nest or lawful wash:" or "washing:"or Were it ho- No doubt, there can be no other cause, but to avoid both those words, to translate, which are used in the Latin and Greek church, to signify "the saBaptizo, "I craments." For in the Greek church the sacrament of the body Baptismus, and blood itself is called but "a mystery" or "mysteries," which yet Evangelium,, the protestants themselves call a true sacrament. Therefore if they "good news?" yet the words should have called matrimony also by that name, it might easily have profanely taken signify sounded to be a sacrament also. But in saying it is a great secret, they put it out of doubt that it shall not be so taken. no more. FULKE, 3. MARTIN, 4. 1 Tim. iii. Col. i. 26. Eph. iii. 9. Cor. xv. 51. Fulke. Seeing the word "secret" that we use, signifieth wholly as much as "mystery," we hope all reasonable men will allow the same also. "Sacrament" without prejudice to the truth we could not translate; and "mystery," for the better understanding of the people, we have expressed in the English word, "secret;" out of which, if it have any force of argument in it, you may prove matrimony to be a sacrament, as well as out of the Greek word "mystery." But it is the sound of an unknown word, that you had rather play upon in the ears of the ignorant, than by any sound argument out of the scripture to bring them to the knowledge of the truth. Martin. They will say unto me, Is not every sacrament and mystery in English a secret? Yes, as angel is a messenger; and apostle, one that is sent. But when the holy scripture useth these words to signify more excellent and divine things than those of the common sort, doth it become translators to use baser terms instead thereof, and so to disgrace the writing and meaning of the Holy Ghost? I appeal to themselves, when they translate this word in other places, whether they say not thus: "And without doubt, great was the mystery of godliness; God was shewed manifestly in the flesh, &c." again, "The mystery which hath been hid since the world began, but now is opened to his saints;” again, " I shew you a mystery, we shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed." And the like. Where if they should translate "secret," instead of "mystery," as the Bezites do in one of these places, saying, "I will shew you a secret thing;" what a disgracing and debasing were it to those high mysteries there signified? And if it were so in these, is it not so in "matrimony," which the apostle maketh such a mystery, that it representeth no less matter than Christ and his church, and whatsoever is most excellent in that conjunction? Now then, if in all other places of high mystery they translate it also "mystery," as it is in the Greek; and only in "matrimony" do not so, but say rather, "This is a great secret," using so base a term in so high and excellent a mystery; must we not needs think, (as no doubt it is,) that they do it because of their heretical opinion against the sacrament of matrimony, and for their base estimation thereof? Fulke. Now you fly to your old shift of the ecclesias- FULKE, 4. tical use of terms, which you cannot prove to be like, of this English word "mystery," which is commonly as profanely and secularly used as any other word. For what is more common among artificers, than their science or mystery of weaving, of dyeing, and such like? And yet the word may be used of the highest secrets of christian religion, as it is of our translators. And wheresoever they have said "a mystery," they might as truly have said "a secret;" and where they say "a secret," they might have said "a mystery." But where you say, that "in all other places of high mystery they translate the word 'mystery,'" it is false. For Matt. xiii. Mark iv. Luke viii., where all the mysteries of the kingdom of God are spoken of, they translate mysteria "the secrets. of the kingdom of heaven;" and 1 Cor. iv., where the sacraments and all other secrets of the christian religion are spoken of, they translate uvoτnpiwv "stewards of the mysteries of God." Wherefore it is a shameful and senseless slander that here only we use this word "secret," to shew our base estimation of matrimony. Martin. But they will yet reply again, and ask us, what we gain MARTIN, 5. by translating it either "sacrament," or "mystery?" Doth that make