A TREATISE OF THE WRITTEN WORD OF God.  
COMPOSED In Latin, by the Reverend Father james Gordon Huntley of Scotland, Doctor of Divinity, of the Society of JESUS.  
And translated into English, by I. L. of the same Society.  
The first Part of the first Controversy.  
Permissu Superiorum, M. DC. X IU.   

THE FIRST CHAPTER.  
Of the Scope and Method of this Treatise.  
ALL the Controversies of this time may be reduced to two heads, for either they are certain general principles & foundations of our faith and religion, or they are particular questions appertaining to the same. Amongst other general principles there are two, about which there is greatest contention at this day: the one is the Word of God, the other the Church: we will first speak of the word of God, and afterwards of the Church, and lastly we will examine every particular Controversy, if God shall ●raunt us life and health. Two things there are which now adays hold many in error. The one is a 〈◊〉 opinion that many have, who think it a matter of little importance, whether they give credit or no to many things taught by the Roman Church, which dangerous persuasion may be taken out of the mind●s of all faithful people, by that which we shall deliver concerning the Word of God, and the Church, for thereby it shall evidently appear, that all things are firmly to be believed, which the Roman Church believeth, and that without this faith no man can hope to be saved. The other is, that such as de●ire to find out the true faith in every particular Controversy, are oftentimes so hindered by the sleights and falsehoods of our adversaries, as it willbe very hard for them to discern that which is true from that which is false. Wherefore we will endeavour in every particular Controversy, to set down the true state of the question. Afterward we will lay open the foundation of the Catholic doctrine. And lastly we will plainly and briefly answer the chief objections of our Adversaries whether they be drawn out of the Scriptures, or taken from the Fathers.  
2. And because our Adversaries evermore boast and brag of the written Word of God, pretending out of it only to prove their doctrine & impugn ours: our chief care shallbe to show, that the Catholic and Roman faith is both evidently and strongly to be confirmed out of the written Word of God, and the doctrine of our Adversaries hath no foundation at all in the holy Scriptures, but is manifestly opposite & repugnant thereunto, yet so, as we will set down the uniform consent of the ancient Church to be agreeing with us in every Controversy, leaving the more ample search of antiquity, unto others, to whom we will refer the Reader, setting down their particular names; so loathe we are that this book of ours should grow too great: and for the same reason we have thought good to omit many arguments which might be drawn out of the holy Scriptures for confirmation of the Catholic faith, contenting ourselves to set down only the more solid and evident proofs, because we are resolved to be as brief as we may.   

CHAP. II.  
Of the Word of God in general.  
THE word of God, if we speak of it in general, may be considered two ways, either for that One, Eternal and Infinite Word which containeth perfectly in itself whatsoever is in the mind of Almighty God, which is the same with the Son of God, and Word of the Father, of whom S. john speaketh in his Gospel saying: In the beginning was the Word, but of this Word we are to say nothing here▪ but the Word of God may be other wise considered and taken for that Word which was not always, nor containeth all things which are in the mind of God but a small part only of them, to wit, such things as God would have us know and believe: and of the Word of God in this sense we speak now. For this Word is the proper and complete object of our faith.  
2. Moreover this Word hath two conditions or properties, the one is, that the same be revealed unto us, for there are innumerable verities in the mind of God the which because they are not revealed to us, do not appertain to this Word. The other is, that it be immediately revealed by God, for such things as God manifesteth unto us by natural reason appertain not to this word of God, 
Rom. ●. v. 19 & 20.  called therefore by the Divines the revealed Word of God. 
Hebr. 11. vers. 1.   
3. Of this Word of God so understood there is no Controversy between us and our Adversaries, but only in words: for whereas our Adversaries say that Catholics affirm, that we must with divine faith believe the words of men, or which is worse, rather believe the words of men than the Word of God, it is a mere slander, for there is no Catholic so ignorant but he knoweth that the Theological virtue Faith relieth astogeather upon the pure, sincere, and certain Word of God alone, according to that of S. Paul, 
1. Thessaly. ●. vers. 13.  when you had received of us the word of the heating of God you received it not as the word of men, but as the Word of God, as indeed it is. Neither can any man doubt but that the revealed word of God is partly the written Word contained in the Canonical books of the old and new Testament, partly unwritten and delivered by tradition and preaching, of which unwritten word the Scripture maketh mention in many places, 
Thes. c. 2. ●. 14 & 1. ad Cor. 15. v. ●. ad Gal. 1. v. 8. 1. Petr. 1. v. ultimo.  but we will first treat of the written Word.   

CHAP. III.  
Of the written Word of God.  
THE written Word of God consisteth of two parts, of the Letter which every▪ man may read in the books themselves, and in the true sense of the Letter, which is as it were the very soul and life thereof, without which the Letter alone rather killeth than quickeneth or giveth life: as we see evidently by experience in the jews, Arians, etc. all other heretics, as well new as old: for the jews hold themselves stiffly to the Letter of the old Testament, & the Arians, as also in a manner all other heretics, receive either altogether, or for the greatest part the Letter of the new; but because they will not acknowledge the true sense of the Letter, jews they are Heretics they are, Catholics they are not. And surely the Letter alone without the true sense cannot truly and properly be called the Word of God, no more than a body without a soul can truly and properly be called a man: wherefore they which spoil the Letter of the true sense may be compared to them who bereave a man of his soul and life.  
2. But whosoever do substitute another contrary sense and meaning in place of the true, do no otherwise, than they, who not only kill a man, but by Art Magic bring into the body of the man killed, some other diabolical spirit, by which the dead body is so moved, and stirred, as it seemeth to many to bealive: all this is so manifest a truth, as our Adversaries themselves are not able to deny it.  
3. This to have been the doctrine of the ancient Church sufficiently appeareth by the words of S. Augustine. 
August. serm. 78. de temp.  The unhappy jews, saith he, & more unhappy Heretics, whilst they attend only to the sound of the ●etter, as a body without a soul, so they remain dead, and void of the spirit which quickeneth. And else where: 
August'● Epist. 222●  All Heretics which receive the Scriptures and their authority will seem to follow them▪ whereas indeed they follow rather their own errors, and are therefore Heretics, not because they co●ntem●e them, but because they do not understand them. And before him S. Hilary that honour of the French Nation. Remember (saith he) that there is not one of the heretics which doth not say that he preacheth now according to the Scriptures, 
〈◊〉 l. ad Const. 〈◊〉.  even those things in which he blasphemeth, albeit he lieth in so saying▪ And a little after: All of them speak Scriptures, without the true sense & meaning, they pretend saith without faith indeed, for the Scriptures consist not so much in the reading as in the understanding, neither are they understood of such as go into prevarication, but continue and abide in charity. Moreover S Hierome. 
Hiero●. in 〈◊〉 Gal.  Let us not think (saith he) the Gospel to be in the words of the Scripture but in the sense, not in the out side, but in the inside, or marrow, not in the leaves of the words, but in the sap, 
Matth. 4. v. 6.  pith, or root of reason. And a little after: otherwise even the Devil himself speaketh. Scriptures, and all heresies according to Ezechiel make unto themselves pillows which they may lay under the elbow of every age. 
Ezech. 13. v. ●8.   
2. By that which hath been said answer may be made to our Adversaries when they object against us, that we affirm the Scripture to be imperfect, obseure, like a nose of wax which a man may writhe which way he will, and lastly the origen and spring in a manner of all heresies: for we affirm this of the naked and dead letter alone, destitute of the true sense; or rather of the letter, to which the Heretics add their own perverse sense and meaning: neither have our Adversaries any cause to wonder at this, seeing S. Paul himself saith of the bare letter alone, 
1 Cor. 3. v. 6. 7. & 9  that is killeth, and bringeth eternally death and damnation. But never any Catholic did ever attribute any such thing to the living letter, which hath conjoined with it the true and native sense, and which alone is truly and properly the word of God.   

