
called
a
man
:
wherefore
they
which
spoile
the
Letter
of
the
true
sense
may
be
compared
to
them
who
bereaue
a
man
of
his
soule
and
life
.
2.
But
whosoeuer
do
substitute
another
contrary
sense
and
meaning
in
place
of
the
true
,
do
no
otherwise
,
then
they
,
who
not
only
kill
a
man
,
but
by
Art
Magick
bring
into
the
body
of
the
man
killed
,
some
other
diabolicall
spirit
,
by
which
the
dead
body
is
so
moued
,
and
stirred
,
as
it
seemeth
to
many
to
bealiue
:
all
this
is
so
manifest
a
truth
,
as
our
Aduersaries
themselues
are
not
able
to
deny
it
.
3.
This
to
haue
byn
the
doctrine
of
the
auncient
Church
sufficiently
appeareth
by
the
words
of
S.
Augustine
.
sayth
he
,
&
more
vnhappy
Heretikes
,
whilst
they
attend
only
to
the
sound
of
the
●etter
,
as
a
body
without
a
soule
,
so
they
remay●●
dead
,
and
voyd
of
the
spirit
which
quickneth
.
And
els
where
:
And
before
him
S.
Hilary
that
honour
of
the
French
Nation
.
Remember
(
saith
he
)
that
there
is
not
one
of
the
heretikes
which
doth
not
say
that
he
preacheth
now
according
to
the
Scriptures
,
And
a
little
after
:
All
of
them
speake
Scriptures
,
without
the
true
sence
&
meaning
,
they
pretend
sayth
without
fayth
indeed
,
for
the
Scriptures
consist
not
so
much
in
the
reading
as
in
the
understanding
,
neyther
are
they
vnderstood
of
such
as
go
into
preuarication
,
but
continue
and
abide
in
charity
.
Moreouer
S
Hierome
.
(
sayth
he
)
the
Ghospell
to
be
in
the
words
of
the
Scripture
but
in
the
sense
,
not
in
the
out
side
,
but
in
the
inside
,
or
marrow
,
not
in
the
leaues
of
the
words
,
but
in
the
sappe
,
And
a
little
after
:
otherwise
euen
the
Diuell
himselfe
speaketh
.
Scriptures
,
and
all
heresies
according
to
Ezechiel
make
vnto
themselues
pillowes
which
they
may
lay
vnder
the
elbow
of
euery
age
.
2.
By
that
which
hath
byn
sayd
answere
may
be
made
to
our
Aduersaries
when
they
obiect
against
vs
,
that
we
affirme
the
Scripture
to
be
imperfect
,
obseure
,
like
a
nose
of
wax
which
a
man
may
writh
which
way
he
will
,
and
lastly
the
origen
and
spring
in
a
manner
of
all
heresies
:
for
we
affirme
this
of
the
naked
and
dead
letter
alone
,
destitute
of
the
true
sense
;
or
rather
of
the
letter
,
to
which
the
Heretikes
adde
their
owne
peruerse
sense
and
meaning
:
neyther
haue
our
Aduersaries
any
cause
to
wonder
at
this
,
seeing
S.
Paul
himselfe
saith
of
the
bare
letter
alone
,
that
is
killeth
,
and
bringeth
eternall●
death
and
damnation
.
But
neuer
any
Catholike
did
euer
attribute
any
such
thing
to
the
liuing
letter
,
which
hath
conioyned
with
it
the
true
and
natiue
sense
,
and
which
alone
is
truly
and
properly
the
word
of
God
.
CHAP.
IIII.
How
we
are
to
seeke
out
the
true
sense
and
meaning
of
the
holy
Scripture
.
THERE
is
a
great
contention
betweene
vs
and
our
Aduersaries
,
about
the
meanes
how
to
finde
out
the
true
and
naturall
interpretation
of
the
lett●er
,
euery
man
is
a
lyar
:
and
so
at
last
all
thinges
are
left
by
them
doubtfull
and
vncertayne
.
2.
But
the
Catholikes
proceed
after
another
manner
,
who
teach
,
that
the
certayne
&
vndoubted
sense
of
the
Letter
is
not
to
be
taken
from
the
iudgment
of
any
particuler
man
,
but
from
the
vniforme
consent
of
the
ancient
Fathers
,
and
especially
from
the
iudgment
and
interpretation
of
the
Catholike
Church
,
to
whome
it
appertayneth
to
iudge
of
the
sense
and
meaning
of
the
holy
Scriptures
,
as
the
holy
and
O●cumenicall
Councell
of
Trent
teacheth
very
well
:
3.
It
shall
suffice
to
obserue
and
note
here
,
The
sense
adultered
,
or
falsified
,
is
no
lesse
repugnant
to
the
truth
,
then
the
letter
,
or
stile
corrupted
.
4.
And
to
conclude
,
it
may
be
inferred
,
that
saluation
is
to
be
found
in
the
Roman
Church
only
,
Caluin
▪
or
some
other
priuate
man
,
who
as
they
themselues
graunt
may
erre
,
and
be
deceiued
;
such
an
humane
fayth
then
,
so
doubtfull
and
vncertayne
,
and
only
warranted
by
mans
authority
,
cannot
iustify
,
or
bring
a
man
to
eternall
saluation
.
CHAP.
V.
How
we
may
know
which
is
the
true
letter
of
the
holy
Scripture
.
ALL
such
as
forsake
the
Roman
Church
,
and
make
little
account
of
her
authority
are
not
only
doubtfull
&
vndertayne
,
which
is
the
true
sense
of
the
Scripture
,
but
they
can
haue
no
assurance
at
all
eyther
of
the
whole
,
or
of
any
part
of
the
letter
therof
.
For
whilst
they
goe
about
to
call
in
question
,
and
make
doubtfull
certayne
bookes
only
of
the
old
Testament
,
before
they
are
aware
they
take
away
all
authority
from
all
other
bookes
both
of
the
old
and
new
Testament
.
For
whereas
there
is
but
one
certaine
and
vndoubted
Canon
of
these
bookes
,
to
wit
,
that
which
is
receaued
and
appre●ued
by
the
iudgment
of
the
Catholike
Church
,
which
cannot
erre
;
our
Aduersaries
reiecting
this
Canon
,
make
all
the
bookes
doubtfull
conteined
therin
▪
for
no
certayne
testimony
can
be
had
of
these
bookes
,
but
eyther
by
this
Canon
only
,
or
by
the
auncient
tradition
of
the
Church
,
but
they
neyther
admit
this
Canon
,
nor
wil
stand
to
this
vnwritten
Tradition
,
or
acknowledge
it
for
the
true
Word
of
God
.
2.
Now
as
for
the
Canons
lately
set
out
by
themselues
,
no
man
can
safely
belieue
them
,
seeing
they
neyther
agree
one
with
another
,
nor
with
the
auncient
Canons
of
the
Church
,
nor
are
any
where
found
in
the
written
Word
of
God
,
which
(
as
they
teach
)
is
only
to
be
belieued
:
neyther
can
they
bring
any
thing
,
eyther
concerning
the
Canon
of
the
Hebrewes
,
or
any
other
auncient
Canon
which
they
haue
not
taken
from
the
writings
of
the
auncient
Fathers
,
whose
authority
without
the
expresse
written
Word
of
God
,
they
will
haue
to
be
in
no
wise
sufficient
to
ingender
fayth
:
so
as
euen
by
the
iudgment
of
our
Aduersaries
,
none
of
all
these
can
establish
fayth
concerning
this
matter
.
3.
Iohn
Caluin
indeed
sayth
,
4.
Moreouer
Caluins
owne
followers
well
perceauing
this
,
fly
vnto
their
owne
peculiar
spirit
,
by
which
they
say
they
are
chiefly
perswaded
and
moued
,
and
not
by
the
only
consent
of
the
Church
.
But
these
speake
nothing
to
the
purpose
,
for
in
faith
two
thinges
concurre
,
5.
And
this
to
haue
beene
the
faith
and
doctrine
of
the
auncient
Church
for
the
discerning
of
true
and
authenticall
Scriptures
,
I
for
my
part
would
not
belieue
the
Ghospell
,
vnlesse
I
were
moued
by
the
authority
of
the
Church
,
of
which
place
I
will
say
more
herafter
in
the
Controuersy
of
the
Church
.
And
else-where
he
saith
:
We
receaue
the
old
and
new
Testament
in
that
number
of
bookes
which
the
authority
of
the
holy
Catholike
Church
deliuereth
.
S.
Augustine
.
6.
I
know
our
Aduersaries
obiect
many
thinges
against
many
bookes
contayned
in
our
Ecclesiasticall
Canon
,
but
their
chiefe
arguments
do
not
only
derogate
authority
from
those
bookes
,
but
also
from
many
others
,
which
they
receaue
as
Canonicall
.
For
they
obiect
that
some
Fathers
did
sometymes
doubt
of
those
bookes
which
they
will
not
admit
,
but
they
are
not
ignorant
that
some
Fathers
of
old
haue
doubted
of
the
Epistles
of
S.
Iames
,
and
S.
Iude
of
the
second
Epistle
of
S.
Peter
,
of
the
2.
and
3.
of
S.
Iohn
,
of
the
Epistle
to
the
Hebrewes
,
and
of
the
Apocalyps
,
of
which
bookes
they
dare
not
now
doubt
,
7.
They
say
further
,
that
in
those
bookes
which
they
reiect
,
there
are
many
thinges
obscure
,
difficult
,
and
full
of
contradiction
,
but
what
booke
of
Scripture
in
a
manner
is
there
in
the
which
there
do
not
occurre
sometymes
thinges
obscure
and
hard
to
be
vnderstood
?
S.
Peter
acknowledge
as
much
?
But
as
for
true
contradictions
there
are
none
at
al
howsoeuer
there
may
be
some
things
which
at
the
first
fight
may
seeme
to
imply
contradiction
,
yet
indeed
all
thinges
agree
very
well
togeather
:
such
a
contradiction
is
oftentymes
found
in
those
bookes
,
which
euen
our
Aduersaries
receaue
,
yea
euen
in
the
Ghospells
themselues
,
but
humbly
,
soberly
,
and
piously
to
be
●nterpreted
,
as
S.
Augustine
many
tymes
admonisheth
.
8.
