A discouerie of the manifold corruptions of the Holy Scriptures by the heretikes of our daies specially the English sectaries, and of their foule dealing herein, by partial & false translations to the aduantage of their heresies, in their English Bibles vsed and authorised since the time of schisme. By Gregory Martin one of the readers of diuinitie in the English College of Rhemes.

CHAP. VI. Heretical translation against PRIEST and PRIESTHOD.

1 BVT because it may be, they vvill stand here vpon their later trans∣lations, vvhich haue the name Church, (because by that time they savv the absurditie of changing the name, & now their number vvas increased, & thēselues began to chalēge to be the true Church, though not the Catholike: and for former times vvhen they vvere not, they deuised an inuisible Church) If then they vvill stand vpon their later trāslations, and refuse to iustifie the former: let vs demaund of them concerning al their English trans∣lations, vvhy and to vvhat end they sup∣presse the name Priest, translating it Elder, in al places vvhere the holy Scripture vvould signifie by Presbyter and Presbyterium, the Priests and Priesthod of the nevv Testament?

2 Vnderstand gentle Reader, their vvylie pollicie therein is this. To take avvay the holy sacrifice of the Masse, they take avvay both altar and Priest, because they knovv right vvell that these three (Priest, sacrifice, and altar) are dependents and consequents one of an other, so that they can not be se∣parated. If there be an external sacrifice,

there must be an external Priesthod to offer it, an altar to offer the same vpon. so had the Gentiles their sacrifices, Priests, and altars: so had the Ievves: so Christ him self being a Priest according to the order of Melchisedec, had a sacrifice, his body: and an altar, his Crosse: vpon the vvhich he of∣fered it. And because he instituted this sa∣crifice to continue in his Church for euer in commemoration and representation of his death, therfore did he vvithal ordaine his Apostles Priests at his last supper, there & then instituted the holy order of Priest∣hod and Priests (saying, hocfacite, Doe this:* 1.1) to offer the self same sacrifice in a mystical and vnblouddy maner, vntil the vvorldes end.

3 To defeate al this and to take avvay all external Priesthod and sacrifice, they by corrupt translation of the holy Scriptures, make them cleane dumme as though they had not a word of any such Priests or Priest∣hod as vve speake of. Their Bibles (vve graunt) haue the name of Priests very often, but that is vvhen mention is made either of the Priests of the Ievves, or of the Priests of the Gentiles (specially vvhen they are re∣prehended and blamed in the holy Scrip∣tures) and in such places our Aduersaries haue the name Priests in there translations

to make the very name of Priest odious amonge the common ignorant people. Againe they haue also the name Priests, vvhen they are taken for all maner of men, vvomen, or children, that offer internal and spiritual sacrifices, vvhereby our Aduersa∣ries vvould falsely signifie that there are no other Priests,* 1.2 as one of them of late freshly auoucheth, directly against S. Augustine, vvho in one breife sentence distinguisheth Priests proprely so called in the Church, and Priests as it is a common name to al Christians. Lib. 20 de Ciuit. Dei cap. 10. This name then of Priest & Priesthod pro∣prely so called (as S. Augustine faith, which is an order distinct from the laitie & vulgar people, ordained to offer Christ in an vn∣bloudy maner in sacrifice to his heauenly father for vs, to preach and minister the Sa∣craments, & to be the Pastors of the people) they vvholy suppresse in their translations, and in al places vvhere the holy Scripture calleth them, Presbyteros, there they neuer translate Priests, but Elders. and that they do obserue so duely and so vvarily and vvith so full and generall consent in al their En∣glish Bibles as the Puritans do plainely cō∣fesse,* 1.3 & M. vvhitgift denieth it not, that a man vvould vvonder to see hovv carefull they are, that the people may not once heare

the name of any such Priest in all the holy Scriptures.

4 As for example in theire translations. vvhen there fel a questiō about circūcision, They determined that Paul and Barnabas should goe vp to Hierusalem vnto the Apostles and ELDERS,* 1.4 about this question. Act. 15. And againe, They vvere receiued of the* 1.5 congregation and of the Apostles and ELDERS. Againe, The Apostles & Elders came together to reason of this matter. Againe, Then pleased it the Apostles and Elders vvith the vvhole cōgregation to send &c. Againe, The Apostles and Elders and brethren send greating &c. Againe, They deliuered them the decrees for to keepe, that vvere ordained of the Apostles and ELDERS.* 1.6 If in al these places they had translated Priests (as in deede they should haue done according to the Greeke vvord) it had then disaduanta∣ged them this much, that men vvould haue thought, both the dignitie of Priests to be great, & also their authoritie in Councels, as being here ioyned vvith the Apostles, to be greatly reuerenced & obeied. To keepe the people from all such holy and reuerent cogitatiōs of Priests, they put Elders, a name vvherevvith our holy Christian forefa∣thers eares vvere neuer acquainted, in that sense.