CHAP. FOUR  
How we are to seek out the true sense and meaning of the holy Scripture.  
THERE is a great contention between us and our Adversaries, about the means how to find out the true and natural interpretation of the letteer, 
〈…〉  a thing to necessary to eternal salvation. They teach, divers things concerning this matter, but deliver nothing that is certain. One assigneth more rules to this purpose, another fewer, but when they have said all, they confess at last that there was never any which hath not at sometime erred in seeking out the true interpretation of holy Scripture. For they give not their assent either to the ancient Fathers, or to their own Masters in all things they teach or write: nay they cannot assign any one whom they acknowledge not to have erred sometime, 
Rom. 3. v. 4.  nor dare affirm to be free from error, seeing as they say, every man is a liar: and so at last all things are left by them doubtful and uncertain.  
2. But the Catholics proceed after another manner, who teach, that the certain & undoubted sense of the Letter is not to be taken from the judgement of any particular man, but from the uniform consent of the ancient Fathers, and especially from the judgement and interpretation of the Catholic Church, to whom it appertaineth to judge of the sense and meaning of the holy Scriptures, as the holy and Ecumenical Council of Trent teacheth very well: 
Concil. Trent. s●ss. 4.  for there is no doubt but that it is more safe to follow such an interpreter as cannot err, than such a oners erreth sometimes, or at leastwise may err, but the Church cannot err in her judgement, 
Matt. 28 c. ulc.  seeing that Christ and the holy Ghost remain with her to teach her all truth; 
joan. 14. ●. 〈◊〉.  whereof more hereafter when we shall come to treat of the Church.  
3. It shall suffice to observe and note here, 
joan. ●6. v. 13.  that according to the doctrine of our Adversaries nothing either solid or certain is contained in the holy Scripture: for whereas all dependeth of the true sense of the Letter, and with them there is no certain or sure means by which to find out this sense, it followeth that they call all into doubt, which is in the Scripture, whereby who seeth not how much they injure them? But contrariwise according to the Catholic doctrine, all things are evident and certain which are contained in the holy Scriptures, appertaining either to faith, or good manners: the Catholics having ever a certain and faithful Interpreter, to wit, the Catholic Church. And surely whosoever rejecteth the sense which the Church giveth, and in place thereof substituteth another altogether repugnant to it, doth all one with him, who rejecting the holy Scripture should in place thereof bring in a new Scripture of his own forging, the sense of the Scripture being no less a part of the word of God than the letter, which in these few words Tertullian confirmeth out of the tradition of the ancient Church: The sense adultered, 
Tertul. de praesc. c. 17  or falsified, is no less repugnant to the truth, than the letter, or style corrupted.  
4. And to conclude, it may be inferred, that salvation is to be found in the Roman Church only, 
Mare. ult. Vers. 16.  and none at all out of it, 
joan. 3. v. 18.  which I prove thus. Both the Scripture testifieth & all men confess that divine faith is necessary to salvation, 
Heb. 11. v. ●  but such as forsake the Roman Church, cannot have divine ●aith which wholly relieth upon the word of God only, but merely human, seeing their faith is founded not in the word of God, interpreted by the Church which cannot err, but in the word and interpretation of Luther, & Calvin▪ or some other private man, who as they themselves grant may err, and be deceived; such an human faith then, so doubtful and uncertain, and only warranted by man's authority, cannot justify, or bring a man to eternal salvation.   

CHAP. V.  
How we may know which is the true letter of the holy Scripture.  
ALL such as forsake the Roman Church, and make little account of her authority are not only doubtful & undertayne, which is the true sense of the Scripture, but they can have no assurance at all either of the whole, or of any part of the letter thereof. For whilst they go about to call in question, and make doubtful certain books only of the old Testament, before they are aware they take away all authority from all other books both of the old and new Testament. For whereas there is but one certain and undoubted Canon of these books, to wit, that which is received and appre●ued by the judgement of the Catholic Church, which cannot err; our adversaries rejecting this Canon, make all the books doubtful contained therein▪ for no certain testimony can be had of these books, but either by this Canon only, or by the ancient tradition of the Church, but they neither admit this Canon, nor will stand to this unwritten Tradition, or acknowledge it for the true Word of God.  
2. Now as for the Canons lately set out by themselves, no man can safely believe them, seeing they neither agree one with another, nor with the ancient Canons of the Church, nor are any where found in the written Word of God, which (as they teach) is only to be believed: neither can they bring any thing, either concerning the Canon of the Hebrews, or any other ancient Canon which they have not taken from the writings of the ancient Fathers, whose authority without the express written Word of God, they will have to be in no wise sufficient to engender faith: so as even by the judgement of our Adversaries, none of all these can establish faith concerning this matter.  
3. john Calvin indeed saith, 
Lib. 1. Inst. c. 7. sect 2. in fine.  that it is as easy for a faithful man to discern Canonical Scripture from that which is not Canonical, as to one that seeth it is easy to discern light from darkness, and white from Black. 
See Bell. l. 1. de verb. Det c. 17. 18. 〈◊〉.  But in so saying he contradicteth both reason and experience, for it is evident that in old time there was no small controversy amongst the raythfull, yea and amongst learned and godly men concerning many books of the old and new Testament, yea and also even now amongst such as our Adversaries esteem faithful men, 
Calu. pralat. in Epist. lacobi & ante Epist. ad Heb. & aunt 2. S. Pe●ri.  which Calvin himself in many places confesseth▪  
4. Moreover Calvin's own followers well perceiving this, fly unto their own peculiar spirit, by which they say they are chiefly persuaded and moved, and not by the only consent of the Church. But these speak nothing to the purpose, for in faith two things concur, 
Rupell. confess. art. 4.  one is the cause or origen of faith, to wit God himself, and the holy Ghost, whereof there is no controversy between us and them, for we all acknowledge the holy Ghost to be the principal cause of the assent we give by faith, that is to say, that it is the holy Ghost who chiefly persuadeth us to believe. The other is the object of faith, or that which is to be believed, whereof we now dispute, for the holy Ghost doth not induce us to believe the false & uncertain devices of men, but the pure and sincere Word of God only: we ask therefore of our Adversaries, by what express Word of God he revealeth unto them, that there are so many Canonical books, and neither fewer nor more; for we read not this any where in the Scripture, and they admit only the written Word of God, how can the holy Ghost then persuade thē●o believe that which is not the Word of God? 
Calu. l. 1. Instit. c. 9 sect. 1.  for we are not now to expect new revelations from God, as do the ●nabaptists and Libertines, whom for this cause our Adversaries condemn. It is necessary therefore that if they will have us believe, that they are persuaded by the holy Ghost to believe such books only to be authentical as they do say are such; that they first show this to be a truth expressly contained in holy Scripture, which they will never be able to do: wherefore there is no certainty with them either of the sense of the holy Scripture, 
Innocent. 1. ep. 3. c. ult. Concil. 3.  or of the Letter, nor ever willbe until they return unto the Church again. 
Carthag. can. 47. S. Aug. Epist. 235. Concil.  But we Catholics are certain of both, for we have a most faithful Canon received in the Church more than a thousand and two hundred years ago, confirmed by a general, 
Tridents. sess. 4.  and Ecumenical Council.  
5. And this to have been the faith and doctrine of the ancient Church for the discerning of true and authentical Scriptures, 
Lib. 4. Instit. c. 14. sect. ult.  that short but pithy sentence of S. Augustins (whom Calvin acknowledgeth to have been the best and most faithful witness of antiquity) sufficiently testifieth, saying: 
Aug. Cō●. Epist. Manich●i c. 5.  I for my part would not believe the Gospel, unless I were moved by the authority of the Church, of which place I will say more hereafter in the Controversy of the Church. And elsewhere he saith: We receive the old and new Testament in that number of books which the authority of the holy Catholic Church delivereth. 
Aug. serm. 191. & temp.  So S. Augustine.  
6. I know our adversaries object many things against many books contained in our Ecclesiastical Canon, but their chief arguments do not only derogate authority from those books, but also from many others, which they receive as Canonical. For they object that some Fathers did sometimes doubt of those books which they will not admit, but they are not ignorant that some Fathers of old have doubted of the Epistles of S. james, and S. Jude of the second Epistle of S. Peter, of the 2. and 3. of S. john, of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and of the Apocalyps, of which books they dare not now doubt, 
Rup●ll ● Confes●● art. 3●  especially Caluins followers, as is manifest by their confession of faith.  
7. They say further, that in those books which they reject, there are many things obscure, difficult, and full of contradiction, but what book of Scripture in a manner is there in the which there do not occur sometimes things obscure and hard to be understood? 
2. Petr. 3. v. 26.  did not S. Peter acknowledge as much? But as for true contradictions there are none at all howsoever there may be some things which at the first fight may seem to imply contradiction, yet indeed all things agree very well together: such a contradiction is oftentimes found in those books, which even our Adversaries receive, yea even in the gospels themselves, 
Aug. de Doct.  which for all that are not to be rejected, 
Christian. l. 2. c. 41. & deserm. Domini in monte l. 1. c. 3.  but humbly, soberly, and piously to be interpreted, as S. Augustine many times admonisheth.  
8. To conclude, all the arguments that our Adversaries make against these books are fully answered by Catholic writers, which have set out Commentaries upon those books, to wit, Cornelius jansenius upon Ecclesiasticus, 
Bell. & Grets'. Controu. 1. l. 1. c. 7. & sequent jesmoreus in sua Chro●ol.  jonnnes Laurinus upon the book of Wisdom, joannes Maldonatus and Christopher à Castro upon Baruch, and Nicolas Serarius upon the rest of the books of the old Testament which our Adversaries call Apocryphal, to omit the most Reverend and famous Cardinal Bellarmine, and his Champion jacobus Gretserus▪ as also james Gordon Lesmoreus. For it is sufficient only to have cited them, seeing that I write only an abridgement of Controversies, & not any long commentaries upon the Scripture. And therefore content myself to have showed in this place that our Adversaries must either receive the Canon of Scriptures approved by the Council of Trent, or be utterly destitute of any certain and assured Canon.   