To
conclude
,
all
the
arguments
that
our
Aduersaries
make
against
these
bookes
are
fully
answered
by
Catholike
writers
,
which
haue
set
out
Commentaries
vpon
those
bookes
,
to
wit
,
Cornelius
Iansenius
vpon
Ecclesiasticus
,
Ionnnes
Laurinus
vpon
the
booke
of
Wisedome
,
Ioannes
Maldonatus
and
Christopher
à
Castro
vpon
Baruch
,
and
Nicolas
Serarius
vpon
the
rest
of
the
bookes
of
the
old
Testament
which
our
Aduersaries
call
Apocriphall
,
to
omit
the
most
Reuerend
and
famous
Cardinall
Bellarmine
,
and
his
Champion
Iacobus
Gretserus
▪
as
also
Iames
Gordon
Lesmoreus
.
For
it
is
sufficient
only
to
haue
cited
them
,
seeing
that
I
write
only
an
abridgment
of
Controuersies
,
&
not
any
long
commentaries
vpon
the
Scripture
.
And
therfore
content
my selfe
to
haue
shewed
in
this
place
that
our
Aduersaries
must
either
receaue
the
Canon
of
Scriptures
approued
by
the
Councell
of
Trent
,
or
be
vtterly
destitute
of
any
certayne
and
assured
Canon
.
CHAP.
VI.
Of
the
Hebrew
Text.
OVR
Aduersaries
when
they
are
vrged
with
Catholike
arguments
taken
from
the
Scriptures
,
are
wont
to
fly
to
the
Hebrew
text
of
the
old
Testament
,
and
to
the
Greeke
text
of
the
new
,
perswading
themselues
by
this
meanes
to
attayne
to
the
true
and
proper
sense
of
the
letter
:
wherefore
somthing
is
to
be
sayd
in
this
place
of
the
Hebrew
&
Greeke
text
,
both
which
appertayne
to
the
Letter
of
the
holy
Scripture
.
2.
We
grant
indeed
,
that
when
the
Latin
translation
is
either
ambiguous
o●
lesse
playne
,
the
Hebrew
text
is
well
and
profitably
looked
into
,
as
also
that
diuers
myst●ries
which
lye
hidden
in
the
Hebrew
text
and
cannot
sufficiently
be
explicated
in
Latin
wordes
,
may
be
the
better
vnderstood
.
And
lastly
that
we
may
the
more
fully
attayne
vnto
the
force
and
Emphasis
of
that
holy
tongue
.
3.
But
as
for
the
Hebrew
text
now
extant
,
we
do
not
acknowledge
it
to
be
of
so
great
either
authority
,
or
perspicuity
as
our
Aduersaries
pretend
,
and
we
further
deny
that
the
vulgar
Edition
wherinsoeuer
it
differeth
from
it
,
is
to
be
corrected
by
it
,
and
that
for
two
reasons
.
The
first
is
,
for
that
the
Hebrew
text
though
neuer
so
incorrupt
,
further
then
it
is
approued
by
the
authority
of
the
Church
,
is
much
more
doubtfull
,
and
vncertayne
then
the
Latin
.
The
other
reason
is
,
for
that
the
Hebrew
text
which
is
now
in
vse
is
in
many
places
corrupted
and
depraued
,
in
which
the
vulgar
Edition
is
entire
and
vncorrupted
.
Both
these
reasons
shal
be
confirmed
in
the
ensuing
●hapters
,
which
the
learned
Reader
may
see
in
the
Latin
edition
,
from
the
seauenth
Chapter
to
the
14.
all
which
I
haue
omitted
to
put
into
English
,
because
I
intend
to
help
the
lesse
learned
,
who
are
not
so
capable
of
that
so
profound
and
learned
a
discourse
.
CHAP.
VII
.
Of
our
Aduersaries
new
Translations
of
the
Bible
.
THE
Catholike
Church
of
Christ
not
without
good
cause
doth
reiect
and
condemne
our
Aduersaries
new
Translations
of
the
Bible
,
and
that
for
many
reasons
.
The
first
and
most
iust
reason
is
,
because
such
their
translations
are
replenished
with
errors
,
which
haue
byn
inuented
eyther
by
Iewes
,
or
Heretikes
,
of
which
see
many
examples
in
the
precedent
Chapters
of
the
Latin
edition
;
but
we
in
this
Chapter
will
set
downe
three
other
causes
or
origens
from
whence
these
errors
spring
,
wherby
it
shall
further
appeare
,
that
our
Aduersaries
can
set
out
no
trans●ation
which
shall
not
be
found
full
of
many
&
great
errors
.
2.
The
first
cause
is
,
for
that
our
Ad●ersaries
eyther
contemne
,
or
make
little
account
of
the
translations
and
interpretations
of
the
Fathers
,
and
imploy
all
their
labour
in
finding
out
all
the
versions
,
and
interpretations
,
and
expositions
of
the
Iewes
,
which
they
highly
extoll
&
commend
:
so
as
in
their
Commentaries
vpon
the
old
Testament
,
you
shall
see
them
cite
Thargus
Rabins
,
and
such
other
Thalmudicall
fictions
,
but
especially
Rabbi
Dauid
Kim●i
,
whom
sometimes
they
call
learned
,
sometymes
the
most
learned
among
the
Hebrewes
.
But
of
the
auncient
Fathers
no
mention
at
all
,
for
if
there
be
,
it
is
for
the
most
part
,
eyther
to
taxe
,
or
manifestly
to
oppugne
,
or
euen
to
corrupt
their
writings
.
3.
Now
what
can
be
more
vnreasonable
or
absurd
,
then
to
begge
the
true
sense
of
the
Scripture
of
the
Iewes
,
who
haue
a
veyle
ouer
their
hartes
,
when
they
read
the
old
Testament
,
with
whome
God
is
not
pleased
,
and
who
are
Aduersaries
to
all
men
,
vpon
whom
the
Angel
of
God
is
come
to
the
end
,
who
peruert
all
the
oracles
of
the
Prophets
that
appertayne
to
Christ
;
and
lastly
,
who
are
the
most
malicious
enemies
of
Christians
.
And
on
the
other
side
to
despise
the
excellent
Doctors
of
Christs
Church
,
who
euen
in
the
iudgment
of
our
Aduersaries
were
indued
with
the
true
faith
,
4.
Moreouer
,
wheras
no
man
can
rightly
interprete
the
Scriptures
who
hath
not
receaued
from
God
the
gift
of
the
interpretation
,
wrapt
in
the
snares
of
the
Diuell
,
and
held
captiue
at
his
will
.
And
seeing
that
saying
of
Christ
is
most
true
,
if
the
blind
lead
the
blind
,
they
both
fall
into
the
ditch
;
it
cannot
be
but
our
Aduersaries
,
blind
and
destitute
of
the
light
of
faith
,
and
led
by
the
blind
Iewes
,
must
needes
fall
downe
headlong
,
and
breake
their
neckes
.
5.
Here●hence
it
is
,
that
our
Aduersaries
do
insert
into
the
new
translations
almost
all
the
places
of
Scripture
corrupted
by
the
Iewes
,
and
that
they
deny
togeather
with
the
Iewes
many
oracles
of
the
Prophets
,
to
be
vnderstood
of
Christ
,
and
many
wayes
wrest
euen
those
oracles
which
they
cannot
deny
to
be
vnderstood
of
Christ
,
from
that
true
sense
in
which
they
are
cited
in
the
new
Testament
,
by
the
Apostles
,
Euangelists
,
and
Christ
himselfe
,
to
prophane
&
impious
senses
lately
inuented
by
the
Iewes
out
of
their
hatred
to
Christ
.
6.
The
second
cause
is
,
that
they
desire
nothing
more
then
in
their
translations
to
depart
from
the
vulgar
edition
,
the
which
seeing
it
is
most
sincere
and
correct
,
they
which
almost
in
all
thinges
leaue
it
,
must
needes
fall
into
many
errors
.
7.
The
third
cause
is
,
the
malicious
intention
of
our
Aduersaries
,
who
set
forth
new
translations
of
the
Scripture
for
no
other
end
,
then
by
them
to
oppugne
the
Catholike
doctrine
,
and
to
establish
and
confirme
their
owne
errors
and
heresies
:
and
therefore
when
any
plain
text
occurreth
,
which
maketh
manifestly
against
their
erroneous
doctrine
,
they
seeke
to
make
obscure
the
true
and
proper
sense
by
their
peruerse
translation
;
but
if
they
light
vpon
any
place
somewhat
obscure
,
which
may
seeme
to
fauour
their
doctrine
,
they
so
depraue
it
by
their
new
translation
,
that
the
Scripture
it selfe
may
seeme
to
confirme
what
they
falsely
teach
,
and
so
by
this
meanes
they
must
needes
stuffe
their
translations
with
infinite
corruptions
,
for
these
three
reasons
:
Iames
Gretser
,
which
we
for
breuity
sake
omit
.
CHAP.
VIII
.
Of
the
Latin
vulgar
Edition
.
OVR
Aduersaries
conuinced
by
the
truth
it selfe
,
confesse
sometymes
,
that
the
vulgar
Edition
not
only
is
to
be
preferred
before
all
other
latin
Editions
,
but
euen
before
the
Greeke
text
of
the
new
Testament
,
and
the
Hebrew
text
of
the
old
,
for
in
many
places
reiecting
them
,
they
follow
our
vulgar
translation
,
as
may
be
seene
in
the
Latin
edition
in
the
Chapters
8.
9.
10.
13.
notwithstanding
that
in
many
other
places
they
exceedingly
inueigh
against
it
,
and
with
great
hostility
oppugne
it
,
partly
for
that
they
see
the
same
to
contradict
in
many
places
their
errors
,
and
partly
also
,
for
that
they
labour
by
all
meanes
to
perruert
the
text
of
the
Scripture
by
their
new
versions
,
to
make
them
speake
in
fauour
of
their
errors
,
which
they
cannot
do
if
the
authority
of
the
old
interpreter
continue
in
all
thinges
entire
and
vndiminished
.
So
farre
off
is
it
,
saith
he
,
that
there
is
one
entire
leafe
,
as
there
are
scarse
three
verses
togeather
not
defiled
with
some
notable
error
.
