thereby when you do exemplify it in special, you shall easily be answered: in the meantime, it is sufficient to deny generally, that wherewith you so generally charge us, that we have in places of controversy translated anything falsely. If one word be otherwise translated in any place of controversy, than it is in other places out of controversy, there may be rendered sufficient reason of that variety, without that it must needs come of partiality to the matter in controversy, but rather of love of the truth, which in all matters of question between us is confirmed by plain text of scriptures, or necessary collection out of the same; so that if the translation in those places were the same that yours is, of the New Testament, it should neither hinder our truth, nor fortify your error. As for small faults and oversights, reason it is (as you say) they should be pardoned on both sides.

Martin. If, as in their opinions and heresies they forsake the an- MARTIN, 3. cient fathers, so also in their translations they go from that text and ancient reading of holy scriptures, which all the fathers used and expounded; is it not plain that their translation followeth the vein and humour of their heresy? And again, if they that so abhor from the ancient expositions of the fathers, yet, if it seem to serve for them, stick not to make the exposition of any one doctor the very text of holy scripture ; what is this but heretical wilfulness? See this, chap. i. numb. 43. chap. x. numb. 1, 2. chap. xviii. numb. 10, 11. and chap. xix. numb. 1.

Fulke. We never go from that text and ancient reading, FULKE, 3. which all the fathers used and expounded; but we translate that most usual text, which was first printed out of the most ancient copies that could be found; and if any be since found, or if any of the ancient fathers did read otherwise than the usual copies, in any word that is any way material, in annotation, commentaries, readings, and sermons, we spare not to declare it as occasion serveth: but that we "stick not to make the exposition of any one doctor the very text of holy scripture," it is a very heinous slander, neither can it be proved in any of the places of your book, which you quote for that purpose.

Martin. Again, if they that profess to translate the Hebrew and MARTIN, 4. Greek, and that because it maketh more for them (as they say), and therefore in all conferences and disputations appeal unto it as to the fountain and touchstone, if they (I say) in translating places of controversy flee from the Hebrew and the Greek; it is a most certain argu

ment of wilful corruption. This is done many ways, and is to be observed also throughout the whole bible, and in all this book.

FULKE, 4. Fulke. We never flee from the Hebrew and Greek in any place, much less in places of controversy; but we always hold, as near as we can, that which the Greek and Hebrew signifieth. But if in places of controversy we take witness of the Greek or vulgar Latin, where the Hebrew or Greek may be thought ambiguous; I trust no wise man will count this a flight from the Hebrew and Greek, which we always translate aright, whether it agree with the Seventy or vulgar Latin, or no.

MARTIN, 5.

τρεία. εἰδωλολά

Martin. If the Greek be idololatria and idololatra, and they transeldwλoλa- late not idolatry and idolater, but, worshipping of images, and worshipper of images; and that so absurdly, that they make the apostle say, 'covetousness is worshipping of images;' this none would do but fools or madmen, unless it were of purpose against sacred images. See chap. iii. Bib. an. 1577. numb. 1, 2.

τρης. Eph. v. Col. iii.

FULKE, 5. Fulke. If the Greek words do signify as we translate, (as hath been often proved,) who but a wrangling quarreller would find fault therewith, except it were to maintain idolatry, or worshipping of images, which before God and all wise men of the world is all one? And where you say, none but fools or madmen would translate, Ep. v. Col. iii., "covetousness is worshipping of images;" I pray you, in whether order will you place Isidorus Clarius, of a monk of Casinas made bishop Fulginas, which in the third to the Colossians upon your vulgar Latin text, (which according to the Greek calleth idololatria, simulacrorum servitus, the service of images,) in his notes. upon the place writeth this: Præter cetera peccata avaritia peculiare hoc nomen assecuta est, ut dicatur esse (horrendum nomen) cultus simulacrorum. Nam pecunia quid aliud est quam simulacrum quoddam, vel argenteum vel aureum, quod homines avari plus amant, et longe majore cultu atque honore prosequuntur, quam ipsum Deum? "Above other sins,

[The translations of Tyndale 1534, Cranmer 1539, and Bishops' Bible 1584, render Ephes. v. 5. ős éσti eidwλodátpηs, “which is a worshipper of images." The Geneva versions 1557, 1560, have it the same as the Authorised version of 1611, "which is an idolater.” The Vulgate has, "quod est idolorum servitus."]