CHAP. VI  
Of the Hebrew Text.  
OUR Adversaries when they are urged with Catholic arguments taken from the Scriptures, are wont to fly to the Hebrew text of the old Testament, and to the Greek text of the new, persuading themselves by this means to attain to the true and proper sense of the letter: wherefore something is to be said in this place of the Hebrew & Greek text, both which appertain to the Letter of the holy Scripture.  
2. We grant indeed, that when the Latin translation is either ambiguous o● less plain, the Hebrew text is well and profitably looked into, as also that divers mysteries which lie hidden in the Hebrew text and cannot sufficiently be explicated in Latin words, may be the better understood. And lastly that we may the more fully attain unto the force and Emphasis of that holy tongue.  
3. But as for the Hebrew text now extant, we do not acknowledge it to be of so great either authority, or perspicuity as our Adversaries pretend, and we further deny that the vulgar Edition wherinsoever it differeth from it, is to be corrected by it, and that for two reasons. The first is, for that the Hebrew text though never so incorrupt, further than it is approved by the authority of the Church, is much more doubtful, and uncertain than the Latin. The other reason is, for that the Hebrew text which is now in use is in many places corrupted and depraved, in which the vulgar Edition is entire and uncorrupted. Both these reasons shallbe confirmed in the ensuing ●hapters, which the learned Reader may see in the Latin edition, from the seventh Chapter to the 14. all which I have omitted to put into English, because I intent to help the less learned, who are not so capable of that so profound and learned a discourse.   

CHAP. VII.  
Of our adversaries new Translations of the Bible.  
THE Catholic Church of Christ not without good cause doth reject and condemn our adversaries new Translations of the Bible, and that for many reasons. The first and most just reason is, because such their translations are replenished with errors, which have been invented either by jews, or Heretics, of which see many examples in the precedent Chapters of the Latin edition; but we in this Chapter will set down three other causes or origens from whence these errors spring, whereby it shall further appear, that our Adversaries can set out no translation which shall not be found full of many & great errors.  
2. The first cause is, for that our Adversary's either contemn, or make little account of the translations and interpretations of the Fathers, and employ all their labour in finding out all the versions, and interpretations, and expositions of the jews, which they highly extol & commend: so as in their Commentaries upon the old Testament, you shall see them cite Thargus rabbins, and such other Thalmudicall fictions, but especially Rabbi David Kim●i, whom sometimes they call learned, sometimes the most learned among the Hebrews. But of the ancient Fathers no mention at all, for if there be, it is for the most part, either to tax, or manifestly to oppugn, or even to corrupt their writings.  
3. Now what can be more unreasonable or absurd, then to beg the true sense of the Scripture of the jews, 
2. Cor. 3. v. 1●. & 1. Thessaly. c. 2. v. 15. 1●.  who lack faith, and who have a veil over their hearts, when they read the old Testament, with whom God is not pleased, and who are Adversaries to all men, upon whom the Angel of God is come to the end, who pervert all the oracles of the Prophets that appertain to Christ; and lastly, who are the most malicious enemies of Christians. And on the other side to despise the excellent Doctors of Christ's Church, who even in the judgement of our Adversaries were endued with the true faith, 
Rom. 8. v. 9 Ephes. 4. v. 14.  full of the holy Ghost, raised by God, and placed in the Church, to the end we should not be carried about with every wind of doctrine, who have defended the faith against all heresies, who have sincerely instructed the faithful people in the mysteries of the Christian faith, who have faithfully sent down to posterity the sense and interpretation of the Scriptures which they received from the Apostles.  
4. Moreover, whereas no man can rightly interpret the Scriptures who hath not received from God the gift of the interpretation, 
2. Cor. 121 v. 10. 28. 2. Petri 1. v. 20. 21.  which is not given but to the members of Christ, and his Church only, it is apparent enough how much more safe it is to follow such holy Doctors, than the impious jews which are wrapped in the snares of the Devil, 
2. Timoth. 2. v. ult.  and held captive at his will. And seeing that saying of Christ is most true, 
Matth. 15. v. 14.  if the blind lead the blind, they both fall into the ditch; it cannot be but our Adversaries, blind and destitute of the light of faith, and led by the blind jews, must needs fall down headlong, and break their necks.  
5. Here-hence it is, that our Adversaries do insert into the new translations almost all the places of Scripture corrupted by the jews, and that they deny together with the jews many oracles of the Prophets, to be understood of Christ, and many ways wrest even those oracles which they cannot deny to be understood of Christ, from that true sense in which they are cited in the new Testament, by the Apostles, Evangelists, and Christ himself, to profane & impious senses lately invented by the jews out of their hatred to Christ.  
6. The second cause is, that they desire nothing more than in their translations to depart from the vulgar edition, the which seeing it is most sincere and correct, they which almost in all things leave it, must needs fall into many errors.  
7. The third cause is, the malicious intention of our Adversaries, who set forth new translations of the Scripture for no other end, then by them to oppugn the Catholic doctrine, and to establish and confirm their own errors and heresies: and therefore when any plain text occurreth, which maketh manifestly against their erroneous doctrine, they seek to make obscure the true and proper sense by their perverse translation; but if they light upon any place somewhat obscure, which may seem to favour their doctrine, they so deprave it by their new translation, that the Scripture itself may seem to confirm what they falsely teach, and so by this means they must needs stuff their translations with infinite corruptions, for these three reasons: 
Grets'. tractat. denovis translation. in deafen. Bellarm.  therefore not without great reason do we reject our adversaries translations which so swarm with corruptions. Many other reasons are both learnedly and largely set down by james Gretser, which we for brevity sake omit.   

