Full text of "Errata of the Protestant Bible; or, The truth of the English translations examined; in a treatise, showing some of the errors that are to be found in the English translations of the Sacred Scriptures, used by Protestants ... in which also, from their mistranslating the twenty-third verse of the fourteenth chapter of the Acts of the Apostles, the consecration of Dr. Matthew Parker ... is occasionally considered"

See other formats

V ^^^ M k-Sf^* ^^ ^vv*

X>«j

KjS >

fytull W^mmxi^ Jibat^g

THE GIFT OF

..CrvoA^y^ Co^OUi/..^

Aj'^'^j^.^..

irj^li^f

Cornell University Library
BS470 .W26 1876

3 1924 029 272 411 ^^^^
olin

Cornell University
Library

The original of this book is in
the Cornell University Library.

There are no known copyright restrictions in
the United States on the use of the text.

http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029272411

ERRATA Cornell CathoUc

Union Library.

OF IH£

PROTESTANT BIBLE;

OB THE

TRUTH OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS EXAMINED •

IN A TREATISK,

SHOWING SOME OF THE EREOBS THAT ARE TO BE FOUND IN THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS

OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES, USED BY PROTESTANTS, AGAINST SUCH POINTS OF

RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE AS ARE THE SUBJECT OF CONTROVERSY BETWEEN

THEM AND THE MEMBERS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH;

IN WHICH, ALSO,

FSOM THEIK MISTRANSLATING THE TWENTY-THIRD VERSE OF THE FODRTEKNTH CHAPTER OP THE

ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, THE CONSECRATION OP DR. MATTHEW PARKER, THE

FIRST PROTESTANT ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, IS

OCCASIONALLY CONSIDERED.

BY THOMAS WAED, ESQ.

A NEW EDITION, CAREFULLY REVISED AND CORRECTED.

TO WHICH AKE ADDED,

THE CELEBEATED PEEFACE OF THE EEV. DE. LINGAED,

IN ANSWER TO EYAN'S "ANALYSIS,"

AND

A VINDICATION, BY THE EIGHT EEV. DE. MILNEE,

"For I testify to every one that beareth tlie words of the prophecy of this book : If any man shall add to these things,
God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of
this prophecy, God shall take away bia part out of the Book of Life, and out of the Holy City, and from these things which
are written iu this book." Eetei^tions xxii. 18, 19.

NEW YOEK:
PUBLISHED BY D. & J. SADLIER & CO.

33 BARCLAY STREET AND 38 PARE PLACE.

TO THE

RIGHT REVEREND JOHIT FENNELLY,

'VIOAB APOSTOLIC OF SIASBAS,

mSHOP OF CASTOBIA,
THIS EDITION OP WABD'S INVALUABLE WORK,

AOAIKST

THE GROSSEST OF ALL C0EBUPTI0N8,
THE OOBBUPTION OF THE SACKED SCBIPXUBES,

MOST KESPECTFULLY mSCEIBED,

AS A SMALL TESTIMONY OF THE HIGH ESTEEM AND VENEBATIOS

IN WHICH HIS LOBDSHIP IS HELD,

HIS LOBDSHIP'S

MOST OBEDIENT HUMBLE SEEYANT3,

THE EDITOR AND PUBLISHEE.

36 AKOUISBA tJTBEET, DUBUH,

1st Jvly, 1841.

CONTENTS.

FAGB

Preface to the Fotirtli Edition. 1 — 14

The Author's Preface 15—24

The Truth of Protestant Translations of the Bible examined 25 — 31

Of the Canonical Books of Scriptm:e 32

Of Books rejected by Protestants for Apocryphal 33 — 39

Protestant Translations against the Church 40, 41

against the Blessed Sacrament and Sacrifice of the Mass, 42, 43

against the Blessed Sacrament and the Altar. 44, 45

against Priests and Priesthood 46, 47

against Priesthood and Holy Orders 48, 49

against the Authority of Priests 60, 51

against Episcopal Authority 52, 53

against the Single Lives of Priests 54, 55

against the Sacrament of Baptism 66, 57 .

against Confession and the Sacrament of Penance, , 58, 59

against the Honour of Our Blessed Lady and other Saints .... 60, 61

against the Distinction of Relative and Divine Worship 62, 63

against Sacred linages. 64, 65

against the Use of Sacred Images. 66 — 69

against Limbus Patrum and Purgatory 70 — 73

against Justification and the Eeward of Good Works . , . . 74, 75

against Merits and Meritorious Works 76, 77

against Free WUl 78, 79

against Inherent Justice 80, 81

in defence of the Sufficiency of Faith alone 82, 83

against Apostolical Traditions 84 — 86

against the Sacrament of Marriage 87

Protestant Corruptions by adding to the Text 88—90

Considerations on the Lambeth Eecords 91—97

Protestant Translation against the Perpetual Sacrifice 98-101

" Corruptions of the Scripture 102-107"

" Absurdities in turning Psalms into Metre 108-111

A Vindication of the Koman CathoHcs 112, 113

A Vindication of Ward's Errata, in Beply to Grier, by the Eight Bev. Dr. Mihier. . . . 114-118

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

BY DR. LINGARD.

Ths. publication of Ward's " Errata to the
Prolrisiant Bible" has disclosed a most curious
and imporlant fact, that the scriptural church
pf Eufriand and Ireland was originally founded
on a faise translation of the scriptures. U was
the be last of the first reformers, that they had
emancipated their disciples from the shackles
of Catholic despotism, and had restored to them
the freedom of the children of God : it now
appears, that this freedom consisted in reading
an erroneous version of the inspired writings,
and in venerating as the dictates of eternal
Wisdom the blunders of ignorant or interested
translators. " The scriptures," they exclaimed,
" are the sole rule of faith. Here they are, no
longer concealed under the obscurity of a
learned language, but exhibited to you in your
native tongue Here you will easily detect the
errors of Popery, and learn the true doctrine of
the Gospel." The credulity of multitudes ac-
cepted with joy the proffered boon ; the new
teachers were hailed as apostles commissioned
by heaven ; and every old womart, both male and
female, that could read, became an adept, if
not in the knowledge of the Bible, at Least in
the prejudices and errors of its translators.

It is not for man to dispute the wisdom of
Providence, and arraign at the bar of his private
judgment the means which God may choose for
the diffusion of religious knowledge. Otherwise,
I must confess, there appears to me something
very unaccountable in the scriptural blunders of
the apostles of the reformation. The object, they
said, of their mission was the dissemination of
evangelic truth. If the Holy Spirit selected them
for this important office, he must also have gifted
them with the true knowledge of the scriptures,
and, if he gifted them with the true knowledge
of the scriptures, it seems to follow that he
ought also to have granted them the power to
make a true translation of the scriptures. The
aposllts of Jesus received the knowledge of
tongues, that they might instruct the diftierent
nations of the earth : the apostles of the church
of England and Ireland ought to have received
'he knowledge of, at least, the Hebrew and
Greek tongues, that they might form an accurate
version of the scriptures. Such a version was
as necessary to that church, as the instructions
of the first apostles could be to the primitive
churches of Christianity. If they were apostol-
ical, she was .scriptural. However, withotit
Bpeciilating on the cause, the fact is certain, not
ouly from the argument? o( U'ard, but e\en

Ironi tne concessions of his adversaries tiiat ili*
fathers of this scriptural church gave it a /ersioi,
of the scriptures abounding with errors. And
here it may reasonably be asked, whence arosB
these errors 1 Were they the offspring of igno-
rance, or design ? Dr. Ryan warmly contends
for the former, and endeavours to fortify his
opinion by the authority of Father Simon : (o)
but then, even admitting his assertions, devoid
as they are of proof, and liable to objection,
what are we to think of the temerity of thesd
men, who, incompetent to the task, and con
scious of their incompetency, still presumed to
violate the purity of the sacred volumes, and to
obtrude on their unsuspecting disciples an erro-
neous version as the immaculate word of God,
and as the sole and infallible guide to religious
truth ? Ward, on the contrary, attempts to
show that the more important of their errors
were committed by design ; and a curious cir-
cumstance it is, highly corroborative of his
opinion, that most of their blunders are favour-
able to their own peculiar doctrines, and unfa-
vourable to those of their opponents. But, it
this be true, what judgment can any unpreju-
diced man fonii of these saints of the reforma-
tion 1. For my part, I know of no crime more
foul in its own nature, more prejudicial in its
consequences, more nearly allied to diabolic
malignity, than that of designedly corrupting the
holy scriptures, and by such corruption, leading
the sincere inquirer into error, and converting
the food of life into the poison of death.

But, from whatever source these false ren-
derings proceeded, whether their authors were
guided by policy or misled by ignorance, this must
be conceded, that if Ward has fairly established
the fact, he is entitled to the gratitude of the im-
partial reader. The impartial reader, let hira
be Protestant or Catholic, will, if his object be
truth, thankfully receive the truth from whatever
hand may present it to him Hesce it was with no
small surprise that I heard the clamour Avhich was
raised against the last edition of the " Enata.''
In parliament and out of parliament, in news-
papers and pamphlets, it was stigmatized as an
attempt to vilify the reformation, and to heap
disgrace on the Established Church. " It was
the work," observed an eminent senator, emi-
nent for the only talent he possesses, that of

(ffi) Ryan's Analysis, p. 5. Simon, howevei, in the pas-
sage referred to, docs not speak of the English translatoi
in particiil!ir, but of the Protestant translators in generaL
This Dr. Rvan has thought fit to conceal from fair ~eader«

PREFACE TO THE KOBRTH EDITION

religions calumny, " it was the work of one
hundred and twenty Popish priests leagued to
put down Proiestantism." Such nonsense
hardly deserves notice. I f facts are to be hidden
from ihe vyu of the public, becausp they reflect
on the cliaractcr of our predecessors, let history
at once be condemned to the flames. The
evangelists did not conceal the treachery of Ju-
das : why should Protestant divines wish to
eonceal the blunders or the frauds of the fathers
of ihcir church ?

To me, it appears, that none among the ad-
versaries of VVard have had the courage, or the
honesty to do justice to that writer. His object
in compiling the " Errata," was twofold : firstly,
to prove that the versions of the scripture on
which the established creed was originally
founded, Were extremely corrupt : and secondly,
to show that though many errors have been
since corrected, there still remain many others
to correct. All this however they prudently
overlook ; and by an artful confusion of times
and persons, by referring to modern Bibles the
charges which he makes against those of a for-
mer age, and by affecting to consider his accu-
sation of the clergy of Queen Elizabeth as
directed against the clergy of the present reign,
they pretend lo convict him of misrepresentation
and calumny. In this, perhaps, they may act
wisely ; they certainly act unfairly. Could they
have shown that Ward had attributed to the
ancient English Bible errors which it did not
contain, or that he had attributed to the present
Bibles errors which have been corrected in them,
they might have substantiated their charges
against him. But this they have not attempted.
They content themselves with exclaiming that
many of the former corruptions have been
corrected, and therefore should not have been
mentioned. But why should they not ? The
very fact of their having been corrected is an
unanswerable proof of Ward's assertion. It
shows beyond the possibility of a doubt, that the
church of England, however scriptural it may
pretend to have been in its origin, was in reality
founded on a false version of the scriptures ; a
version which was a very Babel of confusion,
which spoke sometimes the language of God and
often the language of men, which had attempted
lo improve the lessons of eternal truth by the
addition of the whims, the ignorance, the pre-
judices, and the falsehoods ofTyndal, Coverdale,
Cranmer, &c., &c.

Among the opponents of Ward, the fiercest
and the oidy one who has attempted a full refu-
tation of the " Errata," is Dr. Ryan. His at-
tempt is a consequence of the grant of Ireland
whicli Adrian IV. made to Henry II. Nay,
atart not, gentle reader; the most important
events in!\y often be traced lo remote and almost
" im[>ercoptible causes. The attempt of Dr.
llyati is a consequence of the grant of Ireland
by Adrian IV. to Henry II. By that grant
the Kyans lost an extensive property ;{«) and the
present Dr. is the champion reserved by heaven

(a) Anal., p. 58

to revenge on Popery the injuries which she
inflicted on his ancestors six centuries ago. An
awful lesson this to the ambition of princes !
But let us see, how the Dr. proceeds in ihe work
of vengeance. He has divided his ireatist! into
different sections, corresponding witii ibosn of
the "Errata" In reviewing it, K-ihall follow
the same order.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIOXS
AOAINST

THE CHURCH

Under this head VVard has adduced no loss
than seven texts in which the English translators
had substituted the word congregation foi
church ; to which Dr. Ryan replies, " that the
former mistranslations of these seven texts,
having been corrected in the present Bible,
should have been excluded from the catalogue
of the ' Errata.' "(A) This plea has, 1 trust, been
sufficiently refuted in the preceding observations.
That the correction has taken place, is indeed
an improvement in the present Bible ; but it is
at the same time a condemnation of its prede-
cessors. After the correction. Ward should
not have imputed these .errors to the corrected
copies ; neither has he done so : he should have
imputed them to the more ancient copies, and
in doing so, he is justified by the very concession
of his adversary. " But," continues the Dr.,
" he produces an eighth text to show that wo
have been guilty of misconstruction to injure
his church. In the Romish version it is written :
m?j dove is one; (Cant. xi. 8 :) in ours, my dove
is hut one ; a curious proof of malice to his
church ! Many of his errata are of this kind ;
frivolous in themselves ; and affording no proof
or but feeble proofs of the propositions ho main-
tains."(c) Now, reader what canst thou infer
from this passage, but that Ward had censured
the Protestant version for having adopted the
reading, my dove is hut one ? The reverse,
however, is the truth. Ward did not censure,
he approved that reading. His censure was
levelled against the more ancient reading in the
English Bibles, my dove is alone. " But this,"
he adds, "is also amended." Such was the
candour of Ward, that he carefully pointed out
to his reader every correction. Of the candour
of Dr. Ryan I wish I could speak with equal
commendation. But he has begun his analysis
with an artifice, which it will be impossible for
him to palliate, much less to justify. He has
suppressed the real assertion of his adversary,
which he could not controvert, and has substi-
tuted in its place an assertion so palpably
absurd that it could not fail to make an impres-
sion on the mind of the uninformed reader highly
prejudicial to the character of Ward. Noi
has the Dr. left his artifice to work its own
effect. He has aided it by his own observations,
and has of consequence charged the author of

(i) Ibid., p. 11.

<c\ Ibid.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

Ilio " Erraia " with labouring to create disagree-
nicnis where there was perfect harmony ; and
wishing to widen instead of contracting the
breiich between the two chnrches. (a) Such
ia the honest) of our biblical Aristarchus. But
if he cannot claim the praise of honesty, he may
claim at least that of consistency. The fraud
with which he has commenced his controversial
career, he has been careful to repeat in every
stage of it. He was fully aware that in works
of the imagination, according to the masters of
the art, perfection cannot be attained, unless
character be preserved throughout

ScTveler ad imum,
Qualis ab incaplo processeril, H Hbi constct.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

THE BLESSED SACRAMENT, AND
'J'HE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.

Dr. Rvan commences his strictures On this
section by observing, that five of the texts pro-
duced by Ward having been corrected in the
modern Bibles, should have been excluded from
the " Errata." 1 shall not fatigue the patience
of the reader by repeating what I have already
said on the subject of these concessions : but
shall content myself with reminding him how
extremely corrupt that version must have been,
the defence of which is thus abandoned by its
warmest advocate. He proceeds: "The other
tliree texts have no relation to the sacrament
even in his own translation*, as will appear by
exhibiting them. Whom heaven truly must receine
— Itt us cast wood upon his bread — -for he was
the priest of the Most High. These three texts
are thus rendered by us : Whom henven must
receive — let its destroy the tree with the fruit there-
of — and he was the priest of the Most High, {b)
'J'hese texts are no more for or against the
sacrament than a treatise of astronomy : yet we
are accused of misconstruing them from preju-
dice against it !" Softly, good Doctor ! There
may be more in some of these texts than you
seem to be aware of. Let us examine them
separately.

1 St. Whom heaven must receive. In exhibit-
ing this text, (to borrow the Doctor's expres-
sion,) I fear he has had recourse to his favourite
artifice, which I have exposed in the preceding
section. He has suppressed the text, which
Ward really condemns, and substituted in its
place one which he approves. Ward did not
condemn the corrected reading of the modern
Bibles which Dr. Ryan has exhibited : but he
condenmud the corrupted reading of the ancient
Bibles, which the Dr. very pnidently has for-
gotten. That reading hath, whom heaven must
'.ontain ; a rendering which the correction, it
has since received, sufficiently proves to have
been false. But Dr. Ryan, by suppressing it,
and substituting the corrected passage, states

(a) Anal., p. 11

(fi) Ibid., p. 12.

I two advantages : he conceals the ancient cornip-
tion from the eye of his reader, and represents
Ward as a man of weak intellects, who could
thus refer to the sacrament a text which has no
relation to it. In the corrected copies 1 acknow-
ledge it has not: but in the more ancient it liad.
Ward had told us that it was so rendered by
Beza, according to thai reformer's own confos
sion, in order to exclude the presence of Ghiist
from the sacrament ; and Dr. Ryan must have
kn-ovvn that Protestant controvertisls in England
have often alleged the same text for the same
purpose. Ward then was perfectly correct.

2d, The second passage is very differently reU'
dered in the Catholic and Protestant versions : in
the former. Let us cast wood upon his bread :
in the latter. Lei us destroy the tree vnlh the
fruit thereof. It must be acknowledged that
the Catholic rendering is not conformable to the
present Hebrew : icn?: yy nn-.nxs. But then
it is conformable to the more ancient ver-
sions, the Greek, the Vulgate, and the Arabic,
and the consent of these versions proves that
the modern reading of the Hebrew is false, (c)
The Protestant translators, on the contrary,
have chosen to follow that reading, and accor-
dingly have rendered f? nnnnM, lei us destroy
the tree ; but then, to make sense, they have
been compelled to give to aib a meaning,
which, I believe, it has not in any other part of
scripture, and under -pzn]: the fruit iheretf.
instead of his bread. Ward, therefore, was
justified in numbering this in his catalogue of
errata. If it be asked why he placed it under
the head of false translations against the sacra-
ment, he answers because he suspected it to have
been adopted in order to elude the force of a
passage in the works of St. Jerom, who had re-
ferred the original text to the holy Eucharist. ('/)

3rd. The difference in the third text, Gei.
xiv. 18, depends on the meaning which onsr'it
to be given to the Hebrew particle 1. Tiie
Vulgate and the English Catholic version have
rendered \\.for ; and that it is susceptible of this
meaning is evident from the Protestant trans-
lators themselves, who in similar passages hav)
rendered it in the same manner. (Gen. xx. 3 •.
Thou art but a dead man for the woman which
thou hast taken ; ijs n^?D K1.T] for she is a
man's wife. And Isaiah Ixiv. 5 : Behold Uwu
art wroth, tf!Z'nr\ for we have sinned.) In the
present instance, they have rendered it and.
which Ward ascribes to their wish to elude the
argument that Catholic theologians had been
accustomed to draw from Melchizedeck's typica.
sacrifice of bread and wine.

Dr. Ryan proceeds to instance another text,
which, as he vainly flatters himself, will yield
him an easy victory. " In the Pro'.estant trans-
lation (Heb. X. 10,) it is said, we are sanctified
through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ
once for all." " Ward says that our translators
added the words /«r all, to take away the daily
oblation of Christ's body and blood in the mass.

(d) Errata, No. II.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

But it must be admitted that the compound
Greek word, which Romanists render once should
be rendered once for all ; only once and for a
short time : that the words /or all are improperly
omitted hi the Popish translations, and without
serving the cause for which Catholics contend."(a)
He is an unskilful or an unfortunate champion,
who cannot aim a stroke at his adversary with-
out inflicting a wound on his friends. When
Dr. Ryan condemns the Catholic, his censure
boars still more heavily on the Protesiant trans-
ial jrs : and he chooses to praise them at the very
moment when they condemn him. The Greek
word Eqr>«77«5 occurs frequently in the New Tes-
tament : (6) yet in no one instance can I discover
that the Protestant translators have rendered it
once for all, except in this passjige, Heb. x. 10.
If then, as the Doctor asserts, the words for all
are improperly omitted in the Popish translations,
I trust, he will acknowledge that they are also
improperly omitted in the Protestant translations;
and thus contribute his mite towards comple-
ting Ward's catalogue of errata. The truth,
however, is, that the 1 Protestant translators, in-
stead of thinking the words for all improperly
omitted, were conscious that they formed no part
of the sacred texts, and therefore printed them
in italics, as an indication that they occurred
not in the original, but were useful to form a
right notion of the apostle's meaning. Thus is
Dr. Ryan condemned by his own clients. But,
continues the Doctor, " The term once without
the addition of the words /or all, would not jus-
tify a daily oblation : for where we are sanctified
through the offering of Jesus Christ once, it
must be unnecessary to repeat it : it does not
follow that, because Christ's body was offered
once for sinners, it should be daily offered for
them." (c) Is not this a controversial stratagem,
a ruse de guere, to draw off the attention of the
reader from the real state of the question ? Ward
did not say that because Christ's body was of-
fered once, it follows that it ought to be offered
daily. He was not so weak a logician. But he
did say, that the Protestant translators added
the words for all, in sup])ort of their favourite
doctrine that he was not to be offered daily : and
I confess, I think he is not mistaken : for on no
other ground can I account for their having
added the words for all in this passage, and
having omitted them in every other in which the
Greek term fqpajTKl occurs. As to the assertion
that, " where we are sanctified by the offering of
.Tesus Christ once, it must be unnecessary to
repeal it," I beg leave to refer Dr. Ryan to the
commeiiiary ot St. Chrysostom on this very
epistle, a writer who probably understood the
Greek language as well as modern translators.
Frojn tliat ancient father he will learn, that
though Christ was offered once, and his offering
sufficeth for ever, yet we offer him daily : but
ibat it is one and the same sacrifice, because
we offer one and the same victim. ^nuf
itQOaijfe;rdi],' xai iig to ait jjjxfae ... it ovv ; ■fiftstg

lai Anal., p. 12.

lb) Rom. xi. 10 ; Heb. vii, 28 ; ix. 12.

«ad ixaaitjv t^/ieQctv ov nqoatfeqdliBV ; ngotrifsqofiev
dXK dva/ivrjotp notovfievoi tov Oavuiov iviov xol
fiai iOTc* iuTij xai du nokkat .... TOf yaq Avio*
(ie» ■nQoa<fEQOfi6v bv vvv /lev iteQOv, dvQioy devre-
gov, aii' list TO avio, diaie ftia ioTiv ^ &vata. In
Epist. ad Heb c. ix. hom. xvii.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

THE BLESSED SACRAMENT, AND
THE ALTAR.

Dri. Ryan o])ens his remarks on this section
in his usual maner. " Ward charges us with
misrendering three texts ; this is a curious
charge, when our last translation of two out of
the three agrees exactly with the Popish ; and
when we have no translation of the third." It
will not be a difl^cult task to unravel the web
of his sophistry. Ward did not charge the last
but the more ancient Protestant translations
with misrendering the three texts, and that h.'
charge is true, is evident from Dr. Ryan's
attempts to shift the question from one version
to another. As to the assertion that there is no
translation of the third ; it can only mean that
by Protestants it is not accounted part of the
inspired writings, but occurs in one of the books
which they have classed among the Apocrypha,
lie proceeds thus : " Nor need our first trans-
lators have been afraid of using the word altars ;
as there is no evidence that the Popish altars
resembled those of the apostolic ago."' Did
ever writer trifle more egregiously with the
judgment and the patience of his readers 1
There is no evidence that the Popish altars re-
sembled those of the apostolic age : therefore, the
first Protestant translators need not have been
afraid of using the word ahum ! But is Dr.
Ryan then wilUng to admit that Christians made
use of altars as early as the apostolic age ? Foi
what purpose did they make use of thera ? It
must have been for sacrifice. : otherwise there
could have been no more need of altars among
Christians in the apostolic age, than among
Protestants in the present. But if it were foi
sacrifice, that sacrifice would have been no othei
in substance than what Catholics call the sacri-
fice of the mass.

" The first Protestant translators need not
have been afraid of the word altars .'" Why
then did they substitute temple in its place ? Dr.
Ryan cannot here have recourse to his former
plea of their ignorance of the original languages.
The veriest smatterer in the Greek tongue
could have informed thera that duamcriQiov meant
not a temple but an altar. Their own conduct
in falsifying these texts shows, that they wern
afraid of the word. For what but fear, and
that too of a very urgent nature, could have
impelled men, who had assumed the office ol
apostles, and whose existence as such depended
on their reputation, to pollute that office, and
hazard that reputation, by thus wilfully and de-
liberately corrupting the sacred volumes ?

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

' Le truth is, the first teachers of Protestantism
hil^\ IV formed religion ; they found it also neces-
saiy to reform the inspired writings. They had
created a scriptural church without a sacrifice :
it v;as prudent to have an edition of the scrip-
tures without any honourable mention of altars.
Aliars and sacrifice are correlative terms : the
one naturally leads to the other. When the
Chustian saciifice was abolished, altars were
innocessary. They had, of course, treated them
with every species of indignity, and were too
cautious politicians to permit them to be com-
mended in the scriptures. But after the lapse
of a century, circumstances were changed : the
generation which had witnessed the altars and
the sacrifice of the Catholic worship, had passed
away. A new race of men, with new habits
ind new prejudices, had succeeded, no danger
oould arise from the adoption of the term ; and
the word altar was silently permitted to resume
ita former place in the sacred writings.

Before 1 close my remarks on this section, I
must observe that Ward has noticed another cor-
ruption of the text, which Dr. Ryan has thought
it prudent to overlook. In 1 Cor. xi. 27, the
apostle says. Whosoever shall eat this bread, or
drink this cup of the Lord unworthily, rj ntvij shall
be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord : from
which disjunctive proposition Catholic controver-
tists have been accustomed to draw an argument
iu favour of communion in one kind. This is a
matter of such notoriety that a divine like Dr
Ryan could not be ignorant of it. In the first
Protestant Bibles this text was faithfully trans-
lated : but in the more modern it has been cor-
rupted by the substitution of the copulative
particle and, for the disjunctive particle or: a
substitution of which Ward most justly com-
plains. Now, in what manner does Dr. Ryan
defend it ? He is silent ; he does not even re-
motely hint that such a corruptinn has been
noticed by his adversary. Is he then conscious
of the fraud, but unwilling that it should come
to the knowledge of his Protestant readers 1 I
fear this is the only consistent explanation, which
his conduct will admit. It certainly is not
manly : but it would, perhaps, be too much to
expect that every writer should have the honesty
to make confessions, which would go to crimi-
nate himself. However, he may draw this
lesson from it ; that he, who stands in need of so
much indulgence himself, should be cautious
how he condemns with severity the imaginary
blemishes, which he may fancy that he discovers
iu others

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
.AGAINST

PRIESTS, PRIESTHOOD, AND HOLY
ORDERS.

On this subject Dr. Ryan observes : " Accord-
ing to Ward we misconstrued six texts, by
rendering the Greek word elder instead o{ priest :
he says, we did so, lest the term priest should

reflect honour on the Catholic clergy." (a)
Reader, consult Ward, and thou wilt find he saya
no such thing. Ward attributes the suppression
of the word priest to the suppression of the
sacrifice of the mass. Where iliere is no altai
or sacrifice, there is no need of a priest. But
Dr. Ryan has forged the reason which he hero
gives to Ward, as an introduction to the .sarcasm
against the Catholic clergy, whicji immediately
follows it. " Elder," he also tells us, " is a
more literal translation of the Greek word than
priest, and presbytery than priesthood : so that
the Protestant translators are not chargeable
with a mistranslation of these words, {b) He
will, however, allow me to ask, what kind of men
they were, whom the sacred writers designate
by ihetermnQea^vreQoil Were they not ministers
of religious worship ordained for that purpose
by the apostles 1 As a minister of the Estab-
lished Church, he must answer in the afiirmative.
But if they were, what is the proper term
by which such ministers are described in the
English language ? Not only common usage,
but the very language of the Church of England
decides in favour of the word priest. If then the
translators of the Bible meant to speak a
language intelligible to their readers, they ought
to have translated the Greek word priests and
not elders. Were I to request the favour of
Dr. Ryan to translate the following Latin sen-
tence : " Episcopus Londinensis cum majore
civitatis et duobus ecclesiae presbyteris visitavii
universitatem Oxonienseni," would he prefer as
more literal such a version as this : the o\ erseer
of London, with the greater of the city, and two
elders of the -church, visited the generality of
Oxford 1.

He proceeds : " Ward asserts that these
translators were so conscious, that their bishops
had no grace to confer a sacred character, bv
the imposition of hands, that they put out the
word grace and substituted gift in two passages
of St. Paul." When will Dr. Ryan cease to
deceive his reader 1 No such reason, as he here
relates, occurs in Ward. That writer ascribes
the substitution of the term gift, to the doctrine
which the reformers preached, that order was
no sacrament, (c) Whoever is conversant with
the sacred writings will agree with him that
/agtofia is not properly rendered, by gift. In
scriptural language it always meant grace, or a
supernatural gift.

I cannot follow him through all his mistakes
in this section. The last seems to prove that he
had hardly looked at the book he pretends to
refute. " We are charged," he says, " with
mistranslating the Greek word signifying dea-
con : though all the Protestant versions of it
agree with the Popish without the slightest vari-
ation !"(ri) The truth, however is, that Ward
does not charge them with mistranslating the
passage in question, 1 Tim. iii. 12. He only
notices that in this verse it was translated pro-
perly : and yet in the fourth verse preceding i'

(a) Anal., p. 14.
(i) Ibid.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

was rendered in the more ancient versions,
minister. He only wishes to know why the
isame word, with the meaning attached to it in
the Greek, should in the short space of four
verses be rendered by a different word in Eng-
lish ? In itself this is not a matter of great con-
sequence : but I thought proper to notice it to
expose the artifices of I^r. Ryan, who can thus
condescend to calumniate his adversary, that he
may enjoy a short and dangerous triumph.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

THE AUTHORT.TY OF PRIESTS AND
BISHOPS.

I HAVE joined these two sections together,
because the object of both is in a great measure
(he same, to determine the propriety of trans-
laling certain scriptural terms, according to
their general acceptation, in profane rather than
ecclesiastical language. The words bishop,
prusl, deacon, (in<;i:l, though originally borrowed
from the Greek, have for more than a thousand
years been naturalized among us. The three
former serve to denote persons raised to certain
offices in the church: the last, one employed in the
duly of the heavenly spirits. Their meaning is
perfectly understood by every man who can speak
the English language. But the English transla-
tors, as if they had been making a version of
some profane writer, rejected these terms, and
employed others more consonant in their forma-
tion to the meaning of the radicals, of which the
Greek words are composed. Thus bishop, is
rendered overseer ; the highest functionary in the
church is denoted by a term, which in common
language signifies a menial servant : priest is
translated elder ; and we are vgravely told of
choosing and ordaining elders, as if any thing
but time could in the strict meaning of the word
make an elder : deacons are called ministers, a
term which properly includes all the offices of
the church : angels, messengers, a word which
certainly does not give a very high notion of the
dignity of the heavenly spirits. These innova-
tions Ward condemns, and, I think, with much
justice. He attributes them to the unsettled
stale of religion, when the first English versions
were made. The reformers had demolished the
ancient fabric : they had not agreed what to
substitute in its place. It was therefore politic
in them to exclude bishops, priests, and deacons
tTom the scripture, that the people, who from
Labit had been accustomed to reverse these or-
ders, might not conceive there was any founda-
tion for them in scripture. From the words
ayfstle and disciple, no danger was to be appre-
hended. 'I'hese therefore were suffered to
remain. Though, had tlie translators followed
any general rule, they also should have been
metamorphosed into messengers and scholars. {a)

(a) In the late Bibles the words Aiaxovoir and AyycXoa
ue gometimea rendered properly.

In 1 Peter ii. 1 3, we read in. the Calholiu
version. Be subject. ...whether it be to the king,
as excelling : in the Protestant, whether it be ta
the king, as supreme. Dr. Ryan observes, " the
Greek word Ctibqux'" signifies supreme as well as
excelling ! SO that it is not very material, which
way it is rendered."(S) It should, however, be
observed that in the more ancient version, to
afford some scriptural foundation for the king's
claim to the title of head of the church, it wa3
rendered, to the king, as the supreme head, a
corruption which I trust Dr. Ryan will not have
the temerity to defend. The rendering of the
more modern Bibles is less objectionable, though
it does not in my opinion exactly convey the
meaning of the original to the English reader.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

THE SINGLE LIVES OF PRIESTS

" Ward," observes Dr. Ryan, " says we m's-
rendered the following text of St. Paul : Have
we not the power to eat and to drink — to lead
about a woman, a sister, as viell as the other
apostles? ( I Cor. ix. 5.) We render, a wife, a
sister. The Greek word'signifies wtfe as well as
woman : so that our translators are not charge-
able with misconstruing it " What idea Dr. Ryan
may have formed of the duties of a scriptural
translator, I know not : but the canon which
he hasTiere laid down, is, I conceive, most sin-
gular in its nature, and most pernicious in iti
application. There exists hardly a word in any
language which is not susceptible of several
different meanings : and of these meanings it
appears that the translator of the scriptures is at
liberty to select that which may please him best.
Now I think, and I trust every rational man will
think with me, that, when the signification of
a word is determined, as it generally is by the
context, the translator is" bound to adopt that
signification : and that, when it is not, he is not at
liberty to select the meaning that may please
him best, but ought to render the ambiguity of the
text by an expression of similar ambiguity in the
version : otherwise he does not offer a faithful
copy of the original : he does not translate but
interpret : he substitutes fallibility for infallibility-
and gives the surmises of his own judgment r
prejudice in the place of the real words of the
inspired writer. It is true that the Greek word
yvi'tj signifies wife as well as woman. It signifies
wife in its secondary, woman in its primary and
more general acceptation. Now, is there any
thing in the context to fix it to its secondary
meaning of wife ? Nothing , so that the more
ancient writers, whose judgment could not bo
biassed by controversial disputes, which did not
arise till many centuries after they were laid
in their graves, without hesitation translate ii
woman, and explain it of an unmarried woman
But even allowing it to be as probable thai St

(J) Anel., p. t*

PREFACE TO THB FODRTH EDITION.

Paul meant a married, as that he meant an un-
married woman, this probability should at least
bo preserved in the version, by the adoption of
a word as equally susceptible of either meaning
as the Greek word in the original. It should be
translated a woman, a sister, or a sister woman,
and not a wife, a sister, as in the Protestant
translation. He who says, a woman, ioea not
Jecide whether she were married or not : but he
who says, a wife, determines the question at once,
and by substituting that determination in place
of the words of the apostle, corrupts the sacred
volume, and deceives the credulity of his readers.

The next text is thus rendered in the Catholic
version : / intreat thee also, my sincere compan-
ion: in the Trotestsmt, my true yoke-fellow. As
Dr. Ryan justly observes, " the two versions
seems to be the same in substance." But it
should be remembered, that the Protestant transla-
tion was made for the use of the vulgar, and in the
ears of the vulgar yoke-fellow sounds very much
like w?fe. Now, why did the Protestant trans-
lators act so very differently in rendering this
and the preceding text ? In the former for a
word of doubtful meaning they gave us another
of determinate signification : in this the meaning
of the expression is evident, (we have Dt. Ryan's
word for it,) and yet they render it by a term, to
say the bestof it, of very ambiguous signification.
To solve the problem. Ward asserts that their
object was to teach the people to look with a
more favourable eye on the married clergy : and
whoever reflects on the disputes which then di-
vided the Christian world on that subject, will
not think his opinion devoid of probability.

The next text is iMatt. xix. 11. Our Saviour,
speaking of the virtue of continency, says ; Not
all, they take this word ; but they to whom it is
given. The Protestant translation has all men
CANNOT receive this word, save they to whom it is
given. " A curious proof," remarks Dr. Ryan,
" that we mistranslated to justify the marriage
of the clergy !" The Dr. may make light of the
difference between the two versions : but I must
be allowed to maintain that the Protestant read-
ing is a most palpable corruption. It is confessed
that the word cannot does not occur in the
original : aud it is evident that it cannot be added
without changing the sense. It affords a ready
apology to every slave to impure gratification.
Though the Dr. asserts that there is little differ-
ence between do not receive, and cannot receive,
I think few of our readers are so prejudiced as
not to admit the distinction between power and
act. Every one must know, that men frequently
do not perform actions, though they can perform
them. In short, let me ask why the translators
added the word cannot 1 If it did not add to the
moaning of the original, why was the addition
made \ If it did. where was their honesty ?

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

AOAINST

THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM.

Of the mistranslations in the Protestant Bible
t great number are owing to the peculiar opin-

ions of their authors : and as these are now
forgotten, those are frequently overlooked. It
was the favourite tenet of Beza, that the sacra-
ments of the new and the sacraments of the old
law were of equal efficacy ; and that the baptism
of John was similar to the baptism of Jesus.
Now there occurs a passage of contrary impoit
in Acts xix. 3. In what, said St. Paul to the
Ephesians. were you baptized ^ And they said
in John's baptism. Eta rt ovf B^amtaOrjie ; hi. ds
itnoi'. Eia TO Iwavra ^umio/ta After which,
they were baptized in the name of the Lord
Jesus. Eta to ovo/ja tb ICvqiu Iijaa. To elude the
force of this te.xt, Beza translated : Unto what
were ye baptized? Unto John's baptism: and
explained John's baptism to be a metaphor ex-
pressive of John's doctrine. (o) Beza's opinion
was adopted by the English translators, and with
it was also adopted his version ; though in the
fourth verse they render the same Greek words
baptized in and not unto. By this conduct they
have undoubtedly disfigured and corrupted the
text. Of their readers the greater part are
unable to affix to it any meaning at all : and the
few that do understand it, are presented with
an erroneous version. Ward then was correct
in numbering this passage among the Errata.
Dr. Ryan in its defence only alleges, that the
difference betweerf the Catholic and Protestant
versions is too trivial to be noticed : " into, unto,
you and ye ! !" But I would have him to reflect
that the change of a single syllable will fre-
quently cause a very important change in the
sense : and to recollect that the Catholic version
reads in and not into, as he has thought proper
to assert.

In Titus iii. 5, the Apostle says that we hav«
been saved " by the laver of regeneration, and
the renovation of the Holy Ghost, whom /(e(God)
has poured upon us." In this text, which
evidently alludes to baptism, the Apostle clearly
says that the Holy Ghost i". poured upon us in
that sacrament. But this did not coincide with
the views of Calvin, who therefore boldly ren-
dered Sta Iovjqov noh^yeveatag, xui itaxatiwcebig
nyevfiarog dyto, i i^ey^^" ^9> '//""fi PM lavacrum
regeneratibnis spiritus sancti quod effudit in nos.
The English translators reversed the authority
of Calvin ; and therefore preferring his version
to the words of the original, they also rendered
it, by the fountain of the regeneration of the
Holy Ghost, which he shed on us." If it be said
that the relative which is ambiguous, and may
be referred either to fountain or Hoty Ghost, I
ask, why, where the original is clear, did they
prefer ambiguity? why did they select the veib
to shed, which alludes rather to the fountain than
the Holy Ghost, and why did they so scrupu-
lously adhere to- Calvin's versioii, as to suppress
the very words which h6 suppressed ? In the
modern English Bibles, the words originally
suppressed, are indeed restored, and fountain is
changed into washing : but the ambiguous relative
which, and the verb, to shed, are still retained.
Dr. Ryan owns that the Catholic version is
preferable.

(a) Bez. annnt. in Act xix.

PREFACE TO THE >OUUTH tDITION.

PROTSdIANT TRANSLATIONS
AOaINST

CONFESSION AND THE SACRAMENT
OF PENANCE.

Om this subject the point at issue between
Ward and Dr. Ryan is the true meaning of the
Greek verb fteiavosiv. According to the Doc-
tor it implies sorrow for sin with a firm resolu-
tion of amendment, and is therefore properly
rendered by the Protestant translators to repent.
According to Catholics, it implies not only
sorrow and a purpose of amendment, but also
an external demonstration of that sorrow by
good works performed in a penitential spirit,
such as prayer, alms, and fasting, of which nu-
merous instances are recorded in holy writ. The
Catholic translators have therefore rendered it,
lo do penance. Now, that their rendering is
accurate I think clear: Istly, from some of the
texts themselves, which mention bodily afflic-
tion as an adjunct to the sorrow and amend-
ment required. Thus we read. Matt. xi. 21,
Luke X. 13, They had done penance [repented
Prot. ver.) in sackcloth and ashes ; 2ndly, from
the ancient Greek ecclesiastical writers, who
probably understood the real import of their
own language as well as the Protestant transla-
tors. Now those always style the performance
of penitential works fisruvoiu. Thus St. Basil,
speaking of the prayers, the abstinence, the sack-
cloth and ashes of the Ninivites, exclaims :
Togiturri -fj tuiv Aua^iiai^ ivexoftevbiv fiBtafOia -Ja)
3fl, from the austerities to which in the ancient
church public sinners were subjected, who were
then termed (it if trj ^sravoia dfrsa ; 4th from the
translator of the Vnlgate and the Latin fathers, who
render it by " penitentiam agere." To these I may
aJil Ausonius the poet in the well known passage,

Sum Dea, quae facti, non factique e.'cigo poenas ;
Scilicet ut poeniteat, sic ftsravoia vocor"

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

AGAINST

THE HONOUR OF OUR LADY AND
OTHER SAINTS.

I sHAf.L not dwell long on the texts enumerated
under this head, as they are of minor importance.
By Ward they were noticed with no other view
than to show, how scrupulously anxious the
Protestant translators were not to contaminate
the orthodoxy of their version by any approach
towards the language of Catholics. I shall give
Diid instance. In Psalm cxxxix. 17, occurs the
following passage -.—Thy friends, O God, arc
leciime exceedingly honourable : their princedom
is exceedingly strengthened. In the Catholic
service this text is applied to the saints ; a sufB-
tienl argument for its exclusion from a Protes-
tant Bible. That the Hebrew word ■i^J^ ori-
gin.-illy meant thy friends, atnl emrvn their

(a) St. Baa. horn, in fame etsiceitata.

princedom, cannot be denied. Thoy had been
rendered so by the Greek translator, and tha
Latin translator, and the Syriac translator, and
the Arabic translator, and the Ethiopia trans-
latoi. and the Chaldaic paraphrast. But then
it was the misfortune of those writers to live
before the reformation. Hatred of Popery had
not disclosed to them all the mysteries of the
Hebrew language. Our Protestant translators
applied to the task ; and by the magic touch oi
their pen, the friends nf God, and their prince-
dom, were translated into the thoughts of God
and their sum. " How precious are thy thoughts
unto me, O God ! and how great is the sum of
them." But this version, if it cannot lay claim
to accuracy, has at least one advantage. It
offers to the piety of the orthodox churchman a
new subject of meditation, the sum of God's
thoughts. Truly, if men are determined to
corrupt the language of scripture, let them at
least make it speak sense. To pervert it from
its true meaning is guilt sufficient : to transform
it into nonsense is a work of supererogation : it
is more than is necessary for the support of o»
thodoxy.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

THE DISTINCTION OF RELATIVE
AND DIVINE WORSHIP.

In Hebrews xi. 21, it is said of Jacob, irpr-
asxvi'Tjasv em to i.xqovjrja ga(?f5e avra : which in
the Catholic translation is rendered, according
to the Vulgate, adored the top nf his (Joseph's)
rod: in the TrotestSint, worshipped, leaning on
the top of his staff. Among the ancient writers
there were two opinions respecting the meaning
of this passage, and that to which it alludes,
Genesis xlvii. 31. St. Augustine expounded
them to mean that Jacob adored God, leaning
on his staff, and St. Jerom countenances this
opinion by translating the Hebrew : " adoravit
Israel deum, conversus ad lectuli caput." But
the general opinion was, that Jacob in this
instance directed his respect not immediately to
God, but to his son Joseph. Thos ;, however,
who held this opinion, were divided in theii
manner of explaining it. " He worshipped
Joseph," says Theophylactus, " pointing out the
worship of the whole people. But how did ho
worship ? On the top of his staff: that is, sup.
porting himself on his staff on account of his
age. But some say he worshipped towards the
top of Joseph's rod, signifying by the rod the
sceptre of the kingdom which would bo after-
wards worshipped." {b) Of these two opinions
the former was adopted by Theodoret ; " Israel
sat resting on his staff, and worshipped bending

(p) TlpoueKwrict rcii l(ti(Te(p, ttjv iravros rou ^anv irpocrkvvjjuit
oiiXiiii'' Ilwtr Se TTptjaiKwijcTEV J Ein TO ixpov Trie aaat)ov &vrov,
TtiVTlcnVf Eirtpuadeitr TT]pa0ifa Sia to ytpaa, Tivta it Ctrl n
aKpovTrju paffdov tov Icocrcft, <paatf itpocCKVvriac, rijaaiiuv to Ttji
$aci).etaa oxTinTpov Sta Trjfr paffSov irpoaKVvijdtiirtaBai uxaXot

Theophyl. in cap. xi. ad Haeb.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EUITION.

ais hoad on lis staff:" (o) the lattei by St. Atha-
aasius, who in quoting the passage inserts the
words iii8 lima " the rod of his son ," (i) and by
St. Chrj'sostorn, who says, " though an old man
he worshipped Joseph, foretelling the future
worship to be rendered by the whole people." {c)
In such diver^iity of sentiment no translator car
be blamed for adopting either opinion. 1 would
translate it, He lowed to the top of Joseph's

In Ps, xcviii. 5, ii is said, according to the
Catholic version, adore the footstool of his feet,
because it is holy : in the Protestant, worship at
his footstool, for he is holy. The former version
is favourable to the exhibition of religious re-
spect to creatures ; the latter does not necessarily
i^xclude it. I do not, however, think that the
Protestant rendering is accurate. The Hebrew
phrase is applied in the scriptures to the true
God, to imaginary gods, and to creatures : and
the noture of the worship, which it denotes, is
determined by the nature of its object. But the
reformers had rejected that respect, which Ca-
tholics allow on religious motives to be sometimes
paid to creatures • and it was of course improper
to permit any traces of it to be found in the
sacred volumes. Thus the same phrase adopted
different meanings at the will of the translaior :
and the same preposition on one occasion pointed
out the object of worship, at another excluded
it : onji rpnr.rn n? is rendered, ikou shall
not bow down thyself to them : and -Ttri vnnan
'xorship AT his foolstnnl. If in the former
passage the Hebrew phrase means lo bow down
to, how comes it to mean to worship at, in the
latter ? I fear, that in this text, as in many
others, the prejudices of the translators pre-
vailed over their respect for the original. In
the Catholic version we read, for it is holy ; in
the Protestant, for he is only. The Hebrew
text will bear either meaning.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

SACRED IMAGES AND AGAINST THE
USE OF THEM.

Among the different arts by which the apos-
tles of the reformation contrived to inflame the
animosity of their disciples against the Church
of Rome, few were more eflicacious than the
■Jamour which they raised against the worship
of images. According to the new gospel,
every species of religious respect offered to
inanimate objects was idolatrous : and to prove
the trtith of this doctrine, almost every page of
scripture was improved by new denimciations
of vengeance agains! images, and their worship-

(tz) Eta&tirdTi $aKTtpia St <«;^pi7/i£i'0ff CTriffTTjpt^cTE avrTf.
Xl^oatKvi'iTTiv hiTiKkivac Tfi (ia^S(i3 Trjf tfC^a^iyv. Theod. in

Uen. mterrog. 109,
(ft) Homil. in St. PatreB, 11, p. 693.

(c) Kot yepoiv tijv, fjSri irpooeKWijiTe Tdj lwff«0, ttjv travToa tov
Aaiiv npoiTKVvrt(7t* tfqXwv rif/ toofievriy avr(t}, HoUl. XXVi. in

epis. ad Heb,

pers. No less than thirteen d.fferenl words in
the Hebrew, and nine in the Greek scriptures,
were invariably rendered image in the English
version : so wonderfully comprehensive is the
meaning of that single word in orthodox lan-
guage. Of the texts, which had been thus cor.
rupted, two proved eminently useful. In 2 Cor.
vi. 16, the Apostle was made to say : How
agreeth the temple of God with images ? and this
corruption furnished every iconoclast preacher
with a most powerful text, when he urged the
credulity of his hearers to deface the ornaments
with which Catholic piety had been accustomed
to decorate religious edifices. The other text
occurred 1 John. v. 23, babes, keep yourselves
from images ; and this, when the house of God
had been purged from every trace of Popish
idolatry, was constantly painted in large cha-
racters within the door. Useful, however, as
these texts have been, they no longer appear in
the sacred volumes. They were suffered to
effect the purpose of their authors, and then
were directly consigned to oblivion. The same
has been the fate of several others of similar
import, as Dr. Ryan acknowledges : " but then,"
he adds, " having been corrected, Ward should
not have inserted them in his list." Why not ?
Did they not originally exist in the Protestant
version ? Were they not received by the people
as part of the original text ? Undoubtedly.
Ward then could not have omitted them without
betraying the cause he had undertaken to
defend.

But though several of these texts have been
corrected by men, whose more moderate ortho-
doxy cold blush at the daring effrontery of
their predecessors, Ward still complains that
several are also left, which equally require cor-
rection. In the Protestant version of the
decalogue are read, thou shalt not make to thy-
self any graven image, instead of graven thing.
" But where," says Dr. Ryan, " is the difference ?
When a thing is graven, it becomes an image,
and a graven thing must be the image of some-
thing real or imaginary." (d) If the authors of
the Protestant version reasoned in this manner,
they deserved no less praise as logicians than as
translators. Every graven thing must neces-
sarily be an image, why, then I suppose every
graven ornament is to be called an image, the
pillars that adorn our porticoes will be images ;
even our houses of polished and ornamented
stone must become images. That the Hebrew
word in its original meaning denotes a. graven
thing, cannot be denied : and that it may some-
times mean an image, I will allow. But in what
sense does Dr. Ryan wish itto be taken ? If in the
latter, yet from the context it is evident that it
denotes an image to which divine worship is to
be paid : and such an image in plain English is
an idol. Thus it was rendered by the Greek
translators, and thus it ought to have been
rendered by the Protestant. But if he takes
it in the former sense, the present rendering is
also false : as it restrains the prohibition to

(d) Anal., p. SiS-

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

images, wliereas in the original it includes under
the denomination of graven things, the columns
of stones, which were the objects of worship to
many of the ancient nations.

In two other texts, Rom. xi. 4. ; Acts xix.
35, it is acknowledged that imnge does not
occur in the original. It has been preserved
in the Protestant version as a memorial of the
devotion which the reformed translators paid to
this important word. It was their most useful
auxiliary : and they have rewarded its services
by still giving it a niche in the inspired writings.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

IJMBUS PATRUM AND PURGATORY.

OiV this subject, after a long preamble in
which he shows but little acquaintance with the
Catholic doctrine. Dr. Ryan calls on Popish
divines to show that the twelve texts mentioned
by Ward prove the doctrine or existence of the
Limbus patrum or purgatory. But this is
unnecessary in the present instance. The point
to be determined is, whether the Hebrew word
b'-'nx, denotes the grave, as it is rendered in the
Protestant version, or the slate nf the spul after
death, as it was understood by the Catholic trans-
lators. Now, 1st, that it will admit of the lat-
ter meaning must be acknowledged by Dr. Ryan
himself: since in three instances to allow its
insertion, tho word grave has been expunged in
the corrected editions of the Protestant Bible.
2nd. The proper Hebrew term for the grave is
"isp • nor can I find any proof that ^^ji» is
evei employed in that sense in the scriptures. («)
In every passage in which it occurs, it will
easily bear the meaning ascribed to it by the
Catholic translators : in some it cannot bear
that which is given to it in the Protestant ver-
sion. Thus, when Jacob said, " / will go down
into JntiB vnto my son mourning ;" he could
not mean the grave. He certainly did not con-
ceive Joseph's soul to have been buried : and as
for his body he could not expect to find it in the
grave, as he believed it to have been devoured
by "wild beasts. In favour of his opinion Dr.
Ryan adduces the Samaritan version in which
this text, as he says, is rendered the grave. I
fear, however, that, unable to read the Sama-
ritan version itself, he has been deceived by the
.reacherous authority of its Latin translator.
I he Latin translator of the Samaritan version
lias indeed rendered Gen. xxxvii. 35, sepulchrum:
Inn in the version itself we read, b'n:, which is
niiJenlly the same word as the Hebrew, and has
the same meaning ; and which the same trans-
lator in the parallel passages. Gen. xlii." 38 ;
xliv. 29, 31, has rendered by the Latin word
Jnferi. 3rd. If modern Lexicographers give

(a) In the passages usually refered to 1 Kings xi. 6, 10,
it Is rendered tidria, inferi, by the ancient translators.
They looked on ins^o hia old age, as a figurative ex-
prcasion foi him I't his old age.

both meanings to the Hebrew word, I can op
pose to their authority that .of the anci(,rt Greek
I and Latin interpreters, who as invariably render
Viisx di!)rjo, inferi, ii.fprnus, as they do "-7,
Twqpocj, /Jirjfi", sepulchrum. It is from them that
the true moaning of this ancient language is to
be learned. If, however. Dr. Ryan refuses to
submit to them, I trust he will not reject the
authority of St. Peter, who in Acts xi. 27
translates it di5)?a,.and in obedience to whom the
correctors of the Protestant Bible have in thij
instance erased the_ word grave, by which it hac
been rendered in the more ancient editions.

Dr. Ryan wishes to persuade his readers tha
AVard introduced the text from Heb. v. 7. as a
proof of the existence of purgatory. Why
should he thus misrepresent his adversary ? In
discoursing of the foregoing texts. Ward had
occasion to mention that article of the creed, in
which Christians profess their belief in the de-
scent of our Saviciur into hell : and this had led
him to censure the opinion of Calvin and Beza
that the descent into hell was only a metaphorical
expression, significative of the anguish of de-
spair, and the horrors of damnation, which Jesus
felt on the cross. To' countenance so blasphe
mous an idea, the Protestant translators added
their mite ; and in rendering that passage, in
which St. Peter alludes to the prayer of Jesus
on the cross, tell us that he was heard in that
which he feared. The Greek is diuoiija (niHSf hkt
which in the Catholic version is translated,
he was heard for his reverence. What plea
may be offered in defence of the Protestant
rendering I know not. Dr. Ryan has offered
none. I may therefore assume that it is inil*
fensible.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATION*
AGAINST

JUSTIEICATION AND THE REWARD
OF GOOD WORKS.

Dr. Ryan observes that the texts enumerated
by Ward in this section were too obscure to
induce the Protestant translators to misrender
them. But this is shifting the question. The
point in debate is not, whether these texts be
obscure or not ; but whether they be fairly ren-
dered in the Protestant version. Ward assorts
they are not ; and I think he has made out a
pretty strong case. The Protestant translators
were violent champions in favor of justification
by faith only, and whoever consults this version
will find that they had two sets of English words
to express the Greek word Sixrj and its dcriva-
vations. When they were united in the scriptures
with the word faith, then they were rendered by
just, justice, justification ; but if they were united
with words expressive of the reward or practice
of good works, just and justification disappeared,
and righteous and righteousness were adopted
in their place. If nothing unfair were meant,
what motive could they have for this verbal
legerdemain ? How comes it, that the same

PREPACK TO THE FOURTH EDITION

Greek words should be cautiously rendered' by
(wo different sets of English words, and that
these should be alternately adopted as they fa-
voured the opinions of the translators, or were
adverse to those of their antagonists.

PROTESTAN'T TRANSLATIONS
AQAINST

MERIT AND MERITORIOUS WORKS.

In this section Ward produces five texts
which, he maintains, have been falsely rendered
in the Protostant Bible. In answer, Dr. Ryan
compares these texts as they now stand, with the
same passages in the Catholic version, and. very
gravely asks where is the difference '! Rut know,
gentle reader, that he quotes from the amended
version, in which the three principal corruptions
have been corrected ; while Ward complains of
the original translation. Such artifices are but
Sony indications of the confidence which Dr.
Ryan professes in the goodness of his cause.

Of the remaining texts, one (Coloss. i. 12),
according to the Catholic version, declares that
God has made us worthy ; according to the
Protestant, has made vs meet to be partakers of
the inheritance of the saints. The Greek is
txafoaai'Ti : and as the Protestant translators
have rendered Ixafoa worthy in Matt, ni. 1',
and viii. 8, I see not why they should here have
rendered it meet, were it not to avoid the Ca-
tholic doctrine of merit. The other passage is
in Ps. cxix. 112, in which ^r' is rendered /or
reward, by the Catholic ; unto tlie end. by the
Protestant version. There is something veiy
singular in the fate of this word. If in this
passage the Catholic translator has rendered it
for reward, in verse 33 of the same psalm he
has rendered it always : and in like manner, if
in this passage the Protestant translator has ren-
dered it unto the end, in Psalm xix. 12, he has
rendered it reward. In this confusion of ren-
derings I should thipk it the most prudent to
adhere to the ancient Greek interpreter, rather
than the modern translators. He probably pos-
sessed more accurate MSS , and certainly was
more intimately acquainted with the original
language.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

FREE WILL.

Of the seven texts enumerated by Ward under
this head, three, according to Dr. Ryan, have
been corrected ; a sufficient proof that in the
original Protestant version they were rendered
corruptly. It will be easy to vindicate Ward's
reniarks on the remaining four.
■ l.st The Greek text, 1 Cor. xr. 10, is sus-
ceptible of two meanings : ihat the grace of
God laboured alone, or that the grace of God
and the aposlle laboured together. The Pro-

testant version, by inverting the >vords, " whi'ch
was with me,'' appears to restrain the sense to
the former meaning, and in that respect is not a
faithful representation of the original.

2nd. Romans v. 6, the apostle says that ot
ourselves loe locre dudsfeta, which the Protestant
version renders without strength. The true
meaning is weak : but weakness does noi imply
a total deprivation of strength.

3rd. The Protestant version renders ytt hwXai
&VIU ^uQBitti 8x eiaif, 1 John v. 3, his commiind-
meiits are not grievous. Instead of grievous
Ward contends wo should read heavy. And
that he is accurate will, I trust, appear by
comparing this passage with that in St. Matt.
xi. 30.

4th. Matt. xix. 11, is rendered in the Protes.
tant version : all men cannot receive this saying.
Dr. Ryan acknowledges that cannot is an inter-
polation, by proposing a different version of hi-i
own, in which that word is omitted. The trans-
lators must have trusted much to the credulity of
their readers, when they dared thus to add to
the meaning of the original. Their disciples
however, unconscious of the deception, prided
.themselves on their imaginary happiness ; and.
while they derived new lights from the blunders
and corruptions of the translators, wondered at
their former ignorance, and pitied the blindness
of the slaves of Popery.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

INHERENT JUSTICE.

Among the new doctrines sported by the apos-
tles of the reformation, was that of imputative
justice. No man, how virtuously soever he might
have lived, could be just or righteous indeed,
but only in as much as the justice or righteous-
ness of Christ was imputed to him. With the
merits or demerits of this opinion I have nu
concern : but among the texts by which it was
assailed or defended, Ward has selected six,
which he maintains to have been corrupted bv
the zeal of the Protestant translators. Dr. Ryan
contents himself with replying very gravely, thai
neither do the Catholic versions prove, nor the
Protestant versions disprove the contrary doc-
trine of inherent justice.

Of all the theological champions, with whom
it has been my lot to be acquainted. Dr. Ryan
conducts controversy in the most singular man-
ner. Ward had asserted that in more than one
hundred passages the Protestant version of the
scriptures was corrupted : he noticed in detail
every one of these corruptions, and subjoined
to each the reasons on which he founded his
charge. Then came Dr. Ryan, and undertook
to rebut the accusations. But how does he
proceed ? Does he refute each of Ward's ar-
guments ? No, he does not so much as mention
them. A reader, who had perused none but
Dr. Ryan's tract, would not know that Ward
had a single reason to offer. Tho Doctor

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITIOJT.

throughout appears attempting to silence a dumb
adversary, to conq\ier a man who makes no
resistance. Nowwhence arises this conduct in
Dr. Ryan ? Was he unwilling to refute Ward's
argumoni ? But who cp.n auspect of unwilling-
ness in such a cause the self-created representa-
tive of the Ryans, who lost so extensive a terri-
tory by the papal giimt uf Ireland to Henry II. ?
Was he unable to refute them ? I believe he
was. However, let his reasons have been what
they may, this is certanj, that instead of answer-
ing, he has passed over the arguments of Ward,
as if ho had never seen them. But to proceed
to the texts in question.

1st. The first is a passage of considerable ob-
scurity, Rom. v. 18. By the Rhemish transla-
tors it has been rendered with the most scrupu-
lous and laudable fidelity, while the Protestant
translators have undertaken to make it more
clear by supplying such words, as they thought
wanting. If Ward complain of these additions,
it is probable that his complaint was not un-
founded : since in the corrected editions they
have been expunged, and their place has been
c-upplied by other additions taken, as it appears,
from the sixteenth verse. The alteration I.
think judicious : yet after all, it gives us not the
words of the sacred texts, but only the conjec-
tures of its Protestant translators.

2nd. We are told in the Protestant version,
Rom. iv. 3, that Abraham believed God and
that it was accounted unto him for righteousness.
What is the meaning of these last words, /or
lighleousness ? Do they not imply the same as
instead of righteousness ? Such, at least, is the
rendering, and the explication of Beza, the
master of our translators : pro justitia, i. e. vice
et loco justitisB. Now I appeal to any man ac-
quainted with the Greek and Hebrew languages,
whether such can be the meaning either of St.
Paul, ii-dytadi] cirum ha dixuioavfrjr^ or of the
writer of Genesis fromwhom the Apostle ouotes,

3rd. In Ephes. i. 6, the Apostle says that
God ^;i'«jti-(«(7«<' -ffUag iy to) i]-janrjiAiva. Ward
has made it sufficiently clear from the ancient
Greek writers, that i=/uQi7(naev means, has made
us agreeable or pleasing in his eyes. The Pro-
testant translators have rendered it, has made us
accepted. At first sight it may perhaps appear
that the two renderings are nearly ahke ; but a
closer inspection will discover that the former is
adverse, the latter favourable to the doctrine of
imputative justice. Ward then was probably
accurate in attributing this rendering to the pre-
judices of the translators in favor of their own
f pinion.

4th. The false translation of 2 Cor. v. 21,
's corrected in the more modern Bibles. Who-
ever consults Ward will see what unjustifiable
liberties the original translators took with their
■pxt. Bat on this head Dr. Ryan is silent. He
would fain persuade his readers, it is of the pre-
sent and not of the ancient version that Ward
complains. Such artifices are unworthy of a wri-
er, who is convinced nf the goodness of his eauM.

6th. The two remaining texts, Dan. vi 22 ;

Rom
in

,om. iv. 6, are noticed by Ward principally as
i.isthnces of the huiror which the reformora
seems to have entertained for the word justice
Thai they might not pollute their pages with
sucu a term, they have inserted innncency in the
former, and righteousness in the latter passag*'

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIO.VS
IN FAVOUR OF THE

SUFFICIENCY OF FAITH ALONE.

This section, like most others, offered Dr.
Ryan a subject of imaginary triumph. Out ol
the six corrupt renderings noticed by Ward, ho
boasts that four have been corrected in the later
editions of the Bible. He must be a weak adver-
sary indeed, who can envy him such a triumph
1 shall therefore proceed to the two remaining
texts.

Among the separatists from the Church ol
Rome at tlie period of the reformation, no lees'
than among the separatists from the Church oi
England at the present day, it was a favourite
doctrine, that justification by faith consisted in a
lull assurance of salvation. Whoever could work
in himself this conviction, was secure of future
happiness. His assurance wasinfallible; it would
preserve him from ever falling, so as to forfeit his
claim to the kingdom of heaven. Among the
texts adduced in favour of this opinion was that
of the epistle in the Hebrews, x. 22, with this
diflerence, that former fanatics could only appeal
to the assurance of faith of the ancient Protestant
version, while modern fanatics may appeal to the
full as.surance of faith of the present amended
edition. But does the original text, ev nhigoqioiif
TCTatebiij, warrant such a rendering 1 1 have no
hesitation in asserting, that it does not, and I
found my assertion on the authority of those who
could not have been ignorant of the true meaning
of the Greek language, the ancient doctors o(
the Greek Church. By these the TiXijQocfiogiix
■maxBwo is said to be, a full and perfect faith, a
faith that believes without doubling whatever
God has revealed. Tuvtu. says Theodoret, Siaia
lyjiv TtiOTBvoPTBO^ Kill Ttuauv di)rovoi,av Ttja tfivxijO
sSuQit^ofTsa. Tmo yaq nXr/QngiOQiav B)(a}.eueP:(a)
It is, according to Thoophylact, ntana neni.i]Qiu-
^6V7j «at adt(n(xj(Tog. (b)

The last text is Luke xviii. 43, Thy faith
hath saved thee, instead of hath made thee whole.
That this is a false rendering, is acknowledged.
I shall therefore only ask, why it was first in-
serted in the original version, and why it is still
preserved in the corrected edition ?

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

APOSTOLICAL TRADITIONS.

On this subject I shall be content to refer tlio
reader to the Errata, No. XVI., where he will see

(a) Theod. in Ep. adHeb., c. x. (6) Thood. in ouad , loo.

PREFACE TO THE FOUIITH EDITION.

whai reasons Ward had for censuring the Protes-
tant translators ; and shall only notice Dr.
Ryan's artifice in attempting to persuade us, that
two of the five texts condemned by his adversary
" agree with the Popish translation." What
then I did Ward accuse the Protestants of mis-
translating, when they translated in the same
eense as the Rhemish divines ? No such thing,
Dr. Ryan meant to say, that the ancient ren-
dering of the Protestant Bible in these two pas-
sages was so evidently false, that it has since
been corrected according to the Catholic trans-
lation. Had he said this, he wonld have said the
truth.

MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES.

0^J this head I shall notice the principal
passages. It would fatigue the patience of the
reader to go through them all

On marriage. " In the Popish version,"
says Dr. Ryan, " we read, tliis is a great sacra-
ment : in ours, this is a great mystery. (Eph. v.
22.) Ward allows that the word signifies mystery
in Greek, and in Latin sacrament : surely then
we are not chargeable with mistranslation."(a)
Never perhaps was there a more intrepid writer
than Dr. Ryan ; never one who cared less for
detection, or trusted more to the credulity of
his readers. Does Ward then condemn the
words, this is a great mystery, as a false transla-
tion ? On the contrary, he approves of it as a
true one. But he condemned the original
Protestant rendering, this is a great secret ; a
rendering so very, faulty that Dr. Ryan was
ashamed to notice it, and therefore endeavoured,
by calumniating his adversary, to keep it agreat
secret.

On prayers in an unknown tongue. In
1 Cor. xiv. the Protestant translators have
added the epithet unknown in five different pas-
sages , and in answering this charge, Dr. Ryan
very adroitly becomes the assailant, and accuses
the Catholic translators of having omitted it in
the same passages. What then ? Does it occur
in the original ? No ; but it is necessary to
complete the sense. So Dr. Ryan may think ;
but the apostlfi thought otherwise. He did not
insert it ; and if he did not, I cannot conceive
whence any translator can derive authority to
insert it for him. If you will have the people to
study their faith in the scriptures, let them at
least have the scriptures as they were originally
written. Let the stream flow to them pure from
its source, without the admixture of foreign
matters.