5 But let vs goe forvvard. Vve haue heard often & of old time, of making of Priests: and of late yeres also, of making Ministers: but did ye euer heare in al England of ma∣king

Elders? Yet by these mens translations it hath been in England a phrase of Scrip∣ture this thirtie yere: but it must needes be very strāge, that this making of elders hath not al this vvhile been practised & knovvē, no not among them selues in any of their churches vvithin the realme of England. To Titus they make the Apostle say thus,* 1.7 For this cause left I thee in Creta, that thou shouldest or∣daine ELDERS in euery citie,* 1.8 &c. Againe of Paul and Barnabas: Vvhen they had ordained Elders by election, in euery* 1.9 congregation. Act. 14. If they had said plainely as it is in the Greeke, & as our forefathers vvere vvont to speake, and the truth is: Titus vvas leaft in Creta to ordaine Priests in euery citie: and, Paul and Barnabas made Priests in euery Church: then the people vvould haue vnderstood them: they know such speaches of old, and it had been their ioy and com∣fort to heare it specified in holy Scriptures. Novv they are told another thing, in such nevvnesse of speaches and vvordes, of El∣ders to be made in euery citie & congrega∣tion, and yet not one citie nor cōgregation to haue any Elders in all England, that vve knovv not vvhat is prophane noueltie of vvordes,* 1.10 vvhich the Apostle vvilleth to be auoided, if this be not an exceding profane noueltie.

6 That it is noueltie to all English Chri∣stian eares, it is euident. And it is also pro∣fane,

because they do so English the Greeke vvord of ordaining (for of the vvord Presby∣ter vve vvill speake more anone) as if they should trāslate Demosthenes,* 1.11 or the lawes of Athens concerning their choosing of Magistrates, vvhich vvas by giuing voices vvith liftīg vp their hands. so do they force this vvord here, to induce the peoples e∣lection, & yet in their churches in Englād the people elect not ministers, but their bishop. vvhereas the holy Scripture saith,* 1.12 they ordained to the people: and vvhat∣soeuer force the vvord hath, it is here spo∣ken of the Apostles, and pertaineth not to the people,* 1.13 and therfore in the place to Ti∣tus it is another vvord vvhich cannot be forced further, then to ordaine & appoint. And they might knovv (if malice and He∣resie vvould suffer them to see and confesse it) that the holy Scriptures, and fathers, and Ecclesiastical custome, hath dravven this & the like wordes from their profane & com∣mon signification, to a more peculiar and Ecclesiastical speache: as Episcopus, an ouerseer in Tullie, is a Bishop in the nevv Te∣stament.

7 And concerning 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 vvhich vve novv speake of, S. Hierom telleth them (in c. 58. Esai.) that it signifieth Clericorum ordina∣tionem, that is, geuing of holy orders, vvhich is done

not onely by praier of the voice,* 1.14 but by imposition of the hand: according to S. Paul vnto Timothee, Manus citò nemini imposueris. Impose or put hands quickly on no man that is, be not hastie or easie to giue ho∣ly orders. Where these great etymologistes, that so straine the original nature of this vvord to profane stretching forth the hand in elections, may learne an other Ecclesia∣stical etymologie thereof, as proper and as vvel deduced of the vvord as the other, to vvit, putting forth the hand to giue orders: & so they shal finde it is al one with that vvhich the Apostle calleth imposition of hands, 1 Tim. 4. 2 Tim. 1: and consequently, for, ordai∣ning Elders by election, they should haue said, or∣daining or making Priests by imposition of hands: as els vvhere S. Paul, 1 Tim. 5. and the Actes of the Apostles (Act. 6. and 13.) do speake in the ordaining of the seuen Deacons and of SS. Paul and Barnabas.

8 But they are so profane and secular, that they translate the Greeke vvord 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in al the nevv Testament, as if it had the old profane signification still, & vvere indifferent to signifie the auncients of the Ievves, the Senatours of Rome, the elders of Lacedemonia, and the Christian Clergie. in so much that they say,* 1.15 Paul sent to Ephesus, and called the Elders of the Church: Act. 20, and yet they vvere such as had their flockes, & cure

of soules, as follovveth in the same place. They make S. Paul speake thus to Timo∣thee,* 1.16 Neglect not the gift (so they had rather say then grace,* 1.17 lest holy orders should be a Sa∣crament) giuen thee vvith the laying on of the hands of the Eldership. or, by the authoritie of the Eldership. 1 Tim. 4.* 1.18 Vvhat is this companie of Elder∣ship? Somevvhat they vvould say like to the Apostles word, but they vvil not speake plainely, lest the vvorld might heare out of the Scriptures, that Timothee vvas made Priest or Bishop euen as the vse is in the Catholike Church at this day.* 1.19 let the 4 Councel of Carthage speake for both par∣tes indifferently, and tell vs the Apostles meaning, A Priest vvhen he taketh his orders, the Bis∣hop blessing him and holding his hand vpon his head, let all the Priests also that are present, hold their hands by the Bishops hand vpon his head. So doe our Priests at this day, vvhen a bishop maketh priests: & this is the laying on of the hands of the companie of Priests, vvhich S. Paul spea∣keth of, and vvhich they translate, the compa∣nie of the Eldership. Onely their former transla∣tion of 1562 in this place (by vvhat chance or consideration vve knovve not) let fall out of the penne, by the authoritie of Priesthod.

9 Othervvise in all their English Bibles all the belles ring one note as, The Elders that rule vvell, are vvorthie of double honour. And, Against

an Elder receiue no accusation, but vnder tvvo or three vvitnesses.* 1.20 1 Tim. 5. And, If any be diseased among you, let him call for the Elders of the Church, and let them pray ouer him, and anoynt him vvith oile, &c. Iacob. 5. Vvhereas S. Chrisostom out of this place proueth the high dignitie of Priests in re∣mitting sinnes, in his booke entitled, Of Priesthod,* 1.21 vnles they vvill translate that title also, Of Eldership. Againe they make S. Peter say thus: The Elders vvhich are among you, I exhort vvhich am also an Elder, feede ye Christes flocke, as much as lyeth in you, &c. 1 Pet. 5.