But
to
proue
this
his
impudent
assertion
,
he
bringeth
only
one
place
out
of
the
new
Testament
,
which
a
little
after
we
will
shew
to
haue
byn
exceedingly
well
translated
out
of
the
Greeke
.
He
bringeth
no
other
places
out
of
the
old
Testament
then
such
as
he
taketh
out
of
the
Psalmes
,
which
(
as
it
is
euident
)
are
translated
word
for
word
out
of
the
Greeke
version
of
the
Septuagint
interpreters
.
Nay
in
the
same
place
,
Caluin
acknowledgeth
that
the
Latin
interpreter
hath
,
with
all
possible
diligence
,
expressed
the
Greeke
translation
.
And
as
for
the
Greeke
interpretation
of
the
Septuaginta
,
it
is
most
learnedly
defended
by
Genebrard
,
2.
The
first
is
:
If
our
Aduersaries
will
needes
haue
the
present
Roma●
Church
condemned
for
following
and
authorizing
the
vulgar
Latin
interpretation
,
they
must
needes
also
condemne
the
whole
auncient
Church
,
and
all
the
Fathers
who
liued
in
the
first
foure
hundred
yeares
after
Christ
,
for
they
acknowledged
no
other
interpretation
of
the
old
Testament
as
authenticall
,
then
that
of
the
Septuaginta
Interpreters
,
which
much
more
departeth
from
the
Hebrew
text
,
now
extant
,
then
our
vulgar
Latin
,
as
our
Aduersaries
themselues
confesse
.
Wherfore
if
the
Roman
Church
be
to
be
condemned
for
the
vulgar
Edition
,
much
more
the
Primitiue
Church
for
the
version
of
the
Septuaginta
:
and
heereof
it
followeth
further
,
that
the
Church
is
not
to
be
condemned
which
followeth
a
translation
of
the
Scripture
which
in
some
thinges
may
be
amended
,
so
long
as
nothing
is
to
be
found
in
it
which
is
repugnant
eyther
to
fayth
or
good
manners
:
For
otherwise
the
auncient
Church
had
erred
in
retayning
the
version
of
the
Septuaginta
,
which
was
corrupted
in
some
places
,
but
those
corruptions
were
not
in
any
thing
necessary
to
be
knowne
.
that
we
must
not
depart
from
the
Church
,
for
errors
of
little
importance
,
the
ignorance
whereof
neyther
doth
violate
Religion
,
nor
preiudice
our
saluation
.
Wherfore
albeit
there
should
be
some
such
errors
in
the
vulgar
Edition
,
yet
were
not
the
Roman
Church
,
S.
Hierome
)
to
be
condemned
or
forsaken
.
And
this
may
serue
for
answere
to
our
Aduersaries
arguments
,
when
they
obiect
certayne
light
faults
of
the
vulgar
Edition
which
haue
crept
into
it
,
eyther
by
the
negligence
of
the
printers
,
or
by
any
other
accident
.
As
also
what
our
Aduersaries
obiect
against
the
Psalter
may
heerby
be
conuinced
to
be
very
weake
,
for
seeing
that
no
other
version
is
followed
in
it
,
then
that
auncient
version
of
the
Septuaginta
,
they
cannot
condemne
vs
,
vnlesse
they
will
condemne
the
whole
primitiue
Church
,
togeather
with
vs
,
yea
the
Apostles
and
Euangelists
themselues
,
who
followed
the
same
version
,
is
as
shewed
in
the
11.
Chapter
of
the
Latin
Edition
of
this
Controuersy
.
3.
The
second
ground
.
A
good
interpreter
doth
not
ty
himselfe
to
transtate
word
for
word
,
seeing
that
euery
tongue
hath
his
proper
phrases
,
and
manner
of
speach
,
but
contenteth
himselfe
to
expresse
the
true
sense
and
meaning
of
that
which
he
translateth
.
Wherefore
all
our
Aduersaries
arguments
are
nothing
worth
by
which
they
proue
that
certayne
places
of
the
vulgar
edition
are
somewhat
otherwise
in
the
Hebrew
and
Greeke
,
so
that
the
sense
of
the
whole
period
be
one
and
the
same
,
as
most
of
the
places
are
which
they
carpe
at
in
the
vulgar
Edition
.
4.
The
third
ground
.
The
places
of
holy
Scripture
are
of
two
sortes
,
some
are
cleare
&
manifest
,
as
almost
all
are
,
which
set
downe
the
history
of
the
old
and
new
Testament
.
Others
are
obscure
,
and
full
of
difficulty
,
as
are
many
places
in
the
Psalmes
and
Prophets
.
Now
if
the
interpreter
in
such
places
as
are
euident
and
manifest
,
do
interprete
rightly
all
of
them
,
●nd
in
such
places
of
Scripture
as
are
obscure
,
expresse
a
sense
and
meaning
agreab●e
to
the
Letter
,
though
he
come
short
of
the
best
sense
,
and
that
there
might
be
a
better
gi●en
,
he
is
not
therefore
to
be
thought
to
haue
erred
,
or
not
to
haue
fulfilled
the
office
of
a
good
interpreter
.
For
so
plentifull
and
profound
is
the
sense
of
holy
Scripture
,
especially
in
such
places
as
are
ob●cure
,
as
it
is
not
easy
for
any
man
to
●udge
,
which
is
the
best
sense
.
Nay
if
we
must
interprete
a
new
,
vntill
wee
haue
found
out
the
best
sense
,
there
will
neuer
be
a●
end
of
interpreting
,
but
we
must
euery
yeare
set
forth
a
new
inter●●●tation
,
or
at
least
correct
and
amend
the
●ormer
,
as
our
Aduersaries
haue
done
,
and
Bezw
by
name
,
who
hauing
set
out
fiue
diuers
editions
of
the
new
Testament
euery
one
much
differing
from
the
other
,
5.
The
fourth
ground
.
We
are
not
to
reprehend
the
translations
of
holy
Scripture
,
only
because
they
differ
one
from
another
,
so
long
as
they
are
not
contrary
the
one
to
the
other
:
and
in
this
the
holy
Scripture
differeth
from
other
prophane
writings
.
For
euen
as
the
holy
Ghost
in
diuers
places
of
holy
Scripture
teacheth
thinges
different
,
but
not
repugnant
:
so
the
same
holy
Ghost
can
in
one
place
&
in
the
same
words
teach
diuers
things
.
And
heerehence
it
is
,
S.
Thomas
teacheth
well
,
as
did
S.
Augustine
before
him
,
that
of
one
&
the
same
p●ace
of
Scripture
,
there
may
be
many
litterall
senses
.
For
whereas
the
litterall
sense
is
that
which
the
author
intendeth
,
and
the
proper
and
chiefe
author
of
the
holy
Scripture
is
God
himselfe
whose
intention
and
meaning
is
not
tied
to
one
verity
only
,
as
is
mans
vnderstanding
,
but
he
in
one
and
the
same
moment
comprehendeth
all
things
;
there
is
no
doubt
,
but
that
he
in
the
same
words
and
at
the
same
tyme
,
can
intimate
vnto
vs
diuers
things
.
6.
The
which
thing
is
excellently
declared
by
S.
Augustin
,
O
●ord
,
sayth
he
,
seeing
thou
art
God
and
not
flesh
and
blo●d
,
if
man
be
short
sig●ted
,
can
it
be
hidden
from
the
spirit
which
will
lead
me
into
the
right
land
,
whatsoeuer
thoug
mast
in
those
words
to
reueate
to
posterity
,
howsoeuer
he
by
whome
they
were
sp●ken
,
though
per
adueenture
but
of
one
seme
only
,
〈…〉
many
other
no
lesse
true
,
so
S.
Augustin●
seeing
there●or●
there
are
diuers
litterall
seme●
of
one
and
the
same
place
,
one
interpreter
may
follow
one
sense
,
and
another
〈◊〉
another
,
so
long
as
neyther
of
them
do
say
any
thing
not
agreeable
to
the
word
of
God
,
but
both
the
one
sense
and
the
other
is
godly
,
and
conformable
to
other
places
of
Scripture
:
and
this
maketh
much
for
the
dignity
of
the
Scriptures
,
and
profit
of
the
Church
,
according
to
that
which
S.
Augustin
writeth
elsewhere
:
How
could
God
(
sayth
he
)
better
commend
vnto
vs
the
plentifull
fruit
of
his
Deuine
wordes
,
then
by
so
disposing
,
as
the
same
words
may
be
vnderstood
diuers
wayes
.
7.
Nay
we
see
moreouer
the
holy
Scripture
it selfe
to
shew
very
manifestly
,
that
there
are
diuers
senses
of
the
same
wordes
.
For
there
is
no
doubt
,
but
that
commaundment
o●
Deutero●omy
,
Thou
shal●
not
tye
the
mouth
of
the
Oxe
that
thresheth
,
according
to
the
litterall
sense
,
doth
signify
that
the
mouth
of
an
oxe
is
not
to
be
tyed
whilst
he
treadeth
forth
the
corne
in
the
floare
,
for
so
according
to
the
Letter
the
Iewes
obserued
it
,
as
indeed
they
were
bound
to
do
.
S.
Paul
manife●●ly
reacheth
,
that
God
the
proper
Author
of
the
holy
Scripture
,
intended
chie●ly
another
sense
▪
Is
God
,
sayth
he
,
so
carefull
of
Oxen
,
or
doth
he
not
so
say
in
regard
of
vs
,
for
indeed
these
things
are
written
for
vs
;
h●therto
it
also
apper●ayneth
that
in
the
Hebrew
tongue
one
word
hath
many
●ignifications
,
as
hath
beene
shewed
in
the
seauenth
Chapter
in
the
Latin
Edition
.
8.
Out
of
this
ground
we
affirme
,
that
there
is
no
repugnance
betweene
the
Septuagint
Interprters
,
and
the
Hebrew
text
,
and
betweene
the
Hebrew
text
and
the
vulgar
Edition
,
or
lastly
betweene
the
interpretation
of
the
vulgar
Edition
of
the
old
Testament
,
and
that
of
the
new
,
how
much
soeuer
the
same
wordes
are
diuersly
translated
,
to
wit
,
otherwise
of
the
S●ptuagint
,
and
otherwise
of
the
vulgar
Latine
interpreter
,
or
otherwise
of
the
vulgar
Edition
of
the
old
Testament
,
and
otherwise
of
the
vulgar
Edition
of
the
new
,
where
in
both
places
the
same
wordes
are
cited
,
for
the
same
places
of
Scripture
are
oftentymes
otherwise
cited
by
the
Apostles
in
the
new
Testament
,
then
hath
the
Hebrew
text
of
of
the
old
.
