Skip to main content

Full text of "Errata to the Protestant Bible, or, The truth of their English translations examined : in a treatise shewing some of the errors that are to be found in the Protestant English translations of the Sacred Scripture ... in which also, from their mis-translating 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 


n,*$  •  "I?    ID    TO     A     HP    A  «i"J*1,u 


i>!  i 


ERRATA 

TO  THE  ;/    -Jfa+f^c^ 


PROTESTANT  BIBLE: 

OR  THE 
TRUTH  OF  THEIR 

ENGLISH  TRANSLATIONS  EXAMINED; 

IN 

A  Treatise  shewing  some  of  the  Errors  that  are  to  be  found  in  the  Protestant 

English  Translations  of  the  Sacred  Scripture,  against  such  Points 

of    Catholic    Doctrine   as   are   in   Debate   between 

them  and  the  Church  of   Rome. 

in  WHICH  ALSO, 

From  their  Mis-translating  the  Twenty-third  Verse  of  the  Fourteenth  Chapter  of 

the  Acts  of  the  Apostles,  the  Consecration  of   Doctor  Matthew 

Parker,  the  first  Protestant  Archbishop  of  Canterbury, 

is  occasionally  considered. 


>lWOC'  ■■■ 

BY      N 

THOMAS    W  A  xv  ~, 

AUTHOR  OF  THE  CELEBRATED  FOEM  ENTITLED 

ENGLAND'S    REFORMATION 

A  NEW  EDITION  CAREFULLY  REVISED  AND  CORRECTED. 


-.  i- 


For  I  testify  to  every  one  that  heareth  the  words  of  the  prophecy  of  this  look,  If  any  man  shall  ad  J  to  these  things,  GjJ 
'hall  add  upon  him  the  plagues  written  in  this  hook.  And  if  any  man  shall  take  away  from  the  words  of  the  book  of  this 
prophecy,  God  shall  take  away  his  part  out  of  the  Book  of  Life,  and  out  of  the  Holy  City,  and  from  these  things  which  ar: 
written  in  this  look.     Ret.  Ch.  xxii.  V.  18,   19. 


LONDON  Printed  iii  the  Year  1737: 

AND 


REPRINTED  BY  RICHARD  COYNE,    28,    EAST  ARRAN-STREET 

1807. 


iopO 


t'- 


ADVERTISEMENT  FROM  THE  EDITOR, 


IN  offering  to  the  Public  such  a  Work  as  the  present,  the  Editor  feels  that  he 
cannot  be  totally  silent.  And  first,  he  begs  leave  to  make  his  most  grateful  ac- 
knowledgments to  those  Friends  who  have,  with  so  marked  a  partiality,  and 
so  indefatigable  a  ;  \  exerted  themselves  in  his  behalf;  and  to  the  Public  in 
gene  al,  who  have  pationized  the  Publication  far  beyond  his  most  sanguine  ex- 
pectatio  s.  So  grea:  indeed  has  been  his  encouragement,  that  he  has  already 
obtained  a  Sale  frr  more  than  2000  Copies.  To  merit  this,  no  labour  has 
been  spared;  every  care  has  been  taken  in  the  present,  to  correct  the  numerous 
Errors  of  the  former  Editions,  and  to  amend  the  obsolete  stile  of  the  Au- 
thor. How  far  the  circulation  of  this  learned  Work  will  prove  beneficial  to  So- 
ciety, must  appear  from  its  being  an  antidote  to  those  principles  of  Deism,  In- 
fidelity, and  Irreligion,  which  in  this  age  so  much  pains  have  been  taken  to  dis- 
seminate; and  from  its  power  to  stem  the  torrent  of  falshood  and  misrepre- 
sentation, which  is  every  day  pouring  in  on  public  credulity.  It  must  certainly 
be  acknowledged  by  every  unprejudiced  mind,  a  Work  that  incontrovertibly 
proves  and  exposes  the  miserable  shifting  of  the  first  pretended  Reformers- 
who,  to  support  the  novelty  of  their  doctrines,  and  their  noxious  innovations, 
were  reduced  to  the  wretched  necessity  of  falsifying  the  Word  of  God. 

The  Editor  prides  himself  on  sending  forth  to  the  Public  the  Works  of 
Mr.  Ward,  -whose  bright  and  transcendent  genius  was  eclipsed  for  a  time,  and 
involved  in  his  early  days  in  the  dark  errors  of  infidelity,  until,  as  the  scripture 
phrase  expresses  it,  God  commanded  Light  to  shine  forth  from  the  darkness, 
and  dispersed  the  ignorance  wherein  he  was  enveloped.  Nursed  in  the  lap  of  pre- 
judice, and  imbued  with  the  principles  of  his  cotemporaries,  his  strong  mind 
burst  through  the  cloud  that  surrounded  it,  and  he  became  an  instrument 
in  the  hands  of  God  to  defend  his  Word,    to   instruct   and  to  enlighten. 


*  rhe  Editor  particularly  alludes  to  what  Dr.  Milner  says  of  the  "  frequent  publications  of  John  Fox's  lying  book 
©f  martyrs,  with  prints  of  men,  women,  and  children  expiring  inflames;  the  nonsense,  inconsistencies,  and  falshoods 
of  which,''  he  says,  "  he  hid  in  part  exposed  in  his  letters  to  a  prebendary.  In  revenge  for  this  detection,"  continues 
lie,  "  the  editors  of  the  work  have  this  year  published  it  under  my  name;  in  consequence  of  which  artifice,  I  h  ve 
been  considered  and  addressed  by  several  persons  as  having  lost  my  reason  as  well  as  my  religion,"  See  Dr.  Milner's 
Case  of  Conscience,  published  by  me,  page  102,  note  44. 


In  the  Press,   and  in  a  few  Days  will  be  published  by  the  Editor  hereof: 

WARDS  LEARNED  WORK 


JJNTITLEP, 


%i)t  Controversy  of  £>rtiittation  truly  stated 

f  PRICE  STVrCtl£D*-TJVO  SHILLINGS  ANb  SIX-PENCE.} 

COYNE  will  not  anticipate  the  public  opinion,  nor  bespeak  mankind  in  favour 
of  the  performance,  but  shall  submit  to  the  correction  of  the  world,  if  Mr. 
WARD  has  no1  proved  himself  more  luminous  and  satisfactory  on  the  subject, 
than  any  other  Author  who  has  written  on  the  same. 


COYNE  has  also  ready  for  the  Press., 
THE  CELEBRATED  WORKS 

OF    THE 

LEARNED   Dr.    HAWARDEN. 

Which    will    be    published    in    Six    Volumes,    Octavo. 


[  '3 


SUBSCRIBERS 


TO 


WARD'S  ERRATA  TO  THE  PROTESTANT  BIBLE, 


rcot5$v*>©fi©ei 


Rev, 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rer. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 

Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev* 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 


Dr.  Betagh,  Vic.  Gen.  Dioc.  Dublin,  4 copies 

Mr.  Byrne,  Francis-street,  5  copies 

Mr.  Blake,  MaryVlane,  6  copies 

Mr.  Brown,   ditto 

Mr.  Brown,  Navan 

Charles  Boyle,   Londonderry 

Francis  Bolan,  Aghnacloy  " 

Thomas  Brennan,   Ossory 

Mr.  Bergin,  ditto 

Malachy  Brennan,  ditto 

James  Brennan,  ditto 

Mr.  Byrch,   Ossory 

Pat.  Byrne,  Maynooth  College 

Nich.  Carroll,  Ossory,  6  copies 

Mr.  Corr,  MaryVlane,  6  copies 

Mr.  Connery,    Ossory 

Matthew  Crowley,  Maynooth  College 

Pat.  Corrigan,  Ossory 

John  Cormick 

Thomas  Conolly,  John's-lane 

Mr.  Curran,  Maynooth  College 

Mr,  Cosgrave,   French-street  & 

Pat.  Carey,   Nobber 

Mr.  Callahan,  Bray 

Mr.  Collins 


Rev.  William  Gorman,   Osson 
Rev.  Mr.  Guider,  ditto 


Rev.  Mr.  Delahunty,    Ossory 

Rev.  Mr.  Darcy,   Lay  College,   Mavnooth 

Rev.  James  Doyle 

Rev.  Michael  Doyle,   Rosemary-lane 

Re  v  John  Delany,   Ossory 

Rev.  Edward  Ferris,  D.  D.  P.  M.  T.  Maynooth 
Rev.  Mr.  Fiench,  MaryVlane,    6  copies 
Rev.  John  Fay,    Kilberry 
Rev.  Mr.  Fogarty,   Balbriggen 
Rev.  Mr.  Foster,  Biidge-street 


J§.ev.  Mr.  Grace,  Ossory 
Rev.  Mr.  Gernon,    Monaghan, 
Rev.  P.  Gradv,  Ossory 
Rev    Thorn  at  Gorman,  ditto 
P-ev.  James  Gorman,  ditto 


Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 

Rev. 
Rev. 

Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rtv. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 
Rev. 


Mr.  Henneby,    Cssory 

Andrew  Hare 

Mr.  Hurley 

Mr.  Hussey,  Ossory 

J.  B.  Hamilton,  Bridge-street 

Mr.  Keogan,  Bridge-street,  6  copies 

Richard  Kenrick,  Francis-street 

Mr.  Kelly,  Lusk 

Mr.  Kavanagh 

Patrick  Kearney,  Waterford 

Patrick  Kerby,    Casheli 

Matthew  Kelly,   Maynooth  College 

James  Keating,   Ferns 

Mr.  Kinselagh,  HaroidVcross 

Michael  Kearney,  Meath-street 

Edmund  Keating 

Mr.  Kavenagh,   Ossorv 

Mr.  Kenny,   ditto 

Mr.  Kelly",   ditto 


4  C0D1G' 


Rigli 
Rev, 
Rev 
Rev, 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Rev. 

Pev. 

Rev. 


t  Rev.  Dr.  L. 

Mr.  Laracy,  Ossory 

Mr.  Lake,  Maynooth  College 

Dennis  Lane 

Mr.  Molloy,  John's-lane 
Mr.  Magouran,   Mary's-lane 

Walter  Myler,  Maynooth  College. 

Dan.  M'Calgan,  ditto 

James  M-Namara,  Limerick 

Francis  Molony,  Ross 

John  M'Nuity,    Maynooth  College 

Eugene  M'Carty,   ditto 

Michael  Moran,   Adam  and  Eve 

Eugene  M'Carty,   Kerry 

Mr.  Murphy,   Newiv 

Michael  Muldooi:,  Kilmainham-wood 

Peter  M'Carty 

John  Murphy 

Mr.  Mortimer,  Ossory 

Mr.  M'Kenna,  ditto 


Subscribers  Names. 


Rev.  P.  O'Le-arv,  Mavnooth  College 

Ktv.  Rich-.!  O'Donnell,  S.  G.   Ossory 

Rev.  Mi.  O'J  )onnell 

Rev.  Mr.  O'Reilly,   Academy,    Navan 

Rev.  Mr    O'  •    Maynooth  College 

R    v.  Mr.  G'Nial,   Clonard,    Meath 

Rev.  Charles  O'Donnell,    Londonderry 

Re\     Paul  O'Brien,  Maynooth  Col.  Prcf.  Irish 

Rev.  Mi.  O'Brien,  Rosemary-lane 

Rev    Maurice  P:endvillc,  Kiilamey 
Rev.  Mr.  Plunkett,   John's-lanc 

Rev.   Dr.  Russell,  Arrau-quay 
.Rev.  L.  Pvoach,  Meath-suect 


Mr.    fames  Browne,   Mavnocth  College 
Mr.   Thomas  Harry,  ditto 
Mr.    Thomas  Brad)  ,    lii'.'.o 

Mr.    Bernard  Culler,    ditto 
Mr.    James  Cleary,   di  ■ 

Mr.   Owen  Dempsey,   dittc 

Mr.    R  hn  Fitzhai  ris,   usttc 
Mr.    John  French,   ditto 

J  Ir.    Jennings,   ditto, 

Mr.   Tames  Kenued\ ,  ditto 


Rev.  Patrick  Rishey,  Kilmainham-wood 

Rev.    | o'n n  Rvan 

Rev.  John  Reilly,  Middleton 

Rev.  L.  Reynolds,  Ossory 

Rev.  Daniel  Sinnott,  Maynooth  College 
Rev.  ]  )avid  Sinnott,   ditto 
Rev.  Mr.  Shea,  Ossory 

Rev.  B.   Walsh 

Rev.  Richard  Walsh,   Limerick 

Rev.   1.   Walsh 

Rev.  Mr.  Wall,  Parish  Priest,  Mary's-lane 


r->t©<?SJ« 


Mr.  John  Kelly,   Maynooth  College 
Mr.  "Charles  Reams,    ditto 

Mr.   Patrick  Murphy,   ditto 

Mr.    William  O'Neal,   ditto 
Mr.    Thomas  O'Hanlon,   ditto 

Mr.  Phil.  Quinlan,    ditto 

Mr.    Martin  Redmond,    ditto 

Mr.   Edward  Tookey,  ditto 

Mr.   Thomas  Walsh,   ditto 
Mr.   James  Ward,  ditto 


Mr.  James  Aungier,   Prussia-street 

Mr.  John  Abbot 

Mr.  Daniel  Antisell,   Summer-hill 

Mr.  John  Antisell,   Great  Brhain-stn 

Mr.   James  Brcnan 

Mr.    Nich.  Brady,   Mary's-lane 

Mr.    P-  Barrv 

Mr.   Thomas  Boyle,    Abbey-street 

Air.  Thomas  Broome,   Anglesea-street 

Mr.   Buggy 

Mi.   Bvrcli 

Mrs.  Beltield,   Chancery-lane 

Mr.    John  Brown 

Mr.   Tnomas  Burke,    Abbey  street 

Mr.    Dennis  Byrne,    Bull-lane 

Charles  Ball,  esq.   Temple-street 

|imn  Brown,   esq.    Fredci  ick-  street 

Ed.  T    M.  Butler,    Esq.    Elm-ville,  Clonmell 

Mi.   I  dm  Barrv,  Charicmont-street 

Mr      .i  itthew  Breen,    Mo^ -street 

Mr.   Tnoma    Byrne,   Cook-street 

Mr.    Pairick  Buikc.,    Kilmaly,   co.  Clare 

Mr.    I1    Burke,    Watertord 

Mr     Connor  Brad  well 

Mr.    A  nth  an-  Blake 

Mr.   Bedford'  '     • 

Mr.   o.ephen  Be'.levr 


Mr.   Thomas  Conway,  Bridge-street 

Mr.   Thomas  Coyle,  Capel-street 

Mr.    P.  Callen,   Corn-market 

Mr.   Cowan,    Abbey-street 

Mr.   Thomas  Carroll,  Skerries 

Mr.  John  Cowper,   Liffey-street 

Mr!   iMichael  Carroll,   Ormond-market 

.Mr.    John  Clancy,   Kilkenny 

Mr.  Pat.  Connell 

Mr.   Connor  Corcoran 

Mr.   Richard  Cross,   Bridge-street,   25  conic 

Mr.    William  Cahill 

Mr.    Pat.  Callaghan,   Capel-street 

j\Ir.    W  illiam  Carrolan 

Mr.   Philip  Carthan,   Denmark-street 

Mr.    )  ames  Conroy 

Mr.'  Clare,    Cavendish-row 

Mr.   P.  J.  Campbell 
Mr.    Michael  Cashell,  Cuckoo-lane 
Mr.    Patrick  Casey- 
Mr.    Francis  Currv,    Moore-street 
Mr.  Thomas  Chievers,   Skinner-row 
Mr.  Cullen,    Exchequer-street 
Mr.    |ohn  Coyne,   Cook-street 
Mr.   Peter  Conolly,   Mary's-lane 
Mr.   Joseph  Chievers,   Exchequer-street 
Mr.    Nicholas  Clarke,   Cole's-lane 
Mr.   Thomas  Crokcr,  Castleconnell 


Subscribers 


Names  . 


Mr. 

M  r. 

Mr. 

At!". 
Mr. 

Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 

Geor 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mi. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

M  r. 

Mr. 


Michael  Cody,  Blackhall-row 

!  )hn  Cooney 
Patrick  Council 

fhoinas  Carroll,   Golden-lane 
Charles  Costigan,    Westmorland-street 
A-     had  Campion 
E  ■■r:i'vc  Cronan 
Dennis  Connor 
Maurice  Connell,   Molina 
Patrick  Carroll,  Alailborough-street 

ge  Dromgold,  esq.  M.  D.  George's-hill 

J.  Duncan 

James  Dwyer,   Dolphin's. barn 

Thomas  Doyle 

Henry  Duggan,   Bridge-street 

Henry  Duignan,   merchant,   Trim 

Nicholas  Dowling 

John  Duman 

John  Devereux,   Church -street 

John  Dunn,  Denmark-street 

Thomas  Dunn,   College-green 

Gerrard  Doyle,   Little-Strand-street 

John  Douglass,   Thomas-street 

Laurence  Doyle,   Coal- quay 

John   Doyle,    Smock-alley 

Michael  Doyle 

Richard  Davy 

Michael  Duhv 

Oliver  Drake 

Timothy  Desmond 


Mr.   Thomas  England 


Maj 
Mr. 
Air. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 

P.nr 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Ml 
Mr. 
Mr. 


or  Baron  Edward  Fitzgerald 
Hugh  Fitzparrkk,  Capel-street,   roo  copies 
Fitzpatrick,  Dame-street 
John  Farrel 
Michael    Fogarty 
Clri  istopher  Farrel 
P.  Fury 

Fi tzpatrick ,    Br i tain-stree t 
Timothy  Fitzmorns,   Bow-stveet 
Matthew  Flanagan,   Durrow 
Peter  Fiy,   Cook- street 
Edward  Farnin,   Bick-lane 
J   :v  Fanning     Daiton's-row 
DaniJ  Fa;,,   Cannon- street 
Nicholas  Foran,   Waterford 
E    Fitzgerald 
Dennis  Frtzpatrick 

ick  Gorman,   esq. 
V\  -     ati    G  ""man 
Gilbert  Greaves 
i  ';    nas  George,  Charles-street 
11.    mas  Grace,    Kilkenny 
\v  illiam  Grace,  Castle-street 


Mr.  James  Hely,  Bookseller.  Cork,  50  copies 

William  Halliday,  junr.  esq. 

Mr.   Horan,  Cook-street 

Mr.   P.  Haly,   Ormond-markel 

Mr.    William  He  wit 

Airs.  Prances  Hynes,   Cork 

Miss  Hynes,  Jamaica 

Miss  E.  Hynes 

Mr.  John  Jackson,   Summer-hill 

Mess.  Keating,  Brown,   &  Co.  London,  1000  cop, 

Air.  Christopher  Kendal,  Church-yard 

Air.  John  Kellv,  Curie-street 

Air.  Daniel  Kenny,   King-street 

Air.  George  Kenny 

Mr.  Alartm  Keenan,  James's-strcet 

Air.  Kavenagh 

Air.  William  King,  Lower  Abbey-street 

Air.  Pat.  Kavenagh,   Garter-court 

Mr.  John  Kelly,   Church-street 

Mr.  John  Kehoc,  Michael's-lane 

Air.  Henry  Kealy,   Old-town 

Air.  Cornelius  Kelly,    Londonderry 

Aliss  Alary  Kelly 

Air.  William  Kellv,   Old-castle 

Air.  J.  Kelly 

Mr.  Andrew  Kearney 


Mr. 

Air. 

Air. 

Air. 

F.  L 

Mr. 

M  r. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 

Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Mr. 
Air. 
Air. 
Mi- 
Mr. 
Air 
Air. 
Mi. 

Air. 
Ah. 
Air. 
Air. 
Mr. 
Air. 


Thomas  Larkin,   Mary's  lane 
James  Linehan,   Dame-street 
Nicholas  Lacey,   Abbey- street 
John  Laurenson,   Boot-lane 
ynch,  esq.  Alountjoy-square 
J.  E.  Lynch 
Dennis  Lynch 

Patrick  Lynch,  S.  M.  65,  Capel-street 
Laurence  Lynch,   Westmorland-street 
Pat.  Law  lor,   Smith  field 

Alark  Mulhall,   Dame-street 

James  Aloore,  Be resford -street 

janes  Alurphy,   Alary's-abbey 

Pari  it  k  Martin,  Abbey-street' 

James  Alurphy,    Winetavern-street 

John  Murphy,    Kilkenny 

John  M'Namara,   Anderson's-court 

James  Alalony.   Ormond-quay 

G.J.  Aluphy,  Jame^'s-street 

Patiick  Muiray,   Carrick-on-suir 

Daniel  Aligee 

Ganet  Moiloy,   Patrick-rStrect 

Thomas  Alackay,   Ship-stieet 

Toi'u  iVi'Dor.ald',   Roscrea 

V.  iliam  R    Al'Donald 

Rob'  re  Al'Keon 

Lewis  Al^oie,    Werburgh-street 


The  Life    of   Mr.   Ward. 


eatncv.,  he  had  a   wide  range  to  gratify 


his  taste,  to  con- 


•   •■'•     ''     "AK  :1.1i,,-C;1r  ■licT.rclent  arisThc    was  continually  in'thc  Cnuiches,   the 

-  -"  ->.!,■    u.    ,     iug  -me  ,  .    the   ^*«™^^  I   ovc     "      am    ,''a:n  c  h i  s 

[,om  which  he  did  not  inflect  to  make  numerous  and  use-!ui  quotat. ^  , 

uiite  Mudy,    wind,  was  S-   n  imcrupted  by  accepting  a  comin.^on  >n    he  1  -n      ,  ,  ua  d       .  .  w   _ 

u  .      I.,r;.-.,T  wl.ii  h  time  he  served  in  the  maritime  wai   „.gaiii>,  tlu.    1  au... 

remained  lor  rive  cr  six  veais,   dining  w  ln<  ii  time  nc    l  .  *|jcua,jons  ot    jllS 

;ij     mil.-n,v  ("urn  ended  with  the  war,    and  he  returned  to  Kngland,   at  the  P.  e  •  ,,n      >ltcua.i,n  n 

llls  ninn  ••'>   '  -" '  -'      •'  ..  ,.     i-    „,.,. ;....!    !,..  wt<  r-iti'.ii,'/,e     and  ie<  e'v«  ii  on  teims 

i      .  .  .  •  i  •  i   uiiTin     dt    uniip-  >s   null     a-  1  \    ii  is   own. 

,e  w«  recommended   by  Ins  h  a ,r„..,?.      »  «,     "J   J  »•• ,     J    "       ;"  "^     '    ,,„  .,,„,";„  lhe  vc„ 

?'  t  '1>':d^;r  r'i«/3i"  ^^  "  P^'n^t-'.  anonymou,\  .  ,b,ch  made  I,,, 
'  "6 o,,  an,:  .heological  research,  couU  be  po.e^d    y  a  Layman      "  '/- txi^  Cn^Z7 


„T„ Se'lrom  X  p^nf  Mr.  Ward,  though  he  aftcrwardscompiled  and  tvrolc  uieH.story 
...      .  I,  :s  ,„„,!,  „,  he  re   ::-.',  thr.t  a  coincidence  of  untoward  circumstance..,  and  oaii.cu.ail), 

liis  h  ,1  to  11  v  Ibe  country  ami  ;o  over   to  France,   prevented  this  work  trom   being  eve.  given 


hi 

111 
It 

s 

1 

\\  i 

1  • 

0 

M  . 
t 

!  Ii 
I- 1 1 

d 

.'  th 

t: 

.: 
j 

> 

be 

Oi 

m 

red 
the 

t  (  >liected  bv  him  with  great  diligence,  and  he  hinrell  esteemed 
cucn.  The  manuscript  is  now  in  possesion  of  the  Editor,  and  may,  perhaps,  m  due 
to  the  Public. 

r..€ 


hisa«c,   anno  1708,   and  was  buried  at  St.  Germain's,   in  Fiance,   where 

'J  lie  enemies  ot 


.,  „  e,e  P.  v  ith  a  solemnity  becoming-  so  pious  and  learned  a  man.      1  he  enemies  c 

Mr  Ward'  who,  on  account  of  his  religious  opinions,  and  his  boldness  in  defending  them,  were  roan) 
;  ".  v  to  h  w,  conspired  against  his  character,  and  have  maliciously  conionnded  him  with  anothet  of  th 
,e  n-re,  a  man  of  dissolute  morals,  and  no  education,  but  of  a  prolific  turn  in  producing  work,  e 
[ow  ribaldrv  and  shameful  obscenity.  The  productions  of  tins  man,  whose  name  was  Ld ward,  and 
uhc  ail  his  life  kept  a  public-house'in  Moorfields,  have  been  attributed  to  our  Author  by  Jacob,  Oldvss, 
and  even  the  writes  of  the  Biographical  Dictionary,  published  in  London  in  1798.  1  he  London  Spy 
Vh^ot,  a  dramatic  piece  called  the  Humow  ,  of  a  Coffee-house,  Don  Qjuxote,  turned 
,,,,  Hudi'tvastic  verse,  are  among  the  number  of  those  publications,  winch  have  been  always,  though 
wron  ■:..-•.  imputed  to  the  wiiter  of  the  Reformation.  There  is,  moreover,  a  great  difference  as  tome 
tmieof  their  death,  for  Edward  Waul  lived  to  the  year  1731,  and  we.  find  a  poetical  will  01  his  printed 
in  Appleby's  journal  in  the  September  of  that  year  *'. 

Mr  Ward"  was  a  man  of  a  comprehensive  and  versatile  genius,  that  embraced  and  cultivated  studies 
of  an  almost  opposite  name.  He  possessed  a  deep  fund  of  ancient  and  modern  earning.  He 
knew  -he  Hebrew,  Greek  and  Latin  languages,  and  was  well  skilled  intrench  and  Italian.  ;  I e 
wis  one  of  the  best  controvertists  of  his  time,  as  Tillotson  and  Burnet  both  acknowledged. 
H-  loved  poetry,  particularly  of  the  burlesque  kind,  to  which  a  lively  eccentric  fancy  strongly  in- 
clined him.  He  often  indulged  in  it  for  amusement;  and  perhaps  he  chose  that  ludicrous  channel 
foi  conveying  the  History  of  the  Reformation  to  the  Public,  because  he  saw  it  most  adapted  to  the  taste 
or"  the  times,  and  most  agreeable  to  common  conception.  His  Errata  to  ike  Protestant  Bible,  though 
little  known,  for  want  of  publication  in  a  country  to  which  it  was  obnoxious,  is  a  v\  ork  ot  such  learned 
merit,  such  nice  arrangement,  and  such  clear  disquisition  in  all  the  controverted  points  of  Religion  and 
Scmptu.e,  that  ii  will  convey  Mr.  Ward'.-  name  to  the  latest  posterity  as  a  man  ot  genius,  judgment  and 
erudition.  His  disposition  was  generous  and  mild,  though  nor  incapable  of  being  provoked  to  rescuunent  : 
he  even  fou  ;ht  two  duels  in  his  vouth,  from  which  his  religion  would  certainly  have  restrained  -.  im,  if 
he  had  courage  enough  to  be  a  coward.  When  in  the  army,  lie  was  the  model  of  a  Christian  soldier  ; 
hejoinrd  piety  to  bravery;  he  foucht  and  prayed  ;  and  Ins  intervals  of  leisure  from  duty,  were  tilled  up 
by  leading.  He  was,  in  tine,  a  1  heologiau,  'a  Poet,  and  a  Soldier  ;  and  pasted  his  lite  with  taine  and 
honour  to  himself. 

*  See  the  Perth  edition  of  the  Encyclopaedia,  article  Ward,  where  they  are  properly  discriminated.     . 


PREFAC 


►•<>©*>•« 


AMONG  the  many  and  irreconcilable  differences  between  Roman  Catholics,  and  the  Secta- 
ries of  our  days,  those  about  the  Holy  Scriptures  claim  not  the  least  place  on  the  stasre  of 
controversy:  As,  first,  whether  the  Bible  is  the  sole  and  only  rule  of  faith  ?  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  judg. 
ment,  ought  to  follow  his  own  private  interpretation  of  the' Scripture  ?  If  so,  why  one  party  or 
profession  should  condemn,  persecute,  and  penal-law  another,  for  being  of  that  persuasion  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  safely  and' securely 
depend,  touching  the  exposition  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  authority  we  receive  it  for  the  Word  of  God  ?  And,  whether  we  ought  not  to  receive 
the  sense  and  true  meaning  of  the  Scripture,  upon  the  same  authority  we  receive  the  letter  ?  For 
it  1  rotestants  lhink,_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  deli- 
vered to  them  by  the  same  Church  and  authority  ?  With  several  other  such  like  emeries  fre- 
neswh  PI°P  y  Catho]ics  5  and  never  Yet>  nor  ever  likely  to  be,  solidly  answered  by  any  Secta- 

rW  is"0t.?cdesifin  °f  *his  [oIlowInS  Treatise  to  enter  into  these  disputes;  but  only  to  shew 
thee,   Christian  reader,  that  those  translations  of  the  Bible,  which  the  English  Protestant  clergy 

partial  but  false,  and  disfigured  with  several  corruptions,  abuses,  and  falsifications,  in  deroga- 
tion to  the  most  material  points  of  Catholic  doctrine,  and  in  favour  and  advantage  of  their  own 
erroneous  opinions  :  lor,  ° 

As  it  has  been  the  custom  of  Heretics  in  all  ages,  to  pretend  to  Scripture  alone  for  their  rule 

"v  coX  andUth°rir '  G°d' S  ?°ly  Church  '  S°  h'S  '*  ds°  ever  been  **  pracdee  to  fid! 
sny,  corrupt,  and  abuse  the  same  in  divers  manners. 

^n^heJ-%n'A°  f6"7  Wh°''  b£uks  thf,re°f'  °r  Parts  of  books>  when  theV  are  evidently 
against  tnem     Sod  d,  for  example,  Ebion  all  St.  Paul's  Epistles ;  Manicheus  the  Acts  of  the 

»ue  Gosoe^  and  I  7*  'TV  n^  °f  ,he  f°Ur  GoSPC'S>  Sa^>  That  St"  Joh"'s  is  **  °i 
true  Gospel ,  and  so  do  our  English  Protestants  those  books  which  they  call  Apocrypha. 

c-min  bo^rnf  Vf f  J''  <T  -Ca,"  ^  qUKSti°u  at  th? !eaSt'  aml  ",ake  SOme  doubt  of  the  Authority  of 
iha he  whnl  M  ""I7  S"'Ptmes>  thereb>'.  to  dimi»^h  their  credit :  So  did  Manicheus  affirm, 
G      Jtl  estarnent  was  not  written  by  the  Apostles,  and  particularly  St.  Matthew's 

the  En {2  <  ,1  » ■  i  d,scre',It 'he  Epfle  of  St.  James :  So  did  Marcion  and  the  Arians  deny 
the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  to  he  St.  Paul's;  in  which  they  were  followed  by  our  first  English 

vv,  Protestant 


4  PREFACE. 

Protestant  translators  of  the  Bible,  who  presumed  to  strike  St.  Paul's  name  out  of  the  very  title 

of  the  said  Epistle/ 1 )  .  .  ..  . 

-  Viotlvr  wav  h  to  ^pound  the  Scripture  according  to  their  own  private  spirit,  and  to 
re;.  a  the  iprroved'sense  of  the  ancient  holy  Fathers,  and  Catholic  Church:  So  do  all  Heretics, 
v  ho  seem  to  ground  their  i  rr<  1  *  up  n  the  Scriptures ;  especially  those,  who  will  have  Scripture, 
as  bv  themselves  expounded,  lor  their  only  rule  of  faith. 

/  Another  wav  is,  to  alter  the  verv  original  text  of  the  Holy  Scriptures,  by  adding,  dimi- 
nishing and  chan-ing  it  her::  or  there  lor  their  purpose  :  So  did  the  Arians,  Nestonans,  &c.  and 
iho  Marcion  ;  who  is  therefore  called  Mus  Ponticus,  from  his  gnawing,  as  it  were,  certain 
places  with  his  corruptions;  and  foi  the  same  reason  may  Beza  not  improperly  be  called  the 

Mouse  of  Geneva.  . 

-  Another  way,  not  unlike  this,  is,  to  make  corrupt  and  false  translations  ol  the  benp- 
Mire's  fertile  maintenance  ol"  their  errors:  So  did  the  Arians  and  Pelagians  of  old,  and  so  have 

pretended  reformers  oJ  our  da}  s  done,  which  1  intend  to  make  the  subject  of  this  following 

Yet,  before  1  proceed  any  further,  let  me  first  assure  my  reader,  that  this  work  is  not  under- 
taken with  anv  design  of  lessening  the  credit  or  authority  of  the  Holy  Bible,  as  perhaps  some  may 
be  readv  tc  surmise:  For  indeed,  It  is  a  common  exclamation  among  our  adversaries,  especially 
such  of 'them  as  one  would  think  should  have  a  greater  respect  for  truth,  that  Catholics  make  light 
of  the  written  Word  of  God  :  That  they  undervalue  and  contemn  the  sacred  Scriptures  :  That 
thev  endeavour  to  lessen  the  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  :  Whereas  it  is  evident  to  all,  who  know  them,  that  none  «an  have  a  greater  re- 
spect and  veneration  for  the  Holy  Scripture,  than  Catholics  have,  receiving,  reverencing,  and 
honouring  the  same,  as  the  verv  pure  and  crue  Word  of  God;  neither  rejecting,  nor  so  much 
as  doubting  of  the  least  tittle  in  the  Bible,  from  the  beginning  of  Genesis,^  to  the  end  of  the 
Revelations;  several  devout  Catholics  having  that  profound  veneration  for  it,  that  they  always 
read  it  kneeling  on  their  knees  with  the  greatest  humility  and  reverence  imaginable,  not  enduring 
to  see  it  profaned  in  any  kind  ;  nor  so  much  as  to  see  the  least  torn  leaf  of  a  Bible  put  to  any 
manner  of  unseemly  use.  Those  who,  besides  all  this,  consider  with  what  very  indifferent  be- 
haviour the  Scripture  is  ordinarily  handled  among  Protestants,  will  not,  I  am  confident,  say,  that 
Catholics  have  a  less  regard  lor  it,  than  Protestants ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  a  far  greater. 

Again,  dear  reader,  if  thou  findest  in  any  part  of  this  treatise,  that  the  nature  of  the  sub- 
ject 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  resentments  of  a  zealous  mind,  moved 
with  the  incentive  of  seeing  God's  sacred  word  adulterated  and  corrupted  by  ill-designing  men, 
on  purpose  to  delude  and  deceive  the  ignorant  and  unwary  reader. 

The  Holy  Scriptures  were  written  by  the  Prophets,  Apostles,  and  Evangelists ;  the  Old  Tes- 
tament in  Hebrew,  except  only  some  few  parts  in  Chaldee  and  Syriac ;  the  greatest  part  of  the 
New  Testament  was  written  in  Greek,  St.  Matthew's  Gospel  in  Hebrew,  and  St.  Mark's  in  Latin. 
Wre  have  not  at  this  day  the  original  writings  of  these  Prophets  and  Apostles,  nor  of  the  seventy 
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,  authorized  and  approved  of  by  the 
Church,  is  sufficiently  authentic.  Fur  what  avails  it  for  a  Christian  to  believe,  that  Scripture 
': ;  the  Weird  of  God,  if  he  be  uncertain  which  copy  and  translation  is  true  ?    Yet,  notwithstand- 


ing 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  the  Tigurine  Edition  of  the  Bible,  and 

in 

(1)  Sec  Bibles,  1579,  158c- 


PREFACE.  s 

in  all  their  books  of  controversy;  seeing  therein  they  condemn  the  council  of  Trent,  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  ;  the  Calvin ists  that  of 
Geneva;  the  Zuinglians  that  of  Zuinglius  ;  the  English,  sometimes  one,  and  sometimes 
another:  Yet  because  they  do  not  hold  any  one  to  be  authentic,  it  follows,  from  their 
exceptions  against  the  infallibility  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  declaring  or  decreeing 
a  true  and  authentic  copy  of  Scripture,  and  their  confession  of  the  uncertainty  of  their  own 
translations,  that  they  have  no  certainty  of  Scripture  at  all,  nor  even  of  Faith,  which  thev 
ground  upon  Scripture  alone. 

That  the  Vulgate  of  the  Latin  is  the  most  true  and  authentic  copy,  has  been  the  Judgment 
of  God's  Church  for  above  those  1300  years  ;  during  which  time,  the  Church  has  alwavs 
used  it;  and  therefore  it  is,  by  the  sacred  council  (2)  of  Trent,  declared  authentic  and  canoni- 
cal in  every  part  and  book  thereof. 

Most  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  it  is  in  the  said  Latin  Vulgate,  was  translated  (3)  out  of 
Hebrew  by  St.  Hierom  ;  and  the  New  Testament  had  been  before  his  time  translated  out  of 
Greek,  but  was  by  him  (4)  reviewed  ;  and  such  faults  as  had  crept  in  by  the  negligence  of 
the  transcribers,  were  corrected  by  him  by  the  appointment  of  Pope  Damasus.  "  You  con- 
strain 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.  Trulv,  I  will  affirm  it  confidently,  and  will 
produce  many  witnesses  of  this  work,  that  I  have  changed  nothing;  from  the  truth  of  the 
Hebrew,"  &c.(5)  & 

And  for  sufficient  testimony  of  the  sincerity  of  the  translator,  and  commendations  of  his 
translation,  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  scrip- 
tures into  Latin,  whose  learned  labour  the  Jews  yet  confess  to  be  true."(6J 

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  to  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,  does  in  these  words :  "  St.  Hierom,  I  reverence  ; 
Damasus,   I  commend  ;  and  the  work  I  confess  to  be  godly  and  profitable  to  the  church. "(7) 

Dr.  Dove  says  thus  of  it  :  «  We  grant  it  lit,  that  for  uniformity  in  quotations  of  place.;, 
in  schools  and  pulpits,  one  Latin  text  should  be  used:  And  we  can  be  contented,  for  the 
antiquity  thereof  to  prefer  that  (the  Vulgate.)    before  all  other  Latin  books. "(8) 

And  for  the  antiquity  of  it,  Dr.  Covel  tells  us,  "  that  it  was  used  in  the  Church  1  300  year,-. 
ago:"  Not  doubting  but  to  prefer  that  translation  before  others. (9) 

Dr.  Humphrey  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  igno"rance."(io) 

In  regard  of  which  integrity  and  learning,  Molinceus  signifies   his  good  esteem   thereof, 

saying,  (11)  "I  cannot  easilv  forsake  the  vulgar  and  accustomed  reading,  which  also  I  am 

accustomed  earnestly  to  defend  :"   Yea,  (12)  "I  prefer  the  vulgar  edition,  before  Erasmus's, 

Bucer's,  Bullinger's,  Brentius's,  the  Tigurine  translation  ;  yea," before  John  Calvin's,  and  all 

•others."     How  honourably  he  speaks  of  it !   And  yet, 

B  Conrad  u  j 


6  PREFACE. 

Conradus  Pellican,  a  man  commended  by  Bucer,  Zuinglius,  Melancthon,  and  all  the 
famous  Protestants  about  Basil,  Tigure,  Berne,  &c.  gives  it  a  far  higher  commendation,  1.1 
these  words  :  (i  3)  "I  find  the  vulgar  edition  of  the  Psalter  to  agree  for  the  sense,  with  such- 
dcxtcritv  learning  and  fidelity  of  the  Hebrew,  that  I  doubt  not,  but  the  Greek  and  Latin 
interpreter  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  greatest  of  our  adversaries,  affords  this  honourable 
testimony  of  our  vulgar  translation  :  "  I  confess"  savs  he,  "  that  the  old  interpreter  seems  to 
have  interpreted  the  holy  books  with  wonderful  sincerity  and  religion.  The  vulgar  edition 
I  do,  for  the  most  part,  embrace  and  prefer  before  all  others. "f  14) 

You  see,  how  highly  our  Vulgate  in  Latin  is  commended  by  these  learned  Protestants :  See- 
Re  w  ise,  how  it  hasbeen  esteemed  bv  the  ancient  (15)  Fathers :  yet  notwithstanding  all  this  is 
not  sufficient  to  move  Protestants  to  accept  or  acquiesce  in  it  ;  and  doubtless  the  very  reason 
is  because  tluy  would  have  as  much  liberty  to  reject  the  true  letter,  as  the  true  sense  of 
Scriptures  their  new  doctrines  being  condemned  by  both.  For  had  they  allowed  any  one 
translation  to  Live  been  authentic,  thev  certainly  could  never  have  had  the  impudence 
so  wickedly  to  have  corrupted  it,  bv  adding,  omitting,  and  changing,  which  they  could 
never  have  pretended  the   least    excuse  for,  in  any  copy  by  themselves   held  tor  true   and 

authentic.  m  .    . 

Ob\  But  however,  their  greatest  objection  against  the\  ulgate  Latin  is,  that  we  ought  rather 
to  have  recourse  to  the  original  languages,  the  fountains  of  the  Hebrew  and  Greek,  in  which 
the  Scriptures  were  written  by  the  Prophets  and  Apostles,  who  could  not  err  ;  than  to  stand 
to  the  Latin  translations,  made  by  divers  interpreters,  who  might  err. 

Anfiv.  When  it  is  certain,  that  the  originals  or  fountains  are  pure,  and  not  troubled  or 
corrupt,  thev  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,  Psl.  22.  ver.  16.  they  translate,  "  they 
pierced  my  hands  and  mvfeet:"  Whereas,  according  to  the  Hebrew  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  of  the  liter  jews  against  the  passion  of  our  Saviour,  of  which 
the  old  authentic  Hebrew  was  a  most  remarkable  prophecy.  Again,  according  to  the  Hebrew, 
it  is  read,  (16)  Achaz,  kin<*  of  Israel  ;  which  being  false,  they  in  some  of  their  first  trans- 
lations read,  Achaz,  king  of  Juda,  according  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,  thev  are  forced  to  translate  Zedecias  his  father's  brother,  as  indeed  the  truth  is 
according  to  the  Greek.  (17)  So  likewise  in  another  place,  where  the  Hebrew  is,  "  He  begat 
Azuba  his  wife  and  Jerioth  ;"  which  they  not  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  Azuba."  "But  without  multiplying  examples,  it  is  sufficiently  known 
to  Protestants,  and  by  them  acknowledged,  how  intolerably  the  Hebrew  fountains  and  origi- 
nals are  bv  the  Jews  corrupted:  Amongst  others,  Dr.  Humphrey  says,  "  The  Jewish. 
superstition,  how  many  places  it  has  corrupted,  the  reader  may  easily  find  out  and  judge." 
(18)  And  in  another  place  ;  "  I  look  not,"  says  he,  "  that  men  should  too  much  follow  the 

Rabbins, 

-  (13)  PelUcanin  Prafat.  in  Psaker.  //««.  1584.  (14)  Beza  in  jinnot.  in  Luc.  1.  1.  Et  in  Prafat.  Nov.  Test.  (15) 
5.  I/ierom.  iff  Si.  Aug.  supr.  St.  Greg.  lib.  70.  Jlfor.  c.  23.  Isidor.  lib.  6  Etym.  c.  5.  7.  fcf  de  Divin.  Oflic.  lib.  \. 
cap.   12.   S.  Beda  in  Martyrol.    Cassiod.    21.     lust.    cfc.  (16)   2  Chron.   28.    rtr.     19.    (17)  4  Kings,   24.  ver.   17,. 

19.     (18)  Humph.    I.    I.  de    Rat.    inter},    pag.    178, 


PREFACE.  7 

Rabbins,  as  many  do;  for  those  places,  which  promise  and  declare  Christ  the  true  Mcssias  • 
are  most  filtl  ily  depraved  by  them. "(19) 

"  The  old  interpreter,"  says  another  Protestant,  "  seems  to  have  read  one  way,  whereas 
the  Jews  now  read  another;  which  I  say,  because  I  would  not  have  men  think  this  to  have 
proceeded  from  the  ignorance  or  slothfulness  of  the  old  interpreter:  Rather  we  have  cause 
to  find  fault  for  want  of  diligence  in  the  antiquaries,  and  faith  in  the  Jews;  who,  both  be- 
fore Christ's  coming  and  since,  seem  to  be  Jess  careful  of  the  Psalms,  than  of  their  Tal- 
mudical  Songs." (20) 

I  would  gladly  know  of  our  Protestant  translators  of  the  Bible,  what  reason  they  have 
to  think  the  Hebrew  fountain  they  boast  of  so  pure  and  uncorrupt,  seeing  not  onlv  letters 
and  syllables  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  ?  We  read  in  the  Old  Testament,  of  a  Liber  BeUorum  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  kin^s 
ought  to  rule,  and  laid  it  up  before  our  Lord :  And  the  works  of  Solomon  were  written 
in  the  book  of  Nathan  the  Prophet,  and  in  the  book3  of  Ahias  the  Shilonite,  and  in  the 
vision  of  Addo  the  Seer. "(21)  With  several  others,  which  are  all  quite  perished  ;  yea,  and 
perished  in  such  a  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  divine  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  sound,  no  points,  tittles,  or  letters  lost,  or  mis- 
placed, 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?  As  for  example,  this  very  letter  van  for  jod,f  has  certainly  made  disagree- 
ment in  some  places ;  as  where  the  Septuagkit  read,  to  KfxT&  /*«  «-po$  «'  <pv*«%u,  FortitudJnem  meant 
ad  te  custodiam,  "  My  strength  I  will  keep  to  thee;"   which  reading  St.   Hierom  also  fol- 
lowed :  It  is  now  in  the  Hebrew  yp  fortitudmem  ejus,  «  His  strength  I  will  keep  to  thee. "(22), 
Which  corruptions  our  last  Protestant  translators  follow,  reading,  "  Because  of  his  strength 
will  I  wait  upon  thee  ;"  and  to  make  sense  of  it,  they  add  the  words  "  because  of,"  and 
change  the  words  "  keep  to"  into  "  wait  upon,"  to  the  great  perverting  of  the  sense  and 
sentence.     A  like  error  is  that  in  Gen.  3.  (if  it  be  an  error,  as  many  think  it  is  none)  Ipsa 
content  caput  tuum,  for  Ipse  or  Ipsum,  about  which  Protestants  keep  such  a  clamour. (23) 
^  As  the  Hebrew  has   been  by  the  Jews  abused  and  falsified  against  our  blessed  Saviour 
Christ  Jesus,  especially  in  such  places  as  were  manifest  prophesies  of  his  death  and  passion  : 
So^  likewise  has  the  Greek  fountain  been  corrupted  by  the  eastern  Heretics,  against  divers 
points  of  Christian  doctrine;  insomuch  that  Protestants  themselves,  who  pretend  so  great 
veneration  for  it,  dare  not  follow  it  in  many  places ;  but  are  forced- to  flv  to  our  Vulgate  La- 
tin, as  is  observed  in  the  preface  to  the  Rhemish  Testament ;  where  also  you  may  find  suf- 
ficient 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, 
Twill  only,  amongst  many,  take  notice  of  these  two  folio  wing'rash  and  inconsiderate  addi- 
tions:  First,  Job.  8.  ver.  59.  after  these  words,  Exivit  e  Templo,  "  Went  out  of  the  Tem- 
ple;" are  added,  Transient  per  medium  eonim,  sic  prateriit;,  "Going  through  the  midst  of 

them, 

(19)  L'th.  2.  p.  2 19.  (20)  Conrad.  Pell.  Tom.  4.  in  Psai.  85.  v.  9.  (21)  Numb.  21.  v.  14.  Josh.  10.  v.  13.  2- 
Kings^l.  v.  18.  2.  Paral-  20.  ver.  34.  12.  ver.  1  y.  1  King,  10.  ver.  25.  2  Paral.  9.  ver.  29.  (22)  Psal.  5S, 
v.  10.  in  Prot.  Bible,  it  is  Psal.  59.  ver.  9.     (23)   Gen.  3.  v.  15.   +  >•)     «m  Kin, 


8  PREFACE. 

them,  and  so  passed  bv.-"(*4)  Touching  which  addition,  Beza  writes  thus:  "  These 
words  are  found  in  very  ancient  copies  ;  but  I  think,  as  does  Erasmus,  that  the  first  part, 
«  coin*  through  the  midst  of  them,'  is  taken  out  of  Luke  4.  ver.  30.  and  crept  into  the 
f-xt  by  fault  of  the  writers,  who  found  that  written  in  the  margin:  And  that  the  latter 
part  'and  so  pissed  bv,'  was  added  to  make  this  chapter  join  well  with  the  next.  And 
I  am  moved  thus  to  think,  not  onlv  because  neither  Chrysostom,  nor  Augustine,  (he  might 
have  said,  nor  Hierom)  make  any  mention  of  this  piece,  but  also,  because  .it  seems  not  to 
lime  together  verv  probably;  for,  if  he  withdrew  himself  out  of  their  sight,  how  went 
he  throueh  the  midst  of  them  ?  &c."(25)  Thus  Beza  disputes  against  it ;  for  which  cause, 
I  suppose,  it  is  omitted  bv  our  first  English  translators,  who  love  to  follow  what  their 
master  Beza  delivers  to  them  in  Latin,  though  forsooth  they  would  have  us  think,  they 
followed  the  Greek  most  precisely;  for  in  their  translations  cf  the  year  1561,  1562,  1577, 
i-*o,  thev  leave  it  out,  as  Beza  does :  Yet  in  their  Testament  of  i58o;_  as  also  in  this  last 
■translation,  (Bible  1683)  thev  put  it  in  with  as  much  confidence,  as  if  it  had  neither  been 
disputed  against  bv  Beza,  nor  omitted  by  their  former  brethren. 

To  this  we  may  also  join  that  piece  which  Protestants  so  gloriously  sing  or  say  at  the 
end  of  the  Lord's' Braver,  "  For  thine  is  the  kingdom,  the  power  and  the  glory,  for  ever  and 
ever,  Amer,"  which  not  only  Erasmus  dislikes,^)  but  Bullinger  himself  holds  it  tor  a 
mere  natch  sowed  to  the  rest',  «  by  he  knows  not  whom -,"(27)  and  allows  well  of  Eras- 
mus's judgment,  reproving  Laurentius  Valla  for  finding  fault  with  the  Latin  edition,  be- 
cause it  wants  it:—"  There  is  no  reason,"  says  he,  "  why  Laurentius  Valla  should  take 
the  matter  so  hotlv,  as  though  a  great  part  of  the  Lord's  Prayer  were  cut  away:  Rather 
their  rashness  was 'to  be  reproved,  who  durst  presume  to  piece  on  their  toys  unto  the  Lord's 

Prayer.'" 

Let  not  mv  reader  think,  that  our  Latin  Vulgate  differs  from  the  true  and  most  authen- 
tic 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  Beza,  "  and  without 
cause,  docs  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  ob- 
served, that  the  reading  of  the  Latin  text  of  the  old  interpreter,  though  it  agree  not  some- 
times  with  our  Greek  copies,  yet  it  is  much  more  convenient,  for  that  it  seems  to  follow 
some  truer  and  better  copy."(28) 

Now,  if  our  Latin  Vulgate  be  framed  exactly,  though  not  to  the  vulgar  Greek  examples 
now  extant,  vet  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  Pro- 
testant translators  confess,  and  as  evidently  appears  by  their  leaving  the  Greek,  and  follow- 
ing the  Latin,  with  what  reason  can  they  thus  cry  up  the  fountains  and  originals,  as  incor- 
rupt and  pure?  With  what  honesty  can  they  callus  from  our  ancient  Vulgar  Latin,  to 
the  present  Greek,  from  which  themselves  so  licentiously  depart  at  pleasure,  to  follow  our 
Latin  ?(zq>) 

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

Let  Protestants  onlv  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  Scrip- 
ture was  written,  who  lived  in  the  primitive  times,  when  perhaps  some  oi  the  original 

writings 

(24)  Ai<>$..\  01a  piss  uirui  >£  irzfiyu  *Tut.  (25)  Beza  in  *jol>.  cap.  8.  V.  59.  (tC>)  Erasm.  in  Annot .  (27) 
Buliinjcry  Dead.  9.  Serm.  5.  (28)  ht%a  in  Pnrf.  Nov.  Test.  Anno.  1556.  (29)  See  the  Pivf.  tc  the  Rhcuu'sh 
Testament.     JDr.  Martin's  Discovery.     Reynold's  Refutation  of  Whitaker,  cap.  13. 


PREFACE.  9 

wiitings  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,  that  a  translation  made  or  received  by  this  holy  Doctor,  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  Heretics,  should  be  so  ?(3o) 

In  vain  therefore  do  Protestants  tell  us,  that  their  translations  are  taken  immediately  from 
the  fountains  of  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  ;  so  is  also  our  Latin  Vulgate  ;  only  with  this  differ- 
ence, 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 
fountains  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. 

Obj.  2.Cheminitius  and  others  yet  further  object,  that  there  are  some  corruptions  found  in 
the  Vulgate  Latin,  viz.  that  these  words,  Ipsa  conteret  caput  tuum,  (31)  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. 

Answ.  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  may  be  translated  Ipsa:  Yea,  the  holv  Fathers,  (3^) 
St.  Augustine,  St.  Ambrose,  St.  Chrysostom,  St.  Gregory,  St.  Bede,  Sec.  read  it  Ipsa,  and, 
I  think,  we  have  as  great  reason  to  follow  their  interpretation  of  it,  as  Cheminitius's,  or  that 
of  the  Protestants  of  our  days :  And  though  the  word  conteret  in  the  Hebrew  be  of  the  mas- 
culine 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  1.  3.  Esther  1.  20.  Eccles.  12.  c. 
The  rest  of  Cheminitius's  Cavils  you  will  find  sufficiently  answered  by  the  learned  Cardinal 
Bellarmine,  Lib.  2.  de  verb.  Dei,  cap.    12.    13.   14. 

Again,  Mr.  Whitaker  condemns  us  for  following  our  Latin  Vulgate  so  precisely,  as  thereby 
to  omit  these  words,  (33)  "  when  this  corruptible,  shall  have  put  on  incorruption,''  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  his  version  was  corrupted  afterwards! 

I  answer  to  this,  with  Doctor  Reynolds,  (30)  that  this  omission  (if  it  be  anv.)  could  not 
proceed  from  malice  or  design,  seeing  there  is  no  loss  or  hindrance  to  any  part  of  doctrine, 
by  reading  as  we  read  ;  for  the  self-same  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 
tins)  mortal  has  done  on  immortality."  Where  you  see  the  words,  which  I  have  put  down, 
inclosed  with  parenthesis,  are  contained  most  expressly  in  the  foregoing  sentence,  which 
is  in  all  our  Testaments  ;  so  that  there  is  no  harm  or  danger  either  to  faith,  doctrine,  or 
manners,  il  it  be  omitted. 

That  it  was  of  old  in  some  Greek  copies,  as  it  stands  in  our  Vulgate  Latin,  is  evident  by 
St.  Hierom's  translating  it  thus:  And  why  ought  St.  Hierom  to  be  suspected  of  unfaith- 
ful dealing,  seeing  he  put  the  self-same  words  and  sense  in  the  next  lines  immediately  pre- 
ceding .   And  that  it  was  not  corrupted  since,  appears  by  the  common  reading  of  most"  men, 

C  in 

(30)  Such  were  Luther,  Calvin,  Beza,  Bucer,  Cranmer,  Tmdal,  &c.  (31)  Gen.  3.  (32.)  St.  August,  lib.  2  de 
Gen.  cont.  Mamch.  c.  18.  /.  n.  de  Gen  ad  Literam,  cap.  36.  St.  Ambr.  lib.  de  Fu°a  S*cu/i,  cab.  7.  St.  Chrysost.  in 
Horn.  17  in  Gen.  St  Greg.  lib.  1.  Mar.  cap.  38.  Beda,  tf  alii  in  banc  leum.  (33)  1.  Cor.  c.  15.  ver.  54.  (U) 
bee  Dr.  Reynolds's  Refutation  of  Whitaker's  Reprehensions,  chap.   10.  " 


TO 


PREFACE. 


in  all  after-a"es.  St.  Ambrose,  in  his  commentary  upon  the  same  place,  reads  as  we  do. 
So  does  St.  Augustine,  De  Civitate  Dei,  cited  by' St.  Bede,  in  his  commentary  upon  the 
s  ime  chapter.^;)     So  read  also  the  rest  of  the  Catholic  interpreters,  Haymo,  Anselm,  &c. 

But  if  this  place  be  rightlv  considered,  so  far  it  is  from  appearing  as  done  with  any  design 
of  corrupting  the  text,  that  on  the  contrary,  it  apparently  shews  the  sincerity  of  our  Latin 
translation  :°For,  as  we  keep  our  text,  according  as  St.  Hierom  and  the  Church  then  deli- 
vered it  ;  so  notwithstanding,  because  the  said  words  are  in  the  ancient  Greek  copies,  we 
orenerallv  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.  Augustine,  St.  Bede, 

Havmo,   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,  tne  streams  are,  that  flew  trom  the  Greek  and 
Hebrew  fountains,  through  the  channels  of  Protestant  pens,  the  reader  may  easily  guess 
without  taking  the  pains  of  comparing  them,  from  the  testimonies  they  themselves  bear  of 
one  another's  translations. 

Zuinglius  writes  thus  to  Luther,  concerning  his  corrupt  translation  ;  (36)  "Thou  corrupt- 
est  the  word  of  God,  O  Luther  ;  thou  art  seen  to  be  a  manifest  and  common  corrupter  and 
perverter  of  the  Holy  Scripture;  how  much  are  we  ashamed  of  thee,  who  have  hitherto 
esteemed  thee  bevond  all  measure,  and  prove  thee  to  be  such  a  man  !" 

Luther' s  Dutch  translation  of  the  Old  Testament,  especially  of  Job  and  the  Prophets, 
lias  its  blemishes,,  says  Keckerman,  and  those  no  small  ones, (37)  neither  are  the  blemishes 
in  his  New  Testament  to  be  accounted  small  ones  ;  one  of  which  is,  his  omitting  and  wholly 
leaving  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.  3. 
28.  he  adds  the  word  "Alone"  to  the  text,  saying,  "  we  account  a  man  to  be  justified  by  Faith 
Alone,  without  the  works  of  the  law."  Of  which  intolerable  corruption  being  admonished, 
he  persisted  obstinate  and  wilful,  saying,  "So  I  will,  so  I  command  ;  let  my  will  be  instead 
of  reason,  &c."(38J  Luther  will  have  it  so  ;  and  at  last,  thus  concludes,  "The  word  alone, 
must  remain  in  my  New  Testament,  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,  Omnibus 
cjf  Omnium,  situ  omnibus  operibus,  omnium  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,  deceivers,  &c(3q)  and  indeed,  not  with- 
out 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  in 
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  an  Lavatherus  witness,  sent  it 
back,  and  rejected  it. (40 J 

The 

(35)  St.  BcJa,  in  1.  Ccr.  c.  15.  ($(>)  Zuing.  T.  2.  ad  Luih.  lib.  de  S.  ($7)  Kerierman,  Syst.  6.  Theol  lib.  2. 
.«.  188.  X.  S.  Job.  5.  7.  (38J  To.  5.  Germ.  Jul.  141,  144.  (59)  See  Zuing.  Tom.  2.[adLu'b  lib.  de  Sacr.  fol,  3 S S j 
380.  (-\oJ  HcrJ>.  Hut.  Sac  ram.  part,  u It.  fol,  183,  Laval/),  Hut.  Sacrum.  I.  32. 


PREFACE.  ir 

The  Tigurine  translation  was,  in  like  manner,  so  distasteful  to  other  Protestants,  "  that 
the  Elector  of  Saxony  in  great  anger  rejected  it,  and  placed  Luther's  translation  in  room 
thereof."(4i) 

Beza  reproves  the  translation  set  forth  by  Oecolampadius,  and  the  divines  of  Basil;  af- 
firming, "  that  the  Basil  translation  is  in  many  places  wicked,  and  altogether  differing 
from  the  mind  of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

Castalio's  translation  is  also  condemned  by  (42)  Beza,  as  being  sacrilegious,  wicked,  and 
ethnical;  insomuch,  that  Castalio  wrote  a  special  treatise  in  defence  of  it:  In  the  preface 
of  which  he  thus  complains : — "  Some  reject  our  Latin  and  French  translations  of  the  Bi- 
ble, not  only  as  unlearned,  but  also  as  wicked,  and  differing  in  many  places  from  the  mind 
of  the  Holy  Ghost." 

That  learned  Protestant,  Molinceus,  affirms  of  Calvin's  translation,  "  that  Calvin  in  his 
harmony,  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. "(43) 

And  touching  Beza's  translation,  which  our  English  especially  follow,  the  same  Moli- 
nceus charges  him,  that  "  he  actually  changes  the  text ;"  giving  likewise  several  instances 
of  his  corruptions.  Castalio  also,  "  a  learned  Calvinist,"  as  Osiander  says,  "  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  that  would  require  too  large  a  volume. "(44) 

In  short,  Bucer  and  the  Osiandrians  rise  up  against  Luther  for  false  translations  ;  Luther 
against  Minister  ;  Beza  against  Castalio;  and  Castalio  against  Beza ;  Calvin  against  Ser- 
vetus ;  Illyricus  both  against  Calvin  and  Beza. (45)  Staphylus  and  Emserus  noted  in  Lu- 
ther's Dutch  translation  of  the  New  Testament  only,  about  one  thousand  four  hundred 
heretical  corruptions. (46)  And  thus  far  of  the  confessed  corruptions  in  foreign  Protestant 
translations. 

If  you  desire  a  character  of  our  English  Protestant  versions,  pray  be  pleased  to  take  it 
from  the  words  of  these  following  Protestants;  some  of  the  most  zealous  and  precise  of 
whom,  in  a  certain  treatise,  entitled,  "  A  Petition  directed  to  his  most  Excellent  Majesty 
King  James  the  First,"  complain,  "  That  our  translation  of  the  Psalms,  comprised  in  our 
Book  of  Common  Prayer,  doth,  in  addition,  subtraction,  and  alteration,  differ  from  the 
truth  of  the  Hebrew  in,  at  least,  two  hundred  places."  If  two  hundred  corruptions  were 
found  in  the  Psalms  only,  and  that  by  Protestants  themselves,  how  many,  think  you,  might 
be  found  from  the  beginning  of  Genesis,  to  the  end  of  the  Apocalypse,  if  examined  bv  an 
impartial  and  strict  examination  ?  And  this  they  made  the  ground  of  their  scruple,  to  make 
use  of  the  Common  Prayer  ;  remaining  doubtful,  "  whether  a  man  may,  with  a  safe  con- 
science, subscribe  thereto  :"  Yea,  they  wrote  and  published  a  particular  treatise,  entitled, 
"  A  Defence  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  be- 
ginning of  the  said  book,  the  title  of  every  chapter,  twenty-six  in  all,  pointing  to  the  mis- 
translations there  handled  in  particular.(47)  (48) 

Mr.  Carlile  avouches,  "  that  the  English  translators  have  depraved  the  sense,  obscured 
the  truth,  and  deceived  the  ignorant :  That  in  many  places  they  detort  the  Scriptures  from 
the  right  sense,  and  that  they  shew  themselves  to  love  darkness  more  than  light ;  falshood 
more  than  truth:"  Which  Doctor  Reynold's  objecting  against  the  Church  of  England,  Mr. 
Whitaker  had  no  better  answer  than  to  sav,  "  What  Mr.  Carlile,  with  some  others,  has 
written  against  some  places  translated  in  our  Bibles,  makes  nothing  to  the  purpose;  I  have 
not  said  otherwise,  but  that  some  things  may  be  amended. "(49) 

The 

(41)   Hospin.  in  Concord.  Discord,  fol.  13S.      (42)  In  Rtspons.  ad  Dtfens.  &  Respons.  Castal.  in  Test.  1556.  in  Pr.-ef.. 
y  in  Annot.  in  Mat.  3.  fcf  4.  Luc.  z.  Act.  8.  1$  i».  1  Cc 
(44-)    " 
(46) 
descei 


i2  PREFACE. 

The  Ministers  of  Lincoln  diocess  could  not  forbear,  in  their  great  zeal,  to  signify  to  the 
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  mean- 
ing of  the  Holy  Ghost ;"  calling  it  yet  further,  "  a  translation  which  is  absurd  and  sense- 
less, perverting,  in  many  places,  the  meaning  of  the  Holy  Ghost."(5o) 

For  which  cause,  Protestants  of  tender  consciences  made  great  scruple  of  subscribing 
thereto :  "  How  shall  I,"  says  Mr.  Burges,  "  approve  under  my  hand,  a  translation  which 
hath  so  many  omissions,  many  additions,  which  sometimes  obscures,  sometimes  perverts  the 
sense  ;  being  sometimes  senseless,  sometimes  contrary  ?"(5i) 

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  ot 
the  Council,  desiring  them  with  all  speed  to  procure  a  new  translation:  '*  Because,"  says 
lie,  "  that  which  is  now  in  England  is  full  of  errors. "(52)  And  in  his  advertisements  of 
corruptions,  he  tells  the  Bishops,  "  that  their  public  translations  of  Scriptures  into  English 
is  such,  that  it  perverts  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  receive 
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."(53)  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 
utterlv  prohibited." 

Now  these  our  Protestant  English  translations  being  thus  confessedly  "  corrupt,  absurd, 
senseless,  contrary,  and  perverting  the  meaning  of  the  Holv  Ghost ;"  had  not  King  James 
the  First  just  cause  to  affirm,  "  that  he  could  never  see  a  Bible  well  translated  into  Eng- 
lish :"(54)  And  whether  such  falsely  translated  Bibles  ought  to  be  imposed  upon  the  igno- 
rant people,  and  bv  them  received  for  the  very  Word  of  God,  and  for  their  only  rule  ot 
faith,  I  refer  to  the  judgment  of  the  world;  and  do  freely  assert  with  Doctor  Whitaker, 
a  learned  Protestant,  "  that  translations  are  so  far  only  the  Word  of  God,  as  they  faith- 
ful 1  v  express  the  meaning  of  the  authentical  text. "(55) 

The  English  Protestant  translations  having  been  thus  exclaimed  against,  and  cried  down 
not  only  by  Catholics,  but  even  by  the  most  learned  Protestants, (56)  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  Eli- 
zabeth's days. (57)  Which  work  was  undertaken  bv  the  prelatic  clergy,  not  so  much,  it 
is  to  be  feared,  for  the  zeal  of  truth,  as  appears  by  their  having  corrected  so  very  few  places, 
as  out  of  a  design  of  correcting  such  faults  as  favoured  the  more  puritanical  part  of  Pro- 
testants (Presbyterians)  against  the  usurped  authority,  pretended  episcopacy,  ceremonies, 
md  traditions  of  the  prelatic  party.  For  example:  The  word  "Congregation"  in  their 
llrft  Bibles,  was  the  usual  and  only  English  word  they  made  use  of  for  the  Greek  and  Latin 
word  ixKXn^a  t'ccL'sia,  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  forsaken,  and  which  withstood  and  condemned  them.     But  now,  being  grown 

up 

(50)  Seethe  Abridgment,  which  the  Ministers  of  Lincoln  Diocess  delivered  to  his  Majesty,  pag.  n,  r  2,  13. 
.51)  Burges  Apol.  Sect.  6.  and  in  Covcl's  Ansvv.  to  Burges,  pag.  93.  (52)  See  the  Triple  Cord,  pag.  147.  (53) 
.'-ee  the  Conference  before  the  King's   Majesty,  pag.  46  and  47.      Apologies  concerning  Christ's  descent   into   Hell 

it  Ddd.  (^4)  Conference  before  his  Majesty,  pag.  46.  (55)  Whitaker's  Answer  to  Dr.  Reynolds,  pag.  235. 
(56)  Dr.  Gregory  Martin  wrote  a  whole  Treatise  against  them,      (57)    Bishop  Tunstal  discovered  in  TindaPs  New 

L'f  stament  only,  no  less  than  2000  corruptions, 


PREFACE. 


; 


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,  vea,  and 
persecute  their  dissenting  brethren  ;  rejecting  therefore  that  humble  appellation,  which  their 
primitive  ancestors  were  content  with,  viz.  Congregation,  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,  institutions,  &c.  been  pleased  in  some  places  to 
translate  traditions;  thereby  tovindicate  several  ceremonies  of  theirs  against  their  Puritanical 
brethren;  asinbeh.Jfof  their  character,  they  rectified,  "  ordaining  elders,  by  election." 

The  word  (Image)  being  so  shameful  a  corruption,  they  were  pleased  likewise  to  correct, 
and  instead  thereof  to  translate  (Idol)  according  to  the  true  Greek  and  Latin.  Yet  it  ap- 
pears that  this  was  not  amended  out  of  any  good  design,  or  love  of  truth  ;  but  either  merely 
out  of  shame,  or  however  to  have  it  said  that  thev  had  done  something.  Seeing  they  have 
not  corrected  it  in  all  places,  especially  in  the  Old  Testament,  Exod.  20.  where  They  vet  read 
Image,  "  Thou  shalt  not  make  to  thyself  any  graven  image,"  The  word  in  Hebrew  beiir^ 
Ptsel,  the  very  same  that  Sculpik  is  in  Latin,  and  signifies  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  endeavour  to  discredit  the  Catholic  Religion  ;  and,  contrarv  to  their  own  consciences, 
and  corrections  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  carcass  in  the  grave." 
Yet  we  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  youwill  see  hereafter  ;   which  thev 
would  not  do,  especially  in  Genesis,   lest  they  should  thereby   be  forced   to  admit  of  Limbus 
Patrum,  where  Jacob's  soul  was  to  descend,  when  he  said,   "  I  will  go  down  to  my  son  into 
Hel!,  mourning,"  &e.   And  to  balance  the  advantage  they  think  thev  may  have  given  Catho- 
lics where  thev  have  corrected  it,  they  have  (against  Purgatory  and  Limbus  Patrum).  in  another 
place  most  grossly  corrupted  the  Text  :  For  whereas  the\vords  of  our  Saviour  are,  "  Quick- 
ened   in  spirit    or  soul.     In    the   which   spirit   coming,     he    preached    to  them    also  that 
were  in  prison,"(58)  diey  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.  Montaeue, 
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  Savil  told  him  plainly, 
that  Dr.  Abbot,  Archbishop  of  Canterbury,  and  Dr.  Smith,  Bishop  of  Gloucester,  corrupted 
and  altered  the  translation  of  this  place,   which  himself  had  sincerely  performed.      Note  here, 
by  the  bye,  that  if  Dr.  Abbot's  conscience  could  so  lightly  suffer  him  to  corrupt  the  Scripture, 
his,  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  corrected  in  this  their  new  translation  ;  and  witli 
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  cha- 
racter and  ceremonies  against  Puritans  or  Presbyterians';  or  else,  for  verv  shame,  "urged 
thereto  by  the  exclamations  of  Githolics,  daily  inveighing  against  such  intolerable  falsifica- 
tions. But  because  thev  resolved  not  to  correct  either  all,  or  the  tenth  part  of  the  corruptions 
of  the  former  translation  ;  therefore,  fearing  their  over-seen  falsifications  would  be  observed, 
both  by  Puritans  and  Catholics,  in  their  Epistle  Dedicatorv  to  the  King,  thev  desire  his 
Majesty's  protection,  for  that  "  On  the  one  side,  we  shall  be  traduced,  say  thev,   by  Popish 

D  pei      , 

(58)  1  Peter  3.  ver.   18,   i<j. 


H  rREFAC  E. 

,    ,-sor«?  at  Lome  or  abroad,  who  therefore  will  malign  us,  because  we  are  poor   instruments 
to  nnk-  Ws  liolv  truth  to  be  vet  more  known  unto  the  people  whom  they  desire  still   to 
pirTignorance  and  darkness  :'    On  the  other  side,  we  shall  be  maligned  by  self-conceited 
brethren,  who  run  their  own  ways,  &c." 

We  sec  how  they  endetoom  here  to  persuade  the  king  and  the  world,  that  Catholics  are 
desirous  to  cor.ceal  the  light  of  the  Gospel  :  Whereas  on  the  contrary,  nothing  is  more 
obvious,  than  the  daily  and  indefatigable  endeavours  of  Catholic  missioners  and  priests,  not 
only  in  preaching  and'explaining  God's  holy  word  in  Europe  -but  also  in  forsaking  their 
own  countries  ami  conveniences,  and  travelling  with  great  difficulties  and  dangers  by  sea 
and  land,  into  Asia,  Africa,  America,  and  the  Antipodes,  with  no  other  design  than  to 
nMblish  the  doctrine  of  Christ,  and  to  discover  and  manifest  the  light  of  the  Gospel  to  Infi- 
lls, "who  are  in  darkness  and  ignorance.  Nor  do  any  but  Catholics  stick  to  the  old  letter 
■V(i  ,ellse  of  Scripture,  without  altering  the  Text,  or  rejecting  any  part  thereof,  or  devising 
r  '  w  interpretations  ;  which  certainly  cannot  demonstrate  a  desire  in  them  to  keep  people  m 
ignorance  and  darkness.  Indeed,  as  for  their  self-conceited  Presbyterian  and  Fanatic  brethren, 
who  run  their  own  wavs  in  translating  and  interpreting  Scripture,  we  do  not  excuse  them, 
but  onlv  sav,  that  we  see  no  reason  why  prelatics  should  reprehend  them  for  a  fault,  whereot 
themselves  are  no  less  guilty.  Do  not  themselves  of  the  Church  of  England  run  their  own 
wivs  -ii«o  •  as  well  as  those  other  Sectaries  in  translating  the  Bible  ?  Do  they  stick  to  either 
the  Greek',  Latin,  or  Hebrew  Text?  Do  they  not  leap  from  one  language  and  copy  to  ano- 
ther '  Accept  an  I  reject  what  they  please  ?  Do  thev  not  fancy  a  sense  ot  their  own,  every  whit 
as  contrary  to  that  of  the  Catholic  and  ancient  Church,  as  that  of  their  self-conceited  bre- 
thren the  Presbyterians,  and  others,  is  acknowledged  to  be?  And  yet  they  are  neither  more 
ilfulin  the  tongues,  nor  more  godly  than  those  they  so  much  contemn 


learned  nor  mor 


All  heretics  tM*  have  ever  waged  war  against  God's  Holy  Church,  whatever  particular 
weapons  thev  have  had,  have  generally  made  use  of  these  two,  viz.  «  Misrepresenting  and 
ridiculing  the  doctrine  of  God's  Church  ;"  And,  "  Corrupting  and  misinterpreting  his 
-  acred  word,  the  Holy  Scripture  :"  We  hud  not  any  since  Simon  Magus's  days,  that_  have 
ever  been    more  dexterous  and  skilful  in  handling  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  thev  seem  even  to  have  solely  devoted  themselves  to  no  other  profes- 
sion or  placed  but  "  Cathedra  Irrisorum,"  the  school  or  -  Chair  ot  the  Scorners,"  as  David 
terms  their  seat  ■:   which  the  Holv  Apostle  St.   Peter  foresaw,    when  he  foretold,  that  "There 

hould  come  in  the  latter  days,  Illusores,  Scoffers,  walking  after  their  own  Lusts."  To  whom 
«iid  this  prophecy  ever  better  agree,  than  to  the  Heretics  of  our  days,  who  deride  the  sacred 
Scriptures?  "The  Author  of  the  Book  of  Ecclesiastes,  says  one  of  them,  had  neither 
boots  nor  spurs,  but  rid  on   a  long   stick,   in  begging  shoes  :»     Who  scoff  at   the   book  ot 

Judith  •  Compare  the  Maccabees  to  Robin  Flood,  and  Bevis  of  Southampton  :  Call  Baruch,  a 
peevish  ape  of  Jeremy  :''  Count  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrew  as  stubble :  And  deride  St.  James's, 
as  an  epistle  made  of'  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 
sime  vein  has  still  continued  in  the  writings,  preachings,  and  teachings  of  their  successors ; 
a  great  part  of  winch  are  nothing  but  a  mere  mockery,  ridiculing,  and  misrepresenting  of 
the  doctrine  of  Christ,  as  is  too  notorious  and  visible  in  the  many  scurrilous  and  scomtul 
writings  and  sermons  lately  published  by  several  men  of  no  small  figure  in  our  English  Pro- 
testant Church.  Bv  which'scofling  stratagem,  when  they  cannot  laugh  the  vulgar  into  aeon- 
tempt  and  abhorrence  of  the  Christian  religion,  they  fiy  to  their  other  weapons,  to  wit,  «  Im- 
posing upon  the  people-s  weak  understanding,  by  a  corrupt,  imperfect,  and  falsely  translated 

"y  Tertullian 

i')V:  Dr.  St.  Dr.  T.  Di-  S,  Dr.  T.  Mr.  W.  &c. 


PREFACE.  i0 

Tertullian  complained  thus  of  the  Heretics  of  his  time,  Ista  Haresii  non  reciph  quasdam 
Scripturas,  &c.  "  These  Heretics  admit  not  some  books  of  Scriptures  ;  and  those  which  they 
do  admit,  by  adding  to,  and  taking  from,  they  pervert  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,  that  think  yourselves  skilful  in  Scriptures,  when  that  which  you  defend, 
the  adversary  denies ;  and  that  which  you  deny,  he  defends  ?"  Et  tu  quidem  nihil  per des  nisi 
v oc em  de  Content ione^  nihil  consequeris  nisi  bilem  de  Elasphematione  :  "  And  you  indeed  shall  lose 
nothing  but  words  in  this  contention;  nor  shall  you  gain  any  thing  but  anger  from  his 
blasphemv."  How  litly  may  these  words  be  applied  to  the  pretended  reformers  of  our  days  I 
who,  when  told  of  their  abusing,  corrupting,  and  misinterpreting  the  Holy  Scriptures,  are 
so  far  from  acknowledging  their  faults,  that  on  the  contrary  they  blush  not  to  defend  them. 
When  Mr.  Martin  in'his  Discovery,  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  obstinately  to  defend  them:  And  Whitaker  affirms,  that 
"  their  translations  are  well  done,"  Why  then  were  they  afterwards  corrected  ?  and  that  all 
the  faults  Mr.  Martin  finds  in  them  are  but  trifles  ;  demanding  what  there  is  in  their  bibles 
that  can  be  found  fault  with,  as  not  translated  well  and  truly  ?"(6o)  Such  a  pertinacious, 
obstinate,  and  contentious  spirit,  are  Heretics  possessed  with,  which  indeed  is  the  very  thing 
that  renders  them  Heretics ;  for  with  such  I  do  not  rank  those  in  the  list,  who,  though  they 
have  even  with  their  first  milk,  as  I  may  say,  imbibed  their  errors,  and  have  been  educated 
from  their  childhood  in  erroneous  opinions,  yet  do  neither  pertinaciously  adhere  to  the  same, 
nor  obstinately  resist  the  truth,  when  proposed  to  them  ;  but,  on  the  contrary,  are  willing 
to  embrace  it. 

How  manv  innocent,  and  well-meaning  people,  are  there  in  England,  who  have  scarce 
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,  Idolators, 
Anti-christs,  the  Beast  in  the  Revelations,  and  what  not,  that  may  render  them  more  odious 
than  Hell,  and  more  frightful  than  the  Devil  himself,  and  that  from  the  mouths  and  pens 
of  their  teachers,  and  ministerial  guides  ?  It  is  then  to  be  wondered  at,  that  these  so  grosly 
deceived  people  should  entertain  a  strange  prejudice  against  religion,  and  a  detestation  of 
Catholics  ? 

Whereas,  if  these  blind-folded  people  were  once  undeceived,  and  brought  to  understand, 
that  all  these  monstrous  scandals  are  falsly  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  stocks  and  stones,  as  Protestants  phrase  it,  to  images,  to  saints,  to  angels,  or  to 
any  creature  ;  yea,  to  any  thing  but  to  God  himself,  is  an  idolator,  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  them,  not  only  to^Iove  God  above  all,  and  their  neighbour 
as  themselves,  but  even  to  love  their  enemies.  In  short,  so  far  different  is  the  Roman  Ca- 
tholic religion  from  what  it  is  bv  Protestants  represented,  that,  on  the  contrary,  Faith, 
Hope,  and  Charity,  are  the  three  divine  virtues  it  teaches  us :  Prudence,  Justice,  Fortitude, 
and  Temperance,  are  the  four  moral  virtues  it  exhorts  us  to :  Which  Christian  virtues,  when 
it  happens  that  they  are,  through  human  frailty,  and  the  temptations  of  our  three  enemies, 
the  world,  the  Flesh,  and  the  Devil,  either  wounded  or  lost;  then  are  we  taught  to  apply 
ourselves  to  such  divine  remedies,  as  our  blessed  Saviour  Christ  has  left  us  in  his  Church,  viz. 
his  Holy  Sacraments,  by  which  our  spiritual  infirmities  are  cured  and  repaired.  By  the  sacrament 

of 

(60)  Wbkaker,  pag.  14. 


io 


PREFACE. 


of  Baptism  we  are  taught,  that  original  sin  is  forgiven,  and  that  the  party  baptized  is  rege- 
erated  and  born  anew  unto  the  mystical  body  of  Christ,  of  which  by  baptism  he  is  made 
fivelv  member  :  So  likewise  bv  the  Sacrament  of  Penance  all  our  actual  sins  are  forgiven  ; 
tl  e  same  I  olv  Spirit  of  God  working  in  this  to  the  forgiveness  of  actual !  sin,  that  wrought 
before  in  the  Sacrament  of  baptism  'to  the  forgiveness  of  original  sin.  We  are  aught  like- 
wi£  that  bv  partaking  of  ChW.  very  body  and  his  very  blood  in  the blessed  s.cram 
„r  thp  Fiicharist.  we  bv  a  perfect  union  dwell  in  Him,  and  He  in  Us  ,  and  that  as  Hims.it 
ros S  for  our  justification,  so  we,  atthedayofjudgme.it,  shal  in  him  receive  a  glo- 
•  ions  Resurrection,  and  reign  with  him  for  all  eternity,  as  glorious  members  of  the  same  body, 
whereof  himself  is  the  head.  It  further  teaches  us,  that  none  but  a  priest  truly  consecrated 
I  v  tl  e  Ho  v  S acrament  of  Order,  can  consecrate  and  administer  the  Holy  Sacraments  - 1  his 
[sUr  religion,  this  is  the  center  it  tends  to,  and  the  sole  end  .t  aims  at ;  winch  point,  we  are 
further  taught   can  never  be  gained  but  by  a  true  Faith,  a  firm  Hope,  ana  a  perfect  Charity. 

To  conclude,  if,  I  sav,  thousands  of  well-meaning  Protestants  understood  this,  as  also 
tint  Protest  uuv  itself  is  nothing  else  but  a  mere  imposture  begun  in  England,  maintained 
and  upheld  by  the  wicked  policy  of  self-interested  statesmen  ;  and  stall  continued  by  misre- 
presenting and  ridiculing  the  Catholic  religion,  by  mis-interpret.ng  the  holy  Scriptures ;  yea, 
bv  falsifying,  abusing,  and,  as  will  appear  in  this  following  treatise,  by  most  abominably  cor- 
rupt ng'the  sacred  word  of  God:  How  far  would  it.be  from  them  obstinately  and  pertinaciously 
to  adhere  to  the  false  and  erroneous  principles,  in  which  they  have  hitherto  been  educated  : 
How  willingly  would  they  submit  their  understandings  to  the  obedience  ot  Faith  ?  How 
earnestly  would  they  embrace  that  rule  of  Faith,  which  our  blessed  Saviour  and  Ins  Apostles, 
left  us  for  our  guide  to  salvation  ?  With  what  diligence  would  they  bend  all  their  studies,  to 
learn  the  most  wholesome  and  saving  doctrine  of  God's  holy  Church  ?  In  fine,  if  once  en- 
hghtened  with  a  true  Faith,  and  encouraged  with  a  firm  Hope,  what  zealous  endeavours 
would  thev  not  use  to  acquire  such  virtues  and  Christian  perfections,  as  might  enflame  them 
with  a  perfect  Charitv,  which  is  the  very  ultimate  and  highest  step  to  eternal  felicity  -'  io 
which  may  God  of  his  infinite  goodness,  and  tender  mercy,  through  the  merits  and  bitter 
death  and  passion  of  our  dear  Saviour,  Jesus  Christ,  bring  us  all.     Amen. 


TH1 


the 


T  R  U  T 


t>p 


Protestant  Translations 


OF    THE 


BIBLE 


EXAMINED. 


>00£0«< 


OUR  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  39' Articles,  declared,  "  that  the 
Scripture  comprehended  in  the  canonical  books  (/.  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  therein,  or  cannot  be  proved  thereby,  is  not  to  be  accepted  as  any  point  of  Faith,  or 
needful  to  be  followed."  But  finding  themselves  still  at  a  loss,  their  new  doctrines  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 
translations  ;  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  ma- 
ny^ and  so  notorious,  that  Doctor  Gregorv  Martin  composed  a  whole  book  of  them,  in 
which  he  discovers  the  fraudulent  shifts  the'translators  were  fain  to  make  use  of,  in  defence 
of  them.  Sometimes  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  copy  acknow- 
ledged by  themselves  to  be  corrupted,  and  of  no  credit:  And  when  no  cony  at  all  could  be 
found  out  to  cloak  their  corruptions,  then  must  the  book  or  chapter  of  Scrinture  contra- 
dicting them,  be  declared  apocryphal:  And  when  that  cannot  be  made  probai  It,  they  fall 
down-nght  upon  the  Prophets  and  Apostles  that  wrote  them,  saving,  "  That  thev  mi^ht, 
and  did  err,  even  after  the  con  ing  oi  the  Holy  Ghost."  Thus  Luther,  accused  by  Zuin- 
ghus  for  corrupting  the  Word  of  God.  had  no  way  left  to  defend  his  impietv,  but  by  impu- 
dently preferring  himself,  and  his  own   spirit,  before   that  of  those  who   wrote  the  Holv 


u  .-■, 


x8  Protestant  Translations 

Scriptures,  saying,  "  Be  it  that  the  Church,  Augustine,  and  other  Doctors,  also  Peter  and 
Paul,  yea,  an"  angel  from  Heaven,  teach  otherwise,  yet  is  my  doctrine  such  as  sets  forth 
God's  glorv,  &c/ Peter,  the  chief  of  the  Apostles,  lived  and  taught  (extra  verbum  Dei)  be- 
sides the  Word  of  God."(i)  T  „       ,         ,  „ 

And  against  St.  James's  mentioning  the  Sacrament  of  Extreme  Unction  :  "But  though 
says  he,  "  this  were  the  epistle  of  St.  James,  I  would  answer,  that  it  is  not  lawful  for  an 
Apostle,  by  his  authority,  to  institute  a  Sacrament;  this  appertains  to  Christ  alone."(2) 
As  thoucrh  that  blessed  Apostle  would  publish  a  sacrament  without  warrant  from  Christ! 
Our  Church  of  England  divines,  having  unadvisedly  put  St.  James's  epistle  into  the  canon, 
are  forced,  instead  of  such  an  answer,  to  say,  "  That  the  Sacrament  of  Extreme  Unction 
was  vet,  in  the  days  of  Gregory  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  oi!  in  the  name  of  our  Lord. "(3) 

Nor  was  this  Luther's  shift  alone  ;  for  all  Protestants  follow  their  first  pretended^  reformer 
in  this  point,  In  in.:  necessitated  so  to  do  for  the  maintenance  of  their  reformations,  and 
translations,  so  directly  opposite  to  the  known  letter  of  the  Scripture. 

The  Magdeburgians"  follow  Luther,  in  accusing  the  Apostles  of  error,  particularly  St. 
Paul,  by  the  persuasion  of  James. (4) 

Bren tius  also,  whom  Jewel  terms  a  grave  and  learned  Father,  affirms,  "  That  St.  Pe- 
ter, the  chief  of  the  Apostles,  and  also  Barnabas,  after  the  Holy  Ghost  received,  together 
with  the  Church  of   Jerusalem,  erred." 

John  Calvin  affirms,  that  "  Peter  added  to  the  schism  of  the  Church,  to  the  endanger- 
ing of  Christian  liberty,  and  the  overthrow  of  the  grace  of  Christ."  And  in  page  15c, 
lie  reprehends  Peter  and  Barnabas,  and  others. (5) 

Zanchius  mentions  some  Calvinists  in  his  Epist.  ad  Misc.  who  said,  "  If  Paul  should 
come  to  Geneva,  and  preach  the  same  hour  with  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  Ausburg."(6) 

These  desperate  shifts  being  so  necessary  for  warranting  their  corruptions  of  Scripture, 
and  maintaining  the  fallibility  of  the  Church  in  succeeding  ages,  for  the  same  reasons 
which  conclude  "it  infallible  in  the  Apostle's  time,  are  applicable  to  ours,  and  to  every 
former  century  ;  otherwise  it  must  be  said,  that  God's  providence  and  promises  were  limit- 
ted  to  few  years,  and  Himself  so  partial,  that  he  regards  not  the  necessities  of  his  Church, 
nor  the  salvation  o\  any  Person  that  lived  after  the  time  of  his  Disciples;  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  Abiathar  for  Abimelech  ;  and  St.  Matthew, 
Hieremias  for  Zacharias.(7)  And  Mr.  Fulk  against  the  Rhemish  Testament,  in  Galat.  2. 
fol.  322.  charges  Peter  with  error  of  ignorance  against  the  Gospel. 

Doctor  Goad,  in  his  four  Disputations  with  F.  Campion,  affirms,  that  "St.  Peter  erred 
in  faith,  and  that,  after  the  sending  down  of  the  Holy  Ghost  upon  them. "(8)  And  Whit- 
aker  says,  "  It  is  evident,  that  even  after  Christ's  ascension,  and  the  Holy  Ghost's  descend- 
ing upon  the  Apostles,  the  whole  Church,  not  only  the  common  sort  of  Christians,  but 
also  even  the  Apostles  themselves,  erred  in  the  vocation  of  the  Gentiles,  &c.  yea,  Peter 
also  erred.     He  furthermore  erred  in  manners,  Sec.     And  these  were  great  errors ;  and  vet 

we 


(1)    V'ul  Supr.  Tom.  5.  W 
Tom.  ?.  Wiitemb. 
(4)    Cent.   1    I  i. 
page  18.     (7)  Fag 


Tom.  5.  Wiltemb.  fol.  290.  o  in  Ep.  ad  Galat.  cap    I.      (2)   Be  Cap/.   Bali!,  cap.  de  Extrem.  Unct. 
(})    See  the      cond  Defence  of  the  Expedition  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,    Sec. 
c    10  cal.  580.     (j)   Calvin  in  Galat.   c    2.  v,  14.  p.   511.     (6)  Lavatcr.  in  Hiitor.   Sacrament, 
gc  361.     (8)  The  second  day's  Conference. 


of  the  Scriptures.  jg 

we  see  these  to  have  been  in  the  Apostles,  even  after  the  Holy  Ghost  descended  upon 
them. "(9)  ^ 

Thus  these  fallible  reformers,  who,  to  countenance  their  corruptions  of  Scripture,  grace 
their  own  errors,  and  authorize  their  Church's  fallibility,  would  make  the  Apostles  them- 
selves fallible;  but  indeed,  they  need  not  have  gone  this  bold  way  to  work,  for  we  are  sa- 
tisfied, and  can  very  easily  believe  their  Church  to  be  fallible,  their  doctrines  erroneous,  and 
themselves  corrupters  of  the  Scriptures,  without  being  forced  to  hold,  that  the  Apostles 
erred.  (10)  l 

And  truly  if,  as  they  say,  the  Apostles  were  not  onlv  fallible,  but  taught  errors  in  man- 
ners, 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  of  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  evidently  appear 
from  their  intolerable  abusing  it,  how  little  esteem  and  slight  regard  they  have' for* the 
sacred  Scripture  ;  though  they  make  their  ignorant  flock  believe,  that,  as  thev  have  trans- 
lated it,  and  delivered  it  to  them,  it  is  the  pure  and  infallible  Word  of  God.     ' 

p  Before  I  come  to  particular  examples  of  their  falsifications  and  corruptions,  let  me  adver- 
tise the  reader,  that  my  intention  is  to  make  use  only  of  such  English  translations,  as  are 
common,  and  well  known  ^England  even  to  this  day,  as  being  yet  in  many  men's  hands 

,79,  in  the 

lation  mad 

-  year  1683. 

In  all  which  said  Bibles,(n)  I  shall  take  notice  sometimes  of  one  translation,  sometimes 
of  another,  as  every  one's  falshood  shall  give  occasion  :  Neither  is  it  a  good  defence  for 
the  falshood  of  one,  that  it  is  truly  translated  in  another,  the  reader  being  deceived  by  anv 
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  if  he  find  not  the  falsifica- 
tion in  all,  he  will  certainly  find  it  in  two,  or  at  least  in  one  of  them:  And  in  this  case, 
1  advertise  the  reader  to  be  very  circumspect,  that  he  think  not,  bv  and  bv,  these  are 
talsly  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  onlv  in 
their  translations  of  the  Bible,  but  in  their  other  books  and  writings,  to  alter  and  change, 
add  and  put  out,  in  their  later  editions,  according  as  either  themselves  are  ashamed  of  file 
former,  or  their  scholars  that  print  them  again,  dissent  or  disagree  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  authority  in  the  Church  of"  God,  and  with  all  the 
(12)  ancient  Fathers,  as  I  do  the  Greek,  which  they  pretend  to  translate:  I  cannot,  how- 
ever, but  observe,  that  as  Luther  wilfully  forsook  the  Latin  text  in  favour  of  his  heresies 
and  erroneous  doctrines ;  go  the  rest  follow  his  example  even  to  this  day  for  no  other  cause 
in  the  world,  but  that  it  makes  against  their  errors. 

For  testimony  of  which,  what   greater  argument  can  there  be  than  this,  that  I  uther 
who  before  had  always  read  with  the  Catholic  Church,  and  with  all  antiquity,   these  words 

of 

rJ^lfvJlfwvf"  EcsIe\\contr-  BeJhrr:  Confers.  2.  q.  4.  p.  223.  (10)  Protestants,  to  authorize  their  own  Er- 
rors and  fallibility  would  make  the  Apostles  themselves  erroneous  and  fallible.  Ui)  Bib.  1562,  07,  or  79.  (f) 
bee  the  Preface  of  the  Rheiras  New  Testament,  *        '  '         7J      l     ' 


2o  Protestant  Translations 

of  St.  Paul,  "  Have  not  we  power  to  lead  about  a  woman,  a  sister,  as  also  the  rest  of  the 
Apostles  »(i3)  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  other  votaries  might  do  the  same : 
That  «  Faith  alone  justified,  and  that  good  works  were  not  necessary  to  salvation.  lm- 
mediatelv,  I  sav,  after  he  fell  into  these  heresies,  he  began  to  read  and  trans  ate  the  former 
texts  of  Scripture  accordingly,  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  voca- 
tion and  election,"  leaving  out  the  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  thev  hold  the  self-same  errors.  . 

I  would  gladly  know  of  our  English  Protestant  translators,  whether  they  reject  the  Vul- 
gate Latin  text/  so  generally  liked  and  approved  by  all  the  primitive  Fathers,  purely  out  ot 
design  to  furnish  us  with  a  more  sincere  and  simple  version  into  English  from  the  Greek, 
than  thev  thought  thev  could  do  from  the  Vulgate  Latin  ?  If  so,  why  not  stick  close  to 
the  Greek  copy,  which  they  pretend  to  translate?  but,  besides  their  corrupting  of  it,  fly 
from  it,  and  have  recourse  again  to  the  Vulgate  Latin,  whenever  it  may  seem  to  make  more 
for  their  purpose:  Whence  mav  be  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  easv  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  their  turning  and  wind- 
ing to  and  fro  from  the  Greek  to 'the  Latin,  and  then  again  to  the  Greek,  according  as 
they  should  judge  most  advantageous  to  them.  It  was  also  no  little  part  of  their  design, 
"  to  lessen  the  credit  and  authority  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  au- 
thorized by  the  General  Council  of  Trent,  for  the  only  best,  and  most  authentic  text. 

Because,  therefore,  I  find  thev  will  scarcely  be  able  to'justify  their  rejecting  the  Latin  trans- 
lation, unless  they  had  dealt  more  sincerely  with  the  Greek  ;  I  have,  in  this  following  work, 
set  down  the  Latin  text,  as  well  as  the  Greek  word  whereon  their  corruption  depends  ;  yet, 
where  they  truly  keep  to  the. Greek  and  Hebrew,  which  they  profess  to  follow,  and  which 
they  will  have  to  be  the  most  authentic  text,  I  do  not  charge  them  with  heretical  corrup- 
tions. .       .  . 

The -left-hand  page  . I  have  divided  into  four  columns,  besides  the  margin,  in  which  1 
have  noted  the  book,  chapter,  and  verse.  In  the  first  I  have  set  down  the  text  of  Scrip- 
ture from  the  Vulgate  Latin  edition,  putting  the  word  that  their  English  Bibles  have  cor- 
rupted in  a  different  character  ;  to  which  I  have  also  added  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  words, 
so  often  as  they  are,  or  may  be,  necessary  for  the  better  understanding  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  very  true  meaning  and 
interpretation  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  my  reader  to  the  said  translation  made  at  Rheims,  I  have  not  al- 
tered 

(13)  1  Cor.  9.  v.  5.  Mulurcm  Sororm,  2  Pet.  I  w.  ic.  Ut  per  lona  opera  certam  vestram  vecatiouem  &  Ekcitonem 
fa'.'iatls. 


or  the  Scripture.  2,1 

tered  one  syllableof  the  English,  though  indeed  I  might  in  some  places  have  made  the  word 
more  agreeable  to  the  language  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  of  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  1562,  and  from  the  two  next  impressions,  made  Anno  1577, 
and  1579.  All  which  were  authorized  in  the  beginning  of  (>aeen  Elizabeth's  reign,  when  the 
Church  of  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  agreeable  to  the  Principles  and  Doctrine  of  the  said  Church  of  England  in  those 
days,  however  they  pretend  at  this  dav  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  andThomas 
Newcomb,  Printers  to  the  King's  Most  Excellent  Majesty,  Anno  Dom."  1683.  ^n  which 
Bible,  wherever  I  find  them  to  have  corrected  and  amended  the  place  corrupted  in  their 
former  translations,  I  have  put  down  the  word  "corrected  ;"  but  where  the  falsification  is  not 
yet  rectified,  I  have  set  down  likewise  the  corruption  :  And  that  indeed  is  in  most  places, 
yea,  and  in  some  two  or  three  places,  they  have  made  it  rather  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  nave  been  corrected  in  the  latter,  it  has  not  always  been  the  effect  of 
plain  dealing  and  sincerity;  for  if  such  candid  intention  of  amending  former  faults  had 
every  where  prevailed  with  them,  they  would  not  in  any  place  have  made  it  worse,  but  would 
also  have  corrected  all  the  rest,  as  well  as  one  or  two,  that  are  not  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  unwarrantable  proceedings. 

All  which  I  have  contrived  in  as  short  and  compendious  a  method  as  I  possibly  could,  know- 
ing 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  desire  is  to  be  bench" cia!  to  ali,  I  have  accommodated 
it  not  only  to  the  purse  of  the  poorest,  but  also,  as  near  as  possible,  to  the  capacitvof  the 
most  ignorant;  for  which  reasons  also,  I  have  passed  by  a  great  many  learned  arguments  brought 
by  my  Author,  Dr.  Martin,  from  the  significations,  etymologies,  derivations,  uses,  Sec. 
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  othcr 
things,  whereby  he  largely  confutes  their  insincere  and  disingenuous  proceedinc;? :  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  Mr. 
Gregory  Martin,  entitled,  a  "  Discovery  of  the  ManifoldCorruptions  of  the  Holy  Scriptures," 
&c.  printed  at  Rheims,  Anno  1582,  which  is  not  hard  to  be  found. 

Have  we  not  great  cause  to  believe,  that  our  Protestant  Divinesdo  obstinately  teach  contrary 
to  their  own  consciences  ?  For,  besides  their  having  been  reproved,  without  amendment, 
for  their  impious  handling  the  Holy  Scripture,  if  their  learning  be  so  profound  and  bottom- 
less, as  themselves  proudly  boast  in  all  their  works,  we  cannot  but  conclude,  that  they  must 
needs  both  see  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  thou- 
sand times  more  miserable,  we  may  justly  exclaim,  "those  who  see,  lead  the  blind,  till  with 
themselves,  they  fall  into  the  ditch." 

F  As 


22 


Protestant  Translations 


As  nothing  has  ever  been  worse  resented  by  such  as  forsake  God's  Holy  Church,  than  to 
hear  themselves  branded  with  the  general  Title  of  Heretics  ;  so  nothing  has  been  ever  more 
common  among  Catholics,  than  justly  to  stigmatize  sucli  with  the  same  infamous  character. 
I  am  not  ignorant,  how  ill  the  Protestants  of  our  days  resent  this  term,  and  there- 
fore do  avoid,  as  much  as  the  nature  of  this  work  will  permit,  giving  them  the  least 
disgust  bv  this  horrid  appellation:  Nevertheless  I  must  needs  give  them  to  understand, 
that  the  nature  of  the  Holy  Scripture  is  such,  that  whosoever  do  voluntarily  corrupt  and 
pervert  it,  to  maintain  their  own  erroneous  Doctrines,  cannot  lightly  be  characterized  by 
a  less  infamous  title,  than  that  ot  Heretics;  and  their  false  versions,  by  the  title  of  here- 
tied  Translations,  under  which  denomination  I  have  placed  these  following  corruptions. 

Notwithstanding,  I  would  have  the  Protestant  Reader  to  take  notice,  that  I  neither  name 
nor  judge  all  to  be  Heretics,  as  is  hinted  in  my  Preface,  who  hold  errors  contradictory  to 
God's  Church,  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  many  false  opinions' against  the  truth  of  Christian  Faith,  but  yet  not 
with  Obstinacy  and  Pertinacity,  he  should  err,  but  not  be  an  Heretic.  Saint  Augustine  as- 
serting, that  "if  any  do  defend  their  opinions,  though  false  and  perverse,  with  no  obsti- 
nate animositv,  but  rather  with  all  solicitude  seek  the  truth,  and  are  ready  to  be  cor- 
rected when  they  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.''(i4) 
\n'd  in  another  place,  against  the  Donatists,  "  Let  us,"  says  he,  "  suppose  some  man  to 
hold  that  of  Christ  at  this  dav,  which  the  Heretic  Photinus  did,  to  wit,  that  Christ  was 
only  Man,  and  not  God,  and  that  he  should  think  this  to  be  the  Catholic  Faith  ;  I  will  not 
sav  that  he  is  an  Heretic,  unless  when  the  Doctrine  of  the  Church  is  made  manifest  unto 
him,  he  will  rather  chuse  to  hold  that  which  he  held  before,  than  yield  thereunto."(i5) 

'  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  defend  the  same,  these  men  are  made  Here- 
tics -"(16)  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  themselves  of  the  truth  oi 
Catholic  Doctrine,  and  humblv  embrace  the  same,  than  to  suffer  that  prejudice  against  Re- 
ligion, in  which  they  have  unhappily  been  educated,  so  strongly  to  bias  them,  as  to  turn 
them  from  men  barely  educated  in  error,  to  obstinate  Heretics ;  such  as  the  more  to  harden 
their  own  hearts,  bv  how  much  the  more  clearly  the  Doctrine  of  God's  Holy  Church  is  de- 
monstrated to  them.  When  the  true  Faith  is  once  made  known  to  men,  ignorance  can  no 
longer  secure  them  from  that  eternal  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  condemned  of  his  own 

iudgment."(i7)  . 

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  mis- 
guided people,  they  will  scarcely  be  able  to  free  themselves  either  from  it,  or  escape  the  pu- 
nishment 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  todefend 
the  same,'  and  compel  that  divine  volume  to  speak  against  such  points  of  Catholic  Doc- 
trine as  themselves  are  pleased  to  deny. 

In 

(14)   5.  Aug,  Ep.  162.     («5)  Lib.  4.  contr.  Donat.  c.  6.     (16)  De  Civit.  Dei  lib.  18.  c.   51.     (17)   Titus,  cap.  3. 
•oer.  10. 


of  the  Scripture.  z^ 

In  what  can  an  heretical  intention  more  evidently  appear,  than  in  falsely  translating  and 
corrupting  the  Holy  Bible,  against  the  Catholic  Church,  and  such  Doctrine's  as  it  has  by  an 
uninterrupted  tradition,  brought  down  to  us  from  the  Apostles  ?  As  for  example  : 

Against  the  Holy  Sacrifice  of  the  Altar ,     t 

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

Against  Priests,  and  the  Power  of  Priesthood ? 

Against  the  Authority  of  Bishops 4 

Against  the  sacred  Altar  on  which  Christ's  Body  and  Blood  is  offered c; 

Against  the  Sacrament  of  Baptism 5 

Against  the  Sacrament  of  Penance,  and  Confession  of  Sins j 

Against  the  Sacrament  of  Marriage y 

Against  Intercession  of  Saints q 

Against  sacred  Images J(D 

Against  Purgatory,  Limbus  Patrum,  and  Christ's  Descent  into  Hell 1 1 

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

Against  meritorious  Works,  and  the  Reward  due  to  the  same.. 13 

Against  Free  Will 14 

Against  true  inherent  Justice,  and  in  defence  of  their  own  Doctrine,  that  1 

Faith  alone  is  sufficient  for  Salvation J     JS 

Against  Apostolical  Traditions 15 

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  unprejudiced  and  well-meaning  Protestant  Reader  has  considered,  I 
am  confident  he  will  be  struck  with  amazement,  and  even  terrified  to  look  upon  such  abo- 
minable corruptions ! 

_  Doubtless  the  generality  of  Protestants  have  hitherto  been  ignorant,  and  more  is  the 
pity,  of  this  ill-handling  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  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  their 
own. 

Does  it  appear  to  be  done  by  negligence,  ignorance,  or  mistake,  as  perhaps  they  would 
be  willing  to  have  the  Reader  believe,  or  rather  designedly  and  wilfully,  when  what  they  in 
some  places  translate  trulv,  in  places  of  controversy,  between  them  and  us,  they  grossly  fal- 
sify, in  favour  of  their  errors  ? 

Is  it  not  a  certain  argument  of  a  wilful  corruption,  where  they  deviate  from  that  text, 
and  ancient  reading,  which  has  been  used  by  all  the  Fathers  ; "  and  instead  thereof,  to 
make  the  exposition  or  commentary  of  some  one  Doctor,  the  very  text  of  Scripture  it- 
self ? 

So  also  when  in  their  translations  they  fly  from  the  Hebrew  or  Greek  to  the  Vulgate  La- 
tin, where  those  originals  make  against  them,  or  not  so  much  for  their  purpose,  it  is  a  ma- 
nifest sign  of  wilful  partiality  :   And  this  they  frequently  do. 

What  is  it  else  but  wilful  partiality,  when  in  words  of  ambiguous  and  divers  significa- 
tions, 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,  urge  the  Greek  word  yw*'^  to  signify  wife,  and.  not, -to  signify  wife,  both 
against  the  virginity  and  chastity  of  Priests. 

What 


s 


v'  Mi;  ■■ !  :M 


oa  Protestant  Translations 

What  is  it  but  a  voluntary  and  designed  contrivance,  when  in  a  case  that  makes  for  them, 
they   strain  the  very  original  signification  of  the  word  ;  and  in  the  contrary  case,  neglect  it 

altogether?   Yet  this  thev  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  solcecisms  are  imagined  when  the  construe 
tion&is  most  agreeable  ;  and  errors  pretended  to  creep  out  ot  the  margin  into  the  text :  But 
Beza  made  use  of  all  these,  and  more  such  like  quirks. 

Another  note  of  wilful  corruption  is,  when  they  do  not  translate  alike  such  words  as  are 
of  like  form  and  force:  Example— if  Wccmus  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  original  text;  and  the  words.  Hymns,  Grace, 
Mystery,  Sacrament,  Church,  Altar,  Priest,  Catholic,  Justification,  Tradition,  &c.  avoid- 
ed" and  "suppressed,  where  thev  are  in  the  original,  as  it  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 
the  said  things  and  speeches? 

Though  Beza  and  Whitaker  made  it  a  good  rule  to  translate  according  to  tne  usual  sig- 
nification, and  not  the  original  derivation  of  words ;  yet,  contrary  to  this  rule,  they  trans- 
late Idihm9  an  Image;  Prabyter,  an  Elder ;  Diaconus,  a  Minister;  Epscopis,  an  Overseer, 
&c.    Who  sees  not  therefore  but  this  is  wilful  partiality? 

If  where  the  Apostle  names  a  Pagan  Idol ator,  and  a  Christian  Idolator,  by  one  and  the 
same  Greek  word,  in  one  and  the  same  meaning;  and  they  translate  the  Pagan,  (Idolator) 
and  the  Christian  (Worshipper  of  Images)  by  two  distinct  words,  and  in  two  divers  mean- 
ings,  it  must  needs  be  wilfully  done. 

Nor  does  it  appear  to  be  less  designedly  done,  to  translate  one  and  the  same  Greek  word 
flaunt  Tradition,  whensoever  it  may  be  taken  for  evil  Traditions  ;  and  never  so,  when  it 
is  spoken  of  good  and  Apostolical  Traditions.  t 

So  likewise  when  thev  foist  into  their  translation  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,  trans- 
lated an  Author  of  Sects :  This  cannot  be  excused  for  voluntary  corruption. 