* 1.2210 Vvhere if they vvill tell vs (as also in certaine other places) that our Latin translation hath Seniores and maiores natu: vve tel them, as heretofore vve haue told them, that this is nothing to them, vvho professe to translate the Greeke. Againe vve say that if they meant no vvorse then the old La∣tin translatour did, they vvould be as in∣differēt as he, to haue said sometime Priests and Priesthod, vvhen he hath the vvordes Presbyteros and Presbyterium: as vve are indiffe∣rent in our translation, saying Seniors and Auncients, vvhen vve finde it so in our La∣tin: being vvell assured that by sundrie vvordes he meant but one thing, as in Greeke it is but one, and as both Erasmus, and also Beza him self alvvaies translate it, keeping the name Presbyter and Presbyteri: of vvhō by reason they should haue learned,

rather then of our Latin trāslatour, vvhom othervvise they cōdemne. And if they say, they do folovv them, and not him, because they trāslate not Senior and maior natu, but the vvord Presbyter or 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, an Elder, in al places: vve tell them, and herein vve con∣uent their cōscience, that they do it to take avvay the external Priesthod of the nevv Testament, & to suppresse the name Priest, against the Ecclesiastical, and (as novv since Christ) very proper and vsual signification thereof, in the nevv Testament, councels, & fathers, in al common vvriting and spea∣king: specially the Latin Presbyter, vvhich grevve to this signification out of the Greeke in the foresaid places of holy Scri∣pture.

11 In so much that immediatly in the first Canons and Councels of the Apostles and their successors, nothing is more common then this distinction of Ecclesiastical de∣grees and names, Si Episcopus, vel Presbyter,* 1.23 vel Diaconus &c. If any Bishop, or Priest, or Deacon do this or that. Vvhich if the Protestants or Caluinists vvil translate after their maner thus, If a Bishop, or Elder, or Deacon &c:* 1.24 they do against them selues, vvhich make Presbyter or Elder a common name to all Ecclesiastical persons: & not a peculiar degree, next vnto a Bishop. So that either they must con∣demne

al antiquitie for placing Presbyter in the second degree after a Bishop, or they must translate it Priest as vve doe, or they must make Elder to be their second degree, and so put Minister out of place.

12 And here vve must aske them, hovv this name Minister came to be a degree distinct from Deacon,* 1.25 vvhereas by their ovvne rule of trāslation, Deacon is nothing els but a minister: and vvhy keepe they the old & vsual Ecclesiastical name of Deacon in translating Diaconus,* 1.26 and not the name of Priest, in translating Presbyter? doth not Priest come of Presbyter as certainely and as agrea∣bly as Deacon of Diaconus?* 1.27 doth not also the french and Italian vvord for Priest come directly from the same? vvill you alvvaies folovv fansie and not reason, do vvhat you list, translate as you list, and not as the truth is, and that in the holy Scriptures, vvhich you boast and vaunt so much of? Because your selues haue them vvhom you call Bi∣shops, the name Bishop is in your English Bibles, vvhich othervvise by your ovvne rule of trāslation, should be called an Ouer∣seer or Superintendent: likevvise Deacon you are content to vse as an Ecclesiastical vvord so vsed in antiquitie, because you also haue those vvhom you call Deacons: Onely Priests must be turned contemptu∣ously

out of the text of the holy Scriptures, and Elders put in their place, because you haue no Priests, not vvil none of them, and because that is in cōtrouersie betvvene vs. & as for Elders, you haue none permitted in England, for feare of ouerthrovving your Bishops office & the Queenes supreme go∣uernemēt in all spiritual things & causes. Is not this to folovv the humour of your heresie, by Machiauels politike rules vvith∣out any feare of God?

13 Apostles you say for the most part in your translations (not alvvaies) as vve do, and Prophetes, and Euangelistes, & Angels, and such like, and vvheresoeuer there is no matter of controuersie betvvene you and vs, there you can pleade very grauely for keeping the auncient Ecclesiastical wordes,* 1.28 as your maister Beza for example, beside many other places vvhere he bitterly re∣buketh his fellovv Castaleons translation, in one place vvriteth thus:* 1.29 I cannot in this place dissemble the boldnesse of certaine men, vvhich vvould God it rested vvithin the compasse of vvordes onely. these men therfore concerning the vvord Baptizing,* 1.30 though vsed of sacred vvriters in the mysterie or Sacrament of the nevv Testament, and for so many yeres after, by the se∣crete consent of al Churches, consecrated to this one Sacra∣ment,* 1.31 so that it is novv grovven into the vulgar speaches almost of al nations, yet they dare presume rashly to change it, and in place thereof to vse the vvord vvashing. delicate men forsooth, vvhich neither are moued vvith the

perpetual authoritie of so many ages; nor by the daily cu∣stom of the vulgar speache, can be brought to thinke that lavvful for Diuines, vvhich al men graunt to other Mai∣sters and professors of artes: that is, to reteine and hold that as their ovvne, vvhich by long vse and in good faith they haue truely possessed. Neither may they pretend the authoritie of some auncient vvriters, as that Cyprian saith TINGENTES for BAPTIZANTES, and Ter∣tullian in a certaine place calleth SEQVESTREM for MEDIATOREM. For that vvhich vvas to those auncients as it vvere nevv, to vs is old: and euen then, that the self same vvordes vvhich vve novv vse, vvere familiar to the Church,* 1.32 it is euident, because it is very sel∣dom that they speake othervvise. but these men by this no∣ueltie seeke after vaine glorie, &c.