CHAP. VIII.  
Of the Latin vulgar Edition.  
OUR adversaries convinced by the truth itself, confess sometimes, that the vulgar Edition not only is to be preferred before all other latin Editions, but even before the Greek text of the new Testament, and the Hebrew text of the old, for in many places rejecting them, they follow our vulgar translation, as may be seen in the Latin edition in the Chapters 8. 9 10. 13. notwithstanding that in many other places they exceedingly inveigh against it, and with great hostility oppugn it, partly for that they see the same to contradict in many places their errors, and partly also, for that they labour by all means to perruert the text of the Scripture by their new versions, to make them speak in favour of their errors, which they cannot do if the authority of the old interpreter continue in all things entire and undiminished. 
Calvin in Antidoto contra 4● sess Concil. Tridentini  As for Calvin, he is so deadly an enemy to the vulgar edition, that with great excess he declameth against it in this manner: So far off is it, saith he, that there is one entire leaf, as there are scarce three verses together not defiled with some notable error. But to prove this his impudent assertion, he bringeth only one place out of the new Testament, which a little after we will show to have been exceedingly well translated out of the Greek. He bringeth no other places out of the old Testament than such as he taketh out of the Psalms, which (as it is evident) are translated word for word out of the Greek version of the Septuagint interpreters. Nay in the same place, Calvin acknowledgeth that the Latin interpreter hath, with all possible diligence, expressed the Greek translation. And as for the Greek interpretation of the Septuaginta, it is most learnedly defended by Genebrard, 
Geneb. i● Psal ●  so as it were superfluous to say any more. Indeed Caluins & Luther's disciples find fault with many other places in the vulgar edition, both of the old and new Testament, but we will lay four general grounds, out of which all their arguments may be easily answered.  
2. The first is: If our Adversaries will needs have the present Roma● Church condemned for following and authorizing the vulgar Latin interpretation, they must needs also condemn the whole ancient Church, and all the Fathers who lived in the first four hundred years after Christ, for they acknowledged no other interpretation of the old Testament as authentical, then that of the Septuaginta Interpreters, which much more departeth from the Hebrew text, now extant, than our vulgar Latin, as our Adversaries themselves confess. Wherefore if the Roman Church be to be condemned for the vulgar Edition, much more the Primitive Church for the version of the Septuaginta: and hereof it followeth further, that the Church is not to be condemned which followeth a translation of the Scripture which in some things may be amended, so long as nothing is to be found in it which is repugnant either to faith or good manners: For otherwise the ancient Church had erred in retaining the version of the Septuaginta, which was corrupted in some places, but those corruptions were not in any thing necessary to be known. 
Calu. l. 4, Instit c. 1. sect▪ 12.  Moreover Calvin himself con●esteth, that we must not depart from the Church, for errors of little importance, the ignorance whereof neither doth violate Religion, nor prejudice our salvation. Wherefore albeit there should be some such errors in the vulgar Edition, yet were not the Roman Church, 
Rom. ●. v. 8. Hiero●●. Epist. 57 ●d Dam.  which is so ancient & so hightly commended by the mouth of the Apostle (as speaketh S. Hierome) to be condemned or forsaken. And this may serve for answer to our adversaries arguments, when they object certain light faults of the vulgar Edition which have crept into it, either by the negligence of the printers, or by any other accident. As also what our adversaries object against the Psalter may hereby be convinced to be very weak, for seeing that no other version is followed in it, than that ancient version of the Septuaginta, they cannot condemn us, unless they will condemn the whole primitive Church, together with us, yea the Apostles and Evangelists themselves, who followed the same version, is as showed in the 11. Chapter of the Latin Edition of this Controversy.  
3. The second ground. A good interpreter doth not tie himself to transtate word for word, seeing that every tongue hath his proper phrases, and manner of speech, but contenteth himself to express the true sense and meaning of that which he translateth. Wherefore all our adversaries arguments are nothing worth by which they prove that certain places of the vulgar edition are somewhat otherwise in the Hebrew and Greek, so that the sense of the whole period be one and the same, as most of the places are which they carp at in the vulgar Edition.  
4. The third ground. The places of holy Scripture are of two sorts, some are clear & manifest, as almost all are, which set down the history of the old and new Testament. Others are obscure, and full of difficulty, as are many places in the Psalms and Prophets. Now if the interpreter in such places as are evident and manifest, do interpret rightly all of them, ●nd in such places of Scripture as are obscure, express a sense and meaning agreeable to the Letter, though he come short of the best sense, and that there might be a better gi●en, he is not therefore to be thought to have erred, or not to have fulfilled the office of a good interpreter. For so plentiful and profound is the sense of holy Scripture, especially in such places as are obscure, as it is not easy for any man to ●udge, which is the best sense. Nay if we must interpret a new, until we have found out the best sense, there will never be a● end of interpreting, but we must every year set forth a new inter●●●tation, or at least correct and amend the ●ormer, as our Adversaries have done, and Bezw by name, who having set out five divers editions of the new Testament every one much differing from the other, 
〈…〉 1598.  as himself freely confesteth, yet he plainly acknowledgeth that in his first edition he hath neither satisfied either the greatness of the work, or his own desire. Out of which ground we answer to that which our adversaries object: to wit, that there are many places of the vulgar Edition which might much better and much more clearly have been translated: for it is sufficient that they are well and rightly translated.  
5. The fourth ground. We are not to reprehend the translations of holy Scripture, only because they differ one from another, so long as they are not contrary the one to the other: and in this the holy Scripture differeth from other profane writings. For even as the holy Ghost in divers places of holy Scripture teacheth things different, but not repugnant: so the same holy Ghost can in one place & in the same words teach divers things. And herehence it is, 
1. p. q. 1● art. ult.  that S. Thomas teacheth well, as did S. Augustine before him, that of one & the same p●ace of Scripture, there may be many literal senses. For whereas the literal sense is that which the author intendeth, and the proper and chief author of the holy Scripture is God himself whose intention and meaning is not tied to one verity only, as is man's understanding, but he in one and the same moment comprehendeth all things; there is no doubt, but that he in the same words and at the same time, can intimate unto us divers things.  
6. The which thing is excellently declared by S. Augustin, 
Aug. l. 12. confess. cap. ultimo.  for having said that he thought Moses intended divers senses in his words, he correcteth himself saying, that without all doubt God who is the principal author of the Scriptures did so. O ●ord, saith he, seeing thou art God and not flesh and blo●d, if man be short sighted, can it be hidden from the spirit which will lead me into the right land, whatsoever thoug mast in those words to reveate to posterity, howsoever he by whom they were spoken, though per adveenture but of one seem only, 〈…〉 many other no less true, so S. Augustin● seeing therefore there are divers literal seme● of one and the same place, one interpreter may follow one sense, and another 〈◊〉 another, so long as neither of them do say any thing not agreeable to the word of God, but both the one sense and the other is godly, and conformable to other places of Scripture: and this maketh much for the dignity of the Scriptures, and profit of the Church, according to that which S. Augustin writeth elsewhere: 
Lib. 3. de Doct. Christ. c. 27.  How could God (saith he) better commend unto us the plentiful fruit of his Divine words, then by so disposing, as the same words may be understood divers ways.  
7. Nay we see moreover the holy Scripture itself to show very manifestly, that there are divers senses of the same words. For there is no doubt, but that commandment o● Deutero●omy, 
Deut. 25. v. 4.  Thou shal● not tie the mouth of the Ox that thresheth, according to the literal sense, doth signify that the mouth of an ox is not to be tied whilst he treadeth forth the corn in the floor, for so according to the Letter the jews observed it, as indeed they were bound to do. 
2. Cor. 9 v. 9 10.  Nevertheless S. Paul manifestly reacheth, that God the proper Author of the holy Scripture, intended chief another sense▪ Is God, saith he, so careful of Oxen, or doth he not so say in regard of us, for indeed these things are written for us; hitherto it also appertaineth that in the Hebrew tongue one word hath many ●ignifications, as hath been showed in the seventh Chapter in the Latin Edition.  
8. Out of this ground we affirm, that there is no repugnance between the Septuagint Interprters, and the Hebrew text, and between the Hebrew text and the vulgar Edition, or lastly between the interpretation of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament, and that of the new, how much soever the same words are diversly translated, to wit, otherwise of the S●ptuagint, and otherwise of the vulgar Latin interpreter, or otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the old Testament, and otherwise of the vulgar Edition of the new, where in both places the same words are cited, for the same places of Scripture are oftentimes otherwise cited by the Apostles in the new Testament, then hath the Hebrew text of of the old. But here is diversity without any repugnance, or contrariety. And this hath place especially in the Hebrew text, because in the Hebrew tongue there is so different reading of one and the same word. See examples hereof in the Latin Edition of this Controversy, in this Chapter.  
9 It willbe easy out of that which hath been said to answer that which our adversaries object against divers places of the vulgar edition. For albeit there be diversity between it, and the Hebrew text, there is no repugnance or contrariety: and if our Adversaries think otherwise it proceedeth from their ignorance of the Hebrew tongue, which hath many words subject to ambiguity, and very many phrases much different from the Latin and Greek phrase, as in the Chapters that follow may be seen in the Latin Edition from the 16. to the 20.   

CHAP. IX.  
The place of Genesis (she shall break thy head) is showed to be well translated.  
IT willbe too long, and little to my purpose to examine all the places of the vulgar Edition to which our Adversaries take exception, for many of them differ little or nothing from the Hebrew text of the old Testament, or from the Greek of new: we will handle some few of greatest difficulty, and which our Adversaries do most often and with great bitterness urge against us, that by them, judgement may be given of the rest which are of less importance.  
2. The first place which they say is depraved, and or which they often and eagerly complain, 
Lutherus & Lutherani in Genes. ib.  is that of the third of Genesis v. 15. Ipsa conteret caput tuum: for it is not ipsa in the Hebrew, but ipsum. as if it were spoken of the seed of the woman and not of the woman herself. The Lutherans cry out of great injury done thereby to Christ, as to whom alone it appertaineth to bruise the head of the Devil which we attribute to another, to wit, to the Blessed Virgin.  
3. Calvin also affirmeth, that we have found out a sacrilegious exposition, whilst we accommodate that to the holy Mother of Christ which was spoken of the seed, 
Calu. in c. ●. Gen. v. 1●.  Christ himself. And as for the Lutherans we have less cause to blame than for reprehending our version, seeing they stoutly maintain, that by the seed of the woman Christ only is meant.  
4. But as for Calvin, he showeth the greedy appetite he hath to calumniate when he calleth our version a sacrilegious exposition, for he convinced by the truth, confesseth that by the seed of the woman not only Christ is meant, but all his members yea even all mankind. It is therefore wonderful that he saith, it is a sacrilegious exposition, to apply to the Blessed Virgin Mary that which was spoken of the seed, unless he will not that the Blessed Virgin be any member of Christ, or to appertain any thing to mankind. For seeing that the promise of bruising Satan's head appertaineth to Chris●, and every member of his (as Calvin writeth in express words) it must doubtless principally appertain to the Blessed Virgin, 
Calu. l. 1. Inst. c. 14▪ sect. 18.  as who next after Christ, hath most strongly crushed Satan's head. 
Hunnius in Caluino judaizante, & in ●●nti-pareo.  Wherefore even the Lutherans themselves observe, that Calvin ha●h no reason to object this unto the Catholics.  
5. But to the end we may the better understand whether it be any fault at all, that we retain in the vulgar version the particle (ipsa) we are first to declare the literal sense of this place, and to examine after, whether it be any error that we retain the particle (ipsa) in our version. For it was not out of any ignorance or drowsy carelessness, that the feminine gender crept in here, instead of the masculine, or neuter, 
In Genes. loco citato  as Calvin calumniateth, but it was done of purpose, and for just cause, as shallbe showed.   