But
here
is
diuersity
without
any
repugnance
,
or
contrariety
.
And
this
hath
place
especially
in
the
Hebrew
text
,
because
in
the
Hebrew
tongue
there
is
so
different
reading
of
one
and
the
same
word
.
See
examples
hereof
in
the
Latine
Edition
of
this
Controuersy
,
in
this
Chapter
.
9.
It
wil
be
easy
out
of
that
which
hath
byn
said
to
answere
that
which
our
Aduersaries
obiect
against
diuers
places
of
the
vulgar
edition
.
For
albeit
there
be
diuersity
betweene
it
,
and
the
Hebrew
text
,
there
is
no
repugnance
or
contrari●ty
:
and
if
our
Aduersaries
think
otherwise
it
proceedeth
from
their
ignorance
of
the
Hebrew
tongue
,
which
hath
many
wordes
subiect
to
ambiguity
,
and
very
many
phrases
much
different
from
the
Latin
and
Greeke
phrase
,
as
in
the
Chapters
that
follow
may
be
seene
in
the
Latin
Edition
from
the
16.
to
the
20.
CHAP.
IX
.
The
place
of
Genesis
(
she
shall
breake
thy
head
)
is
shewed
to
be
well
translated
.
IT
wil
be
too
long
,
and
little
to
my
purpose
to
examine
all
the
places
of
the
vulgar
Edition
to
which
our
Aduersaries
take
exception
,
for
many
of
them
differ
little
or
nothing
from
the
Hebrew
text
of
the
old
Testament
,
or
from
the
Greeke
of
new
:
we
will
handle
some
few
of
greatest
difficulty
,
and
which
our
Aduersaries
do
most
often
and
with
great
bitternes
vrge
against
vs
,
that
by
them
,
iudgment
may
be
giuen
of
the
rest
which
are
of
lesse
importance
.
2.
The
first
place
which
they
say
is
depraued
,
and
or
which
they
often
and
eagerly
complaine
,
Genesis
v.
15.
Ipsa
conteret
caput
tuum
:
for
it
is
not
ipsa
in
the
Hebrew
,
but
ipsum
.
as
if
it
were
spoken
of
the
seed
of
the
woman
and
not
of
the
woman
her selfe
.
The
Lutherans
crie
out
of
great
iniury
done
thereby
to
Christ
,
as
to
whome
alone
it
appertayneth
to
bruze
the
head
of
the
Diuel
which
we
attribute
to
another
,
to
wit
,
to
the
Blessed
Virgin
.
3.
Caluin
also
affirmeth
,
that
we
haue
found
out
a
sacrilegious
exposition
,
whilst
we
accommodate
that
to
the
holy
Mother
of
Christ
which
was
spoken
of
the
seed
,
4.
But
as
for
Caluin
,
he
sheweth
the
greedy
appetite
he
hath
to
calumniate
when
he
calleth
our
version
a
sacrilegious
exposition
,
for
he
conuinced
by
the
truth
,
confesseth
that
by
the
seed
of
the
woman
not
only
Christ
is
meant
,
but
all
his
member●
yea
euen
all
mankind
.
It
is
therefore
wonderfull
that
he
saith
,
it
is
a
sacrilegious
exposition
,
to
apply
to
the
Blessed
Virgin
Mary
that
which
was
spoken
of
the
seed
,
vnlesse
he
will
not
that
the
Blessed
Virgin
be
any
member
of
Christ
,
or
to
appertayn●
any
thing
to
mankind
.
For
seeing
that
the
promise
of
bruzing
Sathans
head
appertayneth
to
Chris●
,
and
euery
member
of
his
(
as
Caluin
writeth
in
expresse
wordes
)
it
must
doubtlesse
principally
appertayne
to
the
Blessed
Virgin
,
5.
But
to
the
end
we
may
the
better
vnderstand
whether
it
be
any
fault
at
all
,
that
we
retayne
in
the
vulgar
version
the
particle
(
ipsa
)
we
are
first
to
declare
the
literall
sense
of
this
place
,
and
to
examine
after
,
whether
it
be
any
error
that
we
retayne
the
particle
(
ipsa
)
in
our
version
.
For
it
was
not
out
of
any
ignorance
or
drowsy
carelesnes
,
that
the
feminine
gender
crept
in
heere
,
insteed
of
the
masculine
,
or
neuter
,
CHAP.
X.
Of
the
true
sense
of
these
wordes
:
Ipsa
conteret
&c.
THAT
we
may
find
out
the
true
sense
of
these
wordes
,
we
must
first
re●ute
the
f●lse
expositions
of
our
Aduersaries
.
The
Lutherans
by
the
seed
of
the
woman
will
needes
haue
Christ
only
to
be
mean●
:
we
confesse
indeed
that
he
is
principally
meant
therby
,
and
that
therefore
the
place
may
be
well
vnderstood
of
Christ
,
as
many
auncient
Fathers
haue
expounded
it
,
but
that
Christ
alone
is
meant
hereby
,
and
not
his
members
we
deny
to
be
the
literall
sense
for
the
reasons
following
.
2.
First
it
is
euident
that
the
seed
of
the
Serpent
which
is
opposed
against
the
seed
of
the
woman
,
doth
not
signify
any
one
Serpent
,
but
a
multitude
:
it
is
therefore
very
probable
,
that
by
the
seed
of
the
woman
a
multitude
also
is
signified
,
vnlesse
we
will
haue
the
Scripture
in
so
few
wordes
speak
ambiguously
.
Moreouer
semen
is
a
Nowne
collectiue
properly
signifying
a
multitude
,
neyther
is
there
any
thing
in
this
sentence
that
forceth
vs
to
departe
from
the
proper
signification
of
the
Word
.
This
reason
is
of
so
great
a
force
,
that
C●luin
was
moued
therby
to
forsake
the
exposition
of
the
Lutherans
,
which
he
would
otherwise
willingly
haue
imbraced
the
more
strongly
to
assault
vs
,
for
thus
he
writeth
:
Some
make
no
doubt
but
Christ
alone
is
meant
by
the
seed
of
the
woman
,
whose
exposition
I
could
willingly
approue
,
but
that
I
see
they
offer
too
great
violence
to
the
word
(
seed
)
for
who
will
graunt
,
that
a
Nowne
collectiue
is
to
be
taken
for
one
man
only
?
Thus
Caluin
.
So
strong
is
the
truth
,
that
it
extorteth
a
true
confession
from
her
greatest
enemy
.
3.
Secondly
it
is
said
of
the
seed
of
the
woman
,
that
it
shall
crush
,
and
bruze
the
head
of
the
Serpent
,
but
this
crushing
and
bruzing
the
Scripture
doth
not
attribute
to
Christ
alone
,
but
to
all
that
lead
a
godly
life
in
him
,
for
to
euery
iust
man
the
holy
Ghost
speaketh
,
saying
:
thou
shalt
walke
ouer
the
Addar
and
Basiliske
,
and
thou
shalt
tread
vnder
thy
seete
the
Lyon
and
the
Dragon
.
And
Christ
saith
vnto
his
Disciples
:
Behold
I
haue
giuen
you
power
to
tread
vpon
the
Serpents
and
Scorpions
,
and
vpon
all
the
power
of
the
enemy
.
And
the
Apostle
to
the
Romans
prayeth
saying
.
The
God
of
peace
crush
Satan
vnder
your
feete
quickly
.
And
lastly
in
very
many
places
of
Scripture
the
faithfull
are
said
to
ouer
come
the
Diuell
,
4.
Thirdly
.
Albeit
we
should
graunt
our
Aduersaries
,
that
Christ
alone
doth
crush
the
head
of
the
Diuell
,
which
is
the
former
part
of
the
sentence
:
yet
the
latter
part
can
by
no
meanes
be
applyed
to
Christ
alone
,
where
it
is
sayd
,
that
the
Diuell
shall
crush
this
seed
,
for
Christ
in
his
owne
person
cannot
be
crushed
by
the
Diuell
:
we
must
therefore
needes
by
this
seed
vnderstand
also
the
members
of
Christ
,
for
in
the
Hebrew
text
it
is
thus
word
for
word
,
ipsa
,
velipsum
,
conteret
te
in
capite
,
&
tu
contere●
cum
,
vel
eam
,
in
calcaneo
,
for
the
Hebrew
word
is
the
same
in
both
places
both
in
the
first
and
in
the
later
part
of
the
sentence
,
and
signifyeth
c●nterere
.
5.
As
for
Caluins
exposition
interpreting
by
the
seed
of
the
woman
all
man
kind
;
You
are
of
your
father
the
Diuell
;
they
therefore
cannot
appertayne
to
this
seed
of
the
woman
.
6.
But
whereas
Caluin
in
another
place
sayth
,
7.
For
in
that
sentence
God
sayth
,
first
that
he
will
put
emnity
,
wherefore
he
speaketh
not
of
any
naturall
emnity
,
as
Caluin
insinuateth
,
but
of
a
supernaturall
proceeding
from
God
.
Moreouer
God
signifyeth
betweene
whome
this
emnity
shal
be
,
to
wit
,
betweene
the
Serpent
and
woman
.
Now
as
by
the
Serpent
the
Diuell
is
meant
,
whome
that
naturall
Serpent
represented
,
and
in
whome
God
layed
his
curse
vpon
the
Diuell
:
so
by
the
woman
Eue
,
is
meant
the
spouse
of
Christ
,
or
his
true
Church
represented
by
Eue
,
whose
force
and
victory
against
the
Diuell
was
therefore
foretold
by
God
:
S.
Iohn
in
his
Apocalyps
where
he
declareth
this
emnity
betwene
the
woman
and
the
Serpent
,
to
be
indeed
the
emnity
betweene
the
Church
of
Christ
and
the
Diuell
:
wherfore
here
by
the
Serpent
is
signifyed
the
Diuell
by
the
woman
the
Church
,
by
the
seed
of
the
Serpent
the
Children
of
the
Diuell
,
and
all
the
wicked
who
are
aliens
from
Christ
and
his
Church
,
but
especially
such
as
seduce
others
and
oppugne
the
Church
.
testimony
of
Iesus
Christ
,
as
S.
