|
|
KEY Commentary Side Textual Bibliographic Scriptural
|
|
risen and longed for hym? But coude not beleue the wound of
temptacyon beinge greater then that it coude be healed wyth the
preachynge of a woman with out any other miracle.
|
risen] [1573],
rosen [1531]
Peter . . . hym. Cf. John 20.3–9.
John 20.3–9
But . . .
miracle. Cf. John 20.1–2.
John 20.1–2
|
|
Ioseph of Arimathea and Nicodemus which while he yet liued
durst not be a knowen of hym assone as he was deed /
bedged his
bodie and buried hym boldly. And the wemen assone as
yt was lawful
to worke prepared their annoyntmentes with all
diligence. And
the hertes of the dysciples that went to Emaus burned
in their brestes
to heare speake of hym.
|
Matt. 27.57–60, Mark 15.43,
Luke 23. 50–53, John 19.38
Ioseph of
Arimathea. Cf. Matt. 27.57–60, Mark 15.43, Luke 23.50–53, John 19.38. Nicodemus. Cf.
John 19.39.
John 19.39
bedged] begged [1573]
Christ hys resurrection.[[1573]
And the wemen . . .
annoyntmentes. Cf. Mark 16.1–2, Luke 24.1. Answer has "annoyntmentes," while NT has "odures," i.e.,
"odours" (Wallis 12o/22;TNT 86A).
Mark 16.1–2, Luke 24.1
speake of hym] him spoken of [1573]
And the hertes . . .
hym. Cf. Luke 24.32.
Luke 24.32
|
|
And thomas had not forsaken Christ / but coude not beleue vntyll
he sawe hym / and yet desyred and longed to se hym and
reioysed
when he saw hym and for ioye cryed out / my lorde my
god. There was none of them that euer railed on hym and came so
ferre forth / to saye / he was a disceauer and wrought wyth the
dyuels craft all thys whyle / and se where to he ys come in the
ende? we defye hym
and all hys werkes false wretch that he was and hys
false doctrine also. And therto must they haue come at the last
/ when feare / sorow and wonderynge had bene past / yf they had
not bene preuented
and holpe in the meane tyme.
|
And thomas . . .
god.
John 20.24–29.
John 20.24–29
The Disciples were not without fayth but yet the same was very doubtfull.[[1573]
There . . .
tyme. Cf. CWM 8/1.548/19–25.
|
|
Yee and peter assone as he had denied chryst came too
hym selfe immedyatly and went out and wepte bytterly for sorow.
And thus ye se / that peters fayth fayled not / though yt were
oppressed for a tyme: so that we neade to seke no gloses for
the texte that Chryst
sayd to peter how that hys fayth shulde not fayle.
Yes sayth Master More yt fayled in hym selfe / but was reserued
in our ladye.
|
peter ...
bytterly. Cf. Matt. 26.75, Mark 14.72, Luke 22.61–62.
Matt. 26.75, Mark 14.72,
Luke 22.61–62
Peters fayth fayled not. [1531]
Yee . . .
tyme. Cf. CWM 8/1.551/12–14.
reserued in our
ladye. Cf. CWM 6/1.108/1–21. The Sicilian canonist Panormitanus
(1386–1445) had claimed that, in certain
situations, a simple believer rather than the
pope or bishops might possess the authentic message of Christ, as Luther
adduced in his Resolutiones of the theses of the
Leipzig Disputation, 1519 (WA 2.404/26–31; not in LW) and in responding
to Exsurge Domine in Defense
and Explanation of All the Articles, December 1520 (WA
7.430/9–12; LW 32.81). Luther believed that, amid widespread error, he himself preserved the true faith, Resolutiones of the Leipzig theses (ibid.) and a later lecture
on Genesis (WA 42.334/30; LW 2.102).
Panormitanus also held that Mary had preserved the faith of the church
when Peter fell. Cf. Commentaria in libros
decretalium (Lyons, 1524) 1, de
electione, 122r, cited by Gogan 345n156. More's interpretation,
that the one candle still shining at the end of Tenebrae is a
symbol of Mary, may have come from The Life of
Christ by the 14c Carthusian Ludolf of Saxony, cited by James
Monti, The King's Good Servant but God's First
(San Francisco: Ignatius, 1997) 225 and
n209.
Probably because written against More, Answer
discusses the role of Mary more than any other of Tyndale's works. Cf.
[H3, “And how . . . oure faith”; K5, “And when he saith…” and following; P3, “blasphemie . . . and not she” and following; R1v, “And if there were no imperfectenesse” and following]. Tyndale also alludes to her Conception
free from original sin and Assumption into heaven (Obedience C3, S2); he accuses Mary of minor personal sins (Obedience S4v); he grieves that ignorant
Christians rely on Marian devotions, such as the Little Office of the
Blessed Virgin Mary (Obedience I8v, 1 John A5) and the fast between 8 December and 2
February (Mammon F1v). Thanks to Stephen J. Mayer for the following
interpretation: when Tyndale writes that Jesus emerged from Mary's
armpit (Matthew p1v), he may be mocking the
legend which claimed that Jesus passed through Mary's side. John of Damascus (c645-c750) (NCE 7.1047–49)
rejects this idea in Exposition of the Orthodox
Faith 4.14 (PG 94.1161–62; 2NPNF 9.86); cited by E.P. Nugent CMF, "The Closed Womb of the Blessed
Mother of God," Ephemerides Mariologicae 8 (1958)
266 and n109.
[Hand] [1531]
|