CHAP. X.  
Of the true sense of these words: Ipsa conteret etc.  
THAT we may find out the true sense of these words, we must first re●ute the f●lse expositions of our Adversaries. The Lutherans by the seed of the woman will needs have Christ only to be mean●: we confess indeed that he is principally meant thereby, and that therefore the place may be well understood of Christ, as many ancient Fathers have expounded it, but that Christ alone is meant hereby, and not his members we deny to be the literal sense for the reasons following.  
2. First it is evident that the seed of the Serpent which is opposed against the seed of the woman, doth not signify any one Serpent, but a multitude: it is therefore very probable, that by the seed of the woman a multitude also is signified, unless we will have the Scripture in so few words speak ambiguously. Moreover semen is a Noun collective properly signifying a multitude, neither is there any thing in this sentence that forceth us to depart from the proper signification of the Word. This reason is of so great a force, that C●luin was moved thereby to forsake the exposition of the Lutherans, which he would otherwise willingly have embraced the more strongly to assault us, for thus he writeth: Some make no doubt but Christ alone is meant by the seed of the woman, whose exposition I could willingly approve, 
Calu. in Gen. loco citato.  but that I see they offer too great violence to the word (seed) for who will grant, that a Noun collective is to be taken for one man only? Thus Calvin. So strong is the truth, that it extorteth a true confession from her greatest enemy.  
3. Secondly it is said of the seed of the woman, that it shall crush, and bruise the head of the Serpent, but this crushing and bruising the Scripture doth not attribute to Christ alone, but to all that lead a godly life in him, for to every just man the holy Ghost speaketh, saying: thou shalt walk over the Addar and Basilisk, 
Psal. 90▪ v 13.  and thou shalt tread under thy feet the Lion and the Dragon. And Christ saith unto his Disciples: Behold I have given you power to tread upon the Serpents and Scorpions, 
Luc. 10. v. 19  and upon all the power of the enemy. And the Apostle to the Romans prayeth saying. The God of peace crush Satan under your feet quickly. And lastly in very many places of Scripture the faithful are said to over come the Devil, 
Rom. 16. v. 20.  and to get victories against him, which is all one as to crush him. Seeing therefore the proper work of this seed agreeth also to the members of Christ, 
1. joan. 2. v 13.  the Word seed is not to be limited to Christ alone. 
Apoc. 12. v. 11.  Ad hereunto that God in these words intended to comfort not only Eve deceived by the craft of the Devil, 
1. Cor. 15. v. 57  but all her posterity. Now the comfort is more general, if all the faithful should be able by Christ to overcome the Devil, then if that Christ alone should overcome him, even as our comfort is greater that we together with Christ shall rise again, then if Christ only should rise, and he alone attain to eternal life.  
4. Thirdly. Albeit we should grant our Adversaries, that Christ alone doth crush the head of the Devil, which is the former part of the sentence: yet the latter part can by no means be applied to Christ alone, where it is said, that the Devil shall crush this seed, for Christ in his own person cannot be crushed by the Devil: we must therefore needs by this seed understand also the members of Christ, for in the Hebrew text it is thus word for word, ipsa, velipsum, conteret te in capite, & tu contere● cum, vel eam, in calcaneo, for the Hebrew word is the same in both places both in the first and in the later part of the sentence, and signifieth c●nterere.  
5. As for Calvin's exposition interpreting by the seed of the woman all man kind; 
In Gen. joco citato & l. 2.  it is not to be received, for God in this place denounceth enmity between the seed of the Serpent, 
Instit. c. ●3. sect. 2.  and the seed of the woman, but infidels and ungodly persons have no enmity with the Devil, and his seed, but are rather the seed and sons of the Devil, according to those words of Christ: 
joan. 8. v. 44.  You are of your father the Devil; they therefore cannot appertain to this seed of the woman.  
6. But whereas Calvin in another place saith, 
Calvin l. 1. Instit. c. 14. sect. 18.  that Christ and his members are signified by the seed of the woman, we like well of that his saying, for it is the exposition of the Catholic and ancient Fathers, and indeed the true literal sense.  
7. For in that sentence God saith, first that he will put enmity, wherefore he speaketh not of any natural enmity, as Calvin insinuateth, but of a supernatural proceeding from God. Moreover God signifieth between whom this enmity shallbe, to wit, between the Serpent and woman. Now as by the Serpent the Devil is meant, whom that natural Serpent represented, and in whom God laid his curse upon the Devil: so by the woman Eve, is meant the spouse of Christ, or his true Church represented by Eve, whose force and victory against the Devil was therefore foretold by God: 
Ephes. 5. v. 32. 2. Cor. 11. v. 2. & 3.  for that Eve represented the Church, as Adam did Christ, the Apostle plainly teacheth in his Epistle to the Ephes. and the same Apostle doth therefore elsewhere expound this place of Satan, and the Church, 
Apoc. ●. v. 13. 17.  as doth S. john in his Apocalyps where he declareth this enmity between the woman and the Serpent, to be indeed the enmity between the Church of Christ and the Devil: wherefore here by the Serpent is signified the Devil by the woman the Church, by the seed of the Serpent the Children of the Devil, and all the wicked who are aliens from Christ and his Church, but especially such as seduce others and oppugn the Church. 
Matt. 13. v. 38.  The seed of the woman are the Children of the Church, 
Apocal. 12. v. 17.  especially such as keep God's commandments, and have the testimony of jesus Christ, as S. john speaketh.  
8. Furthermore, this woman, to wit the Church shall crush the head of the Serpent, 
Psal. 90. v. 13. Luc. 10. v. 19 Rom. 16. v. 20.  as we have proved by many places of Scripture. But on the other side the woman's heel shallbe crushed by Satan, for the Church overcometh the Devil by her chief and more excellent members, but she is overcome in such her members as are base and worldly given, which set up their rest here upon earth, and taste no other things but such as are terrene & earthly, 
Defuga. saeculi c. 7.  worthily therefore signified by the heel of the Church; let us not therefore, saith S. Ambrose, walk by love and affection upon't he earth, and the Serpent cannot hurt us. In the first combat is that the Church over cometh by open war, and therefore it is expressed by crushing of the head. In the later combat in which a part of the Church is overcome, the enemy proceedeth by guiles and deceits, and therefore that combat is signified by crushing the heel, for the Hebrew word signifying calcaneum, 
Oleoster in c. 3. Gen.  doth signify also properly insiaiari, & ex insidijs aggredi, as appeareth by many places of Scripture. And out of ignorance hereof Calvin without cause reprehendeth the vulgar interpreter, for otherwise explicating this combat in the later part of the sentence than he had in the former, for the Emphasis, or force of the Hebrew word required that he should interpret the later part as he did by these words, tu insidiaberis calcaneo eius, which is as much to say, as thou shalt crush her heel, not by open war, but by taking her at unawares. See further of this matter in this Chapter in the Latin Edition the 8. §. And you shall see that our Adversaries make a great ado about a matter of small moment, if the words be rightly understood. For whether we read ipsa, and so refer it to the Church, or ipsum, that it may be referred to the children of the Church, the sense is all one, for it is all on to say, the seed of the woman shall crush the head of the Serpent, or the Children of the Church shall do it. And herehence it i●, that the ancient Fathers, whether they read ipse, as S. Hierome, 
Hier. in tradit.  and S. Chrysostome do, or ipsa, as read S. Ambrose, S. Augustine, S. Gregory, 
Hebraicis. Homil. 17. in Gen.  and other Latin Fathers, all of them expound this place of the Church.  
9 Howsoever it be, 
Amb. de fuga saeculi c. 7.  the reading of the vulgar Edition is to be preferred before the other, for this victory is rather to be attributed to the Church, 
Greg. in job. c. 38.  as to the Mother of all the faithful, and to her who continueth for ever, according to that promise of Christ, the gates of hell shall not prevail against her, then to her children or members, which are every day changed, for this promise is an explication of the promise made by God in Genesis, for the head of the Serpent, and the gates of hell signify one and the same thing. 
Matt. 1●. v. 18.  And if the victory be attributed to the woman, that is, to the Church, all things are better explicated, for God first did foretell the enmity that was to be between the woman & the Serpent, and afterward he maketh mention of the seed of the woman, and the Serpent's seed, so as the woman is opposed to the Serpent, and the seed of the one to the seed of the other; but the victory pro●●sed, is said to be gotten against the Serpent himself, and not against the seed: wherefore the same appertaineth rather to the woman herself then to her seed, for the words following (between thy seed and her seed) do not properly signify any new combat, but a continuance of that combat which was between the woman and the Serpent, and are put in by way of parenthesis, for the combat of the Church and of her children is all one combat.  
10. But the chief cause that moved the Church to retain at this time rather the word ipsa, then ipsum, or ipse, was to control the error of the Lutherans, for if the reading had been ipsum, or ipse, one might have thought this promise to have appertained only to Christ, as they (though erroneously) would have it, but by reading ipsa, this promise must needs be understood to have been made to the whole Church. For such is the custom of the holy Church, whether she interpret the Scriptures or administer the Sacraments to do all as is most profitable and most for the edification of the faithful. Neither is Christ hereby excluded but he is rather included in the name of the Church, as is also the holy Ghost, for the true Church of Christ cannot consist or do anything that is good without the help of her supreme head Christ and the assistance of his holy spirit. That the reading according to the Hebrew text i● ipsa, or ipsissima, and not ipsum, or ipse is learnedly proved in the next Chapter of the Latin Edition of this Controversy, to which I refer the Reader, and to the Chapters following, in which other places of the vulgar Edition are defended.   

CHAP. XI.  
That the written Word is no fit judge of Controversies, concerning matters of faith.  
OUR Adversaries in the beginning did stiffly maintain that the holy Scripture was to be the only judge of all Controversies which arise in matters of faith, but when they were told, that to make the Scripture a judge was as much as to say, the Scripture did hear, speak, & live, for all these appertain to a judge, & that nothing is more unreasonable than to assign such a judge of Controversies, as can neither hear, nor speak, but is utterly void of l●●e; 
junius contra Bell.  changing their opinion. They begin now to ●ay that the Scripture is improperly called a judge, 
Cont. 1. l. 3. c. 3. nota 9 etc. 9 nota 8. & 10.  and that to speak properly, the holy Ghost only is the judge. And thus having for many years together spoken unproperly, now a● last they fly to the holy Ghost, of whom there is no doubt, 
Robertus Rolocc. de vocation● effic. c. 15.  but that he is the supreme judge of all.  
2. But they should have added further that the holy Ghost at this time doth not immediately propose any new revelations to any particular man concerning points of faith, but only proposeth verities already revealed, and that by the mouth of the Church, as shallbe showed hereafter in the next Controversy where we shall have occasion to say more of this matter. Whosoever therefore contemneth the judgement of the Church, in so doing, he despiseth the judgement of Christ, and of the holy Ghost, for Christ himself saith, he that despiseth you, despiseth me. Neither doth the holy Ghost speak by the Scripture but when it is rightly understood, 
Luc. 10. v. 16.  which is never but when we embrace the interpretation of the Catholic Church, as we have already showed in the fourth Chapter.   

