Heretical translation against the Sacrament of HOLY ORDERS, and for the MARRIAGE OF PRIESTS and VOTARIES

1 AGAINST the Sacrament of Orders what can they do more in translation, than in all their Bibles to take away the name of Priest and Priesthood of the New Testament altogether, and for it to say, Elder and Eldership? Whereof I treated more at large¹ in another place of this book. Here I add these few observations, that both for Priests and Deacons, which are two holy orders in the Catholic Church, they translate, Ministers, to commend that new degree devised by themselves.² As when they say in all their bibles, Fear the Lord with all thy soul, and honour his ministers. in the Greek it is plain thus,³ & honour his Priests. as the word always signifies, and in the very next sentence themselves so translate,⁴ Fear the Lord and honour the Priests. but they would needs borrow one of these places for the honour of Ministers. As also in the epistle to Timothee,⁵ where S. Paul talks of Deacons, and names them twice: they in the first place translate thus,⁶ Likewise must the Ministers be honest &c. And a little after, Let the Deacons be the husbands of one wife. Lo, the Greek word being one,⁷ and the Apostle speaking of one Ecclesiastical order of Deacons, and Beza so interpreting it in both places, yet our English translators have allowed the first place to their Ministers, and the second to Deacons. And so (because Bishops also went before) they have found us out their three orders, Bishops, Ministers & Deacons. Alas poor souls, that can have no place in Scripture for their Ministers, but by making the Apostle speak three things for two.

2 There are in the Scripture that are called ministers in infinite places, and that by three Greek words commonly: but that is a large signification of minister,⁸ attributed to all that minister, wait, serve, or attend to do any service Ecclesiastical or temporal, sacred or profane. If the word be restrained to any one peculiar service or function, as one of the Greek words is, then does it signify Deacons only. Which if they know not, or will not believe me, let them see Beza himself in his Annotations upon S. Matthew,⁹ who protests that in his translation he uses always the word, Minister, in the general signification: and, Diaconus, in the special and peculiar Ecclesiastical function of Deacons. So that yet we can not understand, neither can they tell us, whence their peculiar calling & function of Minister comes, which is their second degree under a Bishop, & is placed instead of Priests.

3 Again, what can be more against the dignity of sacred orders and Ecclesiastical degrees, than to make them profane & secular by their terms and translations? For this purpose, as they translate, Elders & Eldership, for, Priests and Priesthood, so do they most impudently term S. Peter and S. John,¹⁰ lay men: they say for Apostle, Embassadour, & Messenger: Io. 13. v. 16. and for Apostles of the Churches, Messengers of the same: 2 Cor. 8. for Bishops, overseers Act. 20. Why my Masters, does idiota signify a lay man? Suppose a lay man be as wise and learned as any other, is he idiota? or that one of your Ministers be as unlearned and ignorant as any shepherd, is he not idiota? so then idiota is neither clerk nor lay man, but every simple and ignorant man. They that spake with miraculous tongues in the primitive Church, were they not lay men many of them?¹¹ yet the Apostle plainly distinguishes them from idiota. So that this is more ignorantly or wilfully translated, than Neophytus, a young scholar, ¹² in all your Bibles.

4 Now for changing the name Apostle into Messenger, though Beza do so also in the foresaid places, yet indeed he controls both himself and you in other places, saying of the same word, Apostles: ¹³ A man may say in Latin, legates, but we have gladly kept the Greek word (Apostle) as many other words familiar to the Church of Christ. ¹⁴ And not only of the principal Apostles, but also of the other Disciples he both translates and interprets in his commentary, that they are notable Apostles. and he proves that all Ministers of the word (as he terms them) are and may be so called. And for your Overseers, he says, Episcopos, and not, Superintendentes. Which he might as well have said, as you, Overseers, But to say the truth, though he be too too profane, yet he does much more keep & use the Ecclesiastical received terms, than you do, often protesting it and as it were glorying therein,¹⁵ against Castaleon especially. As, when he says Presbyterum, where you say Elder: Diaconum, where you say, Minister, & so forth. Where if you tell me that howsoever he translate, he means as profanely as you, I believe you, and therefore you shall go together, like Master, like Scholars, all false and profane translators. For, this Beza (who sometime so gladly keeps the name of Apostle) yet calls Epaphroditus legatum Philippensium, Philip. 2. v. 15. Whereupon the English Bezites translate, your messenger, for, your Apostle. As if S. Augustine who was our Apostle, should be called, our messenger.