14 He speaketh against Castaleon, vvho in his nevv Latin translation of the Bible, changed al Ecclesiastical vvordes into pro∣fane and Heathenish, as Angelos in to genios, Prophetas into Fatidicos, Templum into fanum, and so forth. But that vvhich he did for folish affectation of finenesse and stile, do not our English Caluinists the very same vvhen they list, for furthering their Heresies? Vvhen the holy Scripture saith idols accor∣ding as Christians haue alvvaies vnder∣stood it for false goddes, they come and tell vs out of Homer & the Lexicōs,* 1.33 that it may signifie an image, & therfore so they trans∣late it. do they not the like in the Greeke vvord that by Ecclesiastical vse signifieth, penance,* 1.34 and doing penance, vvhen they ar∣gue out of Plutarche, and by the profane

sense thereof, that it is nothing els but chāg∣ing of the minde or amendment of life? Vvhereas in the Greeke Church, Poenitentes, that is, they that vvere in the course of penance, and excluded from the Church as Catechumeni, and Energumeni, till they had ac∣complished their penance; the very same are called in the Greeke 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.* 1.35

15 They therfore leauing this Ecclesiasti∣cal signification, & translating it according to Plutarche, do they not much like to Ca∣staleo? Do they not the same, against the famous and auncient distinction of Latrîa and Dulîa,* 1.36 vvhen they tell vs out of Eusta∣thius vpon Homer, and Aristophanes the Grammarian, that these tvvo are al one? Vvhereas vve proue out of S. Augustine in many places, the second Councel of Nice, Venerable Bede, & the long custom of the Church,* 1.37 that according to the Ecclesiastical sense and vse deduced out of the Scriptures, they differ very much. Do they not the like in Mysterium and Sacramentum, vvhich they translate a Secrete in the profane sense, vvher∣as they knovv hovv these vvordes are othervvise taken both in Greeke and Latin, in the Church of God? did they not the like in the vvord Ecclesia,* 1.38 vvhen they trans∣lated it nothing els but congregation? Do they not the like in 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, vvhich they

translate, ordaining by election, as it vvas in the profane court of Athens: vvhereas S. Hie∣rom telleth them, that Ecclesiastical vvri∣ters take it for giuing holy orders by impo∣sition of hands? Do they not the like in many other vvordes, vvheresoeuer it ser∣ueth their hereticall purpose? And as for profane translation, is there any more pro∣fane then Beza him self, that so often in his Annotations reprehendeth the old Trans∣lation by the authoritie of Tullie and Te∣rence, Homer and Aristophanes, & the like profane authors? yea so fondly and chil∣dishly, that for Olfactum vvhich Erasmus v∣seth as Plinies vvord, he vvill needes say odoratum, because it is Tullies vvord.

16 But to returne to our English Trans∣latours: do not they the like to profane Ca∣staleo, and do they not the very same that Beza their Maister so largely reprehendeth, vvhen they translate Presbyterum, an Elder? Is it not al one fault to translate so, and to translate, as Castaleo doth Baptismum, vvashing? Hath not Presbyter been a peculiar and vsual vvord for a Priest, as long as Baptismus for the Sacrament of regeneration, which Castaleo altering into a common & profane vvord, is vvorthely reprehended? Vve vvill proue it hath, not for their sake, vvho knovv it vvell ynough, but for the Readers sake, vvhom they abuse, as if they knevv it not.

17 In the first & second Canō of the Apo∣stles vve read thus,* 1.39 Episcopus a duobus aut tribus Episcopis ordinetur. Presbyter ab vno Episcopo ordinetur, & Diaconus, & alij Clerici. that is, Let a Bishop be cōsecrated or ordained by tvvo or three Bi∣shops. let a Priest be made by one Bishop. See in the 4 Coūcel of Carthage the diuerse ma¦ner of cōsecrating Bishops, Priests, Deacōs,* 1.40 &c. Where S. Augustine vvas present & sub∣scribed. Againe,* 1.41 Si quis Presbyter contemnens Epis∣copum suum &c. If any Priest contemning his Bishop, make a seueral congregation, and erect another altar, (that is, make a Schisme or Heresie), let him be deposed. So did Arius being a Priest against his Bi∣shop Alexander. Againe, Priests and Deacons,* 1.42 let them attempt to do nothing vvithout the Bishop. The first Councel of Nice saith,* 1.43 The holy Synode by al meanes forbiddeth, that neither Bishop, nor Priest, nor Deacon &c. haue vvith them any forren vvoman, but the mother, or sister, &c. in vvhom there is no suspicion. Againe, It is told the holy Councel,* 1.44 that in certaine places and cities, Deacons giue the Sacraments to Priests. This neither rule nor custom hath deliuered, that they vvhich haue not authoritie to offer the sacrifice, should giue to them that offer, the body of Christ. The 3 Coun∣cel of Carthage vvherein S. Augustine vvas, and to the vvhich he subscribed, decreeth,* 1.45 That in the Sacraments of the body and bloud of Christ, there be no more offered, then our Lord him self deliuered, that is, bread and vvine mingled vvith vvater. Vvhich the sixth general Councel of Constantino∣ple repeating and confirming, addeth:

If therfore any Bishop or Priest doe not according to the order giuen by the Apostles,* 1.46 mingling vvater vvith vvine, but offer an vnmingled sacrifice, let him be deposed &c. But of these speaches al Councels be full: vvhere vve vvould gladly knovv of these nevv Translatours, hovv Presbyter must be translated: either an Elder, or a Priest.