With respect to the texts, 1 Cox. xiii. ; I Cor.
!. 10 ; and 1 Tim. iii. 6, Ward's charges are
directed against the ancient Protestant version ;
and Dr Ryan charges him with misrepresenta-
tion because these passages are corrected in the
modem amended editions ! !

James i 13. Let no man say that he is
tempted of God : for God is not a tempter of

evil : and he tempteth no man. Instead of this
the Protestant version reads, ^or God cannot be
tem.pted with evil. Dr. Ryan has the modesty
to assert that these two constructions are nearly
the same ! (6)

CONCLUSION.

Dr. Ryan has repeatedly challenged the " Po-
pish clergy" to reply to his analysis • he cannot
be offended that I have accepted the invitation.
If in the cause of my reply, I have shown that
he has often adopted artifices unworthy a
scholar and a divine ; that he was frequently
misrepresented, and still more frequently con-
cealed the arguments of his adversary, the blame
must attach not to me, but to himself. Ho
volunteered in the controversy : he must be an-
swerable for the manner in which he has con-
ducted the contest.

Besides those parts of the Analysis which 1
have noticed. Dr. Ryan has offered some argu-
ments respecting the Lambeth Register, and
added answers to Ward's queries. With those
I have no concern. My only object was to
refute his remarks with respect to the Protestant
version of the scriptures. As, however, it would
be uncivil to take my leave without replying to
these queries, which he has placed at the end
of his pamphlet, I shall endeavour to do it as
concisely and as satisfactorily as I can.

The three first queries ask, how the Vulgato
can be an infallible standard for other transla-
tions ? I answer, that the Vulgate is a version
deservedly of high authority, but I never yv\
met with a Catholic who considered it as infal-
lible.

Q. IV. Is the translation of the Bible respon-
sible for the errors or excesses of Beza, or
others, who had no hand in any of our versions t

A. It is not. Nor does Ward say it is. But
many of the first translators were the pupils ol
Calvin and Beza, and it was not irrelevant to
trace in the work of the masters the errors ol
their disciples.

Q. V. Did the Protestant Churches ever pre-
tend to be mfallible m these translations or other-
wise 1

A. I know not whether they did or not. Bin
this I know, they ought to have done so.
Whence can a Protestant ignorant of the origi-
nal languages, derive the knowledge of the
Christian faith, tiul from the translation of the
Bible ? If then, that translation be fallible,
or manifestly erroneous, how can he have any
security that his faith be true 1 Built' on an
unsafe foundation, it can never acquire stability.
The translation of the Bible must be in.'allible,
or at least authentic, or the Protestant in
question must always live in uncertainty.

Q. VI. Did not the translators of the Bible
of the year 1683 correct forty errors in our old
ones 1

A. The reformers of the old Protestant trans-

(o) Anal-, p. 40.

(6) Anal., p. 42.

VRKFACE TO THE FOUHTH EDITIOW.

Ititious did f.onect forty errors, and should have
correcTed forty more.

Q.^VIl. Having adopted the very words of
the Popish English Bible in very many in-
stances, is it fair to charge them in every page
with miilice, design, and misinterpretation ?

A. Ward does not often' charge them with
malice, design, and misinterpretation. His
charges are principally levelled against the ori-
ginal translators. He approves in many places
of the conduct of the reformers of the Protes-
tant version ; in some he condemns them, I fear,
justly.

Q. VIII. It always proves a bad cause to
represent an opponent's argument as weaker
than it is. Show where 1 exhibit Ward's objec-
tions as less strong than they are ?

A. In every division almost without exception.
This I think I have sufficiently proved in the
preceding pages.

Q. IX. According to Ward, the apostles had
a Christian doctrine, a rule of faith, before the
New Testament was written ; prove that they
had it ?

A. If by a rule of faith Dr. Ryan means the
thirty-nine Articles, I do not believe that the
apostle had them either before the scripture was
written or afterwards. But of this I am sure,
that before the scripture was written the apos-
tles preached the Christian doctrine, ^nd estab-
Ushoid cliurches in which it was taught I

humbly conceive that they must have had a
knowledge of it, and have impated that know^
ledge to their disciples.

Q. X. Will not the Greek professor at May
nooth admit that the word Icfunul signifies onct
for all ?

A. As I have not the honour to.be acquainted
with the Greek professor at Maynooth 1 am
unable to answer the question.

Qs. XI. XII. XIII. XV. regard the meaning
of Greek words. For answer I must request
the reader to consult the preceding pages.

Q. XIV. Was it not more decent in an
apostle to lead about a wife than a strange
woman ?

. A. I do not see how he could, unless he were
married. Our blessed Redeemer was often
attended by holy women of his kindred ; why
might not an apostle also ?

Q. XVI. The word na^anTuifii signifies fault
as well as sin. The Romanists render it sin :
why may we not render it fault without being
guilty of misconstruction ?

A. 1 see no great sin in rendering naganiioftii
fault, nor riny great fault in rendering it sin.

Q. XVn. Did not Adrian IV. grant IrelanO
to Henry II., and did not Alexander IV. confirm
that grant ?

A. Did not Dr. Ryan undertake to refute
the " Errata," and baa he not failed in almost
every point ?

THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE.

Among the many and irreconcileable differ-
nnccs between Roman Catholics and the secta-
ries of our days, those about the holy scriptures
claim not the least place on the stage of
controversy : as, firstly, whether the Bible is the
8ole and only rule of faith 1 Secondly, whether
all things necessary to salvation are contained
in the Bible ? Or, whether we are bound to
believe some things, as absolutely necessary to
salvation, which are either not clear in scripture,
or not evidently deduced out of scripture ?
Thirdly, whether every individual person, of
sound judgment, ought to follow his own private
interpretation of the scripture 1 If so, why one
party or profession should condemn, persecute,
and penal-law another, for being of that per-
Buasion he finds most agreeable to the scripture,
AS expounded according to his own private
spirit ? If not, to what interpreter ought they
to submit themselves, and on whom may they
■jafely and securely depend, touching the exposi-
tion and true sense and meaning of the same ?
Fourthly, whence have we the scripture ? That
is, who handed it down to us from the Apostles,
who wrote it ? And by what atithority we
receive it for the Word of God ? And, whether
wo ought not to receive the sense and true
meaning of the scripture, upon the same author-
ity we receive the letter ? For if Protestants
think, the letter was safe in the custody of the
Roman Catholic Church, from which they
received it, how can they suspect the purity of
that sense, which was kept and delivered to
'hem Ijy the same church and authority ? With
several other such like queries, frequently
proposed by Catholics ; and never yet, nor ever
likely to be, solidly answered by any sectaries
whatever.

It is not the design of this following treatise
to enter into these disputes ; but only to show
thee, Christian reader, that those translations
of the Bible, which the English Protestant
clergy have made and presented to the people
for their only rule of faith, are in many places
i,ot only partial, but false, and disfigured with
several corruptions, abuses, and falsifications, in
derogation to the most material points of Cath-
olic doctrine, and in favour and advantage of
tlieir own erroneous opinions : for,

As it has been the custom of heretics in all
ages, to pretend to scripture alone for their
rule, and to reject the authority of God's holy
cliurcb ; so has it also ever been their practice

to falsify, corrupt, and abuse the same in diners
manners.

1 . One way is, to deny whole books thereof,
or parts of books, when they are evidently
against them : so did, for example, Ebion
all St. Paul's epistles ; Manicheus the Acts ol
the Apostles ; Luther likewise denied three
of the four Gospels, saying, that St. John's is
the only true gospel ; and so do our English
Protestants those books which they call the
Apocrypha.

2. Another way is, to call in question at the
least, and make some doubt of the authority of
certain books of holy scriptures, thereby to
diminish their credit : so did Manicheus affirm,
that the whole New Testament was not written
by the Apostles, and particularly St. Matthew's
Gospel : so did Luther discredit the Epistle ol
St. James : so did Marcion and the Arians deny
the Epistle to the Hebrews to be St. Paul's ; in
which they were followed by our first English
Protestant translators of the Bible, who pre-
sumed to strike St. Paul's name out of the very
title of the said Epistle. («)

3. Another way is, to expound the scripture
according to their own private spirit, and to
reject the approved sense of the ancient holy
Fathers, and Catholic Church : so do all here-
tics, who seem to ground their errors upon the
scriptures ; especially those, who will have
scripture, as by themselves expounded, for theii
only rule of faith.

4. Another way is, to alter the very origi
nal text of the holy scriptures, by adding to, di-
minishing, and changing it here or there for their
purpose : so did the Arians, Nestorians, &c. and
also Marcion, who is therefore called Mus
Ponticus, from his gnawing, as it were, certain
places with his corruptions ; and for the same
reason may Beza not improperly be called, the
Mouse of Geneva.

5. Another way not unlike this, is to make
corrupt and false translations of the scriptures
for the maintenance of their errors : so did the
Arians and Pelagians of old, and so have the
pretended reformers of our days done, wltich
I intend to make the subject of this following
treatise.

Yet, before I proceed any further, let me
first assure my reader, that this work is not
undertaken with any design of lessoning the

(«) See Bibles 1679, 1580.

fllF. AI'THOr's VREFACB.

credit or authority of the Holy Bible, as perhaps
some may be ready to suniuse ; for inileed, ii
is a common exclamation amoi'.g our adversaries,
especially such of them as one would think
should have a greater respect for truih, that
Catltolics make, light of the written Word of
God : that they undervalue and condenm the
sacred scriptures, that they endeavour to lessen
ihe credit and authority of the Holy Bible.
Thus possessing the poor deluded people with
an ill opinion of Catholics, as if they rejected,
and trod under feet, the written Word : where-
as it is evfjdent to all, who know them, that none
can have a greater respect and veneration for
the holy scripture than Catholics have, receiving,
leverencing, and honouring the- same, as the
very pure and true Word of God ; neither re-
jeciing, nor so much as douhtiug of the least
little in the Bible, from the beginning of
Genesis, to the end of the Revelations ; several
devout C-atholics having that profound venera-
tion for it, that they always read it on
their knees with the greatest humility and rev-
erence imaginable, not enduring to see it pro-
faned in any kind ; nor so much as to see the
least torn leaf of a Bible put to any mariner of
unseemly use. Those who, besides all this,
consider with what very indifferent behaviour
the scripture is ordinarily handled among Pro-
testants, will not, I am confident, say that
Catholics have a less regard ibr it, than Pro-
testants ; but, on the contrary, a far greater.

Again, dear reader, if thou findest in any part
of this treatise, that the nature of the subject
has extorted from me such expressions as may,
perhaps, seem either spoken with too much heat,
or not altogether so soft as might be wished for ;
yet, let me desire thee not to look upon them as
the dictates of passion, but rather as the just re-
sentments of a zealous mind, moved with the
incentive of seeing God's sacred word adul-
terated and corrupted by ill-designing men, on
purpose to delude and deceive the ignorant and
unwary reader.

The holy scriptures were written by the Pro-
phets, Apostles, and Evangelists ; the Old Tes-
tament in Hebrew, except only some few parts in
Chaldee and Syriac ; the greater part of the
New Testament was written in Greek, St.
Matthew's Gospel in Hebrew, and St. Mark's
in Latin. We have not at this day the original
writings of these Prophets and Apostles, nor of
theseventy interpreters, who translated the Old
Testament into Greek, about 300 years before
the coming of Christ ; we have only copies ; for
the truth and exactness whereof we must rely
upon the testimony and tradition of the church,
which in so important a point God would never
permit to err : so that we have not the least
doubt, but the copy authorised and approved of
by the church is sufficiently authentic. For
what avails it for a Christian to believe that
scripture is the Word of God, if he be uncertain
which copy and translation is true? Yet, not-
withstanding the necessity of admitting some
true authentic copy, Protestants pretend that
there is none authentic in the world ; as may

be seen in the preface to t'je Tigurino edition of
the Bible, and in ail their books of controversy ;
seeing therein they condemn the council ol
Trqnt, for declaring that the old translation is
authentic, and yet themselves name no other for
such. And, therefore, though the Lutherans
fancy Luther's translation ; thfe Calvinists, that
of Geneva ; the Zuinglians, that of Zuinglius ;
the English, sometimes one, and somelunes
another : yet because they do not hold any ono
to be authentic, it follows, from their excep
tions against the infallibility of the Roman Ca-
tholic Church in declaring or decreeing a true
and authentic copy of scripture, and their con-
fession of the uncertainty of their own transla-
tions, that they have no certainty of scripture at
all, nor even "of faith, which they ground upon
scripture alone.

That the Vulgate of the Latin is the most true
and authentic copy, has been the judgment o4
God's Church for above those 1 300 years ; dur-
ing which time, the Church has always used it;
and therefore it is, by the sacred council (a) ot
Trent, declared authentic and canonical in every
part and book thereof.

Most of the Old Testament, as it is in the said
Latin Vulgate, was translated (b) out of Hebrew
by St. Hierom, or St. Jerom ; and the New-Tes-
tament had been before his time translated outoi
Greek, but was by him (c) reviewed ; and such
faults as had crept in by the negligence of the
transcribers, were corrected by him by the ap-
pointment of Pope Damasus. " You constrain
me," says he, " to make a new work of an old,
that I, after so many copies of the scriptures
dispersed through the world, should sit as a
certain judge, which of them agree with the true
Greek. I have restored the New Testament to
the truth of the Greek, and have translated the
old according to the Hebrew. Truly, I will
affirm it confi '• > dy, and will produce many
witnesses of tins work, that I have changed
nothing from the truth of the Hebrew," &c. (b)

And for sufficient testimony of the sincerity oi
the translator, and commendations of his trans-
lation, read these words of the great Doctor St.
Augustin : " There was not wanting," says he
" in these our days, Hierom, the priest, a man
most learned and skilful in all the three tongues
who not from the Greek, but from the Hebrew,
translated the same scriptures into Latin, whose
learned labour the Jews yet conCess to be
true." (e)

Yea, the truth and purity of this translation
is such, that even the bitterest of Protestants
themselves are forced to confess it to be the
best, and lo prefer it before all others, as also
to acknowledge the learning, piety, and sincerity
of the translator of it ; which Mr. Whitaker,
notwithstanding his railing in another place,

(ffl) Con. Trident., Sess. 4.

(4) S. Hierom. in lib. de Viris Illustr. extrerao, et ia
Preefat. librorum qujs Latinos fecit.
(0) Hier. Ep. 89. ad Aug , qiigest. 11, inter Ep. Aug

(d) See his preface before the New Testament, dedica-
ted to Pope Damasus, and his Catalogue in fine.

(e) S. Aug. de Civit. Dei. lib. 18, c. 43, et Ep. 80, ai
Hierom c. 3, et lib 2, Dcict. Christi, c. lb

THE author's rilEFACB

docs in these words : " St. Hierom, I reverence ;
Damasus, 1 commend ; and the work I confess
to he godly and profitable to the church." (a)

Dr. Dove says thus of it : " We grant it fit,
ihsit for uniformity in quotations of places, in
schools and pulpits, one Latin text should be
used : and we can bo contented, for the antiquity
thereof, to prefer that (the Vulgate) before all ',
other Latin hooks." (i)

And for the antiquity of it Dr. Covel tells
us, " that it was used in the church 1300 years
ago :" not doubting to prefer that translation i
before others, (c).

Dr. Huuiphrey frees St. Hierom, both from
malice and ignorance in translating, in these
words : " The old interpreter was much addicted
to the propriety of the words, and indeed with
too much anxiety, which I attribute to religion,
not to ignorance." (rf)

In regard of which integrity and learning,
MolmcBus signifies his good esteem thereof,
saying, (t) " I cannot easily forsake the vulgar
and accustomed reading, which also I am accus-
tomed earnestly to defend :" " Yea, (/) I prefer
the vulgar edition, before Erasmus's, Bucer's,
BulJinger's. Brentius's, the Tigurine transla-
tion ; yea before John Calvin's, and all others."
How honourably he speaks of it!' And yet,

Conratlus Pellican, a man commended by
Bucer, /uinglius, Melancthon, and all the fa-
mous Protestants about Basil, Tigure, Berne,
&c., gives it a far higher commendation, in
these words : (g) " I find the vulgar edition of
the Psalter to agree for the sense, with such
dexterity, learning, and fidelity of the Hebrew,
that I doubt not, but the Greek and Latin inter-
preter was a man most learned, most godly, and
of a prophetical spirit." Which certainly are
the best properties of a good translator.

In fine, even Beza himself, one of the great-
est of our adversaries, affords this honourable
testimony of our vulgar translation : " I con-
fess," says he, " that the old interpreter seems
to have interpreted the holy books with won-
derful sincerity and religion. The vulgar
edition I do, for the most part, ejnbrace and pre-
fer before all others " (h)

You see, how highly our Vulgate in Latin is
commended by these learned Protestants : see
likewise, how it has been esteemed by the an-
cient (() Fathers ; yet, notwithstanding, all this is
not sufficient to move Protestants to accept or
acquiesce in it ; and doubtless the very reason
's, because they would have as much liberty to
reject the true letter, as the true sense of scrip-
ture.s, their new doctrines being condemned by
both. For bad they allowed any one translation

(a) Whitaker in his Answer to Reynolds, p. 341.
lb) Dove's Persuasion to Recusants, p. 16.

(d) Dr Hum. de Ratione r.nerp., lib. 1. pp. 74.

(e) Molin. in Nov. Test.. Part. .30,
(/) Et in Inc. 17.

[!>) Pellican in Pra-.fat. in Psalter. An 1584.

(A)Hez;i in Annot.ln Luc.i. l.Et in Prcefat. Nov. Test.

(i),S. liierom etSt Aug.supr.; St. Greg., lib. 70.; Mor.
8. ij3. ; Istdor., lib 6. Ktym. c. 5, 7, et de Divin, Offic.
lib. i.car. li ; S. Beda in Martyrol. ("aasiod. 21 Inst. &c.

to have been authentic, they certainly could
never have had the impudence so wickedly to
have corrupted it, by adding, omitting, and
changing, which they could never have pre-
tended the least excuse for, in any copy by
themselves held for true and authentic.

Ohj. But however, their greatest objection
acninst the Vulffale Lntin is, that we ought ra-
ther to have recourse to the original languages
the fountains of the Hebrew and Greek, ir
which the scriptures were written by the Pro
phets and Apostles, who could not err, than to
stand to the Latin translations, made by divers
interpreters, who might err.

Ahx. When it is certain, that the originals oi
fountains are pure, and not troubled or corrupt,
they are to be preferred before translations :
but it is most certain, that they are corrupted
in divers places, as Protestants themselves are
forced to acknowledge, and as it appears by
their own translations. For example, Ps. xxii.
ver. 1 6, they translate, " They pierced my hands
and my feet :" whereas, according to the He-
brew that now is, it must be read : " As a lion,
my hands, and my feet;" which no doubt, is not
only nonsense, but an intolerable corruption ol
the latter Jews against the passion of our Sa-
viour, of which the old authentic Hebrew wag
a most remarkable prophecy. Again, according
to the Hebrew, it is read, (A) Achaz, king of
Israel ; which being false, they in some of their
first translations read, Achaz, k:ng of Juda, atl-
cording to the truth, and as it is in the Greek
and Vulgate Latin. Yet, their Bible of 1579, as
also their last translation, had rather follow the
falsehood of the Hebrew against their own
knowledge, than to be thought beholden to the
Greek and Latin in so light a matter. Likewise,
where the Hebrew says, Zedecias, Joachin's
brother, they are forced to translate Zedecias, his
father's brother, as indeed the truth, is accordihg
to the Greek. (/) So likewise in another place,
where the Hebrew is, " He begat Azuba his wife
and Jerioth;" which theynot easily knowing what
to make of, translate in some of their Bibles," He
begat Azuba of his wife Jerioth ; and in others,
" He begat Jerioth of his wife A zuba." But with-
out multiplying examples, it is sufficiently known
to Protestants, and by them acknowledged, how
intolerably the Hebrew fountains and originals
are by the Jews corrupted : amongst others. Dr.
Humphrey says, " The Jewish superstition, how
many places it has corrupted, the reader may ea-
sily find out and judge." {m) And in another place,
" I look not," says he, " that men should too
much follow the Rabbins, as many do ; foi:,tho3e
places, which promise and declare Christ tho
true Messias, are most filthily depraved by
•hem," (n)

" The old interpreter," says another Pro-
testant, " seems to have read one way, whereas
the Jews now read another ! which I say, be-
cause I would .not have men think this to

(k) 2 Chron. xxviii. 19.

(Z) 4 Kings xxiv. 17, 19.

{m) Humph. 1. 1, de Rat. intorp. p. 178.

(») Lib. ii. p. 219.

THE AUTHOR 6 PREyJCE.

have proceeded from the ignorance or sloihful-
ness of the old interpreter : rather we have cause
to find fault for want of diligence in the antiqua-
ries, and faith in the Jews ; who, both before
Christ's coming and since, seem to be less careful
of the Psalms, than oftheirTalmudical songs." (u)

I would gladly know of our Protestant trans-
lators of the Bible, what reasons they have to
think the Hebrew fountain they boast of so pure
and uncorrupt, seeing not only letters and sylla-
bles have been mistaken, texts depraved, but
even whole books of the Prophets utterly lost
and perished ? How many books of the ancient
Prophets, sometime extant, are not now to be
found 1. We read in the old Testament, of a
Liber bellorum Domini, " The Book of the Wars
of our Lord ; the Book of the Just Men
(Protestants call it the Book of Jasher;)the
Book of Jehu the son of Hanani ; the Books of
Semeias the Prophet, and of Addo the Seer ;
and Samuel wrote in a book the law of the
kingdom, how kings ought to rule, and laid it
up before our Lord : and the works of Solomon
were written in the Book of Nathan the Pro-
phet, and in the Books of Ahias the Shilonite,
and in the Vision of Addo the Seer." (h) With
several others, which are all quite perished : yea,
and perished in such time, when the Jews were
" the peculiar people of God," and when, of all
nations, " they were to God a holy nation, a
kingly priesthood :" and now, when they are no
national people, have no government, no king,
no priest, but are vagabonds upon the earth, and
scattered among all people : may we reasonably
think their di^ ine and ecclesiastical books to have
been so warily and carefully kept, that all and
every part is safe, pure, and incorrupt ? that every
parcel is soimd, no points, tittles, or letters lost,
or misplaced, but all sincere, perfect and absolute?

How easy is it, in Hebrew letters, to mistake
sometimes one for another, and so to alter the
whole sense 1 As, for example, this very letter
vau (or jod, (c) has certainly made disagreement
in some places ; as where the Sepluagint read,
rrr xjuroa fiu ttigog (rf cpuXix^u), Furtitudinem meam
ad te custodiam. " My strength I will keep to
thee ;" which reading St. Hierom also followed.
It is now in the Hebrew ^Y' fortitndinem ejus,
" His strength I will keep to thee." (d) Which
corruptions our last Protestant translators fol-
low, reading, " Because of his strength will I
wait upon theo ;" and to make sense of it they
add the words, " because of," and change the
words, " keep to" into " wait upon," to the great
[■erverting of the sense and sentence. A like
error is that in Gen. iii. (if it be an error, as
many think it is none,) Ipsa conteret caput tuum,
for Ipse or Ip.sum, about which Protestants keep
lip such a c'2.mour. (e)

As- the Hebrew has been by the Jews abused

(a) Conrad. Pell. Tom. 4, in Psal. Ixxxv. 9.
(i) iNiimb. xxi. 14 ; Josh. x. 13 ; Kings i. 18 ; 2 Paral.
r t :i4 ; xli. 15 ; 1 Kings x. 25 ; 2 Paral. ix. 29.
(c) ■■'■'K''n Nin.

(i) Psal. Iviil. 10, in Prot. Bible it is Psa'. lix. 9.
ie\ Gen. iii. IB

and falsified against our blessed Saviour Chris*
Jesus, especially in such places as. weie manifest
prophecies of his death and passion, so likewise
has the Greek fountain been corrupted by the
eastern heretics, against divers points of Chris-
tian doctrine, insomuch that Protestants them-
selves, who pretend so great veneration for it,
dare not follow it in many places, but are forced
to fly to our Vulgate Latin, as is observed in
the preface to the Rhemish Testament ; whcrt
also you may find sufficient reasons why our
Catholic Bible is translated into English rather
from the Vulgate Latin than from the Greek.

To pass by several examples of corruptions
in the Greek copy, which might be produced, 1
will only, amongst many, take notice of these
two following rash and inconsiderate additions ;
first, John viii. 59, after these words, Exivit «
lernplo, " Went out of the temple ;" are added,
Transiens per medium eorum, sic preeteriit ,
" Going through the midst of them, and so
passed by." (/) Touching which addition, Beza
writes thus : " 'I'hese words are foimd in
very ancient copies ; but 1 think, as does Eras-
mus, that the first part, ' going through tho
midst of them,' is taken out of Luke iv 30, and
crept into the text by fault of the wr/ters, who
found that written in the margin ; and that
the latter part, ' and so passed by,' was added
to make this chapter join well with the next.
And I am moved thus to think, not only because
neither Chrysostom nor Augustine (he might
have said, nor Hierom) make any mention ol
this piece, but also, because it seems not to
hang together very probably ; for, if he withdrew
himself out of their sight, how went he through
the midst of them ?" &c. {g) Thus Beza dis-
putes against it ; for which cause, 1 suppose, it
is omitted by our first English translators, who
love to follow what their master Beza de-
livers to them in Latin, though forsooth they
would have us think they followed the Greek
most precisely ; for in their translations of the
year 1561, 1562, 1577, 1579, they leave it out,
as Beza does; yet in their Testament of 1580,
as also in this last translation (Bible 1683), they
put it in with as much confidence, as if it had
neither been disputed against by Beza, noi
omitted by their former brethren.

To this we may also join that piece which
Protestants so gloriously sing or say at the op.d
of the Lord's Prayer, " For thine is the king-
dom, the power, and the glory, for ever and ever,
Arnen," which not only Erasmus dislikes, (A)
but Bullinger himself holds it for a mere
patch sowed to the rest, " by, he knows not
whom ;" (i) and allows well of Erasmus's judg-
ment, reproving Laurentius Valla for finding
fault with the Latin edition, because it wants it:
" There is no reason," says he, " why Laiu'entins
Valla should take the matter so hotly, as ihotigh
a great part of the Lord's Prayer were cut

(/ ) Afc^Stitv iia fttav AvTbiV Kai naffriytv Svwf*

(g) Beza in Joh. viii. 59.

(A) Erasm. m Annot.

(i) Bulli.ngcr, Decad. v. Serm. 6.

THE AUTHOR'S t'llEKAUB.

«way •■ rather their rashness was to be reproved,
;rlio durst presume to piece on their toys unto
lie Lord's Prayer."

Let not my reader think that our Latin Vul-
gate differs from the true and most authentic
Greek copies, which were extant in St. Hierom's
days, but only from such as are now extant, and
since his days corrupted. " How unworthily,"
says B«za, " and without cause, does Erasmus,
blame the old interpreter, as dissenting from the
Greek ! He dissented, I grant, from those
Greek copies which Erasmus had gotten ; but
we have found not in one place, that the same
interpretation which he blames, is grounded on
the authority of other Greek copies, and those
most ancient : yea in some number of places we
have observed that the reading of the Latin
text of the old interpreter, though it agree not
sometimes with our Greek copies, yet it is much
more convenient, for that it seems to follow some
truer and better copy." {a)

Now, if our Latin Vulgate be framed exactly,
though not to the vulgar Greek examples now
extant, yet to more ancient and perfect copies ;
if the Greek copies have many faults, errors,
corruptions, and additions in them, as not only
Beza avouches, but as our Protestant translators
confess, and as evidently appears by their leav-
ing the Greek and following the Latin, with what
reason can they thus cry up the fountains and j
originals, as incorrupt and pure ? With what
honesty can they call us from our ancient vulgar
Latin, to the present Greek, from which them-
Belves so licentiously depart at pleasure, to fol-
low our Latin ? {b)

Have we not great reason to think, that as
the Latin Church has been ever more constant
iri keeping the true faith than the Greek, so it
has always been more careful in preserving the
scriptures from corruption ?

Let Protestants only consider," whether it be
more credible, that St. Hierom, one of the
greatest doctors of God's church, and the most
skilful in the languages wherein the scripture
was written, who lived in the primitive times,
when perhaps some of the original writings of
the Apostles were extant, or at least the true
and authentic copies in Hebrew and Greek
better known than they are now ; let us then
consider, I say, whether is more credible, than
a translation made or received by this holy doc-
tor, and then approved of by all the world, and
ever since accepted and applauded in God's
church, should be defective, false, or deceitful ?
or that a translation made since the pretended
Reformation, not only by men of scandalous,
and notoriously wicked lives, but from copies
corrupted by Jews, Arians, and other Greek here-
tics, should be so ? (c)

In vain, therefore, do Protestants tell us,
tlifit their translations are taken immediately

(a) Beza in Prijsfat. Nor. Test., Anno 1556.

(b) See the Prsef. to the Rhemish Testament; Dr. Mar-
tin's Discovery ; Reynold's Refutation of Whitaker,
cap. xiii-

(e) Such were Luther, Calvin, Beza, Bucor, Cranmer,
Tyiwla] &c.

from the fountains of the Greek and Hebrew ,
so is also our Laim Vulgate ; only with this dif
ference, that ours was taken from the fountains
when they were clear, and by holy and learned
men, who knew which were the crystal waters
and true copies ; but theirs is taken from foun
tains troubled by broachers of heresies, self-
interested and time-serving persons ; and after
that the Arians, and other heretics, had, I say,
corrupted and poisoned them with their false
and abominable doctrines.

Ohj. 2. Cheminitius and others yet further
object, that there are some corruptions found
in the Vulgate Latin, viz., that these words,
Jpsci conteret caput luum, [d) are corrupted,
thereby to prove the intercession of the Blessed
Virgin Mary ; and that instead thereof, we
should read Ipsum conteret caput tuum, seeing it
was spoken of the seed, which was Christ, as
all ancient writers teach.

Ans. Some books of the Vulgate edition have
Ipsa, and some others Ipse ; and though many
Hebrew copies have Ipse, yet there want not
some which have Ipsa : and the points being
taken away, the Hebrew word maybe translated
Ipsa : yea the holy fathers (e) St. Augustine,
St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostom, St. Gregory,
St. Bede, &c., read it Ipsa, and I think we
have as great reason to follow their interpreta-
tion of it as (^heminitius's, or that of the Pro-
testants of our days ; and though the word con-
teret in the Hebrew is of the masculine gender
and so should relate to Semen, which also in
the Hebrew is of the masculine gender, yet it is
not rare in the scriptures to have pronouns and
verbs of the masculine gender, joined with nouns
of the feminine, as in Ruth i. 8 ; Esther i.-SO ;
Eccles. xii. 5. The rest of Cheminitius's cavils
you will find sufficiently answered by the
learned Cardinal Bellarmine, lib. ii. de Verb,
Dei, cap. 12, 13, 14.

Again, Mr. Whitaker condemns us for follow-
ing our Latin Vulgate so precisely, as thereliy
to omit these words, (/) " when this corruptible
shall have put on incorruplion," which are in the
Greek exemplars, but not in our Vulgate Latin :
whence it follows assuredly, says he, " that
Hierom dealt not faithfully here, or that Ids
version was corrupted afterwards."

I answer to this, with Dr. Reynolds, {g) that
this omission (if it be any) could not proceed
from malice or design, seeing there is no loss or
hindrance to any part of doctrine, by reading it
as we read ; for the selfsame thing is most
clearly set down in the very next lines before.
Thus stand the words : " For this corruptible,
must do on incorruption ; and this mortal, do on
immortality: and when this (corruptible, has
done on incorruption, and this) mortal has done

(d) Gen. iii.

(c) St -August , lib. 2,deGen.cont. Manich .c.xviii.l.
11, de Gen. ad Literam, cap. xxxvi. ; St. Ainbr. lib. d«
Fuo-a Sieculi, cap vii.; St. Chiysost in Horn. 17, in Gen,
St. Greg. lib. i.; Mor. cap. xxxviii.; Beda et alii iu huul
locum.

( / ) 1 Cor. XV. 54.

(ff) See Dr. Reynolds* Refutation of Whitahr.r's Ro
prehenaioiis, chap. x.

THE AUTHOR a PREFACS.

on immortality." Where you see the words,
which I have put down, inclosed with paren-
thesis, are contained most expressly in the fore-
going sentence, which is in all our Testaments ;
BO that there is no "harm or danger either to
faith, doctrine, or manners, if it be omitted.

That it was of old in some Greek copies, as
it stands in our Vulgate Latin, is evident by St.
Elierom's translating it thus : and why ought St.
Ilierom to be suspected of unfaithful dealing, see-
ing he put the self-same words and sense in the
next lines immediately preceding ? And that it
was not corrupted since, appears by the common
reading of most men, in all after ages. St. Am-
brose, in his commenlar)' upon the same place
reads as we do. So does St. Augustine, De Ci-
vitate Dei, cited by Si. Bede, in .his commentary
upon the same chapter, (a) So read also the rest
of the Catholic interpreters, Haymo, Anselm, &c.

But if this place be rightly considered, so far
is it from appearing as done with any design of
corrupting the text, that on the contrary, it appa-
rently shows the sincerity of our Latin transla-
tion ; for, as we keep our text, according as St.
Hierom and the Church then delivered it ; so not-
withstanding, because the said words are in the
ancient Greek copies, we generally add them in
the margin of every Latin Testament which the
church uses, as may be seen in divers prints of
Paris, Lovain, and other Universities : and if
there be any fault in our English translation, it
is only that this particle was not put down in the
margin, as it was in the Latin which we followed.
So that this, I say, proves no corruption, but
rather great fidelity in our Latin Testament, that
it agrees with St. Hierom, and consequently with
the Greek copies, which he interpreted, as with
St. Ambrose, St. Bede, Haymo, and St. Anselm.

Whether these vain and frivolous objections
are sufficient grounds for their rejecting our
Vulgate Latin, and flying to the original (but
now impure) fountains, I refer to the judicious
reader.

But now, how clear, limpid, and pure the
streams are, that flow from the Greek and He-
brew fountains, through the channel of Pro-
testant pens, the reader may easily guess with-
out taking the pains of comparing them, from
the testimonies they themselves bear of one an-
other's translations.

Zuinglius writes thus to Luther, concerning
his corrupt translation : (h) " Thou corruptest
the word of God, O Luther : thou art seen to
be a manifest and common corrupter and per-
verter of the holy scripture ; how much are we
ashamed of thee, who have hitherto esteemed
thee beyond all measure, and prove thee to be
such a man !"

Luther's Dutch translation of the old Testa-
ment, especially of Job and the Prophets, had
its blemishes, says Keckerman, and those no
small ones, (c) neither are the blemishes in his
New Testament to be accounted small ones ;

(a) St. Beda in 1 Cor. c. xv.
(A) Zuins; t. 2, ad Luth., lib de S.

one of which is, his omitting and wholly lea-vliig
out this text in St. John's Epistle : " There be
three who give testimony in heaven ; the Father,
the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three
are one." Again, in Rom. iii. 28, he adds the
word " alone" to the text, saying, " We account
a man to be justified by faith alone, without tho
works of the law.'' Of which intolerable cor-
ruption being admonished, he persisted obstinate
and wilful, saying, " So I will, so I command ;
let ray will be instead of reason," &c. (cl) Lu-
ther will have it so ; and at last thus concludes,
" The word alone must remain in my New Tes-
tament ; although all the Papists run mad, they
shall not take it from thence : it grieves me,
that I did not add also those two other words,
Omnihu'i et omnium, sine omnibus operibus, om-
nium legum ; without all works of all laws."

Again, in requital to Zuinglius, Luther rejects
the Zuinglian translation, terming them in
matter of divinity, " fools, asses, antichrists, de-
ceivers," &c. (e) and indeed, not without cause ,
for what could be more deceitful and anti-
christian, than instead of'our Saviour's words,
" this is my body," to translate, " this signifies
my body," as Zuinglius did, to maintain his
figurative signification of the words, and cry
down Christ's real presence of the blessed
sacrament ?

When Froscheverus, the Zuinglian printer
of Zurick, sent Luther a Bible translated by the
divines there, he would not receive it; but as
Hospinian and Lavatherus witness, sent it back
and rejected it. (/)

. The Tigurine translation was, in like luannei
so distasteful to other Protestants, " that the
Elector of Saxony in great anger rejected it and
placed Luther's translation in room there-

of-" [g)

Beza reproves the translation set forth by
Oecolampadius, and the divines of Basil ;
affirming, " that the Basil translation is hi many
places wicked,' and altogether differing from ihe
mind of the Holy Ghost"

Castalio's translation is also condemned by
(A) Beza, as being sacrilegious, wicked, anil
ethnical ; insomuch, that Castalio wrote a special
treaiise in defence of it ; in the preface of which
he thus complains : " Some reject our Latin
and French translations of the Bible, not only
as unlearned, but also as wicked, and differing
in many places from the mind of the Hoiv
Ghost." '

The learned Protestant, Molinoeus, affirms
of Calvin's translation, " that Calvin in his har-
mony, makes the text of the Gospel to leap up
and down ; he uses violence to the letter of the
Gospel ; and besides this, adds to the text." (j)

{d) To. V. Germ. fol. 141, 144.

(e) See Zuing. Tom. 2, ad Luth. lib. de Sacr.,fol. 388

o89

(/) Hosp. Hist. Sacram. part. ult. fol. 183; Lavath,
Hist Sacram. 1. 32.

(,?■) Hnspin. in Concord. Discord, fol. 138.

(h) In Respons. ad Defens. et Respcins. Castal it
Test. 1556, in Praefat.et in Annot.in Mat iii. etiv., Ltic
ii.; Act. viii. et x. 1 Cor. 1.

(J) In suaTranslat. Nov. Test. Part. 13, fol. IK)

THE AUTHORS PREFACE.

And touching Beza's translation, which our
English especially follow, the same Molinceus
charges him, that '■ he actually changes the
text ;" giving likewise several instances of his
corruptions. Castalio also, " a learned Cal-
vinist, as Osiancler saj s, " and skilful in the
tongues," reprehends Beza in a book wholly
written against his corruptions ; and says further.,
" I will not note all his errors, for thai would
require too large a volume."(a)

In short, Bucer and ihe Osianderians rise up
against Luther for false translations ; Luther
against Munster ; Beza against Castalio, and
Castalio against Beza ; Calvin against Servetus ;
Illyricus against both Calvin and Beza. (i)
Staphylus and Emserus noted in Luther's Dutch
uranslations of the New Testament only, about
one thousand four hundred heretical corrup-
tions, (c) And thus far of the confessed cor-
ruptions in foreign Protestant translators.

If you desire a character of our English Pro-
testant versions, pray be pleased to take it from
the words of these following Protestants ;
some of the most zealous and precise of whom,
tn a certain treatise, entitled, " A petition di-
lected to his most excellent majesty King
James the First," complain, " that our transla-
tion of the Psalms, comprised in our Book of Com-
mon Prayer, dotb, in addition, subtraction, and
alteration, differ from the truth of the Hebrew
in, at least, two hundred places." If two hun-
dred corruptions were found in the Psalms oiJy,
and that by Protestants themselves, how many,
think you, might be found from the beginning
of Genesis, to the end of the Apocalypse, if ex- .
amined by an impartial and strict examination ?
And this they made the ground of their scruple,
to make use of the Common Prayer ; remain-
ing doubtful, " whether a man may, with a
safe conscience, subscribe thereto :" yea, they
\vrot(i and published a particular treatise, en-
tilled, " A ©«fence of the Ministers' Reasons
for refusal of Subscribing ;" the whole argument
and scope whereof, is only concerning mis-
translating ; yea, the reader may see, in the
beginning of the said book, the title of every
chapter, twenty-six in all, pointing to the
mistranslations there handled in particular

id) («)

Mr. Carlisle avouches, " that the English
translators have depraved the sense, obscured
the truth, and deceived the ignorant : that in
many places they deiort the scriptures from the
right sense, and that they show themselves to love
darkness more than light : falsehood more than
truth." Which Doctor Reynold's objecting
against the Church of England, Mr. Whitaker
had no better answer than to say, " What
Mr. Carlisle, with som.s others, has written
against some places trar4s]ated in our Bibles,
makes nothing to the purpose ; I have not

{a) In Test. Part. 20, 30, 40, 6 J, 65, 66, 74,99, et Part. 8,
13, 14,21, 23
(4) In Defens. trans., p. 170.

(d) Petition directed to his Majesty, p. 75, 76.

(e) That Christ descended into hell.p. 116,117,118,
i21, 154

said otherwise, but that some things miy be
amended." {f)

The Ministers of Lincoln diocess could not
forbear, in their great zeal, to signify to ih6
king, that the English translation of the Bible,
" is a translation that takes away from the text,
that adds to the text, and that sometimes, to the
changing or obscuring of the meaning of ihe
Holy Ghost ;'■ calling it yet further, " a trans-
lation which is absurd and senseless, pervert-
ing, in many places, the meaning of the Holy
Ghost." (g)

For which cause, Protestants of tender con
sciences made great scruple of subscribing
thereto : 'f How shall I," says Mr. Bulges,
" approve under my hand, a translation which
hath so many omissions, many additions, which
sometimes obscures, sometimes perverts the
sense ; being sometimes senseless, scinctimea
contrary V (/;)

This great evil of corrupting the scripture
being well considered by Mr. Broughton, one
of the most zealous sort of Protestants, obliged
him to write an epistle to the Lords of the
Council, desiring them with all speed to procure
a new translation : " because," says he, " that
which is now in England is full of errors." (i)
And in his advertisements of corruptions, he
tells the Bishops, " that their public translations
of scriptures into English is such, that it per-
verts the text of the old Testament in eight
hundred and forty-eight places, and that it causes
millions of millions to reject the New Testament,
and to run to eternal flames." A most dreadful
saying, certainly, for all those who are forced to re-
ceive such a translation for their only rule of faith.

King James the First thought the Geneva
translation to be the worst of all ; and further
affirmed, " that in the marginal notes annexed
to the Geneva translation, some are very partial,
untrue, seditious," &c. (k) Agreeable to this are
also these words of Mr. Parkes to Doctor
Willet : " As for the Geneva Bibles, it is to
be wished, that either they were purged from
those manifold errors which are both in the text
and in the margin, or else utterly prohibited."

Now these our Protestant English transla-
tions being thus confessedly " corrupt, absurd,
senseless, contrary, and preverting the meaning
of the Holy Ghost ;" had not King James the
First just cause to aflirm, " that he could never
see a Bible well translated into English ?" (/)
And whether such falsely translated Bibles
ought to be imposed upon the ignorant geople,
and by them received for the very Word of
God, and for their only rule of faith, I refer to
the judgment of the world ; and do freely assert
with Doctor Whitaker, a learned Protest£.nt,

if) Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, p. 265.

(g) Seethe Abiidgment, which the Ministers ofLircoln
Diocess delivered to his Majesty, p. 11, 12, 13.

(A) Burges Apol. Sect. 6, and in Covel's Answei to
Burges, p. 93.

(i) See the Triple Cord, p. 147.

(k) Seethe Conlerence before the King's Majesty, p. 46,
47. Apologies concerning Christ's descent into hell at
Ddd.

(/i Conference before his Majesty, p. 46.

THE author's PREFA2E.

• that translations are so far only the Word of
God, as they faithfully express the meaning of
the aulhentical text." (a)

The English Protestant translations having
been thus exclaimed against, and cried down not
only by Catholics, but even by the most learned
Protestants, (6) as you have seen ; it pleased his
majesty. King James the First, to command a
review and reformation of those translations
■which had passed for God's Word in King
Edward the" Sixth, and Queen Elizabeth's days,
(c) Which work was undertaken by the prelatic
clergy, not so much, it is to be feared, for the
zeal of truth, as apperirs by their having cor-
rected so very few places, as out of a design of
correcting such faults as favoured the more
puritanical part of Protestants (Presbyterians)
against the usurped authority, pretended episco-
pacy, ceremonies, and traditions of the prelatic
party. For example : the word " congregation"
in their first Bibles, was the usual and only
English word they made use of for the Greek
and Latin word ixxXyala ecclesia, because then
the name of church was most odious to them ;
yea, they could not endure to hear any mention
of a church, because of the Catholic Church,
which they had fosaken, and which withstood
and condemned them. But now, being gi-own
up to something (as themselves fancy) like a
church, they resolve in good earnest to take upon
them the face, figure, and grandeur of a church ;
to censure and excommunicate, yea, and perse-
cute their disssenting brethern ; rejecting there-
fore that humble appellation which their primi-
tive ancestors were content with, viz. congrega-
tion, they assume the title of church, the Church
of England, to countenance which, they bring
the word church again into their translations,
and banish that their once darling congregation.

They have also, instead of ordinances, institu-
tions, &;c. been pleased in some places to trans-
late traditions ; thereby to vindicate several
ceremonies of theirs agriinst their Puritanical
brethren ; as in behalf of their character, they
rectified, " ordaining elders, by election."

The word Image being so shameful a cor-
ruption, they were pleased likewise to correct,
and instead thereof to translate Idol according
to the true Greek and Latin. Yet it appears
that this was not amended out of any good de-
sign, or love of truth ; but either merely out of
shame, or however to have it said that they had
done something. Seeing they have not cor-
rected it in all places, especially in the Old
Testament, Exod. xx., where they yet read
fmage, " Thou shalt not make to thyself any
graven image," the word in Hebrew being Pesel,
the very same that Sculptile is in Latin, and
Kignines in English a graven or carved thing ;
and in the Greek it is Eidolon (an Idol) : so
that by this false and wicked practice, they en-
Jlravour to discredit the Catholic religion ; and,
contrary to their own consciences, and correc-

(.j) M"' taker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, p. 235.

(I) Dr. iJregory Martin wrote a whole Treatise against
ther}

tions in the New Testament, endeavour to make
the people believe that Image and Idol are the
same, and equally forbidden by scripture, and
God's commandments ; and consequently, that
Popery is idolatry, for admitting the due use of
images.

They have also corrected that most absurd
and shameful corruption, grave ; and, as they
ought to do, have instead of it translated hell,
so that now they read, " Thou wilt not leave my
soul in hell ;" whereas Beza has it, " Thou wilt
not leave my carcase in the grave." Yet wo
see, that this is not out of any sincere intention,
or respect to truth neither, because they have
but corrected it in some few places, not in all,
as you will see hereafter; which they would not
do, especially in Genesis, lest they should there-
by be forced to admit of Limbus Pairum, where
Jacob's soul was to descend, when he said, " I
will go down to my son into hell, mourning,"
&c. And to balance the advantage they think
they may have given Catholics where they have
corrected it, they have (against purgatory and
Limbus Pairum) in other places most grossly
corrupted the text : for whereas the words ol
our Saviour are, " Quickened in spirit or soul.
In the which spirit coming, he preached to them
also that were in prison," (d) they translate.
" Quickened by the spirit, by which also he went
and preached unto the spirits in prison." This
was so notorious a corruption, that Dr. Mon-
tague, afterwards Bishop of Chichester and
Norwich, reprehended Sir Henry Saville for it,
to whose care the translating of St. Peter's
epistle was committed ; Sir Henry Saville told
him plainly, that Dr. Abbot, archbishop of
Canterbury, and Dr. Smith, bishop of Glou-
cester, corrupted and altered this translation of
this place, which himself had sincerely performed.
Note here, by the bye, that if Dr. Abbot's con-
science could so lightly suffer him to corrupt the
scripture, bis, or his servant Mason's forging
the Lambeth Records, could not possibly cause
the least scruple, especially being a thing so
highly for their interest and honour.

These are the chiefest faults they have cor-
rected in this their new translation ; and with
what sinister designs they have amended them,
appears visible enough ; to wit., either to keep
their authority, and gain credit for their new-
thought-on episcopal and priestly character and
ceremonies against Puritans or Presbyterians ;
or else, for very shame, urged thereto by the
exclamations of Catholics, daily inveighing
against such intolerable falsifications. Bu(
because they resolved not to correct either all,
or the tenth part of the corruptions of the for-
mer translation : therefore, fearing their over,
seen falsifications would be observed, both by
Puritans and Catholics, in their Epistle Dedi-
catory to the king, they desire his majesty's pro.
teclion, for that " on the one side, we shall be
traduced," say they, " by Popish persons at home
or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because
we are poor instruments to make God's holy

id) 1 Peter iii, 18, 19.

THK author's preface.

!<3

tnith to be yet more known unto the people
whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and
darkness : on the other side, we shall be ma-
ligned by self-conceited brethern, who run their
own ways," &c.

We see how they endeavour here to persuade
the king and the world, that Catholics are desi-
rous to conceal the light of the Gospel : whereas
on the contrary, nothing is more obvious, than
the daily and indefatigable endeavours of Ca-
tholic niissioners and priests, not only in preach-
ing ami explaining God's holy word in Europe ;
but also in forsaking their own countries and
inconveniences, and travelling with great diffi-
culties and dangers by sea and land, into Asia,
Africa America, and the Antipodes, with' no
othar design than to publish the doctrine of
Christ, and to discover and manifest the light of
the Gospel to inndels, who are in darkness and
ignorance. Nor do any but Catholics stick to
tho old letter and sense of scripture, without
altering the text or rejecting any part thereof,
or devising new interpretations ; which certainly
cannot demonstrate a desire in them to keep
people in ignorance and darkness. Indeed, as
for their self conceited Presbyterian and fanatic
brethern, who run their own ways in translating
and interpreting scripture, we do not excuse
them, but only say, tjiat we see no reason why
prelatics should reprehend them for a fault,
whereof themselves are no less guilty. Do not
themselves of the Church of England run their
own ways also ; as well as those other sectaries
in translating the Bible ? Do they slick to
cither the Greek, Latin, or Hebrew text ? Do
they not leap from one language and copy to
another ? accept and reject what they please ?
Do they not fancy a sense of their own, every
whit as contrary to that of the Catholic and an-
cient church, as that of their self-conceited bre-
thren the Presbyterians, and others, is acknow-
ledged to be ? And yet they are neither more
learned nor more skilful in the tongues, nor
more godly than those they so much contemn
and blame.

All heretics who have ever waged war against
God's holy church, whatever particular wea-
pons they had, have generally made use of these
two, viz., " Misrepresenting and ridiculing the
doctrine of God's church ;" and, " corrupting
and misinterpreting his sacred word, the holy
scripture ;" we find not any since Simon Magus s
days, that have ever been more dexterous and
skilful in hatulling these direful arms, than the
heretics of our times.

In the first place, they are so great masters
and doctors in misrepresenting, mocking, and
deriding religion, that they seem even to have
solely devoted tliemselves to no other profession
or place, but " Cathedra! irrisorum," the school
or " chair of the scorner," as David terms tjieir
seat : which the holy apostle St. Peter foresaw,
when he foretold, that " there should come in
tho latter days, illusores, scoffers, walking
after their own lusts." To whom did this pro-
phecy ever better agree, than to the heretics of
our clays, who derido the sacrod scriptures ?

" The author of the oook of Ecclesiastes," says
one of them, " had (.either boots nor spurs, but
rid on a long stick, in begging shoes " Who
scoff at the book of Judith : compare the Ma-
cabees to Robin Hood, and Bevis of Southamp
ton : call Baruch, a peevish ape of Jeremy :
count the Epistle to the Hebrews as stubble .
and deride St. James's, as an epistle made ol
straw : contemn three of the four Gospels.
What ridiculing is this of the word of God !
Nor were the first pretended reformers only
guilty of this, but the same vein has still con-
tinued in the writings, preachings, and teachings
of their successors ; a great part of which are
nothing but a mere mockery, ridiculing, and
misrepresenting of the doctrine of Christ, as is
too notorious and visible in many scurrilous and
scornful writings and sermons lately published
by several men of no small figure in our English
Protestant Church. By which scoffing strata-
gem, when they cannot laugh the vulgar into a
contempt and abhorrence of the Christian reli-
gion, they fly to their other weapons, to wit,
" imposing upon the people's weak under.stand
ing, by a corrupt, imperfect, and falsely trans-
lated Bible." (a)

Tertullian complained thus of the heretics of
his time, Ista hiBresis non recipit quasdum scrip-
iuras, &c. " These heretics admit nc» some
books of scriptures ; and those which they do
admit, by adding to, and taking from, they per-
vert to serve their purpose ; and if they receive
some books, yet they receive them not entirely
or if they receive them entirely, after some sort
nevertheless they spoil them by devising divers
interpretations. In this case, what will you do,
who think yourselves skilful in scriptures, when
that which you defend, the adversary denies ; and
that which you deny, he defends ?" Et lu
quidem nihil perdcs nisi vocem de corilenlione ,
nihil consequeris nisi bilem de blasphematione :
" And you indeed shall lose nothing but words
in this contention; nor shall you gain any thing
but anger from his blasphemy." How fitly may
these words be applied to the pretended refor-
mers of our days I who, when told of their abu-
sing, corrupting, and misinterpreting the holy
scriptures, are so far from acknowledging their
faults, that on the contrary they bhish not to
defend them. When Dr. Martin in his disco,
very, told them of their falsifications in the
Bible, did they thank him for letting them see
their mistakes, as indeed men endued with the
spirit of sincerity and honesty would have done \
No, they were so far from that, that Fulk, as
much as in him lies, endeavours very obstinaudy
to defend them : and Whitaker affirms, thai
" their translations are well done." Why then
were they afterwards corrected ? and that all the
faults Dr. Martin finds in them are but trifles:
demanding what is there in their Bibles that can
be found fault with, as not translated well and
truly ? [b) Such a pernicious, obstinate, and
contentious spirit, are heretics possessed witli,

(a) Dr. St , Dr. S., Dr. T.. Mr. W., &c.

(i) Whitaker, p. 14

THE AUTHOR S PREFACB,

which hideed is llie very thing that renders them
Jierelics ; for with such 1 do not ranii those in
the list, who, though they havQ even with their
first niiik, as I may say, imbibed their errors,
;wd have been educated from their childhood in
»froneoiis opinions, yet do neither perlinaciously
adhere to the same, nor obstinately resist the
.rnlh, when proposed to them ; but on the con-
uary, are willing to embrace it.

How many innocent, and well-meaning people,
are there in England, who have scarcely in all
their life-time, ever heard any mention of a
Catholic, or Catholic religion, unless under
these monstrous and frightful terms of idolatry,
superstition, antichristianism, &c. ? How many
have ever heard a better character of Catholics,
than bloody-minded people, thirsters after blood,
worshippers of wooden gods, prayers to stocks
and stones, idolaters, antichrists, the beast in
the Revelations, and what not, that may render
ihem more odious than hell, and more frightful
than the devil himself, and that from the mouths
and pens of their teachers, and ministerial
guides ? Is it then to be wondered , at, that
these so grossly deceived people should enter-
tain a strange prejudice against religion, and a
detestation of Catholics ?

Whereas, if these blindfolded people were
once undeceived, and brought to understand,
that all these monstrous scandals are falsely
charged upon Catholics ; that the Catholic
doctrine is so far from idolatry, that it teaches
quite the contrary, viz., That whosoever gives
God's honour to slocks and stones, as Protes-
tants phrase it, to images, to saints, to angels,
or to any creature ; yea, to any thing but to
God himself, is an idolater, and will be damned
for the same ; that Catholics are so far from
thirsting after the blood of others, that on the
contrary, their doctrine teaches thein, not only
to love God above all, and their neighbour as
themselves, but even to love their enemies. In
short, so far different is the Roman Catholic
religion from what it is by Protestants repre-
sented, that on the contrary. Faith, Hope", and
Charity, are the three divine virtues it teaches
us ; Prudence, Justice, Fortitude, and Tem-
perance, are the four moral virtues it exhorts
lis .^ *hi9h christian virtues, when it happens
that they are, through human fraility, and the
temptations of our three enemies, the world, the
flesh, and the devil, either wounded or lost ;
then are we taught to apjily ourselves to such j
divine reme lies, as our blessed Saviour Christ
has left us in his church, viz., his. holy sacra-
ments, by which our sjiiritual infirmities are
cured and repaired. By the sacrament of bap-

tism we are taught, that original sin is loigiven
and that the party baptized is regenerated
and born anew imto the mystical body of Ghrisl
of which by baptism he is made a lively mem-
ber : so likewise by the sacrament of penance
all our actural sins are forgiven ; the same holy
Spirit of God working in this to the forgiveness
of actual sin, that wrought before in the sacra- '
ment of baptism to the forgiveness of original
sin. We are taught likewise, that by partaking
of Christ's very body, and his \'ery blood, in tho
blessed sacrament of the Eucharist, we by a
perfect union dwell in him, and he in us, and
that as himself rose again for our justification
so we, at the day of judgement, shall in him
receive a glorious resurrection, and reign with
him for all eternity, as glorious members of tht
same body, whereof" himself is the head. It
further teaches us, that none hut a priest, truly
consecrated by the holy sacrament of order, caii
cimsecrate and administer the holy sacrament.s.
This is our religion, this is the centre it tends
to, and the sole^ end it aims at ; which pviint,
we are further taught, can never ue gained but
by a true faith, a firm hope, and a perfect
charity.

To conclude : if, I say, thousands of ^ell-
meaning Protestants understood this, as also thai
Protestancy itself is nothing else but a mere im-
posture begun in GermanV and England, indir-
tained and upheld by the wicked policy of belf-
interested statesmen ; and still continued by mis-
representing and ridiculing the Catholic religion,
by misinterpreting the holy scriptures ; yea, by
falsifying, abusing, and, as will appear is this ibl-
lowing treatise, by most abominably comipiing
the sacred word of God : now far would it be
from them obstinately and pertinaciously to ad-
here to the false and erroneous principles, in
which they have hitherto been educated ? Hosv
willingly would they submit their understandings
to the obedience of faith ? How earnestly would
they embrace that rule of faith, which oui
blessed Saviour and his Apostles left us for our
guide to salvation ? With what diligence would
they bead all their studies, to learn the most
wholesome and saving doctrine of God's holy
church 1 in tine, if once enlightened with a true
faitli, and encouraged with a firm hope, what
zealous endeavours would they not use to acquire
such virtues and christian perfections, as might
inflame them with a perfect charily, whicli is the
very ultimate and highest step to eternal felicity 1
To which, may God of his infinite goodness
and tender mercy, through the merits and biltei
death and passion of our dear Saviour Jesus
CJirist, bring us all. Amen.

THE TEUTH

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE.

EXAMINED.

UUR pretended Reformers, having squared and
modelled to themselves a faith contrary to the
certain and direct rule of apostolical tradition,
delivered in God's holy church, were forced to
have recourse to the scripture, as their only rule
of faith ; according to which, the Church of
England has, in the sixth of her Thirty-nine
Articles, declared, " that the scripture compre-
hended in the canonical books (i. e., so many of
them as she thinks fit to call so) of the Old and
New Testament, is the rule of faith so far, that,
whatsoever is not read theiein, or cannot be
proved thereby, is not to be accepted as any
point of faith, or needful to be followed." But
Qnding themselves still at a loss, their new doc-
trines being so far from being contained in the
holy scripture, that they were directly opposite
to it ; they were fain to seek out to themselves
many other inventions ; amongst which, none
was more generally practised than the corrupting
of the holy scripture, by false and partial transla-
tions : by which they endeavoured, right or
wrong, to make those sacred volumes speak in
favour of their new-invented faith and doctrine.

The corruptions of this nature in the first
English Protestant translations, were so many,
and so notorious, that Dr. Gregory Martin com-
posed a whole book of them, in which he dis-
covers the fraudulent shifts the translators were
fain to make use of, in defence of them. Some-
limes they recurred to the Hebrew text ; and
when that spoke against their new doctrine,
then to the Greek ; when that favoured them
not, to some copv acknowledged by themselves
to be corru[)ted, and of no credit; arid when no
copy at all could be found out to cloak their
corruptions, then must the bonk or chapter of
scripture contradicting them be declared apoc-
ryphal ; and when that cannot be made prob-
able, they fall downright upon the prophets
and apostles who wrote them, saying, " that
they might and did err. even after the coming
of the Holy Ghost." Thus Luther, accused by
/iiinglius for corrupting the word of God, had

no way left to defend his impiety, but by impu
dently preferring himself, and his own spirit
before that of those who wrote the holy scrip
tures, saying, " Be it, that the church, Augus-
tine, and other doctors, also Peter and Paul,
yea, an angel from heaven, teach otherwise, yet
is my doctrine such as sets forth God's glory, &;c.
Peter, the chief of the apostles, lived and taught
(irxtra verbum Dei) besides the word of God. "(a)

And against St. James's mentioning the sa-
crament of extreme unction : " But though,"
says he, " this were the epistle of St. James, I
would answer, that it is not lawful for an apoEtIc,
by his authority, to institute a sacrament ; this
a43perlains to Christ alone. "(A) As though that
blessed apostle would publish a sacrament with-
out warrant from Christ ! Our Church of
England divines, having unadvisedly put St.
James's epistle into the canon, are forced, instead
of such ail answer, to say, " That the sacrament
of extreme unction was yet in the days of Gre-
gory the Great, unformed." As though the
apostle St. James had spoken he knew not
what, when he advised, that the sick should be
by the priests of the church, " anointed with oil
in the name of our Lord. "(c)

Nor was this Luther's shift alone ; for all
Protestants follow their first pretended reform-
er in this point, being necessitated so to do for
the maintenance of their reformations, and trans,
lations, so directly opposite to the known letter
of the scripture.

The Magdeburgians follow Luther, in accu-
sing the apostles of error, particularly St. Paul,
by the persuasion of James. (f/)

Brentius also, whom Jewel terms a grave ai.d
learned father, affirms, " that St. Peter, the
chief of the apostles, and also Barnabas, aftei

(a) Vid. Supr. torn. 5, Wittemb., fol. 290, and in Ep.
ad Galat., cap. i.

(A) De (/apt. Babil., cap. de Extrem. Uiict., torn. 2,
Wittemb.

ic) See tfie Second Defence of the Exposition of tho
Doctrine of the Church of England, &c.

(d) Cent. 1, 1. ii., c. 10. col .'ifjO.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

the Holy Ghost was received, together with the
church of Jerusalem, erred."

John Calvin affirms, that " Peter added to the
schism of the church, to the endangering of
Christian liberty, and the overthrow of the grace
of Christ." And in page 150, he reprehends
Peter and Barnabas, and others. (a)

Zunchius mentions some Calvinists, in his
Epiit. ad Misc., who said, " If Paul should
■ -■> to Geneva, and preach the same hour
tf . Calvin, they would leave Paul, and hear
Calvin " And Lavatherus affirms, that " some of
Luther's followers, not the meanest among their
doctors, said, they had rather doubt of St. Paul's
doctrine than the doctrine of Luther, or of the
Confession of Augsburgh."(A)

These desperate shifts being so necessary for
warranting their corruptions of scripture, and
maintaining tlie fallibility of the church in suc-
ceeding ages, for the same reasons which con-
clude it infallible in the apostles' time, are ap-
plicable to ours, and to every former century ;
otherwise it must be said, that God's providence
and promises were limited to a few years, and
Himself so partial, that he regards not the
necessities of his church, nor the salvation of
any person who lived after the time of his disci-
ples ; the Church of England could not reject
it without contradicting their brethren abroad,
and their own principles at home. Therefore
Mr. Jewel, in his defence of the apology for the
Church of England, affirms, that St. Mark
mistook Abiathai for Abimelech ; and St.
Matthew, Hieremias for Zacharias.(c) And Mr.
Fulk against the Rhemish Testament, in Galat.
ii., fol. 322, charges Peter with error of igno-
rance against the Gospel.

Doctor Goad, in his four Disputations with
Father Campion, affirms, that " St. Peter erred
in faith, and that, after the sending down of the
Holy Ghost upon them."(c() And Whitaker
says, " It is evident, that even after Christ's
ascension, and the Holy Ghost's descending
upon the apostles, the whole church, not only
die common sort of Christians, but also even
the apostles themselves, erred in the vocation
i)f the Gentiles, &c. ; yea, Peter also erred. He
'urthermore erred in manners, &c. And these
were great errors ; and yet we see these to have
been in the apostles, even after the Holy Ghost
descended upon thein."(e)

Thus, these fallible reformers, who, to coun-
ienance their corruptions of scripture, grace
their own errors, and authorise their church's
fallibility, would make the apostles themselves
fallible ; but indeed, they need not have gone
this bold way to work, for we are satisfied, and
can very easily believe their church to be falli-
ble, their doctrines erroneous, and themselves
i;orru])ters of the scriptures, without being forced
*o >"^'d, that the apostles erred.(y)

fa) Calvin in Galat., c. ii., v. 14, p. 511.
rh) Lavatcr in Histor. Sacrament, p. 18.
^:) Page 361.

(d) The second day's conference.
i,e) Whitaker de£ccle9. contr. Bellar. Controvers. 2
p. 4, p; 2-23.
' f) Protestants, to authorise their own errors and fal-

And truly, if, as they say, the apostles were
not only fallible, but taught errors in manners
and matters of faith, after the Holy Ghost's
descending upon them, their writings can be no
infallible rule, or, as themselves term it, perfect
rule tif faith, to direct men to salvation : which
conclusion is so immediately and clearly deduced
from this Protestant doctrine, that the supposal
and premises once granted, there can be no
certainty in the scripture itself. And indeed,
this we see all the pretended reformers aimed
at, though they durst not say so much ; and
we shall in this little, tract make it most evi-
dently appear, from their intoleiSible abusing
it, how little esteem and what slight regard ihcy
have for the sacred scripture ; though they make
their ignorant flocks believe, that, as they have
translated it, and delivered it to them, it is
the pure and infallible word of God,

Bi!FORE I come to particular examples of theii
falsifications and corruptions, let me advertise
the reader, that my intention is to make use
only of such English translations as are comrnon,
and well known iri England even to this day,
as being yet in many men's hands : to wit,
those Bibles printed in the years 1.562, 1577,
and 1579, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's
reign ; which I will confront with their last
translation made in King James the First's
reign, from the impression printed in London,
in the year 1683.

In all which said Bibles, [g) I shall take
notice sometimes of one translation, sometimes
of another, as every one's falsehood shall give
occasion : neither is it a good defence for the
falsehood of one, that it is truly translated in
another, the reader being deceived by any one,
because commonly he reads but one ; yea, one
of them is a condemnation of the other. And
where the English corruptions, here noted, are
not to be found in one of the first three Bibles,
let the reader look in another of them ; for il
he find not the falsification in all, he will cer-
tainly find it in two, or at least in one of them ;
and in this case, I advertise the reader to bo
very circumspect, that he think not, by and by,
these are falsely charged, because there may be
found, perhaps, some later edition, wherein the
same error we noted, may be corrected ; for it
is their common and known fashion, not only in
their translations of the Bible, but in their oihe!
books and writings, to alter and change, add and
put Out, ip their later editions, according as eithei
themselves are ashamed of the former, or their
scholars who print them again, dissent or disa-
gree from their masters.

Note also, that though I do not so much
charge them with falsifying the Vulgate Latin
Bible, which has always been of so great autho-
rity in the church of God, and with all the (A)
ancient Fathers, as I do the Greek, which they
pretend to translate : I cannot, however, but

libillty, would make the apostles themselves erroneous
and fallible.

ig) Bib. 1562, 77, or 79.

(A) See the Preface to the Rheims New Testament

OF THE SURIl'TURE.

a-j

oDseive, ihat as Luther wilfully forsook the
Latin text in favour of his heresies and erro-
neous doctrines ; so the rest follow his example
even to this day, for no other cadse in the world
but that ii. makes against their errors.

