Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

tion of God's people. The daily sacrifice mentioned in Daniel was the morning and evening sacrifice of the old law, whereunto your blasphemous sacrifice of the mass hath no resemblance. You may not therefore look to recover the credit of massing priests by that sacrifice, which, being once instituted by God, was at length taken away by the only sacrifice of Christ's death; against which all the apologies in the world shall never be able to defend your massing priesthood. As for the chapter of Allen's Apology, whereunto you refer us, [it] containeth certain quotations, and a few sentences of the ancient writers, which have been answered an hundred times, to justify massing priests; but all in vain: for never shall he prove that any one, from the eldest which he named unto Beda, which is the youngest, was such a massing priest in all points, as those traitors are, which by the queen's laws and edict are proscribed and prohibited: I mean not, for their manners, but for their mass and all opinions incident thereunto.

MARTIN, 1.

Calvin's Institutions, lib. 2. c. 16. sect. 10. and in his Catechism.

FULKE, 1.

CHAPTER VII.

Heretical Translation against Purgatory, Limbus Patrum,
Christ's descending into Hell.

Martin. HAviNg now discovered their corrupt translations for defacing of the church's name, and abolishing of priest and priesthood; let us come to another point of very great importance also, and which, by the wonted consequence or sequel of error, includeth in it many erroneous branches. Their principal malice then being bent against purgatory, that is, against a place where christian souls be purged by suffering of temporal pains after this life, for surer maintenance of their erroneous denial hereof they take away and deny all third places, saying that there was never from the beginning of the world any other place for souls after this life, but only two; to wit, heaven for the blessed, and hell for the damned. And so it followeth by their heretical doctrine, that the patriarchs, prophets, and other good holy men of the Old Testament, went not after their deaths to the place called “Abraham's bosom," or limbus patrum, but immediately to heaven: and so again by their erroneous doctrine it followeth, that the fathers of the Old Testament were in heaven before our Saviour Christ had suffered death for their redemption; and also by their erroneous doctrine it followeth, that our Saviour Christ was not the first man that ascended and entered into heaven; and moreover by their heretical doctrine it followeth, that our Saviour Christ descended not into any such third place, to deliver the fathers of the Old Testament out of their prison, and to bring them triumphantly with him into heaven, because by their erroneous doctrine they were never there; and so that article of the apostles' creed concerning our saviour Christ's descending into hell, must either be put out by the Calvinists, as Beza did in his confession of his faith, printed anno 1564; or it hath some other meaning, to wit, either the lying of his body in the grave, or (as Calvin and the purer Calvinists, his scholars, will have it) the suffering of hell pains and distresses upon the cross. Lo the consequence and coherence of these errors and heresies'

Fulke. We may be bold to say with St Augustine, We believe, according to the authority of God, that the kingdom of heaven is the first place appointed for God's elect, and that hell is the second place, where all the reprobate, and such as be not of the faith of Christ, shall suffer eternal punishment. Tertium penitus ignoramus, imo nec esse in scripturis sanctis invenimus: “The third place we are utterly ignorant of yea, and that it is not we find in the holy scriptures.” But hereof it followeth say you, that the godly of the Old Testament went not after their deaths to Abraham's bosom, or limbus patrum, but immediately to heaven. Of limbus patrum, which is a border of the “pope's hell,” I grant it followeth; but of Abraham's bosom it followeth none otherwise than if I should say, “Gregorie Martin went into Cheapside,” ergo, “he went not to London.” That the fathers of the Old Testament were in heaven before our Saviour Christ had suffered death for their redemption, it is no inconvenience; for his death was as effectual to redeem them that lived before he suffered actually, as them that live since; because in God's sight he is “the Lamb that was slain from the beginning of the world.” And the fathers that were justified by faith in his blood, received the same crown and reward of righteousness that we do, being justified by the same means. And yet our Saviour Christ was the first man, that in his whole manhood ascended and entered into heaven, into the fulness and perfection of glory, which is prepared for all God's elect, to be enjoyed after the general resurrection. That our Saviour Christ descended into no prison after his death, we verily believe; and yet we do also constantly believe the article of our creed, that “he descended into hell,” by suffering in soul the pains due to God's justice for the sins of all whom he redeemed, and by vanquishing the devil, and all the power of hell, in working the redemption of all the children of God. If Beza in his confession had clean left out that article, (which is untrue,) he had been no more to be blamed than the authors of the Nicene creed, and many other creeds, in which it is not expressed, because it is partly contained under the article of his sufferings, partly it is in part of the effect and virtue of his death and redemption.

