An answer to a certain book, writtenAn answere to a certeine booke, written

Now M. R. beginneth to declaim against.¹ the new Testament in Greek, as he hath in the former Chapter done against the old Testament in Hebrew. Wherein how unlearnedly and unworthily he hath behaved him-self, the wise reader may perceive by that which hath been answered to his particular reprehensions. And as no cause can be alleged to prefer the latin translation of the old Testament before the Hebrew fountain, so no less absurd and unreasonable is it to leave the Greek, and follow the vulgar translation in the new testament.

NOw M. R. beginneth to declame against.¹ the newe Testament in Greeke, as he hath in the former Chapter done against the old Testament in Hebrew. Wherein how vnlearnedlie and vnworthelie he hath behaued him-selfe, the wise reader may perceiue by that which hath beene answered to his particular reprehensions. And as no cause can be alledged to preferre the latine translation of the old Testament before the Hebrew fountaine, so no lesse absurd and vnreasonable is it to leaue the Greeke, and follow the vulgare translation in the new testament.

1. 1pag. 361.

Their chiefest reason of greatest show and likelihood against the Hebrew text is the malice and impiety of the Jews, who being enemies of Christian religion may therefore be thought to have in many places corrupted their bibles of purpose to disgrace and discredit the Gospel of Christ. But as this is proved most untrue, so being granted for true, it can be no reason against the Greek testament, which ever since the writing and first publishing thereof remained in the custody ⟨p. 326⟩and handling of most godly fathers, Churches and Countries, who had as great skill and care to preserve it from corruption, as had the latins to keep their translations pure and sincere. Then what reason can you bring, or what colour of reason can you pretend in the new testament to cleave only to the latin, and to reject the Greek? The latin, you say, is purer, then the Greek. So have your fellows of Rhemes indeed told us, and this they make their principal ground, whereupon they have been bold to follow the latin, and not the Greek, in translating the new testament. But what advantage soever you think to make of this, or any other such reason, true it is, and by trial so shall be found, and hath heretofore by diverse sufficiently been proved, that the latin translation of the new testament is more generally & notoriously corrupted, then you shall ever be able to avouch of the Greek original text. That Beza writeth against Erasmus in commendation & defence of the latin translation, it is evident, he meaneth not wholly to excuse it from corruption in all places, but only in certain, which Erasmus found fault