For testimony of which, what greater argu-
ment can there be than this, that [..uther, who
before had always read with the Catholic
Church, and with all antiquity, these words of
St. Fanl, " Have not we power to lead about a
woman, a sister, as also the rest of the apos-
tles V (a) And in St. Peter, these words,
■' Labour, that by good works you may make
sure your vocation and election." Suddenly
after he had, contrary to his profession, taken
a wife, as he called her. and preached, that all
votaries might do the same : that " faith alone
iustified, and that good works were not neces-
sary to salvation." Immediately, I say, after
ho fell into these heresies, he began to read and
translate the former texts of scripture accord-
ingly, in this manner : " Have not we power to
lead about a sister, a wife, as the rest of the
apostles ?" and, " Labour that you may make
sure your vocation and election," leaving out
ihe other words " by good works." And so do
both the Calvinists abroad, and our English
Protestants at home, read and translate even
to this day, because they hold the self-same er-
rors

I would gladly know of our English Protes-
tant translators, whether they reject the Vulgate
Latin text, so generally liked and approved
by all the primitive Fathers, purely out of de-
sign to furnish us with a more sincere and
simple version into English from the Greek,
;han they thought they could do from the Vul-
gate Latin 1. If so, why not stick close to the
Greek copy, which they pretend to translate ?
but, besides their corrupting of it, fly from it,
ind have recourse again to the Vulgate Latin^
whenever it may seem to make more for their
purpose. Whence maybe easily gathered, that
their pretending to translate the Greek copy
was not with any good and candid design, but
rather, because they knew it was not so easy a
matter for the ignorant to discover their false
dealings from it as from the Latin ; and also,
because they might have the fairer pretence for
iheir turning and winding to and fro from the
Greek tothe Latin, and then again to the Greek,
according as they should judge most, advan-
tageous to themselves. It was also no little
part of their design, " to lessen the credit and
;iuthorily of the Vulgate Latin translation,"
which had so long, and with so general a
consent, been received and approved in the
church of God, and authorized by the general
Council of Trent, for the only, best, and most
authentic text.

- Because, therefore, I find they will scarcely
be able to justify their rejecting the Latin
translation, unless they had dealt more sin-
cerely with the Greek ; I have, in this following

(a) 1 Cor. ix 5, Mulierem sororem. 2 Pet. i 10, Ut
per bona opera certam vestrim vocationem et electio-
nem faciatis.

work, set down the Latin text, as well as the
Greek word whereon their corruption depends ;
yet, where they truly keep to the Gretk and He-
brew, which they profess to follow, and which
they will have to be the most authentic text, 1
do not charge them with heretical corruptions.

The left-hand page I have divided into foui
columns, besides the margin, in which I havo
noted the book, chapter, and verse. In the
first I have set down the text of scripture from
the Vulgate Latin edition, putting the word thai
their English Bibles hav,e corrupted in a dif-
ferent character ; to which I have also added
the Greek and Hebrew words, so often as they
are, or may be necessary, for the better under-
standing of the word on which the stress lies in
the corrupt translation.

In the second column, I have given you the
true English text from the Roman Catholic
translation, made by the divines of Rheims
and Doway ; which is done so faithfully and
candidly from the authentic Vulgate Latin copy,
that the most carping and critical adversary in
the world cannot accuse it of partiality or
design, contrary to the true meaning and in-
terpretation thereof. As for the English of
the said Rhemish translation, which is old, and
therefore must needs differ much from the more
refined English spoken at this day, the reader
ought to consider, not only the place where it
was written, but also the time since which the
translation was made, and then he will find the
less fault with it. For my part, because I have
referred m}' reader to the said translation made
at Rheims, I have not altered one syllable of the
English, though indeed I might in some places
have made the word more agreeable to the lan-
guage of our times.

In the third column you have the corruption,
and false translation, from those Bibles that
were set forth in English at the beginning ol
that most miserable revolt and apostacy from
the Catholic church, viz., from that Bible which
was translated in King Edward the Sixth's time,
and reprinted in the year 1 562, and from the iwn
next impressions, made Anno 1577, and 1579.
All which were authorised in the beginning of
Queen Elizabeth's reign, when the Chuich ol
England began to get footing, and to exercise
dominion over her fellow sectaries, as well as
to tyrannize over Catholics ; whence it cannot
be denied, but those Bibles were wholly agree-
able to the principles and doctrines of the said
Church of England in those days, however they
pretend at this day to correct or alter them.

In the fourth column, you find one of the last
impressions of their Protestant Bible, viz.,
that printed in London by the assigns of John
Bill, deceased, and by Henry Hills andThoma<
Newcomb, printers to the King's most excel-
lent Majesty, Anno Dom. 1683. In which
Bible, wherever I find them to have corrected
and amended the place corrupted in their former
translations, 1 have put down the word " cor-
rected ;" but where the falsification is not yet
rectified, I have set dowri likewise the corrup-
tion : and that indeed is ii>" most places, yea, and

PROTESTANT TB A^fSI.ATIO*rS

vn aome two or three places, tbey have made it
•ather worse than better : and this indeed gives
me great reason to suspect, that in those few
places, where the errors of the former false
translations have been corrected in the latter,
it has not always been the efl'ect of plain dealing
and sincerity ; for if such candid intention of
amending former faults had every where pre-
vailed with them, they would not in any place
have made it worse, but would also have cor-
rected all the rest, as well as one or two, that are
noi. now so much to their purpose, as they were
at their first rising.

In the right-hand page of this treatise, I have
set down the motives and inducements, that, as
we may reasonably presume, prompted them to
corrupt and falsify the sacred text, with some
short arguments here and there against their un-
warrantable proceeJings.

All which 1 have contrived, in as short and
compendious a method as I possibly could,
knowing that there are many, who are either
not able, or at least not willing to go to the
price of a great volume. And because my de-
sire is to be beneficial to all, I have accommo-
dated it not only to the purse of the poorest,
liut also, as near as possible, to the capacity of
the most ignorant ; for which reasons also, I have
passed by a great many leamed arguments
brought by my author. Dr. Martin, from the
significations, etymologies, derivations, uses,
&c. of the Greek and Hebrew words, as also
from the comparing of places corrupted, with
other places rightly translated from the same
word, in the same translation ; with several
other things, whereby he largely confutes their
insincere and disingenuous proceedings : these
I say, I have omitted, not only for brevity sake,
but also as things that could not be of any great
benefit to the simple and unlearned reader.

As for others more learned, I will refer them
to the work itself, that I have made use of
through this whole treatise, viz., to that most
elaborate and learned work of Dr. Gregory
Martin, entitled, a " Discovery of the manifold
Corruptions of the Holy Scriptures," &c.,
printed atRheims, Anno 1 582, which is not hard
to be found.

Have we not great cause to believe, that our
Protestant divines do obstinately teach contrary
to their own consciences ? For, besides their
haying been reproved, without amendment, for
their impious handling the holy scriptures, if
their learning be so profound and bottomless, as
themselves proudly boast in all their works, we
cannot but conclude, that they must needs both
8t>e their errors, and know the truth. And
therefore, though we cannot always cry out to
them, and their followers, " the blind lead the
blind," yet, which is, alas ! a thousand times
ninre miserable, we may justly exclaim, " those
who see, lead the blind, till with themselves, they
fall into the ditch "

.As riothiiie has ever been worse resented by
such as forsake God's holy church than to hear
•heniselvi's braiuled with the general title of
bcreiics ; so nothing hiis been ever more com-

mon among Catholics, than jtistly to stignia(i.ie
such with the same infamous character. I am
not ignorant how ill the Protestants of our days
resent this term, and therefore do avoid, as much
as the nature of this work will permit, giving
them the least disgust by this horrid appeltaliou ;
nevertheless, I must needs give them to under-
stand, that the nature of the holy sci ipture is
such, that whosoever do voluntarily corrupt anJ
pervert it, to maintain their own erroneous doc-
trines, cannot lightly be characterized by a less
infamous title, than that of heretics ; and theii
false versions, by the title of heretical transla-
tions, under which denomination 1 have placed
these following corruptiorrs.

Notwithstanding, I would have the Protestant
reader to take notice, that I neither name nor
judge all to beheretics, as ishinted in my preface,
who hold errors contradictory to God's churcli,
but such as pertinaciously persist in their errors.

So proper and essential is pertinacity to
the nature of heresy, that if a man should hold
or believe ever so mduy false opinions agaitist
the inith of Christian faith, but yet not with
obstinacy and pertinacity, he should err,- but
not be an heretic. Saint Augustine asserting,
that " if any do defend their opinions, though
false and perverse, with no obstinate animosity,
hut rather with all solicitude seek the truth,
and are ready to be corrected when th-ey find
the same, these men are not to be accounted
heretics, because they have not any election of
their own that contradicts the doctrine of the
church." (a) And in another place, against the
Donatists, " Let us," says he, " suppose scime
man to hold that of Christ at this day, which the
heretic Phoiinus did, to wit, that Christ was
only man, and not God, and that he should think
this to be the Catholic failh ; I will not say that
he is an heretic, unless when the doctrine of the
■church is made manifest unto him, he will rather
choose to hold that which he held before, than
yield thereunto. "(A)

Again, " Those," says he, " who in the church
of Christ hold infectious and perverse doctrine,
if when they are corrected for it, they resist
stubbornly, and will not amend their pestilent
and deadly persuasions, but persist to defead
the same, these men are made heretics : (c) by
all which places of St. Augustine, we see, that
•error without pertinacity, and obstinacy against
God's church is no heresy. It would be well,
therefore, if Protestants, in reading Catholic
books, would endeavour rather to inform tnem-
selves of the truth of Catholic doctrine, and
humbly embrace the same, than to suflfer tha»
prejudice against religion, in which they have
unhappily been educated, so strongly lo bias
them, as to turn them from men barely educated
in error, to obstinate heretics ; such as the more
to harden their own hearts, by how mm h the
more clearly the doctrine of God's holy t.nurch
is demonstrated to thein. When the true f^ith
is once made known to men ignorance Ccto ^»o

(a) S. Aug. Ep. 162.

(J) Lit>- 4, T-ontr. Doiiat , c. vi..

or THE SCRIPTURK.

tunger secure ttem from that eldrnal punishment
to which heresy undoubtedly hurries them : St.
Paul, in his Epistle to Titus, affirming, that " a
man that is an heretic, after the first and second
admonition, is subverted, and sinneth, being
tjoiidennied by his own jndgment." (a)

Whatever may be said, therefore, to excuse
the ignorant, and such as are not obstinate, from
that ignominious character : yet, as for others,
especially the leaders of these misguided people,
they will scarcely be able to free themselves
either from it, or escape the punishment due to
such, so long as they thus wilfully demonstrate
their pertinacity, not only in their obstinately
defending their erroneous doctrines in their
disputes, sermons, and writings ; but even in
corrupting the word of God, to force that sacred
book to defend the same, and compel that divine
volume to speak against such points of Catholic
doctrine as themselves are pleased to deny.

In what can an heretical intention more evi-
dently appear, than in falsely translating and
corrupting the holy Bible, against the Catholic
church, and such doctrines as it has by an unin-
terrupted tradition, brought down to us from the
apostles ? As for example :

1. Against the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar.

2. Against the Real Presence of Christ's
Body and Blood in the Eucharist.

3. Against Priests, and the Power of Priest-
hood.

4. Against the Authority of Bishops.

5. Against the sacred Altar on which Christ's
Body and Blood is ofl^ered.

6. Against the Sacrament of Baptism.'

7. Against the Sacrament of Penance, and
Confession of Sins.

8. Against the Sacrament of Marriage.

9. Against Intercession of Saints.

10. Agrainst sacred Images.

11. Against Purgatory, Limbus Patrum, and
Christ's Descent into Hell.

12. Against Justification, and the possibility
of keeping God's Commandments.

Vi. Against meritorious Works, and the Re-
ward due to the same.

14. Against Free Will.

15. Against true inherent Justice, and in de-
fence of their own Doctrine, that Faith alone is
sufficient for Salvation.

1 6. Against Apostolical Traditions.

Yea, against several other doctrines of God's
holy Church, and in defence of divers strange
opinions of their own, which the reader will find
taken notice of in this treatise : all which, when
the luiprcjudiced and well-meaning Protestant
read(!r has considered, I am confident he will be
struck with amazement, and even terrified to
look upon such abominable corruptions !

Doubtless, the generality of Protestants have
liitherto been ignorant, and more is the pity, of
this illhindling of the Bible by their translators :
nor have, I am confident, their ministerial guides
ever yet dealt so ingenuously by them, as to tell
them that such and such a text of scripture is

(a) Titus iii. 10.

! translated thus and thus, contrary to the true
Greek, Hebrew, or ancient Latin copies on
purpose, and to the only intent, to make it speak
against such and such points of Catholic doctrine,
and in favour of this or that new opinion of theii
own.

Does it appear to be done by negligence, ig-
norance, or mistake, as perhaps they would be
vrilling to have the reader believe, or rather
designedly and wilfully, when vv'hat they in some
places translate truly, in places of controversy,
between them and us, they grossly falsify, in
favour of their errors 1

Is it not a certain argument of a wilful cor-
ruption, where they deviate from that te.\t, and
ancient reading, which has been used by all
the fathers ; and instead thereof, to make the
exposition or commentarj' of sorae one doctor,
the very text of scripture itself?

So also when in their translations they fly
from the Hebrew or Greek to the Vulgate Latin,
where those originals make against theiu, or not
so much for their purpose, it is a manifest -sign
of wilful partiality : and this they frequently
do.

What is it else but wilful partiality, when in
words of ambiguous and divers significations,
they will have it signify here or there, as pleases
themselves ? So that in this place it must signify
thus, in that place, not thus ; as Beza, and one
of their English Bibles, for example, uro;e the
Greek word yvinZxa to signify wife, and not to
signify wife, both against the virginity anl
chastity of priests.

What is it but a voluntary and designed con-
trivance, when in a case that makes for them,
they strain the very original signification of tli<!
word ; and in the contrary case neglect it alto
gether ? " Yet this they do.

That their corruptions are voluntary and
designedly done, is evident in such places where
passives are turned into actives, and actives into
passives ; where participles are made to disagree
in case from their substantives ; where soloacisms
are imagined when the construction is mos
agreeable ; and errors pretended to creep out 6i
the margin into the text : but Beza made use ol
all these, and more such like quirks.

Another note of wilful corruption is, when
they do not translate alike such words as are ol
like form and force ; example : if Ulcerosus be
read full of sores, why must not Gratiosa be
translated full of grace ?

When the words, images, shrines, procession,
devotions, excommunications, &c. are used in
ill part, where they are not in the orginal text ;
and the words, hymns, grace, rnystery, sacra-
ment, church, altar, priest. Catholic, justifica-
tion, tradition, &c. avoided and suppressed,
where they are in the original, as if no such
words were in the text : is it not an apparent
token of design, and that it is done purposely
to disgrace or suppress ths said things and
speeches ?

Though Beza and Whitaker made it a good
rule to translate according to the usual signi"
fication, and not the original derivation of
5

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

words ; yet, contrary to this rule, they trans-
late Idolum, an image ; Presbyter, an elder ;
Diaconus, a minister ; Episcopus, an overseer,
&c. Who sees not tj.erefore but this is wilful
partiality ?

If where the Apostle names a Pagan idol-
ater, and a Christian idolater, by one and the
same Greek word, in one and the same meaning ;
and they translate the Pagan (idolater) and the
Christian (worshipper of images) by two distinct
words, and in two divers meanings, it must needs
be wilfully done.

Nor does it appear to be less designedly done,
to translate one and the same Greek word
nixouSoais tradition, whensoever it may be taken
for evil traditions ; and never so, when it spoken
of good and apostolical traditions.

So likewise, when they foist into their trans-
lation the word tradition, taken in ill part, where
it is not in the Greek ; and omit it where it is
in the Greek, when taken in good part ; it is
certainly a most wilful corruption.

At their first revolt, when none were noted
for schismatics and heretics but themselves,
they translated division and sect, instead of
schism and heresy ; and for heretic, translated
an author of sects. This cannot be excused for
voluntary corruption.

But why should I multiply examples, when it-
is evident from their own confessi(ms and ac-
. knowledgments ? For instance, concerning
uexuvoelxe, which the Vulgate Latin and Erasmus
translate Agile panitentiam, " do penance :"
' This interpretation," says Beza, " 1 refuse for
many causes ; but for this especially, that many
ignorant persons have taken hereby an occasion
of the false opinions of satisfaction, wherewith
the church is troubled at this day."

Many other ways there -ire, to make most
certain proofs of their wilfulness ; as when the
translation is framed according to their false
and heretical commentary ; and when they will
avouch their translations out of profane writers,
as Homer, Plutarch, Pliny, Tully, Virgil, and
Terence, and reject the ' ecclesiastical use of
words in the scriptures and fathers ; which is
Beza's usual custom, whom our English trans-
lators follow. But to note all their marks
were too tedious a work, neither is it in this
place necessary : ihe^e are sufficient to satisfy
the impartial reader, that all those corruptions
and falsifications were not committed either
through negligence, ignorance, over-sight, or
mistake, as perhaps they will be glad to pretend ;
but designedly, wilfully, and with a malicious
purpose and intention, to disgrace, dishonour,
condemn, and suppress the church's catholic
and apostolic doctrines and principles ; and to
favour, defend, and bolster up their own new-
dovised errors, iind monstrous opinions. And
Beza is not far from confessing thus much, when
against Castafio he thus complains : " The mat-
ter," savs hi', " is now come to this point, that
the translators of scripture out of the Greek
into Latin, or into any other tongue, think that
they may lawfully do any thing in translating;
*hoiii if a man renrehind, he shall be answered

by and by, that they do the office of ii translator,
not who translates word for word, but who
expresses the sense : so it comes to pass that
whilst every man will rather freely follow his
own judgment, than be a religious interpretei
of the Holy Ghost, he rather perverts man'.'
things, than translates them." This is spokct.
well enough, if he had done accordingly. But,
doing quite the contrary, is he not a dissembling
hypocrite in so saying, and a wilful heretic in so
doing?

Our quarrel with Protestant translators is
not for trivial or slight faults, or for such verbal
differences, or little escap&s as may happen
through the scarcely unavoidable mistakes ol
the transcribers or printers : no ! we accuse
them of wilfully corrupting and falsifying the
sacred text, against poirsts of faith and mo-
rals, (a)

We deny not but several immaterial faults
and depravations may enter into a translation,
nor do we pretend that the Vulgate itself was
free from such, before the correction of Sixtus
V. and Clement VIII., which, through the mis-
takes of printers, and, before printing, of tran-
scribers, happened to several copies : so that a
great many verbal differences, and lesser faults,
were, by learned men, discovered in different
copies : not that any material corruption in
points of faith were found in all copies ; for such
God Almighty's providence, as Protestants
themselves confess, would never suffer to enter :
and indeed these lesser depravations are not
easily avoided, especially after several transcrij)-
tions of copies and impressions from the origi-
nal, as we daily see in other books.

To amend and rectify such, the ;hurch (as
you may read in the preface to the Sixtino
edition) has used the greatest industry imagi-
nable. Pope Pius IV. caused not only the
original languages, but other copies to be care.
fully examined : Pius V. prosecuted that la-
borious work ; and by Sixtus V; it was finished,
who commanded it to be put to press, as
appears by his bull, which begins, " Elernus
Ule Cmhslium" &c.. Anno 1585. Yet, notwith-
standing the bull prefixed before his Bible, then
printed, the same Pope Sixtus, as is seen in the
preface, made Anno 1 592, after diligent exami-
nation, found that no few faults slipped into his
impression, by the negligence of the printers :
and therefore, Censuit atque decrevit, he both
judged and decreed to have the whole work
examined and reprinted ; but that second cor-
rection being prevented by his death, was after
the very short reign of three other popes, un
dcrtaken, and happily finished by his successor
Clement VIII., answerable to the desire and
absolute intention of his predecessor, Sixtus :
\yhence it is that the Vulgate, now extant, is
called the correction of Sixtus,. because this
vigilant Pope, notwithstanding the endeavours
of his two predecessors, is said to have begun

(a) See a book entitled, Reason and Keligiou, cap.
viii., where the Sixtine and Clementine Bibles are more
fully treated of.

OF THE SCRIPTURE.

It, which was Recording to his desire, recognized
and perfected by Clement 'VIII., and therefore
is not undeservedly called also the Clementine
Bible : so that Pope Sixtus's Bible, after Clc-
mcnCs recognition, is now read in the church,
as authentic, true scripture, and is the very best
corrected copy of the Latin Vulgate.

And whereas Pope Sixtus's bull tujoiried
tliat his Bible be read in all churches, without
ihe least alteration ; yet this injunction supposed
the interpreters and printers to have done ex-
actly their duty every way, which was found
wanting upon a second review of the whole work.
Such commands and injunctions therefore,
where new difficulties arise, not thought of
before, are not, like definitions of faith, unalter-
able ; but may and ought to be changed accord-
ing to the legislator's prudence. What I say
here is indisputable ; for how could Pope
Sixtus, after a sight of such faults as caused
him to intend another impression, enjoin no
alteration, when he desired one, which his suc-
cessor did for him ? So that if Pope Sixtus
had lived longer, he would as well have changed
the Breve, as amended his impression.

And whereas there were sundry different lec-
tions of the Vulgate Latin, before the said cor-
rection of Sixtus and Clement, the worthy doc-
tors of Louvain, with an immense labour, placed
m the margin of their Bible these different lec-
tions of scripture ; not determining which read-
ing was best, or to be preferred before others ;
as knowing well, that the decision of siich causes
belongs to the public judicature and authority
of the church. Pope Clement therefore, omit-
ting no humar. diligence, compared lection with
lection ; and after malurely weighing all, pre-
ferred that which was most agreeable to the
ancient copies, a thing necessary to be done
for procuring one uniform lection of scripture
in the church, approved of by the see apostolic.
4.nd from this arises that villanous calumny
and open slander of Doctor Stillingfleet ; who
affirms, that " the Pope took where he pleased
the marginal annotations in the Louvain Bible,
and inserted them into the text ;" whereas, I
say, he took net the annotations or commen-
taries of the Louvain doctors, but the different
readings of scripture found in several- copies.

Mr. James makes a great deal of noise about
Dis impertinent comparisons between ihese two
editions, and that of Louvain : yet amotig all his
differences, he finds not one contrarie-ty in anj'
material point of faith or morals : and as for
ottier differences, such as touch not faith and
religion, arising from the compressions, being
onger or shorter, less clear in the one, and
more significant in the other ; or happening
ihrpugh the negligence of printers, they give
him no manner of ground for his vain cavils ;
(^specially seeing, I say, the Louvain Bibhf gave
(he different readings, without deterniming
which was to be preferred ; and what faults
were slipped into the Sixtine edition were by him
observed, and a second correction designed ;
which in the Clementine edition was perfected,
iiid one uiiilbrnt reading approved of.

Against Thomas James's comparison, read
the learned James Grester. who sufficiently dia.
covers his untruths, with a " Mentilo lertio
Thomas James decern millia verborwn," &c., after
which, judge whether he hits every thing he
says ; and whether the Vulgate Latin is to be
corrected by the Louvain annotations, or thesu
by the A'ulgate, if any thing were amiss in either?
Ill fine, whether, if Mr James's pretended dif
ferences arise from comparing all with the
Hebrew, Greek, and Chaldee, must we needs
suppose him to know the last energy and force
of every Hebrew, Greek, or Chaldee word,
when there is a controversy, better than the
authors of the Louvain, and correctors of ,the
Vulgate Latin, the Sixline-Clementine edition 1
Again, let us demand of him, whether all his
differences imply any material alteration in
faith or morals, or introduce any notable error,
contrary to God's revealed verities 1 Or are they
not rather mere verbal differences, grounded on
the obscure signification of original words ? In
fine, if he or any for him, plead any material
alteration, let them name any authentic copy,
either original or translation ; by the indispu-
table integrity whereof these supposed errors
may be cancelled, and God's pure revealed
verities put in their place. But to do this, after
such immense labour and diligence used in the
correction of the Vulgate, will prove a desperate
impossibility. (n)

Indeed, Mr. James might have just cause to
exclaim, if he had found in these Bibles such
corruptions as the Protestant apostle, Martin
Luther, wilfully makes in his translations : as
when he adds the word " alone" to the text, to
maintain hisheresy of " faith alone justifying ;"(4)
and omits that verse, " But if you do not forgive,
neither will your Father which is in heaven for-
give your sins. "(c) He also omits these words,
" That you abstain from fornication :" (d) and
because the word Trinity sounded coldly with
him, he left out this sentence, which is the only
text in the Bible that can be brought to prove
that great mystery : " There are three who bear
record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and
the Holy Ghost, and these three are one." (e) Or
if Mr. James had found such gross corruptions
as that of Zuinglius, when instead of our blessed
Saviour's postive words, " this is my body," he
translates, " this is a sign of my body," to avoid
the doctrine of the real presence, or such as are
hereafter discovered in Protestant English
translations : if, I say, he had met with such
wilful and abominable corruptions as these, he
might have had good cause of complaint ; but
seeing the most he can make of all his painful
comparisons comes but to this, %'iz., that he notes
such faults, as Sixtus himself observed, aftev
the impression was finished, and as Clement
rectified ; 1 think he might have better employed

(o) See the Preface to Sixtus V., Edit. Antwerp, 1505;
and Bib. Max , Sext,, 19, 20 ; Serarius, c. 19.
(b^ Rom. iii. 2P.

(d) 1 Thea. iv. 3

(e) John v. 7

PROTESTANT TnA.VSLATIONS OF THK SCRXPTURB.

fiis time in correcting the gross and most into-
lerable corniplions of the Protestant translation,
than to have busied himself about so unnecessary
a work : but there are a certain sort of men,
who had rather employ themselves in discovering
imaginary notes in their neighbours' eyes, than
in clearing their own from real beams.

To conclude this point, no man can be cer-
tait>ly assured of the true scripture, unless he
first come to a certainty of a true church, inde-
pendently of scripture : find out therefore the
true church, and we know, by the authority of
our undoubted testimony, the true scripture ;
for the infallible testimony of the church is ab-
solutely necessary for assuring us of an authen-
tic scripture. And this I cannot see how
Protestants can deny, especially when they
seriously consider, that in matters of religion,
it must needs be an unreasonable thing to endea-
vour to oblige any man to be tried by the scrip-
tures of a false religion ; for who can in pru-
dence require of a Christian to stand in debates
of ri'ligion to the decisions of the scripture of
the Turks, " the Alcoran i* Doubtless, there-
fore, when men appeal to such scripture for
determining religious difi'erences, their intention
is to appeal to such scriptures, and such alone :
and to all such as are admitted by the true
church : and bow can we know what scriptures
are adinitted by the true church, unless we know
which is the true chnrch ?" (a)

So likewise, touching the exposition of scrip-
ture, without doubt, when Protestants fly to
scriptures for their rule, whereby to square their
ieiigion,and to decide debates between them and
their adversaries, they appeal to scriptures as
rightly understood : for who would be tried by
scriptures understood in a wrong sense ? Now
when contests arise between them and others of
different judgments concerning the right mean-
ing of it ; certainly they will not deny, but the
judge to decide this debate must appertain to the
true religion ; for what Christian will apply him-
self to a Turk or Jew to decide matters belong-
ing to Christianity?, or. who would go to an
Atheist to determine matters of religion 1

In like manner, when they are forced to have
recourse to the private spirit in religious mat-
ters, doubtless they design not to appeal to the
private spirit of an Atheist, a Jew, or an He-
retic, but to the private spirit of such as are of
the triie religion : and is it possible for them to
know certainly who are members of the true
church? or what appertains to the true reli-
gion, unless they be certainly informed " which
is the true church ?" So that, Tsay, no man can
be certainly assured which or what books, or
liow much is true scripture ; or of the right
sense and true meaning of scripture, unless
ho first f.ome to a certainty of the true church.

(a) We must of necessity know the true church, be-
fure we be certain either wliich is true scripture, or which
is the trae sense of scripture ; or by what spiiit it is to
bee,\po;inded. And whether that chnrch which has con-
tinued visib e in the world from Christ's time fill this
day, or that which was never known or heard of in the
world till 1.500 years after our Saviour, is the true
church, let the world judge.

And of this opinion was the great St. Augus-
tine, when he declared, that " he would not be-
lieve the Gospel, if it was not that the authority
of the Catholic Church moved him to it :" Ege
vera Evangnlio non crcderem, nisi mi: Ecdesim
CathoUc<B commoveret aut/ioritas. {b)

OF THE CANONICAL BOOKS OF
SCRIPTURE.

The Catholic Church " setting this always be-
fore her eyes, that, errors being removed, the
very purity' of the Gospel maybe preserved in
the church; which being promised before by the
prophets, in the holy scriptures, our Lord Jesus
Christ, the Son of God, first published with his
own mouth, and afterwards commanded to be
preached, to every creature, by the apostles, as
the fountain of all, the wholesome truth, and moral
discipline contained in the written books, and in
the traditions not written, &c., folio»ving the
example of the ortliodo-K fathers, and affected
with similar piety and reverence ; doth receive
and honour all the books both of the Old and
New Testament, seeing one God is the author
of both," &c. (c) These are the words of the
sacred Council of Trent ; w^hich further or-
dained, that the table, or catalogue, of the cano-
nical books should be joined to this decree, lest
doubt might arise to any, which books they are
that are received by the council. They are
these following, viz. :

Of the Old Testament.

Five books of Moses ; that is, Genesis, Exo
dus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy.

Joshua, Judges, Ruth.

Four of the Kings.

Two of Paralipomenon.

The first and second of Esdras, which is
called Nehemias.

Tobias, Judith, Hester, Job, David's Psallei
of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canti-
cles, V/isdom, Ecdesiasticus, Isaias, Hiereinias,
with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel.

Twelve lesser prophets ; that is. Osea,
Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, MichtEas, Na-
hum, Abacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zackarias,
Malachias.

The first and second of the Machabccs.

Of the New Testament,

Four Gospels, acGording to St. Rlatthew, St.
Mark, St. Luke, and St. John.

The Acts of the Apostles, written by St. Luke
the Evangelist.

Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul, viz., to tha
Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Ga!u-
tians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians,. to
the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, two to
Timothv, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews.

Two of St. Peter the Apostle.

(A) S. Aug., lib. contr. Epist. Manich., cap. v.
(c) Concii. Tritlent., Sess. 4, Decret de CanoDicia
Scripturis ; Mark c, ult .

OF BOOKS KEJECTEn BT PROTESTANTS FOR ArOCRYPHAL

Tliiee of St. John the Apostle.

One of St. James the Apostle.

One of St. Jude the Apostle.

And the Apocalypse of St. John the Apostle.

To which catalogue of sacred books is adjoined
this decree : —

" But if any man shall not receive for sacred
and canonical these whole books, with all their
parts, as they are acrustomed to be read in the
Catholic Church, and as they are in the old Vul-
gate Latin edition, &c., be he anathema. "

The third Council of Carthage, after having
decreed, that nothing should be read in the
church under the name of divine scripture, but
canonical scriptures, says, " that the canonical
scriptures are Genesis, E.xodus," &c. ; (r>) so
reckoning up all the very same books, and mak-
ing pnrticularly the same catalogue of them,
with this recited out of the Council of Trent. St.
Augustine, who was present at, and subscribed
to, this council, also numbers the same books as
above. (A)

Notwithstanding which, several of the said
liooks are by the Protestants rejected as Apo-
cryphal : their reasons are, because they are not
in the Jewish canon, and were not accepted for
Tarionical in the primitive church ; reasons by
which they might reject a great many more, if
it pleased them : but, indeed, the chief cause is,
that some things in these books are so mani-
festly against their opinions, that they have no
other answer but to reject their authority, as
appears very plainly from those words of Mr.
Whitaker : " We pass not," says he, " for that
Raphael mentioned in Tobit, neither acknow-
ledge we these seven angels whereof he makes
mention ; all that differs much from canonical
scripture, which is reported of that Raphael,
and savours of, I know not what, superstition.
Neither will I believe free will, although the
book of Ecclesiasticus confirms it an hundred
times." (c) This denying of books to be canoni-
cal, because the Jews received them not, was
also an old heretical shift, noted and refuted by
St. Augustine, touching the book of Wisdom ;
{d) which some in his time refused, because it
reiuted their errors : but must it pass for a
sufficient reason amongst Christians to deny
such books, because they are not in the canon
of the Jews ? Who sees not that the canon of
the Church of Christ is of more authority with
■11 tnie Christians, than that of the Jews ? For
? "canon is an assured rule, and warrant of
direction, whereby (says St. Augustine,) the
infirmity of our defect in knowledge is guided,
and by which rule other books are known to he
God's word :" his reason is, " because we have
no other assurance than the books of Moses,
ti;e four Gospels, and other books, are the tnie
word of God, but by the canon of the church."

(<j) 3 Concil. Carthag., Can, 47.

(h) Vid, Doctr, Christian., lib. 2, c. viii.

tc) Whit confr. Camp., p. 17.

(ti) S. Aug., lib do Prse'lcst. Sanct. . c. U.

(c) Whereupon the same great doctor uttered
that famous saying : " I would not believe The
Gospel, except the authority of the Catholic
Church moved me thereto."

And, that these books which the Protestants
reject, are by the church numbered in the sacred
canon, may be seen above : however, to speak
of them in particular, in their order :

THE BOOK OF TOBIAS

Is, by St. Cyprian, " de Oratione Dominica,"
alleged as divine scripture, to prove that prayer
is good with fasting and alms. St. Ambrose
calls this book by the common name of scripture,
saying, " he will briefly gather the virtues ol
Tobias, which the scripture in an historical
manner lays forth at large ;"(/) calling also this
history prophetical, and Tobias a prophet : and
in another place, he alleges this book, as he
does other holy scriptures, to provide that the
virtues of God's servants far excel those of the
moral philosophers. (^) St. Augustine made a
special sermon of Tobias, as he did of Job. (A)
St. Chrysostom alleges it as scripture, denounc-
ing a curse against the contemners of it. (i.)
St. Gregory also alleges it as holy scripture, {k)
St. Bede expounds this whole book inystically,
as he does other holy scriptures. St. Hierom
translated it out of the Chaldee l-angunge,
■' judging it more meet to displease the Phari-
saical J<jws, who reject it, than not to satisfy the
will of holy bishops, urging to have it." Ep.
ad Chrnmat. el Heliodorum. To. 3. In fine,
St. Augiistine tells us the cause of its being
written, in these words : " The servant of God,
holy Tobias, is given to us after the law, for an
example, that we might know how to practise
the things which we read. And if temptations
come upon us, not to depart from the fear o(
God, nor expect help from any other but from
him."

OF THE BOOK OF JUDITH

This book was, by Origen, Tcrtullian, and
other fathers, whom St. Hilary cites, held for
canonical, before the first general Council ot
Nice ; yet St. Hierom supposed it not so, till
such time as he found that the said sacred coun-
cil reckoned it in the number of cononical scrip-
tures ; after which he so esteemed it. thdt he not
only translated it out of the Chaldee tongue,
wherein it was first written, but also, as occasion
required, cited the same as divine scripture, and

(e) S. Aug., lib. 11, c. 5, contra Faastum, et lib. 2. c
32, contra Ceaconium.
(/) S. Amb., lib. de Tobia. c. i.
{g) Lib. 3, Offic, c. 14.
(A) S. Aug., Scrm., 226. de Tem.
(t) S. Chrysost, Horn. 15, ail Heb.
{k) S. Greg., part. 3, Pastor, cure! odnion. SL,

OV BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR ArOCRYPHAt.

sufficient to cor.vince matters of faith in contro-
vetsy, numberitig it witli other scriptures, where-
of none doubts, saying, " Ruth, Hester, Judith,
were of so great renown, that they gave names
to the sacred volumes." (a) St. Ambrose, St.
Augustine, St. Chrysostom, and many other holy
fathers, account it for canonical scripture.

PART OF THE BOOK OF HESTER.

By the Council of Laodicea and Carthage,
this book was declared canonical ; and by most
of the ancient fathers esteemed as divine scrip-
ture ; only two or three,, before the said coun-
cils, doubted of its authority. And though St.
Hierom in his time, found not certain parts
thereof in the Hebrew, yet in the Greek he
found all the sixteen chapters contained in ten :
and it is not improbable that these parcels were
sometime in the Hebrew, as divers whole books
which are now lost. But whether they ever
were so or not, the church of Christ accounts
the whole book of infallible authority, reading
as well these parts, as the rest in her public of-
fice, (i)

OF THE BOOKS OF WISDOM.

It is granted, that several of the ancient
fathers would not urge these books of Wisdom,
ind others, in their writings against the Jews,
not that themselves doubted of their authority ;
but because they knew that they would be rejec-
ted by the Jews as not canonical : and so St.
Hierom, with respect to the Jews, said these
books were not canonical ; nevertheless, he often
alleged testimonies out of them, as from other
divine scriptures ; sometimes with this paren-
thesis, Si cut tamen plucet librumrecipere, in cap.
viii. andxii. Zachariae: but in his latter writings
absolutely without any such restriction, as in
cap. i. and Ivi, Isaise, and in xviii. Jeremiae ;
where he professes to allege none but canoni-
cal scripture, (e) As for the other ancient
fathers, namely, St. Irenceus, St. Clement of
Alexandria, Origen, St. Athanasins, St. Basil,
St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Gregory Nyssen,
St. Epiphanius, St. Cyril of Alexandria, St.
Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, &c., they make no
doubt at all of their being canonical scripture,
as appears by their express terms, " divine scrip-
ture, divine word, sacred letters, prophetical
sayings, the Holy Ghost saith, and the like."
And St. Augustine affirms, that, " the sentence of
'he books of Wisdom ought not to be rejected
.bv certain, inclining to Pelagianism, which has

{a) See the Argument in tfie Book of Judith in the
Poa'ay Rible, Tom. 1.

(i) "\'ide Doway. Bible, Tom. 1.

SO long been publicly read in the church o'
Christ, and received by all Christians, bishops,
and others, even to the last of the laity, penitents;
and catechumens, cum veneratione Drvinm au
j thoritatis, with veneration of divine authority!
Which also the excellent writers, next to the
apostles' times, alleging for witness, nihil a
adhibere nisi divinum testimonium crediderunl
thought they alleged nothing but divine teslj
niony. {d)

OF ECCLESIASTICUS.

What has been said of the foregoing book,
may be said also of this. The holy fathers above
named, and several others, as St. Cyprian, de
Opere et Eleemosyna, St. Gregory the Great
in Psal. 1. It is also reckoned for canonical
by the third Council of Carthage, and by St. Au..
gustine, in lib. c. 8, Docl. Christian, et lib. 17, c.
20. Civit Dei.

Of BARUCH, with the Epistle of JEREMY

Many of the ancient Fathers supposed this
prophecy to be Jeremiah's, though none of them
doubted but Baruch,his scribe, was the writer of
it ; not but that the Holy Ghost directed him in
it : and therefore by the fathers and councils
'it has ever been accepted as divine scripture.
The Council of Laodicea, in the last canon, ex-
pressly names Baruch, Lamentations, and Je-
remiah's Epistle, (e) St. Hierom testifies, that
ho found it in the Vulgate Latin edition, and that
it contains many things of Christ, and ihelattei
limes ; though because he found if not in the
Hebrew, nor in the Jewish canim, he urges it not
against them. ( / ) It is by the Councils of Flo-
rence and Trent expressly defined to be canoni-
cal scripture.

Of the SONG of the THREE CHILDREN,
the IDOL, BELL, and the DRAGON, with
the STORY OF SUSANNAH.

It is no just exception against these and other
parts of holy scripture of the Old Testament,
to say, they are not in the Hebrew edition,
being otherwise accepted for canonical by the
Catholic Church ; and further, it is very pro-
bable, that these parcels were sometimes either
in the Hebrew or Chaldee ; in which two lan-
guages, part in one, and part in the other, tha

(d) S. Aug in lib.de Prajdestinat. Sanct., cap. 14. Et
lib. de Civit Uei, 17, c. 20.

(e) Seethe Argument of Baruch's Prophecy in th«
Doway Bible, To. 2.

'/) St Hierom., in Praefat. Jercmue.

OF BOOKS REJECTEH BV PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHA!,.

rest of the book of Daniel was written ; for
from whence could the Septuagfnt, Theodotion,
Syijimachiis, and Aqiiila translate them ? in
whose editions St. Hieroni found them. But if
it be objected, that St. Hierom calls them fables,
and so did not account them canonical scripture ;
we answer, that he, reporting the Jewish opinion,
uses their terms, not explaining his own judg-
ment, intending to deliver sincerely what he
iound in the Hebrew ; yet would he not omit
to insert the rest, advertising withal, that he had
it in Theodotion's translation ; which answer is
clearly justified by his own testimony, in these
words : " Whereas I relate,'' says he, " what the
Hebrews say against the Hymn of the Three
Children ; he that for this reputes me a fool,
proves himself a sycophant ; for I did not write
-what myself judged, but what they are accus-
tomed to say against me." (a)

The Prayer of Azarias is alleged as divine
scripture, by St. Cyprian, St. Ephrem, St.
Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius, and
others. (&) 'I'he Hymn of the Three Children
is alleged for divine scripture, by divers holy
fathers, as also by St. Hierom himself, in cap. iii.
ad Galulos et Epist. 49, de Muiiere Septies icia ;
also by St. Ambrose and the Council of Toledo,
c. 13.

So likewise the History of Susannah is cited
for holy scripture, by St. Ignatius, Terlullian,
St. Cyprian, St. Chrysostom, who in Horn. 7,
fine, has a whole sermon on Susaimah, as upon
holy scripture : St. Ambrose and St. Augustine
cite the same also as canonical.

The History of Bell and the Dragon is judged
to be dirine scripture ; St. Cyprian, St. Basil,
and St. Athanasius, in Synopsi, briefly explica-
ting the argument of the book of Daniel, make
express mention of the Hymn of the Three
Children, of the History of Susannah, and of
Bell and the Dragon.

OF THE TWO BOOKS OF
MACCABEES.

Ever since the third Council of Carthage,
these two books of the Maccabees have been
held for sacred and canonical by the Catholic
Church, as is proved by a council of seventy
bishops, under Pope Gelasius ; and by the
sixth general council, in approving the third of
Carthago ; as also by the councils of Florence
and Trent.

But because some of. the Church of England
divines would seem to make their people believe ,
that the Maccabees were not received as cano-
nical scripture in Gregory the Great's time, .
consequently not before, (c) 1 will, besides these
councils, refer you to the holy fathers who lived
before St. Gregory's days, and alleged these

(a) S. Hi?r., lib 2, c. 9, aOvers. Ruffin.
(h) Vide Dovfay Bible, Tom 2.
(c) See the Secimd VindicatioTi of the Exposition of the
Doctrine -jftlic Church of England

two books of the Maccabees as divine sciipture,
namely, St. Clement Alexandrinus, lib. i
Stromal. ; St. Cyprian, lih. i., Epistolantm
Ep. iii. ad Corndmm, lib. iv. ; Ep. i. cl de Ex-
hurl, ad Martyrivm, c. xi. St. Isidorus, lib.
xvi., c. 1. St. Gregory Nazianzen has also a
whole oration coneep-ning the seven Maccabees
martyrs, and their mother. St. Ambrose, lib. i.,
c. 41, OJjic. See in St. Hierom's Commentaries
upon Daniel, c. i., 11 and 12, in how great
esteem he had these. books, though, because he
knew they were not in the Jewish canon, he
would not urge them against the Jews. And
the great doctor St. Augustine, in lib. ii., c 8,
de Doclrina Christiana, el lib. 18, c. 36, dc
Civit. Dni, most clearly avouches, that, " Not-
withstanding the Jews deny these books, the
church holds them canonical." And whereas
one Gaudentius, an heretic, alleged, for defence
of his heresy, the example of Razias, who slew
himself, 2 Mac. xiv., St. Augustine denies not
the.authority of the book, but discusses the fact,
and admonishes, that it is not unprofitably re-
ceived by the church, " if it be read or hoard
soberly," which was a necessary admonition to
those Donatists, who, not understanding the
holy scriptures, depraved them, as St. Petei
says of like heretics, to their own perdition.
Which te.stimonies, I think, may be suthcienf, to
satisfy any one who is not pertinacious and ob-
stinate, that these two books of the Maccabees,
as well as others in the New Testament, were
received, and held for canonical scripture, long
before St. Gregory the Great's time.

Judge now, good reader, whether the author
of the second vindication, &c., has not imposed
upon the world in this point of the books of the
Maccabees. And indeed if this were all the
cheat he endeavours to put upon us, it vi ere
well, but he goes yet further, and names eleven
points of doctrine besides this, which he, with
his fellows, quoted in his margin, falsely affirms
not to have been taught in England by St.
Augustine, the Benedictine monk, when he
converted our nation ; telling us, " that the mys-
tery of iniquity," as he blasphemously terms the
doctrine of Christ's holy church, " was not
then come to perfection." For, first, says he.
" the scripture was yet received as a perfect
rule of faith." Secondly, " the books of the
Maccabees, which you now put in your cannon
were rejecte(l then as apocryphal." Thirdly
" that good works were not yet esteemed meri-
torious." Fourthly, " nor auricular confe^sioit
a sacrament." Fifthly, " that solitary masses
were disallowed by him." And sixthly, " tran.
substantiation yet unborn." Seventhly, " that the
sacrament of the Eucharist was hitherto admi-
nistered in both kinds." What then ? to it waw
also in one kind. Eighthly, "purgatory iiself
not brought either to certainty or to perfection.'
Ninthly, " that by consequence masses for tho
dead were not intended to deliver souls from
these torments." Tenthly, " nor images allowed
for any other purpose than for ornament and
instruction." Eleventhly, "that the sacrament
of extreme unction was yet unformed." Then

OP BOOKS REJECTED BT PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRTPHAl.

you must, with your master, Luther, count St.
James's Epistle, an epistle of straw. Twclfthly,
" inJ even the Pope's supremacy was so far from
being then established as it now is, that Pope
Gregory thought it to be the forerunner of an-
tichrist for one bishop to set himself above all
the rest."

1 will only, in particular, take notice here of
this last of his false instances . because he cites
and misapplies the words of St. Gregory the
Great, to the deluding of his reader : whereas
St. Gregory did not think it antichristian of
unlawful for the Pope, whom (not himself, but)
our Saviour Christ had set and appointed, in
the person of St. Peter, above all the "rest, to
exercise spiritual supremacy and jurisdiction
over all the bishops in the Christian world : but
he thought it antichristian for any bishop to set
up himself, as John, bishop of Constantinople,
had done, by the name or title of universal
bishop, so as if he alone were the sole bishop,
and no bishop but he, in the universe : and in
this sense St. Gregory thought this name or
title not only worihil)' forborne by his prede-
cessors, and by himself, but terms it profane,
sacrilegious, and antichristian ; and in this sense
the bishops of Rome have always utterly re-
nounced the title of universal bishop ; on the
contrary, terming themselves Seroi Servorum
Dei. And this is proved from the words of
Andraens Friccius, a Protestant, whom Peter
Martyr terms an excellent and learned man.
"Some there are," says he, " that object to the
auihority of Gregory, who says, that such a
title pertains to the precursor of antichrist ; but
the reason of Gregory is to be known, and may
be gathered from his words, which he repeats in
many epistles, that the title of universal bishop
is contrary to, and dotli gainsay the grace
which is commonly poured ujion all bishops ; he
therefore, who calls himself the only bishop,
takes the episcopal power from the rest ; where-
fore this title he would have rejected, &c. But
it }s nevertheless evident by other places, that
Gregory thought that the charge and principality
of the whole church was committed to Peter,
&c., and yet for this cause Gregory thought not
that Peter was the forerunner of antichrist."
(o) Thus ewdently and clearly this Protestant
writer explains this difficulty.

To this may be added the testimonies of other
Frptesiants, who, from the writings of St. Gre-
gory, clearly prove the bishop qf Rome to have
liad and exercised a power and jurisdiction, not
only over the Greek, but over the universal
church. The Magdeburgian Centurists show
us, liiat the Roman see appoints her watch over
the whole world ; that the apostolic see is head
of all churches ; that even Constantinople is
subject to the apostolic see. {b) These Cen-
jurists charge moreover the bishop of Rome,
in the very example and person of Pope Gre-
gory, and by collection out of his writings, by
/hem particularly alleged, " that he challenged

'a) Andracus Friccius. oe Ecclesia. 1 . 3, c. ]0, p. 579.
.b) Centiit 6, Col. 425. 42G, 427, 42.'!, 439, 43a

to himself power to command all archbishops,
to ordain and depose bishops at his pleasure."
And, " that he claimed a right to ciie archbishops
to declare their cause before him, when they
were accused." And also, " to excommunicato
and depose them, giving commission to their
neighbour bishops to proceed against them."
That, " in their provinces he placed his legates
10 know and end the causes of such as appealed
to the see of Rome." (c) With much more,
touching the exercise of his supremacy. To
which Doctor Saunders adds yet more out
of St. Gregory's own works, and in his own
words, as, " that the see apostolic, by the
auihority of God, is preferred before all
churches. That all bishops, if any fault bo
found in them, are subject to the see apostolic.
That she is the head of faith, and of all the
faithful members. That the see apostolic i.s
the head of all churches. That the Roman
Church, by the words which Christ spake lo
Peter, was made the head of all churches.
That no scruple or doubt ought to be made ot
the faith of the see apostolic. That all those
things are false, which are taught contrary to
the doctrine of the Roman Church. That to
return from schism to the Catholic Church, is to
return to the commimioii of the bishops of Rome.
That he who will not have St. Peter, to whom
the keys of heaven were committed, to shut him
out from the entrance of life, must not in this
world be separated from his see. That they
are perverse men, who refuse to obey the sec
apostolic." [d)

Considering all these words of Pope Gregory
does not this vindicator of the Church of Eng-
land's doctrine show himself a grand imposter,
to offer to the abused judgment of his unlearned
readers, an objection so frivolous and misapplied,
by the advantage only of a naked, sounding
resemblance of mistaken words ? To conclude,
therefore, in the words of Doctor Saunders :
" he who reads all these particulars, and more
of the same kind that are to be found in the
works of St. Gregory, and with a brazen fore-
head, fears not to interpret that which he wrote
against the name of universal bishop, as if he
could not abide that any one bishop should have
the chief seat, and supreme government of the
whole militant church ; that man, says he,
seems to me either to have cast off all under-
standing and sense of man, or else to have put
on the obstinate perverseness of the devil." (e)

It is not my business in this place, to digress
into particular replies against his other false
instances (/) of the difference between the doc-
trine of Pope Gregory the Great, and that of
the Council of Trent : I will therefore, iti ge-
neral, oppose the words of a Protestant bishop
against this Protestant ministerial guide, and so
submit them lo the consideration of the judicious
reader.

(«) Vid. praeced, Notas.

(d) Dr. Saund. Visit. Monar., lib. 7, a N. 433, 541.

(e) Dr. Saunders supra.

(/) You will find some of them hinted at in uthei
places as occasion ofiers.

OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APpCRyPH^It.

3*?

John Balo, a Prptes„tant bishop, affirms, (a)
that " the religion preached by St. Augustine to
the Saxons was, altars, vestments, images,
chalices, crosses, censors, holy vessels, holy
waters, the sprinkling thereof, relics, translation
of relics, dedicating of churches to the bones
and ashes of saints, consecration of altars, cha-
lices and corporals, consecration of the font of
baptism, chrism and oil, celebration of mass,
the archiepiscopal pall at solemn mass time,
Romish mass books ; also free will, merit, justi-
fication of works, penance, satisfaction, purga-
tory, the unmarried life of priests, the public
invocation of saints and their worship, the
worship of images." (A) In another place, he
say^, ihat " Pope Leo the first decreed, that men
should worship the images of the dead, and al-
lowed the sacrifice of the mass, exorcism, par-
dons, vows, monachism, transubstantiation,
prayer for the dead, offering the healthful host of
Christ's body and blood for the dead, the Roman
bishop's claim and exercise of jurisdiction and
supremacy over all churches, reliqimm pnnti-
ficiiB superstitionis chaos, even the wlioie chaos
of Popish superstitions." He tells us, that
" Pope Innocent, who lived long before St.
Gregory's time, made the anointing of the sick
to he a sacrament." (c)

These are Bishop Bale's words ; which this
vindicator would do well to reconcile with his
own. The like may be found in other Protes-
tants ; namely, in Doctor Humphrey, in Jesui-
titrni, part ii., the Centurists, &c.

But now to return to the place where we oc-
casionally entered into this digression : you see
by what authority and testimonies both of
councils and fathers we have proved these
books, which Protestants reject, to be canonical :
yet, if a thousand times more were said, it would
be all the same with the perverse innovators of
our age, who are resolved to be obstinate, and,
after their bold and licentious manner, to receive
or reject what they please ; still following the
steps of their first masters, who tore out of the
Bible, some one book, some another, as they
found them contrary to their erroneous and he-
retical opinions. For example :

Whereas Moses was the first that ever wrote
any part of the scripture, and he who wrote the
law of God, the ten commandments ; yet Luther
thus rejects both him and his ten command-
ments : (rf) " We will neither hear nor see
Moses, for he was given only to the Jews ; nei-
ther does he belong in any thing to us." " I,"
says he, " will not receive (f) Moses with his
law ; for he is the enemy of Christ." ( /) " Mo-
ses isWie master of all hangmen." {,;?) "The ten
comman'dments belong not to Christians." " Let
the ten commandments be altogether rejetted,

a) Bale in Act. Rom. Pontif,. Edit. Basil., 1G58, p.
J 1, 45, 46, 47, et Cent, I , Col.__3.

(i) Pageant of Popes, fol. 27.

(rf) Tom. 3, Geirn., fol.40, 41, and in Colloq. Mensal.,
Ger., fol, 152, 153.

(e) In Coloc, Mensal., c de Legs et Evaa.

(/) Ibid., fol 118.

( tt) Scrtn. do Mose.

and all heresy will presently cease ; for the ten
commandments are, as it were, the fountain liom
wheTice all heresies spring." (n)

Islebius, Luther's scholar, taught, (?) that
"the decalogue was not to be taught in the
church :" and from this came (k) the sect oi
Antinomians, who publicly taught, that " the
law of God is not worthy to be called the word
of God: if thou an an whore, if an whore-
monger, if an adulterer, or otherwise a sinner,
believe, and thou walkest in the way of salva-
tion. When thou art drowned in sin even te
the bottom, if thou believcst, thou art in thfl
midst of happiness. All that busy themselves
about Moses, that is, the ten commandments,
belong to the devil ; to the gallows with
Moses." (/)

Martin Luther believes not all things to be so
done, as they are related in the Ijook of Job •
with him it is, " as it were, the argument of a
fable." (w)

Castalio commanded the canticles of Solomon
to be thrust out of the canon, as an impure and
obscene song ; reviling with bitter reproaches,
such ministers, as resisted him therein, (n)

Pomeran, a great evangelist among the Luther-
ans, writes fnus touchitig St. James's Epistle :
" He concludes ridiculously, he cites scripture
against scripture, which thing the Holy Ghost
cannot abide : wherefore that epistle may not bo
numbered among other books, which set forth tho
justice of faith." (o)

Vitus Theodorus, a Protestant preacher, of
Nuremberg, writes thus : "The Epistle of Jamea
and Apocalypse of John, we have of set purpose
left out, because tho Epistle of James is not only
in certain places reprovable. where he too much
advances works against faith ; but also his doc-
tdne throughout is patched together with divers
pieces, whereof no one agrees w'ith another.''(p)

The Magdeburgian Centurists say, thai " the
Epistlejof James much swerves from the analogy
of the apostolical doctrine, whereas it ascril>es
justification hot only to faith, but to works, and
calls the law, a law of liberty." (q)

John Calvin doubted whether t-he apostles
creed was made by the apostles. He argued St,
Matthew of error. He rejected these words :
" many are called, but few are chosen." (r)

Clemitius, an eminent Protestant, opposes the
evangelists one against another : " Matthew and
Mark," says, he, " deliver the contrary ; the^e^
fore to MaVthevv and Mark, being two witnesses,
more credit is to be given than to one Luke,"
&c. (*)

(h) In Convival. Colloq. cited by Auri faber, cap. de
Lege.

(i) See Osiander, Cent. Ifi, p. 311, 310, 320.

(k) S'eidan, Hist , 1, 12, fol. 162.

(I) VId, Confessio. Mansfieldensium Ministrorum
Tit. de Antinomisj fol, 89, 00.

(rti.) In Serm. Convival. Tit. de Patriarch, et Prophet.
et Tit, de libi:is. Vet, et. Nov. Test,

(n) Vid, Beza in Vita Calvini.

(o) Pomeran. ad Rom , c. ft.

(p) In Aniiot, in Nov. Test , pag ult ■

ia) Cent. I,, 1,2, c. 4, Col. 54.

(r) Inst, I, 2, c. 16. In Matt 27, Harm, in Matt. 20,IG

(s) Victoria Veritatis et Ruina Panatus, Aie. S.

OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA.

Zuinglius and other Protestants affirm, that
" all things in St. Paul's Epistles are not sacred ;
and that in sundry things he erred." (o)

Mr. Rogers, the great labourer to our English
convocation men, names several of his Protestant
brethren, who rejected for apocryphal the Epis-
tle of Paul to the Hebrews, of St. James, the
first and second of John, of Jude, and the Apoc-
alypse." (A)

Thus, you see, these pretended reformers
have torn out, some one piece or book of sacred
scripture, some another ; with such a licentious
freedom, rejscting, deriding, discarding, and
censuring them, that their impiety can never be
paralleled but by professed Atheists. Yet all
these sacred books were, as is said, received for
canonical in the third Council of Carthage, above
thirteen hundred years ago.

But, with the Church of England, it matters
not by whatauthority books are judged canonical,
if the Holy Spirit, in the hearts of her children,
testify them to be from God. They telling us,
by Mr. Rogers, that they judge such and such
books canonical, " not so much because learned
and godly men in the church so have, and do
receive and allow them, as for that the Holy
Spirit in our hearts doth testify, that they are
from God." By instinct of which private Spirit
in their hearts, they decreed as many as ihey
thought good for canonical, and rejected the
rest ; as you may see in the sixth of the Ihirty-
nine Articles, (c)

OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS
CALL APOCRYPHA.

The Church of England has decreed, (il) that
' such are to be understood canonical books of
the Old and New Testament, of whose authority
there was never any doubt in the church :" and
therefore, by this rule she rejects these for apoc-
ryphal, viz.,

Tobit.

Judith.

The rest of Esther.

Wisdom.

Ecclesiasticus.

Baruch, with the Epistle of Jferemiah.

7 he Song of the Three Children.

The Idol, Bell, and the Dragon.

The Story of Susannah.

Maccabees I.

Maccabees IL

.Mancsseth, Prayer of.

Esdras IIL

Esdras IV. (e)

[a) Tom 2, Elench , f. 10. Magdeburg. Cent 1, 1.
, c. 10. Col. .580

(A) Defence of the 39 Articles, Art. 6.

(c) The private spirit, not the church, told those Pro-
cstants who made the 39 Articles, what hooks of scrip-
ture thny were to hold for canonical.

{d) In the 6th of the 39 Articles.

v'e) The three last are not numbered in the canun of
the scripture

But if none inust pass for canonical, but such as
were never doubted of ii^ the church, I would
know why the Church of England admits of
such books of the New Testament as have for-
merly been doubted of? " Some ancient writers
doubted of the last chapter of St. Mark's Gos-
pel : (/ ) others of some part of the 22nd of St.
Luke ; (o-) some of the beginning of the 8th oi
St. John ; (h) others of the Epistle to the He-
brews ; {{) and others of the Epistles of St.
James, Jude, the second of Peter, the second
and third of John, and the Apocalypse." (A)

And Doctor Bilson, a Protestant, affirms, that
" the scriptures were not fully received in all
places, no, not in Eusebius's time." He says,
" the Epistles of James, Jude, the second of
Peter, the second and third of John, are contra-
dicted, as not written by the apostles. The
epistle to the Hebrews was for a while contra-
dicted," &c. The churches of Syria did not re-
ceive the second Epistle of Peter, nor the second
and third of John, nor the Epistle of Jude, not
the Apocalypse. The like might be said for the
churches of Arabia : will you hence conclude,
says this doctor, that these parts of scripture
were not apostolic, or that we need not receive
them now, because they were formerly doubted
of? Thus Doctor Bilson. (/)

And Mr.^Rogers confesses, that "although
some of the ancient fathers and doctors accepted
not all the books contained in the New Testa-
ment for canonical ; yet in the end, they were
wholly taken and received by the common con-
sent of the Church of Christ, in this world, for
the very Word of God," &c. (m)

And, by Mr. Rogers and the Church of Etig.
land's leave, so were also those books which they
call Apocrypha. For though they were, as we
do not deny, doubted of by some of the ancient
fathers, and not accepted for canonical : " yet
ill the end," to use Mff. Rogers' words, they
were wholly taken and received by the common
consent of the Church of Christ, in this world,
for the very Word of God."(n) "Vide third Coun-
cil of Carthage, which decrees, " that nothing
should be read in the church, under the name o(
divine scriptures, besides canonical scriptures :"
and defining which are canonical, reckons those
which the Church of England rejects as apocry-
phal." To this council St. Augustine subscribed,
who, (o) with St. Innocent, {p) Gelasius, and
other ancient writers, number the said books m
the canon of the scripture. And Protestants
themselves confess, they were received in the
number of canonical scriptures, (q.)

(/) See St. Hierom. epist. ad Hed. q. 3 •

(,?) S. Hilar. 1 10, de Trin., et Hierom, 1 2, oontr.
Pelagian.

(A) Euseb. H., 1. 3, c. 39.

(i) Id, I. 3, c. 3.

(i) Et, c. 95, 28. Hierom Divinis Illust,, in P Jac
Jud. Pet. et Juan., et Ep. ad Dardan.

(l) Survey of Christ. Suff, p. ()fi4. Vid. 1st and 4tJ
day's Confer, in the Tower, anno 1581.

(m) Def. of the 39 Articles, p. 31, Art. 6.

in) Third Council of Carthage, Can. 47.

(n) De Doct. Christian., 1. 2, c.8.

(p) Epist. ad Exuper., c. 7.

(q) Tom. 1, Cone Decret. fiirn 70 Eprscop.

or anCB books as rROTESTANTS OAU. APOOBTrBA.

,, Brentius, a Protestant, says, " there are some
of the ancient fathers, who receive these apoc-
ryphal books into the number of canonical
sci'iptnres ; njid also some councils command
them to be acknowledged as canonical."(a)

Uoctor Covel also affirms of ail these books,
that, " if Ruifinus be not deceived, they were
approved of, as parts of tlie Old Testament, by
tiie !ipostles."(6)

Csi) tiial vviiat Clu'ist's Church receives as
canonical, we are not to doubt of : Doctor Fulk
avouches, that " the Church of Christ has judg-

(a) Brentius Apol. Conf. Wit. Bucer's scripta. Ang.,
p. 713.

(b) Corel oont. Bnig., pp. 76, 77, 78.

ment to discern trne writing flrom connterfeit,
and the Word of God from the writings of men ;
and this judgment she has of the Holy Ghost."
(e) And Jewel says, " the Church of God haj
the Spirit of wisdom to discern true scripture
from false."(<i)

To conclude, therefore, in the words of the
Council of Trent : " If any man shall not receive
for sacred and canonical tliese whole books, with
all their parts, as they mo read in tlie Catholic
Church, and as they are in the Vulgate Latin
edition, let him be accursed."(e)

id) Jewel Def. of the Apol., p. 201.

(e) Condi. Trid., Sew. 4» Seer, de Can. Srcip^

I. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AQAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

«nil Verse.

St. Matlh.
chap. xvi.
»erso 18.

St. Matth.
chap, xviii.
verse 17.

Ephesians
chup. V.
verses 23,
24, 2a, 27,
29. 32.

Hebrews
chap. ii.
verse 23.

Canticles
chap. vi.
terse 8

Ephesians
chap. i.
verses 22,
23

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Et ego dico tibi,
quia tu es Pctrus,
et super hone Pei-
ram tedificabo " ec-
clesiam meam," fa
li^y HxXriaiat. (1)

Quod xi nun au-
dierit eos, die " Ec-
clesim," ixulrjola- si
all tern " ecclcsiam,''
ixxXrjotiis, nor. audte-
rif, sil tibi sicut eth-
nicus et publicanUs.

Viri, diligite usores
veslras, stout el
Chrislus dilexit " ec-
clesiam."

Ut exhiberet ipsi
sibi gloriosam " ec-
ctesiam."

" Sacramenlum "
hoc est magnum ;
ego aulem dico in
Christo et "ecclesia"
iKxiijotaif,

Et ecclesiam pri-
mitivorum, ixxl^ala.

Una est columba
mea. nriK ftta. (2)

Et ipsum dedit
caput supra omnem
" ecclesiam," quce est
corpus ipsius, et
plenitudo ejus, qui
omnia in omnibus
" adimplelur, " r5 !

TtXijIjUflil'S. (3)

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

And I say to
thee, that thou art
Peter, and upon this
Rociv will I build
my " church."

And if he will
not hear them, tell
the " church ;" and
if he will not hear
the " church," let
him be as an hea-
then, and as a pub-
lican.

Husbands, love
your wives,as Christ
loved the " church,"
verse 25.

That he might
present to himself a
glorious " church,"
verse 27.

For this is a
great " sacrament ;"
but 1 speak in Christ,
and in the "church,"
ver. 32, &c.

And the " church"
of the first-born.

My dove is " one."

And hath made
him head over all
the "church," which
is his body, the ful-
ness of him " which
is filled," all in all.

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Ijlhles, printed
A. D. 1502, 1577, 1579.

Instead of church
they translate " con-
gregation." Upon
this Rock will I build
my " congregation."

(1)

If he will not hear
them, tell the '• con-
gregation ;" and if
he will not hear the
"congregatiou," &,c.

The last Tinnslation oi

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

L(in., an. 1683.

Husbands, love
your wives,as Christ
loved the " congre-
gation."

That he might
present to himself
a glorious " congre-
gation."

For this is a great
"secret," for I speak
in Christ, and in the
" congregation."

And the' "con-
gregation" of the

first-born.

My dove is "alone."
(2)

And gave him to
be the head over all
things to the " con-
gregation," which is
his body, the fulness
of him " that filleth"
all in all. (3)

It is corrected in
this last translatitm

Corrected.

Corrected,

Corrected.

My dove i& •• but
one."

And gave him Ic
be the head ovei
all things to the
" church." which i.s
his body, the fulnesa
of hint " that filleth"
all iu all.

THE CHURCH.

The two English Bibles, (a) usually read in
the Protestant congregations at their first rising
up, left out the word Catholic in the title of
'hose epistles which ha^e been known by the
name of Catholicm EpistoltB, ever since the
ajjostles' time : (A) and their latter translations,
dealing somewhat more honestly, have turned
the word Catholic into ■' General," " the General
lipistle of James, of Peter," &c. as if we should
say in ourcreed,"we believe the general church."
So that by this rule, when St. Augustine says,
that the manner was in cities, where there "was
liberty of religion, to ask, gna ilur ad Catholicum ?
we must translate it, which is the way to the
general? And when St. Hierom says, if we agree
in faith with the bishop of Rome, ergo Catholici
sumiis; we must translate, " then we are gene-
rals." Is not this good stuff ?