Iohn
speaketh
.
8.
Furthermore
,
this
woman
,
to
wit
the
Church
shall
crush
the
head
of
the
Serpent
,
womans
heele
shal
be
crushed
by
Satan
,
for
the
Church
ouercommeth
the
Diuell
by
her
chiefe
and
more
excellent
members
,
but
she
is
ouercome
in
such
her
members
as
are
base
and
worldly
giuen
,
which
set
vp
their
rest
heere
vpon
earth
,
and
tast
no
other
things
but
such
as
are
terrene
&
earthly
,
let
vs
not
therefore
,
sayth
S.
Ambrose
,
walke
by
loue
and
affection
vpon
t
he
earth
,
and
the
Serpent
cannot
hurt
vs
.
In
the
first
combat
is
that
the
Church
ouer
cometh
by
open
warre
,
and
therefore
it
is
expressed
by
crushing
of
the
head
.
In
the
later
combat
in
which
a
part
of
the
Church
is
ouercome
,
the
enemy
proceedeth
by
guiles
and
deceites
,
and
therefore
that
combat
is
signifyed
by
crushing
the
heele
,
for
the
Hebrew
word
signifying
calcaneum
,
insiaiari
,
&
ex
insidijs
aggredi
,
as
appeareth
by
many
places
of
Scripture
.
And
out
of
ignorance
heerof
Caluin
without
cause
reprehendeth
the
vulgar
interpreter
,
for
otherwise
explicating
this
combat
in
the
later
part
of
the
sentence
then
he
had
in
the
former
,
for
the
Emphasis
,
or
force
of
the
Hebrew
word
required
that
he
should
interprete
the
later
part
as
he
did
by
these
wordes
,
tu
insidiaberis
calcaneo
eius
,
which
is
as
much
to
say
,
as
thou
shalt
crush
her
heele
,
not
by
open
warre
,
but
by
taking
her
at
vnawares
.
See
further
of
this
matter
in
this
Chapter
in
the
Latin
Edition
the
8.
§
.
And
you
shall
see
that
our
Aduersaries
make
a
great
adoe
about
a
matter
of
small
moment
,
if
the
wordes
be
rightly
vnderstood
.
For
whether
we
reade
ipsa
,
and
so
referre
it
to
the
Church
,
or
ipsum
,
that
it
may
be
referred
to
the
children
of
the
Church
,
the
sense
is
all
one
,
for
it
is
all
on
to
say
,
the
seed
of
the
woman
shall
crush
the
head
of
the
Serpent
,
or
the
Children
of
the
Church
shall
doe
it
.
And
heerehence
it
i●
,
that
the
auncient
Fathers
,
whether
they
read
ipse
,
as
S.
Hierome
,
S.
Chrysostome
do
,
or
ipsa
,
as
read
S.
Ambrose
,
S.
Augustine
,
S.
Gregory
,
9.
Howsoeuer
it
be
,
the
gates
of
hell
shall
not
preuaile
against
her
,
then
to
her
children
or
members
,
which
are
euery
day
changed
,
for
this
promise
is
an
explication
of
the
promise
made
by
God
in
Genesis
,
for
the
head
of
the
Serpent
,
and
the
gates
of
hell
signify
one
and
the
same
thing
.
Serpents
seede
,
so
as
the
woman
is
opposed
to
the
Serpent
,
and
the
seede
of
the
one
to
the
seede
of
the
other
;
but
the
victory
pro●●sed
,
is
sayd
to
be
gotten
against
the
Serpent
himselfe
,
and
not
against
the
seed
:
wherefore
the
same
appertaineth
rather
to
the
woman
her selfe
then
to
her
seed
,
for
the
words
following
(
betweene
thy
seed
and
her
seed
)
do
not
properly
signify
any
new
combat
,
but
a
continuance
of
that
combat
which
was
betweene
the
woman
and
the
Serpent
,
and
are
put
in
by
way
of
parenthesis
,
for
the
combat
of
the
Church
and
of
her
children
is
all
one
combat
.
10.
But
the
chiefe
cause
that
moued
the
Church
to
retayne
at
this
tyme
rather
the
word
ipsa
,
then
ipsum
,
or
ipse
,
was
to
controle
the
error
of
the
Lutherans
,
for
if
the
reading
had
byn
ipsum
,
or
ipse
,
one
might
haue
thought
this
promise
to
haue
appertayned
only
to
Christ
,
as
they
(
though
erroneously
)
would
haue
it
,
but
by
reading
ipsa
,
this
promise
must
needes
be
vnderstood
to
haue
byn
made
to
the
whole
Church
.
For
such
is
the
custome
of
the
holy
Church
,
whether
she
interprete
the
Scripturs
or
administer
the
Sacraments
to
do
all
as
is
most
profitable
and
most
for
the
edification
of
the
faithfull
.
Neyther
is
Christ
hereby
excluded
but
he
is
rather
included
in
the
name
of
the
Church
,
as
is
also
the
holy
Ghost
,
for
the
true
Church
of
Christ
cannot
consist
or
do
anything
that
is
good
without
the
help
of
her
supreme
head
Christ
and
the
assistance
of
his
holy
spirit
.
That
the
reading
according
to
the
Hebrew
text
i●
ipsa
,
or
ipsissima
,
and
not
ipsum
,
or
ipse
is
learnedly
proued
in
the
next
Chapter
of
the
Latin
Edition
of
this
Controuersy
,
to
which
I
referre
the
Reader
,
and
to
the
Chapters
following
,
in
which
other
places
of
the
vulgar
Edition
are
defended
.
CHAP.
XI
.
That
the
written
Word
is
no
fit
Iudge
of
Controuersies
,
concerning
matters
of
fayth
.
OVR
Aduersaries
in
the
beginning
did
stifly
mayntaine
that
the
holy
Scripture
was
to
be
the
only
iudge
of
all
Controuersies
which
arise
in
matters
of
fayth
,
but
when
they
were
told
,
that
to
make
the
Scripture
a
iudge
was
as
much
as
to
say
,
the
Scripture
did
heare
,
speake
,
&
liue
,
for
all
these
appertayne
to
a
iudge
,
&
that
nothing
is
more
vnreasonable
than
to
assigne
such
a
iudge
of
Controuersies
,
as
can
neyther
heare
,
nor
speake
,
but
is
vtterly
voyd
of
l●●e
;
2.
But
they
should
haue
added
further
that
the
holy
Ghost
at
this
tyme
doth
not
immediatly
propose
any
new
reuelations
to
any
particuler
man
concerning
points
of
fayth
,
but
only
proposeth
veri●ies
already
reuealed
,
and
that
by
the
mouth
of
the
Church
,
as
shal
be
shewed
heereafter
in
the
next
Controuersy
where
we
shall
haue
occasion
to
say
more
of
this
matter
.
Whosoeuer
therefore
contemneth
the
iudgment
of
the
Church
,
in
so
doing
,
he
despiseth
the
iudgment
of
Christ
,
and
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
for
Christ
himselfe
saith
,
he
that
despyseth
you
,
despyseth
me
.
Neyther
doth
the
holy
Ghost
speake
by
the
Scripture
but
when
it
is
rightly
vnderstood
,
CHAP.
XII
.
Whether
the
Scripture
be
obscure
or
hard
to
be
vnderstood
.
THE
Word
of
God
is
eyther
written
,
or
vnwritten
and
preached
.
Now
certaine
it
is
,
that
the
Word
preached
is
not
obscure
,
for
it
is
not
hidden
from
such
as
perish
:
the
question
thefore
is
of
the
written
Word
.
2.
For
resolution
of
this
question
,
we
must
answere
with
a
distinction
,
and
say
,
that
if
the
word
Scripture
be
taken
for
the
bare
Letter
only
,
then
doubtlesse
the
Scripture
is
obscure
,
S.
Paul
would
not
have
sayd
,
that
it
killeth
and
causeth
death
and
damnation
;
but
if
it
be
taken
properly
,
that
is
to
say
,
togeather
with
the
true
sense
and
meaning
thereof
,
then
it
is
not
obscure
but
plaine
inough
in
al
things
necessary
to
saluation
,
and
in
this
sense
speaketh
S.
Augustine
,
3.
Moreouer
the
holy
Scripture
is
both
manifest
,
and
obscure
,
but
not
in
regard
of
the
same
persons
.
It
is
passing
obscure
and
not
to
be
vnderstood
of
the
proud
,
such
I
meane
,
as
despise
the
sense
and
consent
of
the
holy
Fathers
,
yea
and
of
the
whole
Catholike
Church
,
but
to
little
ones
and
such
as
are
humble
who
follow
in
al
things
the
foresayd
sense
&
consent
,
testimony
of
our
Lord
is
faythfull
(
sayth
the
Psalmist
)
giuing
wisedome
to
the
little
ones
,
that
is
,
to
such
as
are
humble
and
not
proud
:
and
Christ
our
Lord
sayth
,
thou
hast
hidden
these
thinges
from
the
wise
,
and
reuealed
them
to
little
ones
,
that
is
to
the
humble
.
The
Scripture
indeed
is
obscure
to
such
as
want
fayth
,
&
are
destitute
of
the
holy
Ghost
,
but
easy
&
playne
to
those
which
abide
&
perseuere
in
the
faith
of
the
Church
,
&
by
that
meanes
are
guided
&
gouerned
by
the
holy
Ghost
.
4.
The
Word
of
God
shineth
brightly
,
the
Word
of
God
,
I
say
,
not
the
word
of
men
,
not
the
word
of
the
Diuell
,
for
that
only
is
the
true
Word
of
God
which
is
in
the
true
sense
&
not
in
the
bare
letter
;
for
the
letter
depraued
by
a
false
sense
is
not
the
Word
of
God
,
but
the
word
of
men
or
rather
the
word
of
the
Diuell
:
the
word
of
God
doth
illuminate
the
eyes
,
but
the
eyes
of
such
as
haue
eyes
to
see
,
and
not
their
eyes
,
whose
mindes
Satan
hath
blinded
,
so
as
the
light
of
the
Ghospell
cannot
shine
to
them
.
5.
