A defense of the sincere and true translations of the holie Scriptures into the English tong against the manifolde cauils, friuolous quarels, and impudent slaunders of Gregorie Martin, one of the readers of popish diuinitie in the trayterous Seminarie of Rhemes. By William Fvlke D. in Diuinitie, and M. of Pembroke haule in Cambridge. Wherevnto is added a briefe confutation of all such quarrels & cauils, as haue bene of late vttered by diuerse papistes in their English pamphlets, against the writings of the saide William Fvlke.

MART. 33. Seuenthly, that all the English corruptions here noted, and refuted, are either in all or some of their English Bibles printed in these yeares, 1562. 1577. 1579. And if the corruption be in one Bible, not in an other, commonly the sayd Bible or Bibles are noted in the margent: if not, yet sure it is, that it is in one of them, and so the Reader shall find it if he find it not alwaies in his owne Bible. And in this case the Reader must be very wise and circumspect, that he thinke not by and by we charge them falsly, because they can shew him some later edi∣tion

that hath it not so as we say. For it is their common and knowen fashion, not onely in their translations of the Bible, but in their other bookes and writings, to alter and change, adde & put out, in their later editions, according as either them selues are ashamed of the former, or their scholers that print them a∣gaine, dissent and disagree from their Maisters. So hath Lu∣thers, Caluins, and Bezaes writings and translations bene chan∣ged both by them selues, and their scholers, in many places, so that Catholike men when they confute that which they find eui∣dent faults in this or that edition, feare nothing more than that the Reader hath some other edition, where they are corrected for very shame, and so may conceiue that there is no such thing, but that they are accused wrongfully. For example. Call to minde the late pretended conference in the Tower, where that matter* 1.1 was denied and faced out for Luthers credit, by some one booke or edition of his, which them selues, and all the world knoweth, was most truly layd to his charge.

FVLK. 33. First this is vntrue, for some you haue noted in the new Testament, printed 1580. Secondly, it is vncertaine, for two of these translations might be prin∣ted in one yeare, and so I thinke they were. Therefore I know not well which you meane, but I guesse that the Bible 1562. is that which was of Doctor Couerdales tran∣slation, most vsed in the Church seruice in King Edwards time. The Bible 1577. I take to be that, which being re∣uised by diuerse Bishops, was first printed in the large volume, and authorized for the Churches, about tenne or twelue yeares agoe. That of 1579. I knowe not what translation it be, except it be the same that was first prin∣ted at Geneua, in the beginning of the Queenes Maie∣sties Raigne. And this coniecture as the fittest I can make, I must followe, seeing your note of distinction, is as good, as that fond fellowes, that would know his mai∣sters horse by the bridle.

But it is a common and knowen fashion, you say, vsed of vs, that not onely in translations, but in other bookes and writings of ours, we alter and change, adde, and put

to in our later editions. And who vseth not so to doe, if by later cogitations, that often are wiser, he finde any thing meete to be changed? Doe not you Papistes vse the same? Is Bristowes chapter of obedience in his mo∣tiues, nothing altered from the high treason contained in the first edition? Is nothing added, taken away, or changed in your Iesus Psalter, in any of your editions, or are you your selues ashamed of the former? Or haue your schollers presumed to alter their maisters writings? If you may haue an euasion in these cases, I trust we are not so pente in, but we may change our owne writings without shame of the former, or corruption in the la∣ter. As for the example of S. Iames Epistle, denyed (as you saye) and faced out for Luthers credit, will serue you for no proofe. For so farre off is it, that we, or the world doe knowe, that is was moste truly layed to his charge: that nowe we knowe of a certaintie, that it was a very slaunder, as false, as it was common: seeing Luthers wordes of that Epistle, are not absolute, but in comparison, as is confessed by you, and founde by some of vs to be none otherwise in deede, who haue not stoode vpon one onely booke or edition, but vp∣on as many as they could come by, both in the Latine, and in the Dutch tongue.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Touching S. Iames Epistle.