(1) An'd as they suppress the name Catholic,
even so did they, in their first English Bible,
the name of church itself :(';) because at their
first revolt and apostacy from that church,
which was universally known to be the only true
Catholic Church, it was a great objection
against their schismatical proceedings, and
stuck so much in the people's consciences, that
they left and forsook the church, and the church
condemned them : to obviate which, in the
English translation of 1563, they so totally sup-
pressed the word church, that it is not once to
be found in all that Bible, so long read in their
congregations : because, knowing themselves not
to be the church, ihey were resolved not to
leave God Almighty any church at all, where
they could possibly root it out, viz., in the Bible.
And it is probable, if it had been as easy for
them to have eradicated the church from the
earth, as it was to blot the word out of their
Bible, they would have prevented its "continuing
to the end of the world." '

Another cause for their suppressing the name
church was, " that it should never sound in the
common people's ears out of the scriptures," and
that it might seem to the ignorant a good argu-
ment against the authority of the church, to say,
" we find not this word church in ail the Bible :"
as in other articles, where they find not the
express words in the scripture.

Our blessed Saviour says : " Upon this rock I
will build my church ;" but they make him say,
" Upon this rock I will build my congregation."
They make the Apostle Si;. Paul say to Tirjiothy, |
1 Ep. c. iii. " The house of God, which is the
congregation," not " the church of the living
Gcd, the pillar and ground of truth." Thus
they thrust out God's glorious, unspotted, and

(a) Bib. 1562, 1677.

(A) Euseb., Hist. Ecclej., lib. 2, c. 23, in fine.

(e) Bible, printed anno 1562

most beautiful spouse, the church ; and in plac«
of it, intrude their own little, wrinkled, and
spotted congregation. So they boldly make the
apostle say: " He hath made him head of the con-
gregation, which is the body :" and in anothei
place, " The congregation of the first-born :"
where the apostle mentions heavenly Jerusalem,
the city of the living God, &c.; so that by tliis
translation there is no longer any church mili-
tant and triumphant, but only congregation ; in
which they contradict St. Augustine, who
afliirms, that " though the Jewish congregation
was sometimes called a church, yet the apostles
never called the church a congregation." But
their last translation having restored the word
church, I shall say no more of it in this place.

(2) Again, the true church is known by unity,
which mark is given her by Christ himself; in
whose person Solomon speaking, says : "Una est
cnlumba mea ;" that is, " one is my dove," or
" my dove is one." Instead of this, they, bejng
themselves full of sects and divisions, will have
it, " my dove is alone ;" though neither the He-
brew nor Greek word hath that signification ;
but, on the contrary, as properly signifies one, as
vnus doth in Latin. But this is also amended
in their last translation.

(.3) Nor was it enough for them to corrupt the
scripture against the church's unity ; for there
was a time when their congregation was invisi-
ble ; that is to say, when " they were not at all :"
and therefore, because they will have it, that
Christ may be without his church, to wit, a head
without a body, (<■/) ihey falsify this place in the
Epistle to the Eph., xi. 21, 23, translating,
" he gave him to be the head over all things to
the church," congregation with them, " which
(church) is his body, the fulness of him that
fiileth all in all." Here they translate actively
the Greek word tb TtXrjouuFvu, when, according to
St. Chrysostom, and all the Greek and Latin
doctors' interpretation, it ought to be translated
passively ; so that instead of saying, " and fiileth
all in all," they should say, " the fulness of him
which is filled all in all ;" all faithful men as
members, and the whole church as the body
concurring to the fulness of Christ the head.
But thus they will not translate, " because," says
Beza, " Christ needs no such compliment." And
if he need it not, then he may be without a
church ; and consequently, it is no absurdity, if
the church has been for many years not only
invisible, but also, " not at all." Would a man
easily imagine that such secret poison could lurk
in their translations ? Thus they deal with the
church ; let us now see how they use particular
points of doctrine.

(d) Protestants will have Christ to be a head without
a body, during all that time that their congregation waf
invisible, viz., about 1500 Years.

II. PROTESTANT TRA.NSLATR KS AQAINST

The Book,

•

The true English accord-

Corruptions in the Pro-

The last Translation ii

Chapter,

The Vulgate Latin Text.

ing to the Rhemish

testant Bibles, printed

the Protestant Bible.Ed

and Verse

Translation.

A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

Lon., an. 1683.

St. Matth.

^ccepit Jesus pa-

Jesus took bread

Instead of " bless-

Corrected.

chap. xxvi.

rtem et " benedixit,"

and " blessed," and

ed." they translate,

\iiie 26.

xai iuloy^aai, acfre-

brake, and gave to

" and when he had

git, dedilque, <Sfc. (1)

his disciples.

given thanks." (1)

St. Mark

Accepit Jesus pa-

Jesus took bread.

Instead of" bless-

Corrected.

chap. xiv.

nem et "benedicens,"

and "blessing," &c.

ing," they say, "and

verse 22.

not MoYT^aag,dfC.{2)

when he had given

thanks." (2)

Acts 01

Quern oportet qui-

Whom heaven tru-

Instead of "receive,"

Corrected.

ihe Apos.

dem cmlum " susci-

ly must " receive,"

they say, whom hea-

chap. iii.

pcre" usque «n tem-

until the times of

ven must " contain."

verse 21.

pora reslitulionis

the restitution of all

And Beza, " who

omnium, 6v SsX &q6i.

things.

must be contained

vov diSaaOai. (3)

in heaven." (3)

leremiah

Mittamus lignum

Let us cast wood

" We will destroy

Let us destroy ttie

chap. xi.

Ml panem ejus. (4)

upon his bread.

his meat with wood."

tree with the fruit

yerse 19.

In anodier Bible,
" Let us destroy the
tree with the fruit."
(4)

thereof.

Genesis

At vera Melchize-

And Melchizedek,

Instead of " for

Instead of "for,"

chap. xiv.

dck, sex Salem, pro-

king of Salem,

he was the priest,"

they translate "and."

verse 18.

ferens panem et vi-

brought forth bread

they trarslate, " and

num, " efat enim

and wine ; " for he

ho was the priest,"

sacerdos Dei AUis-

was the priest of

&c. (5)

. ■

stmt. ' (5)

God most high."

TUB BLESSED SACRAMENT AND SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.

(1) The turning of blessings into bare thanks-
giving, was one of the first steps of our pre-
tended reformers, towards denying the real pre-
sence. By endeavouringloiakeawaytheoperation
andefilcacy ofChrist's blessing, pror.ounced upon
the bread and wine, they would make it no more
than a thanksgiving to God : and that, not only
in translating thanksgiving for blessing, but also
in urging the word eucharist, to prove it a niero
thanksgiving; though we find the verb tu/ugigeiv
used also transitively by the Greek fathers,
saying, lof aoiov ivxcgii^riOepia, panem, etchali-
cein eucharistisatos ; or, panem, in quo gratiae actas
sunt ; that is, " the bread and cup made the
eucharist ;" " the bread, over which thanks are
given ;" that is, " which, by the word of prayer
and thanksgiving is made a consecrated meat,
the flesh and blood of Christ." (a) St. Paul
also, speaking of this sacrament, calls it, ( 1 Cor.
x.)"the chalice of benediction, which we do
bless ;" which St. Cyprian thus explicates, " the
chalice consecrated by solemn blessing." St.
Basil and St. Chrysoslom, in their liturgies, say
thus, " Bless, O Lord, the sacred bread ;" and
"bless, O Lord, the sacred cup, changing it by
ihy Holy Spirit :" where are signified the consiB-
cration and transmutation thereof into the body
and blood of Christ.

(2) And, by this corrupt translation, they
would have Christ so included in heaven, that
he cannot be with us upon the altar. But Beza
confesses, " that he translates it thus, on pur-
pose to keep Christ's presence from the altar ;"
which is so far from the Greek, that not only lUy-
ricus, but even Calvin himself, dislikes it. And
you may easily judge, how contrary to St. Chry-
sostom it is, who tells us, " that Christ ascending
into heaven, both left us his flesh, and yet ascend-
ing hath the same." And again, " O miracle !"
says he, " he that sits above v/ith the Father in the
same moment of time is handled with the hands
of all." (4) This, you see, is the faith and
doctrine of the ancient fathers ; and it is the
faith of the Catholic Church at this day. Who
sees not, that this faith, thus to believe the pre-
sence of Christ is in both places at once, because
he is omnipotent, is far greater than the Pro-
testant faith, which believes no farther than that
he is ascended ; and that therefore he cannot
be present upon the altar, nor dispose of his
body as he pleases 1 If we should ask them,
whether he was also in heaven, when he appeared
to Saul going to Damascus .; or whether he can
be both in heaven, and with his church on earth,
to the end of the world, as he promised ; per-
haps, by this doctrine of theirs, they would be
put to a stand. (3)

Consider further, how plain oiir Saviour's
words, '■ this is my body," are for the real pre-

(o) St. Justin in fine, 2 Apolog , St. Irenaeus, lib. 4, 34.
(i) Horn. 2, ad popiii Aiitioch., lib. 3, de Sacerdotio.

sence of his body : and for the real presence o(
his blood in the chalice, what can be more
plainly spoken, than " this is the chalice, the
New Testament in my blood, which chalice is
shed for j'ou" (c) According to the Greek, tc
■noxij^ion TO Bx/ijt'Ofie>or,\he word " which" musl
needs be referred to the chalice : in which
speech chalice cannot otherwise be taken, than
for that in the chalice ; which sure, must needs
be the blood of Christ, and not wine, because his
blood only was shed for us ; according to St.
Chrysostom, who says : " That which is in the
chalice is the same which gushed out of hia
side." (J) And this deduction so troubled Beza
that he exclaims against all the Greek copies in
the world, as corrupted in this place

(4) " Let us cast wood upon his bread ;"
" that is," saith St. Hierom, (e) " the cross upon
the body of our Saviour ; for it is he that said
I am the bread that descended from heaven."
Where the prophet so long before^ saying bread
and meaning his body, alludes prophetically to
his body in the blessed sacrament, made of
bread, and under the form of bread ; and there-
fore also called bread by the apostle, (I Cor. x.)
so that both in the prophet and the apostle, his
bread and his body is all one. And lest we
should think the bread only signifies his body
he says, " Let us put the cross upon his bread ;'
that is, upon his very natural body that hung on
the cross. It is evident, that the Hebrew verb
is not now the same with that which the seventy
interpreters translated into Greek, and St.
Hierom into Latin ; but altered, as may be sup-
posed, by the Jews, to obscure this prophecy ol
their crucifying Christ upon the cross. And
though Protestants will needs take the advan-
tage of this corruption, yet so little does the
Hebrew word, that now is, agree with the words
following, that they cannot so translate it, as to
make any commodious sense or understanding
of it ; as appears by their different translations
and their transposing their words in English
otherwise than they are in the Hebrew. (/)

(5) If Protestants should grant Melchize.
dek's typical sacrifice of bread and wine, then
would follow also, a sacrifice of the New Tes-
tament ; which, to avoid, they purposely translate
" and" in this place ; when, in other places, th"
same Hebrew particle vau, they translate enjm,
for ; not being ignorant, that it is in those, as ip
this place, better expressed by " for" or " because, ''
than by " and." See the exposition of the fathers
upon it. (g)

(d) St. Chrysost. in 1 Cor., cap. x., Horn. 24.

(ej St. Hierom. in com. in cap. xi. vers 19, Hierom
Prophetae.

(/) Genes, xx. 3 ; Gen. xxs- 27 ; Isaiah Ixiv. 5.

{^1 St. Cypr., Epist. fi3, Epiphan. HaBr. 55et79. St
Hieiotn. in Matth. xxvi., ct in Epist. ad Evaj;riuin-

111, PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chnpler,

and Verse.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant' Bthtes, printed
A. D. 15G2, 1577, 1579.

The last Translation o»

thePiotcstant Bible, Ed.

Lon., »n. I6tl3,

Proverbs
chap. ix.
verse 5.

Proverbs
chap. ix.
terse 1.

1 Coiinth.
thap. xi.
verse 27.

1 Corinth,
chap, ix,
verse 13.

1 Corinth,
chap. X.
verse 18.

Daniel
:hap. xiv.
verse 12.

Et verse 17

Etctiam
verse 20.

Venite comeditepa-
nem meum, et bihite
vinurn quod "miscui"
vobis, x.sxi(iaxa, ~oa.

(I)

Immolavit victimas
suas, misciiit vinurn,
BXBQaaey. (2)

Itnque quicunque
maiiducaverit pancm
hunc, vel, >/» biberil
ciilicem domini in-
dignc, (Sfc. (3)

Et qui aliari de-
serviunt cum aliari
parlicipanC, Ouaiuqr/-

Nonne qui edunt
hostids participes,
sunt altaris? dvai-
ui^rjqia. (5)

Quiafecerant sub-
mensa abscondiium
iniroitum, Tgans^a.
(6)

Intuitus rex men-
sam.

Et consumelant
qum erant super men-
sam.

Come, eat my
bread, and drink
the wine which I
have " mingled" for
you.

She hath immola-
ted her hosts, she
hath " mingled" her
wine.

Therefore, whoso-
ever shall eat this
bread, " or" drink
the chalice of our
Lord unworthily,
&c.

And they that serve
the " altar," partici-
pate with the"altar."

Those that eat the
hosts, are they not
partakers of the
" altar ?"

For they had made
a privy entrance un-
der the " table."

The king behold-
ing the " table."

And they did con-
sume the things
■which were upon
the " table."

The corruption is,
drink the wiiiewhich
I have " drawn ;"
instead of " rain-
gled."(l)

She hath "drawn'
her wine. (2)

Instead of " al-
tar," they translafe
" temple." (4)

Partakers of the
" temple. (5)

For, " under the
table," they say, un-
der the " altar," (6)

The king behold-
ing the " altar."

Which was upon
the " ahar."

Come, eat of my
bread, and 'drink of
the wine which ^
have " mingled."

She hath killed
her beasts, she hath
mingled her wine

Wherefore, who-
soever shall eutthia
bread, " and" drink
this cup of the Lord
unworthily, &,c.

Corrected.

The two last chap*
ters they call Apo.
crypha.

THE BLESSED SACRAMENT AND THE ALTAR.

' (1 2) These prophetical words of Solomon
are of great importance, as being a manifest
prophecy of Christ's mingling water and wine
in the chalice at his last supper ; which at this
day, the Catholic Church observes : but Pro-
testants, counting it an idle ceremony, frame
tlieir translation accordingly ; suppressing alto-
gether this mixture or mingling, contrary to the
true interpretation both of the Greek and He-
brew ; as also, contrary to the ancient fathers'
exposition of this place. " The Holy Ghost
(says St. Cyprian) by Solomon, foreshoweth a
type of our Lord's sacrifice, of the immolated
host of bread and wine ; saying. Wisdom hath
killed her hosts, she hath mingled her wine into
ihe cup ; come ye, eiit my bread, and drink the
>vine that I have mingled for you." (a) Speak-
ing of wine mingled (saith this holy doctor) he
foreshoweth prophetically, the cup of our Lord
mingled with water and wine, (b) St. Justin,
frotn the same Greek word, calls it, xqafia ; that
is, (according to Plutarch) wine mingled with
water : so likewise does St. Irenaeus. (c) Sec
also the sixth general council, {d) treating largely
hereof, and deducing it from the apostles and
ancient fathers ; and interpreting this Greek
word by another equivalent, and more plainly
signifying this mixture, viz., fttywai.

(3) In this place, they very falsely translate
" and," instead of " or," contrary both to the
Greek and Latin. And this they do on purpose,
to infer a necessity of communicating under both
kimls, as the conjimctive " and" may seem to do :
whereas, by the disjunctive "or" it is evident, that
we may communicate in one kind only ; as was,
in divers cases, the practice of the primitive
church ; as also of the apostles themselves.
(Act. ii. 42, and xx. 7.)

But the practice of our Saviour is the best
witness of his doctrine : who, sitting at the table
at Emaus (e) with two of his disciples, " took
bread, and blessed, and brake it, and did reach
to them." By which St. Augustine and (^f) the
other fathers, understand the eucharist : where
no mention is made of wine, or the chalice : but
the reaching of the bread, their knowing him,
and his vanishing away, so joined, that not any
time is left for the benediction and consecration
of the chalice.

In the primitive times, " it was the custom to
administer the blood only to children," as St.
Cyprian tells us : and, both he and Tertullian
say, " that it was their practice, most commonly,
to' reserve the body of Christ;"' which, as Euse-
bius witnesses, " they were wont to give alone

(n) Ep. G3, 2.

(6) Apol. 2, in fine.

(«■) Concil. Comtantinop., 6, Can. 32,

(e) I.uke xxiv. 30; Lib. 3, de Consensu.

( f) Hier. Epitaph. Pauia;. Beda. Theophylact. St. Cy-
prian' I. de la^sls, n 10 ; Tertui , 1. 2, ad Ux., n. 4 ;
Kuseb Ecd. Hist, 1. C c. 36; St. Basil, Ep. an Ceesa-
riani Patritiam.

to sick people, for their viaticum." Also, " the
holy hermits in the wilderness, commonly re-
ceived and reserved the blessed body alone, and
not the blood," as St. Basil tells us.

For whole Christ is really present, iindei
either kind, as Protestants themselves liave
confessed : rend their words in Hospinian, (n)
a Protestant, who affirms, " that they believed
and confessed whole Christ to be really present,
exhibited and received under either kind ; and
therefore under the only form of bread : neither
did they judge those to do evil, who communi-
cated under one kind." And Luther, as alleged
by Hospinian, (A) says, " that it is not needful to
give both kinds ; but as one alone sufBceth, the
church has power of ordaining only one, and
the people ought to be content therewith, if it
be ordained by the church." Whence it is
granted, that, " it is lawful for the Church of God,
upon just occasions, absolutely to determine or
limit the use thereof."

(4, 5) To translate temple instead of altar,
is so gross a corruption, that had it not been
done thrice immediately within two chapters,
one would have thought it had been done through
oversight, and not on purpose. The name of
altar both in Hebrew and Greek, and by the
custom of all people, both Jews and Pagans,
implies and imports a sacrifice. We therefore,
with respect to the sacrifice of Christ's body and
blood, say altar, rather than table, as all the an-
cient fathers were accustomed to speak and
write ; though, with respect to eating and
drinking Christ's body and blood, it is also
called a table. But because Protestants will
have only a communion of bread and wine, or a
supper, and no sacrifice ; therefore, they call it
table only, and abhor the word altar, as papis-
tical ; especially in the first translation of 1562,
which was made when they were throwing down
altars throughout England.

(6) Where the name altar should be, they
suppress it ; and here, where it should not be,
they put it in their translations ; ^nd that thrice
in one chapter ; and that either on purpose to
dishonour Catholic altars, or else to save the
credit of their communion table ; as fearing, lest
the name of Bell's table might redound to the
dishonour of their communion table. Wherein
it is to be wondered, how they could imagine
it any disgrace either for table or altar, if the
idols also had their tables and altars ; whereas
St. Paul so plainly names both together : " The
table of our Lord, and the table of devils, (t)
If the table of devils, why not the table of Bell ?
By this we see, how light a thing it was with
them to corrupt the scriptures in those days.

Ce) Hospin. Hist. Saoram , p. 2, fol. 112.
(A) lb., fol. 12.
(i) I. Cor. X. 21.

IV. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

The true English accord-

Corruptions in the Pro

The las' Translation nf

Chapter,

Tho Vulgate Latin Text.

ing to the Khernish

testanl Uiljle:;, printed

.lit l''jlesii.nl BtW'5, td.

and Verse.

TranaUtiun.

A. D. 15C2, 15.-7, 1579.

\M.i., ;in. \tS!i

Acts of

Slatueriint ut as-

They appointed that

Instead of "priests,"

For "prip3t^," they

the Apos.

eendcrenl Pauliis el

Paul and Barnabas

they translate " el-

say here also " ci-

chap. sv.

Barnabas, et quidam

should go up, and

ders."

verse 2.

alii ex aliis ad Apus-
lolos cf'presbytcros"
7ig£<jj?ui£ jas, in Jeru-
salem, d[C.

icrtain others of the
rest, to the apostles
and " priests" unto
Jerusalem.

Titiis,

Hujus ret gratia

For this cause

Instead of "priests,"

For«pi'iests"thef

chap. i.

reliqni ie Cretts, ut

left I thee in Crete,

they translate " el-

say " cliiers."

verse 5

ea qum desunt corri-
gas, et constiluas per
civitates " presbyte-
ros," sieut et ego dis-
posui (til.

that thou shouidest
reform the things
that are wanting,
and shouidest ordaiii
" priests," by cities,
as I also appointed
thee.

ders."

1 Timoth.

Qui bene prasunt

The « priests" that

The "elders" that

" Elders" also io

chap. V.

" pri:sbyteri" duplici

rule well, let them

rule, well, &c.

this Bible

verse 17.

honore digni kabean-
tur.

be esteemed worthy
of double honour.

1 Timoth.

Adverstts " pres-

Against a "priest"

Against an "elder"

Instead of "priesi'

chap. V.

hyterum" aeeuaatio-

receive not accusa-

they put " elder."

verse 19.

nem noli recipeTe,Jfc.

tion, &e.

tion, &c.

St. Jamne,

Tnfirmatitr quit in

Is any man sick

: — Let him

Elders for "priesta"
here also.

chap. V.

vobis? inducat '^pres-

among you ? let him

bring in the "elders"

verse 14.

byteros eeelesiie," et

bring in the" priests"

of the " congrega-

orent super eum.

of the church, and
let them pray over
him.

tion, &G.

»>RIESTS AND PRIESTHOOD.

St. Augustine affirms, "That in the divine
scripturis several sacrifices are mentioned, some
before the manifestation of the New Testament,
&c., and anothernow, which is agreeable to this
manifestation, &c., and which is demonstrated
not only from the evangelical, but also from the
prophetical writings." {a) A truth most certain ;
our sacrifice of the New Testament being most
clearly proved from the sacrifice of Melchizedek
in tlie Old Testament ; of whoiJi, and whose
sacrifice, it is said, " But Melchizedek, king of
Salem, brought forth bread and wine ; for he
was the priest of God most high, and he blessed
him," &c. And to ihake the figure agree to the
thing figured, and the truth to answer the figure
of Christ, it is said, " Our Lord hath sworn, and
it shall not repent him ; thou art a priest for
ever, according to the order of Melchizedek." In
the New Testament, Jesus is made an " high
priest, according to the order df Melchizedek."
For according to the similitude of Melchizedek,
there arises another priest, who continues for
ever,'and has an everlasting priesthood. Whence
it is clearly proved, that Melchizedek was a
priest, and ofTered bread and wine as a sacrifice ;
therein prefiguring Christ oiir Saviour, and his
sacrifice daily offered in the church, under the
forms of bread and wiae, by aa everlasting
priesthood.

But the English Protestants, on purpose to
abolish the holy sacrifice of the mass, did not
only take away the v.'ord altar out of tl^ scripT
ture ; but they also suppressed the name priest,
in all their translations, turning it into elder; (i)
well knowinj; that these three, priest, sacri-
fice, and altat, are dependents and consequents
one of another ; so that they cannot be separ-
ated. If there be an external sacrifice, there
must be an extenal priesthood to oflTer it,
and an altar to oflfer the same upon. So
Christ himself being a priest, according to
the order of Melchizedek, had a sacrifice, " his
body ;" and an altar, " his cross," on which he
offered it. And because he instituted this sacri-
kice, to continue in his church for ever, in com-
memoration and representation of his death,
therefore, did he ordain his apostles priests, at
his last supper ; where and when he instituted
the holy order of priesthood or priests, (saying,
hoc facite, " do this,") to offer the self-same
sacrifice in a mystical and unbloody manner,
until the world's end.

But our new pretended reformers have made
the scriptures quite dumb, as tc< the name of an^y
such priest or priesthood as we now speak of ;
never so much as once naming priest, unless

(n) St. August, Ep. 49, q. '.*

(6) Psal. ex. 4; Heb. vi, 20, and chap rii. 15, 17, 24.

when mention is made eitjer of the priests of the
Jews, or the priests of the Gentiles, especially
when such are reprehended or blamed in the
holy scripture ; and in such places they are sure
to name priests in their translitions, on purpose
to make the very name of priests odious among
the common ignorant people. Agiiin, they have
also the name priests, when they are taken for
all manner of men, women, or children, that
offer internal and spiritual sacrifices ; whereby
they would falsely signify, that there are no other
priests in the law of grace. As Whitaker, (c)
one of their great champions, freely avouches,
directly contrary to St. Augustine, who, in one
brief sentence, distinguishes priests, properly so
called in the churcli ; and priests, as it is a
common name to all Christians. This name
then of priest and priesthood, properly so called,
as St. Augustine says, they wholly suppress;
never translating the word Presbijleros " priests,'
but " elders ;" and that with so full and general
consent in all their English Bibles, that, as the
Puritans plainly confess, and Mr. Whitgift de-
nies it not, a man would wonder to see how
carefid they are, that the people may not once
hear of the name of any such priest in all the
holy scriptures : and even in their latter trans-
lations, though they are ashamed of the word
" eldership," yet they have not the power to put
the English word priesthood, as they ought to
do, in the text, that th<) vulgar may understand
it, but rather the Greek word presbytery : such
are the poor shifts they are glad to make usb
of.

So blinded were these innovators with heresy,
that they could not see how the holy scriptures
the fathers, and ecclesiastical custom, have
drawn several words from their profane and
common signification, to a more peculiar and
ecclesiastical one; as Episcopus, which in Tully
is an " overseer," is a bishop in the New Testa-
ment ; so the Greek word, ;!rf»9oroi'f(»', signifying
" ordain," they translate as profanely, as if they
were translating Demosthenes, or the Laws of
Athens, rather than the holy scriptures ; when,
as St. Hierom tells them, (rf) it signifietli
Clericorum ordinationem ; that is, " giving of
holy orders," which is done not only by prayer
of the voice, but by imposition of the hands,"
according to St. Paul to Timothy, " Impose
hands suddenly on no man ;" that is, " Be not
hasty to give holy orders." In like manner
they translate minister for deacon, ambassador
for apostle, messenger for angel, &c., leaving,
I say, the ecclesiastical use of the word for the
original signification.

(c) Whitaker, p 199; St. Aug., lib. 20, de Civil. L»«,
cap. 10. See the Puritan's Keply, p 159, and WliiteifVt
Defence against the Puritans, p. 722.

(d) St. Hierom. iu cap. Iviii. Esai.

-PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AOAINST

The Rook,

Chapter,

and Verse.

Acts of
the Apos.
chap. xiv.
-«rse 22.

1 Timoth.
chap. i\ .
verse 1 i.

2 Timolh.
chap. i.
ver-w 6.

1 Timolh.
chap. iii.
verse 8.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Et cum conslilu-
issent, j^etgoroci^CTu*'-
leg, illis per sin-
gulas " ecclesias"
"vresbyteros," ngsa-
jSi-regs;. (1)

Noli ncghgere
'gratiam,^' X"Q'0/ja-
Toa, quts in te est,
qu<B data est tibiper
prophetiam cum im-
positione manuttm
" presbyterii." (2)

£t verse 12.

Propter quam cau-
sam admoneo te, ut
resuscites "gratiam"
Dei, quas in te est
per impositionem
minuum mearum.

The true English accortl-

ing to tho Rheniish

Translation.

Corruptions in the Pro^
tcstant'BihIes, printed
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1573.

" Diaconos" si-
militer " pudicus,"
non bilingues, ^c,
Jiaxovus. (3)

Jiaxoroi, Jtaconi.(4)

And when they had
ordained to them
" priests" in every
" church."

Neglect not the
" grace" thai is in
thee, which is given
thee by prophesy,
with imposition of
the hands of "priest-
hood."

For the which
cause I admonish
thee,that thou resus-
citate the " grace"
of God, which is in
thee, by tho imposi-
tion of my hands.

"Deacons" in like
manner " chaste,"
not double-tongued,
&c.

Deacons.

And when they
had ordained " el-
ders by election," in
every " congrega-
tion." (1)

Instead of "grace,"
they translate "gift;"
and " eldership" in-
stead ,of '' priest-
hood.'' (2)

Instead of the
word " grace" they
say " gift."

" Ministers"
" deacons." (3)

for

Deacons. (4)

The last Ttanslation ci

the Protestant liihie, Rd.

Lon., an. 168.1.

"Elders' set in be
stead of " priests."

For the word
" grace" they say
" gift ;" and " prcs'-
bytery," the Gfeeh
word, rather than
the English word,
" priesthood."

They translate
" gift," in the stead
of " grace "

Likewise mi"!t
the " deacons" be
" grave."

DeaconB.

PRIESTHOOD AND HOLV ORDERS.

I V > W E have heard, in old time, o( making
pnests ; and, of late days, of making ministers ;
but who has ever heard in England of making
elders by election ? yet, in their first translations,
it continued a phrase of scripture till King
James the First's time ; and then they ihought
good to blot out the words by " election," begin-
ning to consider, that such elders as were made
only by election, without consecration, could not
prf.tend to much more power of administering
the sacraments, than a churchwarden, or con-
stable of the parish ; for, if they denied ordina-
tion to be a sacrament, (a) ^nd consequently,
to give grace, and impress a character, doubtless
they could not attribute much to a bare elec-
tion : and yet, in those days, when this transla-
tion was made, their doctrine was, " that in the
New Testament, election, without consecration,
was sufficient to make a priest or bishop." Wit-
ness Cranmer himself, who being asked, whether
in the New Testament there is required any
consecration of a bishop, or priest ? answered thus
under his hand, viz., " In the New Testament,
he that is appointed to be a priest or bishop,
needeth no consecration by the scripture ; for
election thereunto is sufficient ; (A) and Dr.
Slillingfleet informs us, that Cranmer has de-
clared, "that a governor could make priests, as
well as bishops." And Mr. Whitaker tells us,
" that there are no priests now in the Church of
Christ ;" page 200, advers. Camp, that is, as he
interprets himself, page 210, " this name [iriest
is never in the New Testament peculiarly ap-
plied to the ministers of the Gospel." And we
are not ignorant, how both King Edward the
Sixth, and Queen Elizabeth, made bishops by
their letters patent only, let our Lambeth re-
cords pretend what they will : to authorize which,
it is no wonder, if they made the scripture say,
" when they had ordained elders by election,"
instead of " priests by imposition of hands ;"
though contrary to the fourth Council of Car-
thage, which enjoins, " that when a priest takes
his orders, the bishop blessing him, and holding
his hand upon his head, all the priests also that
are present, hold their hands by the bishop's
hand, upon his head, (c) So arc our priests
made at this day ; and so would now the clergy
of the Church of England pretend to be made,
if they had but bishops and priests able to make
them. For which purpose, they have not only
corrected this error in their last translations,
but have also gotten the virords, bishop and priest,
thrust intf) their forms of ordination : but the
man that wants hands to work with, is not much
better for having tools.

(2) Moreover, some of our pretender? to
priesthood, would gladly have holy order to take

{a) Twenty-fifth of the Thirty-nine Articles.

(6) See Dr. Burnet's Hist of the Refer.; see Stilling-
Seet Ircnicon, p 39-J.

its place again among the sacraments : and
therefore both Dr. Bramhall and Mr. Masor
reckon it fol- a sacrament, though quite contrary
to their scripture translators, (rf) who, lest it
should be so accounted, do translate " gift" in-
stead of " grace ;' lest it should appear, that
grace is given in holy orders. I wonder tli^y
have not corrected this in their latter transla-
tions : but, perha|)S, they durst not do it, (or
fear of making it clash with the 25lh of tht-it
39 Articles. It is no less to be admired, thai
since they, began to be enamoured of priesthood,
they have not displaced that profane intruder,
" elder," and placed the true ecclesiastical word
" priest," in the text. But to this I hear them
object, that our Latin translation hath Seniores
el majores tiatu ; and therefore, why may not.
they also translate " elders ?" To which I an-
swer, " that this is nothing to them, who profess
to translate the Greek, and not our Latin ; and
the Greek word they know is nqeo^viigHtr presby-
teros. Again, I say, that if they meant no worse
than the old Latin translator did, they would be
as indifferent as he, to have said sometimes
priest and priesthood, when he has the words,
" presbyteros" and " presb3rterium," as we are
indifferent in our translation, saying, seniors and
ancient, when we find it so in Latin : being well
assured, that by sundry words he meant but one
thing, as in Greek it is but one. St. Ilierom
reads, Presbyteros ego compresbyter, (e) in 1 ad
Gal., proving the dignity of priests : and yet
in the 4th of the Galatians, he reads according
to the Vulgate Latin text : Seniores in vobis rugo
cunsenior el ipse : whereby it is evident, that
senior here, and in the Acts, is a priest ; and no*
on the contrary, presbyter, an elder

(3) Lv this place they thrust the word minis-
ter into the text, for an ecclesiastical order : so
that, though they will not have bishops, priests,
and deacons, yet they would gladly have bishops,
ministers, and deacons ; yet the word they
translate for minister, is Siax6voa,iliaconus ; the
very same that, a little after, they translate
deacon, (e) And so because bishops went
before in the same chapter, they have found
out three orders, bishops, ministers, and deacons.
How poor a shift is this, that theyjtre forced to
make the apostles speak three things for two, on
purpose to get a place in the scripture for their
mhiisters ! As likewise, in another place, (/)
on purpose to make room for their ministers'
wives, for there is no living wiihont them, they
translate wife instead of woman, making St.
Paul say : " Have not we power to lead about a
wife ?" &c., for which cause they had rather sa/-
grave than chaste.

(iC) Dr Bramh. p. 9G ; Mason, lib. '.
(c) St. Hier., Ep. 83, ad Evagr
) 1 Cor. ix. 5.

VI.-

-PROTESTA.N r IKA.NSJ.AriOXS dUAI>«ST

•riie Book,

The true -English acpord-

Corruptions in the Pro-

— : — ■ '. — : — r? — r^ —

The last Tisnslalipn o(

-.Chapter,

The Vulgate i^atin Text.

ing to the Khemish

tcstanl Bibles, printed

the Protestant Bible, Ed

and Verse.

Translation-

A. D. 1562, }577, 1579.

Lon., an. 1683.

Malachi

Labia enim sncer-

The priest's lips

For " .shall" they

chap ii.

dotis custudienl sci-

" shall" keep know-

"should keep

translate " should."

\erse 7.

cniinm, et legem re-

ledge, and ihey

knowledge,and they

And for " angel"

quirenl ex ore ejus :

"shall" seek the

"should" seek the

"messenge"," in this

quia " aligelus" Do-

law at his mouth ;

also.

mini exercituum est.

because he is the

(1)

" angel" of the
Lord of hosts.

" messenger" of the

Lord of hosts. (1)

•

Apocalyp.'

" Angela" Ephesi

To the "angel"

To the " messen-

■ Corrected.

chap. ii. Hi.

ecclesia scribe.

of the church of

ger" of, &J., instead

rerses 1,8,
12.

Ephesqs,write thou.

of " angel."

■

Malachi ,

Ecce, ego mitto

gehold, I send

'• Instead of " an-

The same also

chup. iii.

'•angelum' meum,iov

mine " angel," and

gel," they say "mes-

they translate here,

verse 1 .

uy-jtlnf fia, e( prm-

he shall prepare the

senger." And for

without any correc-

parabit viam ante

way before my face.

" Angel" of the tes-,

tion.

fociem meam. El

And the Ruler

tament, they trans-

statimveniel ad tern-

whoni ye seek, shall

late, " Messenger"

plum strum Domina-

suddenly com.e to

of the covenant. (2)

tor, quern vos quosri-

his temple, even the

tis, tt " Angelus"

" Angel" of the

testamenti, queni

testament, whom ye

vos vuliis. (2)

wish for.

St. Matth.

Hie est enim de

For this is he of

For " angel" they

Instead of "an-

chap. xi.

quo scriptum est,

whom it is \yritten,

say " messenger."

gel," they say "mes

\(iiae 10.

ecce, ego mitto " an-
gelutn" meum ante
faciem tuam.

Behold, I send mine
" angel" before thy
face.

senger."

Luke

^Hic est de quo

This is he of

— Behold, I send

For " angej, '

iihap. \ii.

scriptum tst, ecce,

whom it is written.

my " iiiessenger,"

" messengei,"

/erse 27

mitto " angelum "

Behold, I send mine

iiC

meum, 6fC.

" angel," &c.

4 Coriiiih.

Si quid donavi

If I pardoned any

— In the " sight"

Corfocted.

chap. ii.

propter vos in " per-

thing for you in the

of Christ. (3^

/erso !0.

sona" C/iristi,Fv nqo-

(701 Till Xul^U. (3)

" person" of Christ.

— — ^— ^— __

THE AUTHOKirV OK PftlUfiTS.

(1) Because our pretended reformers teach,
'• Thitt order is not a sacrament ;" " that it
has neither visible sign," (what is imposition of
hands ?) " nor ceremony ordained by God ; nor
form ; nor institution from Christ;" (u) con-
sequently, that it cannot imprint a character on
the soul of the person ordained ; they not only
avoid the word " priests," in their transla-
tions, but, the more to derogate from the pri-
vilege and dignity of priests, they make the
scripture, in this place, speak contrary to the
words of the prophet ; as they are read both in
the Hebrew and Greek, cpvi-Hsjai, ^x^i^rijaaoiv,
iiBpai "i-ttBi i where it is as plain as can be spoken,
that " the priest's lips shall keep knowledge, and
they shall seek the law at his mouth ;" which is
a wonderful privilege given to the priests of
the old law, for true determination in matters
of controversy, and rightly expounding the law,
as we may read more fully in Deuteronomy the
1 7th chapter, where they are commanded, under
pain of death, to stand to the priest's judgment :
which, in this place, verse 4, God, by his pro-
phet Malachi, calls, " His covenant with Levi,"
and that he will have it stand, to wit, in the
New Testament, where St. Peter has such pri-
vilege for him and his successors, that his faith
shall not fail ; and where the Holy Ghost is
president in the councils of bishops and priests.
All which, the reformers of our days would
deface and defeat, by translating the words
otherwise than the Holy Ghost has spoken them.
And when the prophet adds immediately the
cause of this singular prerogative of the priest :
" because he is the angel of the Lord of hosts,"
which is also a wonderful dignity to be so called ;
they translate : " because he is the messenger of
the Lord of^hosts." So do they also, in the
Revelations, call the bishops of the seven
churches of Asia, messengers.

(2) And here, in like manner, they call St.
John the Baptist, messenger ; where the scrip-
ture, no doubt, speaks more honourably of him,
as being Christ's precursor, than of a messenger,
which is a term for postboys and lacqueys. 1'he
scripture, I say, speaks more honourably of
him ; and our Saviour, in the Gospel, telling
the people the wonderful dignities of St. 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,! send my angel be-
fore thee :" which St. Hierom calls, tneritorum,
aiiS.rioit', the " increase and augmenting of John's
merits and privileges." [b) And St. Gregory,
" He who came to bring tidings of Christ him-
self, was worthily called an angel, that in his
verj- name there might be dignity." And all

la) Twenty-fifth of the Thirty-nme Articles. Roger's
Defence o( the same, p. 155!

(4) St. Hierom, in Comment, inhunc locum. St.Greg.i
Horn. 6. in Evang.

the fathers conceive a great excellency of tins
word angel ; but our Protestants, who measure
all divine things and persons by the line oftheii
human understanding, translate accordingly,
making our Saviour say, that " John was more
than a prophet," because he was a " messenger."
Yea, where our blessed Saviour himself is called
Angelus leslamenli, the Angel of thu testament;
there they translate, the " messenger of the
covenant."

St. Hierom translated not nuntius, but an-
gelus ; the church, and all antiquity, both
reading and expounding it as a term of mors
dignity and excellency. Why do the innovators
of our age thus boldly disgrace the very elo-
quence of scripture, which, by such terms of
amplification, would speak more significantly
and emphatically ? Why, 1 say, do they for
angel translate messenger ? for apostle, legato
or ambassador, and the like ? Doubtless, this
is all done to take away,.as much as possible, the
dignity and excellency of the priesthood. Yet,
meihinks, they should have corrected this in
their latter translations, when they began them-
selves to aspire to the title of priests ; whose
name, however, they may usurp, yet could not
hitherto attain to the authority and power oi
the priesthood. They are but priests in name
only ; the power they want, and therefore are
pleased to be content with the ordinary style ol
messengers ; not yet daring to term themselves
angels, as St. John did the bishops of the seven
churches of Asia. ,

(3) But, great is the authority, dignity, excel-
lency, and power of God's priests and bishops :
they do bind and loose, and execute all ecclesi-
astical functions, as in the person and power ol
Christ, whose ministers they are. So St. Paul
says : " that when he pardoned or released the
penance of the incestuous Corinthian, he did it
in the person of Christ ;" (c) they falsely trans-
late, " in the sight of Christ ;" " that is, as
St. Ambrose expounds it, ."in the name oi
Christ;" " in his stead," and as " his vicar and
deputy ;" and when he excommunicated the same
incestuous person, he said, " he did it in the
name, and by virtue of our Lord Jesus
Christ." ((f) And the fathers of the Coilncil o)
Ephesus avouch, "that no man doubts, yea, it
is known to all ages, that holy and most blessed
Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pil-
lar of faith, and foundation of the Catholic
Church, received from our Lord Jesus Christ
the keys of the kingdom ; and that power «(
loosing and binding sins was given him ; who,
in his successors, lives and exercises judgment
to this very time, and always." (e)

(d) 1 Cor. V. 4.

U) Parta.ActsiiJ.

VII. PROTESTANT TRANaLATIOKS AOAI?)aT

TheBcxk,

' : r—

The tiue JEnglish accord-

Corruptions in the Pro-

The last Tianslation of

Chapter,

Tlie Vulgate Latin Text.

ing to the Rhemish

testant Bibles, printed

the Protestant Bible, EJ.

aiidVer»«.

Translation.

A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

I.on., an. 1083,

St. Mat.( 4.

Ex te enim exiel

For out of thee

Instead of " rule,"

Corrected.

chap. ii.

dux, qui " regal"

shall come forth the

the NewTestament,

verse 6 ;

populum meum Is-

Captain, that shall

printed anno 1580,

Micah

Tud. ^-Eiarvni, re

^' rule" my people

translates " feed. "

chip. V.

sliui, its iQx^yJu IB

Israel.

(1)

^ erse 2

'laqaijX. (1)

1 Peter

■
Suhjecli igitur

Be .subject there-

In the latter end

Submit yourselves

chap. ii.

estate " om7)i hu-

fore " to every hu-

of king Henry VIII.

"to every ordinance

vetse 13.

mance ercalurte,"

man creature" for

and in Edward VI.

of man," for the

Ttiiarj di-figion/nj

Gof], whether it be

times, they transla-

Lord's sake, whethei

HiloBi,propter Deum,

to the "king, as

ted, " submit your-

it be to the " king,

sive "regi quasi pra-

exceiluig," &c.

selves unto all man-

as supreme.

cellenli" five duci-

ner of ordinance of

bus, (SfC, ^agdsl iia

man " whether it be

ine^iX"'"''- (2)

unto '.he " king, as
to the chief head."
IntheBibleof 1577,
to the "king, as hav-
ing pre-eminence."
In the Bible of 1579,
to the " king, as the
superior." (3)

■

■ y
■

•

Acts of

Atlendite vobis el

Take heed to

— Wherein the

— Wherein tt

the Apos.

universo gregi, in

yourselves, and to

Holy Ghost hath

Holy Gho.st h-

i'h:ip. XX

quo vos Spirilus

the whole flock.

made you " over-

made you "o.-;

\(ise 28.

Sanclus posuiL"epis-

wherein the Holy

seers, to feed the

seers, to feed ■ ,

copos regere. eccle-

Ghost hath placed

congregation" of

chuich" of God,

sium" Dei. 'Enia.

you " bishops to

God. (3)

xd.TSg noi/iiifBtv itjf

rule the church" of

ixxlfjaluv ju @£S.(3)

God.

EFI8C0P4L AVTHOUITy.

( 1 ) It Is certain, that this is a false translation ;
because the prophet's words (Mich, v., cited
by St. Matthew) both m Hebrew and Greek,
signify only a Ruler or Governor, and not a
Pastor or Feeder. Therefore, it is either a
great oversight, which is a small matter, com-
pared to the least corruption ; or else it is done
on purpose ; which I rather think, because they
do the like in another place, (Acts, xx.) as you
may see below. And that to suppress the signi-
ficatiort 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, not/tialfbi ; to wit, that Christ
our Saviour shall rule and feed, (a) yea, he
shall rule with a rod of iron ; and from him, St.
Peter, and the rest, by his commission given in
the same word, noiuaivs, feed and rule my
sheep ; yea, and that with a rod of iron : as when
he struck Ananias and Sapphira with corporal
death ; as his successors do the like offenders with
spiritual destruction, (unless they repent) by the
lerriblerod of excommunication. This is import-
ed in the double signification of the Greek word,
which they, to diminish ecclesiastical authority,
rather translate " feed," than " rule or govern."

(2) For the diminution of this ecclesiastical
authority, they translated this text of scripture,
in King Henry VHI. and King Edward VI.
times, "Unto thd king, as the chief head,"
(1 Pet. ii.) because then the king had first taken
upon him this title of " Supreme head of the
Church." And therefore, they flattered both
hiin and his young sou, till their heresy was
planted ; making the holy scripture say, that
the king was the " chief head," which is all the
same with supreme head. But, in Queen Eliza-
beth's time, being, it seems, better advised in
that point, (by Calvin, I suppose, and the Mag-
deburgenses, who jointly inveighed against that
title ; (4) and Calvin, against that by name, which
was given to Henry Vlll.,) and because, perhaps,
tliey thought they could be bolder with a queen
than a king ; as also, because then they thought
their Reformation pretty well established; they be-
gan to suppress this title in their translations, and
to say, "' To the king, as having pre-eminence,"
and, " To the king, as the superior ;" endeavour-
ing, as may be supposed by this translation, to
encroach upon tnat ecclesiastical and spiritual ju-
risdiction they had formerly granted to the Crown.

But however that be, let them either justify
their translation, or confess their fault : and for
the rest, I will refer them to the words of St.
Ignatius, who lived in the apostles' time, and
tells us, " That we must first honour God, then
the bishop, then the king ; because in all things,
nothing is comparable to God ; and in the
church, nothing greater than the bishop, who is
consecrated to God, for the salvation of the
world ; and among magistrates and temporal
rulers, none is like the king." (c)

(a) Psalm ii. ; Apocalyp. ii. 27 ; Job. xxi. ,

(i) Calvin in cap. vii. Amos ; Magdebur. in Prsef.
Cent. 7, fol. 9, 10, 11.
{c) Ep. 7, ad. Smyrnenses.
S

(3) Again, observe how they here suppresn
the word " bishop," and translate it " overseero ,'
which is a word, that has as much relation to a
temporal magistrate, as to a bishop. And this
they do, because in King Edward VI. and Queen
Elizabeth's time, they had no episcopal conse-
cration, but were made only by their letters
patent ; (</) which, I suppose, they will not den}'
However, when they read of King Edward VI.
making John k Lasco (a Polonian) overseer or
superintendent, by his letters patent ; and of
their making each other snperirttcndents or pas-
tors at F'rankfort, by election ; and such only
to continue for a time, or so long as themselves
or the congregation pleased, and then to return
again to the state of^private persons or laymen ;
(vid. Hist, of the Troubles at Frankfort ;) (c)
and also of King Edward's giving power and au-
thority to Cranmer : and how Cranmer, when
he made priests by election only, I suppose, be-
cause they were to continue no longer than the
king pleased, whereas priests truly consecreatod
are marked with an indelible character, — pre-
tended to no other authority for such act, but
only what he received from the king, by virtue of
his letters patent. Fox, tom. 2, an. 1546,
1547.

And we have reason to judge, that Matthew
Parker, and the rest of Queen Elizabeth's new
bishops, were no otherwise made, than by the
queen's letters patent ; seeing that the form
devised by King Edward VI. being repealed by
Queen Mary, was not again revived till the 8th
of Queen Elizabeth. To say nothing of the
invalidity of the said form, as having neither
the name of bishop nor priest in it, the like doubt
of their consecration arises from the many and
great objections made by Catholic writers (/)
against their pretended Lambeth Records and
Register ; as also from the consecrators of M.
Parker, viz., Barlow, Scorey, &c., whom we
cannot believe to have been consecrated them-
selves, unless they can first show us records of
Barlow's consecration ; and secondly, tell us,
by what form of consecration Coverdale and
Scorey were made bishops ; the Rom. Cath. ordi-
nal having been abrogated, and the, new one not
yet devised, at the time that Mason says they were
consecrated, which was Aug. iiO, 1551. And as
for the suffragan, there is such a difference about
his name, (g) some calling him John, some Rich-
ard ; and about the place where he lived, some
calling him suffragan of Bedford, (A) some of
Dover, (i) that it is doubtful whether shere was
such a person present at that Lambeth ceremony.
But these things being fitter for another treatise,
which, I hope, you will be presented with ere'
long, I shall say no more of them in this place.'

(d) K. Edw. VI. Let. Pat Jo.Utenti. p 71;Regist.Ec-
cles. peregr. Londin. Calvin, p. 3'27, Resp. ad Perseciit,
Angl.

(e) Hist. Fra p. 51, 60, 62, 63, 72, 73, TJ. 87, 97, 99,
125, 126, &c.

(/) Fitzherb. Dr. Chaiiip. Nullity of the EnEli-il
Clergy Prot. demonst. to.
(g) See Dr. Bramhall, p. 98.
(A) Mason, Bramhall, &c.
(i) Dr. Butler Epist. de Consecrat Minist.

VIII. PKOTESTA.NT TRA.VSLAriONB AO. iSST

- The Book,

Chapter,
anil Veise.

1 Curinlli.
chiip. ix.
verse 3.

Philipp.
chap. iv.
verse 3.

Hebrews
cha]). xiii.
verse 4.

St. Matth.
chap. xix.
verse 1 1 .

The Vulgate Latin Text.

St. Matih.
ehap. xi.\.
V«rso 12

Numquid non ha-
betnus polesldtem
" mutiercrn" Soro-
rcm,diSei.(ffii' j'lftwxu,
circumducendi? <^c.
11)

Etiam fogo et te
germane " compar,"
ou^i/j'S j'i-TJCTje. (2)

" Honnrabile con-
nubium in omnibus"
1 l/Jiog 6 y4m°S (>■ fiixai,
et thorns immacula-
tus. (3)

Qui dixit illis,
" Non onines Capi-
vnt" verbum isiud,
i n(5nss j^woSai, sed
quibus datum esl.(4)

The trkie English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translatiun.

Et sti7tt"enunc/ii,"
qui seipsos castrave-
runt, ivvujioi oiiiveg,
ill! i/tdav eav totj^,
propter regnum cm-
Icrvm. (5)

Have rioit we
power tc lead about
a " womunj" a sis-
ter? &c.

Yea, and I be-
seech thee, my sin-
cere " companion."

" Marriage hon-
ourable in all," and
the bed undefiled.

Who said to them,
" Not all take this
word," but they to
whom it is given.

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Billies, printed
A. D. 1502,1577, 1579.

And there are
" eunuchs," who
have made them-
selves " eunuchs"
for the kingdom of
heaven.

Have not we
power to lead about
a " wife," a sister 1
&c. (1)

For cdmpianion,
they say, " yoke-
fellow." (2)

"Wedlock is hon-
ourable among all
men," &c. (3)

— " All men can-
not receive this say-
ing " &c. (4)

There are some
"chaste," which
have made them-
selves " chaste" for
the kingdom of hea-
ven. (5)

The^Tii^t TMnslatioii lH

the Protestant Bible, Ed

Lon., an. 1033.

Instead of *' wrj-
man/' they trans-
late " wife," here
also.

— « Yokefellow."

" Marriage is hon-
ouVable in all."

— " All men can-
not receive this say-
ing/' &c.

Cotrectet'

"THB SINGLE LIVES OF PRIBST9.

(1) " If," says St. Hierom, " none of the
laity, or of the faithful, can pray, unless he for-
bear conjugal duly, .priests, to whom it belongs
to offer sacrifices for the people, are always to
pray ; if to pray always, therefore perpetually to
live single or unmarried.'' (o) But our late pre-
tended reformers, the more to profane the sacred
order of priesthood to which continency and
single life have always been annexed in the New
Testament, and to make it merely laical and
popular, will have all to be married men : yea,
those that have vowed to the contrary : and it is
a great credit among them, for apostate priests
to take wives. And therefore, by their falsely
corrupting this text of St. Paul, they will needs
have him to say, that he, and the rest of the apos-
tles, " led their wives about with them," (as King
Edward the Sixth's German apostles did theirs,
when they came first into England, at the call of
the Lord-protector Seymour ;) whereas the
apostle says nothing else, but a woman, a sis-
ter ; meaning such a Christian woman as fol-
lowed Christ and the apostles, to find and main-
tain them with their substance. So does St.
Hierom interpret it, (A) and St. Augustine also,
both directly proving, that it cannot be translated
" wife." (-2) Neither ought this text to be trans-
lated " yoke-fellow," as our innovators do, en
purpose to make it sound in English, " man and
w^ife ;" indeed, Calvin and Beza translate it in
the masculine gender, for a " companion." And
St. Theonhylact, a Greek father, saith, that " if
St. Paul nad spoken of a woman, it should have
been yrjita, in Greek." St. Paul says himself,
he had no wife, (1 Cor. vii.) and I think we
have a little more reason to believe him, than
those who would gladly have him married on
purpose to cloak the sensuality of a few fallen
priests. In the first chapter of the Acts, ver.
14, Beza translates, cum exorihus, " with their
wives," because he would have all the apostles
there esteemed as married men ; whereas the
words our cum mulierihus, " with the women," as
our English translations also have it ; because,
in this place, they were ashamed to follow their
master Beza.

(3) A0AI.V, for the marriage of priests, and
all sorts of men indifTerently, they corrupt this
text, making two falsifications in one verse : the
one is, " among all men :" the other, that they
make it an affirtnatiTe speech, by adding " is ;"
whereas the apostle's words are these : " Mar-
riage honourable in all, and the bed undefiled ;"
which is rather an exhortation ; as if he should
say, " let marriage be honourable in all, and the
bed undefiled ;" as appears, both by that which
goes before, and that which follows immediate-
ly ; all which are exhortations. Let, therefore,

yo) St Hierom., lib. contr. Jovin., cap. 19 ; 1 Cor.
Tii. 5, 35.

(ft) Lib. 1, adveraus Jovin., do Op. Mod., cap. 4 ; Lib.
9. eap. 21.

Protestants give^ u» a reason out of the Groek
text, why the)' translate the words following, by
way of exhortation, " Let your conversation be
without covetousness ;" and not these words alsr
in like manner, " Let marriage be honourahle in
all." The phraseology and construction of both
are similar in the Greek.

(4) Moreover, it is against the profession of
continency in priests and others, that they trans-
late our Saviour's words respecting a " single
life," and the unmarried state, thus, " all men can-
not," &c., as though it were impossible to live
continent, where Christ said not, " that all men
cannot," but •' ail men do not receive this say.
ing." St. Augustine says, " Whosoever have
not this gift of chastity given them, it is eilhcl
bocause they will not have it, or because they
fulfil not that which they will ; and they thai
have this word, have it of God, and their own
free will." (e) " This gift," says Origcn, " ia
given to all that ask for it." (d)

(5) Nor do they translate this text exactly,
nor, perhaps, witln 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 as themselves are wont often to
allege, then their translation doth by no means
express our Saviour's meaning, when they say,
" there are some chaste, who have made them-
selves chaste," &c., for a man might say all do
so, who live chastely in matrimony. But our
Saviour speaks of such as have made themselves
eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven ; not by
cutting ofT those parts which belong to gene."
ration, for that would be an horrible and mortal
sin ; but by making themselves unable and
impotent for generation, by promise, and vow
of perpetual chastity, which is a spiritual ca.str?.
tioh of themselves.

St. Basil calls the marriage of the clergy
" fornication," and not " matrimony." " 0(
canonical persons," says he, " the fornication
must not be reputed matrimony, because the
conjimction of these is altogether prohibited ;
for this is altogether profitable for the security
of the church." And in his epistle to a certain
prelate, he cites these words from the Council
of Nice ; " It is by the great council forbidden,
in all cases whatsoever, that it should be lawful
for a bishop, priest, or deacon, or for any whom-
soever, that are in orders, to have a woman live
with them ; except only their mother, sister, or
aunt, or such persons as are void of all suspi-
cion. "(e)

(e) Lib. (le Gnfia et Liber. Arbitr., cap 4.
(4 Tract 7, in Matth.

(e) St. Basil, Ep. 1, ad Amphilcch. ; Kp 17, ad Pare-
gor. Presbyt. Con. Nice, in Cod. Grae. Can 3.

IX. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verw.

The Vulgate Latin TcxL

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Tranatution.

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Bibles, printed
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, E>l

Lon., an. 16S3,

Vets of
the Apos.
chap. xix.
verso 3.

Titus
shap. iii
verses 5, 6

" In qna, elg tl,
ergo hapttsali eslis?
qui dixerunt, " /n"
Johannis baplismate.
(1)

Non ex operihus
justititB, qua fecimus
nos, set! secundum
\uam tnisericordtam
siilvos UDS fecit ; per
lavacrum regenera-
tionts ct rcnuvulion-
is Spiritiis Sancli,
"quern effudit" m nos
abunde per Jesum
Christum Salvato-
rem nostrum. (2)

" In" what then
were you baj)tize(l ?
who said, " In"
John's baptism.

Not by the works
of justice, which we
(lid ; but according
to his mercy, he
hath saved us ; by
the laver of regene-
ration, and renova-
tion of the Holy
Ghost, " whom he
hath pourgd" upon
us abundantly, by.
Jesus Christ our
Saviour.

" Unto " what
then were you bap-
uzed ? " And they"
said, " Unto" John's
baptism. (1)

" Unto' what thcr
were ye baptized!
And they said, "Un-
to" John's baptism

— By the " foun-'
tain" of the regene-
ration of the Holy
■Ghost, " which he
shed on" us, &c.(2)

Not by works i.l
righteousressjwhich
we have done ; but
according to his
mere)', he saved us ;
by the" washing" of
regeneration,and re-
newing of the Holy
Ghost, " which he
shed" on us, &c.

THB SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM.

Is the begimiing of tho reformation, they not
only took away fi\e of the seven sacraments,
but also deprived the rest of all grace, virtue,
and efficacy ; making thetn no more than poor '
and beggarly elements ; at the most, no better
thin those of the' Jewish law. And this, be-
cause they would not have them by any means
helpful, or necessary towards our salvation ; for
the obtaining of which, they held and asserted,
that " faith alone was sufficient." (o)

For which reason Beza was not content to
say, with the apostle, (Rom. iv. 11,) " That
circumcision was a seal of the justice of faith ;"
but because he thought that term too low for
the dignity of circumcision, he (to use his own
words) " gladly avoids it ;" putting the verb
instead of the noun, quod obsignarct, for sigil-
lum. And in his annotations upon the sEime
place, he declares the reason of his so doing to
be, the dignity of circumcision equal with any
sacrament in the New Testament. His words
are, " What could be more magnificently spoken
of any sacrament ? Therefore, they that make
a real difference between the sacraments of the
Old Testament and ours, never seem to have
known how far Christ's office extendeth :" which
he says, not to magnify the old, but to disgrace
the new.

(1 ) This is also the cause, why the firstEnglish
Protestant translators corrupted this place in
the Acts, to make no difference between .lohn's
bHptism and Christ's, saying : " Unto what then
were you baptized ? And they said, Unto John's
baptism." Which Beza would have to be spoken
of John's doctrine, and not of his baptism in
water ; as if it had been said, " What doctrine
do ye profess ?" and they said, " Johns ;"
whereas, indeed, the question is, " In what
then ?" or " wherein were you baptized ?" and
they said, " In John's baptism ;" as if they would
say, we have received John's baptism, but not the
Holy Ghost, as yet : whence immediately follows,
' then they were baptized in the name of
lesus :" and after imposition of hands, " the
Holy Ghost came upun them :" whence appears,
the insufficiency of John's baptism, and the great
difference between it and Christ's. And this so
much troubles the Bezaites, that Beza himself
expresses his grief in these words : " It is not
necessary, that wheresoever there is mention of
John's baptism, we should think it the very
ceremony of baptism ; therefore they, who
gather that John's baptism differs from Christ's,
because these, a little after, arc said to be bap-
.ized in the name of Jesus Christ, have no sure
foundation." See his annotations on Acts xix.
Thus he endeavours to take away the foundation

(a) Twenty-fifth of tho Thirty-nine Articles.

of this Catholic conclusion, that John's baptism
differs from, and is far inferior to Christ's.

Beza confesses, that the Greek «f5 " is oflen
used for " wherein"' or '■ wherewith :" as it is in
the Vulgate Latin, and Erasmus ; but he, and
liis followers, think it signifies not so here ;
though but the second verse after, (verse 5,)
the very same Greek phrase clg i6 Svo^u is by
them translated "In;" where they say, " that
they were baptized in," not unto, tho name of
Jesus Christ.

(2) But no wonder, if they disgraced the
baptism of Christ, when some (A) of them durst
presume to take it away, by interpreting these
words of the Gospel : " Unless a man be born
again of water, and the Spirit," &c., in this
manner, " Unless a man be born again of water,
that is, the Spirit," as if by water, in this place,
were only meant the Spirit allegorically. and not
material water : as though our Saviour had said
to Nicodemus : " Unless a man be born again of
water, I mean of the Spirit, he cannot enter into
the kingdom of heaven." To which purpose,
Calvin as falsel)' translates the apostle's words
to Titus (c) thus : Per lavacrum regenerationis
Spirilus Sancti, quod effudil in nos abunde ;
making the apostle say : " That God poured the
water of regeneration upon us abundantly ;" that
is, " the Holy Ghost :" and lest we should not
understand him, he tells us, in his commentary
on this place, " that the apostle, speaking of
water poured out abundantly, speaks not of ma-
terial water, but of the Holy Ghost :" whereus
the apostle makes not " water" and the " Holy
Ghost" all one ; but most plainly distinguishes
them ; not saying, that " water" was poured out
upon us, as they would infer, by translating it
" which he shed ;" but the " Holy Ghost, whom
he hath poured out upon us abundantly." So
that here is meant both the material water, or
washing of baptism, and the effect thereof, which
is, the Holy Ghost poured out upon us.

But, if I blame our English translators, in
this place, for making it indifferent, either
" which fountain," or " which Holy Ghost he
sheU," &c., they will tell me, that the Greek is
also indifferent : but, if we demand of them,
whether the Holy Ghost, or rather a fountain ol
water, may be said to be shed, they must doubt-
less confess, not the Holy Ghost, but water :
and consequently, lhei.r translating " which ho
shed," instead of " whom he poured out," would
have it denote the " fountain of water ;" thereby
agreeing with Calvin's translation, and Beza's
commentary ; for Beza, in his translation, refers
it to the Holy Ghost, as Catholics do.

(A) Beza in Jo. iv. 10, and inTit.iii. 5.
(c) Calvin's Translation in Tit. iji. 5.

-PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AOAIN8T

The Book,

The true English accord-

Corruptions in the Pro-

The last Translation <A

Chapter,
and V erse.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

ing to the Rhemlsh

testant Bibles, printed

the Protestant Bible, Ed

Translation.'

A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

Lon., an- 1683.

St. James

" Confltemini, "

" Confess," there-

" Acknowledge "

" Confess " your

chap. V.

kiofioioyeto&s, ergo.

fore.your "sins" one

your " faults " one

" faults," &c.

verse 16.

alter utrum " pec-
eala" vestra. {]!)

to another.

to another. (1)

St. Matth.

— Si in Tyro et

— If in Tyre and

Beza in all his

Instead of « they

chap. xi.

Sidonefaclts essent

Sidon had been

translations has,

had done penance,"

verse 21 ;

virlutes, qute fact<B

wrought the mira-

" they had amended

they say, " tlicy

St. Luke

sunt in nobis, olim in

cles that have been

their lives." kni

would have repen'

chap. X.

cilicioet cinere " p(B-

done in you, " they

our other transla-

ted."

verse 13.

nitentiam egissent "

had done penance"'

tions say, " they

(tetei'dijaup. (2)

in sackcloth and
ashes, long ere now.

would have repen-
ted." (2)

St. Matth.

•'PcRnitenliam agfte,"

" Do penance," for

" Repent," for the

" Riepenti" &c.

chap, iil

appropinquabit enim

the kingdom of hea-

kingdom of heaven

verse 2.

regnum ccelorum.

ven is at hand.

is at hand.

St. Luke

Predicans baptis.

— Preaching the

Preaching the bap-

— Preaching the

chap. iii.

mum " painitenli(B."

baptism of " pe-

tism of " repen-

baptism of " repen-

verse 3.

nance."

tance."

St. Luke

Facite ergo fructus

Yield, therefore.

— Worthy of "re^

— Fruit worthy of

chap. iii.

dignos "piEnitentice."

fruits worthy of

pentance." Beza

" repentance

verse 8.

" penance."

says, "Do fruits
meet for them that
amend their lives."

rtCtS of

Petrus vera ad

But Peter said to

— " Repent," and

— " Rfepent » and

the Apos.

illos " panilentiam

theiny "do penance,"

be every one of you

be baptized, &c.

chap. ii.

{inquil) agite," el

and be every one of

baptized, &c.

veise 38.

baplizelur unusquis-
que vestrum in no-

you baptized in the
name of JesusChrist.

mine J esu Ckristi.

CONFESSION AXD THE SACr,AMEN'T OV TESAVCK,

5!»

( 1 ) To avoid this term " confession," especially
in this place, whence the reader might easily
gather " sacramental confession," they thus fal-
sify tlie text. It is said a little before, " if any
be sick, let him bring in the priests," &c. . An<l
then it follows, " confess your sins," &c. But
they, to make sure work, say, acknowledge,
instead of confess ; and for priests, " elders,"'
and for sins, they had rather say faults ; " ac-
knowledge your faults," to make it sound among
the ignorant common people, as different as they
can from the usual Caiholic phrase, " Confess
jour sins." What mean they by this ?" If this
acknowledging of faults one to another, before
death, be indifferently made to all men, wh}' do
they appoint in their common prayer-book, (a)
(as it seems, out of this place.) that the sick
person shall make a special confession to the
minister; and he shall absolve him in the very
same form of absolution that Catholic priests
use in the sacrament of penance ? And again,
seeing themselves acknowledge forgiveness of
sins by the minister, why do they not reckon
penance, of which confession is a part, amongst
the sacraments ? But, I suppose, when they
translated their Bibles, they were of the same
judgment with the ministers of the diocess of
Lincoln, (b) who petitioned to have the words
of absolution blotted out of the common prayer-
book ; but when they visit the sick, they are of
the judgment of Roman Catholics, who, at this
day, hold confession and absolution ngcessary to
salvation, as did also the primitive Christians.
Witness St. Basil : " Sins must necessarily be
opened unto those, to whom the dispensations
of God's mysteries is committed." St. Am-
brose : ". If thou desirest to be justified, confess
thy sin : for a sincere confession of sins dissolves
the knot of iniquity." (c)

(2) As for penance, and satisfaction for sins,
they utterly deny it, upon the heresy of, " only
faith justifying and saving a man." Beza pro-
tests, that he avoids these terms, fteiuvoiit,
ptznilenlia, and /teitttoetje, pmnilentiant agite,
of purpose : and says, that in translating these
Greek words, he will always use, resipiscentia
and resipiscile, " amendment of life," and " amend
your lives." And our English Bibles, to this
day, dare not venture on the word penance,
but only repentance ; which is not only far
different from the Greek word, but even from
thn very circumstance of the text; as is evi-
dent from those words of St. MatA. xi., and
Luke X., were these words, "sackcloth and
QshfS," cannot but signify more than the word
repentance, or arnelidment of life can denote ;
as is plain from these words of St Basil, («/)

{a) VUitatidn of fne Sick.

ib) Survey of the Common Prayer-Book.