But  why  should  I  multiply  examples,  when  it  is  evident  from  their  own  confessions  and 
acknowledgments?  For  instance,  concerning  f*fl*»«~Ti,  which  the  Vulgate  Latin  and  Eras- 
mus translate  AgiuPccnitcntiam,  "  do  penance  :"  "  This  interpretation,"  says  Beza,  «  I  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."  .  .    .    .        .lf  ,  , 

Many  other  ways  there  are,  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  prophane  writers,  as  Homer,  Plutarch,  Pliny,  Tully, 
Virgil,  and  Terence,  and  reject  the  ecclesiastical  use  of  words  in  the  Scriptures  and  Fa- 
thers ;  which  is  Beza's  usual  custom,  whom  our  English  Translators  follow.  But  to  note 
all  their  marks  were  too  tedious  a  work,  neither  is  it  in  this  place  necessary:  These  are  suf- 
ficient 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  inten- 
tion, 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-devised 

errors, 


op  the  Scripture,  25 

errors,  and  monstrous  opinions.  And  Beza  is  not  far  from  confessing  thus  much,  when 
against  Castalio  he  thus  complains :  «  The-  matter,"  says  he,  "  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  ;  whom  if  a  man  reprehend,  he 
shall  be  answered  by  and  by,  that  they  do  the  office  of  a  Translator,  not  who  translates 
word  for  word,  but  who  expresses  the  sense:  So  it  comes  to  pass,  that  whilst  everv  man 
will  rather  freely  follow  his  own  judgment,  than  be  a  religious  interpreter  of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  he  rather  perverts  many  things,  than  translates  them."  This  is  spoken  well  enough, 
if  he  had  done  accordingly.  But,  doing  quite  the  contrary,  is  he  not;  a  dissembling  Hy- 
pocrite  in  so  saying,  and  a  wilful  Heretic  in  so  doina  ?  °     " 

Our  quarrel  with  Protestant  Translators  is  not  for  trivial  or  slight  faults,  or  for  such 
verbal  differences,  or  little  escapes  as  may  happen  through  the  scarcely  unavoidable  mistakes 
of  the  Transcribers  or  Printers:  No  !  we  accuse  them  of  wilfully  corrupting  and  falsifying 
the  Sacred  Text,  against  points  of  Faith  and  Morals. (18) 

We  deny  not  but  several  immaterial  faults  and  depravations  may  enter  into  a  transla- 
tion, nor  do  we  pretend  that  the  Vulgate  itself  was  free  from  such,  before  the  correction 
of  Sixtus  V.  and  Clement  VIII.  which,  through  the  mistakes  of  Printers,  and,  before 
printing,  of  Transcribers,  happened  to  several  copies:  So  that  a  great  many  verbal  dif- 
ferences, 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  Al- 
mighty's Providence,  as  Protestants  themselves  confess,  would  never  suffer  to  enter:  And 
indeed  these  lesser  depravations  are  not  easily  avoided,  especially  after  several  transcrip- 
tions of  copies  and  impressions  from  the  original,  as  we  daily  see  in  other  books. 

To  amend  and  rectify  such,  the  Church  ('as  you  may  read' in  the  Preface  to  the  Sixtine 
Edition)  has  used  the  greatest  industry  imaginable.  Pope  Pius  IV.  caused  not  only  the 
original  languages,  but  other  copies  to  be  carefully  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,  •<  Eiernus  ilk  Ccdeniwn,  &c."  Anno.  1585.  Yet,  notwith- 
standing the  Bull  prefixt  before  his  Bible,  then  printed,  the  same  Pope  Sixtus,  as  is  seen  in 
the  Preface,  made  Anno  1592,  after  diligent  examination,  found  that  no  few  faults  slipt  into 
his  impression,  by  the  negligence  of  the  Printers  :  And  therefore,  Censuit  atque  Decrcvu,  he 
both  judged  and  decreed  to  have  the  whole  work  examined  and  reprinted  ;  but  that  second 
correction  being  prevented  by  his  death,  was,  after  the  very  short  reign  of  three  other 
Popes,  undertaken,  and  happily  finished  bv  his  successor  Clement  VIII.  answerable  to  the 
desire  and  absolute  intention  of  his  predecessor,  Sixtus:  Whence  it  is  that  the  Valerate 
now  extant,  is  called  the  correction  of  Sixtus,  because  this  vigilant  Pope,  notwithstanding 
the  endeavours  of  his  two  predecessors,  is  said  to  have  begun" it,  which  was,  according  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  Clement's  recognition, 
is  now  read  in  the  Church,  as  authentic,  true  Scripture,  and  is  the  very  best  tweeted  codv 
of  the  Latin  Vulgate.  t- 

And  whereas  Pope  Sixtus's  Bull  enjoined  that  his  Bible  be  read  in  all  Churches,  without 
the  least  alteration;  yet  this  injunction  supposed  the  Interpreters  and  Printers  to  have  done 
exactly  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,  unalterable  ;  but  may  and  ought  to  be  changed 
according  to  the  Legislator's  prudence.     What  I  say  here  is  indisputable';    for  how' co 

G 

(18)  See  a  Book  entitled,  Reason  and  Religion,  cap.  8.  where  the  Sixtine  and  Clementine  Bibles  are  mor*  fully 
treated  of.  J 


2(3  Protestant  Translations 

Tone  Sixtus,  after  a  sight  of  such  faults  as  caused  him  to  intend  another  impression,  in  join 
no  alteration,  when  he  desired  one,  which  his  successor  did  for  him.?  So  that  if  Pope  Six- 
tus had  lived  longer,  he  would  as  well  have  changed  the  Breve,  as  amended  his   impres- 


sion. 


And  whereas  there  were  sundry  different  lections  of  the  Vulgate  Latin,  before  the  said 
correction  of  Sixtus  and  Clement,'  the  worthy  Doctors  of  Lovain,  with  an  immense  labour, 
placed  in  the  margin  of  their  Bible  these  different  lections  of  Scripture  ;  not  determining 
Uich  reading  was  best,  or  to  be  preferred  before  others  ;  as  knowing  well,  that  the  decision 
a'  such  causes  belongs  to  the  public  judicature  and  authority  of  the  Church,  lope  Ele- 
ment therefore,  omitting  no  human  diligence,  compared  lection  with  lection;  and  artei 
maturely  weighing  all,  preferred  that  which  was  most  agreeable  to  the  ancient  copies,  a 
thing  necessary  to" be  done  for  the  procuring  one  uniform  lection  of  Scripture  in  the  Uiurcn, 
annroved  of  bv  the  see  Apostolic.  And  from  this  arises  that  villainous  calumny  and  open 
Zander  o\  Doctor  StiHin^leet  ;  who  affirms,  that  "the  Pope  took  where  lie  pleased  tfce 
marginal  annotations  in  the  Lovain  Bible,  and  inserted  them  into  the  text:  V\  nereas,  i 
say,*he  took  not  the  annotations  or  commentaries  of  the  Lovain  Doctors,  but  the  dinerent 
readings  of  Scripture  found  in  several  copies. 

Mr/  fames  makes  a  great  deal  of  noise  about  his  impertinent  comparisons  between  tliese 
two  editions,  and  that  of  Lovain:  Vet  among  all  his  Differences,  he  finds  not  one  con- 
trariety in  any  material  point  of  Faith  or  Morals:  And  as  for  other  Differences,  such  as 
touch  not  Faith  and  Religion,  arising  from  the  expressions,  being  longer  or  shorter,  I 
clear  in  the  one,  and  more  significant  in  the  other;  or  happening  through  the  negligence 
of  Printers,  tliev  give  him  no  manner  of  ground  for  his  vain  cavils;  especially  seeing,  I 
•av,  the  Lovain  Bible  crave  the  different  readings,  without  determining  which  was  to  he 
preferred  ;  and  what  Faults  were  slipt  into  the  Sixtine  edition  were  by  him  observed,  and 
a  second  correction  designed;  which  in  the  Clementine  edition  was  perfected,  and  one  uni- 
form reading  approved  of,  . 

Against  Thomas  James's  comparisons,  read  the  learned  James  Gretser,  who^sumcientiy 
discovers  his  untruths,  with  a  "  Mcntiio  tertio  Thomas  James  decern  miha  verbonim"  ^c.  alter 
which,  judge  whether  he  hiiseverv  thing  he  saws  ;  and  whether  the  Vulgate  Latin  is  to  be 
corrected  bv  the  Lovain  Annotations,  or  these  bv  the  Vulgate,  if  any  thing  were  amiss  m 
either?  Inline,  whether,  if  Mr.  [ames's  pretended  difTerences  arise  from  comparing  all 
with  the  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Chaldee,  must  we  needs  suppose  him  to  know  the  last  ener- 
and  force  of  every  Hebrew,  Greek,  or  Chaldee  word,  when  there  is  a  controversy,  bet- 
ter than  the  Authors  o(  the  Lovain,  and  Correctors  of  the  Vulgate  Latin,  the  Sixtine-CIe- 
mentine  edition.  Again,  let  us  demand  of  him,  whether  all  his  differences  impW  any 
material  alteration  in  Faith  or  Morals,  or  introduce  any  notable  error,  contrary  to  God's 
revealed  verities?  Or  are  they  not  rather  mere  verbal  differences,  grounded  on  the  obscure 
signification  of  original  words  ?  In  line,  if  he,  or  any  for  him,  plead  any  material  alteration, 
let  them  name  any  authentic  copy,  either  originafor  translation;  by  the  indisputable  in- 
tegrity whereof  these  supposed  Errors  may  be  cancelled,  and  God's  pure  revealed  verities 
put  iri  their  place.  But  to  do  this,  after  "such  immense  labour  and  diligence  used  in  the 
*  correction  of  the  Vulgate,  will  prove  a  desperate  impossibility. ( 19) 

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  his  heresy  of  "Faith  alone 
justifying  ;"(2o)  and  omits  that  verse,  "  But  if  you  do  not  forgive,  neither  will  your  Fa- 
ther,'which  is  in  Heaven,  forgive  vour  sins. "(21)  He  also  omits  these  words,  "  Fhat  you 
abstain  from  fornication :"(2 2)  And  because  the  word  Trinity  sounded   coldly  with  him, 

he 

(19)  Sec  die  Preface  to  Sixtus  V.  Edit.  Antwerp,  1593,  And  Bib.  MaX;  Sect,  19,  20.  Scrarius,  c.  19.  (2©) 
Rum.  3.  28.     (21)  Mark  11.  zO,     (22}  1  Thes.  4.  3. 


of  the  Scripture.  zj 

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."(23)  Or  if  Mr.  Tames  had  found  such 
gross  corruptions  as  that  of  Zuinglius,  when  instead  of  our  blesed  Saviour's  positive  words, 
"  This  is  my  Body,"  he  translates,  "  This  is  a  sign  of  my  Bodv,"  to  avoid  the  Doctrine  of 
the  Real  Presence,  or  such  as  are  hereafter  discovered  in 'Protestant  English  translations: 
If,  I  say,  lie  had  met  with  such  wilful  and  abominable  corruption*  as  these,  he  might  have 
had  good  cause  of  complaint  ;  but  seeing  the  most  he  can  make  of  all  his  painful'  compa- 
risons comes  but  to  this,  viz.  that  he  notes  such  Faults,  as  Sixtus  himself  observed,  after 
the  impression  was  finished,  and- as  Clement  rectified  :  I  think  he  might  have  better  em- 
ployed his  time  in  correcting  the  gross  and  most  intolerable  corruptions  of  the  Protestant 
translation,  than  to  have  busied  himself  about  so  unnecessary  a  work  :  But  there  are  a  cer- 
tain sort  of  men,  that  had  rather  employ  themselves  in  discovering  ima^inan  motes  in  their 
neighbour's  eyes,  than  in  clearing  their  own  from  real  beams, 

To  conclude  this  point,  no  man  can  be  certainly  assured  of  the  true  Scripture,  unless  he 
first  come  to  a  certainty  of  a  true  Church,  independently  of  Scripture:  Find  out  there- 
tore  thetrue  Church,  and  we  know,  by  the  authority  of  our  undoubted  testimony,  t-  c:< 
true  Scripture  ;  for  the  infallible  testimony  of  the  Church  is  absolutely  necessary  for  assur- 
ing us  of  an  authentic  Scripture.  And  this  I  cannot  see  how  Protestants  can  deny,  espe- 
cially when  they  seriously  consider,  that  in  matters  of  Religion,  it  must' needs  be' an  un- 
reasonable thing  to  endeavour  to  oblige  any  man  to  be  tried  by  the  Scriptures  of  a  false  Re- 
ligion :  For  who  can  in  prudence  require  of  a  Christian  to  stand  in  debates  of  Religion  to 
the  decisions  of  the  Scripture  of  the  Turks,  "  the  Alcoran  ?"  Doubtless,  therefore,'  when, 
men  appeal  to  Scripture  for  determining  religious  differences,  their  intention  is  to 
appeal  to  such  Scriptures,  and  such  alone  ;  and  to  all  such  as  are  admitted  by  the  true 
Church:  And  how  can  we  know  what  Scriptures  are  admitted  bv  the  true  Church,  unless 
we  know  which  is  the  true  Church  .'"(24) 

So  likewise,  touching  the  exposition  of  Scripture,  without  doubt,  when  Protestants  fly 
to  Scriptures  for  their  Rule,  whereby  to  square  their  Religion,  and  to  decide  debates  be- 
tween them  and  their  Adversaries,  they  appeal  to  Scriptures  as  rightly  understood:  fov 
who  would  be  tried  by  Scriptures  understood  in  a  wrong  sense?  Now 'when  contests  an  . 
between  them  and  others  of  different  judgments  concerning  the  right  meaning  of  it  ;  cer- 
tainly they  will  not  deny,  but  the  judge  to  decide  this  debate  must  appertain  to  the  true 
Religion:  For  whatChristian  will  apply  himself  to  a  Turk  or  Jew.  to  decide  matters  be- 
longing to  Christianity  ?    Or  who  would   go  to  an  Atheist  to  determine  matters  ot  Reli- 


cion 


OU; 


In  like  manner,  when  they  are  forced'- to  have  recourse  to  the  private  spirit  in  religL. 
matters,  doubtless  they  design  not  to  appeal  to  the  private  spirit  of  an  Atheist,  a  few,  01 
an  If  retic,  but  to  the  private  spirit  of  such  as  are  of  the  true  Religion  :  And  i  ■  it  possi- 
ble tor  them  to  know  certainly  who  are  members  of  the  true  Church?  Or  what  appertains 
to  the  true  Religion,  unless  they  be  certainly  informed  "  which  is  the  true  Church  ?"  So 
that,  I  say,  no  man  can  be  certainly  assured  which  or  what  books,  or  how  much  is  tvv..: 
Scripture  ;  or  of  the  right  sense  and  true  meaning  of  Scripture,  unless  lie  first  come  to  a 
certainty  ci  the  true  Church.     And  of  this  opinion  was  the  great  St.  Augustine,  when  he 

declared? 

(23)   John  5.  7.     (24)   We  must  of  necessity  know  the  true  Church,   before  we  be  certain   cither  which  is  I 
Scripture,   or  which    is  the  true    sense   of  Scripture  ;   or  by  what   spirit    it  is   to    be  expounded.      And    whether  th:ii 
Church,   which  has  continued  visible   in  the  World  from  Christ's  time  till  this    day,   or  that  which   was  nc\ 
or  heard  of  in  the  World  till  1500  years  after  our  Saviour,  is  the  true  Church,  let  the  World  ju 


o8    Of  Books  rejected  by  Protestants  for  ApochryphaEc 

lu-ed,  that  "he  would  not  believe  the  Gospel,  if  it  was  not  that  the  authority  of  the 
Catholic  Church  moved  him  to  \:  :M    Ego  vtro  Evangeho  non  credcrem,  nisi  me  hcclesLt  Uu  iot,  a 


OF  THE  CANONICAL  BOOKS  OF  SCRIPTURE. 

i^HE  C  itholic  Church  "  setting  thif  ahvavs  before  her  eves,  that,  error:;  being  removed, 
S      the  very   puritv  of  the   Gospel   may  be  preserved  in  the  Church  ;  which  being  pro- 
mised before  bv  the  Prophet-,   in  the  Holv  Scriptures,  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  Son  ot 
I  first  published  with  his  own  mouth,  and  afterwards  commanded  to  be  preached  to  every 
rVinir'-    bv  the   \postles,  as  the  fountain  of  all  the  wholesome  truth,  and  moral  discipline 
coutuned  in  the  written  Books  and  in  the  Traditions  not  written,  &c.  following  the  exam  - 
-1"  o"f  the  orthodox  Fathers,  and  affected  with  similar  piety  and  reverence  ;  dotn  receive  and 
honour  all  the  books  both  of  the  Old  and  New  Testament,  seeing  one  Goo,  is  the  author  01 
h  "  &c  (i)  These  are  the  words  of  the  sacred  Council  of  Trent ;  which  iurtiier  ordained, 
t'the   table,  or   catalogue,  of  the  canonical  Books  should  be  joined  to   this  decree,  lest 
doubt  might  arise  to  any,  which  books  they  are  that  are  received  by  the  Council.      1  hey  are 
these  following,  viz, 


Of  the  Old  Testament, 


FIVE  books  of  Moses ;  that  is,  Genesis, 
Exodus,  Leviticus,  Numbers,  Deutero- 

110  mv. 

Joshua,  Judges,   Ruth.. 

Four  of  the  Kings. 

Two  of  Paralipomenon. 

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

Tobias,  Judith,  Hester,  Job,  DavidVs 
Psalter  of  150  Psalms,  Proverbs,  Ecclesi- 
astes,  Canticles,  Wisdom,  Ecclesiasticus, 
Isaias,  Hieremias,  with  Baruch,  Ezechiel, 
Daniel. 

Twelve  lesser  Prophets ;  that  is,  Osea, 
Joel,  Amos,  Abdias,  Jonas,  Michoeas,  Na- 
hum,  Abacuc,  Sophonias,  Aggeus,  Zacha- 
rias,  Malachias. 

The  first  and  second  of  the  Machabees. 


Of  the  New  Testament. 

FOUR  Gospels,    according    to  St.   Mat- 
thew, 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  the 
Romans,  two  to  the  Corinthians,  to  _  the 
Galatians,  to  the  Ephesians,  to  the  Philip- 
pians,  to  the  Colossians,  to  the  Thessalo- 
nians,  two  to  Timothy,  to  Titus,  to  Phile- 
mon, to  the  Hebrews. 

Two  of  St.  Peter  the  Apostle. 

Three  of  St.  John  the  Apostle. 

One  of  St.  James  the  Apostle. 

One  of  St.  J  tide  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  accustomed  to  be  read  in  the  Catholic  Church,  and  as  they  are  in  the 
old  Vulgate  Latin'edition,  &c.  Be  he  Anathema." 


The 


«//. 


(25)  5.  Aug'  M>  "ntr,  EM<  Manich,  ca£.  S-    (0  Cmti,  Trident,  Scst.  4-  #«»/.  &  Caaome'u  Scriptur'u.  Marl. 


O?  Books  rejected  by  Protectants  for  Apochryphal.  29 

The  third  Council  of  Carthage,  after  having  decreed,  that  nothing  should  he  read  in  the 
Church  under  the  name  of  Divine  Scriptures,  but  canonical  Scriptures,  says,  "  That  the 
canonical  Scriptures  are  Genesis,  Exodus,  &c."(2)  so  reckoning  up  all  the  verv  same  Books, 
and  making  particularly  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  num- 
bers the  same  Books  as  above. (3) 

Notwithstanding  which,  several  of  the  said  books  are  by  the  Protestants  rejected  as 
Apochryphal:  Their  reasons  are,  because  they  are  not  in  the  Jewish  Canon,  and  were  not 
accepted  for  canonical  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  manifestly  against  their  Opinions,  that  they  have  no  other  answer  but  to  re- 
ject their  Authority,  as  appears  very  plainly  from  those  words  of  Mr.  Whitaker :  "We 
pass  not,"  says  he,  "  for  that  Raphael  mentioned  in  Tobit,  neither  acknowledge  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.  Nei- 
ther will  I  believe  Free  Will,  although  the  book  of  Ecclesiasticus  confirms  it  an  hundred 
times. "(4)  This  denying  of  books  to  be  Canonical,  because  the  Jews  received  them  not,  was 
also  an  old  heretical  shift,  noted  and  refuted  by  St.  Augustine,  touching  the  book  of  Wis- 
dom -,(5)  which  some  in  his  time  refused,  because  it  convinced  their  errors :  But  must  it  pass 
for  a  sufficient  reason  amongst  Christians  to  deny  such  books,  because  they  are  not  in  the  Ca- 
non of  the  Jews  ?  Who  sees  not  that  the  Canon  of  the  Church  of  Christ  is  of  more  authority 
with  all  true  Christians,  than  that  of  the  Jews  ?  For  a  "  Canon  is  an  assured  Rule,  and 
warrant  of  Direction,  whereby  (says  St.  Augustine)  the  infirmity  of  our  defect  in  know- 
ledge is  guided,  and  by  which  Rule  other  books  are  known  to  be  God's  Word:"  His  rea- 
son is,  "  Because  we  have  no  other  assurance  that  the  books  of  Moses,  the  four  Gospels, 
and  other  Books,  are  the  true  Word  of  God,  but  by  the  Canon  of  the  Church,"(6)  Where- 
upon 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"  alledged  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  of  Tobias,  which  the  Scrip- 
ture in  an  historical  manner  lays  forth  at  large  ;"(7)  calling  also  this  history  Prophetical, 
and  Tobias  a  Prophet :  And  in  another  place  he  alledges  this  book  as  he  does  other  holy- 
Scriptures,  to  prove  that  the  virtues  of  God's  Servants  far  excel  the  moral  Philosophers. (8) 
St.  Augustine  made  a  special  sermon  of  Tobias,  as  he  did  of  Job. (9)  St.  Chrysostoni 
alledges  it  as  Scripture,  denouncing  a  curse  against  the  contemners  of  it. (10)  St.  Gregory 
also  alledges  it  as  holy  Scripture. (11)  St.  Bede  expounds  this  whole  book  mystically,  as  he 
does  other  holy  Scriptures.  St.  Hierom  translated  it  out  of  the  Chaldee  language,  "  judg- 
ing it  more  meet  to  displease  the  Pharisaical  Jews,  who  reject  it,  than  not  to  satisfy  the  will 

H  of 

(2)  3  Condi.  Carthag.  Can.  47.  (3)  Vid.Boctr.  Christian.  Lib.  2.  c.  8.  (4)  Whit.  Contra  Camp.  p.  ij.  (5)  S* 
Aug.  lib.  de  Pradest.  Sand.  c.  14.  (6)  S.  Aug.  lib.  11.  c.  5.  contra  Faustum  &  lib.  2.  c.  32.  contra  Cresconium.  (7) 
S.  Ami.  lib.  de  Tobia.  c.  1.  (8)  Lib.  3.  OJfic.  c.  14.  (9)  S.  Aug.  Serm.  226.  de  Ton.  (10)  S.  Chrymt.  Hem.  15. 
ad  Heb,     (11)  S,  Greg,  part,  3.  Pastor,  turn  admen,  21. 


3o  Of  Eooks  rejected  by  Protestants  for  Apochryphal. 

of  hoi,  Bishop,  nrgin,  to  ^J^~t£  %£?&  stva'nt  STg£ 
JlTlS?.? "I™v«  ,o "  ^the'l^r^an  example,  that  we  might  know  how  to 
t Jj(  the* n«  "hich  we  read.  And  if  temptations  come  upon  us,  not  to  depart  from 
The  fear  of  God,  nor  expect  help  from  any  other  but  from  Him." 

Of  the  Book  of  Judith. 

T 


HIS  book  was  bv  Oricen,  Tertullian,  and  other  Fathers,  whom  St.  Hilary  cites,  held 
for  canonTc  I,  before  the  first  general  Council  of  Nice  ;  yet  St.  H.erom  supposed  it 
n^so  till  such  time  as  he  found  that  the  said  sacred  Council  reckoned  it  in  the  number  of 
canonic-  ScHptues;  alter  which  he  so  esteemed  it,  that  he  not  only  translated  it  out  of 
th    C  a  dee    ongue,  wherein  it  was  first  written,  but  also  as  occasion  required,  cited  the 

te  as  divine  Scripture,  and  sufficient  to  convince  matters  of  Faith  in  Controversy  num- 
berine  it  wth  other  Scriptures,  whereof   none  doubts,  saying,    »  Ruth    Hester    Judith, 

v  c  of  oV  at  renown,  that  they  gave  names  to  the  sacred  Volumes.",  11)  St.  Ambrose, 
St!  Augustine;  St.  Chrysostom,  and  many  other  Holy  Fathers,  account  it  for  canonical 
Scripture, 

Part  of  the  Book  of  Hester. 

BY  the  Councils  of  Laodicea  and  Carthage,  this  book  was  declared  Canonical;  and  by 
most  of  he  ancient  Fathers  esteemed  as  divine  Scripture ;  only  two  or  three,  before 
e  saT I  Councils,  doubted  of  its  Authority.  And  though  St.  H.erom  m  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  He- 
brew, as  diver,  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  office. (13) 

Of  the  Books  of  Wisdom. 

T  is  granted,  that  several  of  the  ancient  Fathers  would  not  urge  these  books  of  Wisdom, 
3  and  "others,  in  their  writings  against  the  Jews,  not  that  themselves  doubted  of  their 
authority;  but  because  they  knew  that  they  would  be  rejected  by  the  Jews  as  not  Canoni- 
cal And  so  St.  Hierom,  with  respect  to  the  Jews,  said  these  books  were  not  canonical ; 
nevertheless,  he  often  alledged  testimonies  out  of  them,  as  irom  other  divine  Scriptures; 
sometimes  with  this  parenthesis,  Si  mi  tamen  placet  Brum  reaper?,  in  cap.  8.  and  12.  Zacnanae: 
Rutin  his  latter  writings  absolutely  without  any  such  restriction,  as  in  cap.  1.  and  50. 
k-ii*  and  in  18.  Teremice  ;  where  he  professes  to  alledge  none  but  canonical  Scripture. ( 14) 
\  for  the  other  ancient  Fathers,  namely,  St.  Irenes,  St.  Clement  of  Alexandria,  Origen, 
St  Athanasius,  St.  Basil,  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  St.  Gregory  Nyssen,  St.  Epiphanius 
St'  Cvril  of  Alexandria,  St.  Chrvsostom,  St.  Ambrose,  &c.  they  make  no  doubt  at  all  of 
their  being  canonical  Scripture,  as  appears  by  their  express  terms,  «  Divine  Scripture,  Di- 
vine Word,  Sacred  Letters,  Prophetical  Saving,  the  Holy  Ghost  saith,  and  the  like.  And 
St  Augustine  affirms,  that,  "  The  sentence  of  the  books  of  Wisdom  ought  not  to  be  re- 
°l*  ilws  jected 

(12)  See  the  Argument  in  the  Book  of  Judith  in  the  Doway  Bible,  Tom.  I.     (13)  Vide  Doway  Bible,  T*m.  1. 

fa  4)   Vide  Doway  Bible,  Tom.  2.  And.  JoJqq.  Cote.  Tom,  J .  Thesau.  li,  6.  Art.  9. 


Of  Books  rejected  by  Protestants  for  Apochryphal.    31 

jected  bv  certain,  inclining  to  Pelagianism,  which  has  so  long  been  publicly  read  in  the 
Church  of  Christ,  and  received  by  all  Christians,  Bishops,  and  others,  even  to  the  last  of 
the  Laity,  Penitents,  and  Catechumens,  cum  veneratione  Divina  Authoritatis,  with  veneration 
of  divine  authory  ?  Which  also  the  excellent  writers,  next  to  the  Apostles'  times,  alledging 
for  witness,  nihil  se  adhibere  nisi  divinum  testimonium  crediderunt,  thought  they  alledged  nothing 
but  Divine  Testimony. (15) 

Of  EcCLESIASTlCUS. 

WHAT  has  been  said  of  the  foregoing  book,  may  be  said  also  of  this.  The  Holy  Fa- 
thers above  named,  and  several  others,  as  St.  Cyprian,  de  opere  £s?  ekemosyna,  St. 
Gregory  the  Great,  in  Psal.  50.  It  is  also  reckoned  for  Canonical  by  the  third  Council  of 
Carthage,  and  by  St.  Augustine,    nlib.  2.  c.  8.  Doct.  Christian.  13  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  ac- 
cepted as  Divine  Scripture.  The  Council  of  Laodicea,  in  the  last  Canon,  expressly  names 
Baruch,  Lamentations,  and  Jeremiah's  Epistle. (16)  St.  Hierom  testifies,  that  he  found 
it  in  the  Vulgate  Latin  edition,  and  that  it  contains  many  things  of  Christ,  and  the  latter 
times ;  though  because  he  found  it  not  in  the  Hebrew,  nor  in  the  Jewish  Canon,  he  urges 
it  not  against  them. (17)  It  is  by  the  Councils  of  Florence  and  Trent  expressly  defined  to 
be  canonical  Scripture. 

Of  the  Song  of  the   Three  Children,  the   Idol,  Bell  and 
Dragon j  with  the  Story  of  Susanna. 

T  is  no  just  exception  against  these,  and  other  parts  of  Holy  Scripture  of  the  Old  Tes- 
tament, to  say,  they  are" not  in  the  Hebrew  edition,  being  otherwise  accepted  for  Cano- 
nical by  the  Catholic  Church:  And  further,  it  is  very  probable  that  these  parcels  were  some- 
time either  in  the  Hebrew  or  Chaldee ;  in  which  two  languages,  part  in  one,  and  part  in 
the  other,  the  rest  of  the  book  of  Daniel  was  written;  for  from  whence  could  the  Septu- 
agint,  Theodotion,  Symmachus,  and  Aqui la  translate  them  ?  In  whose  editions  St.  Hie- 
rom 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  judgment,  intending  to  deliver  sincerely  what  he 
found  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  accustomed  to  say  against  me."(i8) 

The  Praver  of  Azar'ias  is  alledged  as  Divine  Scripture  bv  St.  Cvprian,  St.  Ephrem,  St. 
Chrysostom,    St.  Augustine,  St.  Fulgentius,  and  others. (19)     The  Hymn  of  the  Three 

Children 

(15)  S.  Aug.  hi  lib.  de  Pmdcsllv.at.  Sand.  cap.  14.  Et  lib.  de  Civil.  Del.  17.  c.  20.  (16)  See  the  Argument  of  lb- 
ruch's  Prophecy  in  the  Doway  Bible,  To.  z.  (17)  St,  Hierom.  in  Prsjal,  Jcrcmia.  (18)  S,  Bier,  lib,  2.  c.  9.  ad- 
ders. Rtifmum.     (19)  Vide  Doway  Bible,  Tom,  2. 


32    Of  Books  rejected  by  Protestants  for  Apochryphai. 

Childr-  n  is  aliedged  for  Divine  Scripture  by  divers  Holy  Fathers,  as  also  by  St.  Hierom  him- 
self, /;/  <"/>.  3.  id  Galhros  rd  Efist.  49.  <&  Muliere  Septus  icta\  also,  by  St.  Ambrose,  and  the 
Council  of  Toledo,  c.    13. 

So  likewise  the  history  of  Susanna  is  cited  for  holy  Scripture  by  St.  Ignatius:,  Tcrtul- 
lian,  St.  Cvprian,  St.  Chrvsostom,  who  in  Horn.  7.  fine,  has  a  whole  sermon  on  Susanna, 
as  upon  Holv  Scripture:  St.  Ambrose  and  St.  Augustine  cite  the  same  also  as  canonical. 

The  history  of  Bell  and  the  Dragon  is  judged  to  be  Divine  Scripture  ;  St.  Cyprian,  St.  Ba- 
sil, and  St.  Athanasius,  in  Synopsi,  briefly  explicating  the  argument  of  the  book  of  Daniel, 
make  express  mention  of  the  Hymn  of  the  Three  Children,  of  the  History  of  Susanna, 
find  of  Hell  and  the  Dragon. 

Of  the  two  Books  of  Maccabees. 

JTHT.R  since  the  third  Council  of  Carthage,  these  two  books  of  the  Maccabees  have 
[j  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  Carthage;  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  Canonical  Scripture  in  Gregory  the 
Great's  time,  consequently  not  before, (20)  I  will,  besides  these  Councils,  refer  you  to  the 
Holv  Fathers,  who  lived  before  St.  Gregory's  days,  and  aliedged  these  two  books  of  the 
Maccabees  as  Divine  Scripture:  Namely,  St.  Clement  Alexandrinus,  lib.  1.  Stromat.  St.  Cy- 
prian, lib.  1.  Epistohmmi  Ep.  3.  ad  Cornelium,  lib.  4.  Ep.  1.  &  de  Exhort,  ad  Martyrium,  c.  ne 
St.  Isidorus,  lib.  16.  c.  1.  St.  Gregory  Nazianzen  has  also  a  whole  oration  concerning  the 
seven  Maccabee  Martyrs,  and  their  Mother.  St.  Ambrose,  lib,  i.f.  41.  Ojjic.  See  in  St. 
Hierom's  Commentaries  upon  Daniel,  c.  1.  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.  2.  c.  8.  de  Doctrina  Chris- 
tiana, iff  Jib.  18.  c.  36.de  Civit.  Dei,  most  clearly  avouches,  that,  "  Notwithstanding  the 
Jews  deny  these  books,  the  Church  holds  them  Canonical."  And  whereas  one  Gauden- 
tins,  an  Heretic,  aliedged,  for  defence  of  his  heresy,  the  example  of  Razias,  who  slew  him- 
self, 2  Mac.  14.  St.  Augustine  denies  not  the  authority  of  the  book,  but  discusses  the 
fact,  and  admonishes,  that  it  is  not  unprofitably  received  by  the  Church,  "  If  it  be  read 
or  heard  soberly,"  which  was  a  necessary  admonition  to  those  Donatists,  who,  not  under- 
standing the  Holy  Scriptures,  depraved  them,  as  St.  Peter  says  of  like  Heretics,  to  their  own 
perdition.  Which  testimonies,  I  think,  mav  be  sufficient  to  satisfy  any  one  who  is  not 
pertinacious  and  obstinate,  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  were  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  Benedic- 
tine Monk,  when  he  converted  our  nation  ;  telling  us,  "  That  the  mystery  of  iniquity," 

as 

(20)  See  the  Second  Vindication  of  the  Exposition  of  the  Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England, 


Of  Books  rejected  by  Protestants  for  Apocryphal.    33 

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  Canon,  were  rejected 
then  as  Apocryphal."  Thirdly,  "  That  good  works  were  not  yet  esteemed  meritorious." 
Fourthly,  "  Nor  Auricular  confession  a  Sacrament."  Fifthly,  "  That  solitary  Masses  were 
disallowed  by  him."  And  sixthly,  "  Transubstantiation  yet  unborn."  Seventhly,  "That 
the  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  was  hitherto  administered  in  both  kinds."  What  then  ?  so 
it  was  also  in  one  kind.  Eighthly,  "  Purgatory  itself  not  brought  either  to  certaintv  or 
to  perfection."  Ninthly,  "  That  by  consequence  Masses  for  the  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  Unc- 
tion was  yet  unformed."  Then  you  must,  with  your  Master  Luther,  count  St.  JamesV 
Epistle,  an  Epistle  of  Straw.  Twelfthly,  "  And  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  oi 
Antichrist  for  one  Bishop  to  set  himself  above  all  the  rest." 

I  will  only,  in  particular,  take  notice  here  of  this  last  of  his  false  instances,  because  he 
cites  and  mis-applies  the  words  of  St.  Gregory  the  Great,  to  the  deluding  of  his  Reader : 
Whereas  St.  Gregory  did  not  think  it  Antichristian  or  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  worthily  forborne  by  his  Predecessors,  and 
by  himself,  but  terms  it  Prophane,  Sacrilegious,  and  Antichristian;  and  in  this  sense  the 
Bishops  of  Rome  have  alwavs  utterly  renounced  the  title  of  Universal  Bishop-;  on  the  con- 
trary, terming  themselves  Servi  Servorum  Dei.  And  this  improved  from  the  words  of  An- 
drreus  Friccius,  a  Protestant,  whom  Peter  Martyr  terms  an  excellent  and  learned  man.  "  Some- 
there  are,"  says  he,  "  that  object  to  the  authority  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  Uni- 
versal Bishop  is  contrary  to,  and  doth  gain-say  the  Grace  which  is  commonly  poured  upon 
all  Bishops;  he  therefore,  who  calls  himself  the  only  Bishop,  takes  the  Episcopal  Power 
from  the  rest:  Wherefore  this  title  he  would  have  rejected,  Sec.  But  it  is  nevertheless  evi^ 
dent  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  th.it 
Peter  was  the  forerunner  of  Antichrist."(ai)  Thus  evidently  and  "clearly  this  Protestant 
writer  explains  this  difficulty. 

To  this  may  be  added  the  testimonies  of  other  Protestants,  who,  from  the  writings  of 
St.  Gregory,,  clearly  p-  ve  the  Bishop  of  Rome  to  have  had  and  exercised  a  power  and  ju- 
risdiction, not  only  over  the  Greek,  but  over  the  Univers-al  Church.  The  Magdeburgian 
Centurists  shew  us,  that  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  Apos- 
tolic S:e.(22)  These  Centurists  charge  moreover  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  in  the  verv  exam- 
ple and  person  of  Pope  Gregory,  and  by  collection  out  of  his  writings,  by  them  particu- 
lurlv  alledged,  "  That  he  challenged  to  himself  power  to  commancf  all  Archbishops,  to 
ordain  and  depose  Bishops  at  his  pleasure."  And,  "  That  lie  claimed  a  right  to  cite  Arch- 
bishops to  declare  their  cause  before  him,  when  they  were  accused."  And  also,  u  To  ex- 
communicate and  depose  them,  giving  commission  to  their  neighbour  Bishops  to  proceed 

I  against 

(21)  Amktas  Friccius  d:  Ecclcsia,  I.  2.  c.  10. page  579.     (22)   Centur.  6  Col.  425",  4c5,  427,  42?!,  429,  43?. 


;4    Of  Books  rejected   by  Protestants  for  Apocryphal. 

against  them."  That,  "  In  their  provinces  he  placed  his  Legates  to  know  and  end  the 
causes  of  such  as  appealed  to  the  See  of  Rome. "(23)  With  much  more,  touching  the  ex- 
ercise  of  his  Supremacy.  To  which  Doctor  Saunders  adds  yet  more  out  of  St.  Gregory's 
own  work:.,  and  in  his  own  words,  as,  "  That  the  See  Apostolic,  by  the  authority  of  God, 
is  preferred  before  all  Churches.  That  all  Bishops,  if  any  fault  be  found  in  them,  are  sub- 
ject to  the  See  Apostolic.  That  she  is  the  head  of  Faith,  and  of  all  the  faithful  members. 
That  the  See  Apostolic  is  the  head  of  all  Churches.  That  the  Roman  Church,  by  the 
words  which  Christ  spake  to  Peter,  was  made  the  head  of  all  Churches.  That  no  scruple 
or  doubt  ought  to  be  made  of  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 
schismto  the  Catholic  Church,  is  to  return  to  the  communion  of  the  Bishops  of  Rune. 
That  he  who  will  not  have  St.  Peter,  to  whom  the  k<-ys  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  See  Apostolic. "(24) 

Considering  all  these  words  of  Pope  Gregory,  does  not  this  vindicator  of  the  Church  of 
England's  Doctrine  shew  himself  a  grand  Impostor,  to  offer  to  the  abused  judgment  of 
his  unlearned  Readers,  an  objection  so  frivolous  and  misapplied,  by  the  advantage  only  ot 
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  yet  with  a  brazen  forehead,  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  a  man,  or  else  to  have  put  on  the  obstinate  perverseness  of  the  De- 

It  is  not  mv  business  in  this  place,  to  digress  into  particular  replies  against  his  other  false 
instances(26)"  of  the  difference  between  the  Doctrine  of  Pope  Gregory  the  Great,  and  that 
of  the  Council  of  Trent:  I  will  therefore,  in  general,  oppose  the  words  of  a  Protestant 
Bishop,  against  this  Protestant  ministerial  Guide,  and  so  submit  them  to  the  consideration 
of  the  judicious  Reader. 

John  Bale,  a  Protestant  Bishop,  affirms,(27)  that  "  The  Religion  preached  by  St.  Augus- 
tine to  the  Saxons  was,  altars,  vestments,  images,  chalices,  crosses,  censors,  holy  vessels, 
holy  waters,  the  sprinkling  thereof,  reliques,  translation  of  reliques,  dedicating  of 
Churches  to  the  bones  and  ashes  of  Saints,  consecretation  of  altars,  chalices  and  corporals, 
consecration  of  the  font  of  baptism,  chrysm  and  oil,  celebration  of  Mass,  the  archiepis- 
eopal  pall  at  solemn  Mass  time,  Romish  Mass  books;  also  free  will,  merit,  justification  of 
works',  penance,  satisfaction,  purgatory,  the  unmarried  life  of  Priests,  the  public  invoca- 
tion of  Saints  and  their  worship,  the  worship  of  Images. "(28)  In  another  place  he  says, 
that  "  Pope  Leo  the  First  decreed,  that  men  should  worship  the  images  of  the  dead,  and 
a'lowed  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  exorcism,  pardons,  vows,  monachism,  transubstantia- 
tion,  prayer  for  the  dead,  offering  of  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,  rdiquium  pontificia  super stitionis  chaos,  even  the  whole  chaos  of  Popish  supersti- 
tions.'" He  tells  us,  that  "  Pope  Innocent,  who  lived  long  before  St.  Gregory's  time, 
made  the  anointing  of  the  sick  to  be  a  sacrament. "(29) 

These  are  Bishop  Bale's  words ;  which  this  vindicator  would  do  well  to  reconcile  with 
his  own.  The  like  may  be  found  in  other  Protestants  ;  namely,  in  Doctor  Humfrey  in  Je- 
suitism!, Part  II.     The  Centurists,  &c. 

But 

(23)  V'id.  pr&ced.  ATotas.  (24)  Dr.  Saund.  Visit.  Monar.lib.  7.  a  N.  433.  541.  (25)  Dr.  Saunders  supra.  (:6) 
You  will  find  some  of  them  hinted  at  in  other  places  as  occasion  offers.  (27  Bale  in  Act.  Rem.  Pontif.  Edit.  Basil. 
1658.  p.  44,  45j  46,  47.  if  Cent.  I  Col.  3.     (28)  Pageant  of  X'opes,  fol.  27.     ^29)  Pageant  of  Popes,  fol.  26. 


Or  Books  rejected   by  Protestants  for  Apocryphal. 


v)3 


But  now  to  return  to  the  place  where  we  occasionally  entered  into  this  digression-  You 
see  by  what  authority  and  testimonies  both  of  Councils  and  Fathers  we  have  proved  th«* 
books,  winch  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  thev 
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  heretical  opinions 
ror  exampie  :  r   «v«». 

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  hi« 
ten  Commandments:— (30)  "We  will  neither  hear  nor  see  Moses,  for  he  was  riven  on lv 
to  the  Jews;  neither  docs  he  belong  in  anything  to  us."— «  I,"  savs  he  «  will  not 
ceive(3i)  Moses  with  his  Law  ;  for  he  is  the  enemy  of  Christ."^)  '«  Moses  is  the  mil 
ter  ot  all  hangmen."(33)  «  The  ten  Commandments  belong  not  to  Christians  »  ««y!l 
the  ten  Commandments  be  altogether  rejected,  and  all  Heresy  Will  presently  cease-  for  the 
ten  Commandments  are,  as  it  were,  the  fountain  from  whence  all  heresies  spring  »(«a\ 

Islebius,  Luther's  scholar,  taught,(35)  that  "the  Decalogue  was  not  to  be'  taught  in 
t«e  Church  :  '  And  from  him  came(36j  the  sect  of  Antinomians,  who  publicly  taught   that 

The  Law  of  God  is  not  worthy  to  be  called  the  Word  of  God  :  If  thou  art  an  whore    if 
an  whoremonger,   if  an  adulterer,  or  otherwise  a  sinner,  believe,   and  thou  walkest  in  lie 
way  of  salvation.     When  thou  art  drowned   in  sin  even  to  the  bottom,  if  thou  believest 
thou  art  111  the  midst  of  happiness.     All   that  busy  themselves  about  Moses,  that  is    the 
ten  Commandments,  belong  to  the  Devil,  to  the  gallows  with  Moses.' Y 37)   ' 

Martin  Luther  believes  not  all  things  to  be  so  done,  as  thev  are  related  in  the  book  of  7oh- 
Y\  ith  him  it  is,   «  as  it  were,  the  argument  of  a  fable."(38)  J 

Castalio  commanded  the  Canticles  of  Solomon  to  be  thrust  out  of  the  Cinon    as  an  im 
pure  and  obscene  Song  ;  reviling,  with  bitter  reproaches,  such  Ministers   as   resisted  him 
therein. (39)  u  inm 

Pomeran,  a  great  Evangelist  among  the  Lutherans,  writes  thus  touching  St.    [ames\ 
Epistles:   <   He  concludes  ridiculously,   he  cites  Scripture  against  Scripture,  which  thing  the 
Holy  Ghost  cannot  abide  ;  wherefore  that  Epistle  may  not  be  numbered  among  other  books 
which  set  forth  the  justice  of  Faith."(4o)  b  ' 

Vitus  Theodoras,  a  Protestant  Preacher  of  Norimberg,  writes  thus:  «  The  E^htle  nf 
James,  and  Apocalypse  of  John,  we  have  of  set  purpose  left  out,  because  the  Epistle  of 
James  is  not  only  in  certain  places  improvable,  where  he  too  much  advances  works  against 
Faith  ;  but  also  his  Doctrine  throughout  is  patched  together  with  divers  pieces,  whereof  no 
one  agrees  with  another."(4i)  *  '      ULILU1   «o 

The  Magdeburgian  Centurists  say,  that  «  the  Epistle  of  James  much  swerves  from  the 
analogy  of  the  Apostolical  Doctrine,  whereas  it  ascribes  justification  not  only  to  Faith  but 
to  works,  and  calls  the  Law,  a  Law  of  Liberty."^)  '  ' 

John  Calvin  doubted  whether  the  Apostles  Creed  was  made  by  the  Apostles.  He  argued 
St.  Matthew  of  error.     He  rejected  these  words :   «  Many  are  called,  but  few  chosen  'VaaV 

Clebitius,  an  eminent  Protestant,  opposes  the  Evangelists  one  against  another  •  "Mat 


Mat- 
thew 


yet.  fS^  Till.      (39)    I  ,</.  bexa  m  fita  Cahmi      (40)   Pomeran     ad  Rem.  e    8       fill  InAnnt    in   M™    -T 
M-  «"■     (V)  Cent.  I.  I.  ,,«.  4.  Col.  54.     (+3)  /„„.  ,\[c.  2(i.     /,  Ma„l,  ,7.  Harm.il  MatuT^.  ?"  ' 


06  Of  such  Books  as  Protestants  call  Apocrypha. 

thew  and  Mark,"  says  he,  «  deliver  the  contrary ;  therefore  to  Matthew  and  Mark,  being 
two  witnesses,  more  credit  is  to  be  given  than  to  one  Luke,"  &c.(44)  _ 

Zuinglius  and  other  Protestants  affirm,  that  «  all  things  in  St.  Paul's  Epistles  are  not  sa- 
cred: and  that,  in  sundry  things  he  erred."(45) 

Mr.  Rogers,  the  great 'labourer  to  our  English  Convocation  Men,  names  several  of  his 
Protest  jnfbrethren,  who  rejected  for  Apocryphal  the  Epistle  of  Paul  to  the  Hebrews,  of  St. 
Tames,  the  first  and  second  of  John,  of  Jude,  and  the  Apocalypse.' (46)    m 

Tims,  vou  see,  these  pretended  Reformers  have  torn  out,  some  one  piece  or  book  ot 
sacred  Scripture,  some  another;  with  such  a  licentious  freedom,  rejecting,  deriding,  dis- 
carding, 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  tnnd 
Council  of  Carthage,  above  thirteen  hundred  years  ago.  m  . 

But,  with  the  Church  of  England,  it  matters  not  by  what  authority  books  are  judged 
Canonical,  if  the  Holv  Spirit,  in  the  hearts  of  her  children,  testify  them  to  be  from  God. 
Thev  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  thaftlie  Holv  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  thev  thought  good  tor  Ca- 
nonical, and  rejected  the  rest ;  as  you  may  see  in  the  Vlth  of  the  XXXIX  Articles. (47) 

Of    such   Books    as    Protestants   call   Apocrypha. 

THE  Church  of  England  has  decreed,(48)  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  Apocryphal,  viz. 
Tobit.  Baruch,      with    the    Epistle     of     Maccabees  I. 

Judith.  Jeremiah.  Maccabees  IE 

The  rest  of  Esther.         The  Song  of  the  Three  Children.     Manesseth,  Prayer  of. 
Wisdom.  The  Idol,  Bell,  and  the  Dragon.       Esdras  III. 

Ecclesiasticus.  The  Story  of  Susanna.  Esdras  IV. (49) 

BUT  if  none  must  pass  for  Canonical,  but  such  as  were  never  doubted  of  in  the  Church, 
I  would  know  whv  the  Church  of  England  admits  of  such  books  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment as  have  formerly  been  doubted  of?  "  Some  ancient  Writers  doubted  of  the  last  chap- 
ter of  St.  Mark's  Gospel  :(5o)  Others  of  some  part  of  the  22d  of  St.  Luke  1(51)  Some  ot 
the  beginning  of  the  8th  of  St.  John  1(52)  Others  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  :(53)  And 
others  of  the  Epistles  of  St.  James,  Jude,  the  second  of  Peter,  the  second  and  third  of 
John,  and  the  Apocalypse."(54) 

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  contradicted,  as  not  written  by  the 
Apostles.  The  Epistle  to  the  Hebrews  was  for  a  while  contradicted,"  &c.  The  Churches 
of' Syria  did  not  receive  the  second  Epistle  of  Peter,  nor  the  second  and  third  of  John,  nor 
the  Epistle  of  Jude,  nor  the  Apocalypse.  The  like  might  be  said  for  the  Churches  ot 
Arabia:  Will  vou  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  ?(5s) 

WJ/  And 

(44)  Victoria  veritat't  fcf ruina  Papatut,  Arg.  5.  (49)  Tom.  2.  Elench  f.  to.  Magdeburg  Cent.  1  /.  2  c.  IO.  Col. 
380.  (46)  Defence  of  the  39  Articles,  Art.  6.  (47)  The  private  Spirit,  not  the  Chinch,  told  those  1  rotestants 
who  made  the  39  Articles,  what  Books  of  Scripture  they  were  to  hold  for  Canonical.  (48;  I"  tnt  6"1  ot  H1*  39 
Articles.  (4g)  The  three  last  are  not  numbered  in  the  Canon  of  the  Scripture  (50)  Se:  tit.  Hierom  epist.  ad  Ned.  q. 
3.  (51)  S.  Hilar.  I.  ic.  lie  Trin  &  Hierom.  I.  2  contr.  Pelagian  (52)  Fusel.  H  I  3.  e.  39  (53)  ldl-  \ J,/'.3' 
454)  Et  c.  25,  28  Hierom  divinis  J!:ust  in  P  //  ,c  Jud  Pet  iff  Joan  &  Ep.  ad  Dardan.  {>$)  Survey  ot  Christ. 
Sufi"  p.  664      Vid.  1st  m,d  4th  days  Confer,  in  the  rower,  anno  1581. 


Of  such  Books  as  Protestants  call  Apocrypha.    37 

And  Mr.  Rogers  confesses,  that  "  although  some  of  the  ancient  Fathers  and  Doctors 
accepted  not  all  the  books  contained  in  the  New  Testament  for  Canonical ;  yet  in  the  end, 
they  were  wholly  taken  and  received  by  the  common  consent  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  in 
this  world,  for  the  very  Word  of  God,"  &c.(£6) 

And,  by  Mr.  Rogers's  and  the  Church  of  England'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  in  the  end,"  to  use  Mr.  Ro- 
gers's words,  they  were  wholly  taken  and  received  by  the  common  consent  of  the  Church 
of  Christ,  in  this  world,  for  the  Word  of  God." (57)  Vide  third  Council  of  Carthage, 
which  decrees,  "  that  nothing  should  be  read  in  the  Church,  under  the  name  of  divine 
Scriptures,  besides  Canonical  Scriptures:"  And  defining  which  are  Canonical,  reckons 
those  which  the  Church  of  England  rejects  as  Apocryphal."  To  this  Council  St.  Augus- 
tine subscribed,  who,(58)  with  St.  Innocent,^)  Gelasius,  and  other  ancient  Writers, 
number  the  said  books  in  the  Canon  of  the  Scripture.  And  Protestants  themselves  confess, 
they  were  received  in  the  number  of  Canonical  Scriptures. (60) 

Brentius,  a  Protestant,  says,  "  there  are  some  of  the  ancient  Fathers,  who  receive  these 
Apocryphal  Books  into  the  number  of  Canonical  Scriptures ;  and  also  some  Councils  com- 
mand them  to  be  acknowledged  as  Canonical."(6i) 

Doctor  Covel  also  affirms  of  all  these  books,  that,  "  if  Ruffinus  be  not  deceived,  they 
were  approved  of,  as  parts  of  the  Old  Testament,  by  the  Apostles. "(62) 

So  that  what  Christ's  Church  receives  as  Canonical,  we  are  not  to  doubt  of:  Doctor 
Fulk  avouches,  that  "  the  Church  of  Christ  has  judgment  to  discern  true  writing  from 
counterfeit,  and  the  Word  of  God  from  the  writings  of  men;  and  this  judgment  she  has 
of  the  Holv  Ghost."(63)  And  Jewel  says,  "  the  Church  of  God  has  the  spirit  of  wisdom 
to  discern  true  Scripture  from  false. "(64) 

To  conclude,  therefore,  in  the  words  of  the  Council  of  Trent:  "  If  any  man  shall  not 
receive  for  sacred  and  canonical  these  whole  books,  with  all  their  parts,  as  they^are  read  in 
the  Catholic  Church,  and  as  they  are  in  the  Vulgate  Latin  edition,  let  him  be  accursed."(65) 

K 

(56)  Def.  of  the  39  Articles,  p.  31,  Art.  6.  (57)  Third  Council  of  Carthage,  Can.  47.  (58)  De  doct.  Chris* 
tian.  I.  2.  c.  8.  (59)  Epist.  ad  Exuper.  C],  (60)  Tom.  I.  Cone.  Decrct.  cum  70  Ep'ucop.  (61)  Brentius  Apol.  Conf. 
W'tt.  Bucert  scripta  Ang.p.  713.  (62)  Covel  cont.  Burg.  p.  76,  77,  EsP  78.  (63)  Fulk  An.  to  a  Counts  Cathol.  p. 
5.     (64)  Jewel  def.  of  the  Apol.  p.  201.     (65)  ConciL  Tr'id.  Sets.  4.  Deer,  de  Can.  Scrip. 


Protestant  Translations  against  the  Church. 


33 

to 

s/j  The  Book,]  The  Vuleate  Latin 

v)      (Chanter,  Text. 


tt 


(Chapter, 
and  Ver. 


$  St,  Matth. 
(A  chant.  16. 
§  ver.  18. 

'A 


Et    c?o    dico    tibi, 


The  true  English  ac- 
cord in  g  tot  heRhe- 
mish  Translation. 


And  I  sav  to  thee, 


quia  tu  es  Petrus,  &  •  that  thou  art  Peter, 
super  banc  Pctram  and  upon  this  Rock 
adificabo   "  Ecclesiani)  will  build      niv 


rik\i;iu      /xa 


^•!"  Churcli." 


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


The  last  Trans,  of  « 
the  Protest.  Bible,  ^ 
Edit.  Lor.d.  anno   •/ 

R 


Instead  of  Church,     It  is  correct- 
they  translate  "Con-  ed  in  this  last 
gregation."  —  Up-  ]  Translation.   $ 
011  this  Rock  will  II  t 

build  mv  "  Congre- !  V 

gation."(66)  I  fc 


A  St.  Matth.        Sjtod  si  ?io)i  audic- 


And  if  he  will  not  J     If  he  will  not  hear  j 

lear  them,    tell  the  i  them,  tell  the  "Con- 1 

«?//tv«i  "  Church ;"  and  it  |  gregation ;"   and  if ! 

I  ';  Ecclesiani  ^^•-■-■-;  j  he  will  not  hear  the   he  will  not  hear  the  | 

\non  audierit,   sit  tibi  I  "  Church,"  let  him  |  "     Congregation," 

sicut  Ethnicus  &  Pub-  i  be  as   an   Heathen, 

\licamis.  I  and  as  a  Publican. 


Corrected. 


h  chant.     iS.  |  rit  cos,  die  "Eeclcsia 
•'  ver.  17. 


y\ 


V) 

V  Eohesians, 

'  :  ch.  5.  ver. 

•;  23,  2-4,  25, 

;  -:>  29,  32. 

■■ 

;/i 

::;  Hebrews 


Fir'/ 7  diiigite  uxorcs 

vestras,  sicut  ly  Chris- 


Sec, 


Husbandslovevour 

wives,  as  Christ  lov- 
t- 


Corrected. 


J  the  "Conffi 
tion." 
Thathe  might  ore- 


Corrected. 


Husbands       love 
vour  wives, as  Christ 
tits  dilexit  "  Eeclesi- 1  lovedthe "Church," 

.;;;.•.,'  v.  25. 

t77    cxhibcrct     ipsi\    Thathemiahtpre- 
sibi  'Joriosaui 

J/tf/H." 

';    Sacramentim?"*  ;      Tor  this  is  a  great ;      For  tiiis  is  a  great !    Corrected. 
hoc  est  magnum  ;  Ego  |" Sacrament;"  but  Ij  "Secret,"  forlspeak  | 
peak  in  Christ,  and   in  Christ,  and  in  the 
11  the   "  Church,"  |'  Congregation.' 


Kcc'e-  !  sent  to  himself  a  elo- '  sent  tohimsdf  aelo- 

I  o  fc> 

iouslChnrch,'v.  27.  j  riousCongregation. 


U 

i 

ft 


autemdico  in  Chris  to  <3 
'fc  Eccksia"  £***««« 


2.  V. 


V  Canticles, 

VI  ch.  6.  v.  8. 

:.   Eohesians, 


Et   Ecclcs  iam  pri- 
vativoruni  i****?.*. 


Una    est     Cohtmba 
mca.  nn.sv  ^-(67) 

Z7/  ipsum  dealt  Ca- 


.  0  2,  &c. 

And  the  "Church" 
>f  the  First-born. 


My      Dove 
Alone.  '(67) 


Mv     Dove  g 
<  but  One.'  « 

i  .  x 

And  <jave  him  to  !       And  gave  him  V) 
to  be    the    Head  y) 

p«j  //u/zat,   is>  plemtu-\  which  is   his   Hod}',  |  gregation,'      winch  j  which  is  his  Bo-  y- 
do  ejus,  qui  omnia  //zjthe   fulness   of  him   is  his  Body,  the  ful- !  dy,  the  fulness  of 


Mv       Dove 
One." 


And   hath   made 


And   the  *  Con 
gregation,'   of    ths 

First-born. 


Corrected. 


h.  1.   ver.  put  supra  omncm  "  Ec-\\\\m  Head   over  all!  be  the  Head  ove. 

/•        1?  ^/^        'xi  /rt/^i  i    1*  !    i  •  >       ,  •  -  1  over  all  tunes  to  v) 

.     22,  23.        )  cle.uam"  qua  est  Cor-   the       "    Churcli,"  j  tilings  to  the  '  Con-  j  the    ,   Chu.c)l  »  ft 

•  fiv:    ;/)f/;/r       ST    ■hJpnittJ-\   w !>w!>    ic     lire     Rnrlv     l  ,n-e.    ■if'r.n    '         1 
v 

8 


omnibus  "  adimp/cturiJ 


which   is  filled,1 


ill  m 


ness  of  him 
nileth'  ail  in al 


that 

.(68) 


him    '    that    fill-  ( 


eth'  all  in  all. 


Protestant  Translations  against  the  Church. 


39 


THE  two  English  Bibles, (a)  usually  read  in  the  Protestant  Congregation?,  at  their  first  rising  up, 
left  out  the  word  CATHOLIC  in  the  title  of  those  Epistles,  which  have  been  known  by  the 
na:ue  of  Catholic*  Epistolcv,  ever  since  the  Apostles'  time  "(h)  And  their  latter  translations,  dealing 
somewhat  more  honestly,  have  turned  the  word  Catholic  into  '  General,'  saying,  *  the  general  Epis- 
tle of  James,  of  Peter.'  &c  As  if  we  should  say  in  our  Creed,  '  we  believe  the  general  Church.' 
So  that  by  this  rule,  when  St.  Augustine  savs,  that  the  manner  was  in  cities,  where  there  was  liberty 
of  Religion,  to  ask,  qua  itur  ad  Catholic  am  P  we  must  translate  it,  which  is  the  way  to  the  General-1 
And  when  St.  Hierom  says,  if  we  agree  in  Faith  with  the  Bishop  of  Rome,  ergo  Catholici  sumus  ;  we 
must  translate,    '  then  we  are  Generals.'      Ts  not  this  good  stuff? 

(66)  And  as  they  suppress  the  name  Catholic,,  even  so  did  they,  in  their  first  English  Bible,  the 
name  of  Church  itself : (c)  Because  at  their  lust  revolt  and  apostacy  from  that  Church,  which  was  uni- 
versally known  to  be  the  only  true  Catholic  Church,  it  was  a  gieat  objection  against  their  Schismati- 
cal  proceedings,  and  stuck  so  much  in  the  people's  consciences,  that  they  left  and  forsook  the  Church 
and  the  Chuich  condemned  thietn  :  To  obviate  which,  in  the  English  translation  of  1562,  they  so  to- 
tally suppressed  the  word  Church,  that  it  is  not  once  to  be  found  in  all  that  Bible,  so  lonp-  read  m  their 
Congregations;  because,  knowing  themselves  not  to  be  the  Chuich,  they  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  com- 
mon people's  ears  out  of  the  Scriptures,'  and  that  it  might  seem  to  the  ignorant  a  good  argument  aoainsc 
the  authority  of  the  Church,  to  say,  '  we  find  not  this  word  Church  in  all  the  Bible  :'  As  in  other  ar- 
ticles,  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  St.  Paul  say  to  Timothy,  1  Ep.  c 
3.  '  The  house  of  God,  which  is  the  Congregation,  not  the  Church,  of  the  living  God,  the  pillar  and 
ground  of  truth.'  Thus  they  thrust  out  God's  glorious,  unspotted,  and  most  beautiful  spouse,  tire 
Church  ;  and,  in  place  of  it,  intrude  their  own  little,  wrinkled,  and  spotted  Congregation.  So  they 
boldly  make  the  Apostle  say,  '  he  hath  made  him  head  of  the  Congregation,  which  is  the  Body  :;  And, 
in  another  place,  '  the  Congregation  of  the  First-born  :'  where  the  Apostle  mentions  heavenly  Jerusa- 
lem, the  city  of  the  living  God,  <kc.  So  that  by  this  translation  there  is  no  longer  any  Church  Mili- 
tant and  Triumphant,  but  only  Congregation  ;  in  which  they  contradict  St.  Augustine,  who  affirms, 
that  '  though  the  Jewish  Congregation  was  sometimes  called  a  Church,  vet  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. 

(67)  Again,  the  true  Church  is  known  by  unity,  which  mark  is  given  her  by  Christ  himself;  in 
whose  person  Solomon  speaking,  says,  '  Una  est  Columba  mca;y  that  is,  '  One  is  my  Dove,5  or,  '  My 
Dove  is  one.'  Instead  of  this,  they,  being  themselves  full  of  Sects  and  Divisions,  will  have  it,  '  My 
Dove  is  alone  ;'  though  neither  the  Hebrew  nor  Greek  word  hath  that  signification  ;  but,  on  the  con- 
trary,  as  properly  signifies  one,  as  unus  doth  in  Latin.      Bur  this  is  also  amended  in  their  last  translation. 

(68)  Nor  was  it  enough  for  them  to  corrupt  the  Scripture  against  the  Church's  unity  ;  for  there  was 
a  time  when  their  Congregation  was  invisible  ;  that  is  to  say,  when  '  they  were  not  at  all:'  And  thcie- 
iore,  because  they  will  have  it,  that  Christ  may  be  without  his  Church,  to  wit,  ahead  without  a  bo- 
dy, (d)  they  falsify  this  place  in  the  Epistle  to  the  Eph.  c  II.  v.  22,  23.  translating,  '  he  gave  him  to 
be  the  Heatl  over  all  tilings  to  the  Church,'  Congregation  with  them,  k'  which  (Church)  is  his  Body, 
the  fulness  of  him  that  filleth  all  in  all.'  Here  they  translate  actively  the  Greek  word  w  ttr^y^y,  when, 
according  to  St.  Chrysostom,  and  all  the  Greek  and  Latin  Doctors'  interpretations,  it  ought  to  be  trans- 
lated passively;  so  that  instead  of  saying,  '  and  rilleth  all  in  all,'  they  should  say,  '  the  Yulness  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,  '  Chi  ist 
needs  no  such  compliment  '  And  if  he  need  it  not,  then  he  may  be  without  a  Church  ,  and  conse- 
quently, 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.    . 


(a)  Bib.  1562,  1577.  (b)  Easel.  Hist.  Eccles.  lib.  2.  c.  23.  in  fine,  (c)  Bible  printed  Anno  1*562.  (d)  Protes- 
tants will  have  Christ. to  be  an  Head  without  a  Body,  during  all  that  time  that  their  Congregation  was  invisible,  \iz\ 
about  1 5  00  years. 


(•:■> 


4-o    Protestani  Translations  against  the  B.  Sacrament. 


I  The  Book, 

Chapter, 
and  Ver. 


;S£S£S<SS5S5£5S5S?£  ?£5£S£?SX£5£3£3S5SS^5£S^S£ 


n  St.  Matth. 
)X  chapt.  26. 
ver.  26. 


$  St.  Mark, 
$  chapt.  14. 
5x  ver.  22. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  (The  trueEnglish  ac-J 


Text. 


)a  Jeremiah, 
n  ch.  11.  ver. 
819. 


Genesis, 
chapt.  14. 
ver.  18. 


Accepit   Jesus  pa- 
nem   iff  l  Benedixit,' 

x.x.    'ivXoyr.aa.;,    QC  frcgit 

dediique,  fcfc.(6y) 


AccepH   Jesus  pa- 

nem  &  6  Benedicens* 

KXi   ivtoyvtra;,  &C.(lJO>) 


S$uem  oportet  qui- 
dem  Calum  i  susci- 
pcrei  usque  in  te?npora 
rcstitutionis     omnium, 

(70 


Mittamus     lignum 
in  Pancm  ejus ,(32) 


cording  to  theRhc 
mish  Translation. 


Jesus  took  bread 
and  *  Blessed,'  and 
brake,  and  gave  to 
his  Disciples. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant liiblcs,  printed 
A. 0.1562,1577,1579. 


Instead  of  *  Bles- 
sed,' they  translate, 
'  and  when  he  had 
given  thanks. '(69) 


I 

The  Lvt  Trans,  of  (/x 
the  Ptotes.   Bible,  ft 

(A 


Jesus  took  Bread, 
and  *  Blessing,'  &c. 


Whom  Heaven 
truly  must  '  Re- 
ceive,' until  the 
times  of  the  resti- 
tution of  all  things. 


Instead  of  Bles- 
sing, they  say,  *  and 
when  he  had  given 
thanks.'(7o) 


Let  us  cast  wood 
upon  his  Bread. 


Atvero  MelchizeA  And  Melchize- 
dek  Rex  Salem  profe-  dek,  King  of  Salem, 
rens  Pancm  iff  Finum,  \  brought  forth  Bread 
'  crat  enim    Sacerdos  and  Wine  ;    *  For 

Dei  Altissimi/(j2>)     i  ^e  was  ttle  pnest  of 
I  God  most  high.' 


Instead  of  Re- 
ceive, they  say, 
whom  Heaven  must 
'  contain.'  And  Be- 
za,  '  who  must  be 
contained  in  Hea- 
ven.'(71) 


'We  will  destroy 
hismeatwithwood.' 
In  another  Bible, 
'  Let  us  destroy  the 
Tree  with  the 
Fruit*'(72) 


Instead  of  <  For 
he  was  the  Priest,' 
they  translate,  'And 
he  was  the  Priest,' 
&c.(73) 


Edit.   Load,  anno 
16S3. 


Corrected. 


'A 


Corrected. 


Corrected. 


H 


Let  us  de- 
stroy theTree  H 
withtheFruit  g 
thereof.  8 


Instead  of  8 
'  For,'  they  $ 
translate  V? 

'  And.'  8 


(bs5S?S3^S553!S5!S5!S5iS3«^^ 


and    Sacrifice  of   the   Mass.  41 

(69)  ^ST^HE  turning  of  Blessing  into  hare  Thanksgiving,  was  one  of  the  first  steps  of  our  pretended 
J  Reformers,  towards  denying  the  Real  Presence.  By  endeavouring  to  take  away  the  ope- 
ration and  efficacy  of  Christ's  Blessing,  pronounced  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 
alo  in  urging  the  word  Eucharist,  to  prove  it  a  mere  Thanksgiving ;  though  we  rind  the"  verb 
ivyjx^Tu-)  used  also  transitively  by  the  Greek  Fathers,  faying,  im  ayrw  tvyxpTrhiSi*.,  panem  <k  chalicem  cu- 
ch  o  tsusatos  ;  or,  panem,  in  quo  gratia:  acta;  sunt  ;  tnat  is,  "  1  he  bread  and  cup  made  the  Eucharist  :" 
"  The  bread,  over  which  thanks  are  given;"  tnat  is,  "  Which,  by  the  word  of  prayer  and  thanks- 
giving is  made  a  consecrated  meat,  the  flesh  and  blood  of  Christ."  ^e)  St  Paul  also,  speaking  of  this 
Sacrament,  calls  it,  (i  Cor  10.)  "  The  chalice  or  benediction,  which  we  do  bless  ;3'  which  St.  Cv- 
prian  thus  explicates,  "  The  ciialice  consecrated  by  solemn  blessing."  St.  Basil  and  St.  Chrysostom, 
in  their  hrurgies,  say  thus,  "  Bless,  O  Lord,  the  sacred  bread  ;"  and  "  Bless,  O  Lord,  the  sacred  cup, 
changing  it  by  thy  holy  spirit  :  "where  are  signified  the  consecration  and  transmutation  thereof  into  the 
Bodv  and  olood  o>    Christ." 

(70)  And,  b,  tii'S  corrupt  translation,  they  would  have  Christ  so  included  in  Heaven,  that  lie  cannot 
be  wi!i  us  up  >n  th  altar.  Beza  confesses,  "  That  he  translates  it  thus,  on  purpose  to  keep  Christ's 
presence  from  the  al  ai  ;"  which  is  so  far  from  the  Greek,  that  not  only  lllyricus,  but  even  Calvin 
himself,  dislikes  it.  Ami  you  may  easily  judge,  iiow  contrary  to  St.  Chrysostom  it  is,  who  telis  us 
"  That  C.irist  ascending  imo  Heaven,  both  left  us  his  flesh,  and  yet  ascending  hath  the  same."  And 
again,  O  Miracle!"  says  he,  "  he  that  sits  above  with  the  father,  in  the  same  moment  of  time  is 
handled  with  the  hands  of  All."  (f)  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  presence  of  Christ  in  both  places  at  once,  because  he  is  Omnipotent,  is  far  greater  than  the  Protest- 
ant faith,  which  believes  no  farther  than  that  he  is  ascended  :  and  that  therefore  he  cannot  be  pre 
upon  the  Altar,  nor  dispose  of  his  body  as  he  pleases  ?  If  we  should  ask  them,  whe.her  he  was  also  in 
Heaven,  when  he  appealed  to  Saul  going  to  Damascus  ;  or  whether  he  can  be  both  in  Heaven,  and 
with  his  Church  on  Earth,  to  the  end  of  tire  world,  as  he  promised  ;  perhaps,  by  this  doctrine  of  theirs. 
they  would  be  put  to  a  stand.    (71) 

Collider  further,  how  plain  our  Saviour's  words,  "  This  is  my  Body,"  are  for  the  Real  Presence  of 
his  Body  :  and  tor  the  Real  Presence  of  his  Blood  in  the  Ciialice,  what  can  be  more  plainly  spoken, 
than—"  This  is  the  Ciialice,  the  New  Testament  in  my  Blood,  which  Chalice  is  shed  for  you:  (o\ 
According  to  the  Greek  to  tnoT^w  to  utxyvzpvjQv  the  word  "  which"  must  needs  be  referred  to  the  Ciia- 
lice :  in  which  speech  Chalice  cannot  otherwise  be  taken,  than  for  That  in  the  Ciialice  ,  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  hit 
side."  (h)  And  this  deduction  so  troubled  Beza,  that  he  exclaims  againft  all  the  Greek  copies  in  the 
world,   as  corrupted  in  this  place. 

^  (72)  "  Let  us  cast  Wood  upon  his  Bread;"  that  is,  saith  St.  Hierom,  (i)  <<  The  Cross  upon  the 
Body  ol  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  therefore  also  called  Bread  by 
the  Apostle  (1  Cor.  10.)  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  pv.t  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  supposed,  by  the  jews,  to  obscure  this  prophecy  of  their 
crucifying  Christ  upon  the  Crofs.  And  though  Protestants  will  needs  take  the  advantage  of  this  cor- 
ruption, 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  differ- 
ent translations,  and  their  transposing  their  words  in  English,  otherwise  than  they  are  in  the  Hebrew,  (k) 
(73)  Jt  Piotestants  should  grant  Melchizedek's  typical  sacrifice  of  bread  and  wine,  then  would  fol- 
low also,  a  sacrifice  of  the  New  Testament  ;  which,  to  avoid,  they  purposely  translate  "and"  in  this 
place;  when,  in  other  places,  the  same  Hebrew  particle  vau,  they  translate  .enim,  for-  not  being  ig- 
norant, that  it  is  in  those,  as  in  this  place,  better  expressed  by  For  or  Becaufe,  than  bv  And.  See"  the 
exposition  of  the  Fathers  upon  it.  (1) 

L  The 

(e)  S  Justin  in  fine.  2  Apolog.  St.  Ireriaeus,  lib.  4.  34.  (f)  Horn.  2.  ad  popul.  Antioch.  lib.  3.  dc  Sacerdotio, 
(g)  Luke  22,  v.  20.  (h)  St.  Chysost.  in  1  Cor.  cap.  10.  Horn.  24.  (i)  S.  Hierom.  in  com.  in  cap  n.  vers  19. 
Hicrem.  Prophets.  (k)  Genes.  20.  v.  3.  Gen.  30.  v.  27.  Isaiah,  64.  v.  5.  (1)  St,  Cypr.  Epist.  63.  Epiphan. 
Hxr.  55  &79.  St.  Hierom  in  Matth.  26.  &  in  Epist.  adEvagrium. 


42 


Protestant  Translations  against 


4  {'> 

kThe  Book,  I  The  Vlllcate  I^tin  j  The  true  English  aC-  j  Corruptions  in  the  Pro-  The   last   transl.  (A 

K       Chanter                   Text.                 i    cording  tOtheRhe-        "stanl  BiUe,  printed  oftheProtes  ■  H 

U        V^iia;n^i,                    icai.                                      r          .      •                  A.D.      1^62,     1577,  ant  Bible,  edit.  $ 

ft      andVe-J                                      mish  Translation.        ,5-(>  Lon.an.1683.  pi 


$  Proverbs, 
V  chap.  0. 


I      JVw'A'  comediU  pa-\      Come      eat     my 

w*y«  mcum,  &  bibitei  Bread,    and    drink 

;  w'«w«  7«5f/  "  miscui"    the  Wine   which  I 


I    74) 


have  "mingled"  for 
vou. 


V^  Proverbs, 

'V  chap.  (1. 
yi        1     -^ 

\  1  Corinth 
B  chap.  11. 
|ve,27. 

v4 


$  1  Cor  in  tli. 
^  chap.  9. 
g  ver.*  13. 

34 


hi 

S'U/S, 


The  corruption 
is,  Drink  the  Wine 
winch  I  have 
"  drawn  ;"  instead 
of  "mingled."  (74) 

She  hath  "drawn" 


davit   vidimus  i      She  hath  immo-  ( 

mhcuit    vinu'in  plated  her  Hosts,  she  i  her  wine.  (75) 


■;  75 ) 


y)  1  Corinth. 
d  chap.  10. 
({  ver.  18. 


^  Daniel, 
V  chap.  14. 
Yl  ver.  12. 

P 

I  Et.ver.  17. 


S 


?  Et  etiam 

vers.  20. 


//(vyr/c*  quicunquc 
m  inducavcrit  panem 
banc  vcl  •„  biberit  ca- 
licem  domini  indi^ne, 
&c.  (76) 


Ft  qui  Altari  dc- 
|  servhmt    cum    Altari 
paiticipant      hanurr^oi 
nnra  (77) 

Nonne    qui    edunt 
Hostias  participes  sunt 

Altar  is?  9y:n*r»fia(78) 


j£Wtf  fecerant   sub 
mensa  absconditum  in- 

tioitum  TfZK^x  (79) 


Intuitu;    rex   men- 
sum. 

Et  consumebant  qua 
erant  super  mens  am. 


hath      "   mingled" 
her  Wine. 


Therefore,  who 
soever  shall  eat  tins 
Bread,  "  or"  drink 
the  Chalice  of  our 
Lord  unworthily, 
e^c. 


Come  cat  ot  (\ 

my  Bread,  and  Y/\ 

drink     of    the  (A 

Wine  wh'icli  1  ft 

have    "  ming-  Y{ 

led."  ft 

She  hath  killed  tt 

her  Beasts ;  she  K 

hath     mingled  (\ 
her  Wine. 


And     they    that 
serve  the  Altar,  par- 


Ins  tead    of    Al- 
tar,   they    translate 
ticipate     with     the  j"  Temple"   (77) 
Altar. 

i 
They     that     eat  j      Partakers   of  the 

the  Hosts,   are  they 

not  partakers  of  the 

"  Altar?" 


a 


For      they      had 
made    a    privy   en- 
the 


trance     under 
"  Table." 


Temple."  (78) 


K 

Wherefore,  «J 
whosoever  ^ 

shall  cat  this  M 
Bread,  and  (9 
drink  this  cup  ^ 
of  the  Lord  ^ 
unworthily,  \{ 
&c.  d 


Corrected. 


Corrected. 


I 

8 


K 


For,  under  the  The  two  last  ia 
Table,  tliev  sav,  !  Chapters  they  ^ 
under  the  "  Altar."  ;  cail     Apocry- 


The  king  behold- 
ing the  "Table." 

And  they  did 
consume  the  things 
which  were  upon  the 
"  Table." 


pha. 


(79) 

The  king  behold- 
ing the  "  Altar." 

Which  was  upon 
the  "Altar," 


the  B.  Sacrament  and  the  Altar.  43 

i^    icirTMIESE   prophetical  words  of  Solomon  arc  of  great  importance     as  being  a  manifest  pro, 

(/4'  h)     1      „  key  of  Christ's  mingling  Water  and  Wine  in  theChalicc  at  his  last  suPrcr      una  ,      . 

tl    ■  ,l,v    Ibe  Catholic   Church    observe,:    but  Protestants,   counting    .1   an  idle  u 

this  da*,   tnc  ^ainoiic    vnun  „.,...,.,-..,,,■  inll,-in,      contrary  to    .he   hue    Intel- 

'"nSb"°?  T^7}V  TanTK  « :           l-o   r. ,™  C  A*,c,en,  bathers'  cxpo.mon  of  .hi. 

pretat.on  bo,  h  ot  . he  G  e k    ndllcbiev^ ».  a •«  T   folt,llew«h  a  >vpe  ol  on.  Lord's  S3cvif.cc, 

place.    ."   1  he  Holy  01  est     s 5s  b . jCypua n)   1  ^^  ^  ^  Hos,s>  ;he  ,,,,,,  mingled 

ol   .lie  immola.od  Host  of  bread  and   vv >ne      s  5        ,  (  ^  ^         ()  ^ 

e»J 'iu7«p.«h.g  .hi-'G™."  wordl/another  e,u,vai=n,,and  more  plainly  s.gp.fying  ,l„s  mixture,  v,,. 

py*'1"0"'  ,  r  1     1     .         ;-,to  An/1     inc-md  of  Or.   contrary   both   rr  the  Greek   and 

(76,    In  this  place,   they  very  falsely  It  as,  a.    A ml.    n.      -- 1"        »»       )  . ,  ...  ^  ^ 

LThi  en  S  An  o°,mc  J  0  he  o,l,e,  bathers,  undent*.,  the  Eucharist :  where  no  mention  ,s  made 
0/  W  me  or  "S  "  but  the  reaching  of  the  Bread,  their  knowing  him  and  his  vanishing  away, 
ot    vv  >ne,  or  u  e  benediction  and  consecration  oi   the  Chalice.  . 

'"ioThe'o  ttti«  .?»«'•' 1«  w  ...hecUm  tcadminisie,  the  Blood  only  ,0  children."  as  St.  Cyprian 
In  the  pi'mitive  »m«'    T        ,lian  sa„     .,  That  it  was  their  practice,  most  commonly,   10  reserve  the 
B,dvU„f  CI  ?H.t°»  »hirh,  a    KuLuiu. witnesses,   «  1  he,  .vefe  wont  ,0  give  alone  to  sick  people,   for 
their  Viaticum."     Also,   "  The  holy  He.mitsin  the  Wileleroeta,  commonly  recced  and  reserved  the 

Messed  Body  alone    ^"^'^J^  k^  ™.    Protestants   themselves  have   confessed ; 

For  whole  Chi  1st   is  really  present,   u'  ,        ff  .<  That   they  believed   and   confessed 

^.'^rieaotTeanrpS  1^1  •^X^^^dfnr Either  Kind/and  therefore  under  the 

?-  f  «,„/•   neither  did  they  judge  thofe  to  do  evil,    who   common. cited   under  one  kind.    — 

Ann  L  'he      a      1  e'd  e    by  Hospima.l  (tj  says,   -  That  it  is  not  neediul   ,0  give   both  k  nd.  ;    bet  as 

r,         1      ,,',«;,         I       Church  has  power  of  ordaining  only  One,  ami  .he  people  ought  ,0  be  content 

£e«wUh     f  U  b    ordanred  by  .he  Church."     Whence    t  ,s  granted,  that,  •  ,,  is  law.nl  ,or  the  Church 

,     Hotl     iron  iust  occasions,   absolutely  to  determine  or  limit  the  use  thereof. 

ft  ,8  To  tran  la  Temple  instead  of  Altar,  is  so  gross  a  corrupt,™,  that  had  it  not  been  done 
th  ile  immediately  within  two  chapters,  one  would  have  thought  it  had  been  .one  through  overcgot, 
thnce  immediate  y  .  Hebrew  and  Greek,  and  by  the  custom  ot  all  pe   pic 

and  not  on  pu,  pose        1  he  name     .   A  We  ^  ^  ^^  {q  ^  b  q[ 

both  Jew     and  1  -fi»      JmP^J  ^        tUan  T  bj       as  al]    the  Ancienl  tatherS  wee  accustomed  to 

Climt's  Lot  y  a,  d  Bloo  ,  ^  Al      ,  .  ^  ^.^  Bo         ;u]  Bloodf   ]t      aho  called 

SPT  I  ;;;       i   t)  u,  will  have  onfy  a  communion  of  Bread  am.  Wine,  or  a  Supper,   and 

a   lame,      but  b"™«  *  »< ^  T  b,        ^  *         ,   abhor    lhe  wor<l  Altar,    as  Papistical  j.  cspec.ally 

;:;\nrb^";amU-rof  ^^  wWcl  w..  made   when  they  were   .browing,  down  Altars  throughout 

oT  Where  the  name  Altar  should  be,   they  suppress  it  ;  and   here,   where   it   should' not  be,  they 

}in  tlei        anslatTons  ;   and  that  thrice  in"  one  chapter  j   and  that  either   on    purpose   to  dishonour 

L    in    men    uansi...'.         ,  . ...    ,  .     _  ,.-.,,,,.        ,  .-r    the    name  ot 


Eiig 

(7 


,'i"  A       s    o      is ,  toa'a,"  th    c  edit  of  their  Communion-Tahle  ;  as  fearing,  lost   the   name 
Bd  's Tibl  em  »h    redouod  to'lne  dishonour  ot  their  Communion-Tahle.      Wherein    u    ,.  ,o  be  won- 
^   how  .he^  could  imagine  i,  ,„y  ^[-^^r  f„  Table  or  A   a, ,  .  I   ,   e    do  .a ,Uo  had  „«, 

^Tahlet^cviMurK^  SelW    B?    this  we   see,    how 

light  a  thing  ic  was  with  them  :o corrupt  the  Scriptures  in  those  days.  .^^ 


'n)  Apol.  2.  in  fine,  (c)  St.-lren«uslib.  5.  prop.  Iiiit.  p  Coned  Constantmop.  6  Ca  j7. 
'  Lib  v  de  Consensu  (. )  Hier.  Epit.pb.  Paul^e.  Bcda  Theopl.y  act.  St.  yPv,an ...  de  1  Ps  s, 
jui   n   4.    Euseb.Eccl.Hist.l.6.c.36.   St.  Basil,   Ep.   ad  Ctcsanam   1  atnt.am.     (s)  H.spm, 


(m)  Ep.  63.  2.  (v 
(q)  Luke  24.  ver.  30. 
n  10.  Tertul.  1.  2.  ad 
Hist.Sacram.Pe2.Fol.  112.     (t)  lb.  Fol.  12.     (u)  1.  Cor.  10,  ver.  21. 


44 


Protestant  Translations  against 


;a£S£5£5SX£2s;5<:J£5S: 


'  SSS£5SSSSS?£S£>£^£5^ 


j   Hie  Book, 
ft      Chapter, 

tf      antf  Ver- 

..is  A  >os. 
tf  clup.  15. 
(J  ver.  2. 

k 

n 

\  Titus, 
$  chap.    1. 
■^  ver.  q. 

■  ■ 

y  1  Timoth. 
K  chap.  5. 
y  ver.  17. 


The  Vulgate  Latin  I  The  trueEnglishac- 
Tcxt.  {    cording  to  theRhe 

mish  Translation. 


i 


1  Timotho 
chap.  5. 
ver.  19. 


g  St.  James, 
11  chap.  5. 
,/y  ver.   14. 

u 


(A 


Statucrunt    ui    as- 

ccadcrcnt  Paulas  <3 
Barnabas )  iff  quidam 
alii  ex  all  is  ad  <pos- 
tolos<s>  "  Presbytcros" 
nrti7$vTtf*i  in   yerusa- 


?/)},       Iff  Co 


Hujus  rci  gratia 
rcliqui  tc  Creta,  ut 
ca  qua  desunt  corri- 
das, iff  constituas  per 
civitatcs  "  Presbytc- 
ros ,"  sic  at  &  ego  dis- 
posal tibi. 


S£ul  bene  prasunt 
"  Presbyteri"  duplici 
honor c  digni  habean- 
ti'.r. 


Adversus  "  P/tt- 
bytcruwP  accusation- 
cm  noli  rccipcrc,  &c. 


hifirmatur  quis  in 
vobi?  inducat  ^Pres- 
bytcros ecclciia"  & 
orent  super  cum. 


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


The  last  Trans,  of 
the  I'iot-.v.  Bible, 
Kclit.  Loud,  anno 
16S3. 


Instead  of"Pnests," 
thev  translate  <4E!d- 


Tiicv    appoints 
that  Paul   and  Ba»- 
tubas  should  go  v.n, 
and  certain  others o 
the  rest,  to  the  .A no 
sties  and  "  Priests" 
unto  Jerusalem. 


For  this  cause  left  Instead  of"Priests," 
I  thee  in  Crete  that  j  they  translate  "Eld- 
thou  shouldst  re-lers.'* 
form  the  tilings  that 
are  wanting,  and 
shouldst  ordain 
"  Priests"  by  ci- 
ties, as  I  also  ap- 
pointed thee. 


The  "  Priests" 
that  rule  well,  let 
them  be  esteemed 
worthy  of  double 
honour. 


Against  a  "Priest" 
receive  not  accusa- 
tion, &c. 


Is  any  man  sick 
among  vou  ?  let 
him  bring  in  the 
"  Priests*'  of  the 
Church,  and  let 
them  pray  over  him. 


The   Elders  that 
rule  well,  &c. 


Against  an"EIder" 
receive  not  accusa- 
tion, Sec. 


Let  him 

bring  in  the  "  Eld- 
ers" of  the  "  Con- 
gregation," &c. 


For"Priests" 

1  hey  sav  here 
also  «  Eld- 
ers." 


For"Pvi 

thev  '.;v   Eid 


"Elders"  also 
in  this  Bible. 


Instead  of 
"Priest"they 
put  "Elder." 


Elders 


for» 


"   Priests" 
here  also. 


8 

A 

; 

YJ 


Priests    and   Priesthood  >r 

T.  Augustine  affirms,   «  That  in  the  Divine  Scripture  feveral  facrifices  are  mentioned,  feme  before 
O  the  iKanifcftat.'onol    the  New  Teltament,   &c.   and  another  now,    which  is  agreeable  to  this  mani- 
teltation.   &c.    and    which   is    demonftrated  not  only  from   the  Evangelical,   hut  aifo  from  the  Prophe- 
tical Writings."  (w)  A  truth  most  certain  ;  our  facrifice  of  the  New  Testament  being  mostclearlv  proved 
from    the  facrific-  ot  Melchizedek   in   the  Old  Testament;    of  whom,   and  whole   facrihee,   it  is  faid, 
•  hut  Mclchizedek,   king  of  Salem,   brought  forth  Bread  and  Wine;   for    he   was   the    Priest   of  God 
most  high,   and  he  blessed  him,"  &c.    And  to  make  the  figure  agree  to  the  thing  figured,   and  the  truth 
to  anfwer  the  h,;ure  of   Christ,   it  is   faid,   "  Our  Lord  hath  sworn,  and  it  shall  not  repent  him-    thou 
ait  airiest  for    ever,    according    to  the   order    of    Melchizedek."      In  the  New  Testament,    Te'sus    is 
mace  an  'High  P.iest,   according  to  the  order  of  Melchizedek.'      For    according  to    the   similitude  of 
Melchizedek,   there  arises  another  Priest,— who  continues  forever,  and  has  an  everlasting  Priesthood  " 
Whence    it   is  clearly  proved,    That  Melchizedek  was  a  Priest,   and  offered  Bread  and  Wine  as  a  fa- 
crifice ;  therein  prefiguring  Chrifl:  our  Saviour,  and  his  sacrifice  daily  offered  in  the  Church,  under  the 
forms  of  bread  and  Wine,   by  an  everlasting  Priesthood. 

But  the  English  Protestants,   on  purpose  to  abolish  the  holv  sacrifice  of  the  Mass,   did  not   only  take 
away  the  word  Altar  out  oi   the  Scripture,   but  they  also  suppressed  the   name  Priest  in  all  their  trans 
lations,     turning  it  into  klder  ;  (x)  well  knowing  that  these  three,  Priest,   Sacrifice,   and  Altar    are  de 
pendents  ana  consequents  one  of  another  ;   so  that  they  cannot  he  separated.     If  there  be  an  external 
facrihee,   there  must  bean  external  Priesthood  to  offer  it,   and  an  Altar  to   offer  the  same  upon       So 
Christ  himself  being  a  Priest,   according  to  the  order  of  Melchidezek,   had  a  Sacrifice,   «  his  Body  •" 
and  an  Altar,    «  his  Cross,  '  on  which  he  offered  it.      And  because  he  instituted   this  Sacrifice,    to  con- 
rinue  in  ins  Church  tor  ever,   in  commemoration  and  representation  of  his  death,   therefore  did  he  or 
aain  his  Apostles  Priests,   at  his  last  Supper  ,  where  and  when  he  instituted  the  holy  order  of"  Priesthood 
or  i  nests,    (saying  Hoc  F acite,   "  Do  this,")   to  offer  the  self-same  Sacrifice  in    a  mystical   and    un- 
bloody manner,    until  tne  world's  end. 

Butour  new  pretended  Reformers  have  made  the  Scriptures  unite  dumb,   as  to  the  name  of  any  such 
I  nest  or  Priesthood  as  we  now  speak  of;    never  so  much  as  once  naming  Priest,   unless  when  mention 
is  made  either  of  the  Priests  of  the  Jews,  or  the  Priests  of  the  Gentiles,   especially  when  such  are  re- 
prehended or  blamed  in  the  Holy  Scripture  ;   and  in  such  places  they  are  sure    to  name  Priests   in    their 
translations,   on  purpose  to  make  the  very  name  of  Priests  odious  among  the  common   ignorant  neonle 
—Again,   they  have  also  the  name  Priests,   when  they  are  taken  for   all    manner   of  men,   women     or 
children,  that  offer  interna!  and  spiritual  sacrifices  ;  whereby  they  would  falsely  signify,  that  there  are  no 
other  Pr.ests  m  the  law  of  Grace.    As  Whitakcr,  (y)  one  of  their  great  champions,  freely  avouches    di 
rectly  contrary  to  St.  Augustine,   who,    in  one  brief  sentence,   distinguishes  Priests,   properly  so  called 
in  the  Church  ;   and  I  nests,   as  it  is  a  common  name  to  all  Christians.      This  name  then   of  Priest  and 
Ir.esthood,  properly  so  called,   as  St.  Augustine  says,  they  wholly  suppress  ,    never  translating  the  word 
- '-esvyicros,  ••  1  nests,  _    but  ••   Elders;      and  that  with  so  full  and  general  consent  in  all  their  English  Bi 
pies,   tliar,  as  the  Puritans  plainly  confess,  and  Mr.Whitgift  denies  it  not,    a  man  would  wonde?  to   see 
now  careful  they  are,   mat  the  people  miv  not  once  hear  of  the  name  of  any  such  Priest  in  all  the  Holv 
oenptures:   and  even  in  their  latter  translations,   though   they  are  ashamed   of  the   word   «  EldershiV' 
vet  they  have  not  the  power  to  put  the  English  word  Priesthood,   as  they  ought  to  do,   in  the  text     tint 
the  vulgar  may  understand  it,   but  rather  the  Greek   word   Presbytery:   such   are  the   poor   shifts'  they 
are  glad  to  make  use  ot.  ^  c> 

So  blinded  were  these  innovators  with  heresy,  that  they  could  not  sec  how  the  Holv  Scriptures  the 
lathers,  and  Ecclesiastical  custom,  have  drawn  several  words  from  their  profane  and  common  sUni 
faeation  to  a  more  peculiar  and  ecclesiastical  one  ;  as  Episcopus,  which  in  Tully  is  an  «  Overseer  " 
is  a  Bishop  in  the  New  I  estament  ;  so  the  Greek  word  ^.poWr,  signifying  «  ordain,"  they  trans'ru-'as 
profanes  as  ,f  they  were  translating  Demosthenes,  or  the  laws  of  Athens,  rather  than  the' Holy -Scrio 
tu.es;  when,  as  St  H.erom  tells  them,  (z)  it  signifieth,  Clericorumordinationem  :  that  is,  <<  Givin-  of 
Holy  Orders,  which  is  none  not  only  by  prayer  of  the  voice,  but  by  imposition  of  the  hand,"  acconlW 
to  M.  Paul  to  rimothy,  «  impose  hands  suddenly  on  no  man,"  that  is,  -  Be  not  hasty  to  oive  Holy 
O.ders  In  like  manner,   they  translate  Minister  for  Deacon,    Ambassador  for  Apostle,'  MesWei  for 

Angel,   eve.   leaving-,   1  sav,    the  ecclesiastical  use  nf  the  wnrt\  f™-  ri,*  .,;.;„.!  .:',,.....•    " 


bay,    the  ecclesiastical  use  of  the  word  for  the  original  signification. 


i\l 


The 


(wj  bt.  August  LP.  45 ,  q.  3.  (X)  Psal  iio.ver.4.  Heb.  C  vtr.  20.  andchap.  7,*r,  i5,-t1l  24.  fy)  Whit- 
ak,r,  pag.  199  St.  Aug.  hb.  20.  de  Civit  De,,  cap.  10.  See  the  Puritans  reply,  jag  150,  A  id  Wlnjift'l  Defence 
against  the  Puritans,  pag.  722.     (z)  St,  Hierom,  in  cap.  58.  Esau  l    b     5J  b        XKrence 


46 


RANSLATIONS  AGAINST 


T  t  Vul jrate  Latin 
Text. 


<^>S5S^5^3^5^5^5S5^S?^S5^S5S^^>S^^^^:?S?S^ 


}<  The  Boo! 


Ch  1 
andVei 


$  Acrs  Apos 
$  than-     14. 

$ 


'.I  i  Timoth. 
Q  chap.  4. 
ft  ver.  14. 


2  Timoth. 
chap.  1. 

ver.  6. 


1  Timoth. 
chap.  3. 
ver*  8.' 


Et  ver.  12. 


(1)  Et  cum  cnsti- 

tu'lSiCnt  [x".-0Tov„c-an-e;] 

////>  />£r  singula*  '  Ec- 
clesias        P/esbytercs' 


(2)  AW/  ncgligere 
lGratiam  [^apu-^aTo,-] 

/<?  a/  //'/>/'  /><?''  prophe- 
iiam  cum  impositione 
manuum  'Prcsbytcri'i? 


The  true  English  ac- 
cording to  theRhe- 
mish  Translation. 


And  when  they 
had  ordained  to 
diem  '  Priests'  in 
every  *  Church.' 


Propter  quam  cau- 
sam  admonco  tc,  nt 
resuscitcs  '  Gratiam' 
Dei,  qua  in  te  est  per 
imposition  em  man  uum 
mearunu 


(3)  '  Diaconos*  si- 
militer '  Pudieos,'  non 
bilingues,  &c. 
O 


UaXiV8f.J 


(4)    a»«k«oi,  Dia- 


com. 


Neglect  not  the 
'  Grace'  that  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  re- 
suscitate the 'Grace' 
of  God,  which  is  in 
thee,  by  the  impo- 
sition of  my  hands. 


'Deacons'  in  like 
nanner'chaste,'not 

loubled-tongued, 
&c. 


Deacons. 


Corruptions  in   the    Pro-  ;  The  last  Trans,  of  ft 

testant    Bibles,   printed      the  Protest.  Bible,  C£ 

.     ,„.         ,  r  r.dit.   Lonu.   anno  ¥• 

A. D.  1562,1577, 1579.      I6S3.  $ 

! (_  Y( 

'Eiders'set  V) 
in  the  stead  of  $ 
<  Priests.'        ft 


(1)  And  when 
they  had  ordained 
'Elders  by  election,' 
in  every  congrega- 
tion. 


(2)  Instead  of 
'Grace,'  they  tran- 
slate *  Gift;'  and 
'  Eldership'  instead 
of  '  Priesthood.' 


Instead  of  the 
word  '  Grace,'  they 
sav  '  Gift.' 


(3)    *  Ministers' 
for  *  Deacons.' 


For      the 
word  'Grace' 
thev     sav 
'  Gift  ;'  "and 
'Presbytery,' 
the     Greek 
word,  rather 
than  the  En- 
glish    word 
'Priesthood.' 


They  tran- 
slate '  Gift,' 
in  the  stead 
of  '  Grace.' 


g 

-  k 
i 

Likewise  Pi 
must  the  n 
'  Deacons  be  y) 
grave.'  % 


(4)  Deacons. 


Deacons. 


K 


K        _  --,c-^^-^^-^>^^:^^-^     ^^^.^5<^^^^^S^:^S^, 


Priesthood    and    Holy    Orders, 


/ 


(i)TTTE  have  heard,  in  old  time,  of  making  Priests  ,  anil,  of  late  days,  of :  nuking  Ministers; 
yy  but  who  has  ever  heard  in  England  of  making  Elders  by  Election  ?  yet,  in  their  first  transla- 
tions, it  continued  a  phrase  of  Scripture  till  King  James  the  First's  time  ;  and  then  they  thought  good 
to  blot  out  the  words  by  "  Election,"  beginning  to  consider,  that  such  Elders  as  were  made  only  by 
Election,  without  Consecration,  could  not  pretend  to  much  more  power  of  administering  the  Sacra- 
ments, than  a  Churchwarden,  or  Constable  of  the  Parish  ;  for,  if  they  denied  Ordination  to  be  a  Sa- 
crament, (a)  and  consequently,  to  give  grace,  and  impress  a  character,  doubtless  they  could  not  attri- 
bute much  to  a  bare  Election  :  and  yet,  in  those  days,  when  thic  transition  was  made,  their  doctrine 
was,  "  That  in  the  New  Testament,  Election,  without  Consecration,  was  sufficient  to  make  a  Priest 
or  Bishop  :"  witness  Cranmer  himself,  who  being  asked,  Whether  in  the  New  Testament  there  is  re- 
quired 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,  necdeth  no  Consecration  by  the  Scripture  ; 
for  Election  thereunto  is  sufficient,"  (b)  and  Dr.  Stillingfleet  informs  us,  that  Cranmer  has  declared, 
"  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."  pag.  200.  advers.  Camp,  that  is,  ;:>  he  interprets 
himself,  pag.  210.  "  This  name  Priest  is  never  in  tire  New  Testament  peculiarly  applied  to  the  Mi- 
nisters of  the  Gospel."  And  we  are  not  ignorant,  how  both  King  Edward  the  Sixth,  and  Queen  Eli- 
zabeth, made  Bishops  bv  their  letters  patent  only,  let  our  Lambeth  records  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  or' 
Carthage,  which  enjoins,  "  That  when  a  Priest  takes  his  Orders,  the  Bishop  blessing  him,  and  holding 
liis  hand  upon  his  head,  all  the  Priests  also  that  are  present,  hold  their  hands  by  the  Bishop's  hand, 
upon  his  head,  (c)  So  are  our  Priests  made  at  this  day ;  and  so  would  now  the  Clergy  of  the  Church  of 
England  pretend  to  be  made,  if  thev  had  but  Bishops  and  Priests  able  to  make  them.  For  which  pur- 
pose, tliev  have  not  only  corrected  this  error  in  their  last  translations,  but  have  also  gotten  the  words, 
Bishop  and  Priest,  thrust  into  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  pretenders  to  Priesthood,  would  gladly  have  Holy  Order  to  take  its 
place  again  among  the  Sacraments  :  and  therefore,  both  Dr.  Bramhal  and  Mr.  Mason,  reckon  it  for  a 
Sacrament,  though  quite  contrary  to  their  Scripture  translators,  (d)  who,  lest  it  should  be  so  accounted, 
do  translate  "  Gift"  instead  of  "  Grace;"  lest  it  should  appear,  that  Grace  is  given  in  Holy  Orders. 
1  wonder  they  have  not  corrected  this  in  their  latter  translations  :  but,  perhaps,  they  durst  not  do  ir, 
for  fear  of  making  it  clash  with  the  25th  of  their  39  Articles.  It  is  no  less  to  be  admired,  that  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  1  hear  them  object,  that  our 
Latin  translation  hath  Seniores  &  majores  natu  ;  and  therefore,  why  may  not  they  also  translate  "  Elders  :" 
To  wdrich  I  answer,  "  That  this  is  nothing  to  them,  who  profess  to  translate  the  Greek,  and  not  our 
Latin  ;  and  the  Greek  word  they  know  is  •/rpsa-,3tm/psc,  Presbyteros.  Again,  1  say,  ihat  it  they  meant  no 
worse  than  the  old  Latin  translator  did,  thev  would  be  as  indifferent  as  he,  to  have  said  sometimes 
Priest  and  Priesthood,  when  he  has  the  words  "  Presbyteros"  and  "  Presby terium,"  as  we  are  indif- 
ferent in  our  translation,  saying  Seniors  and  Ancients,  when  we  find  it  so  in  Latin  :  being  well  as- 
sured, that  by  sundry  words  he  meant  but  one  thing,  as  in  Greek  it  is  but  one.  St.  Hierom  reads, 
Presbyteros  ego  comprcsbytcr  (e)  in  1  ad  Gal.  proving  the  dignity  of  Priests-  and  yet  in  the  4th*of  the  Gala- 
tians,   he  reads,    according  to  the  Vulgate  Latin  text,    Seniores  in  vobis  rogo  conscnior  C9*  ipse  :  whereby  it  is 

i  videntj    that   Senior    here,    and    in    the  Acts,    is  a  Priest  ,   and   not,  on    the    contrary,   Presbyter,    an 
Elder. 

(3)  In  this  place  they  thrust  the  word  Minister  into  the  text,  for  an  Ecclesiastical  Order  :  so  that, 
though  they  will  not  have  Bishops,  Priests  and  Deacons,  yet  they  would  gladly  have  Bishops,  Minister-' 
and  Deacons;  yet  the  word  they  translate  for  Minister,  is  &ax&»or,  Diaconus;  the  very  fame  that,  a  little 
after,  they  translate  Deacon  (4)  And  so  because  Bishops  went  before  in  the  same  chapter,  thev  have 
found  out  three  orders,  Bishops,  Ministers,  and  Deacons.  How  poor  a  shift  is  this,  that  they  are  forced 
to  make  the  Apostles  speak  three  things  for  two,  on  purpose  to  get  a  place  in  the  Scripture  for  their 
Ministers! — As  likewise,  in  another  place,  (f)  on  purpose  to  make  room  for  their  Ministers'  Wives, 
iur  there  is  no  living  without  them,  they  translate  Wife  instead  or  Woman,  making  St.  Paul  say, 
"  Have  not  we  power  to  lead  about  a  wife,"  &c.  for  which  cause  they  had  rather  say  \j\\wc  than 
Chaste. 

The 

(c.)    7$  of   the  39  Articles.  (b)   See  Doctor  Burnet's  Hist,  of  the  Refor.      See  Stillingfleet  Irenicon.  pag.  592. 

(c)  Council  3.  Anno  436  where  St.  Augustine  was  present,  and  subscribed,     (d).  Dr.  Bramh.  pag.  9C  Mason,  lib.  I. 
(e)  St.  Hier.  Ep.  85.  ad  Evagr.     (f)   1  Cor.  9.  ver.  5. 


4  8 


P  R  0  T  E  S  T  A  M  T   T  R  A  N  SL  A  T I  O  N  S  A  G  A 1  N  ST 


C\  The  Bool 
(i  Chapte 
$      andVe 


>    Malachi, 
',,,)  chap.  2. 


The  Vuleate  Latin 

o 

Text. 


The  trueEnglishac- 
cordingtotheRhe- 
mish  Translation. 


:?S3S5£S£5£5s:?£s<i 


1  Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
tectant l>ibles,  printed 
,1.0.1562,1577,1579. 


ver. 


i' 


)) 


i 


l 

}{  Apocalyp. 

,\  chap,  2,  5. 
j*v.  1,8,1s 

/■:  Malachi, 
!'■  vcr.  :. 


V) 

'■■?[  Matthew, 
/'.  chap.  1 1. 
-    rer.  10. 


<    Luke, 

U  <-haP-  7. 
v}  >er.  27. 

M  2  Corinth. 
8  ver.  10. 


(5)  Labia  cnim  sa- 
cerdotis  custodicntscien- 
tia/11,  Is?  legem  rcqui- 
rcnt  ex  ere  ejus  :  quia 
*  '*ngelus'>  Dofnini  cx- 
crcltuwn  csi» 


The  Priests  lip- 
'  shall'  keep  know- 
ledge, and  the 
'  shall'  seek  the  law 
at  his  mouth  ;  be- 
cause he  is  the 
k  Angel'  of  the  Lord 
of  Hosts. 


c    Angela'     Ephcsi 
ccclesia  scribe. 


(6)  Fcce  ego  mitio 
'    Angelum'      mown, 

parabit  euia?n  ante  fa- 
cie m  mcam.  Et  statim 
veniet  act  tcmplum 
mum  dominator,  qucm 
"cos  queritis,  ty  '  An- 
gel us''  Testament!,  qucm 
vos  vultiu 


k 

The  last  Trans,  of  ({ 
the  Piotes.  E'rble,  >/ 
Lltii t .   Load,  anno    vj 

m    ^ t 

(5)  The  Priests  For 'shall,'  \\ 
iips  <  should*  keep  j  they  translate  c{ 
viiowledge,andthey  *  should.' 
'  should'  seek  the  j  And 
iw  at  his  mouth  ;  j  'Angel* 'Me< 
because  he  is  the  sender'  in 
'  Messenger'  of  the  |  this  alio. 
Lord  of  Hosts. 


for  * 

rJ 


Hie  est  cnim  de  quo 
!  scriptum  est,   ccce  ego 


To  the  c  Mes- 
senger' of,  Sec.  in- 
stead of  '  Angel.' 

(6)  Instead  of 
'  Angel,'  they  sav 
'  Messenger.'    And 


To  the  'Angel*  of 
the  Church  of  Ephe- 
s  lis,  write  thou. 

Behold,  I  send 
mine  '  Angel,'  and 
he  shall  prepare  the 
way  before  my  face.  Mor  '  Angel'  of  the 
And  the  Ruler  Testament,  they 
whom  ye  seek,  shall  translate,  *  Messen- 
suddenly  come  to  ger'oftheCovenant. 
his  Temple,  even 
the  '  Angel'  of  the 
Testament,  whom 
ye  wish  foi% 


For  tills  is  lie  of 

whom  it  is  written, 

1  nut  to  *- Angelum"  mcum  j  Behold,  I  send  mine 

ante facicm  tuam.         j '  Anger    before  thv  i 

'  face. 


For  'Angel'  they 

say  '  Messenger.' 


Hie  est  de  quo  sciip-\      This     is     he     of! 
turn    est,    ccce    mitto [whom  it  is  written,    my 
'  /ingcluir?mcum,  cJ>c.   Behold,  T  send  mine   &c. 
! '  Angel,'  &c. 


Behold  I  send 
1 


(7)  Si  quid  donavi  1  If  I  pardoned  any 
propter  -ccs  in  «  Per- I  thing  for  you  in  the 
sond1  Chrtili\aW'WMlta\  '.Person"  of  Christ. 
xflfS.]  j 


(7)  In     the 

'  si-ht'  of  Christ. 


Corrected. 


The    same 
alfo    thev 
translate 


here,  with- 
out any  cor- 
rection. 


Instead  of  & 
'Angel/  they  g 
sav  '  Messen-  v> 

ger-  YA 


For'Aneel,'  yj 

CD  ^| 

'Messen  eer.'    . 


Corrected. 


^^S£SS?^5S^?^?^^^^ 


the  Authority  of  Priests.  jo 

\$)  I3ECAUSE  our  pretended  Reformers  teach,   "  That  Order  is  not  a  Sacrament;"   ««  That  it  has 
X3  neither  visible  Sign,"   what  is  Imposition  of  hands?   "  nor  Ceremony  ordained    by  God;   nor 
Form;   nor  Institution  train  Christ, "(g)  consequently,  that  it  cannot  imprint  a  character  on  the  Soul  of 
the  Person  ordained  ;   they  not  only  avoid  the  word    "  Priests,"    in  their  translations,    but,    the  mote  to 
derogate  from  the  privilege  and  dignity  of  Priests,   they  make  the  Scripture,   in    this  place,   speak   con- 
trary to  the  words  of  the  Prophet  ;   as  they  are  read  both  in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek,  $v*u£tlcu  Ixffi.ewn, 
)\l?p^  lTOU/**  J    where  it  is  as  plain  as  can  be  spoken,   that,   «'  The  Priests'  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,    tor  true  determination  in  matters  of  controversy,   and   rightly    expounding    the  Law,   as  we 
may  tead  more  fully  in  Deuteronomy  the  17th,   where  they  aie,   commanded,   under  pain   ot  death,   to 
stand  to  the  Priest's  judgment :    Which  in  this  place,  ver.  4.  God,  by  his  Prophet  Malachi,  calls,  "His 
covenant    with    Levi,"    and    that    he    will  have    it    to  stand,    to  wit,   in  the  New  Testament,    where  St. 
Peter  has  such  privilege  tor  him  and  his  Successors,   that   his  faith  shall   not  tail  ;   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   Holv   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  ;   thev  trans- 
late,  "  Because  he  is  the  Messenger  of  the  Lord  of  hosts."      So  do  they  also,   in  the  Revelations,  call 
the  Bishops  ot  the  seven  Churches  of  Asia,   messengers. 