5 As also, when you translate of S. Matthias the Apostle,¹⁶ that he was by a common consent counted with the eleven Apostles: Act. 1. v. 26. what is it else but to make only a popular election of Ecclesiastical degrees,¹⁷ as Beza in his Annotations would have us to understand, saying, that nothing was done here peculiarly by Peter as one of more excellent dignity than the rest, but in common by the voices of the whole Church. though in another place upon this election he notes Peter to be the chief or Corypheus. And as for the Greek word in this place,¹⁸ if partiality of the cause would suffer him to consider of it, he should find, that the proper signification thereof in this phrase of speech, is, as the vulgar Latin interpreter, Erasmus, and Valla (all which he rejects) translate it, to wit, He was numbered, or,¹⁹ counted with the eleven Apostles, without all respect of common consent or not consent. As you also in your other bibles do translate.

6 Which diversity may proceed of the diversity of opinions among you. For we understand by Master Whitgift’s books against the Puritans,²⁰ that he and his fellows deny this popular election, & give preeminence, superiority, and difference in this case to Peter, and to Ecclesiastical Prelates. And therefore he proves at large the use and Ecclesiastical signification of the Greek word χειροτονία, not to be the giving of voices in popular elections, but to be the Ecclesiastical imposing of hands upon persons taken to the Churches ministry. Which he says very truly, and needs the less here to be spoken of, specially being touched²¹ elsewhere in this book.

7 One thing only we would know, why they that plead so earnestly against their brethren the Puritans, about the signification of this word, pretending herein only the primitive custom of imposition of hands in making their Ministers, why (I say) themselves translate not this word accordingly,²² but altogether as the Puritans, thus: When they had ordained them elders by election in every Church. ²³ Act. 14. v. 23. For if the Greek word signify here the peoples giving of voices (as Beza forces it only that way out of Tullie & the popular custom of old Athens) then the other signification of imposing hands is gone, which Master Whitgift defends, and the popular election is brought in, which he refels [refutes]: and so by their translation they have in my opinion overshot themselves, and given advantage to their brotherly Adversaries. Unless indeed they translate as they think, because indeed they think as heretically as the other, but yet because their state of Ecclesiastical regiment [rule, government] is otherwise, they must maintain that also in their writings, how so ever they translate. For an example, They all agree to translate Elder for Priest: and M. Whitaker tells us afresh in the name of them all,²⁴ that there are no Priests now in the Church of Christ, that is (as he interprets himself) This name Priest is never in the New Testament peculiarly applied to the Ministers of the Gospel, ²⁵ this is their doctrine. But what is their practise in the regiment of their Church? Clean contrary. For in the order of the communion book, where it is appointed what the Minister shall do, it is indifferently said, Then shall the Priest do or say this & that: &, Then shall the Minister, &c. Whereby it is evident that they make Priest a proper and peculiar calling applied to their Ministers, & so their practise is contrary to their teaching and doctrine.

8 Now concerning imposition or laying on of hands in making their Ministers (which the Puritans also are forced to allow by other words of Scripture,²⁶ howsoever they dispute and jangle [wrangle] against χειροτονία ) none of them all make more of it, than of the like Judaical ceremony in the old Law, not acknowledging that there is any grace given withal, though the Apostle say there is, in express terms. But they will answer this text (as they are wont) with a favorable translation, turning grace, ²⁷ into gift. As, when the Apostle says thus, Neglect not THE GRACE that is in thee, ²⁸ which is given thee by prophecy, with imposition of the hands of Priesthood, they translate, Neglect not the GIFT. And Beza most impudently for, by prophecy, ²⁹ translates, to prophecy: making that only to be this gift, & withal adding this goodly exposition, that he had the gift of prophecy or preaching before, and now by imposition of hands was chosen only to execute that function. But because it might be objected that the Apostle says, Which was given thee with the imposition of hands, or (as he speaks in another place) by imposition of hands, making this imposition of hands an instrumental cause of giving this grace,³⁰ he says that it did only confirm the grace or gift before given.

9 Thus it is evident that, though the Apostle speak never so plain for the dignity of holy Orders, that it gives grace, & consequently is a Sacrament, they pervert all to the contrary, making it a bare ceremony, suppressing the word grace, which is much more significant to express the Greek word,³¹ than gift is, because it is not every gift, but a gracious gift, or a gift proceeding of marvelous and mere grace. As when it is said,³² To you it is given not only to believe, but also to suffer for him. the Greek word signifies this much, To you this grace is given, &c. So when God gave unto S. Paul all that sailed with him,³³ this Greek word is used, because it was a great grace or gracious gift given unto him. When S. Paul pardoned the incestuous person before due time,³⁴ it is expressed by this word,. Because it was a grace (as ³⁵ Theodorete calls it) given unto him. & therefore also the alms of the Corinthians,³⁶ 1 Cor. 16. v. 3. are called, their grace, which the Protestants translate, liberality, neglecting altogether the true force and signification of the Greek words.