{c) St. Basil in Regulis Bievior., Interrogatione 288.
St. Amb., lib, de Pcenit., cap. fi.

(i/) St Basil in Psalm xxix ; SI Aug Horn. 27- Inter-
50 H et Ep. 108; Sozom,, Lib 7, cap. 16. See St.
Hirrrin in Epitaph Fabiol.

" Sackcloth makes for penance , Tor the fathers,
in old time, silting in sackcloth and ashes, did
penance " Do not St. John Baptist, and St.
Paul, plainly signify penitential works, when
they exhort us to " do fruits worthy of penance •"
which penance St. Augustine thus declares ;
"There is a more grievous and more mournful
penance, whereby properly they are called in
the church, that are penitents • removed also
from partaking the sacrament of the altar." And
Sozomen, in his ecclesiastical history, says, " In
the Church of Rome, there is a manifest and
known place for the penitents, and in it they
stand sorrowful, and as it were mourning, and
when the sacrifice is ended, being not made par-
takers thereof, with weeping and lamentations
they cast themselves far on the ground : then
the bishop, weeping also with compassion, lifts
them up ; and, after a certain time enjoined,
absolves them from their penance. This the
priests or bishops of Rome keep, from the very
beginning, even until our time."

Not only Sozomen, but (e) Socrates also, and
all the ancient fathers, when they speak ol
penitents, that confessed and lamented their
sins, and were enjoined penance, and performed
it, did always express it in the said Greek wards ;
which, therefore, are proved most ecidently to
signify penance, and doing penance. Again,
when the ancient Council of Laodicea (_/") says,
that the time of penance should be given to
offenders, according to the proportion of the
fault : and that such shall not communicate till
a certain time ; but after they have done pen-
ance, and confessed their fault, {g) are then to
be received : and when the first Council of Nice
speaks of shortening or prolonging the days of
penance : when (h) St. Basil speaks after the
same manner ; when St. Chrysostoin calls the
sackcloth and fasting of the Ninevites, for cer-
tain days, " Tol dierum pcEnitenliam, so many
days of penance :" in all these places, I wo>ild
demand of our translators of the Enghsh Bible,
if all these speeches of penance, and doing
penance, are not expressed by the said Greek
words ? and I would ask them, whether in these
places, where there is mentioned a proscribed
time of satisfaction for sin, by such and such
penal means, they will translate repentance and
amendment of life only ? Moreover, the Latin
Church, and all the ancient fathers thereof,
have always read, as the Vulgate Latin inter-
preter translates, and do all expound the same
penance, and doing penance : for example, see
St. Augustine, among others ; (j) where you
will find it plain, that he speaks of " penitential
works, for satisfaction of sins'"

(/) Council of Laodicea, Can. 2, 9, et 19

(,e) 1 Council of Nice, Can. 12.

(A) St, Basil, cap. 1, ad Aniphiloch.

{i) St. AnKU3t.,Ep. 108.

XI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS A0AIN9T

The Bciok,

The true English accord-

Corniptions in the Pro-

The last Ttanslation rrt

Chapter,

The Vulgate Latin Text.

ing to th« Rhemish

testant Billies, printed

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

ana Verse.

Trans.'.ition.

A. D. 1562, 1577, 1578.

I.on., an. 1G83.

St. Luke

Ave, " gratia

Hail, " full of

Hail, " thou that

In Bib. 1637

■jhap. i.

plena,'" Dominus U

grace," our Lord is

art freely beloved."

Hail, " thou that art

verse 28.

cum, xexagnat/iivi].

with thee.

In Bib. 1577, "thou

highly favoured." In

(1)

that art in high fa-
vour." (1)

Bib. 1683, Hail,
" thou that art high,
ly favoured," our
Lord is with thee.

St. Matth.

Et " vocavit" no-

And " called" his

And "he" called

And " he" called

chap. i.

nomen ejus Jesum,

name Jesus.

his name Jesus. (2)

his name Jesus.

rerse 25.

xai CKixlsae to ovojia
OUT8 InoBV. (2)

Genesis

" Ipsa" conteret

"She" shall braise

" It" shall bruise

"It" shall bruise

chap. iii.

caput tuum, et tu

thy head in pieces,

thy head, and thou

verso 15.

" insidiaberis" eal-

and " thou shalt lie

shalt " bruise his

shalt " bruise hie

eaneo ejus. (3)

in wait for her heel."

heel." (3)

heel."

2 St. Peter

Dabo autem operant

And I will do my

I will endeavour

I will endoavonr,

chap. i.

et frequenter habere

endeavour; you to

that you may be

that yon may bo

Terse 15.

vos post obitum me-

have often after my

able, after my de-

able after my de-

um, nt " horum me-

decease also, that

cease, to have these

cease,to have "these

moriam" factatis.{4)

you may keep a

things " always in

things always in re.

"memory of these

remembrance." (4)

membrance."

things."

Psttlm

Nimis honorificati

Thy friends,

How dear are

How precious aim

cxxxviii.

sunt amid tut, "'''■n,

God, are become

thy counsels (or

are thy thoughts un-

Eng. Uib.,

01 (fiXoi an, Deus ! ni-

exceedingly honour-

thoughts) to me ?

to me, God ! How

cxxxix.

mis cnnfortatus est

able ; their prince-

! how great is tho

great is the sura of

vrerse 17.

pnncipatus eorum,
axixa*. (5)

dom is exceedingly
strengthened.

sum of them ? (5)

them !

THE HONOUR OF OtTR nr.ESSKD t.ADY AND OTHER SAINTS.

(1)The most blessed Virgin, and glorious
mother of Christ, has by God's holy Church
always been honoured with most magnificent,
titles and addresses. One of the first four general
councils gives her the transcendent title »f the
motherol^ God. (a) And by St. Cyril of Alexan-
dria, she is saluted in these words, " Hail ! holy
mother of God, rich treasure of the world, ever-
shining lamp, crown of purity, and sceptre of true
doctrine ; by thee the holy Trinity is every where
blessed and adored, the heavens exult, angels
rejoice, and devils are chased from us : who so
surpasse,s in elegance, as ' to be able to say
enough to the glory of Mary ?" Yea, the angel
Gabriel is commissioned from God to address
himself to her with this salutation, " Hail I full
of grace."(i) Since which time, what has ever
i)een more common, and, at this d;iy, more gen-
eral and useful in all Christian countries, than in
the Ave Maria to say, gratia plena, " full of
grace ?' But, in our miserable land, the holy
prayer, which every child used to say, is not only
banished, but the very text of scripture wherein
onr blessed Lady was saluted by the angel,
•' Hail ! full of grace," they have changed into
another manner of salutation, viz., " Hail ! thou
that art freely beloved," or, " in high favour."
(c) I v/ould gladly know from them, why this,
or that, or any other thing, rather than " Hail !
full of p;race ?" St. John Baptist was full of the
Holy Ghost, even from his birth ; St. Stephen
was "full of grace,((i) why may not then our Lady
be .(filltd " full of grace," who, as St. Ambrose
s&ys, " only obtained the grace which no other
wcman deserved, to be replenished with the au-
thor of grace ?"

If they say, the Greek word does not signify
so : I must ask them, why they translate ^ixfti-
fieiofT, (e) ulcernsus, '• full of sores," and will
not translate xex"Q^""f^''1^ gratiosa, " full of
graced" Let them tell us what difference there is
in the nature and significancy of these two words.
If ulcrrosus, ax Beza translates it, .be "full of
sores," why is not gratiosa, as Erasmus trans-
lates it, " full of grace V seeing that all such
adjectives in osus signify fulness, as periculosus,
(Brumnosus, &c , as every school-boy knows.
What syllable is there in this word, that seems
to make it signify " freely beloved ?" St. Chry-
sostom, and the Greek doctors, who should best
know the nature of this Greek word, say, that
it signifies to make gracious and acceptable.
St. Athanasius, a Greek doctor, says, that our
blessed Lady had this title, xF^fiigiiaiud'rj, be-
cause the Holy Ghost descended into her, filling
her with all graces and virtues. And St. Hieroni
reads gralta phvn, and says plainly, she was so
saluted, " full of grace," because she conceived
tiim in whom all fulness of the Deity dwelt
corporallj'. {/)

(2) Again, to take fiom the holy mother of
God, what honour they can, they translate,

{a) Cone Eph„ cap. 13 (i) St. Luke i. 18.

(c) St. Luke i. 15. (,/) Act.=^ vli. 8 (e) Luke xvi, 20.
(/) St. Chys. Comment, in Ep. 1 ; St Athan. de S
Di-ipar; St Hieron). in Ep 140 in ExpoM. P.sal x\a.

that " he (viz. Joseph) called his name Jesus."
And why not she, as well as he ? For in St
Luke, the angel sailh to our Lady al.so,
" Thou shall call his name Jesus." Have
we not much more reason to think that the
blessed Virgin, the natural mother of our
Saviour, gave liim the name Jesus, than Joseph,
his reputed father; seeing also St. MattJiew
in this place, limits it neither to him nor her'
And the angel revealed the name first unlo her,
saying, that she should so call him. And the
Hebrew word, Isa. vii., whereunto the angel
alludes, is the feminine gender ; and by the great
Rabbins referred unto her, saying expressly,
in their commentaries, et vocabit ipsa puetta,
&c., " and the maid herself shall call his name
Jesus." (g)

(3) How ready our new controllers of antiquity
and the approved ancient Latin translation, are
to find fault with this text, Gen. iii., " She shall
bruise thy head," &c., because it appertains fo our
blessed Lady's honour ; saying, that all ancient
fathers read ipsum : (h) when on the contrary,
St. Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine,
St. Gregory, St. Bede, St. Bernard, and many
others, read ipsa, as the Latin text now does.
And though some have read otherwise, yet,
whether we read " she" shall bruise, or " her
seed," that is, her Son, Christ Jesus, we attri-
bute no more, or no less to Christ, or to his
mother, by this reading or by that ; as you may
see, if you please to read the annotations upon
this place in the Dovvay Bible. I have spoken
of this in the preface.

(4) Where the scripture, in the original, is
ambiguous and indifferent to divers senses, it
ought not to be restrained or limited by trans-
lation, unless there be a mere necessity, when it
can hardly express the ambiguity of the original.
As for example, in this wliere St. Peter speaks
so ambiguously, either that he will remember
them after his death, or that they shall remember
him. But the Calvinists restrain the sense of
this place, without any necessity; and that
against the prayer and intercession of saints for
us, contrary to the judgment of some of the
Greek fathers ; who concluded from it, " that
the saints in heaven remember us on earth, and
make intercession for us."

(5) In fine, this verse of the Psalms, (i)
which is by the church and all antiquity read
thus, and both sung and said in honour of the
holy apostles, agreeably to that in another Psalm,
" Thou shall appoint them princes over all the
earth," they translate contrary both to the
Hebrew and the Greek, which is altogether

' according to the said ancient Latin translation,
I " How are the heads of them strengthened, or
their princedoms ?" And this they do, pur-
posely to detract from the honour of the aposf
ties and holy saints.

(g) Rabbi Abraham et Rabbi David.
(A) See the Annot. upon this place in the Doway Bible
(r) Oecum. in Caten. Gagneius in hunc locum. Psa.
Tsliv

Xi:. PROTESTANT TEANSLATroN \GAISST '

The Book,

The true £nglish«coor(i-

Corruptions in the Pro-

The last Translation of

Cliaptcr,

The Vulgate Latin Text.

ing to the Rhemish

teetaitt Bibles, printed

'he Protestant Bible, Ed

and \eiHe.

Translation.

A. V. 1562, 1577, 1579.

Lon., an. 1663

Hebrews

. Fide, Jacob mo-

By faith, Jacob

— -And "leanincr

By faith Jacob,

chap. xi.

riens, singulos filio-

dying, blessed every

on the end of his

when he was a-dv-

verse 21.

rum Joseph bene

one of the sons of

staff, worshipped

ing, blessed both tht

dixit, et " adoravit

Joseph, and "adored

God." (1)

sons of JosejA, "and

fasligium virga

the top of his rod."

worshipped, leaning

ejus," nqoaexivrjOBV

upon the top of his

in't 10 SxQoy t^$ qu§Sa

staff."

&iTa. (1)

Genesis

" Aioramt Israel

" Israel adored

" Israel worship-

And "Israel bowed

chap, xlvii.

Deum, conversus ad"

God, turning to" the

ped God towards"

himself upon" the

verse 31.

lecluli caput.

bed's head.

the bed's head. (2)

bed's head.

Ps. xcviii.

Exaltate Domi-

Exalt the Lord

Exalt tho Loid

rerse 5.

num Deum nostrum-

our God, " and

our God, and " fall

our God, and •'•wor-

Eng. Bib.,

" el adiiriite scabel.

adore ye the foot-

down before" his

slii|> at his footstool,"

xcix.

lum pedum ejus,"

stool of his feet,"

footstool, "for he"

" for ho" is hi>ly.

quoniam sanctum est.

•

"because it" is holy.

is holy.

Ps. cxxxi.

Introihimus in

Wo will enter in-

— We will "fall

We will go info

rerse 7.

tabernaculum ejus.

to his tabernacle,

dow n be fore his foot-

hia tabernacles, we

Eng Bib.,

" adorabimus in loco

we will " adore in

stool "

will "worship at hia

cxxxii.

ubt steterunt pedes
ejus."

the place where his
feet etood."

footstool."

THR DISTINCTION OF RELATIVE AND i)IVI\B WORSHIP.

(1 ) The sacred Council of Trent decrees, that
•■ tlie images of Christ, of the virgin mother of
Rod, and of other saints, are to be had and re-
tained, especially in churches; and that due
honour and worship is to be imparted unto them :
not that any divinity is believed to be in them;
or virtue, for which they are to be worshipped ;
or tnat any thing is to be begged of them ; or
Jiat hope is to be put in them ; as, in times past,
the Pagans did, who put their trust in idols ; but
because the honour which is exhil\i»id lo them,
is referred to the archetype, which they resem-
bl-? : so that, by the images which we Idss, and
beiore which we uncover our heads, and kneel,
we adore Christ and his saints, whose likeness
they bear." (a) And the second Council of
Nice, which confirmed the ancient reverence
due to sacred images, tells us, " That these
images the faithful salute with a kiss, and give
an honorary worship to them, but not the true
latria, or divine worship, which is according to
faith, and can be given to none but to God him-
self." (6) Between which degree of worship,
latria and dulia, Protestants are so loath to make
any distinction, that, in this place, they restrain
the scripture to the sense of one doctor ; inso-
much that they make the commentary of St.
Augustine, (peculiar to him alone.) the very text
of scripture, in their translation ; thereby exclu-
ding all other senses and expositions of other
faihers ; who either read and expound, that
" Jacob adored the top of Joseph's sceptre ;" or
else, that " he adored towards the top of his
sceptre :" besides which two meanings, there is
no other interpvetalion of this place, in all anti-
quity, but in St. Augustine only, as Beza him-
self confesses. And here they add two words
more than are in the Greek text, " Leaning
and God :" forcing di/rou to signify ikvjov, which
may be, but is as rare as virg<B ejus, for virgm
sum ; and turning the other words clear out of
their order, place, and form of construction,
which they must needs have correspondent and
answerable to the Hebrew te.xt, from whence
they were translated ; which Hebrew words
themselves translate in this order, " He wor-
shipped towards the bed's head ;" and if so,
according to the Hebrew, then did he worship
" towards the top of his sceptre," according
to the Greek ; the difference of both being only
in these words, sceptre and bed ; because the
Hebrew is ambiguous as to both, and not in the
order and construction of the sentence.

(VJ) Bui why is it, that they thus boldly add
in one place, and take away in another ? Why
do they add " leaned, and God" in one text

1 a) Concil Trident. , Sess 25.
Ci) ConcU. Nicoa. Act 7.

and totally suppress "worshipped &)()" in
another ? Is it not because they are afraid, lest
those expressions might warrant and conl/.m
the Catholic and Christian manner of adoring
our Saviour Christ, towards the holy cross, or
before his image, the crucifix, the altar, &c. ?
And tho.ugh they make so much of the Greek
particle, 67it, as to translate it, " leaning upon,"
rather than " towards ;" yet the ancient Greek
fathers (c) considered it of such little iiBporl
that they expounded and read the text, as if it
were for the phrase only, and not for any signi-
fication at all ; saying, " Jacob adored Joseph's
sceptre ; the people of Israel adored the temple,
the ark, the holy mount, the place where his feel
stood," and the like : whereby St. Damascene
proves the adoration of creatures, named dulia ;
to wit, of the cross, and of sacred images. If, 1
say, these fathers make so little force of the
prepositions, as to infer from these texts, not
only adoration " towards" the thing, but ado-
ration " of" the thing ; how come these, our new
translators, thus to strain and rack the little
particle, st", to make it signify " leaning upon,"
and utterly to exclude it from signifying any
thing tending towards adoration ?

I would gladly know of them, whether in
these places of the Psalms there be any force in
the Hebrew prepositions ? Surely no more than
if we should say in English, without preposi-
tions, " adore ye his holy will : we will adore the
place where his feet stood: adore ye his foot-
stool;" for they know the same preposition .s
used also, when it is said, " adore ye our Lord ;"
or, as themselves translate it, " worship the
Lord ;" where there can be no force nor signi
fication of the preposition : and therefore, in
these places, their translation is corrupt aiu)
wilful ; when they say, " we will fall down be-
fore," or, " at his footstool," &c. Where they
shun and avoid, first, the term of adoration,
which the Hebrew and Greek duly express, by
terms correspondent in both languages througli-
out the Bible, and are applied, for the most
part, to signify adoring of creatures. Secondly,
they avoid the Greek phrase, which is, at least,
to adore " towards" these holy things and
pi ices: and much more the Hebrew phrase,
wiich is, to adore the very things rehearsed
" To adore God's footstool," (as the Psalmist
saith,) " because it is holy," or, " because he is
holy," whose footstool it is, as the Greek read-
eth. And St. Augustine so precisely and reli-
giously reads, " adore ye his footstool," that he
examines the case ; and finds, thereby, that the
blessed sacrament must be adored, and that x\u
good Christian takes it, before he adores it.

CJ4

XIII.-

-PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Kook,

Chapter,

and veree.

Coloss.
chap. iii.
viirse 5.

Ephesiana
chap. V.
verae 5.

2 Corinth,
chap. ri.
verse 16.

1 £p. John
chap. V.
verse 21.

1 Corinth.
chap. X.
vtrse 7.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Et avaritiam, qua:
est " simutacroTum
servitus," etdiuioXai.
pEia. (1)

The true English accord

ing to the Rhemish

Translation.

— Aul avarus, quod
est " idolorum ser-
vitus."

Quis autem con-
sensus templo Dei
cum "idolisVeidailwv

(2)

Filioli, custodite
vos a " timulacris.'"
stdiaXotv.

" Neque idolatry
eiSiaXoknj^ai, efficia-
mint," sicut quidam
ex ipsis.

— And avarice,
which is the " ser-
vice of idols."

— Or covetous per-
son, which is " the
service of idols."

And what agree-
ment hath the tem-
ple of God with
"idols?"

My little children,
keep . yourselves
from " idols."

" Neither become
ye idolaters," as
certain of them.

Corru:(jtions in the Pro-
testant Bibles, printed
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

— And covetotis-
ness, which is the
" worshipping of
images." (1)

The list Translation of

the Htotcstant Bible, Ed

Lon., an. 1683.

— And covetous
ness, which is "idb
latry.'

— Or covetous
man, which is " a
worshipper of im-
ages."

Corrected.

How agreeth the
temple of God with
" images ?" (2)

Babes, keep your-
selves from " im-
ages."

" Be not ■ wor-
shippers of images,"
as some of them.

Corrected

Corrected.

Corrected alsi in
this.

HACKED IMAGES.

{l^ Before I proceed in this, let me ask our
English translators, what is the most proper,
and best English ofVtSuilov, eiiSoiXoWryi;;, e(Siiilo.
iiirifeiii ; iriulum, idolatra, idnlatria? Is it not
idol, idolator, idolatry? Are not these plain
English words, and well known in our lan-
gna^e? Why then need they put three words
for one, " worshipper of images," and " wor-
Bhipping of images?" Whether is the more
natural and convenient speech, either in our
English tongue, or for the truth of the thing to
say, as the holy scripture does, "covetousness
is iilolatry ;" and consequently, '• the covetous
man is an idolator;" or to say, as their first ab-
surd translations have it, " covetousness is
worshipping of images," and the " covetous man
is a worshipper of images ?" I suppose they will
scarcely deny, but that there are many covetous
Protestants, and, perhaps, of their clergy too,
that may be put in the list with those of whom
the apostle speaks, when he says, there are
some " whose belly is their god." And though
these make an idol of their money, and their
bellies, by covetousness and gluttony, yet they
would doubtless take it ill of us, if in their
own scripture language, we should call them
'• worshippers of images." Who sees not,
therefore, what great difference there is be-
tween " idol" and " image," " idolatry" and
"worshipping of images ?" even so much is
there between St. Paul's words, and the Pro-
testant translation ; but because in their latter
translations they have corrected this shameful
absiu-dity, I will say no more of it.

(2) I.v this other, not only their malice, but
their full intent and set purpose of deluding the
poor simple people appear ; this translation being
made when images were plucking down through-
out England, to create in the people a belief, that
the apostle spoke against sacred images in
churches ? whereas his words are against the
idols and idolatry of the Gentiles ; as is plain
from what goes before, exhorting them not to
join with infidels ; for, says he, " How agreeth
the temple of God with idols ?" not " with
images," for " images" might be had without
sin, as we see the Jews had the images of the
cherubim and the figures of oxen in the temple,
and the image of the brazen serpent in the
wilderness, by God's appointment ; though, as
6i>on as they began to make an idol of the
serpent, and adore it as their god, it could no
longer be kept without sin. By this corrupt
custom of translating image, instead of idol, they
80 bewitched their deceived followers, as to
make them despise, contemn, and abandon even
the very sign and image of salvation, the cross
pf Christ, and the crucifix , whereby the man-
ner of his bitter death and passion is represent-
ed ; notwithstanding their signing and marking

their children with it in their baptism, when
they are first made Christians.

By such wilfid corruptions, in theso and othei
texts, as, " Be not worshippers of images, as
son\e (if them ;" and, " Babes, keep yourselves
from images ;" which, the more to impress on
the minds of the vulgar, they wrote upon their
church walls ; the people were animated to
break down, and cast out of their churches, the
images of our blessed Saviour, of his blessed
mother, the twelve apostles, &c., with so full
and general a resolution of defacing and extir-
pating all tokens or marks of our Saviour's pas-
sion, that they broke down the very crosses from
the tops of church steeples, where they could
easily come to them. And though, in their
latter translations, they have corrected this cor-
ruption ; yet do some of the people so freshly,
to this day, retain the malice impressed by il
upon their parents, that they have presumed to
break the cross lately set on the pinnacle of the
porch of Westminster abbey : and the more to
show their spite towards that sacred sign of our
redemption — the holy cross — they placed it, not
long since, upon the foreheads of bulls and
mastifl!"dogs, and so drove them through the
streets of London, to the eternal shame of such
as receive it in their baptism, and pretend to
Christianity. AVhat could Jews or Infidels have
done more ? Was it not enough to break it
down from the tops of churches, and to put up
the image of a dragon, (the figure wherein the
devil himself is usually represented,) as on Bow
Church, («) in the midst of the city, but they
must place it so contemptuously on the fore-
heads of beasts and dogs ?

In how great esteem the holy cross was had
by primitive Christians, the fathers of those days
have sufficiently testified in their writings .
" This cross," says St. Chrysostom, " we may
see solemnly used in houses, in the market, in
the desert, in the ways, on mountains and hills,
in valleys," &c., contrary to which', the pretend-
ed reformers of our times have not only cast it
out of their houses, but out of- their churches
also : they have broken it down from all market-
places, from hills, mountains, valleys, and high-
ways ; so that in all the roads in England there
is not one cross left standing entire, that I have
ever heard of, except one called llal|)h cros.s,
which I have often seen, upon a wild heath or
mountain, near Danby forest, in the north ridiuj?
of Yorkshire, (i)

(a) Why might not a cock (the animal by which nut
Saviour was pleased to admonish St. Peter of his siti.s,
have been placed upon Covent Garden Church, rather
than a serpent l or a cross on Bow Church, lather than
a dragon 1

(i) The inhabitants of Danby, Rosdale, Westerdale,
and Ferndale, may glory before all parts of England.
that they have a cross standing to this day in the iTitdsf
of them.

XIV. PROTKSTA.NT THANSI.ATIO.Nb AQAINST

Th« Book.

Chapter,

and Verse.

1 Corinth,
chap. V.
vor. 9, 10.

Romans
ubap. xi.
verse 4.

.^cts of
the Apos..
chap. xix.
verse 35.

Exodus
chap. XX.
verse 4.

.The V.lgale Lalin Text.

Scripsi vohis in
rpislola, ne commis-
ccamini fornicariis,
non vtique fornica-
riis Imjus tiwndi, aul
avaris, aul rapL^i-
biis, aul " idnlis ser-
vienlibus" EiSiaXolAz-
gulg, ahoquin debue-
ratis de hoc rnundo
exiisse : nunc autem
scripsi vohis non
commisccri ; si is qui
fraler nominalur, est
fornicator, uut aoa-
rus, aut " idolis ser-
viens.'&'C, fiSoti-oXdr.
?«'?. (1)

Reliqui mthi sep-
tem millia virorum
qui non curvaverunt
genua " ante Baal."
(2)

Vin Ephesi, quis
enim est hominum,
qui nesciat Ephesio-
rum civitatem cultri-

magntE
" Jovis

cem esse
Dianis et

prolix?" TB HiongiBi ?

Non fades tibi
"sculptite," ^OD, stdo).
Xoy.

The trjv .Giiidish accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

I wrote to you in
an epistle, not to
keep company with
fornicators ; 1 mean,
not , the fornicators
of this world, or the
covetous, or: the ex-
tortioners, or " ser-
vers of idols ;" other-
wise you should
have gone out of this
world.

But now I have
writ to you, not to
keep company ; if
he that is named a
brother be a forni-
cator, or covetous
person, or a " ser-
ver of idob," &c

Corrtptions in the Pro-
testant Hihles, printed
». I) 1562, 1577, 1579.

I have left me
seven thousand men
that have not bowed
their knees to Baal.

Ye men of Ephe-
sus, for what man is
there that knoweth
not the city of the
Ephesians to be a
worshipper of great
Diana, and " Jupi-
ter's child ?"

Thou shalt not
make to thyself any
graven thing."

1 wrote to you
" that you should"
not company with
fornicators : " and"
I " meant" not " all
of" the fornicators
of this world,"eilher
of" the covetous, or
extortioners, "either
the idolaters," &c.

But " that ye"
company not " toge-
ther ;" if " any" that
is " called" a bro-
ther be a fornica-
tor, or covetous, or
a " worshipper of
images," &c. (1)

The last Translation o.

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon. an. 1683.

It is corrected in
this Bible.

I have left me
seven thousand men
that have not bowed
their knees to " the
image of" Baal. (2)

Instead of " Ju-
piter's child," they
translate "the image
which came down
from Jupiter."

Thou shalt not
make to thyself any
graven image."

I have left mo
seven thousand men
that have not bowed
their knees to " the
image of" Baal

And here they
translate, " the im-
age which fell down
from Jupiter."

Thou shalt not
make to thoe aty
" graven imago."

TIIK USB OF SACKED IMAv.

(1) How malicious iind heretical was their
intention, who, in this one sentence, made St.
Paul seem to speak two distinct things, calling
the Pagans " idolaters," and such wicked
Christians as should commit the same impiety,
" worshij)pers of images ;" whereas the apostle
uses but one and the self-same Greek word, in
speaking both of Pagans and Christians ? It is a
wilful and most notorious corruption ; for, in the
first place, the translators, speaking of Pagans,
r.eiulor the word in the text " idolater ;" but, in
the latter palt of the verse, speaking of Chris-
tians, they translate the very same Greek word,
" worshipper of images," and what reason had
they for this, but to make the simple and igno-
rant reader think, that St. Paul speaks here not
only of Pagan idolaters, but also of Catholic
Christians, who reverently kneel in prayer before
the holy cross, or images of our Saviour Christ
and his saints ; as though the apostle had com-
manded such to be avoided ? All the other words,
covetous, fornicators, extortioners, they trans-
late alike, in both places, with reference both to
Pagans and Christians : yet the word " idola-
ters" not so, but Pagans they call " idolaters,"
and Christians, " worshippers of iirages." Was
n<it this done on purpose, to make both seem
alike, and to intimate that Christians doing
reverence before sacred images, (which Protes-
tants call worshipping of images,) are more to
be avoided than the Pagan idolaters ? whereas
the apostle, speaking of Pagans and Christians
that committed one and the self-same heinous
sin, commands the Christian in that case to be
avoided for his amendment, leaving the Pagan
to himself, and to God, as not caring to judge
him.

(2) Besides their falsely translating " image"
instead of " idol," they have also another way of
falsifying and corrupting the scripture, by intro-
ducing the word " image" into the text, when, in
the Hebrew or Greek, there is no such thing ;
as in these notorious examples : " to the image
of Baal : the image that came down from Jupi-
ter :" where they are not content to understand
" image" rather than " idol," but they must in-
trude it inio the text, though they know full well
it is not in the Greek.

Not unlike this kind of falsification, is that
which has crept as a leprosy through all their
Bibles, and which, it seems, they are resolved
never to correct, viz., their translating sculplile
Mild conflalile, graven image, and molten image ;
namely, in the first commandment ; where they
cannot be ignorant, that in the Greek it is
" idol," and in the Hebrew, such a word as sig-
nifies only a " graven thing," not including this
word " image." They know that God com-
manded to make the images of cherubim, and
(if oxen in the temple, and of the brazen serpent
in the desert ; and therefore, their wisdoms
might htive considered, that he forbad not all
graven images, but such as the Gentiles make,
and worshipped for gods ; and therefore, Non

faciti libi sculplih:, coincide with those -words
that gn before, " Thou shall have no other gods
but me." For so to have an image, as to make it
a god, is to make it more than an image ; and
therefore when it is an idol, as were the idols ol
the Gentiles, then it is forbidden by this com-
mandment. Otherwise v/hen the cross stood
many years upon the table, in Queen Elizabeth's
chapel, pray was it against this conimandment ?
or was it idolatry in her majesty, and her coun
sellers, that appointed it there ? Or do thcii
brethren th« Lutherans beyond seas, at this day,
commit idolatry against this commandment, who
have in their churches the crucifix, and the holy
images of the mother of God, and of St. John
the evangelist ? Or if the whole story of the
Gospel concerning our Saviour Christ, were
drawn in pictures and images in their churches,
as it is in many of ours, would they say, it were
a breach of this commandment ? Fie for shame !
fie for shame ! that they should with such into-
lerable impudence and deceit abuse and bewitch
the ignorant people against their own knowled};c
and consciences.

For do they not know, that God many timca
farbad the Jews either to marry or converse
with the Gentiles, lest they might fall to wor-
ship their idols, as Solomon did, and as the
psalm reports of them ? This then is the
meaning of the commandment, neither to make
the idols of the Gentiles, nor any other, either
like them, or as Jeroboam did in Dan and Be-
thel, (a) By this commandment we are forbid-
den, (not to make images, but) to make idols,
or to worship images, or any thing else, as God.
" I do not," says St. John Damascene, " worship
an image as God ; bufby the images and saints
I give honour and adoration to God ; for whose
sake 1 respect and reverence those that are his
friends." (i) "All over the world," says Pope
Adrian I., " wheresoever Christianity is pro-
fessed, sacred images are honoured by the
faithful, &c. By the image of the body which
the Son of God took for our redemption, we
adore our Redeemer who is in heaven ; far be it
from us, that we (as some calumniate) should
make gods of images ; we only express the love
and zeal we have for God, and his saints : and
as we keep the books of the holy scripture, so
do we the images, to remind us of our duty,
still preserving entire the purity of our faith."
[f). Learn from St. Jerom, after what manner
they made use of holy images in his time ; he
writes in the epitaph of Paula, " that she adored
prostrate on the ground, before the cross, as i!
she saw our Lord hanging on it." And in
Jonas, chap, iv., he proves, that out of the
veneration and love they had for the apostles,
they generally painted their images on the ves-
sels, which are called Saucomartes- And will
Protestants say, that this was idolatry •

(a) 3 Kings xii. 28; Psal. cv. ly.

(b) St. Jo. Damas., Orat. 3.

XVe

-PROTESTAN'"- TRANSLATIONS AOAINMT

The Book,

Chapter,
and Veree.

Isaiuh
chap. XXX.
v»<rso 22,

chnp. ii.
vffiie 18.

Uanicl
thap. xiv
rorso 4.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Et contaminabis
laminas " sculplili-
um'\argenti tui, et
vestimentum " con-
fiatilis" auri tui, <Sfe.
(1)

Quid prodest
" sculptile,''^ quia
sculpsit illud ficlnr
suus " cunjlatite" et
"imuginem falsam ?"
ykuniof on
e}')lvi/iai' avio

•"lies,

Quia non c.olo
" idola" manufacta,
siduku /s(^07io(i;Ta.

(3)

The true jSnglish accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

And thou shah con-
taminate the plates
of the " sculptiles"
of thy silver, and
the garment of the
" molten " of thy
gold.

What profiteth the
" thing engraven,"
that the forger
thereof hath graven
it a " molten," and
a " false image ?"

Because 1 wor-
ship not " idols "
made with bands.

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Bil>les, printed
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

Ye shall defile
also the covering of
the "graven images"
of silver, and thejor-
nament of thy "mol-
ten images" of gold.

(1)

What profiteth
the " image," for
the maker thereof
hath made it an
" image, " and a
" teacher of lies ?"

I worship not
"things" that be
made with hands.
(2)

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, £d

Lnn., an. 1683.

In this also they
translate " graven "
and " molten im-
ages, " instead ol
"graven" and "mol
ten things, ' or
" idols,"

What profiteth
the "graven image,''
that the maker there-
of hath graven it,
the "molten imago,"
and a " teacher oi
lies V

Though they have
corrected it, yet iho
two last chapters aru
omitted in tl.eii
small impressions
for Apocrypha.

IHH Uab Ot bACUKI) IMAGES.

(1) The two Hebrew woids, pesilim aaiimas-
lechotfi, which in the Latin, signify sculptilia and
conflatilia, they in their translation render into
English by the word images, neither word being
Hebrew for an image ; thus, if one shoidd ask,
what is the Latin for an image? and they
should tell him sculptile. Whereupon he seeing
a fair painted image on a table, might perhaps
say, Erct! cgregium sculptile ; which, doubtless,
every boy in the granimar-school would laugh
at. And this I tell them, because I perceive
their endeavour to make sculptile and image of
he same import ; which is most evidently false
as to tlieir great shame appears from these
words of Habbakuk ; Quid prodest sculptile ?
&c., which, contrary to the Hebrew and Greek,
th<;y translate, " What profiteth the image 1"
Sic, as you may see in the former page.

1 wish every common reader were able to dis-
cern their falsehood in this place : first, they
make sculpere sculptile no more than " to make
an image ;" which being absurd, as I have hinted,
(because the painter or embroiderer making an
image cannot be said sculpere sculptile,) might
teach them that the Hebrew has in it no signifi-
cation of image, no more than sculpere can
signify " to make an image :" and therefore
the Greek Ivmbv, and the Latin sculptile, pre-
cisely, for the most part, express neither more
nor less than a " thing graven ;" but yet mean
H Iways ay these words, a " graven idol," to
V hicli signification they are appropriated by use
of holy scripture ; as are also simulacrum,
ydolum, conflaiile, as sometimes imago : in which
sense of signifying idols, if they did repeat
images so often, although the translation were
not precise ; yet it would be in bome part toler-
able, because the sense would be so ; but when
they do it to bring all holy images into contempt,
even the image of our Saviour Jesus Christ cru-
cified, they may justly be controlled for false and
heretical translators. Confatile here also they
falsely translate image, as they did before in
Isaiah, and as they have done sculptile, though
two different words ; and, as is said, each signi-
fying a thing different from image. But where
they should translate image, as, Imaginem
faham, " a false image," they translate another
thing, without any necessary pretence either of
Hebrew or Greek, clearly avoiding here the
name of image, because this place tells them,
that the holy scripture speaketh against false
images ; or, as themselves translate, such im-
ages as teach lies, representing false gods, which
arc not. Idolum nihil est, as the apostle says,
et non sunt dii, qui manibvs funt. Which
distinction of false and true images, our Protes-
tant translators will not have, because they
condemn all images, even holy and sacred also ;
10

and therefore make the holy scrijjtures to speak
herein according to their own fancies. What
monstrous and intolerable deceit ie this 1

(2) Wherein they proceed so lo.-, lluit
when Daniel said to the king, " I worship not
idols made with hands," they make him say, " I
worship not things that be made with hands,''
leaving out the word idols altogether, as though
he had said, nothing made with hands was to be
adored, not the ark, nor the propitiatory, no,
nor the holy cross itself, on which our Saviour
shed his precious blood. As before they added
to the text, so here they diminish and take from
it as boldly as if there had never been a curse
denounced against such manglors of holv scrip-
ture.

See you not, that it is not enough for them tu
corrupt and falsify- the text, and to add and
take away words and sentences at their plea-
sure, but their unparalleled presumption eoi
boldens them to deprive the people of whiJo
chapters and books, as the two last chapters ol
Daniel, and the rest which they call Apocrypl *
which are quite left out in their new Bibliis,
When all this is done, the poor simple people
must be glad of this castrated Bible, for their
" only rule of faith." Va ! v<b .'

The reason they give for rejecting them is
as I told you above, " that they have formerly
been doubted of;" but if you demand, why ihcy
do not, for the same reason, reject a great many
more in the New Testament ? the whole Church
of England answers you in Mr. Rogers' words,
and by him, " Howbeit we judge them (viz.,
books formerly doubted of in the New Testa-
ment) canonical, not so much because learned
and godly men in the church so have, and do
receive and allow of them, as for that the Holy
Spirit in our hearts doth testify that they are
from God." See Rogers' Defence of the Thirty,
nine Articles, pages 31, 32. So that Protestants
are purely beholden to the private spirit in the
hearts of their convocation-men, for almost hall
the New Testament ; which had never been ad'?
mitted by them in the canon of scripture,if the said
" private spirit in their hearts had not testified
their being from God ;" no more than the rest
called Apocrypha, which they not only thrust
out of the canon, but omit to publish in theii
smaller impressions of the Bible ; because,
forsooth, the holy private spirit in their hearts
testifies them to speak ton expressly against thejj
heretical doctrines.

XVI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATICXS AGiiWST

The Book,

Chapter,
and \ er3c.

The Vulgate-Latin Text.

The true English ar.cnrd
ing to the Rhemish

Translation. t

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Bibles, printed
A. I). 15G2, 1577, 1579.

The last Translation <V

the Protestant Bible, Ed,

Lon. an. 1683.

Acts of
tile Apos.
chap. ii.
versa 27.

Genesis
ch. -xxxvii.
/erse 35

Genesis
chap. xlii.
verse 38.

Genesis
chap. xliv.
verses 29,
,31

3 Kings
chap. ii.
Verses 6, fl.

Quoniam nnn de-
relinques " animam
meam in inferno."
TED, ) V"/')" fJs.

&Sou.{i)

Dcscendam ad f-
liiim meum Ivgens in
" infernum, " Knb,
iiSrig, infernus; for
so are the Hebrew,
Greek, and Latin
words for hell. (2)

Deducetis canos
meos cum dolore ad
" inferos."

Deducetis canos
meos cum marore ad
" inferos."

— Ad " inferos."

Because thou "wilt^'
not leave my " soul
in hell." '

I will go down to
my son into " hell "
mourning.

You will bring
down my grey hairs
with sorrow unto
" hell."

— With sorrow
unto " hell."

•Unto "hell."

Thou " shalt" not
leave my " carcase
in the grave." — -
Beza.

Thou wilt not
l°ave my " soul in
the grave." — (Bible

1579.) (1) ;

It is corrected in
this translation

I will go down
into " the grave un-
to" my son mourn-
ing{2)

I will go down
into the " grave."

Instead of" hell,"
they say " grave."

For « hell," they
also say, " grave."

— With sorrow"
uulo " the grave."

— With sorrow
unto the ' grave."

—"To the grave."

■ " To the gra? e '''

LIJHBUS PATRtMI A.VD rURGATORV.

The doctrine of our pretended reformers is,
that " there was never, from the beginning of
the world, any other place for souls, after this
life, but oniy two, to wit, heaven for the blessed,
find hell for the damned." This hereticaj doc-
trine includes many erroneous branches ; First,
that all the holy patriarchs, prophets, and other
holy men, of the Old Testament, went not into
the third place, called Abraham's bosom, or
Umhus pairum ; but immediately to heaven :
that they were in heaven before our blessed Sa-
viour had suiTered death for their redemption ;
whence it will follow, that our Saviour was not the
first man that ascended, and entered into heaven.
Moreover, by this doctrine it will follow, that
our Saviour Christ descended not into any
third place, in our creed called hell, to deliver
the fathers of the Old Testament, and to bring
them triumphantly with him" into heaven : and
so, that article of the Apostle's Creed, con-
cerning our Saviour's descent into hell, must
either be put out, as indeed it was by Beza in
the confession of his faith, printed anno 1 564,
or it must have some other meaning ; to wit,
either the lying of the body in the grave, or, as
Calvin and his followers will have it, the suf-
fering of hell torments, and pains upon the
cross, (a)

(1) In defence of these erroneous doctrines,
they most wilfully corrupt the holy scriptures ;
and especially Beza. who in his New Testament,
printed by Robert Stephens, anno 1556, makes
our Saviour Christ say thus to his Father, Non
deretinqves cadaver meum in sepulchre ; for that
which the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, and St.
Hierom, according to the Hebrew, say, Non
direlinqnes animum meam in inferno. Thus
the prophet David speaks it in Hebrew : (A)
thus the Septuagint uttered it in Greek : thus
the apostle St. Peter alleges it: thus St. Luke
in the Acts of the Apostles : and for this,. St.
Autrustine calls him an infidel that denies it.
Yet all this would not suffice to make Beza
translate it so ; because, as he says, hd would
avoid ( certain errors, as he calls them ) the
Catholic doctrine of limhus pairum and purga-
tory. And therefore, because else it would
make for the Papists' doctrine, he translates
animam, carcase ; infernum, grave, (c)

And tlunigh our English translators are
ashamed of this foul and absurd corruption, yet
their intention appears to come not much, if any
thing at all, short of Beza's; for, in their Bible
of 1 5'W. they liave it in the text, " Thou wilt
not leave my soul in the grave," and in the
margin tkey put, " or life, or person ;" thereby

(a) Calvin's Instit., lib. 2, c. 16, sect. 10, and In his
Cstechiam.
(A) Psal. XV. 10.
lei See Beza's Annofat. in Act il.

advertising the' reader, thai if it please him, he
may read thus, " Thou shalt not leave my life in
the grave," or, " Thoii shall not leave my per-
son in the grave :" as though either man's souV
or life were in the grave, or ainma might be
translated person. I said, they were ash-imed
of Beza's translation ; but ono would rathel
think, they purposely designed to make it worse,
if possible. But you see the last translators
have indeed been ashamed of it, and have cot*
rected it. See you not now, what monstrous
and absurd work our first pretended reformeij
made of the holy scriptures, on purpose to mako
it speak for their own terms? By their putting
grave in the text, they design to make it a cer-
tain and absolute conclusion, howsoever you
interpret soul, that the holy scripture, in this
place, speaks not of Christ's being in hell, but
only in the grave ; and that according to his
soul, life, or person ; or, as Beza says, his car-
case. And so his " soul in hell," as the scrip-
ture speaks, must be his carcase, soul, or life in
the grave, with them. But St. Ghrysostom
says, [d) " He descended to hell, that the souls
which were there bound, might be loosed." And
the words of St. Irenaeus are equally plain :
'• During the three days he conversed where
the dead were : as the prophecy says of him, he
remembered his holy ones who were dead, those
who before slept in the land cf promise ; he
descended to them, to fetch them out, and save
them." (e)

(2) How absurd also is this corruption of
theirs, " I will go down into the grave unto my
son ?" as though Jacob thought that his sou
Joseph had been buried in a grave ; whereas, a
little before, he said, that some " wild boast
had devoured him." But if they mean the state
of all dead men, by grave, why do they call it
grave, and not hell, as the word is in Hebrew,
Greek, and Latin ? But I must demand of our
latter translators, why they did not correct this,
as they have done the former, seeing the Hebrew,
Greek, and Latin words are the same in both 1
It cannot be through ignorance, I find : no, it
must have been purely out of a design to mako
their ignorant readers believe, that the patri-
arch Jacob spoke of his body only to descend
into the grave to Joseph's body : for as con-
cerning Jacob's soul, that, by their opinion, was
to ascend immediately after his death into
heaven, and not descend into the grave. But
if Jacob were forthwith to ascend in soul, how
could he say, as they translate, " I will go down
into the grave, unto my son, mourning ?" as if,
according to their opinion, he should say : " My
son's body is devoured by a beast, and his soid
is gone up to heaven :" well, " I will go dowu
to him into the grave."

(d) St. Chrys. in Eph. iv.
(«) S. Irenaius, lib. 5, fine

Cornell Catholic
Union Library

XVI. ^PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AOAINST

The Book,

ChuDter,

tnd Verse.

Ps. Ixxxv.
verso 13.

Ps. Ixxxix.

verse 49.

Hosea
chap. xiii.
verse 14-

I Corinth,
chap. XV.
verse 55.

Psalm vi.
verse 5.

Proverbs
ch. xxvii.
verso 20.

Hebrews
chap. V.
vorsu 7.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

El eruisti animam
meam ex " infernn
inferiori." ( 1 )

Eruit a
suam manu
fori r (2)

Ero mors tua,
mors, morsus tuux
ero " inferne," J>in3-

Thou hast deli-
vered my soul from
the " lower hell."

Shall he deliver
his soul from the
hand of "hell?"

death, I will be
thy death ; I will be
thy sting, O " hell."

Vbt est, mors, sli-
mulus tuus ? ubi est
'' mfernc,'" victoria
tua ? adij.

In "inferno" autem
quis conjitebitur libi 1

" Infernus" et per-
ditio nunquam im-
plentur.

" Quf in diebus
earnis sU(B preces
siipplicalionesque ad
eum, qui possit ilium
salourn fncere a
morle, cum clamore
valido et lachrymis
offerens, exauditiis
est "pro sua reve-
renCia," inb irfi ivla.
(S«/«ff. (3)

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Biljes, urinted
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

Thou hast deli-
vered my soul from
the " lowest grave."

(1)

Shall he deliver
his soul from the
hand of the "grave?"
(2)

— O "grave," I
will be thy destruc-
tion.

The last TrKnslation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 1683.

Where is, O death,
thy sting ? where is,
0'"hell," thy vic-
tory.

But ira "hell,"
who shall confess to
thee?

" Hell and de-
struction are never
full.

"Who" in the
days of his flesh,
with a strong cry
and tears, offering
prayers and suppli-
cations to him that
could save him from
death, was heard
" for his reverence."

O death, where
is thy sting? O
" grave," where is
thy victory ?

They say, " in the
grave."

« The grave" and
destruction are ne-
ver full.

" Which" in days
of his flesh, "ofl*ered
up" prayers, with
strong " crying, un-
to" him that " was
able to" save him
from death, " and"
was heard, " in that
which he feared."
(3)

Instead of "lower"
hell, they say, "low-
est" hell

Shall he deliver
his soul from the
hand of the "graved*

O death, I will be
thy "plagues;" O
"grave," I will be
thy destruction.

For "hell," they
say, " grave."

In the " grave,
who shall "give thee
thanks ?"

Corrected

"Who" in the
days, &c., " and
was heard in that he
feared.'.'

tlMBVS PATROSI AND PDRGATOBT.

(1) Understand, good reader, that in the Old
Testament none ascended into heaven. " This
way of the holies," as the aposlle says, " being
not yet made open ;" (o) because our Saviour
Christ liimself was to " dedicate that new and
living way," and begin the entrance in his own
person, and by his passion to open heaven ; for
none but he was found worthy to open the
seals, and to read the book. Therefore, as I
said before, the common phrase of the holy
scriptures, in the Old Testament, is, even of the
best of men, as well as others, that dying, they
went down, ad inferos, or ad infernum ; that is,
descended not to the grave, which received their
bodies only ; but ad inferos, " into hell," a com-
mon receptacle for their souls.

So we say in our creed, that our Saviour
Christ himself descended into hell, according
to his soul. So St. Hierom, speaking of the
state of the Old Testament, (A) says, " If
Abraham,, Isaac, and Jacob were in hell, who
was in the kingdom of heaven ?" and again,
' Before the coming of Christ, Abraham was in
hell ; after his coining, the thief was in paradise."
And lest it might be objected, that Lazarus
being in Abraham's bosom, saw the rich glutton
afar off ia hell : and that therefore both Abra-
ham and Lazarus seem to have been in heaven,
the same holy doctor resolves it, that Abraham !
and Lazarus also were in hell, but in a place of
great rest and refreshing ; and therefore very
far off from the miserable wretched glutton,
that lay in torments, which is also agreeable to
St. Augustine's interpretation of this place, (c)
in the Psalm, " Thou hast delivered my soul
from the lower hell," who makes this sense of it,
that the lower hell is the place wJierein the
damned are tormented ; the higher hell is that
wherein the souls of the just rested, calling both
places by the name of hell. To avoid this dis-
tinction of the inferior and higher hell, our first
translatoi;s, instead of lower hell, rendered it
' lowest grave ; which they would not for shame
have done, had they not been afraid to say in
any place of scripture (how plain soever) that
any soul was delivered or returned from hell,
lest it might then follow, that the patriarchs
and our Saviour Christ were in such a hell ;
and though the last translation has restored the
word hell in this place ; yet so loath were our
translators to hear the scripture speak of limbus
patrum or purgatory, that they still retained
he superlative lowest, lest the comparative
bwer (which is the true translation) might seem
more clearly to evince this distinction between
the superior and inferior hell ; though they
uould not at the same time be ignorant of this

fa) Heb. ixS; x. 20.

(6) Epitaph Nepot. cap. 3.

?c) St. Aug. in Va Ixxxv. \X

sentence of Tertullian : I know that the Iiosora
of Abraham was no heavenly place, but only the
higher hell, or the higher part of hell." {d) Nor
can I believe, but they must have read these words
in St. Chrysostom, upon that place of Rsai : " I
will break the brazen ga:es, and bruise the iron
bars in pieces, and will open the treasure dark-
ened," &c. So he (the prophet) calls hell, says
he ; " for although it were hell, yet it held the
holy souls, and precious vessels, Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob." (e)

(2) And thus all along, wherever they find
the word hell, that is, where it signifies tlie
place in which the holy fathers of the Old
Testament rested, called by the church limbus
pnlrum, they are sure to translate it grave ; a
word as much contrary to the sigriification ol
the Greek, Hebrew, or Latin words, as bread is
to the Latin word lac. If I ask them, what is
Hebrew, Greek, or Latin for hell, must they
not tell me, T^iss, '^rjc, infernns ? If I ask them,
what words they will bring from those languages
to signify grave, must they not say, 13P, idgros
sepulcfirum ? With what face then can they look
upon these wilful corruptions of theirs '

(3) Note here another most damnable corrup-
tion of theirs ; instead of translating as all atiti-
quity, with a general and full consent, has ever
done in this place," that Christ was beard of his
Father, for his reverence ;" they read, " that
he was heard in that which he feared ;" or, as
this last Bible has it, " and was heard in that he
feared." And who taught them this sense ot
the text ? Doubtless Beza ; whom, for the most
part, they follow ; and he had it from Calvin,
who, he says, was the first that ever found out
this interpretation. And why did Calvin invent
this, but to defend his blasphemous doctrine,
" that our Saviour Jesus Christ, upon the cross,
was horribly afraid of damnation : and that ho
was in the very sorrows and torments of the
damned : and that this was his descending into
hell : and that otherwise he descended not.'
Note this, good reader, and then judge to what
wicked end this translation tends. Who has
ever heard of greater blasphemy ; and yet they
dare presume to force the scripture, by their
false translation, to back them in it ; " he was
hoard in that which he feared :" as if they should
say, he was delivered from damnation, and the
eternal pains of hell, of which h6 was soro
afraid. What dare they not do, who tremble not
at this ?

(d) Tertul. 1,4, adversus Marcion.

((,) St. Chrysost. Hour, quod Christus sit Dons, to. tt.

'■.4

TVU. PROTESTANT TRANSLaTIONB AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

ai:d Verse.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

The tnie Enelish ar.cnrd-

ing 10 the Ilhemish

Transiatiun.

Corruptions in the Pro
tostant Bibles, crinted
A. I>. 1562, 1577, 1579.

1 he last Tra:islati(m of '

the Protestant Bible, Ed.
Lon. an. 1 683.

Romans
chap. ii.
verse 26.

St. Luke
chap. i.
leise 6.

Apocalyp.
chiip. xii.
verse ^.

2 Timoth
chap. iv.
verse 8.

8 Thcssal.
chap. i.
(crscs 5,6.

Si igilur prcBputium
"juslilias," Sixaico-
fiuittj.egis custodial,
6fc. (1)

Erant autem "justi"
dixawl, ambo ante
Deum, incedentes in
omnibus mandatis et
" justif.cationibus, "
xut diXKibifiaai, Domi-
ni sine querela.

' Byssinum enim
"jnstificationes"sur.t
sanct3rum,ja dixaiai-
fiaru.

In reliquo, reposita
est mihijCorona "jus-
iiliis" rr/i dixnioav.
yrii,quam reddet mihi
Dominus in ilia die
"Justus" judex, 6
Sixinog xqntjg anSm-
oasi, tS^c. (2)

— Tn exemplum
"justi," dtxaiag, ju-
dicii Dei, ut digni
habeamini in regno
Dei, pro quo el
paliamini, si tamen
jjistum est, SixatPOf
egi,apud Deum,relri-
buere tribulationem
iis qui vus tribulanl.

Hebrews
chap. vi.
verse 10,

Non emm ' injus-
tus," aSiKOS, Deus,
ut obliviscatur operis
vestri, 4fc.

If then the pre-
puce keep the "jus-
tices" of the la\v,&c.

And they were
both "just" before
God, walking in all
the commandments
and "justifications"
of oar Lord, without
blame.

For the silk are
the "justifications"
of baints.

Concerning the
rest, there is laid
up for me a crown
of "justice," which
our Lord will ren-
der to me in that
day, a just Judge.

For an example
of the "just" judg-
ment of God, that
you may be counted
worthy of the king-
dom of God, for
which you suffer,
that yet it be " just"
with God to repay
tribulations to them
that vex you, and
to you that are vex-
ed, rest with us, &c.

For God is not
" unjust," that he
should forget your
works, &c.

If the nncircum-
cision keep the "or-
dinances"of the law.

And they were
both "righteous" be-
fore God, Walking
in all the command-
ments and " ordi-
nances" of the Lord
blameless.

For the "fine linen"
are the " righteous-
ness" of saints.

Henceforth there
is laid up for me a
crown of righteous-
ness," which the
Lord the "righle-
ous"Judge shall give
me, &c. (2)

Rejoice, &c

which is a token
of the "righteous"
judgment of God,
that you may be
counted worthy of
the kingdom of God,
for which ye suffer.
For it is a " righte-
ous"thing with God,
to recompence tri-
bulation to them
that trouble yoii, and
to you that are
troubled, rest.

God is not " un-
righteous" to forget
your good works
and labour.

If therefore the
uncircumcision keep
the ^'righteousness"
of the law.

And they were
both "righteous" be-
fore God, walking
in all the command-
ments and " ordi-
nances" of the Lord
blameless.

For the " fino
linen" is the " righ-
teousness" of saints

For " justice,
they translate "righ-
teousness :" and for
a "just" judge, they
say a " righteous"
judge.

Here also they say
" righteous" judg-
ment, and " righ-
teous thing," instead
of "just," &;c

For God is not
" unrighteous," &c.

jnSTiFICATtOV, AND THE REWARD OF GOOD WORR».

(1} As the article of justification has many
luMnches, and as their errors therein are mani-
fold, so are their English translations accord-
ingly in many respects false and heretical : first,
against justification by good works, and by
keeping the commandments, they suppress the
very name of justification in all such places
wliere the word signifies the eomniaiidments,
or the law of (Joii ; and wuere the Greek signi-
fies most exactly justices and justifications,
according as our Vulgate Latin translates,
iuslittas and justificalioncs, there the English
translators say, statutes or ordinances ; as you
see in these examples, where their last transla-
tion, because they would seem to be doing,
though to small purpose, changes the first cor-
ruption, " ordinances of the law " into righ-
teousness ; another word, as far horn" what it
should have been, in comparison, as the first :
and to what end is all this, but to avoid the
term justifications ? they cannot be ignorant how
difierent this is from the Greek, which they
pretend to translate. In the Old Testament,
perhaps they will pretend that they follow the
Hebrew word, which is u-pn ; and therefore, they
translate statutes and ordinances ; (righteousness
too, if they please ;) but even there also, are not
. the seventy Greek interpreters sufficient to
teach them the signification of the Hebrew
word, who always interpret it, dixauMifiaiu ; in
English, justifications ?

But admit that they may control the Septua-
giiit In the Hebrew ; yet in the New Testament
they do not pretend to translate the Hebrew,
but rather the Greek. What reason have they
then for rejei;ting the word just and justifica-
tions ? Surely, no other reason, but that which
their master Beza gives for the same thing ;
saying, that " he rejected the v/orA jiisltficationes,
on purpose to avoid the cavils that might be
made from this word, against justification by
faith. "(«) As if he should say, this word,
truly translated according to the Greek, might
minister great occasion to prove, by so many
places of scripture, that man's justification is not
by faith only, but also by keeping the law, and
observing the commandments of God ; which,
therefore, are called according to the Greek
and Latin, juflific.nlioni's, because they concur
to justification, and making a man just: as by
£;t: Luke's words, also, is well signified ; which
have this allusion, that they ware both just, be-
cause they walked in all the justifications of our
Lord ; which they designedly suppress by other
words.

(2) And hereof it also rises, that when Beza

(a) Buza Annat. in I.Kk. i.

could not possibly avoid the word in his transla-
tion, Apoc. xix. 8, " the silk is the justification of
saints;" he helps the matter with this commenta-
ry, " That justifications are those good works,
which are the testimony of a lively faith. "(i)
Bat our English translators have found another
way to avoid the word, even in thtir transla.
tions : for they, because they could not say
ordinances, irarislate, " the right<H>usness o
saints;" abhorring the word "justifications of
saints ;" because they know full well, that this
word includes the good works of saints : which
works, if they should in translating, call theii
justifications, it would rise up against their " jus-
tifications by faith only :" therefore, where thej'
cannot translate ordinances and statutes, which
are terms farthest off from justification, they
say, righteousness, making it also the plural
number ; whereas the more proper Greek word
for righttousness is Eudvxt]i, (Dan. vi. 22,) which
there some of tliem translate, unguiltiness,
because they will not translate exactly if you
would hire them.

And by their translating righteous, instead of
just, they bring it, that Joseph was a righteous
man, rather than a just man ; and Zachary and
Elizabeth were both righteous before God,
rather than just ; because when a man is
called just, it sounds that he is so indeed, and
not by imputation only. Note also, that where
faith is joined with the word juet, they omit
not to translate it just, " the just shall live by
faith," to signify, that "justification is by faith
alone. "(c)

(3) These phices, (2 Tim., 2 Thess., and
Heb.) do very fairly discover their false and
corrupt i4itenlions, in concealing the word ius-
tice in all their Bibles ; for, if they should
translate truly, as they ought to do, it would
infer, ((/) that men are justly crowned in heaven
for their good works upon earth, and it is God's
justice so to do ; and thai he will do so. because
he is a just Judge, and because he will show
his just judgment ; and he will not forget so to
do, because he is notuijjust; as the ancient fathers
do interpret and expoynd. St. Augustine most
excellently declares, that it is God's grace,
favour, and mercy in making us, by his grace,
to live and beliex-e well, and so to bo worthy of
heaven ; and his justice and just judgment,
to render arid rppay eternal life for those works,
which himself wrought in us : which he thus
expresses, " How should he render or repay
as a just judge, unless he had given it as a inor-
ciful Father ?" («)

{b) Beza Annot. in Apoc. xix.

(d) St. Chrys. Theodoret, Oecumen.upoa these places.

(e) St. Aug. de Gra ef lib Arbitr., cap. 6.

ynil.-^PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AOAIJTST

The Bonk,

Chapter,

and Verse.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

The true English ar.cord-

ing 10 the Rhcniish

Tninslation.

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant BiMes. printed
A. II. 1562, 1577, 1579.

Tlie last Translation of

the ProteslaiU llilile, Gd.

Lon. an. IfiSS.

Romans
chap. viii.
ver.se 1 8.

Hebrews
chap. X.
verse 29

Colosa.
' chap. i.
verse 12.

Ps. cxviii.
rcrse 1 1 2.

Hebrews
chap, ii.
verso 9.

" Existimo,^' Inylt,!!.
i««i, enim quad non
sunt "coTidtirua pas-
siones" hiijus tempo-
ris ad Juluram gto-
nam, djrc, ax «!««
TjQog Ttjf /tellaaav
doSa>'. (1)

Quanta magis pii-
iatis " deleriora me-
reri, snpplicia^' noaui

iifiojiiug, (jvi Filium
Dei cuuculcavent,
^c. (2)

Gratias agentes
Deo Palri, qyi " dig-
noSj* iJcai'ttiaiKPTi.nos
frcil in partem "xur-
tin" sanctorum in lu-
mine. (3)

" Inclinavi" cor
meum ad faciendas
"JHS/iJicationes tuas
in eternum, propter
retributionem," (4)

Eum autem qui
moJico quam gngeli
" minoratus est" vi-
dcmiis Jesnm, prop-
ter "passionem" mor-
tis gloria el hunore
coronatum. [6)

For " I think"
that the " passions"
of this time are not
" condign to" the
glory to come, that
shall be revealed in

How much more,
think you, doth
he '"deserve worse
punishinents," who
hath trodden the
Son of God under-
foot?

Giving thanks to
God the Father,
who hath made us
" worthy" unto the
part of the " lot" of
the saints in the
light.

I have " inclined"
my heart to do thy
"justifications for
ever for reward."

But him that was
a' little " lessened
under" the angels,
we see Jesus, be-
c.ause of the " pas-
sion"of(Jeath,crown-
ed with glory and
honour.

For I am " cer-
tainly persuaded,"
that the "a.tflictions"
of this time are not
" worthy of" the
glory which shall be
in us. (1)

How much "sorer
shall he be punish-
ed," which treadelh
under-fool the Sou
of God 1. (2)

Giving thanks to
God the Father,
" that" hath made
us " meet to be par-
takers" of the " in-
heritance" of the
saints in light. (3)

I have " applied'.'
my heart to fulfil
thy "statutes always
even unto the end."
(4)

. We see Jesus
crowned with glory
and honour,"which"
was a " little infe-
rior to" the angels,
" through" the " suf-
fering" of death.
(5)

For " I reckon"
that the siifTeiings
of this present time,
are not " worthy to
be compared with"
the glory which shall
be revealed in us.

Of how much
"sorer punishment,''
suppose ye, shall he
be thought " wor-
thy" who hath trod-
den under-foot the
Son of God.

Giving thanks im-
to the Father that
hiith made us"meet,'

— " Even nmo the

end.'*

But we 8eeJe.sua,
who was made a
"little lower than"
the angels, for the
" sufTering" of death
crowned wiih glory
and honour.

MERITS, AN'D MERIT0R10C8 WORKS.

(1) I SHALL not say much of this gross cor-
ruption, because they have been pleased to correct
it in their last translation : nor wilt I dwell on
their first words, " I am certainly piersuaded,"
which is a far greater asseveration than the
•apostle uses ; I wonder how they could thus
translate that Greek word Uyl^onai ; but that
they were resolved nor only to translate the
apostle's words falsely, against meritorious
works, but also to avouch and affirm the same
forcibly. And for the words following, they
are not in Greek, as they translate in their first
English Bibles, " the afflictions are not worthy
of the glory," &c., because they will not have
our sulTering here, though for Christ's sake, to
merit eternal glory ; but thus, " The afflictions
of this time, are not equal, correspondent, or
comparable to the glory to come," because they
are short, but the glory is eternal ; the afflic-
tions are small and few, in comparison ; the
glory great and abundaiit, above measure. By
this the apostle would encourage us to suffer ;
as he does also in another place very plainly,
when he says, " Our tribulation which presently
is for a moment and light, worketh (' prepareth,'
says their Bible, 1577, with a Very false mea-
ning) above measure exceedirtgly, an eternal
weight of glory in us." See you not here, that
short tribulation in this life " works," that is
causes, purchases, and deserves an ' eternal
weight of glory in the next ? And what is that,
but to be meritorious, and worthy of the same ?
As St. Cyprian says, (a) " O what manner of
day shall come, my brethren, when our Lord
shall recount the merits of every one, and pay
us the reward, or stipend of faith and devotion I"
Here you see are merits, and the reward for the
same Likewise St. Augustine : (A)" The ex-
ceeding goodness of God has provided this,
that the labours should soon be ended, but the
rewards of the merit shall endure without end ;
the apostle testifying, the passions of this time
are not comparable," &c.' " For we shall re-
ceive greater bliss, than are the afflictions of all
passions whatsoever." ,

(2) How deceitfully they deal with the scripture
in this place ! One of their Bibles (c) very falsely
and corruptly leaving out the words " worthy
of," or " deserve," saying, " How much sorer
shall he be punished ?" &c. And the last of
their translations adding as falsely to the te.xt
the word " thought :" " How much sorer pun-
i.shment shall he be thought worthy of," &c. ;
and this is done to avoid this consequence, which
must have followed by translating the Greek
word sincerely; to wit, if the Greek here, by
:here own translation, signifies •' to be vvorthy
of," or " to deserve," being spoken of pains or
punishments deserved ; then must they grant
us ihe same word to signify the same thing
eiscwhere in the New Testament, when it is
spoken of deserving Heaven, and the kingdom

(a) St. Cyprian, Kp 50, v. 3.

">) St. August. Serm. 5", de Sanct.

ycj Bible of 156-2.

of God, as in Luke, xx., xxi., where if they
translate according to the Greek, which they
pretend to, they should say, "may be worthy,"
and " they that are worthy ;" and not according
to the Vulgate Latin, which I sec, they are
willing to follow, when they think it may make
the more for their turn.

(3) Thk Greek word ixafHoai, they translate to
make " meet" in this place, but in other places
(viz. Mat. iii. 8, 11, and viii. 8,) they translate
IxMvof, " worthy." And why could they not
follow the old Latin interpreter one step further '>
seeing this was the place where they should have
showed their sincerity, and have said, that God
made us " worthy" of heavenly bliss ; because
they cannot but know, that if ix«>'A;, be "worthy,"
then ixavHaat must needs be " to make worthy."
But they follow their old master, Beza, (d) who
tells them, that here, and there, and soforth,
1 have followed the old Latin interpreter, trans-
lating it " worthy," but in such and such a place
(meaning this for one) I choose rather to say
" meet." What presumption is here ! The
Greek fathers interpret it " worthy." St. Chry-
sostom, upon this place, says, (e) " God doth
not only give us society with the saints, but
makes us also worthy to receive so great a dig-
nity." And CEcumenius says : that " it is God's
glory to make his servants worthy of such good
things : and that it is their glory to be made
worthy of such things." {/)

(4) Here is yet another most notorious cor-
ruption against " me.rits :" " I have applied my
heart to fulfil thy statues, always, even unto the
end ;" and for their evasion here, they fly to the
ambiguity of the Hebrew word 2i?7' as if the
seventy interpreters wore not sufficient to de-
termine the same ; but because they find it am-
biguous, they are resolved to take their liberty,
though contrary to St. Hierom, and the ancient
fathers, both Greek and Latin.