18 Do not al the fathers speake after the same maner, making alvvaies this distin∣ction of Bishop and Priest, as of the first and second degree?* 1.47 S. Ignatius the Apostles scholer doth he not place Presbyterium as he calleth it, and Presbyteros (Priests, or the Col∣lege of Priests) next after Bishops, and Dea∣cons in the third place, repeating it no lesse then thrise in one Epistle, & commending the dignitie of all three vnto the people?* 1.48 doth not S. Hierom the very same, saying, Let vs honour a Bishop, do reuerence to a Priest, rise vp to a Deacon?* 1.49 And vvhen he saith, that as Aaron and his sonnes and the Leuites vvere in the Temple, so are Bishops, Priests, & Deacons in the Church, for place and degree. And in an other place, speaking of the outrages done by the Vandals and such like,* 1.50 Bishops vvere taken, Priests slaine, and diuers of other Ecclesia∣stical orders: Churches ouerthrovven, the altars of Christ made stables for horses, the relikes of Martyrs digged vp &c. Vvhen he saith of Nepotian, fit Cleri∣cus, & per solitos gradus Presbyter ordinatur: he becō∣meth a man of the Clergie, and by the accu∣stomed

degrees is made, vvhat? a Priest, or an Elder? vvhen he saith, Mihi ante Presbyterum sedere non licet &c. doth he meane he could not sit aboue an Elder, or aboue a Priest, him self as then being not Priest? Vvhen he, and Vincentius (as S. Epiphanius vvriteth) of reuerence to the degree,* 1.51 vvere hardly in∣duced to be made Presbyteri: did they refuse the Eldership? Vvhat vvas the matter that Iohn the B. of Hierusalem, seemed to be so much offended vvith Epiphanius and S. Hierom?* 1.52 vvas it not because Epiphanius made Paulianus, S. Hieroms brother, Priest vvithin the said Iohns Diocese?

19 Vvhen al antiquitie saith, Hieronymus Presbyter, Cecilius Presbyter, Ruffinus Presbyter, Philippus, Iuuencus, Hesychius, Beda, Presbyteri: and vvhen S. Hierom so often in his Cataloge saith, Such a man Presbyter: is it not for distinction of a certaine order, to signifie that they vvere Priests, and not Bishops? namely vvhen he saith of S. Chrysostom, Ioannes Presbyter Antiochenus, doth he not meane, he vvas as then but a Priest of Antioche? Vvould he haue said so, if he had vvritten of him, after he vvas Bi∣shop of Constantinople?

20 But of al other places, vve vvould de∣sire these gay trāslatours to trāslate this one place of S. Augustine, speaking of him self

a Bishop and S. Hierom a Priest:* 1.53 Quanquā enim secundum honorum vocabula, quaeiam Ecclesia vsus obtinuit, Episcopatus Presbyterio maior sit: tamen in mul∣tis rebus, Augustinus Hieronymo minor est. Is not this the English thereof? For although according to the titles or names of honour, which now by vse of the Church haue preuailed, the degree of Bishop be greater thē Priest∣hod, yet in many things, Augustine is lesse thē Hierom. or, doth it like thē to trāslate it thus, The degree of Bishop is greater then Eldership &c? Againe, against Iulian the Heretike vvhen he hath brought many testimonies of the holy Doctors that vvere all Bishops, as of SS. Cyprian, Am∣brose, Basil, Nazianzene, Chrysostom: at length he cōmeth to S. Hierom vvho vvas no Bishop,* 1.54 and saith: Nec sanctum Hieronymum, quia Presbyter fuit, contemnendum arbitreris that is, Neither must thou thinke that S. Hierom, because he vvas but a Priest, therfore is to be contemned: vvhose diuine elo∣quence, hath shined to vs from the East euen to the vvest, like a lampe, and so forth to his great cōmen∣dation. Here is a plaine distinction of an inferiour degree to a Bishop, for the which the Heretike Iuliān did easily contemne him. Is not S. Cyprian full of the like pla∣ces? is not al antiquitie so full, that vvhiles I proue this, me thinketh I proue nothing els but that snovv is vvhite?

21 In al vvhich places if they vvil trans∣late Elder, and yet make the same a common

name to all Ecclesiastical degrees,* 1.55 as Beza defineth it, let the indifferent Reader con∣sider the absurde cōfusion, or rather the im∣possibilitie thereof: if not, but they vvill graunt in al these places it signifieth Priest, and so is meant: then vve must beate them vvith Bezaes rod of reprehension against Castaleon:* 1.56 that vve can not dissemble the boldnes of these mē. vvhich vvould God it rested vvithin the custom of wordes onely, and vvere not important matter, concerning their Heresie. These men therfore tou∣ching the vvord Priest, though vsed of sacred vvriters in the mysterie of the nevv Testamēt, and for so many yeres after by the secrete consent of al Churches, consecrated to this one Sacrāment, so that it is novv grovven to be the proper vulgar speach almost of al Nations:* 1.57 yet they dare presume rashly to change it, and in place thereof to vse the vvord Elder. delicate men forsooth (yea vvorse a great deale, because these do it for heresie & not for delicacie) vvhich neither are moued vvith the perpetual authoritie of so many ages, nor by the daily custom of the vulgar speach can be brought to thinke that lavvful for Diuines, vvhich all men graunt to other Mai∣sters and Professors of artes, that is, to reteine and hold that as their ovvne, vvhich by long vse and in good faith they haue truely possessed. Neither may they pretend the au∣thoritie of any auncient vvriter (as that the old La∣tin Translatour saith Senior, and Seniores:) for ** 1.58 that vvhich vvas to them as it vvere nevv, to vs is old: and euen then, that the self same vvordes vvhich vve novv vse, were more familiar to the Church, it is euident, because it is very seldom that they speake othervvise.

