West. You have corrupted? Emissenus; for instead of "cibis satiandus," that is, "to be filled with meat," you have set "cibis satiandus spiritualibus," that is, "to be "filled with spiritual meats."

Cran. I have not corrupted it; for it is so in the Decrees 9. West. You have corrupted another place of Emissenus; for you have omitted these words: "Mirare, cum reveren"dum altare cibis spiritualibus satiandus ascendis: sacrum "Dei tui corpus et sanguinem fide respice; honorem mirare; "merito continge," &c. That is, " Marvel thou, when thou "comest up to the reverend altar to be filled with spiritual "meats: look in faith to the holy body and blood of thy "God; marvel at his honour; worthily touch him.”

Cran. This book hath not that ".

West. Also, you have falsified this place by evil translat- Cranmer charged ing: "Honora corpus Dei tui,” i. e. "Honour the body of with false

66

thy God." You have translated it, "s Honora eum qui translating. "est Deus tuus," i. e. "Honour him which is thy God." Whereas Emissenus hath not "honour him," but "honour "the body of thy God."

himself.

Cran. I have so translated him; and yet no less truly, Cranmer than not without a weighty cause: else it should not have purgeth been without danger, if I had translated it thus; "Honour "the body of thy God;" because of certain, that according to the error of the Anthropomorphites, dreamed that God had a body.

West. Nay, you most of all have brought the people into that error, which so long have taught, that he sitteth at the right hand of God the Father; and counted me for an he

P [See Cranmer's translation, vol. ii. p. 323, and the original among the Authorities in the Appendix: from a comparison of which it will appear, that the charge of corruption was unfounded.]

a De Consecrat. dist. 2. " Quia."

[See the original in the Authorities, which fully justifies Cranmer's assertion. It is strange that Weston, in the very act of charging another with false quotation, should himself be so audacious as to substitute "merito continge" for "mente continge."]

[This "evil translating" is not stated quite correctly. Cranmer's words are, "Look upon the body and blood of him that is thy God; "honour him, touch him with thy mind," &c. See vol. ii. p. 323; and vol. iii. p. 415.]

Argument.

The right hand of

retic, because I preached, that God had no right hand.
Then I will oppose you in the very articles of your faith.
Christ sitteth at the right hand of God the Father;
But God the Father hath no right hand:

Ergo, Where is Christ now?

Cran. I am not so ignorant a novice in the articles of my God, what faith, but that I understand, that to sit at the right hand of it signifieth. God doth signify, to be equal in the glory of the Father. West. Now then take this argument:

Cranmer charged with mistranslating Duns.

Dr. Cran

Wheresoever God's authority is, there is Christ's body;
But God's authority is in every place:

Ergo, What letteth the body of Christ to be in every place?

Moreover, you have also corrupted Duns.

Cran. That is a great offence, I promise you.

West. For you have omitted "secundum apparentiam," i. e. "as it appeareth;" where his words are these: "Et si "quæras, quare voluit Ecclesia eligere istum intellectum ita "difficilem hujus articuli, cum verba Scripturæ possent sal"vari secundum intellectum facilem et veriorem, secundum apparentiam, de hoc articulo," &c. That is, "If you demand, why the Church did choose this so hard an un"derstanding of this article, whereas the words of Scripture may be salved after an easy and true understanding, as appeareth, of this article," &c.

66

66

66

Cran. It is not so.

West. Also, you have set forth a Catechism in the name mer chal- of the Synod of London, and yet there be fifty, which witnessing that they were of the number of that Convocation, never heard one word of this Catechism.

lenged

for set

ting forth the Catechism in

Cran. I was ignorant of the setting to of that title; and the Convo- as soon as I had knowledge thereof, I did not like it:

the name of

cation.

[See Defence, vol. ii p. 333. Cranmer did not, as he was charged, omit the words "secundum apparentiam;" but it may be questioned whether he rightly translated them. The sentence proceeds thus : "dico, quod eo Spiritu expositæ sunt Scripturæ, quo conditæ. Et ita supponendum est, quod Ecclesia catholica eo Spiritu exposuit, quo "tradita est nobis fides, Spiritu scilicet veritatis edocta, et ideo hunc "intellectum eligit quia verus est." Scotus, In Sentent. lib. iv. dist. ii. qu. 3. ed. Hiqu. tom. viii. p. 619.]

mer purg

therefore, when I complained thereof to the Council, it was Dr. Crananswered me by them, that the book was so entitled, because eth himself it was set forth in the time of the Convocation ".

66

concerning the Cate

West. Moreover, you have in Duns translated "In Ro-chism. "mana Ecclesia," pro "Ecclesia catholica ;" " In the Church "of Rome," for "the catholic Church."