(5) In fine, so obstinately are they set against
merits, and meritorious works, that some of
them think, {g} that even Christ himself did not
merit his own glory and exaltation : for making
out of which error, I suppose, they have trans-
posed the words of this text, thereby making
the apostle say, that Christ was inferior to
angels by his sufTering death ; that is, says Beza,
" for to suflier death ;" by which they quite ex-
clude the true sense, that, " for suffering death,
he was crowned with glory ;" which are the
true words and meaning of the apostle. But in
their last transl.ations they so place the words,
that they will have it left so ambiguous, as yon
may follow which sense you will. Intolerable
is their deceit !

(,/) BcTia Annot. in Matth. iii. Nov. Test. 155&

(ej Oecum. in Caten-

(/) St. Baz I. in Orat. Litur.

(^) Ser Calvin in Epist. art Philip.

XIX. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Rook,

CtiKpier,
and Verse.

St. John
chap. i.
verse 12.

1 Corinth,
chap. XV.
vorso 10.

Ephesians
cliap. iii.
verse 12.

2 Corinth,
chap. vi.
vorse 1.

Romans
chap. V.
verse 6.

1 Ep. John
chap. V.
rcisc 3.

St. Matth.
:hap. xijsr
vene 11.

The Vulgate Latm Text.

Quotqnot auiem
recepervnl eum, de-
dit CIS ^' poleslatem"
i^ualaPj fdios Dei
fieri. (I)

— Scd abundan-
tius illis omnibus Id-
boravi : non ego an-
ten, sed gratia Dei
" mecum," ^ X^qk; iS
©«5 ij oil' i/iol. (2) '

In quo habemus
"fiduciam" ct " ac-
cessum" in confiden-
tia per fidcm ejus.
C3)

" Adjuvantes" av-
vfQi(oiivifs,autem ex-
hortamur, ne in va-
cuum gratiam Dei
recipiatis. (4)

TTt quid enim
Christus, cum adhuc
" infirmi essemus"

secundum tempuspro
" impiis " mortuus
est. (5)

ff(Be est enim
charilas Dei, ut
mandatif ejus cusln-
dtamus ■ et mandala
rjus "gravia" nun
sunt, ai ifiolal ^a.
^ai ax slalf. (6)

Qui dixit tllis,
" non omnes capiunt,
i n&yteg -(oijjum ver-
bum istud, sed qui-
bus datum est. (7)

The true English aceord-

ing to the Rheiniiih

TransUijon.

But as many as

eceived liim, he

gave them " power"

to be made the

sons of God.

— But I have la-
boured more abun-
dantly than all they;
yet not 1, but the
grace of God " with
me.'

In whom we have
" afliance" and " ac-
cess" in confidence,
by the faith of him.

And " we help-
ing," do exhort, that
you receive not the
grace of God in
vain.

For, why did
Christ, when we as
yet " were weak,"
according to the
time, die for the
" impious."

For this is the
charity of God, that
we keep his com-
mandments : and his
commandments are
not " heavy."

— All men
not" receive
saying.

"do
this

Corruptions m the Pro-
testant Blltte.s. printed
A. 1). 1562, 1577, 1579.

IJut as many as
received him, he
gave them " prero-
gative" (" Dignity,"
says Beza)to belhe
sojis of God. (1)

— - Yet not 1,
but the grace of
God " wliich is"
with me. (2)

" By" whom we
have "boldness" and
"entrance, with the"
confidence " which
is" by the faith of
him ; or " in him,"
as Bcza has it. (3)

And we " God's
labofirers," &c. In
another Bible, Wo
" together are God's
labourers." '(4)

Christ, when we
were yet of " no
strength," died for
the " ungodly." (5)

— And his com-
mandments are not
" grievous." (6)

The lait TTaiiil&Uon ol

the PictCMtant Kilile, F.i).
I. on., an. 168.1,

Corrected.

— Yet not I, but
the grace of Hod
" which was*' with
me.

Corrected.

Corrected,

For when we
were yet " without
strength," in due
time Christ died for
the " ungodly "

— Instead of, hia
commandments aro
not " lieavy," they
say, are not " grie-
vous."

— All men " can-
not" receive this
saying. (7)

— All men " nau.
not" receive tlus
sayhig.

FKEE WILL.

(1) AJAi.N'ST free will, instead of power,
.hey, in their transliition, use the Vvord preroga-
tive ; and Beza, the word dignity ; protesting
(a) that whereas, in other places, he often trans-
lated this Greek word, power and authority,
here he rejected both indeed against free will ;
which, he says, the sophists would prove out of
this phice, reprehending Erasmus for following
thoiii in his translation. But whereas the Greek
word is indiiferenily used to signify dignity or
liberty, he tiiut will translate eitherof these, and
exclude the other, restrains the sense of the
Holy Ghost, and determines it to his own fancy.
Now we may as well translate liberty, as Beza
does dignity ; but we must not abridge the sense
of the Holy Ghost to one particular meaning,
and therefore we translate putestas and power,
words indid'erently signifying both dignity and
liberty. But in their last Bible it is corrected.
It Would have been well, if they had corrected
this next, though I think of the two, they have
made it worse ; translating, " not I, but the
grace of God which was with me," (" which is
with me,) say their old Bibles."

('.I) Bv which falsity, they here also restrain
the sense of the Holy Ghost; whereas, if they
had translated according to sincerity, " Yet
not I, but the grace of God with me," the text
might have had not only the sense they confine
it to, but also this, " not I, but the grace of
God which laboured with me." So that, by this
'atter, it may be evidently signified, that the
(jrace of God, and tlie apostle, both laboured
together ; and not only grace, as if the apostle
had done nothing, like unto a block, or forced
only ; but that the grace of God did so concur,
as the principal agent, with all his labours, that
Ills free will wrought with it : and this is the
most approved interpretation of this place,
which their translation, by putting, " which is,"
sr, " which was," into the te.vt, excludes.

But they reprehend the Vulgate Latin inter-
preter for neglecting the Greek article, not con-
sidering that the same many limes cannot be
expressed in Latin : the Greek phrase having this
prerogative above the Latin, to represent a thing
more brieflv, commodiousiy, and significantly
by the article, as Juculius Zrhitdesi, Jucubus
Alphtp.i, J 11(1 IIS Jacnhi, Muria Cleop/ia : in all
which, though the Greek article is not expressed,
yet they are all sincerely translated into Latin.
Nor can the article be expressed without adding
more than the article, and so not without adding
10 the text, as they do very boldly in such
speeches, throughout the New Testament.
Yea, they do it when there is no article in the
Greek, and that purposely : as in this of the
Enhesians, (3) where they say, " Confidence is
by faith," as though there were no " confidence by
works." TheGreek,f«' unnidr/irFi Sm ji/g nigfui;,
bears not that translation, unless there were an
article after confidence, which is not ; but they
add it to the text : as also Beza does the like, in
Rom viii. 2, and their English Geneva Tesla-

(fl) Bezi Nov. Test 1580.

ments after him, lo maintain the heresy of im-
putative justice : as in his annotations he plainly
deduces, saying confidently, " I doubt not, but
a Greek article must be understood ;" an<l
therefore, forsooth, put into the text also. He
does the same in St. James ii. 20, still debating
the case in his annotations, w'ly he does .so ; and
when he has concluded in his fancy, that this or
that is the sense, he puts it so in '.he text, and
translates accordingly. But if they say, that in
this place of the Corinthians there is a Greek
article, and therefore they do well to express it :
I answer, first, the article may then be expressed
in translation, when there can bo but one sense
of the same. Secondly, it must be expressed,
when we cannot otherwise give the sense of the
place, as Mat. i. 6 ex irji; m 'Ov^la, Ex ca qua
fait Uricc, where the Vulgate interpreter omits
it not ; but in this of St Paul, which we now
speak of, where the sense is doubtful, and the
Latin expresses the Greek sulficiently otherwise,
he leaves it also doubtful and indifferent, not
abridging it, as they do, saying, " the grace o'
God which is with me."

(4) AoAix, in this other place of the Corin-
thians, where the apostle calls himself and his
fellow preachers, " God's co-adjutors, co-la-
bourers," or such as labour and work with God,
how falsely have their first translators made il,
let themselves, who have corrected it in theit
last Bible, judge.

(5) And in this next, the apostle's words do
not signif}', that " we had no strength," or
" were without strength ;" but that we were
" weak, feeble, infirm :" and this they corrupt to
defend their false doctrine, " that free will was
altosrether lost by Adam's sin." (A) (c)

(6) Whe.v they have bereaved and spoiled a
man of his free-will, and left him without all
strength, they go so far in this point, that they
say, the regenerate themselves have no free will
and ability ; no, not by and with the grace ol
God, to keep the commandment. To this pur-
pose, they translate, his commandments are not
" grievous," rather than " are not heavy ;" for
in saying, " they are not heavy," it would follow,
they might be kept and observed ; but in saying
" ihey are not grievous," that may be true, were
they never so heavy or impossible, through pa-
tience ; as when a mail cannot do as he would ;
yet it grieves him not, being patient and wise,
because he is content to do as he can, and ia
able.

(7) Our Saviour says not in this place of St,
Matthew, as thcj' falsely translate, " All men
cannot," but, " All men tlo not ;" and therefore,
St. Augustine says, " Because all will not" (d)
But when our Saviour says afterwards, " He
that can receive, let him receive :" he adds
another Greek word to express that sense,
6 Sv^afievog /tuQeiv ^biQfno) whereas by the Pro.
testant translation, he might have said, 6 /(u^im
XaioeiTu), Vide aboTe.

(ft) Whitaker, p. 18.

(d) St. August, de Gia et lib. Arbitr. c»p. 4>

XI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS A3AINST

The Book.

Ghajvter,

and Verse.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

The true English arcord-

ing to the Rhemish

Translation.

Corruptions in the Pro
testant Bibles, printed
A. i>. 1502, 1577, 1579.

The last Translation c(

the Protestant Bible,£d

Irf>n. an. )683.

Romans
chap. V.
vp.rse 18.

Romans
chap. iv.
versfl 3.

2 Corinth,
cliiip. V.
"er. lilt.

Gphesians
chap. i.
verse 6.

Daniel
chap. vi.
i-erse 22.

Romans
chap. iv.
versu 6.

" Igilur" sicut per
unius delictum in
omnes homines in
condemnatumsm : sic
ttper unius justitiam
m omnes homines m
justificationem vita.
1)

Therefore, as by
the oflTence of one,
unto itll men to con-
demnation : so also
by the "justice" of
one, unto all men to
justification of life.

Credidit Abraham
Deo, et repiilalum
est ilii "adjustitiam"
£(f dixnioauvtjp. (2)

— Ut nos ej^ce-
remur "justitia" Dei
ipso, dt»awav»Ti 0««

In qua " gratif,-
caot7,E;taj4T<uCT6i', nos
IS dilecto Jilio suo.
(4)

— Quid coram co
" justiiia inventa est
in me." (5)

Stent et David
dicit, i-tyel, bealitu-
dtnem hominis cui
Dcus acceplo fert
justxtiam sine operi-
bus. (6)

Abraham believed
God, and it was re-
puted him '■ to jus-
tice."

— That we might
be made the. " jus-
tice" of God in him.

Wherein he hath
" gratified us" in his
beloved Son.

— Because before
him "justice was
found in mo."

As David also
"termeth"' the bless-
edness of a man, '"to
whom"' God " repu-
teth justice" with
out works.

" Likewise then,"
as by the oflTence of
one, " the fault
came on" all men
to condemnation : so
by the " justifying"
of one " the benefit
aboundeth towards"
all men, to " the"
justification of li^e.

(1)

Abraham believed
God, and it was re-
puted to him " for
justice." (2)

That we " by his
means" should be
" that righteousness
which before" God
" is allowed." (3)

Wherein he hath
"made us accepted,"
(or " freely accep-
ted") in his beloved
Son. (4)

Because before
him, " my justice
Was found out." (5)

As David " de-
scribeth" the bless-
edness of "the" man,
" unto whom" God
" imputeth ' rightC'
ousness." (6)

Therefore, as by
the olTences of one,
"judgment came u[>-
on" all men to con-
demnation : even so
by the " righteous-
ness of of one,"ihe
free gift came upon"
all men unto ju.sti6-
catiop f life

And it was ac-
counted unto him
"for righteousness."

That we miglii be .
made the " righte-
ousness" of God ill
him.

Wherein he hath
made us "accepted"
in the Beloved.

Forasmuch as be
fore him"innocency
was found in me."

Instead af "ter-
meth" they say,"de.
scribeth ;" and foi
justice," they hava
" righteousness."

ISTHERJiNT JUSTICt.

(iyBEZ«, in his annotations on Rom. v. 18,
protests, that his adding to this text is especially
against inherent jnsiic e, which, he says, is to be
avoided as nothing more. His false translation
you see our English Bibles follow ; and have
idik'd no fewer than six words in this one verse ;
yea, their last translations have added seven, and
artme of those words much different from those
of ihcir former brethren ; so that it is impossible
to make them agree betwixt themselves. I
cannot but admire to see how loath they are to
miflcr the holy scripture to speak in behalf of
inherent justice.

(2) So also in this next place, where they add
the word " for" to the text, " and it was reputed
to him for justice," for " righteousness," says
Jheir last righteous work ; for the longer they
live, the further they are divided from jusiico ;
because they would have it to be nothing else,
but instead and place of justice : thereby taking
away true inherent justice, even in Abraham
himself But admit this translation of theirs,
which, notwithstanding in their sense, is false,
nust it needs signify not true inherent justice,
because the scripture says, it was reputed for
justice ? Do such speeches import, that ills not so
indeed, but is only reputed so? Then if we shoidd
say, this shall be reputed to thee " for" sin, " for"
a great benefit, &c., it should signify it is no sin
indeed, nor great benefit. But let them remem-
ber, that the scripture uses to speak of sin and
of justice alike, reputabitur libi in peccalum,
"It shall be reputed to thee for sin," as St.
Hierom translates it. (a) If then justice only
be reputed, sin also is only reputed : if sin be in
us indeed, justice is in us indeed. And the
Greek fathers make it plain, that " to be re-
puted unto justice," is to have true justice indeed ;
interpreting St. Paul's words, that " Abraham
obtained justice," " Abraham was justified ;" for
that is, say they, " It was reputed him to justice."
And St. James testifies, that " In that Abraham
was justified by faith and works, the scripture
was fulfilled," which says, " It was reputed him
to • justice," Gen. xv. 6, in which words of
Genesis there is not " for justice," or " instead
of justice," as. the English Bibles have it, for the
Hebrew np-,3> -b nz-Drr should not be so trans-
lated, especially when they meant it was so
counted or reputed for justice, that it was not
justice indeed

(3) Again, how intolerably have their first
translations corrupted St. Paul's words, 2
Cor. v., which though their latter Bibles have
Lndcrtaken to correct, yet their heresy would
not suffer ihera to amend also the word

la) Deut., xxiii. and xxi^ j OScura. in Caten.Photius,
ebap. ii. ver. 33.

«1

" righteousness !" It is death to them to htai

of justice.

(4) Here again they make St. Paul say, thai
God made us " accepted," or " freely accepted in
his beloved Son," (their last translation leaves out
Son very boldly, changing the word his into the,
" accepted in the Beloved,") as if they had a mind
to say, that " in, or among ail the beloved in
the world, God has only accepted us :" as they
ma'ive the angel in St. Luke say to our blessed
Lady, " Hail! freely beloved," to take away all
grace inherit and resident in the blessed Virgin,
or in us : whereas the apostle's word signifies
that we are truly made grateful, or gracious and
acceptable ; that is to say, that our soul is
inwardly endued and beautified with grace, and
the virtues proceeding from it ; and conse-
quentl)', is holy indeed before the sight of God,
and not only so accepted or reputed, as they
imagine. Which St. Chrysostom suflicienily
testifies in these words : " tie said not, which he
freely gave us, but, wherein he made us grate-
ful ; that is, not only, delivered us from sins, but
also made us beloved and amiable, made our
soul beautiful and grateful, such as the angels
and archangels desire to see, and such as him-
self is in love withal, according to that in the
Psalm, the king shall desire or be in love with
thy beauty." (6) St. Hierom speaking of bap-
tism, says : " Now thou an made clean in the
laver : and of thee it is said, who is she that
ascends white ? and let her be washed, yet she
cannot keep her purity, unless she be strength-
ened from our Lord ;" (c) whence it is plain,
that by baptism original sin being expelled, in-
herent justice takes place in the soul, rendering
it clean, white, and pure ; which purity the soul,
strengthened by God's grace, may keep and
conserve.

(5) Another falsification they make here in
Daniel, translating: "My justice was found out;"
and in another Bible, " My unguiltiness was
found out," to draw it from inherent justice,
which was in Daniel. In their last edition you
see they are resolved to correct their brethren's
fault; notvi'iihstanding though they mend one,
yet they make another ; putting innoccncy in-
stead of justice. It is very strange that out
English Protestant divines should have such a
pique against justice, that they cannot endure
to see it stand in the text, where the Chaldee,
Greek, and Latin place it.

(6) It must needs be a spot of (he samu
infection, that they translate " describeth" here ;
as though imputed righteousness (for so they had
rather say, than justice) were the description oi
blessedness.

(b) St. Chrys. in this place of the EphesiAiut.

XZI.— ^PROTKSTANl TRASSUATIONS IK

The B6ok,

Chspter,

and \ erse.

Ilubrews
chap. X.
vrtrse 22.

1 Corinth,
chap. xiii.
trcrse 2^

1 Corinth,
chap. xii.
i^crse 31.

The V-ilgate Latin Text.

St James
I'liap. ii.
verso 22.

St. Luke
chap, xviii.
rcrse 42.

8t. Mark
cLap. X
vf!rsc 52,
aiul

chap. riii.
verse 48.

" Accedamus" cum
verocordf in"pleni-
tudin^' jidet, i» ni-ij-
QOifoqia nl^ews. (1)

Et St habuero
"omnem" nixaav,ji.
dem, ita ul monies
transftram charita-
tem aulem non ha-
buero, nihil sum. (2)

Et adhuc " excel-
lentiorem viqm" vo-
bis demonstro.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translulion.

Vides quqniam
fides " co-operaba-
tur," oui'ijpj'f », operi-
bus illius. (3)

Et Jesus dixit
illi, respice, fides
tua te " salvum fe-
cit," fi nJ^'S "5 asaa.
»i as. (4)

Vade,fides tua "te
salvum Jicit"

Let us ''approach"
with a true heart, in
^' fulness" of faith.

And if 1 should
have " all" faith, so
thai I could remove
mountains,and have
not charity, I am
nothing.

And yet 1 show
you a " more excel-
lent way."

Seest thou that faith
" did work with" his
works.

Cqr|rupti<fns in the PrO'
ttiB'aiit Bibles, |j>rinted
A. D. 1562, 1577, 1S79.

Let US " draw
nigh" with a true
heart, in " assu-
raiice"«tf faith. (1)

If 1 should have
"whole" faith. "To-
lam fiJem " saith
Beza, for " omnem
fidem." (2)

— Thy faith hath
" made thee whole."

— Thy faith hath
' made thee safe."

The last Ttmsilation ^

the Protcatanl Bililf, Eil.

Ij(>n., an. 1683;

Beza, in Testa-
ment, 1536, trans-
lates it : " Behold,
moreover also," I
show you a way
" most diligently."
And in another, viz.,
of 1565: And "be-
sides," I show you a
way"to excellency."

Thou seest that
faith " was a helper
of" his works. —
Beza. (3)

— Thy faith hath
" saved thee." (4)

Let ns " draw
near" with a true
heirt, in "full as-
surance" of faith.

"Air faith.

— Thy faith hath
" saved thee."

Corrected.

— Thy faith balk
"saved thcc."

Corrected.

DEFENCE OF THE SUFFICIENC* OF FAITH ALON!

All other means of Siilvatinn being thus taken
Bwny, as you have already seen, their only and
last refuge is faith alone : and that not the
Christian faith contained in the articles of the
creed, and such like ; but a special faith and con-
fidence, whereby every man must assuredly
believe, that himself is the son of God, and one
of iho elect predestined to salvation. If he be
not, by faith, as sure of this, as of Christ's incar-
nation and death, he shall never be saved.

( 1 ) For maintaining this heresy, they force
.he Greek text to express the very word of
assurance and certainty thus : " Let us draw
nigh with a true heart, in assurance of faith :"
their last translation makes it, " in full assurance
of faith ;" adding the word full to what it was
oefore ; and that, either because they would be
thought to draw that word from the original, or
else because they would thereby signify such an
assurance or certainty, as should be beyond all
manner of doubt or fear ; thereby excluding not
only charily, but even hope also, as unneces-
sary.

(2) The word in the Greek is far diflerent
from their expression ; for it signifies, properly,
the fulness and completion of any thing ; and
therefore, the apostle joins it sometimes with
faith, sometimes with hope, (as in Heb. vi. 1 1,)
sometimes with knowledge or understanding,
(Col. ii. 2,) to signify the fulness of all three, as
the Vulgate Latin interpreter most sincerely
(Rom. iv. 21,) translates it. Thus when the
Greek signifies " fulness of faith," rather than
" full assurance," (or, as Beza has it, " certain
persuasion,") " of faith ;" they err in the precise
translation of it ; and much more do they err in
the sense when they apply it to the " certain "
and " assured faith," that every man ought to
nave, as they say, of his own salvation. Whereas
the Greek fathers expound it of the " fulness of
faith," that every faithful man must have alt such
things in heaven, as he sees not ; namely, that
Christ is ascended thither, that he shall come
with, glory to judge the world, &c., (a) adding
further, and proving out of the apostle's words
next following, that (the Protestants) " only
faith is not sufficient, be it ever so special or
assured. "(6) For the said reason do they
also translate, " The special gift of faith," (Sap.
jii. 14,) instead of '• The chosen gift of faith."
Another gross corruption they have in Ecclesi-
osticus, V. 5. But because, in their Bibles of
the later stamp, they have rejected these books,
8a not canonical, though they can show us no
more reason or authority fnr their so doing, than
for altering and corrupting the text, I shall be
content to pass it by.

(3) Brza, by corrupting this place of the
Corinthians, translating lotam fidem for omnem

a) St. Chry80»t.,Theodoret , Thcopbyl. upon Rom. x.
(6) St. Cbryoost., Horn 13, c. 10, wi Heb.

fidem, thinks to exempt from the apostle's words
their special justifying faith ; whereas it may be
easily seen, that St. Paul names and mean?
" all faith," as he doth " all knowledge,'' and
" all mysteries," in the foregoing words. And
Luther confesses, that he thrust the wojril
" only," (only faith) into the text.(c)

(4) Also by his falsifying this text of St.
James, he would have his reader think, an he
also expounds it, " That faith was an efficient
cause, and fruitful of good works ;" whereas the
apostle's words are plain, that faith wrottght
together with his works ; yea, and that his faith
was by works made perfect. This is an impu-
dent handling of scripture, to make works the
fruit only, and effect of fahh ; which is their
heresy.

(5) AoAiN, in all those places of the Gospel,
where our blessed Saviour requires the people's
faith, when he healed them of corporal diseases
only, they gladly translate, " Thy faith hath
saved thee," rather than, " Thy faith hath healed
thee," or, " Thy faith hath made thee whole."
And this they do, that by joining these words
together, they may make it sound in the ears of
the people, that faith saves and justifies a man :
for so Beza notes in the margin, ^ries saluat,
" faith saveth ;" whereas the faith that was here
required, was of Christ's power and omnipotence
only ; which, as Beza confesses, may be pos-
sessed by the devils themselves ; and is far from
the faith that justifies.(({)

But they will say, the Greek signifies as they
translate it : I grant it does so ; but it signi-
fies very commonly to be healed corporally, as,
by their own translation, in these places, Mark
v. 26 ; Luke viii. 36, 48, 50 ; and in other places,
where they translate, " I shall be whole," " they
were healed ;" " he was healed ;" " she shall be
made whole." And why do they here translate
it so ? Because they know, " to be saved,"
imports rather the salvation of the soul : and
therefore, when faith is joined with it, they
translate it rather " saved " than " healed," to
insinuate their justification by " faith only."

But how contrary to the doctrine ot the
ancient fathers this Protestant error of " faith
alone justifying" is, may be seen by those who
please to read St. Augustine. De Fide et Opirc,
c. 14.

To conclude, I will refer my I'rotcstant
SoLiFiDiAM to the words of St. James the apos-
tle ; where he will find, that faith alone, without
works, cannot save him

XXII. PROTESTANT IKANSLATIOSIS AOAI> ST

The Book,

Chapter,

and \ crse.

2 Thessal
chap. ii.
verse 15.

2 Thessal.
ehaj). iii.
rerse 6.

1 Corinth.
ihiip. xi.
verse 2.

Cplos.s.
chap, ii
Verse 20.

1 Peter
(.hap. i.
\eise 18.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Ita(jue fratres,
state el tenele " tra-
ditiones"ni»giidiiaei;,
quas didicistis. sine
per serinonem, stve
per epislolam nos-
tram. (1)

-- Ut subtrahalis
vos ab omni ffatre
ambulantc inordi-
nate, et non secun-
dum " traJilionem,"
quam accepcrunt a
nobis.

Laudo autem vos
fratres, quod per
omnia mei memores
eslis, et sicut " tra-
didi" vobis, prcecepta
mea tenetis, xuOuig
nitgadoxu, lu; na^a-
Soaeig xuie/«t£.

Si ergo mortui estis
cum Christo ab " ele-
meiilis"/iujus mundi:
quid adhuc tanquam
viventes in mundo de-
cernitis ? it Soyftaii-
leaGe. (2)

Scteutes quod non
corruptibilibas auro
vtl argento redtmpti
estis de vana veslra
conversatiunt " pa-
terncB traditionis" i*
Tijg ftaiatiig ifiitif
una^QOiftji nuiqo.ia-
pr"JvB. (3)

The true English accord-
ing to the Rheini:sh
Translation.

Therefore, bre-
thren, stand and
hold the " tradi-
tions" which you
have learned, wlie-
ther it be by word,
or by our epistle.

— That you with-
draw yourselves
from every brother
walking inordinate-
ly, and not accord-
ing to the "tradi-
tions" which they
have received of us.

And I praise you
brethren, that in all
things you be mind-
ful of me, and as I
have " delivered"
unto you, you keep
my " precepts.''

If 'hen you be
dead with Christ
from the "elements"
of this world, why
do you yet "decree"
as living in the
world?

Knowing that not
with corruptible
things, gold or sil-
ver, you are re-
deemed from your
vain conversation of
" your fathers' tradi-
tion."

Conuptions in the Pro-
testant Bibles, printed
k. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

For " traditions,"
thoy say " ordinan-
ces." (1)

Instead of " tradi-
tions," they trans-
late, " instructions."

—And " keep the
ordinances," as I
have " preached"
unto you.

If "ye" be dead
with Christ from
the " rudiments" of
" the" world, why,
" as though" living
in the world, " are
ye led with tradi-
tions ?" And, " are
ye burthened with
traditions ?" (2)

" Vou were" not
redeemed with cor-
ruptible things, gold
or silver, from your
vain conversation
" received by the"
tradition of the" fa-
thers. (3)

The last Translatun tl

the Protesianl Ffihle, Eil :

Lnn., an. 1683,

Corrected.

Corrected

— And keep the
"ordinances," as 1
have delivered them
to you.

— Why, as though
living in the world,
are you " subject to
ordinances V

-^ From ■ your
vain conversation
" received by tradi-
tion from your fa
thers."

AJ-OSTOLICAL TRADITIONa

A OENERAL mark, wHerewith all heretics that
have ever disturbed God's church have been
branded, is, " to reject apostolical traditions,"
and to fly to the scri]rture, as by themselves ex-
pounded, for their " only rule of faiih" We
read not of any heresy since the apostles' time,
on which this character has been more deeply
Btam|)ed, than in those of this last age, especially
the first heads of them, and those who were the
iiiierpreiers'-and translators of the scriptures;
whom we find to have been possessed with such
prejudice against apostolical tradition, that
wheresoever the holy scripture speaks against
certain traditions of the Jews, there all the Eng-
lish translations follow the Greek exactly, never
omitting to translate the Greek word nuf/addaig,
■' tradition." On the contrary, wheresoever the
sacred text speaks in commendation of tradi-
tions, to wit, such traditions as the apostles de-
'ivered to the church, thpre (1) all their first
translations agree not to follow the Greek,
which is still the self-same word ; but for tradi-
tions, use the words ordinances or instructions,
preachings, institutions, and any word else,
rather than traditions : insomuch, that Beza,
the master of our English scripturi^ts, translates
the word nagoiSdaeig, traditam dnclrinam, " the
doctrine delivered," putting the singular number
for the plural, and adding " doctrine" of his own
accord, {a)

Who could imagine their malice and partiality
against traditions to be so great, that they should
all Sirree. in their first translations 1 mean ;
for t'r.<j/ could not but blush at it in their last,
with one consent so duly and exactly, in all
these places set down in the former page, to
conceal and suppress the word tradition, which,
in other places, they so gladly make use of? 1
appeal to tlieir consciences, whether these things
were not done on purpose, and with a very
wicked intention, to signify to the reader, that all
traditions are to be reproved and rejected, and
none allowed.

(2) l.N some places they do so gladly use this
word tradition, that rather than want it, they
niake bold to thrust it into the text, when it is
not in the Greek at all; as you see in this place
of the Epistle to the Colossians, (A) " Why, as
though living in the world, are yon led with
traditions V And as another English Bible reads
mere heretically, " Why are ye burthened with
traditions V Doubtless, they knew as well then,
as they do now at this day, that this Greek word
Siyua, doth not signify tradition ; yea, they were
Dot ignorant, when a little before, in the same

fa) 2 Thos. ii. 3.
(4) Bib. 1579

chapter, and in other places, themsoA-es trans-
late ShyftuTu, " ordinances,'' " decrees." (c)
Was not this done then to make the very name
of tradition odious among the people ?

And though some of these gross corruption.^
are corrected by their last translators, yet we
have no reason to think they were amended cut
of any good or pure intention, but rather to de-
fend some of their own traditions, viz., wcarhig
of the rocket, surplice, four-cornered cap, keep-
ing the first day in the week holy, baptizing in-
fants, &c., all which things being denied by
their more refined brethren, as not being clearly
to be proved out of scripture, and they having
no other refuge to fly to but tradition, were forced
to translate tradition in some places, where it is
well spoken of. But, I say, this could noi
be from any pure intention of correcting their
corrupted scripture ; but rather for the said seli-
end ; which appears evidently enough from
their not also correcting other notorious Ailsifi-,
cations, (as I Pet. i. 18,) (3) " You were not re-
deemed with corruptible things, from your vain
conversation received by tradition from yo\ii
fathers ;" where the Greek ix Tr\i /jujulixg i/jCr
iuu^(joq>rig niiTfjOTjixQoddiH, is rather to be thus
translated, and it is the Greek they pretend to
follow, and not our Vulgate Latin which they
condemn : " From your vain conversation de-
livered by the fathers ;" but because it sounds
with the simple people, to be spoken against the
traditions of the Roman Church, ihey'Were as
glad to sufler it to pass, as the former translators
were, for the same reason, to foist in the word
tradition ; and for delivered, to say received. 1
say, because it is the phrase of the Catholic
Church, that it has received many things by
tradition, which they would here control by like-
ness of words, in their false translations. Bui
concerning the word tradition, they will tell us,
perhaps, the sense thereof is included in the
Greek word, delivered. We grant it : but
■would they be contt-nt, if we should always ^x-
pressly add tradition, where it is so included ?
Then should we say in the Corinthians, " 1 praise
yeu, that as I have delivered to you, by tradition,
you keep my precepts or traditions." And again,
" For I received of our Lord, which also I de-
livered unto you, by tradition." (d) And in
another place, " As they, by tradition, delivered
unto us, which from the beginning saw," &r.
and such like, by their example, we should
translate in this sort. But we use not this licen-
tious manner in translating the holy scriptures ;
neither is it a translator's part, but an interpre-
ter's, and his that makes a commentary : noj
does a good cause need any other translati > i
than the express text of the scripture.

(e) Col. ii. 14 ; Eph. ii. lb.
(d) J Cf.r xi. 2. 23 ; Luke i. a

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AOAIKST APOSTOLICAL TR APt TIOTfS.

But if you say, (u) that our Vulgate Latin
has, iu this, place, the word tradition ; we grant
it has so, and therefore, we also translate accor-
dingly : but you, as 1 hinted above, profess to
trauijiate the Greek, and not our Vulgate Latin,
w"hich you condemn as papistical, and say it is
the worst of all, though Beza, your master,
pronounces it to be the best. (4) x\nd will yon,
notwithstanding, follow the said Vulgate Latin,
ratlier than the Greek, when you find it seems
to make for your ptirpose ? This is your j)ar-
liality and inconstancy. One while you will
follow it, though it differ from; the Greek ; and
another time you reject it, though it agree with
(he Greek most exaptl}' ; as we. have shown you
"ibDve, (Col. ii. 20,} where the Vulgate Latin
hath nothing of traditions, but, quid decernkis, as
it is in the Greek i yet there your sincere breth-
ren translate: "Why are ye burthened with
'••■idiliQns 1"

Is not all this to bolster up their errors and
Heresies, without sincerely following either the
Greek or Latin 1 The Greek, at least, why do
they not follow? Doth the Greek nuqitSoafig,
induce them to say, ordinances for traditions ?
Or lUyiiitiu lead them to say, traditions for de-
crees 1 Or (5/x«iio,u«r«, nqto^vTeqog, ^Si]Q, f Woiii'oc,
&c., force them to translate ordinances for jus-
tifications, elder for priest, grave for hell, image
for idol, &c. ? No ! Where they are afraid of
being disadvantageous to their heresies, they
scruple not to reject and forsake both the Greek
and Latin.

Though Protestants, in their last translation of
the Bible, have indeed corrected this error in
several places, not iu all, on ptirpose, thereby to
defend themselves against their Puritanical bre-
thren, when ihey charge them with several Po-
pish observances, ceremonies, and traditions,
which they cannot maintain by scripture alone,
without being forced, as is said, to (ly to unwrit-
ten traditions : yet, when they either dispute
with, or write against Catholics, they utterly
deny traditionsj and stick fast to the scripture
alone, for their " only rule of faith :" falsely
aiisertingj that the scripture was received by the
priniiuvo church as a " perfect rule of faith."

These arc the words of a late ministerial (c)
guide ol the Church of England, " The scrip-
ture was yet (viz., when St. Augustine was sent

i«ii Discover/ ot oic nock, p. 147.

(^j Beza, Praf. in Nov. Test , 1550.

(c) See the Pamphlet called a Second Defence of the
Expositioii of the Doctrine of the Church of England,
kc.,p. 13, n »!.

into England) received as a perfect rule ot
faith :" for which he cites another atithwitj' like
his own. But how true this is, let the holy
fathers of the first five hundred years satisfy ua.

St. Chrysosto.m, expounding the words of St.
Paul, (3 Thess. %v.) affirms, that "Hereby it
appears, that the apostles did not deliver all
things, by epistle, but many things without wri-
ting ; and these are worthy of faith : wherefore
also, let us esteem the tradition of the church
to be believed. It is a tradition, s«ek no far-
ther." (d)

And the same exposition is given by St. Basil
Theophylact, and St. John Damascene : as also
by St. Epiphanius ; who says, " We itiust use
tradition, for all things cannot be received from
divine scripture ; wherefore the holy apostles
have delivered some things by tradition : even
as the holy apostle says, as I have delivered to
you, and elsewhere ; so I teach, and have de-
livered in the churches." (e)

St. Augustine, proving that those who were
baptized by heretics should not be re- baptized,
says, " the apostles commanded nothing hereof;
but that doctrine which was opposed herein
against Cyprian, is to be believed to proceed
from their iradition, as many things be, which
the church holds ; and are therefore, well be-
lieved to be commanded of the apostles/ al-
though they are not written." {f) These words
of this great doctor are so clear, that .Mr. Cart-
wright, [g) a Protestant, speaking thereof says,
"To allow St. Augustine's words, is to bring in
Popery again." And in another place, (//) " If
St. Augustine's judgment be a good judginent,
then there be some things commanded of God,
which are not in the scriptures, and thereupon
no sufficient doctrine contained in the scriptures."
How to make all this agree with the doctrine of
our present ministerial guides of the Church
of England, who teach that m those primitive
times, '^ the scripture was received as a peifect
and only rule of faith," will be a task that, I am
confident, no wise man, who ha:3 either honour,
credit, or respect for truth, will vent-jre to un-
dertake.

, (rf) St. Chrys. in 2 Thes. Horn. 4.

(p) See St. Basil de Spirit. Sanct., c. SO ; Thnophil in
2 Thess. ii. ; St Damaac, cap. 17, de Imag. Sanct. ; St
Epiph. HaT. Gl.

(/) St. Aug. de Bapt. contra Don., lib. 5, cap. 23

(^') In Whitg. Def ,p. 103.

(A) And his Second Reply against Whitg., part I , on
84,85.86.

XXllI. PnOTESTANT TRANSLATION AGAINST THE KACitiMEN'T OF HARRTAOB.

The Book,

Chaptsr,

and \ erse

The VulgHte Latin Text.

The true English arcord-

iiig lo the Rheniish

Tninsiation

Corruptions in the Pro- The last Tranglation of
lestant BiWes, printed I ;he Pnitestani Bilile, Ed.
A. IT. 1562, 1577, 1579. I t.im. ;in. 1693.

Ephosians
chup. r.
vcree 32.

" Sacramentum "
fivi^^otof, hcs mag-
num est. ( 1 )

This is a great
' sacrament."

This is a great
"secret." (1)

This is a great
' mystery."

( 1 ) The church of God esteems marriage a holy
sacrament, as giving grace to the married per-
sons, lo live together in love, concurJ, atid
fidelity. But Protestants, who reckon it no
more than a civil contract, as it is amongst in-
GJuls, translated this text accordingly, calling it,
m their first translations, instead of a " great
sacrament," oi " mystery," as in the Greek, a
" great secri.-t.'

But we will excuse them for not translating
" sacrament," because they pretended not to
translate the Latin but the Greek : yet, however,
we must ask them, why. they call it not " mys-
tery," as it is in the Greek ? Doubtless, they
can give us no other reason, bivt that they
wished only to avoid both those words, which
arc used in the Latin and Greek Church, to sig-
nify sacrament ; for the word myslerj- is the
same in Greek, that sacrament is in Latin ; and
in the Greek church, the sacrament of the bod„y
and blood itself, is called by the name of mys-
terj-, or ir>j-sleries ; so that, if they should have
called matrimony by that name, it would have
sounded equally well as a sacrament also : but
in saying, " it is a great secret," they are sure it
hall not be taken for a sacrament.

Cut perhaps, they will say, is not every sacra-
ment and mystery, in English, " a secret ?" Yes,
OS angel is a " messenger ;" priest, an " elder ;"
apostle, " one that is sent ;" baptism, " washing ;"
evangelist, " a bringer of good news ;" Holy
Ghost, " Holy Wind ;" liishop, " overseer or
superintendent." But when the holy scripture
jses these words to signify more excellent and
liviue things than those of the common sort,
oray does it become tmnslators to use profane.

instead of ecclesiastical terms, and thereby to
disgrace the writing and meaning of the Holy

Ghost 1.

The same Greek word, in all other places, (a)
they translated mystery ; who, therefore, can
imagine any other reason for the translating of it
" secret" in this place, than lesi it might seem lo
make against their heretical opinion, " That
marriage is no sacrament ?" though the apostle
makes it such a mystery, or sacrament, as repre-
sents no less than the conjunction of Christ and
his church, and whatsoever is most excellent in
that conjunction.

And St. Augustine teaches, that " a certain
sacrament of marriage is commended to the
faithful that are married ; whereupon the
apostle says : ' Husbands, love your wives ; as
Christ loved the church.' " (A) And Fulk grants,
that " Augustine and some others of the arcient
fathers take it, that matrimony is a great mystery
of the conjunction of Christ and his church." («)

But because they have kept to the Greek in
their last translation, I shall say no more of it
nor should I indeed have thus much noticed il
here, but to show the reader how intolerably
partial and crafty they were in their first tran»
lations.

(a) Tim. iii.; Col. i. 26; Eph. iil. 9; 1 Cor. xv. l^
(i) St. Aug. de Nupt. et Concnp., lib. i. c. 10.
(e) Fulk. in Rhetn. Test, in Epbes. v. 32, sect. S.

HerefoUeto several herettcal additions, and other notormis falsifications, ^c.

XXIV. ^PROTESTANT CORRDPTION'S

The Book,

CLapter,

and Veree.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

The true English arcord-

ing lo the llhemish

Translation.

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Bib'es. printed
A. I). 1562, 1577, 1579.

The last Tranalation of

the Protestant Bible Ed.

Lon. an. IC83.

2 Paralip.
or Chron.
ch. xxxri

verso 8.

Acts of
tho Apos.
chap. ix.
ver.se 22.

1 St. Peter
chap. i.
verse 25.
See the
like atlJi-
tiun in
1 Corinth,
chap. ix.
verse 17.

St. James
chap. iv.
verse 6.

.(Tolossians
chap. i.
verse 23

Rcliqva autem
verborum Joukim, et
abominalionum ejus,
qu^'i opcratus est,
"et quoB invenia sunt
in eo," conlinentitr in
Itbro regum Jud<B et
Israelii)

Et eonfundebat
Judaos qui hahita-
bant Darnasci, aff,r-
mans quuniam hic est
Christus. (2)

Verbum autem
Domini manet in
teternum : hoc est
autem verbum quod
" evanvelttatum est"
in vos. (3)

Majorem autem
dat gratiam. (4)

Si tamen pcrmane-
tis in fide fundali et
Stabiles, et immobtles
a spe evangetii quod
audislis, quod prtedi-
calum est in universa
ereatura que sub
cxlo est. (5)

But the rest of
the words of Joakim,
and of his abomi-
nations which he
wrought, " and the
things that were
found in him," are
contained in the
book of the kings of
Judah and Israel.

And confounded
the Jews,&c., affirm-
ing that this is
Christ.

But the word of
our Lord reinainelh
for ever: and this
is the word that
" is evangelized "
among you. '

And giveth greater
graces

If yet ye continue
in the faith ground-
ed and stable, and
un moveable from
the hope of the gos-
pel which you have
heard, which is
preached among all
creatures, &c

The rest of the
acts of Jehoakin,
and his abomina-
tions which he did,
" and carved images
that were laid to his
charge,"behold they
are written in the
book of the kings Of
Judah and Israel.
(1)

Saul confounded
the Jews, proving,
" by conferring one
scripture with ano-
ther," that this is
very Christ. (2)

The word of the
Lord endureth for
ever : and this is the
word which " by the
gospel" was preach-:
ed unto you. (3)

But "the scrip-
ture" oflereth yresL-
ter grace. (4)

If ye continue
established in the
faith, and be not
moved away from
the hope of the
gospel, which you
have heard " how it
was'' preached. Or,
" whereof" ye have
heard " how that it"
is preached. Or,
" whereof" ye have
heard " and which
hath been"preached.
(5)

Corrected.

— And this la-
the word, which
" by the gospel" is
preached unto you.

But "he" givet
more grace.

Which ye have
heard, "and which
was" preached to
every creature

Br ADDING TO THE TEXT.

(1)1 HAVE not set down these few examples
of their additions, as if they were all the only
places in the Bible that were corrupted after
this manner ; for if you observe well in the fore-
going chapters, you will find both additions and
diminutions ; and that so frequently done, and
with such wonderful boldness, as if these trans-
lators had been privileged by especial license to
aJJ to, or diminish from, the sacred text at
their pleasures : or, as if themselves liad been
only excepted from that general curse denounced
against all such as either add to, or diminish
from it, in the close of the Holy Bible (Apo-
calypse xxii. 18, 19,) in these words, " For I
testify to every one, hearing the words of the
prophecy of this book : If any man shall add to
these things, God shall add unto him the plagues
written in this book. And if any man shall
diminish of the words of the book of this pro-
phecy, God shall take away his part out of the
book of life, and out of the holy city, and of
these things that be written in this book."

Against holy images they maliciously add to
the te.\t these words " carved images, that were
laid to his charge." And to what intent is this,
but to deceive the ignorant reader, and to fo-
ment his hatred against the images of Christ,
and his saints ? as they have done also in another
place, {Rom. xi. 4,) where they maliciously add
the Word " image" to the text, where it is not in
the Greek, saying, instead of " I have left me
Bex en thousand men, who have not bowed their
knees to Baal," thus, " I have left me seven
thousand men, who have not bowed their knee to
the image of Baal." (a)

(2) " By conferring one scripture with
a.ioiher:" this is added more than is in the
Greek, in favour of their presumptuous opinion,
that the comparing of the scriptures is enough
ibr any man to undertsand them himself, solely
by his own diligence and endeavour ; and thereby
to reject both the commentaries of the doctors,
and the exposition of holy councils, and the Ca-
tholic Church, (i)

(3)' "Br the gospel:" These words are
added deceitfully, and of ill intent, to make the
simple reader think, that there is no other word
of God, bill the written word; for the common
reader, hearing this word gospel, conceives
nothing else. But indeed all is gospel, what-
soever the apostles taught, either by writing, or
by tradition, and word of mouth.

It is written of Luther, (c) that in his first
ti:inslation of the Bible into the German tongue,
he left out these words of the apcstle clearly :
"This is the- word which is evangelized to you ;"
because St. Peter does here define what is the
word of God, saying : " That which is preached '
lo you, and not that only which is written.

(a) Bible 1562.
h) Bible 1577.
(c) Liud. Dubitat., p.

(4) In this place they add to the text the
words " the scripture ," where the apostle may
as well, and indifferently say : '" The Spirit," or.
" Holy Ghost," gives more graces, as is more
probable he meant, and is so expounded by
many. And so also this last translation of li»iir.9
intimates, by inserting the word He : " Bui He
giveth more grace :" though this is more ilian
they can stand by. But they will never be pre-
vented from inserting their commentary in the
text, and restraining the " Holy Ghost'' to one
particular sense, where his words seem to bo
ambiguous, which the Latin interpreter never
presumed to do, but always leaves it as open to
either signification in the Latin, as he found it
in the Greek.

(5) l.«j this last place they alter the apostle's
plain speech with certain words of their own ;
for they will not have him say, " Be unmoveable
in the faith and gospel, which you have heard,
which has been preached ;" but, " whereof you
h'tve heard how it was preached ;" and though
he spoke not of the gospel preached to tliem,
but of a gospel which they had only heard of,
that was preached in the world.

The apostle exhorts the Colossians to con-
tinue grounded in the faith and gospel, which
they had heard and received from their apos-
ties, {d) But our Protestants, who with Ily-
menaeus and Alexander, and other old heretics,
have fallen from their first faith, approve not of
this exhortation.

It is certain that these words, " whereof you
have heard how it was preached," are not so in
the Greek ; but, " which you have heard, which
has been preached :" as if it were said, that
they should continue constant in the faith and
gospel, which themselves had received, and
which was then preached and received in the
whole world.

In Cor. xiv. 4, where it is said, " He that
speaketh with tongues, edifieth himself;" the
Bible printed 1683, translates thus: "He that
speaketh in an unknown tongue, edifieth him-
self;" so likewise in the 13th, 14th, 19th, and
27th \erses, they make the same addition '. so
that in this one chapter they add the word " un-
known" no less than five times to the text, where
it is not in the Greek. And this they do, on pur-
pose to iriake it seem to the ignorant people, that
mass and other ecclesiastical offices ought not to
be said in Latiq : whereas there is nothing hero
cither written or meant of any other tongues,
but such as men spoke in the primitive cliurch
by miracle ; to wit, barbarous and strange
tongues, which could not be interpreted com-
monly, but by the miraculous gift also of inter-
pretation : and though also they might ,by a
miracle speak the Latin, Greek, or Hebrew
tongues ; yet these could not be counted unknown

(d) 1 Tim. i. e

PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS BY ADDING TO THE TEXT.

tongues, as being the common languages of the
World, and of iLf learned in every city ; and in
which a'so the s.^ iptiires of the Old and New
Testament were written; which could not be
said to have been written in an unknown tongue,
though they were not penned in the vulgar lan-
guage, peculiar to all people ; but in a learned
and krown speech, capable of being interpreted
by thousands in every country, though not by
every illiterate person.

I would gladly know from our translators,
what moved them to add the word " unknown"
in some places, and not in others, where the
Grsek word is the same in all 1 For instance, in
the fifth verse of this chapter, where the apos-
tle wishes that all should speak with tongues ;
they translate exactly according to the Greek,
without adding to the text ; when in nil the
other plices, where they think there may be
some shadow or colour of having it meant of
the general tongue, and known language of
the church, they partially, and with a very ill
tncaning, thrust in the word " nnknovi-n." See
the annotations upon this place, in the Khemish
'J'cstainent

Again, Rom. xii. 6, 7, where the apostle's
words are, " Having gifts according to the grace
that is given us, different, either prOphecy ac-
cording to the rule of faith : or ministry, in
ministering ; or he that teaches, in doctrine ;"
they, by adding several words of their own, not
found in the Greek, and altering others, make
the text run thus ; " Having then gifts, difl'ering
according lo the grace thai is given us, whether
prophecy (let us prophecy) according to the
pmportion of faith ; or ministry (let us wait on
our) ministering ; or he that teaches on teach-
ing.

Besides their additions here, they pervert the
text, by changing the word " rule" of faith into

' proportion" of faith ; whereby they would have
their readers to gather no more froni this place,
llian only that their new ministers are to pro-
tihecy or preach, and wait on their ministering
according to the measure or proportion of faith
■w ability, less or more, that they are endued
*ith. Whereas by this text, as also by many
oiher places of holy writ, we may gather that
the apostles, by inspiration of the Holy Ghost,
before they divided themselves into divers na-

ions, made among themselves a certain'rule and
form of faith and doctrine, containing not only the
twrlve Articles of the Creed ; but all other prin-
ciples, grounds, and the whole platform of the
ChriKiim Religion ; which rule was before any
of tho books of the New Testament were writ-
ten, and before the faith was preached among the
Gon^iles; by which rule not only the doctrine
of all other inferior teachers was to be tried, but
also the preaching, writing, and interpreting,
whi' li is here called prophecying, of the apos-
lles and evangelists themselves, were by God's
Church api)roved and admitted, or reproved and
tcjected according to this rule of faith. This

form or rule' every apostle delivered by word of
mouth, not by scripture, to the country by them
converted, which was also by the apostolical
men, and those who received it entire from the
apostles, delivered also entire to the next follow-
ing age ; which also receiving it from them, de-
livered it as they had received it, to the succeed-
ing age, &c., till this our present age.

And this is the true analogy of faith, set down
and commended to us everywhere for apostolical
tradition ; and not the fantastical rule or square,
which every ministerial guide, accoiding to his
great or small proportion of faith, pretends to
gather out of the scriptures, as understood by
his own private spirit, and wrested to his own
heretical purpose ; by which he will presume to
judge of, and censure the lathers, councils,
church, yea, the scripture itself In the primi-
tive church, as also in the church of God, at
this dpy, all teaching, preaching, and prophecy,
ingare not measured according to the proportion
of every man's private and public spirit, but by
this rule of faith, first set down and delivered by
the apostles: and therefore, whatsoever novelties
or prophecyings will not abide this text, they
are justly, by the apostles, condemned, as con-
trary and against the rule of faith thus delivered.

I cannot omit taking notice, in this place, of
two " notorious and gross corruptions" in their
first translation, seeing ihey much concern this
Church of England's " priesthood." The first is
in Acts i. 26, where, instead of saying : " He,
Matthias, was numbered whh the eleven ;" they
translate it, " He was, by a common consent,
counted wifli the eleven." The other, already
mentioned, is, " Acts, xiv. 22, where, foi", '' When
they had ordained to them priests in every
church," they say : •' When they had ordained
elders by election in every congregation." In
one of these texts, the words, '' by a common
consent," and in the other, " by election," are
added on purpose to make the scripture speak in
defence of their making superintendents and el-
ders by election only, without consecration and
ordination, by imposition of hands : by which
corrupt additions it evidefltly appears to Ldvo
been the doctrine of the Church of EnglanJ, in
those days, that election only, without conse-
cration, was sufficient to make bishops and
priests.

But in their last translation, made in the bo-
ginning of King James the First's reign, they
have corrected these places, by expunging the
words formerly added. And this was donie by
the bishops and clergy, for their great hoiiour,
dignity, and authority ; kiiowing that conaeeva-
lion, which they thought now high tirhe to pro-
tend to, must needs elevate them much above
the sphere of a bare election, in which they for-
merly moved. And perhaps, another no less
prevalent reason was, that they might more se-
curely fix themselves in their bishoprics and
benefices ; thinking, perhaps, that bishops con-
secrated, might pretend to that jure divtnt

CONSIDERATIONS OX THE tAMBBTH RECORDS.

which men only elected by the congregation or
prince, held at the mercy and good liking of the
electors: what other motives induced them to
this, matters not. However, they th night it
now convenient to pretend to something more
tlian a bare election ; to wit, to receive an epis-
copal and priestly character, by the imposition
of hanils : whereas we find not, that their prede-
cessors, Parker, Jewel, Horn, &c., ever pre-
tended to any other character, but what they
received by the Queen's letters patent, election,
and an act of parliament ; as is plain from the
23rd and 25th of their 39 Articles, as well as
from the statute 8 Kliz. I., and therefore ^ere
content to have the scripture read, " He was, by
a common consent, counted with the eleven ;"
and, " When they had ordained elders by elec-
tion. ""(a)

And whereas our present ministerial guides of
the Church of England, would gladly have
people believe them to have a succession of
bishops from the apostolic times to this day ; yet
so far was Mr. Parker, Jewel, and the rest of
their first bishops, from pretending to any such
episcopal succession, " if they had been truly
consecrated, they must of necessity have owned
and maintained a succession among them," that,
on the contrary they published and preached
majiv things to discredit the same : and to that

purpose, falsified and corrupted the scriptiire
against succession, for in the defence of the
apology of the Church of England, they write
thus : " By succession Christ saith, that desola-
tion shall sit in the holy place, and anti-christ
shall press into the room of Christ ;' for proof
of which, they note in the margin. Matt, xxiv
And in another place of the same defence, they
say of succession : St. Paul says to the faithful at
Ephesus : " I know that after my departure
hence, ravening wolves shall enter and succeed
me ; and out of yourselves there shall, by suc-
cession, spring up men speaking perversely ;"
whereas St. Paul has never a word about suc-
cession or succeeding ; nor is succession named
in the 24th of St. Matthew (c) So that you
see, the first bishops of the Church of England,
not oidy corrupted the sacred text, in translating
many places of the Bible against ordination ;
but also in their other writings, falsified the scrip-
ture with their corrupt additions against succes-
sion. (rf) Two sufficient reasons for us to believe,
that they neither had nor pretended to either con-
secration, or episcopal succession in those da)'s ;
consf-quently were not consecrated at Lambeth,
by such as had received their consecration and
character from Roman Catholic bishops, who
claim it no otherwise than by an uninterrupted
succession from the apostles, and so from Christ.
And this obliges me to digress a little into (d)

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE LAMBETH RECORDS,

BT WHICH PR0TEST<4NT BISHOPS ENDEAVOUR TO PROVE THE CONSECRATION OF THEIR FIRST
ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, DR. MATTHEW PARKER.

(A) In the beginning of King James the
First's reign, a new translation of the Bible being
undertaken, the said falsifications of scripture
corrected, and a full resolution put on of
assuming to themselves the character of conse-
crated bishops and priests ; they thought it
absolutely necessary to derive this character
from such bishops as had been, as they thought,
consecrated by Roman Catholic bishops ; by
whose hands they would now make the world
believe, the first of their predecessors, Matthew
Parker, was consecrated with great solemnity
at Lambeth. To which purpose, they presume
to obtrude upon the world certain, before un-
heard of, records or registers. But the age in
which the sim first shone upon these records,
viz., anno 1613, not being so easily imposed upon
as was expected, the said Lambeth Register
became suspected, and, for divers reasons,
detected as a forged instrument. Fitzherbert,
a mnri of great sincerity and authority, writ
acainst these Lambeth Records, in the very year

;,7.) Dr. Tenison and A. B., in the Speculum Considered,
p.' 4:), tell U3, " That in the Church of England they have
a su'ccessioii of bishops continued down from the apos-
tolic times to tills day; but to name or number them,"
they aly, '• is n^'ither necessary nor useful." They might
have added, not possible.

(b) The Lambeth Kecords Coasidered-

that Mr. Mason, workman to Dr. Abbot,
archbishop of Canterbury, first published them
to the world. These are his words : («) " It
was my chance to understand, that one Mr.
Mason, lately published a book, wherein ho
endeavours to prove the consecration of the
first Protestant bishops, by a register, testifying,
that four bishops consecrated Matthew Parker,
the first archbishop of Canterbury. Thou shall
therefore understand, good reader, that this our
exception, touching the lawful vocation and
consecration of the first Protestant bishops in
the late queen's day, is not a new qnarrel, now
lately raised, but vehemently urged divers limes
heretofore, by many other Catholics, many years
ago ; yea, in the very beginning of the late
queen's reign : as namely, by two learned doc-
tors, Harding and Sta.pleton, who mightily
pressed them with the defect of due vocation
and consecration, urging them to prove the same,
and to show how, and by whom they were made
priests and bisheps." Thus he.

(«) See the Defence of the Apol., pp. 132, and 127.

(d) The first Protestant bishops and clergy were so far
from pretending to citherconsecratiohorsuccessiou, that
tney corrupted the scripture against bv.th.

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE

And to giro you the words of the said doc-
tors : thus writes Dr. Harding to Mr. Jewel,
pretended bishop of Salisbury: "It remains,
Mr. Jewel, you tell us, whether your vocation
be ordinary or extraordinary : if it be ordinary,
show us the letters of vonr orders ; at least,
show us that you have received power to do the
ofiice you presume to exercise, by the due order
of laying on of hands, and consecration ; but
order and consecration you have none ; for
which of all these new ministers, howsoever else
you call them, could give that to you, which he
has not himself" These are his very words to
Mr. Jewel ; having but a little before urged
him also, in the words of Tertullian, thus :
" You know what Tertullian says of such as yon
be, Edanl originei eeclesiarum suarum ; we say
likewise to you, Mr. Jewel ; and what we say to
you, we say to each one of your companions :
tell us the original, and first spring of your
church ; show us the register of your bishops
continually succeeding one another from the
beginning ; so as that the first bishop may have
soi'ne one of the apostles, or of the apostolical
men, for his author, and predecessor, Sic.[a)
Therefore, says he, to go from your succession,
which you cannot prove, and to come to your
vocation : How say you, sir ? you bear yourself,
as though you were bishop of Salisbury ; but how
can you prove your vocation 1 by what authority
usurp you the administration of doctrine and
sacraments ? what can you allege for the right
and proof of your ministry 1 who has called you •
who has laid hands on you ? by what example
has he done it ? how. and by whom are you con-
.secrated ? who has sent you ? who has committed
to you the office you take upon you ?" &c. In
this manner was Mr. Jewel urged : to all which
he rover replied, by sending Dr. Harding to
any register of his, or his metropolitan's conse-
cration : or by telling him, that their consecration
at Lambeth, was upon record : or that they had
authentic testimonies to show who imposed hands
upon them. And how easily had such answers
been given to these hard qiiestiims, if there had
then been extant any authentic register or
records of his own, or of Matthew Parker's
consecration at Lambeth.

After the same manner he is set upon by Dr.
Stapleion, in his answer to Mr. Jewel's book,
entitled, a reply, &c. : " How chanced then, Mr.
Jewel," says he, " that j'ou and your fellows,
bearing yourselves for bishops, have not so much
as this congruity and consent ; I will not say of
the Pope, but of any Christian bishops at all,
throughout all Christendom ; neither are liked
and allowed by any one of them all ; but have
taken upon you that office, without any imposi-
tion of hands, without al! ecclesiastical authority,
rtitliout all order of canons and right 1 I ask not,
.who favc you bishoprics, but who made you
l,ishops V 'J'hus he to Jewel. (A)

',a) We also at this day still urRe our Protestant hiiih-
Dps tn prove their succession. But they, instead of doing
it, waive us offvvith these words : " To name or nurnlier
lur bishop.", is neither useful nor tiecesgary " Viile Supr.

(A) See Stapleton's Return ot Untruhtg. His Challenge
to Jewel and Horn, and his Counterblast against Horn.

And thus again^ in his Counterblast against
Horn, pretended bishop of Winchester: "Is
it not notorious," says he to Horn, " that yov.
and your colleagues, Parker, &lc., were not or-
dained according to the prescript, I will not saj
of the church, but even of the very statutes ?
How then can you challenge to yourself tho
name of the lord bishop of Winchester ?" And
in another place he urges Mr. Horn with his
" being without any consecration at all of his
metropolitan, Parker; himself, poor man," says
ho, " being no bishop neither." Who, I say once
again, can imagine Jewel and Horn .should have
been so careless of their character and honour,
as not to have' produced their Lambeth register
and records, if any such authentic writings
had then been extant, when not only their own
credit, but even the credit of their metropolitar,
Parker, and all the rest of Queen Elizabeth'.)
new bishops ; yea, the whole succession of thi*
race, were so miserably shipwrecked ? Yea, id
how great stead would such Lambeth writings
have stood Mr. Horn, when he durst not join
issue with bishop Bonner upon the plea, " That
he was no bishop, when he tendered Bonner the
oath of supremacy."

The case was thus :(c) By the first session of
that parliament, 5 Eliz I., power was given to
any bishop in the realm, to tender the oath of
supremacy, enacted 1 Eliz., to any ecclesiastical
person within his diocese ; and the refuser was
to incur a premunire. By virtue of this statute,
Mr. Robert Horn, pretended bishop of Win-
chester, tenders the oath to Doctor Bonner
bishop of London, but deprived by Queen
Elizabeth, and then a prisoner in the Marshal-
sea, which was within the diocese of Winches-
ter : Bonner refuses t(i take it. Horn certifies
his refusal into the King's Bench ; whereupim
Bonner was indicted upon the statute. He prays
judgment, whether, he might not give in evir
dence upon this issue, Qund ip.se mm est inde
cvlptihiUs, eo quod diclus episcopiis de Winc/ies-
liT mm fiiil. episcnpus timpore dbloliimis tacra-
miinli. " That he was not culpable, because
the said Horn, called bishop of Winchester, was
not bishop when he tendered him the oath." And
it was resolved by all the judges at Serjeants'-
Inn,' in judse Caltlin, the chief justice's cham-
ber, " that if the verity and matter be so, indeed,
he should well be received to give in evidenco
upon this issue, and the jury should try ii,''
Now, what the trial was, appears by that he was
not condemned, nor ever any further trour
bled for that case, though he was a man espcr
cially aimed at. And at the next sessions oi
that parliament, which was the 8th of Elizabeth,
they were forced for want', you see, of a better
character, to beg they might be declared bish-
o]).* by act of parliament.

Besides, it is no more credible, that sucn
knowing and conscientious men, as Dr. Staple-
ton, Dr. Harding, Constable, Kellison, &c. t}ien
living in England, and probably at ].iondon,
would question so public and solemn an action,

LAMBETH RECOTirS.

than it is, tban a sober man should now call in
doubt kinsj James the Second's coronation at
Westminster ; or ask in print, who set the crown
ujion liis head, pretending he had never been
crowni'.d.

But in answer to these our objections : Dr.
Bramhall falsely affirms, that the said records
were spoken of in the eighth year of queen
Elizabeth : for proof of which, he would gladly
have the world so grossly to mistake the words
of ihu statute of the 8th of Eliz. as to think that
the mention there made of the records " of her
mijesty's father and brother's time, and also for
her own time," have relation to their Lambeth
Register : whereas by the records there spoken
of, is understood only the records of her father's,
brother's, and her own letters patent ; and not
their then unknown Lambeth Register.

But Dr. Bramhall, to make good his false as-
sertion, and to impose upon the unvi^ary reader,
most egregiously falsifies the words of the said
statute , saying, " The statute speaks exprsssly
of the records of elections, and confirmations,
and consecrations :" (a) but you will find in the
said statute, expressly these words : " As by her
majesty's said letters patent, remaining on re-
cord, more plainly will appear." Which, if at-
tentively considered, is sufficient to convince the
reader, that " the records of her majesty's said
father's and brother's time, and also of her own
time," relate not to any records or registers of
the archbishop of Canterbury ; but only to the
records of the king's and queen's letters patent.
This device o( Bramhall is more fully answered
and refuted by the author of the " Nullity of the
Prelatical Clergy of England ;" whither I will
refer my reader.

Again, Protestants tell us further, (i) that
there is a register of their bishops, found in a
book called " Parker's Antiquitates Britannicae ;'"
which I deny not: but to this I answer, that the
said register is forged and foisted into Parker's
Antiq. Britan. For that edition, printed anno
1 605, is the first that ever mentioned any such
thing : the old manuscript of that book, having
no such register at all in it ; as a learned author
(c) who diligently examined the same, affirms
in these words : " In the old manuscript of that
book. Park. Antiq. Brit., which I have seen, and
diligently examined, there is not any mention or
memorial at all of any such register or conse-
cration of Mat. Parker, or any one of those pre-
tended Protestant bishops, as the obtruded re-
gister speaks of And any man reading the
printed book, will easily see, that it is a mere
foisted and inserted thing ; having no connec-
tion, correspondence, or affinity, either with
that which goes before or follows; and con-
atns more things done after Mat. Parker had
written that book." Yet this very register

(a) In this statute is expressly mentioned her majes-
tv'B " father's and brotlier's letters patent ;" as also " her
own remaining on record."

(i) Antiq. Brit., edit Hanov., Ifi05.

(c) The author of a book, called, " The Judgment of
the A()ostles and first Aget 'n points of Doctrine," &c-,
minted in the year lti33. See pe 200, 211, and 394-

mentions not any certain place or form of their
consecration ; so that it might be performed as
well at the Nag's Head'fs at Lambeth. And
indeed, we deny them not to have had a certain
kind of puritanical consecration, by John Scorey
at the Nag's Head in Cheap^ide ; but we deny
the said Nag's Head consecration to be either
valid or legal, boih for defect in the form, and
in the minis(er, John Scorey himself being no
bishop, no more than Barlow and Coverdalu, as
is hinted above, in page 53. By reason of which
defects, the queen, it seems, was forced after-
wards to declare, or make them bishops, by act
of parliament. But to pass by these things, and
to come to a closer examination of their Lam-
beth Records : (d)

Mr. Mason, the very first man that ever told
us of this Lambeth Register, urges it in this
manner: (f.) "Queen Mary died in the yeai
1558, the 17th of November ; the same day died
cardinal Pool, archbishop of Canterbur)' ; and
the very same day was queen Elizabeth pro-
claimed. The 15th of January next following,
was the day of queen Elizabeth's coronation,
when Dr. Ogleihorp, bishop of Carlisle, was so
happy as to set the diadem of that kingdom upon
her royal head. Now the see of Canterbury
continued void till December following ; about
which time the dean and chapter having received
the conge (Telire, elected master Parker for their
archbishop, yujf/a morem antiquum el laudabilem
consuetudinem ecclesitB pradicliB ab anliqua usita-
lem et incussa ohservatam, proceeding in that
election " according to the ancient manner, and
the laudable custom of the aforesaid church ;"
citing for these words, his new found register,
ex Regist. Mat. Parker. " After which elec-
tion, orderly performed, and signified according
to the law, it pleased her highness to send her
letters patent of commission, for his confirma-
tion and consecration, to seven bishops ;" whose
names, with as much of the commission as is
necessary, he sets down ; after which he tells us,
" That to take away all scruple, he will faithfully
deliver out of authentical records," as he calls
them, putting in the margin ex Regist. M. Par-
ker, with as much confidence as if they had then
been made known to the world, and published ot
produced upon all occasions, for fifty yeais to-
gether, before ever he spoke of theni," both the
day when he, Mr. Parker, was consecrated, and
by whom, viz.,

Anno 1559. Mat. Park. ( J^Jfg™„^^"'°'''
Cant. cons. 17 Decemb. . j^Jj,^^ Coverdale,
°y ( John Ilodgkins."