In
vaine
therefore
do
our
Aduersaries
heape
togeather
so
many
places
of
Scripture
,
in
which
it
is
said
,
that
the
Word
of
God
is
said
to
be
cleare
,
ful
of
light
,
&
perspicuous
,
for
this
is
not
attributed
by
the
Scripture
to
the
bare
letter
,
but
to
the
letter
ioyned
with
the
true
sense
,
which
true
sense
cannot
be
had
out
of
the
Catholike
Church
.
6.
Neyther
doth
the
Scripture
say
,
that
the
Word
of
God
is
manifest
to
all
indifferently
,
but
to
such
only
,
as
being
indued
with
the
true
fayth
,
are
humble
o●
hart
,
and
therefore
inspired
by
the
holy
Ghost
;
if
therefore
our
Aduersaries
will
haue
the
Scripture
to
be
full
of
light
,
and
easy
to
be
vnderstood
of
them
,
it
is
necessary
that
they
returne
againe
to
the
true
Church
,
in
which
only
is
true
faith
,
〈◊〉
humility
,
the
true
sense
of
the
Scripture
,
&
the
true
spirit
of
God
,
without
whi●●
the
holy
Scripture
will
neuer
be
plaine
,
cleare
and
manifest
:
for
it
is
great
imprudency
,
I
will
not
say
impudency
,
to
contend
so
eagerly
and
with
such
hostility
about
the
plainenes
and
perspicuity
of
the
holy
Scripture
,
and
to
haue
no
will
to
returne
into
that
way
,
the
which
only
leadeth
to
that
plainenes
and
perspicuity
.
CHAP.
XIII
.
Whether
the
holy
Scripture
be
to
be
translated
into
the
vulgar
tongue
.
THAT
we
may
briefly
dispatch
that
which
hath
beene
so
largely
treated
of
by
many
concerning
this
matter
,
we
will
reduce
all
vnto
foure
generall
assertions
.
The
first
is
;
There
is
not
doubt
but
the
Word
of
God
is
to
be
preached
to
the
people
in
the
vulgar
tongue
,
so
as
the
question
is
only
of
the
bare
written
letter
.
2.
The
second
assertion
is
;
Neyther
the
example
of
Christ
,
nor
of
the
Primitiue
Church
do
conuince
that
the
Scripture
is
to
be
translated
into
the
vulgar
tongue
,
but
rather
the
contrary
,
for
Christ
neuer
commaunded
the
Iewes
to
translate
the
Scriptures
out
of
the
Hebrew
tongue
into
the
Syriac
,
and
yet
in
Christs
tyme
the
auncient
Hebrew
tongue
was
to
the
Iewes
as
the
Latin
is
to
the
French
,
Italians
,
and
Spanyards
,
and
only
the
Syriac
tongue
was
in
vse
amongst
the
common
people
,
which
euen
our
Aduersaris
confesse
,
such
I
meane
as
are
the
more
skillfull
in
the
Syriac
,
and
Hebrew
tongue
,
as
namely
these
,
Sebastian
Munster
in
his
preface
before
his
Siriacal
&
Chalda●cal
Grammer
,
Francis
Iunius
in
his
preface
before
the
new
Testament
in
the
Syriac
tongue
of
Termel●●●
,
Peter
Martin
Morentine
of
Nauarre
in
the
preface
of
his
Caldaicall
Grammer
printed
at
Rochell
the
yeare
1590.
3.
Neyther
did
S.
Paul
write
in
Latin
to
the
Romanes
but
in
Greeke
,
though
not
the
Greeke
tongue
but
the
Latin
was
their
vulgar
tongue
.
S.
Luke
did
write
the
actes
of
the
Apostles
at
Rome
in
Greeke
and
not
in
Latin
.
S.
Augustines
tyme
foure
hundred
yeares
after
Christ
,
the
Byble
was
not
extant
but
in
the
three
learned
tongues
,
Hebrew
,
Greeke
and
Latin
,
no
not
in
the
tyme
of
Rabbanus
Maurus
,
who
liued
eight
hundred
yeares
after
Christ
,
as
himselfe
testifyeth
in
expresse
words
.
4.
Neyther
can
our
Aduersaries
alleadge
any
authenticall
example
of
the
auncient
Church
for
the
translation
of
the
Scripture
into
the
vulgar
tongue
:
Theodoret
,
Socrates
,
Sozomenus
,
and
Cassiodorus
.
5.
For
as
for
that
which
certayne
late
writers
alleadge
of
S.
Chrysostome
his
translating
of
the
Scripture
into
the
Armenian
tongue
,
as
also
of
S.
Hierome
his
translating
of
the
same
into
the
Dalmatical
tonge
,
there
can
no
certayne
proofe
be
brought
thereof
.
And
they
who
write
this
,
do
not
affirme
,
that
all
the
Scripture
was
translated
by
them
,
but
certayne
partes
only
vsed
of
old
to
be
read
in
the
prayers
of
the
Church
,
as
the
Psalmes
,
Epistles
,
Ghospels
,
and
Lessons
which
were
song
publickely
at
Masse
,
&
in
the
Canonicall
houres
.
which
we
read
to
haue
byn
graunted
by
Pope
Iohn
the
eight
of
that
name
,
to
the
Morauian●
at
their
first
conuersion
to
the
faith
of
Christ
,
but
this
was
880.
yeares
after
Christ
,
and
this
custome
was
of
no
long
continuance
amongst
them
,
as
appeareth
by
that
which
Pope
Gregory
the
seauenth
writeth
to
the
Duke
of
Bohemia
,
Cesar
Baronius
.
6.
The
third
assertion
;
To
translate
the
Scripture
into
the
vulgar
tongue
is
neyther
in
it selfe
vnlawfull
,
nor
forbidden
by
any
Ecclesiasticall
law
,
so
it
be
truly
translated
.
Nay
such
a
translation
serueth
Preachers
to
great
vse
,
who
are
to
cite
and
expound
the
Scriptures
to
the
people
in
the
vulgar
tongue
.
Hereticall
translations
are
indeed
forbidden
,
especially
of
the
new
Testament
,
because
in
them
many
places
of
holy
Scripture
are
by
false
translating
corrupted
.
7.
The
fourth
assertion
;
It
is
not
a
thing
profitable
to
all
to
read
the
Scriptures
in
the
vulgar
tongue
,
yea
to
many
it
is
rather
pernicious
,
for
we
are
taught
by
the
Apostle
S.
Peter
,
8.
Our
Aduersaries
obiect
certayn
places
of
S.
Chrysostome
,
and
S.
Hierome
,
in
which
they
exhort
to
the
reading
of
the
Scripture
,
but
they
should
haue
obserued
that
those
Fathers
speake
of
reading
the
Scripture
in
the
Greeke
tongue
then
extant
,
or
in
the
Latin
according
to
the
old
edition
,
which
was
neuer
forbidden
to
any
by
the
Church
:
whereas
our
Controuersy
is
about
the
translations
of
the
holy
Scripture
out
of
the
Hebrew
,
Greek
and
Latin
into
the
vulgar
tongue
,
which
are
all
for
the
most
part
corrupted
.
9.
And
it
is
worth
the
nothing
,
that
our
Aduersaries
spend
their
tyme
in
vayne
,
in
gathering
togeather
arguments
by
which
to
perswade
men
that
it
is
necessary
for
them
to
read
the
Scriptures
in
the
vulgar
tongue
,
to
the
end
they
may
learne
out
of
them
what
they
must
necessarily
know
if
they
wil
be
saued
,
for
how
truly
or
plainly
soeuer
they
be
translated
no
man
shall
euer
recevue
any
fruite
by
them
,
vnlesse
he
first
belieue
aright
,
and
be
guided
by
the
holy
Ghost
,
to
whome
it
appertayneth
to
guide
vs
into
the
right
land
,
Hebrew
text
much
better
then
Christians
,
in
which
there
is
so
ample
and
cleare
mention
of
Christ
,
and
yet
for
all
that
they
do
not
belieue
in
Christ-Our
Aduersaries
therefore
haue
little
reason
to
keepe
such
a
do
about
the
wordes
of
Scripture
,
or
the
translation
of
them
,
let
them
first
imbrace
the
true
Faith
which
is
in
the
Church
only
,
let
them
seeke
after
the
holy
Ghost
who
is
not
to
be
found
out
of
the
Church
,
let
them
seeke
out
the
true
sense
of
the
Letter
,
which
the
Church
only
conserueth
vncorrupted
,
and
it
will
easily
be
graunted
vnto
them
to
haue
the
Scriptures
in
what
tongue
soeuer
they
will
,
so
they
be
truly
and
vncorruptedly
translated
,
and
that
they
vse
them
to
their
owne
saluation
,
and
not
to
their
destruction
,
as
many
do
,
wherof
we
haue
for
witnesses
not
only
the
Scripture
but
dayly
experience
,
and
this
shall
suffice
concerning
the
translation
of
the
Scripture
into
the
vulgar
tonge
.
10.
For
of
the
prayers
in
Latin
eyther
priuately
made
by
the
people
,
or
publikely
offered
by
the
Priest
at
masse
,
and
in
the
administration
of
the
Sacraments
,
we
wil
treat
hereafter
in
their
proper
places
.
CHAP.
XIIII
.
That
our
Aduersaries
vse
many
sleightes
in
corrupting
the
Word
of
God
.
OVR
Aduersaries
often
require
vs
to
proue
all
that
which
we
say
out
of
the
written
Word
of
God
,
but
when
we
cite
the
same
in
expresse
tearmes
they
haue
many
wayes
by
which
they
depraue
it
.
Wherfore
before
I
make
an
end
of
this
Controuersy
concerning
the
written
Word
,
it
shall
not
be
from
the
purpose
briefly
to
detect
such
their
corruptions
;
partly
to
the
end
that
no
man
be
deceaued
by
them
,
and
partly
that
euery
man
may
vnderstand
nothing
to
be
so
plainely
and
clearely
set
downe
in
the
written
Word
,
which
by
the
Commentaries
of
crafty
and
subtile
wittes
may
not
be
weakned
and
made
of
little
force
,
if
no
regard
be
had
to
the
authority
and
iudgment
of
the
Church
.
And
that
no
man
may
thinke
that
I
herin
calumniate
them
or
deale
lesse
sincerely
with
them
,
I
will
set
downe
out
of
their
owne
writings
some
one
or
two
exampls
of
each
manner
of
corrupting
,
wherof
many
examples
will
occure
in
each
Controuersy
.