Cran. Yea, but he meant the Romish Church.

mer charg

West. Moreover, you have depraved St. Thomas ; namely, Dr. Cranwhere he hath these words; "In quantum vero est sacrifi-ed with "cium, habet vim satisfactivam: sed in satisfactione atten- mistrans lating Tho. "ditur magis affectio offerentis, quam quantitas oblationis. Aquinas. "Unde Dominus dicit apud Lucam de vidua quæ obtulit "duo æra, quod plus omnibus misit. Quamvis ergo hæc "oblatio ex sui quantitate sufficiat ad satisfaciendum pro "omni pœna: tamen fit satisfactoria illis pro quibus offer"tur, vel etiam offerentibus, secundum quantitatem suæ "devotionis, et non pro tota pœna." That is, " Inasmuch "as it is a sacrifice, it hath the power of satisfaction: but "in satisfaction the affection of the offerer is more to be

"[A different explanation of this title was given by Philpot; who in the Convocation of the preceding October, "stood up, and spake "concerning the Catechism, that he thought they were deceived in the "title of the Catechism, in that it beareth the title of the Synod of "London last before this, although many of them which were then "present, were never made privy thereof in setting it forth; for that "this House had granted the authority to make ecclesiastical laws unto "certain persons to be appointed by the King's Majesty; and what"soever ecclesiastical laws they, or the most part of them, did set "forth, according to a statute in that behalf provided, it might well be "said to be done in the Synod of London, although such as be of this "House now had no notice thereof before the promulgation." Foxe, vol. iii. p. 20. See also Lamb, Hist. of the XXXIX. Articles, p. 8. It is a question who was the author of this Catechism. By the Oxford disputants it was attributed, on the assertion, as they pretended, of Cranmer, to Ridley: but Ridley himself, though he admitted that he noted many things for it and consented to it, denied that he was its author. It has been ascribed also to Ponet, Bp. of Winchester, and to Alex. Nowell. Ward, one of the English divines sent to the Synod of Dort, believed it to be Nowell's; and Strype, in his later publications, expresses the same opinion. But it must be confessed that his reasons are not convincing. See Burn. Ref. vol. iii. p. 410. Strype, Cranm. p. 294; Memor. vol. ii. p. 368; Annals, vol. i. p. 353. Preface to Cranmer's Catechism, Oxford, 1829.]

* [See Answer to Gardyner, (vol. iii. p. 156.)]

Weston

before the

weighed than the quantity of the oblation. Wherefore "the Lord said in Luke's Gospel of the widow which "offered two mites, that she cast in more than they all. "Therefore although this oblation of the quantity of itself "will suffice to satisfy for all pain, yet it is made satisfac"tory to them for whom it is offered, or to the offerers, "according to the quantity of their devotion, and not for "all the pain."

66

You have thus turned it; "Quod sacrificium sacerdotis "habet vim satisfactivam," &c. That is, "That the sacri"fice of the priest hath power of satisfaction," &c. And therefore in this place you have chopped in this word "sacerdotis," "of the priest;" whereas in the translation of all the New Testament you have not set it, but where Christ was put to death. And again, where St. Thomas hath " "pro "omni pœna," "for all pain," your book omitteth many things there y.

Thus you see, brethren, the truth steadfast and invincitriumpheth ble; you see also the craft and deceit of heretics: the truth victory. may be pressed, but it cannot be oppressed. Therefore cry altogether, "Vincit veritas ;" i. e. "The truth over"cometh z."

This disordered Disputation, sometime in Latin, sometime in English, continued almost till two of the clock. Which being finished, and the arguments written, and delivered to the hands of Mr. Say, the prisoner was had away by the Mayor, and the doctors dined together at the University College.

y [The manuscript in the Public Library, Cambridge, gives Cranmer's answer to this charge:

"Cran. Because I would not write all that long treatise."]

z [It appears from the manuscript in the Public Library, Cambridge, that Cranmer, having filled the respondent's place, now demanded, according to the practice of scholastic disputations, to argue as oppo

nent.

"Cran. Oppono: vos respondete scripturis.

"West. Habebis alium diem ad opponendum."

This day was the following Thursday, April 19; Tuesday and Wednesday having been occupied by the Disputations with Ridley and Latymer.]

[Disputation at Oxford with Harpsfield, April, 1554.]

and Monu

It followed furthermore... that Mr. Harpsfield,... the Foxe, Acts nineteenth of April, should dispute for his form, to be ments, made Doctor. To the which Disputation the Archbishop of vol. iii. Canterbury was brought forth, and permitted, among the P. 86, &c. rest, to utter an argument or two in defence of his cause.

a

Disputation of Master Harpsfield, Bachelor of Divinity, answering for his form to be made Doctor.

[The argument against Harpsfield was supported for some time by Weston, who concluded with a quotation from Fulgentius. After which,] not waiting Harpsfield's answer, he offered Mr. Cranmer to dispute; who began in this wise b.

Cran. I have heard you right learnedly and eloquently entreat of the dignity of the Scriptures, which I do both commend and have marvelled thereat within myself. But whereas you refer the true sense and judgment of the Scrip- The opitures to the catholic Church, as judge thereof, you are much nion of Mr. Harpsfield deceived; specially, for that under the name of the Church, reproved, you appoint such judges as have corruptly judged, and referring contrary to the sense of the Scriptures. I wonder likewise the Scrip

a [The following is the title of this Disputation in the manuscript in the Public Library, Cambridge:

"Disputationes habita Oxoniæ de vera præsentia naturalis et orga"nici corporis Christi in sacramento altaris.

"Defendit D. Harpsfield veritatem, respondentis agens partes.

"Opponit primum D. Weston disputandi gratia, deinde D. Cranmerus "er sua opinionis fide."]

b [An Oxford scholar, who was present at this Disputation, relates, that Cranmer "passed all men's expectation in doing the same. I my"self, which did ever think that he was better learned than many re"ported he was, yet would I have thought he could not have done so "well, nor would not have believed it, if I had not heard him myself." Foxe, Acts, &c. 1st edit. p. 935.]

the sense of