CHAP. XII.  
Whether the Scripture be obscure or hard to be understood.  
THE Word of God is either written, or unwritten and preached. Now certain it is, that the Word preached is not obscure, for it is not hidden from such as perish: the question therefore is of the written Word. 
●. Cor. 4. v. 3.  Our Adversaries in the beginning did teach that the whole Scripture was easy, and no part thereof hard to be understood, but after that not only many obscure places, but even whole Chapters out of the Canticle of Canticles, out of Izechiel, and other Prophets were objected by the Catholics, 
Beza de notis Eccl. Volu. 3. p. 137. edit. ann. 1582.  they changing their mind confess that very many places of Scripture are obscure, but that all points of doctrine necessary to salvation, are be ●ound in places plains and easy,  
2. For resolution of this question, we must answer with a distinction, and say, that if the word Scripture be taken for the bare Letter only, then doubtless the Scripture is obscure, 
●. Cor. 3. v. 6. 7. 9  or else S. Paul would not have said, that it killeth and causeth death and damnation; but if it be taken properly, that is to say, together with the true sense and meaning thereof, than it is not obscure but plain enough in all things necessary to salvation, and in this sense speaketh S. Augustine, 
l. 3. de doct. Christiana c. 7. & 9.  as do also other Fathers whom our Adversaries cite when they say, that all things necessary to salvation are manifestly contained in the holy Scripture.  
3. Moreover the holy Scripture is both manifest, and obscure, but not in regard of the same persons. It is passing obscure and not to be understood of the proud, such I mean, as despise the sense and consent of the holy Fathers, yea and of the whole Catholic Church, but to little ones and such as are humble who follow in all things the foresaid sense & consent, 
Psal. 18. v. 8.  it is manifest and perspicuous. The testimony of our Lord is faithful (saith the Psalmist) giving wisdom to the little ones, that is, to such as are humble and not proud: and Christ our Lord saith, 
Matth. 11. v. 25.  thou hast hidden these things from the wise, and revealed them to little ones, that is to the humble. The Scripture indeed is obscure to such as want faith, & are destitute of the holy Ghost, but easy & plain to those which abide & persevere in the faith of the Church, & by that means are guided & governed by the holy Ghost. 4. The Word of God shineth brightly, the Word of God, I say, not the word of men, not the word of the Devil, for that only is the true Word of God which is in the true sense & not in the bare letter; for the letter depraved by a false sense is not the Word of God, but the word of men or rather the word of the Devil: the word of God doth illuminate the eyes, but the eyes of such as have eyes to see, and not their eyes, 
2. Cor. 4. v. 4.  whose minds Satan hath blinded, so as the light of the Gospel cannot shine to them.  
5. In vain therefore do our adversaries heap together so many places of Scripture, in which it is said, that the Word of God is said to be clear, full of light, & perspicuous, for this is not attributed by the Scripture to the bare letter, but to the letter joined with the true sense, which true sense cannot be had out of the Catholic Church.  
6. Neither doth the Scripture say, that the Word of God is manifest to all indifferently, but to such only, as being endued with the true faith, are humble o● heart, and therefore inspired by the holy Ghost; if therefore our Adversaries will have the Scripture to be full of light, and easy to be understood of them, it is necessary that they return again to the true Church, in which only is true faith, 〈◊〉 humility, the true sense of the Scripture, & the true spirit of God, without whi●● the holy Scripture will never be plain, clear and manifest: for it is great imprudency, I will not say impudence, to contend so eagerly and with such hostility about the plainness and perspicuity of the holy Scripture, and to have no will to return into that way, the which only leadeth to that plainness and perspicuity.   

CHAP. XIII.  
Whether the holy Scripture be to be translated into the vulgar tongue.  
THAT we may briefly dispatch that which hath been so largely treated of by many concerning this matter, we will reduce all unto four general assertions. The first is; There is not doubt but the Word of God is to be preached to the people in the vulgar tongue, so as the question is only of the bare written letter.  
2. The second assertion is; Neither the example of Christ, nor of the Primitive Church do convince that the Scripture is to be translated into the vulgar tongue, but rather the contrary, for Christ never commanded the jews to translate the Scriptures out of the Hebrew tongue into the Syriac, and yet in Christ's time the ancient Hebrew tongue was to the jews as the Latin is to the French, Italians, and Spaniards, and only the Syriac tongue was in use amongst the common people, which even our Aduersaris confess, such I mean as are the more skilful in the Syriac, and Hebrew tongue, as namely these, Sebastian Munster in his preface before his Syriacal & Chalda●cal Grammar, Francis junius in his preface before the new Testament in the Syriac tongue of Termel●●●, Peter Martin Morentine of Navarre in the preface of his Caldaicall Grammar printed at Rochel the year 1590.  
3. Neither did S. Paul write in Latin to the Romans but in Greek, though not the Greek tongue but the Latin was their vulgar tongue. 
Hier. de Script.  So S. Luke did write the acts of the Apostles at Rome in Greek and not in Latin. 
Eccles. in Luca. See S. Aug. l. 2. de doct. Christ. c. 11. & seq ●  And even to S. Augustine's time four hundred years after Christ, the Bible was not extant but in the three learned tongues, Hebrew, Greek and Latin, no not in the time of Rabbanus Maurus, who lived eight hundred years after Christ, as himself testifieth in express words.  
4. Neither can our Adversaries allege any authentical example of the ancient Church for the translation of the Scripture into the vulgar tongue: 
Rabb. l. 5. de inst. Cler. c. 8.  they tell us indeed of one Vulphilas a Bishop of the Goths who is said to have translated the Scripture into the Gothish tongue, but he was not a Catholic, but an Arian Heretic, 
Theod. lib. 4. hist. Ecc. c. ult. Socrat. lib. 4. c. 27. Sozom l. 6. c. 37. Cass. in hist. ●ripart. l. 8. c. 13.  as witness Theodoret, Socrates, Sozomenus, and Cassiodorus.  
5. For as for that which certain late writers allege of S. Chrysostome his translating of the Scripture into the Armenian tongue, as also of S. Hierome his translating of the same into the Dalmatical tongue, there can no certain proof be brought thereof. And they who write this, do not affirm, that all the Scripture was translated by them, but certain parts only used of old to be read in the prayers of the Church, as the Psalms, Epistles, gospels, and Lessons which were sung publicly at Mass, & in the Canonical hours. which we read to have been granted by Pope john the eight of that name, to the Morauian● at their first conversion to the faith of Christ, but this was 880. years after Christ, and this custom was of no long continuance amongst them, as appear by that which Pope Gregory the seventh writeth to the Duke of Bohemia, 
Baron. Tom. 10. ann. 880. n. 19 & Tom. 11. ann. 1080. n. 1.  & is to be seen in Cesar Baronius.  
6. The third assertion; To translate the Scripture into the vulgar tongue is neither in itself unlawful, nor forbidden by any Ecclesiastical law, so it be truly translated. Nay such a translation serveth Preachers to great use, who are to cite and expound the Scriptures to the people in the vulgar tongue. Heretical translations are indeed forbidden, especially of the new Testament, because in them many places of holy Scripture are by false translating corrupted.  
7. The fourth assertion; It is not a thing profitable to all to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue, yea to many it is rather pernicious, for we are taught by the Apostle S. Peter, 
2. Pet. ult. v. 26.  that in the Scriptures are many things hard to be understood, which unlearned, and unstaid people deprave to their own destruction. Many also there are uncapable of meat and solid sustenance, who are therefore to be fed with milk, 
1. Cor. 3. v. 2. Heb. 5. v. 12.  as the Apostle speaketh, and for such it is more wholesome to be fed by the sermons and instructions of their Pastors, then to feed themselves with reading the Bible. It was therefore great prudence of the Church to forbid that the Bible, though translated and set forth by Catholics, should be read of all indifferently, 
Index. lib. prohibit. Reg. 4.  and without the approbation and leave of the Bishop, Pastor, or Ghostly Father.  
8. Our adversaries object certain places of S. Chrysostome, and S. Hierome, in which they exhort to the reading of the Scripture, but they should have observed that those Fathers speak of reading the Scripture in the Greek tongue then extant, or in the Latin according to the old edition, which was never forbidden to any by the Church: whereas our Controversy is about the translations of the holy Scripture out of the Hebrew, Greek and Latin into the vulgar tongue, which are all for the most part corrupted.  
9 And it is worth the nothing, that our Adversaries spend their time in vain, in gathering together arguments by which to persuade men that it is necessary for them to read the Scriptures in the vulgar tongue, to the end they may learn out of them what they must necessarily know if they willbe saved, for how truly or plainly soever they be translated no man shall ever receive any fruit by them, unless he first believe aright, and be guided by the holy Ghost, to whom it appertaineth to guide us into the right land, 
Psal. 142. v. 8. & 10.  to make known unto us the way in which we are to walk, to teach us the will of God which we are to fulfil. Which is manifestly to be seen in the jews who understand the Hebrew text much better than Christians, in which there is so ample and clear mention of Christ, and yet for all that they do not believe in Christour Adversaries therefore have little reason to keep such a do about the words of Scripture, or the translation of them, let them first embrace the true Faith which is in the Church only, let them seek after the holy Ghost who is not to be found out of the Church, let them seek out the true sense of the Letter, which the Church only conserveth uncorrupted, and it will easily be granted unto them to have the Scriptures in what tongue soever they will, so they be truly and uncorruptedly translated, and that they use them to their own salvation, and not to their destruction, as many do, whereof we have for witnesses not only the Scripture but daily experience, and this shall suffice concerning the translation of the Scripture into the vulgar tongue.  
10. For of the prayers in Latin either privately made by the people, or publicly offered by the Priest at mass, and in the administration of the Sacraments, we will treat hereafter in their proper places.   