22 Thus vve haue repeated Bezaes vvor∣des

againe, onely changing the vvord Bap∣tisme into Priest, because the case is all one: & so vn vvittingly Beza the successor of Cal∣uin in Geneua, hath giuen plaine sentence against our English Translatours in al such cases, as they go from the cōmon receiued and vsual sense to another profane sense, & out of vse: as namely in this point of Priest and Priesthod. Vvhere vve must nee∣des adde a vvord or tvvo, though vve be to long, because their folly & malice is to to great herein. For vvhereas the very name Priest neuer came into our English tonge but of the Latin Presbyter (for there vpon sacerdos also vvas so called onely by a conse∣quence) they translate sacerdos,* 1.59 Priest, and Presbyter, not Priest, but Elder, as vvisely and as reasonably, as if a man should translate Praetor Londini, Maire of London: and Maior Londini, not Maire of London: but Greater of London: or Academia Oxoniensis, the Vniuer∣sitie of Oxford: and Vniuersitas, Oxoniensis, not the Vniuersitie, but the Generalitie of Ox∣ford: and such like.

23 Againe, vvhat exceding folly is it, to thinke that by false and profane translation of Presbyter into Elder, they might take away the external Priesthod of the new restamēr, vvhereas their ovvne vvord Sacerdos vvhich they do and must needes translate Priest, is

as common and as vsual in all antiquitie, as Presbyter: and so much the more, for that it is vsed in differētly to signifie both Bishops and Priests, which Presbyter lightly doth not but in the nevv Testament. as vvhen Con∣stantine the Great said to the Bishops as∣sembled in the Coūcel of Nice,* 1.60 Deus vos consti∣tuit sacerdotes, &c. God hath ordained you priests, and hath giuen you povver to iudge of vs also.* 1.61 And S. Am∣brose, Vvhen didst thou euer heare, most Clement Prince, that lay men haue iudged Bishops. Shal vve bend by flat∣terie so farre, that forgetting the right of our Priesthod, vve should yeld vp to others,* 1.62 that vvhich God hath com∣mended to vs? And therfore doth S Chrisostō entitle his sixe bookes De Sacerdotio, Of Priesthod, concerning the dignitie and cal∣ling, not onely of mere Priests,* 1.63 but also of Bishops: & S. Gregorie Nazianzene hand∣ling the same argumēt saith,* 1.64 that they execute Priesthod together vvith CHRIST. and S. Ig∣natius saith, Do nothing vvithout the Bishops, for they are priests, but thou the Deacon of the priests. And in the Greeke Liturgies or Masses, so often, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, Then the priest saith this, and that,* 1.65 signifying also the Bishop vvhen he saith Masse: and* 1.66 S. Denys saith sometime Archisacerdotem cum sacerdotibus▪ the high Priest or Bishop vvith the Priests: vvhereof come the vvordes 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉, in the auncient Greeke fathers, for the sacred fun∣ction

of Priesthod, and executing of the same.

24 If then the Heretikes could possibly haue extinguished priesthod in the vvord presbyter, yet you see, it vvould haue remai∣ned still in the vvordes Sacerdos and Sacerdotiū, vvhich them selues translate Priest & Priesthod: and therfore vve must desire them to trans∣late vs a place or tvvo after their ovvne maner: first S. Augustine speaking thus, Quis vnquam audiuit sacerdotem ad altare stantē etiam super reliquias Martyrum,* 1.67 dicere: offero tibi Petre, & Paule, vel Cypriane? Vvho euer heard that a PRIEST stāding at the altar, euen ouer the relikes of the Martyrs, said, I offer to thee Peter, & Paul, or Cyprian? So (vve trow) they must trāslate it.* 1.68 Againe, Nos vni Deo & Martyrū & nostro, sacrificiū immolamus, ad quod sa∣crificium sicut homines Dei, suoloco & ordine nominātur, non tamen à sacerdote inuocantur. Deo quippe, non ipsis sacrificat, quamuis in memoria sacrificet corum, quia Dei sacerdos est, non illorum. Ipsum verò sacrificium corpus est Christi. Vve thinke they vvill and must translate it thus: Vve offer sacrifice to the one onely God both of Martyrs and ours, at the vvhich Sacrifice, as men of God they (Martyrs) are named in their place and order: yet are they ** 1.69 not inuocated of the priest that sacrificeth. For he sacrificeth to God, & not to them (though 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sacrifice in the memorie of them) because he is Gods Priest, and not theirs. And the sacrifice it self is the body of Christ.