10 But concerning the Sacrament of orders, as in the first to Timothee,³⁷ so in the second also, they suppress the word grace, and call it barely and coldly, gift, saying: I put thee in remembrance, that thou stir up the gift of God which is in thee, by the putting on of my hands. Where if they had said, the grace of God which is in thee by the putting on of my hands: then were it plain that S. Paul by the ceremony of imposing hands upon Timothee in making him Priest or Bishop, gave him grace: and so it should be a very Sacrament of holy Orders. For avoiding whereof they translate otherwise, or else let them give us another reason thereof, specially the Greek word much more signifying grace, than a bare gift, as is declared.

11 The more to profane this sacred order, whereunto continency & single life has been always annexed in the New Testament for the honour and reverence of the functions thereunto belonging, to profane the same (I say) and to make it mere laical [lay] & popular, they will have all to be married men, yea those that have vowed the contrary: and it is a great credit among them, for our Priests Apostataes to take wives. This they would deduce from the Apostles custom, but by most false and impudent translation: making S. Paul say thus as of his own wife and the other Apostles wives, Have not we power to lead about a wife being a sister, ³⁸ as well as the rest of the Apostles? Whereas the Apostle says nothing else but,³⁹ a woman a sister, that is, a Christian woman, meaning such holy women as followed Christ, and the Apostles, to find and maintain them of their substance.⁴⁰ So does S. Jerome interpret it, and S. Augustine, both directly proving that it can not be translated, wife, but, woman: & the Greek fathers most expressly. And as for the Greek word, if they say it is ambiguous,⁴¹ S. Augustine tells them that as the Apostle has put it down with all the circumstances, there is no ambiguity at all that might deceive any man. Yea let us set a part the circumstances, & consider the Greek word alone in itself, and Beza will tell us in other places,⁴² that it signifies a woman rather than a wife: reprehending Erasmus for translating it, wife, because there is no ⁴³ circumstance annexed why it should so signify: thereby declaring that of itself it signifies woman, and therefore much more when the circumstance also (as S. Augustine says makes it certain, that so it does signify.

12 Wherefore great must the impudency of Beza be (and of the English Bezites) that knowing this and protesting it elsewhere in his Annotations, yet here translates, sororem vxorem, a sister a wife, and saying after his lordly manner, I doubted not so to translate it, disputing and reasoning against all other interpreters both ancient and later, for the contrary,⁴⁴ yea and affirming that S. Paul himself, did foolishly, if he spake there of other rich women. Such a fancy he has to make the Apostles not only married men, but that they carried about their wives with them, and that they were the Apostles wives, (for so he translates it Act. 1. v. 14.) that returned with them after our Lord’s ascension to Jerusalem,⁴⁵ and continued together in prayer till the Holy Ghost came upon them. Whereas S. Luke there speaks so evidently of the other holy & faithful women which are famous in the Gospel (as the Maries & other) that the English Bezites themselves dare not here follow his translation. For I beseech you Master Beza (to turn my talk unto you a little) is there any circumstance or particle here added why it should be translated wives? none.⁴⁶ then by your own reason before alleged it should rather be translated, women. Again, did Erasmus translate well, saying, It is good for a man not to touch a wife? 1 Cor. 7. v. 1. No, say you, reprehending this translation, because it dehorts [dissuades] from marriage. If not, show your commission why you may translate it in the foresaid places, wife, and, wives, at your pleasure: the Greek being all one, both where you will not in any wise have it translated, wife, and also where you will have it so translated in any wise.

13 Again, to this purpose they make S. Paul say as to his wife,⁴⁷ I beseech thee also faithful yokefellow Phil. 4. v. 3: for in English what does it else sound but man and wife? But that S. Paul should here mean his wife, most of the Greek fathers count it ridiculous and foolish, S. Chrysostom, Theodorete, Oecumenius,⁴⁸ Theophylactus. Beza & Calvin both mislike it, translating also in the masculine gender, S. Paul himself says the contrary that he had no wife, 1 Cor. 7. And as for Clemens Alexandrinus who alleges it for Paul’s wife, Eusebius plainly insinuates,⁴⁹ and Nicephorus expressly says, that he did it ἀνταγωνιστικῶς, by the way of contention and disputation, whiles he earnestly wrote against them that oppugned [attacked, opposed] matrimony.