CHAP. XIIII.  
That our Adversaries use many sleights in corrupting the Word of God.  
OUR Adversaries often require us to prove all that which we say out of the written Word of God, but when we cite the same in express terms they have many ways by which they deprave it. Wherefore before I make an end of this Controversy concerning the written Word, it shall not be from the purpose briefly to detect such their corruptions; partly to the end that no man be deceived by them, and partly that every man may understand nothing to be so plainly and clearly set down in the written Word, which by the Commentaries of crafty and subtle wits may not be weakened and made of little force, if no regard be had to the authority and judgement of the Church. And that no man may think that I herein calumniate them or deal less sincerely with them, I will set down out of their own writings some one or two exampls of each manner of corrupting, whereof many examples will occur in each Controversy.  
2. The first manner of shifting of places alleged out of the written Word is, to say, that the original text is corrupted, and what is alleged crept out of the margin into the text, whereof see many examples in the 12. and 18. Chapter of the Latin Edition of this Controversy.  
3. Their second shift is to reject the vulgar translation and instead thereof to cite some new and corrupt translation of their own. It is evident enough, that Luther in his first version of the new Testament into the German tongue, 
joannes Coclaus de acts Luther. ann. 1522.  set forth in the year 1522. hath more than a thousand errors, as many have observed, amongst which, neither the last, nor the least is his presuming to add to the text of S. Paul the 3. Chapter and 28. verse, the particle alone, thereby the stronglier to establish his doctrine, that Faith alone justifieth, for this place of the Apostle, We think a man is justified by faith, he translateth by faith alone: & when a certain friend of his to whom the same was objected by a Catholic asked the cause why he so translated it, 
Rom. 3 v. 28.  he no less ridiculously then proudly answereth, in a certain little book set forth by him in the year 1530. under this title: A certain information or answer made to two questions proposed by a certain good friend concerning the translation of Scripture, and the invocation of Saints. 
Luth. To. 4. Germ. excuso Wi●emb. anno 1551. fol. 475. pag. 2.  In which he adviseth his friend to answer the Catholics objection after this manner. D. Martin Luther will have it so, and sa●●h, that a Papist and an Ass is all one thing: so I will, so I command, let my will stand for a reason, for we will not be the Papists scholars, but their judges. Luther will have it so, & he saith, that he is a Doctor above all the Pope's Doctors. So Luther, concluding at last that the word (alone) shall remain in his new Testament, though it should make all his adversaries mad: and he addeth further, that he is only sorry, that he had not added two words more to the text, and translated it after this manner▪ we are ius●ifyed by only faith without any works of any law.  
4. Zwinglius also who first in our age endeavoured to persuade many, that the body of Christ is not really contained in the Sacrament of the Eucharist, the better to establish this his error, goeth about to prove that those words of Christ, this is my body, are very well translated thus, this signifieth my body, 
Zuingl. de vera & falsa relig. c. de Eu●b. par. 262. in lib. excuso Tuguri. 1555.  & with this his new translation he is so ravished, as if he had received the same from heaven, for these are his word●: So therefore hath Luke, with whom we content ourselves, without citing any other Evangelist. And having taken bread he gave thanks, broke it, and gave it them, saying, this signifieth my body which is given for you, do this in remembrance of me. Thou seest O faithful soul, but yet wrapped in absurd opinions, how all things here agree, and nothing inviolently either taken away or added, so as thou hast cause to wonder, that thou hast not been always of this opinion, and much more that any dare so boldly tear and rend the body of this speech so well joined together. So Zwinglius in the praise of his new translation, wherein he arrogates more authority to himself, than is due, so as that of Cicero in his book de divinatione may well be applied to him, I never saw any man arrogate greater authority to himself, and in the end say just nothing.  
5. Moreover concerning Caluins and Bezas errors in translating or rather perverting the holy Scriptures, 
Calu. l. ●. instil. c. 16. à sect. 10 ad ●3. & in c. 26. Matt. v. 39 & in c. 27.  whole books are extant, as also of the corruptions of the Geneva bills, which are every year increased, but this shall much more commodiously be declared hereafter in the particular Controversies. 
Matth. v. 46. Item i● Catech Domi. 10.  We will only here set down one example of a corruption to be found in Caluins, 
Beza in c. ●. ad Heb. v. 7. & in 〈◊〉 mai●ore Catech sm. Calu. c. 16. ●it. sect. 10 in ●ine.  Bezas, and all the Geneva bibles. And this corruption is forged a purpose by them to confirm a new and notable blasphemy against Christ and himself, by some apparent testimony of Scripture, for they reach in many places that Christ when he prayed in the Garden was seized with an extreme fear, 
Beza in maiori Catechis. Vol. ●. tract. Theol.  lest God being angry with him for our sins, for which he had taken upon him to satisfy, should inflict upon him eternal damnation, neither did Christ fear without cause, 
pag. 657. ●uxta edit. Genevens. 〈◊〉 1582. apud. Eu●tathium Vignon.  for they say he suffered upon the Cross the pains of a damned person, & the torments of hell; for these are the impions words of Calvin: Christ suffered in his soul the torments of a forlorn, and damned man: and Beza saith, at what time Christ hang upon the Cross, he was in the midst even of the torments of hell, which is as much, as to say, that God himself was not only afraid of the torments of hell, but that he suffered and endured them, for it is evident that Christ was true God. But against these absurd paradoxes we are to dispute hereafter. It shall suffice here to show, that they have depraved the holy Scripture, to 〈◊〉 this their impious assertion, for whereas it is written in the fifth to the Hebrews, 
Heb. 5. v. 7.  and 7. v. that Christ was heard of God for his reverence, Calvin first, and after Beza, and all the Geneva bibles, make the text to say, Christ was heard by reason of his fear, or because he was afraid, but that in the last Edition Beza hath added more words to the text, 
Beza annot. ann● 1598.  making it sound thus: His prayers being heard he was delivered from this fear. Moreover Calvin in his commentaris and Beza in his annotations seek to prove out of this text, that Christ feared eternal damnation, & that he was delivered out of this fear by his prayers which he offered with tears: true it is that in the French bibles lately printed at Geneva, the year 1●05. they have put in the margin, vel pro sua reverentia, where enforced by truth they manifestly contradict Calvin and Beza, who plainly deny that this place is so to be translated, yet lest their inconstancy should be noted, they leave the former words in the text (ayant esté exaucé 〈◊〉 qu'il craignoit) that is in latin, exauditus est eo, vel in eo, quod timuit.  
6. But all others as well Catholics as their Adversaries who have written before Calvin, translate prosua reverentia, vel propietate sua, as Erasmus, Bucer, the Tigurives in their bibles of the year 1542. Nay Sebastian Castalio for this cause sharply reprehendeth Beza, 
Castal. in de●en. suae translationes ●ibli. in ●ine.  who glorieth that Calvin was the first that found out this new explication, in a note of his upon this 7. v. see his editions of the year 1560. & 1565.  
7. The third shift is, their false exposition of the text though never so truly translated, for by divers commentaries and little notes in the margin, they go about to persuade the Readers the clean contrary to that which is expressly in the text: see examples hereof in this Chapter in the latin edition.   