[ Critici Sacri. vii. 284.]

covetousness hath obtained this peculiar name, that it is called (which is an horrible name) the worshipping of images; for what other thing is money but a certain image, either of silver or gold, which covetous men do love more, and prosecute with far greater worship and honour, than they do God himself?" Or, if you make no count of Isidorus Clarius, in what degree will you account the deputies of the council of Trent3, whose severe censure this note hath escaped? of fools, or of madmen, or of enemies to sacred images? Yea, how will you excuse your own vulgar Latin translation, which turneth idololatria out of Greek into simulacrorum servitus, "the service or worship of images"? I am not so unaquainted with your shameless shifts, but I know right well that you will say, this Latin word simulacrum signifieth a false image, or an idol that is worshipped as God; for nothing else you will acknowledge to be an idol. But who shall better tell us what the Latin word simulacrum doth signify, than the father of eloquence in the Latin tongue, even Tully himself, who in his oration pro Archia poeta useth simulacrum for the same that statua and imago? Speaking of the cunning image-makers of Greece, he saith, Statua et imagines non animorum simulacra sunt, sed corporum: "standing images and other images are not similitudes or images of the minds, but of the bodies." And in his accusation of Verres he nameth effigies simulacrumque Mithridatis, "the shape and image of Mithridates." In his second book De Inventione he sheweth that Zeuxis, that famous painter, did paint the image of Helena: ut excellentem muliebris forma pulchritudinem muta in sese imago contineret, Helena se pingere velle simulacrum dixit. “That a dumb image might contain in it the excellent beauty of a woman's form, he said he would paint the similitude or image of Helena." Also in his familiar epistles, Epist. lxviii., Illi artifices corporis simulacra ignotis nota faciebant: "those workmen did make the images of the bodies known to them that knew them not." And so commonly he useth simulacrum justitiæ, virtutis, civitatis, for the image or similitude of justice, of virtue, of a city or commonwealth, &c. And so do other good Latin writers, as well as he, use the word simulacrum, not only for an image

[The deputies who took off the interdiction pronounced on the edition of 1542.]

cultu. lib. 6.

cap. 43.

De orig. error. lib. 2. cap. 2.

that is religiously worshipped, but even generally for any image, and in the same signification that they use the word imago. But peradventure ecclesiastical writers use the word simulacrum only for idols forbidden; and I perhaps shall be chidden of Martin for citing testimonies out of profane authors, to know the use of ecclesiastical terms. Let us see then what christian writers say to this matter, and how they use this word simulacrum. You yourselves say we may not translate that verse of Genesis, "God made man after his idol." De vero Dei But Lactantius1 calleth men viventia Dei simulacra, “living images of God," which we ought to garnish rather than simulacra insensibilia Deorum, "the senseless images of the Gods," which the heathen garnished: yea, he hath a whole chapter, intituled, De simulacris et vero Dei simulacro et cultu, "Of images and of the true image and worship of God"; in which also he sheweth that simulacrum is called of similitude and therefore the heathenish idols, having no resemblance of God, cannot properly be called simulacra. St Ambrose, another writer of the church, upon 1 Cor. x., upon that text, Non quia simulacrum est aliquid, &c., “not that the image is anything" (the Greek is idolum :) Simulacrum vere nihil est, quia imago videtur rei mortua: "The image or idol is indeed nothing, because it seemeth to be an image of a dead thing." Also upon the 45th psalm: "God was high in the patriarchs and prophets, which did not compare him imaginibus terrenis et simulacris scrupeis3, to images or similitudes of the earth and stone." Tertullian also, a Latin writer, in his book De Spectaculis, speaking of cunning workmanship of imagery, shewed in those plays, and the authors of them, saith: Scimus enim nihil esse nomina mortuorum, sicut nec ipsa simulacra eorum : we know that the names of those dead men are nothing, as also their images.'