14 Again, for the marriage of Priests & of all sorts of men indifferently, they translate the Apostle thus:⁵⁰ wedlock is honorable among all men. Where one falsification is, that they say, among all men, and Beza, inter quosuis, and in the margin, ⁵¹ in omni hominum, ordine, in every order or condition of men, and in his Annotation he rails, to make this translation good: whereas the Greek is as indifferent to signify, that marriage is honorable by all means,⁵² in all respects, wholly, throughly [thoroughly], altogether. So does not only Erasmus, but also the Greek fathers expound it, namely Theophylact,⁵³ whose words in the Greek be very significant, but too long here to trouble the reader with them. Not in part says he, honorable, & in part not: but wholly, throughout, by all means honorable and undefiled, in all ages, in all times. Therefore to restrain it in translation to persons only (though it may also very well be understood of all persons that have no impediment to the contrary) that is to translate falsely.

15 Another and the like falsification in this same short sentence, is, that they make it an affirmative speech, by adding, is: whereas the Apostles words be these,⁵⁴ Marriage honorable in all, and the bed undefiled. Which is rather an exhortation, as if he should say, Let marriage he honorable in all, and the bed undefiled. How honorable? That (as S. Peter speaks, 1 Pet. c. 3.) men converse with their wives according to knowledge, imparting honour, ⁵⁵ unto them as to the weaker vessels: that is (as S. Paul also explicates it, 1 Thess. c. 4.) possessing every man his vessel in sanctification and honour, ⁵⁶ not in the passion or lust of concupiscence [lust, desire], as the Gentiles, &c. Lo what honorable marriage is, to wit, when the husband uses his wife honorably and honestly in all respects, not beastly and filthily according to all kind of lust & concupiscence. And that the Apostle here exhorts to this honorable usage of wedlock, rather than affirms anything, it is most probable both by that which goes before & that which immediately follows, all which are exhortations. & let the Protestants give us a reason out of the Greek text, if they can, why they translate the words following by way of exhortation, Let your conversation be without covetousness: ⁵⁷ and not these words also in like manner, let marriage be honorable in all. Certain it is that the Greek in both is all one phrase and speech,⁵⁸ and Beza, is much troubled to find a good reason against Erasmus who thinks it is an exhortation. The sentence then being ambiguous and doubtful at the least, what jolly fellows are these, that will so restrain it in translation, that it can not be taken in the other sense, and not rather leave it indifferently, as in the Greek and vulgar Latin it is, lest the sense of the Holy Ghost be not that, or not only that, which they translate.

16 Moreover it is against the profession of continency in Priests & others, that they translate our Saviour’s words of single life and the unmarried state, thus:⁵⁹ All men can not receive this saying: as though it were impossible to live continent. Where Christ said not so, that all men can not, but, All men do not receive this saying. But of this I have spoken more in the chapter of free will. Here I add only concerning the words following, that they translate them not exactly, nor perhaps with a sincere meaning. For if there be chastity in marriage as well as in the single life, as Paphnutius the Confessor most truly said, and they are wont much to allege it, then their translation does nothing express our Saviour’s meaning, when they say, There are some chaste, ⁶⁰ which have made themselves chaste for the kingdom of heavens sake. for a man might say, all do so that live chastely in matrimony. But our Saviour speaks of them that are impotent and unable to generation [begetting], called ⁶¹ eunuchs or gelded [castrated] men, and that in three divers kinds: some that have that infirmity or maim from their birth, othersome that are gelded afterward by men, & other that geld themselves for the kingdom of heaven, not by cutting of those parts which were an horrible mortal sin, but having those parts as other men have,⁶² yet geld themselves (for so is the Greek) and make themselves unable to generation. Which how it can be but by voluntary profession, promise, and vow of perpetual continency which they may never break, let the Protestants tell us. Christ then as it is most evident speaks of gelded men, either corporally, or spiritually (which are all such as profess perpetual continency:) and they tell us of some that were borne chaste, and some that were made chaste by men, and some that make themselves chaste: a most foolish and false translation of the Greek words, χάρισμα and χάρις.