These are Mr. Mason's obtruded records;
with which let us compare the words of another
recorder. Dr. Bramhall, who, after having told
us of Mat. Parker's being, by conge d'elire,
elected archbishop of Canterbury, says : ( f)

{d) Stat. I., 8th Eliz.
(c) Mason, lib. 3, p 12&
(/) Brain, p. 83.

CONSIDERATIONS ON THB

" The queen, accepting this election, was gra-
ciously pleased to issue out two commissions for
the legal confirmalion-of the said election, and
consecration of tlie said archbishop ; the former
dated the 9lhof September, anno 1559, directed
to six bishops ; Culhhert, bishop of Durham ;
Gilbert, bishop of Balh; David, bishop of
Peterborougli ; Anilion/, bishop of LandaflT;
William liarlow, bishop ; and John Scorey,
bishop." Which commission he sets down at
large, from Ro., par. 2, 1 Eliz. Dated, Apud
Redgrave, Nonn die Septembris anno regni
EUzabethcB Auglm, ^c, prima.

Per breve de privato sigtHo,

ExaminatoT, Ri. Bkoughton.

Then he goes on : (a) " Now if any man de-
sire a reason why this first commission was not
executed, the best account I can give him is this,
that it was directed to six bishops, without an
" Aul minus, or at the least four of you ;" so as
if any one of the six were sick, or absent, or
refused, the rest could not proceed to confirm or
consecrate. And that some of them did refuse,
1 am very apt to believe, because three of them,
not long after, were deprived." Thus Dr.
Bramhal!.

The three bishops, he means, that were, as
l;e would have us believe, '• shortly after de-
prived," were Cuthbert Tunstal, bishop of Dur-
ham ; Gilbert Bourn, bishop of Balh ; and David
Pole, bishop of Peterborough. But according
to John Stow, (i) and Holiinshead, these three
bishops, with other ten or eleven, all Catholics,
were deprived and deposed from their sees, in
July before, for refusing the oath of supremacy.
"In the month of July," says Stow, "the old
bishops of England, then living, were called and
examined by certain of the Queen's Majesty's
council, where the bishops of York, Ely, and
London, vi'iih others, to the number of thirteen
or fourteen, for refusing to take the oath,
touching the Queen's supremacy, and other
article's, were deprived of their bishoprics."
Holiinshead had also the same words, and tells
us further who succeeded in their rooms and
places."

Ilollinshoad, in the praises of bishop Tunstal,
of Durham, has these words : " He was, by the
noble Queen Elizabeth, deprived of his bishop-
ric, &c., and was committed to Matthew Parker,
bishop of Canterbury, who used him very hon-
ouralily, both for the gravity, learning, and age
of the said Tunstal : but he, not long remaining
under the ward of the said bishop, did shortly
after, the 1 8th of November, in the year 1 559,
depart lliis life at Lambeth, where he first re-
ceived his consecration." By this it appears,
that Matthew Pa(-ki=r was bish6p of Canterbury,
ind lived in the bishop's palace at Lambeth,
con^eiiuently installed in the bishopric, which

(<i)P. 85.

(i) Bee John SH w and HoUinabed, in an. 1 Eliz.

he could not be before he was consecrateil, i(
consecration was then used ; and all this beforf
the lath of November, 1559.

And well might he, by this time, be in lire
full enjoyment and possession of the bisho[)ric
of Canterbury ; for by Stow and Hollinsheadj
we find him called bishop elect on the 9ih of
September, when he and others assisted ai the
king of France's obsequies. Yea, by Holiins-
head, it evidently appears, that they were elected
immediately, or, however, very shortly after the
deprivation of the old Catholic bishops : f»r, on
the 12th of August, we find Doctor Grindall
not only called bishop elect, but exercising as.
much power, as if he had been more than oidy
elect. His Words are these : " On the 12th ol
August, being Saturday, the high altar in Paul's
Church, with the rood, and the images of Mary
and John, standing in the rood-loft, were taken
down ; and this was done by the command o(
Doctor Grindall, newly elected bishop of Lon-
don."

The truth of what I have here set down, from
Holiinshead and Stow, is unquestionable : but
if it agree not with Mr. Mason, and Doctor
Bramhall, and their Lambtah Records, shall we
not have just cause to reject these as forged ?
But, before we compare them together, let us
first see what accordance and agreement is
found among the records and recorders them-
selves.

Firstly, in the queen's letters patent, or com-
mission for consecrating Matthew Parker, (c)
the suffragan bishop, there mentioned, is naincj
Richard, suffragan of Bedford ; whereas by Mr.
Mason and others, he is called John : yea,
Mason calls him John in one place, and Richard
in another. I suppose those, who inade these
records, might be ignorant of the said suffragan's
name ; and therefore for inaking sure work, calls
him sotnetimes Richard, sometimes John , but if
these records had been inade while the man
himself was living, and when he imposed hands
on Matthew Parker, he could have satisfied them
of his true name, and the place vvhere he was
safi'ragan, viz., whether of Bedford or Dover?
And whether there was any other suffragan
there besides himself, if we suppose that the
Lambeth nularius publicus dould be ignorant •(
such circumstances.

Secondly, Mr. Sutcliff affirm.s, that Parker
was consecrated by Barlow, Coverdale, Scorey,
and two suffragans. But by our pretended
register, we find but one suffragan at that
solemnity, (d)

Thirdly, Mr. Mason, tnH. his records, style
him suffragan of. Bedford ; but by Doctor Butler
he is called suffragan of Dover. («)

Fourthly, in Mr Mason, we hear tell but ol
one commission from the qtteen, for the cni;!-*!-
mation and consecration of Matthew I'arker.
But Bramhall, by more diligent search ainor.g

(e) See D. Bram., pp. 87, 89, 90.

[di Sutclifi' against Dr. Kcllison, p. 0.

(e) Biitlcr, Ep. de CoDseorat. Miniet.

LAMBETH RECORDS

•the records, finds two ; the first dated September
the 9th. (a)

Fifthly, by which commission it appears,
Pariier was elected before the 9th of Septem-
ber : but Mr. Mason says, he was elected about
the beginning of December. ,

Thus they concur one with another : and to
compare them with Richard Hollinshead, and
John Stow's chronicles, theyjuinp as e.\aetly, as
if the one had been written at China, and the
other at Lambeth : for,

Si.ulily, Mr. Mason, I say, affirms, that the
dean and chapter elected Doctor Matthew
Parker about the month of December. But
in Slow and Hollinshead, we find him and
others called bishops elect, on the 9th of Sep-
tember. Yea, seeing Hollinshead calls Grindall
newly elect on the r<ith of August, we may
easily conclude, that Matthew Parker the metro-
politan, was also elected before that time ; which,
you see, is about four months before Mason's
election by conae (Telire.

Seventhly, Mr. Mason affirms, that the see of
Canterbury continued void till December 1559.
On the 17th of which month, according to the
new register, Parker was consecrated. [?ut
in Hollinshead we find, that Matthew Parker
was bishop of Canterbury, and lived in the
bishop's place at Lambeth, where he had bishop
Tunslal committed, prisoner, to his charge, long
before the 17th of December: for on the) 8th
of November, 1559, the said bishop Tunstal
died.

Eighthly, Doctor Bramhall, as is said, from
our new-made records, brings us a commission,
dated on the 9th of September, 1559. And
directed, besides others, to three Catholic
bishops, Cutlibert Tunstal, Gilbert Bourn, and
David Pool, requiring them to confirm and
consecrate Matthew Parker. And he has the
confidence to affirm, that " the said three
bishops were shortly after deprived of their
bishoprics, as he is very apt to believe, for
refusing to obey the said commission." But in
Stow and Hollinshead we find, that the said
three Catholic bishops, with ten or eleven
others, were deprived of their bishoprics in the
month of July before, for refusing the oath of
supremacy ; and Mason himself confirms this, by
, acknowledging they were deprived not long
after the feast of St. John the Baptist ; for
which he also cites Saunders, lib de Schismate
Angl. But pray consider, sirs, what can be
more absurd, than to imagine that Queen
Elizabeth would be beholden to such Roman
Catholic bishops, as she had formerly deprived
of their bishoprics, and made prisoners, for the
confirming arid consecrating of her new Protes-
tant bishops, who were to be " unlawfully
intruded" into their sees ; especially she having,
as Bramhall says, Protestant bishops enough of
h'T own ; or if such had been wanting, might,
Le says, have easily had store of bishops out of
Ireland, to have done the work ?

Piay give me leave to demand of our English

(a) Bran., p. 83.

prelates, why this first commission was by tho
queen directed to those three zealous Catholic
bishops, and not rather to her own Protestant
bishops, to whom she directed the last commis-
sion, dated December 6 ? Her majesty was not
ignorant that their consciences had been toe
tender to permit them to swear herself head o(
the Church of England : and that rather than
gall their so tender consciences, they were con-
tent to lose their bishoprics, and sufi'er perpetual
imprisonment : could she, upon revolving this in
her princely thoughts, easily imagine that they
would, without all scruple, impose hands on her
newly elected bishops, whom they knew to bf
of a religion as far different from themselves,
as king Edward the Vlth was from queen
Mary's ? Could she suppose, that they would
make bishops in that church, whereof themselves
refused to be members ? Could she think, that
those Catholic bishops would consecrate Parker,
according to king Kdward the Vlth's form of
consecration, which they had in queen Mary's
days dec' .red to be invalid and null ; and which,
at this time, was also illegal ? Or could the
queen easily imagine, that Matthew Parker and
the rest of her chosen bishops, who had stood
so much upon their punctilios at Frankfort,
would receive consecration by a form condemned
as superstitious and antichristian ; and from
which, as Mason says, they had pared away so
many superfluities ; yea, so many, as even to
pare out the very name, itself, of bishop ? Let
the impartial reader consider these things.

How our present pretended bishops them-
selves will make all these things agree, will
be hard to imagine ; which, if they caimot do,
let them be content to leave us to our own
liberties, and freedom of thought ; and to excuse
us, if we freely affirm, that " Matthew Parker
was never consecrated at Lambeth : that the
said records are forged : and, that themselves
are but mere laymen, without mission, without
succession, and without consecration."

Ninthly, it is none of the least objections
against Parker's solemn consecration at Lam-
beth, that we find it not once mentioned by the
historians of those times, especially by John
Slow, who professed so particular a kindness
and respect for Parker ; and who was so exact
in setting down all things, of far less moment,
done about London. Doubtless, he omitted it
not through negligence or forgetfulness, seeing
he is not unmindful to set down the consecration
of cardinal Pole, Parker's immediate prede-
cessor, and the very day on which he said his
first mass. Nor does it appear to have been
through forgetfulness, that Hollinshead men-
tions not this notorious Lambeth solemnity,
seeing he tells us, that bishop Tunstal, who died
under Parker's custody, " received his consecra-
tion at Lambeth :" if either he or John Stow had
but given us only such a short hint as this, of
Parker's consecration at Lambeth, we should
never have questioned it further, nor have
doubted of the truth of it, though they had not
been so exact to a hair in every punctilio, as to
have told us of the chapel's being " adorned

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE

witli lapestry towards the east ; a red cloth on
the floor, in advent ; a sermon, communion,
concourse of people ; Miles Coverdalc's side
VI ooUen gown ; of the queen's sending to see if
all tilings had been rightly performed." What
care was here taken ? " Of answer being
broiiglit her, that there was not a little amiss,
Diily Miles Coverdale was in his side woollen
gown, at the very minute of the consecration :
of ihe'.r assuring her that that could not cause
any defect in the consecration," &c., as our
records mention ; which ridiculous circum-
Miances render them not a whit the more cre-
d/jle. (a)

If now, from what has been said, these
ivambeth records appear evidently to be forged,
10 what other refuge will these pretenders to
episcopacy have recourse for their episcopal
character, but to queen Elizabeth's letters
jjatenl, and an act of parliment ? If so, I see
no great reason why they should find fault with
their ancient name and title of parliamentary
bishops. Whoever read of bishops, between
St. Peter's time and Parker's, that stood in need
of an act of parliament to declare them such 1
Doubtless, if they had been consecrated at
Lambeth by imposition of the hands of true
bishops, though all their consecrators had been
in side woollen gowns, and neither tapestry
towards the east, nor red cloth on the floor of
the chapel, and could have shown authentic
records of the same, they would never have
desired the queen to make and declare them
bishops by act of parliament: nor woidd the
queiMi, and the wisdom of the nation, have con-
sented to the marking of such a superfluous
act, if their reverences had desired it. No i no !
there would have been no more need of any such
act for them then, than there had been for
three score and nine preceding archbishops of
Canterbury.

After all this, another query will yet arise ;
to wit, by what form of consecration .Matthew
Parker was consecrated ? Our present prelates
and clergy will not say, I suppose, that he was
made bishop according to the Roman Catholic
form, though queen Elizabeth had revived the
act of 25 Henry VIII., 20, which authorized
the same. Nor can they say that king Ed-
ward the Vlth's form was then in being, in the
eye of the law ; for that part of the act of
Edward the Vlth which established the book of
ordination, having been repealed by queen Mary,
was not revived till six years after the pretended
consecration of Matthew Parker, viz., till the
8th of Elizabeth, as is easily proved. For
whereas the act of 5th and 6th Edward VI., 1,
consisted of two parts ; one, which authorized
the book of common prayer, as it was then
newly explained and perfected ; another which
e.^labiished the form of consecrated bishops, &c.
»iid ad dud to the book of common prayer.
This act, as to both these parts, was repealed by
:j;ifien Murv ; and this repeal was reversed by

lO) .Several ridiculous circumstances mentioned in the
K><ordB, whi h yel render them ics.s credible

1 Elizabeth I., as to that part wliich concerned
the book of common prayer only ; for so runs
the act, " The said statute of repeal, and every
thing therein contained, only, concerning tho
said book, viz. of common prayer, authorized
by EdwarJ VI. shall be void, and o) no effect."
And afterwards, 8th Elizabeth I. was revived
that other part of it, which concerned the form
of ordination, viz., in these words, "' Such order
and form for the consecrating of archbishops,
bishops, &c., as was set forth in the time ol
j Edward VI. and added to the said book of com-
mon prayer, and authorized 5th and 6th of
Edward VI. shall stand, and be in full force ;
and shall from henceforth be used and observed."
By which it is as clear as the sun at noon-day,
that Edward the Vlth's form was not restored
at all by 1 Elizabeth, either expressly or in
general terms, under the name and notion ol
the book of common prayer, as Protestants
would have it thought. Nay rather, it w.is
formally excluded by the said act, 1 Elizabeth.
For that act of Edward VI. consisting of
nothing else but the authorizing of the book
of common prayer, and establishing, and adding
to it the book of ordination ; and the act ol
queen Mary having repealed that whole act, as to
both these parts, that act of 1 Eliz. reversing that
repeal, as to the book of common prayer onlv,
did plainly and directly exclude the repealing of
it, as to the book of ordination ; there being
nothing else to be excluded, by that word only,
but that book. So that it is undeniably evident
that king Edward the Vlth's form of consecra-
tion was at that day illegal. And must we
imagine, that the queen would sufler her new
bishops to be consecrated by an illegal form,
when she could as easily have authorized it by
the law, as she had done the Roman form, by
reviving the act 25th Henry VIII. 20th ? Yea,
it had been as easy to make that form legal, as
it was afterwards to declare them bishops by
act of parliament ; and doubtless, more com-
mendable.

liut admit Matthew Parker, and the rest of
queen Elizabeth's new bishops, were made such
by this, then illegal, form ; yet, if this form
prove invalid, they are but still where they were
before their election, as to their character.
And that it is invalid, is sufficiently and clearly
proved by the learned author of Erastus Senioi,
to whom I will refer my reader. Yea, the
Protestant bishops and clergy themselves have
judged the said form to be invalid ; and there
fore thought necessary to repair the essential
defects of the same, by adding the words bishop
and priest. Essential defects, I call the want
of these two words bishop and priest, for if
they had not been essential, why were thev
added ? Yet this will not serve their turn ; for
before they can have a true clergy, they must
change the character of the ordainers, as well
as the form of ordination. A valid form of
ordination, pronounced by a minister not validly
ordained, gives no more character than if it had
continued still invalid and never been altered.
The present Protestant bishops, who charged

lAMBETH RECORDS.

the form of their own consecration, upon their
adversaries' objections of the invalidity thereof,
(for immediately after E/asius Senior was pub-
lished against it, tbey altered it, viz , anno
1662,) might as well submit to be ordained by
Catholic bishops ; or else, with the Presbj'-
terians, utterly deny an episcopal character, as
allow, by altering the form after so long a time
and dispute, that it was not sufficient to make
themscl-es, and their predecessors, priests and
bishops.

What has hitherto been said, concerning the
nullity of their character, is yet further con-
firmed by their altering the 25th of their 39
Articles ; for these first bishops, Parker, Horn,
Jewel, Grindall, &c., understanding the condi-
tion in which they were, for want of consecra-
don by imposition of hands, resolved in their
convocation, anno 1562, to publish the 39
Articles, made by Cranmer and his associates,
but with some alteration and addition ; especially
to that Article wherein they speak of the sacra-
ments : for,

Whereas Cranmer's 25th or 26th Article says
nothing of holy orders by imposition of hands,
or any visible sign or ceremony required
therein ; Parker, and his bishops, having taken
upon themselves that calling, without any such
•ceremony of imposition and episcopal hands, for
I believe they set not much by John Scorey's
hands and Bible in the Nag's Head, declared,
that " God . ordained not any visible sign or
ceremony for the five last, commonly called
sacraments ;" whereof holy orders is one. This
alteration and addition you may see in Doctor
Heylin's appendix to Ecclesia Rrslaurata, page
1 89. In this convocation they denied also holy
orders to be a sacrament ; consequently not
likely to impress any indelible character in the
soul of the party ordained ; which doctrine con-
tinued long among them, as appears by Mr.
Rogjrs, in his defence of the 39 Articles, who
affirms, that " none but disorderly Papists will
say that order is a sacrament ;" and demands;
" Where can it be seen in holy scripture, that
orders or priesthood is a sacrament ? what form
has it 1 (says he) what promise ? what institution
from Christ V\a) Sut after they began to
pretend to have received an episcopal character
from Roman Catholic bishops, and to put out
their Lambeth Records in defence of it, they
disliked this doctrine, and .taught the contrary,
viz., that ordination is a sacrament. " We
deny not ordination to be a sacrament," says
Doctor IJramhall, " though it be not one of
these wo which are generally necessary to sal-
vatio-' ''(&)

B'- order of this convocation the Bible of
1562 was printed, where the aforesaid text,
"When they had ordained to them priests," &:c.,
was. tr:inslat'ed, " V/hen they had ordained eluers
by electior ;" which, as soon as they began to
thirst after the glorious character of priests and
bishops, they corrected.

(a) Defence of the Thirty-nine Articles, pp 154, 155. '
{b^ .**<! Mason and Dr. Bram.p. 97.- i

And though Cranmer cartd as little for any
visible signs, imposition of hands, or ceremonies
in ordination, as the other first Protestant refor-
mers, and according to their practice haj
abjured the priestly and episcopal character
which he had received among Catholics ; as may
be gathered by his words, related by Fox in his
degradation, thus: " Then a barber clipped his
hair round about, and the bishop scraped the tops
of his fingers, where he had been anointed."(c)
When they were thns doing ; " All this," quoth
the archbishop, " needed not, I had myself dtme
with this geer long ago." Ar*d also by his
doctrine; that, "In the New Testament, he
that is appointed to be a priest or bishop, needs
no confirmation by the scripture ; for election
thereunto is sufficient." Though, I say, Cran-
mer valued not any episcopal consecration,
which he had received in the Catholic Church,
yet he presumed not to make the denial thereof
an article of the Protestant faith ; but queen
Elizabeth's pretended bishops, and English
Church, in their convocation 1562, seeing, they
knew they had no episcopal character by impo-
sition of true bishops' hands, thought fit, to
make it a part of the Protestant belief, " That
no such visible sign or ceremony was necessary,
or instituted by Christ ;'' and therefore con-
cluded holy orders not to be a sacrament. And
though, I say, the Church of England now
teaches and practises the contrary, and in king
James the First's reign erased from the text the
%vord ELECTION as an imposture, or gross cor-
ruption, yet this change of the matter docs no
more make them now true priests and bishops,
than their last change of the form of ordination,
in the year 1 662, soon after the happy restoration
of king Charles the Second.

" Ecclesia non est, qua sacerdolem non habel

There can be no church without priests." — SI- Jerom.

It is enough, that in this place we have proved
these men without consecration or ordination ;
yet seeing they glory also in assuming to them-
selves the name of pastors, pastor of St. Mar-
tin's, &c., it may not be unseasonable to proposa
a few queries, touching their pastoral jurisdic
lion.

1 . Whether it is not a power of the keys, ttt
institute a pastor over a flock of clergy and
people ?

2. Whether any but a pastor can give pas-
toral jurisdiction ?

3. Whether any bishop, but the bishop of the
diocese, or commissioned from him, or hia
superior, can validly institute a pastor to any
parochial church, within such a diocese ?

4. Whether any number of bishops can validly
confirm, or give pastoral jurisdiction to the
bishop of any diocese, if the metropolitan, oi
some authorized by him, or his superior, be
not one 1

5. Or to the metropolitan of a province, if tha

PROTESTANT TR ANSr.ATIO.N AGAINST

primate of the nation, or some authorized by him,
or bis superior be not one ?

' 6. Whether any but the chief patriarch of that
part of the world, or authorized by him, can
validly give pastoral jurisdiction to the primate
of a nation 1

7. Whether the bishop of Rome is not chief
patriarch of the western church, consequently
of this nation ?

8. Whether Mat. Parker, the first Protestant
pretended archbishop of Canterbury, received
his pastoral jurisdiction from , the bishop of
Rome, or from others by him autitorized ?
or,

9. Whether those who made Mat. Parker
primate of England, or archbishop of Cantej-
bury, had any jurisdiction to that act, but what
they received from queen Elizabeth?

10. Whether queen Elizabeth had the power
of the keys, either of order or jurisdiction ?

1 1 . Whether it is not an essential part of the
Catholic Church to have pastors 1

12. Whether salvation can be had in a church
wanting pastors ?

13. Whether they do not commit a most
heinous sacrilege, who having neither valid
ordination, nor pastoral jurisdiction, do notwith-
standing take upon them to administer sacra-
ments, and exercise all other acts of episcopal
and prici-tly functions ?

14. Whether the ])eople are not also involved
with them, in the same sin, so often as they
communicate with them in, or co-operate to
those sacrilegious presumptions ?

1 5. Whether those, who as.sume to themselves
the names and offices of bishops arid priests,'
take upon them to teach, preach, administer
sacraments, and perform all other episcopal and
priestly functioiis, without vocation, wi'hout
ordination, without consecration without suc-
cession, without mission, or without pastoral
jurisdiction, are not the very men of whom out
blessed Saviour charged us to beware ? («)

16. To conclude, whether it is wisdom in tlie
people of England, to hire such men at the
charge of perhaps above £\ ,000,000 [query, now
3 or £4,000,000 ?] per annum, to lead them the
broad way to perdition ?

ANOTHER CORRUPT ADDITIO.N AGAINST THE PERPETUAL SACRIFICE OF

CHRIST'S BODY AND BLOOD.

Protestants teach, in the 31st of the 39
Articles, " That the offering of Christ once made,
18 that perfect redemption, propitiation and
satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world,
&c. AVherefore the sacrifice of masses, in
which it was commonly said, that the priests did
offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have
remission of pain and guilt, were blasphemous
fables, and dangerous deceits." By this doctrine
the Church of England bereaves Christians of
the most inestimable jewel and richest treasure,
that ever Christ our Saviour left to his church ;
to wit, the most holy and venerable sacrifice of
his sacred body and blood in the mass, which is
daily offered to God the Father, for a propitia-
tion for our sins. And because they would
have this false and erroneous doctrine of iheir's
backed by sacred scripture, they most egregiously
corrupt the text, Heb. x. 10, by adding to the
same two words not found in the Greek or
Latin copies, viz., " For all ;" the apostle's words
being, "In the which will we are sanctified by
the oblation of the body of Jesus Christ once ;"
which they corruptly read, in their last transla-
tion : " By the which will we are sanctified,
through the oflering of the body of Jesus Christ
once, for all." By which addition they endea-
vour to take away the daily oblation of the
body and blood of Christ in the holy sacrifice
of tiio mass ; contrauicling the doctrine of God's
holy church, which believes and teaches, " that
our Tjord God, although he was once to ofl'er
himself to God the Father upon the altar of the
cross by death, that ho might there work eternal
redemption ; yet because his priesthood was not
J) be extinguished by death, in tlie last supper,

which night he was to be betrayed, that he might
leave a visible sacrifice to his beloved spouse the
church, whereby that bloody one, once to be'
performed upon the cross, should be represented,
and the memory thereof should remain to the
end of the world, and the wholesome virtue
thereof should be applied for the remission ol
those sins which we daily commit, declaring
himself to be ordained a priest for ever, ac-
cording to the order of Melchizedek, he offered
to God the Father his body and blood, under
the forms of bread and wine ; and under the
signs of the same things he gave it to the apos-
tles, whom then he ordained priests of the New
Testament, that they should receive it ; and by
the words he commanded them, and their suc-
cessors in the priesthood, that they should offer
it : " Do ye this in commemoration of me," &;a.
And, " Because in this divine sacrifice, which
is performed in the mass, the self-same Christ is
contained, and unbloodily offered, who oflered
himself once bloodily upon the altar of the cross ;
the holy synod teaches the sacrifice to be truly
propitiatory, &c. Wherefore, according to the
tradition of the apostles, it is duly offered, not
only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions, anil
other necessities of the faithful that are livhig,
but also for such as are dead in Christ, as not yet
fully, purged. "(A) This is the Catholic doc-
trine, delivered in the sacred Council of Trent,
which the Ciiurch of England calls blasphemous
fables, and dangerous deceits ; and against
which they falsity the sacred text of scripture,

(a) Mat. vii. 15.

(i) Concil. Trid., seas. 32, cap. 1, c^>. 8,

THK PERPETUAL SACRIFICK.

by thrusting icto it words of their own, which
they find not in any of the Greek or Latin
copies.

tint lest they may object, that this is but a
new doctrine, not taught in the primitive church,
nor delivered down to us by the apostles or by
apostolical tradition ; I will give you ihe-se fol-
lowing testimonies from the fathers of the first
five hundred years.

St. Cyprian says, (a) " Christ is priest for
ever, according to the order of Melchizedek,
which order is this, coming from this sacrifice,
and thence descending, that Melchizedek was
priest of God most high, that he oflered bread
and wine, that he blessed Abraham ; for who is
more a priest of God most high, than our I>ord
Jesus Christ, who oflered sacrifice to God the
Father, and offered the same that Melchizedek
had oflered, bread and wine, viz., his body and
blood V

And a little after : " That therefore in Gene-
sis the blessing might be rightly celebrated about
Abraham by Melchizedek the priest, the image,
or figure of Chrst's sacrifice, consisting in
bread and wine, went before : which thing our
Lord perfecting and performing, offered bread,
and the chalice mixed with wine, and he, that is
the plenitude, fulfilled the verity of the prefi-
gured image."

The same holy father, in another place, as
cited also by the Magdeburgian Centurists, (6)
in this manner, "Our Lord Jesus Christ," says
Cyprian, lib. 2, ep. 3, " is the high priest of
God the Father ; and first offered sacrifice to God
tho Father, and commanded the same to be done
in rememberance to him ; and that priest truly
e.\-ecutes Christ's place, who imitates that which
Christ did ; and then he offers in the church a
true and full sacrifice to Goil." This saying so
displeases the Centurists, that they say, " Cy-
orian affirms superstitiously, that the priest
executes Christ's place in the supper of our
Lord."

St. Ilierom : (c) " Have recourse," says he,
" to the book of Genesis, and you shall find
Melchizedek, king of Salem, prince of this city,
who even there, in figure of Christ, offered
bread and wine, and dedicated the Christian
mystery in our Saviour's body and blood."
Again, " Melchizedek offered not bloody vic-
tims, but dedicated the sacrament of Christ in
bread and wine, a simple and pure sacrifice."
/nd yet more plainly in another place, " Our
ministry," says he, " is signified in the word of
order, not by Aaron, in immolating brute vic-
tims, but in offering bread and wine, that is, the
body and blood of our I^ord Jesus."

St. Augustine expressly teaches, that " Mel-

hizedek bringing forth the sacrament, or

mystery, of our Lord's table, knew how to

figure his eternal priesthood." («/) " There

(a) Ep. 53, ad Csci'.ium.

(A) In the Alphab. Table of the Third Cent., under the
letter S., col. 83.

(<i)Ep.95.

first appeared," says he in another place, " that
sacrifice which is now offered to God by Cliris-
tians, in the whole world." (e)

Again, (Cone. 1, in Psal. xxxv.) "There wr.3
formerly," says he, "as you have known, the
sacrifice of the Jews, according to the ordci of
Aaron, in the sacrifice of beasts, and this in
mystery; for not as yet was the sacrifice of the
body and blood of our Lord, which the faithful
know, and such as have read the Gospel ; which
sacrifice now is spread over the whole world.
Set therefore before your eyes two sacrifices,
that according to the order of Aaron ; and this,
according to the order of Melchizedek ; for it is
written, our Lord has sworn, and it shall not
repent him, thou art a priest for ever, according
to the order of Melchizedek." And in Cone.
2, Psal. xxxiii., he expressly teaches, " that
Christ, of his body and blood, instituted a sacri-
fice, according to the order of Melchizedek."

Nothing can be more plain than these words
of St. Irena;us, in which he affirms of Christ,
(f) " Giving counsel also to his disciples, to
ofier the first fruits of his creatures to God ; not
as it were needing it, but that they might be
neither unfruitful nor ungrateful, he himself
took of the creature of bread, and gave thanks,
saying, this is my body ; and likewise the chalice,
he confessed to be his blood, which is made of
that creature which is in use amongst us, and
taught a new oblation of the New Testament,
which oblation the church receiving from tho
apostles, throughout the whole world, ofliers to
God, to him who gives us nourishment, the firsi!
fruits of his gifts in the New Testament; of
whom, amongst the twelve prophets, Malachy
has thus foretold : ' I have no will in you, the
Jews, says our omnipotent Lord, and I will
take no sacrifices at your hands, because, from
the rising of the sun to the setting thereof, my
name is glorified amongst the Gentiles ; and in
every place, incense is offered to my name, and
a pi: RE SACRIFICE, bccausc my name is great
among the Gentiles, saith our Lord Almighty,'
manifestly signifying by these things, because
the former people indeed ceased to offer to God ;
but in every place a sacrifice is oflered to God, and
this PURE, for his name is glorified among the
Gentiles." Thus St. Irenaeus, whose words so
touch the Protestant Centurists, that they say,
" Irenffius, &c., seems to speak very incommo-
diously, when he says, he, Christ, taught the
new oblation of the New Testament, which the
church receiving from the apostles, offered to
God over all the world."

Eusebius Ctesariensis : {g) " We sacrifice,
therefore, to our highest I^ord a sacrifice o{
praise ; we sacrifice to God a full, odoriferous,
and most holy sacrifice ; we sacrifice after a new
manner, according to the New Testament, a

PURE HOST."

St. John Chrysostom expounding the words of

(e) Lib. 1 G, do Civ. Dei, c. 22. See him also lib. 17, c, 17,
and lib. 18, c. 35; cum Psalm cix., lib. 1, contr. Advcro,
Leg. et Prophet, c. 20: Serm. 4, de Sanctis Innoceniibus

(/) Lib. 4, Advera. Haer., c. 32.

{g) Lib. 1, Demonstrat. Evan c 10

100

PROTESTANT T«ANSLATI07< AGAINST

he prqpliet Ma! achy, says, (a) " The church,
which every where carries about Christ in it, is
prohibited from no place ; but in every place there
are altars, in Rvery place doctrines ; these things
God foretold by his prophet, for both declaring
llie church's sincerity, and the ingratitude of the
Dihsr people, the Jews, he tells them, I have no
pleasure in you, oic. Mark, how clearly and
plainly he interprt-'s the mystical table, which is
the unbloody host, a.*dlhe pure perfume he calls
holy prayers, which are offered after the host.
Thou seest how it is gi anted, tnai that angelical
sacrifice should every where be known ; thou
seest it is circumscribod with no limits, neither
the altars, nor the song. In every place incense
is offered to my name ; tlleiefore the mystical
table, the heavenly and exceedingly venerable
sacrifice is indeed the prime pvire host."

Is it not a thing to be admired, that the
Church ot England should not jnly corrupt the
sacred scriptures against the great and most
dreadful sacrifice ; but should iilso make it an
article of her faith, that it is a blasphemous
fable, and dangerous deceit? When, without
all doubt, she cannot be ignoran.f, that the holy
fathers call it : (h) " A visible sacrifice ; (c)
"The sacrifice;" {il) "The duly sacrifice;"
(ft) " The true' sacrifice according to the order of
Melchizcdek ;" (/) " The sacrifi;e of the body
and blood of Christ ;" (g) " The r.acrifice of the
altar ;" (//) " The sacrifice of the church ; {i)
" The sacrifice of the New Tt stament ;" [k]
" Which succeeded to all sacrifi ;es of the Old
Testament." Arid tliat it was o.Tered for the
health of the emperor, Sacrificamuj pro salute im-
^c.raUirix" siiys Tertullian, de Scapul. c. 2. That
it was offered for the sick. Pro iujirmis etiam sac-
rificamus, says St. Chrysostom, Hum. 27, in Act
Apos. " For those upon the sea, and for the fruits
of the earth," idem. And for the purging of houses
infected with wicked spirits. St. Aug. de Civit.
Die, lib. 22, c. 8, says, that " One went and of-
fered," in the house infected, " tht; sacrifice of
Christ's body, praying that the vexation minht
cease, and by God's mercy it ceased immediately."

In the first Council of Nice, can, 14, we find
these words : " The holy council has been in-
formed, that in some places arid cities the dea-
cons distribute the sacrament to priests ; neither
rule nor custom has delivered, that they who
have not power to offer sacrifice, should distri-
bute the body of Christ to them who offer."
Sec also, concil. 3, Bracarense. can. 3. and

'«; Ad. Psal. xcv.

•h) St. Agii., (le Civit. Dei, Ijh. 10, c. 19.

{(I) Aug. Cit. c. 16, et. Cone. Tolet., Lean. 5; Origen. in
Num. Hiini. 23.

(e) St. Cyprian, 1. 2, ep. 3, et Aug., lib. 10, c. 22, de
Civil. Dei

(/) Et till 29, c, S, et lib 20, contr, Faustum, e. 18 ; ct
S. Hieruin ,lib. 3,conlr. Pelag.; Aug. in Psal xj(xiii,eon.
2, to. 8; ft St. Crys., lib. 1, Cot. Horn 24.

(?) S. Aug. in Enchiridion, c. 1 10, et de Cura pro Mor-
tals, c. 18.

(A) Et de Civit. Dei, 1- 10, c. 20.

(t) Et de Gratia Novi Test., c. 18, et S. Irenaeus, lib. 4,
:. 32.

(i) Aug de Civit. Dei, lib. 17, c. 20.; St. Clement, in
Apont Cbnstit., edit. 1564, Antverpiir,llb.e. c. 22 fol. 123

concil. 12, can. 5. Moreovt that "this holy
sacrifice," as God's church at this day teaches
and practises, " was offered for the sins of the
living and dead," is a truth so iiiideniablc, that
Crastoius, a learned Protestant, in his book ol
the mass, against Bellarmin, page 167, repre-
hends. Origen, St. Athanasius, St. Ambrose,
St. Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St Gregory
the Great, and venerable Hede, for maintaining
" the mass to be a propitiatory sacrifice for tlio
sins of the living and of the dead." Consider
then, what truth there is in the word;j of that
author {I) who affirms, that in Gregory tho
Great's time, " Masses for the dead were not
intended to deliver souls from those torments of
purgatory." Doubtless he considered not tho
words of St. Augustine, lib. 9, Confess, c. 12,
and De Verb. Apost. Serm. 34, viz. " That tho
sacrifice of our price was offered for his mother
Monica, being dead," and, " That the universal
church does observe, as delivered from their
forefathers, to pray for the faithful deceased in the
sacrifice, and also to olfer the sacrifice for them."
Nor considered this great vindicator, that great
miracle related by St Gregory the Great, him-
self, concerning purgatory, and the benefits souls
there receive, by the offering up of this propitia-
tory sacrifice. In his fourth Book of Dialogues,
chap. 55, telling us of a monk called Justus, who
was obsequious to him, and watched with him in
his daily sickness: "This man," says he, "being
dead, I appointed the healthful host to be offered
for his absolution thirty days together, which
done, the. said Justus appeared to his brother by
vision, and said, I have been hitherto evil, but
now am well, &c " And the brethren in the mon-
astery counting the days, found that to be the day,
on which the 30th oblation was offered for him.,

Nor would doubtless this vindicator liave told
us, " That transubstantiation was yet unborn,"
to wit, in St. Gregory the Great s time, unless Jio
had a mind to impose upon his reader, if he had
ever read the doctrine of those fathers, who
lived before St. Gregory's time, for example :

St. Ignatius, martyr, in his epistle to the
people of Smyrna, speaking of the heretics of
his time, men of the same judgment with this
vindicator, writes thus : " 'I'hey allow not ol
eucharists and oblations," says he, " because
they do not believe the eucharist to be the flesh
of our Saviour Jgsus Christ, which suffereil foi.
our sins, and which the Father, in his meicy
raised again from the dead."

St. Justin, martyr, in his apology to the em-
peror Antonius Pius, made for the Christians;
" Now this food," says he, " amongst us, is called
the eucharist, which it is lawful for none to par-
take of, but those who believe our doctrine to be
true, who have been washed in the laver of rcge-
neration for the remission of sins; and who rcgij-
late tlieir lives according to the prescription o(
Christ ; for we do not receive this as common
bread, or common drink ; but as by the word ol
God, Jesus Christ, our Redeemer, being mado

{I) The author of the Second Defence of the Ercpoeitioo
of the Uoctrinc of tht Church of England, SLc , p. 13.

THE PERPETUAL SACRIFICB

lOl

flbsh, had both flesh and blood for the sake of
uiir salvation ; just so we are taught, that that
fond, over which thanks are given by prayers, in
his own words, and whereby oiir blood and flesh,
are by a change, nourished, is the flesh and blood
of tfie incarnate Jesus ; for the apostles, in the
commentaries written by them, called the gos-
pel, have recorded that Jesus so commanded
thetn."

St. Irenaeus, taking an argument from the
participation of the eucharist, proves the resur-
rection of the flesh, against the heretics of his
i-iiiie. (a) " As the blessed apostles say : ' Be-
cause we are members of his body, of his flesh,
and of his bones ;' not speaking this of any
spiritual or invisible man, but of that disposition
which belongs to a real man, that consists of
flesh, nerves, and bones ; and is nourished by
the chalice, which is his (Christ's) blood, and
receives increase by that bread which is his body.
And as the vine, being planted in the earth,
brings forth fruit in season : and a grain of
wheat falling upon the ground, and rotting, rises
up with increase by the virtue of God, who com-
prehends all things, which afterwards, by a pru-
dent management, becomes serviceable to men ;
and receiving the word of God, are made the
eucharist, which is the body and blood of Christ ;
so also our bodies being nourished by it, and
laid in the earth, and there dissolved, will rise
at their time ; the word of God working in them
this resurrection, to the glory of God the
Fa'.her."

Euseliius Csesariensis : (4) " Making a daily
commemoration of him (Christ,) and daiiy cele-
brating the memory of his body and blood ; and
being now preferred to a more excellent sacri-
fice and ofllce than that of the old law, we think
It -unreasimable any more to fall back to those
first and weak elements which contained certain
signs and figures, but not the truth itself"
Another place of Eusebius, as quoted by St.
John of Damascene : " Many sinners," says he,
" being priests, do oflcr sacrifice ; neither does
God deny his assistance, but by the Holy Ghost
consecrates the proposed gifts. And the bread
indeed is made the precious body of our Lord,
and the cup his precious blood. "(c)

St. Hilary : " We must not speak," says he,
" of the things of God, like men, or in the sense
of the world : let us read what is written, and-
understand what we read, and then we shall be-
lieve with a perfect faith. For what we say of
the natural existence of Christ within us, if we
do not learn from him, wo say foolishly and
profanely ; for he himself says : ' My flesh is
meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.'
There is no place left for doubting of the reality
of his flesh and blood ; for now, by the profes-
sion of Christ himself, and by our f-iith, it is
truly flesh, and truly blood. Is not this trnlh ?
tt may indeed not be true for them, who deny
Christ to be true Goi."{d)

^a) I.i5>. 5, c. 11.

(4) Lit). I, de Demonstrat. Evang., c. 10.

^c) Lib. 'J, Parallel., c. 45.

(d) Lib. «, de Triiiitato.

St. Cyril of Jerusalem :(e) " Since, therefore,
Christ himself does thus affirm, and says of the
bread, ' This is my body ;' who, from hence,
forward, dare be so bold as to doubt of it 1
And since the same (Christ) does assure u.s, anrj-
say : ' This is my blood ;' who, 1 say, can doiib*
of it, and say, it is not his blood? In C^aiia ol
Galilee he once, with his sole will, turned water
into wine, which much resembles blood ; and
does not he deserve to be credited, that he
changed wine into his blood ; for if. when in-
vited to a corporal marriage, he wrought so stu-
pendous a miracle, have we not much more
reason to confess, that he gave his body and
blood to the children of the bridegroom ?
Wherefore, full of certainty, let us receive the
body and blood of Christ; for under the form
of bread is given to thee the body, and the blood
under the form of wine ; that having received
the body and blood of Christ, thou mayost be
made partaker with him of his body and blood.
Thus we shall become Christophers, that is,
' bearers of Christ,' receiving his body and
blood into us. Do not, therefore, look on it as
mere bread only, or bare wine; for, as God
himself has said, it is the body and blood ol
Christ. Notwithstanding therefore, the infor-
mation of sense, let faith onfirm thee ; and do
not judge of the thing by the taste, but rathtr
take it for most certain by faith, without the
least doubt that his body and blood are given
thee- When you come to communion, do not
come holding both the palms of your hands open,
nor your fingers spread ; but let your left hand
be as it were a rest under the right, into which
you are to receive so great a King ; and in the
hollow of your hand take the body of Christ,
saying, amen."(/)

St. Gregory Nyssen :(o^) "When we have
eaten any thing that is prejudicial to our consti-
tution, it is necessary that we take something
that is capable of repairing what was impaired ;
that so, when this healing antidote is within us,
it may work out of the body, by a contrary
affection, all the force of the poison. And
what is this antidote ? It is nothing but that
body which overcame death, and was the origin
of our life. For, as the apostle tells us, as a
little leaven makes the whole lump like itself, so
that' body which, by God's appointment, suffered
death, being received within out body, changes
and reduces the whole to its own likeness. And
as when poison is mixed up v^ith any thing that
is medicinal, the whole compound is rendered
useless ; so likewise that immortal body being
within him that receives it, converts the whole
into its own nature. But there being no other
way of receiving any thing within our body
unless it be first conveyed into our stomach by
eating or drinking, it is necessary that by thi?
ordinary way of nature, the life-giving virtue of
the Spirit be communicated to us. But now,
since that body alone, which was united to the

(e) In Catechis.

(/) It WHS the custom in those clays for the prieatto ■"«-
liver the holy sacrament into the hands of the communicant.
(g) In Orat, Cat., c. 37

103

PROTESTANT CORROPTIONB

Diviriiiy, lias received tfeis grace, and it is mani-
fest that our body can no otherwise become im
mortal, we are to consider how it is impossible,
thai one body, which is always distributed to so
many thousand Christians over the whole world,
should be the whole, by a part in every one, and
otill remain whole in itself."

And a little after : " I do, therefore, now
rightly believe, that the bread sanctified by the
word of God is changed into the body of God
the Word. And here likewise the bread, as
the apostle says, is sanctified by the word of
God and prayer : not so, that by being eaten it
becomes the body of the Word, but because it is
siidderdy changed by the word into his body,
by these words : ' This is my body.' And this
is effected by virtue of the benediction, by which
the nature of those things which appear is
transelemented into it."

Again, in another place :{a) " And the bread
in the beginning is only common bread ; but
when it is sanctified by the mystery, it is made
and called the body of Christ."

St. Hieroin : " God forbid," says he, " that
I should speak detractingly of these men,
(priests,) who, by succeeding the apostles in
their function, do make the body of Christ
with their sacred moiiih."(4)

St. Augustine : " We have heard," says he,
"our Master, who always speaks truth, our di-
vine Rcdeen>er, ihe Saviour of men, recom-
mending to us our ransom, his blood ; for he
spake of his body and blood ; which body he
called meat and which blood he called drink.
The faithful understand the sacrament of the
faitli.Cul." •' But there are some," says he,
" who do not believe ; they said : ' This is an
haid saying, who can hear him ?" It is an hard
saying but to those who are obslinate; that is,
it is incredible but to the incredulous."(e)

The same boly father and great doctor, in his
commentary upon the Thirty-third Psalm,
speaks thus of Christ : " And he was carried in
his own hands ? And can this, brethren, bo
possible in man ? Was ever any man carried
in his own hands ? H(i may be carried by the
hands of oih-ers, but in his own no man was
ever yet carried. How this can be literally un-
derstood of David, we cannot discover ; but in
Christ we find it verified ; for Christ was car-
ried in his own hands, when giving his own very
body, he said : ' This is my body ;' for that body
he carried in his own hands." Such is the
humility of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is
much recommended to men. How plain and
positive are the words of these ancient and holy
fathers, for the real presence of Christ's body
and blood in the Wessed sacrament of the
eucharist, which Froiestants so flatly deny ? 1
would ask our Church of England divines
whether, if the}' had been present among th6
apostles when Christ said : " Take and eat, this
is my body," they durst have assumed the bold-
ness to have contradicted the omnipotent Word,
and have replied: " It is not thv body. Lord, it
is only bread V I believe the most stifT sacra-
mentarian in England would have trembled to
have made such a reply ; though now they dare,
with blasphemous mouth, call the doctrine of
transubstantiation, the " mystery ot iniquity."

I have insisted somewhat longer upon these
two points than, perhaps, the reader may think
proper for this treatise ; but when he considers
that the priesthood and sacrifice, against which
Protestants have corrupted the scripture, and
framed their new a,rticles of faith, are 'wo such
essential parts of Christian religion, thatif either
of them be taken away, , the whole fiibric of
God's church falls to the ground, he will not
look upon it as an unnecesary digression.

SEVERAL OTHER CORRUPTIONS AND FALSIFICATIONS

NOT ME.VTIONED UNDER THE FOREOOIXO HEADS.

This Treatise increasing beyond what indeed
I designed it at first, will oblige me to as much
brevity as possible, in these following corrup-
tions :

In Romans viii. 39. instead of the word " cha-
ri'y," they, contrary to the Greek, translate
" love ;" and so generally in all places, where
rpuch is spoken in commendation of charily.
The reason is, because they attribute salvation
to faith alone, they care not how little charity
ma)- sound in the ears of the people. So like-
wise in 1 Cor. xiii. for '• charity," they eight
times say "love." In Rom. ix. 16, (or this
text . " Therefore it is not of the wilier, nor
she runner, but of God that showeth mercy,"

f(») In Ornt. in diem Luniinum.
(M In Epist. ad Heiibdorum.
(c) Lib. dc Verb. Apobt. Serm.

they translate in their old Bibles : " So lieth it
not then in a man's will or running, but in the
mercy of God ;" changing of, into in, and
wilier and runner, into will and running ; and
so make the apostle say, that it is not at all in
man's will to consent or co-optrale with God's
grace and mercy.

In 1 Corinthians i. 10, for "schisms," which
are spiritual divisions from the unity of thu
church, they translate " dissensions." which may
be in worldly things, as well as rtligion ; this
is done because themselves were afraid to bo
accounted schismatics. So likewise

In Galaiians v. 20, for " heresy " as it , is in
the Greek, they translate " sects," in favour Oi
themselves, being charged with heresy ; also

In Titus iii. 10, instead of saying, according
to the Greek, " A man that is an heretic.
&c., their Bible of 1662 translates, "A man

OF THE SCRIPTPRB

103

that is author of sects ;" favouring that name for
their own sakes, and dissembling it as though
the holy scripture spake not against heresy or
heretics, schism or schismatics.

In I Tim. iii. 6, for a " neophyte," (one lately
baptized or phnted in Christ's mystical body,)
they translate in their first Bibles, " a young
fcholar ;" as though an old scholar could not be
a neophyte, by deferring his" baptism, or by long
delaying his conversion to God, which he learn-
ed to be necessary long before.

In Titus iii. 8, instead of these words, " to
excel in good works," they translate. " to show
forth good works ;" and, as their last edition has
it, " to maintain good works ;" against the dif
ferent degrees of good works.

In Hebrews x. 20, for "dedicated," they
translate, in their first Bibles, "prepared," in
favour of their heresy, that Christ was not the
first who went into heaven, which the word dedi-
cated signifies.

In the two Epistles of Peter, iii. 16, they
force the text to maijitain a frivolous evasion,
that " St. Paul's Epistles are not hard," but the
" things in the epistles ;" whereas both the
Greek and Latin texts are indifferent with regard
to both constructions. It is a general custom
of theirs, and where they find the Greek text
indifferent to two senses, there they restrain
it only to that which may be most advantage-
ous to their own error, thereby excluding its
reference to the other sense. And often-
times, where one sense is received, read, and
expounded by the greater part of the ancient
fathers, and by all the Latin church, there they
very partially follow the other sense, not so
generally received.

In St. James i. 13, for " God is not a tempter
of evils," they translate, " God is not tempted
with evils," and " God cannot be tempted with
evils," (a) than which nothing is nore imper-
tinent to the apostle's speech in that place. Why
is it that they refuse to say, " God is not tempted
to evil," as well as the other ? is it on account
of the Greek word, which is passive ? They
may find in their lexicon, that it is both an active
and passive ; as also appears by the very cir-
cumstance of the foregoing words, " Let no man
say, that he is tempted by God." Why so ?
" Because," says the Protestant translators,
" God is not tempted with evil." Is this a good
reason ' nothing less. How then ? " Betsause,
God is not tempted to evil ;" therefore let no
man say, that " he is tempted by God."

This reason is so coherent, and so necessary
in this place, that if the Greek word were only
a passive, as it is not, yet it might have better
beseemed Beza to translate it actively, than it
did to turn an active into a passive, against the
real presence, as himself confesses he did with-
out scruple. But though he might and ought to
have trnnslatcd this word actively, yet he would
not, because he would favour his own heresy ;
which, quite contrary to these words of the
apostle, says, that " God is a tempter to evil ;" his

((}) A,if9toaaas koic^

words are, Imlucit Dominvs in tentattonem eca
quos sataiKB arhtlrio peftnittef, &c. (/>) " The
Lord leads into temptation those whom he per-
mits to be at Satan's disposal; or, into whom
rather he leads or brings in satan himself, lo fill
their hearts, as Peter speaketh." Note, that lie
says, God brings satan into a man to fill his
heart, as Peter said to Ananias : " VVhy has
satan filled thy heart, to lie i.nto the Holy
Ghost?" So that by this doctrine of Beza, God
brought satan into Anania's heart to make him
lie unto the Holy Ghost ; and so leading him
into temptation, was author and cause of that
henious sin.

Is not this to say," God is a tempter to evil,"
quite contrary to St. James's words ? Or could
he that is of this opinion, translate the contrary ;
to wit, that " God is no tempter to evil ?" Is not
this as much as to say, that God also brought
satan into Judas to fill his heart, and so was
author of Judas's treason, even as he was of
Paul's conversion? Is not this a most absurd
and blasphemous opinion ? Yet how can they
free themselves from it, who allow and maintain
the aforesaid exposition of " God's leading into
temptation ?" Nay, Beza, for maintaining the
same, translates, " God's providence," instead
of " God's prescience," .A^cts ii. 23, a version so
false, that the English Bezaites, in their transla-
tion, are ashamed to follow him.

And which is worse than all this, if worse can
be, they make God not only a leader of men into
temptation, but even the author and worker of
sin : yea, that God created or appointed men to
sin ; as appears too plainly, not only in their
translation of this following text of St. Peter's,
but also from Beza's commentary on the same.
Also Bucer, one of king Edward the Vlth's
apostles, held directly, that " God is the author
of sin." (c)

St. Peter says of the Jews, that Christ is to
them, Petra scandali qui offendunt verba vec
credunt in qun et posili sunt, fis o xat iii&eanv ;
that is, " A rock of scandal to them (the Jews)
that stumble at the word, neither do believe
wherein also they are put," as the Rhemish
Testament translates it : or as it is rendered in
king Edward the Vlth's English translation, and
in the first of queen Elizabeth's, " they believe
not that whereon they were set ;" which transla-
tion Illyricus approves, (rf) "This is well to be
marked, lest a man imagine that God himself did
put them, and (as one, meaning Beza, against
the nature of the Greek word, translates and in-
terprets it) that God created them for this pur-
pose, that they should withstand him. Etasmus
and Calvin, referring this word to that which goes
before, interpret it not amiss, that the Jews wcro
made or ordained to believe the word of God,
and their Messias ; but yet that they would not
believe him ; for to them belonged the promises,
the testaments, and the Messias himself; as St.

(J) Annot. Nov. Test., anno 155(5, Mutt. vi. 13.
(e) See Bucer'e Scripta Anglicixna, p. 931 ; et in
ad Rom. in p. 1, c. 94.
(d) Illyricua's Gloee in 1 Pnt il &

104

PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS

Peter says. Acts, ii. 3, and St. Paul, Rom. ix.
And to them were committed the oracles of
God, by witness of the same Paul, Rom. iii."
Thus Illyricus ; who has here given the true
sense of this text, according to the signilication
of the Greek word ; and has proved the same
by script-lire, by St. Peter and St. Paul, and has
confirmed it by Erasmus and Calvin, lea,
TiUther follows the same sense in this place : so
ines Castalic in his annotations to the New
Toitament,

Mel Beza, against all these, to defend his
blasf.hfcmous doctrine, that " God leads men into
temptation and brings in satan to fill their hearts,"
translates it thus : Sunt immorigeri ad quo J ettnm
conditi jeurunl, (n) " They are rebellious,
whereiinlo also they were created ;" With whom
his scholars, our English translators, are resolv-
ed to agree ; therefore, in their Bible of the
year i677, they read, " Being disobedient unto
the which thing they were ordained." And in
that of 1572 : " Being disobedient unto the which
thing they were even ordained." This is yet
worse, and with this, word for word, agrees the
Testament of 1580, and the Scottish Bible of
1579. This is also the Geneva translation in
the Bible of 1561, which the French Geneva
Bible follows. And how much our Protestant
last translation differs from these, may be seen
in the Bible printed at London, anno 1683,
where it is read thus : " And a rock of oflTence,
even to them which stumble at the word, being
disobedient whereunto also they are appointed."

Is imt this to say positively, that God is au-
thor of men's disobedience or rebellion against
Christ ? " But, if God," says Castalio against
Beza, " hath created_some men to rebellion or
disobedience, he is author of their disobedience ;
as if he has created sonic to obedience, he is
truly author of their obedience." Yes, this is to
make God the author of men's sin, for which
purpose it was so translated : and thus Beza in
his notes upon the text explains it ; that " men
are made or fashioned, framed, stirred up, crea-
ttd or ordained, not by themselves, for that were
iibsurd, but by God, to be scandalized at him,
and his Son our Saviour ; Chrislus est eis offen-
diculo, prout etiam ad hoc ipsum a Deo ^unt con-
diti ;" and further discourses at large, and brings
other texts to prove this sense, and this translation.

And though Luther and Calvin, as is said, dis-
sented not from the true sense of this text, yet
touching the blasphemous doctrine, (A) that
" God is the author of sin," they, with Zuinglius,
must, for all this, have the right hand of Beza.
" How can man prepare himself to good," says
L ither, " seeing it is not in his power to make
his ways evil ? For God works the wicked
work ill the wicked."

" When we commit adultery or murder," says
Zuinglius " it is the work of God, being the
mover, the author, and inciter, &c. God moves

[a) Vide Gaslalio in Dcfciisione quu Translat., pp. 153,
154 155.

'4) Lut To. 2, Wittetn. an. 1551, Assert. Art. 36, Viil.
de Aotvo. Arbit fol. 195, Kilit. 1603. Zuing. Xt. 10, J&
proviilentia Dei, fol. 3G9, 3GG, 367

the thief to kill, &,c. He is forced to sin, &c.
God hardened Pharaoh, not speaking hyperbo"
lically, but he truly hardens him, yea, althougli
he resist." By which, and other of his writings,
he so plainly teaches God to be the auihoi ol
sin, that he is therefore particularly reprehended
by the learned Protestant, Grawerus, in Absur-
da Absnrdoruin, c. 5, de Prtsdest., fol. 3, 4.

" God is author," says Calvin, " of all those
things, which these Popish judges would have to
happen only by his idle sufferance." (c) He
also affirms our sins to be not only by God's
permission, but by " his decree and will." Which
blasphemy is so evidently taught by him and
his followers, that they are expressly condemn-
ed for it by their famous brethren : Feining, lib.
de Urnvers. Grut.,p. 109 ; Osiander, i'ncn/nd-.
Coiitrnv., p. 104; Scaffman, de Peccal., Causis^
pp. 1 55, 27 ; Stizlinus, Dcsput. Theol. de Pro-
vitl. Dei. srct. 141 ; Graver, in Absurda Absurd.,
in Fronllfp. Yea, the Protestant magistrates
of Berne made it penal by the laws, for any in
their territories to preach Calvin's doctrine
thereof, or for the people to read any of his
books concerning the same, (d) Are not these
blessed reformers ? " O excellent instrument of
God !" as Dr. Tenison styles the chief of them.(c)

Protestants denying free will in man, not oiily
to do good, but even to resist evil, open a very
wide passage into this impious doctrine, of
making God the author of sin.

In 1 St. Peter i. 22, the apostle exhorts
Christains to live as becomes men of so excel-
lent a vocation : " Purifying," says he, " youi
souls by obedience of charity," (/) &c. ; a little
before, verse 17, remembering always, that
" God, without exception of persons, judges every
man according lo his works." From which place
it appears, that we have free will working with
the grace of God ; that we purify and cleanse
our souls from sin ; that good works are neces-
sarily required of Christians : for by many di-
vine arguments St. Peter urges this conclusion ;
Ul animus nostras caslijicemiis, " That we purify
our own souls." So the Protestant translation,
made in Edward the Sixth's time, has it, " For-
asmuch as you have purified your souls.' (g)
So likewise one of queen Elizabeth's Bibles :
" Even ye which have purified your souls ;" and
so it is in the Greek. Notwithstanding all
which, Beza, in his Testaments of 1556 and
1565, translates it, Animabus vcstris purijicatis
obediendo verilati per Spiritum : which another
of queen Elizabeth's Bibles renders thus : " See-
ing your souls are purified in obeying the truth',
through the Sprit." So translates also the En-
glish Bible, printed at Geneva, 1561, and the
Scotch, printed at Edinburgh, 1579.

So that these words make nothing at all either
for free will, or co-operation with God's grace,
or value of good works, but rather the con.

Cc)CaIvin,instit. l.l,c. 18, and 1.2, c.4,anJ 1.3, c. 23

(d) Vid. Litteras Senat. Bern, ad Minislros, &c. im.
1555.

(e) Dr. Ten. Conf. with M. P.

If) Castific.-intes animas veetras in'ol edientia Chantati^
is) Bib. 1561, 1579.

OK THE SCRIPTITKK.

JOS

iraryv proving that in our justification we
work not, but are wrought ; we purify not our-
selves, but are purified ; we are not active and
doers with God's grace, but passive and suffer-
ers ; which opinion the Council of Trent con-
demns, (a) The Protestant Bible of 1 683, has
again corrected this, and translates : " Seeing ye
have purified your souls," &c. ; but whether with
any good and sincere intention, appears by their
liaving left uncorrected another fault of the same
stamp in Philippians i. 28.

Where St. Paul, handling the same argument,
exhorts the Christians not to fear the enemies
of Christ, though they persecute, ever so ter-
ribly, " which to them," says he, " is cause of
perdition, but to you of salvation ;" where he
makes good works necessary, and so the causes
ol salvation, as sins are of damnation. But
Bcza will have the old interpreter overseen in
so translating : " because," says he, " the a/Hic-
tion of the faithful is never called the cause of
their salvation, but the testimony." (i) And,
(herefore, translates the Greek word eSei^ig,
indicium. And his scholars, the English trans-
lators, render it a " token ;" though, indeed, one
of their Testaments translates it, as we do,
a " cause ;" so do also Erasmus, and the Ti-
gurine translators ; (c) yea, the apostles com-
paring sins with good works, these leading to
heaven, as those to hell, convinces its sense to
be so ; as 'I'heodoret, a Greek father, also
gathers from that word, saying : " That pro-
cures to them destruction, but to you salvation."
(d) So St. Augustine, St. Hierom, and other
Latin fathers.

And that good works are a cause of salvation,
our Saviour himself clearly shows, when he thus
speaks of Mary Magdalen : Ri-mitluntiir ti pec-
cata mvlla, quoniam ddr.xU mullum : " Many sins
are forgiven her, because she loveth much."
Against which no man living can cavil from the
Greek, Hebrew, or Latin, but that works of
charity are a cause why sins are forgiven ; and
60 a cause of our justification and salvation,
which are evidently the words and meaning of
our blessed Saviour. Notwithstanding, Beza
and our English translators have a shift for this
also ; he translates. Rernissa sunt p'ccata rjus
mtilla : nam dilexil multum : which in our Eng-
lish Bible is rendered, " Her sins which are
many, are forgiven ; for she loved much ;" («)
whicli the reader, perhaps, may think to be a
difference so small as is not worth taking notice
jf ; but,'if well considered, will be found as great
as is between our doctrine and Protestants.
And first, the text is corrupted, by making a
uller point than either the Greek or Latin
oears, the English making some a colon, (:) and
some a semicolon, (;) where in the Greek there
is only a comma {,) ; and Beza ni his Latin, yet
more desperately makes a down and full period,(.)

(fl) Scfis. 6, cap. 4.

lb) Bcza Annot. in ilium locum

(d) Theoil. in Phil , cap

(e) Bcza Teet. anno 1565. Bih. 1683.

thereby dividing and distractirg the latter pan
from the former, as though it contained not a
reason of that which went before, as it does, but
were some new matter ; wherein he is cimtrolled
by another of his own translators, and hy the
Greek prints of Geneva, Zurich, Hnsil, and other
German cities, who poin' it as it is in our Ijaliu
and English. But their falsehood upjiears much
more in turning quomam into nam, " because'
into "for." {/)

Seeing onr Saviour's words are in effect thus :
" Because she loved much, therefore, many sina
are forgiven her;" which they, by this peritr
sion and mispointing it, make a quite difi'ereni
and almost contrary sense ; thus : " Because .shr
had many sins Ibrgiven her, therefore, she loved
much ;" and this love following was a token ol
the remission which she, by only faith, had ob-
tained before ; so turning the cause into tho
effect, and the antecedent into the consequent,
hereby utterly overthrowing the doctrine '.vhich
Christ by his words and reason gives, and the
church by his words and reason gathers. Beza
blushes not to confess why he thus altered
Christ's words, saying : Nam dihxit, tiyinijoe,
"For she loved:" the Vulgate translation and
Erasmus render it, " Because she loved." " But
I (says he) had rather interpret it as I do, that
men may understand in these words to be shown,
not the cause of remission of sins, but rather
that which ensued after such remission, and that
by the consequent is gathered the antecedent.
And therefore, ihey who abuse this place, to
overthrow free justification by faith alone, are
very impudent and childish." (g) Thus Bcza,
But the ancient fathers, who were neither impu-
dent nor childish, gathered from this text, that
charity, as well as faith, is requisite for obtaining
remission of sins. St. Chrysostom, Horn. 6, in
Mat. says, (//) "As first by water and the
Spirit, so afterwards by tears and confession, we
arc made clean ;" which he proves by this place
So St. Gregory, expounding this same place,
says, " Many sins are forgiven her, because she
loved much ; as if it had been said expressly,
he burns out perfectly the rust of sin, whosoevei
burns vehemently with the fire of love. For so
much more is the rust of sin scoured away, by
how much more the heart of a sinner is inflamed
with the great fire of charity."

And St. Ambrose upon the same words- —
" Good are the tears which are able to wash
away our sins. Good are the tears, wherein is
not only the redemption of sinners, but also the
refreshing of the just."

And the great St. Augustine, debating this
story in a long homily, says, («)" This sinful
woman, the more she owed, the more she loved ;
the forgiver of her debts, our Lord himself, af-
firming so : Many sins are forgiven her, because
she loved much. And why loved -she much,

(/) 1556.

(;») Beza in Luc. vii. 47,
\\) Hon). 33, in Evang.
(i) Horn. 23, inter. 50.

108

PROTESTANT CORRnPTIONS.

but because she owed much ? "Vyhy did she
all these offices of weeping, washing, &c., but
to obtain remission of her sins ?" Other holy-
fathers agree in the seif-same verity, all making
her love to be a cause going before, and not an
elfect or sequel coming after the remission of sins.

1 have only taken notice here how Beza and
our English translators have corrupted this
text ; but he who pleases to read Musculus,
ill locis Communibiis, c. de Juslificat., 11,5, will
find him perverting it after another strange
manner, by boldly asserting, without all reason
01 probable conjecture, that our blessed Saviour
spoke in Hebrew, and used the preterperfect for
the present tense ; and that St. Luke wrote in
the Doric dialect ; so that Musculus would have
it said : " She loved Christ much, and no won-
der ; she had good cause so to do, because many
sins were forgiven her."

But Zuingliiis goes yet another way to work
with this text, and tells us, that he supposes the
word "love" should have been "faith:" his
words are, " Because she loved much. I sup-
pose, that lovK is here put for faith ; because she
has so great affiance in me, so many sins are
forgiven her. For he says afterwards. Thy
faith hath saved thee ; that is, has absolved and
delivered thee from thy sins." (a) Which one
distinction of his, will answer all the places that
in this controversy can be brought out of scrip-
lure to refute their "only faith." But, to
conclude, what can be more impious than to
affirm, that for obtaining of sins, charily is not
required as well as faith, seeing our blessed
Saviour, if we credit his evangelist, St. Luke,
and I think his authority ought to be preferred
before that cf Zuinglius, Beza, Musculus, or
our English sectaries, most divinely conjoins
charity with faith, saying of charily, " Many sins
are forgiven her, because she loved much !"
straightway adding of faith, " Thy faith has made
thee safe ; go in peace."