25 Likevvise vvhen S. Ambrose saith,* 1.70 The consecration (of the body of Christ) vvith vvhat vvordes is it, and by vvhose speache? of our Lord

Iesus. For in the rest that is said, there is praise giuen to God, praier made for the people, for kings and others: but vvhen it commeth that the venerable sacrament must be consecrated, novv the Priest vseth not his ovvne vvordes,* 1.71 but he vseth the vvordes of Christ.* 1.72 And S. Chriso∣stom in very many places saith, The sacred ob∣lation it self, vvhether Peter or Paul, or any meaner Priest vvhatsoeuer offer it,* 1.73 is the very same that Christ gaue to his disciples,* 1.74 and vvhich novv the priests do make or cosecrate▪ vvhy so I pray thee? because not men do san∣ctifie this, but Christ him self, vvhich before consecrated the same. And againe, It is not man that maketh the body and bloud of Christ, but he that vvas crucified for vs, Christ: the vvordes are vttered by the Priests mouth,* 1.75 and by Gods povver and grace are the things proposed, conse∣crated. For this, saith he, is my body. Vvith this vvord are the things proposed, consecrated.

26 And so by these places, vvhere them selues translate Sacerdos a Priest, they may learne also hovv to translate Presbyteros in S. Hierom saying the very same thing,* 1.76 that at their praiers, the body and bloud of our Lord is made. and in an other place, that vvith their sacred mouth, they make our Lordes body. Likevvise vvhen they read S. Ambrose against the Nouatians, that God hath graunted licence to his Priests to re∣lease and forgiue as vvel great sinnes as litle vvithout exception:* 1.77 and in the Ecclesiasti∣cal historie, hovv the Nouatian Heretikes taught that such as vvere fallen into great sinnes, should not aske for remission of the Priest, but of God onely:* 1.78 they may learne hovv to translate Presbyteros in S. Hie∣rom

& in the Ecclesiastical historie, vvhere the one saith thus: Episcopus & Presbyter, cum pec∣catorum audierit varietates, scit qui ligandus sit, qui sol∣uendus: and the other speaketh de Presbytero Poenitentiario,* 1.79 of an extraordinarie Priest that heard confessions and enioyned penance,* 1.80 vvho aftervvard vvas taken avvay, and the people vvent to diuers ghostly fathers as before. And especially S. Chrysostom vvill make them vnderstand what these Presbyteri vvere, and hovv they are to be called in En∣glish, vvho telleth them in their ovvne vvord, that Sacerdotes, the Priests of the nevv lavv haue povver not onely to knovv,* 1.81 but to purge the filth of the soule, therfore vvhosoeuer despiseth them, is more vvorthie to be punished then the rebel Dathan and his complices.

27 Novv then (to conclude this point) seeing vve haue such a cloude of vvitnesses (as the Apostle speaketh) euen from Christs time,* 1.82 that testifie not onely for the name, but for the very principal functions of ex∣ternal Priesthod, in offering the sacrifice of Christs body & bloud, in remitting sinnes, and so forth: vvhat a peeuish, malicious, & impudent corruption is this, for the defa∣cing of the testimonies of the holy Scrip∣tures tending there vnto, to seeke to scrarch aduantage of the vvord Presbyter, & to make it signifie an Elder, not a Priest: Presbyterium Eldership rather then Priesthod: as if other

nevvfangled cōpanions that vvould forge an Heresie that there vvere no Apostles, should for that purpose translate it alwaies legates: or that there vvere no Angels, and should translate it alwaies Messengers: & that Baptisme vvere but a Iudaical ceremonie, and should translate it vvashing: vvhich Ca∣stalio did much more to lerably in his tran∣slation then any of these should, if he did it onely of curiositie and folly. And if to take avvay al distinction of clergie & laitie the Protestants should alvvaies translate clerum,* 1.83 lotte or lotterie, as they do translate it for the same purpose parish and heritage: might not* 1.84 Beza him self controull them, saing, that the auncient fathers transferred the name clerus to the Col∣lege of Ecclesiastical Ministers?

28 But alas, the effect of this corruption & heresie concerning Priests, hath it not vvrought vvithin these fevv yeres such cō∣tempt of al Priests, that nothing is more odious in our countrie then that name: vvhich before vvas so honorable and Ve∣nerable, and novv is, among all good men? If ministerie or Eldership vvere grovven to estimation in steede thereof, somevvhat they had to say: but that is yet more con∣temprible, and especially Elders and Elder∣ship for the Queenes Maiestie & her Coū∣sellors vvill permit none in gouernement

of any Church in England, and so they haue brought al, to nothing els, but profane laitie. And no maruel of these horrible in∣conueniences, for as the Sacrifice & Priest∣hod goe together, and therfore vvere both honorable together: so vvhen they had according to Daniels Prophecie, abolis hed the daily sacrifice, out of the Church, vvhat remained, but the contempt of Priests and Cleargie and their offices, so far forth, that for the holy Sacrifice sake, Priests are cal∣led in great despite, Massing Priests. of them that litle consider, or lesse care, vvhat nota∣ble holy learned fathers of al ages since Christs time, this their reproche toucheth and concerneth, as by the testimonies be∣fore alleaged is manifest, and vvhereof the Reader may see a peculiar Chapter in the late Apologie of the English Seminaries.* 1.85

Notes

• * 1.1

  Luc. c. 22. v. 19.
• * 1.2

  Vvhitakers. p. 199.
• * 1.3

  See the puri∣tans replie. pag. 159. and vvhitgifts de¦fence against the Puritans pag. 722.
• * 1.4

