to play the peevish quarreller. And trow you, I will not say, that for the fault of kings the name of tyrant became odious? Yes, verily, I will not spare to say, and so I said before, that for the fault of such cruel kings, as were called tyranni, though the name itself first signified not so, that name of tyrant became odious. As for your fomblitudes1 of Manlius and Judas, two proper names, compared with image, and idol, king, and tyrant, which be common names, I will not vouchsafe to answer them. But the name of "ministers" (you say) is odious, for the faults of ministers, and not for the faults of priests. Popish priests are odious enough for their own faults; so that they need not be charged unjustly with the faults of our evil ministers: which I would wish were fewer than they be; but I trust there are not so many evil of them, as your popish priests have been, and are daily found to be. And whosoever of our ministers hath been found worst, I think there may be found, not a priest, but a pope, of your side as evil, or worse than he. But if reverence done by papists, (which you call Christians,) to images had been evil, (say you,) it should have made the name of images odious also. No, Sir, that followeth not, so long as that reverence was accounted good and lawful; and now that it is found to be abominable, the people having the other odious word of idols in use, need not abandon the name of images, except they had another to signify lawful and good images. The curse of the idolatrous Council of Nice the second, no christian man regardeth, which knoweth that by God's own mouth in the scriptures all makers and worshippers of idolatrous images are accursed. 17. Martin. But to omit this man's extraordinary and unadvised speeches, MARTIN, which be too many and too tedious, (as when he saith in the same sentence, "Howsoever the name 'idol' is grown odious in the English tongue,' as though it were not also odious in the Latin and Greek tongues, but that in Latin and Greek a man might say according to his fond opinion, fecit hominem ad idolum suum, and so in the other places, where is imago,) to omit these rash assertions, I say, and to return to his other words, where he saith, that though the original property of the words hath [1 Danish, famler, to hesitate, stammer, falter: this word of Fulke's is deduced from fumble. Or is it a misprint for similitudes ?] that signification, yet "no christian man would say, that God made man according to his idol, no more than a good subject would call his lawful prince a tyrant:" doth he not here tell us that which we would have, to wit, that we may not speak or translate according to the original property of the word, but according to the common, usual, and accustomed signification thereof? As we may not translate Phalaris tyrannus, "Phalaris the king," as sometime tyrannus did signify, and in ancient authors doth signify; but "Phalaris the tyrant," as now this word tyrannus is commonly taken and understood: even so we may not now translate, "My children, keep yourselves from images," as the aTò Tv el- word may, and doth sometime signify, according to the original property thereof; but we must translate, "Keep yourselves from idols," according to the common use and signification of the word in vulgar speech, and in the holy scriptures. Where the Greek word is so notoriously and usually peculiar to idols, and not unto images, that the holy fathers of the second Nicene council (which knew right well the signification of the Greek word, themselves being Grecians) do pronounce anathema to all such as interpret those places of the holy scripture, that concern idols, of images, or against sacred images, as now these Calvinists do, not only in their commentaries upon the holy scriptures, but even in their translations of the text. Ab idolis. δώλων. 1 Joh. v. FULKE, 17. Fulke. We cannot yet be rid of this man's extraordinary and unadvised surmises, which are too many and tedious; as where I say the name idol is odious in the English tongue, he gathereth, that I mean it to be odious only in the English tongue, and not in the Latin and Greek. I have shewed before, that in Tully's time it was not odious in Latin; and it is not long since Master Martin confessed the Greek word, according to the original propriety, to signify as generally as cikov, "an image," which is not odious. Although in later times, among Christians, both of the Greek and the Latin church, the name of idolum became odious, as well as the word 'idol' in English. Therefore it is not my fond opinion, but M. Martin's foolish collection, that a man may say in Latin, fecit hominem ad idolum suum: and yet I am charged with rash assertions, when nothing is reproved that I affirm, but that which he himself doth imagine. But now you will return to those words of mine, where I say, that though the original propriety of the words hath that signification, yet no christian man would say, that God made man according to his idol, no more than a good subject would call his lawful prince a tyrant. These words, you say, do tell us, that we may not speak or translate according to the original propriety of the word, but ac- 18. fol. 35. Martin. This then being so, that words must be translated as their MARTIN, common use and signification requireth, if you ask your old question, what great crime of corruption is committed in translating, "keep your- Loco citatc. selves from images," the Greek being eidwλwv, you have answered yourself, that in so translating, "idol" and "image" are made to signify one thing, which may not be done, no more than "tyrant" and "king” can be made to signify all one. And how can you say then, that "this is no more absurdity, than instead of a Greek word to use a Latin of the same signification"? Are you not here contrary to yourself? are "idol" and "image," "tyrant" and "king," of one signification? Said you not, that in the English tongue "idol" is grown to another signification than "image," as "tyrant" is grown to another signification than "king"? Your false translations, therefore, that in so many places make "idols" and "images" all one, not only forcing the word in the holy scriptures, but disgracing the sentence thereby, (as Ephes. v. and Eph. v. A coCol. iii.) are they not in your own judgment very corrupt; and, as your is a worshipown consciences must confess, of a malicious intent corrupted, to disgrace and Col. iii. thereby the church's holy images, by pretence of the holy scriptures that is worshipspeak only of the pagans' idols? vetous man per of images; Covetousness ping of images. Fulke. Again I repeat, that words must, or may be FULKE, translated according to that signification they had in time 18. MARTIN, 19. T Baal, subaud. στήλη. Num. xxii. τὸ διοπε τές. of the writer whom you translate. And to my question, what absurdity is it in that text of St John, for eldwλov to translate "image"; you answer, by that means idol and image are made to signify one thing. But that is not so; for image signifieth more generally than idol in English, and "image" answereth properly to the Greek word eidwλov, "idol" to the meaning of St John, that is, of wicked images; so that the translation is good: even as Túpavvos may be translated "a king," generally, according to the word; and if the author mean of a cruel king, it may be translated "a tyrant." For king is a general word, applied to good kings and to evil, as image is to lawful and unlawful images. Therefore our translations, that for eldwλov say an image, are not false, much less any malicious corruptions. And if the translators, in so doing, intended to disgrace popish images, I think they did well, and according to the meaning of the Holy Ghost; who, forbidding generally all images, that may be had in religious reverence, did not restrain the signification of the word edwλov to the wicked idols of the gentiles, but left it at large, to comprehend all such images, and all kinds of worshipping them, as are contrary to the law and commandment of God. Martin. But of the usual and original signification of words (whereof you take occasion of manifold corruptions) we will speak more anon, if first we touch some other your falsifications against holy images; as, where you affectate to thrust the word "image" into the text, when there is no such thing in the Hebrew or Greek, as in that notorious example1, 2 Par. xxxvi. (Bib. 1562.) "Carved images that were laid to his charge:" again, Rom. xi., "To the image of Baal";" and Acts xix., [ Καὶ τὰ λοιπὰ τῶν λόγων Ιωακὶμ καὶ τὰ πάντα ἢ ἐποίησεν, οὐκ idov Tavтa yeypaμμéva, &c. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 8. "Reliqua autem verborum Joakim, et abominationum ejus, quas operatus est, et quæ inventa sunt in eo, continentur in libro Regum, &c." Vulg. "The rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and his abominations which he did, and carved images that were laid to his charge, behold, they are written, &c." Bible 1562. "And his abominations which he did, and that which was found upon (found in, Authorised version) him," Geneva Bible, 1560.] [' οἵτινες οὐκ ἔκαμψαν γόνυ τῇ Βάαλ. Rom. xi. 4. "Qui non curvaverunt genua ante Baal," Vulg. "Which have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal," Cranmer, Geneva, Authorised. "Which "The image that came down from Jupiter"." Where you are not content to understand "image" rather than "idol," but also to thrust it into the text, being not in the Greek, as you know very well. 19. Fulke. Three places you note, where the word image FULKE, is thrust into the text, being neither in the Hebrew nor Greek. The first, 2 Par. xxxvi. bib. 1562, which I confess is a fault, but I marvel how it crept in. For Thomas Matthew's Bible, which was printed before it, hath not that word, "carved images." It is reformed also in both the translations that followed. The second, Romans xi., is no corruption; for seeing you acknowledge that a substantive must be understood to bear up the feminine article; what reason is there, why we should not understand cikóvi, rather than σrnλn, seeing it is certain Baal had an image that was worshipped in his temple? 2 Reg. x. The third place is Acts xix., where the word image is necessarily to be understood, "which fell down from Jupiter," as it was feigned. Hereunto Pliny beareth witness, Lib. xvI., cap. 40, and sheweth by whom it was made, and of what matter of the like speaketh Herodianus. And the similitude of this image is yet to be seen in those ancient coins that yet remain, which were called vaoi, "temples1." Wherefore your vulgar translation, which turneth Toû dioTeTous Jovis prolis, is not right; and therefore is corrected. by Isidorus Clarius, a Jove delapsi simulacri, with the consent of the deputies of the council of Trent. have not bowed the knee to the image of Baal," Bishops' bible, 1584.] Γ' ὃς οὐ γινώσκει τὴν Ἐφεσίων πόλιν νεωκόρον οὖσαν τῆς μεγάλης Αρτέμιδος καὶ τοῦ Διοπετοῦς. Acts xix. 35. "Qui nesciat Ephesiorum civitatem cultricem esse magnæ Dianæ, Jovisque prolis?" Vulg. "And of the image which came down from heaven," Tyndale. "Of the image which came from heaven," Cranmer. "Of the image which came from Jupiter," Geneva. "And of the [image] which came down from Jupiter," Bishops' bible. "To be a worshipper of great Diana, and Jupiter's child," Rhemish. "And of the image which fell down from Jupiter," Authorised version.] [The Scholiast upon the Rhetoric of Aristotle 1. 16, says, that ναοὶ are εἰκονοστάσια, capellulæ cum imaginibus inclusis. Ammianus Marcellinus says, that Asclepias secum semper circumferret Deæ cœlestis argentum breve figmentum. Such was meant by Tv σkηVÝ TOÙ Modox, Acts vii. 43. Beza calls those coins vaol, which have the |