Martin. These now being the heretical doctrines which they mean Martin, 2. to avouch and defend, whatsoever come of it; first, they are at a point not to care a rush for all the ancient holy doctors, that write with full consent to the contrary, as themselves confess, calling it their common Leon, Pet. error; secondly, they translate the holy scriptures in favour thereof on. most corruptly and wilfully, as in Beza's false translation, who is Calvin's o 16.

successor in Geneva, it is notorious; for he, in his New Testament of

[merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors]

MARTIN, 3.

the year 1556, printed by Robertus Stephanus in folio, with annotations, maketh our Saviour Christ say thus to his Father, Non derelinques cadaver meum in sepulchro; “Thou shalt not leave my carcase in the grave,” Acts ii. for that which the Hebrew, and the Greek, and the Latin, and St Jerome, according to the Hebrew, say, Non derelinques animam meam in inferno, as plainly as we say in English, “Thou shalt not leave my soul in hell.” Thus the prophet David spake it in the Hebrew, Psal. xv.; thus the Septuagint uttered it in Greek; thus the apostle St Peter allegeth it; thus the holy evangelist St Luke, in the Acts of the Apostles, chap. ii., recordeth it; and for this, St Augustine calleth him an infidel that denieth it: yet all this would not suffice to make Beza translate it so, because of certain errors, (" as he heretically termeth them,) which he would full gladly avoid hereby, namely, the catholic true doctrine of limbus patrum and “purgatory.” What need we say more ? He translateth animam, “a carcase;” so calling our Saviour Christ's body, irreverently and wickedly, he translateth infernum “grave.”

Fulke. That many of the christian fathers held this error, that the godly of the Old Testament were not in heaven before Christ's death, it is no cause why we should be afraid to confess the truth revealed to us out of the holy scriptures, to the glory of God. And if the wrong or ambiguous translation of one Hebrew word, sheol, deceived them that were for the most part ignorant of the Hebrew tongue; what reason were it that we should not in translation reform that error ? But as for Beza's first translation of the Greek word Novyi) “dead body,” and #öns “ grave,” I have answered at large, cap. 1. sect. 31.; where also it is shewed, how vainly you take hold of the English word “carcase,” to charge Beza with unreverent calling of our Saviour Christ's body, when it was dead, because he calleth it in Latin cadaver.

Martin. Need we take any great labour to prove this to be a foul corruption, or that it is done purposely, when he confesseth that he thus translateth, because else it would serve the papists? Which is as much to say, as, the word of God, if it be truly and sincerely translated, maketh indeed for them. For the first part, we will not stand upon it, partly because it is of itself most absurd, and they are ashamed of it; partly because it shall suffice to confute Beza, that two other as famous heretics as he, Castaleo and Flaccus Illyricus, write against him in this point, and confute him; partly also, because we speak not here universally of all heretical translations, but of the English corruptions specially; and therefore we may only note here, how gladly they also would say somewhat else for “soul,” even in the text, if they durst for shame: for in the margin of that English translation they say, “ or life,” “or Bib. an. 1579. person;" hereby advertising the reader, that he may read thus if it please him, “Thou shalt not leave my life in the grave,” or, “Thou shalt not leave my person.” As though either man's soul or life were in the grave, or anima might be translated “person,” which the selfsame English bible doth not; no, not in those places where it is evident Acts vii. 14. that it signifieth “the whole person." For though this word “soul,” by a figure, is sometime taken for “the whole man,” yet even there they do not, nor must not translate it otherwise than “soul;” because our tongue beareth that figure as well as Latin, Greek, or Hebrew; but here, where it cannot signify “the whole person,” it is wicked to translate

it so.

Fulke. If you take more labour than you are well Fulke, 3.

able to bear, yet shall you prove it no heretical corruption. As Castaleo and Illyricus, the one an heretic, the other a schismatic, have inveighed against Beza, so hath he sufficiently confuted them. But to our English translation, where in the margin they say “life,” or “person,” when in the text they say “soul;” what doth this offend you? They render the usual English word for the Greek word, but they admonish the reader that the word “soul” in this place signifieth not the soul separated from the body, but either “the life,” or “the whole person;” because that, although the body only be laid in the grave, yet according to vulgar speech and sense the whole man is said to be buried, and his life seemeth to be inclosed in the grave, according to which popular and humane conceit the prophet in that psalm speaketh ; as appeareth in the latter part of that verse, which is all one in sense with the former, “neither wilt thou give thy holy one to see corruption,” where corruption, which is proper only to the body, is there spoken generally of the whole man. If this exposition please you not, yet you have no cause to find fault with the translation, which in that place is according to the common and ordinary signification of the Greek word Novy”, “soul;” which, as it is some- Act. ii. time taken for the whole person, as you note, Act. vii. 14, so is it here, as the latter part of the verse doth most plainly declare'.

[ocr errors]
« PoprzedniaDalej »