2.
The
first
manner
of
shifting
of
places
alleadged
out
of
the
written
Word
is
,
to
say
,
that
the
originall
text
is
corrupted
,
and
what
is
alleadged
crept
out
of
the
margent
into
the
text
,
whereof
see
many
examples
in
the
12.
and
18.
Chapter
of
the
Latin
Edition
of
this
Controuersy
.
3.
Their
second
shift
is
to
reiect
the
vulgar
translation
and
instead
thereof
to
cite
some
new
and
corrupt
translation
of
their
owne
.
It
is
euident
inough
,
that
Luther
in
his
first
version
of
the
new
Testament
into
the
Germane
tongue
,
S.
Paul
the
3.
Chapter
and
28.
verse
,
the
particle
alone
,
thereby
the
stronglier
to
establish
his
doctrine
,
that
Fayth
alone
iustifieth
,
for
this
place
of
the
Apostle
,
We
thinke
a
man
is
iustifyed
by
fayth
,
he
translateth
by
fayth
alone
:
&
when
a
certaine
friend
of
his
to
whome
the
same
was
obiected
by
a
Catholike
asked
the
cause
why
he
so
translated
it
,
D.
Martin
Luther
will
haue
it
so
,
and
sa●●h
,
that
a
Papist
and
an
Asse
is
all
one
thing
:
so
I
will
,
so
I
command
,
let
my
will
stand
for
a
reason
,
for
we
will
not
be
the
Papists
schollers
,
but
their
Iudges
.
Luther
will
haue
it
so
,
&
he
saith
,
that
he
is
a
Doctor
aboue
all
the
Popes
Doctors
.
So
Luther
,
concluding
at
last
that
the
word
(
alone
)
shal
remayne
in
his
new
Testament
,
though
it
should
make
all
his
Aduersaries
mad
:
and
he
addeth
further
,
that
he
is
only
sory
,
that
he
had
not
added
two
wordes
more
to
the
text
,
and
translated
it
after
this
manner
▪
we
are
ius●ifyed
by
only
faith
without
any
workes
of
any
law
.
4.
Zwinglius
also
who
first
in
our
age
endeauored
to
perswade
many
,
that
the
body
of
Christ
is
not
really
contayned
in
the
Sacrament
of
the
Eucharist
,
the
better
to
establish
this
his
error
,
goeth
about
to
proue
that
those
words
of
Christ
,
this
is
my
body
,
are
very
well
translated
thus
,
this
signifieth
my
body
,
&
with
this
his
new
translation
he
is
so
rauished
,
as
if
he
had
receaued
the
same
from
heauen
,
for
these
are
his
word●
:
So
therefore
hath
Luke
,
with
whome
we
content
our selues
,
without
citing
any
other
Euangelist
.
And
hauing
taken
bread
he
gaue
thankes
,
brake
it
,
and
gaue
it
them
,
saying
,
this
signifyeth
my
body
which
is
giuen
for
you
,
do
this
in
remembrance
of
me
.
Thou
seest
O
faithfull
soule
,
but
yet
wrapped
in
absurd
opinions
,
how
all
thinges
heere
agree
,
and
nothing
inviolently
eyther
taken
away
or
added
,
so
as
thou
hast
cause
to
wonder
,
that
thou
hast
not
byn
alwayes
of
this
opinion
,
and
much
more
that
any
dare
so
boldly
teare
and
rent
the
body
of
this
speach
so
well
ioyned
togeather
.
So
Zwinglius
in
the
praise
of
his
new
translation
,
wherein
he
arrogates
more
authority
to
himselfe
,
than
is
due
,
so
as
that
of
Cicero
in
his
booke
de
diuinatione
may
well
be
applyed
to
him
,
I
neuer
saw
any
man
arrogate
greater
authority
to
himselfe
,
and
in
the
end
say
iust
nothing
.
5.
Moreouer
concerning
Caluins
and
Bezas
errors
in
translating
or
rather
peruerting
the
holy
Scriptures
,
Geneua
Bylles
,
which
are
euery
yeare
increased
,
but
this
shall
much
more
commodiously
be
declared
heerafter
in
the
particuler
Controuersies
.
Geneua
Bybles
.
And
this
corruption
is
forged
a
purpose
by
them
to
confirme
a
new
and
notable
blasphemy
against
Christ
and
himselfe
,
by
some
apparent
testimony
of
Scripture
,
for
they
reach
in
many
places
that
Christ
when
he
praied
in
the
Garden
was
seized
with
an
extreme
feare
,
he
suffered
vpon
the
Crosse
the
paynes
of
a
damned
person
,
&
the
torments
of
hell
;
for
these
are
the
impions
words
of
Caluin
:
Christ
suffered
in
his
soule
the
torments
of
a
forlorne
,
and
damned
man
:
and
Beza
sayth
,
at
what
tyme
Christ
hang
vpon
the
Crosse
,
he
was
in
the
middest
euen
of
the
torments
of
hell
,
which
is
as
much
,
as
to
say
,
that
God
himselfe
was
not
only
afraid
of
the
torments
of
hell
,
but
that
he
suffered
and
endured
them
,
for
it
is
euident
that
Christ
was
true
God
.
But
against
these
absurd
paradoxes
we
are
to
dispute
heerafter
.
It
shall
suffice
heere
to
shew
,
that
they
haue
depraued
the
holy
Scripture
,
to
〈◊〉
this
their
impious
assertion
,
for
wheras
it
is
written
in
the
fifth
to
the
Hebrewes
,
Christ
was
heard
of
God
for
his
reuerence
,
Caluin
first
,
and
after
Beza
,
and
all
the
Geneua
Bybles
,
make
the
text
to
say
,
Christ
was
heard
by
reason
of
his
feare
,
or
because
he
was
afraid
,
but
that
in
the
last
Edition
Beza
hath
added
more
words
to
the
text
,
His
prayers
being
heard
he
was
deliuered
from
this
feare
.
Moreouer
Caluin
in
his
commentaris
and
Beza
in
his
annotations
seeke
to
proue
out
of
this
text
,
that
Christ
feared
eternall
damnation
,
&
that
he
was
deliuered
out
of
this
feare
by
his
prayers
which
he
offered
with
teares
:
true
it
is
that
in
the
French
Bybles
lately
printed
at
Geneua
,
the
yeare
1●05
.
they
haue
put
in
the
margent
,
vel
pro
sua
reuerentia
,
where
inforced
by
truth
they
manifestly
contradict
Caluin
and
Beza
,
who
plainly
deny
that
this
place
is
so
to
be
translated
,
yet
least
their
inconstancy
should
be
noted
,
they
leaue
the
former
words
in
the
text
(
ayant
esté
exaucé
〈◊〉
qu'il
craignoit
)
that
is
in
latin
,
exauditus
est
eo
,
vel
in
eo
,
quod
timuit
.
6.
But
all
others
as
well
Catholikes
as
their
Aduersaries
who
haue
written
before
Caluin
,
translate
prosua
reuerentia
,
vel
propietate
sua
,
as
Erasmus
,
Bucer
,
the
Tiguriues
in
their
bibles
of
the
yeare
1542.
Nay
Sebastian
Castalio
for
this
cause
sharply
reprehendeth
Beza
,
7.
The
third
shift
is
,
their
false
exposition
of
the
text
though
neuer
so
truly
translated
,
for
by
diuers
commentaries
and
little
notes
in
the
margent
,
they
goe
about
to
perswade
the
Readers
the
cleane
contrary
to
that
which
is
expressely
in
the
text
:
see
examples
hereof
in
this
Chapter
in
the
latin
edition
.
CHAP.
XV.
The
fourth
,
fift
,
and
sixt
shift
that
our
Aduersaries
vse
in
deprauing
the
Word
of
God
.
THE
fourth
shift
of
our
Aduersaries
is
to
fly
to
figuratiue
and
metaphoricall
speaches
,
for
it
is
most
true
that
was
wit●●ly
obserued
by
S.
Augustine
.
the
mind
be
preoccupated
with
any
erroneous
opinion
,
whatsoeuer
the
Scripture
saith
to
the
contrary
,
men
take
to
be
a
figuratiue
speach
.
And
surely
there
is
no
kind
of
figuratiue
speaking
to
which
our
Aduersaries
at
one
tyme
or
another
haue
not
recouse
:
but
there
are
three
figures
of
which
our
Aduersaries
doe
o●tenest
serue
themselues
in
deprauing
the
holy
Scriptures
,
which
are
these
,
Me●onymia
,
Hyperbole
,
and
Ironia
,
Metonymia
is
a
figure
very
familiar
with
Caluin
,
this
is
my
body
:
for
hauing
disputed
long
about
the
sense
of
those
words
at
last
he
concludeth
thus
:
I
omit
(
sayth
he
)
Allegories
and
Parables
,
least
any
man
should
thinke
that
,
I
seeke
euasions
,
a●d
to
go
from
the
matter
in
hand
,
I
say
it
is
a
Metonymicall
speach
.
So
Caluin
.
2.
By
the
figure
Hyperbole
our
Aduersaries
shift
of
all
those
so
euident
testimonies
,
by
which
wee
proue
that
remisof
sinnes
is
obtayned
of
God
by
good
works
,
Almes
deliuereth
from
all
sinne
,
and
death
,
and
suffereth
not
the
soule
to
go
into
darknes
.
And
againe
,
Almes
deliuereth
from
death
,
&
it
is
that
that
purgeth
sinne
&
maketh
vs
find
mercy
&
life
euerlasting
.
Moreouer
water
putteth
out
a
burning
fier
,
and
Almes
resisteth
sinne
:
for
the
Lutherans
say
,
that
all
these
are
Hyperbolicall
speaches
.
Roman
Church
,
your
haith
is
preached
all
ouer
tse
world
.
Caluin
in
like
manner
by
the
same
figure
not
only
depraueth
many
places
of
the
auncient
Fathers
,
Philip
Melancthon
goeth
about
by
the
figure
Ironia
to
delude
those
manifest
wordes
of
Christ
,
that
which
remayneth
,
giue
Almes
,
and
behold
all
thinges
are
cleane
vnto
you
.