(6)  And  here,  in  like  manner,  they  call  St.  John  the  Baptist,  Messenger;  where  the  Scripture,  no 
doubt,^  speaks  more  honorably  of  him,  as  being  Christ's  precursor,  than  of  a  Messenger,  which  is  ;>. 
term  for  Postboys  and  Lacqueys.  The  Scripture,  I  say,  speaks  more  honorably  of  him  :  And  our  Sa- 
viour, 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,  be- 
hold, I  send  my  Angel  before  thee  :"  Which  St.  Hierom  calls,  mcrhorum  ai^cv,  the  "  Increase  and 
augmenting  of  John's  merits  and  privileges. "(h)  And  St.  Gregory,  "  He  who  came  to  bring  tiding 
of  Christ  himself,  was  worthily  called  an  Angel,  that  in  his  ver\  name  there  might  be  dignity."  Ami 
all  the  Fathers  conceive  a  great  excellency  of  this  word  Angel  ;  but  our  Protestants,  who  measure  all 
divine  things  and  persons  by  the  line  of  their  human  understanding,  translate  accordingly  ;  making  our 
kaviour  say,  that  "  John  was  more  than  a  Prophet,"  because  he  was  a  Messenger.  Yea,  where  our 
blessed  Saviour  himself  is  called,  Angelm  Testanienti>  the  Angel  of  the  Testament,  there  they  translate, 
the  "  Messenger  of  the  Covenant. "(7 ) 

(7)  St.  Hierom  translated  not  Nuncius,  but  Angclus,  the  Church,  and  all  Antiquity,  both  reading 
and  expounding  it  as  a  term  of  more  dignity  and  excellency  :  Why  do  the  Innovators  of  our  age  thus 
boldly  disgrace  the  very  eloquence  of  Scripture,  which,  by  such  terms  of  amplification,  would  speak 
more  significantly  and  emphatically  ?  Why,  I  say,  do  they  for  Angel  translate  Messenger  ?  for  Apos- 
tle, Legate  or  Ambassador,  and  the  like  ?  Doubtless,  this  is  all  done  to  take  away,  as  much  as  possi- 
ble, the  dignity  and  excellency  of  Priesthood.  Yet,  methinks,  they  should  have  corrected  this  in 
their  latter  Translations,  when  they  began  themselves  to  aspire  to  the  title  of  Priests;  whose  name, 
however,   they  may    usurp,    yet  could  net  hitherto  attain  to  the  authority  and  power  of  the  Priesthood. 

I  hey  are  but  Priests  in  name  only  ;  the  Power  they  want,  and  therefore  are  pleased  to  be  content  with 
tne  ordinary  stile  of  Messengers ;  not  yet  daring  to  term  themselves  Angels,  as  St.  John  did  the  Bishops 
of  the  Seven  Churches  of  Asia. 

(8)  But,  great  is  the  authority,  dignity,  excellency,  and  power  of  God's  Priests  and  Bishops: 
1  hey  do  bind  and  loose,  and  execute  all  ecclesiastical  functions,  as  in  the  person  and  power  of  Christ, 
whose  ministers  they  are.  So  St.  Paul  says,  "  That  when  he  pardoned  or  released  the  penance  of  the 
incestuous  Corinthian,  lie  did  it  in  the  person  of  Christ  :"(i)  They  falsely  translate,  "  In  the  sight  oi 
Christ;"   that  is,   as  St.  Ambrose   expounds  it,   "  In   the   name  of'  Christ,"   "  In    Iris  stead,"   and   as 

His  Vicar  and  Deputy  :"   And  when  he  excommunicated  the  same  incestuous  Person,  lie  said,    "  He 

did  it  in  tiie  name,   and   by  virtue    of  our   Lord   Jesus  Christ. "(k) And   the  Fathers  of  the  council 

of  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  Pillar  of  Faith,  and  Foundation  of  the  Catholic  Church, 
received  from  our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  the  keys  of  the  kingdom  ;  and  that  power  of  loosing  and  binding 
sms  was  given  him  ;  who,  in  his  successors,  lives  and  exercises  judgment  to  this  very  time,  and  al- 
ways ."(1)" 

N  The 

(g)   25  of  the  39  Articles.     Roger's  Defence  of  the  same,  page  155.     (h)   St.  Hierom,  in  Comment,  in  hunc  lo- 
cum.    St.  Greg.  Horn.  6.  in  Evang.     (i)   2  Cor.  2.  ver.  10.     (k)    1.  Cor.  5.  ver.  4.     (1)   Part.  2.  Acts  3. 


5° 

ft  The  Book, 
h  Chanter, 
vj      and  Ver. 

$  Matthew, 
5|  chap.  2. 
ft  ver.  6. 

$  Micah, 

v  chap.  5. 
^  ver.  2. 


RO 


testant  Translations  against 


^:>s5^5<s<>s:'>s^:>i'>^^ 


:>s>s?s^:^  >s^5^?S ; 


1   Peter, 

chap.  2. 
ver.  13. 


$  Acts  Apos. 
^?  chap.    20. 

A  ver.  28. 


TJie  Vulgate  Latin 
Text. 


(9)  Ex  te  enlm  ex- 
let  dux,  qui  6  Regat* 

populum  meum  Israel. 


(io)  Subjecti  igitur 
estate  '  cw/«  hutname 
creatura'  [wclo-ri  as>6'Wk„ 
»'"»]  propter  Dewn, 
sive  '  ifcgi  quasi  pra- 
cellentif  she  ducibus, 

C~s         ro       «  -     *       * 

O  £•     L^atri>.Et    wj    v&tct- 


(11)  Attenditc  vo- 
tes iff  anii'erso  gregi, 
in  quo  vos  Spiritus 
Sanctus  posuit  '  £/>/>- 
fo/w  regere  Ecclc- 
siam  Dei.1 


The  trtieEnglishac- 
cordingtotheRhe- 

mish  Translation. 


For  out  of  thee 
shall  come  forth  the 
captain,  that  shall 
'  Rule'  my  people 
Israel. 


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


(9)  Instead  of 
'rule,'  theNewTes- 
tament,         printed 

anno    1580,    trans- 
lates '  feed.' 


Be  subject  there- 
fore c  to  every  hu- 
man    creature'    for 


(10)  In  the  latter 
end  or  King  Henrv 
VIII.  and  in  Edward 


God,  whether  it  be   the  VI.  times,   they 
to  the    c   King'    as  translated,  *  submit 


excelling,  &c. 


Take  heed  to  your 
selves,  and  to  the 
whole  flock,  where- 
in the  Holy  Ghost 
hoth  placed  you  *  Bi- 
shops to  rule'  the 
Church  of  God. 


yourselves  unto  ah 
manner  of  ordinance 
of  man,'  whether  it 
be  unto  the  King,  as 
<  to  the  chief  head.' 

In  the  Bible  of 
1577.  To  the  King, 
as  *  having  pre- 
eminence.' 

In  the  Bible  1579. 
To  the  King,  as  the 
*  superior.' 


(11) Where- 
in the  Holv  Ghost 

J 

hath  *  made  you 
overseers,'  to  '  feed 
the  Congregation' 
of  God. 


The  last  Trans,  of 
the  Protes.  Bible, 
Edit,  Lond.  anno 
1683. 


Corrected. 


ft 

ft 

ft 
n 

\ 

Submit vour-  .-, 
stlvi-stoeven  ft 
ordinance  of  ft 
man,  for  the  • 
Lord's  sake,  -) 
*  whether  it  '') 
be  to  the 
King,'  as  su- 
preme, ft 

ft 
ft 
ft 
ft 

ft 

ft 


—  Wherein 
the  Holy 
Ghost     hath 
made  you 
overseers,  to 
feed  the 
Church  of 
God. 


|^3!SS5S?©«5S5!£5S^^  ; 


episcopal  Authority.  51 

(q)TT  is  certain,  thai  this  is  a  false  translation  ;  because  the  Prophet's  woids  (Mich.  5.  cited  by  St. 
Matthew)  both  in  Hebrew  and  Greek,  signify  only  a  Ruler  or  Governor,  and  not  a  Pastor  or 
Feeder.  Theiefore,  it  is  either  a  gieat  oversight,  which  is  a  small  matter,  compaied  to  the  least 
corruption  ;  or  else  it  is  done  on  purpose  ;  which  I  rather  think,  because  they  do  the  like  in  another 
piace,  (Acts  20.)  as  you  may  see  below.  And  that  to  suppress  the  signification  of  ecclesiastical  power 
and  government,  that  concurs  with  feeding,  tirst  in  Christ,  and  from  him  in  his  Apostles  and  Pastors 
of  the  Church  ;  both  which  arc  here  signified  in  this  one  Greek  word,  wpxiyu ;  to  wit,  that  Christ 
our  Saviour  shall  rule  and  ieed,(m)  \ea,  he  shall  rule  with  a  rod  of  iron  ;  and  from  him,  St.  Peter, 
and  the  rest,  bv  his  commission  given  in  the  same  woid,  «*<»{*«»«,  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  succes- 
sors do  the  like  offenders  with  spiritual  destruction  (unless  they  repent)  by  the  terrible  rod  of  Excom- 
munication. This  is  imported  in  the  double  signification  of  the  Greek  word,  which  they,  to  diminish 
ecclesiastical  authority,   rather  translate   "  tccd,"   than    "  rule  or  govern." 

(10;  For  the  diminution  of  this  Ecclesiastical  authority,  they  translated  this  text  of  Scripture,  in 
King  Henry  VIII.  and.  King  Edward  VI.  times;  "  Unto  the  King  as  the  chief  head,"  (1  Pec  2.)  be- 
cause then  the  King  had  first  taken  upon  him  this  title  of  "  Supreme  Head  of  the  Church."  And 
theiefore  they  flattered  both  him  and  his  young  son,  till  their  Heresy  was  planted  ;  jnaking  the  Holy 
Scripture  sav,  that  the  King  was  the  "  Chief  Head,"  which  is  all  the  same  with  Supreme  Head.  But', 
in  Queen  Elizabeth's  nine,  being,  it  seems,  better  advised  in  that  point,  (by  Calvin,  I  suppose,  and 
the  Magdeburgenses,  v.  ho  jointly  inveighed  against  that  title  ;(n)  and  Calvin,  against  that  bv  name. 
which  was  given  to  Henry  the  Vlllth)  and  because,  perhaps,  they  thought  they  couid  be  bolder  with 
a  Queen  than  a  King;  as  also,  because  then  they  thought  their  Reformation  pretty  well  established  ; 
they  began  to  suppress  this  title  in  their  translations,  and  to  say,  "  To  the  King,  as  having  pre-emi- 
nence," and,  "  To  the  King,  as  the  Superior;"  endeavouring,  as  may  be  supposed  by  this  transla- 
tion, to  encroach  upon  that  ecclesiastical  and  spiritual  Jurisdiction  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  tilings,  nothing  is 
comparable  to  God  ;  and  in  the  Church,  nothing  greater  than  the  Bishop,  who  is  consecrated  to  God, 
for  tire  salvation  or  the  world  ;   and  among  Magistrates  and  temporal  Ruler-:,  none  is  'like  the  King."(o) 

(11)  Again,  observe  how  thev  here  suppress  the  word  "  Bishop,"  and  translate  it  "overseers,"' 
which  is  a  word,  that  lias  as  much  relation  to  a  temporal  Magistrate,  as  to  a  Bishop.  .And  this  they  do, 
because  in  King  Edward  the  VI.  and  Queen  Elisabeth's  time,  they  had  no  episcopal  consecration,  but 
were  made  only  by  their  letters  patent  ;(p)  which,  1  -suppose,  they  will  not  deny.  However,  whet: 
they  read  of  King  Edward  the  Vlth  making  John  a  Lasco  (a  Polonian)  overseer  or  superintendant,  bv 
lii's  letters  patent ;  and  of  their  making  each  other  superintendants,  or  Pastois  at  Frankfort,  bv  ele;; 
tion  ;  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  lay-men  ;  Vid.  Hist,  of  the  Troubles  at  Frank- 
fort ;(cj)  and  also  of  King  Edward's  giving  power  and  authority  to  Cranmer  ;  and  how  Cranmer,  when 
he  made  Priests,  by  election  only,  L  suppose,  because  they  were  to  continue  no  longer  than  the  Kiny 
pleased;  whereas  Priests  trulv  consecrated,  are  marked  with  an  indelible  character,  pretended  to  no 
other  autlioiity  for  such  act,  but  only  what  he  received  from  the  King,  by  virtue  of  his  letters  patent. 
Fox  torn.  2.  an.  1546,    154.7. 

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  Kiiv; 
Edward  VI.  being  repealed  by  Queen  Mary,  was  not  again  revived  till  the  8th  of-  Queen  Elizabeth 
To  sav  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  Catholh 
writers(r)  against  their  pretended  Lambeth  Records  and  Register;  as  also  from  the  comsecrators  of  M. 
Parker,  viz.  Barlow,  Scorey,  cVc.  whom  we  cannot  believe  to  have  been  consecrated  themselves,  unless 
thev  can  first  shew  us  records  of  Barlow's  consecration  ;  and  secondly,  tell  us,  by  what  (ovw  of  con- 
secration Coverdaie  and  Scorey  were  made  Bishops  ;  the  Rom.  Cath.  ordinal  having  .been  abrogated, 
and  the  new  one  not  yet  devised,  at  the  time  that  Mason  says  thev  were  consecrated  ;  which  was  Air.',.. 
30,  1551.  And  as  for  the  Suffragan,  there  is  such  a  difference  about  his  narne,(s)  some  calling  him 
John,  some  Richard  ;  and  about  the  place  where  he  lived  ;  some  calling  him  Suffragan  of  B  dford,(tj 
some  ot  Dover, (v)  that  it  is  doubtful  whether  there  was  such  a  person  present  at  that  -Lambeth  cere- 
mony. But  these  things  being  titter  tor  another  treatise,  which,  1  hope,  you  will  be  presented  with  ere 
long,    I  shall  say  no  move  of  them  in  this  place.  The 

(m)  Psalm.  2.  Apocalyp.  2.  v.  27.  Job.  21.  (n)  Calvin  in  cap.  7.  Amos.  Magdehur.  in  Prrcf.  Cent.  7.  fob  9,  Ko, 
II.  (o)  Ep.  7.  ad.  Smyrnenses.  (p)  K.  Edw.  VI.  Let.  Pat.  Jo.  Utenti.  p.  71.  Regist.  Eccles.  peregr.  Londin, 
Calvin,  p.  327.  Resp.  ad  Persecut.  Angl.  (q)  Hist.  Era.  pag.  51,  60,  62,  63,  72,  73,  74,  87,  97,  99,  17.5,  126, 
&c.  (r)  Eitzherb.  Dr.  Champ.  Nullity  of  the  English  Clergy  Prot.  demonst.  &c.  (s)  See  JL)r.  Bramhal),  p.  9b. 
(t)  Mason,  Bramhall,  &c.     (v)  Dr,  Butler  Epist.  de  Consecrat.  Minist. 


5* 


Protestant  Translations  against 


•^js^sssss^^ssssasss . 


y)  The  Book, 
$  Chapter, 
Y\      andVcr. 


\o  i  Corinth. 
VI  chap.  9. 

<ft  ver*  5* 


fl  Philipp. 
#  chap.  4. 
V  ver.  3. 

» 

1 

I 

1 
£j  Hebrew, 
(j  chap.  13. 
y)  ver.  4. 
v) 


vj  Matthew, 
#  chap.  19. 
m  ver.  1 1. 


-a  Matthew, 

A  chap.  19. 

ver.  12. 


The  Vuljate  Latin 
Text. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro-  |  The  last  Tmns.  of  ^ 
the  I-rotest.  Bible,  V- 
Edit.   Loud,   anno     ' 


(12)  Numquid  non 

babe  mm       potcstatem 

Mulicrumf  sororem 

oeJtTwpHv  yt;var«a,   circum- 

ducendi?  <S?c. 


(13)  Et'uvn  rogo  13 
te  germane '  ComparJ 


( 1 4)  Honorabile 
4  Connubium*  in  omni- 
bus ,        TJfAlO?      0       '/^/XO?       SV 

■crao-i,    y  t bonis  WDMl- 

culatus. 


( 15)    J^H/    fifr.Y/7  ?7- 
//>,    '  AT<5«  0/«tf£f  £<?/>/'- 

#;;/'     verbum      istud, 

a  waVnf  xu^m*  Scdqui- 

bus  datum  est. 


(16)  Et  sunt '  isw- 
nuchij    qui  seipsos  ca- 


Tlie  true  English  ac- 
cording  to  theRlie- 
mish  Translation. 


Have  not  wepower 
to  leacl  about  a  'Wo- 
man,' a  sister  ?  &c. 


Yea,  and  I  beseech 
thee,  my  sincere 
*  Companion.' 


Marriage  honour- 
able in  all,  and  the 

bed  undeiiled. 


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


And     there     are 
'Eunuchs,' whohave 


straverunt,  «w»xM  0,'T»- 1  made  themselves 
4  Eunuchs'  for  the 
Kingdom  of  Hea- 
ven. 


Hi  iv.dyj.exrixvr'j^':,  prop- 
ter Regnum  Calorum. 


testant    Bibles,   printed 


A. 0.1562,1577,1579. 


16S: 


<A 


( 1 2)  Have  not  we  Instead  of  vj 
power  to  lead  about  | '  Woman,1  $ 
a  «  Wife,'  a  sister?  I  they  trans-  (i 
late  <  Wife'  jK 
here  also.        u 


i< 


.(i3) 
nion, 

«  Yoke-fellow.' 


lor  compa- 
thev      say, 


(14)  'Wedlock' is 
honourable  among 
all  men,  &c. 


(.5) «  All 

men  cannot  receive 
this  saying,'  &c. 


(17)  There  are 
some '  chaste' which 
have  made  them- 
selves '  Chaste'  for 
the  Kingdom  of 
Heaven. 


fellow. 


(A 
<  Yoke-  g 


'Marriage' 
is  honoura- 
ble in  all. 


'All 

men'  cannot 
receive  this 
savin  e, 


&c. 


Con 


ected.  8 


the  Single  Lives  or  Priest?,  &e.  r0 

7  3  5 

(.2)«  TF,» says  St.  Hierom,  -none  of  the  laity,  or  of  the  faithful,  can  puy,  unless  he  forbear 
1  conjugal  duiv,  Priests,  to  whom  it  belongs  to  offer  sacrifices  for  the  people  are  aLavs  to 
pray  ;  ,f  to  prav  a!  vavs,  therefore  perpetually  to  live  single  or  unmarried."(w)  kt  our  re  3  d 
Reformers,  the  ,n,re  to  profane  the  sacred  order  of  Priesthood,  to  which  Continencv  a  ,1  Si  lie  S 
have  aUaxshcen  annexed  ,n  the  New  Testament,  and  to  make  it  merely  laical  and  uopu  r I  h  h  . 
all  to  he  marned  n,en  ;  vea,  those  that  have  vowed  to  the  contrary:  and  it  is  a  grc  "t  c?ed"t  amo  Z  he 
for  apostate  Priests  to  take  wives.  And  therefore,  by  their  falsely  conuptinf  th, text  of  St*  , ]'• 
they  w.ll  needs  have  him  to  say,   that   he,   and  the    rest  of  the  Arties   **l  e,f  t  I  -  ' 

them,"  (as  King  Edward  the  Sixth's  German  Apostles  d,d  the^vl  n  wSotef 
at  the  call   of  the  Lord  Protector  Seymour  ;)   whereas   the   Apostle  savs  „n  L!^      I  England, 

sister  ;  meaning  such  a  Christian  woman  a  followed  Christ  and  the  Anosd  ^r.  fi  V"  a1wom.an'.a 
them  with  then-  substance.  So  does  St.  Hierom  interpret  it  xT an  S^Aug^tine  also  toil™ZZ 
proving  that  it  cannot  be  translated  «  wife,»      (  .3     Neithe;  ^     ,u  lhi    ^^  ^o  ■   bot h  d „ec  t  y 

fellow,"  as  our  Innovators  do,  on  purpose  to  make  it  sound  in  English,  ^  man  and  wife  "  T  ?\  f  ' 
Calvin  and  Beza  translate  it  in  the  masculine  render,  for  a  -  eomnanion  "  A  aI  V  ,  J  ldeed>' 
Greek  Father,  saith,  that   «  If  St.  Paul  had  spoken    o  a  , La    X   'hv,  I  heophylact,   a 

St.  Paul  savs  himself,  he  had  no  wire,  (,  Cor  )  And  I  t"i  -  we  h-  -  1  ?•  "  ^^  '"  GrCek" 
lieve  him,  than  those  who  would  gladly' hive  hnn  marrfed,  Q1 i  purp  I  to  do-k  .  e'  "^  ^^  t0  -bc- 
fallen  Priests.     In  the  first  chapter  of  die  Acts,   ver       4    Beza  tan  la  eV  quality  o     a  tew 

w.ves,"  because  he  would  have' all  the  Aoostles  here'es "me' "as  mar ZdltT  'T™'  ^  P™ 
cunt  mullenbus    «  with    the  women,"  as  our  English  trans." rion    "s \t  l^IusT  in'thi"  "" 

they  were  ashamed  to  follow  their  master,  Beza.  '     because,   in  tins  piace, 

(14)   Again,    for  the  man  iage  of  Priests,    and  all   sorts  of   men  indifferent     ,t  „ 
making  two  falsifications  in  on°e  verse  :   The  one   is,    -  aL  "  all  m  n    "  Tn'  o  1    r     t'at  til ^  '7' 
it  an  affirmative  speech,   by  adding   «  is,"   whereas  the  ApostVs  words  ar-  t!  L     •    Vi,r  i"         ke 

able  m  all,  and  the  bed  undefiled*"  which  is  rather  an  exhort  on  4  ,T  E  1  ,?'IarriaSeThon0l,r" 
riage  be  honourable  in  ail,  and  the  bed  undefiled  ;"  as  apta.-  Zh  t  [  '  ""  ^  ,"  LeC  mar- 
that  which  follows    immediately;    all   which   are  exhortations'     Let    theteVoV"     I'V^^m  C'   and- 

reason  out  of  the  Greek  text,  why  they  translate  the  words  following,  bv  wayV  ^  "  of"  7  " 
your  conversation  be  without  covetousness  ;"    and   not  these   wo.^   M^';,,  i;L      '"       "■'°"1        J^eL  . 

"af,Cc  eMo"°Urablem-  alL"-    ^  Ph™ol?gy  ™»  instruction  of  both  are  sin  Harnthe  Greek  """ 
(i5)   Moreover    ,t  is   aga.nst  the  profession  ot  continency   in  Priests  and  others,   that   thev  t  ans!,., 
our  Saviour  s  words  respecting  a   -single  life,"  and  the   -'unmarried  state,"   thus,    "  ma 

°°r'»  ,  "S  An°Ugh  'i  WCr£  lmp0SSlb  C-t0  Hve  cont,'nent :  where  Christ  said  not,  -That  all  men  can" 
not,  but  "All  men  do  not  receive  this  saying."  St.  Augustine  says,  -  Whosoever  haveTott^" 
Si  t  of  chastny  g.ven  them,   it   is  either  because  thev  will  noV  hav-   it    or   b»n,r      I        f  tc?  , 

wh:di  they  will:  And  they  that  have  this  word,  have  it  of  God  'an  d  their  S  1  "M  - 1  " 
gitr,"   savs  Origin,   -  ,s  given  to  all  that  ask  for  it."(z)  ^         X  h!^ 

he(rl^r-V°-    (l°  theytraililare,/his.text  exactly,   nor,   perhaps,   with  a  sincere  meaning  ;    for    if  there 
he  cha.tny  ,n  marriage,  as  well  as  in  the  single   life,   as  Paphnutius  the  Confessor  .nosttuv'iH 
as  themselves  are  wont  often  to  alledge,   then  their  translation  doth  bv   no  SZ     o  n-  S     '     " 
meaning    when  they  say,    -There  are  some  chaste,   who   have    made     he  Sv  s  ,    as "  "    ^"^  S 
man  might  say,   ad  do  so,   who    live  chastely   in    matrimony.      But  our  Saviour    sneaks     f  „,  " 
made  themselves  eunuchs  for  the  Kingdom  of  Heaven  ■   not  bv  fim;„     Tff  T       !  ,  •  aS  have 

gener-tion.  for  ,h«  wou.J  be  an  kJMe  mi  S,  °& Si ?f  , hTXI'u"  ill '  ', ^  ^'  '° 
««.or  £cncrat,c„,  by  pron.se,  a„d  vow  of  perpetual  chaui.,.  'which  U°a  spiritual  IZ^t  ZZ 

St.  Basil  calls  themarriageof  the  Clergy  "  Fornication,"  and  not  "  Matrimony." ■  Of  cano  ' 

meal  persons,      says  he,   '•  the  fornication  must  not  be  reouleil  „,,,;„.„,     i,„, "  ,,  •  "ll>" 

these  is  ai,ose,herI,roh,l„ted  ;  for  this  is  altogether  profi  X  t "h  Z u"L  of  he^C tu™J»"T„".  "' 
ins  epi.de  to  .a  certam  Prelate,  he  cues  these  words  from  the  Council  of  Nice*  :  «  s  b  c  '«„  C  '  '" 
ctlforbtdden,   ,n   a  I  cases  whatsoever,   .hat  it  should  be  lawful  for  a  Bishop,   Priest,   or  Dei  on  "' 

any  wnomsoever,  that  are  ,n  orders    to  have  a  woman  live  with  them  ,   exct'pt  only  tir-'ir  \Z  "u "' 


or  aunt,  or  such  persons  as  are  void  of  ah  suspicion. "(a) 

o 


1 


2  S  al  H.v?Lihbl  T";-1?;  ??'  ^'v1-  C°r-  7'  5'  3>-     ^X^  L!b-  J-  advers»s  Jo'«n-   <le  op,  men  cap.  -     [  lb 
2  cap    24.     (y)  Lib  f]e  Gratia  &  Liber.  Arbitr.  cap.  4       (7.)   Tract    7.  inM-mh       z-,1   <;r     i*n  ;i     if  .'   t     ' 

phdoch.  Ep.  i7.  ad  Paregor.  Presbyt.  Con.  Nice,  in  Cod.  gS Can   3.  ?  (  }  '      P*  '"  *d  Am~ 


54 


Protestant  Translations  against 


9^^^£^5£SS2£SS35£3iS  ci  OSS  & 

V] 


;>S«SC5<^JS?a!:2X5SS£3S>S55S«X:^SC«5S5!SS£3£^:SS^SSS£^ 


9  -,-., 


Book, 
Chapter, 
and  Ver. 

Acts  Apos. 
$  chap.  19. 
h  ver.  3. 

I 

I] 


a 

;<: 
C 

I 

a 
8 


Titus, 
chap.  3. 
ver,  5,  6n 


1 

a 
8 


0 
k 


The  Vulgate  Latin  !  ThetrueEngHshaC-    Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 

Text.  cording  to  theRhe- 1     rf  '!*  Blh>'8  Pr,nted 

•   1    -r  ,    .  A.  D.      1562,     «577, 

mish  rranslation.  ' 


K 


(17) 


/«'      ^«(9 

fAgo    babtizati 
qui    dixerunt, 

i  In    Jobannis   Bap- 

tismate. 


i579« 


The  last  transl. 
of  the  Protest- 
ant Bible, edit. 
Lon.an.  1683. 


ft,'      T», 

estis  ? 


(18)  Non  ex  opc- 
ribus  justified,  qua  fc- 
cimus  nos,  sed  secun- 
dum suam  misericor- 
diam  salvos  nos  fecit  ; 
per  lavacrum  rcgenc- 
rationis  iff  renova- 
tionh  Spiritus  Saudi, 
1  S$uem  effudiC  in  nos 
abundc  per  Jesum 
Christian  Sal-vat  or  cm 
nostrum. 


<  In'  what  then 
were  you  baptized? 
who  said, 'In' John's 
baptism. 


Not  by  the  works 
of  justice,  which  we 
did  ;  but  according 
to  his  mercy,  he 
hath  saved  us ;  by 
the  laver  of  rege- 
neration, and  reno- 
vation of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  « Whom  he 
hath  poured'  upon 
us  abundantly,  by 
Jesus  Christ  our 
Saviour. 


(17)  'Unto'  what  1    'Unto' what 
then  were  you  bap-  ;  then  were  ye 
tized  ?    *  and  they'  j  baptized  ? 
said,  «  Unto'  John's  j  andthevsaid, 


baptism. 


(18)  —  By  the 
*  Fountain'  of  the 
regeneration  of  the 
Holy  Ghost,  *  which 
he  shed  on'  us,  &c. 


«  Unto' 
John's   bap- 
tism. 


Not  by  works 
of  righteous-  ft 
ness,  which  § 
wehavedone;  v) 
but  accord- 
ing to  his 
mercy,  he 
saved  us  ;  by 
the'washing'  w 
of  regenera-  Y) 
tion,  and  re-  H 
newingofthe  $ 
Holy  Ghost,  n 
'  which  he  $ 
shed'  on  us 
&c. 


$ 


the  Sacrament  or  Baptism,  r- 

cire»»ci,i«r  h«  (» nJ« *h"«B  w*i., « *'   *^W.«inJ T«  'O0llow  for;h?  <!;£im;  of 


Beza  confesses,  that  the  Greek  .{« t>  is  often  used  for  «  wherein"  or  "  wherewith  •"  no  :,  :.  :     n 

where  thev  sav    «  ThiJ  rh™ J.™,  k      ■      V        ^ree*  phrase   »«  t0  Ov0/*«  ,s  by  them  translated  "  In  ,': 
7/rV  R  ^      7'        i  hat.lf  7      vC  baPt,zed  in>  n°t  unto,  the  name  of  Jesus  Christ 

Spirit,  he  cannot  enter  into  the  Ki  m   of    Heaven  »     T        1     T  ^  ^f™'   l   mean   of  the 

lates  the  Apostle',  words  to  T  tu^d^thnT-    L  /\  purpose    Calvin  as  falsely   trans- 

«W,;   making  th^  Ado  tie  sav      <  Th^^  ^mtus  SaMcti*  ?uod  <ff*&  <»  «" 

that  is/  ..  ,he  AoJ  Gtt^od  list1  ^^"SJiSSfid0 ^imgrTlil?u?Tn^S1rdant'y'' 

on  this  p  ace,   "  Thnt  the  A -,0^1,*     CnB,i,;n        r  ,        "  '"'   ne  tclli  us»   ln  "is  commentary 

wate r.   but  of  J  H^^h^wttV^  S  r  -^US'  "  H°!  "cH 

rcn. :  B„,  if  we  demand  of   L^  whether  the  H.UcZT  T'       /  "1C  ■GrM-k  'S  a'£°  indiffc- 

said.obesl.ed,  <hev  must  doubtte  eonfe  s  no^he  Hdv  fit°,  "' >er  a  fountatn  o,  water,  may  he 
translating  •  Whieh  he  shed  "  instead'of  '«  W  ,  h  '  i  '  ,".'  Wat,e,r;  And  con«quently,  their 
tain  of  ware. •  •"   thereby  KtLi,T^C  >    T    he,P°.Urcd  ouS'"  would  have  it  denote  the  •'  Foun- 

ds translating  ^n^KT^^^J^T'  "**"**  Co~ ^  fo,Bt 


translating 

,,.   51   ,.i,_.  '    .  .  ,     •         ""  "w  p^un-uuui,      wijuui  nave  it  denote  the  ' 

er;      thereby   agreeing  with   Calvin's  Transition.   =,„,!   R^,><  <- !  ™ % 

>eza,   in 

The 

(b)  25  of  the  39  Articles,     (c)  Beza  in  4.  To.  ver.  10.  &  in  Tit  c   1   ver   c      fA\  r,i  '  >    t       1  »• 
cap.  3.  v  5.  t  J  •  '«•  *«•  «  "i  xn.c,  3.  ver,  5.     (dj  Lalyin's  Translation  in  Tit. 


56 


Protestant  Translations  against 


;35P£5^5£.^5£5S  ^:5SS£3SS£S£5!SS£«3£: 


jj  The  Book, 
U  Chanter, 
gjmclVer. 

fi  St.   James, 
ft  thap.  5. 
Jk  ver.  16. 

IK 

)' 

t 

ft  St.  Matth. 

$  chap.  1 1. 
fever!*  1. 

§  St.  Lulu, 
iap.  ic. 
:r.  13. 

K 

.  Matih. 

^  chap.  3. 
n  vcr.  2. 


Thi 


Vulgate  Latin 
Text. 


ft 

J?  St.  Luke, 
y|  chap.  3. 
y  vcr.  3. 

<#  St.  Luke, 
I  chap.  3. 


The  true  English  ac- 
cording to  theRhe- 
mish  Translation. 


(19)  '  Confitemin? 

K/r«;;z  c  PeccatcC  vcs- 
tra. 


(20)— -Si in  Tyro 

13  Si  done  facta  essent 
virtutes,  qua  facta 
sunt  in  vcbis,  ohm  in 
cilicio  &?  fkK  '  -Pff- 
nitentiam       egissentj 


'  Panitcntlam  agitef 
appropinquabit  cnim 
Rcmum  Calorwn. 


Prcdicans     baplis- 

mum  '  Panitcntia.' 


Facile  ergo  fructus 
divnos  '  Pamitentia.'' 


'  Confess,'  there- 
fore, your  *  Sins' 
one  to  another* 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bibles,  printed 
A.D.I562, 1577, 1579. 


(19)  '  Acknow- 
ledge your  *  Faults1 
one  to  another. 


—  If  in  Tyre  and 
Sidon  had  been 
wrought  the  mira- 
cles that  have  been 
done  in  you,  'They 
had  done  penance' 
in  sack-cloth  and 
ashes,  long  ere  now. 


'  Do  penance,'  for 
theKinerdomofHea- 

veil  is  at  hand. 


—  Preaching  tht 
baptism  of  '  pe> 
nance.' 


Yield,  therefore, 
fruits  worthy  of 
'  penance.' 


(20)  —  Beza  in 
all  his  translations 
has,  '  they  had  a- 
mended  their  lives.' 
Andour  other  trans- 
lations say,  '  they 
would  have  repent- 
ed.' 


Th 


ft 

a-t   Tran-.   of  ^ 
ft 

rl 


ran 
the  Fro*.    .   Bib] 
Edit.   L01.il.  aiu 
i68i. 


Gonf  ssy-iur 
■  Faults',  &c. 


J 

v)  Acts  Apos. 

ft  chap.  2. 

i  ver.  38. 

I 

ft 


Petrus  vero  ad  iilos 
iPanitentiam  (in  quit) 
agite,'    &   baptizetur 


But  Peter  said  to 
them,  'do  penance,' 
and  be  every  one  of 


unusquisque    vestrumlyou  baptized  in  the 
in  nomine  J 'em  Chris-  j  name      of       Jesus 

//.  I  Christ. 


'  Repent,'  for  the 
Kingdom  of  Hea- 
ven is  at  hand. 


Preaching  the 
baptism  of  'Repent- 
ance/ 


—  Worthv  of 
'  Repentance.*  Ee- 
za  says,  '  Do  fruits 
meet  for  them  that 
amend  their  lives.' 


— '  Repent,'  and 

be  every  one  of  you 
baptized,  Sec. 


—  Instead 
of 'They  had 
•done  pe- 
ii. 1  nee,'  they 
say,  '  They 
would  have 
repented.' 


'  Recent,' 
&c. 


k 

ft 

i 

ft 

ft 

ft, 
ft 

ft 

ft 
ft 
ft 
ft 
ft 

8 

ft 
ft 

ft 

ft 
ft 
ft 
ft 

ft 
ft 


—  Preach' 
ing  the  bap- 
tism ot  '  Re- 
pentance.' 


ft 

ft 

ft 
y> 

A 
ft 


Fruit 

worthy    of 
'repentance.' 


ft 

ft 
ft 

i 


ft 

ft 


ft 


—'Repent,'^ 

and  be    bap-  ft 
tized,  &c.        § 


;; :  *  -5-:^£^^3<^^^<^  .<;r^?^^^^?s3^^^^^^5^^s?<^5 


Confession  and  the  Sacrament  of  Penance, 

»o 

{ig)  f~VT*0  avoid  this  term  "Confession, "especially  in  thi    place,  whence  i lie  re; 

I     "Sacsai  icntal  Confession,"  they  thus  falsify  the  text,  it  is  said  a  little  before,  ••   ; 
let  him  bring  in  'tlie  Priests,   &o."     And  then  it    follows,   "Confess   your   sms,    &:«,."      fjuc'th'w      "> 
make  sure  work,   say,    acknowledge,    instead   of  confess  ;    and  for  Priests,  "  Lihcrs:'1    and  j"or  cins    'her 
had    rather    say    faults;    "  Acknowledge  your  faults,"  to   make    it   bound  among    the  ignorant   coi 
people,   as  different  as  they  can    from    ilie  usual  Catholic   phra  ,e,    "  Confess  \  .,."       What    meai 

thev  by  this?  It  this  acknowledging  of  faults  one  to  another,  before  dea.h,  be  indiffe  .  mad- to  all 
men,  why  do  they  appoint  in  their  common-praver  book,  (c)  (as  i:  sec  ns,  our  ol  this  Tia<t  )  th  m  the 
sick  person  shall  make  a  special  confession  to  the  Minister  ;  :'.nd  he  shall  abs  live  h  in  in  the  very  sime 
iorm  of   absolution   that  Catholic  Priests  use  in  the  Sacrament  or   Penance?—,  'am     -•;<•, 

selves   acknowledge  forgiveness  of  sins  by  the  .Minister,   why  Jo  they    not   reckon  Perm  re.- 
Confession  is  a  part,  amongst  the  Sacramento  ?   Pur,    [suppose,   when  they  translated 
were  of  the  same  judgment  with  the  Ministers  of  tue  Diocese  of    Lincoln,  (d)    who  ';ethi  ,necl  to 
the   words  of  Absolution  blotted  out   ot  the  common  prayer   book  :   but  when   thev  v  ■.  :,.     thev 

are  of   the  judgment  of  Roman  Catholics,    woo,   at  this  day,   hold  Confession  and  Ah    .  necess-'r^ 

to  Salvation,   as  did  also  the  primitive  Curisuans  :   witness  St.  Babii  ;  "  Sms  mu-t  nccc 
unto  those,   to  whom  toe  dispensations  of  God's  mysteries  is  committed. "      St.  Ambrose    "'  Ift'i 
sirest  to  be  justified,  confess  thy  sin  ;    for  a  sincere  confession  of  sins  dissolves  the  knot  of 

(2c)    As    tor  Penance,   and  Satisfaction   for  Sins,   the)   utterly    deny    it,   upon  the  heres\    . 
Faith  justifying  and  saving  a  man."      lieza  protests,   that  he  avoids  these  term  >,   pftx^ncc,  Piznncnt'a   lr\\ 
f*£la»s6»T6,   Panitentiam  aghe,  of  purpose:   and  says,   that  in  translating  these  Greek  words,  ne  will  il'vavs 
use.    Reslpiscentla  and  Reslphche,    "  Amendment  of  life,"   and  "  Amend  your  lives."      And  our  Em 
Bibles,    to  this  day,   dare  not  venture  on  the  word  Penance,    but  only  Repentance  ;  which  i,  not  onTv  far 
different  from  the  Greek  word,   but  even  from   the  very  circumstanced  ol    tiie  text  ;   as  is  evident   fY< 
those  ot   Sr.  Math.   11.   and  Luke  10.   where  these  word.,    "  Sack-cloth  and  Ashes,"  cannot  but  ^  ■■     '•• 
more  than  the  word  Repentance,   or  Amendment    ot    Life  can  denote  ;    as  is  plain   from    tiiese  w    -V  '- '•" 
St.   Basil,  (f)    "  Sack-cloth  makes  for  Penance  ;    for  the  Fatheis,    in  odd  time,    sittiiv  in  Sa<  k-c;<  tli        \ 
Ashes,   did  Penance."      Do   not  St.  John  Baptist,  and  St.  Paul,  plainly  signify  penitential  vvoil  ,    wo'- 
they  exhort  us  to  "  do  Fiuits  worthy  of  Penance  ?"  which  Penance  St  Au  'ust.ue  thu-  dec  hi  1        *•'  j  >-! 
is  a  more  grievous  and  more  mournful  Penance,   whereby  properly   taey  are  cai.ed  in  the  Cnu  ch     rl    •• 
are  penitents , -/removed  also  from    partaking   the  Sacrament  ot  the  Altar.      And  So/  }   n,"    cr' 

clesiastical  History,   says,    "  In  the  Church  of  Rome,    there  is  a  manifest  and  kno.vu  place  '  y  the  pe- 
nitents,  and  in  it  they  stand  soirowful,  and  as  it  were  mourning,   and  when  the  sacrifice  is  e     !■-•  i' 


then  the  Bishop,    weeping  also  witii  compassion,   lifts  them  up;    and,    after  a  certain  time  e 


not  made  partakers  thereof,   with  weeping  and  lamentations  they    cast  the  nselves   far   c 


■  -  enjoin. '(■  id 
solves  them  from  then  Penance.  'Phis  the  Priests  or  Bishops  of  Rome  keep,  from  the  very  oe  ■■■■•,  [^ 
even  r  time."  .  J       °   '     "-' 

Not  only  S  izomen.  but  (g)  Socrates  also,  and  all  the  Ancient  Fathers,  when  they  speak  of  Peuireivs 
tharconft   sed  and  lamented  their  sin.^,   and  were  enjoined  Penance,   and  performed   jt,   did   aiwa- 
!-•;'    it  1:1  the    aidGn  ds ;    which,  therefore,  are  proved  most  evidently  to  siguitv   Penan.-    am] 

«'°;ng  Penance.      Again,    when  the  ancient  Council   of   Laodicea  (h)  says,    that   the   time    of    JV; 
'en  to  offenders,  according  to  the  proportion  of  the  fault  :   and    that  such  shad  not  com 
:iic:;r'  :r  a  ;  enai  1  time     but  after  they  have  djuc  Penance,  and  confessed  their  fault,  (;)  are  then 

d  when  the  firs:  Council  of  Nice  speaks  ol    hortening  or  prolonging  the  days   oi  Penance  • 
St._  Bash  spen!  1  rhc  same  manner  :  when  St.  Chrysostom  calb  the  sack-cloth  and  lasting 

Ninevites,    foi  <    ■   ;..n  days,    "   Tot  dicrum  Ramttntiam,   so  many  days    of  Penance:"    m  all    thes- 
■,u,(1  demand  of     ur  tramdators  of   the  Lnoish  linde,    if   all  these   speecues    of  Penance,  , 

xl  by  the  said  Greek  words?    and  1  would  ask   tnem,    whether   m   these 
■  :  1*  re  is  mentioned  a  prescribed  time  of  satisfaction  for  sin,  by  such  and  sucii  penal  mean'; 
tancc  and  Amendment  of  Life  only  ? —Moreover,    tiie   Latin    Cuurch,    and    all 
•:  i'atner:  .  ..         iways  read,    a  Latin  inerpreter   translates,     ami  do   1 

and  doing  Penance  :    for    example,    see  it.  Augustine,   among    others;    (j) 
will  f.nd  it  plain,  that  he  speaks  of  Painful  or   "  Penitential  works,   for  satisfaction  oi Jn ,." 

P  hue 

(c)  Visitation    of  the   Sick,     (u)  Survey  of  the  Common-prayer  Book.       (e)  St.  Basil,  in  rcnilfs  brevior       Intern, 
atione  288.  St.Amb.iib.de  paenit.  cap.  6      (f    St.  Ba.il  in  Psalm  29,  St.  Aug.  Horn.  21.    Inter  co  *i    &     v    ,J" 
>zom.hb    7.  cap.   16.   See  St.  Hierom.  in  Epitaph.  Fabiol.      (g)  Sucrat.  lib.  5.  cap.  19.    '(b)   Council   of   l.w' 
an.  2,9,  &  19.     C>  1  Council  of  Nice.  Can.  12.  Easii,  cap.  1.  ad  Amphiloch.     (1;  St.  Ausnm    Lp   1     ;' 


Wll 

of  f 

he 

Ni 

!  v 

i  ' 

•    '1 

\  !a< 

W 

toe 

:  w 

the 

'A; 

ICK 

exp 

V/h 

ere 

V 

c 


c.B 


%>£  5:-:.-':' 

w 
n 
ft  The  Boor, 

(i      Chapter, 

&      and  Ver. 

c 

}    St.  Luke, 
$  chap.  i. 

t) 

V; 
(A 
v; 

,'A 
>2 


Protestant  Translations  against   the 


•  S. 


The  Vulgate  Latin 
Text. 


(21)   /ivc,   '  gra- 
//Vz    plena?    Dominus 

tCCUin  xtXPpTupim. 


Yl  St.  Matth. 


cliap.  1. 

ver.  2:. 


K 

n 

1    . 

Y(  Genesis, 
ft  chap.  3. 


ver. 


x5- 


■y 


ft 

8 

H  2  St.  Peter, 
g  chap.  1. 
tf  ver.  1 

1 


Psal.  138. 
£wg.  Bib. 
139.  ver. 

17- 


(22)  £/  c  vocavi? 
nomen   ejus   Jesum, 

Ir.aav. 


(23)  Ipsa  confer et 
caput  tuum,  Es3  tu 
'  insidiabcris  calcanco 

ejus: 


(24)  Dabo  autcm 
operant  &  frequenter 
habere  vos  post  obitum 
?neum,  ut  c  horum  mc- 
morian?  faciatis. 


The  trueEnglish ac- 
cording to  theRhe- 

mish  Translation. 


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


(25)  Nimls  honori* 
ficati   sunt   amici  tu/, 

imis  cenfor- 


Hail,  full  of  grace, 
our  Lord  is  witl 
thee. 


D 


cus 


A 


high  favour. 


(21)   Hail,    thou 

that  art  freely  be- 
loved. In  Bib.  1577. 
Thou    that   art    in 


And  c  called9  his 
Name  Tesus. 


She  shall  bruise 
thy  head  in  pieces, 
and  thou  shalt  6  lie 
in  wait  for  her  heel.' 


And  I  will  do  my 
endeavour  ;  you  to 
have  often  after  my 
decease  also,  that 
you  may  keep  a 
memory  of 
things. 


(22 )  And  «  he1 
called  his  name  Je- 
sus., 


(23)  It  shall  bruise 
thy  iiead,  and  thou 
shalt  '  bruise  his 
heel.' 


(24)  I  will  endea- 
vour that  you  may 
be  able,  after  my 
decease,  to  have 
these  things  *  al- 
hese|vvays  in  remem- 
brance.5 


Thv  friends,  O 
God,  are  become  ex- 
ceedingly honour- 
able ;  their  prince- 


tatus    est    principals  dom  is  exceedingly 
corum  ErvWNl  IDS?  j  strengthened 


(25)  How  dear 
are  thy  councils  (or 
thoughts)  to  me  ? 
O !  how  great  is 
the  sum  of  them? 


ft 

The  last  Trans,  of  ft 
the  Piotcf.  I'.iUc,  /v 
fcldit.  Loi.d.  anno  /J 
1683.  {) 

ft 

lnJLSib.1637.  ft, 
Hail,  thou  Hi 
that  art  high-  ft 
Iv 
In 

thou  ft 
that  art  high-  ft 
lv  favoured,  f\ 
our  Lord  is  <q 
with  thee.       6 

ft 

ft 

And  .«   he'  ft 


1  y/ 

favoured,  -h 
ib.  1683.  K 
Hail, 


called    his 
name  Jesus. 


ft 
i. 


It      shall 
braise     thy 

head,      and  ft 

thou     shalt  # 

*  bruise   his  y. 

heel.'  « 

I  will  en-  jjj 
deavour,  that  ^ 
vou  may  be  ^ 
able  after  my  g 
decease,  to  w 
have  these  ft 
things  always  ft 
in  *  remem-  H 
brance.*  Vj 


How  pre-  y) 
cious  also  are  ft 
thy  thoughts  ^ 
unto  me,  O  Yi 
God !  How  H 
great  is  the  JQ 
sum  of  them  1  S 


^S^S^^^S^S^^^SS^^S^ 


Honour  of  our  Blkssed  Ladv  and  other  ^ain;:3.         59 

(21)  r  5  "\TF  most  B.  Virgin,  mhI  glorious  Mother  of  Christ,  lias  by  God's  Holy  Chinch  always  been  ho- 
I  nonred  with  n  >st  magnificent  titles  and  addresses  :  One  of  the  first  Four  General  Councils  giv<  : 
hci  th  transcendent  title  of  the  Mother  of  God.  (o)  Am!  by  St.  Cyril  of  Alexandria,  she  is  saluted 
in  'lit-  r  wo'd-  "  Hail  !  Holv  Mother  of  God,  Rich  Treasure  of  the  World,  Ever-shining  Lamp, 
Crown  ot  Pmii  v  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  surpasses  in  elo- 
quence as  to  he  ablet  >  say  enough  to  the  gloi  v  of  Mary  ?"  Yea,  the  Angel  Gabriel  is  commissioned 
from  G)d  to  address  himself  to  her  with  tin's  salutation,  "  Hail  !  full  of  grace  :"(p)  Since  which  lime, 
what  has  ever  be*  n  more  common,  and,  at  this  day,  more  general  and  useful  in  all  Chiistian  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  our 
Blessed  Ladv  was  saluted  hv  the  Angel,  *•  Hail  !  full  of  Grace,"  they  have  changed  into  another  man- 
ner of  salvation,  viz.  "  Hail  !  thou  that  art  freely  beloved,"  or,  "  in  high  favour. "(q)  I  would 
gladly  know  from  them,  why  this,  or  that,  or  any  other  thing,  rather  than  "  Hail  !  full  of  Grace?" 
St.  John  Baptist  was  full  of  the  Holy  Ghost,  even  from  his  birth  ;  St.  Stephen  was  full  of  grace  ;(r) 
why  may  not  then  our  Lady  be  called  "  Full  of  Grace,"  who,  as  St.  Ambrose  says.  "  Only  obtained 
the  Grace  which  no  other  woman  deserved,   to  be  replenished  with  the  Author  of  Grace?" 

If  they  say,  the  Greek  word  does  not  signify  so  :  I  must  ask  them,  why  they  translate  >j'Xxi^V^,(?)  ul- 
cerosa, "  Full  of  Sores,"  and  will  not  translate  z^appi;,  Gratiosa,  "  Full  of  Grace  ?"  Let  them  tell  us 
what  difference  there  is  in  the  nature  and  significancy  of  these  two  words.  It  Uleerosus,  as  Be/a  trans- 
lates it,  be  "  Full  of  Sores,"  why  is  not  Gratiosa,  as  Erasmus  translates  it,  "  Full  of  Grace?"  seeing 
that  all  such  adjectives  in  osus  signify  fulness,  as  Pericuiosu;,  JErumnosus,  ?xc.  as  every  school-boy 
knows.  What  syllable  is  there  in  this  word.,  that  seems  to  make  n  signify  ':  Freely  beloved  ?"  St. 
Chrysostom,  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,  say:;,  that  our  Blessed 
Lady  had  this  title,  xs^apli^^,  because  the  Holv  Ghost  descended  into  her,  filling  her  with  ali  graces 
and  virtues.  And  St.  Hierom  reads  Gratia  Plena,  and  says  plainly,  she  was  >o  saluted,  "  Full  of  Grace,'' 
because  she  conceived  him  in  whom  ail  fulness   of  the  Deity  dwelt  corporally. (tj 

(22)  Again,  to  take  from  the  Holy  Mother  of  God,  what  honour  they  can,  they  translate,  that  "  He 
(viz.  Joseph)  called  his  name  fesus."  And  why  not  site,  as  wei!  as  he  ?  For  in  Sc.  Luke,  the  Angel 
saith  to  our  Lady  also,  "  Thou  shalt  call  his  name  Jesus."  Have  we  not  much  more  reason  to  think 
that  the  B.  Virgin,  the  natural  Mother  of  our  Saviour,  gave  him  the  name  Jesus,  than  Joseph,  his 
reputed  father  ;  seeing  also  St.  Matthew,  in  this  place,  limits  it  neither  tc  him  nor  her  ?  And  the  Angel 
revealed  the  name  first  unto  her,  saying,  that  she  should  so  call  him.  And  the  Hebrew  word,  Isa.  7. 
whereunto  the  Angel  alludes,  is  the  feminine  gender  ;  and  by  the  great  Rabbins  referred  unto  her,  say- 
ing expressly,  in  their  commentaries,  ct  vocabit  ipsa  Puella,  &:c.  "  And  the  Maid  herself  shall  call  his 
name  Jesus.'"(u) 

(23)  How  ready  our  New  Controllers  of  Antiquity,  and  the  approved  Ancient  Latin  Translation, ■ 
are  to  iiiid  fault  with  this  text,  Gen.  3.  "  She  shall  bruise  thy  Head,"  2tc.  because  it  appertains  to  our 
Blessed  Lady's  honour  ;  saying,  that  all  Ancient  Fathers  read  Ipsum:{\)  When  on  the  contrary,  Si. 
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" 
snail  bruise,  or  "  Her  Seed,"  that  is,  her  Son,  Christ  jesus,  we  attribute  no  more,  or  no  less  to 
Christ,  or  to  his  Mother,  by  this  reading  or  by  that  ;  as  you  may  see,  if  vou  please  to  read  the  anno- 
tations upon  this  place  in  the  Doway  Bible.     1  have  spoken  of  this  in  the  Preface. 

(24)  Where  the  Scripture,  in  the  original,  is  ambiguous  and  indifferent  to  divers  senses,  it  ought 
tiot  to  be  restrained  or  limited  by  translation,  unless  there  be  a  mere  necessity,  when  it  can  hardly  ex- 
press the  ambiguity  of  the  original  :  As  for  example,  in  this  where  St.  Peter  speaks  so  ambiguously, 
either  that  he  will  remember  them  after  his  death,  or  that  they  shall  remember  him.  But  the  Calvin- 
ists  restrain  the  sense  of  this  place,  without  any  necessity  ;  and  that  against  the  prayer  and  intercession 
ot  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  tor  us. 

(25)  In  fine,  this  verse  of  the  Psalms, (w)  which  is  by  tire  Church  and  all  antiquity  read  thus,  and  both 
sung  and  said  in  honour  of  the  holy  Apostles,  agreeable  to  that  in  another  Psalm,  "  Thou  shah  ap- 
point 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,  ;'  Flow  are  the  head-,  of  them 
strengthened,  or  their  princedoms:"  And  this  they  do,  purposely  to  detract  from  the  honour  of  the 
Apostles  and  holy  Saints. 

(o)  Cone.  Eph.  cap.  13.  (p)  St.  Luke,  1.  v.  18.  (q)  St,  Luke,  I.  v.  15.  (r)  Act.  7.  ver.  3.  (?)  Luke  16. 
ver.  20.  (t)  St.  Chrys.  Comment,  in  -Ep.  1.  St.  Athan.  de  S.  Deipar.  St.  Hierom.  in  Ep.  140  in  Expos.  Psal.  44. 
(u)  Rabbi  Abraham,  &  Rabbi  David,  (v)  See  the  Annotations  upon  this  place  in  the  Doway  Bible,  (w)  Oecuiyi. 
in  Caten.  Gasfiieius  in  hunc  locum.  Psal,  44. 


bo 


y)  The 
k     CI 

1      ™ 

Book 
dWi 

vi  ' 

•ew, 

.  1 1 . 

tf  ver. 

2  I . 

>testant  Translations  against 


,>o,^--  :-  '  - 


:-: 

V 


p.  47 
»  ver.  31. 


ft 

yj. 

$Psa!.  98. 
<  ■  v  (  r .  ; . 
'in  En£.  Bib. 


^99- 

ft 

y\ 

ft 

vi 
;-■ 
^  P:  a!.  131 


,     v. 


/  • 


.Bib. 
y) 


The  Vnl^ltS   Utin  j  The  true  English  JC,  Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 

"      T  !    cordinertotheRhe-     tc*\T    <       '  P 

j—  .      :-        ,  A. 1).  1562,1577,1579. 

mish   t  ranslation. 


(26)  //./.,     7^/>!      By    Faith,    Jacob 

moricns  singuks  ///o-  dying,  blessed  every 

j/v/w   ,wf/>/ji  bencdhcit,  one   of  the  sons   of 

I  y    '  Adoravit  fasti-   Joseph, and'Adored 

;  »ktm  rirga  [jus.  \  the  top  of  his  rod.' 


Edit.   Load,   anno 
1 683. 


(27)  Adoravith-\  Israel  adored  God, 
racl  Dcum,  conversus  \  turning  to  the  bed's 
ad  lectuli  caput.  head 

!  ,.-Ui  IL/Nl    <>  it  M  lu/ 


(26)  —  And  lean- 
ing on  the  end  of 
his  staff,  worship- 
ped God. 


ft 
The  last  Trans,  of  ^ 
the  Protest.  Bible,   A 

(A 
ft 

..  I.     ■—      ■■  m    — _•-  »    ■■!■■■  A   ,    . 

By      Faith  ^ 
Jacob,   when  $ 

he  was  a  dy-  ft 
,  ing,  blessed  ^ 
i  both  the  sons  U 
of  Joseph,  * 
«  And  wor-  $ 
shipned,leaii-  f\ 
ing  upon  tile  ft 


Exaltate  Domimnn]      Exalt   the     Lord 

7,     '  e£7  j  our    God,      <  And 

adorate  scabellum  pc-  \  adore    ye   the   foot- 

</w;z    f/'w/     quoniam  j  stool    of    his    feet,' 

sanctum  est. 


(2 

7) 

Tsnei 

i  wor- 

si 

i  i  p 

■:ec 

'   Got 

1   <  to- 

\- 

arc 

s' 

the 

bed's 

h 

;a:i 

, 

Exalt    the    Lore 
our  God,   and  '  Fa' 
down     before''      hi- 
foot-stool,  '  For  he' 

because  it  is  holy.       is  holy. 


top  oi  his 

staff.' 


ft 

x 

ft 

And  Israel  ft 
'Bowed  him-  ft 
self  upon' the  ft 

bedVhead.      Q 

'A 


% 


Jntroibimus  in  Ta-\      We  will  enter  m- 


__ We     will 

Fall    down    before 


bcrnaculum  ejus,  '  A-  !  to    his   Tabernaci  , 
dorabimus  in  loco,   ubi]  we  will    'Adore   in  |  his  toot 
stctcrwit  pedes  ejus?    \  the  place  where  his 

:  feet  stood.' 


::y?e':.  <\5£>^e": 


ft 

Exalt    the  $ 

.  ft 

.ord  our         /j 

Gxl,    and        H 

'  Worship  at  ^ 

hisfoot-stool,  ft 

for  he"  is  ho-  (A 
Iv.  ^ 

We  will  go  )X 
into  his  Ta-  (A 
iiernacles,  we  ft 
uill  *  Wor-  $ 
ship  at  his  ^ 
foot-stool.'      1^ 

H 
ft 

ft 

ft 
ft 

eieC^3^:^5^ 


The  Distinction  of  Relative  and  Divine  Worship.     6r 

(26)npHE  Sacred  Council  of  Trent  decrees,  that  (<  The  Images  of  Christ,  of  the  Virgin  Mother  of 
A  God,  an  :  of  other  Saints,  are  to  be  had  and  retained,  especially  in  Churches  ;  and  that  clue 
honour  and  worship  is  to  be  imparted  unto  them  :  not  that  any  divinity  is  believed  to  be  in  them  ;  or 
virtus,  for  whi<  h  they  are  to  be  worshipped  ;  or  that  any  thing  is  to  be  begged  o{'  them  ;  or  that  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  exhibited  to  them,  is  referred  to  the  archetype,  which  they  resemble  :  so  that,  bv  the 
.mages  which  we  kiss,  and  before  which  we  uncover  our  heads,  and  kneel,  we  adore  Christ  ami  his 
Saints,  whose  likeness  they  bear,  (w)  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  himself."  (x)  Between  which  degrees  of  worship,  Latria  &  Du~ 
ha,  Protestants  aie  so  loth  to  moke  any  distinction,  that,  in  this  place,  they  restrain  the  Scripture  to 
the  sense  of  one  doctor  ;  insomuch  that  they  make  the  commentary  of  St.  Augustine,  (peculiar  to  him 
alonej  the  very  text  of  Scripture,  in  their  translation;  thereby  excluding  all  other  senses  and  expo- 
sitions of  other  Fathers  ;  who  either  read  and  expound,  that  "  [acob  adored  the  top  of  Joseph's  scep- 
tre ; •  or  else,  that  "  He  adored  towards  the  top  of  his  sceptre  :"  besides  which  two  meanings,  there  is 
lio  other  interpretation  of  this  place,  in  ah  antiquity,  but  in  St.  Augustine  only,  as  Beza  himself  con. 
iesses.  And  here  they  add  two  words  more  than  are  in  the  Greek  text,  "  Leaning  and  God  :"  forcing 
dwouto  Signify  dvrov,  which  may  be,  but  is  as  rare  as  Virgo,  ejus,  for  Virga  sues  ;  and  turning  the  otbe*r 
word,  clear  out  of  their  order,  place,  and  form  of  construction,  which  they  must  reeds  have  coi  res- 
pondent and  answerable  to  the  Hebrew  text,  from  whence  they  were  translated  ;  which  Hebrew  words 
tnemselves  translate  in  this  order,  "  He  worshipped  towards  the  Bed's-head  ;"  and  if  so,  according  to 
tie  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. 

(27)  But  why  is  it,  that  they  thus  boldly  add  in  one  place,  and  take  away  in  another  3  Why  do  Micv 
add  "  Leaned  and  God"  in  one  text,  and  totally  suppress  "  Worshipped  God"  in  another  t  Is  it'  not 
because  they  are  afraid,  lest  those  expressions  might  warrant  and  confirm  the  Catholic  and  Christian 
manner  of  adoring  our  Saviour  Christ,  towards  the  Holy  doss,  or  before  his  Image,  the  Crucifix,  the 
Altar,  &c.  s  And  though  they  make  so  much  of  the  Greek  particle,  *r(,  as  to  translate  it,  «  L-anii- 
upon,  rather  than  «  Towards,"  yet  the  ancient  Greek  Fathers  (v)  considered  it  of  such  little  import' 
that  they  expounded  and  tead  the  text,  as  if  it  were  for  the  phrase  only,  and  not  for  any  signification 
at  all  ;  saying,  <<  Jacob  adored  Joseph's  sceptre  ,  the  people  of  Israel  adored  the  Temple',  the  Ark,  the 
Holy  Mount,  the  place  where  his  feet  stood,"  and  the  like:  wheieby  St.  Damascene  proves  the  Ado- 
ration or  Creatures,  named  Dulia\  to  wit,  of  the  Cross,  and  of  Sacred  Images.  If.  I  sav,  these  Fa- 
thers make  so  little  force  of  the  prepositions,  as  to  infer  from  these  texts,  not  only  Adoration  "  Towards 
-netn.ng  but  Adoration  of  '«  The  thing  ;"  how  come  these,  our  new  translators,  thus  to  strain  and 
rack  the  little  particle,  .«,,  to  make  it  signify  "Leaning  upon,"  and  utterly  to  exclude  it  from  sie- 
nifying  any  thing  tending  towards  Adoration  ? 

i  would  gladly  know  of  them,  Whether  in  these  places  of  the  Psalms  there  be  any  force  in  the  He- 
brew prepositions  ?  surely  no  more  than  if  we  should  say  in  English,  without  prepositions,  «  Adore  ye 
his  Holy  Hi.I:  We  will  adore  the  place  where  his  Feet  stood:  Adore  ye  his  Foot-stool  :"  for  they 
know  the  same  preposition  is  used  also,  when  it  is  said,  «  Adore  ye  our  Lord  ;"  or,  as  themselves 
tian  ate  it,  Worship  the  Lord  ;"  where  there  can  be  no  force  nor  signification  of  the  preposition  : 
and  therefore,  in  these  places,  their  translation  is  corrupt  and  wilful  j  when  they  say,  «  We  will  fall 
dow^nbefore,"  or,  -At  his  Foot-stool,"  &c.  Where  they  shun  and  avoid,  first,  the  term  of  Ado- 
ption,' which  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  duly  express,  by  terms  correspondent  in  both  languages  through- 
out he  Bible,  and  are  applied,  for  the  most  part,  to  signify  Adoring  of  Creatures.  Secondlv,  they 
avoid  the  Greek  phrase,  which  is,  at  least,  to  adore  -towards"  these  holy  things  and  places:  and 
much  more  the  Hebrew  phrase,  which  is,  to  adore  the  very  things  rehearsed.'  «  To  adore  God's  foot- 
stool,     (as  the  Psalmist  saith)   "  because  it  is  holy,"  or,   «  because  he  is  holy,"  whose  foot-stool  it  is, 

L  J'"  ,»reM   ^  f  bt'  AuSusc,ne  so   P,ecisely  and  religiously  reads,    «  Adore  ye    hi,  Foot- 

too]       that  he  examines  the  case  ;   and  finds,  thereby,  that  the  Blessed  Sacrament  must  be  adored,    and 
that  no  good  Christian  takes  it,   before  he  adores  it. 

CL  The 

lib(T}  vrTinlTn^T  Sr  25a  n(K)  2  C°ncIL  Niccn*  Act'  7«     (Y)  S<-  Chry3.  O.cum  in  Collection.  St.  Damasc. 
uo.  1,  pro  imaginib.  Leont.  apud  Damas.. 


6z 


Protestant  Translations  against 


t 

\<  The  Book, 
A  Chapter, 
y)      and  Ver. 


)■)  Colossi  an s, 


The  Vulgate  Latin 
Text. 


oX  chap.  3. 

h, ver-  5- 

I 

< 

: 

W  EphesianSj 
>A  chap.  5. 

..■■: 


w  2  Corinth. 
V  chap.  6. 
$  ver.  .16. 


(28) 
ritianu 


Et  Ava- 

qua   est    si- 


mulacrorum    servitus, 


ver.  5. 


Ant  Avarus, 

quod  est  Jdolomm  ser- 
vitus. 


The  trueEnglish  ac- 
cording to  the Rhe- 
mish  Translation. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant   Bibles,    printed 

A.D.  1562,1577,1579. 


And  Ava- 
rice, which  is  the 
service  of  Idols. 


(28) — And  cove- 
tousness,  which  is 
the  worshipping  of 
Images. 


(29)  Quis  autcm 
consensus  Temple  Dei 
cam  Idol  is  ?    nfo*uv. 


w  i  Ep.John, 
)K  chap.  5. 
Y{  ver*  21. 


Or  covetous 

person,     which      is 
the  se'rvice  of  Idols. 


The  last  Trans.  of 
the  Protest.  Bible, 
Edif.  Lond.  anno 
1*83. 


And 

covetousness, 
which  is  idol- 
atry. 


Or    cove- 1    Corrected. 


tous  man,  which  is 
a  worshipper  of 
Images. 


And  what  agree- 
ment hath  theTem- 
ple    of    God    with 

Idols  ? 


(29)  How  agreeth 
the  Temple  of  God  | 
with  Images  ? 


Corrected. 


Fi/ioli,      custoditc 
vqs      a      simulacris. 


A 


/i  1 


Corinth. 


My  little  children, 
keep  yourselves 
from  Idols > 


Babes,  keep  your- 
selves from  images. 


Neque    Idololatrcc 
>xaTf«»,  efficiamh 
stent  quidam  ex  ipsis 


§  chap.  lc.     J  «i*»xox«xp*.,  efficiamini, 
y}  ver.  7. 

8 


Corrected. 


Neither  become!  Be  not  wor- 
ye  Idolaters,  as  cer-  shippers  of  images, 
tain  of  them.  as  some  of  them. 


yi 

K 

U 


k 

k 
k 


(A 


Corrected     $ 
also  in  this,     ft 


^5S5S5«S£S2S3S2S^^  S£SS3S35S555S5!Ste 


Sacred   Image 


<j 


^ 


(28)  TpjEFORE  I  proceed  in  this,  let  me  ask  our  English  Translators,  what  is  the  most  proper,  and 
±)  best  English  of  «Sto*ov, ■  «&;*o*aTp*K,  e»&w?wAaTpsI«  j  Idolum,  Idolatra,  Idobjlatna  ^  Is  it  not  Idol, 
Idolater,  Idolatry?  Are  not  these  plain  English  words,  and  well  known  in  our  language  ?  Whvthcn 
need  they  put  three  words  for  one,  "  Worshipper  of  Images,"  and  "  Worshipping  of  Images  ;"  Whe- 
ther 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  Idolatry  ;"  and  consequently,  "  The  Co- 
vetous mail  is  an  Idolater  ;"  or  to  say,  as  their  first  absurd  translations  have  it,  "  Covetousness  is  wor- 
shipping of  Images,"  and  the  "  Covetous  man  is  a  worshipper  of  Images  ?"  I  suppose  they  will  scarceiv 
deny,  but  that  there  are  many  covetous  Protestants,  and,  perhaps,  of  their  Clergy  too,'  that  may  • 
put  in  the  list  with  those  of  whom  the  Apostle  speaks,  when  hesays,  there  are  some  "  Whose  heiiv  r. 
their  God:"  And  though  these  make  an  Idol  ot  their  money  and  their  bellies,  bv  covetousness  and 
gluttony,  yet  they  would  doubtless  take  it  ill  from  us,  if  in  their  own  Scripture  language,  we  shouid 
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  Protestant  translation,  but  because  in  their  latter  translations  they 
have  corrected  this  shameful  absurdity,  I  will  say  no  mere  of  it. 

(29)  In  this  other,  not  only  their  malice,  but  their  full  intent  and  set  purpose  of  deluding  the  poo: 
simple  people  appear;  this  translation  being  made,  when  Images  were  plucking  down  throuehouc 
England,  to  create  in  the  people  a  belief,  that  the  Apostle  spoke  against  sacred  Images  in  Chuiches; 
whereas  his  words  are  against  the  Idols  and  Idolatry  of  the  Gentiles  ;  as  is  plain  from  what  .>ocs  be- 
fore, 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  sec  the  jews  had  the 
images  of  the  Cherubims,  and  the  figures  of  Oxen  in  the  Temple,  and  the  image  of  the  Brazen  Sei  - 
pent  in  the  wilderness,  by  God's  appointment  ;  though,  as  soon  as  thev  began  to  make  an  Idol  of  rh< 
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  so  bewitched  their  deceived  followers,  as  to  make  them  de- 
spise, contemn,  and  abandon  even  the  very  sign  and  image  of  salvation,  the  Cross  of  Christ,  and  tlm 
Crucifix  ;  whereby  the  manner  of  his  bitter  Death  and  Passion  is  represented  ;  notwithstanding  their 
signing  and  marking  their  children  with  it  in  their  baptism,   when  they  are  first  made  Christians.0 

By  such  wilful  corruptions,  in  these  and  other  texts,  as,  "  Be  not  worshippers  of  Images,  as  somt 
of  them;"  and,  "Babes,  keep  yourselves  from  Images ■;"  which,  the  more  to  impress  cm  the  mind? 
of  the  vulgar,  they  wrote  upon  theii  Church  walls;  the  people  weie  animated  to  break  down, 
and  cast  out  of  their  Chuiches,  the  image  of  our  blessed  Saviour,  his  blessed  Mother,  the  twelve' 
Apostles,  &c.  with  so  full  and  general  a  resolution  of  defacing  and  extirpating  all  tokens  or  marks  of 
our  Saviour's  Passion,  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  it  upon  tin  11 
parents,  that  they  have  presumed  to  break  the  cross  lately  set  on  the  pinacle  of  the  porch  of  Westmin- 
ster Abbey:  And  the  more  to  shew  their  spite  towards  that  sacred  sign  ol  our  ledcmption,  the  holy 
C  ross,  placed  it,  not  long  since,  upon  the  foreheads  of  bulls  and  mastiff-dogs  and  sodiuve  them  throu-h 
streets  of  London,  to  the  eternal  shame  of  such  as  receive  it  in  'then  baptism,  and  pretend^o 
Christianity.  What  could  Jews  or  Infidels  have  done  more?  Was  it  not  enough  to  break  it  down  from 
k  to1)S  of  Churches,  and  to  put  up  the  image  of  a  Dragon,  (the  hguie  wherein  the  Devil  himself  \'- 
usually  represented)  as  on  Bow-Church, (z)  in  the  midst  of  the  city,  but  they  must  place  it  so  con 
femptuously  on  the  foreheads  of  beasts  and  dogs? 

In  how  great  esteem  the  holy  Cioss  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 
Jicd  in  houses,  in  the  market,  in  the  desert,  in  the  ways,  on  mountains  and  hills,  in  vailevs,"  &c. 
contrary  to  which,  the  pretended  Reformers  of  our  times  have  not  only  cast  it  out  of  theii  houses,  bur 
out  of  their  churches  also:  They  have  broken  it  down  from  ali  market-places,  fiom  hills,  mountains," 
*  alleys,  and  high-ways;  so  that  in  ail  the  roads  in  England  there  is  not  one  cross  left  standing  <-nVi  re 
that  I  have  evcrhernd  of,  except  one  called  Ralph  Cross;  which  1  have  often  seen,  upon  a  wud  heath 
01  mountain,   near  Dauby  Forest,  in.  the  North  Riding  of  Yorkshire. (a) 

TIu 

(z)  Why  might  not  a  Cock  (the  animal  by  which  our  Saviour  was  pleased  to  admenhh  St.  Peter  of  his  sins)  have 
been  placed  upon  Covent  Garden  Church,  rather  than  a  Serpent  :  or  a  Cross  en  Bow-Church  rather  than  a  Dragon  > 
(a)  1  he  inhabitants  of  Danby,  Rosdale,  Westerdale,  and  Ferndale,  may  glory  before  all  parts  of  Enrlaud,°thai 
they  have  a  Cross  standing  to  this  day  in  the  -.ru'dst  of  theno  ° 


D'A 


Protestant  Translations  against  the 


;  i   •  Book, 

Ch;ij  ter, 

:  \  er. 

1  (brirth. 

■  5- 
ver.  c),  1  ■• 


The  Vulgate  Latin 
Text. 


i?S3^>C>2>^: 


^3^>t:>?:: 


ThetrueEnfflishaC-    Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
~  . i>:ui  ...   __•....  j 


testant   Bibles  printed 
A.D.      ■  «■«* 


1502,     :  5  7  7  5 


l519- 


Y( 

i 

V) 

■  I 


v 

■■ 
Yl 

\ 

y). 

y$  Romans, 
Ya  chap.  1 1. 

(\  ver.  4. 

k 

'#  Acts  Apos. 
''  char.  ig. 


(  -;o)    Scrip:!  vobis 
in  cpistoLi,  nc  tommis- 
ccanuni  fomicarii  .y ' } ' 
utique  fornkariis  />'.- 
jus  niundi,  aut  avaris, 
ant     rapacibus,     aut 
'  IJo'tis    ScrvientibusJ 
£ ;  ^h-j\xr;a.U ,      alioquin 
debucratis  de  hoc  mun- 
do  exiisse :  Nunc  an- 
ion scrips  i  vobis   non 
commisceri ;  si   is  qui 
\f rater  nominatur,  est 
\  fornicator ^  aut  avarus, 
1  aut  '  Idolis  Servient  J 

v5<:.     -  ;y?  ->zT:  x:' 


ver. 


or 


'•; 

■1 
v; 

ys  Exodus, 
''  chap.  20. 
Y)  ver.  4. 


(31)  Rcliqui  mihi 
septan  millia  virorum 

qui    non   curvavcrunt 
genua  ante  Baal. 


Viri  Epbesi,  quis 
cnim  est  bominum,  qui 
ncsciat  Ephesiorum  ci- 
"Sitatem  eultrieem  esse 
Magna  Diana  iff 
'    Jovis    pro/is  ?      T» 


Non     fades      tibi 
c  Scufptile,   ^DS     t!$v- 


cording  to  theRhe- 
mish  Translation. 

f  wrote  to  vou  in 
an  epistle,  not  to 
keep  company  with 
fornicators;  I  mean, 
not  the  fornicators 
of  this  world,  or  the 
covetous,  or  the  ex- 
tortioners, or 'Serv- 
ers of  Idols;'  other- 
wise vou  should  J  extortioners, 'cither- 
have  gone  out  of  the  Idolaters,'  &c. 
this  world.  But    '  that     ye' 

But  now  I  have  company  not i  toge- 
writ  to  you,  not  to  j  ther  ;'  if  '  anvA  that 
keep  company;  if  is  *  called'  a  bro- 
ke that  is  named  a  ther,  be  a  fornica- 
brother  be  a  forni-  j  tor,  or  covetous,  or 
cator  or  covetous 
person,  or  a  *  Server 
of  Idols,'  &c. 


(30)   I  wrote    to 
vou      c    that      you 

should'  not  com- 
pany with  for- 
nicators :  *  Andr  I 
'  meant'  net '  all  of 
the  fornicators  of 
this  world,  '  either 
of  the  covetous,  or 


lA 
The   last    transl.    •', 
of  the  Protest- 
ant Bible, edit.  ^ 
Lon.an.  1683.  ^ 
(A 


It  is  corrected  tf 
in  this  Bible.  $ 


a  '  Worshipper'  of  ! 
*  Images,'  &c. 


I  have  left  me  se- 
ven  thousand  men  . 
that  have  not  bowed 
their  knees  to  Baa 


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, andjupiter's 
'Child?' 


Thou  shalt  not 
make  to  thyself  any 
graven  c  Thing.' 


(31)  I  have  left 
me  seven  thousand 
men  that  have  not 
bowed  their  knees 
to  '  the  Image  of 
Baal. 

Instead  of  *  Ju- 
piter's Child,'  they 
translate  'the Image 
which  came  down 
from  Jupiter.' 


Thou   shalt    not 
make  to  thyself  any 
'graven  <  Image.' 


K 


Thou    shalt 
not  make  to 
thee  any  '  gra- 
ven Image.'       y\ 


I  have  left 
me  seven  thou- 
sand men  that 
have  not  bow- 
ed their  knees  vj 
to  the  '  Image'  vi 
of  Baal.  g 

And  here  y> 
they  translate,  V) 
'  the  Image  vi 
which  fell  )^ 

down  from 
Jupiter.' 


V, 


Use  of  Sacred  Images 


o 


<3°)  T  TOW   malicious  and  heretical  was  their  intention,  who,    in  this  one  sentence,    made  St.  Paul 
X  X   seem  to  speak  two  distinct  things,  calling  the  Pagans  "  Idolaters,"  and  such  wicked  Cnristians 
as  should  commit  the  same  impiety,  "   Worshippers  of  Images  ;"    whereas  the  Apovde  uses  hat  one  and 
the  self-same  Greek  word,    in   speaking  both  of  Pagans  and  Christians?    it  is   a    wilful  and  most  noto- 
rious corruption  ;    tor,  in  the  Just  place,   the    translators,   speaking. of   Pagans,   render  the  v.'o*\i  in    the 
text    "  Idolater  ;"    hut,  in  the  latter  part  of    the  verse,   .speaking  of    Christians,    thev  translate    the  vcrv 
same  Greek    word,    "  Worshipper  of    images,"     Ami  what  rea-or;  had    thev  for  this,    hut   to  ma! 
simple  and  ignoi ant  reader  think,    that  St.  Paul   speaks   here  not  oniv  ot    Pa^an  Ldolateis,    but   also   of 
Catholic  Christians,    who  reverently  kneel  in  prayer  befoie    the  Holy  Cross,    or  linages  of  our  Saviour 
Christ  and   his  Saints  ;    as  though  the  Apostle  had  commanded  such  to  be  avoided  ?  all  the  otner  words 
covetous,    fornicators,  extortioners,    they  translate  alike,   in  both  place:-,    with  reference  both  10  Pa    aius 
and  Christians  :    yet  the  word  "  Idolaters"  not  so,   but  Pagans  they  cali    ''Idolaters,"   !md  Christian- 
«'  Worshippers  of"  Images."      Was  not  this  done  on  purpose,  to  make  both  seem  alike,  and  to  intimate 
that  Christians  doing  reverence  before  Sacred  Images,  (which  Protestants  call  worshipping  of   Images) 
are    more   to   be   avoided    than    the    Pagan    Idolater-?    whereas    the  Apostle,   speakin^   of"Pa~ans    atul 
Christians  that  committed  one  and  the  .self  same  heinous  sin,  commands  the  Christian  "in  th  u  case  '  i  be 
avoided  for  his  amendment,   leaving  the  Pagan  to  himself,    and  to  God,   as  not  caring  tojud-e  him. 

(31)    Besides  their  falsely  translating   "Image"    instead   of  "  Idol,"   thev  have  also   another   way  of 
falsifying  and  corrupting  the  Scripture,   by  introducing  the  word   "  Image   into  the  text,    when,    m   the 
Hebrew  or  Greek,   there  is  no  such  thing;   as  in  these  notorious  examples,   "    to  the  lma^e  of  Baa!  : 
the  Image  that  came  down  from  Jupiter  :"   where  they  are  not  content  to  understand   "  Image"  rather 
than   "  Idol,"   but  they  must  intrude   it  into  the  text,   though  they  know  full  well  itis  not  in  the  Greek. 
Not  unlike  this  kind  of  falsification,   is  that  which  lias  crept  as  a  leprosy  through  all  their  .Bibles',  and 
which,  it  seems,   they  are  resolved  never  to  correct,   viz.   then  translating  SculptUe  and  Confatiie,   graven 
Image,  and  molten  Image  ;  namely,   in  the  first  Commandment ;   where  they  cannot  be  ignorant,   that 
iir  the  Greek  it  is  "  Idol,"   and  in  the  Hebrew,  such  a  word  as  signifies  only  a   "    graven  thin","   not- 
including  this  word   *«  Image."     They  know  that  God  commanded  to  make  the  images  of  Cherubins, 
and  of  Oxen,   in   the  Temple,  and  of  the  Brazen  Serpent  in  the  Desert;   and  therefore  their  wisdom' 
might  have  considered,  that  he  forbad  not  all  graven  Images,   but  such  as  the  Gentiles  made,   and  wor- 
shipped for  Gods  ;    and  therefore,   JV 'on  fades  tibi  SculptUe,   coincide    with    those   words   tnat  'go    befoie 
'  Thou  shah  have  no  other  Gods  but  me."      For  so  to  have  an  Image,  as  to  make  it  a  God,  Is  to  make 
st  more  than  an  Image  :   and  therefore  when  it  is  an  Idol,  as  were  the  Idols  of  the  Gentiles,  then  his 
forbidden  by  this  Commandment.   Otherwise,  when  the  Cross  stood  many  years  upon  the  Table,  in  Queen 
Elizabeth's  Chapel,   pray  was  it  against  this  Commandment  ?  or  was  it  idolatry  in  her  Majesty,   and  her 
counsellors,  that  appointed  it  there  ?  or  do  their  brethren  the  Lutherans  beyond  seas,   at  this  day,  commit 
idolatry  against  this  Commandment,   who  have  in  their  Churches  the  Crucifix,  and  the  Holy"lma<res  of 
the  Mother  of  God,   and  of  St.  John  the  Evangelist?  or  if  the  whole  story  of  the  Gospel  conce&rnin<r 
our  Saviour  Cnrist,  were  drawn  in  Pictures  and  Images  in  their  Churches,   as   it  is   in   many  of  oursf 
would  they  say,   it   were   a   breach    of  this  commandment  ?   Fie  for  shame  !    he  for  shame  !    that    thev 
should  with  such  intolerable  impudence  and  deceit  abuse  and  bewitch  the  ignorant  people  against  then- 
own  knowledge  and  consciences. 

For  do  they  not  know,  tiiat  God  many  times  forbad  the  Jews  either   to  marry   or  converse  with   the 
Gentiles,   lest  thev  might  fall  to  worship  their  Idols,  as  Solomon  did,  and  as  the  Psalm  reports  of  them  ? 
I  nis  then  is  the  meaning  ot  the  Commandment,   neither  to  make    the  Idols  of   the  Gentiles,   nor   any 
oner,   either  like  them,   or  as  Jeroboam   did   in   D.ux    and  Bethel,  (a)      By   this  Commandment    we  'are 
forbidden,    (net  to  make  Images,   but)    to  make  Idols,   or  to  worship  Images,  or  any  thing  else,  as  God. 
'  I  do  not,"  says  St.  Jo.   Damascene,   "  worship   an  Image  as  God  ;    but    by   the  Images   ami   Saints  1 
give  honour  and  adoranon  to  God  ;  for  whose  sake  I  respect  and  reverence  those  that  are  nis  friend,  "  (b) 
"  All  over  the  world,"   says  Pope  Adrian  I.    '<  wheresoever  Christianity   is    professed,    sacred  Images 
are  honoured  by  toe  fa.thrul,    &c.     By  the  Image  of  the  Body  which  the  Son  of  God  took  tor  our  Re- 
demption,   we  adore  our  Redeemer  who  is  in  leaven  ;    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  ot  the  Holy  Scripture,   so  do  we  the  images,    to  remind  us  of  our  duty,   soil    pre- 
serving entire  the  purity  of  our  faith."  (c)      Learn  from  St.   Jerom,  afrei   what    manner  they  mad-  u  c 
of  holy  images   in    his.  time;   he  writes  in  the  epitaph  of  Paula,   "  That  she  adored    prostrate   on   the 
ground,   before  the  Cross,   as  if  she  saw  our  Lord  hanging  on  it-"      And  in   Jonas,   chap.  4.  he  pr  »ves' 
that  out  of  the  veneration  and  love  they  had  for  the  Apostles,  they  generally  painted  their' images  on  the 
vessels,   which  are  called  Saucomaries.      And  will  Protestants  say,   that  tins  was  idolatry  3 

R  The 

(a)  3  Kings,  chap.  12.  v.  28.     Psal.  105,  v.  19.    (b)  St.  Jo.  Daroas.  Orat.  3.    (c)  Adrian.  I.  Pontif.  Ep.  ad  Con - 

stan.  &  irenae.  Impp. 


66 


Pro'i  instant  'Translations  against  the 


w  The  Book, 
Chapter, 


:&S£A£5!Sa£*£S£5SX£SC3!£ 


':?S5<:>$5<5<^S^?: 


I 


A      and  Ver. 
c 


ver.  22. 


ft  Isaiah, 
0  chap.  3 

8" 


Q. 


i 

)i 
)i 

)i  Habbak. 
Ja  chap.  2. 
g  ver.  18. 


W.  Daniel, 
^  chap.  14. 
vi  ver.  4. 


>^ 


The:  Vallate  Latin 
Text. 


(33)  2'?/  contamina- 
bis  laminas  sculptilittm 
argenti  tui,  &  vesti- 
mention  conflatilis  auri 
tui,  &c 


rhetriieEnglishaC-  I  Corruptions  in  the  Pro 
,.  f.     r»i  testant    Bibles,    pnntet 

cording  to  theR he 


mish  Translation. 


And  thou  shalt 
contaminate  the 
plates  of  the  Sculp- 
tils  of  thy  silver, 
and  the  garment  of 
the  Molten  of   thy 


roklo 


£>uid  prodest  sculp- 
tile,  quia  sculpsit  Mud 
fictor   suns    cotiflatilc, 
&  imaginem  falsam  ? 


(34)  £>uia  non  colo 
Idola    ?nanufacta, 


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


pruned 
A.D.1562, 1577,1579- 


(32)  Ye  shall  de- 
file also  the  covering 
of  the  graven  ima- 
ges of  silver,  and 
the  ornament  of  thy 
molten  images  of 
gold. 


of  w 
theProtes.  Bible,  n 
Edit.   Lond.  anno 
1683- 


The  last  Trail 

i 

In  this  also  \A[ 
they  trans-  M 
late  graven  $ 
and  molten  & 
images,  in-  u 
stead  of  gra-  w 
ven  and  mo!-  ^ 
ten  things, or  & 
idols.  jj 


Because  I  wor- 
ship not  Idols  made 
with  hands. 


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


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


What  pro- 
fiteth thegra- 
ven      image, 
that  the 
maker  there- 
of hath  gra- 
ven   it,     the 
molten 
image,  and  a 
teacher     of 
lies  ? 


Though 
they  have  cor- 
rected it,  yet  ^ 
the   two   last  ft 
chapters    are 
omitted       in 
their      small 
impressions 
for  Apocry- 
pha. 


^5^^?S5S5S?S5S5SS<S<S^5£ 


3SS£S3S5S5S5S5S£^^ 


Use  of  Sacred  Image:,.  07 

(33)rT"MIE  two  Hebrew  words,  Pcsi/im  and  Massechoth,  which  in  the  Latin  signify  Seulpiilia  and  Ctti- 
Jl  f.atilui,  they  in  their  translation  render  into  English  by  the  \vo:d  Images,  ncithei  word  hein^ 
Hebrew  tor  an  Image  :  Thus,  if  one  should  ask,  what  is  the  Latin  (or  an  Image  r  and  thev  should  tell 
him  Sculptile:  Whereupon  he  seeing  a  fair  painted  image  on  a  table,  might  perhaps  say,  ecce  ertegium 
Sculptile  ;  which,  doubtless,  every  boy  in  the  grammar-school  would  laugh  at.  And  this  1  tell  them, 
because  I  perceive  their  endeavour  to  make  Sculptile  and  Image  of  the  same  import;  which  is  most  evi 
dently  lalse,  as  to  their  great  shame  appears  from  these  words  of  Habbakuk  :  Quid  ptodest  Sculptile:-  ^t 
which,  contiary  to  the  Hebrew  and  Greek,  they  translate,  "  What  profitetli  the  Imager"  &c.  as  \  >u 
may  see  in  the  former  page. 

I  wish  every  common  reader  was  able  to  discern  their  falsehood  in  this  place  :  First,  they  make 
Sculpere  Scuptile  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  tht 
Hebrew  has  in  it  no  signification  of  Image,  no  more  than  Sculpere  can  signify  "  To  make  an  Image:  " 
And  therefore  the  Greek  kvnflw,  and  the  Latin  Sculptile,  precisely,  for  the  most  part,  express  neithe: 
more  nor  less  than  a  "  Thing  graven  ;"  but  yet  mean  always  by  these  words,  a  "  Graven  Idol,''  to 
which  signification  they  are  appropriated  by  use  of  Holy  Scripture  ;  as  are  also  Simulacrum,  Idolum, 
Cotiflatile,  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  some  part  tolerable,  because  die  sense 
would  be  so  ;  but  when  they  do  it  to  bring  all  holy  Images  into  contempt,  even  the  Image  of  our  Sa- 
viour Christ  crucified,   they  may  justly  be  controlled  for  false  and   heretical  Translators. Confiatih 

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  signifying  a  thing  different  from  Image.  But  where 
they  should  translate  Image,  as,  Imaginem  falsam,  "  A  false  Image,"  they  translate  another  thing,  with- 
out any  necessary  pretence  either  of  Hebiew  or  Greek,  clearly  avoiding  here  the  name  of  Image,  be- 
cause this  place  tells  them,  that  the  Holy  Scripture  speaketh  against  false  Images;  or,  as  themselves 
translate,  such  Images  as  teach  lies,  representing  false  Gods,  which  are  not.  Idolurx,  nihil  est,  as  the 
Apostle  says,  cfT*  non  sunt  Dii,  qui  manibus  fiunt.  Which  distinction  of  false  and  true  linages,  our  Pro- 
testant Translators  will  not  have,  because  they  condemn  all  Images,  even  holy  and  sacred  also  ;  and 
therefore  make  the  Holy  Scriptures  to  speak  herein  according  to  their  own  fancies.  What  monstrous 
and  intolei ale  deceit  is  this  ! 

(34)  Wherein  they  proceed  so  far,  that  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  ched  his  precious 
blood.  As  before  they  added  to  the  text,  so  here  they  diminish  and  rake  from  it  as  boldly  as  if  there 
bad  never  been  a  curse  denounced  against  such  manglers  of  Holy  Scripture. 

See  you  not,  that  it  is  not  enough  for  them  to  corrupt  and  falsify  the  text,   and  to  add  and  take  away 
words  and  sentences  at  their  pleasure,  but  their  unpaialleled  presumption  emboldens  them  to  deprive  the 
people  of  whole  chapters  and   books,   as  the  two  last  chapters  of  Daniel,   and  the  rest  which  thev  c-Ji 
Apocrypha,  which  are  quite  left  out  in  their  new  Bibles.     When  all  this  is  done,   the  poor  simple  peo 
pie  must  be  glad  of  this  castrated  Bible,  for  their  "  Only  Rule  of  Faith."     Va  !    '  > 

1  he  reason  they  give  for  rejecting  them  is,  as  I  told  you  above,  "  That  rhev  have  formerly  beer- 
doubted  of:"  but  if  you  demand,  why  they  do  not,  for  the  same  reason,  reject  a  great  many  more  in 
the  New  Testament  ?  the  whole  Church  of  England  answers  vou  in  Mr.  Rogers's  words,  and  by 
him,  "  How  be  it  we  judge  them  (viz.  books  formerly  doubted  of  in  the  New  Testament)  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's  Defence 
of  the  Thirty-nine  Articles,  page  31,  32.  So  that  Protestants  are  purely  beholden  to  the  private  Spi- 
rit in  the  hearts  of  their  Convocation-men,  for  almost  half  the  New  Testament  ;  which  had  never 
been  admitted  by  them  in  the  Canon  of  Scripture,  if  the  said  "  Private  Spirit  in  their  hearts  had  nor 
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  their  smaller  impressions  of  the  Bible  ;  because,  forsooth,  the 
holy  private  Spirit  in  their  hearts,  testifies  them  to  speak  too  expressly  agains!  their  heretical  doctrines 

The 


o 


s 


Protestant  Translations  against 


•(} 

ft  The  Book, 
ty  Chapter, 
'^)      and  Ver. 


V  Acts  Apos. 
J\  chap.  2. 
«  ver.  ,y 

VJ 


Q  Genesis, 

'#  chap.  57, 
ft  ver.  35- 


V  Genesis, 
#  chap.  44. 
gj  v.  29.  31. 


0  3  Kings, 
y)  chap.  2. 
$  ver.  6,  9. 


^asssssssss 


The  Vulgate  Latin 
Text. 


^5^S3^S5S^^^5S5SS  5S5SSS3S5S«5^©^ 


(s  0  £$uoniam  non 
dcrelinqucs  '  animam 
mcam  in  Inferno.'' 


(36)  Descendant 
ad  jilium  meum  lugens 
in  '  Infernum,'  blNW, 
ten,  Infer  nus ;  for 
so  are  the  Hebrew, 
Greek,  and  Latin 
words  for  HelL 


Deducetis  canos 
meos  cum  dolore  ad 
4  Inferos* 


Deducetis  canos 
meos  cum  mozrore  ad 
c  Inferos.'* 


Ad  « Inferos? 


cordingtotheRhe- 
mish  Translation. 


Because  thou  wilt 
not  leave  my  *  Sou) 
in  Hell.' 


I  will  go  down  to 

mv  son  into  *  Hell' 
mourning. 


You  will  bring 
down  my  grey  hairs 
with  sorrow  unto 
<  HelL' 


—  With  sorrow 
unto  •  HelL' 


—  Unto  '  Hell.' 


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


(35)  Thou  «  shalt' 

not  leave  my  '  Car- 
cass in  the  Grave.' 

Beza. 

Thou  wilt  not 
leave  my  Soul  in 
<  the  Grave.'    (Bib. 

15790 


(36)  I  will  go 
down  into  *  the 
Grave  unto'  my  son 
mournine. 


Instead  of 'Hell,' 
they  say  *  Grave.' 


With  sorrow  un- 
to *  the  Grave. 


'  To  the  Grave.' 


The  last  Trans 

the  Piotes.  Bible,  // 

Edit.    Load,  anno  yj 

,683.  g 

— T ft 

It    is   cor-  ft 

rected  in  this  ft 

translation.     ft 

ft 

ft 

ft 

ft 
V 
t\ 
ft 

ft 

ft 

ft 

I   will    go  ft 

down  into       ft 

the  '  Grave.'  y) 


ft 

ft 
ft 
ft 
ft 
ft 
ft 

For < Hell,'  jjjj 
they  also  say,  %) 
'  Grave.  w 


With  sor-  ^ 
row  unto  the  ft 
i  Grave.'         ft 


—  To  the  ft 
1  Grave.'         <d 


Limbus  Patrum  and  Purgatory. 


69 


THE  doctnne  of  our  pretended  Reformers  is,  that  '•  There  was  never,  from  the  brjlnnm"  of  the 
world,  any  other  [dace  (or  souls,  after  this  life,  but-only  two,  to  wit,  Heaven  for  the  blessed,  and 
Hell  for  the  damned.''  1  his  heretical  doctrine  includes  many  cnoneous  branches :  hirst,  that  all  the 
holy  Patriarchs,  Prophets,  and  other  holy  men,  of  the  Old  Testament,  went  nor  into  the  third  place, 
called  Abraham's  Bosom,  01  Limbus  Patrum  ;  but  immediately  to  Heaven  :  That  they  were  in  Heaven 
before  our  blessed  Saviour  had  suffered  death  for  their  redemption  :    Whence  it  will  follow,  tha-  our  Sa- 


bv  tli 


tine  1 1  w  1 1 


viour  was  not  the  first  man  that  ascended,  and  entered  into  Heaven. 

follow,   that  our  Savioui   Christ  descended  not  into  any  thud  place,    in  our  creed  called    Hell,"  toVciiver 

the  bathers  of   the   Old  1  estamem,   and  to  bring  them  triumphantly    with    him    ir.t  >  Heaven  :     And  so 

till'      -irt.,     !n      „^        .U,.        A    J..'.     O ]  •  i,  -  .  ,  J 


that  article  of  the  Apostle's  Creed,  concerning  our  Saviours  tie: 
as  indeed  it  was  by  Beza  in  the  Confession  of  his  Faith,  primed  anno  1564,  or  it  mu.t  ^ave  some  other 
meaning  ;  to  wit,  other  the  lying  of  the  body  in  the  grave,  or,  as  Calvin  and  his  ioilc-A  2rs  will  have 
it,   toe  suffering  of   HeL-  I  orments,   and  pains  upon  the  Cross,  (d) 

(35)   In  defence  of  these   erroneous  doctrines,   they  most  wilfully   corrupt  the   Holy  Scriotures  •   end 
especially  Beza,   who  in  his  New  Testament,  ■  printed  by   Robert  Stephens,   anno    ic5o,    makes  ca'    Sa- 
viour Canst  say   thus  to  his  Father,  non  derelmqim  cadaver  maim  in    Sepulchro  ,   for  ti,  /  v  ilK.h    the   He- 
brew,  Greek,  and  Latin,   and  St.   Hierom,   according  to  the  Heb.ew,   say,   non   derelinques  awmdm 
in  lnfe*  no.      rhus  the  Prophet  David  speak  it  in  Hebrew  :  (c)    Thus  the    Septuagint  uttered    in   Greek- 
1  bus  tne  Apost  e  St    Peter  alledges  it  :   Thus  Sr.   Luke  in  the  Acts  of  the  Apostles  :   And  for  thh 
Augustine  calls  him  an  Infidel  that  denies   it.      Yet  all  this  would   not   sum, 
be< 


Sr, 
:e    to  make  Beza  translate  it 


so;  because,  as  he  says,  he  would  avoid  (certain  cues,  as  he  calls  them)  the  Catholic  Doctrine  of 
Limbus  Pauum  and  Purgatory.  And  therefore,  because  else  it  would  make  for  the  Pupi  its  Doctrine,  he 
translates  Ammam,   Carcase;  Infernum,  Grave. (f) 

And  'hough  our  English  Translators  are  ashamed   of  this  foul   and   absurd   corruption,   yet  their  in- 


As  though  either  man  s  Soul  or  Life  were  in  the  Grave,  or  Anima  might  be  translated  Person. 
they  were  ashamed  of  Beza  s  translation  ;  but  one  would  rather  think,  thev  purposely  designed  to  make 
it  worse,  if  possible.  But  you  see  the  last  Translators  have  indeed  been  ashamed  of  it,  and  have  cor- 
rected it.  .See  you  not  now,  what  monstrous  and  absurd  work  our  hist  pretended  Reformers  made  of 
tne  Holy- Scriptures,  on  purpose  to  make  it  speak  for  their  own  turns?  By  their  putting  Grave  in  the 
text,   they  design  to  make  it  a  certain  and  absolute  conclusion,   howsoever  you  interpret  Soul,   that  the 


lead  were  :    As  the  prophesx  savs  of  him,   he  remembered  his  holy  ones  who  were  d^~\,  , 
fore  slept  in  the-  Land  or    Promise  ;   lie  cl 


•  1  rj      ,  ,,  '  J  ~J      -••-•    ■'«!     v^^-.i^v,.    inio,      no    I.11L.V        I1JVC    UUl!t     Hie     ;  (  I  I   U' C  i" 

..ce ing  the  Hebrew     Greek,   arm  Latin  words  are  the  same  in  both  ?    It  cannot  he  through  irnorrmce     I 
.inti  :    i\o.    >r  mint  hnu.    ►,£<-.  ^.,,-,0.,   — ►  _r  _  _i_  •         .  1         ...  „       .         .  »..    o  ■ 


^:    No     it  must  have  been  purely  out  of  a  design    to  make   their  ignorant   Readers  believe, 
I  atnarch  Jacob  spoke  of  his  body  only  to  descend  into   the  Grave   to  Joseph's  body  :    For 


T-rr.h'.  ,~i     .1     "     -        ,  .-.-' ~~~  —  '*""   llll'u""<-   iu  juscpi.  i  uuuy  :    ror  as  concerning 

Jacobs  soul,   that     by  their  opinion,   was  to    ascend   immediately,  alter  his  death  into  Heaven,   and  no 

descend  into  the  Grave.    But  it  Jacob  was  forthwith  to  ascend  in  soul,  how  could  he  say,  as  they  tram- 

houIdsavW'    K-    T°  th7rSVe'  ,u5"°  mJ  S;jn'   mourning?"   As  if,   according  to  their  opinion,  he 

go  Wo  him  L^\he  Gi'ave  "0Ured  *7  *  ^  ^  h"  ^  ^°°C  "F  *°  H™"   Wc»-"  '    "  ' 


Th. 


»  Acff^t  cw  in  e4"  mA"/  "  h"'S  ratedrSrn'    (e)  P"1  1J  ""  10     (f)  Sce  B"a>s  Annotat- 

<&j   >-"•.  vur}&.  in  i^^n.  4.      (iij   b.  Irenasus,  lib.  5.  fine, 


Q 


V  R  O  P  F.ST  A  NT    T  R  \  NSL  \  T  IONS  AGAINST 


>3s-?£3 


"S  ^5^5S3^5S?S?S>5:"^r- 


:  '  'i  h<  Vi  *  >k, 
', .,  Ghai  ter, 
v;       and  Vtr. 


n 


le    VllllMte    Latin  I   rhetrueEr.clishaC-  Corruptions  in   the  Pro 

r,,°                                    i-              "i      o!  tcstant    Bibles,    prmtec 

Text                !    cordmgtotheRhe-  „   n     r       '     ,r„ 

■    ,     T,          •  A.D  1562, 1577,1 979 


mish  Translation 


The  last  Train,  of  {/, 
the  Protest.  B  Mo,  ;;.: 
k'.ilit.   Load,    ii'.iio 


V,  Psalm  ^.  (-:/)/:/ c/7,/. //,;///-;      Thou    hast    deli-        (37)    Tiiou    has         limead  ot      tf 


tf  vtr. 


w 


Psalm  So. 


>v>. 


;    ver.  40,. 


///<  </ '//  . .v  *  In  £/■-  j  \  t  re d  n  1  v  soul  fro ,  1 1  d e i i \  e r ed    n  1  v    soul    '  lo w e r '    Hell,  g 
„,,/.,;,,'  !  the   <  Lower  Hell.'     from   the   •  Lowest.  ^W  'low"  g 


^Hosea, 
*  chap.  13. 

:,■  wr.  14. 

/\ 

:  \ 

\  1 

(    1  Corinth, 
chap.  15. 

'er-  55- 

k 

v  Psalm.  6. 
k  ven  5- 

i 

Yl 

Cj  Proverbs, 

)\  chap.  27. 

V-?  vers.  20. 

6  Hebrews, 
y)  chap. 
>v  ver.  7. 

v; 

V? 


(%$)    Eruit    ani- 
ni.au  suam  mamt  '  //z- 


D* 


Grave, 


Shall  lie  deliver!  (38)  Shall  he  de-|  ^  Shall  he  de-  (< 
his  soul  from  the  liver  his  soul  from  p.1  ver  ^-s  sou|  n 
hand  of  '  Hell  ?» 


fro  »w/-j  ■?:<<:,    Oj      O  death,  I  will  bc 
;;w/v,   r.'iorsus  tuns  cro  thy  death;  1  will  be 


c  Inferno'  VlN*U; 


;;.'//,'//..•  tuus :     vbi  est, 
'  Infernef  -victoria  tua  ? 


In  c  Inferno*  antem 
quis  confitebltur  tibi  ? 


'  Inf emus'   &  per- 
ditio  nunquam  implen- 

tur. 


the     hand     of     the     ri"?  th«  han'l  8 
,  .,  3,  lot  the 'Graver    ft 

4  Grave?'  g 


thy  sting,  O  '.Hell.'  Hon 


Where  is,  O  death, 
thy  sting?  where  is, 


ft 

—  O  '  Grave,'  li  Q  death,  1  gj 
will  be  thv  destruc-  j  vill  be  thy  ft 
•  Plagues  ;'  O  ft 
'  Grave,'  1  will  ft 
oe  thy  tlc.-truc-  ^ 
nan.  n 

For  <  Hell,'  ft 


O   death,    where 
is    thv    stine  ?     () 


()  *  Hell,'  thy  vie-  '  Grave,'    where  is 


torv  ? 


But  in  <  Hell,' 
who  shall  confess  to 
thee  ? 


'  Hell'  and  de- 
struction are  never 
full. 


thv  victory  ? 


(39)  Q21  m  diebus  Who  in  the  days 
carnis  slice  preccs  sup-  of  his  flesh,  with  a 
plicationesque  ad  cum, ,  strongcry  and  tears, 
qui  possit  ilium  salvum  offering  prayers  and 
facere  a  morte,  cum  'supplications  to  him 
clamore  valido  fcf  la-  \  that  could  save  him 
chrymis  offcrens,  exau-  \  from  death,  was 
heard  *  For  his  re- 
verence.' 


hey  sav,  r 

«  Grave.'  H 

ft 

V 

{■' 

Thev     say,     e  In  i    Inthe'Grave,  0\ 
the  Grave.'  |  who  shall  give  ^ 

hee  thanks  ?'    Y{ 

v; 
(A 


ditus  est  '  Pro  sua  re- 
verential 


1  The  Grave5  and 
destruction  are  ne- 
ver full. 


(39)  « Which'  in 
days  of  his  flesh, 
'  offered  up'  pray- 
ers, with  strong 
*  crying,  unto'  him 
that  *  was  able  to' 
save  him  fromdeath, 
'and'  was  heard,  'In 
that  which  he  fear- 
ed.' 


Corrected.    $ 

ft 


Who  in  the  $ 
days,  &c  'And  ft 
was  heard  in  YX 
that  he  feared.'  » 


cSS  C5i; 


S^3£^£5£5£5^S5^^3^S^S^3£^3S^5S:^ 


Limbus   Patrum   and  Purgatory.  71 

^^[INDERSTAND,     good   reader,    that   in    the   Old   Testament    none    ascended   into   Heaven. 


This    way   of   the   holies,  '    as  the  Apostle  says,   "  being  not  vet  made  open  ■' 
our  Saviour  Christ  himself  was  to   "  Dedicate  that  new  and  living  way,"'   and  begin  the  entrance  in  Ins 
own   person,   and  by  his  passion  to  open  Heaven  ;    for  none  but  lie  was  found  worthy  to   open  the  S-al« 
and  to  read  the  Book.      Therefore,   as  I  said  before,   the  common  phrase  of   the  Holy  Scriptu.e,   in  the 
Old    I  estament,    is  even  of   the  best  of  men,   as  well  as  others,    that  dying,    they  went  down     ad  Inf< 
or  ad Infeinum  ;   that  is,  descended  not   to  the  Grave,   which  received  their  bodies  onlv  ;    but  adlnfcm 
"•  into  Hell,"   a  common  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,  (k)  says,  <<  It  Abraham,  Isaac,  and  Jacob 
were  in  Hell,  who  was  in  the  kingdom  of  Heaven?"  and  again,  "Before  the  coming  of  Chi  ist,  Abia- 
ham  was  in  Hell  ;  after  Ins  coming,  the  Thief  was  in  Paradise."  And  lest  it  miglnbe  objected,  that 
Lazarus  being  in  Abraham  s  bosom,  saw  the  rich  glutton  afar  off  in  Hell  :  and  that  therefore  both  Aura 
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  nlacc,  (1)  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  wherein  the  damned  are  tormented  ;  the  higher  Hell  is  that 
where.n  the  souls  of  thejust  rested,  calling  both  places  by  the  name  of  Hell.  To  avoid  this  distinction 
ot^  the  inferior  and  higher  Hell,  our  fiist  translators,  instead  of  lower  Hell,  rendered  it  lowest  Grave- 
which  they  would  not  tor  shame  have  done,  had  they  not  been  afraid  to  say  in  any  place  of  Scriptu.e 
(how  plain  soever)  that  any  soul  was  delivered  or  returned  from  Hell,  lest 'it  might  then  follow;  that 
he  Patriarchs  and  our  .Saviour  Christ  were  ,n  such  a  Hell  :  and  though  the  last  translation  has  restored 
the  word  Hell  ,n  this  place  ;  vet  so  loth  were  our  translators  to  hear  the  Scripture  speak  of  Limbus  Pa- 
trum or  Purgatory  that  they  snll  retained  the  superlative  lowest,  lest  the  comparative  lower  (which  is 
the  true  translation)  might  seem  more  clearly  to  evince  this  distinction  between  the  supei  ior  and  inferior 
Hell  ,  though  they  could  not  at  the  same  time  be  ignorant  of  this  sentence  of  Tertullian  ;  "  I  know 
Mat  the  bosom  of  Abraham  was  no  Heavenly  place,  but  only  the  higher  Hell,  or  the  higher  part  of 
V       ■  (i:V'r     0n?n   i       'T'  bUt  lheV  ,VlUSt  \T  ieatl  tl,cse  WOu!s  ,n  St-  Chrysostom,  upon°that  place  of 

darkened  "    Tr       J**!        M       P  "VT'    f^Ju^  ^  ^  *»"  *"  PicCCS'  a'nd  wi»    °P™  ^    ""Sure 
la  kened       &c.    So  he    (the  Prophet     call.  Hell,  says  he;    «  For  although  it  were  Hell,  yet  it  held  the 

holy  souls,   and  precious  vessels,   Abraham,   Isaac,   and  Jacob  "  (n)  "eiuinc 

<38)  And  thus  all  along  vvhe^vei^they  find  the  word  Hell,  that  is,  where  it  signifies  the  place  in 
which  the  Holy  Fathers  of  the  Old  Testament  rested,  called  by  the  Church  Limbus  Patrum,  they  are 
sure  to  translate  it  Grave  j  a  word  as  much  contrary  to  the  signification  of  the  Greek,  Hebrew,  or  La~ 
,.n  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,  ^B?  At,  Infernus  P  If  1  ask  them,  what  words  they  will  bring  from 
those  languages  to  signify  Grave,  must  they  not  say,  ISp  ,■«>*,  Scpulchrum?  with  what  face  then  can 
Mey  Iook  upon  these  wilful  corruptions  of  theirs  ? 

