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. 5. And here I appeale to all that haue skill in Greeke speaches and Phrases, whether the Apostles wordes in Greeke sounde not thus: I laboured more aboundantly than all they: yet not I, but the grace of God (that la∣boured) with mee. Vnderstanding not the participle of Sum, but of the verbe going before, as in the like case when our Sauiour saith, It is not you that speake, but the ho∣ly Ghost that speaketh in you. If he had spoken short thus, but the holy Ghost in you, you perhaps would translate as you doe here, the holy Ghost WHICH IS IN YOV. But you see the verbe going before is rather repeated, Not you speake, but the holy Ghost THAT SPEAKETH IN YOV. Euen so, Not I laboured, but the grace of God labouring with me, or, WHICH LABOVRED WITH ME. So praieth the wise man Sap. 9, 10. Sende wisedome out of thy holy heauens, that she may be with me, and labour with me as your selues translate. Bib. 1577.

FVLK. 5. And I likewise appeale not onely to all

that haue skill in Greeke speaches and phrases: but to al them whose eares are accustomed to reasonable speachs, whether it be like that the Apostle would vnderstande that participle, whereof (perhaps) there is no verbe, for where shall we reade 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉? Secondly whether hee would vnderstand the participle of an other verbe adie∣ctiue, than wēt before, for before he said 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Third∣ly, whether hee were so desirous to set forth his owne cooperation with the grace of God, that he woulde ex∣presse it with two prepositions, one in apposition, the o∣ther in composition. Fourthly, whether he meant to at∣tribute any thing to him selfe, whē, as it were correcting that which he saide of labouring, he saith, yet not I, but the grace of God. Fifthly, whether he purposed to chal∣lenge any merite of the labour to him selfe, or make his labour any thing separate or separable frō the grace of God, when he said before, by the grace of God I am that I am. Laste of all whether his wordes being resolued, if this participle be added, they conteyne not a ridiculous tautologie, or vaine repetition. I haue laboured more than they all, vet not I, but the grace of God which la∣boured togither with mee hath laboured. To con∣clude in your example which you faine. Because you can finde none to answere your fansie: if the wordes were as you suppose 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, wee would and muste if wee did well, translate it thus. It is not you that speake but the holy Ghost. which is in you, and so vnderstand, spea∣keth. The saying of Philo, or what so euer eloquent Iewe that was, whiche gathered that booke of wise∣dome, is not of such importaunce, that wee neede to seeke any interpretation thereof, although it is cer∣taine, that by wisedome, hee meaneth not the Sonne of God, the wisedome of the Father, but diuine know∣ledge and vnderstanding, which is a gifte of his spirite, whereof hee speaketh by a rhetoricall Prosopopoea, or fi∣ction of person.

Notes

• 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 (〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 &c.) 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• Et mecum labo∣ret.