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. 18. If in wordes of ambiguous and diuerse sig∣nification, they will haue it signifie here or there, as it pleaseth them: and that so vehemently, that here it must needes so signi∣fie, and there it must not: and both this, and that, to one ende and in fauour of one and the same opinion: what is this but wilfull translation? So doth Beza vrge 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 to signifie, wife,* 1.1 and not to signifie, wife, both against virginitie and chastitie of Priestes: and the English Bible translateth accordingly. See chap. 15. num. 11. 12.

FVLK. 18. To the generall charge, I answer gene∣rally, we do not as you slaunder vs. Nor Beza whom you shamefully belye, to vrge the worde 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. 1. Cor. 7. v. 1. not to signifie a wife against virginitie, and chastitie of Priestes. For cleane contrariwise, he reproueth Erasmus restraining it to a wife, which the Apostle saith general∣ly: it is good for a man not to touch a woman, which doth not onely conteine a commendation of virginitie in them that be vnmaried, but also of continencie in them that be maried. And as for the virginity or chasti∣tie

of Priestes, he speaketh not one worde of it, in that place, no more than the Apostle doth. Now touching the other place, that you quote. 1. Cor. 9. v. 5. Beza doth truely translate 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, a sister to wife, because the word sister, is first placed, which comprehendeth a woman, and therefore the word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 following, must needes ex∣plicate, what woman he meaneth, namely a wife. For it were absurd to say, a sister a woman. Therfore the vulgar Latine Interpreter, peruerteth the words, & saith: Mulie∣rem sororem. It is true, that many of the auncient fathers, as too much addict to the singlenes of the Clergie, though they did not altogither condemne mariage in them, as the Papists doe: did expound the sister whereof S. Paule speaketh, of certaine rich matrones, which followed the Apostles, whithersoeuer they went & ministred to them of their substance, as we reade that many did to our Sa∣uiour Christ. Math. 27. v. 55. Luc. 8. v. 3. But that expositi∣on can not stand, nor agree with this text for many cau∣ses. First the placing of the wordes, which I haue before spoken of. Secondly this word 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 were needeles, ex∣cept it should signifie a wife: for the word sister signifi∣eth both a woman, & a faithful woman, and otherwise it was not to be doubted, least the Apostle would leade a heathen woman with him. Thirdly the Apostle speaketh of one womā, & not many, wheras there were many that followed our Sauiour Christ, whereas one alone to fol∣low the Apostle, might breede occasion of ill suspition, and offence, which many could not so easily. Fourthly, those that are mentioned in the Gospell, our Sauiour Christ did not leade about, but they did voluntarily fol∣low him: but the Apostle here saith, that he had authori∣tie, as the rest of the Apostles, to leade about a woman, which argueth the right, that an husband hath ouer his wife, or of a maister ouer his maide. Fiftly, it is not all one, if women could trauel out of Galilie to Ierusalem, which was nothing neare an hundred miles; that women could followe the Apostles into all partes of the world.

Sixtly, if the cause why such women are supposed to haue followed the Apostles, was to minister to them of their substance, the leading them about, was not burdenous to the Church, but helpeful: but the Apostle testifieth, that he forbare to vse this libertie, because he would not be burdenous to the Church of Corinth, or to any of them. Seuenthly, seing it is certaine that Peter had a wife, and the rest of the Apostles are by antiquitie reputed to haue bene all maried: It is not credible that Peter, or any of the rest, would leaue the companie of their owne wiues, & leade strange women about with them. As for the ob∣iection that you make in your note vppon the text, to what ende should he talke of burdening the Corinthi∣ans with finding his wife, when he himself cleerely saith, that he was single? I answer, Although I thinke he was single, yet is it not so cleere as you make it, for Clemens Alexandrinus thinketh he had a wife, which he left at Phi∣lippi, by mutual consent. But albeit he were single, it was lawfull for him to haue maried, and Barnabas also, as wel as all the rest of the Apostles. Againe, to what end should he talke of burdening the Church with a woman, which was not his wife, when such women as you say ministred to the Apostles of their goods? Wherby it should follow that none of the Apostles burdened the Churches where they preached with their owne finding, which is cleane contrary to the Apostles wordes and meaning. Where∣fore the translation of Beza, and of our Church, is most true, and free from all corruption.

Notes

• * 1.1

  Beza in ••. Cor. 7. v. 1. & 9. v. 5. Bib. an. 1579.