As you see here, they use all their endeavours
to su|)press the necessity of good and charitable
works ; so, on the other side, they endeavoured
to make their first Bibles countenance vice, (h)
BO far as to seem to allow of the detestable sin
of usury, provided it were not hurtful to ihe
. borrower. In Deuteronomy x.xiii. 1 9, they
translate thus, " Thou shall not hurt thy brother
Sy usury of money, nor by usury of corn, nor by
usury of any thing that he may be hurt withal ;"
by which they woidd have it meant, that usury
is not hero forbidden, unless it hurls the party
that borrows. A conceit so rooted in most
men's Iii!art3, that they think such usury very
lawful, and therefore frequently offend therein.
But Almighty God, in this place of holy scrip-
:ure, has not one word of hurtins or not hurting,
as may bo seen in the Hebrew and reek ; and
as also appears from their having corrected the
same in their Bible of 1 683, where they read, as
it ought 10 be, " Thou shalt not lend upon usury
to thy brother, usury of money, usury of vic-
tuals, usury of anything that is lent upon usury."

(a) Zuing. in Luc. vir To 4.
(4) Bib. 1562, l.*77.

If the Hebrew word signify to hurt by tistiTy,
why did not they, in the very words next fol
lowing, in the self-same Bibles, translate it thus ;
" Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury,
but not unto thy brother?" why said they not
rather, " A stranger thou mayest hurt by usury,
but not thy brother V is it not all the same in
word and phrase here as before ? 'I'he Jews
woidd have given them thanks for so translating
it ; who, by forcing the Hebrew word as they
do, think it well done, to hurt any stranger, that
is, any Christian by usury, be it ever so gre.it.

Whether the first Protestant translators oi
the scriptures were guided by that spirit which
should be in Christian Catholic translators, may
be easily gathered from what follows, as well as
from what you have already seen.

They were so profane and dissolute, that
some of them termed that divine book^
called, Canticum, Canticorum, containing the
high mystery of Christ and his church, " The
Ballad of Ballads of Solomon," as if it were a
ballad of love, between Solomon and his concu-
bine, as Castalio wantonly translated it.

And yet more profanely, in another place,
which even their last translation has not yet
vouchsafed to correct, " We have conceived, we
have born in pain, as though we should have
brought forth wind." (c) I am ashamed to set
down the literal commentary of ihis their trans-
lation. Was there any thing in the Hebrew to
hinder them from translating it in this manner :
" We have conceived, and as it were travailed tc
bring forth, and have brought forth the Spirit ;"
Why should they say wind rather than spirit ?
They are not ignorant, that the Sepiuagint in
Greek, and the ancient fathers, do all exjwuud
it, ((^, e,/,) according to both the Hebrew and
Greek, of the " Spirit of God," which is first
conceived in us, and begins by fear, which the
scripture calls : " The beginning of wisdom ;"
insomuch, that in the Greek there are these
godly words, famous in all antiquity, " Through
tiie fear of thee, O Lord, we conceived, and
have travailed with pf.in, and hav€ brought forth
the Spirit of thy salvation, which thou hast made
upon the earth :" which excellently sets before
our eyes the degrees of a faithful man's increase,
and proceeding in the Spirit of God. But to
say, " We have been with child," as their last
translation has it, (g) " and have brought forth
wind," can admit no spirii/ual interpretation ; but
even as a mere Jew should translate, or under-
stand it, who has no sense of the Spirit of God.
It is the custom of Protestants, in all such cases
as this, where the more appropriate sense is o(
God's holy Spirit, there to translate wind, as in
Psalm cxivii. 18.

Another impropriety similar to this is, thai
they will not translate for the angel's hunouT
that carried Habakuc, "He sent him into
Babylon, over the lake, by the force of hia

((i) St. Ambrose, lib 9, de Interpret., c. 4
i.e) Clirysostom, m Peal. vii. prop, fin,
{/) See S. Hierom upon this place-
Cg) Bible 1683.

OF THE SCRIPTURB.

107

spirit;" but thus: "Through a mighty wind."
So attributing it to the wind, not to the angel's
power, and omitting quite the Greek word, aurS,
'' his," which showeth plainly, that it was the
angel's spirit, force, and power. (o)

Again, where the prophet Isaiah speaks most
manifestly of Christ, saying : " And {out Lord)
shall not cause thy doctor to fly from thee any
more, and thine eyes shall see thy master ;"
which is all the same in efiect with that which
Christ says, " I will be with you unto the end of
the world ;" there one of their Bibles translates
thus, " Thy rain shall be no more kept back,
but thine eyes shall see thy rain." Their last
translation has corrected this mad falsiiication.(i)

Again, whore the holy church reads : " Re-
Toice, ye children of Zion, in the Lord your God,
becaufe ho has given you the doctrine of jus-
tice -"{c} there one of their translations has it,
" The rain of righteousness :" and their last
Bible, instead of correcting the former, makes
it yet worse, if it can be made worse, saying,
" Be glad then, yc children of Sion, &c., for he
hath given you the former rain moderately."
Does the Hebrew word force them to this 1
Doubtless they cannot but know, that it signifies
a teacher or master : and therefore, even the
Jews themselves, partly understand it of Esdras,
partly of Christ's divinity : yet these new and
partial translators are resolved to be more pro-
fane than the very Jews. If they had, as I
hinted above, been guided by a Catholic and
Christian spirit, they might have been satisfied
with the sense of St. Hierom, a Christian doctor,
upon these places, who makes no doubt but the
Hebrew is doctor, master, teacher ; who also in
the psalm translates thus : " With blessings shall
the doctor be arrayed,"((?) meaning Christ ;
where Protestants, with the Jews of latter days,
the enemies of Christ, translate, "The rain covers
the pools." What cold stuff is this in respect of
that other translation, so clearly pointing to
Christ, our doctor, masterjind ]a.wg\ver.(e)

And again, where St. Jerom, and all the
fathers translate and expound, "There shall be
faith in thy- times," to express the wonderful
faith that shall be among Christians ; there they
translate, " There shall be stability of thy times."
And their last Bible has it thus, "And wisdom
and knowledge shall be the stability of thy
times." Whereas the prophet reckons all these
virtues singly, viz., judgment, justice, which
they term righteousness, faith, wisdom, knowl-
edge, and the fear of our Lord ; but they, for a
little ambiguity of the Hebrew word, turn faith
into stability.

In Isa. xxxrii. 22, all their first Bibles read,
" O virgin daughter of Sion, he hath despised
thee, and laughed thee to scorn : O daughter of
Jerusalem, he hath shaken his head at thee." In
the Hebrew, Greek, St. Hierom's translation
and commentary, as also in the last Protestant
Bible, printed 1683, it is quite contrary, viz..

(a) Isa. XXX. 20.
(i) Joel ii. 23.
Ic) Lyra in 30.
( iS Psalm Ixxxiv. 7.

(<) Isaiah xxxiiL 6

" The virgin daughter of Sion has despi.sed thee
O Assur : the daughter of Jerusalem has shaken
her head at thee." All are of the feminine
gender, and spoken of Sion literally triumphing
over Assur; and of the church spiritually tii-
umphing over heresies, and all her enemies. In
their first Bibles they translated all as of the
masculine gender, thereby applying it to Assur ; '
insulting against Sion and Jerusalem. But for
what cause or reason they thus falsify it, will bo
hard to determine, unless they dreaded, that by
translating it otherwise it might be applied
spiritually to the church's triumphing over
themselves, as her enemies. We cannot judge
it an oversight in them, because we find it so
translated in the fourth book of Kings, xix. 21,
j'ea, and in all their first translations.

A great many other faults are found in theil
first translations, which might be passed by, as
not done upon any ill design, but perhaps, rather
as mistakes or over-sights, (/) yet however,
touching some few of them, it will not be amiss
to demand a reason, why they were committed :
as for example, why they translated, " Ye abject
of the Gentiles," Isa. xlv. 20, rather than, " Ye,
who are saved of the Gentiles ;" or, as their
translation has it, " Ye that are escaped of the
nations V or.

Why, in their Bible of 1579, did they write
at length : " Two thousand to them that keep the
fruit thereof," rather than " two hundred ;" as
it is in the Hebrew and Greek, and as now theii
last Bible has it 1 or.

Why read t"hey in some of their Bibles, " As
the fruits of cedar ;" and not rather according to
the Greek and Hebrew, " Tabernacles of
cedar ;" or however, as their last translation has
it, " Tents of Kedar ?" or.

Why do they translate : " Ask a sign, either
in the depth, or in the height above," rather than,
" Ask a sign, either in the depth of hell," &c., as
the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin has it l{g) Or,

Why do they translate : " To make ready an
horse," rather than " beasts," as the Greek has
it; and as also now their edition of 1683 reads
it ?(/*) Or,

Why translate they : "- If a man on the sab
bath-day receive circumcision, without breaking
the law. of Moses;" rather than, according to
the Greek, which their last translation has . fol-
lowed : " If a man on the sabbath-day receive
circumcision, to the end the law of Moses should
not be broken V'{i) Or,

Why read they : " The Son of man must
suffer many things, and be reproved of the
elders," for " be rejected of the elders," as
the Greek, and now their Bibles of 1683 have
it ; and as in the Psalm, " The stone which the
builders rejected ;" we say not reproving of the
said stone, which is Christ ?(A)

Again, why translate they thus : Many wliicii

(/) Cantica. Canticor , viii. 12. j Camica. Canticor, ;
4 ; Isa. vii. 11.
(g) Isa. vii. 11.
(h) Acts xxiii. 24.
(i) Jo. vii. 23.
(k) Mark viil 31.

LU8

PllOTESTANT ABSURDITIES,

had seen the first house,- when the foundation of
thia house was laid before their eyes, wept," &c.,
when in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, it is
read thus : " Many who had seen the first house
in the foundation thereof, (i. e., yet standing
upon the foundation, undestroyed,) and this
temple before their eyes, wept ?" I suppose
they imagined, that it should be meant they
Fnw Solomon's temple when it was first founded ;

which, because it was inipossible they trans-
lated otherwise than it is in the Hebrew and
Greek : they should indeed have considered
better of it.

Though we do not look upon several of these
as done, I say, with any ill design, yet wo canr>ot
excuse thsra for being done with much more
licentious boldness than ought to appear in sin-
cere and honest translators.

ABSURDITIES IN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE.

Thbir unrestrained licentiousness is yet fur-
ther manifest, in their turning of David's Psalms
into rhyme, without reason, and then singing
them in their congregations ; telling the people,
from Saint James, v. : " If any be merry, let
him sing psalms ;" being resolved to do nothing
but what they produce a text of scripture for,
though of their own making : for, though the
apostle exhorts " such as are heavy, to pray,"
and " such as are merry, to sing ;" yet he does
not in particular appoint David's Psalms to be
sung by the merry, no more than he appoints our
Lord's Prayer to be said by such as he exhorts
to pray, though perhaps, he meant it of both : so
t from any thing our bold interpreters can
gather from the text, JEquo animn est ? Psallat.
xXXfiiui, St. James might mean other spiritual
songs and hymns, as well as David's Psalms :
but be it that he exhorted them to sing David's
Psalms, which we have no cause to deny,because
the church of Christ has ever used the same ; yet
that he meant it of such nonsensical rhymes as
T. Sternhold, Joseph Hopkins, Robert Wisdom,
and other Protestant poets have made to be sung
in their churches, under the name of David's

Psalms, none can ever grant, who has read
them. It has hitherto been the practice of God's
churc'h to sing David's Psalms, as triily trans-
lated from the Hebrew into Latin ; but never
to sing such songs as Hopkins and Sternhold
have turned from the English prose into metre :
neither do I think that sober and judicious
Protestants themselves can look upon them as
good forms of praises to be sung in their churches
to the glory, honour, and service of so great, so
good, and so wise a God, when they shall con-
sider how fully they are fraught with nonsense
and ridiculous absurdities, besides many gross
corruptions, viz., above two hundred ;{n) con-
fessed by Protestants themselves ta be foimd in
the Psalms in prose, from which these were
turned into metre, which we may guess aro
scarcely corrected by the rhyme. To collect all
the faults committed by the said blessed poets
in their psalm-metre, would be a task too tedious
for my designed brevity ; I will, therefore,
only set down some few of their absurd and
ridiculous expressions ; and for the rest,leave tho
reader to compare these psalms in metre with tlio
others in prose, even as by themselves translated .

PSALMS IN Prose, Bible 1683

PsALU ii. verse 3
Let us break their bauds asunder, and cast
away their cords from us.

Psalm xvi. verses 9, 10.
Theretore, my heart is glad, and my gloiy re-
joicelh : my flesh also shall rest in hope. For
thou wilt not leave my suul in hell, &c.

Psalm xviii. verse 36.
Thou hast enlarged my steps under me, that
.riy feet did not slip.

ifl) Spe the I'rpfarc.

\i) The reailer niiil not tie told why this ia added, be-
sides iU iiiakiiiJ up I lie rhyme.

{c) What they trnnKlate " felory " in prose they call

PSALMS IN Metre, Bible 1683.

Psalm ii. verse 3.
Shall we be bound to them ^ say they ;

Let all their bonds be broke,
" And of their doctrine and theil law,

Let us reject the yoiie."(i)

. Psalm xvi. verses 9, 10
Wherefore my heart and " tongue" aIso,(e)

Do both lejoice together ;
My " flesh and bodip' rest in hope.

When I this thing consider :
Thou wilt not leave my soul in " grave,"

For, Lord, thou lovcst me, &c.

Psalm xviii. verse 36.

And under me thou makest plain

The way where I should walk :
So that my feet shall never slip,

"Nor stumble at a balk."

" tongue," in rhyme. And for want of one foot to mona
up aiiother verse, they thrust in a whole bodj, " fleph and
body." Again, what in prose is called hell, in rhyme tbey
term grave ; as if souls were left in the grave,

IN TURNING PSALMS INTO UETRC.

PSALMS IN Prose, Bible 1683.

Psalm xviii. verse 37.
1 have pursued mine enemies, and overtaken
them : neither did I turn again till thoy were
consumed

Psalm xxii. verse 7.
All they that see me, laugh me to scorn.
Thoy shoot out the lip, they shako the head.

Psalm xxii, verse 12.
Many bulls have compassed me, strong bulls
of Basan have beset me round.

Psalm xxvi. verse 10.
In whose hand is mischief, and their right
hand is full of bribes.

Psalm xlix. verse 20.
Mali that is in honour, and understandeth not,
is like the beasts that perish.

Psalm Ixxiv. verses 11, 12.
Why withdraweth thou thy hand, even thy
riijht hand ? Pluck it out of thy bosom.

Psalm Ixxvii. verse 16.
— He caused waters to run down like rivers.

Psalm Ixxviii. verse 57.
— ^They were turned aside like a deceitful bow.

Psalm Ixxxix. verse 46.
The days of his youth hast thou shortened :
thou hast covered him with shame. Selah.

Psalm xcvii. verse 12.
Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness
to the upright in heart

Psalm xcix. verse 1.
The Lord reigneth, let the people tremble ; he
sittcth between the cherubims, let the earth bo
moved.

Psalm cxix. verse 70.
Their heart is as fat as grease ■ (As fat as
drawn, in another Bible. But in the Latin
Vulgate, Coagulatum est sicut lac cor enrum.)

Psalm cxix. verse 83.
For 1 am become like a bottle in smoke.

(a) This warrior lays about him in a different manner

from David. , . , t . «. n

(A) We have heard of crafty heads, but never of crafty

(e ) in the title page they say," If any be merry, let him
•ing psalms' ' But considering w hat psalms they are, they
15

PSALMS IN Metre, Bible 1683

Psalm xviii. verse 37.
So I suppress and wound my foes,

Ihat they can rise no more:
For at my feet they fall down flat,

I strike them^U so sore, (a)

Psalm xxii. verse 7.
All men despise, as they behold

Mc walking on the way :
" They grin, tney mow, they nod their beads," &c.

Psalm xxii. verse 12.
So many bulls do compass me,

That be full strong of head :
" Yea, bulls so fat, as though they had

In Basan-field been fed.

Psalm xxvi. verse 10.
Whose hands are heap'd with " craft (i) and guile,'

Their lives thereof are full.
And their right hand with " wrench and wile.

For bribes doth pluck and pull."

Psalm xlix. verse 20.
Thus man to honour God hath brought.

Yet doth he not consider ;
But like brute beast, so doth ho live,

" And turn to dust and powder."

Psalm Ixxiv. verses 11, 12.
Why dost thou draw thy hand " a bock.

And hide it in thy lap 1"
O pluck it out, and be not slack,

" To give thy foes a rap."(c)

Psalm Ixxvii. verse 16.
— Of such abundance that " no floods
To them might be compared."

Psalm Ixxviii. verse 57

— ^They went astray,
Much lik a bow that would not bend.
But slip and start away.

Psalm Ixxxix. verse 46.
Thou hast cut off, and made full short

His youth and lusty days ;
" And rais'd of him an ill report.

With shame and great disprai8e."((2)

Psalm xcvii. verse 13.
And light doth spring up to the just,

With pleasure for nis part,
Grea) joy with gladness, mirth and lust, A(c{c)

Psalm xcix. verse 1.
The Lord doth reign, " altho at it

The people rage full sore ;"
Yea, he on cherubims doth sit,

« Tho' all the world do roar."

Psalm cxix. verse 70.
Their hearts are swoln with worldly wealtb.
As " grease so aro they fat."

Psalm cxix. verse 83.
As a ■■ skin-bottle" in tho smoke.
So am I parch'd and dried.

advise him to sing, they might have done as well to tave
said rather, " If any would be merry, let him sing psalms."

{d) To say that God raises an ill report of men, has af-
finity to Beza's doctrine, which makes God the author of
sin. Vid. Supr.

(e) I thought, till now, that lust had been a ein

110

PnoTESTANT ABSURDITIES IN TURMNG PSALMS INTO MElRt'

PSALMS IN Prose, Bible 1683.

Psalm cxix. verse HO.
The wicked have laid a snare for me.

Psalm cxis. verse 130.
The entrance of thy word giveth light : it
pvoth understanding unto the simple

Psalm cxix. verse 150.
They draw nigh that follow after mischief:
they are far from thy law.

Psalm cxx. verse 5.
Woe is me, that I sojourn iu Mesech,, that I
dwell in the tents of Kedar.

Psalm cxxvii. verse 2.
It is in vain for you to rise up early, to sit up
late, to eat the bread of sorrow.

Psalm cxxix. verse 6.
Let them be as grass upon the house-tops,
which withereth before it groweth up.

PSAL.MS IN Metre, Bibli: 1683.

Psalm cxix. verso 110.
Altho' the wicked laid their nets
" To catch me at a bay."

PsALM cxix. verso 130.
When men first " enter into" thy word,

They find a light most clear;
And very idiots understand,

" When they it read or hear."(A)

Psalm cxix. verse 150
My foes draw near, " and do procure

My death maliciously:"
Which from thy law are far gone back,

" And strayed from it lewdly."

Psalm cxx. verse 5.

Alas I too long I slack,
Within these tents " so black,"

Which Kedars are by " name ;"
" By whom the flock elect.
And all of Isaac's sect,

Are put to open shame. "(c)

Psalm cxxvii. verse 2.

Though ye rise early in the morn,
And so at night go late to bed,
" Feeding full hardy wilh brown bread,"

Yet were your labour " lost and worii."(d)

Psalm cxxix. verse 6.
And made as grass upon the house.
Which withereth " ere it grow. "(e)

I could weary the reader with such like ex-
amples ; they seldom or never speak of God's
covenant with Israel, but they call it God's
trade. (<J) As in Psalm Ixxviii. 10, where they sing,

For why t they did not keep with God,

The covenant that was made ;
Nor yet would walk or lead their lives,
According to his " trade."

Psalm Ixxxvii. verse 10.
For why ^ their hearts were nothing bent
To him, nor to his " trade."

Psalm ex. verse 37.
For this is unto Israel
A statute and a " trade."

Psalm Ixxxi. Verse i.
And set all my commandments light,
And will not keep my " trade.

Psalm Ixxxix. verse 33.
To them be made a law and " trade," &c.

Psalm cxlviii . verse 6. ^

Such Stuff as this you will find in other
places. The words " more" and " less" have
also stood them in as good stead as " trade" to
make rhyme with, viz :

All men on earth, both " least" and " most."
Psalm xxiii. verse 8.

All kings, both " more" and " less."

Psalm xlviii. verse 1 1 .

The children of Israel each one both " more" and " less."
Psalm xlviii, verse 14.

Seo also Psalm cix. verse 10; Psalm xi.
verso 6 ; Psalm xxvii. verse 8, dec, &c.

Nor are they a little beholden to an " ever and
f )[■ aye ;" " for ever and a day ;" '' for evermore
.iways," and the like.

Besides thoir •nriiing the psalms into metre,

(rt)I'erhnps, this word "trade" should have been " tradi-
.i.in" with thein :.hut for fenr of aPopish terra, which they
10 much detest llii\ would rather wKte nonsense than use it,

they also made rhyme of the Lord s Prayer, the
Creed, and the Ten Commandments. In which
one thing is remarkable, viz., that in the Creed;
upon the article of Christ's descent into hell
they make a very plain distinction between the
hell of the damned, and that of the fathers of
the Old Testament, Limbus Palrvm, thus :

And so he died in the flesh, but quickened in the sprite,
His body then was buried, as is our use and right.
His soul did afler this descend into the lower parts,
A dread unto the wicked spirits, butjoy to faithful hnarts.

Whom do they mean by those " faithful hearts,"
to whom our blessed Saviour's descent into hell
Limbus, was a joy, but those of whom the pro-
phet Zachary spoke, when prophebying of our
Saviour's releasing them, he said : " Thou also
in the blood of thy Testament hast let forth thy
prisoners out of the lake, wherein there is no
water ?" And, whom St. Peter meant, when he
said, that Christ in spirit "coming, preached to
the spirits also that were in prison ; which had
been incredulous sometimes, when they expect
ed the patience of God in the days of Noe,
when the ark was in building." (/)

The turning of this article into metre is, I
suppose, the very cause why we have not the
Creed printed in metre in their latter impres-
sions ; and consequently, none of the other pray-

(i) By singing thus, they would possess the people tha!
even the most ignorant of them are capable to understand
the scripture when they read it, or have it read to them.

(c) Why is all this added lonly for the sake of rhyming
to the word "name," unless they would make Isaac a
sect maker, and his religion a seci like their own.

(rf) If brown bread is the bread of affliction, a great
many feeds on it who are able to buy white.

(e) How grass can wither before it grows, is a paradox.

(/) Zach. ix. 11.

PROTESTANT TK A NSr.ATIONS 01' THE SCHIPTURE.

ers and rhymes, which their first Bibles had
after the Psalms ; because to put out this and
.110 more, would have given too shrewd a cause
of fiuSj)icJon.

Besides the turning of these into metre, they
made also certain other prayers of their own in
rhyme ; in one of which they rank the Pope,
whom their modern divines count a great bishop,
and chief patriarch of the western church, and
from whom they pretend to receive their episcopal
and priestly character, in the same list with the
Turk, as if both were infidels alike, and both
alike enemies to Christ. Robert Wisdom thus
sets out his psalm, which the ignorant people
may be apt to take for one of Davids ; assuring
themselves that David himself prayed to be de-
livered from the Turk and the Pope, and conse-
quently, that the Pope is a dangerous creature :

Preserve us, Lord, by thy dear word,
From Turk and Pope det'eml us, Lord,
\Vhicl> both woulil thrust out of his throne,
Our Lord Jesus Christ, thy dear Son.

But this, with such other like stuff, is also left
out by Protestants in their last impressions, as
being indeed ashamed of the impiety, malice,
and folly of these gross imposters, especially of
this Robert Wisdom, who, notwithstanding his
name, was doubtless the most ignorant of all
'hose who ever undertook to turn psalm into
metre. And so it is likely he was looked upon
by Dr. Corbet, sometimes bishop of Norvrich,
when he made the following address to his ghost :

TO THE GKOST OF R. WISDOM.

That once a body, now but air,
Arch-botcher of a psalm or prayer.

From Carfax (a) come,
And patch us up a zealous lay,
With on old ever and for aye.

Or al! and some.

Or such a spirit lend me,

As may an hymn down send me.

To purge rny brain.
Then Rol)in look behind thee,
Lest Turk or Pope <io find thee.
And go to bed again.
•
Thu mav seem too light for a treatise of this
Mture ; but the ridiculous absurdity of these
rhyme.5, the singing of which in the churches,
has, by several learned Protestants, been com-
plained of and lamented, cannot be fidly enough
exposed; that so, if possible, fhe common peo-
ple's eyes maybe opened, and they may be taken
off from the fondness they seem to have for
them

Though the ignorance, rather than ill inten-
tion of these busy poets appear in their psalm-
metre ; yet what follows canriot be excused
from being done with a very treacherous design
( f iho translators ; for what can possibly be a
mort! sly piece of craft to deceive the ignorant
I eider, than to use Catholic terms in all such
; laces where they may render them odious, and
when they must needs sound ill in the people's
gars ? For exainple, 2 Maccabees vi. 7, this term

(Jl The [ilucc of his burial in Oxford.

"procession" they very maliciously translate,
saying : " When the feast of Bacchus was kept,
they were constrained to go in procesfion to
Bacchus." Let the reader see in the Greek
Lexicon if there be any thing in this word,
TJotunuSufiv tGj diovvoai, like the Catholic Church's
processions, or whether it signify so much as
" to go about," as other of their Bibles translate
it, with perhaps no less ill meaning than that of
1570, though they name not procession. (6)

St. John, ix. 22, 25, where, for " He should
be put out of the synagogue," there first transla
tions read : " He should be excommunicated," to
make the Jews' doings against them, that con-
fessed Christ, sound like the Catholic Church s
acting against heretics, in excommunicating
them ; as if the church's excommunication ol
such, from the society and participation of the;
faithful, were like to that exterior putting out
of the synagogue. And by this they designed
to disgrace the priest's power of excommunica-
tion, whereas the Jews had no such spiritual ex-
communication ; but, as the word only signifies,
did put them out of the synagogue ; and so they
should have translated the Greek word, includ-
ing the very name synagogue. But this trans-
lation was made when the excommunications
of the Catholic church were daily denounced
against them, which they have corrected in their
last Bible, because themselves have begun to
assume such a power of excommunicating their
non-conforming brethren.

In Acts xvii. 23, for " seeing your, idols," or
" seeing the things which you Atheniana did
worship," they translate, " seeing your devo-
tions," as though devotion and superstition were
all one.

And verse 24, for " temples of Diana," they
translate " shrines of Diana," to make the
shrines of saints' bodies, and other holy relics,
seem odious ; whereas the Greek word signifies
temples. And Beza says: " He cannot see how
it tan signify shrines."

Thus they make use of Catholic words and
terms, where they can thereby possibly render
them odious ; but in other places, lest the an-
cient words and names should still be retained
they change them into their own unaccustomeJ
and original sound. So in the Old Testament,
out of an itch to show their skill in the Hebrew,
the first translators thought fit to change most of
the proper names from the usual reading, never
considering how far differently proper names of
all sorts are both written and sounded in differ-
ent languages ; but this is in a great part rectified
by the last translators, according to the directions
of king James the First, that in translating the
proper names, they should retain the usual and
accustomed manner of speaking.

Their altering of these proper names ip the
Old Tastament, through the pride of being es-
teemed such knowing masters in the Hebrew
was yet much more tolerable, than the chansjing
of many other words in the Ne.v, through an

(4) Bib. 1562, 1577

A VINDICATION OF

112

heretical intention of introducing an utter obli-
I'ion of them among the people.

The words " church, bishop, priest, altiir,
cucharisl, sacrifice, grace, sacrament, baptism,
penance, angel, apostle, Christ, &c., at their
fivit revolt, ihey suppressed, and changed into
" congregation, superintendent, elder and minis-
ter, table, thanksgiving, gift, mystery, washing,
repentance, messenger, ambassador, anointed ;"
several other words and phrases they likewise
altered, as is evident from what goes before.
And for what cause was all this change and al-
teration of Catholic terms and phrases, but that
the sound of the words should vanish with the
substance of the things which ahey have taken
away ? With bishops they banished the pastoral
care and charge of the Pope and Catholic bish-
ops, and set up a child and a woman for the
heads of their congregation. With priests wont
away the office of priest, in offering the holy
sacrifice of Christ's body and blood ; with grace
went away the sacrament of holy orders, and
four or five of the other sacraments; with altar,
eucharist and sacrifice, they excluded the proper
service of Almighty God, with Christ's sacred
presence in the blessed sacrament ; with the
word penance they banished confession, absolu-
tion, and satisfaction for sins ; they altered the
word church, because they had cut themselves
ofT from the Catholic church. And what other
design could we suppose them to have had in
leaving out apostles, and putting in ambassadors
or legates ; in leaving out angels, and introduc-
ing messengers ; in putting down the word
anointed, where Christ used to be read ; and in
translating grave for hell ; but in time to ex-
tinguish all faith and memory of apostle, angel,
heaven, hell, Christ, and Christianity ;" and to
bring thetn to atheism and infidelity, the very
centre to which their reformation tends ? {a)

This fantastical and impious vanity, in chang-
ing Catholic and Christian terms and speeches
into their profane and heathenish use and signi-
fication, was a thing so detested, even by Beza
himself, notwithstanding his often being guilty
of the same, that he inveighs against it, and
those who use 't, in this manner : " The world
is now come to that pass," says he, " that not
only they who write their own disconrses, re-
fuse the familiar and accustomed words of scrip-
ture, as obscure, um.avoury, and out of use, but
also those that translate the scripture out of
Greek into Latin, challenge to themseive:-- the
like liberty ; so as while every man will rather
freely follow his own judgment than reh^iously
behave himself as the Holy GhDSt's interpreter,
many things they do not convert, but pervert,
for which licentiousness and boldnesb, except
remedy be provided in time, either I aui notably
deceived, or within a few years, insteaii of Cliris-
tians we shall become Ciceronians, i. e. Paganfi
and by little and little shall lose the possession
of the things themselves." (6) By tl.is you sei3,
that though Beza was one of the greatest mas-
ters in this wanton, novel, and licentious nrt of
changing Christian for Heathen terms nnd
phrases, yet he foresaw that in the end, with the
words, would be taken away the things signified
'' sacraments, baptism, eucharists, priesthood,
sacrifice, angels, apostles, and all apostolical
doctrine ;" and that so we should be brought
again from Christianity to heathenism.

From WHICH, and from the Stil[.ixgflee71-4N
KRROR, (c) that, by asserting, " The pagan god,
Jupiter, to be the true God, blessed for ever,
more," throws open the door of Jupiter's temple,
and points out the very pathway to paganism,

GOOD LORD, DELIVER tJS 1

A VINDICATION OF THE ROMAN CATHOLICS :

AS ALSO THEIR DECLARATION, AFFIRMATION, COMMINATION ; SHOWING THEIR ABHORRENCE
OF THE FOLLOWING TENETS. COMMONLY LAID AT THEIR DOOR. ANDTHEV HERE OIILIGE
THEMSELVES, THAT IF THE ENSUING CURSES BE ADDED TO THOSE APPOINTED TO BE
READ ON THE FIRST D.iY OF LENT, XHEY WILL SERIOUSLY AND HEARTILY ANSWER AMEN
TO THE.VI ALL.

1. CvRSED is he that commits idolatry ; that
prays to images or relics, or worships them for
God. K. Hmen.

2. Cursed is every goddess worshipper, that
believes the Virgin Mary to be any more than a
creature ; thvtt honours her, worships her, or
puts his trust in her more than in God ; that be-
lieves her abi've her Son, or that she can in any
thing coinmaiid him. R. Amen.

3. Cursed is he that believes the saints in
heaven to be his redeemers, and prays to them
is such, or that gives God's honour to them, or
X) any creature whatsoever. R. Amen.

4- Cv'rsod is he that worships any breaden

(a) Change of worJe Imliiccs cha.iigc of fnitl;.

I god, or makes gods of the empty elements of
bread and wine. R Amen.

5. Cursed is he that believes priests can foi-
give sins whether the sinner repent or not : or
that there is aiiy power in earth or heaven that
can forgive sins, without a hearty repentance
and serious purpose of ainendmenl. R. Amen.

6. Cursed is he that believes there is authority
in the Pope or any others, that can give leave to
commit shis ; or that can forgive liim his sins
for a sum of money. R. Amen

7. Cursed is he that believes that, indtpundtntiy

(6) Beza in Act. x. 4G, edit anno 155G, but in the lat-
ter pil. of I5G5, sor.ie of these worilg are altered either bj
hiniseif or the printi^r.

'II:k ROMAN CATHOLICS.

113

of the merits and passion of Christ, he can merit
salvation by his own good works ; or make con-
dign satisfaction for the guilt of his sins, or the
pains eternal due to them. R. Amen.

8. Cursed is he that contemns the word of
God, or hides it from the people, on dcsigri to
keep them from the knowledge of their duty,
and to preserve them in ignorance and error
R. Amen.

9. Cursed is he that undervalues the word of
God, or that forsaking scripture chooses rather
10 follow human traditions than it. 11. Amen.

10. Cursed is ht that leaves the command-
ments of God, to observe the constitutions of
men. R. Amen.

1 1 . Cursed is he that omits any of the Ten
Commandments, or keeps the people from the
knowledge of any one of them, to the end that
they may not have occasion of discovering the
truth. R. Amen.

12. Cursed is he that preaches to the people
in unknown tongues, such as they understand
not ; or uses any other'means to keep them in
ignorance. R. Amen.

13. Cursed is he that believes that the Pope
can give to any, upon any account whatsoever,
dispensation to lie or swear falsely ; or that it is
lawful for any, at the last hour, to protest him-
self innocent in case he be guilty. R. Amen.

1 4. Cursed is he that encourages sins, or
teaches men to defer the amendment of their
lives, on presumption of their death-bed repen-
tance. R. Amen.

15. Cursed is he that teaches men that they
may be lawfully drunk on a Friday or any other
fasting-day, though they must not taste the least
bit of flesh. R. Amen.

] 6. Cursed is he who places religion in
nothing but a pompous show, consisting only in
ceremonies ; and which teaches not the people
to serve God in spirit and truth. R. Amen.

17. Cursed is he who loves or promotes
cnielty, that teaches people to be bloody-mind-
ed, and to lay aside the meekness of Jesus Christ.
R. Amen.

18. Cursed is he who teaches that it is law-
ful to do any wicked thing, though it be for the
interest and good of mother church : or thai any
evil action may be done that good may come of
it. R. Amen.

19. Cursed are we, if amongst all these
wicked principles and damnable doctrines com-
monly laid at our doors, any one of them be
the faith of our church ; and cursed are we, if
we do not as heartily detest all those hellish
practices as those who so vehemently urge them
against us. R. Amen.

20. Cursed are we, if in answering, and saying
Amen to any of these curses, we use any equivo-
cation, mental reservation ; or do not assent to
thfcm in the common and obvious sense of the
trords. R. Amen.

And can the Papists then, thus seriously, and

without check of conscience, say Amen to nil
these curses '

Yes, they can, and are ready to do it whenso-
ever, and as often as it shall be required of them.
And what then is to be said of those who either
by word or writing, charge these doctrines upon
the faith of the Church of Rome I " Is a lynig
spirit in the mouth of all the prophets '! are they
all gone aside 1 do they backbite with their
tongues, do evil to their neighbour, and take up
reproach against their neighbour ?" I will say no
such thing, bat leave the impartial considerer to
judge. C3ne thing I can safely affirm, that the
" Papists" are fouUj' misrepresented, and show in
public as much unlike what they are, as the
Christians were of old by the Gentiles ; that they
lie under a great calumny, and severely smart in
good name, persons, and estates, for such things
which they as much and as heartily detest as those
who accuse them. But the comfort is, Christ
has said to his followers : " Ye shall be hated of
all men." (Math. x. 22,) and St. Paul : "We
are made a spectacle unto the world ;" and we
do not doubt, that he who bears this with pa-
tience, shall for every loss here and contempt
receive a hundred -fold in heaven : " For the base
things of the world, and things which are de-
spised, hath God chosen." 1 Corinth, i. 28.

As for problematical disputes, or errors of
particular divines, in this, or any other matter
whatsoever, the Catholic Church is no way re-
sponsible for them ; nor are Catholics, as Catho-
lics, justly punishable on their accouut. But,

As for the king-killing doctrine, or murder of
princes, excommunicated for heresy ; it is an ar-
ticle of faith in the Catholic Church, and ex-
pressly declared in the General Council of Con-
stance, sess. 15, that such doctrine is damnable
and heretical, being contrary to the known laws
of God and nature.

Personal misdemeanors of what nature soever,
ought not to be imputed to the Catholic Church,
when not justifiable by the tenets of her faith and
doctrine. For which reason, though the stories
of the Paris massacre ; the Irish cruelties, or
powder-plot, had been exactly true, (which yet
for the most parts are mis-rolatcd) nevertheless
Catholics as Catholics, ought not to suffer for
such offences, any more than the eleven apostles
ought to have suffered for Judas's treachery.

It is an article of the Catholic faith to believe,
that no power on earth can license men to lie,
forswear, and perjure themselves, to massacre
their neighbours, or destroy their native country,
on pretence of promoting the Catholic cause, or
religion. Furthermore, all pardons and dispen-
sations granted, or pretended to be granted, in
order to any such ends or designs, have no other
validity or effect, than to add sacrilege and
blasphemy to the above-mentioned crimes.

Sweet Jesus, bless our sovereign pardon
our enemies. Grant us patience ; and establish
peace and charity in our nation.

VERSION OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE

■» VINDICATION OF WAKD's ERRATA, IN IlEPLY TO GKIER, BY THE RIGHT REV. Dtt, MIINER.

Dear Sir — You have witnessed the failure of
onr vicar in his attempt to vindicate the canon
of scripture, witho'jt recourse to the authority
of tradition, and this on Protestant, as well as
on (Jatholic grounds. As to the other point,
which he says he is equally called upon to prove,
on the same condition of not recurring to tra-
dition, namely : " Which are the books that have 1
: been written by Dinine inspiration, and, indeed,
that any books at all have been so written,"(a)
he entirely gives it up, in the following terms :
■' To pronounce with confidence what books of
the canon, or parts of books, are inspired, and
what not, may consistently belong to Dr. M.,
as being a member of a church which lays claim
to infallibility : but certainly not to a member
of the Church of England. So that when he
asks, how we have learned, what books have been
written by Dinine inspiration, or that any books
at nil have been so written 1 we may answer that,
where the holy scriptures declare that they set
forth a divine revelation, or that they express
ihe word of God, we believe them to do so :
S^lh'ds again grovnding a i,bing to be proved npnn
Itself!] but as to '.he fact of their inspiration,
we must, with awe and humility, decline to say,
what we believe no church, ancient or modern,
can attest."(6) If this were so, I would ask
the vicar, of what great use is the scripture
more than any other good book ? and why is it
called the word of God 1 Again, with what
consistency does the Church of England appeal
to it, in her Articles, as her only rule of faith ?
But the vicar's ideas are evidently confused on
the subject, and therefore, he hastens to another
more familiar to him, since he has already pub-
lished a quarto volume on the fidelity of the
English Bible. However, as the fifty pages he
spends upon it in the present work, consist, for
the most part, of mere declamation in praise of
?he translation, its authors, and himself, together
with proportional abuse of its critics, and Dr. M.,
a style in which I will not contend with the
Rev. Gentleman,) I hope to be able to confine
my reflections within much narrower bounds
than he confines his.

The vicar begins his declamation, dear Sir,
with unlimited abuse of your correspondent.
'fliis he carries on through the greater part of
ten pages, reproaching me with, ignorance, svper-
ahonsncss, arrogance, siipcrficialness, ^c.{c) In

(a) Ronly, p. 2.

{t.) P <).

fcl P. 61, ct Bcq.

short, he says, that " Dr. M. cannot stand <l
competition, on the score of learning and talents,
with even the obscurest," of the fifty-four clergy-
men who were named in the reign of James I.,
to make a new version of the scripture, though
he confesses there are five amongst them of
whom he knov/s nothing at all, and some others,
of whom he has barely learned something from
the late Dr. Todd.((i) To this abuse I am content
to answer, that as the vicar knows nothing oi
me or my attainments, but what he learns from
my publications, which, together with his own,
are belore the world, so our respective charac-
ters for learning and talents will not be decided
upon by \yhat we may say of ourselves, but by
what others may judge of us.

The very profession of the vicar, which is to
vindicate, at the same time Tyndal's translation
of the ^Bible, and king Jaines's correcticni of it,
as being both of them faultless, carries with i5
its own refutation, and betrays his insincerity
and spirit of chicanery. His fellow-labourer,
Dr. Ryan, whose Analysis of Wanl's Errala{s]
he has commended, " as decisive to the e.xtent
it goes,"(/) very fairly gives up se\eral corrup-
tions of the sacred text, which disgraced Tyn-
dal's and the other early translations and edi-
tions of the English Bible, during more than
fifty years, as indefensible. Thus, for example,
speaking of Ward, he says : " He produces seven
texts to show that we mistranslated our Bible
for the purpose of injuring his church, and to
excuse our apostacy from it ; but the former
mistranslations of these seven texts having been
corrected in our present Bible, should have been
excluded from his catalogue of errata. "(;[,')
With the same fairness Dr. Ryan says : " Ho
(Ward) produces eight te.\ts, which ho accuses
us of misconstruing against the sacrament and
mass ; but five of the eight having been correc-
ted in our version, agreeably to his own, should
have been excluded from the book."(A) The

(rf) P. Gfi. (e) Dublin, 1808. (f) Reply, p. 94.

is) Analysis, p. 10. In Tyndal's, transhiiioii. am! the
pditions of iijIiS, 1577, 1579, insieail of iHb wnnl ciiuiicil
the word on.N'GRRGATiON is used in ihp following manner:
Thnu art Paler, and upon Ihls ruck will I build my con-
gregation, Mat. xvi. 18. If kevill not hear them, Id tM
CONGREGATION ; and if he will not hear the ciiNOiiSGAnoN,
let him lie to thee as a lirathen, &c. Mat xviii. 17.

(A) ibid., p. 13. in two of these passages. Mat. x.xvi.
and Mark xiv. i22, instead of saying : Jesus bi.e.sseo lli«
bread, the old edilions say : Having givkn thanks. In
two other passages, 1 Cof. \x. IPi, and 3 Cor. X. 18, the
word TKMHi.E is used, instead of altar, to e:cclude tb<
idea of a sacrijice under the new law.

VERSION or THE ENGLISH BIBLE.

115

- DoctoT proceeds : " Our opponent (Ward)
charges us with misconstruing twelve texts, for
the purpose of proving Catholics guilty of idol-
atry." But six of the twelve being corrected in
our Bible, ought to have been omitted " in his
list." (a) In a word, this advocate of the Eng-
lish Bible challenges the Popish doctors, as he
calls them, to answer him this question : " Did
not the translators of our Bible of the y< ir 1683,
correct forty errors in our old ones ? (A) Such
is the acknowledgment of Dr. Ryan, writing
in defence of the English Bible, against the
learned cavalier Thomas Ward ; but the Rev.
Mr. Gricr undertakes equally to vindicate the
old version and the new one, the corrected and
the uncorrected text ; and even in those very
passages in which the infidelity of the latter is
most glaring, and obnoxious to the English
Church as well as to the Catholic Church. For
example, he defends Tyndal and his followers
in tne use of the word congregation, for that of
chujch, affirming that, in so doing, " they did
not depart from the letter or the meaning of
the Holy Ghost." (c) In a word, he pronounces,
with Selden's TaWe- Ta/Aer, that " the English
translation of the Bible is the best in the world,
and which renders the sense of the original the
best ; taking in for the English translation the
Bishop's Bihle as well as king James's ;" ad-
ding : " The bishops made the preceding Eng-
lish versions of Tyndal and Coverdale, the
models and as it were the basis of their own "
(d) Thus then, according to the vicar, the ver-
dion of the Lutheran Tyndal fron the Latin
Vulgate, of the Calvinist CoverdaJs, from the
Vulgate and the Greek, (e) and the corrected
version of the English divines from the Hebrew
and the Greek, though often differing from each
other in meaning, as well as in other respects,
are each of them " the best translation in the world,
and renders the sense nf the original the best."

The vicar, as might be expected, speaks in
high terms of Tyndal, whom John Fox calls
England's apostle, and with equal censure of his
i^reat antagonist. Sir Thomas More. Had the
vicar read and faithfully exhibited the former's

(a) Tbid. p. 24. The following are some of the old
orruptionB, which have been since corrected, accordiri!;
to the original, and the Rheims Testament, Coloss. iii. 5,
Covetousncss, which is the worshipping of imafres, Ephes.
V. 5 ; 2 Cor. vi. IG, Uoio agreeth the temple nf God with
imascs? I John v. 21, Babes, keep yourselves from images.

(A) P 62. To this the Catholic Doctors answer in the
affirmative. But they add first, that the very circumstance
of their being corrected by Protestants, is a proof that
Hie latter acknt wiedged them to be errors : secondly, that
after the forty corrections in question have been made, a
still greater number of corrections remain to be made.

(c) Answer to Ward's Errata, by the Rev. R. Grier,
1812, p. 2. To this, his former work, the vicar refers in
bis present Reply, with his usual modesty, as follows'; " I
trust the readers of my Answer will credit the truth of the
ai*sertion, that my publication, comprising, as it does, the
ablest arguments of our most learned divines, contair i a
full and victorious refutation of pernicious error; and
that I have successfully established the superior merit of
our standing English text, no less than its fidelity." —
Reply, p. 94. (ri) P. T6.

(e) Coverdale had the chief hand in the Geneva edition,
which was so obnoxious to the Church of England, that
the prelates of the establishment constantly oppose its
publication, as may be seen in Strype.

books, called, The Wicked Mammon. The True
Obedience, and The Answers to iSyr T. More,
together with the latter's Confntarion of Tyn-
dale's Answere, ^c, 1 ani convinced he must
have lowered his tone of panegyric with respect
to Tyndal into that of extenuation, at least, as
he would have found this pretended apostle's
language to be no less seditious than it is hetero-
dox, and no less injurious to the present Church
of England, than it was to that of former limes.
With the most specious pretentions to charity
and submission, he terms, at every turn, those
who were most dignified and venerated in church
and state, " apish, pivish, popish jugglers, tnieves,
mnrl.herers, blood-suppers, Pilates, Herods,
priapists, sodomites, hangmen, Christ-killers,
devils, &c." (/) The learned and dignified
author, quoted below, points out, " amonge other
tokens of Tyndale's evill intent in hys transla-
cion, for enswample, that he chaunged common-
lye this woorde chvrche into this woorde congre-
gacinn, and this woorde priest into this woorde
senionr ; and charilie into love, and grace into
favour, confession into knowledge, and penaunct
and repentance, with wordes tno, which ho
chaunged and useth dayly, as in turning ydoles
into ymages, and anonynting into smering, conse-
crating into charming, sacramentes into cere
monys, and ceremonys into witchecrafle, and yet
many moe." (g) Notwithstanding John Fox at-
tributes a splendid miracle (in rendering void
the enchantment of a certain magician,) to the
sanctity of Tyndal, (h) he is far from succeed-
ing in vindicating his rehgious or his moral
principals. («) It appears that, though Cover-*
dale encouraged his disciple Frith to die for his
belief, yet, it is plain, from his story, that he
himself suffered death, not for that, or his Eng-
lish translation of the Bible, but for treasonable
practises against the government of the Low
Countries, under which he lived. But why does
not the vicar honour the name of the above-men-
tioned Frith, who had so large a share in his
iTiaster Tyndal's Bible, with a single notice ? I
can conceive no other motive for this, except
that, when he was burnt in Henry's reign, for
denying the Catholic doctrine of the sacrament,
archbishop Cranmer had the chief hand in bring,
ing him to the stake. The vicar, however, makes
amends for this omission, by the lofty praises he
heaps on the " venerable Coverdale," as he calls
him, who was the most conspicuous charactet
in giving the 'early editions of the English Bible.
This apostate friar was of the same religious
order with Luther, and, like him, broke through
his solemn vow of continency. by taking to him-
self a pretended vrife, during the confusion o\
Edward's reign, at which time also he becatuo
bishop of Exeter. Retiring to Geneva, when
Mary mounted '.a' throne, he sucked in there

(/) Sir Thomvip M-jrc's "Works, I..onQOJi. 1517, p. 336

Ig) Syr T. More's Second Boke, wkicht ccn/vJeth tkt.
Defence nf "Vyndall, for his Translacion, p 405.

(A) See Acts anci Moriani.

(t) This appears by his attempt to get into Bishoj Tut*-
stal's service, after he had declared himself a Protestant,
and by his constant maxim of, bearing with the liinei.

116

VKRSION OF THE ENOLISH BIBLE.

the doctrine and prejudices of Calvin, so that, 11
returning to England when Elizabeth became |
queen, he was neither restored to his see, nor |
treated as a bishop. It was not without diffi-
culty that he obtained the poor living of St.
Magnus', near London Bridge, and he was, after
some time, turned out of that for non-comformity.
The vicar sets up a most curious proof of the
fidelity of Coverdale's biblical labours, which is
worthy, dear sir, of your notice, as a specimen
of the conclusiveness of his reasoning ; it is
this, Fulk declares as follows : " I myself did
heare that Reverend father, M. Dr. Coverdale,
of holie and learned meniorie, in a sermon at
St. Paiile's Crosse, upon occasion of some
slaunderous reportes, that then were raised
against his translation, declare his faithful pur-
pose in doing the same, which, after it was
finished and presented to K. Henry VIII., and
by him committed to diverse bishops of that
time 10 peruse, of which, as I remember, Stephen
Gardiner was one — they being demanded by
the king. Are there any heresies maintained
thereby? They answered that there were no
heresies that ijiey could find maintained there-
by." (o) So far Fulke, to whose account of
Coverdale's sermon, the vicar subjoins the fol-
lowing inference : " This single admission of
Gardiner speaks volumes !" But, dear Sir, 1
would ask the reverend gentleman the following
questions ; Of what weiuhl is William Fulke's
account ^of Miles Coverdale's sermon in defence
of the old exploded version ? Secotidly, What
signify Stephen Gardiner's words concerning it,
^orany other point during Henry's rfign, when he
was as abject a slave to the ndiginns tyrant as
Crunmer himself was ? Thirdly, What pro- f of
the fidelity of a scriptural translation voulil the
decision even of a council he, thai it mninlained
no heresies ; when it might be found censiirahte
on twenty other Iheologieul charges ? And what
then becomes of the reverend vicar's volumes of
evidence, for the purity o( Coverdale's version ?
But the simple fact of a new translation of the
".hole scripture having been set on foot and ex-
• ciited by auihority both of church and state, in
) aines's reign, is a proof that the former version
if Tyndal and Coverdale, even after it had
teen corrected by the bishops was deemed to
iie faulty That it did abound witH. errors is
demonstrated bv the learned Gregory Martin, in
his Discoverie, &c., whom Fulke in vain at-
tempted to answer. The same Is again de-
monstrated, together with sufficient proofs that
the present version also abounds with errors, by
the iiiielligent Thomas Ward, in his Errata,
the success of whose undertaking accounts
for the vicar's unhonnded abuse of him. (i)
But what need is there of a further e.xposure

(a) Rrply, p. 73. ' J

(ft) There is no expression nf hatred and i-onti^mpt too /
Strong for the vicar, in spe:iking ot"-llirse two ablv.and
learned men, which is the liKst proof of hi.s Ixinfr wound-
ed by their pens, and his iii:«bility to cope with ih^m. TKi'
fellow sludi'nts of Gregory Miirtin, ;il nxf.ird, liore a vtTV .
different testimony of his learning and merit from that o'' !|
Mr. Gricr, Thinleliraled historianoflhat universityre- i
UtoB lli<it, wl.eii llic Duke of Norfolk, to whose eldest boi.

of the iatter's absurdity, in attempting to vin-
dicate both the old and the new version, the un-
corrected and the corrected one, and to prove
that each of them is the best translation in the
world, than the vicar's subsequent comparison
between them, and the preference which he
gives, in an important instance, to the former ? (c)

Proceeding to treat of the new version of the
scriptures, which was made by order of king
James I., more than seventy years after the first
appearance of the former, the vicar chiefly con-
fines himself to combating the following pas-
sage in The End of Controversy, where, speak-
ing of the Bibles, " which had been published
by authority or generally used by Protestants in
this country," the author said : "Those of Tyn-
dal, Coverdale, and queen Elizabeth's bishops,
were so notoriously corrupt, as to cause a gen-
eral outcry against them among learned Protes-
tants, as well as among Catholics, in which
the king himself, .fames I., joined : and accord-
ingly, he ordered a new version of it to be made,
being the same that is now in use, w ith some few
alterations made in it after the restoration. "(«/)

The vicar commences his attack on this pas-
sage with denying, first, that learned divines of
the Church of England, whom alone he ac-
knowledges to be Protestants, objected to the
old version ; and, secondly, thit the Puruans,
to whom he refuses that title, raised an outcry
against it. But I would ask him, whether the
subscribers to the Mitlinory Petition to Parlia-
ment, who therein describe themselves to bo
" more than a thousand ministers, that had sub-
scribed the service book" of Common-Prayer,
and whose representatives, at the cotiference ot
Hum] ton-Court, were Dr. Reynolds, and Dr.
Spark, both of them professors of O.xford Uni-
versity, were not divines of the Church of Eng-
land 1 And whether these representatives did
not then and there petition as follows ; " May it
please your Majesty, that the Bible he newly
translated, such as are extant not answering the
original, which he (Dr. Reynold's) instanced in

Martin was then domestic tutor, visited St. John's College,
he was greeted with a public oration, in which (he orator,
speaking of its great ornament, Gregory Martin said :

" Habes, illualrisnme Dux, HSreeum nnsti'nm, Grascum

nostruvi,
Poetam nostrum, dccv-s el ^luriavi nostram.^

Allu:n. Oxon., P. I, iV. 221.

With respect to Ward, it may be enough to say that,
though a layman, and a military man, he proved hirnsc'i
to be an overmatch for his different clerical antagonists,
one of whom was HicheU vicar of Hexain; another,,
Tennison. A B., of Canterl'Ury. See his Minwmacliia,
Hid CUnlns on the Hefotvtntiov, though written in dogrel
verse, contain such sterling matter, as to have caused the
conversion oi many Protesrants, and among others, ol
the late Kev. Roland Davies, C. A. D. The vicar's pre-
tended Answer fo tke Errntn, Wits the prototypi^ to hiR
Hnph In the End nf Cnnlrnyersii. He wriles much raAout
diflVri nt subjects, nni tibonl thevi, and makes many Ih)M
assertions and denials, hut never once proves the poiu;
which he takes in hand to prove.

(c) (luoting that foolish book, SMen's Tnble-Tnlk, lia
saystiint " Tile Bishop's Bililelthe oM translation,) -opicd
chitfly from Tyndal and Coverdale, ranks equally hijjh,
as a translation, with king .lames's, and either of them is
ifie otsl Irnnsldlioii, in llu, ivirld." — Reply, p. 7fi.

((/) End of Controversy, Let ix., p. 71

TUaiON OF THE RN0LI8H BIBIiB.

iliree particulars." (a) Did not the Lincolnshire
ministers present a petition to the king in De-
cember, 1604, complaining that " the book of
Common Prayer appoints such a translation of
scripture to be used in the churches, as in some
places is absurd, and in others, takes from, per-
verts, obscures, and falsifies the word of God ;
examples of which are produced with the autho-
rities of the most considerable reformers." (4)
Was not Broughton of Cambridge an episcopal
Protestant, and "the greatest scholar of his
age for Hebrew." as Strype testifies? And yet
lie charged the Bible, authorized in his time,
jthe Bishops' Bible) with " a great number of
errors." which he cnlled " traps and pitfalls ;"
adding, in his letter to the Lord Treasurer,
that sundry lords and some bishops, and others
of inferior rank, had requested him to bestow
his labour in clearing the Bible translations, (c)
Finally the vicar himself quotes the translators
of the new version as " echoing the words of the
king," when they state that "upon the impor-
tunate petition of the Puritans," the conference
of Hampton-Court was held, in which " they
had recourse at last to this shift, that they could
not with good conscience, subscribe to the Com-
munion Book, since it maintained the Bible as it
was there translated, which was, as they said,
a most corrupt translation." {d) I would now
appeal to any candid reader, of whatever reli-
gion he may be, no less than to yourself, whether
1 was not justified in stating, " there was an
outcry against those Bibles, (Tyndal's, Cover-
dale's, and the Bishops') among learned Protes-
tants, as well as Catholics ?" It remains to be
seen whether " king James joined in it or not?"
The vicar is forced to acknowledge the truth
uf Fuller's and Collier's account of this business ;
who state, that on Dr. Reynolds' petition being
made, his Majesty answered : " I profess I
could never yet see a Bible well translated in
English ; but I think that, of all, that of Geneva
is the worst." (e) This declaration the vicar
says, " can only be supposed to mean that he
never yet had seen an English Bible in which
there were not passages capable of being belter
translated ! (f) His pretext for this perversion of
language is, that when the king gave orders for
the new translation, which he represents him to
have done merely to humour a poor empty shift,
a mere shallow pretence {g) of the Church of

(a) These particulars are the following ; Ist. Gal. iv. 35,
r- r"""' Y^'i wrong translated bordereth. Accoriling to this,
Mount Sina in Arabia, borders upon Jerusalem ! 3ndly,
Ps cv. 28, Tliey were not disobedient (or they rebelled not,)
contradictorily translated, They were not obedient. 3rdly,
Ps.cvi.20, Phineas exec^Ucd judgment,viTongtra.r>f\aied,
Phineas prayerf. See Fuller's Ch. Hist., B. X., p. 14. The
vicar asserts that " the passages at first objected to (by the
non-conformists, and which he calls an empty shift and a
hiilUiw pretence,) have continued in it (the existing version)
jfilkoul allaration," p. 81 . Now the fact is, that each of
them has been altered according to the suggestion of Dr.
Reynolds and his party, as wili be seen in the present Eng-
:ish Bible,

(b) Neat's Hist, of the Puritans, vol. ii. p. 53.

ie) Strype's Life of A. B. Whitgift, pp. 433,587.
id) Reply, p. 80.

(e) fuller. Eccl. Hist., B. x., p. 14.
(/)lbid..p.9l. (^) Reply, p. 81.

«7

England's enemies, he gate direction^ that " The

Bishops' Bible be followed, and as little altered
as the truth of the original will permit ; and lha«
Tyndal's, &c., be used when thty agree better
with the text than the Bishops'." (.'/) And yet
what else does this signify, except that the
Bishops' Bible is not always conformable to the
truth of the original? and that the other editionf
sometimes agree belter with the text than does
the bishops^ ? Such is the vicar's ingenuity in
refuting his own argument ; after which exhi-
bition, he concludes, with his customary self-
complacency, " I have thus disposed of the
royal censure in all its bearings." (i)

The vicar represents it to be a demonstra-
tive proof of the diflerent sects of non con-
formists and dissenters subscribing to the purity
and excellence of the present version, that
they have never attempted to substitute another
in its place. But is this the fact? Did not
the Grand Committee for Religion, in 1656,
when the Presbyterians were in power, appoint
a sub-committee, "to confer with Dr. Walton
and five others about another translation of the
Bible ! and were not many meetings held on
this subject at secretary Whitlock's house ?"(*)
Again, at the Savoy Conference in 1661, did not
the non-conformist divines object to a great num-
ber of faulty translations of scriptural passages
which occurred in the liturgy, and obtain that
they should be amended ; (/) I need say nothing
by way of answer to the vicar, in justification of
Sir Thomas More's, bishop Tunstall's. and othe
Catholics' predictions, as to the consequences to
be expected from the general diffusion of Tyn-
dal's and the other Protestant Bibles without an
expositor, fir so much as a commentary or note
upon them, since these were visibly fulfilled in
the sacrilegious confusion of Edward's reign, and
still more in the fanatic rebellion and regicide
fury of that of Charles L, when not a folly or
a crime took place without chapter and verse
being quoted in its vindication. In short, the
Established Church of England, with the vicar
himself, has at last taken just alarm at the
consequences to be apprehended for herself,
as well as for the state, from an unbounded
and indiscriminate diffusion of Bibles, without
the Prayer Book to direct its meaning. I do
not find myself called upon to make any re-
mark on the praises which the twenty- two
Protestant writers, whom he quotes, bestow
on their own Bible. The vicar's citation of
these twenty-two witnesses makes no more for
his cause, than if I were to cite the two hundred
and fifty-two prelates of the Council of Trent
who pronounced upon mine.

Speaking of the last English translation of the
Bible, thff one now in use, published by king

(A) P. 91.

(t) P. 92.

(k) Collier's Eccl. Hist., P. ii., p. 869.

(l) For example, in the Epistle of the First Sunday afte
Epiph.,Rom. xii. 1, the text stood thus: Be yechanpcdin
your shape. In the Epist. for Sunday before taster, Philip,
li. 5, Christ was said to \>e found in his apparel as a man
Collier, P. ii!, p. 878.

iis

▼SRSION OF THE ENOLIBH SIBtB^

fames I., in 1611, th6 author of The End of
Controversy said : " Though these new transla-
tors ha"e corrected many wilful errors of their
predefiessors, most of which are levelled at Ca-
lliolic doctrines and discipline, yet they have left
u sufficient number of these behind, for which I
do not find that their advocates offer any ex-
cuse." Two of these he specified as standing
in direct opposition to the original text, as it is
quoted by those advocates, Dr. Ryan and the
Kev. Mr. Grier. (a) On these two points, one of
them regarding the celibacy of the clergy, the
Other, coinmunion under one kind, the last
named gentleman says : " I join issue with Dr.
-M." (6) I will state each of them briefly, yet
clearly. Our B. Saviour having condemned
the Jewish practice of divorce, His disciples say
unto him : If the case of a man be so with his
wife, it is not good to marry. But he said
iinlo them : All men receive not this saying ;
in Greek : ov navies J^wjoost lov loyov Tovrop.
Mat. xix. 2. In like manner St. Paul says, 1 Cor.
vii. 7 : / say therefore to the unmarried and
widows: it is good for them if they abide even
as I ; but if they do not contain let them
marry f in Greek et Se ovx Eyxgatevonat. Now
in both these passages, the latter as Well as the
earlier Protestant translators change do not
into CANNOT, in excuse for the first reformers'
breach of their vowed celibacy. {c\ With re-
spect lo the former of these falsifications. Dr.
Ryan derides it, and says : "The Remish ver-
sion agrees nearly with our own !" {d) while
the vicar refers to his former work for a satis-
factory proof that the word cannot " is most
agreeatle to the original," («) vvhiehsays do not.
As to the second falsification, the vicar says :
'• I have been obliged to convict Dr. M. of gross
ignorance of the Greek, no less than a fraudu-
lent application of the Latin, and have proved
to demonstration that the Rhomish version of
this text, f» d.e ovx nYQuiTevortai is erroneous."
(/) Now in what does this boasted conviction of
my ignorance, and of the erroneoUsness of the
Rhemishi version, consist ? . Why the vicar says

(a} En<l of Controv., Let. ix., p. 73.

(A) P. 95.
■ (c) A nothcr falsificatitm-of thesartie kind, which seems to
(Ifclevelled at the t^*net of free-wiII,occurs both. in the earlier
and later version of Galal. v. 17. The apostle says: You

bo NOT thf^ tkitlSSrt^t Ijmt, would : anv OiXtjte ravra iroirjTCy

this the translators turn thus : So that vmi cannot do Ike
Ihinas thiil^'.iou'woulil, contrary tothc original Greek, the
Latin Vglgatp, thw Syriac, Arias fllontanus, Erasmus,
Beza, 'Iremelljus, fcc. It is extraordinary that neither
the editor of the Rheims Testament nor Ward has pointed
out this corruption.

(rf) Analysis, p, t9.

(c) Reply, p.O.'i. On oonsultingtlieborik, anil page here
referred to, theonly, words rplatingitotihetrnnslation itself,
consist in a repetition of Ryan's above-quoted falsehood,
•namely, Iw snys : '•.■The Rhemish constructTon does not
sulistanlially dilTer from the Protestant one." The restof
hi'S lontr dissertation is made up of his own confused expo-'
silion of the scriplure and ihe fathers on the subject of
celibiicv. See A nswer to Ward, pp. 33, 34, 35.

(/) Ibid., p. 95, ,

that tf^KtsvopM " is a verb of the middle vdce,

and that " the Vulgate reading, which agreei
with it, is, si vero se tion continent, (g) that ia
lo say : if they do not contain themselves ;"
therefore, according to the vicar, the passage
ought to be translated : if they cannot contain.
as in the common Bible ! What is it that chi-
canery and confidence will not attempt to prove !
The other instance of still subsisting error in
the latter translation of the Bible, as well as in
the former, consists in the false translation ol
1 Cor. xi. 27, where St. Paul speaking of the
B. Sacrament, says : Whosoever shall eat this
bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord un-
worthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the
blood of the Lord : Jiaie o; av eoOitj ton apro*
70VT0V I) TiiKij TO noitjQiov Tov xvfitou availing, svo-
;f05, E(7Tat lov miparog xai aifiaia^ tov xvginu.
This text, which is so decisive in favour of the
Catholic doctrine, respecting the body and blood
of Christ being received under either kind in the
B. Sacrament, is. On that accountj falsified in
both translations of the English Bible, by turning
the disjunctive article or, into the conjunctive
article and. Dr. Ryan finding this falsification
(which Ward does not fail to expose) loo gross
to be defended, very prudently passes it by un-
answered. The vicar had, in his former work,
attempted to prove that i and x<", or and and,
are con\'ertible articles ! At present he con-
tents himself with relating a story abotit Dr.
Kilbie, who, he says, hearing a certain clergy-
man maintain in the pulpit that there are ihri"
arguments against the translation of a cortaiu
word, in the way it has been translated, an-
swered him that there are thirteen reasons why
it should be translated as it stands ; concluding
thus : " To Dr. M. I leave the application ol
the foregoing anecdote, for it certainly affords
a useful hint to a self-confident critic." Such
is the issue of the contest tOi which the vicai
challenged me ! And such are his reasons
for showing that the term; do not, should
be translated cannot, and why the disjunctive
OR, should be changed into the conjunctive
and. I hope you will not forget Dr. Kilbie:
if I do not mistake) the vicar will again intro-
duce him to you. In the mean time, I remain,
Yours,, &c.,

J. M., D. D.

P. S- —The vicar's mode of reasoning on thc
corrnption in question is of a piece with ihaf
of Luther, quoted by me in Letters to a Pre-
bendary, Let. v., p. 187, when being called to
an account for an undeniable false translation
of scripture, he answered : " Sic volo, sic jubco,
Luther usita vult, ei ait se doctorem esse supra
omnes daetores in, tola Papain"

ig) Answer, p. 36.

THE END.
K. B.— For A lilt of additional erron in late additions of the Protestant Bible,, tea th« '■ Rock of Ik^ Chweh.''- Ki,

^w- ,,

\ :

Internet Archive Audio

Featured

Top

Images

Featured

Top

Software

Featured

Top

Books

Featured

Top

Video

Featured

Top

Mobile Apps

Browser Extensions

Archive-It Subscription

Save Page Now

See other formats