Such doth Howlett charge us withal. it may appear; yet, that it might seem new, and a sudden piece of work compiled with small study, you thought good by carping at my confutation of Howlet1 last made, and of M. Whitaker's work, set forth later than it, as it were by setting on new ears upon your old pot, to make it seem to be a new vessel. And first of all, you would seem to have taken occasion of my confident speech in my confutation of Howlet's nine reasons, in rehearsing whereof you use such fidelity as commonly papists used to bear towards God, the church, your prince, and your country. For what face soever I set upon the matter, with a whorish forehead and a brasen face you make report of my saying; which, being testified by a thousand copies printed, as it were by so many witnesses, doth cry out upon your falsehood and injurious dealing. For my words, out of the place by you quoted against Howlet, are these: "That some error may be in translation (although by you it cannot be shewed) I will not deny; but that any shameless translations, or wilful corruptions, can be found of purpose to draw the scriptures to any heretical which Fulke rejoined the following year, in his book entitled A rejoinder to Bristow's Replie in defence of Allen's Scroll of Articles and Booke of Purgatorie, &c. 1581. p. 792. Wood's Athenæ, Vol. 1. pp. 482-484.] [The Howlet here referred to was Persons the Jesuit, who published under this name a treatise, entitled A brief Discourse, containing the reasons why Catholics refuse to go to Church. Doway, 1580. It was answered the same year, in A Check to Mr Howlet's Screechings to her Majesty, (Wood's Athenæ, Vol. v. pp. 68, 69.;) and in a Caveat for Parson Howlet, 1581, (Hartshorne's Book Rarities of Cambridge, p. 442;) and also by Fulke, in Howlet's Nine Reasons; and seems to be the same book as the one just mentioned. Wood's Athenæ, Vol. 11. p. 60, and Possevinus in Apparat. Sacr. Vol. 11., under Robert Persons.] [ Whitaker, a learned divine, and Master of St John's College, Cambridge: the able antagonist of Cardinal Bellarmine, Stapleton, Campian, Saunders, Rainolds, &c. He died in 1595.] [3 "A briefe confutation of a Papist Discourse: lately set forth, and presumptuously dedicated to the Queen's most excellent Majestie: by John Howlet, or some other birde of the night, under that name, contayning certaine Reasons, why Papistes refuse to come to Church, which reasons are here inserted and set downe at large, with their several answers. By D. Fulke, Maister of Pembroke Hall, in Cambridge. Seene and allowed. At London, printed for George Byshop, 1581. qto. b. l. 58 leaves."] opinion, all the papists in the world shall never be able to make demonstration." This was my saying, and I repeat it again with as great confidence as before; yea, and with much greater too, forasmuch as all the papists in the seminary, having now beaten their heads together to find out "shameless translations and wilful corruptions of purpose to maintain heresies," can find nothing but old frivolous quarrels answered long before, or new trifling cavils, not worthy indeed of any learned man's answer, but for satisfying of the simple and ignorant. How this my saying differeth from your slanderous report, I trust every reasonable papist that will take pains to confer them together, will be enforced to acknowledge. For where I say "shameless translations and wilful corruptions," (as Howlet chargeth us), you report me to say "mistranslated;" although in plain words I did confess that there might be some errors even in the best and perfectest of our translations. For to translate out of one tongue into another is a matter of greater difficulty than it is commonly taken, I mean exactly to yield as much and no more than the original containeth, when the words and phrases are so different, that few are found which in all points signify the same thing, neither more nor less, in divers tongues. Wherefore, notwithstanding any translation that can be made, the knowledge of the tongues is necessary in the church, for the perfect discussing of the sense and meaning of the holy scriptures. Now, if some of our translators, or they all, have not attained to the best and most proper expressing of the nature of all words and phrases of the Hebrew and Greek tongues in English, it is not the matter that I will stand to defend, nor the translators themselves, I am well assured, if they were all living but that the scriptures are not impudently falsified or wilfully corrupted by them, to maintain any heretical opinion, as the adversary chargeth us, that is the thing that I will (by God's grace) stand to defend against all the papists in the world. And this end you have falsely and fraudulently omitted in reporting my saying, whereupon dependeth the chief, yea, the whole matter of my assertion. You play manifestly with us the lewd part of Procrustes, the thievish host, which would make his guests' stature equal with his bed's, either by stretching them out if they were too short, or by cutting off their legs if they were too long. So [PULKE.] 7 MARTIN, 2. Evident marks or wilful cor ruptions in translating. if our sayings be too short for your purpose, you strain them Martin. The first mark and most general is: If they translate elsewhere not amiss, and in places of controversy between them and us most signs to know falsely; it is an evident argument that they do it not of negligence, or ignorance, but of partiality to the matter in controversy. This is to be seen through the whole bible, where the faults of their translations are altogether, or specially, in those scriptures that concern the causes in question between us. For other small faults, or rather oversights, we will no further note unto them, than to the end that they may the more easily pardon us the like, if they find them. FULKE, 2. Fulke. This mark is too general to know anything 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 transelowλola- 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. ös éστw eidwλodáтpns, "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.] |