nor for any mistranslation. For seeing the Spirit of God (as I have said) useth the word ecclesia generally for a company of Christians, Jews, and Gentiles, the translator hath not gone from the truth and use of the scriptures, to use the word "congregation," which signifieth indifferently all three. Wherefore there needeth no condemnation, nor confession of any gross fault herein committed; except you will count it a gross fault in St Luke, to use the word EKKλnoia without any scrupulosity for all three, as the translator doth the word "congregation," and you in two significations the word "assembly." Neither can your heathenish and barbarous burning of the holy scriptures so translated, nor your blasphemy in calling it the devil's word, be excused for any fault in translation which you have discovered as yet, or ever shall be able to descry. That stinking cavil of leaving out of the bible this word "church" altogether, being both foolish and false, I have answered more than once already. It is not left out altogether, that in contents of books and chapters, and in notes of explication of this word "congregation'," is set down. Neither could there be any purpose against the catholic church of Christ in them that translated and taught the creed in English, professing to believe "the holy catholic church." As for our hatred of the malignant antichristian church of Rome, we never dissembled the matter, so that we were afraid openly to profess it what need had we then after such a fantastical manner (as is fondly imagined) to insinuate it?

Martin. But, my masters, if you would confess the former faults MARTIN, 5. and corruptions never so plainly, is that enough to justify your corrupt dealing in the holy scriptures? Is it not an horrible fault so wilfully to falsify and corrupt the word of God, written by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost? May you abuse the people for certain years with false translations, and afterward say, "Lo, we have amended it in our later translations"? Then might the heretic Beza be excused for translating See his New instead of "Christ's soul in hell," his "carcase in the grave:" and of the year because some friend told him of that corruption, and he corrected it in the later editions, he should nevertheless in your judgment be counted right honest man. No, be ye sure, the discreet reader cannot be so abused; but he will easily see that there is a great difference in mending some oversights which may escape the best men, and in your gross false

[Congregation. See No. 2.]

a

Test. in Latin

1556 printed

by Robert Steven, in fol. Acts ii. 27.

translations, who at the first falsify of a prepensed malice, and afterwards alter it for very shame. Howbeit, to say the truth, in the chiefest and principal place, that concerneth the church's perpetuity and stability, you have not yet altered the former translation, but it remaineth as before, Matt. xvi. 18. and is at this day read in your churches thus, "Upon this rock I will build my congregation." Can it be without some heretical subtilty, that in this place specially, and (I think) only, you change not the word congregation" into "church"? Give us a reason, and discharge your

Bib. 1577.

FULKE, 5.

66

credit.

Fulke. You are very hardly, and in very deed maliciously, bent against us, that you will accept no confession of faults escaped, never so plainly made. As for corrupt dealing in the holy scriptures, and falsifying of the word of God, you are not able, no, not if you would burst yourself for malice, to convict us. And therefore look for no confession of any such wickedness, whereof our conscience is clear before God, and doth not accuse us. As for Beza's correction of his former translation, Acts ii. 27, if your dogged stomach will not accept, he shall notwithstanding with all godly learned men be accounted, as he deserveth, for one who hath more profited the church of God with his sincere translation and learned annotations, than all the popish seminaries and seminarists shall be able to hinder it, jangle of gross and false translations as long as you will. But "the chiefest and principal place, that concerneth the church's perpetuity," is not yet reformed to your mind. For in the bible 1577, we read still, Matt. xvi., "Upon this rock I will build my congregation." If Christ have a perpetual congregation, "builded upon the foundation of the prophets and apostles, himself being the corner-stone," his church is in no danger ever to decay. Yet you ask, whether it can be without some heretical subtilty, that in this place specially, and (as you think) only, the word "congregation" is not changed into "church." It is an homely, but a true proverb: The good wife would never have sought her daughter in the oven, had she not been there first herself. so full of heretical subtilties and traitorous devices, that you dream of them in other men's doings, whatsoever cometh into your hands; yea, where you yourself can have no probable imagination what to suspect. And therefore we must give you a reason in discharge of our credit. For my part,

You are

I know not with what special reason the translator was moved; but I can give you my probable conjecture, that he thought it all one, (as indeed it is,) to say "my congregation," or "my church." For what is Christ's congregation, but his church? or what is Christ's church, but his congregation? And yet, to put you out of all fear, the Geneva translation hath the word "church," that you make so great account of, as though it were not an indifferent word to the true church of true Christians and the false church of malignant heretics; being usurped first to signify the congregation of Christians, by a metonymy of the place containing for the people contained. For the etymology thereof is from the Greek word kupiakn, which was used of Christians for the place of their holy meetings, signifying "the Lord's house;" therefore in the northern, which is the more ancient English speech, is called by contraction kyrke, more near to the sound of the Greek word.