For
Philip
contendeth
that
Christ
spake
not
those
words
in
earnest
,
but
in
iest
,
which
he
tooke
from
Erasmus
,
as
he
did
many
other
things
,
but
Caluin
and
Beza
confesse
,
foolish
Ironia
.
Albeit
they
also
peruert
the
same
wordes
another
way
,
for
they
restrayne
the
word
omnia
,
only
to
meate
.
3.
The
fift
shift
is
,
when
Catholiks
alledge
plaine
places
of
Scripture
which
admit
no
figure
,
to
say
that
the
Scripture
,
yea
euen
Christ
himselfe
did
speake
exactly
,
but
after
a
grosse
and
popular
manner
,
the
meaning
is
,
that
he
speaketh
only
probably
,
and
not
solidly
.
For
example
sake
when
wee
proue
that
the
Sacrament
of
the
Eucharist
excelleth
the
Manna
of
the
Iewes
by
these
wordes
of
Christ
,
Fathers
indeed
haue
eaten
Manna
and
are
dead
,
this
is
the
bread
descending
from
heauen
,
that
if
any
man
eate
of
it
he
dye
not
,
Caluins
answere
is
,
that
Christ
accommodated
his
speach
to
the
grosse
conceipt
or
opinion
of
the
Iewes
.
one
Diuell
will
not
cast
out
another
,
Caluin
answereth
,
we
must
remember
(
sayth
he
)
that
when
Christ
vseth
such
prouerbes
,
as
are
in
vse
among
the
people
,
he
vseth
them
only
,
as
probable
coniectures
,
and
not
as
solid
proofes
.
So
he
.
No
meruaile
therfore
,
if
our
Aduersaries
say
our
arguments
are
not
solid
,
seeing
they
write
so
much
of
Christs
owne
arguments
.
4.
Their
sixt
shift
is
,
to
answere
to
such
plaine
testimonies
as
are
alledged
out
of
Scripture
against
their
errors
,
that
the
Scripture
speaketh
not
simply
,
that
is
to
say
,
not
truly
,
but
according
to
the
false
opinion
of
them
,
ag●inst
whom
it
hath
to
do
,
which
indeed
is
nothing
els
,
but
to
deny
the
Scripture
.
This
is
an
vsuall
shift
of
Caluin
who
interpreteth
to
dispute
by
contention
,
not
according
to
our
owne
mind
,
but
according
to
their
error
,
and
foolish
affection
who
obscure
the
light
of
the
Ghospell
.
So
as
when
we
proue
that
our
Sacraments
excell
the
Sacraments
of
the
old
law
,
S.
Paul
sayth
,
that
the
ceremonies
of
the
Iewes
were
shaddows
of
things
to
come
,
but
Christ
the
body
it selfe
.
And
againe
,
that
the
Sacrifices
of
the
law
could
not
make
perfect
according
to
conscience
▪
but
serued
only
to
sanctification
&
cleansing
of
the
flesh
:
and
〈◊〉
that
they
could
not
take
away
sinne
.
we
are
,
sayth
he
,
to
obserue
diligently
that
the
Apostle
S.
Paul
in
all
these
places
speaketh
,
not
simpliciter
,
sed
per
contentionem
,
which
what
it
is
to
say
,
we
haue
interpreted
out
of
Caluin
before
.
CHAP.
XVI
.
Of
the
seauenth
and
eight
shift
.
THEIR
seauenth
shift
is
when
they
are
vrged
with
expresse
words
of
Scripture
to
say
that
they
are
to
be
vnderstood
before
men
,
and
not
before
God
,
or
in
truth
.
This
shift
Caluin
and
Beza
vse
often
,
for
thus
they
rid
themselues
of
these
places
,
Euery
branch
that
bringeth
not
forth
fruite
,
in
me
,
he
will
cut
off
▪
2.
That
place
also
of
S.
Iames
,
Man
is
iustified
by
workes
,
and
not
by
fayth
alone
,
is
interpreted
by
Caluin
and
Beza
,
and
almost
all
other
our
Aduersaries
of
iustification
only
before
men
,
&
not
before
God
.
See
more
examples
in
this
Chapter
in
the
latin
edition
.
3.
The
eight
shift
is
,
when
they
know
not
what
to
answere
,
to
say
it
is
an
improper
speach
,
and
by
this
occasion
to
change
the
words
of
the
Scripture
into
other
words
of
their
owne
forging
.
For
when
we
c●te
the
words
of
Christ
in
which
a
reward
is
promised
to
fasting
and
prayer
,
Caluin
turneth
them
of
,
when
Christ
,
sayth
he
,
promiseth
a
reward
from
God
〈◊〉
fasting
,
he
speakes
improperly
,
as
is
sayd
a
litte
before
.
Concerning
prayer
,
likewise
whe●
to
proue
free
will
we
alledge
those
wor●s
of
Christ
,
make
the
tree
good
,
Caluin
a●swereth
,
it
is
an
improper
speach
.
CHAP.
XVII
.
Of
the
ninth
and
tenth
shift
.
THEIR
ninth
shift
is
,
when
the
words
of
Scripture
are
so
playne
and
manyfest
,
that
they
cannot
otherwise
escape
,
they
say
at
last
,
that
●e
Scripture
commendeth
vnto
vs
a
thing
impossi●e
:
and
to
make
this
shift
more
probable
●hey
corrupt
the
text
by
adding
the
parti●●
(
si
)
as
if
the
Scripture
spake
conditionally
,
and
not
absolutely
,
for
when
we
cite
the
places
of
Scripture
in
which
life
euerlasting
is
promised
to
such
as
keepe
Gods
commandments
,
wilt
enter
into
life
,
keepe
the
commandments
;
do
this
and
thou
shalt
liue
.
The
answere
of
Caluin
and
Beza
is
,
impossible
.
Caluin
vpon
the
former
place
writeth
thus
:
Some
of
the
auncient
Father●
,
saith
he
,
haue
interpreted
this
place
amisse
,
as
do
the
Papists
after
them
,
as
if
Christ
should
teach
●hat
we
cold
deserue
life
euerlasting
by
keeping
the
law
.
And
a
little
after
he
concludeth
saying
:
This
answere
of
Christ
is
according
to
the
old
law
,
to
wit
that
no
man
can
be
accounted
iust
before
God
,
but
he
who
●hall
satify
the
law
,
which
is
impossible
.
And
vpon
the
later
place
he
writeth
this
,
it
is
impossible
,
sayth
he
,
to
fulfill
what
the
law
commaundeth
,
A
legal
promise
,
saith
he
,
annexed
to
a
condtion
impossible
proueth
nothing
,
&
thus
with
s●ch
impossibilities
he
dallieth
with
vs
,
&
wth
the
holy
Scripture
it selfe
:
so
far
forth
,
●s
they
dare
affirme
,
that
the
Apostle
in
one
Chapter
auoucheth
vnto
vs
seauen
times
thinges
impossible
:
Is
there
any
man
,
saith
Beza
,
that
shal
be
able
to
bring
these
workes
which
the
Apostle
saith
shal
be
rewarde●
with
eternall
life
?
And
wheras
in
the
seauenth
v.
the
Apostle
saith
,
that
God
doth
render
life
euerlasting
to
such
as
seeke
the
same
by
the
patience
of
good
works
,
their
answere
is
,
that
he
insinuateth
a
thing
impossible
,
and
that
no
man
can
do
any
good
worke
before
God
,
no
not
the
iustest
man
,
which
is
not
worthy
of
eternall
damnation
.
Whosoeuer
,
Caluin
,
haue
made
the
greatest
progresse
before
all
others
in
the
way
of
the
Lord
,
if
they
cast
their
●yes
vpon
the
Lord
God
,
what
worke
soeuer
they
attempt
or
go
about
,
they
see
into
be
accursed
.
And
surely
●
for
my
part
,
could
easily
belieue
that
such
is
the
progresse
of
our
aduersaries
in
the
way
of
our
Lord
▪
See
the
rest
of
the
Apostles
places
in
the
latin
edition
.
2.
The
tenth
&
last
shift
is
the
wresting
of
diuers
wordes
to
a
wrong
sense
,
and
to
inuent
sundrie
different
vnderstandings
of
the
wordes
,
to
build
vpon
it
many
interpretations
neuer
heard
of
before
,
and
for
a
finall
Conclusion
to
say
,
Christ
,
this
i●
my
〈◊〉
with
is
giuen
for
you
,
may
suffice
:
for
some
of
them
wrest
the
pronowne
hoc
,
others
the
word
est
,
others
the
word
corpus
,
others
the
pronowne
meum
,
others
the
relatiue
quod
,
others
the
prepositi●n
pro
,
others
the
pronowne
he
vobis
and
others
the
Verbe
datur
,
and
〈◊〉
word
they
wrest
diuers
waies
,
so
as
one
more
then
thirty
yeares
ago
,
two
hundred
expositions
of
these
few
wordes
of
Christ
,
of
which
〈◊〉
Xainctes
〈◊〉
particularly
84.
And
that
they
are
both
many
,
and
different
,
yea
repugnant
,
wherwith
they
labour
to
make
ob●cure
these
wordes
of
our
Sauiour
,
no
man
can
doubt
.
See
another
example
in
the
latin
edition
.
And
it
is
worthy
of
the
noting
,
that
in
all
these
shi●fs
they
serue
themselues
of
other
places
of
Scripture
,
to
proue
what
they
say
:
wherby
it
may
appeare
how
easy
a
thing
it
is
,
to
corrupt
the
Scripture
by
other
places
of
Scripture
,
but
that
the
prouident
and
dayly
ca●e
of
the
holy
Catholike
Church
opposeth
it self
against
such
corruptions
,
Pillar
and
firmament
of
truth
,
against
which
the
gates
of
hell
shall
neuer
preuaile
.
FINIS
.
Notes, typically marginal, from the original text
Notes for div A03881-e170
Notes for div A03881-e310
Notes for div A03881-e620
Notes for div A03881-e870
Notes for div A03881-e1590
Notes for div A03881-e1940
Notes for div A03881-e2880
Notes for div A03881-e3210
Notes for div A03881-e4760
Notes for div A03881-e4880
Notes for div A03881-e5270
Notes for div A03881-e6050
Notes for div A03881-e6880
Notes for div A03881-e7800
Notes for div A03881-e8100