66

4

[Nam si deorum cultores simulacra insensibilia excolunt, et quidquid pretiosi habent, in ea conferunt, quibus nec uti possunt, nec gratias agere, quod acceperint; quanto justius est et verius, viventia Dei simulacra excolere, ut promereare viventem? Lactantii De vero Cultu, Lib. vi. cap. 13. Opera, Vol. 1. p. 472. edit. Dufresnoy, Lutet. Paris. 1748.]

[Simulacrum vere nihil est, quia imago videtur rei mortuæ: sed sub tegmine simulacrorum diabolus colitur. Ambros. Op. Vol. 11. p. 145.] [ In Psal. XLV. Enarratio, prop. fin.]

[Tertullianus de Spectaculis, p. 15. edit. Rigalt. 1634.]

Afterward to their names, nominibus, he joineth imaginibus, to shew that simulacra and imagines are all one, which of Christians at that time were greatly abhorred in detestation. of idolatry. St Augustine' calleth the same simulacra, which before he called imagines: Cum ex desiderio mortuorum constituerentur imagines, unde simulacrorum usus exortus est: "when for desire of the dead images were made, whereof the use of images came, through flattery, divine honour was given unto them." And so they brought in idolatry, or the worshipping of images. The same Augustine', in his book Octoginta Quæstion., in the seventy-eighth question, which is intituled De simulacrorum pulchritudine, "of the beauty of images," ascribeth to God the cunning by which they are made beautiful. And in his questions upon the book of Judges, lib. vii. cap. 41, inquiring how Gideon's ephod was a cause of fornication to the people, when it was no idol', he

[Non igitur mirum est, si prævaricatores angeli, quorum duo maxima vitia sunt superbia atque fallacia, per hunc aerem volitantes, quod uni vero Deo deberi noverant, hoc sibi a suis cultoribus exegerunt, a quibus dii putari voluerunt, dante sibi locum vanitate cordis humani: maxime cum ex desiderio mortuorum constituerentur imagines, unde simulacrorum usus exortus est. Augustini Contra Faustum. Lib. xx. cap. 17. Opera, Vol. ví. p. 577. edit. Paris. 1837.]

[Ars illa summa omnipotentis Dei, per quam ex nihilo facta sunt omnia, quæ etiam sapientia ejus dicitur, ipsa operatur etiam per artifices, ut pulchra atque congruentia faciant; quamvis non de nihilo, sed de aliqua materia operentur, velut ligno, aut marmore, aut ebore, et si quod aliud materiæ genus manibus artificis subditur. Sed ideo isti non possunt de nihilo aliquid fabricare, quia per corpus operantur, cum tamen eos numeros et lineamentorum convenientiam, quæ per corpus corpori imprimunt, in animo accipiant ab illa summa sapientia, quæ ipsos numeros et ipsam convenientiam longe artificiosius universo mundi corpori impressit, quod de nihilo fabricatum est; in quo sunt etiam corpora animalium, quæ jam de aliquo, id est, de elementis mundi fabricantur, sed longe potentius excellentiusque, quam cum artifices homines easdem figuras corporum et formas in suis operibus imitantur. Augustini Liber de diversis Quæstionibus, LXXVIII. Vol. vi. p. 125.]

[Hoc ergo illicitum cum fecisset Gedeon, fornicatus est post illud omnis Israel, id est, sequendo illud contra legem Dei: ubi non frustra quæritur, cum idolum non fuerit, id est, cujusquam Dei falsi et alieni simulacrum, sed ephud, id est, unum de sacramentis tabernaculi quod ad vestem sacerdotalem pertineret, quomodo fornicationem scriptura dicat populi ista sectantis atque venerantis. Augustini Quæstiones in Judices, XLI. Vol. I. p. 939.]