it one of the sacraments properly so called, to wit, such a sacrament as baptism is? No, surely; but howsoever we gain otherwise, at least we gain the commendation of true translators, whether it make with us or against us. For otherwise it is not the name that maketh it such a peculiar sacrament. For, (as is said before,) sacrament is a general name in scripture to other things. Neither do we therefore so translate it, as though it were forthwith one of the seven sacraments, because of the name: but as in other places, wheresoever we find this word in the Latin, we translate it "sacrament", (as in the apocalypse, "the sacrament of the woman";) so finding it here, Apoc. xvii. we do here also so translate it: and as for the diverse taking of it here and elsewhere, that we examine otherwise, by circumstance of the text, and by the church's and doctors' interpretation; and we find that here it is taken for "a sacrament" in that sense as we say, "seven sacraments:" not so in the other places. Fulke. No reasonable man can charge us to be false FULKE, 5. translators, when we turn the Greek word into that which it MARTIN, 6. Jude, 4. Acts vii. 45. FULKE, 6. doth generally, properly, and always signify. And for all your bragging of sincere translating, if you should translate Tob. xii. I am persuaded you would not say, "it is a good thing to hide the king's sacrament:" yet is the Latin word in that place sacramentum, and the Greek uvoτýptov. But it is sufficient for you to have a shadow of something to find yourself occupied, rather than you would be saying of nothing. Martin. As when we read this name "Jesus" in scripture common to our Saviour and to other men, we translate it always alike "Jesus;" but when it is "Jesus Christ," and when some other "Jesus," we know by other circumstances. Likewise presuppose baptism in the scripture were called "a sacrament:" yet the protestants themselves would not, nor could thereby conclude, that it were one of their two sacraments: yet I trow they would not avoid to translate it by the word "sacrament," if they found it so called. Even so we, finding matrimony" so called, do so translate it, neither concluding thereby that it is one of the seven, nor yet suppressing the name, which no doubt gave some occasion to the church and the holy doctors to esteem it as one of the seven. They contrariwise, as though it were never so called, suppress the name altogether, calling it "a secret," to put it out of all question, that it is no sacrament: which they would not have done, if the scripture had said of baptism or the eucharist, "This is a great sacrament." So partial they are to their own opinions. cr Fulke. Except you thought you had to do with very ignorant persons, or else esteemed too much of your lately professed divinity, you would never cumber the reader with such childish trifles of the name of Jesus, of the bare name of sacrament, which could not prove baptism or the Lord's supper to be sacraments, &c., and what we would do if we found them so called, &c. I have already told you what we have done, where not only the sacraments, but all other precious jewels of Christ's church, committed to the dispensation of his ministers, are called μvoτnpia, and translated "secrets," without any abasement of the dignity of them, or without any intent to suppress any of the honour and reverence which is due unto them. Wherefore, using the word "secret" in this text, we had no purpose to derogate anything from the worthiness of matrimony, much less from the spiritual mystery which the apostle offereth to be considered by it in Christ and his church. CHAPTER XVII. Heretical Translations against the blessed Sacrament, and other σας. 1577. Martin. Now let us see concerning the eucharist, which they allow MARTIN, 1. for a sacrament, how they handle the matter to the disgracing and defacing of the same also. They take away the operation and efficacy of Christ's blessing pronounced upon the bread and wine, making it evλoynoas. only a thanksgiving to God: and to this purpose they translate more εὐχαριστή gladly "thanksgiving," than "blessing;" as Matt. xxvi. the Greek Bib. 1562. words being two, the one signifying properly "to bless," the "to give thanks," they translate both thus, "when he had given Great differthanks'." Likewise Mark xiv. in the bible