(39)  Note  here  another  most  damnable  corruption  of  theirs ;  instead  of  translating,  as  all  antiquity 
with  a  general  and  full  consent  has  ever  done  in  this  place,  «  That  Christ  was  heard  of  his  Father  for 
Ins  reverence  ;'  they  read,  «  J  hat  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  of  the tex  = '  doubile"- 
Beza  ;  whom  tor  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  hi  blasphemous 
doctrine,  «  I  hat  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  upon  the  Cross,  was  horribly  afraid  of  damnation  :  and Ta 
he  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  {hey  dare  presume  to  force  he 
bcipture,  by  their  false  translation,  to  back  them  in  it;  «  He  was  heard  in  that  which  he  feared  » 
as  it  they  should  say,  he  was  delivered  from  damnation,  and  the  eternal  pains  of  Hell,  of  which  he  was 
sore  afraid.      What  dare  they  not  do,  who  tremble  not  at  this  ? 


The 


(i)Heb.9.v.8 .Heb.io.-ver.ao.     (k)  Epitaph.  Nepot.  cap  *.     (1)  St.  Aug.  in  Ps,  8c.  ver.  1  a.     fm)  Tertul 
I.4.  adversusMarcion.     (n)  S.  Clirysost,  Horn,  quod  Christus sit  Deus,  To.  5.  6  5  3      l 


(HtllSl  iO. 


Protestant  Translations  against 


)i  The  Book, 
(l      Chapter, 

Y{        anH  V.-i 


Vcr 


/{  Romans, 
U  chap.  2. 
.  r.  26. 

ft 

M   r        t      , 

St.  Luke. 
1. 


6. 


;y  cha 
ver. 

Apocalvp. 
g  cnap.  19- 
y/j  ver.  b. 

$  2  Timoth. 
A  c.oap.  4. 

$  ver.  b> 

i 

'J 

V) 

■.  n 

Thessa), 

hap    1. 

0   ' -'-"I.  5,   0. 


//  Hebrews, 
lap.  6. 

g  ver.  10. 


The  Vul  crate  Latin 
Text. 


(39)  Si  igitur  prec- 
putiumjustltias,  Ikxm- 
1  pxra,    legis    custcdiat, 

i  i£c. 

Erant  autcm  justi. 
I  lWioj,  amboantcDeum, 
!  inecdentes  in  omnibus 
J  mandalis   o3  justifica- 

bl<S,   kx.    oixziuiu  n, 

Domini  sine  querela. 


Byssinum  enim  ?us~ 
\lifica:iones  sunt  sanc- 
torum^ rx  h»xiuu*Tx. 

(40)  /;/  reliquo,  re- 
\i  est  mihi,  corona 

IjUStJtia,    T«;    A*a.^yv»;f, 

|  quam  reddet  mihi  Do- 
minus  in  ilia  die  Justus 


Fhe  true  English  aC- |  Corruptions  in  the    Pro-    The  last  Trans,  of 

the  Protest.  Bible; 
Edit.  Load,  anno 
1633. 


cording  to  thellhe- 
mish  Translation. 

If  then  the  pre- 
puce keep-  the  jus- 
tices of  the  law,  &c. 


testant    Bibles,   printed 
A. D.  1562,1577,1579. 


(39)  If  theuncir-        i("   therefore 
cumcision  keen  the    t,,c  uncircum- 


ordi nances   of 
law. 


tin 


And  they  were 
both  righteous  be- 
fore God,  walking 
in  all  the  com  man  d- 
and  justifications  of  I  ments  and  ordinan- 
our  iford,  without  ces  of  the  Lord 
blame.  blameless. 


And  they  were 
both  just  before 
God,  walking  in  all 
the  commandments 


judex ) 


In  exemphnn 

justly  aiKXixc,  judicii 
De  ,  ut  digni  habea- 
mini  in  regno  Z)<  /,  pro 
quo  &  patiatnini,  si 
tamen  justum  est, 
oMXHot  :,-»,  a  pud  Deum 
retiibuere  tribulation- 
em  Us  qui  vos  tribulant. 


For  the  silk    are       For  the  fine  linen 

the  justifications  of  J  are   the    righteous- 
saints.  1  ness  of  saints. 

! 

Concerning  the  (40)  Henceforth 
rest,  there  is  laid  up  ]  there  is  laid  up  to: 
for  me  a  crown  of  [  me  a  crown  of  right- 
justice,  which  our  eousness,  which  th^ 
Lord  will  render  to  j  Lord  the  righteous 
me  in    that   day  a  judge  shall  give  me, 


sioti    keep   the 
1  ighteousness 

ut   die  law. 


Non  cnim  injusius, 
x'-k.^,  Deus,  ut  obil- 
\viscatur  cperis  vestri, 


just  iudgt 


For  an  example  of 
the    just    judgment 
of  God,     that   you 
mav     be      counted 
w  orthy  of  the  king- 
dom   of    God,    for 
which    you    suffer, 
that  yet  it  be  just 
I  with  God  to  repay 
j  tribulation  to  them 
I  that  vex  you,    and 
j  to    vou     that     are 
;  vexed,  rest  with  us, 
i  Sec. 

For  God    is  not 
unjust,      that       he 
should  foi  get  your 
j  works,  &c. 


&c, 


Rejoice,  &c- 


which  is  a  token  oi 
the  righteous  judg- 
ment of  God,  that 
you  mav  be  count- 
ed worthy  of  the 
kingdom  of  God, 
for  which  ye  suffer. 
For  it  is  a  righteous 
j  thing  with  God,  to 
recompence  tribu- 
lation to  them  that 
trouble  vou,  and  to 
vou  that  are  trou- 
ble 1  rest. 

God  is  not  un- 
righteous, to  forget 
vour  good  works 
and  labour. 


And  thevwere 
>oth   righteous 

•ctore   God, 
walking  in  all 
the  command- 

nents   and   or- 
dinances of  the 
Lo:d    blame- 
less. 

For  the  fine 
linen    is    the 
righteous- 
ness of  saints. 

For  justice, 
they  translate 
righteous- 
ness :  and  for 
.1  just  judge, 
they  say,  a 
righteous 

J-4U6C' 

Here     also 
■ ihey   say 
righteous 
i  judgment, 
'  andrighteous 
thing,     in- 
stead of  hist, 
Sec. 


ft 

i 

k 

a 

Y 


For  God  is 
not  unright- 

OUS,   &C. 


^ :  S££f  ^SS^T^^  3SS£S£5S ; 


Justification,  and  the  Reward  of  Good  Works.       73 

(39)  A  S  the  article  of  Justification  has  many  branches,  and  as  their  errors  therein  are  manifold,  so 
_£\  are  their  English  translations  accordingly  in  many  lespects  false  and  heretical  ;  Hist,  against 
Justification  by  Good  Works,  and  by  keeping  the  Commandments,  they  suppress  the  verv  name  of 
Justification  in  all  such  places  where  the  word  signifies  the  Commandments,  or  the  Lav/  of  God  ;  and 
wheie  the  Greek  signifies  most  exactlyjustices  and  Justifications,  according  as  our  vulgate  Latin  trans- 
lates, Justitias  &  Justijicationes,  there  the  English  translations  say,  Statutes  or  Ordinances  ;  as  you  sec 
in  these  examples,  where  then  last  translation,  bccau.se  they  would  seem  to  be  doing,  though  to  small 
purpose,  changes  the  first  corruption,  "  Ordinances  ot  the  Law,"  into  Righteousness  ;  another  worn, 
as  far  from  what  it  should  have  been,  in  comparison,  as  the  firsc  :  and  to  what  end  is  all  this,  but  to 
avoid  ihe  term  Justifications  ?  they  cannot  be  ignorant  how  different  tins  is  from  the  Greek,  which  thev 
pretend  to  translate. — In  the  Old  Testament,  perhaps  they  will  pretend  that  they  follow  ;he  Hebrew 
word,  which  is  C'pn  »  and  therefore  they  translate  Statutes  and  Ordinances;  (Righteousness  too,  if 
thev  please)  ;  but  even  there  also,  are  not  the  seventy  Greek  interpreters  sufficient  'd  teach  them  the 
signification  of  the  Hebrew  woid,   who  always  interpret  it,   hxeuupxlx  j    in  English,  Justifications? 

But  admit  that  they  may  control  the  Septuagint  in  the  Hebrew  ;  yet  in  the  New  Testament  thev  do 
not  pretend  to  translate  the  Hebrew,  but  rather  the  Greek  What  reason  have  they  then  for  rejecting 
the  word  Just  and  Justifications  ?  surely,  no  other  reason,  but  that  which  their  master  Bcza  gives  for 
the  same  thing  ;  saving  tha  "  he  rejected  ihe  word  Justlficationes,  on  purpose  to  avoid  the  cavils  that 
might  be  made  from  tins  word,  against  Justification  by  Faith."  (a)  As  if  he  should  say,  this  word, 
truly  translated  according  to  the  Greek,  might  minister  great  occasion  to  prove,  by  so  many  places  ot" 
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,  Justifica- 
tiones,  because  they  concur  to  Justification,  and  making  a  man  just:  as  by  St.  Luke's  words,  also,  is 
well  signified  ;  which  have  this  allusion,  that  they  were  both  just,  because  they  walked  in  all  the  Jus- 
tifications of  our  Lord  ;  which  they  designedly  suppress  by  other  words. 

{40)  And  hereof  it  also  rises,  that  when  Beza  could  not  possibly  avoid  the  word  in  his  translation, 
Apoc.  19.  8.  "  The  Silk  is  the  Justification  of  Saints  ;"  he  helps  the  matter  with  this  commentary, 
''  That  justifications  are  tiiose  good  Works,  which  are  the  Testimony  of  a  lively  Faith."  (b)  But  our 
English  translators  have  found  another  way  to  avoid  the  word,  even  in  their  translations  :  for  thev,  be- 
cause thev  touhl  not  say  Ordinances,  translate,  i(  The  Righteousness  of  Saints;"'  abhorring  the  word 
"Justifications  of  Saints,"  because  they  know  full -well,  that  this  word  includes  the  Good-works  oi 
Saints  :  which,  works,  if  they  should  in  translating,  cail  their  Justifications,  it  would  rise  up  a<rainsc 
their  '4  Justifications  by  Faith  only:"  therefore,  where  they  cannot  translate  Ordinances  and  Statutes,-. 
which  are  terms  faithest  off  from  justification,  thev  say,  Righteousness,  making;  it  also  the  plural  num- 
ber ;  whereas  the  move  propel  Greek  word  for  Righteousness,  is  tvGuf/jj,  (Dan.  6.22)  which  there 
some  of  them  translate  Unguiitiness,   because  they  will  not  translate  exactly  if  you  would   hire  them. 

Ami  by  their  translating  Righteous,  instead  of  Just,  they  bring  it,  that  Joseph  was  a  righteous  man, 
rathei  than  a  just  man  ;  and  Zu.er.ary  and  Elizabeth  were  Doth  righteous  before  God,  rattier  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  Fairh  is  joined  with  the  word  Just,  they  omit  not  to  translate  it  Just,  "  The  fust  shall 
live  by  Faith,"    to  signify,   that  "  Justification  is  by  Faith  alone,"  (c) 


(41)  These  places,- (2  Tim.  1  Thcss.  and  Hob.)  do  very  fairly  discover  their  false  and  corrupt  inten- 
tions, in  concealing  the  word  Justice  in  all  their  Bibles  ;  for,  if  thev  should  translate  truly,  as  thev 
ought  to  do,  i:  would  infer,  (d)  that  men  are  justly  crowned  in  Heaven  for  their  good  Works  up  ,i\ 
v.  th,  am!  r.  is  God;s  justice  so  to  do;  and  that  he  will  do  so,  because  he  is  a  just  Judge,  and  because 
he  will  shew  his  just  judgment  ;  and  he  will  not  forget  So  to  do,  because  he  is  not  unjust  ;  as  tiie  An- 
cient Father:  do  interpret  and  expound.  St.  Augustine  most  excellently  declares,  that  it  is  God's  grace, 
favour,  and  mercy  in  making  us,  by  his  grace,  to  live  and  believe  well,  and  so  to  be  worthy  of  Heaven  ; 
and  his  Justice  and  just  Judgment,  to  render  and  repay  eternal  Life  for  tiiose  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  merciful  Father?"  (e) 

T  The 

(a)   BezaAnnot.  inLuk.  1.     (b)  Ber.a  Annot.  in  Apoc.  19.     (c)  Rom.  1.    (d)  St,  Chrys,  Thcodcret,  Oecumen. 
Upon  these  places,     (e)  St.  Aug.  de  Gra,  &  lib.  Arbitr.  cap.  6. 


4 


k:ass£5 :: 


Protestant  Transla 


-^sr^^r- 


IONS  AGAINST 


:^s?c>s?c 


ir.    Pnoj,      The  Vlllffate  Latin  «ThctrueEncjIishaC-    Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 

1C    IjOOk,  i   1  lie    V  UIL,uie   wuu,  ->  te&tant    Bibles  printed 

Chanter,  Text.  cording  to  theRhe- ,     AD         fia>    I5??j 


(*  Tli 

.;<       and  Ver 


misli  Translation. 


A.  D. 
1579* 


'fi  Roman 
i{  chap.  8. 
JJver.  1 3. 

Yi 


(42)  ExhUmo,  7,y,-  For  <  I  think'  that 
&**,,  cw/w  ?w«/  wow'the  passions  of  tins 
nint  condigna  passiorics  i  ' 


(42)  For  I  am  'cer- 
tainly persuaded,' 
that  the  ' afflictions' 


%w  fcw/>er/i  <«//«-   dign  to' the  glory  to  of  this  time,  are  not 


fA 

)jj  Hebrews, 
chap.  10. 


g 


v. 


ve 


•29. 


turam 


gloria  jn,    <3  c. 


The  last  transl.  ^ 
of  the  Protest-  A 
ant  Bible, edit.  ^ 
Lon.  an.  168  3.  £< 

For  '  I  reck-  r\ 
on'  that  the  XK 
sufferings  of  v 
this 


(/. 


come,   that  shall  be 
revealed  in  us. 


present  U 


'worthv'ofthe  glory  time,  are  not  fy 
'  which 'shall    be    in  '  worthy'    to  $ 


v)  Colossians, 
y,  chap.  1. 
}j  ver.  12. 


Psal.  118. 
p\  ver.  112. 

\h  Hebrew s5 
j%  chap.  2. 
8  ver.  9. 


(43)  Quant 0  magis 
put  at  is  deter  iora  mc- 
reri,    supp/icia,    no™ 

pia?l    gw  F/V/w/w  Dei 

!  conculcaverit,  &c. 


(44)  Gratia  s  agcn- 
tes    Deo   Patri,    qui 

dignos,     jxawcravn,     «0J 

/ff/'r  *'#  partem  sor- 
tis  sanctorum  in  tu- 
mble. 

(45)  Jnelinavi  cor 

meum  ad  faciendas 
justificationcs  tuas  in 
eternum,  propter  re- 
tributionem. 

(46)  Eum  autem 
qui  modieo  quam  An~ 
gcli  minoratus  est,  vi- 
demus  Jesum,  propter 
passionem  mortis  gloria 
13  honor e  coronatum- 


How  much  more, 
think     you,     cloth 


us. 


(43)  How-  much 
'  sorer  shall"  lie  *  be 


he    *  deserve   worse  j  punished,        which 
punishments,'  who  !  treadeth' under- foot 
hath     trodden    the  \  the  Son  of  God  ? 
Son  of  God  under 

foot  ? 


Giving  thanks  to 
God     the     Father, 


which  8 


(44)        Giving 
thanks  to  God  the 


who  hath  made  us  j  Father,  '  that'  hath 
'  worthy'  unto  the  {  made  us  'meet  to  be 


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  un- 
der the  Angels,  we 
see  Jesus,  because 
of  the  passion  of 
death,crownedwith 
glory  and  honour. 


partakers'  of  the 
'  inheritance*  of  the 
saints  in  light. 

(45)  I  have  ap- 
plied my  heart  to 
fulfil  thy  statutes 
always,  even  unto 
the  end. 

(46)  We  see  Je- 
sus crowned  with 
glory  and  honour, 
'which'  was  a  little 
'inferior  to'  the  An- 
gels, ' through'  the 
'suffering*  of  death. 


he   compared 
with  the 
glory 

shall  he  re-  yi 
vealed  in  u^.  yj 
Of  how  % 
much  sorer  £? 
nun  is  me  nt,  \i 
suppose  ye,  ';' 
shall  he  be  w 
thought'wor- 
thy'  who  hath 
trodden  un-  $ 
der-foot  the  g 
Son  of  God.  V) 
iving  U 
thanks  unto  $ 
the  Father  (< 
that  hath  tt 
made   us  y, 

'  meet,'  &c.     yi 

—  '  Even    tit 
unto      the 
end.' 


But  we  see 
Jesus,  who  was 
made  a  little 
lower  than  the 
Angels,  for  the 
suffering  of  V) 
death  crowned  V/ 
with  glory  and  V) 
honour.  V9 


Merits,  and  Meritorious  Works.  j* 

(42)  T  SHALL  nor  say  much  of  this  gross  corruption,   because  they  have  been  pleased  to  correct  it  in 
J_   their  last  translation  :  Nor  will  I  dwell  on  their  first  words,  "  I  am  certainly  persuaded,"  which 
is  a  tar  greater  asseveration  than  the  Apostle  uses  ;   I  wonder  how  they  could  thus  translate  that  Greek 
word  7uyi£o/**» ;   but  that  they  were  resolved   not  only   to  translate    the    Apostle's  words   falsely,  against 
Meritorious  Works,   but  also  ro  avoucli    and  affirm  the  same   forcibly.     And  for  the  words   following, 
they  are  not  in  Greek,   as  thev  translate  in  their  first  English  Bibles,    "  The  afflictions  are  not  worthy 
of  the  glory,"   &cc.   because  they  will  not  have  our   suffering  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   afflictions   are    small    and 
tew,   in  comparison  ;   the  glory  great  and  abundant,  above  measure.      By  this  the  Apostle  would  encou- 
rage us  to  surfer  ;   as  he  does    also    in    another   place  very   plainly,   when    he   says,   "Our   tribulation, 
which  presently  is  for  a  moment  and  light,   worketh,    ('  prepared-!,'  says  their  Bible,    1577,  with  a  verv 
raise  meaning)   above  measure  exceedingly,   an  eternal  weight  of  glory  in  us."      See  vou  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, (f)    "  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  !"   Here  you  see  are  Merits,  and 
the  reward  for  the  same.  —  Likewise  St.  Augustine  :(g)    "  The  exceeding  goodness  of  God  has  provided 
this,   that  the  labours  should   soon   be  ended,  but  the  rewards  of  the  Merits   shall   endure  without  end  ; 
tire  Apostle  testifying,   the    passions  of  this   time   are   not   comparable,"   cVc.      "  For  we   shall  receive 
greater  bliss,   than  are  the  afflictions  of  all  passions  whatsoever." 

(43)  How  deceitfully  they  deal  with  the  Scripture  in  this  place  !  One  of  their  Bible-  (h)  verv  falsely 
and  corruptly  leaving  out  the  words  "  Worthy  of,"  or  "  Deserve,"  saving,  "  How  much  sorer  shall 
ire  be  punished  :"  cVc.  And  the  last  of  their  translations  adding  as  falsely  to  tire  text  the  word 
"  I  bought  :"  "  How  much  sorer  punishment  shall  he  be  thought  worthy  of?"  cVc.  And  this  is  done 
to  avoid  this  consequence,  which  must  have  followed  by  translating  the  Greek  word  sincerely  ;  to  wir, 
it  the  Greek  here,  by  their  own  translation,  signifies  "  To  be  worthy  of,"  or  "  To  deserve,"  beiu£ 
spoken  oi  pains  or  punishments  deserved  ;  tiren  must  they  grant  us  the  same  word  to  si^nifv  the  same 
thing  elsewhere  in  the  New  Testament,  when  it  is  spoken  of  deserving  Heaven,  and  tire  kingdom  ot 
God,  as  in  Luke,  ch.  20,  and  21.  where,  if  thev  translate  according  to  the  Greek,  which  they  pie- 
tend  to,  they  should  say,  "  May  be  worthy,"  and  "  Thev  that  are  worthy  ;"  and  not  according  to  the 
Vulgate  Latin,  which,  I  sec,  they  are  willing  to  follow,  when  they  think  it  mav  make  the  more  for 
their  turn. 

(44)  The  Greek  word  Uouiuo-m,  they  translate  to  make  "  Meet"  in  this  place,  but  in  other  places 
(viz,.  Mat.  3.  c.  8,  11,  and  v.  8.)  they  translate  tzxvhs,  "  Wrorthy."  And  why  could  they  not  follow  the 
old  Latin  interpreter  one  step  further  r  seeing  this  was  tire  place  where  they  should  have  shewed  their 
sincerity,  and  have  said,  that  God  made  us  "Worthy"  of  heavenly  bliss;  because  they  cannot  bus 
know,  that  if  »xa»o?  be  "  Worthy,"  then  Uavucrca  must  needs  be  "To  make  worthy."  But  thev  follow 
their  old  master,  Beza,(i)  who  tells  them,  that  here,  and  here,  and  so  forth,  I  have  followed' the  old 
Latin  interpreter,  translating  it  "  Worthy  ,"  but  in  such  and  such  a  place  (meaning  this  for  one)  I 
chuse  rather  to  say  "Meet."  What  presumption  is  here  !  The  Greek  Fathers  interpret  it  "Wor- 
thy." St.  Chrysostom,  upon  this  place,  says,(k)  "  God  doth  not  only  give  us  societv  with  tire  Saints, 
but  makes  us  also  Worthy  to  receive  so  great  a  dignity."  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. "(1) 

(45)  Here  is  yet  another  most  notorious  corruption  against  "  Merits:"  "  I  have  applied  my  heart  to 
fulfil  thy  statutes,  always,  even  unto  the  end;"  and  for  their  evasion  here,  they  fly  to  the  ambiguity 
of  the  Hebrew  word  ^py,  as  if  the  seventy  interpreters  were  not  sufficient  to  determine  the  same  ;  bur 
because  they  find  it  ambiguous,  they  are  resolved  to  take  their  liberty,  though  contrary  to  St.  Hierom, 
and  the  Ancient  Fathers,   both  Greek  and  Latin. 

(46)  In  fine,  so  obstinately  are  they  set  against  Merits,  and  Meritorious  Works,  that  some  of  them 
think,  (m)  that  even  Christ  himself  did  not  merit  his  own  glory  and  exaltation:  For  making  out  of 
■which  error,  I  suppose,  they  have  transposed  the  words  of  this  text,  thereby  making  the  Aposde  say, 
that  Christ  was  made  inferior  to  Angels  by  his  suffering  death  ;  that  is,  says  Beza,  "  For  to  suffer 
death  ;"  by  which  they  quite  exclude  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  translations  they  so 
place  the  words,  that  they  will  have  it  left  so  ambiguous,  as  you  may  follow  which  cense  you  will: 
Intolerable  is  their  deceit  ! 

The 


(f)  St.  Cyprian,  Ep.  56.  v.  3 
Matth.  Not.  Test.  1556.     (k)  CE 


(g)  St.  August.  Serm.  57.  tie  Sanct.     (h)  Bible  of  1562.     (i)  Beza  Annotat.  in  3. 
Scum,  in  Caten.     (1)  St.  Basil,  in  Oat,  Litur.    (m)  See  Calvin,  in  Epist.  ad  Philip- 


6 


Protestant  Translations  against 


;^>£5s? 


5CSC" 


fa 


d  The  Book, 
A  Chapter, 
<i      and  Ver. 


;  St.  John, 
|  chap.  i. 

<\  ver.  i :. 

i   ., 

Y{  i  Corinth. 

Y{  chap,  ic. 

, ,  ver.  10. 

(i 

: 

8 


The  Vulgate  Latin 


Text 


(47)  £uotqnot  au- 
tcm  rcccperant  cum, 
dcd'it  as  '  1  otestatenC 
iZ<s<Ticrj  Jtlios  Dei  fieri. 

(48)  —  Sed  abun- 
danlius  Mis  omnibus 
laberavi :  non  czo  an 


The  trueEnglish  ac- 
cording to  theRhe- 

mish  Translation. 


But  as  many  as 
received  him,  he 
ga\e  them  '  Power' 
to  be  made  the  sons 
of  God. 

—  But  I  have  la- 
boured more  abun- 
dantly than  all  thev: 


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


tern,   sed  gratia    Dei  vet   not  I,   but    th 


j '  me  cum.    *  %* 


,j  Ephesians. 
§  chap.  3. 
g  ver.  12. 

i 

■j 

1 


I  gracv  of  God  '  with 
,  me.' 


In  whom  we  have 
<  affiance'  and  '  ac- 


(49)  In  quo  habe- 
tnus  jiduciam   &  ac~ 
ccssum    in   confidential^   in  confidence, 
per fidem  ejus.  I  by  the      th  of  him. 


W  2  Corinth 
#  chan.  6. 
y\  ver.  1. 

i 

k 

Romans, 
chap.  5. 

%  ver'  6' 

1 


6  iEp.John, 

hap.   5. 

<( 
y) 

ft 

y} 

f)  St.  Matth. 
$  chap.  19. 
^  ver.  II. 


(50)  c  Adjuvantcs,' 

hortamur,  nc  in  -vacu- 
um gratiam  Dei  reci- 
piatis. 

(51)  L7/  <7<7/</   <?>2//?2 

Christus,  cum  adhuc 
1  iniirmi  cssemus,  c>tu» 
ipZ»  aVSn'w.,  secundum 
tempus  pro  impiis  mor- 
tmis  est. 

(52)  HtfC  a/   £722772 

count  as  Dei,  us  man- 
data  ejus  custodiamus 


And  'we  helping,' 
do  exhort,  that  you 
receive  not  the 
grace  of  God  in 
\  aim 


T7/> 


why  did 
Christ,  when  we  as 
et  *  were  weak,' 
according  to  t  he 
time,  die  for  the 
impious. 

For  this  is  the 
charity  of  God,  that 
we    keep   his    com- 


(47)  Jiuc  .■■:>  man\  as 
received  hen,  he  ^avc 
them  '  Prerogative,' 
;  Dignity, suys  Keza)to 
be  the  sons  of  ( jod. 

(48)  — yet  not  I, 
but  the  grace  of  God 
4  which  is'  with  me. 


(49)  <  By'  whom 
we  have  '  boldness' 
and  '  entrance,  with 
the'  confidence 

<  which  is'  by  the 
faith  of  him,  or  in 
him,  as  Beza  has 
it. 

(5c)  And  we'God's 
labourers,'  &c.  In 
anoth.  r  Bible,  We 
'  together  are  God's 
labourers.' 

(51)  Christ,  when 
we  were  yet  of  no 

<  strength,  died'  for 
the  '  ungodly.' 


which     was 
with  me. 


Corrected. 


(-2) And  his 

commandments  are 
not  '  grievous.' 


mandata  ejus  *  gra-  j  man d m en ts  :     A n d 


via  non  sunt,  «;  i.-^u.) 


(53)  %'  di-!  lUi^ 


his  commandments 
are  not  '  heavy.' 


—  All  1 


men  c  do 


g 

The  last  Trans,  of  fa 
the  Frotes.  Bible,  ^ 
Edit.  Lond.  anno  '/} 
1683.  ^ 

7"^ 

Corrected,    w 

ex 

— Yet   not  $ 
I,    but   the     $ 

irrace  of  God  # 

a 

fa 

k 

K 
ft 

y,1 

fa 

ft 
H 

Pi 
X{ 

°) 

Corrected.    ^ 

fa 

K 
(A 

r< 

For  when   we  <'\ 
■  -      4 
!  were  vet' with     fa 

j  out     strength,'  <K 

j  : n    d..ie    time      ^ 

Christ  died  t.a-^ 

the  ungodly.       ^ 

-Insread    of,  ^ 
:  •  hiico.r.mand-  g 
j  ments   arc   not  f> 
!  heavy,  they        g 

ay,     '  Ave  not  ^ 

ft 


C53) 


-All 


men 


»&«   owwa  capiunt, 

-~...-r-  y.  .    ..  'cerbum  i  savin ; 


Dt'     receive     this  j  *  cannot'receive  this 
!  saviir:. 


i  ievous. 


isiud,    ( 


:>r.: 


;  s^5s?s^?^s^3^^ 


—All   men  g 

4  cannot''    re-  ^ 
ceive    this      tt 


savins. 


Against  Free  Wile, 


77 


(47)     A    GAINST   Free-Will,   instead  of  Power,  they,   in  their  translation,  use   the  woi  d  Preroga- 

X"\    five  ;   and  Beza,   the  word  Dignity  ;    protesting  (n)  that   whereas,   in  other    places,    he  often 

translated  this  Greek  word,   Power  and  Authority,   here  he    rejected   both   indeed  against  Free- Will; 

which,   he  says,  the  sophists  would  prove  out  ot  this  place,    reprehending  Erasmus  for  following  them 

in  his  translation. But  whereas  the  Greek  word  is  indifferently  used  to  signify  Dignity  or  Liberty, 

he  that  wiil  translate  either  of  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  docs  Dignity  ? 
but  we  must  not  abridc,e  the  sense  of  the  Holy  Ghost  to  one  particular  meaning  ,  and  therefore  we 
translate  Potcstas  and  Power,  words  indifferently  signifying  both  Dignity  and  Liberty.  But  in  then- 
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.) 

(48)   By  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  la- 
boured with  me."  So  that,  by  this  latter,  it  may  be  evidently  signified,  that  the  grace  of  God,  and 
the  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  his  free-will  wrought  with  it  :  and  this  is  the  most  approved  interpretation  of  this  place, 
which  their  translation,  by  putting,   "  which  is,"  or,   "  which  was,"   into  the  text,  excludes. 

But  they  reprehend  the  vulgate  Latin  interpreter  for  neglecting  the  Greek  article,  not  considering 
that  the  same  many  times  cannot  be  expressed  in  Latin  ;  the  Greek  phrase  having  this  prerogative  above 
the  Latin,  to  represent  a  thing  more  briefly,  commodiously,  and  significantly  by  tire  article,  as  Jacobus 
Zcbcdai,  Jacobus  Alpha i,  Judas  Jacobi,  Maria  Clcophce  :  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  to  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  Ephesians,  (49)  where  they  say,  "  Confidence  is  by  Faith,"  as 
though  there  were  no  "  Confidence  by  Works."  The  Greek,  evarcsroilha-si  &* -m?  «rir£«?,  bears  not  that 
translation,  unless  there  were  an  article  after  Confidence,  which  is  not ;  but  they  add  it  to  the  text: 
as  aKo  Beza  does  the  like,  Rom.  8.  2.  and  their  English  Geneva  Testaments  after  him,  to  maintain  the 
heresy  of  imputative  justice  •  as  in  his  annotations  he  plainly  deduces,  saying  confidently,  "I  doubt 
not,  but  a  Greek  article  must  be  understood  ;"  and  therefore,  forsooth,  put  into  the  text  also.  He 
does  the  same  in  St.  James,  2.  v.  20.  still  debating  the  case  in  his  annotations,  why  he  does  so  ■  and 
when  he  has  concluded  in  his  fancy,  that  this  or  that  is  the  sense,  he  puts  it  so  in  the  test,  and  trans- 
lates accordingly.  But  if  they  say,  that  in  this  pl;*ce  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  be  but  one  sense  of  the  same.  Secondiv,  it  must  be  expressed,  when  wc  cannot  other- 
wise give  the  sense  ot  the  place,  as  Mar.  1 .  v.  6.  ik  t>3$  ra  'Oypta,  Ex  ca  qua  fait  Ur'ue,  where  the  vuleate 
interpreter  omits  it  not  ;  Inn  in  this  of  St.jPaul,  which  we  now  speak  of,  where  the  sense  is  doubtful 
and  the  Latin  expresses  the  Greek  sufficiently  otherwise,  he  leaves  it  also  doubtful  and  indifferent  not 
abridging   it,   as  they  do,   saying,    's  The  grace  ot   God  which  is  with  me." 

(5c)  Again,  ifi  tnis  other  place  of  the  Corinthians,  where  the  Apostle  calls  himself  and  his  fellow 
jueachers,  "  God's  co-adjutors,  co-bbourers,"  or  such  as  labour  and  work  with  God,  how  falsely 
have  their  first  translator-,  made  it,    let  themselves,    who  have  corrected  it  in  their  last  Bible,   judge. 

(51)  And  in  this  next,  the  Apostle's  words  do  not  signify,  that  "  We  had  no  strength,  or,  "'were 
without  strength;"  but  that  we  were  "  weak,  feeble,  infirm:"  and  this  they  corrupt  to  defend  their 
jalsc  doctrine,   "  That  free-wiil  v.  as  altogethei  lost  by  Adam's  sin.    (  o)  (p) 

(52)  \V  hen  they  have  bereaved  and  spoiled  a  man  ot  his  tree- will,  ami  left  him  without  all  strength 
fhey  go  -o  tar  in  this  point,  that  they  say,  the  regenerate  themselves  have  not  free-will  and  ability  ;&no 
not  by  and  with  the  grace  of  God,  to  keep  the  commandment.  To  this  purpose,  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;  hut  in  saying  "  they  are  not  grievous  " 
that  may  be  true,  were  they  never  so  heavy  or  impossible,  through  patience  ;  as  when  a  man  cannot  do 
as  he  would;  yet  it  grieves  him  not,  being  patient  and  wise,  because  lie  is  content  to  do  as  he  can,  and 
is  able. 

(53)  Our  Saviour  says  not,  in  this  place  of  St.  Matthew,  as  they  falsely  translate,  l£  A!!  men  cannot," 
but,  "  All  men  do  not  ;"   and  therefore,    St.    Augustine  says,    "  Because  all  will  not."  (q)      But  when 
our  Saviour  says  afterwards,    "  He  that  can  receive,    let  him  receive:"   He  adds  another  Greek  word  to 
express  that  sense,  0  owufi.tv®' %ufu»  XujiAa  :  whereas   by  the  Protestant  translation,   he  might  have    said 
•  Xuiav  xufUTU•     Vide  above. 

U  The 


Pro    •:'.  i.- ant  Translations  aoaj 


. 


;:>^?s5SJ^s<: 


v-=^<-  >•-=-*-- 


,  •  The  Book, 

;■        Cha    :    r, 
and 


Tl 


Vulgate.  Latin 
Text. 


The  true  English  aC-  '  Corruption?    in  the  Pro-  j  The  last  Tnm?    of  ^ 

i-     ,.     .r,    r>  i        I    testant    Bibles,    printed      t,::  l  *"tjl  -"  ~-  '"llv-'»  '., 

COrdinGftOtil'.RIie-         A    ,«        .    ,        '    *\r „,        Edit.    Loud,  anno  ft 

•    ,      -*  •  A.D.XJ6J, 1577, 1579.  „„  yj 

niish   i  ransuition.  i  16-^-  ft 


.:■  Romans,  (54)  Jgitur  sicut  per 


)  Cll  ip.     ;, 

'    v\  r.  1  8. 


Therefore,  as  b\ 

leiietum  in  om-  the  offence  of  one, 
us  homines  in  con- junto  all  men  to 
iemnjticnem :     sic    tl  I  condemnation  :    .so 


'per  urn  us    justi/iam  in 

i  cmnes  homines  in  justi- 
fied! ionem  vita. 


n 
ft 
ft 


;<>;  Romans, 
#  chap.  4. 


,  ver 

11 


j- 


;  2  Corinth. 
:.  chap.  5. 
.  ■  ver.  ult. 


lesians, 


1 


ft 

ft  Epl 
ijchap. 
w  ver.  6. 


V) 

/,  Daniel, 
;    chap.  6. 

VI  ver.  22. 

ft 


Romans, 


^  cl^p.  4. 
>4  ver.  6. 
ft1 


also,  l)V  the  justice 
of  one,  unto  all  men 
to  justification  of 
life. 


(54)     '  Likewise  j     There!  ;;e,  a 

bv  the  or'-jl,y  the  <>* 

-,    •   )i  one.   '  iucisr- 

1 L''  Jo 

,       ","  I    ne  :'. i    '...".  IV.C  up  ■ 

fault    came   on     ah' 


then, 
!enee 


a; 
ot   one, 


(55)  Credidit  Abra- 
ham Deo,  Iff  r.  put at 'am 
est   illi   iid  justitiam. 


(^6)  —  L'/  «oi  gf- 
ficeremur  just  it  ia  Dei 

ipSO.         hxciioai;*    0sa    ev 


(57)  7/2  gfj/5  gra- 
tijica-vit,  ixacnuaw,  nos 
in  dilee to  filio  suo. 


•  neii  to  condemna- 
tion :  go  bv  the  *  jus- 
tifying' of  one  '  the 
oenefic  abounded; 
towards'  all  men,! 
to  "  the'  justifica- 
tion of  life. 


>n     is 
i.  ven  so 

ot    one. 

ire  1 


,*-»  ■ 


ft 

ft 

ft 
ft 

men   to  l) 
natio. 

cv  me  w 

'  7    ft1 

'  the  w 
came   .  / 


1  unto 
lion  ot  iue 


Abraham  believed  !  (55)  Abraham 
God,  and  it  was  re-  believed  God,  and 
puted  him  to  'jus-  it  was  reputed  to 
tice.'  him  '  for'  justice. 


—  That  we  might 
be  made  the  'justice' 
of  God  in  him. 


(56)  That  we  '  by 
his  means  should  be- 
that  righteousness 
which  before'  God 
'  is  allowed.' 


men  '/' 
irica-  y; 

ft 

ft 
ft 

An^   it  was  'p 
accounted  unto  $ 


nun  *  to 
;eousne; 


■gJ 


I  (S8)  —  S^iia  eo- 
'  /7?/?2  cojustitia  hrcenta 
\  est  in  me. 


(59)  S/Vtt/  ci?  /J^7- 
•ivV/  d/W/,  t.tyu,  beati- 
tudincm  hominis  cui 
Dcus  accepto  fcrt  jus  - 
titiam  s  ine.  ope  rib  us. 


Wherein  he  hath  |  (57)  Wherein  he 
'  gratified  us'  in  his  j  hath  *  made'  us  'ac- 
beloved  Son.  '  cepted,'  (or, 'freely 

(accepted)'     in     his 
beloved  Son. 


That    we 
might   be 
made  the 
'righteousness' 
of  God  in  him, 


—  Because  before 
him,    c  justice 
found  in  me.' 


ft 

ft. 

y 

ft 

ft 

;[ 

ft 
ft 
ft 

Wherein  he  ft 
hath  made  us  ft 
'  accepted'  in  # 
the  Beloved.       $ 

ft 
ft 

ft 

ft 

ft 

For  as  much  ft 

as  before    him  ft 

'  Innocency      ft 

was    found     in  ft\ 

ft 

Instead  of  "(/{ 
'  termeth'  they  \{ 
say,  «  describ-  ^ 
eth  ,'  and  for  M 
'justice,'  they  ft 
have  «  righte-  Y> 
ousness.'  ^ 

ft 


(58)  Because  be- 
was  I  fore  him,  '  my'  jus- 
tice was  found  out. 


As  David  also 
c  termeth'  the  bless- 
edness of  a  man,  to 
whom  God  reputeth 
'justice"  without 
works. 


(59)  As  David 
'  describeth'  the 
blessedness  of  '  the' 
man,  '  unto'  whom 
God  '  imputeth 
righteousness.' 


Inherent   Tu stick. 
j 

(54)  TJR'ZA,  Jn  his  ^notations  on  Rom.  5.  18.  protests,  that  his  adding  10  this  text  is  especially 
XJ  against  Inherent  Justice,  which,  he  says,  is  ro  be  avoided  as  nothing  more.  His  false  trans- 
lation you  sec  our  English  Bibles  follow  ;  and  have  added  no  fewer  than  six  words  in  tiiis  one  verse - 
yea,  their  last  translations  have  added  seven,  and  some  of  these  words  much  different  from  those  of  their 
former  brethren  ;  so  that  it  is  impossible  to  make  them  agree  betwixt  themselves.  I  cannot  but  admire- 
to  see  how  torn  they  arc  to  suffer  the  Holy  Scripture  to  speak  in  behalf  of  Inherent  Justice. 

(55)  So  also  in  this  next  place,  where  they  add  the  word  "  for"  to  the  text,  «  And  it  was  reputed 
to  him  tor  justice,"  tor  "  righteousness"  says  their  last  righteous  work  ;  for  the  longer  they  live,  the 
further  the;  are  divided  from  justice  ;  because  they  would  have  it  to  be  nothing  else,  but  instead  and 
place  or  Justice;  thereby  taking  away  true  Inherent  Justice,  even  in  Abraham  himself.  But  admit 
mis  translation  of  theirs,  which,  notwithstanding  in  their  sense,  is  false,  must  it  needs  signify  not  true 
Inherent  Justice,  necause  the  Scripture  says,  it  was  reputed  for  Justice  ?  Do  such  speeches  import,  that 
it  is  not  so  indeed,  but  is  only  reputed  so?  Then  if  we  should  say,  this  shall  be  reputed  to  thee  "  for" 
bia'  "  tor  ']  great  benefit,  &c.  it  should  signify  it  is  no  sin  indeed,  nor  great  benefit.  But  let  them 
remember,  that  the  Scripture  uses  to  speak  of  sin  and  of  justice  alike,  Reputabitur  tlbi  in  beccetum,  «  It 
snail  be  .eputed  to  thee  lor  sin,"  as  St.  Hierom  translates  it.(r)  If  then  justice  only  be  reputed,  sin 
aiso  is  only  reputed  :  it  sin  be  m  us  indeed,  justice  is  in  us  indeed.  And  the  Greek  Fathers  make  it 
plain,  tn  at  "  lobe  reputed  unto  justice,"  is  to  be  true  justice  indeed;  interpreting  St.  Paul's  words, 
that  Abraham  obtained  justice,"  -  Abraham  was  justified  ;"  tor  that  is,  say  they"  "  It  was  reputed 
him  to  just.ee  And  bt.  James  testifies,   that   »  In  that  Abraham  was  justified  bv  faith  and  works,  the 

Scripture  was  fulfilled,"  which  says,  --It  was  reputed  .him  to  justice?'  Gen.  re  vr  o  in  which 
words  of  Genesis  there  is  not  «<  for  justice."  or  -instead  of  justice,"  as  the  English  Bibles  have  it. 
tor  trie  Hebrew  np^  y,  rctl>n*>  shouul  n°r  °e  -  translated,  especially  when  they  meant  it  was  so 
counted  or  repined  for  justice,   that  it  was  not  \^i'\zz  indeed, 

(56}   Again,  how  intolei ably  have  their  first  translations  corrupted  St.  Paul's  words,  2  Co,. 
though  the,r  latter  Bibles  have  undertaken  to  correct,   vet  their  heresv  would  not  surfer  them  10 
also  the  word  "  righteousness!"   h  is  death  to  them  to'hear  of 


r.  5.  which 


justice. 


(57  Here  again  they  make  St.  Paul  say,  that  God  made  us  »  accented,"  or  «  freely  accepted  in 
his  beloved  Son        (their  last  translation   leaves  out   Son  very    boldly,   changing  the  word'  his    into  the" 

Accepted  ,n  the  beloved,'  )  as  if  they  had  a  mind  to  say,  that  "In,  or  among  all  the  beloved  in  the 
world     God  has  only  accepted  us:"   As  they   make   the  Angel   in    St.  Luke  say"  to  our  blessed   Lady, 

Hail  !  freely  beloved,'  to  take  away  all  grace  inherent  and  resident  in  the  blessed  Virgin,  or  in  us  ; 
W  heieas  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  consequently,  is  hply  indeed  before  the  sight  of  God,  and  not  only  so  accepted  or  reputed,  a. 
they  imagine.  Which  St.  Chrysostom  sufficiently  testifies  in  these  words,  "  He  said  not,  which  he 
treely  gave  us,  but,  wherein  he  made  us  grateful ;  that  is,  not  only  delivered  us  from  sins,  but  als> 
made  us  beloved  and  amiable,  made  our  soul  beautiful  and  grateful,  such  as  die  Angels  and  Archangels 
desire  to  see,  and  such  as  himself  is  in  love  withal,  according  to  that  in  the  Psalm,  the  King  shall  de- 
rl^n^    T  '  1  WAKh,  thy  !,caut>-(s)      St-  Hie,om  speaking  of  baptism,   says,    «   Now  thou  ait  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  strengthened  from  our  Lord;"(t)  whence  it  is  plain,  that  by 
baptism  original  sin  being  expelled,  inherent  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. 

-  (58)  Another  falsification  they  make  here  in  Daniel,  translating,  «  My  justice  was  found  out;"  and 
m  another  Bible,  <<  My  unguiltiness  was  found  out,"  to  draw  it  from  Inherent  Justice,  which  was  in 
JJaniel.  In  their  last  edition  you  see  they  are  resolved  to  correct  their  brethren's  fault  ;  notwithstand- 
ing though  they  mend  one,  yet  they  make  another  ;  putting  innocency  instead  of  Justice.  It  is  verv 
strange  that  our  English  Protestant  divines  should  have  such  a  pique  against  justice,  that  thev  cannot 
endure  to  sect  stand  in  the  text,   whe.e  both  the  Chaldee,   Greek,   and  Latin  place  it. 

m  (59)  It  must  needs  be  a  spot  of  the  same  infection,  that  thev  translate  describcth  here  ;  as  though 
imputed  righteousness   (tor  so  they  had  rather  say,  than  justice)    were  the  description  of  blessedness. 

The 

•Jv?  D,n%?'  H-'  and  2A'  CEcUm* '"  C'ate.n*  PhdtIuS;  chap.  2,  ver.  23,  (s)  St.  Chrys.  in  this  place  of  the  Ephe- 
nans,     (t)  bt,  Hierom.  Lb.  3.  contra  Pelatfianos.  " 


So 


Protestant  Translations 


y)  The  Hook, 
ft  Chapter, 
ft      and  Ver. 

#  IT  brews, 
//*  chap.  10. 
t.  22. 

;{  i  Corinth. 
;.  chap.  13. 
$ver.  2. 

(■ 


^o^'^^^5^^s<rx<3^>s^5<:>s?s: 


S3^^^5^3S>^5S5S^^^>S3^3S^>SS<^^>^:?S>S: 


ft 
ft 


ft  1  Corinth. 

h  chap.  1 2. 

ver.  31. 


\ 

■J 
■' 

.; 

! 


$  St.  James 
t\  riian    .-, 


V) 

Q  ver. 


St.  Luke, 

l)  chap.  18. 

#  S'.  Mark, 
hap.  10. 

ft  iLU  :>*• 
^  and  char). 

e\  0.  \  el.  40. 

ft 

ft 
ft 


The  Vulgate  Latin  I 
Text. 


(6  )  Acccdamus 
cum  rcero  cqrdc  in 
'  plcniiudine*     fdei, 


(61)  Et  si  habuero 
'  omncm?  ■~^uv,  Fi-  \ 
dem,  it  a  id  monies 
tram  ft  rain,  char'da- 
tcm  autcm  non  habuc- 
ro,  nihil  sum. 


Et  adhuc  exceUcn- 
tiorcm  viam  vobis  dc- 
monstro. 


The  trueEnglish ac- 
cording to  theRhe- 
mish  Translation. 


(62)  Vides  quoniam 


Let  us  approach 
with  a  true  heart,  in 
'  fulness'  of  faith. 


And  if  I  should 
have  '  all'  faith,  so 
that  T  could  remove 
mount;1. ins, and  have 
not  charity,  I  am 
nothing. 

And  yet  I  shew 
you  a  *  more  excel- 
lent wav.' 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- 
testant Bi  i<  s,  printed 
A.D.1562,1577,1579 


Seest    thou     that 


(60)  Let  us  <  draw 
nigh'  with  a  true 
heart,  in4  assurance' 
of  faith. 


(61)  If  I  should 
have  '  whole'  faith. 
E'ctam  Jidem,  saith 
Beza,  for  omnen  fi- 
de m. 


Beza  in  Testa- 
ment. 1556,  trans- 
lates it,  «  Behold, 
moreover  also'  I 
shew  you  a  wav 
'  most  diligently.' 

And  in  another, 
viz.  of  1565.  And 
'  besides,'  I  shew 
you  a  way  *  to  ex- 
cellency.' 


(62)  Thou  seest 


fides   '  co  operabaturj  i  faith     '  did     work'  1  that    faith    <  was    a 
trv,ify»t  operibus  iliiu<.    with  his  works.  helper  of  his  works. 


Beza. 


(6$)  Et  Jesus  dixit  \      Thy    faith    hath        (63)    Thy  .  faith 
////',  respite,  fides  tuay  made  thee  whole.1   hath  'saved'  thee. 
te     '    salvum    fecit,' 


Vade,  fides  tua  i  te\      Thy    faith    hath 
sahum ■fecit*  l  made  thee  safe.' 


Thy    faith    hath 
saved' thee. 


The  last  Tran?.  of 
the  3'rotest.  .Bible, 
Edit.  Lond.  anno 
16S3. 


Let  us  draw 
near  with  a 
true  heart,  in 

'  full      assu- 
rance' of 
faith. 
<  All'  faith. 


Corrected. 


/J 

\\ 

ft 
ft 
ft 
ft 
ft 

c< 
ft 
ft 

ft 

ft 


ft 

_,  yj 

Corrected,     t) 

ft 


ft 

ft 

Thy  faith  |j 
hath  '  saved  # 
thee.'  ft 

ft 

yj 

Corrected. 


ft 
ft 


sSS3iSS?SS£^X^^;5^©£ae^«^5^SS  ^  :5^^5S2S55S5^55S£55£5S5S3£5d|& 


In  Defence  of  the  Sufficiency  of  Faith  alone.        8x 

ALL  other  means  of  salvation  being  thus  taken  away,  as  you  have  already  seen,  their  onlv  and  last 
refuge  is  Faith  alone  ;  and  that  not  the  Christian  Faith  contained  in  the  articles  of  the  Creed,  and 
such  like;  bur  a  special  faith  and  confidence,  whereby  every  man  must  assuredly  believe,  that  himself 
is  the  son  of  God,  and  one  of  the  elect  predestined  to  salvation.  It  he  he  not,  by  Faith,  as  sure  of 
this,   as  of  Chi'st's  incarnation  and  death,   he  shall  never  be  saved. 

(60)  For  maintaining  this  heresy,  they  torce  the  Greek  text  to  express  the  very  word  of  Assurance 
and  Certainty  thus  ;  "Leo  us  draw  nigh  with  a  true  heart,  in  assurance  ot  Faiih  :"  their  last  trans- 
lation makes  it,  "  Li  full  assurance  of  Faith  ;"  adding  the  won!  Full  1  >  what  it  was  before  ,  and  tiiat, 
either  be'  jsc  thev  w  mid  be  thought  to  draw  that  word  from  the  original,  or  else  because  they  would 
therebv  signify  such  an  Assurance  o;  Certainty,  as  should  be  beyond  ah  manner  ol  doubt  or  fear  ; 
thereby  excluding  not  only  Charity,   but  even  Hope  also,   as  unnecessary. 

(61)  The  word  in  the  Greek  is  far  different  from  'heir  express  u  ;  for  ir  signifies,  nr  pcrly,  the 
fulness  and  completion  of  anv  thing  ;  and  therefore,  the  Apostle  jjjns  it  sometimes  wiih  Faith,  some- 
times with  Hope,  (as  in  H  b.  6.  ver.  1 1.)  sometimes  with  Knowledge  or  Understanding,  (Col.  2.  vcr.  2.) 
to  signify  the  fulness  ol  aii  three,  as  the  Vulgate  Latin  interpretei  most  sincerely  Rom.  4.  ver.  21) 
translates  it.  Thus  when  the  Greek  signifies  "  Fulness  of  Faith,"  rather  than  "  Full  Assurance" 
(or,  as  Bcza  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  "  Ce  tain"  and  "  Assured  Faith," 
that  every  man  ought  to  have,  as  the-  say,  of  his  own  salvation.  Whereas  the  Greek  Fathers  ex- 
pound it  of  the  "  Fulness  of  Faith,"  that  every  faithful  man  must  have  oi  all  such  things  in  Heaven, 
as  he  sees  not  ;  namely,  that  Christ  is  ascended  thither,  that  he  shall  come  with  glory  to  judcre  the 
world,  6ic.  (u)  adding  further,  and  proving  out  of  the  Apostle's  words  next  following,  that  (the  Pro- 
testants)   "  only  Faith  is  not  sufficient,   be  it  ever  so  special  or  assured."  (v)— For  the  said  reason  do 

they  also  translate,  "  The  special  gift  of  Faith,"  (Sap.  3.  14.)  instead  of,  "  The  chosen  gift  of  Faith." 
.Another  gross  corruption  they  have  in  Ecclesiastieus,  chap.  5.  ver.  5.  But  because,  in  their  Bibles  of 
the  later  stamp,  they  have  rejected  these  books,  as  not  canonical,  though  they  can  shew  us  no  more 
reason  or  authoiity  tor  their  so  doing,  than  for  altering  and  corrupting  the  text,  I  shall  be  content  to 
pass  it  by. 

(62)  Ee'/.a,  by  corrupting  this  place  of  the  Corinthians,  translating  To  tarn  Fidcm  for  Omnem  Fidcm, 
thinks  to  exempt  from  the  Apostle's  words,  their  special  justifying  Faith  ;  whereas  it  may  be  easily 
seen,  that  St.  Paul  names  and  means  "  All  Faith,"  as  he  doth  "  All  Knowledge,"  and  "  All  Myste- 
ries," in  the  foregoing  words.  And  Luther  confesses,  that  he  thrust  the  word  "  only,  (only  faith") 
into  the  text,  (w) 

(63;  Also  by  his  falsifying  this  text  of  St.  James,  Ire  would  have  his  reader  think,  as  Ire  also  ex- 
pounds it,  '•  '1  hat  Faith  was  an  efficient  cause,  and  fruitful  of  good  Works;"  whereas  the  Apostle's 
words  arc  plain,  that  Faith  wrought  together  with  his  Works  ;  yea,  and  that  his  Faith  was  by  Work? 
made  perfect.  This  is  an  impudent  handling  of  Scripture,  to  make  Works  tire  fruit  only,  and  eCect  oi 
faith  ;    which  is  their  heresy. 

(64)  Again,  in  all  those  places  of  the  Gospel,  where  our  blessed  Saviour  requires  tire  people's  Faith, 
when  he  healed  them  of  corporal  diseases  only,  they  gladly  translate,  ':  Thy  Faith  hath  saved  thee," 
i3ther  than,  fi  Thy  Faith  hath  healed  thee,"  or,  "  Thy  Faith  hath  made  thee  whole."  And  this  thev 
do.  that  by  joining  these  words  together,  they  'Tray  make  it  sound  in  tire  ears  of  tire  people,  that  Faith 
saves  and  jus-tifies  a  man  :  for  so  Be/,a  note,  in  the  margin,  Fides  salvat,  "  Faith  saveth  ;"  whereas  the 
l"aith  that  was  here  required,  was  of  Christ's  power  and  omnipotence  onlv  ;  which,  as  Beza  confesses, 
may  he  possessed  by  the  Devil'  themselves      and  is  far  from  the  Faith  that  justifies.  (:;) 

But    tlrev    01      ;ay,    the  Greek    signifies  as  they  tianslatc  it:    I  grant  it  docs  so  ;   but    it  signifies    very 

>rally,  as.  by  their  own  translation,  in  these  places,  Mark  5  vcr.  26. 
n  ether  places,  where  they' translate,  "  J  .hah  be  wh  le,  ihey  were 
all  be  made  whole."  And  wiry  do  they  here  translate  ir  so  r  Because 
imports  rather  the  salvation  of  the  sou'  "  and  therefore,  when  Faith  is 
it  lather  "  Saved"  than  "  Healed"  to  insinuate  tiief-r  justification  by 
•'   Faith  0  ilv." 

But  '  w  contrary  to  the  doctrine  of  the  Ancient  Fathers  this  Protestant  error  of  ••  Faith  irlonc  jus- 
tifying" ;  ..    may  be  seen  by  those  who  please  to  read  So   Auourtine,    Dr  Fide  dc  Open-,   r.   14. 

']  o  conclude,    1  will  refer  my  Protestant  Solifidian  to  tire  words   of  St.  James    tire  Apostle..  w!i 
he  will  rind,    that  Faith  alone,    without  Works,  cannot  save  lum. 

X  Tb- 

(n)  ft.  Chrysost.  Theodore*.  '1  !  e<  phyl.  upon  Rom.  10.       (v)  St.  Chrysost.  Horn,  19.  c.  10.  cd  Heb.       (w)  L<!t!i 
torn.  2.  ml.  405.  Edit,  Witte.  anno  155J.     (x)  Beza  Annot.  in  1  Cor,  13.  2. 


'o:  in  monl 

v   to    be    he, i led   coi  ; 

Lei.  a  8. 

ver.  36,  46.  5c    and 

!     :i  ed,    h 

e  was  healed,   she   s 

thcV    V    iO 

x,    li  To  he    saved,' 

;oined  wi 

tit    it.   thev   translate; 

82 


Protestant  Translations  against 


%5 

V'.i 


£$<3£><^<S£5S 


:;vi^^.>w-'^ 


The  Book, 
Chapter, 
andVer. 

2  Thessa!. 
ch;ip.  2. 
ver.  ic. 


2  Thessal . 
chap.  3. 
ver.  6. 


1  Corinth, 
ciiap.  1 1 . 


The  Vulgate  Latin 

Text. 


Th»  H-n     F  n  crlUh  ar-  i  Corruptions   In   the  Pro-  I  The  last  Trans,  cf 

1  lie  tl  U- i-.nuM>->Il.av--  r  .  the  Protest    RM- 

tcstant    Bibles,    printed      ',.,,•  "  uU" 
A     ,^        ^  fc-cht.   Loud,  anno 

A.D.1562,  1577, 1579.       16, 


cordingtotheRhe- 
mish  Translation. 


ver.  2. 


Colossians, 
chap.  2. 
ver.  20. 


(65)  toque  f rat  res ) 

stilt:  iff  id  net  j   '  fra- 

dltlOllCS,  -x^^jO-ii;. 

anas  didicistis,  sive 
per  scrmoncm,  sive  per 
epistolam  nostram. 

—  [//  subtrahatis 
vos  ab  cmni  fratre 
ambulante  inordinate, 

iff  non  secundum  '  ira- 
dttioncm,*  quam  acce- 
perunt  a  nobis. 


Laudo  a titcm  vos 
fratrcs,  quod  per  om- 
nia mci  memorcs  estis, 
iff  sicut  tradidi  vobis, 
pracepta  me  a  tenet  is. 

X.CC\ix-q  TTXCil^KX,    tx;  mxcx- 


1  Peter, 
chap.  I. 
ver.  1 3. 


'66)  Si  ergo  mortui 
estis  cum  Christo  ab 
dementis  hujus  mundi : 
quid  adhuc  tanquam 
viventes  in  mundo  de- 

Cemitis  ?  r^oypuT^t^e. 


(67)  Scientes  quod 
non  corrupt  ibilibus  a  ti- 
ro, rcel  argentc  re- 
dempti  estis  de  vana 
vestra  conversatione 
pate  ma  traditionis. 

cX    7r.'     pxrxix^    VjAUV    x.X- 


Therefore,  bre- 
thren, stand  anil 
hold  the  <  tradi- 
tions' which  you 
!  have  learned,  whe- 
ther it  be  bv  word, 
or  bv  our  epistle, 

—  That  you  with- 
draw yourselves 
from  every  brother 
walking  inordi- 
nately,  and  not  ac- 
cording to  the 
6  traditions9  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  then  you  be 
dead  with  Christ 
from  the  elements  of 
this  world,  why  do 
vou  yet  *  decree'  as 
living  in  the  world? 


(Gj)  For  *  tradi- 
tions,' they  say. 
4  ordinances.' 


Corrected. 


Instead  of  *  tra- 
dition,' they  trans- 
late, '  instructions.' 


Corrected. 


—  And  *  keep  the 
ordinances,'  as  1 
ha\  e  *  preached' 
unto  vou. 


Knowing  that 
notwithcorruptible 
things,  gold  or  sil- 
ver, you  are  re- 
deemed from  your 
vain  conversation  of 
vour  fathers'  tra- 
dition. 


(66)  If  <ye'  be  dead 
1  withChrist  from  the 
I  'rudiments' of  *  the' 
'■  world,  why,  '  as 
I  though'  living  in 
the  world,  '  are  ye 
led  with  traditions?' 
and,  '  are  ye  bur- 
thened  with  tra- 
ditions ?' 

(67)  '  You  were' 
',  not  redeemed  with 
'corruptible  things, 
;  gold  or  silver,  from 
;  your  vain  conver- 
sation '  received  by 
the'    tradition   '  of 


ces 


?' 


y; 

k 
n 

;■! 

y\ 
n 

y\ 

yj 

yi 


And 

keet?  the  '  or- 
dinances/  as 
I  have  deli- 
vered them 
to  vou. 

.__  Why, 
as  though  liv- 
ing in  the 
world,  are 
vou  '  subject 
to     ordinan- 


i 
ft 

ft 
y 

y 
ft 
ft 
ft 

ft. 

8 

ft 

ft 

ft 
ft 


the'  fathers. 


—  From 
your     vain 
conversation 
'  received  by 
tradition 
from  your 
fathers.' 


rSK^ 


AP  O  S  T  O  L I  C  A  L    T  R  A  D 1  T  I  ON  S  , 


;   living   in   the  world,   are  you   led  with  traditions  ?"    And  a; 
;ally,   "  Why  are    ye  burthened  with  traditions  ?"    Doubtless, 


A  GENERAL,  mark,  wherewith  all  Heretics  that  have  ever  disturbed  God's  Church  have  been 
branded,  is,  ;-  To  reject  apostolical  traditions,"  and  to  fly  to  the  Scripture,  as  by  themselves  ex- 
pounded for  their  ';  only  rule  of  faith  "  We  read  not  of  any  heresy  sinee  the  Apostles'  tune,  on  which 
this  character  has  been  more  deeply  stamped,  than  in  those  of  this  last  age,  especially  the  first  heads  of 
them,  and  those  who  were  the  Interpreters  and  Translators  of  the  Scriptures;  whom  we  find  to  have 
been  posoessed  with  such  prejudice  against  apostolical  tradition,  that  wheresoever  the  Holv  Scripture 
speaks  against  certain  traditions  of  the  Jews,  there  all  tlie  English  translations  follow  the 'Greek  ex- 
actly, never  omitting  to  translate  the  Greek  word -arapa^'o-jf,  "tradition."  On  the  conttarv,  whereso- 
ever the  sacred  text  speaks  in  commendation  ot  traditions,  to  wit,  such  traditions  as  the  Apostles  deli- 
vered to  the  Church,  there  (65)  all  their  hist  translations  agree  not  to  follow  the  Greek,  which  is  still 
the  self-same  word  ;  but  tor  traditions,  use  the  words  ordinances  or  instructions,  preachings,  institu- 
tions, and  any  word  eise,  rather  than  tradition  :  Insomuch,  that  Beza,  the  master  of  our  English 
scripturists,  translates  the  word  -Era^j-fi?,  traditam  doctrinam,  "  The  doctrine  delivered,"  putting  the 
lingular  number  tor  the  plural,    and  adding   k-  doctrine  '  of  his  own  accord. (y) 

Who  could  imagine  their  malice  and  partiality  against  traditions  to  be  so  great,  that  they  should  all 
agree,  in  their  first  translations  1  mean  ;  for  they  could  not  but  blush  at  it  in  their  last,  with  one  consem: 
io  duly  and  exactly,  in  ail  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?  I  appeal  to  their  consciences,  whether 
these  tilings  were  not  done  on  purpose,  and  with  a  very  wicked  intention,  to  signify  to  the  Reader, 
riiat  all  traditions  are  to  be  leproved  and  rejected,   and  none  allowed. 

(66)  In  some  places  they  do  so  gladly  use  this  word  tradition,   that   rather  than   want   it,   they  make 
bold  to  thrust  it  into  the  text,  when  it  1-:  not  in  the  Greek  a;  all  ;   as  you  see  in  this  place  of  the  epistle 
*o  the  Colossians.(z) — 4i  Why,   as  thou 
another   English    Bible  reads  more  here 

they  knew  as  we'll  then,   as  they  do  now  at  this  day,   that  this  Greek  word  coy^%,   doth  not  signify  tra 
dition;   yea,   they  were  not  ignorant,   when  a   little  before,   in   the  same  chapter,   and   in  other-*  places, 
themselves  translate  ooypxlx,   "  ordinances,1'   u  decrees. "(a)      Was  not  this  done  then  to  make  the  ve-rv 
name  of  tradition  odious  among  the  people  ? 

And  though  some  of  these  gross  corruptions  are  corrected   by  their  last  Translators,   yet  we  have  ns 
reason  :o  think  they  were  amended  out  of  any  good  or  pure  intention,   but  the  rather  to  defend  some  o! 
■their  own  traditions,   viz.  wearing  of   the  rochet,  surplice,   four-cornered  cap,   keeping  the  first  day  in 
the   week  holy,   baptizing  infants,   cVc.  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  tradi- 
tion,  were  forced   to  translate  tradition  in  some  places,   where  it  is  well   spoken  ot.     But,   I   say,   this 
could  not  be  from  any  pure  intention  of  collecting  the  corrupted  Scripture  ;   but  rather  for  the  said  self- 
end  ;    which  appears  evidently  enough  from  their   not  also  correcting  other  notorious  falsifications,    (as 
1  Pet.  1.  18.)  (07)    "  You  were  not   redeemed  with  corruptible  tilings,   from    your   vain   conversation 
received   by  tradition  from  your  fathers  ;"   where  the  Greek   ix.  t«?  fiaraiaj  vpm  ai/arpop??  <mxroo^»aoaJTii,   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  delivered  by  the  Fathers:"  But  because  it  sounds 
with  the  simple  people,   to  be  spoken  against  ihe  traditions  oi   the  Roman   Cfiurch,   they  were   as   glad 
£0  suffer  it  to  pass,   as  the  former  Translators  were,  for  the  same  reason,   to  foist  in  the  word  tradition  ; 
and  tor  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  likeness  of  words,     in  their  false 
translations.     But  concerning  the  word  Tradition,   they  will  tell  us,   perhaps,   the   sense   thereof  is  in* 
eluded  in  the  Greek  word,  Delivered.      We  grant  it:  But  would  they  be  content,   if  we  should  always 
expressly  add   tradition,   where  it  is  so  included  ?  Then  should   we  say   in   the  Corinthians,    "  I  praise 
you,   that  as  1  have  delivered  to  you,   by  tradition,   you   keep  my  precepts  or   traditions." — And  again, 
"  For  I  received  of  our  Lord,  which  also  i  delivered  unto  you,  by  tradition. (b) — And  in  anothei  place, 
"  As  they,  by  Tradition,  delivered  unto  us,  which  from  the  beginning  saw,"  eke.  and  suck  like,  by  their 
example,   we  should  translate  in   thi^  sort.      But  we  use  not  this  licenti  >us  manner   in  translating  the 
Holy  Scriptures  ;    neither  is  it  a  Translator's  part,    but  an  Interpreter's,   and  bis  that  makes  a  commen- 
tary :   Nor  does  a  good  cause  need  any  other  translation  than  the  express  text  of  the  Scripture. 

But 


(y)  2Thess.  2,  3.     (z)  Bib.  J579.     (a)  Col.  2.  14.  Eph.  2.  15,     (b)    1  Cor,  ix.  ver.  :,  23.  Luk.  l.v,  2, 


8,  Protestant  Translations,  &c. 

P   ,  -r  „„  ,-  V,  tint  our  Vuljatc  I  atin  Ins,  in  this  place,  the  word  tradition.  ;   we  grant  it  Ins  so, 

Hut  i!    jgu  sa.  .(.C;   mat  out       u.s                    r  ,,  M,intcd  above,  profess  to  tianshtc  llic  Greek, 

;1„,1  therefore  we  also  translate  arcorJmgK  ■  f>  "     ™™,     Litis  the  worst  of  all,   though 

.,„„  no:  our  Vulgate  In,,,,   wh.ch  vou  co  ulunn  lap,     el     and      ^                 di          fo||ow  [hc  ,*, 

Bc».   your  ouster     P^^^^^^n  vo„' find  h  seen,  tonnke  for  your  purpose?  This  is  your 
vu!:n-e  Latin,   laiher  than  ,«  t.ieel  ,  ,         ,     |(  (]iff(,r  (rom  ,,,c  Greek  .   and  ano. 

''«>'  ani1  '"constancy-      One   .vh.lc     o    w    I  tollo t,  ^^  ^^  ^ 

lin,B  V"'  Tre',he'vciS. te      1  h      o,M   ^  of  t"  d,tions,'bu,,   ^^  as  ii .is   in   the 

&t:;  y'et 'her:  ,Ur  sincere  brethren  translate,   ""why  are  ye  burthen*  with  ,rad,t,onsr" 

,    1!  rt.Uro  l-olrter  up  ihcir  errors  and  heresies,  without   sincerely  following  either  the  Gree'- 
,':•     f- tod     "  leas!,  why  do  .Lev  no,  follow  !  Doth  the  Greek   »«f^,   induce  them    to 


fne  Greek     a,  leas,     w    ,*,,  uv  no     o  .o „      ~u        ■-  ^^ .   (.     ^, 

5  £c'fo  ce  ° Cm?o, ^1*.  Ort»«,  fo;  Justifications     Elder  fo,    Priest,  Grave  tor 

tU-    lUIlt     im-iii  . .      „„,„.,,tnrtPouc      trv     t    It'll'         irrf(lft„ 


at  iii 
inn  i 


lin         for  J  -  To  !    Who'e  they    arc  afraid  of  being  disadvantageous  to  then-   heresies, 

they  scruple  not  to  reject  and  forsake  both  the  Greek  ana  Latin. 

Th-uoh  Protests     in  the  last   translation   of  the    Bible,    have  indeed  corrected  this  error  in  several 

'       l'V      n°  m    r""'   rDOce    thereby  to  defend   themselves   against   their    puntanica     brethren,   when 

•    :    L1   u'm  with' e;;-al  Popish   observations,   ceremonies,   ami   traditions,   which    they  cannot 

nn  bv^  Scrioture    alone,   without   being   forced,   as  is  said,   to    fly   to   unwritten   tradition,  :  \  et, 

Vhev  either dd  oute  with,   or  write  against,   Catholics,   they  utterly  deny  traditions,   and  stick  fast 

ifre  t4uu!e  alonC   for  -heir    "  only  W  of  faith  :"   Falsely   asserting,   that  the  Scripture  was  re- 

.       ed  by  the  primitive  Church  as  a  «  perfect  rule  of   faith. 

Thc«e  arc  the  words  of  a  late  ministerial  (e)  guide  of  the  Church  of  England,  -The  Scripture  was- 
vet(v7  whcnSr  Augustine  was  sent  into  England)  received  as  a  perfect  rule  o  faith  :  tor  which 
he  cites  another  authority  like  his  own.  En:  how  true  this  ,s,  let  .he  Holy  tathers  of  the  first  hve 
hundred  \  ears  satisfy  us. 

t       .1         „,\^  rsf  s,    pnn-i     c-,  The«s.  chao.  ic)   affirm?,   that   "  Hereby  it 
St    Chrv^ostom,   expounding  the  words  ot   bt.  raui,    ^    ''    V         v      ■  ■ 
-n-e.'       hat  the  Apostles  did  not  deliver  all  things  by  eristie,   but  many  things  withou     writing; am, 
these  are  worthy  of  faith:    Wherefore  also,   let  us  esteem   the  tradition  of  the  Church   to  be  be!. even. 
I:  is  a  tradition/  seek  no  further. "(f) 

And  the  same  exposition  is  .riven  by  St.  Basil,  Theophyhct,  and  St.  John  Damascene  :  As  also  by 
S,  Fmphaniu*-  wlosnvs,  »  We  must  use  tradition,  for  all  things  cannot  be  received  from  divine 
S  Vio  t  wheVefore  the  holy  Apos.les  have  delivered  some  things  by  tradition  :  Even  as  t he  hoy 
Apostle  says,  as  1  have  delivered  to  you,  and  elsewhere;  so  1  teach,  and  have  delivered  in  the 
Churches,  "(g) 

S-     Wustine,   proving  that   those  who  were  baptized  by  Heretics  should   not   here-baptized,   says, 

<<  The  Apostles  commanded  nothing  hereof;    but  that  doctrine  wh.ch  was    opposed  herein  aga:-  st  Cv- 

prian,    is  to  be  believed   to  proceed  f.om  theor  tradition,    as   many   things  be,    which  tae  Church  holds; 

.-,,  j  believed   to  he  commanded  of    the  Ape,,;!-;,    akoc  ugh    tnev  art    not    »n  ,en.      (h.) 

,t    this  great  doctor  ate  so  clear,   that  Mr   Cartwr.ght,  (.)  a  Protestant,   speakmg  mcrcoi. 

v,     -To  allow  St.  Augustinc-s  words,   is  to  bring  in  V  pery  again.         Juu\  in  anotner  place^  (k)         i 

„,ur,c    a  good   judgment,    then   there  be  som,    things  commanded  of    Goo     with 

;e  not  in  t!  e  Scriptures,   and   thereupon    no   sumcent   doctrine  contained  in  the    Scriptures.         Hc-w  to 

..  .2  with  ill.   doctrine  of  our  present  ministerial  guiues  of   the  Churcn  of   England,  ^  w  no 

epriniitivi  times,  "  The  Su  iptm  e  wasreceivtd  as  a  perfected  only  iuIc  of  Jaim,      w? 

i   .  a  ..,,!s    ha  .    1  am  conhd-  nt,   no  wise   man,   who  has  either  honor-,   creuit,  oi  respect  tor  truth,  will 

The 


are  to  urn.; 


I  .  ,covt.T    ,f  ..      Ri       ....    ,,  |     ;,  ;>:!.    in  Nov.   Test.    1556.      (e)   See  the  Pamphlet,  called,  a 

c       ;  -'i     '      ,                                         ,    .;  l)ocuii;ct.f  tU  Church  of  England,  &cpag.  13.  n.  24.      (t)   bt.  Chrys. 

•   ,:  Spirit    {;i  . -.   c.  29.  Thcophil.  in  2  Thess.   2.  Damasc.  cap.  17.  de  lmag. 

V.;".      ".';,'  t-c  liapt.  contra  Don.  lib.  5.  cap.  23.      (i)  InWhitg.  Dcf.p.  103.      (k) 


LnU  his  Sc-u:.d  Reply  against  V.'lutg.  Pait  1.  pag.  ^4>  y5?  ^^^ 


Protestant  Translation  against  the  Sacrament  of  Marriage.       8  c 


$  The  Book,  The  Vulgate  Latin 

k 


Chapter, 
and  Ver. 


Text. 


d  Ephesians,  Sacramcntwn,  uv- 

Kh  c*  5*  v*  32»  \rr,f™»  'J0C  MPgnuvi  est* 


K 


< 


The  true  English  ac- 
cording  to  theRhe- 
mish  Translation. 


This  is  a  great 
*  Sacrament.' 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro-    The   last   transl.  )/( 
testant   Bibles  printed 
A.D.     1562,     1577, 

lS79» 


This   is  a  *  great 
Secret.' 


^3£5£5^:^5i£3!££C5£^3£23^3S3£3£5^^ 


of  the  Protest- 
ant Bible,  edit,  vj 
Lon.an.  1683.  y) 

This  is  a  great  •> 

*  Mvsterv.'    V 
K 

ft 

y. 


THE  Church  of  God  esteems  Marriage  a  Holy  Sacrament,  as  giving  grace  to  the 
married  persons,  to  live  together  in  love,  concord,  and  ■fidelity.  But  Protestants, 
who  reckon  it  no  more  than  a  civil  contract,  as  it  is  amongst  infidels,  translated  this  text, 
accordingly,  calling  it,  in  their  first  translations,  instead  of  a  "  Great  Sacrament,"  or 
*«  Mystery,"  as  in  the  Greek,  a  "  Great  Secret." 

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 
"  Mystery,"  as  it  is  in  the  Greek  ?  doubtless,  they  can  give  us  no  other  reason,  but  that 
they  wished  only  to  avoid  both  those  words,  which'are  used  in  the  Latin  and  Greek  Church, 
to  signify  Sacrament ;  for  the  word  Mystery  is  the  same  in  Greek,  that  Sacrament  is  in  Latin  : 
and  in  the  Greek  Church,  the  Sacrament  of  the  Body  and  Blood  itself,  is  called  by  the 
name  of  Mystery,  or  Mysteries ;  so  that,  if  they  should  have  called  Matrimony  by  that 
name,  it  would  have  sounded  equally  well  as  a  Sacrament  also:  but  in  saving,  "it  is  a 
great  Secret,"  they  are  sure  it  shall  not  be  taken  for  a  Sacrament. 

But  perhaps  they  will  say,  Is  not  every  Sacrament  and  Mystery  in  English,  "  a  Secret?" 
Yes,  as  Ange'3  js  a  "Messenger;"  Priest,  an  "  Elder ;"  Apostle,  "One  that  is  sent';" 
Baptism,  "Washing;"  Evangelist,  "  A  Bringer  of  good  News;"  Holy  Ghost,  "  Holv 
Wind;"  Bishop,  "  Overseer  or  Superintendent :"  But  when  the  holy  Scripture  uses  these 
words  to  signify  more  excellent  and  divine  things  than  those  of  the  common  sort,  pray  does 
it  become  translators  to  use  profane,  instead  of  ecclesiastical  terms,  and  thereby  to  disgrace 
the  writing  and  meaning  of  the  Hoiv  Ghost. 

The  same  Greek  word,  in  all  other  places,(l)  thev  translated  Mvstery;  who,  therefore,  can 
imagine  any  other  reason  for  the  translating  of  it' Secret  in  this' place,  than  lest  it  might 
seem  to  make  against  their  heretical  opinion,  "  That  Marriage  is  no  Sacrament?17  though 
the  Apostle  makes  it  such  a  Mvsterv,  or  Sacrament,  as  represents  no  less  than  the  conjunc- 
tion 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  vour  Wives  ;  a 
Christ  loved  the  Church."  (m)  And  Fulk  grants,  that  "  Augustine  and  'come  other'  of 
the  Ancient  Fathers  take  it,  that  Matrimony  is  a  great  Mystery  of  the  conjunction  of 
Christ  and  his  Church.''  (n) 

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  it  here,  but  to  shew  the  reader  how  into- 
lerably partial  and  crafty  they  were  in  their  first  translations. 


Here  follow  several  heretical  ADDITIONS,  and  other  notorious  falsifications,  &c. 

Y  "  The 


MJ'T  3-  £°J-  T>  ™"-  z6'  EP,ies-  3-  >*r.  9.   1  Cor.  15,  ver,  i5.    (m)  St.  Aug.  de  Nvpt.  &  Concur).  lib,  «.  c.   r: 
(nj  l'uik.  in  JKhen%  Test,  in  Jiphcs.  5.  32,  sect,  c. 


r ROT EST 


c 


OR R OPTIONS 


#  The  Book, 
d  Chapter, 
$      and  Ver. 

(A 

^  2  Parahp. 
$  or  Chron. 
Reap.   36. 


:;^^:^3^?er;^  :r:^>^^ 


The  Vulgate  Latin 
Text. 


I 

ft  Acts  Apos. 
6  cap.  9. 
ft  ver.  22. 

(,  1  St.  Peter, 
y  ver.  25. 

g  1  Corinth. 
L;  rap.  9. 
er.  17. 
)  St.Jan.ec, 

y;  ver.  o. 

Y{ 

A 

\'l  Colossians, 

yj  cap.   1. 

$  vcr"  23- 

Af 


(  6  8 )  Rcliqua  a  litem 
rcrborum  ^joakim,  & 
abominationum  ejus, 
quas  opcratus  est  & 
qua  invents  sunt  in 
co  contincntur  in  libro 
regum  juda  &  Is- 
rael. 


(69)  Et  confundc- 
bat  yudaos  qui  habi- 
tabant  Damasci  qfflr- 
mans  quoniam  hie  est 
Christus. 


(jo)  Vcrbum  ciuicm 
Domini  manet  in  ater- 
num ;  hoc  est  autcm 
vcrbum  quod  evange- 
lixatum  est  in  vos. 


(71)  Major  em  au- 
tcm dat  gratiam. 


(72)  Si  i 'amen  per - 
mamiis  in  fide  fun- 
dati,  &  stabiles,  & 
immobilcs  a  spe  evan- 
gclii  quod  audistis, 
quod  pradicatum  est 
in  universa  crealura 
qua  sub  codo  est.] 


The  trueEnglish  ac- 
cording to  theR  he - 
misii  Translation. 


But  the  rest  of  the 
words  of  Joakim, 
and  of  his  abomi- 
i  nations  \v  Inch  he 
'  vvroup-hr,  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. 


Corruptions  in  the  Pro- I  Tl^  Iait  Trans,  off? 
tenant  Bibles,  printed  the  Trotes.  Bible,  W 
A    1)    ,  -A,    ,  ,  _.,,      ■     i-i'i;.    Lo.ul.   anno  y) 

t\.u.  1502, 15/7,1;, 79.  ]    iAQ„  (A. 


163; 


'■'■>     The    1  est    oi  i      Corrected,    $ 
the    :,.:>   of  Jekoaki  g 

mil    i:i>    aooinmati 


)  carved  images  that  ! 
J  w.  ere      laid       to        his  j 

charge,'  behold  thev  I 
j  are  written  in  the  ( 
I  book    of    the    kings  of 

Judah  and  Israel. 


But  the  word  of 
our  Lord  remaineth 
for  ever:  and  this 
is  the  word  that  is 
evangelized  among 
you. 

And  giveth  great- 
er graces. 


If  yet  ye  continue 
in  the  faith  ground- 
ed and  stable,  and 
immovable  from  the 
hope  of  the  Gospel 
which  you  have 
heard,  which  is 
preached  among  al) 
creatures,  &c. 


(69)  Saul  confound- 
ed the  Jew  s,  proving 
'  by  conferring  one 
Scripture  with  ano- 
ther,' that  this  is  very 
Christ. 


(70)  The  word  of 
the  Lord  endureth  for 
ever  :  and  this  is  the 
word  which  '  by  the 
j  Gospel'  was  preached 
unto  you. 


(71)  But  «  theScrip- 
:ure'  olfereth  greater 
-race. 


(72)  If  ye  continue 
stablished  in  the  faith, 
ami  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, 

'  whei  eof '  ye  have 
heard  '  and  which  hath 
been'  preached. 


ft 

a: 

g 

.: 

yj 


% 


Corrected. 


i 


— And  this  v,[ 
is  the  word,  '■{ 
which  <  byg 
the  Gospel*  is  g 
preached  un-  1a 


to  you. 

But 'he5  giv- 
eth     more 
grace. 

—Which  ye  ft 

have  heard,  n 
i  and  which  y> 
was'  preach-  ^ 
ed  to  every  \{ 
creature.         $ 


^■^,2S2S3£35£5£/5iS25S5S^ 


BY    ADDING   TO    THE   TEXT. 


87 


uSj  V  HAVE  not  set  down  the; 


! 


lew  examples  of   their  auditions,    as  if  they  were  all  the  only  places 
u;>:ed  atcr  this  manner;    for   if  you  observe  well  in  the  fore-oni,/ 
and    that    so    frequently   done,   and  with   such, 
had  been  privileged  by  especial    license    to   add  to,    or  dimi- 


mis  ana  diminutions 
an  lators 


chapters,    you  will  find   both  add 

wonderful  boldness,   as  it'  ihoe 

nish  from,   the  sacred  te.xi    at   their  pleasures :   Or,   as  if  theTnsclves  had  been  only   excepted 'from    that 

general  curse  denounced  ag  in  t  ail  such  as  either  add  to,  or  diminish  from  it,   in  the  close  of  the  Holy 

Bible   (Apocalypse  21    vei.   iS,    r..l    in  these  words,    "  For  I  testify  to  every  one,   hearing  the  words  of 

the  prophesy 


le  prophesy  of  his  hook  :  F  an>  man  shall  add  to  these  things,  God  shail  add  unto  bun  the  plagues 
'lirten  in  this  be  ok.  And  it  any  man  shall  diminish  of  the  words  of  the  hook  of  this  prophesy,  God 
nil  take  away  h  s  part  out  oi  the  book  of  life,  and  out  of  the  holy  city,   and  of  these  things'  that  bf* 

written  in  this  book."'  ° 

Against  holy  Images  they  maliciously  add  to  the  text  these  words,  "  Carved  Images,  that  were  laic 
to  his  charge."  A;>d  to  what  intent  is  this,  but  to  deceive  the  ignorant  Reader,  and  to  foment  his 
hatred  against  the  Images  of  Christ,  and  his  Saints?  As  they  have  done  aiso  in  another  place,  (Rom. 
ii.  4.)  where  they  maliciously  add  the  word  "  Image"  to  the  text,  where  it  is  not  in  the  Greek,  say- 
ing, instead  of  "  1  have  left  me  seven  thousand  men,  who  have  not  bowed  their  knees  to  Baal,"' thus 
"   1  have  left  me  seven  thousand  men,   who  have  not  bowed  their  knee  to  the  image  of  Baal.'^o'l 

(69)  "  By  conferring  one  Scripture  with  another:"  This  is  added  more  than  is  in  the  Greek  in  fa- 
vour of  their  presumptuous  opinion,  that  the  comparing  of  the  Scriptures  is  enough  for  any 'man  to 
understand  them  himself,  solely  by  his  own  diligence  and  endeavour  ;  and  thereby  to  reject  'both  tin- 
commentaries  ot   the  Doctors,   and  the  exposition  of  holy  Councils,   and  the  Catholic  Church. (p) 

(70)  '•'  By  the  Gospel:"  These  words  arc  added  deceitfully,  and  of  ill  intent,  to  make  the  sim- 
ple Reader  think,  that  there  is  no  other  word  of  God,  but  the  written  word;  for  the  common 
Reader,  hearing  this  word  Gospel,  conceives  nothing  else.  But  indeed  ail  is  Goso 
Apostles  taught,   either  by  writing,  or  by  tradition,   and  word  of  mouth. 

It  is  written  of  Luther,  (q)  that  in  his  first  translation  of  the  Bible  into  the  German  tongue  he  left 
out  these   words  of  the   Apostle  clearly,    "  This  is   the   Word  which   is  evangelize  ' 


whatsoever  tl 


St.  Peter  does  here  define  what  is  the  word  of  God,   8 
not  that  only  which  is  written. 


,   ;;   i  hat  which  is  preached"   to   \ 


«  to    you  ;"    because 
.'ou,   and 


(71)  In  this  place  they  add  to  the  text  the  words  "  the  Scripture;"  where  the  Apostle  may  as  well 
and  .nd.fxerently  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  theirs  intimates,  by  inserting 
me  word  He:  "  But  He  giveth  more  grace:"  Though  this  is  more  than  they  can  stand  by  But  the? 
will  never  be  prevented  from  inserting  their  commentary  in  the  text,  and  restraining  the  "  Holy 
Ghost  to  one  particular  sense,  where  his  words  seem  to  be  ambiguous,  winch  the  Latin  internretcr 
never  presumed  to  do,  but  always  leaves  it  as  open  to  either  signification  in  the  Latin,  as  he  found  it  in 
:he  Greek. 

(72)  In  this  last  place  they  alter  the  Apostle's  plain  speech  with  certain  words  of  their  own  •  for 
they  will  not  have  him- say,  "  Be  immovable  in  the  Faith  and  Gospel,  which  you  have  heard  which 
/ias  been  p. cached;"  but,  »  Whereof  you  have  heard  how  it  was  preached  -"as  though  he  sooke  nor 
cf  the  Gospel  preached  to  then.,  but  of  a  Gospel  which  they  had  only  heard3  of,  that  was  preached  in 
tie  world.  J  l   v-av-JJt'u  ni 

The  Apostle  exhorts  the  Colossians  to  continue  grounded  in   the  Faith  and  Gospel,   which  thev  7<ad 
heard  and  received  from  their  first  Apostles  (r)      But    our  Protestant,,    who  with  Hvmenaeus  and  Aiex 
ander,   and  other  old  Heretics,   have  fallen  from  then  fnsi  taith,   appiove  not  of  this  exhortation/ 

It  is  certain  that  these  words,  «  V/bereof  you  have  heard  hew  it  was  preached."  are  'not  so  in  thf. 
Greek;  but,  -Which  vou  have  heard,  wl.kl:  I:-,  r-:m  preached:"  As  if  it  were  said,  that  thev 
should  continue  constant  in  the  Faith  and  Gospel,  which  themselves  had  received,  and  which  was  th  I 
preached  and  received  in  the  whole  world. 


In 


(o)  Bible  1562.     (p)  Bible  1577-     (q)  Lind.  Dubitat  p.  S3,     (r)   i  Tira  cap.  1.  ver.  6. 


88  Protestant  Corruptions 

In  Cor.  cap.  14.  ver.  4.  where  ic  is  said,  "  He  that  speaketh  with  tongues,  euiheth  himself;"  the 
Bible  pruned  1683,  translates  thus,  "  fie  that  speaketh  in  an  unknown  tongue,  edifieth  himself:"  So 
likewise  in  the  13,  14,  10,  and  27th  verses,  they  make  the  same  addition;  so  that  in  this  one  chapter 
thev  add  the  word  "  unknown"  no  less  than  five  times  to  the  text,  where  it  is  not  in  the  Greek.  And 
ihis  they  do,  on  purpose  to  make  it  seem  to  the  ignorant  people,  that  Mass  and  other  ecclesiastical 
offices  ought  noc  to  lie  said  in  Latin  :  Whereas  there  is  nothing  here  either  written  or  meant  of  any 
other  tongues,  but  such  as  men  spoke  in  the  primitive  Church  by  miracle;  to  wit,  barbarous  and 
strange  tongues,  which  could  not  be  interpreted  commonly,  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  tongues,  as  being  the  common  languages  of  the  world,  and  or  the 
learned  in  every  citv  ;  and  in  which  also  the  Scriptures  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   lantruaee,   peculiar  to   ail    people  ;   but  in  a  learned  and    known   speech,   capable  ot   beine: 

£>  DO7'  ,  1  ,  -11 

interpreted  by  thousands  in  every  country,   thougn  not  by  every  illiterate  person. 

I  would  gladly  know  from  our  Translators,  what  moved  them  to  add  the  word  f;  unknown"  in  :ome 
places,  and  not  in  others,  where  the  Greek  word  is  the  same  in  all  r  Lor  instance,  in  the  filth  verie  of 
this  chapter,  where  the  Apostle  wishes  that  all  sitould  speak  with  tongues,  they  translate  exactly  ac- 
cording to  the  Greek,  without  adding  to  the  text  ;  when  in  all  the  other  piaces,  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  meaning,  thrust  in  the  word  "  unknown."  See  the  anno- 
tations upon  this  place,   in  the  Rhemish  Testament. 

Again,  Rom.  12.  ver.  6,  7.  where  the  Apostle's  words  are,  "  Having  gifts  according  to  the  grace 
that  is  given  us,  different,  either  prophecy  according  to  the  rule  ot  faith;  or  ministry,  in  ministring  ; 
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,  differing  according  to  the 
grace  that  is  given  us,  whether  prophecy  (let  us  prophesy)  according  to  the  proportion  ot  faith;  or 
ministry  (let  us  wait  on  our)  ministering  ;  or  he  that  teaches  on  teaching." 

Resides  their  additions  here,  they  pervert  the  text,  by  changing  the  word  "  rule"  of  faith  into  "  pro- 
portion" of  faith  ;  wherein  thev  would  have  their  Readers  to  gather  no  more  from  this  place,  than 
only  that  their  new  Ministers  are  to  prophecy  or  preach,  and  wait  on  their  ministering,  according  to 
the  measure  01  propoition  ot  faith  or  ability,  less  or  more,  that  they  are  endued  with.  Whereas  by  this 
text,  as  also  by  many  oilier  places  of  Holv  Writ,  we  may  gather  that  the  Apostles,  by  inspiration  or 
the  Holy  Ghost,  before  they  divided  themselves  into  divers  nations,  made  among  themselves  a  certain 
rule  and  form  of  faith  and  doctrine,  containing  not  only  the  Twelve  Articles  of  the  Creed,  but  all 
other  principles,  grounds,  and  the  whole  platform  of  the  Christian  Religion  ;  which  rule  was  before 
any  oi  the  books  of  tiie  New  Testament  were  written,  and  before  the  faith  was  preached  among  the 
Gentiles;  by  which  rule  not  only  the  doctrine  ot  all  other  inferior  teachers  was  to  be  tried,  but  also 
the  preaching,  writing,  and  interpreting,  which  ishere  called  prophecying,  of  the  Apostles  and  Evan- 
gelists themselves,  were  by  God's  Church  approved  and  admitted,  or  reproved  and  rejected  according 
to  ihis  rule  ot  faith.  This  form  or  rule  every  Apostle  delivered  by  wo  id  ot  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  following  age  ;  which  also  receiving  it  from 
them,  delivered  it  as  they  bad  received  it,   to  the  succeeding  age,   Stc.  till  this  our  present  age. 

And  this  is  the  true  analogy  of  faith,  set  down  and  commended  to  us  every  where  for  apostolical  tra- 
dition ;  and  not  the  fantastical  rule  or  square,  which  every  ministerial  guide,  according  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  heretical  purpose  ;  by  which  he  will  presume  to  judge  of,  and  censure  the  Fa- 
thers, Councils,  Chuich,  yea,  the  Scripture  itself.  In  the  primitive  Church,  as  also  in  the  Church 
of  God,  at  this  day,  all  teaching,  preaching,  and  prophecying  is  not  measured  according  to  the  pro- 
portion of  every  man's  private  and  public  spirit,  hut  by  this  rule  of  faith,  first  set  down  and  delivered 
by  the  Apostles :  And  therefoie  whatsoever  novelties  or  prophesvings  will  not  abide  this  test,  they  are 
justly,  by  the  Apostles'  condemned,    as  contrary  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  they  much  concern  the  Church  of  England's  "  priesthood:"  The  first  is  in  Acts  i. 
verse  26.  where,  instead  of  saying  "He,  Matthias,  was  numbered  with  the  eleven;"  they  translate 
it,   "  He  was,  by   a  common  consent,  counted  with  the  eleven."     The  other,  already  mentioned,   is, 

Acts 


BY    ADDING    TO    THE    TeXT>.  So 

Acts  14.  verse  22.  where,  for,  "  When  they  had  ordained  to  them  Priests  in  every  Church,"  liiev 
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,  "  Bv  Election,"  arc  added  on  purpose  to 
make  the  Scripture  speak  in  defence  of  their  making  Super- Intendants  and  Elders  by  Election  onhi 
without  consecration  and  ordination,  by  impositionof  hands  :  by  which  corrupt  additions  it  evidently* 
appears  to  have  been  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  in  those  days,  that  election  on'v,  without 
consecration,   was  sufticient  to  make  bishops  and  priests. 

But  in  their  last  translation,  made  in  the  beginning  of  King  James  the  first's  reign,  they  have  cor- 
rected these  places,  by  expunging  the  words  formerly  added.  And  this  was  done  by  the  bishops  and 
clergy,  for  their  greater  honour,  dignity,  and  authority  ;  knowing  that  Consecration,  which  they 
thought  now  high  time  to  pretend  to,  must  needs  elevate  them  much  above  the  sphere  of  a  bare  Elec- 
tion, in  which  they  formerly  moved.  And  perhaps,  another  no  less  prevalent  reason  was,  that  they 
might  more  securely  fix  themselves  in  their  bishoprics  and  benefices;  thinking,  perhaps,  that  bishops 
consecrated,  might  pretend  to  that  Jure  Divlno,  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  wot.  However,  they  thought  it  now  convenient  to  pretend  to  something  more  than  a  bare 
election  ,  to  wit,  to  receive  an  episcopal  and  priestly  character,  by  the  imposition  of  hands  :  whereas 
we  find  not,  that  their  predecessors,  Parker,  Jewel,  Horn,  tec.  ever  pretended  to  any  other  character, 
but  what  they  received  by  the  Queen's  letters  patent,  election,  ami  an  act  of  parliament  ;  as  is  plain 
from  the  23d  and  25th  of  their  39  articles,  as  well  as  from  the  statute  8  Eliz.  1.  and  therefore  were  con- 
tent to  have  the  Scripture  read,  '-He  was,  by  a  common  consent,  counted  with  the  eleven;"  and3 
6'  When  they  had  ordained  elders  by  election,"  (s) 

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  dav  ;  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  many  things  to  discredit  the  same: 
and  to  that  purpose,  falsified  and  corrupted  the  Scripture  against  succession,  for  in  the  Defence  of  the 
Apology  of  the  Church  of  England,  they  write  thus, — "  By.  succession  Christ  saith,  that  desolation 
shall  sit  in  the  Holy  Place,  and  Antichrist  shall  press  into  tire  room  of  Christ  ;"  for  proof  of  which, 
they  note  in  the  margin,  Mat.  xxiv.  And  in  another  place  oi'  the  same  Defence,  they  say  of  succes- 
sion ;  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  succession,  spring  up  men 
speaking  perversely  :"  whereas  St.  Paul  has  never  a  word  about  succession  or  succeeding  ;  no:  is  suc- 
cession named  in  the  24th  of  St.  Matthew,  (t)  So  that  you  see,  the  first  bishops  of  the  Church  of 
England,  not  only  corrupted  the  sacred  text,  in  translating  many  places  of  the  Bible  ag*ainst  Ordination  ; 
but  also  in  their  other  writings,  falsified  the  Scripture  with  their  corrupt  additions  against  succession,  (u) 
To  sufficient  reasons  for  us  to  believe,  that  they  neither  had  nor  pretended  to  either  Consecration,  or 
Episcopal  Succession  in  those  days  ;  consequently  were  not  consecrated  at  Lambeth,  bv  such  as  had  re- 
ceived 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 
j.  little  into  (u)  & 

Z  SOME 

(s)  Dr.  Tenfson  and  A,B.  in  the  Speculum  considered,  p.  49.  tell  us,  "  That  in  the  Church,  of  England  they 
have  a  succession  of  bishops  continued  down  from  the  Apostolic  times  to  this  day:  but  to  name  or  number 
them,"  they  say,  "  is  neither  necessary  nor  useful :"  they  might  have  added,  not  possible,  (t)  See  the  Defence  of 
the  Apol.  p.  132.  and  p.  127.  (u)  The  first  Protestant  bishops  and  clergy  were  SO  far  from  pretending  to  either 
Consecration  or  Succession,  that  they  corrupted  the  Scripture  against  both. 


ro  Protestant  Corruptions 

SOME  CONSIDERATIONS  ON  THOSE  LAMBETH  RECORDS, 


,      •      •         c  .  •       r,m«  the  first's  rci-n,   a    new  translation   of   the    Bible   being  under- 
(v)    In   the  beginning  of    km?  James  the  msts  rei   i       „  tuu  resolution   put  on   of  assuming  to  them- 
takeii,    the  said  falsifications  ot     en  pre,  tree  .cd      and       ^  ■'  .f   ^  (] 

selves  the  character  of  Consecrated  B,  ,1 o    .and  rMms  )   cons?cratcd  bv  Korean  Catholic  K.shops  ; 

thischaiactcr  from  su.l.  o.shops  as  bad  been,   as  t hey    H  -  ■     J-,   predcceSi3I£f,    Matthew 

by  whose   hands   .hey  would  now  make   the  worl  1      c .eve,    th .  iu  F  umc   Co  ob_ 

Parker,   was  consecrated  with  great  solemnity  at  ^nibeth-      U        L U     l  ,  ,  ^.^  ^^  ^ 

nude  1,,-on  the  world  certain,  before  unheard  o  f™£™£$  £  d  upou  as\vas  expected,  the 
fi.st  shone  upon  these  recorder/ anno    oi,, ^'^.S  j,       dctected  as    a   forged    instrument. 

„id  Lambeth  Register  became  ^SP^  J;  a  d'  -,  ?' ^^ainst  these  Lambeth  records,  in  the  very  year 
Fitz-Herbcrt,  a  man  ol  great  sincerity  and  autl  on  t>,  w     t  a  a ™  fi  biished  dlem  to  the  world, 

that  Mr.  Mason,  workman  to  Dr.  Abbot,  Archb si  op  of  C  an  e bur   ,  P  ^  bWshcd 

These  are  his  words  :  (w)-"  It  was  my  chance    o   u nde.s  a  th  bU  a         Uer> 

a  hook,   wherein  he  endeavours  to  prove  th consecra  ton  of    h     h    ^  q|  Cautcrbury.      Thou 

testifying,    that  four  bishops  consecrated  A  at    "v,      «i  ^ .,   the  he  &wful  vocatloa  and  con- 

sult therefore  understand,   gooc  i  eadei    that  t  hi    on     cx.eptr o i,  S  ,     nQW  huc,  .  raised 

secration  of  the  first  Protestant  bishops  in  the  late  Queen  sday,   s ^  not  a n 

1-  vehemently  u,g  d  diver-time;  before,  l^nany  -'-(^^^-;o--  ^atdint  J  ot'apleton, 
Uho  KiivSptU  S  :^^;\U^cta;;ldu^ocation  and  consecr^,  urgmg  f  -  prove 
Ac  same*,   and  to  shew  how.  and  by  whom  they  were  made  priests  and  bishops         1  hu    he 

And  to  gijxyou    the  words  of  .»-satd  doctors:   thus.     ^»h^^uo[i  ^  ot«n*     o>  ex- 
bishop  of   Sahshuiv  :— "  It  remains,  Mr.  Jewel,  vou  ten  us,    v.  j 

traorLary:   if  it'bc  ordinary,   shew  us  the  letters  of  y°«^^ 

ccved  power  to  do  .he  office  von  presume  to  exercise ,  by  thee u older  oi   ay     g  miaisiers,    how- 

secration:   but  Order  and  Consecration   you  have  norm      foi   w    ml i    o t  a  ^ 

soever  else  you  call  them,    could  give  that  to  you,   which  he  has   n0    h.»  elt  .       ^  ^  ;J 

words  to  Mr.  Jewel  ;  having  but  a  little  before  u  ged  h'^a^'^h|ffto^  ,OT  :  we  say  like- 
..  You  know   what  '1  ertull.an  says  of   such  as  you   be,   Uant  Vn&nax  Td]  ^ 

wi,e  to  vou,    Mr.  Jewel  ;   and  v.  hat  we  say  to  you,  w  e  s  uo  «    i  one  I  inuallv  suc. 

,he  original,   and  fiist  spring  ot  your  Church  ;   thewusth     legist e  -ot  you  onc  of  the  Apostles, 

,  ceding  one  another  f.om  the  beginning  ;  so  as  that  the  ^If^™^^,  savs  he,  to  go  from 
or  of  the  Apostolical  men,  for  his  author  and  pi edecesso,  J ^^^^y  yoll,  Sir  ?  y&ou  bear 
,  ,  ur  succession,  which  you  cannot  prove  and  to  come  to  >^ur  ;oc^"  ^  YOU1Y  location  ?  by  what 
Vouiself,  as  though  you  were  lushop  of  Sa  .sbury:  out  ^^  ""  ^^XVcan  vou  allege  for  the 
Authority   usui,.   you   the    administration  of  doctrine  and   saeramen  ts  .     v   ate  ^ 

light    and    proof    of    your    ministry?     who   has    called    youi     who   ha s  laid   ha„fl  y 

-ample    has    he    done    it?    how,    and   by   whom  are  you   consecrated  r  who^as  ^J° 
(  nil  n!;tted  to  you  the  office  vou  take  upon  vou,   cW       In  this   mann      ^^^etTopolitan's  conse- 
which  he  never  replied,   by  sending  Dr.  Harding   to  any  regis  e.    of  his    oi  h is  m  tr  I 
cration  :   or  by  telling  him,    that   their  consecration  at  La mbe th     w  a     ^p on     ccoid  ^^^  ^ 

authentic  test  monies  to  shew  who  imposed  hands   upon  them.      Aim  now  ca      v  rprnrds  Gf   his 

given  to  these  hard  questions,   if  there  had  then  been  extant  any  authentic  registei    oi    reeo,ds 
own,  or  of  Matthew  Parker's  consecration  at  Lambethi  TpwpI"*  book    entituled, 

After  the  same  manner  he  is  set  upon  bv  Dr.  Stapleton  in  his  answer  to  M r.  Jewel  sb 0^k  ent  l  , 
A  Replv,  &c.  »  How  chanced  then,  Mr.  Jewel,  says  he,  that  you  and  your  fellows  beannr 
selvc  to  bishops,  have  not  so  much  as  this  congruity  and  consent  ;  I  will  not  say  o  the  I  ope  but  ot 
anvC" -stian  Bishops  at  all,  throughout  all  Christendom  ;  neither  are  liked  am  al ^^d  bY  ;  n>  one 
t)tthem  all  ;  but  bale  taken  upon  you  that  office,  without :  Yl^r^oV"^!^  ™dyo  "  brsSopricsr^bac, 
siastical  authority,   without  all  order  of  canons  and  right:   1  ask   not,  who  ga%c  you  » 

who  made  you  bishops  ?   thus  he  to  Jewel,  (y)  And 

(v)  The  Lambeth  record,  considered,     (w)  See  Fitzhevbert^s  Appendix  to  the  ^^^t'^^toA^'c 
duU  Falsities  and  Lies,  printed  anno  1613.     (x)  We  also  at  thrs  day  still  urge  our  Rote  .ant  bis  o^     J 
th«r  succession.      But  they,  instead  of  doing  it,  wave  us  off  with  these  words    «  1  o  narne  °^u^er        Tevveland 
h  neither  useful  nor  necessary."     Vid.  Supr.     (y)  See  Stapleton's  Return  of  Untiuths.     Hu  Challenge  to  jev,eia 
1  lorn,  and  his  Counterblast  against  Horn. 


BY    ADDING    TO    Till:    LhX'  yj 

And  ihus  again,  in  his  Counter-blast  against  Morn,  pretended  bishop  of  Wincheste;  ■--'••  Is  it  not 
us."  sav  h  :  to  Hern,  "  tha!  vou  and  your  colleagues,  Parker,  eke.  were  not  ordained  accord- 
ing to  the  preset  ipr,  1  will  not  sav  of  the  Church,  but  even  of  the  very  statutes?  how  then  can  you 
challenge  to  youiseit  me  name  of  theloi.i  bishop  of  Winchester?"  And  in  another  place  he  urges 
Mr.  Horn  with  his  "  l.'eing  without  any  consecration  at  all  of  his  metropolitan,  Parker;  himself 
poor  man,"  says  he,  "  being  no  bishop  neither."  Who,  1  say  once  again,  tan  imagine,  that  [ewe! 
and  Horn  should  have  been  so  careless  of  their  character  and  honour,  as  not  to  have  produced  then 
Lambeth  register  and  records,  if  any  such  authentic  writings  had  then  been  extant,  when  not  only  theii 
own  credit,  Inn  even  'he  credit  of  their  metropolitan,  Parker,  and  all  the  rest  of  queen  Elizabeth's  new 
bishop?,  yea,  the  whole  succession  of  thai  race,  were  so  miserably  shipwrecked  ?  yea,  in  how  great 
stead  would  such  Lambeth  writing-  have  stood  Mr.  Horn,  when  lie  durst  not  join  issue  with  bishop 
Bonner  upon  the  plea,   "  Thai  he  was  no  bishop,   when  he  tendered  Bonner  the  oath  of  supremacy." 

The  case  was  thus  :  (z)  by  the  first  session  of  that  parliament,  5  Eli/,.  1.  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,  pre- 
tended bishop  of  Winchester,  tenders  the  oath  to  Doctor  Bonner,  bishop  of  London,  but  deprived  by 
queen  Elizabeth,  and  then  a  -prisoner  in  the  Marshalsea,  which  was  within  the  diocese  of  Winchester : 
Bonner  tefuses  to  take  it.  Horn  certifies  his  refusal  into  tire  King's  Bench  ;  whereupon  Bonner  was 
indicted  upon  the  statute.  He  prays  judgment,  whether  lie  might  not  give  in  evidence  upon  this  issue 
Quod  ipse  non  est  hide  cu'.pabiUs,  cc  quod  dictus  cpisccpus  de  Winchester,  non  fuit  cpisccpus  tempore  oblationis  sacra - 
menti.  "  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 
judge  Cattlin,  the  chief  justice's  chamber,  -'  That  if  the  verity  and  matter  be  so  indeed,  he  should 
well  be  received  to  give  in  evidence  upon  this  issue,  and  the  jury  should  try  it."  Now,  what  the 
trial  was,  appears  by  that  he  was  not  condemned,  nor  ever  any  further  troubled  for  that  case,  though 
he  was  a  man  especially  aimed  at-  And  at  the  next  sessions  of  that  parliament,  which  was  the  8th  or 
Elizabeth,  they  we; c  forced  for  want,  you  see,  ot  a  better  character,  to  beg  they  might  be  declared 
bisfiops  by  act  of  parliament, 

Besides  it  is  no   more   credible,  that  such   knowing  and  conscientious  men,   as   Dr.  Stanleton,  Dr 
Haiding,    Constable,    Kellison,   &:c.   then  living   in  England,   and  probably  at  Loudon,  would  question, 
so  public   and  solemn  an  action  ,    than  it  is,   that  a  sober  man  should  now  call  in   doubt    kinf   fames  tin* 
second's  coronation  at  Westminster  ;  or  ask  in  print,    who  set  the  crown  upon  his  head,   pretending  he 
had  never  been  crowned. 