Martin. What shall I say of Beza, whom the English bibles also MARTIN, 6. follow, translating actively that Greek word, (which in common use, and by St Chrysostom, and the Greek doctors' exposition, is a plain passive,) to signify, as in his annotations is clear, that Christ may be without his church, that is, a head without a body. The words be these in the heretical translation: "He gave him to be the head over all

[The following extract from Beza's New Testament will serve to explain the matter in dispute in this and the two succeeding numbers: Ητις ἐστὶ τὸ σῶμα αὐτοῦ, τὸ πλήρωμα τοῦ πάντα ἐν πᾶσι λпpovμévov. Ephes. i. 23. Rendered by Beza, "Quæ est corpus ipsius, et complementum ejus qui omnia implet in omnibus:" upon which he has this note:

Complementum, λýрwμa, sive supplementum. Is enim est Christi in ecclesiam amor, ut quum omnia in omnibus ad plenum præstet, tamen sese veluti mancum et membris mutilum caput existimet, nisi ecclesiam habeat sibi instar corporis adjunctam. Hinc factum ut Christus interdum collective pro tota ecclesia capiti suo adjuncta accipiatur, ut 1 Cor. xii. 12, 13, et Gal. iii. 16. Hinc etiam illud "in Christo," toties repetitum; quod multo expressius aliquid significat quam cum Christo, vel per Christum. Hinc factum ut diceret apostolus se in Christo, et Christum in se vivere, Gal. ii. 20. Hinc illa Christi vox, Saule, Saule, quid me persequeris? Quo etiam pertinet quod scriptum est, Col. i. 24. Hinc denique nostra spes omnis et consolatio proficiscitur. Qui implet, тоû λпpovμévov. Chrysostomus passive accipit, ut sit sensus, Christum prorsus impleri in omnibus,

Eph. i. 21. 23. τοῦ πληρουμένου.

FULKE, 6.

things to the church, which (church) is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all." "St Chrysostom," saith Beza, (he might have said, all the Greek and Latin ancient fathers,) "taketh it passively in this sense, that Christ is filled' all in all, because all faithful men as members, and the whole church as the body, concur to the fulness and accomplishment of Christ the head. But this," saith he, "seemeth unto me a forced interpretation." Why so, Beza?

Fulke. That Beza translateth the participle, τοῦ πληpovμévov, actively, it is plain, both in the text of his translation, and in his annotations: but that he doth it to signify, that Christ may be without his church, that is, a head without a body, it is a shameless slander. His words, upon which you weave this cobweb, are these: Omnino autem hoc addidit apostolus, ut sciamus Christum per se non indigere hoc supplemento, ut qui efficiat omnia in omnibus revera ; nedum ut suppleatur a quoquam, nisi quatenus pro immensa sua bonitate ecclesiam dignatur sibi quasi corporis instar adjungere. "This the apostle hath added altogether for this end, that we may know that Christ of himself hath no need of this supply, as he which worketh in truth all things in all;' so far it is, that he should be supplied by any body, but that of his infinite goodness he vouchsafeth to adjoin his church unto himself as his body." Who but the devil would find fault with this godly and catholic saying? wherein it is affirmed, that Christ, which according to the perfection of his divine nature needeth no supply, yet of his infinite mercy vouchsafeth to become head of his church, as of his body; so that he will not be counted perfect without it. Is this to say, Christ may be a head without a body? or is it for his benefit, or the benefit of his church, that he is the head thereof? But the more to lay open this malicious slander and impudent falsifying of Beza's words and meaning, I will set down his saying, going im

id est, singulos fideles conferre ad Christi complementum, uti corpus ipsum ex singulis membris est compactum. Mihi videtur coacta ista interpretatio, [qui potius active istud accipio, edit. 1582, p. 231.] quum τὸ πληροῦσθαι pro πληροῦν Xenophon usurparit, Lib. vi. Hellen. et συμπληρούσθαι pro συμπληροῦν Plato in Timæo. Omnino autem hoc addidit apostolus, ut sciamus Christum per se non indigere hoc supplemento, ut qui efficiat omnia in omnibus revera; nedum ut suppleatur a quoquam, nisi quatenus pro immensa sua bonitate ecclesiam dignatur sibi quasi corporis instar adjungere. Edit. 1556, p. 249.]

mediately before, upon the word λnρwμa, which he calleth complementum sive supplementum, "a fulfilling or supplying :" Is enim est Christi in ecclesiam amor, &c. "For such is the love of Christ toward his church, that whereas he performeth all things to all men unto the full; yet he esteemeth himself as an unperfect head, and maimed of the members, unless he have his church adjoined to him, as his body. Hereof it cometh, that Christ is taken sometime collectively for the whole church, adjoined to her head, as 1 Cor. xii. 12, 13, and Gal. iii. 16. Hereof cometh also that phrase in Christ,' so often repeated, which signifieth something more expressly than with Christ, or by Christ. Hereof that voice of Christ, Saul, Saul, why dost thou persecute me?' Whither also pertaineth that which is written, Col. i. 24. Finally, hereof proceedeth all our hope and consolation." How think you? is not this man willing to separate the church from Christ, the head from the body? O monstrous malices of godless papists! His exposition of the place being such, as you see, let us now examine what can be said against his translation for a man must not translate falsely to make a true sense. It is alleged against him, that Chrysostom and all the Greek and Latin fathers take the participle passively. Beza confesseth it of Chrysostom, whom the later Greek writers

commonly do follow. But the participle, being derived of the mean verb, may have either passive or active signification. But why doth Beza say, that the exposition of Chrysostom is "forced," which taketh it passively? He saith not in respect of Chrysostom's sense, which he himself followeth, and it is contained in the word λnpwua, but in respect of the grammar, that Távта should be put absolutely without any word to govern it, seeing the participle of the mean verb may be taken actively, and govern ávтa, being the accusative case.

Martin. Mark his doctors whom he opposeth to the fathers, both MARTIN, 7. Greek and Latin. "Because Xenophon" saith he, "in such a place, and Plato in such a place, use the said Greek word actively." I omit this miserable match, and unworthy names of Xenophon and Plato, in trial of St Paul's words, against all the glorious doctors; this is his common custom. I ask him rather of these his own doctors, how they use the Greek word in other places of their works? how use they it most commonly? yea, how do all other Greek writers, either profane or sacred,