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Presbyteros.
• * 1.5

  The later Bibles read Church.
• * 1.6

  Act. 16.
• * 1.7

  Tit. 1.
• * 1.8

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Presbyteros
• * 1.9

  Bib. an. 1562.
• * 1.10

  1 Tim. 6.
• * 1.11

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Act. 14.
• * 1.12

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.13

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Tit. 1.
• * 1.14

  Greg. Naziā. in titul. Ser. 1.4.5. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. and, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Ignat. ep. 10. saith of Bis∣hops, 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.15

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.16

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉
• * 1.17

  Bib. 1579.1577.
• * 1.18

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Presbyterij.
• * 1.19

  ca. 3 in the yere 436. Vvhere S. Augustine vvas present and subscri∣bed.
• * 1.20

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. lib. 3. de Sa∣cerdotio.
• * 1.21

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.22

  S. Hierom readeth, Pre∣sbyteros ego compresbyter. Ep. 85. ad Euagr. & in 1 ad Gal: pro∣uing the di∣gnitie of Priests. and yet in 4 Gal. he readeth according to the vul∣gar Latin text, Seniores in vobis rogo consenior & ipse. Vvhere∣by it is eui∣dēt, that Se∣nior here & in the Actes is a Priest, & not cōtrarie, Presbyter, an elder.
• * 1.23

  See can. A∣post. Conc. 1 Nic. Epistol. Ignat. Conc. Carth. 4.
• * 1.24

  Beza in 1 Pet. 5.
• * 1.25

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 Diaconus.
• * 1.26

  1 Tim. 3. Bib. 1577.1579.
• * 1.27

  Prebstre. Prete.
• * 1.28

  Beza in c. 9. Mat. nu. 25. &c. 10. nu. 2
• * 1.29

  in 3 ca. Mat. nu. 11.
• * 1.30

  Baptizo.
• * 1.31

  Baptisme.
• * 1.32

  Baptizo. Mediator.
• * 1.33

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Confut. of the Reas. 10.35.
• * 1.34

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.35

  Dionys. Ec. Hier. c. 5.
• * 1.36

  Latrîa. Dulîa. Beza in •• Mat. nu. 10.
• * 1.37

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉 in the Scriptu∣res, almost alvvaies vsed for the ser∣uice and ho∣nour proper to God. Au∣gust. de Ciuit. Dei. li. 10. c, 1.
• * 1.38

  Bib. an. 1562.
• * 1.39

  That Presby∣ter hath sig∣nified a Priest, from the Apostles time, not an Elder.
• * 1.40

  Can. 2.3.4.
• * 1.41

  Can. Apost. 32.
• * 1.42

  Can. 40.
• * 1.43

  Can. 3.
• * 1.44

  Can. 14.
• * 1.45

  Can. 24.
• * 1.46

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.47

  Ep. 2. ad Trallianos. 〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.48

  Comment. in c. 7. Mi∣cheae.
• * 1.49

  Ep. 85. ad E∣uagrium.
• * 1.50

  Epitaph. Ne∣potiani c. 9.
• * 1.51

  Ep. 60 apud Hiero. ca. 1.
• * 1.52

  Ep. 1 ad He∣liod.
• * 1.53

  Inter Episto∣las Hiero. Ep. 97 in fine.
• * 1.54

  Lib. 1. ca. 2. in fine.
• * 1.55

  Annot. in 1 Pet. 5.
• * 1.56

  Bezaes vvordes in the place a∣boue allea∣ged.
• * 1.57

  Prete Prebstre Priest.
• * 1.58

  Presbyter for a Priest. Bap∣tismus for the Sacra∣ment of Bap¦tisme.
• * 1.59

  See M. Whit∣gifts defēce against the Puritans re∣plie. pag. 721 vvhere he af∣firmeth that this vvord Priest, com∣meth of the vvord Pres∣byter, & not of the vvord Sacerdos.
• * 1.60

  Ruffin li. 1. ca. 2.
• * 1.61

  Epist. 32. ad Valentinia∣num Imp.
• * 1.62

  Iuris Sacer∣dotalis.
• * 1.63

  in Apolog. pro sua fug. orat. 1.
• * 1.64

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉. Epist. 10. ad Hieronem. Sacerdotes.
• * 1.65

  〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉〈 in non-Latin alphabet 〉.
• * 1.66

  Ec. Hiera. c. 3.
• * 1.67

  Li. 8. cap 27. De Ciu. Dei.
• * 1.68

  Li. 22 Ciuit. c. 10.
• * 1.69

  So as he said before, I of∣fer to thee Pe∣ner, &c.
• * 1.70

  Li. 4. de Sa∣ceam. c. 4.
• * 1.71

  Sacerdos.
• * 1.72

  Ho. 2 in 2 Timotin.
• * 1.73

  Sacerdos.
• * 1.74

  Sacerdotu
• * 1.75

  Sacerdotis
• * 1.76

  Presbyteri
• * 1.77

  Sacerdotibas
• * 1.78

  à Sacordote
• * 1.79

  Sozom. li. 7 c. 16.
• * 1.80

  Socrat. li. 5 c. 19.
• * 1.81

  Li. 3. de Sa∣cerd.
• * 1.82

  Hebr. 12.
• * 1.83

  Clerics.
• * 1.84

  In 1 Pet ••. See S. Hie∣rom ad Ne∣pot. de vit. Clericorum ep. 2. c. 5.
• * 1.85

  Chap. 6.