But  in  answer  to  these  our  objections  ;  Dr.  Bramhall  falsely  affirms,  that  the  -aid  records  were  spoken 
of  in  the  eighth  year  of  queen  Elizabeth  :  for  proof  of  which,  he  would  gladly  have  the  world  s>» 
grossly  to  mistake  the  words  of  the  statute  of  the  8;h  of  Eliz.  as  to  think  that  the  mention  there  made 
or  the  recoids  "  of  her  majesty's  father  and  brother's  time,  and  also  for  her  own  time,**'  have  relation 
to  their  Lambeth  register  :  wheieas  by  the  records  there  spoken  of,  is  understood  onlv  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  assertion,  and  to  impose  upon  the  unwaiy  reader,  mosi 
egregiously  falsifies  the  words  of  he  said  statute  ;  saying,  "  The  statute  speaks  expressly  of  the  records 
ot  Elections,  ami  Confirmations  and  Consecrations:"  (a)  but  vou  will  find  in  the  said  statute,  expressly 
these  words,  "  As  by  her  Majesty's  said  letters  patent,  remaining  on  record,  more  plainly  will  appear." 
Which,  if  attentively  considered,  is  sufficient  to  convince  the  reader,  that  "The  records  of  her  ma- 
jesty's said  father's  and  brother's  time,  and  also  of  her  own  time,'5  relate  not  to  any  records  or  regis- 
ters of  the  archbishop  of  Canterbury  ;  but  only  to  the  records  of  the  king's  and  queen's  letters  patent. 
This  device  of  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,  (b)  that  there  is  a  register  of  their  bishops,  found  in  a  book  called 
"  Parker's  Antiquitates  Britannicce  .;"  which  I  deny  not  :  But  to  this  I  answer,  that  the  said  register 
is  forged  and  foisted  into  Parker's  Antiq.  Britain  For  that  edition,  printed  anno  1635,  's  c'lc  hTst  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  manu- 
script of  that  book,   Park.  Antiq.  Biit.    which  I  have  seen,   and  diligently  examined,   there  is  not   an\ 

mention 

(z)  See  Abridg.  of  Dyer's  Reports,  fol.  234.  (a)  In  this  statute  is  expressly  mentioned  her  majesty's  "  Father's 
and  brother's  letters  patent ;''  as  also,  "her  own  remaining  on  record."  (b)  Antiq.  Brit.  cult.  Ha'.iov.  j  605. 
(c)  The  author  of  a  book,  called,  "  The  Judgment  of  the  Apostles  and  first  Age,  in  Points  of,  Doctrine."  &c. 
printed  in  the  year  1633.    See  pag.  200,  21 1,  and  394. 


■) 


Pr 


u 


stant   Corruption 


mention  or  an 

ded  Protestant  bishops,    a 
,vill  easily  sec,    that   it   is  a  mei 
affinity,   either  with  that  which 


anv  -icli  register  or  consecration  of  Mat.  Parker,  or  any  one  of  those  pre- 
'[[;■  obtruded  register  speaks  of".      And  any  man   reading   the  punted  book- 


loisted  and  inserted  jhing  ;  having  no  connection,  correspondence,   or 

jes  before  or  follows ;  and  contains  more  things  done  after  Mat.  Parker 
written  that  book."     Yet  this  very  register  me 
n  :   .so  that  it  might  be  performed  as  well  at  th< 


cratioi 


;ns  net  any  certain  place  or  form  ol  their  conse« 
e  Nao-'s  head,  as  at  Lambeth.  And  indeed,  we  deny 
to  have  had  a  certain  kind  of  puritannical  consecration,  by  John  Scorey,  at  the  Nag's  head  in 
CI  ea  « side  ■  but  we  denv  the  said  Nag's  head  consecration  :o  be  e.tner  valid  or  legal,  br,h  foi  defect  m 
*  e  form  'and  in  the  Minister;  |ohn  Scorey  himself  being  no  bishop,  no  more  titan  Barlow  and  Co- 
vrrd  le  s  iunted  above,  in  page  35.  By  reason  of  winch  defects,  the  queen,  ,t  seems,  was  force* 
iftenvards  to  declare,  or  make  thenr  bfsliops  by  act  of  parliament.  But  to  pass  by  these  dungs,  and  to 
ie  to  a  closer  examination  of  iheir  Lambeth  records,  (c) 

Mr.  Mason,  the  verv  first  man  that  ever  told  us  of  this  Lambeth  register,  urges  it  in  this  manner,(d)- 
■  Queen  Mary  died  in  the  year    1558.    ihc  «7th  of  November  ;   the  same  day  died  cardinal  loo  c  h- 

■  ■:  -hn„  rf  Canterbury  ■  and' the  verv  same  day  was  queen  Elizabeth  proclaimed.  1  he  15th  ol  January 
t ^oHo^nr^  ihc  day  of  queen  Eli.abeVscoVonat.on,  when  Dr  Oglethorp,  bishop  of  Carlisle, 
was  so  happy  as  to  set  the  diadem  of  that  kingdom  upon  her  royal  head.  Now  the  see  ot  Came. bury 
continued  void  till  December  following;  about  which  time  the  dean  and  chapter  having  received  the 
\„le  V  dire  elected  master  Parker  for  their  archbishop,  Juxta  morcm  antiquum  'J  laudubdem  comuetudinem 
*4r>  predict*  ab  antimtn  uMatam  &  mconcussa  cbservatam,  proceeding  in  this  election  according  to  the 
ancient  manner,  and  t./e  laudable  custom  of  the  aforesaid  Church  ;"  c.tmg  tor  these  words,  his  new- 
•ound  register  ex  repist-.  Mat.  Parker.  "  After  which  election,  orderly  performed,  and  signified  ac- 
'•ordino  to  the'law,  n  pleased  her  highness  to  send  her  letters  parent  of  commission,  for  his  confirmation 
and  consecration  to  seven  bishops  ;"  whose  names,  with  as  much  ot  the  commission  as  is  necessary,  he 
1 


^ets  clown 
authentical  recor 


ich  he  tells  us,    -  That  to  take  away  all  scruple,  he  will   faithfully  deliver   out  ot 
'-  :,<  he  calls  them,  putting  in  the  margin  ck  legist,   M.  Parker,   with  as  much  con- 


f  they  had  then  been  made  known  to  the  world,   and  published  or  produced  upon  all  occa- 

'--  -poke  of  them,   "  both   the   day  whs;;  he,  Mr.  Parker9 


sions,  for  fifty  years   together,   before  ever  ne 
■was  consecrated,   and  by  whom,  viz. 


Anno  1559.  Mat.  Park.  Cant.  cons.   17.  Decemb. 


B 


v  -^ 


f  William  Barlow. 

fobn  Scorey. 

Miles  Coverdale. 
John  Hodgkins." 


These  are 
Dr.  Bramhal 
Canterbury, 
commissions 
former  dated 
Gilbert,   bis! 
Barlow,   bisb 
»;ar.  2.  1.  Eli 


op;   and' John  Scorey,   bishop."      Which    commission   he   sets  down   at  large,   from  Re, 
z.    'Dated;  Jpu  I  Redgrave,  mno  die  Septembris  anno  re^ni  Elizabeth*  Angli<s>  ac.  prim:. 

Per  breve  de  privato  sigillo 


Examinatur  Ri.  BROUGHTON, 


CM     LUUill    HOI    I'lUl-V-Hl    l«J      will""      "■      -"' — -  -j  .        .. 

iciieve,   because  three  of  them,  not  long  after,  were  deprived  :       I  hus  Dr.  iiramliall. 


Th 


C.)  Stat.  1.  S  Elis,        (d)  Mason,  lib.  3.  p.  izO.        (e)  Bram.  p.  83.         (Q  Page  85, 


BY    ADDING   TO   THE  TEXT 

were  C^hbeerf&,^  ^ve  us  believe    «  Shortly  ...  deprived," 

shop  of  Peterborough.   Butaccord me  to       u's  u',B,?hop   °f   B'uh  •  and   "avid  Pole,  Bi .. 

tenor  eleven,  all  Cathohcs,  were  dip ri/ed  and Z'^^f^  H°  ^Shead'  ,hc"  three  Bish^>  with  mher 
Oath  of  Supremacy.  «  In' the  month  o "JuU  "T I^f™  ^  "ft  ^^  berfore>  fo"  -fusing  the 
«ng,  were  called  and  examined  by  certainof  he  Hueen'J  M  5  ?W  Biihops  of  England,  then  liv- 
York,  Ely,  and  London,  with  others,  t "the  number  ol ?  th^f  *  S,Counci,>  where  the  Bishops  of 
oath,  cotjch.ng  the  Queen's  supremacy  andotl  er  r  ie  eV  C  7"  T?',  f<?r  rcfusinS  t0  take  th« 
i-head  has  also  the  same  words,  and 'tells  us  ^^l^^^r^Z  a^cef '     ^ 

bleHCnhEt^th,e  ScK of'ht Tilopn,1  °i  D-h^  h«  *~  -rds :  «  He  was,  by  the  no. 
of  Canterbury,  who^sed%Im  very  Lnoura'b  y'  bot'hTrTe  """"^  to  .Ma«^w  Paier7,  B?.hop 
Tunstal  :  But  he,  not  long  remaining  under  the  wan  of  the VS V]  ^T^  ™6  ^C  of  the  s^ 
of  November,  in  the  year  , ceo,  depart  thi<  If IZ f  ,  f  Sai?  L)shoP'  d,d  shortly  after,  the  i8ih 
-on."     By  this  it  app/ars,  ti!i?ffl  ^   "rst   received   his  'consecra- 

palace  at  Lambeth,  consequently  installed  in  the  W»L  P  ?     Canterbury,  and  lived  in  the  Bishop's 

-rated,  if  consecration  ^  t]J„  ^  ■»  ^ffi  ^  ^of^venlt  before  he  was  co'n! 

^7forT;8s\?we;„YHhJnit;Te'ad';e;,e  ^Mim?  rsessi? of  the  bi'ho"ric  °f  c- 

he :  and  others  assisted  at  the  King  of  France's  obexes  te  K  «"!,•  ','?  September,  when 
hat  they  were  elected  immediately,  or,  however  verv^wZ  ft  bJr,Hojl'ni*«d  it  evidently  appears, 
"C  Bishops  :  For,  on  the  „,h  of  Au<4 , Te find  SL  f'!  •  ll  '  deP,t,v:,tio»  of  ""  old  Cathol 
««c.s,n|„  much  power,  as  if  he  hTd  Cn more  than  oS^ '  not  °"ljr  ""«"  Bishop  elect,  but 
•2th  of  August,  being  Saturday,  the  highTtar  in  pin  "s  PI  ' ".swords  are  these :  «  On  the 
Mary  and  John,  standing  i„  the  rood -oft :  were  rnlrJ 1  Church>  w"h  the  lood.  and  the  images  of 
Doctor  Griad.ll,  newl/elected  Bishop  of  London."  ;  ""'  ""*  W3S  ll°,,e  b»  thc  «»»»*■"  of 

agrle  ^thM?  Ma^nrandDol"^^^,":"1,"9^^  ,""'  ?T'  »  »*»*»»W.  :    But  if  it 

cause  to  reject  these  as  forged  i  But,  before "    com  ,a,      ,''""  ''"'"''f"'  rCCO,<!s'  shM  ™  »«  ">'«  J" 
->d  agreement  is  found  anfong  the  r^ds  a„d  reeoX"  themsdv^    "'  '"  "  *"'  ^  wh"  acc0,da"« 

!•<=  ,s  called  John  :  Yea,  Ma  on  cailfhim  John   n  In,  1    Bld(ol,dD;.  Tllc'eas  bX  M'-  Main  andothfr" 
who  made  these  records,  might  be g mi,  of  the  JfdTSff      R,.Chard  '"'  ",0,her-     '  «»PP««th«e 
"'-wort,  calls  him  sometimes   RieLrd     somL  mes  tin      R  Pr  V"2'"6  ;  ami  therefore  lor  making 
->c  man  himself  was  living,  and  »Vn  h    i m    «     T   Ja       '  ^'  "  tbe!<'  ,ecor<ls  '""'  •'««  made  while 
'hen,  ol   his  true  name,   and  ti,     nla «  J   ei         "   ,      S^ff 'a''    Ma"hCW  F"^''   '":  ':aM  '>avc  satisfied 

^"^^b:--:£^«£fi^ 

calTeu,&agfnofDonv,era.(k,hiS  ''eC°rdS'  **  '"'"  Saff"e»  of  Bedfonl  :  But  by  Doctor  Btitler  be  .- 
Fourthly,  in  Mr.  Mason,  we  hear  tell  hnt  of  •    ■ 

finds?11  COT?ion  of  Matthew  Parke  .     But  B     iiln.T'"'"'0"  ^r  """  ^'^  for  thc  «"'»'«- 
finds  two  ;  the  first  dated  September  the  9th.(l)   B""ah'U'  '"'  mm  a,1'ie"<  search  among  the  records, 

M.^  tt^tSatuAV?^  b-c  the  9,h  of  September :  Bu,  Mr. 


A  a 

I  li  us 


(g)  See  John  Stow  and  Holmshead,  in  an.  i    Eliz      fM  c„  n    p 
■ivelliBon,  p.  c.     (k)  Butler  Fn   A    n  »«-•  -         '    '     te  -0*  Bram-  P-  3?,   8q,  no 

>  r  i-    ^k;  sutler  *.p.  dc  Consccrat,  Minist.      (l)Bram,  p,  83,  ^    9 


(0  Sutcliff  against  Dr. 


r ,  Protestant  Corruptions 

Thus  thev  concur  one  with  another:  And  to  compare  them  with  Richard  Hollinshead,  and  John 
Stow's  chronicles,  they  jump  a,  exactly,  as  if  the  one  had  been  written  at  China,  and  the  other  at  Lam- 
belli  :  For, 

Sixthlv     Mr.  Mason,   I  say,  affirms,  that   the   Dean  and   Chapter  elected  Doctor  Matthew  Parker 
nbout  the  month  of  December.     But  in  Stow  and  Hotinshead,    we   find  h,m    and   others  called  Bishop, 
elect    on  the  oh  of  September.     Yea,  seeing  Hollinshead  calls   Gr.ndall  newly   elect  on   the    12th  o 
Aucust    we  n?ay  easily  conclude,   that  Matthew  Parker,  the  metropolitan     was  also  elected  before  that 
time  ;  which,  you  see,   is  about  four  months  before  Mason's  election  by  Conge  d    Elire. 

Seventhly,  Mr.  Mason  affirms,  that  the  sec  of  Canterbury  continued  void  till  December  1559  On 
lh  ?  ,7th  of  which  month,  according  to  the  New  Register,  Parker  was  consecrated.  But  in  Ho..^ 
head  we  find,  that  Matthew  Parker  was  Bishop  of  Canterbury,  and  lived  in  t  he  Bishop  s  paiac< L  - 
beth  where  he  had  Bishop  Tunstal  committed,  prisoner,  to  his  charge,  long  betore  the  i7ch  ot  Decem- 
ber:  For  on  the  18th  of  November,    1559,  the  said  Bishop  Tunstal  died. 

Eichthly,  Doctor  Bramhall,  as  is  said,  from  our  new-made  records,  brings ;  us ;a  commission,  dated 
cntWli  of  September,  1559.  And  directed,  besides  others,  to  three  Catholic  Bishops,  Cuthberc 
Tunstal,  Gilbert  Bodrn,  and  David  Pool,  requiring  them  to  confirm  and  consecrate  Matthew  Parker. 
And  has  the  confidence  to  affirm,  that  <<  The  said  three  Bishops  were  shortly  after  deprived  of  then 
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  ot 
the  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  ot  St.  John  the  Baptis  : 
For  which  he  also  cites  Saunders,  lib  de  Schismate  Angl.  But  pray  consider,  S.rs  what  can  be  more  ab- 
surd than  to  imagine  that  Queen  Elizabeth  would  be  beholden  tosuch  Roman  Catholic  Bishops,  as  she 
had  formerly  deprived  of  their  bishoprics,  and  made  prisoners,  for  the  confirming  and  consecrating  of 
her  new  Protestant  Bishops,  who  were  to  be  "  unlawfully  intruded"  into  their  sees  ;  especially  she  hav- 
ing as  Bramhall  savs,  Protestant  Bishops  enough  of  her  own;  or  if  such  had  been  wanting,  might,  lie 
says',  have  easily  had  store  of  Bishops  out  of  Ireland,  to  have  done  the  work  ? 

Prav  Cive  me  leave  to  demand  of  our  English  Prelates,  why  this  first  -commission  was  by  the  Queen 
directed  to  those  three  zealous  Catholic  Bishops,  and  not  rather  to  her  own  Protestant  Bishops,  to  whom 
.he  directed  the  last  commission,  dated  December  6?  Her  Majesty  was  not  ignorant  that  their  con- 
sciences had  been  too  tender-to  permit  them  to  swear  herself  head  ot  the  Church  of  England  :  And  that 
rather  than  "all  their  so  tender  consciences,  they  were  content  to  lose  their  bishoprics,  and  suher  per- 
petual 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  be  ot  a  reli- 
gion as  far  different  from  themselves,  as  King  Edward  the  Vlth  was  from  Queen  Mary  s?  Cornel  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  Euvvard  the 
Vlth'sformof  consecration,  which  they  had  in  Queen  Mary's  days  declared  to  be  invalid  and  null  ; 
and  which,  at  this  time,  was  also  illegal  ?  Or  could  the  Queen  easily  imagine,  that^  Matthew  Parker 
•md  the  rest  of  her  chosen  Bishops,  who  had  stood  so  much  upon  their  punctilios  at  rrankfort,  would 
receive  consecration  by  a  form  condemned  as  superstitious  and  Antichristbn  ;  and  from  which,  as  Ma- 
son savs,  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  themselves  will  make  all  these  things  agree,  will  be  hard  to  ima- 
gine •  which,  if  they  cannot  do,  let  them  be  content  to  leave  us  to  our  own  liberties,  and  freedom  of 
thought  ;  and  to  excuse  us,  if  we  f/eely  affirm,  that  "  Matthew  Parker  was  never  consecrated  at  Lam- 
beth :  That  the  said  recotds  are  forged  :  And,  that  themselves  are  but  mere  laymen,  without  mission, 
without  succession,  without  consecration. 

Ninthly,  it  is  none  of  the  least  objections  against  Parker's  solemn  consecration  at  Lambeth,  that  we 
find  it  not  once  mentioned  by  the  Historians  of  those  times,  especially  by  John  Stow,  who  professed  so 
particular  a  kindness  and  respect  for  Parker ;  and  who  was  so  exact  in  setting  down  all  things,  ot  far 
1  less 


BY    ADDING   TO    THE    TEXT.  A- 

yj 

icss  moment,  clone  about  Lon-lon.     Doubtless   he  omitted  ir  not  through  negligence  or  forgetful  nes- 
seeing  he  is  not  unmimiiui  to  set  clown   the  consecration   of"  Cardinal    Pole,    Parker's   immediate  pro--' 
cessor,  and  the  very  day  on  which,  he  said  his  rirst  Mass.      Nor  does  it  appear  to  have  been  through  for 
getfulness,  that  Hollmshead  mentions  not  tin's   notorious   Lambeth   solemnity,   seeing  he  tells  us    that 
Bishop  lunstal,   who  died  under  Paper's  custody,   "  received  his  consecration  at  Lambeth  •"  If  either 
he  or  John  brow  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  n  i 
been  s  »  exact  to  a  hair  in  every  punctilio,   as  to  have  told  us  of  the  Chapel's  being  «  adorned  with  ta 
pestry  to  wards  the  east;   a  red  cloth  on  the  floor,   in  Advent;   a  sermon,  communion,  concourse  of  peo- 
ple ;    Miles  Coverdale  s  side  woollen  gown  :   Of  the  Queen's  sending  to  see  if  all  things  had  been  right- 
ly performed  :      What  care  was  here  taken  ?   «  Of  answer  being  brought  her,   that  there  was  not  a  tit- 
tle amiss,   only  Miles  Coverdale  was  in  his  side  woollen  gown,   at  the  very  minute  of  the  consecration  ■ 
Ot  their  assuring   her  that  that  could   not   cause  any  defect   in   the  consecration,"   &c.  as  our  records 
mention  ;   which  ridiculous  circumstances  render  them  not  a  whit  the  more  credible. (mj 

If  now,  from  what  has  been  said,   these  Lambeth    Records  appear  evidently  to  be   forced    to  what 
other  refuge  will  these  pretenders  to   episcopacy    have   recourse  for  their  episcopal   character,    but    to 
Queen  Elizabeth  s  Letters  Patent,  and  an  Act  of  Parliament  ?  if  so,  I  see  no  great  reason  why  they 
snould  rind  fault  with  their  ancient  name  and  title  of  Parliamentary  Bishops.      Whoever  read  of  Bi 
shops,   between  St.  Peter's  time  and  Parker's,   that  stood   in  need   of  an  Act   of  Parliament  to  decla.  * 
them  such?   Doubtless,   if   they  had  been   consecrated  at  Lambeth    by    imposition  of  the  hands  of  tru- 
JSishops,   though  all   their  consecrators  had   been   in   side  woollen  gowns,   and  neither  tapestry  toward^ 
the  east,   nor  red  cloth  on  the  floor  of  the  Chapel,  and  could  have  shewn  authentic  records  of  the  same" 
they  would  never  have  desired  the  Queen  to  make  and  declare  them    Bishops   by    Act  of  Parliament' 
Nor  would  the  Queen,   and  the  wisdom  of  the  nation,   have  consented  to  the  makino-  of  such  a  suoei 
nuous  Act,   it  their  Reverences  had  desired  it.      No  !   no  !    there  would  have  been  no°more  need  of  any 
such  Act  ior  them  then,  than  there  had  been  for  three  score  and  nine  preceding  Archbishons  of  C-m 
leibury.  b  *  wn- 

After  all   this,  another  query  will  yet  arise  ;   to  wit,  by  what  form  of  consecration  Matthew  Pnker 
was  consecrated  ?   Our  present  prelates  and  clergy  will  not  say,   I  suppose,   that  he  was  made  Bish  ™  i/ 


...  ,  .  lii-  •       ,      ?  —    — *>  -"^^^    w.    vummuii    i  ia\ci,   and   esta 

Wishing,  and  adding  to  it   the  book  of  ordination:   And  the  Act  of  Queen  Mary   bavin-/  repealed   •' 
whole  Act,  as  to  both  these  parts,   that  Act  of   (  Elizabeth    reversing   that  repeal,   as  To  the  Boo'    of 
Common  Prayer  only,  did  plainly  and  directly  exclude  the   repealing  of  it,  as  to  the  book  of  orthna 


tion 


(m)  Several  ridiculous  circumstances  mentioned*  in  the  records,  winch  yet  render  them  less  credible 


g6  Protestant  Corruptions 


ifnn  ;   there  being  nothing  else 


to  be  excluded,  by  that  word  only,  but  that  book.  So  that  it  is  unde- 
niablv  evident,  that  Kin  °  Edward  the  Vith's  form  of  consecration  was  at  that  day  illegal.  And  must 
•  imagine,  that  the  Queen  would  suffer  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 
25  Henrv  VIII.  20  ?  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  commendable. 

But  admit  Matthew  Parker,  and  the  rest  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  new  Bishops,  were  made  such  by 
then  illegal,  form  ;  vet,  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  Senior,  to  whom  1  will  refer  my  Reader.  Yea,  the  Protestant  Bishops  and  Clergy 
themselves  have  judged  the  said  form  to  be  invalid  ;  and  therefore  thought  necessary  to  repair  tiie  es- 
al  defects  of  the  same,  by  adding  the  words  Bishop  and  Priest.  Essential  defects,  I  call  the  want 
of  these  two  words,  Bishop  and  Lhiest ;  for  if  they  had  not  been  essential,  why  were  they  added? 
Yet  this  will  not  serve  their  turn  ,  for  before  they  can  have  a  true  Clergy,  they  must  change  the  cha- 
racter of  the  Ordainers,  as  well  as  the  form  of  ordination.  A  valid  form  ot  ordination,  pronounce.! 
by  a  Minister  not  validly  ordained,  gives  no  more  character  than  if  it  had  continued  still  invalid,  and 
never  been  alrered.  The  present  Protestant  Bishops,  who  changed  the  form  ot  their  own  consecra- 
tion upon  their  adversaries  objections  of  the  invalidity  thereof,  (tor  immediately  after  Erastus  Senior  was 
published  against  it,  they  altered  it,  viz.  anno  1662)  might  as  well  submit  to  be  ordained  by  Catholic 
Bishops  ;  OY  else,  with  the  Presbyterians,  utterly  deny  an  episcopal  character,  as  allow,  by  altering 
the.  form  after  so  long  time  and  dispute,  that  it  was  not  sufficient  to  make  themselves,  and  their  prede- 
cessors,  Priests  and  Bishops. 

What  has  hitherto  been  said,  concerning  the  nullity  of  their  character,  is  yet  further  confirmed  bv 
their  altering  the  25*11  of  their  39  Articles:  For  these  first  Bishops,  Parker,  Horn,  Jewel,  Grindali 
v've.  understanding  the  condition  in  which  they  were,  tor  want  of  consecration  by  imposition  ot  hands, 
jesolved,  in  their  convocation,  ami';.  1562,  to  publish  the  39  Articles,  made  by  Cranmer  and  his  asso- 
ciates, but  with  some  alteration  and  addition  ;  especially  to  that  Article  wherein  they  speak  ^>v  the  Sa- 
craments :   For, 

Whereas  Cranmer's  25th  or  26th  Article  says  nothing  of  holy  orders  by  imposition  of  hands,  or  any 
.isiblesign  or  ceremony  requiied  therein;  Parker,  and  his  Bishops,  having  taken  upon  themselves  that 
>  ailing,  without  any  such  ceremony  of  imposition  and  episcopal  hands,  for  I  believe  they  set  not  much 
bv  John  Scorey's  Hands  and  Bible  in  the  Naggs-Head,  declared,  that  "  God  ordained  not  any  visible 
o.^n  or  ceremony  tor  the  five  last,   commonly  called   Sacraments;"  whereof   holy  orders  is  one.     This 

lation  and  addition  you  may  see  in  Doctor  Heylin's  Appendix   to  Ecclesia  Restaurata,  page  189. 

in  this  convocation  they  denied  also  holy  ordeis  to  be  a  Sacrament  ;  consequently  not  likely  to  impress 
any  indelible  character  in  the  soul  of  the  party  ordained:  Which  doctrine  continued  long  among  them, 
as  "appears  by  Mr.  Rogers,   in  his  Defence  of  111039  Article;,   who  affinns,   that   "  None  but  disorderly 

is;s  will  say  that  order  is  a  Sacrament ;"  and  demands,  "  Where  can  it  be  seen,  in  Holy  Scripture* 
•  rdeis  or  priesthood  is  a  Sacrament  ?  what  form  has  it  ?  ('.ays  lie)  what  promise  ?  what  institution 
from  Christ  ?"(n)  But  after  they  began  to  pretend  to  have  received  ar,  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.  "  Wedeny  not  ordination  to  be  a  Sacra- 
ment," says  Doctor  Bramhall,  ''  though  it  be  not  one  ot  these  two  which  are  generally  necessary  to 
•..  o ation."(o) 

By  order  of  this  convocation  the  Bible  of  1502  was  punted,  where  the  aforesaid  text,  "  When 
they  had  ordained  to  them  Priests,"  &co.  was  translated,  "  When  they  had  ordained  Elders  by  elec- 
tion ;"  which,  as  soon  as  they  began  to  thiist  after  toe  glorious  charactei  ot  Priests  and  Bishops,  they 
coi  rected. 

And  though  Cranmer  cared  as  little  for  any  visible  signs,  imposition  of  hands,  or  ceremonies  in  or- 
dination, as  the  other  first  Protestant  Reformers,  and  according  to  their  practice  had  abjured  the  priest- 
ly and  episcopal  charactei',  which  he  had  received  among  Catholics  ;  as  may  be  gatheied  by  his  words, 
related  by  Fox  in  his  Degradation,  thus  :  "  Then  a  Barber  clipped  his  hair  round  about,  and  the  Bi- 
shop scraped  the  tops  of  his  hngeis,  where  he  had  been  anointed. "(p)      When  they  were   thus  doing  ; 

"  All 

(n)  Defence  of  the  39  Articles,  p.  154,  155.  (0)  See  Mason  and  Dr.  Bram.  page  97.  (p)  Fox's  Act  and 
Monuments,  fob  216. 


BY     ADDING    TO    THE    TEXT,  o7 

*«  All  tills,"  quoth  the  Archbishop,  "  needed  not,  I  had  myself  done  with  this  gcer  Ion*  ago."  And  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  ele<  tion  thereunto  is  sufficient."  Though,  I  say,  Cranmer  va- 
lued not  any  episcopal  consecration,  which  he  had  received  in  the  Catholic  Church,  yet  he  presumed 
no!  to  make  the  denial  theieof  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  imposition  of  tiue  bishops'  hands,  thought  fit  to  make  ic  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 
piactises  t he  contrary,  and  in  King  James  the  fust's  reign  etased  fiom  the  text  the  word  election  as  a:i 
imposture,  or  gross  corruption,  yet  this  change  of  the  matter  does  no  more  make  them  now  true  priesrs 
and  bishops,  than  their  last  change  of  the  form  of  ordination,  in  the  year  1C02,  soon  attei  the  happy 
restoration  of  King  Charles  the  second. 

Ecclcsia  nan  est,  quce  sacerdetem  non  habel, 

There  can  be  no  Church  without  priests.— St.  Jerorn, 

It  is  enough,  that  in  this  place  we  have  proved  these  men  without  consecration  or  ordination  •  vet 
seeing  they  glory  also  in  assuming  to  themselves  the  name  of  pastors,  pastor  of  St.  Martin's  &c.  i^ 
may  not  be  unseasonable  to  propose  a  few  (luaerieo,   touching  their  pastoiai  jurisdiction. 

I.   Whether  it  is  not  a  power  of  the  keys,   to  institute  a  pastor  over  a  flock  of  clergy  and  people  ? 
IT.    Whether  any  but  a  pastor  can  give  pastoral  jurisdiction  ? 

III.  Whether  any  bishop,  but  the  bishop  of  the  diocese,  or  commissioned  from  him,  or  his  superior, 
can  validly  institute  a  pastor  to  any  parochial  church,   within  such  a  diocese  ? 

IV.  Whether  any  number  of  bishops  can  validly  confiim,  or  give  pastoral  jurisdiction  to  the  bishop, 
of  any  diocese,   if  the  metropolitan,  or  some  authorized  by  him,   or  his  superior,    be  not  one  ? 

V.  Or  to  the  metropolitan  of  a  province,   if  the  primate  of  tiie  nation,  or  some  authorized  by  him 
or  his  superior,   be  not  one  ?  ' 

VI.  Whether  any  but  the  chief  patriarch  of  that  part  of  the  world,  or  authorized  by  him,  catr  va- 
lidly give  pastoral  jurisdiction  to  the  primate  of  a  nation  ? 

VII.  Whether  the  bishop  of  Rome  is  not  chief  patriarch  of  the  western  church,  consequently  of  th> 
nation  •'  J 

VIII.  ^  Whether  Mat.  Parker,  the  first  Protectant  pretended  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  received  his 
pastoral  jurisdiction  from  the  bishop  of  Rome,   or  from  others  by  him  authorized  ?  or, 

IX.  Whether  those  who  made  Mat.  Parker  primate  of  England,  or  archbishop  of  Canterbury,  had 
any  jurisdiction  to  that  act,   but  what  they  received  from  queen  Elizabeth  ? 


X.    Whether  queen  Elizabeth  had  the  power  of  the  kevs,   either  of  order  or  jurisdicti 
X  '.    Whether  it  is  not  an   essential  part  of  the  Catholic  Church  to  have  pastors  ? 


XII.  Whether  salvation  can  be  had  in  a  church  wanting  pastors  ? 

XIII.  Whether  they  do  not  commit  a    most  heinous  sacrilege,  who  having  neither  valid  ordination 
nor  pastoral  jurisdiction,   do  notwithstanding  take  upon  them  to  administer  sacraments,  and  exercise  all 
other  acts  of  episcopal  and  priestly  functions  ? 

XIV.  Whether  the  people  are  not  also  involved  with  them,  in  thesame  sin,  so  often  as  they  commu- 
nicate with  them  in,   or  co-operate  to,   those  sacrilegious  presumptions? 

XV.  Whether  those,   who  assume  to  themselves  the  names  and  offices  of  bishops   and    priests     take 
upon  them  to  teach,   preach,   administer  sacraments,   and  perform  all  other  episcopal  and  priestly'func 
rions,   without  vocation,   without  ordination,    without  consecration,  without  succession,   without  m.s 
sion,  or  without  pastoral  jurisdiction,'  are  not  the  very  men  of  whom  our  blessed  Saviour  charged  us  to 
beware  r  (a)  b 

XVI.  To  conclude,   whether  it  is  wisdom  in  the  people  of  England,   to  hire  such  men  at  the  charge 
Di  perhaps  zoovc  1,000,000  per  annum-,   tc  lead  them   the  broad  way  to  perdition  ?  "   * 

I;  b  '  /mother 

'  (a)  Mat.  7,  15.: 


♦  Paot  •   Couri  pi 

Another  corrupt  Addition  against  the  perpetual  Sacrifice  of 
CHRIST'S  BODY  AND  BLOOD, 

i-i        .  t    c  .i,o  «n  ivtW-lr^     "  That  the  offering  of  Christ   once   made. 

fohe.etorc  the  sacrifice  ot  masses,   in  which  ,t      as   ;  on  -  only       >  ^    ,   ,  uJ 

i  i    .,,  ,'  ilie  .bad     to  have  remission  ot   pain   ana   gum,   vy-  -       ■'  -  . 

.he  quick  J.n.  the  dead,  to ,  i  En»Jand  bereaves  Christians  ,.i    the   mosl  urns-    ..  ,  ue  jewel 

deceits:"    oy  this   doc  .me  .lie  <L ■  m  c  vv>.      ,h(.     if    .  tl.  lv,     ,  „  lc„... 

an1J,  'iCh?,ficeCo?hi=  st  d  b  .Ka       b,oo.f  n^  the  LU   which  is  daily  offered   to  God  the  ha  bet,   W 
.,«r^  our  sm"     And  ueoause  tbev  would I  have  this    ahe  an     eiton^us  .,   eti.iie  o,      lei,  , 
bfeked  by  sacred  Scripture,  they  most  «g^ou.l,  cc uaupt    he  K        I       ;>.  w01,^1=; 


D  \  I  L  V 


I  , 


nder  me 


~:;u;;wreirmth^a;:tra,,,at,o,,  ^;  ^sirxr:,; ;":' .■; 

of  G'od's  holy  Chute,,,  which  behe.es    ,  1  teach    ,        la    °  u  b  ^ 

£;.S,,f » ^^K"^^ « ',* t-  £  r^d „,  ■«,:„ ,,, ,,,. ,., 

itue.nption,  )ctix  I  }         ,   ,      leave  a  visible  s-tcrhte  to  his  bd   veil  .po  •, 

ite  rh«  «<> y  b;  * A*  ^v^^  ^^  cr,  .ho»w  be  r— -,  ( 

h       ofUo  i  d  remain  to  the  end  of  the  world,   and  the  wholesome  v.nuc  thou, 
the  re  n  s  ton  of  those  sins  which  we  da.ly  commit,  declaring  hnnteif  robe  ,.«  a.  .* 
the  remission     ,   u  ;        uttered  to  God  the  Father  his  body  and     . 

according  to  the  o.d      of  Mel h;     ck  ^  ^^       ^  ^  (         .  .^  „ .         (hen 

forms  oi  bread  and  wine      ,ma  untie,  should  ret  e:ve    it;   and   bv    He  words  he  torn- 

he  ordained  priests  of  the  New   lestamen,   th  t         y  shorn      ^  •    4<         •        .      j     commemo. 

ivianded  «he%.nd^^ 

ration  ot   me,      &c.     And,       Because  n       •  0ff,red  himself  once  bloodily  upon  the  altar  01 

same  Christ   is  contained    and  unbloodily  reeled     vvl ■"'««£  £  £*"   ^         WhJcto?e,  according  to 
the  Co  s  :  the  holy  synod  teaches  the  saenhee  to  be      ui}  pro  p  uat    y,  -  sati  factions,  "and 

Greek  or  Latin  copies. 

But  lest  they  may  object,  that  this  is  but  a  new  doctrine,  not  taught  in  the  primitive  Church  nor 
deUvercd  downyto  u^by  the  Apostles  by  Apostolical  tradition ;  I  will  give  you  these  following  testimo- 
nies from  the  fathers  of  the  first  five  hundred  years. 

St  Cvoriansavs  (c)  «  Christ  is  priest  for  ever,  according  to  the  order  of  Melchizedek,  which  or- 
der  is  tlifs  coming  from  This  sacrifice,  and  thence  descending,  that  Melchizedek  was  priest  of  Gou 
mos  h  ah  thaT.e  offered  bread  and  wine,  that  he  blessed  Abraham  ;  for  who  is  more  a  priest  of  God 
most  hi8gh,  than  our  lord  Jesus  Christ,  who  offered  sacrifice  to  God  the  Father,  and  offered  the  same 
that  Melchizedek  had  offered,  bread  and  wine,  viz.  his  body  and  blood. 

And  a  little  after-  «  That  therefore  in  Genesis  the  blessing  might  be  rightly  celebrated  about  Abra- 
ham  by  M  Ichrzedek  the  priest,  the  image,  or  figure  of  Cnnst's  saenfic  e  <™™»f™£<£*£ 
wine,  went  beture  ;  which  thing  our  Lo.d  perfecting  and  peitorming  offered  bread  and  the  chal.ee 
m.xed  with  wine,  and  he,  that  is  the  Plen,tude5  fulhlledtne  verity  ot  the  prefigured  image. 

The 

(b)  Concii.  Trid.  sess.  22.  cap.  i,  cap.  2.    (c)  Ep.  fy  ^  C«ecilium. 


liV    ADDING  TO   Till.  Tl    I 


99 


i  lie  same  holy  father,  in  another  place,  as  cited  also  by  the  Magdebuigian  centurists,  (,i)  in  this 
manner.  '  Our  Loul  |esus  Christ,"  says  Cyprian,  lib.  2  ep.  3.  "  i.>  the  high-priest  of  Gml  the  Fa- 
ther ;  mill  ti  1  s*  offered  sacrifice  to  GoU  the  Father,  and  commanded  the  same  to  be  done  in  remembrance 
of  bun  :  and  'hat  priest  truly  executes  Cinist's  place,  who  imitates  that  which  Christ  did  ;.and  then  he 
offers  111  the  Cnurch  a  true,  and  full  sacrifice  to  God."  This  Saying  so  displeases  the  centuris's,  that  ther 
say,  "  Cvvrian  ailirms  superstitiously,  that  the  priest  executes  Christ's  place  in  the  supper  of  0111 
Lord/' 

Sr.  Hierom.  (e)  "  Have  recourse,"  says  lie,  "  to  the  book  of  Genesis,  and  you  shall  find  Melchi- 
zedek, king  of  Salem,  prince  of  this  ciiv,  who  even  there,  in  figure  of  Christ,  offered  bread  and 
wine,  and  dedicated  the  Christian  mvstery  in  our  Saviour's  body  and  blood."  Again,  "  Meichizedck 
offered  not  bloody  victims,  but  dedicated  the  sacrament  of  Christ  in  bread  and  wine,  a  simple  and.  pure 
sacrifice."  And  yet  m  re  plainly  in  another  place,  "  Our  ministry,"  says  he,  "  is  signified  in  the 
word  of  Order,  not  by  Aaron,  in  immolating  biute  victims,  but  in  offeiing  bread  and  wiue,  tha:  is, 
the  body  and  blood  01  our  Lord  Jesus." 

St.  Augustine  expressly  teaches,  that  "  Melchizedek  bringing  forth  the  sacrament,  or  mystery,  o: 
our  Lord's  table,  knew  how  10  figure  Ii is  eternal  priesthood."  (t) — <4  There  first  appeared,*'  savs  he  in 
another  place    "  that  sacrifice  winch  is  now  offered  to  God  by  Christians,   in  the  whole  world."  (g) 

Again,  (Cime.  1.  in  p:al  xxxv.)  "  There  was  formerly,"  says  he,  "  as  you  have  known,  the  sacri- 
fice ot  tlie  Jevvs,  according  to  r lie  order  of  Aaron,  in  the  sacrifice  ot  beasts,  ami  this  in  mvsterv  :  rot 
not  as  yet  was  the  sacrifice  of  the  body  and  blood  ot  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  Melchi- 
zedek  :  for  it  is  written,  our  Lord  has  sworn,  and  it  shall  not  repent  him,  thou  art  a  priest  for  ever, 
according  to  t'ne  order  of  Melchizedek."  And  in  Cone.  2.  psal  xxxiii.  he  expressly  teaches,  "  That 
Christ,  of  his  body  and  blood,  instituted  a  sacrifice,   according  to  the  order  of  Melchizedek." 

Nothing  can  be  more  plain  than  these  wordsof  St.  Irenxus,  in  which  he  affirms  of  Christ,  that  (h) 
*'  Giving  counsel  also  to  his  disciples,  to  offer  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  look  of  the  creature  of 
bread,  and  gave  thanks,  saving,  this  is  mv  body  ;  and  likew.se  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  the  Apostles,  throughout  the  whole  world, 
offers  to  God,  to  him  who  gives  us  nourishment,  the  first  fruits  ot  h;s  gift':  in  the  New  Testament  1 
of  whom,  amongst  the  twelve  prophets,  Malachy  has  thus  foretold  :  I  have  no  will  in  you,  the  Jews, 
says  our  omnipotent  Lord,  and  1  will  take  no  sacrifices  at  your  hands,  because,  from  the  rising  of  the 
sun  to  the  setting  thereof,  my  name  is  glorified  among  the  Gentiles  ;  and  in  every  place,  incense  is  Gf- 
icred  to  my  name,  and  a  pure  sacrifice,  because  my  name  is  great  among  the  Gentiles,  faith  our 
Lord  Almighty,  manifestly  signifying  by  these  tilings,  because  the  former  people  indeed  ceased  to  offer 
to  God  ;  but  in  every  place  a  sacrifice  is  offered  to  God,  and  this  pure,  for  his  name  is  glorified  among 
the  Gentiles."  Thus  St.  Irenseus,  whose  words  so  touch  the  Protestant  centurists,  that  they  say, 
•'  Irenzeus,  ckc.  seems  to  speak  very  incommodiously,  when  he  says,  he,  Christ,  taught  the  new  ob- 
lation of  the  New  Testament,  which  the  Church  receiving  from  the  Apostles,  offered  to  God  over  all 
ihe  world." 

Eusebius  Caesariensis.  (i)  "  We  sacrifice,  therefore,  to  our  highest  Lord  a  sacrifice  of  praise  :  we 
sacrifice  to  God  a  full,  odoriferous,  and  most  holy  sacrifice  :  we  sacrifice  after  ?.  new  manner,  according 
to  the  New  Testament,  a  pure  host." 


Mark. 


(d)  In  the  Alphab.  Table  of  the  3  Cent,  under  the  letter  S.  col.  83.  (t)  Ep.  ad  Marcel,  ut  migret.  Bethleem. 
Ep.  ad  Evagr.  Quaest.  in  Gen.  c.  14.  (f)  Ep.  95.  (g)  Lib.  16.  de  Ci.  Dei,  c.  12.  See  him  also  lib.  17.  c.  17.  C- 
lib.  18.  c.  35.  cum  Psalm  109.  lib.  1.  contr.  Advets.  Leg.  &  Prophet,  c.  20.  Serai.  4  dc  Sanctis  Iiutoct.'-t'- ■» 
(h)  Lib.  4.  Advers.  Hsr.  c.  32.     (i)  Lib.  1.  dejeuenstrat,  Evang,  c.  10.    (k)  Ad.  Psal.  95. 


soo  Protestant   Corruptions 


cal  table,   which  is  the  unbloody  host,   and    the 


ures  against  .he  great  and  mos tc he.uki- s .uil bee  but      .                                         ^  ^^  be           rant> 

t  is  a  blasphemous  tabic,    and   dangerous  dec  :ett  ?  V\lc.i,   wu. »°             ,fi       ,  »  („)«The  dailv  sacrifice." 

hat  the-  holy  rathe, ,  call  it  M)  "A  visible  sacr.hce.  (m  .■      ^llc*  V^'!  i'ic  sa-.rifiee  of  the  bo«W  ^  nd  blood  of 

*>  V  T!-  *™$Z  ^1"*^  Church."  (s)  -Ihesacnticeof  the 


..IK 


1  »'>:  G°a's  mC1Cy,  it,C"^1  ""'r':1':1.!;  ^,1  ,h«fi  words,   «  The  holy  council 


"     "T'"b   ;  --  •'  ,        i-pnrehpncls   Oricen,    b>  •  At  hanasius,    at.    nmi)iobc,    »■  v»    w 

Mass    against   Bellarmni. pajc 167,  Jg^J  C^d^  Arabic  Bcdc,   for  maintaining    -The  Mass  to  be 
•"^cn^oro:^,  lo^^i„;V  of  the  dead,;     Colder  then,   wh.ru-*  there 

d 


1   with    him    in    his  daily   sickness: 


,  '•'•  ,  .     whc     vvas  obsequious  to  him,   and  watched   witu    mm    .11    ii.a  u-i.y    -  — 

:  :-V.  ■   ^shV    '«     e°n*  dead,   Appointed  the  healthful  host  to   be  offered   for    his  absolution 

.  V;  ;Hch  do^e,    the  said  Justus  appeared   to  his  brother  by  v.s.on,    and  said,    I    have 

;!,:^VV;     '    .    '  i,'  •         &c/'     And  the  brethren  in  the  monastery  counting  the  days, 

I:- en    hiuierto    evil,    oui    now   ani     •  -",    <-w-<  _  . 


in  o"go      the  Great'*  '""■   ™,CS3  he  had  *  mind  J°  *  ,  P°-Se  "T  h"  "*?"'   "   '"  ""  '  " 

.'    ^inec/f  th   se   fathers,   who  lived  before  St.  Gregory's  time,  tor  example  : 
l"    ''' m   l'-  .••'%",  •*.   ,  •.„..•.!.,.,  ti,„  „^,.1p  of  Smvrna.   sneakme   of   the    heretics  of  his   time, 


matiu? 


,s  Ma.tyr,   in  his  epistle  to  , he  people  ot   Smyrna    speakmg  ot   tne    neiet  cs  o     m  „m  = 
■  s.meiud-ment  w-ith   his  vindicator,   writes  thus:   »  They  al  ow  not  of   Eucharists  and  Ob- 
-'  .!  Av     he J     "because  thev  do  not  believe    the    Eucharist  to   he   the   flesh    of  our   Sav.our  Jesus 

';._   w^c"h   si;ffcrcj    for  our'sins,   and   which    the  Father,   in    his    mercy,   raised    again    from    the 

(1C;t"lu  tin  Martyr     in  his   apology  to  the  emperor  Antonius  Pius,    made   for  tire  Christians  :   "Now 

'  a'"i7e     among.t^s,  Is  called    the  Euchar  s  ,    which  it    is    lawful  for  none    to    partake   ot, 

o'w        •  1      e  our  doctrine  to  be  true,   who  have  been  washed  ,n    the    aver  of  regeneration  tor 

Z  remis.ion  ot  sins  ;   and  who  regulate  then  lives  according  to  the  prescription  or  Christ      foi  we^do 

/n  St    Au*    de  Civit   Dei  lib.  ic.  c.  19,     (*)  St   Cypr.  1.  2..ep.  3-  &  St.  Aug.  cit.  c .20.     (n)  Aug^  cit.  c   16.  & 

(     ",   \      1*  can\    Ori  ,«..  in  Nun,    Hum    23.      (o)  S.  Cyprian,  1.  2.  eP    3.  &  Aug.  l,b    16   c    22.  de  Civ.t.  De.. 

°;£^     ,    c   8   &  H.     o    contr.  Factum  c    18.  &  S    Hiero.n  li.  3.  eontr    Pelag.  Aug.  in  Psal.  33    con    2.  to  8. 

{<?l   r>    v,   I,'',      Cor    Mom    24.     W  S.Aug,  in  Enchiridion  c.  .10.  &  de  Cura  pro  mortms,  c.  18     (r)  Et  de  Civit. 

V;    Mo   c      o        01     de"  ptiaNov'TestTc    ,8.  &  S.  Irenes,  li.  4.  c.  32.     (t)  Aug.  de  Civ,t    Dei,  h    .7.C.2D. 

^'itmu.t'in  Xpoiconstit   edit.  i554    Antvcrpix.  H.  6.  c.  22.  fol.  1,3-     H  The  Author  of  the  beeond.L^ 

'.'ace  uf  til*  i-spuatiou  ot  the  Doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England,  &c.  p.  13. 


BY  ADDING  TO  THE  TeXT.  IOI 

not  receive  this  as  common  bread     or  common  drink  ;   but  as  by  the  Word  of  God,    Jesus  Christ,  our 
Redeemer,   being  made  flesh,   had  both  flesh   and  blood  tor  the  sake  of  our  salvation  .    Just  so  we  are 

hiS''   '.  T  l  ?°  '   V"  Whldl  thLa,\kS  are  Siven  by  Payers,   in  his  own  words,  and  whereby  our 

blood  and  flesh  are  by  a  change  nounshed,   is  the  flesh  and  blood  of  the  incarnate  Jesus:  For  the  Lot- 

them'"         Commcmanes  wl;Cte»  ty  them,  called  the  Gospels,  have  recorded  that  Jesus  so  commanded 

St.  Iiensus,  taking  an  argument  from  the  participation  of  the  Eucharist,  proves  the  resurrection  of 
:  hVsh  agamst  the  T  et.es  of  his  time. (a)  «  As  the  blessed  Apostles  say,  Because  we  are  mem- 
is  of    n\i   L-udy,   ot    ins  flesh,   and  ot   his   bones:  not  sneakino-  ihitftf^   «n; I  «r  ;„.,;,;u„ 


'      ,    '   —— "/"■-  v<v  xib  uic    uiesseu   nposties  sav,  because  we   are   mem- 

iii,  flesh  and  ot  his  bones  ;  not  speaking  this  of  any  'spiritual  or  invisible  man, 
bu'  of  -ha  d.sposi  -on  which  belongs  to  a  real  man,  that  consists  of  flesh,  nerves,  and  bones  ;  and  is 
nounshec  by  the  ehahce,  which  is  his  (Christ's)  blood,  and  receives  increase  by  that  bread  which  i, 
his  h  dv      And  ps  the  v-nc,   being  planted  in  the  earth,   brings  forth  fruit  in  season:    And  a  grain  of 

W? ,11  IP  ,:",0n  \     F  '  an,d  r?Uing'  HseS  Up  with  incrcase  hV  the  virtueof  God,  who  compre- 

hends al  I  tnmg>    which  atterwards,  by  a  prudent  management,   becomes  serviceable   to  men  ;   and  re- 

SliTA  • 6  W°  ,  a°u  arC  ma^  th,C  Eucharisr>  which  is  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ  ;  so  also  our 
bodies  being  nounshed  by  it,  and  laid  in  the  earth,  and  there  dissolved,  will  arise  at  the  r  time  j  the 
word  ot  God  working  in  them  this  resurrection,  to  the  glory  of  God  the  Father." 

Euscbius  Canadensis  (b)-.« Making  a  daily  commemoration   of  him,   (Christ)   and  daily  celebrat- 

tl  L  thaToTt/J  Ol  ,hlS  "^  and|blTd  ;  and  be,'ng  n°W  Preferrcd  to  a  '-re  excellent  sacrifi  e'and  office 
™?«r     V V  ,aW'  WC  th'nk  lt  u»reaso»abIe  any  more  to  fall  back  to  those  first  and  weak  ele- 

s  nuoted  bv  S?nTnhed  ?  n'"  8'gM  ^  6ffre8'  bm  DOt  the  truth  itSelf-"     A™^<  P1^'  of  E  seb    s, 
as  quoted  by  St.  John  of  Damascene,   »  Many  sinners,"  savs  he,   »  being  Priests,  do  offer  sacrifice 
neither  does  God  deny  his  assistance,   but  by   the  Holy   Ghost  consecrates  dre  proposed  J£:  An  I  the 
bread  indeed  is  made  the  precious  body  of  our  Lord,  and  the  cup  his  precious  blood!" (cf 

theSw"ldarLTu3,V^lS^n0tSpeak,5'  Sayf  he',  "  °f  lhe  thi"SS  of  God'  likemc">  or  5»  ^  sc'^  of 
a  ne7fec  faith  Fo It'  "  ™Tl  and  ""^rstand  what  we  read,  and  then  we  shall  believe  with 
a  pe.tect  faith,  bor  what  we  say  of  the  natural  existence  of  Christ,  within  us,  if  we  do  not  learn 
from  him,   we  sav  foolishly  and    profanely  •   for  he  himself  <nvs     «  M„  fl.  i    "  i      . 

olood  is  drink  indeed."     There  is'no  place  leftfSr  £uwigT,he  r^a  itytf  hisTs   T, d*  lool     for 

^irutV "  hTa'-nd0  7  C  fl  ^  ^  "*  °Ur  ^  "  is  ^  flesh  a"d  "-'  ^  *  no 
tins  truth  r  lt  may  indeed  not  be  true  for  them,   who  deny  Christ  to  be  true  God."(d) 

<<  Time's  mf  bJod?S"lem;(e)7,<  Si"Ce  t]ieref°rJe  Christ  himself  does  thus  affllm>  and  saYs  °f  ^e  breaif, 
1  Iiis  .,  my  body  ;      who,  from  henceforward,  dare  be  so  bold  as  to  doubt  of  it?   And  since  the  same 

fid?    n^na^Gln  '  ^  "  Thi?JfW  "?«>."  who,  1  say,  can  doubt  of  it    and  sa""  is  not 
blood"-  a  n I  does  not ht    '      '  0nC?'  ^^  ^  wiH'  turned  warer  into  wine,  which  much  resembles 
'  a"d  d0eS  not  he  deserve  to  be  credited,  that  he  changed  wine  into  his  blood  ?    For  if,   when  in- 

confe  s  thffL'IIW  /"  Twghi  S°  S*Upend°US  a  m'rade'  have  wc  ™  »»ch  more  Te  son  to 
confess,  that  he  gave  his  body  and  blood   to  the   children  of  the  bridegroom  ?   Wherefore     full  of  cer 

boV'a  n^hVbSn^  h0ty  r'  bl°?d  °f  ChTl  '•  F°r  U"d£r  fhC  fo™  of  bill  il^en  to  the  t  e' 
mavest  £ fn iade tl  "'  p0™^.  ^"f  ;  thaC  haVinS  ,eceiVed  the  bodY  and  hi^d  of  Christ  thou 
"£S?"  r°h?  b°d-ra,nd  S,!00d-     Thusweshall  become  Christophers,  that  is, 

only  or  bare  win  'for  r"?-'3  bftand  -b °?d.imo  US--Do  not  therefore  iock  on  it  as  mere  bread 
thereto  re     the    n LjZr        ^  t*  ^V^'  K  'S  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ-     Notwithstanding, 

but  rathe;  take  h  fo    n  !      °f  ^t'  ,C^.f?th  C.°?farm  thee  '  and  do  "ot  JudSe  of  the  <l»ng  by  ^e  «astf 
he       W         vl  Crtam^    TaUh'    W,thoUt  'he  least  doubt  that  his   body  and  blood  are  given 

y^Z»sJr^d^t^mmVi0l'  d,0Knot  come holding  both  the  paln!3  of  y°ur  hands °pen' r!or 

Jece  ve  sgo  ,rea   a  Xin,     A  "i     '  h,f d  be,  aS  "  We,e  a  Ie  (  under  the  ri§ht>  inco  which  >ou  aie  » 

receive  so  great  a  king.  And  in  the  nollow  of  youi  hand  take  the  body  of  Christ,  saying,   Amen."(f) 


C  c 


St. 


tate^  teUnC;tVchio(b)m^  *'  ^^^  Evajg.  c   io.     (c)  Lih   3.   Parallel,  c.  ^5.     (d)  Lib    8.  d-  Trini. 

hand  of  the  Cwimun kant°       ''^        CUSl°m  M  thy8C  da)S  Ll  ^   ^  l°  dcIivcr  U'e  h^>  Sacranieilt  ^«  the 


ioz  Protestant  Corruptions 

St.  Gregory  Nvssen.(g,) — ';  When  wc  have  eaten  any  thing  thai  Js  prejudicial  to  our  constitution,  it 
is  neccssaiv  thnt  we  take  sometliing  that  is  capable  of  repairing  what  was  impaired  ;  that  so,  when  this- 
healing  antidote  is  within  us,  i:  may  work  out  ot  the  body,  by  a  contrary  affection,  all  the  force  of  the 
poison.  And  what  is  this  antulote  ?  It  is  nothing  but  that  body  which  overcame  death,  and  was  the 
origin  of  our  lite.  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  our  body,  changes  and 
reduces  the  whole  to  its  own  likeness.  And  as  when  poison  is  mixed  up  with  any  thing  that  is  medi- 
cinal, 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  o  her  wav  ot  receiving  any 
thing  within  our  bodv,  unless  it  be  first  conveyed  into  our  stomach,  by  eating  or  drinking,  it  is  neces- 
sary that  bv  this  ordinary  way  ol  natuie,  the  lite-giving  virtue  of  the  Spirit  be  communicated  to  us. 
But  now,  since  that  bodv  alone,  which  was  united  to  the  Divinity,  has  received  this  grace,  and  it  is 
in  an  it  est  that  our  bodv  can  no  otherwise  become  immottal,  we  are  to  consider  how  it  is  impossible, 
;'i  n  one  bodv,  which  is  always  distributed  to  so  many  thousand  Christians  over  the  whole  world,  should 
he  the  whole,  bv  a  part  in  every  one,   and  still  remain  whole  in  itself." 

And  a  lirile  after.  ';  1  do  therefore  now  rightly  believe,  that  the  bread  sanctified  by  the  word  of 
God,  is  changed  into  the  bodv  of  G  id,  the  Word.  —  And  here  likewise  the  bread,  a;  the  .Apostle  says, 
is  sanctified  by  the  Word  ot  God  and  prayer  ;  no:  so,  that  by  being  eaten  it  becomes  the  body  ot  the 
Word,  but  because  it  is  suddenly  changed  by  the  Word  into  his  body,  by  these  wort's,  "  This  is  my 
';.  uly."  —  And  this  is  effected  by  virtue  of  the  benediction,  by  which  the  nature  of  those  tilings  which 
;.ppear  is  trans-elemented  into  it." 

Again,   in  another  place. (h) — (i  And  the  bread  in  the  beginning  is  only  common  bread  ;  but  whet: 
is  sanctified  by  the  mystery,    it  is  made  and  called  the  body  ot  Christ." 

St.  Hicrcm. — "  God  forbid,"  says  he,  "  that  1  should  speak  detracingly  of  these  men,  (Priests)  who 
bv   uicceeding  the  Apostle;  in  their  function,   d.>  make  the  body  of  Christ  with  their  sacred  mouth. "(i) 

St.  Augustine,  (k) — "  We  have  heard,"  says  he,  "  our  master,  who  always  speaks  truth,  our  divine 
Redeemer,  the  Saviour  of  men,  recommending  to  us  our  ransom,  his  blood:  For  he  snake  of  his  body 
,  id  blood  ;  which  bodv  he  called  meat,  and  which  blood  he  called  drink.  The  faithful  understand  the 
S.iciameut  ol   the  faithful.  —  i'ut   there   ate  some  (says  he)  who  do   not  believe   they  said,    '•  This  is  an 

I  saying,   who  can  hear  him  r"    It  is  an  hard  saying  bur  to  those  who  are  obstinate;   that  is,   it  is  in 
\  icdible  but  to  the  incredulous. "(k) 

The  same  Holy  Father,  and  great  Doctor,  in  his  commentary  upon  the  XXXIII  Psalm,  speaks  thus 
of  Christ  :  "  And  he  was  carried  in  his  own  hands?  And  can  this,  brethren,  be  possible  in  man  ?  Was 
ever  any  man  carried  in  his  own  hands  ?  He  may  be  carried  by  the  hands  of  others,  but  in  his  own 
'.  )  man  v.;.  •  ever  vet  carried.  How  this  can  be  literally  understood  of  David,  we  cannot  discover  ;  but 
in  Christ  we  find  it  verified  :  For  Christ  was  carried  in  his  own  hands,  when  giving  his  own  very  bo- 
he  said,  "  This  is  my  bodv  ;  '  for  that  body  he  carried  in  his  own  hands."  Such  is  die  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  blessed  Sa- 
t  lament  of  the  Eucharist,  which  Protestants  so  flatly  i\cnv  ?  I  would  ask  our  Church  of  England  Di- 
vines, whether,  if  they  had  been  present,  among  the  A^postles  when  Christ  said,  "  Take  and  eat,  this 
i,  my  body,"  they  durst  have  assumed  the  boldness  to  have  contradicted  the  omnipotent  Word,  and  have 
rtplyed,  "  It  is  not  thy  body,  Lord,  it  is  only  bread  r"  1  believe  the  most  stiff  Sacramentarian  in  Eng- 
land, would  have  trembled  to  have  made  such  a  reply;  though  now  they  dare,  with  blasphemous 
mouth,  call  the  doctrine  of  Transubstantiation,  the  "  Mystery  of  Iniquity." 

I  have  insisted  somewhat  the  longer  upon  these  two  points,  than  perhaps  the  Reader  may  think  pro- 
per for  this  treatise  :  But  when  he  considers  that  the  priesthood  ami  sacrifice,  against  which  Protestants 
have  corrupted  the  Scripture,  and  framed  then  new  articles  of  faith,  are  two  such  essential  parts  ot 
Christian  Religion,  that  if  either  of  them  be  taken  away,  the  whole  fabric  of  God's  Church  fails  tc 
the  ground,   he  will  not  look  upon  it  as  an  unnecessary  digression. 

Several 

(jr)  In  Orat.  Cat.  c.  37.  (h)  In  Orat.  in  diem  luminum,  (i)  In  Epist.  ad  Heliodorum.  (k)  Lib.  de  Verb^ 
Apost.  Serm. 


of  the  Scripture. 


xo 


Several  oilier  Corruptions  and  Falsifications,   not  mentioned 

under  the  foregoing  Heads. 

TINS  Treatise  increasing  beyond  what  indeed  f  designed  it  at  first,   will  oblige  me  to  as  much  bre- 
vity as  possible,    m  these  following  corruptions:  fa  Dre 

.,  w°»a"nSi8,Ver-    39n  inSteau  °,f  ^  Wu'd   "Ch™}Y>"  theV'   COlUrary    to   the   Greek,   translate 

Love  ,      and  so  generally  in  al!  places,   where  much  ,s  spoken  in  commendation   of  char  tv       The 

reason  ,s    because  they  attribute  salvation  to  faith  alone,  they  care  not  how  little  charitv  may  sound  in 

he  ears  of  the  people-So   Lkew.se   .n   the    i    Cor.   cap.   13.    for    -Charitv,"    they    eight 

■Love         In  Rom    9.  ver.  ,6,  for  this  text,   «  Therefore  it  is  not  of  the  wilier,   nor  thl    u  bit 

or  God  that  sheweth  mercy,"   they  translate  in  their  old  Bibles,    «  So  lyeth  it  not  then  in  a  man's  w 

or  running,   but  m   the  mercy  of  God  ;"  changing   Of,   into  In,  and   Wilier  and  Runner,  Tnto  Will 

and  Running  ;  and  so  make  the  Apostle  say,  that  it  is  not  at  all  in  man's  will  to  consent  or  co  ooera te 

with  God  s  grace  and  mercy.  upciaic 

In  1  Corinthians,  cap.  1.  ver  10.  for  «  Schisms,"  which  are  spiritual  divisions  from  the  unity  of 
the  Church,  they  translate  «  Dissentions,"  which  may  be  in  wordlv  things,  as  well  asTelidon  Tht 
is  done  because  themselves  were  afraid  to  be  accounted  Schismatics,     So  likewise  lcll&lon  ■    J-  ^ 

In  Galatians  5.  ver.  20.  for  «  Heresy,"  as  it  is  in  the  Greek,   they  tranship    «  Wt*  "  -..  (  c 

themselves,  being  charged  with  heresy  :  Also  Y  transJate        hccts>      in  favour  of 

.birr  Iitso3f  r^K, « r&.h^iK  Ses» ;;  v*  ™  tf l* an  nrr- &c- 

be  a  Neophyte' by  deferring  hi,  baptiam.  or' by  lon'g  de^gti  ™«&  o  Go°     ^l^ltZ 

:o    be  necessary  long  before.  vj^u,    wmuiuc  teainea 

In  Titus  3.  ver.  8.  instead  of  these  words,   "  To  excel  in  good  works  »  thev  fnn^t,     <<  t       1 
fen!,  good  work, ,»  and,  as  their  last  edition  has  it,  "  To  maintain  good'  JklKtnu      tfe 

degrees  of  good  works.  0    u:>l  lue  uineient 

fJnnfnf?.™   1°'  VCl'"   f*   ^  "  Dedicated»"  ^   translate,   in   their  first  Bibles,   -Prepared"   in 
ilif  es  '     C1CSy'   that  ChnSt  W3S  n0t  thC  firSt  Wh°  WCttt  into  Heave^  which  the  word  dedicated 


tu[?     V  p     J  r       f  "P"  3.,»Cr"  l6'   th6y  f°rCe  the  tC>:t  t0  maIntain  a   frivolous  evasion 

that   "  .st.  Paul  s  Epistles  are  not  hard,"  but  the   «  things  in   the  Epistles;"   wherea boh  the  Greek 

ana  Latin  texts  are  indifferent  with  regard  to  both  constructions  •   It  is  a  p~,  eral  n  l\  ,L 

where  they  find  the  Greek  text  indifferent  to  two  senses,  there  they    estrtin  it  onU to  tht      h  "i' 

be  most  advantageous  to  their  own  error,  thereby  excluding  ,ts  reference  tc  the od  e^-en  I        ^'J*™? 

t.mes,  where  one  senses  received,   read,   and  expounded  by  the  ireate Dart  of "  th^  A      '    An*  °ften- 

and, ,y  all  the  Latin  Church,   there  they   very  partially  folCth^ 

,vi!h  e^^^^^  God  is  not  tempted 

the  Apostle's  speech  in  that  place.      Why  is  it  that  they  re  use  to  s  n  P       ' g  ""P^tinent  to 

well  as  the  other  ?    Is  it  o/aecount  of  V  Greek  wo'rd     whS^'a  PaS      ?"  T^T^]^   ? 
Lexicon,   that  it   .s  both  an  active  and   passive;   as  also  appears  bv  the   very   circuinTt     ce  of  rl 
going  words,    «  Let  no  man  say,   that  he  is  tempted  by  God."      Why  so  ?    -  Bee ,         '     ,         u     o    °rC" 
rant  Translators,   «  God  is  not  Wed  with  evil"     Is  this  a  good  reLon  P   No  h  ng  less "&"; 
-  BecaUSe  God  is  not  tempted  to  evil :"  'Therefore  let  no  man'sav,   that   «  He  i    tempted  bv  God  »  " 

1  his  reason  is  so  coherent,  and  so  necessary  in  this  place    that'    f  the  GreVl        *  } 

..«,  -  it  is  not,  yet  it  .night  have  better  be/eetned  BL  2  nl^^^tlT^.r 


an 

jc;   ',    : 


(')    #7r«g#J0J   X«»»j 


104  Protectant  Translations 

active  into  a  passive,  against  the  Real  Presence,  as  himself  confesses  he  did  without  scruple.  But 
though  he  might  and  ought  to  have  translated  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  words  are.  inducit  Do  minus  in  tcntationcm  ecs  quos  Satana  arbhrio  permittct,  &c.  (m) 
"  The  Lord  leads  into  temptation  those  whom  he  permits  to  be  at  Satan's  disposal  ;  or  into  whom  ra- 
the! he  leads  or  brings  in  Satan  himself,  to  fill  their  hearts,  as  Peter  speaketh."  Note,  that  he  says, 
God  brings  Satan  into  a  man  to  fill  his  heart,  as  Peter  said  to  Ananias,  "  Why  has  Satan  filled  thy 
heart,  to  lye  unto  the  Holy  Ghost  ?"  So  that  by  this  doctrine  of  Beza,  God  bi ought  Satan  i.uo  Ana- 
nias's  heart  to  make  him  lye  unto  the  Holy  Ghoet  ;  and  so  leading  him  into  temptation,  was  author 
and  cause  of  that  heinous  sin. 

Is  not  this  to  say,  "  God  is  a  tempter  to  evil,"  quite  contrary  to  St.  James's  words  ?  Or  cot-Id  he 
that  is  of  this  opinion,  translate  the  contrary  ;  to  wit,  that  "  God  is  no  tempt-ei  io  evil  3"  Is  not  ibis 
as  much  as  to  say,  that  God  also  brought  Satan  into  Judas  to  fill  hisheart,  and  so  was  .  uthor  of  ]  las's 
treason,  even  as  he  was  of  Paul's  conversion  ?  Is  not  this  a  most  absurd  and  blasph  moui  opinion  ;  vet 
how  can  they  free  themselves  from  it,  who  allow  and  maintain  the  aforesaid  e»  oo^r:,!.  ot  "God's 
leading  into  temptation  ?"  Nav,  Beza,  for  maintaining  the  same,  translates,  '  G  '*-  1'rov. deuce,'' 
instead  of  "  Gpd's  Prescience/"  Acts  2.  ver.  23.  a  version  so  false,  that  the  Eng.-sh  .Bezues,  in  their 
translation,  are  a  hamed  to  follow  him. 

And  which  is  worse  Elian  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  o  appointed  men  to  sin  ; 
as  appears  too  plaiuiv,  not  only  in  their  translation  of  this  following  text  of  Sr  Peter's,  but  also  from 
Beza's  commentary  on  the  same.  Also  Bucer,  one  of  King  Edward  the  Vlth's  Apostles,  held  direct- 
ly, that  <;  God  is  the  author  of  sin. "(n) 

St.  Peter  sa\sof  the  Jews,  that  Christ  is  to  them,  petra  scandal!  qui  effendunt  verba  ncc  crcdunt  in  quo 
is>  positi  sunt,  «s  0  xx\  v&wcu  ;  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  ren- 
dered 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  translation  Illyricus  approves,  saying,  (o)  "  This  1.; 
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  interprets  it)  that  God  created  them  for  this  pur- 
pose, that  they  should  withstand  him.  Erasmus  and  Calvin,  referring  this  word  to  that  which  goes 
before,  interpret  it  not  amiss,  that  the  Jews  were  made  or  ordained  to  believe  the  Word  ot  God,  and 
their  Messias  ;  but  yet  thai  they  would  not  believe  him  :  For  to  them  belonged  the  promises,  the  Tes- 
taments, and  the  Messias  himself;  as  St.  Peter  says,  Acts  2,  and  3-  and"  St.  Paul,  Rom.  9.  And  to 
them  were  committed  the  oracles  of  God,  by  witness  of  the  same  Paul,"  Rom.  3.  Thus  Illyricus  ; 
who  has  here  given  the  true  sense  of  this  text,  according  to  the  signification  of  the  Greek  word  ;  and 
lias  proved  the  same  by  Scripture,  by  St.  Peter  and  St.  Paul,  and  has  confirmed  it  by  Erasmus  and  Cal- 
vin. Yea,  Luther  follows  the  same  sense  in  this  place :  So  does  Castalio  in  his  Annotations  to  the  New 
Testament. 

Yet  Beza,  against  all  these,  to  defend  his  blasphemous  doctrine,  that  c'  God  leads  men  into  temp- 
tation, and  brings  in  Satan  to  fill  their  hearts,"  translates  it  thus  :  Sunt  immorigcri  ad  quod  etiam  condiii 
fucrunt,(p) — "  They  are  rebellious,  whereunto  also  they  were  created  :"  With  whom  his  scholars,  our 
English  Translators,  are  resolved  to  agree  ;  therefore,  in  their  Bible  of  the  year  1577,  they  read, 
4<  Being  disobedient  unto  the  which  thing  they  were  ordained  "  And  in  that  of  1572;  "  Being  diso- 
bedient 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  trans- 
lation 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  offence,  even  to  them  which  stumble  at  the  Word,  being  disobedient 
whereunto  also  they   are  appointed." 

Is  not  this  to  say  positively,  that  God  is  author  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   some   to  obedience,  he   is   truly   author  of  their 
obedience. 'J      Yes,  this  is  to  make  God  the  author  of  men's  sin,  for  which   purpose  it  was  so  trans- 
lated : 

(m)  Armot.  Nov.  Test  Anno  1556.  Mat.  6.  v.  13.  (n)  See  Bucer's  Scripta  Angiicana,  p.  931.  Et  in  Epi*t. 
ad  Rem.  in  p.  1  c.  94,  (0)  Illyricuj's  Gloss,  in  l  Pet.  c.  2.  ver.  8.  (p)  Vid,  Caotau©  in  aeiensionc  qua  translat. 
F-  i$2>  154,  >55- 


of   the  Scripture.  105 

lated-  Anil  thus  Bcza  in  his  notes  upon  the  text  explains  it:  that  "Men  are  made  or  fashioned, 
framed  stiricd  up,  created  or  ordained,  not  by  themselves,  for  that  were  absurd,  but  by  God,  to  be 
scandalised  at  him,  and  his  Son  our  Saviour  ;  Christus  est  els  offendiculo,  prout  etiam  ad  hoc  ipsum  a  Deo  sunt 
tcnditi:"   And  further  discourses  at  large,   and  brings  other  texts  to  prove   this  sense,   and  this  transla- 

'°And  though  Luther  and  Calvin,   as  is  sajd,  dissented  not  from  the  true  sense  of  this  text,   yet  touch- 
Mi 
rh 


no  the  blasphemous  doctrine,(q)  that   "  God  is  the  author  of  sin,      they,   with  Zuinglms,  must,  tor  all 
hfs,  have  the  right  hand  of  Beza.     "  How  can   man  prepare  himself  to  good,      says    Luther,   "see- 
ing it  is  not  in  his  power  to  make  his  ways  evil  ?   For  God  works  the  wicked  work  in  the  wicked. 

"  When  we  commit  adultery  or  murder,"  says  Zuinglms,  "  it  is  the  work  oi  God,  being  the 
mover  the  author,  and  inciter,  &c.  God  moves  the  thief  to  kill,  &e.  He  is  toiced  to  sin,  &c.  God 
hardened  Pharaoh,  not  speaking  hypcrbolicallv,  but  he  truly  hardens  him,  yea,  although  he  resist.  — 
Bv  which,  and  other  of  his  writings,  he  so  plainly  teaches  God  to  be  the  author  of  sin,  that  he  is 
therefore  particularly  reprehended  by  the  learned  Protestant  Grawerus,  in  Absuida  Absurdorum,  c   5.  de 

f*  God  Ts  author,"  says  Calvin,  "  of  all  those  things,  which  these  Popish  judges  would  have  to 
happen  only  bv  his  idle  sufferance. "(1)  He  also  affirms  our  sins  to  be  not  only  bv  God's  permission, 
but  by  "  His  decree  and  will  :"  Which  blasphemy  is  so  evidently  taught  by  him  and  his  followers,  that 
they  are  expressly  condemned  for  it  by  their  famous  brethren;  Feming,  lib.  de  unlvers.  Grat.p.  109. 
Osiander,  Enchirid.  Controv.  p.  1O4.  Scaffman,  de peccat.  causis,  p  155,  27.  St.zlinus  disput.  Theol.  dc_ 
Provid  Dei  Sect.  141.  Graver,  in  Absurda  Absurd,  in  frontisp.  Yea,  the  Protestant  Magistrates  ot 
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.(s)  Are  not  these  biessed  Reformers  .  O  ex- 
cellent instrument  of  God  !   as  Dr.  Tenisou  stiles  the  chief  of  them.(t) 

Protestants  denying  free  will  in  man,  not  only  to  do  good,  but  even  to  resist  evil,  open  a  very  wide 
passage  into  this  impious  doctrine,  of  making  God  the  author  of  sin. 


that  we  purify  and  cleanse  our  souls  from  sin  ;  that  good  works  are  necessarily  required  ot  Chilians: 
For  by  many  divine  arguments  St.  Peter  urges  this  conclusion  :  Ut  anmas  nostras  casttficcmus,  "  That  we 
purify  our  own  souls."  So  the  Protestant  translation,  made  in  Edward  the  Vlth's  time,  has  it.  "  for- 
asmuch as  you  have  purified  your  souls." (v)  So  likewise  one  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  Bibles,  "  Even  ye 
-which  have  purified  your  souls  ;"  and  so  it  is  in  the  Greek.  Notwithstanding  all  winch  Beza.  in  his 
Testaments  of  1556  and  1565,  translates  if,  Animabus  vestris  purificatis  obediendo  veritati  per  Spintum : 
which  another  of  Queen  Elizabeth's  Bibles  renders  thus:  "  Seeing  your  souls  are  puiified  in  obeying 
the  truth,  through  the  Spirit."  So  translates  also  the  English  Bible,  printed  at  Geneva,  1561,  and  the 
Scotch,   printed  at  Edenburgh,    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  contrary  ;  proving  that  in  our  justification  we  work  not.  but  are 
wrought  ;  we  purify  not  ourselves,  but  are  purihed  ;  we  are  not  active  and  doers  with  God's  grace,  bur 
passive  and  sufferers:  Which  opinion  the  Council  of  Trent  condemns,  (w)  The  Protestant  Bible  of 
168",  has  again  corrected  this,  and  translates,  "  Seeing  ye  have  purified  your  souls,"  &c.  but  whether 
with'any  good  and  sincere  intention,  appears  by  their  having  left  uncorrected  another  fault  of  the  same 
>tamp  in  Philippians,  cap.  1.  ver.  28. 

Where  St.  Paul,  handling  the  same  argument,  exhorts  the  Christians  not  to  iear  the  enemies  o. 
Christ,  though  they  persecute  never  so  terribly,  "  Which  to  them,"  says  he,  "-is  cause  of  perdition, 
but  to  vou  of  salvation  :"  Where  he  makes  good  works  necessary,  and  so  the  causes  of  salvation,  as 
?ins  are  of  damnation.  But  Bcza  will  have  the  old  interpreter  overseen  in  so  translating,  "  Because-," 
savs  he,  "  the  affliction  of  the  faithful  is  never  called  the  cause  of  their  salvation,  but  the  testimo- 
ny."(x)  And  therefore  translates  the  Greek  word  &«£<;,  Indicium.  And  lis  scholars,  the  English 
Translators,  render  it  a  "  Token,"  though  indeed  one  of  their  Testaments  translates  it  as  we  do,  a 
"  Dd  "  Cause;" 

(a)  Lut  To  2  Wittem.  an.  1551.  Assert.  Art.  36.  Vid.  de  Servo.  Arbit.  fol.  195.  Edit.  1603  Zuing  To.  10. 
«le  providentia  Dei,  fol.  365,  366,  367.  (r)  Calvin,  instit.  1.  1.  c.  18.  &  1.  2.c.  4.  &  1  3.  c.  23  (s)  Vid.  Lute- 
ras  Senat.  Bern,  ad  Ministros.  &c.  an.  1555.  (t)  Dr.  Ten.  Conf.  with  M.  P.  (u)  Castititaiues  anmas  vestras  in 
•bedicntia  Charitatis.     (v)  Bib-  1561,   1579.     (w)  Sees.  6.  cap.  4.     (x)  Beza  Annot.  in  ilium  locum. 


•f  .     t 


Pro  t  e  s  t  a  n  t  T  i\  a  n  s  latiu  n  s 


"  Caus  so  doe.,  .tlbo  Erannus,  ami  the  Tigurine  Translators:  (y)    Yea,  the  Apostles  cotrmaiinrr  On 

with  good  works,    these  leading  to  Heaven,   as  those  to  Hell,  convinces  its  sense  to  be  so  ;   as  Theodore/ 
a  ( -J leek   lather,    also  gathers   horn    that  word,   saying,    "    That    procures    to    them   destruction     bu' 
vou  salvation. "(/.j      So  St.   Augustine,   Si.  Hierom,   and  other  Latin  Fathers. 

And  that  good  works   are    a   cause    of  salvation,   our    Saviour   himself  clearly   shews,    when   he    thu 
-••peaks  oi   Mary  Magdalen  :   Rcmittuntur  a  peccata  mult  a  y  quoniam  dUc.xh  multum  ;    "  Many  sins  are  forp-iver 
her,  because  she  loved  much.*'    Against  which  no  man  living  can  cavil  from  the  Greek,  Hebrew    ^\- l  ■ 
tin,   but    that  work1'  ot  charitv   are  a  cause  why  sins  are  forgiven  ;   and   so  a  cause    of  our    iustinc-  ti 
and  salvation,    which  arc  evidently   the  words  and    meaning   of  our  blessed  Saviour.      Notwithstanding 
Beza  and  our  English  Translators  have  a  shift  for  this  also  ;    he  translates,    Rcmissa  sunt   prccata  ejus  mul- 
ct ;   nam  dilcxit  multum  ;    which  in  our  English  Bible  is  rendered,    "  Ihr  sins  which  are  'many,   aie  for- 
given;   for  she  loved  much  ;5'(a)    which  the  Reader  perhaps  mav  think    to  be   a   difference  so   small 
is  not  worth,  taking  notice  of;    but,   if  well  considered,    will  be   found  as  great,    as  is    between  oui  d\ 
trine  and  Protestants.      And  fiiFt,    the  text    is  corrupted  by  making  a  fuller  point  than    cither  the  Greek 
or  Latin  bears,    the  English  making  some  a  colon,   (:)  and  some  a  semicolon,  (;)  where   in  Greek  there 
is  only  a  Comma,  (,)    and  Beza,    in  his  Latin,   yet  more  desperately   makes   a   down  and  full  peioJ     f  ) 
thereby  dividing  and  distracting  the  latter  part    from  the  former,   as  though  it  contained  no*  a     ;a-o'n     f 
that  which  went   before,    as  it  does,    but  were  some  new  matter:    Wherein  he  is  contollcu   by  another 
of  his  own  Translators,    and  by  the  Greek  prints  of  Geneva,    Zurich,    Basil,    and  other  Geiman  cities 
who  point  it  as  it  is  in  our  Latin   and  English. — But  their  falshood  appears  much,  more  in   rurm'nrr  n„» 
mam  into  Nam,  because  into  ror.(b) 

Seeing  our  Savioui's  words  are  in  effect  thus,  '-Because  she  loved  much,  therefore  many  sins  are 
forgiven  her  ;"  which  they,  by  this  perversion  and  mispointing  it,  make  a  quite  different  and  almo- 
contrary  sense  ,  thus,  "  Because  she  had  many  sins  forgiven  her,  therefore  she  loveth  much  •"  and 
this  love  following  was  a  token  of  the  remission  which  she,  by  only  faith,  had  obtained  before -"so 
turning  the  cruse  into  the  effect,  and  the  antecedent  into  the  consequent,  hereby  utterly  overtinowin^ 
the  doctrine  which  Christ  by  his  words  and  reason  gives,  and  the  Church  of  his  words  and  reason  oat 
thers.      Beza  biushes  not   to  confess  why  he  thus   altered    Christ's  words,  saying,   Nam  dilcxit    'factum 

■  for  sine  loved  :"  1  he  Vulgate  translation  and  Erasmus  render  it,  "  Because  she  loved  :"  But  1  (says 
he)  had  rather  interpret  it  as  i  do,  that  men  may  best  understand  in  these  words  to  be  shewn  not  the 
cause  of  remission  of  sins,  but  rather  that  which  ensued  after  such  remission,  and  that  by  the  Cons'e 
que  in  is  gathered  the  Antecedent.  And,  therefore,  they  who  abuse  this  place,  to  overthrow  free  ius" 
tification  by  faith  alone,  are  very  impudent  and  childish  :"  (e)  Thus  Beza.  But  the  Ancient  Fathers 
who  were  neither  impudent  nor  childish,  gathered  from  this  text,  that  charitv,  as  well  as  faith,  is  re' 
quisite  for  obtaining  remission  of  sins.  St.  Chrysostom,  Horn.  6.  in  Mat.  says,  (d)  "  As  first 'bv  wa~ 
ter  and  the  spirit,  so  afterwards  by  tears  and  confession,  we  are  made  clean  ;""  which  he  proves  by  this 
place.  So  St.  Gregory,  expounding  this  same  pMace,  says,  "  Many  sins  are  forgiven  her,  because  she 
loved  much  ;  as  it  it  had  been  said  expressly,  he  burns  out  perfectly  the  rust  of  sin,  whosoever  burns 
ehemently  with  the  tire  of  love.      For  so  much  more  is  the  rust  of' sin  scoured  away,   by   how  much 

ire  the  heart  ot  a  sinner  is  inflamed  with  the  great  fire  of  charity." 


And  St.  Ambrose  upon  the  same  words.—"  Good  arc  the  tears  which  are  able  to  wash  away  cur  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,  (ej  '<  This  sinful  woman 
the  more  she  owed,  the  more  she  loved,  the  torgiver  of  her  debts,  our  Lord  himself,  affirming  so* 
Many  sms  are  forgiven  her,  because  she  loved  much.  And  why  loved  she  much,  but  because  she  owed 
much  ?  Why  dul  she  all  these  offices  of  weeping,  washing,  &c.  but  to  obtain  remission  of  her  sins  ?" 
Utner  Holy  bathers  agree  in  the  self-same  verity,  all  making  her  love  to  be  a  cau^e  going  before  and 
not  an  effect  or  sequel  coming  after  the  remission  of  sins. 

I  have  only  taken  notice  here  how  Beza  and  our  English  Translators  have  corrupted  this  text  •  but 
he  who  p  cases  to  read  Mwsculus,  in  locis  Commumbu:,  c.  dc  Justjcai.  n.  c.  will  find  him  perverting;  it 
a  ter  another  strange  manner,  by  boldly  asserting,  without  all  reason  or  probable  conjecture,  that  our 
blessed  Sav.our  spoke  m  Hebrew,  and  used  the  preterperfect  for  the  present  tense,   and  that  St.  Luke 

wrote 

\nj\^\\5(nu\{u  Tlieod-.in  *ha-  GaP-   «•     00  Beza  Test,  anno  1565,  Bib.  1683,     (b)  i556.     (c)  Beza  in 
Luc.  7.  v.  47.     (d)  Horn.  33.  in  Evang.     (e)  Horn,  23.  inter  50.  "  ,  **        KJ 


o  f  t  h  e  Script  u  r  k  .  i  o  '; 

wrote  in  the  Doi  ic  dialect ;   so  that  Musculus  wouUl  have    it   said,    "She  loved   CMiiisi   much,   and    no 
wonder  ;   she  had  pood  cause  so  a>  dj,    because  many  sins  were  forgiven  her.'' 

But  Zuinglius  goes  yet  another  way  to  work  with  this  text,  ami  tells  us,  that  he  supposes  ti  .  word 
"  Lo\c"  shmid  hav<  been  "  Faith:"  his  words  a;e,  "  Because  she  loved  much.  I  suppose,  that 
Love  i;  her.  put  for  Fakh  ;  because  she  has  so  great  affiance  in  me,  so  many  sins  are  forgiven  her."' 
k<j\  he  sa\  ;  nftrrwaids,  "  Toy  Fa;.h  iiath  saved  thee;  that  is,  has  absolved  and  dflivcred  thee  from 
thy  sins."'  {.) — Which  one  distinction  of  his,  will  answer  all  the  places  that  in  this  controversy  can  be 
brought  c  it  >f  S.  rip  aie  to  refute  tneir  "  Only  Faith."  But,  to  conclude,  what  can  be  more  impious 
than  to  arhhm  that  tor  obtaining  of  sins,  Chantv  is  not  required  as  wcil  as  Faith,  seeing  our  blessed 
Saviour,  ;f  we  oedit  nis  1.-  mgel  .t,  .St.  Luke,  and  1  think  his  authority  ought  to  be  preferred  before 
;'i.:  of  Zuinglius  Bez.i.  Musculus,  oi  cur  English  sectaries,  most  divinely  conjoins  Charitv  with 
1  i  i.  saving  of  Cnaiitv  "  Ma-iy  ins  are  forgiven  her,  because  she  loved  much  !"  straightway  adding 
of   Faun,   "  Thy  f  lith  has  made  thee  sale  ;   go  in  peace." 

As  v  1  see  he  e,  th  ay  use  all  tlie;r  endeavours  to  suppress  the  necessity  of  good  and  charitable 
works;  so,  on  tue  other  side,  In  v  endeavouied  to  make  their  hist  Bibles  countenance  vice,  (g)  so  far 
as  to  seem  to  a  low  of  iv  detesrab!  *  sin  of  usury,  provided  it  were  not  hurtful  to  the  borrower,  in  Deutete- 
nomy  xxiii  vi  •  19  thev  translate  thus,  "  Thou  shalt  not  hurt  thy  brother  by  usury  of  monev,  nor  bv 
usury  of  coin,  n  ,r  by  u  m  y  of  any  thing  that  he  may  be  hurt  withal  :"  by  which  thev  would  have  it 
meant,  that  usury  is  not  here  fornidden,  unless  it  hurts  the  party  that  borrows.  A  conceit  so  rooted  in 
most  men's  hearts,  that  they  think  such  usury  very  lawful,  arid  therefore  frequently  offend  therein. 
But  Almightv  God,  in  this  place  of  holy  Scripture,  has  not  one  word  of  hurting,  or  nor  hurting,  a< 
may  be  c,een  in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  ;  and  as  also  appears  from  their  having  corrected  the  same  in 
their  Bible  of  1683,  where  they  read,  as  it  ought  to  be,  <:  Then  shale  not  lend  upon  usury  to  thy  bro- 
ther, usury  ot  monev,  usury  of  victuals,  usury  of  any  thing  that  is  lent  upon  usury." — It  the  Hebrew 
word  signify  to  hurt  by  usury,  why  did  nor  they,  in  the  very  words  next  following,  in  the  self-same 
Bibles,  translate  it  thus,  "  Unto  a  stranger  thou  mayest  lead  upon  usury,  but  not  unto  thy  brother?''' 
why  said  thev  not  rather,  "  A  stranger  thou  mayest  hurt  by  usury,  but  not  thy  brother  r"  is  it  not  al! 
he  same  in  word  and  phrase  here  as  before  ?"  the  Jews  would  have  given  ihem  thanks  for  so  trans- 
fating  it;  who,  by  forcing  the  Hebrew  word  as  the*/  do,  think  it  well  do:  e,  ■■■  hurt  anv  straimei,  that 
'S,  any  Christian,   by  usury,   be  it  ever  so  great. 

Whether  the  first  Protestant  translators  of  the  Scripture  were  guided  by  that  spirit,  which  should  be 
;n  Christian  Catholic  translators,  may  be  easily  gathered  from  wn.ai  follows,  as  well  as  from  what  you 
have  already  seen. 

They  were  so  prophane  and  dissolute,  that  some  of  them  termed  that  divine  booh,  called,  Cunucun 
Canticorum,  containing  the  high  mystery  of  Christ  and  his  Church,  li  The  Ballad  of  Ballads  ot  Solo- 
mon," as  if  it  were  a  ballad  ot  love,  between  Solomon  and  his  concubine,  as  Ca^talio  wantonly  trans- 
•  ated  it. 

And  yet  more  prophanely,  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."  (h)  I  am  ashamed  to  set  down  the  literal  commentary  of  this  their  translation.  Was  there  any 
thing  in  the  Hebrew  to  hinder  them  from  translating  it  in  this  manner.  "  We  have  conceived,  and  a? 
it  were  travailed  to  bring  forth,  and  have  brought  forth  the  Spirit  r"  Why  should  they  say  Wind  rathe: 

lliail     Stlinf   f      IllPV    n  re    lint    lirnnrnnl         tli-ir    tllr-     ^..nl-nlrrinf    in     f^r»»/»t  in/1     tl-.»>     Anrirnf     fTotlicrc        /li->      oil    o-v.. 


„..,..~..,      ........    ,.»    i..^    v_.  .  ,**.■>.    HH.H.    .410    iuv-j\.    j-vjuiv     wuiu.:,      laniuuo    ill    an    jinniuiu  ,  x   ntuu"ii    n  1 1*    a  v_<ji     u< 

thee,  O  Lord,  we  conceived,  and  have  travailed  with  pain,  and  have  brought  forth  the  Spirit  of  thy 
Salvation,  which  thou  hast  made  upon  the  earth  :"  which  excellently  sets  before  our  eyes  the  degree' 
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  lias  h,  (m)  '■  and  have  brought  forth,  wind,"  can  admit  no  spiritual  in- 
terpretation ;  but  even  as  a.  meie  Jew  should  translate,  or  understand  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  us 
of  God's  holy  Spirit,   there  to  translate  Wind,   as  in  psalm  cxlvii.  ver.  18. 

Another 

(f)  Zuing.  in  Luc.  7.  To.  4.     (g)  Bib.  1562,  1577.      (hN  Isaiah,  c.  16.  ver.  18.     (i)  St.  Ambrose,  lib.  2.  de  In- 
terpret.  c,  4.     (k)  Chrysostome,  in  psal.  7.  pi  op.  fin.     (1)  See  S.  Hierom  upon  this  place,     (m)  J3ib.  1685. 


i0S  Protestant  Translations 

i  •  -       •    -i      »«.v,;*;c    ,w  thrv  \vill  not  translate  for  the  Angel's  honour  that  carried 

Ha^ 'Xffi^  ^rce  of  his  Spirit^  bn.  thus,  "  Through 

n^^\nt"     iozunhuungn  to   the  Wind,   not  to  the  Angel's  power,  and  omitting  quite  the 

Urcck  word,  £S,  «  His,"  which  shcweth  plainly,  that  it  was  the  Angel's  Spirit,  Force,  and  Power,  (n) 

Aoain    where  the  Prophet  Isaiah  speaks  most  manifestly  of  Christ    saying,   «  And  (our  Lord)   shall 

noVcau";  oc  tor  to  nv  from  thee  any  more,   and  thine  eyes  shall  see  thy  master  ;"   which  ..all  the 

unc  in  effect  with  that   which  Christ  says,   «  1  will   he  with  you    unto  the   end  of  the  world         there 

one  of 'their Bibles  translates  thus,    "  Th'v  rain  shall  he  no  more  kept  back,  but  thine  eyes  shall  see  thy 

rain."      Their  last  translation  has  corrected  this  mad  falsification,  (o) 

Aoain.  where  the  holy  Church  reads,  -Rejoice,  ye  children  of  Sion,  in  the  Lord  your  God  be- 
cause  he  has  given  you  the  doctrine  of  just.ee  ;"  (p)  there  one  of  the.r  translations  has  ,t  <  I  he  ram 
of  righteousness  -'and  their  last  Bible,  instead  of  correcting  the  former,  makes  ,t  yet  worse  .f  it  can 
be  made  worse,  saving,  "  Be  glad  then,  ye  children  of  Sion,  &c.  for  he  hath  given  you  the  former 
rain "mod  ra  elv."  Does  the  Hebrew  word  force  them  to  tins  P  Doubtless  they  cannot  but  know  that  ,C 
signifies  a  teacher  or  master:  and  therefore,  even  the  Jews  themselves,  partly  understand  ,t  ot  Esdras, 
partlv  of  Christ's  divinity:  yet  these  new  and  partial  translators  are  resolved  to  be  more  prophanc  than 
he  very  jews.  If  they  had;  as  1  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 
magkes  no  doubt  but  the  Hebrew  is  doctor,  matter,  teacher  ;  who  also  m  the  psalm  translates  thus, 
«  With  blessings  shall  the  doctor  be  arrayed,"  (q)  meaning  Christ  ;  where  Protestants,  with  the  Jews 
of  latter  days,  the  enemies  of  Christ,  translate,  <<  The  rain  covers  the  pools.'  What  cold  stuff  ,s  this 
in  respect  of  that  other  translation,  so  clearly  pointing  to  Christ,  our  doctor,  master,  and  lawgiver,  (r) 

And  aaain,  where  St.  Jerom,  and  all  the  Fathers  translate  and  expound,  «  There  shall  be  Faith  in 
ihy  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  Know- 
ledge shall  be  the  Stability  of  th'v  tuner,"  Whereas  the  Prophet  reckons  all  these  virtues  singly,  viz. 
Moment,  Justice,  which  thex  'term  Righteousness,  Faith,  Wisdom,  knowledge  and  the  Fear  of  our 
lord  ;   but  they,   for  a  little  ambiguity  of  the  Hebrew  word,   turn  Faith  into  Stability. 

In  Isa.  37.  ver.  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  ihee.  In  the  He- 
brew, Greek.  St.  Hicrom's  translation  and  commentary,  as  also  in  the  last  Protestant  Bible,  printed 
1683,  it  is  quite  contrary,  viz.  "  The  virgin  daughter  of  Sion  has  despised  thee,  O  Assur:  the  daughter 
of  Jerusalem  has  shaken  her  head  at  thee."  All  are  of  the  feminine  gender  and  spoken  o  Sion  i.te- 
lally  triumphing  over  Assur;  and  of  the  Church  spiritually  tiiumphmgovcrheres.es,  and  all  her  ene- 
mies. In  their  first  Bibles  they  translated  all  as  of  the  masculine  gender,  thereby  applying  it  to  Assur  ; 
insulting  against  S.on  and  Jerusalem.  But  for  what  cause  or  reason  they  thus  falsify  it,  will  be  hard  to 
detei  mine,  unless  thev  dreaded,  that  bv  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,  be- 
cause we  find  it  so  translated  in   the  fourth  book  of  Kings,   cap.  19.  ver.  21.   yea,   and  in  all  the.r  hist 


translations. 


A  treat  manv  other  faults  are  found  In  their  first  translations,  which  might  be  passed  by,  as  not  done, 
upon  any  ill  design,  but  perhaps  rather  as  mistakes  or  over-sights,  (s)  yet  however,  touching  some  tew 
of  them,  it  will  not  be  amiss  to  demand  a  reason,  why  they  were  committed:  as  tor  example,  why 
they  translated.—"  Ye  abject  of  the  Gentiles,"  Fa  45.  ver.  20.  rather  than,  "  Ye,  who  are  saved  of 
ihe  Gentiles  ,"  or,   as  their  translation  ha;-  it,   "  Ye,  that  are  escaped  ot  the  nations:"  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  j""  as  it  is  in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek,  and  as  now  their  last  Bible, 
has  it?  or, 

Why  read  they  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  ot 

Kcdar  f"  or, 

Why 

(n)  Tsa.  30.  v.  20.     (o)  Joel  2.  v.  23.     (p)  Lyra  in  30.     (<])  Psalm  84.  ver.  7.     (r)  Isaiah  33,  ver.  &     (s)  Can- 


r-.^i: r>„„.:,. 


of  the  Scripture,  too 

Why  do  they  translate,  «c  Ask  a  sign,  cither  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?  (a)   Or, 

Why  do  they  translate,  *<  To  make  ready  an  horse,"  rather  than  <c  beasts,  as  the  Greek  has  it ;  and 
as  also  now  their  edition  of  1683  reads  it  ?(b)  Or, 

Why  translate  they,  "  If  a  man  on  the  Sabbath  Day  receive  circumcision,  without  breaking  the 
law  of  Moyses,"  rather  than,  according  to  the  Greek,  which  their  last  translation  has  followed,'"  [f 
a  ma-.i  on  the  Sabbath  day  receive  circumcision,  to  the  end  the  law  of  Moyses  should  not  be  broken  ?"(c) 
Or,  ' 

Why  read  they,  "  The  Son  of  man  must  suffer  many  things,  and  be  reproved  of  tire  Elders,"  for 
"  Be  rejected  of  the  Elders,"  as  the  Greek,  and  now  their  Bibles  of  1683  have  it ;  and  as  in  the  P  aim, 
"  The  scone  which  the  builders  rejected  •"   we  bay  not  reproving  of  the  said  stone,  which  is  Christ  r(d) 

Again,  why  translate  they  thus,  "  Many  which  had  seen  the  first  house,  when  the  foundation  of  this 
house  was  laid  before  their  eyes,  wept,"  &c.  when  in  the  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Latin,  i.  is  read  thus  : 
"  Many  who  had  seen  the  first  house  in  the  foundation  thereof,  (i.  e.  yet  standing  upon  the  foundation, 
undestroved)  and  this  temple  before  their  eyes,  wept?"  I  suppose  they  imagined',  that  it  should  be 
meant  they  saw  Solomon's  Temple  when  it  was  first  founded  ;  which,  because  it  was  impossible,  thev 
translated  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  we  cannot  ex- 
cuse them  for  being  done  with  much  more  licentious  boldness,  than  ought  to  appear  in  sincere  and  ho- 
nest Translators. 


Absurdities  in  turning  Psalms  into  Metre. 

THEIR  unrestrained  licentiousness  is  yet  further  manifest,   in  their  turning  of  David's  Psalms  into 
rhyme,  without  reason,   and  then    inging  them  in  their  congregations ;   telling  the  people,   from  Saint 
James,  cap.  5.    *«  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  arc  merry,  to  sing  ;"  yet  he  does  not  in  particular  appoint  Da- 
vid's Psalms  co  be  sung  by  the  merry,  no  more  than  he  appoints  our  Lord's  Piayer  to  be    aid'by  such  as 
he  exhoits  to  pray,   though  perhaps  he  meant  it  of  both  :   So  that  from  any  thing  our  bold  Interpreters 
can  gather  from  the  tex  ,  JEquo  ammo  est  ?  Psallat.  •^cXXira.  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,  winch 
we  have  no  cause  to  deny,   because  the  Church  of  Clmst  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  Church  to  smg  David's  Psalm  :,  as'truly 
translated  from  the  Hebrew  into  Latin  ;   but.  nevei    to  sing  such  songs  as  Hopkins  and   Sternnold  have 
turned  from  the  English  prose  into  metre:  Neither  do  I  think  that  ;ober  and  judicious  Protestants  them- 
selves 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  consider  how  fully    thev    are 
fraught  with  nonsense  and  ridiculous  absurdhi  :;,   besides  many   gross  corruptions,    viz:,  above  two 'hun- 
dred ;(e)   confessed  by  Protestants  themselves  to  be  found  in  the  Psalms  in  prose,   from  which  these  were 
turned  into  metre,   which  we  may  guess  are  scarcely  corrected  by  the  rhyme:   To  collect  all   the  (:\u\:s 
committed  by  the  said  blessed  p  »ets  :u  their   psalm-metre,   would  be  a  task   too   tedious  for  my  designed 
brevity  ;   1  will  therefore  only  set  down  some  few  of  their  absurd  and  ridiculous  expressions  ;   and  for  the 
rest,  leave  the  Reader  to  compare  these  psalms  in  metre  with  the  o.hers  in  prose,  even  as  by  themselves 
translated. 

E  e  Pi  alms 

(a)  Isai.  7.  v.  11;    (b)  Acts  23.  v.  24.     (c)  Jo.  7.  v.  23.     (d)  Mark  8.  31.     (e)  Seethe  Preface, 


no 


Protestant  Absurdities 


PSALMS  in  Prose,  Bible  1683. 

Psalm  ii.     Verse  3. 
Let  us  break  their  bands  asunder,   and  cast  away 
their  cords  hum  us. 


Psalm  xvi.     Verse  9,    10. 
Therefore  my    heart   is  glad,  and  my   glory  re- 
joiccth  :   My  flesh  also  shall  rest  in  hope.      For  taou 
wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  Hell,  Sec. 


Psalm  xviii.     Verse  36. 
Thou  hast  enlarged  my  steps  under  aic,   that  my 
feet  did  not  slip. 

Psalm  xviii.     Verse  37. 
I   have   pursued   mine   enemies,    and   overtaken 
them  :   Ncithei  did  I  turn  again  till  they  were  con- 
sumed. 

Psalm  xxit.     Verse  7. 
All  they  that  see  me,  laugh  me  to  scorn.     They 
shoot  out  the  lip,   they  shake  the  head. 

Psalms  xxit.     Verse  12. 
Many  bulk-,  have  compassed  me,  strong  bulls  ot 
Basanhave  beset  me  tound. 


Psalm   xxvi.     Verse  10. 
In  whose  hand  is  mischief,  and  their  right  hand 
is  full  of  bribes. 


Psalm  xlix.     Verse   20. 
Man  that  is  in   honour,  and  understandeth  not, 
is  like  the  beasts  that  perish. 

Psalm  lxxiv.     Verse  ii,  12. 
Why    withdraweth    thou   thy   hand,     even    thy 
right  hand  ?  Pluck  it  out  of  thy  bosom. 


PSALMS  in  Metre,  Bible  1683, 

Psalm  ii.     Verse  3. 
Shall  we  be  bound  to  them  r  say  they  , 

Let  all  their  bonds  be  broke, 
<<  And  of  their  doctrine  and  their  law. 
Let  us  reject  the  yoke." (a) 

Psalm  xvi.     Verse  9,   10. 
Wherefore  my  heart  and   "  tongue"  also,(b) 

Do  both  rejoice  together  ; 
My  "  flesh  and  body"  rest  in  hope, 

When  L  this  thing  consider. 
Thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  "  grave,-' 
For  Lord  thou  lovest  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." 

Psalm  xviii.     Vers?  37, 
So  T  suppress  and  wound  my  toes, 

That  they  can  rise  no  more  : 
For  at  my  feet  they  fall  down  flat, 
I  strike  them  all  so  sore.(c) 

Psalm  xxii.     Verse  7. 
All  men  despise,  as  they  behold 

Me  walking  on  the  way  : 
"  They  gi  in, 'they  mow,  they  nod  their  heads"  &c. 

Psalm  xxii.     Verse  12. 
So  many  bulls  do  compass  me, 
That  be  full  strong  of  head  : 
"   Yea,  bulls  so  fat,  as  tho'  they  had 
In  Basan- field  been  fed." 

Psalm   xxvi.     Verse  10. 
Whose  hands  are  heap'd  with  "  craft(d)  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  he  live, 
<'  And  turn  to  dust  and  powder." 

Psalm  lxxiv.     Verse  ii,   12. 
Why  dost  thou  draw  thy  hand  "  a  back, 

And  hide  it  in  thy  lap  ?" 
O  pluck  it  out,  and  be  not  slack, 
"  To  give  thy  foes  a  wrap."(e) 


(a)  The  Reader  need  not  be  told  why  this  is  added,  beside,  its  making  up  the  rhyme,  (b)  What  they  translate 
»  irlorv"  in  uros^  rhev  call  «'  toneue"  in  rhyme.  And  for  want  or  one  toot  to  make  up  another  verse,  they  thrust  in 
a  wh7e  bod yT^flK  bod  <>  S  Again,  what  in  prose  is  called  Hell,  in  rhyme  they  term  Grave ;  As  d ^ s ^ 
left  in  the  Grave,  (c)  This  warrior  lays  about  him  at  a  d.fterent  rate  from  David  (f)  W?  ™e  \™\d  £  "^ 
heads,  but  never  of 'crafty  hands,  (e)  In  the  title  page  they  say  "If  any  be  merry  1*  him  «i g  Psatog.  Buy™ 
sidering  what  Psalms  the/are,  they  advise  him  to  sing,  they  might  have  done  as  well  to  have  said  rather,  11  any 
would  be  merry,  let  him  sing  Psalms." 


in  turning  Psalms  into  Metre. 


in 


PSALMS  in  Prose,  Bible  1683. 

Psalm  lxxvii.     Verse   16. 
■ He  caused  waters  to  run  down  like  rivers. 

Psalm  lxxviii.     Verse  57. 
——They  were  turned  aside  like  a  deceitful  bow. 

Psalm  lxxxix.     Verse  46. 

The   days   of    Ins    youtii    hast   thou   shortened; 
Thou  hasc  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  i. 

The  Lord  reigneth,  let  the  people  tremble  ;  he 
sitteth  between  the  Cherubims,  let  the  earth  be 
moved. 


Tsalm  cxix.     Verse  70. 

Their  heart  is  as  fat  as  grease  :  (As  fat  as  brawn, 
in  another  Bible.  But  in  the  Latin  VnWate,  Coa<ru. 
latum  est  sicut  lac  cor  corum.) 

Psalm  cxix.     Verse  83. 
For  I  am  become  like  a  bottle  in  the  smoak. 


PSALMS  in  Metre,  Bible  168". 


Psalm  lxxvii.     Verse  i6. 
-Of  such  abundance,   that  "  no  floods 


Psalm  cxix.     Verse  no, 
The  wicked  have  laid  a  snare  for  me. 

Psalm  cxix.     Verse  130. 

The  entrance  of  thy  Word  giveth  light:  It  giv- 
eth  understanding  unto  the  simple. 


To  them  might  be  compared." 

Psalm  lxxviii.     Verse  57. 

— ■ — They  went  astray, 
Much  like  a  bow  that  would  not  bend, 
But  slip  and  start  away. 

Psalm  lxxxix.     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  dispraise. "(f) 

Psalm  xcvii.     Verse  12. 

And  light  doth  spring  up  to  the  just, 

With  pleasure  for  his  part, 
Great  joy  with  gladness,  mirth  and  lust,   &c.(g) 

Psalm  xcix.     Verse  i. 

The  Lord  doth  reign,  "  altho'  a:  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  wealth, 
As   "  grease  so  arc  they  fat." 


Psalm  cxix.     Verse  83. 

As  a  "  skin-bottle"  in  the  smoak, 
So  am  I  parch'd  and  dried. 