17 The Bezites here, are blameless, who translate it word for word, eunuchs: but they are more to blame in another place, where in derogation of the privilege and dignity of Priests,⁶³ they translate thus: The Priest’s lips should preserve knowledge, ⁶⁴ and they should seek the Law at his mouth. where in the Hebrew and Greek it is as plain as possibly can be spoken,⁶⁵ The Priest’s lips shall keep knowledge, and they shall seek the Law at his mouth. Which is a marvelous privilege given to the Priests of the old Law, for true determination of matters in controversy, and right expounding of the Law, as we read more fully Deutero. 17. Where they are commanded under pain of death to stand to the Priests judgement, which in this place God by the Prophet Malachi calls his covenant with Levi, and that he will have it to stand,⁶⁶ to wit, in the New Testament, where Peter has such privilege for him and his successors, that his faith shall not fail, where the Holy Ghost is president [presiding] in the Councils of Bishops and Priests. All which these Heretics would deface and defeat, by translating the words otherwise than the Holy Ghost has spoken them.

18 And when the Prophet adds immediately the cause of this singular prerogative of the Priest, quia angelus Domini exercituum est, because he is the Angel of the Lord of hosts, which is also a wonderful dignity, so to be called: they after their cold manner of profane translation say, because he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts. So do they in the next chapter call S. John the Baptist, messenger: ⁶⁷ where the Scripture no doubt speaks more honorably of him as being Christ’s precursor, than of a messenger, which is a term for posts also and lackeys. The Scripture I say speaks thus of S. John,⁶⁸ Behold I send mine angel before thee: and our Saviour in the Gospel, Mat. 11. Luc. 7: telling the people the wonderful dignities of S. John, and that he was more than a prophet, cites this place and gives this reason, For this is he of whom it is written, Behold I send mine Angel before thee. Which S. Jerome calls meritorum αὔξησιν,⁶⁹ the encrease and augmenting of John’s merits or privileges, that in Malachi he is called an Angel: ⁷⁰ & S. Gregory says, he which came to bring tidings of Christ himself, was worthily called an Angel, that in his very name there might be a dignity. and all the fathers, and all wit and reason conceive a great excellency in this name: only our profane Protestants that think of all divine things and persons most basely, translate accordingly, even in the foresaid Gospel also, making our Saviour to say, that John was more than a prophet, because he was a messenger. Yea where our Saviour himself is called,⁷¹ Angelus Testamenti, the Angel of the Testament, there they translate, the messenger of the covenant.

19 If S. Jerome in all these places had translated, nuntium, then the English were, messenger: but translating it, angelum, and the Church and all antiquity so reading and expounding it as a term of more dignity & excellency,⁷² what mean these base companions to disgrace the very eloquence of the Scripture, which by such terms of amplification would speak more significantly and emphatically? What mean they (I say) that so inveigh against Castaleo for his profaneness, themselves to say, for Angel, Messenger, for Apostle, Legate or Embassadour, and the like? Are they afraid, lest by calling men Angels, it would be mistaken, as though they were Angels indeed by nature? Then S. Paul spake dangerously, when he said to the Galatians,⁷³ As God’s Angel you received me, as Christ Jesus. But to proceed.

20 It is much for the authority and dignity of God’s Priests, that they do bind and loose, and execute all Ecclesiastical function as in the person & power of Christ, whose ministers they are. So S. Paul says, 2 Cor. 2. v. 10. that when he pardoned or released the penance of the incestuous Corinthian,⁷⁴ he did it in the person of Christ, that is (as S. Ambrose expounds it) in the name of Christ, in his steed, as his Vicar and deputy. But they translate it, In the sight of Christ. Where it is evident they can not pretend the Greek, & if there be ambiguity in the Greek, the Apostle himself takes it away interpreting himself in the very same case, when he excommunicates the said incestuous person, saying, that he does it,⁷⁵ in the name and with the virtue of our Lord Jesus Christ: so expounding what he means also in this place.