CHAP. XV.  
The fourth, fifth, and sixth shift that our adversaries use in depraving the Word of God.  
THE fourth shift of our Adversaries is to fly to figurative and metaphorical speeches, for it is most true that was wit●●ly observed by S. Augustine. 
Aug. l. 3 de doctrine. a Christ. cap. 10.  If (saith he) the mind be preoccupated with any erroneous opinion, whatsoever the Scripture saith to the contrary, men take to be a figurative speech. And surely there is no kind of figurative speaking to which our Adversaries at one time or another have not recouse: but there are three figures of which our Adversaries do oftenest serve themselves in depraving the holy Scriptures, which are these, Me●onymia, Hyperbole, and Ironia, Metonymia is a figure very familiar with Calvin, 
Matt. 26. v. 26. Calu. l. 4. Instit. c. 17. sect. 21.  for by it he perverteth many places of Scripture, yea even those plain words of Christ, this is my body: for having disputed long about the sense of those words at last he concludeth thus: I omit (saith he) Allegories and Parables, lest any man should think that, I seek evasions, a●d to go from the matter in hand, I say it is a metonymical speech. So Calvin.  
2. By the figure Hyperbole our adversaries shift of all those so evident testimonies, by which we prove that remisof sins is obtained of God by good works, 
Tob. 4. v. 11.  as are these: Alms delivereth from all sin, 
Tob. 12. v. 9  and death, and suffereth not the soul to go into darkness. And again, Alms delivereth from death, 
Eccl. 3. v. 33.  & it is that that purgeth sin & maketh us find mercy & life everlasting. Moreover water putteth out a burning fire, and Alms resisteth sin: for the Lutherans say, that all these are Hyperbolical speeches. 
Apol. confess. Augustanae tit. de justif.  Beza also seeketh to extenuat by the figure Hyperbole that which the Apostle writeth in the praise of the Roman Church, 
Rom. 1. v. 8. Beza ibid.  when he saith, your haith is preached all over tse world. Calvin in like manner by the same figure not only depraveth many places of the ancient Fathers, 
Lib. 4. Instit. c. 14. sect. ult.  but will needs force Christ himself without any need at all, to speak Hyperbolically. And finally Philip Melancthon goeth about by the figure Ironia to delude those manifest words of Christ, 
Calu. in c. 6. Matt. v. 16. & in c. 24. v. 82.  that which remaineth, give Alms, 
Luc. 11. v. 41. Phil. in apol. Confess. Aug. tit. de justif.  and behold all things are clean unto you. For Philip contendeth that Christ spoke not those words in earnest, but in jest, which he took from Erasmus, as he did many other things, but Calvin and Beza confess, 
Erasmus in annot. Luc. Calu. & Beza in illa verba S. Luc.  that this is a foolish Ironia. Albeit they also pervert the same words another way, for they restrain the word omnia, only to meat.  
3. The fifth shift is, when catholics allege plain places of Scripture which admit no figure, to say that the Scripture, yea even Christ himself did speak exactly, but after a gross and popular manner, the meaning is, that he speaketh only probably, and not solidly. For example sake when we prove that the Sacrament of the Eucharist excelleth the Manna of the jews by these words of Christ, 
joan. 6. v. 48. & 49.  your Fathers indeed have eaten Manna and are dead, this is the bread descending from heaven, that if any man eat of it he die not, Calvin's answer is, that Christ accommodated his speech to the gross conceit or opinion of the jews. 
l. 4. Instit c. 14. sect. 25.  When we prove the Exorzismes of the Church, by which she casteth out devils, to be holy, because Christ saith, one Devil will not cast out another, Calvin answereth, we must remember (saith he) that when Christ useth such proverbs, 
Calu. in illum v. 25 Matth. 12.  as are in use among the people, he useth them only, as probable conjectures, and not as solid proofs. So he. No marvel therefore, if our Adversaries say our arguments are not solid, seeing they write so much of Christ's own arguments.  
4. Their sixth shift is, to answer to such plain testimonies as are alleged out of Scripture against their errors, that the Scripture speaketh not simply, that is to say, not truly, but according to the false opinion of them, against whom it hath to do, which indeed is nothing else, but to deny the Scripture. This is an usual shift of Calvin who interpreteth to dispute by contention, 
Cal. l. 2. instit. c. 1●. sect. 7.  to be all one, as to disput not according to our own mind, but according to their error, and foolish affection who obscure the light of the Gospel. So as when we prove that our Sacraments excel the Sacraments of the old law, 
Coloss. 2. v. 17.  because S. Paul saith, that the ceremonies of the jews were shadows of things to come, but Christ the body itself. And again, that the Sacrifices of the law could not make perfect according to conscience▪ 
Heb. 9 v. 9 & 13.  but served only to sanctification & cleansing of the flesh: and 〈◊〉 that they could not take away sin. 
Heb. 10. v. 11.  To all these places Calvin answereth, 
Cal. l. 4. Instit. c 14. sect 25.  we are, saith he, to observe diligently that the Apostle S. Paul in all these places speaketh, not simpliciter, sed per contentionem, which what it is to say, we have interpreted out of Calvin before.   

CHAP. XVI.  
Of the seventh and eight shift.  
THEIR seventh shift is when they are urged with express words of Scripture to say that they are to be understood before men, and not before God, or in truth. This shift Calvin and Beza use often, for thus they rid themselves of these places, Every branch that bringeth not forth fruit, in me, he will cut off▪ 
Ioa●. 15. v. 2. Calu. Ibid.  Calvin h●●re contendeth that the evil which believe in God are in Christ only in the estimation of men▪ and not indeed: whereof it followeth, that the words of Christ are thus to be understood, to wit, that the evil 〈◊〉 indeed to men to be in Christ, but are not so in truth.  
2. That place also of S. james, 
jacob. 2. 24 Beza Calu & ill● v●rba.  Man is justified by works, and not by faith alone, is interpreted by Calvin and Beza, and almost all other our Adversaries of justification only before men, & not before God. See more examples in this Chapter in the latin edition.  
3. The eight shift is, when they know not what to answer, to say it is an improper speech, and by this occasion to change the words of the Scripture into other words of their own forging. For when we c●te the words of Christ in which a reward is promised to fasting and prayer, Calvin turneth them of, 
Calu▪ in c. 6. Matt. v. 4.  with this answer, when Christ, saith he, promiseth a reward from God 〈◊〉 fasting, he speaks improperly, as is said a little before. Concerning prayer, likewise whe● to prove free will we allege those wor●s of Christ, 
Matt. 12 v. 33. Calu. ibid.  to wit, make the tree good, Calvin answereth, it is an improper speech.   

CHAP. XVII.  
Of the ninth and tenth shift.  
THEIR ninth shift is, when the words of Scripture are so plain and manifest, that they cannot otherwise escape, they say at last, that ●e Scripture commendeth unto us a thing impossi●e: and to make this shift more probable ●hey corrupt the text by adding the parti●● (si) as if the Scripture spoke conditionally, and not absolutely, for when we cite the places of Scripture in which life everlasting is promised to such as keep God's commandments, 
Matt. 19 v. 17.  as when Christ saith, if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments; 
Luc. 10. v. 28.  And again, do this and thou shalt live. The answer of Calvin and Beza is, 
Calu. in 19 Matt. v. 17.  that Christ in these words speaketh of a thing impossible. Calvin upon the former place writeth thus: Some of the ancient Father's, saith he, have interpreted this place amiss, as do the Papists after them, as if Christ should teach ●hat we could deserve life everlasting by keeping the law. And a little after he concludeth saying: This answer of Christ is according to the old law, to wit that no man can be accounted just before God, but he who ●hall satify the law, which is impossible. And upon the later place he writeth this, 
Calu in c. 16. Luc. v. 28.  it is impossible, saith he, to fulfil what the law commandeth, 
Lib. 3. Instit. c. 17. sect. 7.  yea it is a principal axione with Calvin. & a common answer to all such places. A legal promise, saith he, annexed to a condtion impossible proveth nothing, & thus with s●ch impossibilities he dallieth with us, & with the holy Scripture itself: so far forth, ●s they dare affirm, that the Apostle in one Chapter avoucheth unto us seven times things impossible: 
Calu. & Beza. in c. ●. ad Rom.  for whereas the Apostle in the 2. cap. of the Ep. to the Rom. and 6. affirmeth first, that God will render t● every one according to his works, the interpret the place thus, that God will indeed give to men according to their good works it there were any such, but that no man can do any good work before God. 
Beza in c. ad Rom. v. 6. annot. ●edit. annis 1550. 1564. 1565.  Is there any man, saith Beza, that shallbe able to bring these works which the Apostle saith shallbe rewarde● with eternal life? And whereas in the seventh v. the Apostle saith, that God doth render life everlasting to such as seek the same by the patience of good works, their answer is, that he insinuateth a thing impossible, and that no man can do any good work before God, no not the justest man, which is not worthy of eternal damnation. Whosoever, 
Calu. l. 3. Instit c. 19● sect. 4.  saith Calvin, have made the greatest progress before all others in the way of the Lord, if they cast their ●yes upon the Lord God, what work soever they attempt or go about, they see into be accursed. And surely ● for my part, could easily believe that such is the progress of our adversaries in the way of our Lord▪ See the rest of the Apostles places in the latin edition.  
2. The tenth & last shift is the wresting of divers words to a wrong sense, and to invent sundry different understandings of the words, to build upon it many interpretations never heard of before, and for a final Conclusion to say, 
Luc. 22. v. 19  the place is obscure, and therefore proveth nothing. For example hereof, those most evident words of Christ, this i● my 〈◊〉 with is given for you, may suffice: for some of them wrest the pronoun hoc, others the word est, others the word corpus, others the pronoun meum, others the relative quod, others the preposition pro, others the pronoun he vobis and others the Verb datur, and 〈◊〉 word they wrest divers ways, so as one more than thirty years ago, 
Anno 2577.  hath gathered out of their writings two hundred expositions of these few words of Christ, of which 〈◊〉 Xainctes 〈◊〉 particularly 84. And that they are both many, and different, yea repugnant, wherewith they labour to make obscure these words of our Saviour, no man can doubt. See another example in the latin edition. And it is worthy of the noting, that in all these shi●fs they serve themselves of other places of Scripture, to prove what they say: whereby it may appear how easy a thing it is, to corrupt the Scripture by other places of Scripture, but that the provident and daily ca●e of the holy Catholic Church opposeth itself against such corruptions, 
●. ad Tim. v. 25. Matth. ●8.  worthily therefore called the Pillar and firmament of truth, against which the gates of hell shall never prevail.  
FINIS.