Psalm  exix.     Verse  no. 

Altho'  the  wicked  laid  their  nets, 
"  To  catch  me  at  a  bay." 

Psalm  cxix.     Verse  130. 

When  men  first  "  enter  into"  thy  Word, 
They  find  a  light  most  clear  ; 

And  very  ideots  understand, 

"  When  they  it  read  or  hear."(h) 


(f)  To  say  that  God  raises  an  ill  report  of  men,  has  affinity  to  Beza's  doctrine,  which  makes  God  the  author  of  sin, 
Vid.  Supr.  (g)  I  thought,  till  now,  that  lust  had  been  a  sin.  (h)  By  singing  thus,  they  would  possess  the  people  that 
even  the  most  ignorant  of  them  are  capable  to  understand  the  Scripture  when  they  read  it,  or  hayc  it  read  to  them. 


II 


Protestant  Absurdities 


PSALMS  in  Prose,  Bible  1683. 


Psalm  cxix.     Verse  150.  .  f 

They    draw    nigh    lhat    follow    alter    mischief: 
They  are  far  from  thy  law. 


Psalm  cxx.     Verse  $. 
Woe   is   me,   that   I  sojourn   in  Mesccli,   that 
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  exxix.     Verse  6. 
Let  them  be  as  grass  upon  the  home- tops,  which 
v.ithereth  before  it  groweth  up. 


PSALMS  in  Metre,  Bible  1683* 


Psalm  cxix.     Verse  150. 
My  foes  draw  near,   "  and  do  procure 

Mv  death  maliciously  :" 
Which  from  thy  law  arc  far  gone  back, 

"  And  strayed  from  it  lewdly." 

Psalm  cxx.     Verse   5. 
Alas  !    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." (1) 

Psalm  cxxvii.     Verse  2. 
Though  ye  rise  early  in  the  mom, 

And  so  at  night  go  late  to  bed, 
"  Feeding  full  hardy  with  brown  bread," 

Yet  were  your  labour  "  lest  and  worn."(k) 

Psalm  cxxix.     Verse  6. 
And  made  as  grass  upon  the  house, 
Which  withered!  "  ere  it  grow." 


1  could  wearv  the  Reader  with  such  like  examples:  They  seldom  or  never  speak  of  God's  covenant 
with  Israel,  but  they  call  it  God's  trade. (m)     As  in  Psalm  lxxviii.  10.  where  they  sing, 

For  whv  :   they  did  not  keep  with  God,  the  covenant  that  was  made  ; 

Nor  yet  would  walk  or  lead  their  lives,   »  according  to  his  trade."— Psalm  Lxxxvil.     Verse  to. 

For  whv  ?  their  hearts  were  nothing  bent  to  hi  n,  nor  to  his  "  trade.''— Psalm  ex.      Verse  37. 

For  this  is  unto  Isiacl  a  statute  and  a  "  trade."— Psalm  lxxxi.     Verse  4. 

And  set  ail  my  commandments  light,   and  will  not  keep  my   "  trade."— P>ALM  LXXXIX.      V  £RSe  32. 

To  them  be  made  a  law  and  "  trade,"  &c— Psalm  cxlvhi.     Verse  6. 

Such  stuff  as  this  you  will  find    in   other  places.     The  words  "  mere"  and  "  less'7  have  also  stood 
them  in  as  good  stead  as  "  trade"   to  make  rhyme  with,   viz. 

All  men  on  earth,  both   <<  least"   zmi  "  most."— Psalm  xxxiii.     Verse  8. 

All  kings,   both  "more"  and   "less." — Psalm   xlviii.     Verse  ii. 

The  Children  of  Israel,  each  one  both  "  more"  and  "  less."— Psalm  xlviii.     Verse  14. 

Sec  also  Psalm  cix.     Verse  10.— Psalm  xi.     Verse  6.— Psalm  xxvii.     Verse  8.  &c.  &c. 
Nor  are  they  a  little  beholden  to  an  "  ever  and  for  aye."     "  For  ever  and  a  day."     "  For  evermore 
always,"  and  the  like. 

Besides 

(1)  Why  is  all  this  added?  only  for  the  sake  of  rhyming  to  the  word  '«  name,"  unless  they  would  make  Isaac  a  sect- 
maker    and  his  religion  a  sect  like  their  own.      (k)  If  brown  bread  is  the  bread  of  affliction,  a   great  many  feeds  on  it 
who  are  able  to  buy  white,      (1)   How  grass  can  wither  before  it  -rows,  is  a  paradox,     (m)   Perhaps  this  word  "  trade 
should  have  been  "  tradition''  with  them;  but  for  tear  of  a  Popish  term,  winch  they  so  much  detest,  they  would  rather 
write  nonsense  than  use  it. 


I ;  J    T  U  R  N  J  N  G   P  S  A  J,  IvI  S    1  N  T  O  M  K  T  R  E , 


II 


R  •  •ules  the 
-i.il  the  'J'cn  * 
icle  oi   Chri 
.-.!  th 


;  turmr.g  the  psalms  into  metre,   they  alio  made  rlivmc  of  the  Lord's-Prayer,  the  Creed 
-;■  .mandments       in  which  one  thing  is  remarkable,    vi/,.   that  in  the  Creed,  upon  the  ar- 

hr.se  s  decent  into  Hel  ,   they  make  a  very  plain  distinction  between  the  Hell  of  rhedamned, 

I   the  l<  atners  ot   the  Old   iestament,   Limbm  Putrum,   thus: 


\:u\  so  he  died  in  the  flesh,   hut  quickened  in  the  sprite. 

His  body  then  was  buried,    as  i.  ->ur  use  and  right. 

His  s.-ud  did  after  this  descend  into  the  lower  party, 

A  dread  unto  the  wicked  spirits,   but  joy  to  faithful  hearts. 


ins,  '  to  whom  our  blessed  Saviour's  descent  into  Hell 


The 

p: inted 
which 

U'O  sin 


'urnsng  or    tins  article    into   m 
in  metre  in  their  latter  imp  re 


is,   I    suppose,   the  very   cause  why 
nd 


we  "nave  not  the  Creed 


,      ri  .mprcss.ons,  ;,„„  consequently,  none  of  the  other  prayers  and  rhyrnes 

ewd a  «"« I'" "ullit.  '       "Si       "USe  t0  ■""  °Ut  "»'»»"»<"»'•«!   would  have  liven 


R.  W. 

Prtsei  vc-  us,  Lord,  by  thy  dear  word, 
4-iom  Turk  and  Pope  defend  us  Lord, 
Which  both  would  thrust  out  of  his  thron< 
Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  thy  dear  Son. 


Dut  this,   with  such  othe1' 
d  ashamed  nf 


thein.pi  Xi'lMiT^^^^^jr- 

Wisdo,,,,  who,  notwnhstanding  hi,  nan.e,   was  doubtle » "he'rac-  ol         !       U    'h™   ' 

tooK  to  turn  psalm  into  metre     And  soil  is  likely  he  wa<  lookerl  ,,„h     if,  I        •  C'  U!ili':,'- 

A  Norwich,  vH!c„heraadet!:,followirKL';hc«tohis^;r  '  "' ■  sun,cl"»"  ^P 


(a)  Zac.o.  u. 


P* 


To 


ii4  Protestant   Translations 


To  the  Ghost  of  R.  Wisdom. 

That  once  a  body,   now  but  air, 
Arch-botcher  oi    a  psalm  or  prayer, 

from  Carfax  (b)  come, 
And  patch  us  up  a  y,ealous  lay, 
With   an  old  ever  an.l  for  aye, 

Or  all  and  some. 

Or  such  a  spirit  lend  me, 

As  may  an  hvmn  down  send  me, 

To  puree  m v  brain. 
Then  Robin  look  behind  ihce, 
lest  Turk  or  Pope  do  find  thee, 

And  go  to  bed  again. 

This  m?v  seem  too  light  for  a  treatise  of  this  nature  ;  hut  the  ridiculous  absurdity  of  these  rhymes, 
the  singing'' of  which  in  the  Churches,  lias,  by  several  learned  Protestants,  been  complained  of  and  la- 
mented, cannot  be  fully  enough  exposed  ;  that  so,  if  possible,  the  common  peoples'  eyes  may  be 
opened,  and  they  may  be  taken  off  from  the  fondness  they  seem  to  'have  tor  them. 

Though  the  ignorance,  rather  than  ill  intention  oi  these  busy  poets  appear  in  their  psalm-metre  -r 
vet  what  follows  cannot  be  excused  from  being  done  with  a  very  treacherous  design  of  the  translators  : 
for  uh.it  can  possibly  be  a  more  sly  piece  of  cratt  to  deceive  the  ignorant  reader,  than  to  use  Catholic 
terms  in  all  su<  h  places  where  they  may  render  them  odious,  and  when  they  must  needs  sound  ill  in  the 
people's  cais  r  For  example,  1 1  Maccabees  6.  ver.  7.  this  term  "Procession"  they  very  maliciously 
Translate,  saying,  "  When  the  feast  of  Bacchus  v\  as  kept,  they  were  constrained  to  go  in  Procession 
to  Bacchus."  let  the  leader  sec  in  the  Greek  Lexicon  if  there  be  any  thing  in  this  word,  vopzzixdvHv 
-,..;  dictvo-v,  like  the  Catholic  Chuich's  Processions,  or  whether  it  signify  so  much  as  "  Togo  about," 
;,s  other  of  their  Bibles  translate  it,  with  perhaps  no  less  ill-meaning  than  that  of  1570,  though  they 
name  not  Procession.- (c) 

St.  John.  cap.  9.  ver.  22  and  25.  where,  for  "  He  should  be  put  out  of  the  Synagogue,"  their  first 
translations  lead,  •'  He  should  be  excommunicated,"  to  make  the  Jews'  doings  against  them,  that  con- 
n  ised  Christ,  sound  like  the  Catholic  Church's  acting  against  heretics,  in  excommunicating  them  ;  as- 
it  tiie  Chuich's  excommunication  of  such,  from  the  society  and  participation  of  the  faithful,  weie  like 
xo  that  exterior  putting  out  of  the  Synagogue.  And  by  this  they  designed  to  disgrace  the  Priests'  power 
of  excommunication,  whereas  the  [evvs  had  no  such  spiritual  excomrrvunication  ;  but,  as  the  word 
only  signifies,  did  put  them  out  of  the  Synagogue  ;  and  so  they  should  have  tianslated  the  Greek  word, 
including  the  very  name  Synagogue.  But  this  translation  was  made  when  the  excommunications  ot 
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  ot  excommunicating  their  non-conforming 
brethren. 

in  Acts  17.  ver.  23.  for,  "  Seeing  your  Idols,"  or,  "  Seeing  the  things  which  you  Athenians  did 
worship,"  they  tianslate,  "  Seeing  your  Devotions,"  as  though  Devotion  and  Superstition  were  all 
one. 

And  ver  24.  for  "  Temples  of  Diana,"  they  ttanslate  "  Shrines  of  Diana,"  to  make  the  shrines 
of  saints  bodies,  and  other  holy  relics,  seem  odious;  whereas  the  Greek  word  signifies  temples.  And 
Be/a  says,    "  He  cannot  see  how  it  can  signify  shrines." 

1  iius  they  make  me  ot  Catholic  words  and  terms,  where  they  can  thereby  possibly  render  them 
odious  ;  but  in  other  places,  lest  the  ancient  words  and  names  should  still  be  retained,  they  change  them 
into  their  own  unaccustomed  and  original  sound.  So  in  the  Old  Testament,  out  of  an  itch  to  shew 
ti  1  sknl  in  the  Hebrew,  the  first  translators  thought  tit  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  different  languages  ;  but  this  is  in  a  great  part  rectified  by  the  last  translators,  according  to 
the  diicctions  ot  King  James  the  Firs:,  that  in  tianslating  the  proper  names,  they  should  retain  the  usual 
and  accustomed  manner  of  speaking. 

Their 

(b)  The  place  of  Ms  burial  in  Oxford.         (c)  Bib.  fjfoj   1577. 


IJ5 


op   the  Scripture. 

word,  ,n  the  New,  through  a„     ee^a      „!•,',  „    mrore.tol.er:lblc'    'ha»  •''«  changing  of  many  other 
people.  °  nereucal  intention  of  introducing  an  utter  oblivion  ot  them  among  the 

u^And    aZT^^'J^  ^"-"L  Eu<:h"i".  Sacrifice,  Grace,  Sacrament,  Baptism,  Pen- 

cv^ntlr^to^^ 
hnL    ri  i   y  Bishups  they  banished  the  pastoral  care  and  charcc  of  the  Pone  and  Ca 

t  r  h«"s:  r  w0hrd  cut *;enr  •  "'^  tarfed  Vession-  *"*•',,"  :„?.^  5^ ,-  - 

.'."Sri-iz:  hsu=s;g„t fey,  c^litch^Chd^ lcm,s  r1  redr  'r 
£^rzt».t  r,™^ 

lose  the  possession  of  the  things  themselves  »e)Bvl\'ou  !«     fh«  \h        W     '  '       '""^''i" 

GOOD  LORD    DELIVER   US   I 

■try,  against  the  Church  of  Rome,  Pag.  7    &  pf  40.  (0  Dr.  btillingfleefs  charge  of  IdolT 


FINIS. 


/  the   Roman  Catholics:  As  also  their  Declaration,  AJlrmaticn,  Com  mi 'nation  , 
rf.'ur  Abhorrence  of  the  following  Tenets,  commonly  laid  at  their  Door  ;  and  they  h  re  oblige 
fhtm.\J\'csf  that  if  the  ensuing  Curses  be  added  to  these  appointed  to  be  read  on   the  fir  it  Day    oj 
Lenr,  they  will  seriously  and  heartily  answer  Amen  to  them  all. 


URSFD  is  he  that  commits  Idolatry;  that  prays  to 
4    Images    c-i    Relics,     01    worships    them    for    God. 
K     Amen. 

II.  Cursed  is  cverv  Goddess  Worshipper,  that  believes  the 
Virgin  IVLrv  to  beam'  more  than  a  creature;  that  honours  her, 
wcr-hips  her,  or  puis  his  trust  in  her  more  than  in  God  ; 
that  bt  lieves  her  above  lur  Son,  or  that  she  can  in  any  thing 
command  him.      R,  Amen. 

III.  Cursed  is  he  that  believes  the  Saints  in  Heaven  to  be 
his  Redeemers,  that  prays  to  thuu  as  such,  or  that  givcsGod's 
honoui   to  then;,   or  to  any  creature  whatsoever.      R.  Amen. 

(Y.  Cursed  is  he  that  worships  any  Kreadei  God,  01  makes 
Gods  of  the  empty  elements  of  bread  and  wine.      R.  Amen. 

V.  Cursed  is  he  that  believes  Priests  can  forgive  sins  whe- 
ther the  sinner  repent  or  not  :  or  that  there  is  any  power  in 
earth  or  Heaven  that  can  forgive  sins,  without  a  hcaity  re- 
pentance and  -  ti'ous  purue  e  of  amendment.     R.  Amen. 

VI.  Cursed  is  he  that  believes  there  is  authority  in  the  Pope 
or  anv  others,  thai  can  give  icave  to  commit  sins:  or  that 
can  forgive  him  his  sins  for  a  sum  of  money.      R.  Amen. 

VII.  Cursed  is  he  that  believes  that,  independent  of  the 
merits  and  piston  of  Christ,  he  can  merit  salvation  by  his 
own  good  works;  or  make  condign  satisfaction  ior  the  guilt 
of  hi-  sins,  or  the  pains  eternal  due  to  them.      R.  Amen. 

VI!  1.  Cur.-cd  is  he  that  e  ontemns  the  word  of  God,  or  hides 
it  from  th  i  -   on  design  to  keep  them  from  the  know- 

led,  e  of  theii  du  '     ar.d  iu  preserve  them  in  ignorance  and 
error.      !'..  A:r,  a." 

IX.  Cursed  is  he  that  undervalues  the  word  of  God,  or 
that  forsaking  Scripture  rhuses  rather  to  follow  human  tta- 
dm  inns  than  it.      R.   Amen. 

X.  Cursed  is  he  that  leaves  the  Commandments  of  God,  to 
observe  the  constitutions  of  men.     R.  Amen. 

XI.  Cursed   is    he  that   omit?  any  of  the  Ten  Command- 
,  or  I      ;'•  the  people  from  the   knowledge   of  any  one 

ol    them,   to  the  end  that  they  may  not  have  occasion  of  dis- 
covering roe  truth.     R.  Amen. 

XiJ.   Cursed  is  he  that  preaches  to  the  people  in  unknown 
Lie-,   suclt  as  they   understand    not;    or   uses  any  other 
mean    to  keep  them  in  ignorance.      R.  Amen.- 

XIII.   Cursed  is  he  that  believes  that  the  Pope  can  give  to 

,   upon  anv  account  whatsoever,    dispensation  to   lie  or 

:we  ir  falsely  ;  or  that  it  is  lawful  for  any,  at  the  last  hour, 

i  .  nrnrest  himself  innocent  in  case  he  be  guilty.      R.  Amen. 

x  IV.   Cursed  is  lie  that  encourages  sins,   or  teaches  men  to 

i  the  amendment  of  their  lives,  on  presumption  of  their 

etc  nh-bed  repentance.      R.  Amen. 

XV.  Cursed  is  he  that  teaches  men  that  they  mav  be  law- 
fully prunk  on  a  Friday  or  anv  other  fasting-day.  though  they 
i.  ust  not  taste  the  least  bit  of  flesh.      R.  Amen. 

XVI.  v  ursect  is  he  who  places  Religion  in  nothing  but  a 
pompous  shew,  consisting  only  in  ceremonies;  and  which 
teaches  no:  the  peopb;  tc  serve  God  in  spirit  and  truth. 
R.  Amen. 


of  them  be  the  Faith  of  our  Church  :  and  cursed  are  we,  ii 
we  do  not  as  heartily  detest  all  those  hellLh  practices  as  they 
that  so  vehen  ently  urge  them  against  us.      R.  Amen. 

XX.  Cursed  are  we,  ii  in  answering,  and  saying  Amen  to 
any  of  these  Curses,  we  use  any  equivocations,  mental  re- 
servations; or  do  not  assent  to  them  in  the  common  and  ob- 
vious sense  ol   the  words.      R.  Amen. 

And  can  the  Papists  then,  thus  seriously,  and  without 
check  of  conscience,  say  Amei    ;."  all  these  Curses? 

Yes  they  can,  and  are  reach'  •/  do  it  whensoever,  and  as 
often  as  it  shall  be  required  of  the  a  Ar'  what  "hen  i-  to 
be  said  of  those  who  either  by  wo1  '  01  v  iifi;  g,  c  harge  these 
doctrines  upon  the  Faith  of  the  v  hurc  ,.  of  Rome.  "  Is  a 
lying  spirit  in  the  mouth  of  all  the  Piophets  J  are  they  all 
gone  aside?  do  they  backbite  with  cheir  tongues,  do  evil  to 
their  neighbour,  and  take  up  reproach  against  their  neigh- 
bour r"  I  will  say  no  such  thinfe,  but  leave  the  in  partial  con- 
siderer  to  judge.  One  thing  1  cm  safely  affi.m,  that  the 
Papists  are  foully  misrepresented,  and  shew  in  public  as  much 
unlike  what  they  are,  as  the  Christians  weie  ur  old  by  the 
Gentiles;  that  they  lie  under  a  great  calun  r.\  .  m  i  :  everely 
smart  in  good  name,  persons,  and  estates,  Ii  -u  h  lungs 
which  they  as  much  and  as  heartily  detest  as  thtiss  who  ac- 
cuse then;.  But  the  comfort  is,  Christ  has  said  to  his  fol- 
lowers, "•  Ye  shall  be  hated  of  all"  men,"  (VJ-.rtH.  10,  22.) 
and  St.  Paul,  "  We  are  made  a  spectacle  unto  the  world;'' 
and  we  do  not  doubt,  that  h=  who  bears  this  with  patience, 
shall  for  every  loss  here  and  contempt  receive  a  hundred-fold 
in  Heaven  :  '«  For  base  things  of  the  world,  and  things 
which  are  despised,   hath.  God  chosen."      ]   Corinth.  1.  28i 

As  for  problematical  disputes,  or  errors  of  particular  de- 
vices, in  this,  cr  anv  other  matter  whatsoever,  the  Catholic 
Church  is  no  way  responsible  for  them:  nor  are  Catholics 
as  Catholics,    justly  punishable  on  their  account.     Put, 

As  lor  the  King-killing  doctrine,  or  murder  c  f  Princes, 
excommunicated  for  heresy:  it  is  an  Article  of  Faith  in  the 
Catholic  Church,  and  expressly  declared  in  the  Genera' 
Council  of  Constance,  Sess.  15.  that  such  doctrine  is  damna- 
ble and  heretical,  being  contrary  to  the  known  laws  ol  God, 
and  Nature. 

Personal  misdemeanors  of  what  nature  soever,  ou Jit  not 
tc  be  imputed  to  the  Catholic  Church,  when  not  justifiable 
by  the  tenets  of  her  faith  and  doctrine.  For  which  reason, 
though  the  stories  of  Paris  Massacre  ;  the  Irish  Cruelties,  or 
Powder-Plot,  hnd  been  exactly  true,  (which  yet  for  the 
most  part  are  mis-related)  nevertheless  Catholics  as  Catho- 
lics, ought  not  to  suffer  for  such  offences,  any  more  than  the 
eleven  Apostles  ought  to   have  suffered  for  Judas's   rrcach- 


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   destroj    their 

J  native  country    on  pretence  of  promoting  the  Catholic  e^ue, 

XVII.   Cursed   is  he  who  loves  or  promotes  cruelty,  that    or   Religion.      Furthc.niore,    all   Pardons  and  Dispensations 

■   '        p°o;  le  to  be  bloody  minded,    and  to  lay  aside   thej  granted,  or  pretended  to  be  granted,  in  order  to  any  such 

meekness  of  Jesus  Christ.      R.  Amen.  |  ends  oi  designs,  have  no  other  validity  or  effect,  th-m  to  add 

X\  ill.   Cursed  is  he  who  teaxhes  it  lawful  to  do  any  wicked  !  Sacrilege  and  Blasphemv  to  the  above-mentioned  crimes. 


thing,   tin 
Chun  h  :   or  th 
ci  ii  ■  of  ir.      P 
\  X.    Cm  so 
and  d..:i:r.r.bk 


it  b:  for  the  interest  and  good  of  Mother 
an}'  evil  action  may  be  done  that  good  may 
Amen. 


>.i  ate  wc,  ii  a i 
ti  Kttir.cs  ecu 


ion^ 
i;  on 


st  all  these  wicked  principles  . 
at  cur  doors,  anv  one' 


Sweet  Jesus   bless  our  Sovereigns  :  pardon  our  enemies. 
Grant  us  patience  ;  and  establish  peace  and  charity  in  oui 

nations. 

FINIS. 


AN 

ANSWER  *«&»■- 

Oenr 


TO 


V^  *■*'  ^  * 


OSHaifr'g  Strata  of  tftt  -protoftant  $t!>U; 


TO  WHICH  IS  ADDED, 


AN     APPENDIX, 


CONTAINING   A 


REVIEW  OF  THE  PREFACE  TO  THE  FOURTH  EDITION  OF  THE  ERRATA, 


BY     THE 

REVEREND   RICHARD   GRIER,  A.  M. 

MASTER   OF   MIDLETON    SCHOOL. 


- 


(/.in  la i  io 


llontion ; 

Printed  by  G.  Sidney,  Northumberland-Street ; 

PUBLISHED    BY    T.  CADELL    AND    W.  DAVIES,    IN   THE    STRAND ; 

W.  S.  WATSON,   DUBLIN  J    AND    EDWARDS    AND     SAVAGE,    CORK. 


1812, 


TO  THE 


RIGHT  REVEREND 

WILLIAM,   LORD  BISHOP    OF   CLOYNE, 

My  Lord, 

When  I  first  submitted  the  outline  of  this 
Synopsis  of  controverted  texts  to  your  Lordship's  inspec- 
tion, I  had  scarcely  ventured  to  form  the  resolution  of  expos- 
ing it  to  the  public  eye.  The  favourable  judgment,  how- 
ever, pronounced  upon  it  by  your  Lordship  ;  and  the  encou- 
ragement conveyed  in  your  Lordship's  opinion,  that  "  it 
would  be  useful  to  the  Protestant  Church/5  if  I  exhibited, 
at  the  sa,me  time,  "  the  weakness  and  the  injustice  of  the 


vi  DEDICATION. 

attack  made  bv  Ward  on  the  received  English  Translation 
of  the  Bible  ;"  decided  me  on  exerting  my  best  industry  for 
the  attainment  of  so  desirable  an  end. 

Of  the  industry  which  was  thus  excited, 
these  pages  are  the  result.  In  them  you  will  perceive,  My 
Lord,  that,  in  compliance  with  your  wish,  I  have  included 
those  texts,  which  are  set  down  as  corrected  in  Ward's- 
treatise,  and  made  them  the  subject  of  distinct  enquiry  ;  for, 
otherwise,  as  is  most  justly  observed  in  your  Lordship's 
letter,  "  the  cunning  would  contend,  and  the  ignorant  sus- 
pect, that  the  strongest  objections  were  among  those  which 
did  not  appear." 

When  the  occasion  and  the  nature  of  the 
subject  are  considered,  I  shall  not,  I  hope,  appear  inex- 
cusable, or  seem  to  act  in  violation  of  private  communica- 
tion, in  making  a  public  use  of  your  Lordship's  letter.  For, 
if  I  feel  an  honest  pride,  in  sanctioning  my  procedure  by 
such   high  authority ;    I  am  no   less  gratified  in  recording, 


DEDICATION.  vii 

than  the  Protestant  Clergy  must  be  in  receiving,  an  opinion 
on  so  important  a  subject,  from  a  Prelate  of  your  Lordship's 
acknowledged  talents,  extensive  learning,  and  well-known 
attachment  to  the  interests  of  the  Established  Religion. 

With  a  grateful  sense  of  the  credit  derived 
from  the  permission  to  prefix  your  Lordship's  name  to  the 
following  Work,  and  with  the  sincerest  wish  for  your  Lord- 
ship's health  and  happiness, 

I  have  the  honour  to  subscribe  myself, 

My  Lord, 

with  dutiful  respect, 

your  Lordship's  most  obedient, 

and  faithful  humble  Servant, 


RICHARD  GRIER. 

Midleton,   January  \sty  1812. 


SUBSCRIBERS'  NAMES, 


A. 

Abbot,  Joshua,  Esq.  Cork. 

Abbot,  Charles,  Esq.  Dublin. 

Adams,  Rev.  Charles  11.  Dungourney. 

Adams,  Rev.  Samuel  H.  Creg. 

Adair,  Rev.  Doctor,  Fermoy. — 2  copies. 

Allman,  William,  Esq.  M.  D.  Dublin. 

Armstrong,  Rev.  George,  Bantry. 

Armstrong,  Rev.  William  C.  Sligo. 

Ashe,  Rev.  Doctor,  Bristol. 

Atterbury,  Rev.  Doctor,  Rector  of  Lisgoold. 

Austin,  Rev.  Doctor,  Rector  of  Midleton. 

B. 

Baillie,  Rev.  C.  Archdeacon  of  Cleveland. 
Ball,  Bent,  Esq.  Rocksboro'  House. 
Baldwin,  Henry,  Esq.  Bandon. — 2  copies. 
Beaufort,  Rev.  G.  L.  Rector  of  Brinny. 
Bell,  Rev.  Robert,  Youghall. 
Beilby,  William,  Esq.  Dublin. 
Berkeley,  Rev.  Joshua,  Cork. 
Bermingham,  G.  Esq.  Trinity  College,  Dublin. 
Boland,  T.  Esq.  Trinity  College,  Cambridge. 
Boston,  John,  Trinity  College,  Dublin. 
Brinkley,  Rev.  John,  Archdeacon  of  Cloghcr. 
Brooke,  T.  Esq.  Castle  Grove,  L — Kenny. 
Bury,  Rev.  Robert,  Cork. 
Burrowes,  Rev.  Doctor,  Enniskillen. 
Bushe,  Charles  Kendal,  Esq.  Solicitor-General 
of  Ireland. 


C. 

Cashel,  His  Grace  the  Archbishop  of — 5  copies, 
Cloyne,  Right  Rev.  Lord  Bishop  of — 5  do. 
Cork  and  Ross,   the  Hon.  and  Right  Rev.  Lord 

Bishop  of — 3  copies. 
Chichester,  Right  Rev.  Lord  Bishop  of 
Carbery,  Right  Hon.  Lord 
Clancarty,  Right  Hon.  Earl  of 
Chatterton,  Sir  William  A.  Bart.  Cork. 
Carson,  Rev.  Thomas,  Rector  of  Shanagarry,, 
Carrol,  Thomas,  Esq.  Cork. 
Carey,  Rev.  Richard,  Clonmel. 
Carpendale,  Rev.  Thomas,  Armagh. 
Caulfield,  Rev.  Hans,  Kilkenny. 
Chester,  Rev.  John,  Rector  of  Castlemagnor. 
Chetvvood,  Rev.  J.  Rector  of  Glanmire. 
Cleghorn,  James,  Esq.  M.  D.  Dublin. 
Coleman,  Rev.  Charles,  Armagh. 
Coghlan,  Rev.  Doctor,  Annemount. 
Collis,  Rev.  Z.  C.  Archdeacon  of  Cloyne. 
Cotter,  Rev.  G.  S.  Rector  of  Ightermurragh. 
Cotter,  Rev.  James  L.  Castlemartyr. 
Cooke,  Edward,  Esq.  Trinity  College,  Dublin. 
Crowley,  Rev.  Matthew,  Dublin. 
Craig,  Rev.  Robert,  Blackrock,  Dublin. 
Cradock,  Rev.   Thomas,   for  Marsh's    Library, 

Dublin. 
Creaghe,  Rev.  John,  Doneraile. 
Cummins,  Marshal,  Esq.  Cork, 


LIST  OF  SUBSCRIBERS'  NAMES. 


D. 

Durham,  lion,  and  Right  Rev.  Lord  Bishop  of — 

5  copies. 
Davenport,  Rev.  Doctor,  F.  T.  C.  D. 
Disney,  Rev.  Robert,  Rector  of  Mitchelstown. 
Dowling,  Rev.  Dionysius,  Blackrock,  Dublin. 
Downing,  Rev.  Samuel,  Kilkenny. 

E. 

Ely,  Right  Rev.  Lord  Bishop  of — cl  copies. 

Fames,  Rev.  William,   Dublin. 

Edgar,  Rev.  John,  Tallagh. 

Edwards,  Rev.  A.  Cork. 

Ellington,  Rev.Dr.Provost  of  T. CD. —2 copies. 

Elsley,  Rev.  H.  Ripon. 

Evanson,  Rev.  William  A.  Cork. 

Ewiug,  Rev.  John,  Castlewray,  L — Kenny. 

F. 

Fitzgerald,  Robert  U.  Esq.  Lisquinlan. 
Forsayth,  Rev.  John,  Cork. 
Foster,  Rev.  George,  Cashel. 
Freeman,  Rev.  Richard  D.  Castlccoi\ 

G. 

Gaggin,  Rev.  Richard,  Mallow. 

Garde,  John,  Esq.  Ballinacurra. 

Garde,  Henry,  Esq.  M.  D.  Castlemartyr. 

Gavan,  Rev.  John,  Clontarf. 

Gibbings,  Rev.  Thomas,  Limerick. 

Goold,  Thomas,  Esq.  Dublin. 

Gouldsbury,  Rev.  J.  Rector  of  Boyle. 

Graves,  Rev.  Doctor,  S.  F.  T.  C.  D. 

Gray,  Rev.  Rowland,  Cork. 

Greene,  Rev.  Doctor,  Vicar  of  Tullelease. 

Groves,  Rev.  Edward,  Belfast. 

G wynnc,  Rev.  William,  Castlenock. 

II. 

Hales,  Rev.  Doctor,  Rector  of  Killesandra 
Hamilton,  Rev.  Saekville  R.  Castlccor. 


Hamilton,  Rev.  Thomas,  Midleton. 

Hamilton,  Rev.  Hans,  Kilkenny. 

Hamilton,  Rev.  James,  Buttevant. 

Hamilton,  Rev.  George,  Kilkenny. 

Harding,  Robert,  Esq.  ditto. 

Hayden,  Rev.  Thomas,  Vicar  of  Rathcoole. 

Hewitt,  Rev.  Francis,  Newmarket. 

Hincks,  Edward,  Esq.  A.  B.  Trinity  College. 

Hingston,  Rev.  Dr.  Vicar  General  of  Cloyne. 

Hingston,  Rev.  James,  Ahada. 

Hingston,  Rev.  W.  II.  Cloyne. 

Hickey,  Rev.  Doctor,  Bandon. 

Hobson,  Rev.  Richard  J.  Dublin. 

Hutton,    Rev.  Joseph,    do. 

Hyde,  John,  Esq.  Castle  Hyde. 

Hyde,  Rev.  Arthur,  Rector  of  Killarney. 

I.  and  J. 
Jebb,  Rev.  John,  Cashel. 
Johnson,  Rev.  Henry,  Dublin. 
Jones,  Thomas,  Esq.  Rathfarnham.— 3  copies. 
Irwin,  Rev.  Henry,  Cork. 
Irwin,  Rev.  James,  Raphoe. 
Irwin,  Rev.  John,  ditto. 

K. 

Kildare,  the  Hon.  and  Right  Rev.  Lord  Bishop 

of — 5  copies. 
Killaloe,  the  Hon.  and  Right  Ren.  Lord  Bishop 

of — 3  copies. 
Kavanagb,  Thomas,  Esq.  Dublin. 
Kennedy,   John  P.    Esq.  ditto. 
Kenny,  Rev.  Doctor,  Vicar-General  of  Cork. 
Kenny,  Rev.  Thomas,  Rector  of  Donoughmorc. 
Kenny,  Rev.  E.  II.  Cork. 
Kcr,  Rev.  James  A.  Kilkenny. 
King,  Right  Hon.  Henry,  M.  P. 
King,  Rev.  John,  Archdeacon  of  Killala. 
King,  Henry,  Esq.  Trinity  College,  Dublin. 
Kingsbury,  Rev.  Thomas,  Vicar  of  Kilberry. 
Kipling,  Rev.  Doctor,  Dean  of  Peterborough. 


LIST  OF  SUBSCRIBERS'  NAMES, 


Kirchoffer,  Rev.  Robert,  Rector  of  Clondroid. 
Knox,  Rev.  Arthur,  Bray. 


Limerick,  Right  Rev.  Lord  Bishop  of 

La  Touche,  James  Digges,  Esq.  Dublin. 

Lane,  Rev.  James,    do. 

Lane,  Abraham,  Esq.  Cork. 

Lane,  Abraham,  jun.  Trinity  College,  Dublin. 

Lee,  Rev.  Giles,  Cork. 

Lee,  Rev.  P.  Fermoy. 

Le  Mesurier,  Rev.  Thos.  N.  Longville,  Bucks. 

Leney,  Rev.  Alexander,  Blackrock,  Dublin. 

Litton,  Samuel,  Esq.  M.  D.  do. 

Lloyd,  Rev.  Doctor,  F.  T.  CD. 

Lord,  Rev.  John,  Mitchelstovvn. 

Lovett,  Rev.  Doctor,  Lismore. 

Lombard,  Rev.  John,  Mallow. 

Long-field,  Rev.  Robert,  Castlemary. 

M. 

Madder,  Rev.  George,  Chancellor  of  Cashel. 
Magee,  Rev.  Doctor,  S.  F.  T.  C  D. 
Magee,  John,  Esq.  Trinity  College,  Dublin. 
Mahon,  Rev.  Edward,  Elphin. 


Mooney,  Rev.  Doctor,  F.  T.  C.  I) 
Morgan,  Rev.  Moore,  Dublin. 
Murray,  Rev.  H.  do. 
Musgrave,  Sir  Richard,  Bart.  do. 
Musgrave,  John,  Esq.  C.  C.  Cambridge. 

N. 
Nash,  Rev.  Doctor,  F.  T.  C.  D. 
Neligan,  Rev.  James,  Ballina. 
Newenham,  Worth  H.  Esq.  Midleton  Lodge, 
Newenham,  Rev.  Thomas,  Cool  more. 
Newman,  Rev.  Horace  T.  Cork. 
Nevins,  Rev.  James,  Dublin. 
Nixon,  Rev.  Brinsly,  Rector  of  Ardagh, 

O. 

Ossory,  Right  Rev.  Lord  Bishop  of — 5  copies. 
Oxford,  Right  Rev.  Lord  Bishop  of— 2  ditto. 
O'Connor,  Rev.  Doctor,  Castlenock. 
O'Donnoghue,  Rev.  H.  C.  Bristol. 
O'Grady,  S.  Esq.  7th  Light  Dragoons. 
O'Neil,  William,  Esq.  Kilkenny. 
Oldfield,  Rev.  John  O.  Lurgan. 
Onslow,   Rev.  Doctor,  Dean  of  Worcester. 
Ormston,  John,  Esq.  Dublin. 
Orpen,  Rev.  John,  Cork. 

P. 


Mansfield,  Francis,  Esq.  Castlewray,  L — Kenny.     Perceval,  Right  Hon.  Spencer,  Chancellor  of  the 


Mathias,  Rev.  B.  W.  Dublin. 

Maturin,  Rev.  Charles  R.  do. 

Maunsell,  Rev.  Thomas,  Kilkenny. 

Maunsell,  Rev.  William,  Millstreet. 

M 'Clean,  Rev.  Alexander,  Rathfarnham. 

M'Gintock,  W.  Esq.  Green  Lodge,  Strabane. 

M'Cormick,  Rev.  John,  Doneraile. 

M'Cabe,  James,  Esq.  M.  D.  Dublin. 

M'Minn,   Thomas,   Esq.    ditto. 

Meade,  Rev.  Richard,  Kinsale. 

Meredith,  Rev.  Thomas,  F.  T.  C.  D. 

Miller,  Rev.  Dr.  late  Fellow  of  T.  C.  Dublin. 

Mockler,  Rev.  James  P.  Fermoy. 


Exchequer. — 5  copies. 
Plumptre,  Rev.  Dr.  Dean  of  Gloucester. 
Plunket,  Right  Hon.  W.  Cunningham. 
Pole,  Right  Hon.  W.  Wellesley,— 5  copies. 
Pack,  Rev.  Doctor,  Kilkenny. 
Parkinson,  Rev.  Dr.  Kegworth,  Leicestershire. 
Pennefather,  J.  Esq. 

Poole,  Thomas,  Esq.  Sovereign  of  Midleton, 
Poole,  Rev.  Jonas,  Glanmire. 
Power,  Pierce  H.  Esq.  Ring. 
Pratt,  Rev.  James,  Cork. 
Pratt,  Rev.  Robert,  Midleton. 
Pureed,  Rev.  Matthew,  Charlevillc 
b2 


xii  LIST  OF  SUBSCRIBERS'  NAMES. 

Q.  T. 

Quailc,  Rev.  Doctor,  Trinity  College,  Dublin.  Taylor,  Thomas,  Esq.  M.  D.  Dublin. 

Quarry,  Rev.  J.  Rector  of  Upper  Sbandon,  Cork.  Thompson,  Rev.  William,  Archdeacon  of  Cork 

R.                        [:)  copies.  Thorpe,  Rev.  Doctor,  Dublin. 

Raphoe,  Hon.  and  Right  Rev.  Lord  Bishop  of —  Townsend,  Rev.  Horace,  Clona°-hkiltv. 

Redesdale,  Right  Hon.  Lord — '2  copies.  Townsenid,  Rev.  John,  ditto. 

Ridge,  Rev.  T.  Kildarc.  Townsend,  Rev.  Joseph,  Kilkenny. 

Roberts,  Rev.  Samuel  T.  Kilkenny.  Townsend,  Rev.  Philip,  Cork. 

Roe,  Rev.  Peter,  ditto.  Tuckey,  Rev.  Dr.  Treasurer  of  Lismore. 

Rogers,  Rev.  Doctor,  Killcigh.  Tuckey,  Rev.  Brodrick,  Mallow. 

Russell,  Rev.  Joseph,  Fermoy.  Twiss,  Rev.  Richard,  Drogheda. 
Ryan,  David.  Esq.  Kilkenny. 

Ryder,  Rev.  Joshua  B.  Castlelyons.  CT.  and  V. 

S-  Ussher,  Rev.  Doctor  J.  Deny. 

Salisbury,  Right  Rev.  Lord  Bishop  of  Ussher,  Rev.  Doctor,  F.  T.  C.  D. 

Shannon,  Right  Hon.  Earl  of  Vescy,  Rev.  Doctor,' Dublin. " 

St.  Asaph,  Right  Rev.  Lord  Bishop  of  Vigors,  Rev.  Doctor,  ditto. 
Sadleir,  Rev.  Francis,  F.  T.  C.  D. 

Sandes,  Rev.  S.  Creaghe,  E.  T.  C.  D.  \y 

Scoflle;  RJoLJD  eS'  "r'r  °f  MaS'0U,"Cy-  Waterf0rd-  Ri=ht  Rev-  Lord  ^shop  of 

^cott,  Ke\.  John,  Dean  ot  Lismore.  Winchester    H™         i   i:>-   i     ™        t 

Sect,  Robe,,,  Esq.  Castlegrove,  L-Kenny.  T5"        °            '  ^  ^ 

Seton,  Anketelle,  Es(i.  Dublin.  xu    in          r>        ,J 

Shanahan,  Michael,  Esq.  T.  C  D.  JfJ^f   ^  °f  RiP»- 

Shaw,  Robert,  Esq!  M  P  '  '"°'  ^  thc  L,br^  of  th*  College  Church, 

ci          i>        i»   ,           .       '  Itipon. 

Shaw,  Rev.  Robert,  Kilkenny.  Wni,       l   T>       ,_. 

Shields,  Rev.  Doctor,  Drogheda  Z  n    p'  ^?°mM'  Y°U*halL 

c-    i  •       i>        .    ,,'»'•  VV  all,  Rev.  C.  W     am    FTP   7~> 

Simk.r.s,  Rev.  A.  Mann,  Cove.  w,n   „„     n    .        ,    '  u  1LD- 

Singer,  J.  11.  Esq.  F.  T.  C.  D.  Z^  ^  G' *«**««»  of  Emly. 

Smith   Re,  George,  Rector  of  Castlemart,,  ^£  £  ?S^  D"b'in- 

Spread,  Rev.  Edward,  Rector  of  Ahern.  W         '  ,.       p          ,  '_    , 

Stannistreet,  Rev.  Thomas,  Cove  w           ,                     '  C°'k- 

Stannistreet,  Henry,  Esq.  Lismore.  v  ^  ^T"  KJ?"^i,it!a- 

Stewart,  Rev.  Doctor,  Clonaghkiltv  W     '       p       ^       *     '"^  C°"e^  Dubli»- 

Stopford,  Rev.  Dr.  late  Fellow  of  T  C   Dnblir  W  "  *'     t/             '  CaS'ld- 

Sullivan,  Rev.  Francis  C.  Bandon  w  n 7'  I     T'  ^  Mid,eton- 

Swavnc,  Rev.  .,.  Uniacke,  y       *  J|  ''S>  J;  ^  M.  D.  Cork. 

Swayne,  Rev.  John,  Midleton.  Z    T     ?''  ^"^  Dubii"- 

Swete,  Rev.  Benjamin,  Cork  Woodward,  Rev.  Doctor,  Rector  of  Glanworth. 

Swcte,  Rev.  John,  Bristol  „  '  'XOn'  llcv-  N"  Rector  of  Mallow. 

Wynne,  Rev.  Henry,  Dublin. 


PREFACE. 


A  declaration,  made  by  *o.ne  of  the  leading  and  most  active  members  of  the  Romish 
Hierarchy,  to  a  f  Clergyman  of  the  Established  Church,  first  suggested  the  absolute  neces- 
sity of  exhibiting  a  comparative  view  of  the  ^received  Versions  of  the  Protestant  and 
Popish  Bibles,  with  the  original ;  so  as  to  shew,  that  there  exists  the  clearest  evidence 
of  the  accuracy  of  the  former,  and  that  the  charges  brought  against  it  by  Thomas  Ward, 
are,  in  the  highest  degree,  illiberal,  unfounded,  and  absurd.  On  the  authority  of  this 
libeller,  it  was,  that  the  Right  Rev.  Gentleman  alluded  to  has,  with  unmeasured  severity, 
censured  the  Protestant  Bible  as  an  ^imperfect  translation  of  the  divine  word ;  while  he 
bestowed  unqualified  praise  on  Ward's  Errata,  and  exulted  in  the  circumstance  of  its 
having  already  gone  through  ||four  editions.     Such  being  the  language  of  that  gentleman, 

*  The  Right  Reverend  Doctor  Coppinger.  From  the  very  distinguished  part  which  he  has 
lately  taken  in  public  discussion  ;  first,  in  dedicating  the  expose  of  his  '  unbigoted  creed'  to  the  Dublin  Society, 
and  afterwards  in  re-publishing  it  with  notes  critical  and  explanatory,  it  may  be  inferred,  that  he  solicits,  rather 
than  declines,  publicity.  He  has  in  consequence  relieved  the  Author  from  the  disagreeable  dilemma  in  which  he 
stood,  as  to  the  manner  in  which  he  should  introduce  his  name  to  public  notice ;  for,  having  once  determined  to 
enter  on  this  controversy,  he  had  no  alternative  left,  but  to  sacrifice  every  feeling  of  personal  consideration. 

f  The  Rev.  Doctor  Green,  Curate  of  Midleton,  and  Vicar  of  Tullilease. 

X  In  the  Appendix,  the  reader  will  perceive,  that  the  readings  of  the  more  ancient  English  Versions  have 
not  been  unattended  to,  particularly  such  as  did  not  come  under  review  in  the  body  of  the  work. 

§  Such  language  was  mildness  itself  compared  with  that  used  by  him  to  Thomas  Poole,  Esq.  Sovereign  of 
Midleton,  in  a  conversation  on  the  subject  of  his  opposition  to  the  establishment  of  a  charitable  school  in 
that  town.  On  that  occasion,  Doctor  Coppinger  did  not  content  himself  with  pronouncing  upon  the  Protestant 
Translation  of  the  Bible,  as  imperfect;  or  as  abounding  with  errors  ;  or  as  containing  passages  adverse  or  hostile 
to  the  Rhemish  Version,  as  he  has  done  in  his  late  production  ;  but  without  ceremo/iy,  thought  proper  to  stigma- 
tize it  as  altogether  "  SPURIOUS."  See  Observations  by  the  Rev.  H.  Townsend,  on  Doctor  Coppinger's 
letter  to  the  Dublin  Society.    P.  60. 

j|  In  the  Advertisement  to  the  first  edition  of  the  Errata,  the  Editor  boasts,  that  "  so "great  has  been  his 
encouragement,  that  he  had  then  obtained  a  sale  for  more  than  2000  copies."  If  the  remaining  three  editions 
which  it  has  gone  through  be  set  down  at  1000  copies  each,  the  aggregate  number  of  this  precious  work,  which  has 
get  into  circulation,  amounts  to  no  Jess  than  5000  !  !  !  With  this  fact  before  their  eyes,  shall  the  Protestant 
Clergy,  but  particularly  those  of  Ireland,  sit  silent  spectators,  and  indifferent  lookers  on,  without  uttering  a 
murmur  of  disapprobation,  or  using  a  single  effort  to  counteract  the  effects  of  the  poisonous  venom  difiused 
throughout  their  country  in  the  pages  of  that  publication  ? 


XIV  PREFACE. 


whose  influence  over  the  Popish  community  in  Ireland  is  acknowledged  to  be  most 
commanding  and  extensive,  it  cannot  be  thought  to  attach  too  much  importance  to  it, 
if  it  be  made  the  subject  of  critical  remark. 

It  is  difficult  to  imagine  how  *Doctor  Milner  will  reconcile  what  he  has  advanced  as 
the  apologist  of  the  Popish  Bishops,  with  a  declaration  at  once  so  open  and  explicit, 
since  in  his  letter  to  Doctor  Elrington,  he  says,  f  "  I  also  demonstrate  the  egregious 
mistake  you  are  under  in  supposing  my  episcopal  brethren  encouragers  of  the  obnoxious 
work."  The  words  themselves  betray  a  something  not  very  creditable  to  his  candour ; 
for,  it  is  morally  impossible,  that  a  person  acting  like  him,  as  the  confidential  agent  of 
his  '  Episcopal  Brethren,'  and,  also,  who  has  entered  so  deeply  into  their  views,  but  more 
particularly,  into  those  of  his  '  valuable'  friend  at  Midleton,  could  have  been  ignorant, 
that  they  secretly  encouraged  the  re-publication  of  that  scandalous  performance,  although 
their  names  did  not  appear  in  the  list  of  Subscribers.  Be  this  as  it  may,  he  can  offer  no 
palliation  for  the  unfairness  with  which  he  is  chargeable  in  ascribing  to  Doctor  Elrington 
a  supposition,  which  he  never  made. 

But  now  conjecture  gives  way  to  certainty :  for,  however  strong  the  grounds  of 
suspicion  have  hitherto  been,  however  conclusive  the  evidence  which  before  presented 
itself,  that  the  Errata,  if  not  tacitly  approved  by  the  Popish  Bishops,  would  not  have 
been  so  extensively  patronised  by  their  clergy ;  still,  as  their  own  admission  was  wanting 
to  establish  the  fact,  the  matter  must  have  remained  in  considerable  doubt.  It,  there- 
fore, will  not  be  going  too  far  to  say,  that  Doctor  Coppinger's  avowal  clears  it  all  away, 
and  that  from  his  opinion  may  be  inferred  the  collective  sense  of  the  body  to  which  he 
belongs.  He  has  spoken  out  on  the  occasion,  with  a  frankness,  for  which  he  is  entitled 
to  the  highest  credit,  and  has  identified  himself  with  Ward  both  in  principles  and  in 
language;  and  not  himself  alone,  but  the  J  Popish  Clergy  throughout  the  Empire.  This 

fan  *  £  X  ^Tr  T?^  t0  inf°rm  thC  rCader'  Aat  thC  D°Ct0r  MilnPr  SP°ken  <*  here>  is  ™  other  than  the 
famous  Bwhop  of  Castabala,  Author  of  the  Inquiry,  &c.  &c.  &c.  and  who  has  raised  himself  into  eminent 
notonety,  not  more  by  Jus  equivocations  on  the  Veto,   than   by  his   direct   falsification   of  the  authorities   from 

winch  he  draws  his  quotations, 

t <  \  I'  TCn'  af,0rd"'  "°  P'Ca  f°r  ',,arSing  him  With  »**•*  »y  supposition  about  the 

" Tn'i„ Th T.      ',       T'  OK'  d"~C  "  (,he  aSSCr"011  °f  D°CtOT  Mil"«>  a  -ry  unfounded  one,  and 

wm«™  ,    ,      s,,,,,,  of  t,nfa,r„eSS  as  well  a.  of  divination."     Re1ia„ks  on  Doctor  Milner's  Tour  in  Ireland,  ^85. 

1  sav  for  Z  If    ','    I  '    7  'S  °"  K-°Ti  "*  "P"55  dCClarati°'1  °f  D°C,0r  C°PP!»S"  *"**■     "  What 

Ward  great  „,er,,s;  and  of  the  Protestant  Translation  of  the  Bible  being  ■  spurious.')  I  say  without  fear  of 
con.rad,,,o„,  for  ^Prelate  in  the  E.npirc ;  for  every  Prelate  in  the   Cathohc  World    or  in  Mr.  Town      dt 

qj:TaZxz  r "  mmef  See  ,K-  ?■ j,oc,ui"  c°"i>i"g"r's  le™  -  *■  d»-  s-  «-o.,d  1 1 

p.  o.     i  he  Uerg)  under  his  jurisdiction  echo  the  same  sentiments.    Ibid.  p.  90. 


PREFACE.  XV 

adoption,  however,  of  Ward's  sentiments,  will  not,  as  it  should  not,  subject  them  to 
the  slightest  inconvenience,  either  in  person  or  in  property.  Enjoying  the  sweets  of 
religious  liberty,  they  will  not  be  constrained,  as  he  was,  to  fly  to  a  foreign  country,  to 
evade  the  laws  of  their  own  : — a  circumstance,  which,  while  it  reflects  the  highest  credit 
on  the  mild  spirit  of  the  present  times,  strikingly  marks  their  ingratitude,  in  bearding 
the  Protestant  Clergy  with  the  foul  imputation  of  obstinate  and  habitual  *hypocrisy ;  of 
their  Bishops,  Priests,  and  Deacons,  being  without  f  consecration,  ordination,  mission,  &c. 
and  in  charging  the  Protestant  Laity,  with  the  heinous  sins  of  schism  and  sacrilege. 
This  contrast  will  appear  still  stronger,  when  it  is  considered,  what  fate  would  attend 
that  author  in  a  Popish  country,  during  the  reign  of  the  Inquisition,  who  dared  to 
question,  not  the  spiritual,  but  even  the  temporal  supremacy  of  the  Pope. 

X"  Argument,"  observed  that  distinguished  literary  character,  the  late  Primate 
Newcome,  "  is  the  only  weapon  that  should  be  wielded  to  defend  Christianity,  or  any 
mode  of  professing  it."  Discussion  carried  on  with  candour  and  impartiality,  is,  indeed, 
the  only  means  which  Protestants  have  ever  desired  to  use  in  support  of  their  religious 
tenets ;  and  if  their  adversaries  have,  on  their  part,  recourse  to  virulence  and  invective, 
to  falsehood  and  calumny,  they  but  thereby  defeat  their  own  cause.  In  the  spirit,  then, 
of  sincerity  and  truth,  it  is  designed  to  conduct  the  present  controversy ;  and  if  any 
expression  be  used,  in  the  course  of  it,  which  may  wound  the  feelings  of  those  who 
have  different  views  from  the  author,  it  arises  from  the  nature  of  the  subject  treated  of, 
as  he  disclaims  the  remotest  idea  of  giving  any  offence  whatever.  As  by  the  advocacy 
of  Ward's  Errata,  the  Popish  Bishops,  and  their  subordinate  clergy,  have  declared  to  the 
world,  that  its  language,  and  its  sentiments,  are  identically  their  own,  and,  consequently, 
that  they  consider  themselves  parties  in  th^  dispute;  they  cannot  expect  to  be  treated 
more  indulgently,  than  the  abettors  of  antiquated  prejudice,  and  of  charges  grounded  on 

*  The  Rev.  Dr.  Kipling,  Dean  of  Peterborough,  has,  in  his  neat  and  satisfactory  pamphlet,  rescued  the 
Protestant  Clergy  of  the  Empire  from  this  odious  charge.  He  has  exhibited,  in  the  clearest  manner,  its  folly, 
its  falsehood,  and  its  uncharitableness ;  and  besides,  has  put  an  end  to  the  much-agitated  question  respecting  the 
primacy  of  St.  Peter,  by  the  production  of  the  most  unequivocal  testimonies  to  prove,  that  he  never  exercised  the 
episcopal  office  at  Rome.  His  little  work,  which  manifests  very  great  research,  and  comprises  a  vast  deal  of 
important  matter,  cannot  be  too  highly  spoken  of.  See  certain  accusations  brought  by  Irish  Papists,  &c. 
examined. 

f  The  Rev.  Dr.  Elrington's  pamphlet,  in  answer  to  Ward's  Controversy  of  Ordination,  is  creditable 
both  to  the  learning  and  to  the  abilities  of  the  author.  He  has,  by  a  closeness  of  reasoning  and  strength  of  argu- 
ment, demonstrated,  that  Ward's  essay,  on  that  particular  subject,  is  a  most  wicked  libel ;  and  that  the  Nag's  head 
story  is  a  most  infamous  fabrication.  In  consequence  of  the  decided  part  Doctor  E.  has  taken  in  this  controversy, 
he  has  been  raised  to  the  highest  rank  in  the  University  of  Dublin. 

X  See  his  attempt  towards  an  improved  Version  of  the  Minor  Prophets. 


PREFACE. 
XVI 


ignorance  and  falsehood,  deserve.  The  reader,  therefore,  must  bear  in  mind  that  when- 
ce Ward's  name  is  introduced  in  the  sequel,  it  is  intended  to  reach  beyond  the  ,ndm- 
dual  and  that  the  quotations  from  his  treatise  arc  to  be  considered  as  the  language  of 
its  Subscribers,  and  of  the  Popish  Clergy  at  large. 

Since    therefore,  the  author  deems  himself  justified  m  noticing  Ward  s  book  m  a 
formal  way,  he  will  put  in  no  plea,   nor  offer  the  slightest  apology,   for  detecting  and 
exposing,  in  the  most  pointed  manner,  the  false  reasoning,  and  unearned  misrepresen- 
tatL    by  which  it  is  characterised,  under  an  apprehension  that  what  he  says  may  be 
Lifting  to  the  votaries  of  Popery,  or  unpalatable  to  the  fa.ud.ou.  taste  of  modern 
liberal!.     In  cither  case,  he  has  only  to  repeat,  what  he  has  already  exphc.tly  declared, 
that  in  undertaking  the  present  vindication,  he  has  been  actuated  by  no  feeling -of  hosti- 
lity towards  the  calumniators  whose  principles  he  arraigns  ;  and  that,  ,f  they  be  displeased 
at  the  part  which  he  has  taken,  it  cannot  be  a  concern  of  his,  as. they,  and  not  he, 
•beam  the  controversy.     The  wisdom  of  reviving  ancient  heats,  long  buried  in  oblivion, 
and  of  publishing  the  most  malignant  productions  against  .the  Established  Clergy,  can 
only  be  known  to  the  secret  Consistory  of  Maynooth,  and  the  Hierarchy  of  «  invisible 
conscience."     To  common  understandings,  most  unquestionably,   the  motives  for  pur- 
suing this  line  of  conduct  are  not  discernible.     To  be  scurrilous,  and  yet  supplicant   to 
talk  of  conciliation,  and,  in  the  same  breath,  to  tell  those  to  be  conciliated,  that  «  they 
are  not  Christians,"  betrays  so  marked  a  contradiction,  every  thing  so  fore.gn  from  the 
ordinary  course  of  human  proceedings,  that  it  cannot  be  reconciled  to  the  common  prin- 
ciples of  reason.     It  is  a  question,  whether  it  would  not  defy  the  sophistical  ingenuity  of 
Loyola  himself,  to  make  it  bear  even  a  seeming  consistency. 

The  work,  against  which  the  present  investigation  is  directed,  is  professedly  an 
extract  of  Gregory  Martin's  fbook,  and  cannot  claim  even  the  subordinate  merit  of  being 
made  either  .with  accuracy  or  judgment.  In  his  Preface,  {Ward  speaks  of  "  abridging 
his  author  (viz.  G.  Martin)  into  as  short  and  compendious  a  method  as  possible;  as  his 
desire  is  to  be  beneficial  to  all,  in  accommodating  it,  not  only  to  the  purse  of  the  poorest, 
but  to  the  capacity  of  the  most  ignorant."     Thus  it   turns  out,  that  this  mighty  and 

*  Dr.  Milner  confidently  asserts,  "  that  in  every  remarkable  controversy  between  Catholics  and  Protestants, 
which  has  taken  place  in  England  or  Ireland,  during  the  last  thirty  years,  the  latter  have  been  the  aggressors,  the 
former  the  defendants !"  See  Instructions  addressed  to  the  Catholics  of  the  midland  counties,  &c.  page  24. 
When  Doctor  Milner  can  speak  thus,  he  must  entertain  a  strange  opinion  of  the  intelligence  of  his  readers,  if  he 
expects  to  be  believed  in  what  directly  outrages  their  uniform  experience.  Let  him  answer  one  simple  question. 
Have  Protestants  been  the  aggressors  in  the  controversy  excited  by  the  re-publication  of  Ward's  works  ? 

t  Discovbrie  of  the  corruptions  of  Scripture.    Rheims,  A.  D.  15S2.  t  Errata,  page  21. 


PREFACE.  xvii 


pompous  work  of  Errata  is  nothing  more  than  a  compendium  of  Martin's  prior  work. 
It  is  a  performance  sui generis,  replete  with  coarse  invective  and  vulgar  abuse,  the 
natural  effusions  of  bigoted  malice ;  and  were  it  not  for  the  high  decree  of  credit 
attached  to  it  by  the  Popish  Clergy  in  Ireland,  would  deserve  to  be  consigned,  with  its 
author,  to  contempt  and  oblivion,  rather  than  be  raised  into  notice  by  receiving  a  regular 
answer.  Although  the  author  heaps  the  most  opprobrious  epithets  on  the  English  Pro- 
testant Translators  of  the  Bible,  and  accuses  them  of  blasphemy,  heresy,  most  damnable 
corruptions,  vile  imposture,  intolerable  deceit,  &c.  he  yet  entreats  *  "  his  dear  reader,  not 
to  look  upon  such  expressions  as  the  dictates  of  passion,  but  rather  as  the  just  resent- 
ments of  a  zealous  mind,  &c."  Whatever  such  expressions  may  evince  as  to  the  zeal, 
they  can  leave  no  doubt  as  to  the  spirit  in  which  the  author  has  composed  his  work  ;  and 
when  the  f  Editor  boasts  of  the  unprecedented  sale  it  has  obtained,  on  re-publication, 
through  "  the  indefatigable  zeal"  of  his  friends,  there  is  equally  strong  evidence,  that  the 
spirit  of  those  friends,  whom  the  public  cannot  now  mistake,  is  perfectly  congenial  with 
his  own. 

The  leading  articles  in  the  Errata  were  answered  at  least  a  century  before  the 
appearance  of  this  wretched  performance,  at  the  time  when  they  were  first  given  to  the 
public.  Doctor  W.  Fulke,  in  his  J  treatise,  completely  refuted  Martin's  charges  one  after 
the  other,  and  was  equally  successful  in  silencing  the  Annotators  of  the  Rhemish  New- 
Testament.  Cartwright,  too,  a  man  of  no  ordinary  stamp,  employed  his  talents  in  the 
same  cause.  Since  their  time,  other  Divines,  still  more  distinguished  for  their  learning 
and  abilities,  and  not  tinctured,  as  they  were,  with  puritanism,  but  admirers  of  Chris- 
tianity in  its  primitive  excellence,  have,  at  different  periods,  by  their  elucidations  of  the 
Scripture,  armed  the  scholar  with  incontrovertible  arguments  against  the  cavils  of 
Popery  inevery  shape  in  which  they  have  appeared.  So  that,  in  the  present  line  of  con- 
troversy, it  would  be  nothing  short  of  vanity  to  lay  any  claim  to  originality ;  as  diligent 
research  will  lead  but  to  this  conclusion,  that  nothing  can  be  said,  which  has  not  been 
anticipated  ;  nor  any  new  argument  offered  which  has  not  been  already  used.  However, 
the  re-production  of  those  arguments,  divested  of  the  quaint  and  stiff  form  which  many 
of  them  possess,  when  placed  in  a  new  point  of  view,  and  suited  to  the  varying  fashion 
of  the  times,  must  be  attended  with  beneficial  consequences.  By  the  author,  at  least, 
this  enquiry  must  ever  be  regarded  with  infinite  satisfaction,  inasmuch  as  it  has  more 
intimately  acquainted  him  with  his  duty,  enlarged  his  knowledge,   and  strengthened  his 

*  Errata,  page  21.  f  See  Advertisement  to  the  Errata. 

X  Defense  of  the  true  translations  of  the  holie  Scriptures.  London.  1583. 

C 


Xviil  PREFACE. 

conviction,  that  the  genuine  principles  of  Christianity  are  those,  which  are  received  and 
inculcated  by  the  Church  of  which  he  is  a  member. 

It  now  remains  to  say  a  few  words  respecting  the  design  of  these  pages,  preparatory 
to  what  will  follow  in  detail. 

It  would  be  an  idle  task  to  enter  into  a  vindication  of  the  Protestant  Translation  of 
the  Bible;  the  more  immediate  object  in  view  being  to  defend  it  against  the  objections 
made  by  Ward  to  particular  passages,  and   to  shew,  that  there  appears  the  strongest 
evidence  of  their  correctness,   as  they  now  stand.     To   expect  that   any  answer  to  his 
Errata,  would  receive   the  perusal  of  Romanists  in  general,    would   be  the  extreme  of 
folly  ;   when  their  clergy  are  so  desirous  to  keep  them  in  "-ignorance,   and  to  f  withhold 
from  them  every  source  of  information  connected  with  their  religious  creed ;  and  when 
it  is  but  too   well  known    that    the  avrog  z(pn  of  the  most  unlettered   of  their  priests, 
would  more  than  out-weigh  in  their  minds,  the  decisions  of  all   the   Protestant  Univert- 
sities  in  Europe.     It  will,  notwithstanding,  be  gaining  some  advantage  to  the  cause  of 
true  religion,  should  even  a  few  of  that  persuasion  venture  to  steal  a  glance  into  these 
heretical  pages;  for  although  they  may  obstinately  persist  in  error,  they  may,  neverthe- 
less, be  induced  to  view  their  Protestant  countrymen  in  a  more  charitable  light,  when 
they  see  "  the  reason,"  they  can  give,    "  of  the  hope  that  is  in  them  ;"  and  thus   by 
becoming  less  intolerant,   and  less  bigoted,  they  may  be  rendered  better  men  and  better 
Christians.     From    that  quarter,  it   is  granted,  no  greater  good  can  be   expected.     A 
most  desirable  end  will  also   have  been  attained,  if  it  but  contribute  to  remove  from 
society  that  disgusting  affectation  of  liberality,   which  characterises  the  present  age:  if 
it  but  stimulate  those  of  the  Protestant  Clergy,  who,  from  conforming  to  the  prevailing 
humour,  may  be  betrayed  into  a  total  indifference  about  subjects  of  this  kind,  to  explore 
the  sacred  records  themselves ;  if  it  but  induce  them  to  become  the  advocates  of  truth, 
and  to  enlighten  such  as  are  in  error;  if  it  set  them  on  the  enquiry,  w  nether  their  religion, 
and  their  own  communion  in  particular,  be  not  those  they  would  embrace,  were  they  now 
required,  for  the  first  time,  to  fix  their  choice;  if  it  engage  "the  intelligent  and  well-informed 
among  the  Protestant  Laity,  in  the  same  godly  employment,  and  unite  both  in  defence  of 

*  A  remarkable  instance  of  this  kind  occurred,  during  one  of  those  conversations  held  with  Dr.  Coppinger, 
respecting  the  propriety  of  admitting  the  New  Testament  into  the  poor  school  of  Midleton.  On  one  of  his  relatives 
remarking,  that  '  the  Bible  was  the  driest  stuff  he  ever  read  ;'  the  R.  R.  Dr.  quaintly  rejoined,  <  that  so  it  was,  indeed, 
very  dry  reading.'  This  is  critically  the  una  et  eadeni  vox  of  the  Popish  clergy.  They  deery  reason,  discourage 
tree  enquiry,  and  instruct  their  flocks  to  look  up  to  them  as  that  living,  speaking  authority,  compared  with 
which,  Scripture  itself  is  a  dead  letter. 

t  In  the  Dublin  Correspondent  of  Nov.  10,  1810,  a  letter  from  Maynooth,  signed  Cathoucus,  appeared, 
stating  that  the  cause  of  expulsion  of  nineteen  students  from  that  College,  proceeded  from  certain  books  being 
found  in  their  possession.  It  appears  that  the  <  certain'  books  were  Protestant  ones,  such  as  the  superintendant  of 
that  enlightened  seminary  would  pronounce  libri  exitiosi  et  damnabUes ! 


PREPACK.  XIX 

their  holy  Jerusalem  at  a  time  in  which  it  is  assailed,  as  well  by  its  open  foes  from  with- 
out, as  its  no  less  formidable  enemies  from  *  within  ;  in  whatever  way  the  superstition  of 
the  one,  or  the  enthusiasm  of  the  other,  can  affect  it. 

Jn  furtherance1  of  these  ends,  the  author  has  used  his  most  unwearied  industry  in 
those  hours  which  he  was  able  to  detaeh  from  the  duties  of  his  situation,  and  has  exer- 
cised his  best  judgment  in  selecting  the  subject  matter  of  this  production  from  the  mate- 
rials with  which  he  was  supplied.  Not  being  without  apprehensions,  that  his  answer 
may  be  expected  to  be  more  complete,  he  must  declare  that  he  has  prepared  it  under 
circumstances  of  peculiar  disadvantage,  as  he  has  had  but  occasional  assistance  from  a 
public  library,  and  but  limited  intercourse  with  those,  by  whose  superior  judgment  and 
learning  he  might  be  benefited. 

*  An  expose  of  the  principles  held  by  those  of  the  Established  Clergy,  who  are  designated  by  the  title  of 
*  Calvinistic  Methodists,'  but  who  boldly  arrogate  to  themselves  that  of  true  Churchmen,  appeared  in  August 
last  in  the  Eclectic  Review.  Since  that  period,  it  has  been  re-published  in  an  abridged  state  both  in  Dublin  and 
Cork.  Its  author  has  undertaken  to  controvert  the  opinions  expressed  by  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  in  his  Refutation 
of  Calvinism.  That  he  has  not  succeeded  in  his  design,  a  brief  extract  from  his  remarks  will  shew.  In  page  12, 
he  attempts  to  prove  that  there  is  a  palpable  contradiction  between  certain  passages  in  his  Lordship's  work,  and 
for  this  purpose  instances  the  following  one  in  page  130,  viz.  "  there  is  no  necessary  connexion  between 
faith  and  good  works,"  as  clashing  with  that  in  p.  160,  viz.  "  true  faith  produces  good  works,  as  naturally 
as  a  tree  produces  its  fruits."  There  is  no  doubt,  but  that  on  the  face  of  this  statement  he  appears  to  establish 
his  point.  But  what  will  the  reader  think  of  the  candour  of  the  Censor,  when  he  is  told,  that  in  the  former 
passage,  the  Bishop  speaks  of  a  passive  faith,  a  general  belief'm  the  truths  of  the  Gospel,  such  as  Simon  Magus 
entertained,  and  such  as  St.  Paul  alluded  to,  in  his  first  epistle  to  the  Corinthians  ;  while  in  the  latter  he  makes 
express  mention  of  a  lively,  operative  faith,  bringing  forth  its  natural  fruit  of  good  works  ?  If  he  consult  the 
book  itself,  he  will  perceive,  that  there  is  not  the  remotest  variance  between  the  passages  in  question,  and  that 
the  contrivance  resorted  to  resembles  those  practised  by  the  low  and  interested  cunning  of  Popish  Pole- 
mics. Of  the  Bishop  himself,  he  thus  speaks:  (page  16.)  While  his  Lordship's  "  attention  is  fixed  on  one  topic, 
he  keeps  pretty  clear  of  error.  But  he  appears  to  have  no  compass  of  thought.  He  cannot  take  in  the  whole  of  a 
subject  at  a  view."  Alas !  what  has  the  author  of  these  poor  pages  to  expect,  when  so  little  mercy  is  shewn  to 
one  of  the  profoundest  scholars,  and  ablest  divines  of  the  day  ? 

If  then,  as  the  venerable  Bishop  of  Durham  says,  (Sermons,  p.  436.)  it  be  the  duty  of  the  orthodox 
divine,  "  to  cry  aloud  and  spare  not  the  unscriptural  errors  of  Popery,"  is  it  not  equally  his  duty  to  be  c  instant  in 
season,  and  out  of  season,'  in  his  opposition  to  the  no  less  unscriptural  errors  of  Calvinism  ?  For  certain  it  is, 
that  the  propagators  of  the  latter,  who  pretend  to  be  acted  on  by  the  irresistible,  or,  to  speak  in  the  cant  of  the 
qualified  Calvinists,  (there  can  be  no  such  thing  as  Calvinism,  qualified  and  purged  of  its  obnoxious  tenets;  it  is  a 
system  of  that  nature,  that  the  person  who  holds  one  part,  holds  all,)  by  the  "  certain"  impulses  of  the  Holy 
Spirit,  are  more  decidedly  hostile  to  the  doctrines,  and  to  the  well-being  of  the  Established  Church,  than  even 
the  deluded  advocates  of  the  former. 

It  was  probably  with  a  view  to  the  prevention  of  such  principles  as  those  disseminated  by  the  Eclectic 
Reviewers,  that  several  of  the  Irish  Bishops,  but  particularly  their  Lordships  of  Cloyne  and  Cork,  have  in  their 
visitatorial  capacities,  each  issued  a  peremptory  order,  that  no  clergyman,  not  under  their  control,  (whether  Calvir- 
man  or  Orthodox,)  should  preach  in  any  pulpit,  within  their  respective  dioceses,  without  special  permission. 


xX  PREFACE. 


In  the  arrangement  pursued  by  him,  he  has  been  principally  guided  by  Fulke's 
Defense,  which,  as  has  been  already  observed,  appeared  in  answer  to  Martin's  Dis- 
covers, &c.     So,  that  as  the  Errata  is  nothing  more  than  an  extract  from  Martin's  prior 
work    the  present' answer  may  be  considered  as  a  digest,  not  only  of  Fulke,  but  of 
other  eminent  authorities,   who,  since  the   Reformation,   have  defended   Protestantism 
from  the  attacks  of  Popery.     Therefore,  the  only,  it  must  not  be  said  merit,  but  credit, 
which  is  laid  claim  to  for  this  production,  is,  that  as  it  has  been  conceived,  and  under- 
taken with  the  best  intentions,— those  of  a  desire  to  repel  actual  misrepresentation,   and 
to  defend  those  truths  in  which  all  Protestants  are  so  deeply  interested,— so  it  has  been 
executed  with   the  utmost  fidelity  and  correctness  in  its   statements   and    quotations. 
Beyond  the  task  of  arranging,   condensing,  and  directing  against  Popish  cavils  in  their 
modern  form,   the  valuable   materials   of  the  learned  divines  who  have  gone  before  him 
on  the  same  ground,   the  author  does  not  take  credit   to  himself ;   and   whether  he  be 
entitled  to  any  even  upon  this  score,   it  is   for  an  enlightened  public  to  judge.     Before 
them  he  presumes  to  make  his  appearance ;   and  while  he  appeals   to  their  liberality  in 
behalf  of  his  own  exertions,  and  entreats  them  candidly  to  excuse  such  faults  and  over- 
sights as  he  may  have  committed,  he  cannot  but  express  a  hope,  that  the  example  of 
his  industry,  at  least,  will  be  imitated,  and  his  design  followed  up,  and  perfected,  by 
others  more  competent  to  the  undertaking. 

The  Revisers  of  the  Protestant  Bible  in  1610,  were  men  whose  candour  and  ability, 
in  the  discharge  of  the  sacred  duty  imposed  on  them,  cannot  be  impeached  except  by 
the  most  obstinate  bigot ;  nor  questioned,  but  by  the  most  confirmed  sceptic.     Their 
translation,  the  one  now  in  use,  is  of  unrivalled  excellence,  and,  as  Gray  forcibly  expresses 
it,  "  is  a  most  wonderful  and  incomparable  work,   equally  remarkable  for  the  general 
fidelity  of  its  construction,  and   the  magnificent  simplicity  of  its  language."     Bishop 
Lowth,  too,  than  whom  no  man  ever  lived  better  qualified  to  pronounce  on  its  merits,  con- 
sidered it  as  the  best  standard  of  the  English  language.    When  engaged  in  the  execution 
of  their  task,  they  altered  about  thirty  texts,  and  having  no  other  object  at   heart,  than 
the  cause   of  truth,  would  with  equal  fairness,  have  reduced   the  remaining  passages, 
between  which  a  difference  existed,  to  uniformity,  if  the  genius  of  the  languages,  from 
w  hich  they  derived  their  translation,  or  the  meaning  of  the  inspired  writers  admitted  it. 
Exclusive  of  the  Hebrew  of  the  Old  Testament,  the  Septuagint  Version  of  it,  and  the 
various  Greek  copies  of  the  New  Testament,  they  called  in  to  their  assistance  even  the 
standard  of  the  Popish  Church, — the  Latin  Vulgate  by  Jerome.     Nay,  they  consulted 
the  very  imperfect  English  Translations  of  Rheims  and  Douay.     And,  notwithstanding 
this  fairness  on  their  part,  their  labours,  on  the  authority  of  Ward,  are  branded  with  the 
imputation  of  error. 


PREFACE.  XXI 

The  entire  number  of  texts  set  down  by  Ward  as  erroneous  amounts  to  about  140 ; 
and  of  these,  he  considers  no  fewer  than  120  as  "  damnable  corruptions,"  and  accord- 
ingly embodies  them  in  (what  Dr.  Milner  calls)  his  Polyglott  ;  at  the  same  time  exhibit- 
ing the  parallel  Latin  and  English  versions  of  the  Popish  Bible.  The  remaining 
number,  which  consists  of  about  twenty,  he  adverts  to  only  in  a  general  way  ;  because 
he  says,  "  we  do  not  look  upon  these  as  done  with  any  ill  design."  But  had  he  acted 
on  those  fair  and  honourable  principles,  upon  which  controversy  should  always  be  con- 
ducted, he  would  have  deducted  the  number  of  the  texts,  which  he  acknowledges  to 
have  been  amended,  from  the  number  he  calls  corrupted ;  in  which  case,  the  residue 
would  be  confined  to  those,  for  which  alone  the  Church  of  England  is  responsible.  To 
those  alone,  in  truth,  the  author  feels  himself  immediately  bound  to  direct  his  attention  ; 
yet,  at  the  same  time,  he  has  deemed  it  expedient  to  bring  under  revision  the  entire 
range  of  texts  objected  to  by  Ward,  lest  it  might  be  supposed  or  pretended,  that  the 
omission  of  any  wTas  an  admission  of  the  justice  of  the  objections  brought  against  that- 
particular  part. 

It  may  be  observed,  that  all  these  texts,  taken  as  they  stand,  may  be  comprised 
under  three  general  heads  :  First ;  those  which  are  the  same,  or  the  same  in  substance  in 
both  versions.  Secondly  ;  those  which  are  so  obscure  in  the  original,  whether  Hebrew 
or  Greek,  as  to  make  it  difficult  to  determine,  which  translation  in  English  is  to  be 
preferred.  The  Popish  doctrines  dependant  on  the  passages,  which  come  under  these 
two  heads,  are  not  established  by  the  one,  nor,  as  the  Popish  clergy  complain,  combated 
by  the  other  translation.  And  thirdly  ;  those  texts,  and  they  the  greater  number,  which 
are  truly  and  literally  rendered  in  the  Protestant  Bible,  as  on  reference  may  be  seen,  and 
only  mistranslated  in  the  Rhemish  one.  And  that  they  will  never  be  rectified  in  this,  is 
most  probable,  since  they  uphold  the  doctrines  which  relate  to  t  ran  substantiation, 
celibacy,  penance,  images,  and  purgatory,  &c.  The  better  to  illustrate  the  meaning, 
and  exhibit  the  just  interpretation  of  each  text,  the  plan  laid  down  in  Ward's  book,  has 
been  strictly  adhered  to.  According  to  it,  the  reader  will  perceive  at  one  view,  the 
parallel  constructions  in  the  different  languages. 

The  First  Column  contains  the  references, 

In  the  Second,  the  Greek  of  the  New  Testament  as  collated  by  Mills,  Wetstein, 
and  Griesbach  :  and  the  Greek  Version  of  the  Old  Testament  according  to  the  seventy, 
are  given.  Holmes's  LXX,  in  the  texts  which  occur  belonging  to  the  pentateuch,  has  been 
consulted.  In  order  to  preserve  uniformity,  it  has  been  thought  better  to  retain  the  title 
Original  Greek  in  those  columns,  where  the  Septuagint  reading  is  only  given,  than  to 
vary  it,  according  as  the  texts  belonged  to  the  !New  or  the  Old  Testament. 


•;  PREFACE. 

XX11 


In  the  Third,  the  reading  of  the  Vulgate  quoted  by  Ward  is  inserted.  Under  it 
are  subjoined  occasional  selections  from  Pagninus's  translation  of  the  Bible;  or,  as  it  is 
better  known  under  another  name,  from  that  of  Arias  Montanus,  where  the  Latin  varies 
from  that  of  Jerome.  This  version  has  been  chosen  in  consequence  of  the  high  esti- 
mation in  which  it  was  held  by  the  Popish  Church.  And  although  *Father  Simon 
objects  to  it,  as  being  too  literal ;  yet  he  honestly  confesses,  that  Walton  preferred  it  to 
allother  translations,  and  that  Pope  Gregory  XIII.  in  his  epistle  to  Philip  II.  of  Spain, 
pronounced  the  Polyglott  of  which  it  constituted  a  part,—"  Opus  vere  aureum." 

In  the  Fourth,  the  Rhemish  Translation  is  included.  This  title,  although  not 
strictly  proper,  has,  in  imitation  of  Ward,  been  retained.  The  New  Testament  only 
was  translated  at  Rheims;  the  version  of  the  Old  Testament  having  been  executed  at 
Douay,  in  about  twenty-eight  years  afterwards.  As  he  could  scarcely  have  been  igno- 
rant of  this  circumstance,   he  betrays,   to  say  the  least  of  it,  great  inaccuracy  in  not 

noticing  it. 

In  the  Fifth,  Beza's  Latin  text  of  the  New  Testament  is  given.  Here  also  are 
inserted  occasional  selections  from  Montanus's  Bible,  where  he  agrees  with  Beza.  This 
agreement  between  the  translation  of  so  eminent  a  Popish  divine  as  Montanus,  and  that 
of  Beza,  one  of  the  leading  Reformers,  is  a  corroborative  proof,  that  the  passages  in  the 
Protestant  Bible  condemned  by  Ward  as  corruptions,  and  which  King  James's  Transla- 
tors have  rendered  agreeably  to  the  sense,  in  which  those  two  learned  men  understood 
them,  so  far  from  being  defective,  are  perfect  translations.  In  this  column,  such  Hebrew 
words  as  Ward  quotes,  are  now  and  again  adduced,  together  with  Montanus's  Latin. 

The  Sixth  Column  contains  those  texts  which  Ward  calls  mistranslations  of  the 
Protestant  Bibles  of  1562.  1577-  and  1579,  under  the  head  Bishops  Bible.  This 
Version  is  designedly  selected  from  among  the  early  ones,  as  the  principal  part  of  its 
framers  were  of  episcopal  rank,  and  distinguished  for  their  piety  and  learning  :  a  cir- 
cumstance which,  while  it  shews  their  fitness  for  the  task,  is  every  way  justificatory  of 
the  purity  of  their  motives.  Next,  because  it  made  its  appearance  in  1568,  being  nearly 
an  intermediate  period  between  the  earliest  and  latest  of  the  preceding  dates.  And 
lastly,  because  Ward  has  left  it  in  doubt,  to  which  of  the  f  five  versions,  which  were 

*  Crit.  Hist,  of  the  O.  Test.  Book  ii.  c.  20.  et  passim. 

A.  D. 

|   Coverdalk's  Bible 1535 

Matthews's  Bible 1537 

The  Great  Bible 1539 

Cranmer's  Bible , 1540 

The  Geneva  Bible.,.,,., , 15G0 


PREFACE.  xxiii 

made  before  1562,  he  refers  those  dates;   whether  to  different  editions  of  one  and  the 
same  Bible,  or  to  editions  of  different  Bibles  published  at  those  periods. 

And  the  Seventh  Column  comprises  the  parallel  passages  from  King  James's  Bible. 

As  the  Church  of  England  does  not  lay  claim  to  infallibility,  none  of  her  members 
need  blush  to  allow,  that  this  last  version  demonstrates  the  inaccuracy  of  the  preceding 
ones,  in  some  particular  texts.  And,  as  it  is  frankly  admitted,  that  these  are  in  consequence 
superseded,  none  bui  the  enemies  of  truth  will  arraign  them,  disused  as  they  are,  of 
obscuring  any  of  the  fundamental  doctrines  of  Christianity.  This  circumstance,  how- 
ever, is  unaccountably  overlooked  by  Ward;  for  he  roundly  asserts,  that  the  people  of 
England  were  misled  during  the  reigns  of  three  of  their  monarchs,  by  the  use  of  adul- 
terate versions  of  the  Scriptures.  But  whatever  excuse  might  be  advanced  for  him  in 
uttering  such  a  slander,  when  on  the  eve  of  flying  from  his  native  country,  none  surely 
can  be  alleged  tor  Doctor  Milner,  in  repeating  it  under  the  semblance  of  a  truth. 
*  "  If"  says  he,  "  Ward  makes  his  charges  good,  though  it  be  only  with  respect  to  those 
early  versions,  he  gains  his  cause."  It  must  not  have  occurred  to  this  Right  Rev.  Doctor, 
that  when  he  spoke  thus  hypothetically,  he  admitted  the  possibility,  either  of  the 
charges  being  unsupported  by  Ward,  or  that  they  may  be  refuted  by  others.  But  waving 
this  consideration,  a  revival  of  the  charge  comes  with  a  bad  grace  from  a  Popish  Bishop 
of  the  present  day. 

That  the  early  English  Versions  of  the  Protestant  Bible  required  revision,  and  alte- 
ration, will  excite  no  surprise,  when  it  is  considered,  what  a  ferment  existed  in  the  times 
in  which  they  were  made,  and  how  imperfect  the  English  language  then  was,  which 
necessarily  became  the  medium  of  interpretation.  But  how  much  more  pointedly,  and 
justly,  might  it  be  retorted  against  the  Popish  Doctors,  that  the  discordant  copies  of  the 
Vulgate,  that  Urim  and  Thummim  of  their  Church,  have,  on  the  principle  applied  by 
Ward  to  the  English  Bibles,  deceived  not  merely  a  single  nation,  but  all  Christendom ; 
and  that  the  people  wandered  in  the  mazes  of  uncertainty,  not  during  the  reigns  of  two 
or  three  monarchs  only,  but  for  centuries,  in  the  most  tranquil,  as  well  as  in  the  most 
troublous  times ;  and  that,  too,  after  the  Latin  language  had  arrived  at  its  highest  pitch 
of  refinement  and  elegance. 

It  may  be  readily  conceived,  that  this  will  not  be  listened  to,  at  least  will  not  be 
believed,  by  those  who  maintain  the  infallibility  of  their  Church.  However,  as  the 
obstinacy  and  incredulity  of  such  people  are  not  designed  to  be  removed  by  these  pages, 
it  may  not  be  unacceptable  to  an  opposite  class  of  readers,   to  have  presented  to  them. 

Inquiry.  Sec.  Ed.  p.  241. 


XXIV  PREFACE. 


a  brief,  historical  account  of'  the  Vulgate  itself,  as  affording  sufficient  grounds  for  the 
statement  which  has  been  made. 

About  the  middle  of  the  second  century,  a  period  removed  from  the  age  of  the 
Apostles,  and  their  immediate  successors,  and  when  the  gift  of  tongues  had  ceased  in  the 
Church,  the  necessity  of  a  Latin  translation,  both  of  the  books  of  the  Old  Testament, 
and  of  the  writings  of  the  Evangelists  and  Apostles,  became  indispensable.  In  conse- 
quence, versions  m  that  language,  now  more  generally  spoken  than  any  other,  were 
multiplied  by  the  learned  and  pious  men  of  that  day.  The  most  remarkable  of  these 
was  that  called  the  Italic  Version.  Of  this,  Jerome,  towards  the  conclusion  of  the 
fourth  century,  undertook  the  correction;  because  the  copy  of  the  Septuaoint  Transla- 
tion of  the  Old  Testament  which  it  followed,  was  defective,  and  that,  in  some  passages  of 
the  New  Testament,  the  Latin  Translation  did  not  fairly  represent  the  meaning  0f  the 
Creek  text.  I  lis  correction,  however,  did  not  extend  farther,  as  he  suffered  other  minor 
deviations  to  remain  as  he  found  them.  He  afterwards  made  a  translation  of  the  Old 
Testament  from  the  Hebrew  into  Latin,  which,  (with  the  exception  of  the  Psalms,  and 
some  other  books  of  the  Old  Testament,  as  given  in  the  Italic  Version,  which  he  embo- 
died into  his  work/)  is  that  called  the  *Vulgate.  This  version  of  the  Scriptures,  not- 
withstanding its  excellence  and  antiquity,  does  not  appear,  even  in  St.  Bernard's  time,  to 
have  been  generally  received  into  the  Popish  Church,  as  he  does  not  always  use  it. 
However,  from  the  twelfth  century,  in  which  he  flourished,  to  the  beginning  of  the 
sixteenth,  and  indeed  to  the  present  day,  in  a  modified  state,  the  Vulgate  is  esteemed  by 
it,  as  an  unerring  record  of  the  Divine  word. 

From  the  period  at  which  Jerome  finished  his  Version,  to  that  when  printing  was 
invented,  an  interval  of  nearly  a  thousand  years,  no  attempt  was  made,  either  to  revise 
or  correct  it.  During  this  long  repose,  learned  men  confined  their  researches  rather  to 
the  discovery  of  allegorical  meanings  and  abstruse  significations,  in  the  texts  of  Scrip- 
ture, than  to  that  of  their  true  and  natural  sense,  or  of  their  genuine  and  unadulterated 
reading.  And  as  to  the  general  contents  of  the  Sacred  Volume  itself,  they  never  enter- 
tained an  idea  beyond  that  of  making  transcripts  from  it.     fCardinal  Ximenes  first  set 

-1.  .1.  p.  .8       [he  latter  says,  «  Opus  Vulgate  versionis  est  opus  planum  auctorum,  et  ex  versionibus  half 
H.nonvuHan,,  alusque  compositun,"     Professor  Michaelis  too  (Introduction,  &e.  vol.      c.  Z  p!  m  nd^ 

t  See  Kees's  New  Cyclopad.    Article  Bible. 


PREFACE.  XXV 

about  translating  the  Old  Testament,  from  the  Hebrew  into  Latin,  and  rectifying  the 
errors  which  had  crept  into  the  Vulgate.  As  to  Lyranus,  who  preceded  him,  he  only 
wrote  a  commentary  on  the  Latin  Bible.  The  Cardinal,  about  the  year  1502,  inserted 
the  Vulgate,  corrected  and  altered,  in  the  Complutensian  edition  of  his  Polyglott ;  and  in 
1532,  R.  Stephens  edited  an  improved  Latin  Translation  of  the  Bible  at  Paris.  Beside 
these,  and  the  Doctors  of  Louvain,  who  enriched  Stephens's  edition  with  various  read- 
ings of  several  Latin  MSS.  none  of  equal  eminence,  in  the  Popish  communion,  appear 
to  have  been  engaged  in  the  revision  and  emendation  of  what  may  be  called  the  modern 
Vulgate,  until  the  pontificates  of  Popes  Pius  IV.  and  V.  and  Gregory  XIII.  ;  at  which 
period,  numerous  editions  were  published,  widely  ^differing  from  each  other.  Although 
Gregory's  Latin  Bible  was  declared  to  have  been  restored  to  its  original  integrity, 
Sixtus  V.  his  immediate  successor,  published  another  edition,  which,  by  a  bull  issued  in 
1589,  be  pronounced  true,  and  resolved  that  it  should,  without  hesitation,  be  considered 
that  which  the  council  of  Trent  acknowledged  as  authentic,  twenty-five  or  thirty  years 
before  !  This  extraordinary  declaration  of  Sixtus  evidently  originated  in  a  most  absurd 
article  of  the  decree  passed  by  the  Fathers  assembled  at  that  council.  Absurd  it  was, 
as,  before  it  was  framed,  they  acknowledged  that  the  edition  of  the  Vulgate  mentioned 
in  it  was  very  defective.  The  article  runs  thus,  "  f  If  any  person  does  not  esteem  these 
books,  with  all  their  parts,  as  contained  in  the  Vulgate  Edition,  to  be  Scriptures  and 
Canonical,  let  him  be  anathema."  Notwithstanding  that  Sixtus  finished  his  edition  of 
the  Vulgate,  as  is  fully  set  forth  in  the  bull  bearing  the  above  date,  yet  J  Ward,  in  con- 
tradiction to  this  fact,  says,  that  he  only  began  it,  but  that  it  was  "  undertaken  and 
happily  finished  by  his  successor  Clement  VIII.  answerable  to  the  desire  and  absolute 
intention  of  his  predecessor  Sixtus."  But  this,  evidently,  is  nothing  more  than  a  plau- 
sible pretext  to  keep  up  the  appearance  of  consistency  between  their  Holinesses.  The 
defence  set  up  by  Ward  is,  that  Clement's  edition  is  the  identical  one,  which  Sixtus  had 

*  "  Injuria  temporum,  variisque  casihus,  libraviorum  ignorantia  et  oseitantia,  multa  irrepsere  quae  per 
Corrector";!  Biblicaemendare  voluerunt  antiquiores  critici.  Ad  antiquos  codices  revoeata  et  emendata  denique, 
maximal)  dignitatem  et  auctoritatem  nacta  est  in  Cone.  Trident.  Sess.  iv.  Can.  2."  Vid.  Le.  Long.  Ed.  Masch. 
vol.  ii.  p.  28.  Again,  he  thus  describes  the  proceedings  of  Popes  Sixtus  V.  and  Clemens  VIII.  "  Jussu  Sixti  V. 
a  viris  ad  hoc  opus  delegatis,  versio  latina  iterum  sub  examen  vocata,  recognita,  emendata  publiee  prodiit, 
anno  1590.  Constitutione  munita,  qua  ex  certa  scientia,  deque  apostolicse  potestatis  plenitudine,  pro  vera,  legi 
tima,  authentic^,  indubitata,  deelaratur.  Iterum  biennio  vix  peracto  Clemens  VIII.  ex  eadem  apostolicas  potestatis 
plenitudine,  novam  emisit  editionem  authenticam,  quae  nefn  meris  vitiis  typographicis,  sed  hand  levioris 
momenti  lectionibus  a  priori  authentica  recedit.  Ibid.  p.  50. 

f  Mosh.  Eccl.  Hist.  vol.  iv.  p.  214.  j  Errata,  p.  25. 

d 


PREFACE. 
XXVI 


Ul 


his  mind's  eye,  previous  to  ins  death.  Indeed,  *Clement  in  the  Preface  to  his  Bible 
says  so  ;  but  although  he  does,  and  although  he  also  intimates,  that  Sixtus  intended  a 
new  edition,  yet  he  does  not  attempt  to  prove  it.  Nor  could  he,  as,  after  Sixtus  printed 
his  edition,  he  corrected  with  his  own  hand  the  faults  which  he  discovered,  a  fact  acknow- 
ledged in  'his  own  fbull,  but  yet  studiously  suppressed  by  Clement.  But  besides  his 
having  made  several  corrections  with  his  pen,  Sixtus  caused  several  words  to  be 
♦reprinted,  and  pasted  on  every  single  copy  of  that  edition,  which  proves  that  he  did  not 
afterwards  intend  to  publish  a  new  one. 

Clement  is  accused,  and  not  without  foundation,  with  adding  to,  altering,  and  taking 
from  the  text,  to  favour  the  Popish  doctrine.  Of  this,  among  others,  the  contested 
passage  in  St.  John's  first  Epistle  ;  viz.  "  tres  sunt  qui  testificantur  in  ccclo,  &c."  is  a 
strong  proof.  It  is  essentially  requisite  to  give  this  instance,  if  for  no  other  reason 
than  to  shew  the  reader  the  extent  of  Ward's  knowledge  of  Scripture,  so  far  as  regards 
the  Trinity.  §He  says,  that  the  preceding  "  is  the  \\only  text  in  the  Bible,  that  can  be 
brought  to  prove  that  great  mystery."  Now,  as  to  this  particular  text,  there  is  stronger 
evidence  that  it  does  not,  than  that  it  does,  belong  to  the  Epistle  of  St.  John.  For  it  is 
not  found  in  the  Italic,  nor  Syriac  Versions.  Erasmus  did  not  consider  it  genuine,  as  it 
was  not  noticed  by  the  most  eminent  of  the  early  Fathers  ;  his  words  are,  "  Hqui  (scil. 
patres)  cum  in  Arianos  scriberent,  hunc  locum  neutiquam  omississent,  si  genuinum  esse 
crediderunt."  On  the  same  side  rests  an  authority,  which  will  not  suffer  by  a  compa- 
rison with  any  of  either  ancient  or  modern  days,  that  of  the  **Bishop  of  Lincoln.  But, 
beside  this  particular  instance  of  interpolation,  in  other  points,  the  infallibility  of 
Clement  VIII.  is  directly  at  variance  with  that  of  Sixtus  V  ;  and  it  may  be  asked  Doctor 
Milner,  and  his  Episcopal  Brethren,  how  they  will  reconcile  these  contradictories,  if  they 

*  "  Quod  cum  jam  esset  excusum,  ct  ut  in  lucem  emitteretur,  idem  Pontifcx  opcram  darct,  animadvertens 
non  paua  in  Sacra  Biblia  nra?li  vitia  irrepsisse,  quae  iterata  diligentia  indigere  vidcrentur,  tamen  opus  sub 
incudem  revocandum  censuit  et  decrevit.  Id  vero  cum  morte prceventus  prsestare  non  potuisset,  &c."  Clemen- 
tine Edition  op  the  Vulgate,  p.  6. 

f  "  Eaque  res  quo  magis  incorrupte  perficcretur,  nostra  nos  ipsi  manu  correximus,  si  qua  praeli  vitia 
obrepserant." 

X  Kennicott  makes  mention  of  a  copy  of  this  description  being  preserved  in  the  Bodleian  Library  in 
Oxford,  in  which,  beside  Sixtus's  autographical  corrections  of  some  passages,  words  newly  printed  are  pasted  on 
those  which  lie  considered  erroneous.     Dissert,  vol.  i.  p.  19/. 

§  Errata,  p.  27. 

]|  Will  the  Popish  clergy  rest  so  important  a  doctrine  on  a  doubtful  text,  and  overlook  the  following  ones  : 
*iz.  Matt.  c.  xxviii.  v.  19.  2  Cor.  c.  xiii.  v.  14.  Rev.  c.  i.  v.  1  ? 

i[  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc.  **  See  Elements  of  Theology,  vol.  ii.  p.  90. 


PREFACE. 


XXVJJ 


but  allow  the  long  established  principle  in  logic,  that  of  two,  both  cannot  be  true  ?  It 
is  impossible  they  can,  and  therefore  they  fly  to  an  *evasion,  as  pitiful  as  it  is  unsuitable 
to  their  purpose. 

James,  first  keeper  of  the  Bodleian  Library,  having  with  indefatigable  labour  com- 
pared the  Bibles  of  these  two  Popes,  verse  by  verse,  discovered  no  fewer  than  f  two  thou- 
sand articles  in  which  they  differed  !  Some  of  these,  certainly,  are  but  trivial  varia- 
tions; yet  others  of  them  are  diametrically  opposite  to  each  other,  and  all  are  sufficient 

*  "  Slight  verbal  errors  of  copyists  and  printers  must  have  found  place  in  every  copy  and  edition ;  but  it  has 
been  the  care  of  several  succeeding  Popes  to  have  these  corrected  as  much  as  possible."  Milner's  Inquiry, 
page  348. 

f  The  following  texts,  extracted  from  James's  Papal  War,  are  given  as  they  stand  in  the  Sixtine  and 
Sixtine-Clementine  editions  of  the  Vulgate.  The  tone  of  confidence  observed  in  the  Preface  to  each  of  those 
Bibles  is  singularly  remarkable.  Sixtus  V.  speaks  to  this  effect;  that  agreeably  to  the  decree  of  the  Council  of 
Trent,  he  having  called  upon  God,  and  relying  on  St.  Peter's  authority,  for  the  public  good  of  the  Church,  felt 
little  hesitation  about  publishing  that  Bible.  He  sets  forth  his  labour,  in  selecting  the  best  readings ;  his  design 
that  according  to  the  decree  of  the  Trent  Council,  the  Vulgar  Bible  might  be  most  correctly  printed ;  and  his 
performance,  viz.  that  he  had  accurately  purged  this  edition  from  various  errors,  and  with  utmost  diligence  restored 
it  (in  pristinam  veritatem)  to  its  ancient  verity.  After  this  he  declares  his  will,  viz.  he  decrees  that  that  edition 
should  be  taken  for  that  Vulgar  Latin,  which  the  Council  of  Trent  declared  authentic.  And  this,  he  says,  he 
does,  (as  is  pertinently  observed  by  Le  Long.  Vid.  note  *,  page  xxv.)  from  his  own  certain  knowledge  and  platitude 
of  Apostolic  authority.  And  that  it  ought  to  be  received  as  such  (sine  ulla  dubitatione  aut  controversial)  without 
any  doubt  or  controversy.  After  this,  Clement  VIII.  in  1582,  sends  forth  his  edition  of  the  Vulgate,  and 
expressly  requires,  that  it  also  be  received  under  the  same  circumstances.  The  differences  between  the  two  are 
numerous.     Those  here  pointed  out  will  suffice  as  an  example. 


John  vi.  33. 
Luke  viii.  2\J. 
Isaiah  xix.  12. 

1  Kings  vii.  9. 
Exodus  xvi.  3. 

2  Ezra  in.  28. 
Eccl.  xxi.   15. 
Hab.i.    13. 
John  vi.  65. 
Levit.  xxvii.  17. 
Deut.  xxiv.  6. 
Josh.  ii.  18. 
Ibid  xi.  19. 

2  Peter  i.  16. 

Yet  are  both  these  editions 


Clemens  VIII. 
Panis  Dei  est.     Alteration. 
Cum  egressus  esset,  &c.    Omission. 
Annuncient  tbi.  Typograph. error. 
Extrinsecus.     Contradiction. 


Sixtus  V. 

Panis  verus  est. 

Cum  de  nam  egressus  esset,  &c. 

Annuncient  tibi. 

7/ztrinsecus. 

Jnduxistis. 

Ad  portam. 

//jsipientia. 

Non  respicis. 

Credentes. 

Estimationem  mam. 

y^pposuit,  tibi. 

Signum  non  fuerit. 

Quae  se  non  traderet. 

Doctas. 

to  be  received  on  the  authority  of  the  Pope  and   Council  j   although,  with  the 

d2 


Eduxistis. 

Id. 

A  porta 

Id. 

Sapientia. 

Id. 

Respicis. 

Id. 

Non  credentes. 

Id. 

Estimationem  tuam. 

Id. 

Opposuit. 

Id. 

Signum  fuerit. 

Id. 

Se  traderet. 

Id. 

Indoctas. 

Id. 

PREFACE. 

xxvm 


to  shew,  that  their  works  partake  of  the  nature  of  all  human  productions  James 
published  the  entire  collection  in  161 1  in  one  volume,  which  he  entitled  Papal.  Bellum, 
I  the  Dedication  to  which  he  thus  forcibly  expresses  himself;  «  institui  comparare 
Papain  cum  Papa,  Sixtum  cum  Clemente,  Octavum  cum  Quinto  :  and  as  the  result  he 
thus  concludes,  «  liquebit  ex  odio  hujus  comparationis,  quam  disparet  dissimihs  sit  ratio, 
Sixti  et  dementis ;  ait  Clemens,  negat  Sixtus ;  ait  Sixtus,  negat  Clemens.  Thus  is 
infallibility  opposed  to  infallibility,  and  the  excommunicato  major  lata  sententtce  is  thun- 
dered forth  against  the  slightest  change  in  either  copy,  and  yet  both  are  pronounced 
authentic,  and  sent  forth  to  be  received  and  maintained  unalterably  for  ever. 

There  is  not,  probably,  a  single  objection  urged  against  the  infallibility  of  the  Church 
of  Rome   which  carries  with  it  such  force  as  this.     The  Popish  Doctors  say,  that  his 
Holiness,  assisted  by  his  conclave  of  Cardinals  and  his  Council,  cannot  err  in  matters  of 
faith      But,  if  to  determine  what  is,  and  what  is  not,  Scripture,  be  not  to  act  in  matters 
of  faith,  it' is  impossible  to   say  what  is.     Sixtus  V.  sets  about  preparing  a  perfect 
edition  of  the  Latin  Bible,  collects  the   most  ancient  MSS.  as  well  as  the  best  printed 
copies,  summons  the  most  eminent  ^scholars  to  assist  in  the  prosecution    of  the   work, 
assembles  a  congregation   of  Cardinals,  and  presides  over  all   with  a  zeal  not    to  be 
exceeded  by  his  knowledge.     The  result  of  their  joint  labours  and  study  is  an  edition  of 
the  Vulgate  declared  to  be  corrected  in  the  best  manner  possible,  and  published  with  a 
tremendous  fexcom  muni  cation  of  any  person,  who  would  dare  ever  afterwards  to  make 
the  minutest  change.     Notwithstanding  this,  after  an  intervention    of  the  reigns  of 
three  Popes,  (Urban,  Gregory  XIV.  and  Innocent  IX,)  which  did  not  exceed  two  years, 
Clement  publishes   another  edition  repugnant  to  the  former,  which,  in  turn,  he  pro- 
nounces authentic,  and  enforces  by  a  similar  sentence  of  excommunication. 

If,  then,  Sixtus's  Bible  was  perfect,  Clement,  with  his  assessors,  must  have  been 
fallible,  and  vice  versa.     So  that  conceding  to  Ward,  that  Sixtus  did  intend  a  better 

exception  of  the  three  first  passages,  they  directly  contradict  each  other.  Kennicott  points   out  three  discrepances 

which  have  been  overlooked  by  Doctor  James. 

Heb.  rnxn  y:nx  hiko  njio  mxo  won 

Lxx.  rtTfaxoffntts  x*^'  oxrctKOtnxn;  yi,\.  irmccy.ocnai  x^- 

2  Chron.  c.  xiii.  v.  3.  Quadraginta  Millia.  Octoginta  M\     v.  17.  Quinquaginta  M\  Sixtus.     rcontra- 

Quadringenta  m\  Octingenta  m\  QuingentaM*.      Clemens.   I  diction. 

See  Kennicott's  Dissertations,  vol.  i.  p.  197. 

*  "  Lectissimis  aliquot  sanctie  Romanae  Ecclesiae  Cardinalibus,  aliisque  turn  sacrarum  literarum,  turn 
rariarum  liwguarum  peritissiniis  viris ;  adhibitis  antiquissimis  codicibus  manuscriptis,  &c."    Pref.  ad  Vulg.  p.  6. 

f  The  form  of  the  excommunication,  which  may  be  met  with  in  the  concluding  part  of  the  last  note 
on  the  eighth  Article  of  the  Appendix,  is  richly  entitled  to  the  reader's  attentive  perusal. 


PREFACE.  2xix 

edition,  where  is  the  certainty  that  had  Sixtus  lived,  he,  and  his  council,  might  not  have 
exhibited  as  strong  signs  of  fallibility,  in  the  second,  as  in  the  first  edition  ? 

Ward,  it  is  admitted,  endeavours  to  palliate  this  palpable  incongruity  in  the  copies 
of  the  Vulgate  edited  by  those  Popes,  when  he  says,  that  the  opposite  readings  of 
Sixtus's  and  Clement's  editions  of  the  Vulgate  are  to  be  attributed  *"  to  the  negligence 
of  printers."  But  any  person  at  all  acquainted  with  the  process  of  printing  must  per- 
ceive what  a  wretched  palliation  this  is.  Printers,  through  negligence,  might,  by 
putting  in,  or  leaving  out,  a  letter,  or  a  syllable,  give  a  new  turn  to  a  particular  pas- 
sage. But  when  has  it  occurred,  that  they  substitute  not  merely  a  letter,  or  a  syllable, 
but  an  entire  word  of  a  different  signification,  for  another  ;  or  that  they  add,  and  omit 
in  a  variety  of  places,  as  fancy  leads  them,  letters,  syllables  and  words  ?  So  that,  according 
to  Ward's  reasoning,  there  were  no  aberrations  of  Sixtus's  Bible  from  his  manuscript, 
but  what  were  caused  by  the  negligence  of  printers,  and  that  had  he  lived  to  re-edit  his 
work,  he  would  have  corrected  the  few  typical  errors  which  had  crept  into  it.  There  is  no 
question,  but  he  would  rectify,  in  a  subsequent  edition,  the  typical  errors  of  a  preceding 
one;  but  surely,  he  would  never  think  of  producing  so  complete  a  change,  as  appears 
to  have  taken  place  in  the  Clementine  edition,  which  was  announced  under  his  name. 
That  he  would  not,  if  the  edict  issued  by  him  in  1589,  and  other  evidence  were  wanting, 
may  be  proved  by  the  mention  of  one  historical,  and  well-authenticated  fact :  viz.  the 
resolution  with  which  Sixtus  refused  to  make  any  the  slightest  alteration  in  his  edition  of 
the  Vulgate,  when  Philip  II.  King  of  Spain,  complained  of  its  being  too  favourable 
to  the  party  which  opposed  the  Church  of  Rome.  So  that  the  story,  so  plausibly  told, 
is  nothing  but  a  pious  forgery,  invented  to  uphold  the  authority  claimed  for  its  chief 
Pastors.  When  to  this  is  added,  that  numerous  editions  of  the  Vulgate  have  been  pro- 
duced, since  the  dawn  of  the  Reformation,  differing  from  each  other  so  much,  as  to 
leave  it  a  doubtful  matter  which  comes  nearest  the  original  translation  of  Jerome, 
with  what  shew  of  good  sense,  can  the  Protestant  Bible  now  used  be  condemned,  on 
the  ground  of  its  not  agreeing  with  a  standard,  which  evidently  is  itself  not  yet  fixed  ? 

With  respect  to  the  Douay  Bible,  it  will  be  necessary  to  say  but  a  few  words. 
A  wider  difference  cannot  be  pointed  out  between  the  Protestant  Bible  of  1610,  and 
those  versions  mentioned  »by  Ward  of  1562,  1577,  and  1579,  in  the  passages  which  he 
quotes,  than  can  be  proved  to  exist  between  the  last  Dublin  and  Edinburgh  editions  of 
the  Douay  Old,  and  the  Rhemish  New  Testaments,  and  the  original  ones  of  1582  and 

f  James,  in  the  Preface  to  his  Index  Expurgatorius,  calls  this  a  most  brilliant  fiction.  It  is  in  vain,  he  says, 
to  expect  that  the  work  of  any  author,  whether  pseudo-catholic,  or  not,  should  be  engaged  (sanum)  perfect,  after 
undergoing  inquisitorial  purgation,  for  this  reason ;  "  cum  a  Clemente  VIII.  Biblia  Sixti  V.  Praecessoris  sui  de 
industria  corn  mu  tat  a,  susque  deque  versa  sint,  splendidissimo  mendacio,  ob  errata  typographical  &c." 


xxx  PREFACE- 


1609  in  those  particular  passages.  It  would  be  out  of  place  to  specify  instances  here, 
as  the  reader  can  satisfy  himself  of  their  existence  by  adverting  to  the  texts  in  the 
columns  headed  by  the  title  Rhemish  Version. 