printed 1562. And when scriptures they translate it " blessing," they mean nothing else but "giving "blessing," thanks," as Beza telleth us in his annotations, Matt. xxvi. 26. We and " reply, and by most manifest scripture prove unto them, that the former Greek word doth not signify "thanksgiving" properly, but "blessing," and a blessing of creatures to the operation of some great effect in them as when Christ took the five loaves and two fishes, to multiply Benedixit eis, them, he blessed them, Luke ix. What say they to this, think Matt. xxvi. 26. [' λαβὼν ὁ Ἰησοῦς τὸν ἄρτον, καὶ εὐχαριστήσας, "Accepit Jesus panem, et benedixit, et fregit," Vulg. panem; et quum benedixisset, fregit," Beza. "Jesus took bread and blessed and brake," Wiclif. "Jesus took bread, and gave thanks, brake it, and said," Tyndale, Geneva. "Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake it," Cranmer. Jesus took bread, and blessed, and brake," Rheims. "Jesus took bread, and blessed it, and brake it," Authorised version. λαβὼν ὁ Ἰησοῦς ἄρτον εὐλογήσας ἔκλασε, Marc. xiv. 22. "Accepit Jesus panem; et benedicens fregit," Vulg. "Quum accepisset Jesus panem, et benedixisset, fregit." "Jesus took bread and blessed and brake," Wiclif, Tyndale. "Jesus took bread, and when he had given thanks, he brake it," Cranmer. "Jesus took bread, blessed, brake, and gave to them," Geneva. "Jesus took bread, and blessing brake, and gave to them," Rheims. "Jesus took bread, and blessed and brake it,' Authorised version.] [· εὐλόγησεν αὐτοὺς, Luc. ix. 16. "Blessed," all the versions. λaßov TÒν aρTоv Evλóynoe, Luc. xxiv. 30. "He took bread and blessed," Wiclif, Rheims. "He took bread and blessed it," Cranmer, Authorised version. 'He took bread, blessed it," Tyndale, Geneva. ἔλαβε δὲ τοὺς ἄρτους ὁ Ἰησοῦς, καὶ εὐχαριστήσας διέδωκε τοῖς μαθη [FULKE.] 32 ence in the between giving of thanks.' εὐλόγησεν αὐτούς. Annot. in Luke ix. 16. FULKE, 1. you? Doth not the Greek word here plainly signify, "blessing of creatures?" "No," saith Beza, "no doubt but here also it signifieth giving thanks." How, Beza? He addeth, "Not as though Christ had given thanks to the bread, for that were too absurd: but we must mollify this interpretation thus, that he gave thanks to God the Father for the loaves and the fishes." Is not this a notable exposition of these words, benedixit eis? case. Fulke. The sacrament of the body and blood of Christ being a matter of some great weight and controversy between us, you might not omit but note our false translations against it. But because we have dealt so sincerely as malice hath nothing to blame therein, you must feign a quarrel and forge a controversy, where none is between us, namely, that we take away Christ's blessing pronounced upon the bread and wine, making it only a thanksgiving unto God: which is a false and impudent slander, as in that which followeth concerning this matter most plainly shall appear, even by testimony of him whom you do most slander in this But let us see what fault is in our translation, Matt. xxvi. and Mark xiv. Two of our translations for evλoynoas say, "when he had given thanks." To this I answer, that Beza telleth you that in seven Greek copies the word is euxapioτnoas, which signifieth "giving of thanks," without controversy; as also evλoynoas doth, but not only so, expressing rather the Hebrew word 772, which signifieth both "to bless and to give thanks." But seeing Saint Luke and Saint Paul, reporting the institution of the supper, do use the word euxapioτnoas, which signifieth "giving of thanks;" we count them the best interpreters of the other two evange lists, which plainly teach us that by "blessing" they mean "giving of thanks," or that the Greek word doth here signify "giving of thanks," as in many other places. The place, Luke ix., where Christ blessed the loaves, is also interpreted by St John, who reporting the same miracle (as Beza sheweth) useth the word which signifieth only thanksgiving: but because evλóynoev is in Luke used as a verb transitive, which cannot signify thanksgiving or prayer made Taîs, John vi. 11. "Jesus therefore took the loaves, and when he had given thanks, he distributed to them that sat," Rheims. We find the Rhemish version translating in Matt. xxvi. 26. exapiotηoas, "blessed it," in John vi. 11. " and when he had given thanks."] |