21 And it may be, that for some such purpose they change the ancient and accustomed reading in these words of S. Matthew, Ex te enim exiet dux qui regat populum meum Israel: ⁷⁶ translating thus,⁷⁷ Out of thee shall come the Governor that shall feed my people Israel. for, that shall rule my people Israel. This is certain that it is a false translation, because the Prophets words Mich. 5. (cited by S. Matthew) both in Hebrew & Greek,⁷⁸ signify only a ruler or Governor, & not a Pastor or feeder. Therefore it is either a great oversight, which is a small matter in comparison of the least corruption: or rather because they do the like Act. 20. v. 28, it is done to suppress the signification of Ecclesiastical power and government, that concurs with feeding, first in Christ, and from him in his Apostles and Pastors of the Church, both which are here signified in this one Greek word, to wit,⁷⁹ that Christ our Saviour shall rule and feed, (Psal. 2. Apoc. 2. v. 27) yea he shall rule in a rod of iron: and from him, Peter and the rest, by his commission given in the same word feed and rule my sheep: ⁸⁰ Io. 21: yea and that in a rod of iron, as when he stroke Ananias and Sapphîra to corporal death,⁸¹ as his successors do the like offenders to spiritual destruction (unless they repent) by the terrible rod of excommunication. This is imported in the double signification of the Greek word, which they to diminish Ecclesiastical authority, they translate, feed, then, rule, or govern.

22 To the diminishing of this Ecclesiastical authority, in the later end of the reign of king Henry the eight, & during the reign of king Edward the sixth, the only translation of their English Bibles, was, Submit yourselves unto all manner ordinance of man: whether it be UNTO THE KING,⁸² AS TO THE CHIEF HEAD. 1 Pet. 2. Where in this Queen’s time, the later translators can not find those words now in the Greek, but do translate thus,⁸³ To the king as having preeminence: or, to the king as the Superior. Why so? Because then the King had first taken upon him this name of Supreme head of the Church, and therefore they flattered both him and his son, till their heresy was planted, making the holy Scripture to say that the king was, the Chief head, which is all one with, supreme head: but now being better advised in that point (by Calvin I suppose and the Lutherans of Magdeburg,⁸⁴ who do jointly inveigh against such title, and Calvin against that by name, which was first given to king Henry the eight) and because they may be bolder with a Queen than with a king, and because now they think their kingdom is well established, therefore they suppress this title in their later translations, & would take it from her altogether if they could, to advance their own Ecclesiastical jurisdiction, without any dependence of the Queen’s supreme government of their church, which in their conscience (if they be true Calvinists, or Lutherans, or mixed of both) they do and must mislike.

23 But howsoever that be, let them justify their translation, or confess their fault. And as for the kings supremacy over the Church, if they make any doubt, let them read S. Ignatius words,⁸⁵ who was in the Apostles time, even when S. Peter gave the foresaid admonition of subjection to the king, and knew very well how far his preeminence extended, and therefore says plainly in notorious words, that, we must first honour God, then the Bishop, & then the king. Because in all things nothing is comparable to God, & in the Church, nothing greater than the Bishop, who is consecrated to God for the salvation of the whole world, and⁸⁶ among magistrates & temporal rulers, none is like the king. See his⁸⁷ other words immediately following, where he prefers the Bishops office before the kings and all other things of price among men.

24 But in the former sentence of S. Peter, though they have altered their translation about the kings headship, yet there is one corruption remaining still in these words, Submit yourselves UNTO ALL MANNER ORDINANCE OF MAN. Whereas in the Greek it is word for word as in the old vulgar Latin translation, omni humanae creaturae, ⁸⁸ and as we have translated, to every human creature: meaning temporal Princes and Magistrates,⁸⁹ as is plain by the exemplification immediately following, of king, and dukes and other sent or appointed by him. But they in favour of their temporal statutes, Acts of Parliament, Proclamations & Injunctions made against the Catholic religion, do translate all with one consent, Submit yourselves to all manner ordinance of man. Does κτίσις signify ordinance? or is it all one to be obedient to every one of our Princes, and to all manner ordinance of the said Princes?

25 A strange case and much to be considered, how they wring and wrest the holy Scriptures this way and that way and every way to serve their heretical proceedings. For when the question is of due obedience to Ecclesiastical canons, and decrees of the Church and general Councils, where the Holy Ghost by Christ’s promise is assistant, and whereof it is said,⁹⁰ If he hear not the Church, let him be unto thee as an heathen & Publican: and, He that hears you, hears me: ⁹¹ he that despises you, despises me: there they cry out aloud, and odiously term all such ordinances, Mens traditions, and, commandments of men, & most despitefully contemn and condemn them. But here, for obedience unto temporal edicts & Parliament-statutes daily enacted in favour of their schism and heresies, they once maliciously forged, and still wickedly retain without alteration, a text of their own, making the Apostle to command submission unto all manner ordinance of man, whereof has ensued the false crime of treason and cruel death for the same, upon those innocent men and glorious martyrs, that chose to obey God and his Churches holy ordinances, rather than man’s statutes and laws directly against the same.