Fulke,  Fuller,  and  many  other  learned  writers,  since  their  day,  have   condemned 
the  translation  of  the  Rhemists,  on  account  of  the  number  of  terms  which  it   retains, 
unintelligible  to  the  generality  of  readers.     Fulke  observed,  that  "  by  all  means,  they 
(viz.  the  Rhemish  Translators)  laboured  to  suppress  the  light  of  truth  under  one  pretence 
or  other  ;"  while  Fuller's  quaint  remark  was,  that  the  Version  of  the  Scriptures,  "  made 
by  the  Jesuits  of  Douay  and  Rheims,  ivas  a  translation  which  needed  to  be  translated:' 
That  learned  *Prelate,  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  speaks  nearly  to  the  same  effect.      '  They 
retained  in  it,"  says  he,  "  many  Eastern,  Greek,  and  Latin  f  words,  and  contrived  to 
render   it   unintelligible  to  common  readers."     After  these  opinions,  it  must  excite  no 
small  surprise,  that  the  last  is  the  only  objection,  which  ^Doctor  Milner  ever  heard  made 
to  the  translation   of  the  Bible  used  in  the  Popish  Church.     When  a  man  like  him 
almost  exclusively  restricts  his  reading  to  books  written  on  one  side  of  a  subject,  can 
the  incompetency  of  the  Popish  clergy  (whose  course  of  study  is  still  more  limited)  to 
assign  any  other  reason,  why  they  think  as  they  do,  than  because  they  so  think,  and  the 
total  ignorance,  which  they  oftentimes  betray  about  the  saving  truths  of  the  Gospel,  be 
wondered  at  ?     As  this  is  a  subject  not  immediately  connected  with  the  one  in  hand,  it  is 
unnecessary  to  enlarge  on  it.     One  practical  inference,  however,  may  be  deduced  from 
what  has  been  said  ;  and  that  is,  that  those  who  are  so  vulnerable  themselves,  should  be 
reserved  in  making  charges  against  others. 

The  author  has  now  to  notice  a  fact,  which  falls  strictly  within  the  range  of  the 
present  controversy.  It  has  been  communicated  to  him  by  an  ^English  Prelate  of  the 
first  distinction,  in  so  obliging  a  way,  as  to  demand  the  expression  of  his  most  respect- 
ful acknowledgments.  The  point  to  which  his  attention  has  been  directed,  is  the  insin- 
cerity of  the  Church  of  Rome  in  deliberately  sanctioning  Versions,  which  pretend  to  be 
true  Versions,  when  they  are  not.  A  most  singular  instance  of  this  kind  occurs,  in  a 
||French  New  Testament,  published  by  the  Jesuits  at  Bourdeaux  in  1686',  with  the 
permission  of  the  ecclesiastical  authorities  of  that  place.     As  Bishop  Kidder,  to  whom  the 

*  Elem.  Thcol.  vol.  ii.  p.  16".  f  Parascue,  Azymes.  Gazophylace,  &c.  &c. 

X  Inquiry.  Sec.  Ed.  p.  349.  §  The  Right  Reverend  the  Lord  Bishop  of  Ely. 

||  Le  Nouveau  Testament  de  notre  Seigneur  J.  C.  traduit  de  Latin  en  Frangois  par  les  Theologiens  de 
Louvain:  imprime  a  Bourdeaux  chez  Jacques  Mongiron— Millanges,  Imprimeur  du  Roi  et  du  College  168G. 
avec  approbation  et  permission. 


PREFACE.  XXXI 

Christian  world  is  indebted  for  the  exposure  sent  forth  by  him  of  its  numerous,  and  gross 
falsifications,  found  no  little  difficulty  in  procuring  a  copy  of  that  curious  production, 
and  as  that  difficulty  has  by  this  time  nearly  grown  into  an  impossibility,  it  is  not  impro- 
bable that  Doctor  Milner,  or  some  of  his  Episcopal  brethren,  will  have  the  hardihood  to 
deny  its  existence.  Should  they  be  disposed  to  do  so,  they  will  have  found  precedent 
in  the  conduct  of  *Baldwin  the  Jesuit.  But  in  addition  to  a  copy  of  it  in  the  possession 
of  the  learned  Prelate  just  spoken  of,  there  is  another  preserved  in  the  Fagel  Library  of 
Trinity  College,  Dublin.  And  of  Bishop  Kidder's  work,  one  copy  may  be  met  with  in 
the  library  founded  by  Primate  Marsh,  near  St.  Sepulchre's,  in  that  city.  So  that  as  these 
works  are  confessedly  scarce,  it  is  desirable  to  present  the  reader  with  some  of  the  texts, 
as  they  are  rendered  in  the  French  Testament,  and,  at  the  same  time,  with  an  abridged 
view  of  the  comments  made  on  them  by  Bishop  Kidder.  This,  under  existing  circum- 
stances, is  the  more  to  be  desired,  as  the  Popish  Clergy  are  in  the  habit  of  inveighing 
against  the  Protestant  Version  of  the  Bible  ;  as  they  affect  to  say  that  Protestants  have 
no  Bible,  or  at  best,  but  an  adulterate  one;  as  they  scoff  and  deride  them  on  this  head ; 
and  as  they  likewise  boast  that  their  Church  has  been  the  faithful  preserver  of  those 
Divine  Oracles  But,  as  Bishop  Kidder  judiciously  remarks,  "  here  is  a  proof  of  their 
insincerity ;  here  is  what  may  convince  any  honest  man,  even  of  their  own  communion, 
who  is  willing  to  know  the  truth,  in  this  most  important  matter.  No  man  will  in  other 
cases  trust  a  cheat,  or  a  forger  of  Testaments  and  Deeds.  But  how  great  must  this 
wickedness  be,  when  the  Holy  Oracles  of  God  are  corrupted  to  serve  a  turn  ?" 

It  is  granted,  that  the  Popish  Church  of  Ireland  sanctions  the  use  of  no  other  than  the 
Rhemish  Bible,  (and  that,  too,  in  a  limited  degree,)  and  that  it  is  purged  of  many  of 
the  errors  and  corruptions  which  disgrace  the  Bourdeaux  one.  But  is  it  guided  even  by 
that  ?  Is  it  not,  on  the  contrary,  become  a  dead  letter ;  while  in  theory,  as  well  as  in 
practice,  they  adhere  to  the  falsifications  of  the  French  Divines  ?  So  that  what  has 
been  said  by  Bishop  Kidder  of  the  then  state  of  the  Popish  Clergy,  is,  after  a  lapse  of 
more  than  a  century,  applicable  to  the  existing  succession. 

The  few  passages  selected  here  from  the  French  New  Testament,  with  the  literal 
English  of  the  parts  corrupted,  fully  proves  the  justice  of  the  preceding  observations. 

Acts  xiii.  2.  Or  comme  ils  ofFroient  au  Seigneur  le  sacrifice  de  la  Messe,  et  qu'ils 
jeunoient,  le  S.  Esprit  leur  dit. 

"  Now  as  they  offered  unto  the  Lord  the  sacrifice  of  the  Mass,  &c." 

*  Baldwin  perceiving  that  the  Papal  Bibles,  (viz.  those  of  Sixtus  V.  and  of  Clemens)  united  to  overthrow 
the  boasted  infallibility  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  knowing  the  Bible  of  Sixtus  to  be  extremely  scarce,  boldly, 
though  not  unwisely,  affirmed,  that  it  was  never  published  at  all !    James's  Defence,  p.  34. 


PREFACE. 

xxxu 


The  foregoing  is  one  of  the  most  notorious  falsifications  to  be  found  in  the  French 
Translati  i  It  was  made  designedly  to  support  the  doctrine  of  «  the  Sacrifice  of  the 
Mass  "  Bv  it  the  Translators  departed  from  the  Vulgate,  as  well  as  from  the  English 
Protestant  Version.  *This  is  the  very  passage,  respecting  which  Monsieur  Veron,  when 
asked  why  he  wrested  it  from  its  natural  meaning,  replied,  because  he  had  been  often 
asked  by  Calvinists,  what  Scripture  affirmed  that  the  Apostles  said  Mass ! 

1  Cor.  iii.  15.  Si  l'ceuvre  de  quelqu'un  brule,  il  en  portera  la  perte,  mais  il  sera  sauve 
quant  a  luy,  ainsi  toutefois  comme  par  le  feu  du  Purgatoire. 

<c  but  be  shall   be  saved   as  to  himself;    yet  so,   as   by  the  fire  of 

Vurzatorij." 

^Here  they  have  added  to  the  text,  to  prove  the  existence  of  the  Limbus  Patrum. 


2  Cor.  vi.  14.  Ne  vous  joignez  point  par  Sacremcnt  de  Mariage  avec  les  Inndelles. 

1  Cor.  vii.   10.  ISIais  a  ceux  qui  sont  conjoints  par  le  Sacremcnt  de  Mariage,   Je 

leur  commando,  non  point  moy,  mais  le  Seigneur,  que  la  femme  ne  se  separe  point  du 

Mary. 

"  join  not  yourselves  by  the  Sacrament  of  Marriage,  &c. 

"  But  they  who  are  joined  by  the  Sacrament  of  Marriage,  &c." 

In  defence  of  Marriage  as  a  Sacrament,  they  also  corrupted  1  Tim.  iv.  3.  viz.  Con- 

damnans  le  Sacremcnt  de  Mariage,  &c.     See  also  Tit.  i.  6.  Because  Protestants  deny 

this   doctrine,  they  make    the  Apostles  thus  speak  against  them,  as  if  they  were   the 

Apostates  he  points  at. 

1  Tim.  iv.  1.  Or  l'Esprit  dit  clairement,  qu'en  derniers  temps  quelques  uns  se 
separeront  de  lafoy  llomaine,  s'adonnans  aux  esprits  d'erreur,  et  aux  doctrines  enseignees 
par  des  diables. 

"  Now  the  Spirit  distinctly  says,  in  the  latter  times,  some  shall  depart  from  the 
Roman  faith,  &c." 

Here  they  are  guilty  of  another  forgery,  for  the  purpose  of  representing  the  Church 
of  Rome  as  the  only  Catholic  Church. 

*  Simon's  Crit.  Hist,  of  the  New  Test.  p.  357. 


PREFACE.  XXxiii 

1  Jean.  v.  7-  Toutc  iniquite  est  peche,  mais  il  y  a  quelque  peche  qui  n'est  point 
mortel,  mais  vcniel. 

"  There  is  a  sin  that  is  not  mortal,  but  venial." 

Here  they  add  to  the  text  in  order  to  support  the  distinction  drawn  by  the  Church 
of  Rome,  between  mortal  and  venial  sins. 


2  Cor.  viii.  J 9.  Et  non  seulement  cela,  mais  aussi  il  a  este  ordonne  par  les  Eglises, 
compagnon  de  notre  Pelcrinagc,  &c. 

And  not  only  that,  but  was  also  appointed  by  the  Churches  the  companion  of 
our  Pilgrimage,  &c." 

In  this  passage  St.  Paul  merely  speaks  of  his  having  selected  a  brother  to  accompany 
him  on  his  travels  ;  yet  in  their  translation,  they  affect  to  shew  that  the  practice  of 
pilgrimage  is  warranted  by  Scripture.  They  elsewhere  introduce  Pelerins,  as  in 
3  John  i.  5,  &c. 


Heb.  xi.  30.  Par  la  foy  les  murs  de  Jericho  tomberent,  apres  une  procession  de  sept 
jours  tout  autour. 

'■  By  faith  the  walls  of  Jericho  fell  after  a  procession  of  seven  days." 
That  they  may  establish  the  antiquity  of  Popish  processions,  they  make  their  trans- 
lation speak  accordingly. 


In  their  rendering  of  1  Cor.  ix.  5,  after  the  words  "  have  we  not  power  to  lead 
about  a  sister,  a  wife;"  they  add,  pour  nous  servir  en  l'Evangile,  et  nous  souvenir 
de  se  biens  :  "  to  serve  us  in  the  Gospel,  and  relieve  us  out  of  her  goods" 


Luke  iv.  8.   Serviras  de  latrie  a  luy  seul. 

"  Thou  shalt  serve  him  only  with  latria" 

They  make  an  addition  here  to  the  text,  to  preserve  the  distinction  drawn  by  their 
Church  between  Dulia  and  Latria  ;  and  what  shews  their  inconsistency  is,  their  omit- 
ting it  in  another  text  (Matt.  iv.  10.)  exactly  parallel.  By  the  one  passage,  at  least,  they 
insinuate  that  there  is  ground  in  Scripture  for  the  worship  of  creatures. 


XXliv  PREFACE. 


In  2  Pet.  iii.   IJ.  The  Vulgate  reading  is  "  insipientium  errore ;"  yet  they  render  it 
erreur  de  medians  herctiques : — "  the  error  of  wicked  hereticks." 


Heb.  x.   10.  Par  laquclle  volonte  nous  sommes  sanctifiez,  a  scavoir  par  1'oblation  du 
corps  du  J.  C  une  fois  fait. 

11.  Et  tout  Sacrificateur  se  presente  chaque  jour  sacrifiant,   et  offrant  souvent  les 
memes  hostics,  lesqucllcs  ne  peuvent  jamais  oster  les  pechez. 

12.  Mais  ccttuy-cy  offrant  une  hostie  pour  les  pechez,  est  assis  pour  toussiours  a  la 
dextre  de  Dicu. 

18.  Or  ou  il  y  a  remission  d'icieux,   il  n'y  a  plus  maintenant  d 'oblation  legale,  pour 
le  peche. 

It  is  unnecessary  to  detain  the  reader  by  making  further  reference  to  this  singular 
compound  of  misrepresentation  and  falsehood. 

In  bringing  this  prefatory  matter  to  a  conclusion,  there  remains  only  one  point  to  be 
touched  on,  and  that  is,  the  reason  why  the  term  "  Catholic"  is  studiously  avoided  through- 
out these  pages,  and  other  terms,  which  may  be  thought  reproachful,  adopted.  The  assur- 
ance already  given  is  a  pledge,  that  it  has  been  done  without  any  intention  to  offend.  The 
term  Papist,  or  Romanist,  is  used  in  consequence  of  the  claim  set  up  by  Doctor  Milner,  and 
other  Popish  authors,  to  the  exclusive  appellation  of  Catholic  for  themselves,  and  for  those 
of  their  communion  ;   as  well  as  to  assert  a  right.     For  to  acknowledge  that  the  epithet 
'  Catholic'  is  appropriate  to  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  that  it  is  contradistinguished  in 
meaning  to  that  of  <  Protestant,'   would   be  an  act  of  criminal  acquiescence;  inasmuch 
as  it  would  imply,  that  the  Protestant  Church  did  not  belong  to,  and  was  not  within 
the  pale  of,  the  Catholic  Church  of  Christ.     It  is,  therefore,  imperative  op  Protestants, 
not  only  in  their  writings,  but  even  in  their  conversation,   to  discountenance,  in  every 
possible  way,  these  arrogant  pretensions  of  their  Popish  Brethren  to  exclusive  catholi- 
city. A  specimen  of  Doctor  Milner's  mode  of  reasoning  will  justify  the  caution.     *  "  If 
I  ask  you,   '  what  Church  you  profess  in  the  Apostle's  creed  to  believe  in  :'  you  answer 
me,  <  in  the  Holy   Catholic   Church.'     If  I   proceed  to  ask  you,  <  pray,  are  you  a 
Catholic  ?'     You  reply,  <  No,  I  am  a  Protestant.'     And  if  I  further  interrogate  you, 
'  is  there  any  place  in  this  town  where  the  Catholics  meet  to  perform  divine  worship  V 

•  Substance  of  a  Sermon  preached  at  the  blessing  of  the  Popish  Church  of  St.  Chad's,  in  the  town  of 
Birmingham,  in  Dec.  1809,  by  the  Right  Rev.  Dr.  Milner. 


PREFACE.  XXXY 

You  will  not  fail  to  point  out  this  Chapel,  or  else  that  other  Catholic  Chapel  on  the 
other  adjoining  hill.  Who  can  hear  this  without  exclaiming  in  admiration  :  <  How  is  it 
possible  that  you  believe  in  the  Catholic  Church,  without  being  yourself  a  Catholic ; 
and  even  while  you  acknowledge  there  are  persons  of  a  different  communion  from 
yourself,  who  are  Catholics  ?" 

Thus   it  appears,   that   Doctor  Milner,    under   the  flimsy  texture  of  a   sophism 
assumes  the  title  of  <  Catholic,'  as  a  right,  which  has  been,  even  by  his  own  admission,' 
m  his  <  Letters  to  a  Prebendary/  conceded  only  as  a  matter  of  courtesy. 


CONTENTS. 


SECT. 

The  Church - 

The  Blessed  Sacrament  and  the  Sacrifice  of  the  Mass 

The  Blessed  Sacrament  and  the  Altar 

Priests,  Priesthood,  and  Holy  Orders 1V- 

Authority  of  Priests 

The  single  lives  of  Priests ♦ 

Sacrament  of  Baptism 

Confession  and  Sacrament  of  Penance vnl- 

The  honour  of  the  Blessed  Lady  and  the  other  Saints , 1X- 

The  Distinction  of  Relative  and  Divine  Worship x- 

Sacred  Images,  and  the  use  of  them 

The  Limbus  Patrum  and  Purgatory 

Justification  and  the  Reward  of  Good  Works xm- 

Merit  and  Meritorious  Works 

Free-Will xv' 

xvi. 
Inherent  Justice 

Sufficiency  of  Faith  alone 

Apostolic  Traditions 

Sacrament  of  Marriage, • 

XX 

Miscellaneous  Subjects > 

Perpetual  Sacrifice  of  Christ's  Body  and  Blood 

Abjuratory  Clauses  examined 

Appendix 


4 

15 
16 
22 
30 
36 
38 
44 
50 
54 
66 

77 
81 

87 

93 

98 

102 

107 

109 

122 

124 
139 


ADDITIONAL  SUBSCRIBERS. 

The  Right  Hon.  and  Right   Rev.  the  Lord  Bishop  of  London,— 2  Copies. 
The   Hon.  and  Right  Rev.  the  Lord  Bishop  of  Derry,— 2  Copies. 

/ 


SYNOPSIS, 

&c.     &c.     &c. 
SECTION  /.—THE  CHURCH. 


Hook.  Ch.  Ver.Omr.  Greek.  Vulffate  Text.  .RhemishVersion.  Beza'sLatinText, 


Mat.  Xvi.    18.|Exx7ww 


xvni.  17 


Ephesians  v, 
23,  24,  25, 
27.  29-  32. 

Heb.  xii.  £3. 


Epb.  i.  22. 


rr,  iwXr,7\oi. 


rriv  EKxXr,(7Hx.ii 


TY)    tXKXyCTHZ 


TV  tv.yJiranx 


'.cclesiam 


Ecclesiai 


Ecclesiam 


Ecclesiae 


Ecclesias 


Church 


Church 


Church 


Church 


Church 


Ecclesiam 


Ecclesiai 


Ecclesiam 


Ecclesia: 


Ecclesia? 


Bps.  Bible,  1568 


'Congregation 


K.James'sBiblei6ir 


Church    (1) 


Congregation.!    Church    (2) 


'Congregation. 


Congregation. 


^Congregation.      Church  (b) 


Church    (3) 


Church    (4) 


Marked  thus  *  were  altered  to  their  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 

If     + 
0«     JL/iK?\Y}(TlOL*  Some  men's  wit,  it  has  been  remarked,  resembles  a  dark  lantern,  which  answers 

their  own  purpose,  and  guides  them  their  own  way  ;  but   is  never  known   to  enlighten  others.     Of 

this  description  is  the  wit,  with  which  f  Ward  prefaces  his  first  article.   It  suits  his  purpose  so  far  as  to 

lead  him  to  one  or  two  conclusions,  which  a  person  might  suppose  was  all  he  wanted;  but  leaves  no 

other  impression  on  the  mind,  than  that  his  arguments  are  as  weak  as  they  are  ridiculous. 

After  complaining   that  the  Protestant  Translators  suppressed  the  word  Catholic  in  the  title  of 

those  epistles  called  Catholicce  Epistolce,  in  the  two  English  Bibles  of  156'2  and  1577  ;    and  that,  in 

their  latter  translations,  they  changed  it  into  '  general :'  he  sneeringly  observes,   "  as  if  we  should  say 

in  our  creed,  we  believe  in  the  general  church/'  He  then  infers  the  necessity  of  translating,  "  according 

to  this  rule/'  the  question,   qua  itur  ad  Catholicam  ?   "  which  is  the  way  to  the  general  ?"    and  the 

words,  ergo   Catholici   sumus,  "   then   we  are  generals."     The   true  construction  of  the   word,  he 

maintains,  is  '  Catholic,'  and  appeals  to  the  authority  of  Eusebius,  in  support  of  his  assertion. 

%  Mintert  deduces  it  from  the  Hebrew   hr\p,   an  assembly,  and  not  from  txnetbia,  to  call  out. Parkh.  in  loc. 

t  Errata,  page  39, 


\  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

Now,  to  pass  over  the  wretched  quibbling  he  has  had  recourse  to  in  drawing  the  above  infe- 
rences. Ins  allegations  shall  be  considered  in  the  order  in  which  they  are  brought  forward.  First, 
ihen,  the  translators  of  the  bibles  alluded  to,  cannot  with  justice  be  said  "to  leave  out*'  the  word 
Catholic,  when  it  is  not  even  once  expressed  in  any  text  of  scripture.  Secondly,  it  is  a  great 
untruth  to  say,  that  Eusebius  mentions  the  Epistohr  Catlwliar  to  have  been  so  (-ailed  "ever  since  the 
Apostles' time ;"  as  on  this  head  he  is  altogether  silent ;  and  only  states  that,  in  his  oun  time,  they 
were  so  i-alled.  (Kcumenius,  a  writer  of  the  tenth  century,  in  his  preface  to  St.  James's  Epistle, 
cxpressK  savs,  Ctitholicw,  id  est  unrccrsales,  dieuntur  lnt\  §c.  "  these  Epistles  are  called  Catholic,  that 
is  universal  01;  'general."  Here  evidently  they  are  so  named,  in  consequence  of  their  not  being  par- 
ticularly addressed  to  any  one  church,  as  those  to  the  Romans,  Corinthians,  See.  but  generally  to  the 
faithful.  And,  thirdly,  the  Catholiecc  Epistolce  are  not  entitled  to  the  exclusive  appellation  of  Catho- 
lic, with  respect  to  the  doctrine  they  contain,  since  St.  Paul's  Epistles  furnish  doctrine  as  catholic,  or 
orthodox;   as  perfect  (wrSrf.os),  and  as  sound,   as  any  in  them. 

Ward's  next  charge  is,  that  in  the  first  English  Bibles  the  word  '  church'  was  suppressed,  "  that 
it  mi<j;ht  seem  to  the  ignorant  a  good  argument  against  the  authority  of  the  church."  The  English 
Creed,  drawn  up  by  the  Reformers  at  the  time,  in  which  profession  is  made  of  the  Catholic  'Church,' 
convincinglv  proves  that  not  to  be  the  cause,  why  that  word  was  omitted  in  those  first  editions  of  the 
bible.  Moreover,  in  whatever  text  the  word  '  congregation'  occurs,  a  marginal  note  is  added  to 
signifv,  that  by  that  term  is  meant  'church:'  a  further  proof  that  no  fraud  was  intended.  Finally, 
as  the  translators  rendered  the  Hebrew  word  *  bnp  ca/uil,  congregation,  in  the  Old  Testament, 
they  deemed  it  lit  to  retain  it  also  in  the  New  Testament,  that  the  ignorant  might  not  suppose  God 
had  no  church  under  the  old  dispensation.  Be  this  as  it.  may,  it  evidently  appears,  they  did  not 
suppress  ;  neither  did  they  depart  from  the  letter,  or  the  meaning  of  the  Holy  Ghost. 

St.  Luke  applies  the  term  ecclesia  to  Jews,  Christians,  and  Gentiles,  when  assembled  together. 
The  Rhemists  themselves  translated  it  assembly,  in  Acts  vii.  38,  and  in  one  or  two  places  beside.  But 
of  this,  as  might  be  expected,  Ward  takes  no  notice. 

What  has  been  stated  above,  has  been  offered  more  by  way  of  explanation,  than  as  an  apology  for 
the  first  translators  of  the  Protestant  Bible  having  rendered  the  Greek  word  mm™  '  congregation,' 
rather  than  '  church.'  It  is  sufficient  that  the  passages,  in  which  it  occurs,  were  altered  to  their 
present  reading,  in  the  last  authorised  version,  viz.  that  of  l6ll.  This,  however,  is  far  from 
satisfying  (Doctor  Milner.  who  insists  that  Thomas  Ward,  his  great  prototvpe,  iiains  his  cause,  if 
he  makes  his  charges  good,  though  it  he  only  with  respect  to  those  early  versions;  for,  to  adopt  his 
own  quotation  of  Ward,  "  the  change  was  made  too  late  to  answer  the  purpose.  The  people  were 
deceived  by  a  vast  number  of  corruptions  in  the  sacred  texts,  during  the  reipns  of  Henrv  VIII 
Edward  VI.  and  Elizabeth."  This  is  but  saying,  in  other  words,  that  the  grounds,  on  which  the. 
Reformation  was  effected,  are  thereby  invalidated;  that  the  first  Reformers  were  guilty  of  the  sin  of 
.ehism  ;  and  that  their  successors,  the  Protestants  of  the  present  day,  are  involved  therein.  Now, 
;'     tor  Milner  must,  at  least  ou-ht  to  know,  that  Protestants  do  not  justify  their  religious  tenets  by 

*  Congregalio.  C«tus.  Buxt. 
r  Sec  his  Inquiry  intj  certain  vulgar  opinions.  Second  edit.  p.  341 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  3 

arguments  derived  from  any  translation,  and  that  the  ORIGINAL  is  the  standard  by  which  they 
regulate  their  faith  and  practice.  If  he  be  a  man  of  candour,  he  will  admit,  that  even  taking  the 
words  objected  to  by  Ward,  in  his  first  article,  as  they  stand  in  the  early  translations  made  by  the 
English  Reformers,  no  fundamental  doctrine  is  dependent  thereon  ;  and  that  in  separating  from,  and 
protesting  against,  the  corruptions  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  the  Church  of  England,  as  a  separate 
branch  of  the  Church  of  Christ,  has  not  done  more  than  what  the  former  did  at  an  early  stage  of  its 
existence,  when  it  protested  against  the  usurpation  of  the  Bishop  of  Constantinople.  A  few 
words  will  answer  the  charge  of  the  sin  of  schism.— A  continuance  in,  would  have  been  more  sinful, 
than  a  separation  from,  a  church  in  the  corrupt  and  diseased  state  in  which  that  of  Rome  was  at  the 
time  of  the  Reformation. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver. 


Cant.  vi.  9. 


Orig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text. 


Una 


Rhemish  Version.  Beza's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  1568.  K.James'sBibleiGir 


One 


A.  Montanus      *  Alone 
(translates      thei 
Heb.  KM  ipsa.  I 


but  one 


(6) 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  the  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 

6.  Mid.  It  is  absurd  to  object  to  the  addition  of  "but"  which  in  no  way  whatever  affects  the  sense. 
A.  Montanus  translates  the  Hebrew  ««n  nrm  una  ipsa,  which  rather  favours  its  insertion.  Doctor 
Milner  says,  Ward  did  not  complain  of  this  word  being  "foisted"  into  the  text,  but  of  the  word  one 
being  changed  into  alone.  How  unfair  this,  to  renew  a  charge,  the  grounds  for  which  ceased  to  exist 
upwards  of  seventy  years  before  it  was  first  advanced  ? 


Book.  Ch.  Ver. 


Eph.i.  '23. 


Orig. Greek. j  Vulgate  Text. 


to  wA^-o^a  rtiplenitudoejus 
qui  omnia  in 
omnibus   ad- 


7TCIVTX    EC  "KXQl 

7rA>!§s^Eva, 


Rhemish  Version 


which    is  filled 
all  in  all. 


impletur. 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


Complementum 
ejus  qui  omnia  im- 
plet  in  omnibus.  A. 
Mont,  ejus  adim- 
plentis. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568.  K.James'sRibleiGii 


that   filleth, 
&c. 


thztfilleth, 
&c.  (7) 


7.  :  T8  7T?WS[JLSV2.  f  Montanus  and  Beza  understand  this  term  in  the  active  signification.  Coinci- 
dence of  opinion,  between  divines  of  such  opposite  ways  of  thinking,  is,  on  a  controverted  point,  almost 
decisive.     But  what  strengthens  the  case  is  this,  that  the  excellence  of  Montana's  bible,  arising  from 

X  Of  profane  writers   of   eminence,    Xenophon   and   Longinus  use    it  actively. 
1   In  his  notes  on  Theophylacfs  translation  of  the  word  «**!»<•«,  he  observes,  «  qui  adimplet,  vel  adimpletur,  verbum  enim 

est  medium,  &c." 
B    2 


A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


the  precise  adaptation  of  his  Latin  translation  to  the  Hebrew  text,  has  been  attested  by  the  most  cele- 
brated of  the  popish  universities;  and  that  he  himself  had  been  patronised  by  Philip  the  Second  of 
Spain,  a  monarch  every  way  disposed  to  encourage  popery.  Under  these  circumstances,  Montanus, 
surely,  will  not  be  suspected  of  promoting  the  cause  in  which  Beza  was  engaged. 

tErasmus  explains  vx^/mm  thus,  "  plenitudo  sive  impletio  ejus  qui  omnia  in  omnibus  implet."  Isi- 
dorus  Clarius,  too,  admits  it  may  be  taken  either  passively  or  actively.  But  beside  such  high  authority, 
the  very  nature  of  the  passage  requires  it  to  be  taken  actively,  as  thereby  an  unnecessary  repetition  is 
avoided,  and  the  government  of  warn*  is  ascertained.  To  the  want  of  this  grammatical  accuracy  it  is 
owing,  that  Chrysostom's  exposition  is  so  forced  ;  for,  according  to  it,  7r«mt  is  put  absolutely,  or  with- 
out any  governing  word.      However,  his  sense  of  the  passage  is  the  very  one  which  Beza  follows. 

-|  Ward  observes,  "  but  thus  (viz.  passively)  they  will  not  translate,  '  because/  says  Beza,  e  Christ, 
needs  no  such  .{compliment,1  and  if  he  need  it  not,  then  he  may  be  without  a  church."'  Nothing 
can  be  more  dishonest  than  to  suppress  the  words  per  sc  (of  himself,  i.  e.  in  respect  of  his  divine 
nature)  on  which  the  meaning  of  the  passage  principally  rests,  and  then  to  draw  a  conclusion 
directly  opposite  to  the  one  intended.  Beza's  words  are,  "  ut  sciamus  Christum  per  se  non  indigere 
hoc  supplemento,  &c."  This  is  not  saying  that  Christ  may  be  "  a  head  without  a  body,"  nor  alluding, 
by  the  most  distant  implication,  to  the  invisibility,  or  the  non-existence,  of  the  church,  for  many 
years,  as  Ward  asserts.  Besides,  let  the  reader  attend  to  what  Beza  elsewhere  advances,  and  then 
judge  whether  a  garbled  quotation  from  his  Comments  does  him  justice.  "  Is  enim  est  Christi  in 
eeelesiam  amor,  ut  cum  omnia  omnibus  ad  plenum  pnustet,  tamen  se  velut  mancum  et  mutilum  putat, 
nisi  eeelesiam  sibi  habeat  adjunctam-"  and  then  subjoins,  "  non  ideo  ecclesia  est  Christi  w^-w/xa,  quod 
Christus  tkr  se  ea  carere  non  potest,  is  enim  potius  earn  implet,   &c." 

As  to  the  insinuation  thrown  out  by  Ward,  in  an  accompanying  note,  it  will  suffice  to  remark, 
that  during  the  entire  period  of  L300  years,  commencing  with  the  Christian  era,  there  existed, 
without  interruption,  a  church  which  always  protested  against  the  corruptions  of  Christianity,  although 
it  had  not  assumed  a  settled  and  determinate  shape  before  the  expiration  of  that  period. 


SECTIOX  //-Till:  BLESSED  SACRAMENT  AND  THE  SACRIFICE  OF  THE  MASS. 


Book.Ch.  Vcr.jOrig.  Greek.!  Vulgate  Text.  jRhemishVersion.  Beza's  LatinTextBps.  Bible,  15C8.'K.James'sBiblei6'ii 


Mat.xxvi.'iti. 


y.x;  n},oyr,7Xi 


Mark  xi v.  22 


s/r.ccc; 


et  benedixit. 

and  blessed 

et  cum  bene- 
dixisset. 

A.  M.  et  be- 
nedieens. 

*and    when 

lie   had  '  given 
thanks.' 

and  blessed  (8) 

et  benedicens 

and  blessing 

et  cum  bene- 

*and  when  lie  had 

and  blessed  (9) 

dixisset. 

'given  thanks.' 

Marked  thus  *  were  altered  to  their  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 
8  and  0.   St.  Paul,§  and  St.  Luke.'j  who  must  be  considered  the  best  interpreters  of  the  other  two 

X    See  Annotations  on  the  New  Testament,  page  .533.  -)•  Errata,  page  39. 

*  To  give  '  cvnp.  ment'  as  a  translation  of  complementum  must,  it  is  conceded,  be  a  typical  error,  rather  than  have  proceeded 
from   ignorance  in   Ward,  or    his   Editor.  §    1  Cur.  xi.  24.  ||  xxii.  10. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  5 

evangelists,  SS.  Mathew  and  Mark,  use  the  word  «^«?nj«*s.  So  that  a  comparison  of  the  above 
references  with  *  those  belonging  to  the  present  article,  will  prove  to  demonstration  that  the  bread 
was  only  blessed  by  giving  thanks  over  it, — a  circumstance  indicative  of  that  action  not  being  directed 
to  the  bread.  The  Papists  contend,  that  at  the  utterance  of  the  blessing,  the  elements  receive  a 
change,  and  quote  1  Sam.  ix.  13,  as  a  proof  of  it.  Here,  because  the  word  "  bless"  is  construed  with 
the  meat  of  the  feast,  it  must,  forsooth,  receive  some  strange  nature  and  substance,  whereas  Samuel 
did  not  pray  for  any  change  in  the  meat,  but  that  it  might  be  wholesome  to  the  guests. 

f  Ambrose  affirms,  that,  through  blessing,  the  nature  of  the  elements  is  changed,  i.  e.  not  the 
matter  of  bread  and  wine  ;  but  that  what  was  before  common  is  by  that  means  ordained  for  a  heavenly 
use. 

;|;Ward  repeats  Gregory  Martin's  quotations  from  some  of  the  Fathers,  in  support  of  the  doctrine 
of  §transubstantiation.  Irenaeus,  he  says,  thus  expounds  :  "  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:"  and  St.  Basil  and  St.  Chrysostom,  in  their  liturgies,  "  bless,  O  Lord,  the  sacred 
bread  ;"  and  "  bless,  O  Lord,  the  sacred  cup;  changing  it  by  thy  holy  spirit."  In  these  passages, 
Ward  observes,  "  are  signified  the  consecration  and  transmutation  thereof  (scil.  of  bread  and  wine) 
into  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ."  Such  is  the  language  of  the  Popish  clergy  of  the  present  day, 
who  hold  that  the  consecration  entirely  consists  in  the  utterance,  or,  as  ||Fulke  quaintly  expresses  it,  in 
"  the  magicall  murmuration"  of  the  words,  hoc  est  Corpus  Maun,  (which  are  words  neither  of  prayer 
nor  thanksgiving,)  over  the  bread  by  a  priest,  with  the  intent  of  consecrating.  But  by  the  explana- 
tions set  forth  in  the  above  quotations,  Protestants  are  willing  to  abide,  as  no  meaning  different  from 
what  they  ascribe  to  them  is  thence  deducible.  They  agree  with  the  Greek  liturgies,  that  the  crea- 
tures of  bread  and  wine  are,  by  the  operation  of  the  divine  spirit,  changed  into  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ,  after  a  divine  and  spiritual  manner;  and  with  Irenaeus,  that  prayer  and  thanksgiving  effect  this 
blessing. 

But  as  Irenaeus's,  Basil's,  and  Chrysostom's  writings  are  adduced  by  Ward  as  advocating  the  doctrine 
of  transubstantiation,  it  shall  be  proved,  that  their  sentiments  on  the  Eucharist  have  been  grossly  mis- 
represented, waving  all  reference  to  the  passages  already  cited  ;  and  that  they  did  not  understand  the 
matter  differently  from  the  Church  of  England  at  this  day.  Those  great  luminaries  of  the  primitive 
Church,  who  must  be  deemed  the  best  expounders  of  their  own  thoughts,  it  is  maintained,  never 
understood  the  change  that  took  place  in  the  Eucharist  to  signify  the  gross,  corporeal  presence  of 
Christ;  nor  have  they,  as  will  presently  appear,  left  room  for  either  doubt  or  conjecture  on  this 
subject,  in  particular. 

First,  Iremeus  held  no  such  opinion  as  that  attributed  to   him  by  Ward;  for  if  he  did,  he  would 

*  See  column  Original  Greek,  numbers  8  and  9.  t  Lib,  3.c.  5.  de  Sacram. 

X  Errata,  page  41. 

§  Ward  uses   the   words  "  real  presence"  as  if  Protestants  denied  Christ's  being  really  present  in  the  sacrament,  after  a 
spiritual  manner.     They  deny,  indeed,  that  he  is  present  (sensualiter)  so  as  to  be  the  object  of  the  senses. 

||  Defenfe  of  the  true  Translations  of  the  Holie  Scriptures.  Ch.  xvii.  §.  5.  p.  43/. 


G  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

not  have  considered  the  elements,  in  the  Eucharist,  to  have  retained,  like  other  food,  their  nutritive 
properties.  His  words  are,  §"  When,  therefore,  the  cup  which  is  mixed,  and  the  bread  which  is 
made  receives  the  word  of  God,  and  the  Eucharist  becomes  the  body  of  Christ,  and  from  than 
the  .substance  of  our  bodies  is  increased,  and  acquires  consistence,  fyc.  ' 

Next ;  Basil,  it  is  equally  clear,  held  no  such  opinion,  as  in  his  comments  on  the  xxxivth  Psalm, 
v.  8th.  (the  xxxiii.  in  the  original)  he  thus  expresses  himself.  *"  We  have  often  observed  that  the  opera- 
tions of  the  mind  are  calted  by  the  same  names  as  those  of  the  outxeard  members.  But  as  our  Lord 
is  the  true  bread,  and  his  flesh  is  the  true  meat,  it  is  necessary  that  the  delightful  pleasure  which  we 
receive  from  that  Bread,  should  be  conveyed  to  us  by  our  tasting  it  spiritually."  Lastly :  St. 
Chrysostom's  declaration  against  the  popish  doctrine  is  even  more  pointedly  direct.  It  is  this;  |"  But 
what  lie  calls  bread  is  his  saving  doctrines  (alluding  to  where  Christ  calls  himself  the  bread  of  life), 
and  the  faith  in  him  and  his  bodv :  for  both  strengthen  the  mind."  And  in  another  part  of  his 
works,  the  same  Father  is  no  less  explicit  on  this  subject.  ;j;"  Since,  therefore,  the  Word  says,  this 
is  my  body  :  let  us  both  obey  and  believe,  and  look  upon  it  ivilh  the  eyes  of  the  understanding,  or 
spirit.  For,  what  Christ  delivered  has  nothing  to  do  with  the  senses;  but  although  joined  with 
sensible  objects,  all  is  spiritual.  Thus  in  baptism,  also,  &c."'  The  reader  must,  on  a  perusal  of 
these  passages,  be  convinced  that  Wards  statement  is  intended  to  deceive,  and  that  he  deservedly 
forfeits  all  pretensions  to  candour  and  truth  ;  as  the  Fathers,  whose  authority  he  quotes,  instead  of 
countenancing,  condemn,  as  far  as  their  testimony  goes,   the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation. 

And  here  it  may  not  be  impertinent  to  remark,  that  the  last  quotation  made  from  St.  Chrysostom's 
works  happens  to  be  one  that  exhibits  as  strong  an  instance  of  literary  imposture  as  any  that  disgraces 
the  writings  of  popish  authors,  either  ancient  or  modern.  Mr.  Fletcher,  in  his  remarks  on  the 
Bishop  of  Durham's  ^pamphlet,  not  being  able  to  establish  his  positions  with  all  that  fulness  of  evi- 
dence, which  should  ever  accompany  controverted  points,  betakes  himself  to  the  vile  contrivance  of 
mutilating  the  text  to  effect  that  purpose.  As  he  evidently  acted  on  the  detestable  principle,  that  "  the 
end  justifies  the  means;"'  it  is,  to  be  sure,  not  surprising,  that  he  has  not  been  scrupulous  as  to  the 
mode  of  attaining  it.  He  omits  the  sentences  marked  in  italics  in  the  above  quotation  from  Chrysos- 
tom's Homilies,  on  which  the  Father's  meaning  principally  rests,  and  thus  gives  a  new  turn  to  the 
sense  of  the  passage,  and  widely  different  from  that  intended.  This  scandalous  attempt  to  impose  on 
the   public  has,  by  the  judicious  research  of  ||Mr.  Le  Mesurier,  been  detected  and  reprobated,  as  it 

§  'Owoli    «>    xat    to    y.j£<xu£iox    TTofojsioy    x.*i    o    yty-yu^   u^rcq   nnhyzjxi    rot   Xoyoy    ra    0e8,    v.cli    ymTxi    v   ivyx^nx  to  au^ux.    Xf'ra,   ia 
rarui   01  a.dn  y.x\   o-wirxTxi   rj  t«  c-agxc?  yjjjmv   'worctmi;,  8cc.  lib.  5,  c.  2,  p.  3Q6,  advers.  haeres. 

*    Ilo/./.a^a  Ti~W.xiJ.ir,     oti    T0»$  t|fc&s»  uiXi~i»  i{XU)yo^uK  ai  t»«    f^X^    WgHTXyopVQnoU    5W/KE»$.       EflK/  $t  agTOf  £fW  a^uS»W5  0  KtfgtOf  v/tut, 

y.-x\  v  oxg  at/Ta  al.rfr,:  jfi  fyvo-K;,  xyxy.fr>  rnv  'noom  t»$  wf gwrvnjj  ts  «§th  hoc  ytvueu$  qp»  NOHTHE  e/ym<70a».  Basil.  Oper.  Tom.  i. 
p.  148. 

-I  AfTi,  c:  r.jet  -a.  SiyixxTa.  Ktyet  itlxv&ot  ix  aurnptx,  xxi  t»v  w*r«  tut  £K  xvroy,  n  to  aupct.  to  txvra.  A^cporifx  yxgtsvgoh  t~>  fv^y. 
Chrys.  Oper.  Tom.  viii.  p.  270. 

f  Y.TTU  ovy  0  Aoy,<  $r,~;,  tuto  e r*  to  auax  y.a ,  xxi  7T£i9^fSa,  xai  m-tvupty,  kxi  NOHTOIS  AYTO  BAEIinMEN  O*0AAMOII. 
Ov&n  yzi>  mrbrrw  itx^Wiy   V"    '"    X?r<",   ***'   aio-fcwn  ^   v^etyfutnv   nANTA    h    NOHTA.      Chrys.  Horn,   in    Mat.  lxxxii.  §.  4. 

p.  787. 

§  Grounds  on  which  the  Church  of  England  separated  from  the  Church  of  Rome,  reconsidered. 
ij  See  his  admirable  Treatise  on  the  doctrine  of  the  Eucharist,  page  122. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  7 

should.  It  is,  indeed,  a  fact  of  that  description  which  needs  but  be  known  to  be  reprobated  ;  and 
every  person  who  regards  fairness  and  good  faith,  in  cases  of  such  moment,  must  participate  in 
that  gentleman's  manly  and  indignant  feelings  upon  this  subject. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.lOrig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text.  RhemishVersion.  Beza's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  1568, 


Acts  iii.  2  1 


w&j  tfgais*  'quern  oportet  whom   Heaven!  quern  oportet  *whom  Heaven 
quidem       iruly  must  re-ccelo  capi.  mustcontain. 

ccelum  susci- ceive. 
pere.         [ 


K.James'sBibleifin 


whom  Heaven 
must  receive  (10) 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  the  present  reading  A.  D.l'il  1. 


10.  Ov  OBI  SpCZVOVi  &c.  Doctor  Milner's  opinion  coincides  with  Ward's,  that  this  text  has  rela- 
tion  to  Christ's  presence  on  the  altar,  and  that  it  has  been  translated,  \\"guem  oportet  Ccelo  capi"  to  favour 
the  Protestant  system.  This  remark,  as  it  is  pointed  at  the  Protestants  of  the  present  day,  is  extremely 
illiberal.  He  might  as  well  arraign  them  of  all  the  errors  into  which  their  excessive  zeal  led  Luther, 
Calvin,  and  others,  who  bore  a  distinguished  part  in  the  Reformation.  Admitting  Beza  to  be  wrong 
in  his  translation  of  the  passage  '<>»  *«,  &e.  and  that  the  English,  which  is  the  same  in  both  Protestant 
and  Popish  Bibles,  is  right ;  still  it  is  not  by  these  the  point  at  issue  would  be  determined,  but  by  the 
Greek.  But  in  what  does  this  imputed  error  in  Beza's  translation  consist  ?  Why,  in  the  resolution 
of  an  active  into  a  passive  verb,  which  may  be  done,  as  every  Latinist  knows,  without  at  all  affecting 
the  sense.  It  would  be  idle  to  ask  Doctor  Milner,  who  so  strenuously  defends  all  Ward's  positions, 
but  let  the  question  be  put  to  any  ingenuous  and  well-informed  mind,  whether  this  passage,  taken 
separately,  or  in  connection  with  what  precedes  and  follows  it,  either  favours  or  disfavours  the  doc- 
trine of  transubstantiaiion  ?  St.  Peter  had  nothing  of  the  kind  in  view.  Gregory  Nazianzen,  speaking 
of  Christ's  being  contained  in  Heaven,  says,  f"  For  he  must  reign  until  then,  and  be  received  in 
"  Heaven  until  the  times  of  the  restitution."  And  Chrysostom,  to  whom  Ward  so  confidently  appeals, 
as  advocating  this  monstrous  doctrine,  in  saying,  ;];"  That  Christ  ascending  into  Heaven,  both  left  us 
his  flesh,  and  yet  ascending  hath  the  same;"  only  speaks  of  the  ineffable  manner  in  which  Christ  is 
spiritually  present,  although  corporeally  absent.  That  this  is  the  case,  and  that  Ward  has  erroneously 
interpreted  the  passage  just  cited,  will  further  appear,  by  the  following  one  from  the  same  Fathers 
writings.  §"  We  may  see  the  people  dyed,  and  made  red,  with  the  precious  blood  or  Christ,  which 
as  it  is  not  with  the  eye  of  the  body,  but  with  the  eye  of  faith,  so  is  Christ  that  is  corporeally  pre- 
sent in  Heaven,   spiritually  present  unto  the  faith  of  the  worthy  receiver." 

To  what  has  been  already  said  on  this  article,  it  may  not  be  superfluous  to  add  that  which  Ward 


])  Sec  column,  '  Beza's  Latin  Text.' 

+  <$*£»  yz^   ctnot   fixcrfrsvtui   a.'/g\   t«Je,   xcu    vjt     ovgatvw  h^jgr^xt  <%xe>  Xi0,x'1  xv-jy-nrarcKreui;.     Serm.  SeCUUu,  de  nllO. 
X  Horn.  2.  ad  popul.  Antioch,  x1  Lib,  3.  de  Sacerdotio. 


8  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

would  lead  his  reader  to  suppose  might  be  converted  into  a  query  next  to  being  unanswerable.  *"  If," 
says  he,  "  we  should  ask  Protestants,  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  ;  perhaps,  by  this  doctrine  of  theirs,  they  would  be  put  to  a  stand."  That  this 
assumption  is  founded  in  ignorance,  or  something  worse,  will  appear  by  stating  St.  Luke's  narrative  to 
which  Ward  alludes,  where  not  a  word  of  Christ's  personal,  or  corporeal  presence  is  even  once 
mentioned,  t"  And  as  he  (viz.  St.  Paul)  journeyed,  he  came  near  Damascus:  and  suddenly  there 
shined  round  about  him  a  light  from  Heaven,  &c."  and  he  "  heard  a  voice,  &c."  The  light  and 
voice  only  presented  themselves  to  his  senses  ;  Christ  had  at  that  time  ascended  into  Heaven,  and 
will  thence  descend  at  the  last.  day.  This,  not  less  than  his  promise  to  be  with  his  Church  to 
the  end  of  the  world,  in  the  Person  of  the  Comforter,  or  Holy  Spirit,  who  would  J' guide  it  into  all 
truth,'  clearly  proves  his  residence  on  earth  to  be  only  a  spiritual  one. 


Book.  Ch.  Vcr. 

Jeremiah    xi, 
19- 


()ri'r.  Greek. 


.;     rev    upiot 


Hcb.  nrvntyj 


Vulirate  Text.  RhemishVersion 


mittamus  lig- 
num  in    pa- 

nem  ejus. 
Pagninus 

renders  it, — 
Corrumpa- 
mus  cibum 
veneno. 


let  us  cast  wood 
upon  his  bread. 


Beza's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  15GS 


A.  Mont,  cor 
rumpamus  lig 
num     in    pane 
-jus. 


let  us  destroy 
the  tree  with 
the  fruit  there- 
of. 


K.James'sBibleiGii 


let  us  destroy  the 
tree  with  the  fruit 
thereof.  (11) 


11.  LctbaA^LtSy,  The  intelligent  reader  is  referred  by  Doctor  Milner  to  Ward's  notes  on 
this  text,  (being  one  of  the  three  he  alludes  to,)  as  sufficient  to  convince  him,  that  the  Prophet  Jere- 
miah s  meaning  is  such,  as  is  there  stated:  at  least  so  much  may  be  inferred  from  what  he  says  in  his 
§Inquiry.  This  certainly  is  vouching  more  for  Ward,  than  could  be  said  of  any  individual  since  the 
days  of  Jeremiah  ;  when,  if  at  all,  the  phrase  he  made  use  of,  was  understood.  But  what  says  this 
favourite  expositor  of  Doctor  M.  ?  Why,  that  St.  Hierom  considered  the  passage  to  have  a  prophetical 
allusion  to  Christ's  ||"  body  in  the  blessed  sacrament ;"  and  that  St.  Paul,  a  still  higher  authority,  in 
his  first  epistle  to  the  %  Corinthians,  called  his  body,  bread.  "  So  that,  both  in  the  Prophet  and  the 
Apostle,  his  bread  and  his  body  is  all  one."  Now,  it  may  be  here  observed,  that  the  Father's 
exposition  is  both  forced  and  unnatural,  and,  what  is  remarkable,  uncommonly  brief;  indeed,  this  very 
circumstance  demonstrates,  as  strongly  as  any  thing  can,  the  difficulty  he  found  in  interpreting  the 
passage.  And,  as  to  the  Apostle,  if  the  intelligent  reader  will  attentively  weigh  his  words,  he  will 
discover  as  strong  grounds  for  supposing,  that  the  sacramental  bread,  the  fo  «ro{  (which,  St.  Paul  says, 
is  emblematical  of  the  '  many  '  disciples  constituting  one  Christian  society),    is  there  stated  by  him  to 


*  Errata,  page  41. 
i  Page  345,  note  :■). 


f  Acts  ix.  3.  and  4.  also  xxii.  6  and  7. 
1)  Errata,  page  41. 


X  St.  John  xvi.  13. 

%  C.  10.  v.  10'  and  1/. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN   1611.  9 

represent  his  own  body,  as  that  of  Christ.  The  Apostle's  meaning,  then,  which  is  equally  clear  and 
explicit,  is  no  elucidation  of  the  Prophet's  allusion,  which  is  in  itself  obscure  ;  not  affording  a  sha- 
dow of  support  to  that  creature  of  the  brain, — the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation. 

lorra  \y  rmTO:.  The  Latin  version  of  this  phrase  is  given  in  the  columns  as  it  stands 
in  the  Vulgate,  and  in  the  Bibles  of  Pagninus  and  Arias  Montanus.  The  -interpretations  also,  it  has 
given  rise  to,  are  still  more  various.  According  to  some ;  '  let  us  destroy  him  with  wood  instead  of 
bread  ;  i.  e.  let  us  famish  him  in  a  close  prison,  or  in  the  stocks,  &c.'  According  to  others ;  '  let  us 
mix  poison  with  his  meat ;  or  starve  him  ;  or  beat  him,'  (baculos  gustet).  They,  however,  all  bear  to 
this  one  point;  let  us,  some  way  or  other,  put  an  end  to  the  prophet  and  his  prophecy:  "  let  us,"  to 
use  his  own  words,  "cut  him  off  from  the  land  of  the  living,  that  his  name  may  be  no  more  remem- 
bered." In  this  figurative  manner  the  prophet  expressed  himself,  when  he  treated  of  the  schemes 
laid  for  his  destruction  by  the  men  of  Anathoth,  who  were  offended  at  his  prophesying  such  sharp 
things  against  Judah. 

Such  is  the  clear  and  literal  interpretation  adopted  by  the  Church  of  England,  and  which  is  so 
well  expressed  by  her  translators,  viz.  "Let  us  destroy  the  tree  with  the  fruit  thereof."  Very  different 
is  the  exposition  borrowed  by  Ward,  according  to  which  he  tortures  the  sense  of  scripture,  solely  that 
he  may  accommodate  it  to  his  particular  purpose.  Where  Jerome  expounds,  <k  let  us  put  the  cross  upon 
his  bread,"  Ward  considers  it  to  mean  "  upon  his  very  natural  body  that  hung  on  the  cross."  Jerome's 
interpretation  has  been  already  stated  to  be  forced  and  unnatural ;  nor,  indeed,  is  Ward's  application  of 
it  less  so;  as,  evidently,  the  cross  was  not  put  upon  Christ,  but  Christ  was  put  upon  the  cross.  It  is 
still  a  wilder  conjecture  to  apply  it  to  the  sacrament,  which  Papists  call  bread;  and  yet,  according  to 
the  Popish  notion,  is  not  bread! 

It  is  rather  questionable,  whether  Jerome  consulted  the  Hebrew  text  or  not,  as  he  does  not  point 
out,  in  his  usual  way,  in  what  respect  it  and  the  Septuagint  Greek  differ. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver 


Genesis  xiv. 

3  8. 


Orig.  Greek. 


acTaj  y.a.\  oinov 
&C. 


Vulgate  Text. 


At  vero  Mel- 
chesidech  rex 
Salem,  Drofe- 
renspaneme! 
vinum,  era; 
enim  Sacer 
dos&c.PAGN. 
reads,  '  pro 
tulir,  (Scc.'and 
again,  'e^ipse 
erat.' 


RhemishVersion. 


But  Melchesi- 
dech,  the  king 
ofSalem,  'bring 
ing  forth'  bread 
and  wine,  '  for' 
he  was  the  priest 
.tc. 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


A.  M.    for 
gives  eduxit 


Bps.  Bible,  156S 


'brought  forth,' 
&c. 
'  and,'  Sec. 


K.James'sBible  1611 


And  Melchize- 
dek,  king  of  Sa- 
lem, '  brought 
forth'  bread  and 
wine;  '  and'  he 
was  priest  of  the 
most  high  God. 
(12) 


*  That  followed  by  the  Protestant  Translators  seems  to  be  this  :  "  dejiciamus  arborem  cum  J'ructu  suo.     Phrasis  Ytf,   &c.  de 
dejectione  et  extirpatione  arborum,  Deut.  xx.  19.  accipitur."  Pol.  Annot.   in  loc. 

C 


10 


A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


12.  2%r,VSyK£  TOV  CtP70V,kc.  *  Ward  observes,  "  if  Protestants  should  grant  Melchise- 
dek's  typical  sacrifice  of  bread  and  wine,  then  would  follow  also  a  sacrifice  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment." Protestant,  will  not,  nor  indeed  should  Papists,  contravene  the  opinion  of  some  of  the 
most  eminent  of  the  Fathers,  who,  in  treating  of  Mefchisedek's  oblation  of  bread  and  wine,  spoke 
of  it  as  a  sacrifice  of  thanksgiving  only.  It  carries  an  absurdity  on  the  face  of  it,  to  say,  that  the 
Popish  sacrifice,  which  is  neither  bread  nor  wine,  resembles  that  of  Melchisedek,  which  consisted 

of  both. 

The  Hebrew  verb  nsraim,  which  occurs  in  the  book  of  -{-Judges,  and  which  is  but  a  different 
inflexion  of  that  under  consideration,  evidently  does  not  import  sacrifice ;  although  there 
Gideon  bade  the  angel  tarry,  until  he  brought  him  a  gift,  or  oblation,  from  his  house.  Pagninus 
renders  it  ct  educam,  and  this  version  is  confirmed  by  Montanus.  X  Bonfrerius,  one  of  Pole's  sacred 
critics,  thus  interprets  the  act:  "  hoc  tantum  animo  fuit  Gideon,  ut  hospiti  cibum  apponeret." 
Bishop  Patrick  subscribes  to  this  opinion.  It  is  likewise  rendered,  by  the  same  Greek  word,  (viz. 
«,WW)  in  the  Ixx.  as  the  other.  So  that  if  it  were  exclusively  confined  to  this  signification,  that, 
whatever  is  brought  forth  is  a  sacrifice;  there  would  be  more  sacrifices  than  ever  God  ordained. 
Now  as  to  *rcnn  in  the  present  text,  Montanus  translates  it,  eduxit,  which  seems  to  be  its  exact 
meaning.  §  Ambrose,  whom  Pagninus  follows,  uses  the  word  protulit.  ||  Augustin,  fl  Cyprian,  and 
the  vulgar  Latin,  read  proferens.  **  Josephus  says,  in  his  remarks  on  the  passage,  "  ministravit 
exercitui  xenia."  And,  lastly,  ttJeromc>  not  offering  any  opinion  of  his  own,  merely  states  the 
judgment  of  others ;  "  Melchisedek  vie  tori  Abraham  obviam  processerit,  et  in  refectionem,  tarn 
ipsius,  quam  pugnatorum  ipsius,  panes  vinumque  protukrit"  Hence  we  may  conclude,  that 
Melchisedek's  bringing  forth  bread  and  wine  to  Abraham,  was  purely  an  act  of  hospitality,  and 
involved  no  one  consideration,  as  Popish  expositors  would  fain  have  it,  of  the  sacerdotal  office. 
If  it  did,  it  is  natural  to  suppose,  that  a  word,  somehow  expressive  of  the  sacrifice,  would  have 
been  adopted  by  Moses,  instead  of  one,  which  bears  no  relation  to  it  whatever.  But  were  the  above- 
mentioned  interpreters,  and  all  others,  to  expound  the  bringing  forth  bread  and  wine,  as  pertaining 
to  the  priesthood ;  to  them,  the  individual  authority  of  St.  Paul  may  be  opposed.  In  his  epistle  to 
the  XX  Romans,  and  particularly  in  that  to  the  §§Hebrews,  he  fully  demonstrates  in  what  fUsense 
Christ  is  to  be  considered  as  "  a  priest  for  ever  after  the  order  of  Melchisedek  ;"  that  he  is  not  so 
by  offering  himself  for  ever  in  behalf  of  his  people,. but  by  interceding  for  them  always.  But, 
beside  that  St.  Paul  is  sufficiently  explanatory  in  the  passages  alluded  to,  as  to  the  nature  of  the 
priesthood  ;  it  cannot  be  thought  of  for  a  moment,  that  he,  under  the  immediate  impulse  of  the 
divine  spirit,  would  omit  to  mention  so  striking  a  circumstance  as  a  sacrifice  of  bread  and 
wine,  particularly  when  he  was  relating  the  resemblances,  which  he  discovered  Melchisedek  bore 
*o  Christ. 

Ward  closes  this  article  with. a  censure  on  the  Protestant  Translators*  for  having  rendered  the 

•  Errata,  page  41.  f  c-  6.  v.  IS.  +  Vid;  Poli  Synopsin  in  loc. 

}  Demyster.  initiand.  j|  De  tit.  xxxiii.  Psal.  f  Ep.  ad  Coecil.  **  Vid.  Scholas.  Histor.  c.  64. 

-ft  Ep.  ad  Evagr.  ij  C.  8.  v.  34.  ^  C.  ?.  and  c.  10.  v.  12,  13,  14;  Jf  Vid.  Macknight  in  loc. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


1! 


Hebrew  particle  (i)  and,  "  in  this  place,  when  in  other  places  they  translate  it,  (enirri)  for/'  It  is  not 
possible  to  conceive  a  weaker  or  more  absurd  observation  than  this.  Vau  certainly  is  sometimes 
used  as  a  causal,  (viz.  for,  because,)  and  sometimes  as  a  copulative  conjunction,  but  never  has  any 
force  of  itself  to  create  either  signification,  since  it  must  be  expounded  according  to  the  sense 
of  the  passage  where  it  occurs.  A.  Montanus,  whose  authority  should  not  be  rejected 
by  the  Popish  clergy,  here  too,  follows  the  reading  of  Pagninus.  scil,  et.  In  the  epistles 
already  referred  to,  Cyprian  reads  thus,  "  fmt-autem  sacerdos  :"  and  Jerome,  erat  autem  sacerdos,  &c. 
"  and  he  was  the  priest."  Notwithstanding  this  agreement,  their  exposition,  in  particular,  is 
quoted  by  Ward. 

Insulated  references  to  the  voluminous  works  of  the  Fathers  are  well  calculated  to  mislead, 
and  when  the  nature  of  these,  and  others  still  more  specious,  which  may  be  frequently  met  with 
in  the  Errata,  is  considered,  it  will  argue  no  want  of  charity  to  say,  that  they  have  been  made 
with  that  intention.  The  effect,  however,  will  be  the  same,  whether  the  case  be  so,  or  not;  as  not 
one,  in  one  hundred,  of  the  Popish  Clergy,  into  whose  hands  Ward's  book  has  fallen,  will  either  con- 
sult the  originals  themselves,  or  question  the  accuracy  of  his  selections. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver 


Proverbs 
ix.  5. 


Proverbs 
ix.  2. 


Or  ig.  Greek. 


XXI  9HETE  OtWK  OV 

Heb.  »riDDD 


Vulgate  Text. 


rx,  vitgxaiv  si? 

X^Tl)^*  TO* 

la,VTV)<;ou>ov,&zc 
Heb.  nUDD 


.  .  .et  bibite, 
vinum  quod 
miscuivobis 
Pagx.  gives 
only,  '  mis 
cui.' 


Immolavit 
victimas 
suas,  mis- 
cuit    vinum 
Pagn.  victi 
mam  suam. 


Rhemish  Version. 


and  drink  the 
wine  which  J 
have 
for  you. 


mingled 


.  .  .She  hath 

immolated  her 

hosts,  she  hath 

mingled  her 

wine. 


Beza's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  1568 


A.  M.  '  bibite 
m  vino,  miscui' 


and  drink  the 
wine  which  I 
have  *'  drawn/ 


. .  .  She  hath 

*  e  drawn  '  her 

wine. 


K.  James'sBible  i6n 


and  drink  of  the 

wine    which     I 

have   '  mingled.' 

(13) 


She  hath  killed 
her  beasts ;  she 
hath  '  mingled  ' 
her  wine;  &c. 

(14) 


Marked  this  *  were  altered  to  their  present  reading  A.  D.  1611 , 


13.  14-  VDDD.  XS/CSpCLZCt*  On  the  texts  corresponding  with  these  numbers,  }  Ward  ob- 
serves; that"  Protestants  counting  the  mingling  of  water  and  wine  in  the  chalice  an  idle  cere- 
"  mony,  frame  their  translation  accordingly."  This  is  a  most  gross  misrepresentation,  even  as  it 
regards  the  first  translators  of  the  Protestant  Bible,  who  never  understood  these  texts  as  any  way 
prophetical  of  the  Lord's  Supper;  but  more  particularly  as  it  relates  to  those  of  1611,  whose  trans- 
lation is  nearly  the  same  with  the  Popish  one.  Water,  it  is  not  denied,  was  used  in  the  primitive 
church,  in  the  celebration  of  the  Eucharist ;  but  such  a  custom  is  not  warranted  by  scripture, 
indeed,  it  is  not  even  hinted  at  there,  while  express  mention  is  made  of  t  "  the  fruit  of  the  vine/' 

+  Errata,  page  43.  f  Mat  c.  xxvi.  v.  20.    Mark,  c.  xiv.  v.  25.   and  Luke.  c.  xxii.  v.  18. 

C    2 


12         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

Cyprian  condemned  the  practice  as  unscriptural,  and  sharply  reproved  those  heretics  in  his  tine, 
who  styled  themselves  Aquarii,  because  they  admitted  the  use  of  water  in  the  administration 
of  this  sacrament.  His  words  are  :  *  "  if  it  he  not  lawful  to  loose  any  one  of  the  least  command- 
ments of  Christ,  how  much  more  is  it  unlawful  to  break  so  great  and  so  weighty  a  one,  which  so 
very  nearly  relates  to  the  sacrament  of  our  Lord's  passion,  and  of  our  redemption;  or  by  any 
human  institution  to  change  it  into  that  which,  is  quite  different  from  the  divine  institution." 
f  Jerome  says,  "  in  the  type  of  his  blood,  he  offered  not  water  but  wine."  Yet  what  they  and  ail 
others  have  advanced  on  the  subject,  is  of  little  worth,  compared  with  the  authority  of  the  Holy 
Scriptures.  According  to  these,  the  words  in  the  text  are  nowise  typical,  as  Ward  contends,  "  of 
our  Lord's  sacrifice  of  the  immolated  host  of  bread  and  wine  :"  but  more  plainly  intimate  the  many 
blessings  wisdom  prepared  for  men,  if  they  would  but  make  a  right  use  of  them. 

Wisdom  mingled  her  wine,  &c.  preparatory  to  the  banquet,  and  in  alluring  men  to  partake  of 
it  she  would,  as  has  been  most  pertinently  ;|;observed,  have  rather  added  what  would  have  made  it 
delicious  such  as  spices  or  honey,  &c.  than  water,  which  would  but  weaksn  it  and  make  it  hoth 
tasteless  and  unpalatable.  But,  besides,  the  same  Hebrew  word  §lDDb  is  used  by  || Isaiah,  in  a 
way  that  determines  its  sense  here.  The  prophet  is  denouncing  woe  against  drunkards,  "  and  men 
of  strength  to  mingle  (sechar)  strong  drink  :"  so  that  the  mixture  could  not  have  been  with  water, 
but  some  ingredient  that  would  make  it  still  more  intoxicating. 

As  to  the  first  clause  of  the  verse,  where  wisdom  is  spoken  of  as  having  "  killed  her  beasts  ;" 
it  would  be  desirable  to  know,  to  what  part  of  the  sacrament  Papists  would  make  such  a  pro- 
cedure applicable.  Ward  has  thought  proper,  and,  no  doubt,  on  very  sufficient  grounds,  to  pass 
it  by  without  making  any  particular  observation. 

It  is  well  worthy  of  remark,  that  the  words  for  you,  which  are  extremely  significant,  occur 
in  the  Ulthemish  translation,  although  there  is  no  corresponding  word  in  the  Hebrew  to  warrant 
their  adoption.  Thus  would  the  Rhemists  have  unwittingly  furnished  an  additional  argument 
ao-ainst  the  exclusion  of  the  laity's  communicating  in  both  kinds;  if  their  interpretation  of  the 
passage  could  be  admitted. 

To  conclude,  then  :  The  clearest  exposition  that  can  be  given  is  this  ; — that  Solomon  had  a 
o-eneral  view  of  some  great  blessing  that  should  befal  mankind,  in  the  person  of  the  Messiah, 
but  not  a  distinct  revelation  of  any  changes,  or  corruptions,  that  were  to  arise  in  the  Christian 
Church. 


Ep.  63.  ad  Ccccii.  j    In  typo  sanguinis  sui,  non  obtulit  aquam,  scd  vinum.  Advers.  Jov.  Tom.  A.  p.  198. 

%  Vid.  Pol,  Annot.  in  loc.and  Bishop  Patrick  on  the  O.  T. 

^  According  to  Parkhurst,  -joa  implies  "  wine  mixed  with  the  lees,  turbid  and  highly  intoxicating." 
ij  C.  5.  v.  22.  ^  Sec  column  Pvhemish  Translation. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


13 


Book.  Ch.  Ver 


1  Cor.  xi.  27 


Oris:.  Greek. 


rov  a^Tot  tstov; 
H  Ttim  to  7tot»- 

ai  ra  avpartoc, 
yx\  cttjj.xT0<;  Tt< 
K.fs-*a.. 


Vulgate  Text. 


Itaque 
quicunique 
manducave- 

rit  panem 

huuc,  vel  bi- 

berit  calicem 

Domini  in 

digne,  &c. 


IthemishVersion 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


Therefore, 
whosoever 
shall  eat  this 
bread,  or  drink 
the  chalice  of 
our  Lord  un- 
worthily, &c. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568 


Itaq.  quisquis 
ederit  panem 
nunc,  aut  bibe- 
rit  hoc  pocu- 
lurn  Domini  in- 
digne,  reus  te- 
uebitur  corpo- 
ris et  sanguinis 
Domini. 


Wherefore, 

whosoever 

shall    eat   this 

bread,aw«/drink 

this  cup,  &c. 


K.Jamcs'sBible  i6n 


Wherefore,  who- 
soever shall  eat 
this  bread, '  and' 
drink  this  cup  of 
the  Lord,  unwor- 
thily, shall  be 
guilty  of  the 
body  and  blood 
of    the    Lord. 

(15) 


15.  t]  7tlVTf  This  is  another  of  the  texts,  as  translated  in  the  common  English  Testa- 
ment, that  Doctor  Milner,  not  less  than  Ward,  looks  on  as  a  corruption.  * "  Though 
small  to  the  eye,  it  is,"  observes  the  former,  "  great  as  to  the  sense,  inasmuch  as  it  spoils  a 
scriptural  argument  in  favour  of  the  Catholic  doctrine,  concerning  the  body  and  blood  of 
Christ  being  both  received  under  either  kind."  Undoubtedly.  This  alleged  corruption  of  v  being 
translated  and,  does  invalidate  every  argument  that  can  be  adduced  in  support  of  the  practice  of 
denying  the  cup  to  the  laity.  But,  if  it  be  allowed,  that  scripture  is  the  best  interpreter  of 
scripture,  the  allegation  is  false.  And  here,  for  the  purpose  of  proving  it  to  be  so,  it  may  not  be 
irrelevant  to  apply  Tertullian's  frule  of  determining  the  sense  of  the  passages,  which  are  few,  by 
that  of  the  many. 

That  »,  then,,  is  properly  rendered,  by  and,  will  appear  on  referring  to  the  parallel  texts  of 
jLuke  and  §Matthew  ;  for  what  is  »  in  the  former,  is  x«i  in  the  latter  :  so  that  as  two  distinct  ques- 
tions are  put,  the  use  of  »  in  a  disjunctive  sense  is  forbidden  ;  which  double  use  of  *>  is  surely  not 
more  unaccountable  than  that  of  the  ([particle  vau  in  the  Hebrew  language.  In  addition  to  this,  it 
should  be  observed  that,  in  the  next  verse  but  one,  it  is  11  «crfi»»»  KM  mm>,  which  determines  the  sense 
of  -4  not  to  be  disjunctive.  The  **copulative  in  the  verse,  which  immediately  precedes,  as  well  as 
that,  tfwhich  immediately  follows,  has  the  same  force. 

But,  admitting  the  use  of  the  disjunctive  particle  'or,'  still  it  would  not  answer  Doctor 
Milner's  end,  as  the  neglect  of  either  the  one  or  the  other  of  the  two  things  proposed,  would  not 
hence  follow.  For  instance,,  the  communicant  is  told,  that  punishment  will  be  the  consequence 
of  an  unworthy  reception  of  either  the  bread  or  the  wine;  if  he  offend  in  the  one  particular,  the 
use  of  'or'  does  not  most  remotely  imply  that  the  other  maybe  entirely  dispensed  with:  it 
rather  demonstrates  that  both  elements  are  to  be  held  in  equal  reverence.  Rosenmiiller's  comment 
on  the  passage  is  as  satisfactory  as  it  is  concise  :  "  As  to  the  particle  „,"  he  says,  "  it  is  without 
"  reason  that  the  Papists  rely  upon  it,  as  shewing  that  both  species  are  not  absolutely  necessary. 

*  Inquiry,  page  346.  f  "  Oportet  secundum  plura  intelligi  pauciora."  +  C.  xx.  v.  2.  §  C.  xxi.  v.  23. 

|j  See  remarks  on  number  12.  ^[  ]  Cor.  c.  xi.  v.  2g. 

**  ecraju?  yag  a*  ta$unn  Ton  agro*  tutov,  KAI  to  7roT>jg'o»  tsto  numi,  ft   '87«*  «*  T«  o^ts  ectSutw,  KAI  ix  ts  wctj^b  vmtm. 


U        A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

For  first,  there  is  a  variety  of  reading  (as  some  read  **»)  ;  and,  also,  it  is  common  with  the 
Greek  translators  of  the  Old  Testament  to  put  **.  for  *,  as  in  *Genesis.  Besides  this,  any  one 
of  the  Corinthians  might  take  the  cup  unworthily,  as  by  drinking  to  intoxication,  although  in 
eating  no  indecency  had  been  committed."  After  this  view  of  the  subject,  will  Doctor  Milner 
be  bold  enough  to  affirm,  that  he  can  derive  any  argument  from  scripture  to  uphold  what  he  calls 
a  "  catholic  doctrine,"  but  what   is,  in   reality,  only  an  emanation  from  the  doctrine  of  tran- 

substantiation? 

What  the  usage  of  the  church  has  been,  in  this  particular,  during  the  first  twelve  centuries, 
can  be  incontestably  proved  from  the  earliest  writers.  Cyprian,  in  his  epistle  to  C^cilius,  which 
has  been  already  spoken  of,  is  decidedly  against  the  Popish  distinction ;  and  fChrysostom  is  not 
less  so  where  he  expressly  says,  thai  there  is  nu  diflcicnce  between  the  priest  and  the  laity,  "  as 
in  the  participation  of  the  divine  mysteries;  for  we  are  all  admitted  to  them  alike"  And,  im- 
mediately after,  J"  But  to  all  one  body  is  tendered,  to  all  one  cup  :"  which,  he  says,  was  not  the 
case  under  the  old  law,  where  the  people  were  denied  a  participation  of  that  of  which  the  priest 

partook. 

There  is  even  an  admission  on  record,  made  A.  D.  1414,  by  the  Council  of  Constance,  by 
which  the  Popish  innovation  was  first  established,  "  that  Christ  instituted  this  sacrament  in  both 
kinds,  and  that  the  primitive  Christians  received  in  both  kinds :"  and  this  admission  was  sub- 
sequently repeated  by  the  ^Council  of  Trent.  But,  besides,  the  express  injunction  of  Christ,  as 
related  by  ||St.  Matthew,  after  He  gave  the  cup  to  the  Apostles,  was,  "  drink  ye  all  of  it ;"  and 
^[St.  Mark  says,  "  they  all  drank  of  it,"  when  he  presented  the  cup.  All,  laity  as  well  as  clergy, 
are  desired  to  drink  the  cup  **"  for  the  remission  of  sins." 

Ward  lays  great  stress  on  that  text  of  ft^t-  Luke,  where  Christ  is  only  related  to  have 
broken  bread  before  his  ascension.  But,  if  no  mention  be  made  of  the  wine,  it  arises  from  the 
concise  way  in  which  St.  Luke  expresses  himself;  for  as  the  terms  bread  and  wine  are  in  a  manner 
correlative,  the  mention  of  one  sufficed.  However  this  be,  neither  the  text  in  question,  nor 
those  others  pointed  out  by  him,  in  the  .JtActs,  authorises  the  practice  of  the  Popish  Church. 

The  diversity  of  reading  to  be  met  with  in  the  oldest  Greek  copies,  of  which  Rosenmiiller 
speaks,  is  a  well  attested  fact,  and  a  further  corroboration  of  the  Protestant  translation  of  n 
being  correct.  §§Griesbach,  who  has,  with  most  astonishing  pains,  collated  all  the  various  Greek 
MSS.  which  are  extant,  presents  his  reader  with  as  many  as  thirteen,  exclusive  of  the  Alexandrine 
and  Claromontane,  which  have  *«<.  Add  to  this,  that  in  the  versions  of  the  Syriac,  Arabic, 
and  iEthiopic  MSS.  the  reading  is  the  same  ;  and  that  the  learned  ||j|Wolff  enumerates  no  fewer 
than  thirty  of  the  oldest  copies,  even  of  the  Vulgate,  from  1462  to  1569,  in  which  ""  "  was 
translated  "  et." 

*  C.  ill _  v.  22.  Symmachus  habet  xa,>.cv  n  7ron)§ov,  alii  xan  iromgov.    Rosenmiiller,  vol.  iv.  p.  151. 

+  otot,   £T«v  awoXavtn*    hr,    rat   fttxrv*   pvrDftut.       'Ofxoiu<;  yx%   I1ANTE2    u^a^x   ru»   uviut.       Tom  X.  p.  5t>0. 

X  *Ma  nAZIN  h  au^a  ir^otuvrcu,  xou  ir3vgio*  h.     Chrys.  Ibid.  §  Paol.  Hist.  lib.  iii.  p.  485. 

»  C xxvi-  v-  27-  ^  C.  xiv.  v.  23.  **  Mat.  c.  xxvi.  v.  28.  ft  C.  xxiv.  v.  30. 

^*  C  ii.  v.  42.  and  c.  20.  v.  ?.  §§  Nov. Test.  Grace,  vol.  ii.  p.  265.  Hi!  "  Curae  Pbilol."  Vol.  iii.  p.  4£2, 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


15 


It  now  only  remains  to  notice  a  very  futile  objection  of  Ward.  His  words  are,  "  For 
whole  Christ  is  really  present,  under  either  kind,  as  Protestants  themselves  have  confessed."  He 
then  introduces  Luther,  on  the  authority  of  Hospinian  (a  Protestant  writer  too),  as  subscribing 
to  the  opinion, — "  that  it  is  not  needful  to  give  both  kinds."  To  say  nothing  of  this  opinion, 
which  was  retracted  by  the  Lutheran  church,  inasmuch  as  the  cup  was  restored  by  it  to  the  laity,  it 
argues  great  folly  to  arraign  the  Protestants  of  the  present  day  of  the  errors  into  which  their 
ancestors  fell  before  the  articles  of  their  religion  obtained  a  settled  and  determinate  shape.  On 
this  principle,  it  might  as  well  be  said,  that  because  Calvin  caused  Servetus  to  be  burned ;  or  that 
because  Cranmer,  the  chief  promoter  of  the  Reformation  in  England,  brought  an  Anabaptist  to 
the  stake;  their  followers,  the  present  race  of  Protestants,  should  consequently  persecute  those 
who  differ  from  them  in  religious  principles. 


SECTION  ///.-THE  BLESSED  SACRAMENT  AND  THE  ALTAR. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver 


lCor.  ix.  13 


pm,  TepotTiopivoii- 


1  Coi*.  X.  1  8.  Svo-HtrretB 


Orig.  Greek 


Vulgate  Text. 


et  qui  altari 

deserviunt 

cum    altari 

participant. 


altar is 


Rhemish  Version 


and  they  that 
serve  the  *  al- 
tar' participate 
with  the  '  al- 
tar.' 


of  the  altar 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


et  qui  altari  as 
sident  cum  al- 
lari  participant 

Montanus 
translates  (  as 
sidentes '    cow- 
participant. 


altari  s. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568. 


and  they  which 
wait  at  the 
*  temple  are  par 
takers  with  the 
'  altar.' 


K.James'sBibleiGn 


and  they  which 
wait  at  the  'al- 
tar' are  partakers 
with  the  '  altar.' 
(16) 


*of  the'fewffi/e'lofthe  'altar.'(17)_ 


Marked  thus  *  were  altered  to  their  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 

16.17-  Oi  TO,  iegCL  Spya,%0[J.eV0l,  &c.  These  words,  which  occur  in  the  first  clause 
of  the  verse,  contain  an  allusion  to  the  Levites,  who  performed  sacred  offices ;  and  vpntpvom,, 
which  is  found  in  the  last  clause,  denotes  the  continual  attendance  at  the  altar,  and  clearly  de- 
signates the  service,  of  the  priest.  In  the  next  verse,  the  Apostle  completes  the  simile,  by 
observing,  "  that  they  which  preach  the  gospel,  should  live  of  the  gospel."  Where,  then,  are 
the  grounds  the  Romanists  go  on  for  setting  up  an  altar;  and  without  an  altar  will  they  talk  of 
sacrifice? 

"  But,"  remarks  tWard,  "  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  papistical."     A  more  infamous  calumny  has  not  been  uttered  against  the  Church  of  England, 


t  Errata,  page  43. 


16  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

which  believes,  as  is  laid  down  by  the  Apostles,  that  the  sacrament  of  the  Lord's  Supper  is  the 
communion  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  And  as  to  the  word  altar,  wherever  it  occurs 
in  scripture,  it  signifies  the  altars  of  the  Jews  or  the  Gentiles,  and  never  the  communion  table. 
Sometimes,  in  the  Old  Testament,  the  altar  is  called  a  table  ;  but  the  table  is  no  where  called  an 
altar  in  the  New  Testament;  as  will  appear  on  a  comparison  of  the  epistle  to  the  Hebrews  with 
that  to  the  Corinthians.  So  that,  although  the  *Prophet  called  the  Lord's  altar,  his  table ;  and 
although  some  of  the  Fathers  occasionally  denominated  the  table  an  altar  ;  it  is  not  sufficient  rea- 
son for  calling  it  either  indifferently,  under  the  new  dispensation,  or  for  violating  a  distinction  so 
strictly  observed  by  St.  Paul.  It  is  certain,  that,  in  his  epistle  to  the  -("Hebrews,  he  does  not  mean 
by  the  use  of  the  word  &*.«mpo»  (which  he  applies  in  a  figurative  sense,  putting  the  altar  for  the 
sacrifice)  a  carnal  sacrifice,  since  he  afterwards  explains  the  nature  of  it  to  be  that  of  "  praise." 


Hook   Cb.Ver. 

Orig.  Greek. 

Vulgate  Text. 

RhemishVersion. 

Beza's LatinText  Bps.  Bible,  1568.  K.James'sBiblei6n 

Dan.  xiv. 
12.  17-  20. 

Tt-OCTTB^Olt 

mensam 

table 

Apochryphal   Apocryphal. (18) 

IS.  The  texts  belonging  to  this  number  are  Apocryphal. 


SECTION  IV.— PRIESTS,  PRIESTHOOD,  AND  HOLY  ORDERS. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver. 

i 
Orig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text. 

RhemishVersion. 

Beza's  Latin  Text 

Bps.  Bible,  1568. 

K.Jame.s'sBible  iGn 
— 

Acts  xv.  2. 
Tit.  i.  5. 

XXi  XttTCCrfiffXi 

Presbyteros 

et  constituas 
1  per  civitates 
Presbyteros. 

priests 

and  should  or- 
dain   '  priests' 
by  cities. 

Presbyteros. 

et  constituas 
oppidatim   (A. 
M.  per  civita- 
tem)  presbyte- 
ros. 

'  Elders' 
'  Elders' 

'Elders.'   (19) 

and  ordain   '  El- 
ders'    in     every 
city.               (20) 

19-  20.  ^TigScfivTSgXS,  Ward  says  ;  "  Our  pretended  Reformers  never  so  much  as  once 
name  priest,  unless  when  mention  is  made  of  the  priests  of  the  Jews,  or  the  priests  of  the  Gen- 
tiles." Protestants  do  not  object  to  the  word  '  priest'  in  respect  of  its  etymology,  as  appears 
from  the  repeated  mention  of  it  in  their  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  in  those  parts,  where  the 
minister  is  said  to  discharge  the  priestly  offices,  of  (declaratory)  absolution,  of  consecration,  &c. 
but  in  respect  of  its  use  and  general  signification.  So  that,  if  their  translators  call  the  sacrificers 
of  the  Old  Testament,  and  also  of  the  Gentiles,  priests,  according  to  the  common  acceptation  of 

*  Malacbi,  c.  i.  v.  7-  t  C.  xiii.  v.  10.  J  Senior — qui  ecclesiae  praeest.  Scap.  Lex. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN    161 1.  1; 

the  term,   it  is  in  conformity  to  the  language  of  scripture,  which  calls   them   by  one  name  *t=»«Jna 
scil.  *«§«*:  so,    also,  because   the  ministers   of  the   New  Testament,  while  they   receive  different 
appellations,  are  never  denominated  «§»?,  or  priests  ;  they  very  properly  adhered  to  the  same  rule, 
by  naming  them  Elders. 

"But,"  continues  Ward,  "Protestants  leave  the  ecclesiastical  use  of  the  word  wVa0uTtpS  for 
the  original  signification."  Considering  the  tone  in  which  this  observation  is  made,  it  amounts, 
at  least,  to  an  indirect  admission  that '  priest'  is  not  the  literal  translation  of  the  Greek  word.  The 
legitimate  meaning  of  the  term  is  Elder  or  Elderman,  a  name,  in  the  first  age  of  the  Church, 
given  to  bishops,  as  appears  from  the  ("Acts  ;  where  the  persons,  called  elders,  in  one  place,  are, 
in  another  place,  called  bishops.  The  same  may  be  observed  in  St.  Pauls  tEpistle  to  Titus.  And 
^Ignatius  styles  the  Apostles,  the  'Presbytery'  of  the  Church.  If,  therefore,  a  change  in  the 
government  of  the  church,  which  existing  circumstances  required,  took  place  alter  the  Apostolic 
age,  whereby  those  designated  by  the  title  n^Bvn^  became  subordinate  to  those  styled  Ew^o™ ; 
that  gives  no  colour  whatever  for  rendering  the  former  term  '  priests,'  on  the  ground  of  a  supposed 
similarity  between  the  governing  orders  of  the  Jewish  and  Christian  Churches. 

Again;  on  referring  to  the  Vulgate,  it  will  be  there  found,  that  in  the  same  || verse  the 
reading  is  seniores,  and  co?iscnior.  These  terms  are  rendered,  in  some  editions  of  the  Rhemish 
New  Testament,  'seniors,'  and  *  fellow-senior;'  and,  in  others,  'ancients,'  and  'ancient.'  In  a 
succeeding  number,  other  instances  of  a  similar  kind  will  be  pointed  out.  *[Chrysostom,  too, 
whose  authority  should  lead  to  a  decision  on  the  subject,  pronounces  directly  against  the  popish 
signification  of  the  term  *r§e<r/3im§«.  His  words  are  extremely  apposite,  and  well  entitled  to  the 
reader's  attention:  oytox  'ieRea,  «**«  to*  ytyiexx&rx.  He  says,  that  the  term  signifies,  "  not  a  priest, 
but  a  grave,  ancient  man."  Others  of  the  Fathers  express  themselves  to  the  same  effect.  And 
**Beza  affirms  they  were  called,  "  Presbyteri  vel  sexiores,  turn  propter  ajtatem,  turn  propter 
judicium,  quod  de  ipsis  facit  eeclesia." 

As  the  popish  doctors  contend  that  wpa&trc*^  implies  *  priest,'  ff^^-rega  must  consequently  imply 
1  priestess:'  and  if  so,  it  would  be  desirable  to  know  how  they  account  for  her  non-attendance  at 
the  popish  altar. 

JJWard  says  that  the  English  divines,  and  among  them  Cranmer  himself,  affirmed,  that  "  election, 
without  consecration,  was  sufficient  to  make  a  Priest  or  a  Bishop."  This  impudent  assertion  he 
grounds  on  the  early  version  of  xf,;o™^«mj,  "  ordained  by  election"  and  because  Whitaker,  Sutcliffe, 
&c.  who  were  not  strictly  writers  in  defence  of  the  Church  of  England,  held  such  language.  But  a 
brief  statement  of  the  real  principles  on  which  ordination  in  the  English  Church  is  founded,  will  best 
disprove  such  a  charge.  "  Parliament/'  says  Archbishop  Bramhall,  "  has  no  operative  power  to 
muke  those  priests  who  want  the  essentials  of  priesthood,  but  a  receptive  power  to  receive  such  for 
true  Priests,  who  are  ordained  according  to  ike  institution  of  Christ." 

*  Tayl.  Concord.  Heb.  et  Trommii  Concord.  Graec.  f  C.  xx.  v.  1/.  28.  \  C.  i.  v.  5.  /. 

§  When  on  his  way  to   martyrdom,   he   informs   the   Philadelphians,  that  he  betook  himself  to  the   Apostles,  as  to  the 
Presbytery  of  the  church,  n^ocrtpvyuv  rot?  AaroroXoK,  uq  m^oZun^B  Ey.*A>;<ria,'.     Ignat.  Epist.  ad  Philadelpl).  sect.  3. 
!|  1  Epis.  Gen.  Pet.  c.  v.  v.  i.  ^[  De  Saccrdotio.  **  Vid.  Bez.  Annot. 

It  1  Tim.  c.  v.  v.  2.  %\  Errata,  page  47. 

D 


18 


A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


Book.  Ch.  Ver 


1  Tim.  v.  17 


1  Tim.  v.  10. 


Jam.  v.  14. 


Acts  xiv.  2: 


Orig.  Greek 


rifty/^fTtpoi 


y.xrct  Ylptzfiv- 


Vulgate  Text. 


Prcsbvteri 


[inversus 
Presbyterum 

inducat 
Presbyteros 
ecclesiffi. 


Presbyteros. 


Rhemish  Version 


Priests 


against  a 

'  Priest/ 


let  him  bring 
in  the'  Priests' 
of  the  Church. 


Priests 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


Presbyteri. 


ad  versus 

Presbyterum. 


Bps.  Bible,  156*8.  K.Jamcs'sBiblei6n 


Elders.' 


against  an 

'  Elder.' 


advocato  c  pres- let  him  bring 
byteros'  eccle-.in  the  '  Elders' 
siae.  A.  M.  ad-  of  the  Church. 
vocety  &c. 

Presbyteros  '  Elders' 


'Elders.'     (21) 


;igainst    an   '  El- 
der.' (22) 


let  him  call  for 
the  «  Elders  '  of 
the  Church.  (23) 


when  they  had 
ordained  them 
'  Elders.'      (24> 


21.  22.  23.  24.    See  the  preceding  number. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.  Orig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text. 


lTim.iv.  14-  M?«^n 


ra 

toj,      &C.     &C 
llft?f3vri 


l£« 


tpm 


noli  negli- 
gere  '  gra- 
tiam'  qua?  in 
te    est,  &c. 


Presbyterii. 


Rhemish  Version 


neglect  not  the 
'  grace'  that  is 
in     thee,     &c. 


Priesthood. 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


ne  negugito 
'  donum ' quod 
in  te  est,  See. 
-  -  -  Presby- 
terii. A.  M. 
ne  neglige  ill ud 
in  te  donum. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568, 


gift 


'  Eldership1 


K.James's  Biblei6i  t 


Neglect  not 
the  <  gift '  that 
is  in  thee,  &c. 

of  the  Presby- 
tery. (25) 


25 .  •IIpgcr^WTSp/8.  (Ward  says,  «  if  they  (the  Protestant  Translators)  meant  no  wo«c 
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  <  presbyteri  urn,'  as  we  are,  savin- 
seniors  and  ancients,  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."  Jerome  translates  H>^w  which  occurs  but 


*  Coetus  presbvterorum  Scap.  Lex.  +  Fmh  naa*  a*  *  vj   -r-  „  . 

T  errata,  page  4, .  ♦  Vid.  Erasm.  Schmid.  Concord.  Graec.  in  loc. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1C11. 


VJ 


in  three  places,— in  the  first  peniores ;  in  the  second,  \majores  natu  ;  and  in  the  third,  \\pres- 
bytcrium.  Again,  as  to  it^wt^,  lie  renders  it  ^senior,  or  major  natu,  much  oftener  than  presbyter, 
where  the  ministers  of  the  gospel  are  spoken  of.  Evidently,  then,  it  must  follow,  that  he  is  no 
less  liable  to  the  charge  of  evil  intention,  corruption,  or  novelty,  than  the  Protestant  translators  ; 
since  both  equally  derived  their  versions  from  the  same  source.  And  it  is  equally  evident,  "  that 
as  he  meant  but  one  thing,  since  in  Greek  it  is  but  one,1'  it  must  be  in  the  signification  of  that 
term  lie  uses  oftenest ;  viz.  'senior,'  or  elder;  and,  therefore,  it  follows,  that  he  understood 
'  presbyter '  to  be  synonymous  with  'senior,'  '  major  natu,'  &c.  which  the  Protestant  Translators 
have  rendered  '  elder;'  and  not  with  sacerdus,  priest,  i.  e.  sacrijicer,  according  to  the  Ilhemish 
Version. 

Well,  then,  were  they  justified  in  being  scrupulous  about  the  adoption  of  the  terms  'priest,' 
6  priesthood,'  &c.  on  the  misapplication  of  which  the  Popish  Church  partly  grounds  the  sacrifice  of 
the  mass,  a  sacrificing  priesthood,  kc.  and  in  preserving  as  perfect  a  distinction  between  the 
priesthood  of  the  law  and  the  ministry  of  the  gospel  as  ffligwt  and  m^vn^  point  out.  As,  then, 
presbyter  and  priest  are  not  of  the  same  import,  it  is  preposterous  in  Ward  to  affirm,  that 
presbyter,  sacrijicium,  altare  (elder,  sacrifice,  altar),  are  consequents  inseparable  from,  and 
dependent  on,  each  other;  or,  that  presbyter  bears  more  relation  to  '  sacrifice,'  &c.  than  senior, 
major  natu,  &c. 


Book.  Ch.  Vcr 


•J  Tim.    i.  6. 


Oriff.  Greek 


ccycc^uTtv^av  To 
X,^  criJ.cc. 


Vulgate  Text. 


ut  resuscites 
'  gratiam' 


!themishVersion, 


hat    thou    re- 
suscitate the 
'  grace.' 


Beza's  LatinText 


ut  exsuscites 

*  don  urn.'     A. 

M.   'donum.' 


Bps.  Bible,  1568 


:ift  ' 


K.James'sBibleiGn 


that  thou  stir  up 
the  <  gift'    (26) 


£67.  U  yCLglGfj. a.  The  Protestant  translators  arc  charged  by  §§Ward  with  adopting  the 
word  'gift'  instead  of '  grace,'  "for  fear  of  making  it  clash  with  the  xxvth  of  their  xxxix.  articles." 
Here  is  an  accusation  brought  forward  in  direct  opposition  to  fact;  since  Tindal  and  Coverdale, 
who  made  the  first  English  versions  of  tire  bible  which  were  printed,  were  no  way  concerned  in 
framing  the  ||||.\xxix.  articles.  These  were  not  drawn  up  for  several  years  after,  and  were  generally 
supposed  to  be  the  production  of  Cranmer  and  Ridley.     The  former,   therefore,  could  not  be  said 

X  Luke,  c.  xxii.  v.  66.        §  Acts,  c.  xxii.  v.  v.  j]  l  Tim.  c.  iv.  v.  14.  <j  See  Mat.c.xv.  v.2.~- Ac^s,  c.  xv.  v.  4  et  passim. 

ft  Sacerdos  is  translated  in  the  French  Bibles  SacrificaU-ur  •  and  Presbyter,  where  it  signifies  a  minister  of  the  word  and 
sacraments,  Preiic.  It  is  also  a  most  remarkable  circumstance,  that  in  the  Iktsh  Version  o  the  New  Testament  made  from  the 
\  ulgate,  and  by  a  Romanist  too,  six  of  the  seven  texts  adduced  by  Ward,  and  among  them  even  that  of  James  v.  14.  on  which  the 
Popish  Church  founds  extreme  unction,  are  rendered  by  Sinnsvar,  Slnnscaruibh,  and  Sheanora,  words  expressive  of  f loer, 
fRESBYTEiiY,  &c.  ;  while  the  text  in  Titus  i.  5,  and  only  that,  is  rendered  by  Sagairt,  (Sacerdos)  which  properly  implies  Priest, 
in  the  Popish  signification  of  that  term  !  !     See  Focalsiu  Gasidhilge-Sax-Bheaela,  in. Joe. 

it  Quod  quis  gradficando  donavit,  donum.   Scap.  SS  Errata,  page  A"J . 

\\  See  Beimel's  Essay  on  the  thirty-nine  Articles. 


D 


20        A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE   CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

to  have  shaped  their  translation  according  to  a  particular  form  of  faith,  which  was  not  in  existence 
at  the  time;  or  to  be  actuated  bv  any  other  motive  than  that  of  conveving  the  Apostle's  meaning 
in  the  plainest,  yet  most  expressive  language.  And  if  the  revisers  of  the  bible,  in  1611,  con- 
firmed '  gift,'  as  the  fittest  reading,  it  did  not  arise  "  for  fear"  (as  Ward  expresses  it)  of  causing 
any  discordance  between  their  version  and  the  articles,  but  because  it  was  warranted  by  the 
original  Greek.  Indeed,  there  is  a  palpable  absurdity  in  saying  that  a  translation  of  any  word  in 
scripture  has  been  made  to  suit  the  articles,  which  can  themselves  be  only  interpreted  by 
scripture. 

Xow,  as  to  the  word  x*si<ri**>  it  is  no  where  taken  in  scripture,  but  as  a  l  free  gift '  of  God,  or 
a  '  gift  of  his  grace.'  And,  although  extraordinary  gifts  were  imparted  by  the  hands  of  an 
Apostle,  at  the  first  planting  of  the  church,  yet,  as  they  ceased  with  the  necessity  which  called 
them  forth,  it  naturally  follows,  that  'grace'  should  not  always  accompany  that  ceremony.  This, 
experience  testifies;  as,  if  the  candidate  for  holy  orders  possess  not  gifts  competent  to  the  dis- 
charge of  his  office,  he  will  not  exhibit  any  increase  of  grace,  or  gracious  gifts,  although  he  may 
have  authority  committed  to  him.  For  this  reason,  therefore,  the  Church  of  England  does  not 
t  steem  holy  orders  a  sacrament;  inasmuch  as  it  is  defective  in  the  essential  properties  of  one.  In 
this  opinion  she  is  borne  out  not  only  by  the  language  of  scripture  itself,  but  by  the  concurrent 
testimony  of  some  of  the  most  eminent  among  the  Fathers,  during  the  first  live  centuries,  who 
make  mention  of  only  two  sacraments;  viz.  Baptism  and  the  Lord's  Supper.  It  is  quite  a 
modern  doctrine,  and  owes  its  origin  to  Peter  Lombard,  so  celebrated  for  his  "  Book  of  Sentences," 
who  first  enumerated,  in  the  twelfth  century,  seven  sacraments:  nor  was  the  sense  of  the  Romish 
Church  respecting  it  decided  before  the  sixteenth  century,  when  it  was  formally  declared  by  the 
Council  of  Trent. 

Moreover,  on  a  comparison  of  Romans  c.  xii.  v.  6,  in  which  x*9*p»**  occurs,  with  the 
texts  belonging  to  numbers  £5  and  <:6,  the  propriety  of  rendering  that  term  <  gifts'  will  be 
strikingly  apparent.  For  the  Latin  of  the  Syriac  version  of  the  former  text  is  domim;  and  in 
the  Sixtine-Clementine  edition  of  the  Vulgate  itself,  it  is  donationes.  This  word  was  selected  by 
Jerome,  probably,  to  avoid  tautology,  as  well  as  the  absurdity  which  would  arise  from  the  following 
run  of  the  sentence:  '  habentes  autem  gratias,  secundum  gratiarn.'  The  Rhemists,  perceiving 
their  leader  to  have  thus  confounded  terms  which  are  in  themselves  of  different  significations,  ven- 
tured to  depart  from  his  version,  and  consequently  from  their  own  rule,  by  rendering  the  word 
donationes  'gifts;'  but  which  more  strictly  implies  the  «  act  of  giving  away.'  Jerome's  transla- 
tion, too,  of  «*«H«5  viz.  *dunatum  est,  proves  he  did  not  consider  the'  verb  x«t&r»  in  that 
particular  passage,  more  than  in  fSt.  Luke's  Gospel  and  the  J  Acts,  to  imply  the  grace  of  God. 
Why,  then,  it  maybe  asked,  did  the  Rhemists  translate  that  verb,  <  it  is  given;'  and  thereby 
suppress  the  mention  of  grace  altogether  ? 

*  Pbil'c'i-v-29-  t  Cvu.y.2l.«,4*.Vulg.ifo*,I*.  t  c.iii.v.  14. et passim. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  lflll. 


21 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.jOrig.  Greek. 


1  Tim.  iii.  8 


Vulgate  Text. 


'  Diaconos ' 
similiter  pu- 
dicos. 


Rhemish  Version. 


'  Deacons  ' 

in  like  manner 

chaste. 


Be/.a's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  156*8.  K.Janies'sBible  iGii 


Diaconos       !  *'  Ministers, '  likewise  must  tlio 
itidem   venera-j  in  a  I  '  Deacons  '  be 

biles.  j  marginal  note  !  grave.         (27) 

I    c  Deacons. ' 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  the  present  reading  A.  I).  161  I 


27-  A/##0J/«£.  §Ward  says,  "  The  word  they  translate  for  minister  is  Jbmix*,  diaconus; 
the  very  same  that,  a  little  after,  they  translate  deacon."  This  makes  it  appear,  that  the 
insertion  of  the  ||text  taken  from  the  first  epistle  to  Timothy  among  the  Errata,  was  not,  as 
Doctor  Ryan  was  led  to  suppose,  because  Ward  either  desired  to  increase  his  catalogue  of  errors, 
or  that  he  looked  upon  it  as  one;  but  that  he  wished  to  ridicule  a  supposed  contrivance,  or  (to 
use  his  own  elegant  phrase)  "  a  poor  shift,  "  of  the  Protestant  Translators  in  attempting 
to  make  "  three  orders,  Bishops,  Ministers,  and  Deacons,  out  of  two;"  viz.  E*i«iMroi  and  Awm. 
This  is  but  Gregory  Martin  redivivus,  he  having  set  up  the  same  wretched  cavil  a  century  before 
Ward's  time.  The  first  translators,  unquestionably  with  no  such  design  as  that  imputed  to  them, 
rendered  the  Greek  word  of  the  ^f text  in  question  ' ministers,'  because  they  conceived  it  was 
taken  in  the  general  sense.  Their  successors,  however,  altered  it  to  *  deacons '  in  16*11,  from 
which  period  to  the  present  it  has  continued  to  be  so  read. 

Ward  next  proceeds  to  object  to  '  grave,'  as  fit  English  for  **«/*»«,  which  he  savs  they 
prefer  to  '  chaste ;'  "  on  purpose  to  make  room  for  their  ministers'  wives."  '  Grave  '  is  a  word 
peculiarly  proper  as  a  translation  for  the  Greek,  since  it  includes  the  ideas  of  dignity,  stavedness, 
&c.  in  the  clerical  character.  But,  admitting  the  word  'chaste'  to  he  still  more  proper,  it  would 
not  make  for  the  popish  doctrine  of  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy;  as  St.  Paul  expressly  states,  and 
in  the  same  chapter  too,  the  qualities  required,  as  well  in  the  characters  of  the  wives  themselves 
as  in  the  deacons,  which  he  would  not  have  done,  were  the  latter  single.  Notwithstanding  that, 
in  the  ffepistle  to  the  Philippians,  the  Greek  word  is  rendered  by  the  same  Latin  (viz.  pudicus)  in 
the  Vulgate,  and  in  the  text  corresponding  with  the  above  number,  yet  the  Rhcmists  vary 
their  English  translation,   terming  it  in  the  one  place  'chaste,' and  in  the  other  ;|;.J;'  honest.' 

The  Latin  of  the  Syriac  version  is  honestus;  hut  whether  guided  by  other  versions  or  not,  it 
appears  they  overlooked  Jerome's  text,  although  Ward  stiffly  maintains  the  contrary. 


§  Enata,p.  4?.  ||  C.  iii.  v.  12.  f  C.  iii.  v. 

***■  Venerabilis,  sanctus,  gravis,  castus.  Heeler.  ft  C  iv.  v  S. 

$J  Sonic  later  editions  of  the  Rhenish  Testament  read  'modest.' 


22 


A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,   WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.Orig.  Greek. 


1  Tim.  iii.      Ai 


1£. 


ay;'.i  .'"ojcav 


Vulffatc  Text.  Rhemish  Version.  Be/.a'sLatinText.  Bps.  Bible,  15Gy.jK.James'.sBibleiG  t 


Diaconi  sint 

unius   uxoris 

viri. 


let  Deacons  be,  Diaconi  sint 
the  husband   \   unius  uxoris 


ot  one  wife. 


manti. 


Let    the  k  Dea- 
cons '  be,  &c. 


Let  the  '  Dea- 
cons  be  the  bus- 
bar Is  of  one  wife. 
(28) 


<JS.  yv\  r.  This  term  is  rendered  '  wife  *  in  the  *Rhemish  New  Testament,  and,  in  the  verse 
immediate! v  preceding,  '  woman.'  Here  there  could  be  no  other  motive  why  the  Rhemists  should 
prefer  the  latter  term,  except  to  make  scripture  speak  in  behalf  of  the  single  lives  of  the  Romish 
Clergy;  since,  as  has  been  noticed  in  the  preceding  number,  the  Apostle  is  treating  of  the  neces- 
sary qualifications  of  deaconesses,  or  deacons'  wives,  not  less  than  their  husbands.  Of  this 
Ward  seems  to  be  aware,  as  he  passes  it  by  unnoticed,  and  dwells  on  a  ftext  where  yv», 
whose  signification,  even  if  ambiguous,  which  it  is  not,  would  not  explain  away  what  is 
emphatically  laid  down  here  by  the  same  authority. 


occurs 


SECTION  V.— AUTHORITY  OF  PRIESTS. 


Bock.  Ch.  Ver.Orig. Greek.  Vulgate  Text. 


Malachi  ii 


<1       Ot»     VEIA15     tl- 

'  *  ,  y 

i- 
7ii)7lr  y.y.i  \oij.qv 

'  ty.CxTxc'.a'i'/ 

'./.  <?<<t.i.x~rjC,   av- 

ru,  JUti  '  ccyfi- 

&c. 
,  Hcb.  i^VrD. 


Labia  enim 

sacerdotis 

custodient 

scientiam,  et 

leeem  reqni- 


Rbcmish Version.  Beza'sLatinTcxt.  Bps. Bible,  156'8.!K.James'sBiblei6ii 


The  Priests' lips 

1  shall'   keep 
knowledge,  and 
they  'shall'  seek 
the   law   at   his 
rent  ex  ore  Imouth.  because 
ejusrquia'an- he  is  the  '  an- 
gel us,'  &c.    gel,"  <S:c. 


'29. 


custodient. 


4£vXcl£btxi 


/ 


should  '  keep 
.   .    '  should  ' 

jseek 

i  because  he  is 
•the 'messenger' 
&c. 


For  the 

priests'    lips 

'  should  '    keep 

knowledge, 

and  they 

'   should  '    seek 

the     law    at    his 

mouth  :   for  he  is 

the    '  messenger  ' 

of    the   Lord    of 

hosts.  ('29) 


requircnt.     £^0^  0*8(7*    (_  In  the  opening  of  the  |jchaptcr  in  which  these  words  occur, 
'he  priests  are  addressed  by  God   through  his  prophet.     In  the  fourth  verse,  he  makes  mention  of 


*  Sec  Column  '  Rhemish  Version,'  and  1  Tim.  c.  iii.  v.  1 1 .  [   1  Cor.  c.  ix.  v.  5.  See  also  No.  30. 

L  Custodient,  i.  e.  custodire  detent:  verba   quae  actionem  notant  de  ddito  ssepe   intelliguntur.    Vid.  Ezek.  c.  xxxiv.  v.  2.  qui 
pascunt,  i.  c.pascere  dtlelant.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc.  i!   Malachi,  c.  ii.  v.  1. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


23 


Ihe  covenant  lie  made  with  Levi,  about  keeping  the  law;  and,  in  the  eighth  verse,  of  the  viola- 
tion of  that  covenant :  as  he  says,  "  but.  ye  are  departed  out  of  the  way  ;  ye  have  caused  many  to 
stumble  at  the  law;  ye  have  corrupted  the  covenant  of  Levi,  saith  the  Lord  of  Hosts."'  Asa 
reproof  is  here  conveyed,  the  future  indicative  of  the  Hebrew  verb  is  best  rendered  into  English 
by  the  potential,  as  the  former  language  has  not  fthat  mood.  Thus,  then,  it  is  clear,  that  the 
prophet  speaks  of  the  knowledge  of  the  law  which  the  priest  ought  to  have,  and  not  that  which 
he  always  had  :  as  many  of  the  priests,  even  all  sometimes,  were  ignorant;  and  the  high-priest 
often  an  idolater.  They  who  condemned  Christ  and  his  gospel  were  high  priests ;  and  the  idolatrous 
Urias  was  an  high  priest.  So  that  the  words  evidently  contain  a  commandment  of  what  the  priest's 
lips  should  do,  rather  than  an  assurance  that  he  always  did  so:  for,  as  he  had  authority,  so  he  should 
be  {capable,  to  decide  in  all  cases  of  controversy  which  fell  within  the  limits  of  God's  law. 

From  this  passage  it  is  that  §Ward  infers  the  infallible  (his  language  certainly  implies  nothing 
short  of  infallibility)  judgment  of  the  popish  priests  in  matters  of  religion.  His  inference  is,  however, 
wrong  ;  as  St.  Peter  and  his  successors,  not  being  differently  privileged  from  Aaron  and  his  successors, 
might  fall,  and  be  deceived.  And  although  Christ  prayed  that  his  and  their  faith  should  not  fail,  and 
even  that  of  all  believers;  and  that  they  might  be  sanctified  in  the  truth;  yet  it  would  be  folly  to 
maintain  that  they  were,  therefore,  not  liable  to  err,  when  the  very  circumstance  of  prayer  itself  sup- 
poses the  possibility  of  error. 

The  priest  (.'=?w)  is  not  called  angelus,  merely  because  he  should  imitate  the  sanctity  of  an  angel ; 
but  as  he  was  the  legate,  or  conveyer  of  the  divine  commands  to  men,  under  the  old  dispensation,  the 
term  is  better  rendered  by  messenger.  This  rational  explication  is  however  rejected  by  Ward,  and  one 
substituted,  which  may  well  lead  the  unlearned  and  unthinking  in  the  popish  church  to  look  upon  their 
clergy,  as  something  more  than  human  ;  and  to  suppose  that  those,  who  are  styled  '  angels,'  are  so  in 
nature.  When  even  Bristow,  a  popish  doctor  of  considerable  learning,  mistook  the  angel  of  the 
church  of  Philadelphia  for  an  angel  by  nature,  surely  the  possibility  of  the  frequent  recurrence  of  such 
mistakes  cannot  be  doubted,  among  others  less  informed. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver. 


Apoc.  ii.  1.  8. 
12.  iii.  1. 


Orig.  Greek. 


tw  ctyyihu 


Vulgate  Text. 


Angelo 


Rhemish  Version  .JBeza'is  Latin  TextBps.  Bible,  1568.|K.James'sBiblei6 


ii 


To  the  Angel 


Angelo 


tfTo  the  '  mes-  Unto  the  '  angel.' 
sender." 

(30) 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  the  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 


30.  AyisA0£.     Ward,  as  is  common  with  the  popish  commentators  on  this  passage,  absurdly 
identifies  the  angel,  or  bishop,  or  president  of  the  church,  with  the  church  itself;    whereas  the  letters 

f  Hebrsei,  quia  potentialem  modum  non  habenr,  cogunlur  abuti  futuro  indicativi. Grotius. 

+  Sacerdotum  est  callere  legem,  et  alios  Ulara  docere.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc.  §  Errata,  page  4Q 


lA         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS   ILLUSTRATIVE 

to  the  church  arc  directed  to  the  angel,  or  bishop,  be  being,  by  virtue  of  his  office,  the  fittest  person 
to  communicate  their  contents  to  it.  The  ablest  expositors  are  of  opinion,  that  they  are  addressed 
V'ad  ancrclum  immediate,  ad  ecclesiam  mediate;"  and  one  of  them  particularly  observes,  that  «  per 
angelos,  Lundum  stylum  apocalypticum,  omnes  eos,  qui  sub  eoium  prxfectura  agunt  quovis  modo, 
ant  neg'ociantur,  repr;csentari  vel  insinuari,  nulli  dubium  esse  potest." 


Book.  C  h.  V  or. brig-,  Greek 


Vuliratc  Text.  RhcmisliVersion 


\c 


initio    '  an- 1   I  send  mine 
>s»/A^\i'  •  Lelurn'ineum  '   angel,'   &c.... 
'?  &c....et  '  an- even  the  angel 
jgelus'  Tcsta-|of    the    Testa- 
imenti,  &c  ....  ment,  &c. 
i  Pagninus    ! 
|readsl,f(i:derisi 


Beza's  Latin  Text  lips.  Bible.  1568 


'  Messenger,' 
&c....'  Messen- 
ger' of  the  co- 
venant. 


K.James'sBibleiGii 


I  will  send  my 
Messenger,  &c.... 
even  the  Messen- 
ger of  the  cove- 
nant. 

(31) 


31  -\^.  -\AyFsK0C.  Ward  says,  "  St.  Hierom,  St.  Gregory,  and  all  the  Fathers,  conceive  a 
great  excellency  of  this  word  angkl."  As  to  the  name  of  <  angel,'  it  is  of  itself  no  title  of  dignity  ; 
inasmuch  as  there  are  angels  of  the  devil  and  darkness,  as  well  as  angels  of  God  and  light.  So  that, 
as  the  term  is  generally  understood  to  signify  a  spirit,  or  a  pure  spiritual  nature,  and  not  a  bodily 
creature,  the  Protestant  Translators  thought  proper  to  adopt  the  term  messenger  in  conformity  to  the 
Hebrew  and  Greek,  and  this  without  at  all  lessening  the  dignity  of  the  persons  so  addressed,  which  de- 
pends on  their  being  '  angels  *  of  God,  of  the  Church,  8cc. 

Isidorus  Clarius  interprets  the  passage  in  question  (viz.  Mai.  iii.  J.)  legatus.  Even  the  Vulgate 
reading  of  the  Prophet  jHaggai  is  '  nuncius  '  domini,  the  Lord's  '  messenger ;'  the  same  occurs  in 
different  "other  passages  of  scripture,  where  mention  is  made  of  God's  messengers;  the  Hebrew 
term  continuing  unvaried  throughout. 

Can  any  thing,  then,  more  clearly  demonstrate  how  unfounded  Ward's  accusation,  in  this  article, 
is  than  the  very  circumstance  just  stated  ?  But  it  may  be  answered,  that  although  angelas  be  found  in 
most  copies  of  the  Vulgate,  and  in  the  Bibles  of  Montanus,  Isidorus  Clarius,  &c.  in  one  of  the  texts 
of  Isaiah  before  referred  to,  yet  that,  in  the  Sixtinc-Clementine  Bible,  a  reading  (viz.  nuncius)  which 
warrants  the  Douay  translation  (viz.  messenger)  is  to  be  met  with.  Now,  admitting  this,  what  does  it, 
on  Ward's  own  principle,  prove  :  Why,  that  any  use  of  the  term,  as  he  conceives  it  to  be  only  applicable 
«•  to  post-boys  and  lacqueys,"  must  derogate  from  the    "  dignity  and  excellency"'  of  the  priesthood: 

§  Vid.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc. 
f  Austin  says,  "  a  name  not  of  nature,  but  of  office.'"     See  Leigh's  Ciit.  Sacr. 
J   C.  i.  v.  13,  nuruius  occurs  twice  in  this  passage,  and  is  rendere.l  messenger  each  time  in  the  Douay  Bible. 

il  Viz.  Isaiah,  c.  alii.  y.  19.  and  c.  xliv.  v.  20'. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  25 

and  as  it  were,  ex  confesso,  is  he  convicted  of  the  very  charge 'lie  brings  against  the  Protestant  Trans- 
lators ;  while  his  modest  comparison  between  the  popish  priests  of  the  present  day,  and  the  prophets, 
apostles,  Sec.  of  the  primitive  age,  is  made  to  appear  in  its  true  light.  For,  it  is  to  be  apprehended, 
that  the  resemblance  is  not  striking  enough  to  be  perceived  by  those  who  are  in  the  habit  of  judging  for 
themselves,  and  deciding  by  the  evidence  of  facts. 

It  only  remains  to  be  noticed,  that  as  in  the  first  clause  of  the  Jverse,  the  allusion  is  to  John  the 
Baptist,  the  Hebrew  word  is  fitly  rendered  'messenger;'  (which  the  Greek  ayfa*  itself  strictly  implies,) 
as  the  messenger,  or  ambassador  of  a  prince,  is  received  as  the  prince  himself;  and  in  the  second  clause, 
Christ  being  pointed  out  by  the  same  term,  is  most  appropriately  represented  in  his  mediatorial  capacity 
as  '  messenger  '  of  the  league,  i.  e.  of  the  covenant  between  God  and  man.  In  this  sense  Grotius  consi- 
dered him,  when  he  styled  him  "  Legatus  ille  magnus,  &c." 


Book.  Ch.  Ver. 

Orig.  Greek. 

Vulgate  Text. 

RhemishVersion. 

Beza's  Latin  Text 

Bps.  Bible,  1568. 

KJn    "s'sBibleiGii 

Matthew 
xi.  10. 

rov  ccyyt'Xoii  pa, 
&C. 

Angelum 
meum 

mine  Angel 

nunciummeum 

my  '  messen- 
ger' 

my  '  messenger.' 
(32) 

Luke  vii.  2?. 

Idem. 

Id. 

Id. 

id. 

Id. 

Id.         (33) 

32.  33.     See  the  preceding  numbers. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver 


2  Cor.  ii.  10. 


Oriff.  Greek, 


Xf.T» 


Vulgate  Text. 


in  the  person 
of  Christ 


RhemishVersion 


in  persona 
Christi 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


in  conspectu 

Christi 

A.  Mont,  in 

facie. 


Bps.  Bible,  156*. 


in  the  '  sight, 
&c. 


K.James 'BiblelGll 

in  the  '  Person' of 
Christ. 

(34) 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  the  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 
34.§Ei>  7TfO<r&J7rw.  At  the  time  Ward  enumerated  this  among  his  Errata,  it  was  no  less  acknow- 


+  Mai.  c.  iii.  ver.  1. 
§  On  this  text  the  Rhemists  presumptuously  ground  that  most  unscriptural  tenet  of  the  works  of  supererogation,  according 
to  which  the  Saints  have  not  only  deserved  eternal  happiness,  but  that  their  good  works  so  far  exceeded  what  they  were  bound  to 
perform,  that  they  have  it  in  their  power  to  apply  the  excess  to  the  benefit  of  others  !  Although  this  subject  be  included  in  the 
discussion  on  a  succeeding  article,  yet  the  language  of  the  popish  church,  in  treating  it,  is  too  absurd  and  dogmatical  to  be  passed 
over  in  silence. 

"  Whereupon  we  inferre  most  assurely,  that  the  satisfactorie  and  penal  works  of  holy  Sainctes  suffered  in  this  life,  be  commu- 
nicalle  and  applicable  to  the  use  of  other  faithfull  men,  their  fellow-members  in  our  Lord,  and  to  be  dispensed  according  to  every 
man's  necessite  and  deserving,  by  them  whom  Christ  hath  constituted  over  his  familie,  and  hath  made  the  dispensers  of"  his  trea- 
sures." See  Rhem.Test.  on  2  Cor.  c.  ii.  v.  ]0. 


26  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

ledged,  than  it  is  now,  by  Protestants,  that  bishops,  priests,  or  elders,  both  bind  and  loose,  as  in  the 
person  and  power  of  Christ  ;  so  in  his  name,  and  by  his  authority.  And  as  to  remission  of  sins,  or 
•[-absolution,  they  do  not  exclude  its  form,  provided  that  the  promises  of  (iod  in  Christ  be  first  de- 
clared; while  they  condemn  the  popish  absolution,  which  keeps  those  who  confess  in  ignorance  as  to 
the  terms  on  which  they  receive  it. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver 


Mat.  ii.  t). 


Micah  v.  2. 


Oritr.  Creek.  Vulgate  Text.  jRhemish  Version.  Beta's  LatinText 


■jnx.     r.ydij.cno: 
'.~IC  1T0lf/.'JCV;t  TO 

>,xot  ui  lapxr.h 


ex  te  enim    lor  out  of  thee 
exiet  dux,  |     shall  come 


ex  te  enim 
exibit   dux    qui 


qui  regat  po-i  forth  the  cap    pascet  populum 
puluinmeum  tain  that  shall     ilium  meum 
Israel.       I  rule  my  people         Israel. 
Israel. 


■a  r.yxi  u;  xpxr  qui  sit  domi 
nator.  &c. 


that  shall  be   I 
the  dominator 
in  Israel. 


A.  Mo xt.  ren- 
ders it,  ad  ex- 
existendum  do- 
minatorem. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568.  K.James'sBibleiGu 


*that  shall  feed,  for   out   of    thee 
ike.  shall  come  a  Go- 

vernor, that  shall 
•  rule  '  my  people 
Israel.  (35) 


in 


Governor,'  &c. 


that  is  to  be 
c  Ruler  '  in  Israel. 
(36) 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  Hie  present  reading  A.  D.  16]  1. 


35.  36.  OCi;  ZOl^dlVBi,  The  texts  corresponding  with  these  numbers  were  altered  to  their 
{present  reading  A.  U.  lo'l  1.  But,  taking  them  as  they  stand  in  the  first  English  translations,  it  is 
worth  while  enquiring  whether  they  imply  any  thing  derogatory  (as  it  is  insisted  on  they  do  not)  to 
Episcopal  authority.  In  the  gospel  of  §St.  John,  Christ  manifestly  confines  the  word  to  '  feeding;' 
since  g»*«  occurs  twice,  and  ^»^«»«  but  once.  The  Vulgate  has  pasce,  and  the  Rhemish  New  Testa- 
ment 'fced,'  as  their  respective  translations  of  the  Greek,  as  well  of  »IJMU,.  as  |W,  and  in  the  || first 
Epistle  General  o{  Peter,  »«,*»,»«,  also,  obtains  a  similar  translation  in  both;  so  that  if  the  Protestant 
Translators  deserve  censure,  Jerome,  not  less  than  the  Rhemists,  must  come  in  for  a  share.  Moreover, 
St.  Peter  could  not  so  well  manifest  his  love  of  Christ  by  governing,  or  ruling,  (in  the  sense  attached 
to  these  words  by  Ward)  <;  zeit/i  a  rod  of  iron;'  as  by  carefully  feeding  his  flock.  Neither  does  the 
signification  '  to  feed'  exclude  the  other,  it  rather  implies  governing.  But  beside  all  this,  the  Pro- 
testant translation  of  the  word  is  "  rule'"  in  f  Revelations  ;  and  an   expression  still  stronger,  and   one 


>ce  St.  John,  c.  xx.  v.  23.  and  Matt.  c.  xviii.  v.  18.  "  Whose  soever  sins  ye  remit,  they  are  remitted  unto  them,  &c."  was 

a  general  commission. 

\  ?ce  column,  '  Bible  '  lfjJl.  §  C,  xxi.  v.  15,  16,  17.  \  C.  v.  v.  2. 

U"  C.  ii.  v.  27.  andc.  xix.  v.  15, 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  I6ii, 


-? 


-which  would  tend  to  increase,  rather  than  diminish,  the  authority  of  the  Church,  is  used  (mttumu  is  the 
Septuagint  reading)  in  the  "Psalms:  scil.  "  thou  shalt  break  them,  &c."  The  reader  will  perceive  from 
this,  how  badly  Ward  is  borne  out  by  fact  in  the  charges  he  makes,  and,  at  the  same  time,  how  little 
scripture  countenances  that  overbearing,  tyrannical  sway  over  potentates  and  nations,  which  the 
Church  of  Rome  substituted  for  that  salutary  control  acknowledged  by  the  Church  of  England  as 
essential  to  the  well-being  of  the  Church  of  Christ. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.Orig.  Greek.]  Vulgate  Text.  Rhemish  Version.  Beza's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  15G8.  K.Janics'sBiblcifin 


1  Pet.  ii.  13. 


HCC  TO). 

p. 


SV0»Tt' 


XirorccynTe  ovul       Sllbjecti 

f^^f^igitur    estote 
omni  huma 
nae  creaturse 

propter 
Deum,  sive 
regi  quasi 
pnuccllenti : 


Be  subject 

therefore  to 

every   human 

creature,  for 

God,  whether 

it  be  to  the 

King  as  excel 

ling  : 


Proinde 

subjecti    estote 

cuivis  humanaj 

'  ordinationi  ' 

propter  Domi- 

num  :  sive  regi, 

ut     supere- 

minenti : 

A.  Mont. 

'  superhabenti. ' 


.  .  .  .  '  unto  ali  Submit) ourselves 
manner  of  or-  to  '  every  ordi- 
dinance  of  nance  of  man  ' 
man  ;'  whether'  (or  the  Lord's 
it  be  unto  thesake :  whether  it 
Kingas  'havingbe  to  the  King  as 
pre-eminence.'  I*  Supreme.'   (37) 


T 

37'  %T10'IQ%  This  term  denotes  creature,  creation,  &c.  Both  Greeks  and  Romans  called  the 
appointment  of  their  magistrates  a  '  creation '  of  them.  But  as  the  Apostle  is  here  enjoining  the 
Christians  of  Pontus  to  obedience  to  persons  in  authority,  without  considering  whether  their  religion 
was  true  or  false,  the  natural  import  of  the  word  must  evidently  be  rule,  law,  or  ordinance.  As  the 
word  stands  in  the  Rhemish  translation,  the  injunction  of  the  Apostle  involves  a  palpable  absurdity  ; 
viz.  that  masters  should  be  subject  to  their  slaves,  &c.  In  the  gospel  of  ;j;St.  Mark,  the  Vulgate 
translation  of  the  same  term  is  creature,  which  is  there  properly  rendered  'creature'  by  the  Rhemists. 
§^Ex°"-'-  || Ward,  with  his  accustomed  acrimony,  inveighs  against  the  English  Translators,  as 
being  actuated  by  the  same  motive,  in  their  translation  of  this  term,  which  they  entertained  when 
they  rendered  iro^ecmn,  '  to  feed;'  viz.  that  of  diminishing  ecclesiastical  authority,  and  conferring  it  on. 
the  crown.  He  then  insinuates  that,  in  their  subsequent  translation,  they  made  a  change,  for  the 
purpose  of  withdrawing  the  spiritual  jurisdiction  so  conferred,  from  the  crown,  in  the  reign  of  Queen 
Elizabeth;  "  because,"  he  says,  "  perhaps,  they  thought  they  could  be  bolder  with  a  Queen  than  a 
King,  &c.:'    This  is   not  the  case,  as   she  enjoyed  and  exercised  the  same  authority  in  ecclesiastical 


*  C.  ii.  v.  Q.     The  Protestant  Version,  evidently,  was  made  from  the  Hebrew.    Pagntnus  renders  amir   contort 
fonfringes ;   which  A,  Montanus  confirms.     Yet  this  does  not  alter  the  tendency  of  the  above  remark. 

I  Creatio,  creatura,  ordinatio  politica,  &c.    Scap.  Heder.  Lex.  1  C.  xvi.  v.  \5. 

§  Superemineo,  antecello.  Scap.  ||   Errata,  page 51. 

E  2 


eaSj  0: 


*S         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

matters    as  her  predecessors,   Henry  the  Eighth,  and  Edward  the  Sixth  ;  nor  was   the  title  of  <  Su- 
preme Head  »  of  the  Church  granted  to  those  monarchs,   except  in   the  same  sense  in   which  it  was 

afterwards  conferred  on  her.  m 

It  may  be  observed  respecting  Ward's  quotation  from  one  of  *  Ignatius  s  epistles,  viz.  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;  and  among  Magistrates,  none  is  like  the 
King"— that  supposing  those  writings  genuine,  the  words  cited  imply  nothing  of  a  Bishop's  pre- 
eminence above  a  King,  but  what  Protestants  acknowledge  to  be  true  of  every  ordinary  priest;  only, 
however,  in  what  peculiarly  belongs  to  his  office. 


Book.  Ch.Ver 


One.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text. 


Acts  xx.   28, 


vti  «a 


Spiritus 

"°i  Sanctus  po- 
„    suit   bpisco- 
KxXrio-iav,  &c.  |  pos,  regere 
ecclesiam, 
&c. 


Rhcmish  Version. 


Beza's  Latin  Texi 


The  Hol\  .  . .  Spiritus  ille 


Ghost  hath 

placed  you 

Bishops  to  rule 

the  Church, 

ike. 


Sanctus,  con 
stituit  Episco- 
pos,  '  ad  pas- 
cendam '  eccle 
siam,  &c.  A. 
"Sic  xt.  J)  as  cere 


Bps.  Bible,  1568.  K.James'sBibleiGn 


.   .   .    '  Over- 
seers, to  feed," 
£c. 


...    The   Holy 

Ghost  hath  made 

vou   '   Overseers, 

to  feed '  the 

Church,  ike. 

(38) 


3S.^E7Cl<r%07r%$9  *7t0lULCLlVZlV^  &c.  Ward's  objection  to  the  Protestant  translation  of  this 
phrase  is  no  less  frivolous  than  that  he  made  in  the  preceding  number.  Of  the  two  versions,  the 
Rhemish  one  is  clearly  the  least  accurate  ;  as  the  former  Greek  word  implies  an  Overseer,  and  the 
latter,  the  office  of  a  Shepherd,  supplying  his  flock  with  (here  metaphorically,  spiritual,)  food.  Such 
is  the  natural  explication  of  the  passage,  sanctioned,  too,  I  y  Erasmus,  one  of  the  ablest  and  most 
learned  men  of  the  sixteenth  century,  in  the  following  words :  "  q.  d.  ad  curandum,  more  pastorum  ; 
nam  Episcopi  est,  non  se,  sed  oves  pascere*  Ward,  however,  is  totally  regardless  of  this,  and,  unde- 
viatingly  pursuing  his  object,  heaps  abuse  and  calumny  on  the  Protestant  translators,  ;'  who,''  he  says, 
11  suppress  the  word  bishop,  and  translate  it  overseers  ;  and  this  they  do,  because,  in  King  Edward  the 
Sixth  and  Queen  Elizabeth's  time,  they  had  no  episcopal  consecration,  but  were  made  only  by  their  letters 
patent."  He  then  concludes  with  telling  his  readers,  that  he  will  proceed  no  further,  as  he  reserves 
"  these  things  for  j|another  treatise/'  And  here  it  may  not.  be  irrelevant  to  remark,  that  this  other 
treatise  did  make  its  appearance,  in  which  he  repeated  these  identical  charges  ;  and  that  on  its  repub- 
lication in  Dublin,  two  or  three  years  ago,  it  has,  for  the  first  time,  been  most  ably  answered  by  *[Dr. 


*  Ep.  ad  Smyrnenses. 
f  Inspector.     Scaf.     St.  Paul,  when  he  called  the  Elders  of  Christ's  Church  EniSKOnoi  seems  to  have  alluded  to  Isaiah 

lx.  17.  (lxx.  Vers.)    K;u  iuru  TS;a;-;>^Ta>  era  £►  t^nn,  xai  ra?  EFIIXKOllOYE  an  (thy  Overseers)  ui  Stxcaoevvr.. 

t   l\isco.  guberno.  euro.  Steph.  ||  Viz.  The  Controversy  of  Ordination. 

^  See  his  pamphlet.,  entitled,  The  Clergy  of  the  Church  of  England  truly  ordained,  &:c. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 

Elrington.      He  has  most  satisfactorily  proved,   that  a  viler  slander,  or   a     rosier  falsehood,   was  n« 
propagated,   than  the  Nag's   Head   story;  and   that  it    has   been    designedly  fabricated   to  substantiate 
the  first  part  of  the  fort-going  charge.      From   the  book  itself,   to    which  the   reader    is  referred    (-v<  rv 
necessary  information  may  be  had ;  as  it  would  neither  suit  the  design  of  the  present  undertaking,  nor 
be  doing  justice  to  Doctor  Ellington's  work  to  have  it  more  than  briefly  adverted  to. 

With  respect  to  letters  patent,  edicts,  or  acts  of  parliament,  making,  or  being  thought  capable 
of  making,  bishops,  nothing  can  be  more  abhorrent  from  the  principles  of  the  Church  of  England. 
Her  sentiments  on  this  head,  which  are  clear  and  explicit,  are — that  where  there  is  any  deficiency  in 
the  essentials  of  consecration  or  ordination,  they  (viz.  letters,  Sec.)  cannot  make  either  valid  ;  and,  on 
the  other  hand,  that  if  they  possess  those  essentials,  nothing  can  render  them  invalid.  With  this 
conviction  impressed  on  her  mind,  Queen  Elizabeth  neither  did,  nor  affected  to  do.  more  than  to 
appoint  Bishops  to  Sees,  where  they  were  to  discharge  episcopal  functions.  The  emperors  formerly 
exercised  a  like  jurisdiction  within  their  dominions,  and  even  sometimes  extended  it  to  the  appointment 
of  the  Popes.  Must  not  the  Papists  be  aware,  that  it  was  by  means  of  the  civil  power,  that  the 
spiritual  authority  of  their  own  church,  humble  and  lowly  as  it  was  in  the  fifth  century,  gradually 
waxed  strong,  until  towards  the  beginning  of  the  seventh,  it  usurped  the  power  which  fostered  its 
encroachments,  and  settled  in  a  confirmed  despotism,  which  continued  both  the  scourge  and  the 
terror  of  Europe,  to  the  era  of  the  Reformation?  Equivocal  as  the  attachment  of  *Constantine  the 
Great  undoubtedly  was,  at  first,  to  the  Christian  religion,  and  its  professors,  it  was  his  edicts  and 
laws  in  their  favour,  which  not  only  caused  persecution  to  cease,  but  which  laid  the  foundation  of  Chris- 
tianity becoming  the  established  religion  of  the  Roman  empire.  Numberless  fother  instances  might 
be  added,  if  necessary,  to  shew  that  the  authority  possessed  by  the  governing  power,  in  every  country 
which  embraced  Christianity,  has  been  exercised  in  its  support ;  any  one  of  which  would  be  sufficient 
to  set  aside  Ward's  objections.  It  may  be  added  that  this  interference  of  the  civil  power  is  not 
exclusively  confined  to  the  Christian  church ;  it  is  what  has  taken  place,  wherever  even  the  Pagan  and 
Mahomedan    religions    have    been   established. 

As  to  the  allegation  made  by  Ward,  that  the  Church  of  England  never  pretended  to  any  other 
than  nominal  episcopacy  for  several  years  after  Queen  Elizabeth  began  her  reign,  much  need  not  be 
said  to  point  out  the  gross  falsity  of  it.  Burnet,  whom  in  this  instance  he  misrepresents,  says  nothing 
more  than  that  the  Church  of  England,  with  that  moderation  which  marks  her  character,  has  drawn 
up  her  Jtvventy- third  article,  so  as  to  comprehend  those  Christian  Societies  who  dispense  with 
episcopacy  and  episcopal  ordination  as  unnecessary,  within  the  number  of  Christian  Churches;  while 
she  claims  for  her  own  clergy,  an  uninterrupted  succession  of  the  three  ancient  orders  of  Bishops 
Priests,  and  Deacons,  and  a  regular  ordination  to  their  holy  office,  from  the  Apostolic  to  the  pre- 
sent age.  Burnet,  speaking  of  the  framers  of  the  article,  observes,  "  they  left  this  matter  open  and  at 
large  for  such  accidents  as  have  happened,  and  such  as  might  still  happen." 

*  See  Mosh.  Eccl.  Hist.  vol.  i.  page  321.  f   Clovis  in  France,  Ethelbert  in  England,  &c. 

+  "  It  is  not  lawful  tor  any  man  to  take  upon  him  the  office  of  public  teaching,  or  ministering  the  Sacraments  in  the  congre- 
gation before  he  be  lawfully  called  and  sent  to  execute  the  same,  &c."     Article  xxm. 


30       A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


SECTION  VI.— THE  SINGLE  LIVES  OF  PRIESTS. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver. brig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text 


RhemishVersion. 


1  Cor.  ix.    5 


ywxix.x    TTl^iX- 
ym,  &C. 


Phil.  iv.  3. 


Heb.  xiii.  4. 


Kat   t^uru    ax 
<7£   av^yyt   yv>j- 


T/^xio;    o  yxfj.o<; 
tii  irxat,    xxi 

X0IT7)  XfJUXVTOi;' 


numquid 
non    habe- 
mus,  po- 
testatem 
mulierem, 
sororem    cir- 
cumducendi: 
&c.  The  Vul- 
gate consult- 
ed by  A.  M 
reads 
muliercu- 
lam.' 


Have  not  we         An  non 
power    to    lead      licet  nobis 
about  a  woman,    sororern    ux- 
a  sister?  &c.         orem  circum- 
ducere,  &c. 


Etiam  rogo 
et  te  germane 
compar. 


Honorabile 
cunnubium 
in  omnibus, 
et  thorus  im- 
maculatus. 


Beza's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  1568 


Yea,  and  I  be 
seech  thee,   my 
sincere  compa 
nion. 


Marriage  ho 
nourable  in  all, 
and  the  bed  un- 
defined. 


et  rogo  te  quo- 
que,   socie  ger 

mane,  &c. 

A.  Mont. 
renders 

av^vyt  '   socie. 


Honorabile  est 
inter  quosvis 
conjugium,   et 
cubile  impollu 
turn,   &c. 


.  a  sister, 
a  wife  ? 


yoke-fellow, 
&c. 


K.James'sBihleiGn 


Wedlock  ( is  * 
honorable,  &c 


Have  we  not 

power    to    lead 
about  a  '  sister,  a 
wife?'  &c.     (3Q) 


And  I  intreat 
thee    also,     true 
yoke- fellow,  &c. 
(40) 


Marriage  '  is  ' 
honourable  in  all, 
and  the  bed  un- 
dented, &c. 

(41) 


39.  A$eX(pr,V      yVVXim.     The  latter   term  taken  by  Itself  may  indifferently  be   translated 
'  wife,'  or  ;  woman/  as  the  circumstance  of  the  place  requires,  where  it  is  used.     The  Septuagint  read- 

*  Mulier.  facniina.  uxor.  Scap. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


31 


mg  is  >.«  in  *two  chapters  of  Genesis,  towards  the  beginning,  where  no   doubt  can  arise  about   its 
acceptation.     That  it  signifies  <  wife/  in  the  present  instance,   is  obvious  for  many  reasons.     It  would 
in   the   first  place,  be    absurd  to   translate   the   Greek    'a  sister,   a  woman;'  as  the  term  «^  itself 
imports  a  woman,  here,  also,  a  faithful  woman  ;  and  as  y,^,,  follows,  it  must  needs  mean   <  wife  '  to 
avoid  unnecessary  repetition.     Jerome,  in  his  translation,  reverses  the  natural  order  of  the  words  thus 
muhercm  soronna  ;   a  circumstance  on  which,  in  particular,  the  Rhemists   lay  great  stress      Next    as 
only  one  woman  attended  the  Apostle,   not  only  no  imputation  can  be  thrown  on  St.  Peter,  whom' St 
Paul  states  to  be  a  married  man,   but  even  suspicion   is  guarded  against  by  the   adoption   Jf  the  word 
wife.     Thirdly,   the  words  -  to  lead  about,"  imply  a  degree  of  authority,  such   as  that  of  a   husband 
over  his  wife,  and  winch  the  Apostle  could  not  have  used,  if  he  spoke   of  a  woman  voluntarily  follow- 
ing him.     And.  lastly,  supposing  a  woman  would  voluntarily  attend  the  Apostle  in  his  travels  through 
Judea,  it  is  very  improbable  that  she  would  extend  her  attendance  on  him  to  foreign  countries. 

tSt.  Paul  sa\s,  -  let  every  man  have  his  own  wife  ;"  and  {again,  -  marriage  is  honourable  in  all  " 
Numberless  other  passages  might  be  adduced  which  favours  the  marriage  of  the  clergy,  while  not  one 
exists  which  can  be  interpreted  into  a  prohibition.  Is  not  ||Ward,  then,  convicted  of  a  gross  untruth, 
when  he  asserts,  -  that  continency,  and  a  single  life,  have  always  been  annexed,  in  the  New  Testament' 
to  the  sacred  order  of  priesthood  ?"' 

The  testimony  of  the  Fathers,  too,  is  directly  at  variance  with  what  Ward  asserts.  For,  §CIe- 
mens  or  Alexandria  relates  Peter's  wife  to  have  continued  in  matrimonial  connection  with  him  to  the 
day  of  his  martyrdom.  Nay,  further,  he  expressly  makes  mention  of  their  daughter,  Petronilla,  and 
even  of  her  espousal  to  one  Flaccus.  Again,  he  says,  he  that  marries,  ™  WITW  Awrf**,  «  hath  the 
Apostles  for  examples."  And,  in  another  place,  he  confutes  the  enemies  to  matrimony  with  these 
very  words  of  St.  Paul,  "  have  we  not  power  to  lead  about  a  sister  a  wife,  as  well  as  the  other  Apostles  ?" 
He,  at  the  same  time,  adds,  that  «  they  carried  their  wives  about,  not  as  wives,  but  as  sisters  :" 
ovx.  is  «&x?as,  m^py  re*  yvmw.  Tertullian,  a  presbyter  of  the  second  century,  also  says,  "  licebat  Apos- 
tolis  nubere,  et  uxores  circumducere."  Furthermore,  it  should  be  remarked,  that  as  the  Jews  were 
wont  to  call  their  own  wives,  sisters,  on  account  of  their  common  origin  ;  so  did  the  primitive 
Christians  address  theirs  by  the  same  appellation,  on  account  of  their  common  faith. 

Not  before  the  fourth  century  was  any  attempt  made  by  the  Popes  to  prohibit  the  marriage  of  the 
clergy,  which  amounts  to  a  presumptive  proof,  that,  up  to  that  period,  celibacy  amongst  them  was  un- 
known, f  Joceline  says,  that  Calphurnius,  St.  Patrick's  father,  was  a  Deacon,  and  that  his  grand- 
father, Potitus,  was  a  Presbyter:  a  fact  not  to  be  denied  even  by  **Doctor  Milner,  although  he 
endeavours  to  reconcile  the  historian's  account  with  the  practice  of  the  popish  church.  It  is,  besides 
certain,  that  this  gross  abuse  of  ecclesiastical  power  was  not  made  general  in  its  effects  before  the 
pontificate  of  Gregory  the  Seventh,   towards  the  conclusion  of  the  eleventh  century. 

*  ii.  15.  and  iv.  I.  f  1  Cor.  vii.  2.  *  Heb.  xiii.  4.  [)  Errata,  page  53.  §  Fascicul  Temp 

f  "  Calphurnius  autem  priu;  in  Diaconatu  diutius  Domino  servivit."     And  again  :    "  Extitit  vir  quidam   Calphurnius 

nomine,  filius  Potiti  Presiyteri. Vita  Sti.  Palric. 

**   Inquiry,  pp.  149,  150. 


32  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

40.  Xv^VyB  yVVTilS.  tWard  says,  "  neither  ought  this  text  to  be  translated  yoke-fellow,  as 
our  innovators  do,  on  purpose  to  make  it  sound  in  English  man  and  wife."  The  words  could  not 
receive  a  more  appropriate  translation  than  yoke-fellow,  (viz  a  partner  in  any  yoke  whatsoever)  which 
the  Greek  signifies.  So  that  if  it  implies  '  man  and  wife'  in  English,  it  does  equally  so  in  Greek. 
It  is  not  clear  either,  notwithstanding  what  Ward  says,  that  St.  Paul  was  single.  The  text  he  quotes 
does  not  say  so  precisely  ;  as,  in  addressing  the  '  unmarried  and  widows,'  all  that  can  be  inferred  from 
his  expression  is,  that  he  was  unmarried  at  the  time  he  wrote  those  particular  words  Besides,  he  but 
merely  recommends  their  continuance  in  their  then  state;  his  words  are,  £"  it  is  good  for  them  if  they 
abide  even  as  I."  There  is  also  a  strong  degree  of  probability  that  the  Apostle  saluted  some  ruler  of 
the  church,  whom  he  calls  yoke  fellow,  scil.  in  the  work  of  Christ.  This  is  the  sense  in  which  Pro- 
testant commentators  interpret  the  passage.  But  whether  the  words  be,  or  be  not,  refernble  to  the 
term  '  wife,'  the  English  translation  does  not  decide  ;  a  convincing  proof  that  the  translators  were 
guided  by  the  meaning,  and  not  the  sound,  of  this  or  that  form  of  words  ;  and  that  their  design  waf, 
not  such  as  is  charitably  imputed  to  them,  that  of  "  cloaking  the  sensuality  of  a  few  fallen  priests.'' 

41.  The  insertion  of  "  is  "  in  the  Protestant  translation,  undoubtedly  makes  the  passage  clearer, 
but  no  more  implies  the  marriage  of  the  clergy,  than  the  omission  of  it  does  their  celibacy.  So  that 
it  is  a  matter  not  worth  contesting,  whether  the  passage  be  understood  with  the  Church  of  Rome  as 
comprehending  a  precept,  or  with  the  Church  of  England  as  comprehending  an  assertion.  Estius  un- 
derstood it  in  the  latter  sense,  when  he  says,  "  res  eodem  recidit,  utrovis  modo,  (assertive  vel  pre- 
ceptive) accipias."  Notwithstanding  his  authority,  and  that  it  is  of  little  consequence,  whether  the 
word  be  added  or  omitted,  it  is  proper  to  observe,  that  many  of  the  §Fathers  infer  from  this  passage  the 
permission  and  lawfulness  of  marriage  to  all  men ;  which  interpretation  could  only  be  admitted  by 
understanding  the  Apostle's  words  in  an  affirmative  sense.  Moreover,  the  particle  h,  in  the  second 
clause  of  the  verse,  denotes  the  words  in  the  first  clause  to  be  expressed  affirmatively.  Since,  therefore, 
the  object  of  the  Apostle  is,  as  ||Beza  properly  judges,  to  dissuade  m  n  from  fornication  and  adul- 
tery, he  points  out  marriage  as  a  pure  and  holy  remedy,  and  one  which  God  has  provided  for  man's 
infirmity. 


*  Conjunctus.  copulatus.  Scap.  f  Errata,  page  53. 

+    ]  Cor.  vii.  8. 

§  Theodoreton  Heb.  xiii.  4.  says,  "  this  ordinance  God  made  in  the  beginning.  Let  us  make  (says  he)  an  helper  for  him. 
Therefore  when  he  had  fashioned  her  and  brought  her  to  him,  he  joined  them  together,  and  gave  the  blessing  of  marriage,  saying, 
increase  and  multiply,  and  fill  the  earth.  But  lawless  and  unchaste  desires  brought  in  adultery  and  fornication."  Chrysostom  and 
CEcumenius  interpret  the  same  text  in  the  same  way  ;  and  Fulgentius  also,  taking  it  in  an  affirmative  sense,  observes,  "  the  mar- 
riage of  Christians  is  indeed  holy,  for  in  that  state  conjugal  chastity  is  preserved  in  the  body,  and  purity  of  faith,  in  the  heart:" 
quia  et  conjugalis  Hi  castitas  custoditur  in  corpore,  et  puritas  fidci  servatur  in  corde.  Fulg.  ad  Gall,  de  Statu,  vid.  Ep.  2.  Hentenius, 
a  popish  writer  too,  renders  ti^o$  6  y<xuo;  honorabile  est  conjugium. 

1|  "  Deinde  res  ipsa  ostendit,  Apostolum,  ut  Hebraeos  deterreret  ab  omni  scortatione  et  adulterio,  de  matrimonio  praefari,  tan- 
quam  honesto  ac  sancto  adversus  scortationis  ac  adulterii  turpitudinem  remedio  :  tacite  etiam  monentem  ut  matrimonium  majore 
religione  colant."    Vid  Annot.  p.  437. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


M 


Book.  Ch.  Ver, 


Orig.  Greek 


Mat.  xix.  1 1 


Vulgate  Text. 


RhemishVersion. 


Oy  irxvTa;    "/u- 
t«tov,  uTtit    on 


Non  omnes      Not  all  take 
capiunt   ver-  this  word,   but 


Ibid.  xix.  12. 


v.x\    \\tj\i  utrj- 

yjj\    OITIKE?  IVVH- 

y}vx)>  ixviHi 
St  x  T*]»  |3a<7k- 
Xii«»  twc  ov(>X' 
nut.  '  O  ovvxfjii 

UTCU. 


bum  istud, 

sed  quibus 

datum  est. 


they  to  whom 
it  is  given. 


et  sunt 

eunuchi,  qui 

seipsos  cas- 

traverunt 

propter  reg- 

num   ccelo- 

rum,  qui  po~ 

test  capere 

capiat. 


Beza's  LatinText  Bps.  Bible,  1568 


Non  omnes 
capaces  hujus 
sermonis,  sed 
ii  quibus  datum 
est. 


And  there  are 
eunuchs  who 
have  made 
themselves 
eunuchs  '    for 
the  kingdom  of 
heaven.  Hethat 
can  take,    let 
him  take.  The 
Rhem.  Vers. 
of  1582,  has 
'  which  have 
gelded  them- 
selves,' &c. 


All  men  'can- 
not receive,' 
&c. 


K.James'sBibleiGn 


All  (men)  cannot 
receive  this  say- 
ing, save  (they) 
to  whom  it  is 
given. 

(42) 


et  sunt  eunu- 
chi qui   seipsos 

castrarunt 

propter  regnum 

coelorum,  qui 

potest  capax. 

esse,  capiat. 

A.  Mont. 

'  potens' 


*There  are 

some  f  chaste, ' 

which  have 

made     them 

selves  chaste.  ' 


And   there  be 
•eunuchs  '  which 

have  *  made 
themselves  eu- 
nuchs '     for   the 
kingdom   of 
heaven's   sake. 
He  that  is  able 
to   receive  (it,) 
let    him   receive 

(it.) 

(<i3) 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  tlie  present  reading  A*  D.  1611. 


42.  Oy  7TCLVTSC  ytoPSCTl.  Ward  does  not  more  decidedly  condemn  the  Protestant  translation 
of  this  passage,  which,  he  says,  was  made  "  against  the  profession  of  continency  in  priests.  &c."  than 
JDoctor  Milner  supports  that  of  the  Rhemists,  as  being,  in  his  mind,  "  of  no  slight  importance 
towards  settling  the  dispute  concerning  the  possibility  of  leading  a  continent  life.*'  But  the  defence  of 
this,  or  the  reprobation  of  that,  translation,  is  of  trifling  avail,  if  not  derived  from,  and  warranted  by, 
the  original  language.  Our  Lord,  who  knew  what  man  was  better  than  man  himself,  left  no  express 
general  rule  on  the  subject,  which  he  would  have  done,  could  it  possibly  have  been  complied  with. 


f  Gussetius  Ta  x,u&»  ostendit  in  variis  Unguis  respondere  t«  3VKtc-8*».  Vid.  Lex.  Heb. 


%  Inquiry,  page  34(5. 


Si  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

The  Rhemish  construction  of,  •wmf^,  "  all  men  do  not  receive,"  does  not  substantially  differ 
from  the  Protestant  one,  "  all  men  cannot  receive  ;"  and  is  resolvable  into  two  distinct  propositions  : 
some  men  do,  and  some  do  not,  receive,  &c.  Now,  as  to  the  persons  who  come  under  the  latter 
description,  no  cause  is  assigned,  why  they  "  do  not  receive/  nor  is  any  mention  made  of  the  possi- 
bility of  their  receiving  '  the  saying.'  Indeed,  such  possibility  cannot  even  be  so  much  as  inferred,  in 
consequence  of  the  words,  s  «W»»<  xw  XW™>>  which  close  the  following  verse.  These  words, 
then,  (which  the  Rhemists  render,  "  he  that  can  take  it,  let  him  take  it/')  confirm  the  exactness 
of  the  Protestant  translation  of  the  others.  They  had  been  said  to  no  purpose,  if  all  men  were  able 
who  wished  it ;  and  if  all  who  wished  it  obtained  it:  for  in  this  case,  our  Lord  would  have  said,  all 
men  do  not  receive  this  saying,  but  they  who  wish,  let  them  receive  it. 

Ward  next  quotes  St.  Augustine  as  saying,  "  whosoever  have  not  this  gift  of  chastity  given  them, 
it  is  either  because  they  will  not  have  it,  or  because  they  fulfil  not  that  which  they  will."  So  far  is 
this  Father  from  advocating  the  continency  of  priests,  or  others,  that  a  statement  of  his  words  will 
shew  his  meaning  to  be  the  reverse  of  what  Ward  asserts.  Probably  a  more  flagrant  attempt  to  mis- 
represent the  sense  of  an  author  is  not  any  where  else  to  be  met  with.  The  following  is  the  passage 
alluded  to:  *"  All  men  do  not  receive  this  word,  but  they  to  whom  it  is  given  ;  for  they  to  whom  it 
is  not  o-iven,  cither  they  will  not,  or  else  they  do  not  fulfil  that  which  they  will  :  but  they  to  whom  it 
is  given,  do  so  will,  that  they  fulfil  that  which  they  will.''  Here  is  nothing  ambiguous;  it  is  clearly 
laid  down,  that  it  is  not  in  the  power  of  every  man,  who  desires  it,  to  be  continent;  but  that  it  is  the 
special  gift  of  God,  that  any  both  feel  the  inclination  and  possess  the  ability  of  fulfilling  it.  The 
words  marked  in  italics  are  omitted  by  Ward,  upon  which  the  sense  of  the  entire  passage  turns,  and 
these  substituted:  «  and  they  that  have  this  word,  have  it  of  God,  and  their  own  free  will."  But 
what  precludes  the  possibility  of  mistaking  the  Father's  meaning,  is  the  quotation  heat  the  same  time 
makes  from  the  Book  of  Wisdom  ;  the  authority  of  which  will  not  be  rejected  by  the  popish  doctors, 
as  they  consider  it  canonical  scripture,  t"  And  as  I  knew  that  I  could  not  otherwise  be  continent, 
unless  God  gave  it,  this  very  thing  also  was  wisdom,  to  know  whose  gift  this  was  ;  I  went  unto  the 
Lord  and  prayed  unto  him."  The  reader  can  now  decide,  whether  the  Protestant  translation,  "  all  men 
cannot  receive,"  be  not  the  most  correct. 

Having  thus  disposed  of  St.  Augustine's  opinion,  it  becomes  necessary  to  advert  to  that  of  Ongen, 
which,  according  to  tWard,  is  comprised  in  the  following  few  words;  viz.  "this  gift  (of  chastity)  is 
given  to  all  that  ask  for  it."  Here  it  may  be  enquired,  if  this  Father  were  so  convinced,  why  did  not 
he  himself  ask  for  it ;  and  why,  if  he  thought  he  could  keep  the  vow  of  perpetual  chastity,  had  he 
recourse  to  the  ||last  extremities?  These  are  questions,  which,  while  they  are  not  likely  to  receive  an 
answer  either  from  Doctor  Milner,  or  any  of  his  Irish  '  Episcopal  Brethren,'  make  the  authority  of  Ori- 
gen  on  the  subject  go  for  nothing.  For  his  conduct  manifestly  proved,  that  he  considered  the  observance 
of  the  rule  he  prescribed  to  himself,  as  above  man's  power,  otherwise  he  would  not  have   violated  it. 

*  Nun  omnes  capiunt  verbum  hoc,  sedquibus  datum  est:   quibus  enim  non  est  datum,  autnolunt,  aut  non   implent   quod 
volunt  j  quibus  autcm  datum  est,  sic  volunt,  ut  impleant  quod  volunt.     St.  August.  De  lib.  arb.  cap.  4. 

f  Wisd.  viii.  21.   Douay  Bib.  1610. 
♦  Errata,  page  53.  II  See  Mosb.  Eccl.  Hist.  vol.  i.  page  287- 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IX  1 


CI  1. 


So  that  the  popish  doctors  should  be  more  reserved  in  bringing  forward  his  testimony  than  that  of  ail 
others;  inasmuch  as  it  rather  makes  against,  than  for  their  cause.  Ward's  language  in  this  article  is 
justly  reprehensible,  as  he  converts  a  subject  of  deep  seriousness,  whether  he  intended  it  or  not,  into 
one  of  obscene  levity.  "Our  Saviour's  words,"  he  says,  do  not  justify  the  mutilating  "  those  parts. 
which  belong  to  generation,"  in  the  popish  clergy,  which  would  be  extremely  sinful ;  but  to  make 
"  themselves  impotent  for  generation,  by  promise  and  vow,  which  is  a  spiritual  castration,  &c"  proh. 
pudor ! 

Jerome,  too,  although  he  in  general  strenuously  contends  for  abstinence  from  marriage,  says, 
*"  that  it  is  better  to  marry,  than  out  of  marriage  to  live  incontinently;  since  they  greatly  sin  who 
vow  that  which  they  cannot  keep."     So  much  for  the  opinions  of  those  early  writers. 

Now,  as  to  the  ftext  so  confidently  brought  forward  by  Doctor  Milner,  as  contributing  so  much 
towards  "  settling  the  dispute  concerning  the  possibility  of  leading  a  continent  life,"  it  may  be 
observed,  that,  however  extensive  his  information  be  in  other  respects,  his  knowledge  of  the  Greek 
language  appears  to  be  rather  of  an  imperfect  nature.  He  says,  that  the  Rhemish  version,  if  they  do 
not  contain,  "is  according  to  the  Greek  as  well  as  the  Vulgate."  It  can  only  be  ascribed  to  igno- 
rance to  say  it  is  according  to  the  Greek,  (»U  \tynfaxtmmu,)  since  the  verb,  which  is  of  the 
middle  voice,  is  not  made  to  convey  an  appropriate  meaning  ; — that  of  making  the  persons  spoken  of 
the  object  of  t.heir  own  actions.  But  to  say  it  is  according  to  the  Latin  text  of  the  Vulgate,  in  which 
he  is  so  well  skilled,  is  unpardonable;  as  it  proceeds  from  a  disregard  to  truth.  The  Vulgate  reading 
is,  "si  vero  se  non  continent;"  which  evidently  imports  the  same  meaning  as  the  Greek.  As,  then, 
the  Rhemish  version  takes  no  notice  of  se,  it  is  incorrect,  and  being  equally  so,  as  has  been  shewn, 
when  referred  to  the  Greek,  it  is  absurd  to  make  it  bear  any  such  interpretation  as  that  assigned  it  by 
Doctor  Milner. 

The  Protestant  translation,  "  if  they  cannot  contain,"  is  but  another  form  of  expression  for  the 
more  literal  signification  of  the  words — if  they  do  not  possess  the  government,  or  mastery,  over 
themselves ;  and  is  for  that  reason  to  be  preferred. 

43.  EVVS^KTCLV  SXVTSg.  Ward,  in  his  exposition  of  this  text,  says,  that  such  are  spoken  of 
"  as  have  made  themselves  Eunuchs  for  the  kingdom  of  Heaven,"  by  a  vow  of  perpetual  chastity. 
From  this  it  appears  he  understands  the  passage  in  a  figurative  sense,  the  very  reverse  of  that,  which 
the  ||translation  given  it  by  the  Rhemists  in  loS'J  bears.  lie  disclaims  the  literal  sense  of  it  in  such 
indelicate  terms,  that  to  offer  any  thing  by  way  of  animadversion,  in  addition  to  what  has  been  said 
in  the  preceding  number,  would  but  lead  to  that  kind  of  discussion,  which,  on  grave  subjects,  should 
eyer  be  avoided. 

Now  that  the  Protestant  and  Popish  versions  are  the  same,  it  is  not  possible  to  deduce  from  them 
a  single  argument  in  favour  of  celibacy  ;  for,  in  the  preceding  verse,  nothing  imperative  is  contained. 
Our  Lord  simply  observes,  as  he  did  before,  that  there  are  some  men  who  have  conquered  the  pro- 
pensities of  nature,  that  they  might  the  more  effectually  promote  the  interests  of  the  gospel.  But 
this,  as  has  been  before  stated,  is  far  from  being  a  general  rule  laid  down  by  him  to  be  followed. 

*  Epist.  ad  Demetr.  f   1  Cor.  vii.  Q. 

X  From  ly^mns,  Having  power  over  ones  oivn  inclinations. — Parkh.  fl  See  Col.  Rhem.  Vers 

v  2 


36  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


SECTION  VII.— SACRAMENT  OF  BAPTISM. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver. 


Orig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text. 


Acts  xix.  3. 


lw9-.Tt'     <"     ot 
iwroii,  Ek  to 

jJ.CC. 


RhemishVersion, 


Tit.  iii.  5,  6. 


?l«T£0l/  vrcthty- 

ytnatcci  xa» 

CL»a>itx.n>acrtu<; 

TrtevjJ.a.'Tot;  a.y\n 

'Ov  (^X11"  E 

Ike. 


In  quo  ergo 
baptizati  es- 
tis  ?  qui  dix- 
erunt,  In  Jo- 

hannis  bap- 
tismate. 


In  what  then 
were  you  bap- 
tized? whosaid, 
In  John's  bap- 
tism. 


.  .  salvos  nos 
fecit  per  lava 
crum  regene- 
rations et  re- 
novationis 
S.  Sti.  Quern 
efFudit  in  nos 
abunde,  &c. 


Beza'sLatinText. 


In  quid  ergo 
baptizati  estis ; 

ipsi  vero  dixe- 
runt,  in  Johan- 

nis  baptisma. 


.he  hath  saved 
us;  by  the  la  ver 
of  regeneration 
and  renovation 
of  the  Holy 
Ghost,  whom 
ie  hath  poured 
upon  us  abun- 
dantly, &c. 


. . .  servavit  nos 

per   lavacrum 

regenerationis 

et  * 

renovationis 

Spiritus  S. 
Quern  efFudit 
super    nos   co 

piose,  &c. 

A.  Mont. 

'  servavit.' 


Bps.  Bible,  1568 


i  unto  what, 

&c. 

unto  '   John's 
baptism. 


*'  By  the  foun- 
tain, '  &c. 

'  which  he  shed 
on'  us,    &c 


K.James'sBiblei6n 


'  Unto  what 

then   were  ye 

baptised  ?'     and 

they   said,    Unto 

John's  baptism. 


(44) 


.  .  .  He  saved  us, 
by  the  washing  of 
regeneration,  and 
renewing   of  the 

Holy    Ghost  ; 
which  he  shed  on 
us  abundantly 
h rough   Jesus 
Christ,  &c. 

(45) 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  the  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 

44.  Ei£  TJ  SVf  &c  §Ward  ushers  in  this  article  with  a  charge  which  affords  as  convincing  a 
proof  of  uncandid  mis-statement,  or  of  gross  ignorance,  or  of  both,  as  any  to  be  met  with  in  his 
work.  He  chooses  to  say,  that  Protestants  have  deprived  the  two  sacraments  which  they  retain  "  of 
all  grace,  virtue,  and  efficacy ;"  because  they  did  not  consider  them  necessary  to  salvation,  for  the 
obtaining  of  which  they  held  "  that  faith  alone  was  sufficient."  The  doctrines  of  the  Church  of 
England  give  the  most  direct  contradiction  to  these  assertions.     In  her  XXVIIth  Article,  she  thus 


$  Errata,  page  55. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  37 

speaks :  "  By  baptism,  the  promises  of  the  forgiveness  of  sin,  and  of  our  adoption  to  be  the  sons  of 
God  by  the  Holy  Ghost,  are  visibly  signed  and  sealed  ;  faith  is  confirmed  ;  and  grace  increased  by 
virtue  and  prayer  unto  God.''  In  her  catechism,  she  makes  specific  mention  of  two  sacraments  as 
being  "  generally  necessary  to  salvation."  Her  homilies  and  liturgy  speak  a  similar  language.  Is  this 
converting  her  two  sacraments  "  into  beggarly  elements  ;"  stripping  them  of  all  grace  ;  or  dispensing 
with  them,  as  useless,  in  the  work  of  salvation  ?  As  to  the  expression  c  faith  alone,'  it  will  not 
appear  surprising  that  it  made  the  impression  it  did  on  Ward's  mind,  when  it  is  considered  that  it  was 
introduced  into  the  eleventh  article,  and  words  of  the  same  import  into  the  homilies  and  liturgy,  in 
opposition  to  the  popish  doctrine  of  human  merit.  The  sense  in  which  they  are  to  be  understood  is 
admirably  set  forth  by  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln  in  his  late  *publication,  a  work  which  will  most  amply 
repay  the  reader  for  his  trouble  in  consulting  it. 

Ward  speaks  of  the  insufficiency  of  John's  baptism,  and  the  great  difference  between  it  and 
Christ's.  Now  it  appears,  that  Christ  himself,  when  baptised,  received  no  tother  baptism  than  that  of 
John.  jSt.  Luke  records  a  saying  of  St.  Paul,  which  shews  the  value  he  placed  on  John's  baptism ; 
and  so  far  was  he  from  annulling  it,  that  he  confirmed  it  by  the  imposition  of  hands.  "  Then,-'  said 
Paul,  "  John  truly  baptised  with  the  baptism  of  repentance,  &c."  And  what  strengthens  the  proof 
that  his  baptism  was  not  inferior  to  Christ's,  is  that  such  as  had  been  baptised  by  him  were  never  re- 
baptised.  For  as  Christ  baptised  none  himself,  it  must  follow,  either  that  the  Apostles  were  not  at  all 
baptised,  or  else,  only  baptised  by  John.  Finally,  if  John  was  a  minister  of  the  gospel,  and  not  of 
the  law,  then  must  his  baptism  be  a  sacrament  of  the  New  Testament,  but  if  it  differ  from  the  bap- 
tism of  Christ,  then  are  there  two  baptisms  of  the  New  Testament,  contrary  to  what  is  declared 
in  the  §Nicene  Creed. 

The  learned  II Doddridge,  it  is  true,  affirms,  that  numbers  who  had  received  the  baptism  of 
John,  "  probably  afterwards  received  Christian  baptism.''  But,  with  all  due  respect  for  such  high 
authority,  is,  or  ought,  probability  to  be  deemed  sufficient  grounds  to  go  on,  in  determining  a  ques- 
tion of  this  nature  ?  Indeed,  the  utmost  it  amounts  to  is  a  possibility,  that  any  of  the  persons, 
spoken  of  by  ^]St.  Matthew,  were  included  among  St.  Peter's  auditors,  as  mentioned  in  several  pas- 
sages in  the  **Acts.  The  most  that  this  would  go  to  establish  would  be,  that  a  difference  did  exist 
between  the  baptism  of  John  and  that  of  Christ;  but  not  that  any  insufficiency,  or  any  inferiority, 
existed  in  the  former,  compared  with  the  latter,  for  the  reasons  already  stated. 

As  to  the  translation  of  «?,  it  is  perfectly  immaterial  whether  it  be  "  in,''  or  "  into.''  It  creates  no 
difference  in  the  sense  whether  «s  to  o»opz  be  rendered  '  in  the  name,' or  « into  the  name;'  as  '  into 
the  name  of  the  Father,  Son,  &c."  is  of  the  same  import  with  the  reading  '  in  the  name  of  the 
Father,  &c.'  At  the  time  Ward  produced  '  into,'  when  given  as  a  translation  of  »?,  as  an  error,  it 
seems  he  was  not  aware  that,  in  the  tt Epistle  to  the  Ephesians,  Jerome  rendered  i»?  ««»  to  ^^a,  in 
omnem  plenitudinem  ;  and  the  Rhemists  '  unto  all  the  fulness,  &c.'' 

45.  AlOL  ?\H7P&.   Here  is  another  blemish  pointed  out  by  Ward,  and  which,  no  doubt,  is  looked 

*  Refutation  of  Calvinism,  ch.  iii.  f  St.  Matt.  ill.  13.  %  Acts  xix.  4. 

§  "  One  baptism  for  the  remission  of  sins,  &c." 
||  Expositor,  vol.  iii.  page  281  1  iii.  5,  0.  **  ji.  33.  41.  iv.  4.  and  vi.  7-  +t  »».  JO. 


58         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

on  by  Dr.  Miiner,  and  his  '  Episcopal  Brethren/  as  a  glaring  corruption.  But  an  attentive  considera- 
tion of  the  passage  will  disprove  the  charge  of  misconstruction  in  the  Protestant  Bible.     The  Greek  of 

*  laver'  is  tew,  which  is  not  the  term  used  by  St.  Paul,  for  if  it  were,  he  would  have  said  hxtompt. 
The  term  he  did  adopt,   viz.  **r?or,  imports  a  bath,  washing,  &c. 

According  to  the  Rhemish  version,  i|iX«»  is  '  poured  upon;'  and,  according  to  the  Protestant  one, 

*  shed  on.'  1  lere  the  difference  is  so  inconsiderable,  that  either  interpretation  may  as  well  be  said  to 
be  levelled  against  the  rite  of  baptism  as  the  other.  What  the  faith  and  practice  of  the  Church  of 
England  is  in  this  particular,  has  been  so  explicitly  declared,  in  the  article  immediately  preceding,  that 
it  is  almost  superfluous  to  repeat,  that  she  considers  baptism  no  less  a  sacrament  than  the  Church  of 
Rome.  Such  a  declaration,  however,  seems  in  a  manner  called  for,  in  consequence  of  the  assertion 
made  b\  Ward,  with  equal  impudence  and  falsehood,  that  Protestants  have  made  Baptism,  and  the 
Supper  of  the  Lord,  by  depriving  them  of  all  efficacy,  and  reducing  them  to  "  poor  and  beggarly 
elements,  at  the  most,  no  better  than  those  of  the  Jewish  law.'' 


SECTION  VIII.— CONFESSION  AND  SACRAMENT  OF  PENANCE. 


Book   Cli.Vcr 


Jam.  v.    lb. 


Orig.  Greek.,  Vulgate  Text. 


i^oM>.oyn^<o-,  i  confitemini 

«**"*<»«  t*    I  erajo   alter 

5  &c>        ;  utrum  pec- 

cata  vestra. 


Rhemish  Version.  Beza's  LatinText 


confess 

therefore 

your  sins  one 

to  another. 


confitemini  alii 
aliis  oftensas, 

&c. 

A.  Moxt. 

'  alii  aliis  ffen- 

siones? 


Bps.  Bible,  15(58 


*  '  Acknow- 
ledge '  your 
'  faults,'    &c. 


A.Jamcs'sBibleiGn 


Confess  (your) 
faults  '    one    to 
mother,   <Scc. 


(46) 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  the  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 

46.  HcLgCLTkiOdiACL,  This  word  is  best  rendered  by  fault,  and  is  opposed  to  a^ricc,  which 
implies  sin.  It  is  not,  however,  on  it  that  the  principal  stress  must  be  laid,  but  on  «**«;*(;,  which  dis- 
tinctly points  out  the  Apostle's  meaning.  He  is  enjoining  mutual  confession,  ("  vobis  invicem"  to  use 
the  words  of  Erasmus,  "  non  sacerdotibus/)  which  overturns  the  doctrine  of  auricular  confession,  i.  e. 
confession  to  the  priest ;  it  being  as  obligatory  on  the  priest  to  confess  to  the  layman,  as  for  the  layman 
to  confess  to  the  priest.  Besides,  it  supersedes  all  pretences  to  that  priestly  power  exercised  by  the 
popish  clergy  over  the  laity  of  their  communion.  And  as  to  the  word  '  acknowledge,'  which  was 
adopted  by  the  first  Protestant  translators,  it  clearly  signifies  nothing  different  from  '  confess,'  the  read- 
ing of  their  successors. 


f- Lapsus,  offensa,  erratum.   Scap. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION   OF  THEM   IN    1G1I.  w 

Cut,  says  *Ward,  "  if  this  acknowledging  of  faults  one  to  another,  before  death,  be  indifferently 
made  to  all  men,  why  do  they  appoint,  in  their    Common    Prayer   Book,   that  the  sick    person   shall 
make  a  special  confession  to  the  minister,  and  that  lie  shall  absolve  them,  &c.  ?"     Now,    in    the  order 
prescribed  in  the  Book  of  Common  Prayer,  for  the  visitation  of  the  sick,  he  only  is  "  moved  to  make 
a  special  confession  of  his  sins,"  who  "  feels  his  conscience  troubled  with  any  weighty  matter,"  that  he 
may  receive  spiritual  comfort  from  the  minister,  who  possesses  authority,   in  God's  name,  to' remit  his 
sins,  as  well  as  the  sins  of  those  who  are  in  health.     But  it  does  not  hence  follow,  that  confession  is  a 
sacrament;   if  it  did,  preaching  also  should  be  considered  one;   inasmuch  as   by  it,   the  people,   who 
believe,  are,  through  the  ministry  of  the  preacher,   absolved  from  their  sins.     To  constitute  what  he 
calls4  sacramental  confession,'  it  should  have  an  outward  sign   to   represent  the  inward  grace  of  the 
remission  of  sins ;   of  which  requisite  it  is  totally  destitute.     In  their  annotations    on    this  very  text, 
the  Rhemists  express  themselves  with  some  hesitation,  evidently  considering  it  as  one  not  very  favour- 
able to  them.     "  It  is  not  certain,"   they  observe,   "   that  he    (St.  James)  speaketh    here  of  sacra- 
mental confession,  yet  the  circumstances  of  the  letter  well  beareth  it,  and  very  probable  it  is  that  he 
meaneth  of  it."   Ward,  however,  and  his  abettors  of  the  present  day,  speak  on  the  subject  in  the  dogma- 
tical language  of  their  Church.  They  represent  confession  as  essential  to  the  pardon  of  sin,  and  as  having 
an  intimate  connexion  with  a  Sacrament  ;  and  the  priest  as  having  power  to  prescribe  conditions  of  ab- 
solution !  That  this  is,  however,  but  a  modern  doctrine,  not  having  been  received  into  the  Church  of 
Rome  before  the  time  of  flnnocent  III.  A.  D.   1215,  and  that  it  does  not  convey  the   sentiments   of 
the  primitive  church,  inasmuch  as  secret,  auricular,  sacramental   confession   was  altogether  unknown 
to  it,  may  be  proved  by  a  brief  statement  of  the  means  it  took  to  enforce  its  authority,  and  maintain 
its  purity. 

First,  then,  the  nature  of  the  confession  enjoined  by  the  Apostle  is   but   that  directed  by  Our 
Saviour  himself,  |"  agree  with  thine  adversary  quickly,   &c."   a  confession  to   the  person  injured,  and 
not  a  general  one.     On   this  principle  the  ancient  church   seems  to  have  grounded  her  discipline,  as 
the  early  ecclesiastical  writers,  Origen,  Chrysostom,  and  Basil,  censured  all  private  confession  of  sins 
to  men,  from  its  liability  to  abuse,  and    recommended  it   to  be   made  only  to  God.     In  the  case  of 
apostates,  it  certainly  imposed  severities,  by  enjoining  a  public  confession  of  their  offence.     It  after- 
wards relaxed,  by  admitting,  first,  a  private  confession,  and  then  a  private  atonement.     In  the  eighth 
century,  masses,  alms,  &c.  were  substituted  ;  and  towards  the  thirteenth,  when  the  Church  of  Rome 
had  reduced  the  minds  of  men  under  her  yoke,  her  Pontiff  made    auricular  confession  an    imperative 
duty,  and,  to  strengthen  the  delusion,   called  it  a  sacrament.     Since  that  period,   it  has  been  a  fruitful 
source  of  gain  to  her  clergy,  and  the  encourager,  if  not  the  parent,  of  every  violation  of  law,  whether 
human  or  divine,  wherever  popery  predominates.     But  were  there  no  other  objection  to  the  existence 
of  this  infamous  practice,  an   insuperable  one  would  arise  from  its  tendency  to  violate  the  sanctity  of 
virgin  innocence ;    for  that  woman,  who  reveals  every  trifling  occurrence,  must  necessarily  have  loose 
principles  of  virtue  ;  while  it  is  equally  as  certain,  that  the  confessor  himself  cannot  long  retain  a  purity 
of  mind.     It  is  a  physical  impossibility  that  he  should,  and  contradictory  to  man's  knowledge  of  his 
fellow-creatures. 

*  Errata,  page  5?, 
f  Mosh.  Eccl,  Hist.  Vol.  iii.  page  244.  J  Matt.  c.  v.  v.  25. 


40         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  RExMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.  Orig.  Greek, 


Mat.  xi  21, 

and 
Luke  x.    13. 


Mat.  iii.  2. 


Luke  iii.  3. 


'0T»   »     ID  'l'vf>tj>. 

&C.    irxXou   «> 

f»      aUKXCJ       *xi 

a&D. 


Ibi4.  iii.  8. 


VuluateText. 


RhemishVersion, 


quia,   si    in 
l'yro,    &c. 

)lim   in   cili 
cio  et  cinere 
paenitentiam 
egissent. 


MeT«>os»Ti. 
y,yyty.E   yap    *> 

QzaiXtix    rut 

HpXiUV. 


for  if  in  Tyre, 
&c.     they   had 
done  penance 
in  sackcloth 
and  ashes 
lo  g  ere  now. 
The  Rhemish 
Test,  first  edit. 
1582.  hair- 
cloth. 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


X.V)PV(T<TU*    fcatt- 


Tloiri<ra,Ti    ow 
•m;  fj.tr duo icc^. 


Paenitentiam 
agite,  appro- 

pinquabit 
enim  regnum 

coelorum. 
The  Sixtine 
Clem.  edit. 
appropinqua- 
vit. 

praedicans 

baptismum 

pasnitentia?. 


facite  ergo 

fructus  dig- 

nos  pajniten 

tiae. 


nam  si  in  Tyro, 

&c.  olim    cum 

sacco  et  cinere 

(sedentes)  resi- 

puissent. 

A.  Mont. 

in  sacco  etc. 

pcenituisscnt. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568.K.James'sBiblei6n 


they  *  would 
have  repented.' 


Do  penance, 
for  the  king- 
dom of  heaven 
is  at  hand. 


they  '  would 

have    repented  * 

long   ago    in 

sackcloth  and 

ashes. 


(47) 


preaching  the 
baptism  of  pe- 
nance. 


Resipiscite, 

Appropinquavit 

enim  regnum 

coelorum. 

A.  Mont. 
pcenitemini,  &c. 
appropinquavit. 


prafdicans  bap- 
tismum resipis- 
centiaa. 


«  Repent, '  &c. 


Acts  ii.  38. 


TltTpos   it    i(p*i 
tt^os-  aura?, 
M-'TanNjs'aTt 

KSI  CaTTTHTOxTW 


Petrusveroad 
illos,  paeni- 
tentiam (in- 
quit)  agite, 
baptizetur, 
&c. 


yield  therefore 
fruits  worthy  of 
penance. 


But  Peter  said 
to    them,   Do 

penance,   and 
be  every  one  of 

you  baptized, 
&c. 


ferte   igitur 
fructus  ( onve 
nientes  resipis- 
centiee. 


Petrus  autem 
ait  ad  eos,  Re- 
sipiscite et  bap- 
tizetur unus- 
quisque,  &c. 
A.  Mont. 
pcenitcmini. 


'  Repent  ye,'  for 
the  kingdom  of 
heaven  is  at  hand. 
(48) 


t  of  repentance,' 
&c. 


f  of  repentance,' 
&c. 


Repent.* 
&c. 


preaching   the 
baptism  of  re- 
pentance. 

(49) 


Bring  forth, 
therefore,   fruits 
worthy   •  of  re- 
pentance.'     (50) 


Then  Peter  said 
unto  them, 

1  Repent,'  and  be 
baptized,  &c. 


(5!) 


47, 


-51.   MsTCCVOfeU  To  what  other  cause,   than  the  deepest  and  most  interested 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1G11 


li 


bigotry,  can  it  be  a,  .gned  that  the  popish  doctors  persist  in  asserting,  in  opposition  to  the  literal 
meaning,  and  strict  acceptation  of  the  Greek  word,  that  their  version  of  it,  in  this  and  the  succeeding 
numbers,  is  the  most  correct.  *m™*  mean  penance,  or  mortification  of  the  body!  A  word  in  its 
primary  and  natural  signification,  which  implies  only  that  thorough  change  of  mind,  which  brings  with 
it  sorrow  for  the  past,  and  purposes  oi  amendment  for  the  future;  neither  of  which  feelings  may 
accompany  thoseoutward expressions,  which  the  Church  of  Rome  looks  on,  as  an  all-sufficient  atonement 
for  all  sins  whatever.  Indeed,  so  light  did  the  Latin  Fathers  of  the  middle  ages  make  of  the  admo- 
nition to  repentance,  that  they  considered  it  to  consist,  not  only  in  oral  confession,  but  in  a  mere 
gronn  !    Their  language  was,  "  si  ingemueris,  salvaberis.'' 

Ward  observes,  -  as  for  penance,  or  satisfaction  for  sins,  they  (viz.  Protestants)  utterly  deny  it 
upon  the  heresy  of  faith  only  justifying  and  saving  a  man."  It  lias  been  already  stated,  in  wha't 
sense  the  Church  of  England  understands  the  words  <  faith  only.'  They  occur  in  her  public  Formu- 
laries, and  imply  that  true  and  lively  faith,  which  necessarily  produces  good  works.  They  deny, 
indeed,  the  pretended  merit  of  works  as  satisfying  God  for  sin,  but  do  not  deny  the  necessity  of 
works,  as  a  condition  of  salvation.  |  He  then  proceeds  to  say,  "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  the  very  circumstances  of  the  text,  as  is  evident  from  those  of  St.  Matt.  xi.  21, 
and  St.  Luke  x.  13,  where  these  words,  sackcloth  and  ashes,  cannot  but  signify  more  than  the 
word  repentance,,  or  amendment  of  life,  can  denote ;  as  is  plain  from  the  words  of  St.  Basil— Sack- 
cloth makes  for  penance ;  for  the  Fathers,  in  old  time,  sitting  in  sackcloth  and  ashes,  did  penance." 
The  passages  in  the  Gospels  alluded  to,  neither  directly,  nor  by  implication,  prove  that  the  words, 
*  sackcloth  and  ashes,'  imply  any  satisfaction  to  God  for  the  sins  of  the  life  past.  They  but  shew,  that 
that  perfect  change  of  mind,  and  total  abandonment  of  evil  habits,  expressed  by  ^t**,,*,  were  testified 
by  those  external  signs.  A  great  injustice  is  done  to  St.  Basil  in  making  him  an  advocate  for  penance, 
when  he  but  points  out  the  use  and  end  of  wearing  sackcloth.  His  words  are,  .<;"  Sackcloth  is  an 
helper  towards  repentance,  being  a  sign  of  humiliation;  for,  formerly  the  Fathers  repented,  sitting 
in  sackcloth  and  ashes."  It  may  be  observed,  that  Ward  entirely  omits  the  words  marked  in  italics 
upon  which  the  sense  of  the  passage  depends. 

But,  continues  §he,  "  do  not  St.  John  the  Baptist  and  St.  Paul  plainly  signify  penitential  works 
when  they  exhort  us  to  do  fruits  worthy  of  penance?"     The  question  is  not,  whether  sorrow,  for  that 
is  admitted  on  all  hands,  but  whether  satisfaction,  be  a  part  of  repentance.     <:  The  fruits  meet  for 
repentance"  argue  it  to  be  real,  and  without  dissimulation;  but  do  not  at  all  prove,  that  any  atone- 

*  To  the  perverted  interpretation  of  this  term  may  be  ascribed  the  rise  of  that  fanatical  sect  in  Italy,  denominated  Flagellants 
about  the  thirteenth  century.  They  inflicted  on  their  naked  bodies  the  severest  punishments;  and  all  this,  says  the  historian,' 
"  with  a  view  to  obtain  the  divine  mercy  for  themselves  and  others,  by  their  voluntary  mortiiication  and  penance."  Mosh.  Eccl! 
Hist.  vol.  iii.  page  245. 

f  Errata,  page  CJ . 

St.  Basil,  in  Psal.  xxix. 

§  Errata,  page  57. 


42         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

ment  is  thereby  offered  for  sins  previously  committed.  The  fruits  required  are  *"  post  factum  sapere 
et  de  errore  admisso  ita  dolere,  ut  corrigas ;"  or  as  it  is,  in  I  St.  Paul's  writings,  emphatically  expressed, 
"the  being  renewed  in  the  spirit  of  the  mind." 

Ward  next  asserts  that  all  the  ancient  Fathers  understood  the  Greek  word  "  to  signify  penance, 
and  doing  penance."  A  few  quotations  from  their  writings  will  convince  the  reader,  that  this  is  not  the 
fact.  ITertullian  considers  the  Greek  word  to  imply  not  "  confession  of  an  offence,  but  changing  of  the 
mind."  fcllilarius  thus  expresses  himself,  "  peceati  pamitentia  est,  ab  eo  quod  pacnitendum  intellexe- 
ris,  destitisse."'  ||St.  Augustin  understands  the  phrase  not  only  to  imply  the  exercise  of  public  peni- 
tents, but  also  the  imcard  repentance  of  the  heart.  11St.  Ambrose,  "  I  read  of  his  tears,  (viz.  St. 
Peter's)  but  not  of  his  satisfaction:'  And,  lastly,  St.  **Athanasius  says,  "  Mrr«»o.«  is  so  called,  because 
it  transfers  the  mind  from  evil  to  good.''  Numbers  of  later  writers  might  be  instanced,  who  expound 
it  in  the  same  way.  Of  these,  Aretas,  a  commentator  of  the  tenth  century,  thus  expresses  himself: 
jj  "  MfT«ma  is  a  change  from  worse  to  better."  From  all  these  it  may  be  inferred,  that  what  Ward 
calls  '  penitential  works,'  however  they  might  serve  as  a  testimony  of  sorrow,  and  as  such  might  re- 
concile the  Church  to  those  who  had  offended  her;  they  could  be  no  'satisfaction  for  sins,"  which  no 
sacrifice,  but  that  of  the  Lamb  of  God,  was  capable  of  taking  away.  It  consequently  follows, 
that  satisfaction  is  no  part  of  repentance. 

The  Vulgate  furnishes  internal  evidence,  that  the  author  of  it  never  designed  to  express  more  than 
one  thing,  viz.  repentance,  by  his  translation  of  the  Greek  word.  As  a  proof  of  this,  he  renders  it 
pcenitentiam  agile  in  J+one  Gospel,  and  in  §§another  pcenitemim.  The  Rhemists  rendered  the  former 
text  "do  penance,"  and  the  latter  "be  penitent,"  or  "  repent."  The  difference  of  construction,  there- 
fore, which  they  have  observed,  is  not  warranted  by  the  Vulgate  Latin  ;  still  less  by  the  Greek.  For, 
in  both  places,  but  one  thing  is  enjoined  to  be  done,  and  but  one  reason  assigned  why  it  should  be 
done, — that  of  the  kingdom  of  Heaven  being  at  hand. 

In  the  lljl Acts,  and  in  the  HHsecond  Epistle  to  Timothy,  pcenitentiam  is  the  Vulgate  reading,  and 
'  repentance,'  that  of  the  Rhemish  Testament.  But  why  should  they  not  render  it  '  penance,'  if, 
as  the  Popish  Expositors  say,  the  terms  repentance  and  penance  be  synonymous  ?  If  the  Rhemists 
understood  them  to  imply  the  same  thing,  why  did  they  not  translate  the  passage  thus, — that  God 
had  exalted  Christ,  "  a  Prince  and  a  Saviour,  for  to  give  penance,"  instead  of  "for  to  give  repentance  V 
A'jain,  in  the  Old  Testament,  the  Douay  doctors  translate  a  passage  in  ***one  of  the  Prophets, 
agat  pcinitenliam,  "doth  penance;"  and  immediately  after  \\\pc£nitentiam  egerit,  'shall  repent:' 
although  God  speaks  of  sinners  in  the  one  place,  as  well  as  in  the  other.  As  they  affect  to  be  guided  by 
Jerome,  they  cannot  avail  themselves  of  the  circumstance,  that  he  made  his  translation,  not  from  two 
different  inflexions  of  the  same  verb,  as  before;  but  from  quite  indifferent  verbs,  as  may  be  seen  by 
referring  to  the  lxx.  Greek.  And,  lastly,  the  Vulgate  reading  in  §§§ Wisdom  is  pcenitentiam  agentes, 
which  they  render  '  repenting.'  But,  why  not  translate  it,  '  doing  penance,'  as  well  as,  '  do  penance,' 
in  the  above  quoted  text  from  Jeremiah  ?     After  all  this,  it  is  not  possible  that  Doctor  Milner,  or  any 

*  Vid.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc.  \  Eph.  c.  iv.  v.  23.  %   Contra  Marc. 

§  Oper.  Hilar,  in  Psal.  exxxvii.  Jj   Horn,  xxvii.  %  In  Luc.  lib.  x.  c.  22. 

**  A;a  tUto  hiyiTut  pnawa.,  oti  pTacriSr,^/    rov  vav  ajs    ts    kxxV    w^o;    to  ay«9ov.     Quest.  133.  de  parab. 
j    >\trx;oiu  sr<  uirccra.au;  ccttq  7uv  yjipvwv,  xai  p.STa£o>.»)  £7n  to  ^tXrion.      Ill  Apocal.   C.  3. 

4*  Matt.  c.  iii.  v.  2.  §§  Mark,  c.  i.  v.  15.  ||||  C.  v.  v.  31.  and  c.  xi.  v.  18.  11  C.  ii.  v.  25. 

**■*  Jer.  c.  viii.   v.  6,  til   Ibid.  c.  xviii.   v.  8.  Xtt  Evtr^u  and  anxmu.  $$  C.  v.  v.  3. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN   1611.  1< 

of  his  l  episcopal  brethren,'  will,  in  future,  venture  to  assert,  that  mit«>o>«  is  mistranslated  by  '  repen- 
tance' in  the  Protestant  Bible  ;  or  deny,  that  their  own  English  version  is  shaped  so  as  to  answer  a 
particular  purpose,  and  that  a  distinction  is  preserved  in  it  between  penance,  which  men  are  forced  by 
their  Church  to  perform,  and  repentance,  which  is  the  gift  of  God. 

It  is  not  improper  to  add,  that  where  sorrow  is  to  be  expressed,  panilentia  is  very  fitly  used  ;  thus 
when  the  Evangelist  speaks  of  Judas's  sorrow,  he  adopts  *^«t*^»6»?  (and  not  pfT«x»>0iO  which  in  the 
Vulgate  is  rendered  ' panitentia  ductus.'  It  is  evident,  then,  that  the  strict  propriety  of  rendering 
ixtrxwM  by  resipiscentia,  is  confirmed  ;  and  by  '  repentance'  equally  so,  since  the  English  language  does 
not  contain  another  more  comprehensive,  nor  a  more  suitable  term,  expressive  of  the  original :  and  that 
c  penance'  is  a  word  entirely  unwarranted. 

In  the  preceding  number,  the  rise  and  progress  of  auricular  confession,  and  the  pernicious  con- 
sequences attending  it,   have  been  briefly  detailed.     It  is    here   proper   to   take  a  similar  view  of  that 
doctrine  with  which  it  is  intimately  connected.     On  a  commutation  of  penance  taking  place,  instead  of 
the  ancient  severities  of  the  Church,  a  milder  discipline  was  substituted.     Among  the  poor,  so  many 
paters  sufficed  for  so  many  days  of  fasting;   while  the  rich  bought  off  their  penance  by  alms.     Theo- 
dore of  Tarsus,  afterwards  promoted  to  the  See  of  Canterbury,   first  published  a   ■[ Penitential,  or  sort 
of  registry,   in  which  the  degree  and  the  description  of  penance  which  was  attendant  on  each  offence, 
were  accurately  defined.     In  it  was   pointed  out,   not  only  the  procedure  with  respect  to  the  penitent, 
but  likewise  the  duty  of  the  confessor  himself.     This  new  discipline,  although  it  soon  became  general 
among  the  clergy  of  the  Latin  Churches,   was  but  of  transitory  duration,  as   in   the  eighth  century  it 
fell  into  disuse,  and  finally  gave  way  to  a  still  newer  one— the  canon  of  indulgences.     In  establishing 
this,  the  Church  of  Rome  not  only  departed  from  the  gospel  doctrine  of  repentance,  but  distroved 
the  ancient  ecclesiastical    discipline   of  penance,  and   thereby  threw   open   the   door  to  every  kind  of 
immorality  and  vice.     The  chief  agents  at  first  concerned  in  the  scandalous  traffic  of  indulgences  were 
of  the  episcopal   order.     The  Sovereign   Pontiff,  however,  did  not  long  continue  indifferent  to  their 
proceedings,   since  he  assumed    the   exclusive   power  of    remitting   penalties.     The  Court  of  Rome 
having  thus  become  the  grand  emporium  of  indulgences,   it  published  both  an  universal  and  a  plenarv 
remission  of  all  penalties;   nay,  it   impiously  pretended  to  dispense  with  those  punishments  which  are 
designed  as  a  retribution  for  guilty  sinners  in  a  future  state.      This  daring  innovation  was  followed  up 
in  the   succeeding  century  by  new  articles  of  faith,  which    tended  to  confirm   and  extend  the  papal 
power.     And  Pope   Innocent  III.    A.  D.  1^215,  instead  of  reforming  the  abuses  which  existed  in  the 
Church,  increased  their  number;  and,   aided  by  the  Fourth  Council  of  Lateran,  laid    the   foundation 
of  all  those  corruptions  and  superstitions,  which  continue  in   the   Church  of  Rome   to   this   day,    to 
obscure  the  lustre,  and  disfigure  the  beautiful   simplicity  of  the  gospel.     It   should   not  be   forgotten, 
that    the  shameless  abuse   practised   in  granting  pardons   for    sin,   and   the   matchless   impudence  of 
Tetzcl,  who    proclaimed   the   absolving  power  of  the   Pope  to  extend  to  all  punishments  present  and 
future,  were  causes  chiefly  instrumental  in  bringing  about  the  Reformation. 

*  Matt.  c.  xxvii.  v.  3.  Beza  on  this  text  observes,  "  nee  enim  resipiseit,  qnemcunque  prrnitet,  sed  sTpe  in  detenus  rnit."  He 
renders  the  Greek  word  peenitens.  It  may  be  added  that  the  ^tra^tXua.  which  Judas  felt  was  too  late ;  this  cannot  be  said  of 
fj.iTct.iGnz,  which  is  always  taken  in  a  good  sense. 

■f  Gibbon  says,  "  a  year  of  penance  was  appreciated  at  about  four  pounds  sterling  for  the  rich,  and  nine  shillings  for  the  indi- 
gent." Like  Mosheim,  he  then  shews  how  the  unscriptural  doctrine  of  supererogation,  &c.  and  the  military  ardour  of  the  cru- 
sades, sprang  out  of  this  dispensing  power  of  the  church.  See  Decl.  and  1' all,  vol.  ii.  page  IS.  And  also,  the  Appendix  to 
this  work,  Article  VIII.  for  an  extract  taken  from  A.-Egan's  Table  or  Indulgences. 

G    ^ 


44        A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


SECTION  IX.— THE  HONOUR  OF  THE  BLESSED  LADY  AND  THE  OTHER  SAINTS. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver. 


Luke  i.  28. 


Orig.  Greek, 


UBTX   C7S. 


Mat.  i.  25. 


Vulgate  Text. 


Khenn;  u\  .  rsion.  Beza's  Latin  Text 


Ave,  gratij      i  of 

plena,  Dom»  our  Lord 

nus  tecum.  w  ith  thee. 

l  iate   edition 

reads, 
'  the  Lord.' 


y.xt  «x  tyiwo-xe* 
ctvrijv,  &C...xai 
exctXtas  to  ovo^x 
xvth  IHZOTN. 


Genesis  iii. 
15. 


et   non  cog- 

noscebateam 

&c.  et  vocavit 

nomen  ejus 

Jesum. 


And   he  knew 
her     not,    &c. 

and  '  called  ' 
his  name  Jesus. 

Some  late 
editions  read, 

"  he  called." 


Ave.  gratis  di 

lecta :   Domi- 

nus  tecum  est. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568, 


*  thou  art  in 
high  favour.' 


Afro;  era    tȣW 

ail  y.t(pctXr,v,  y.ca 

<tv   rnfiicrtit; 

cans  ifligvxv 


Ipsa  conteret 
caput  tuum, 

et  tu  insidia- 

beris  calca- 

neoejus. 

Pagninus 

reads, '  ipsuiri 
(*on) 

conteret   tibi 

caput,  et   tu 
con  teres  ei 
calcaneum. 


et  non  cogno-iand 

vit  earn,    ike. 
vocavitque  ejus 
nomen  Iesum. 


KJames'sBibleiG'n 


Hail,    (thou   that 

art)  highly 

favoured,  the 

Lord   (is)  with 

thee,    &c. 

(521 


he  called,' 
&c. 


She  shall  bruise 
thy  head   in 
pieces,  and  thou 
shalt  lie  in  wait 
of  (Ward  reads 
for)  her  heel. 


And  knew  her 

not    till    she    had 

brought  forth  her 

first-born  son: and 

'  he  called  '   his 

name  Jesus. 

(53) 


<  It 'shall     LIt,  shaH  bruise 
bruise  thy  head,;  u      h    d     and 


and  thou   shalt 
bruise  his  heel. 


thou  shalt  bruise 
his  heel. 

(54) 


*52.  YLsyCigLTOOfJiSVYl.      The  Protestant  Translators  are  charged  with  mistranslating  this  word, 
>  X^mu.  gratia  officio,  facio  ut  aliquis  sit  acceptus.  Scap.  Hcder.  Schraev.  Lex.  To  be  favoured,  highly  favoured.  Parkh.  Lex. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  icil.  45 

although  they  have  rendered  it  agreeably  to  its  literal  and  received  meaning.  Their  version  does  not 
certain.y  countenance  a  worship  being  paid  to  the  Virgin  Mother,  superior  to  that  even  of  God  the 
■      '  But,   if  it  do  not,  it  is  because  the  language,  which  has  been  made  the  medium  of  the  divine 

wih,  does  not  warrant  it;  which,  without  encouraging  a  blind  and  stupid  veneration  for  the  blessed 
Virgm,  conveys  a  full  and  distinct  declaration  of  her  being  a  distinguished  favourite  of  Heaven 
J  rotestants  have  accordingly  always  considered  her  to  be  blessed,  acceptable,  nay,  full  of  grace  and 
have  denied  her  no  honour,  which  does  not  derogate  from  that  due  to  God.  They  in  fact  "allow  her 
to  have  been  endued  with  all  gracious  gifts,  as  much  as  mortal  creature  could  be,  except  Christ  whose 
pecuhar  privilege  was  that  of  being  free  from  sin.  But  such  blasphemous  titles  as  those  enumerated 
by  tWard  are  justly  refused  to  her.  Some  of  them,  it  is  true,  present  no  idea  at  all  to  the  minds  of 
the  learned;  yet,  what  absurd  notions  may  be  attached  to  them  in  the  minds  of  the  ignorant'  The 
use  of  such  appellations,  therefore,  when  not  found  in  Scripture,  must  undoubtedly  be  injurious  to 
true  religion.  J  J 

tWard  asks,  «  why  they  translate  Hx  §'  full  of  sores/  and  will  not  translate  „WT^„  (Sratiosa) 
All  of  gracer'  seeing  that  all  sneh  adjective,  in  ,»,  signify  fulness,  as  periculosus,   «rum«L,  &c» 
f  there  were  ,n  the  Enghsh  language  such  a  participle  as  soued,  it  might  have  been  adopted  as  the 
translator ,  of  ^    as  pavoubed  is  of  w™^.     No  person  ever  thought  of  rendering  ||,ww, 
.lull  of  gold,  rather   han  GILT,  or  any  other  similar  Greek  word,  which  could  be  translated  into  English 
by  a  parucple.     Atl.ann.iu.  says,  all   those  graces  and  gifts  were  < freely  •  given   her,  and  not  vouch- 
safed her  on  the  score  of  fur  own  merits.     Protestants  require  neither  more  nor  less. 

,  ?!'  lAiTf  T  W:"''1'  "  f°  take  fr°m  th£  H°'y  M°ther  0f  God  what ,'°»°"  'hey  can,  they 
translate,  hat  he  (v,z  Joseph)  called  hi.  name  Jesus."  A.  the  question  is.-whether  Joseph  or  Man- 
gave  the  child  Jesus  h.s  name,_it  is  not  difficult  of  decision.  First,  it  is  clear  from  the  context  •  a, 
the  same  person  is  naturally  pointed  out  in  the  text  under  consideration,  who  is  spoken  of  in  the  verse 
immedrntely  preceding,  with  which  it  is  connected.  Secondly,  it  was  more  usual  for  the  man,  than  for 
the  woman,  to  give  the  name.  And,  lastly,  a  little  before,  in  the  same  chapter,  Joseph  i.  said  to 
have  received  a  command,  a.  to  the  name  which  was  to  be  given  to  the  child  :  f  ■•  and  thou  shall  call  his 
name  Jesus.'  1  rom  all  which  it  may  be  collected,  that  the  Evangelist  meant  Joseph  rather  than 
Mary.  It  is,  however,  a  matter  of  most  perfect  indifference,  which  reading  is  adopted-'  he  called  '  or 
'  she  called  :'  for,  supposing  Mary  to  be  meant,  still  it  gives  her  no  claim  to  adoration  ;  neither  does 
the  use  of  '  he  '  establish  the  charge  of  mistranslation. 

_  54.  AUTOS  <T8  Tri§n<rsi.  Pagninus  renders  mi  ipsum,  referring  it  to  semen,  which  read- 
ing Montanus  approves.  In  the  Vulgate  text,  quoted  by  Ward,  it  is  ipsa,  on  which  is  partly  founded 
the  argument  used  by  the  Romanists,  that  the  Virgin  Mary  should  be  worshipped.  And  by  applying 
the  prophecy  to  her  alone,  they  nrc  naturally  led  to  tttaddress  her  as  they  do  in  their  service.  But  the 
absurdity  of  the  application  is  manifest,  for,  on  the  same  grounds,  the  term  ipsa  points  out  Eve,  Sarah, 
Kebecca,   &c.  as  bruising  the  serpent's  head,  as  well  as  Mary  ;  Christ's  lineage  being  through  them. 

-f   Viz.  The  Holy  Mother  of  God,  Ever-shining  Lamp,  Crown  of  Purity,  &c.  &c.  Sec.   Errata,  patre  50. 
t  Ibid-  *  Luke>  c-  xvi-  v-  20-  II  Rhem.  Trans),  gilt  in  Rev.  c.  xvii.  v.  iv.  'and°c  xviii    v   \6 

*  Matt.  c.  i.   v.21.  **  AliUegunt  r^™. 

ttt  Viz.  By  thee,  the  Holy  Trinity  is  every  where  blessed  and  adored ;  Queen  of  Heaven  >t  &c.  &c.  See  not-  |-  on  No  5- 


4(i         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

Most  of  the  old  Latin  copies  have  ipse  ;  for  of  twenty-eight,  by  which  Hentenius  revised  the 
Vulgate  version,  he  discovered  ipsa  to  be  the  reading  only  of  two.  In  the  year  1589,  P°Pe  Sixtus 
Ouintus  himself  directed  ipse  to  be  restored.  The  Seventy  use  »««?,  although  the  substantive 
(scil.  avr^ct)  to  which  it  refers  is  neuter ;  a  circumstance  which  not  unfrequently  happens  in  Greek 
writings.  This  change  in  the  gender  of  the  pronoun  is  strongly  exemplified  in  tSt.  Luke's  Gospel, 
and  may  be  met  with,  even  in  profane  {authors.  When,  therefore,  the  Hebrew,  Greek,  and  Latin 
languages,  but  particularly  the  first,  authorise  the  Protestant  translation  of  ]6ll,  viz.  it,  as  referring 
to  the  seed,  i.  e.  Christ,  is  it  not  strange  that  the  Romish  clergy  should  impute  error  where  none 
exists,  and  obstinately  stand  out  as  the  abettors  of  a  doctrine,  which  not  only  disgraces  the  page  of 
Holy  Writ,  but  the  learning  and  sense  of  an  enlightened  age  ? 

Ward  refers  his  readers  to  the  annotations  on  this  passage  in  the  Douay  Bible,  as  sufficient  to 
shew  that  the  Popish  doctors  "  attribute  no  more,  or  no  less  to  Christ,  or  to  his  Mother,  by  this  read- 
ing or  by  that."  But  this  is  the  very  thing  which  Protestants  condemn,  since,  as  has  been  already 
observed,   it  is  blasphemous  to  ascribe  that  to  the  Mother  of  Christ,  which  is  peculiar  to  himself. 

Of  the  Fathers,  who,  §Ward  says,  read  ipsa,  St.  Ambrose's  authority  is  uncertain,  by  reason  of 
the  defectiveness  of  the  Greek  copy,  whence  he  derived  his  translation  ;  St.  Augustin  refers  it  to  the 
Church;  and  him  St.  Gregory  follows.  So  that  St.  Bernard  alone,  who  is  comparatively  a  late  writer, 
expounds  it  as  a  prophecy  of  the  Virgin  Mary. 

It  was  not  before  the  fourth  century,  that  the  Virgin  Mary  first  received  a  formal  worship.  In  the 
fifth,  her  image  was  received  into  churches,  and  obtained  the  most  distinguished  place.  Towards  the 
beginning  of  the  tenth,  her  worship  became  perfectly  idolatrous,  and,  in  the  latter  part  of  the  same 
age,  masses  were  celebrated,  and  abstinence  from  flesh  observed  for  her  sake.  At  this  period,  too,  a 
new  description  of  worship  was  invented,  called  the  |l  Rosary  and  Crown.  Her  dignity  received  a 
still  further  augmentation  in  the  twelfth  century,  by  a  fiction  relating  to  her  immaculate  conception, 
and  the  festival  which  was  instituted  in  honour  of  it.  Since  that  period,  the  hyperdulia,  an  inter- 
mediate sort  of  worship  between  what  is  due  only  to  God,  and  that  offered  to  the  other  saints,  has 
been  introduced,  in  consequence  of  some  new  perfections  found  in  her.  And  so  late  as  the  beginning 
of  the  last  century,  Clement  XI.  appointed  a  festival  to  be  celebrated  throughout  the  Romish  Church, 
similar  to  that  of  the  twelfth  century.  Such  has  been  the  origin  and  growth  of  all  those  idolatrous 
practices,  and  that  senseless  superstition,  so  far  as  relates  to  the  Virgin  Mother,  which  so  largely 
contribute  to  make  the  Church  of  Rome  corrupt  and  degenerate:  the  respect  which  was,  at  the  outset, 
shewn  her,  growing  into  reverence,  and  that,  at  length,  degenerating  into  positive  worship.  So  that 
the  Reformers  have,  on  the  justest  grounds,  protested  against  the  doctrines  of  that  church  in  this 
particular,    as   being   **vainly  invented,    and    grounded  on  no  warrant  op  scripture,    but 

RATHER    REPUGNANT    TO    THE    WORD    OF    GoD. 

f  In  c.  viii.   v.  5,  6,  7>  8.  o  and  itipov  refer  to  ar^c^,  which  is  masculine. 
\  e.  g.   "  Ubi  illic  scelus  est,  qui  me  perdidit  ?     Ter.  Andr.  Act  iii.  §  Errata,  page  50. 

I]  The  Rosary  consists  in  fifteen  repetitions  of  the  Lord's  prayer,  and  one  hundred  and  fifty  salutations  of  the  blessed  Virgin  • 
while  the  Crown  consists  in  six  or  seven  repetitions  of  the  Lord's  prayer,  and  six  or  seven  times  ten  salutations,  or  Ave  Marias. 
Mosh.  Eccl.  Hist.  vol.  ii.  page  4 29.  The  use  of  beads,  so  general  among  Romanists,  for  the  purpose  of  counting  their 
prayers,   evidently  originated  in  this  institution. 

**  Article  xxiii. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1C11. 


47 


Book.  Ch.Ver. 


2  Pet.  i.  xv. 


Psal.  cxxxix. 
17. 


Orig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text.  ilthemishVersion.  Beza's  Latin  Text  Bps.Biblc,  lf>o'S.  K.James'sBibleifin 


Oriaxv    '  ca   xp- 
yjxi    uvruf.' 


Dabo   a  utem 

operam  et 

frequenter 

habere  vos 

post  obitum 

meum,    ut 

horum  me- 

moriamfacia- 

tis.    '  Horum 

omnium '  is 

found  in 

Sixtus  Vth's. 

Bible. 


Mihi  autem 
nimis    bono 

rificati  sunt 

amici  tui, 
Deus  ;   nimis 

confortatus 
est  principa- 

tus  eorum. 
Pagnt.  ct 

mihi  quain 
pretiosts 
fuerunt  ("l^"1) 

cogitationtis 

tuye,  Deus  : 


And  I  will  do 
my  endeavour  ; 
you  to  have 
often  after  my 

decease  also, 
that  you    may 
keep  a  memory 
of  these  things. 


But  to  me,  thy 
friends,  O  God, 
are  become  ho 

nourable  ex- 
ceedingly, their 
'  principality'  is 

exceedingly 

strengthened. 

Ward  uses 

princedom. 


Sed  et  studebo 

ut  vos  subinde 

post   exitum 

meum  possitis 

horum  men- 

tionem  facere. 

Mont,  reads 

studebo,  See. 

and  facere. 


Mont,  renders 


Moreover,   I  will 

to   have  endeavour  that  ye 

these  things     may  be  able  after 

'  alwa)s  in  re-|  my  decease   t<"> 

membrance.'      have  these  things 

o 

always  in  'remem- 
brance.' (55) 


How   dear  are 

i  thv    councils 
(in  reg.j  capita. .     -       ,        ~  . 
to   me  ?        O 


Pagn.  summce. 


How  precious 
also  are  thy 
U!|c  thoughts'   unto 
how  great  is  lme,  O  God!  how 
the   '  sum  '  ofgreat  \s  tiie  <sum' 
them!       !0fthem!       (56) 


55.MvrjlJ,rjV  7roi2l(j()cLl.  *Ward  adduces  this  text  in  support  of  the  doctrine  of  the  "  inter- 
cession of  saints  ;"  and  in  cases  like  the  present,  where  "  St.  Peter  speaks  so  ambiguously,  either  that 
he  will  remember  them  after  his  death,  or  that  they  shall  remember  him,"  he  would  have  a  certain 
latitude  of  expression  allowed  translators.  So  much  admitted  by  this  Popish  Champion,  as  that  the 
passage  yields  a  double  meaning,  is  an  additional  proof  of  the  slight  grounds  on  which  he  occasionally 
censures.  Now,  as  to  the  sense  he  attaches  to  it,  the  matter  stands  thus :  St.  Peter,  knowing  his 
death  to  be  at  hand,  would  have  said  to  no  purpose,  that  he  would  exercise  'his  earnest  endeavours' 
(which  the  verb  cxufaZp  implies)  in  behalf  of  those  he  addressed,  if  it  were  in  his  power  equally  to  use 


*  Errata,  page  5g. 


48  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

them  after  his  death  :  besides,  even  if  it  could  be  hence  inferred,  that  the  saints  intercede  with  God 
for  men,  there  is  nothing  in  the  text  whatever  to  warrant  the  practice  of  praying  to  them.  H  the 
Protestant  interpretation  be  now  contrasted  with  the  foregoing,  it  will  be  seen  on  which  side  the 
advantage  lies.  It  is  briefly  this;  that  he  would,  during  his  life  time,  so  thoroughly  instruct  them, 
and  so  deeply  impress  his  doctrine  on  their  minds,  that,  even  after  his  decease,  the  remembrance  of  it 
should  not  be  effaced.  In  this  light  *Grotius  viewed  the  matter,  when  he  thus  expounded  St.  Peter's 
meaning:  "Cum  sentiam  brevi  me  moriturum,  ita  alte,  hoc  volo  hijigi  vestris  animis,  ut  mm  possitis, 
nee  post  meam  mortem,  non  scrpe  eorum  recordari." 

Ward  says,  that  some  of  the  Greek  Fathers  concluded  from  this  text,  "  that  the  saints  in 
heaven  remember  us  on  earth,  and  make  intercession  for  us."  It  is  well  that  he  has  qualified  his 
observation  with  the  word  '  some ;'  but  had  he  at  the  same  time  acknowledged,  that  they  who  are 
comprehended  under  this  term,. some,  did  not  flourish  before  the  end  of  the  fourth,  or  beginning  of  the 
fifth  century,  he  would,  at  least,  have  had  the  credit  of  being  candid.  Up  to  that  period,  it  is  certain 
that  the  custom  of  invoking  saints,  as  intercessors,  was  unknown  :  for,  fTertullian  says  that,  in  his 
time,  the  church  prayed  to  God  alone.  jlremcus  condemned  it  as  an  heresy,  that  men  called  upon 
angels.  And  §Augustine,  who  lived,  by  two  centuries,  later  than  either  of  these,  says,  "  dead  men 
ought  to  be  so  honoured  that  we  may  imitate  them,  but  ought  not  to  be  worshipped.'' 

The  word  \\om?iiu?n,  which  was  added  to  this  text  by  Sixtus  V.  was  suppressed  by  Clemens  VIII. 
The  insertion,  or  omission  of  it,  is,  to  be  sure,  of  little  consequence;  yet  it  is  sufficient  to  shew  how 
discordant  the  opinions  of  those  celebrated  Popes  were,  as  to  the  reading  of  the  Vulgate  text,  and,  at 
the  same  time,  the  absurdity  of  their  pretensions  to  infallibility. 

56.  Tin-  01  (plXoi  CX.  The  difference  beLween  the  Protestant  and  Douay  versions  of  this 
passage  is  very  remarkable  ;  and  yet  so  little  does  either  bear  on  the  contested  point,  that  the  one  may 
with  as  much  propriety  be  said  to  establish  the  adoration  of  the  saints  as  the  other.  That  the  meaning 
is  forced,  as  it  stands  in  the  Popish  bible,  is  evident  for  the  following  reasons:  First,  fyj,  if  trans- 
lated '  friends,"  and  not  '  thoughts,'  or  '  counsels,'  which  it  equally  signifies,  would  ill  accord  with 
the  conclusion  of  the  verse,  where  ttftn  summci,  or  (as  **Montanus  renders  it)  caput,  occurs.  Next, 
from  the  nature  of  the  subject  treated  of  by  the  inspired  penman  :  He  is  enlarging  on  the  marvellous 
texture  of  the  human  frame,  and  on  the  all-seeing  providence  of  God ;  but  before  he  concludes,  he  is 
represented,  according  to  the  Douay  version,  as  making  a  most  unnatural  digression,  to  celebrate  the 
friends  of  God.  And,  lastly,  it  will  follow,  that  the  Protestant  translation  of  the  disputed  passage  is  to 
be  preferred,  since,  by  it,  the  transition  from  celebrating  the  works  of  God,  to  an  admiration  of  his 
counsels,  becomes  easy  and  unaffected.     It  will  not  have  escaped  the  reader's  notice,  that  ttPagninus's 

*  Vkl.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc.  t  Apol.  c.  xxx.  t  Lib.  ii.  c.  58. 

§  De  ver.  relig.  cap.  55. 
it  See  James's  Papal  War  for  abundant  proof  of  the  contradictory  meanings  elicited  from  the  word  of  God,  by  the  additions, 
suppressions,  and  alterations  of  the  Vulgate  Latin,  mnde  by  the  above-named  Popes,  in  their  respective  editions  of  the  bible. 
%  'l'i  masc.  plur.  in  Reg.  Pastoral  cares,  attentions  as  of  a  Shepherd  for  his  Jlock.    Parkh. 
**  See  col.  Beza's  Latin  Text.  -j-f  See  col.  Vulgate  Text. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN   ifin. 


i<> 


translation  agrees  with  that  of  the  Protestants  ;  a  circumstance  corroborative  of  its  faithfulness,  and 
of  the  purity  of  the  intentions  of  their  translators,  in  taking  the  Hebrew  alone  for  their  guide.  That 
they  are  charged  by  *Ward  as  translating  contrary  to  the  Greek,  is  of  little  consequence,  as  they 
neither  followed  it,  nor  professed  to  have  done  so;  but  that  they  translated  contrary  to  the  Hebrew, 
is,  as  has  been  proved,  as  untrue,  as  that  they  formed  their  translation  "  purposely  to  detract  from  the 
honour   of  the   Apostles   and    holy   Saints." 

Since  faith  and  invocation  should  terminate  in  the  same  object,  how  can  Protestants   call  on  that 
Saint,  in  whom  they  do  not  believe  ?     And,  therefore,  if  they  cannot,   without  blasphemy,  say,   that 
they  believe  in  this  saint  or  angel ;  neither  can   they,  without  idolatry,   pray  unto  that  saint  or  angel. 
Are  not  the  two  following  articles  found  in  the  creed  of  Pope  Pius-     "That  the  saints   reigning  toge- 
ther with  Christ,  are  to  be  venerated  and  invoked  ;  and  that  they  offer  up  prayers  to  God  for  us,  and 
their  relics  are  to  be  venerated."     As  also,  "  I  do  most  firmly  assert,  that  the  images  of  Christ  and 
the  ever  Virgin  Mother  of  God,  and  other  saints,  are  to  be  had,  and  retained,  and  that  due  honour  and 
veneration  are  to  be  given  them.'"     Can  the  Romanists  complain  of  being   here  misrepresented,   when 
the  articles  of  their  own  creed  are  cited  against  them,  and  when  they  are  judged,  as  it  were,  according 
to  their  own  confession  :  It  is  not  a  little  remarkable,  in  how  many  ways,  God  has  condemned  abomina- 
tions such  as  these.     Thus  when  Moses  died,  the  Israelites  could  not  find  his  body  ;  for  had  they,  the 
probability  is,  that  they  would   have  worshipped  the  remains  of  their  great  benefactor.     As  little  is 
known  of  the  Virgin  Mary,  as  she  is  spoken  of  only  once  after  the  ascension.     Our  Saviour,  on  more 
than  one  occasion,  during  his  life  time,  addressed  her   in   a  way  which  tended  not  only  to  discounte- 
nance idolatry,  but  even  to  prevent  the  idea  of  it  being  indulged  in.     As  when  he  said,  t"  Woman, 
what  have  I  to  do  with  thee  r"     And  again,  t"  who  is  my  mother,  and  who  are  my  brethren  ?''   Which 
he  thus  answered,  "  behold  my  mother,  and  my  brethren,  for  whosoever  shall  do  the  will  of  my  Fa- 
ther, which  is  in  heaven,  the  same  is  my  brother,  sister,   and   mother."     It  is  most  certain,  that  his 
views  penetrated  into  futurity,  and  that  he  foresaw  the  blasphemous  worship  of  the  Virgin,  when  he 
declared  himself  in  this  decided  manner.     With  respect  to  Joseph,  who  sprang  up  all  at  once  the  next 
greatest  saint  to  his  spouse  Mary,    in    the  fourteenth  century,  his  death  is  not  once   mentioned;  and, 
with  the  exception  of  Peter,  the  same  may  be  said  of  the  Apostles.  It  would,  therefore,  appear  astonish- 
ing, when  every  thing,  which  bore  relation  to  the  death  of  these  extraordinary  men,  has  been  wrapped 
up  in   obscurity,  that   this  all-wise  purpose  of  God  should  be  perverted  to  the  propagation  of  error, 
were  it  not  known,  that  the  whole  fabrication  of  saint-worship,  in  the  Church  of  Rome,  proceeded  from 
covetousness  and  ambition ;   to  gratify  which,  every  feeling  of  true  piety  and  devotion  was  necessarily 
prostituted. 


*  Errata,  page  59.  f  John  c.  ii.  v.  iv. 

t  Matt.  c.  xii.  v.  48,  49,  50.  and  Mark,  c.  iii.  v.  33,  34,35. 


H 


50 


SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


I'lON  X.— Till-:  DISTINCTION  OF  RELATIVE  AND  DIVINE  WORSHIP. 


'■;lh.  '.reck.  V   l-v.te  Text.  fRhemish  Version 


(TiV  S7TI 


•  ,y ,    \U- 

"'  -yr,j-., 

to  ctxpot 
da  can  a 


Gen.  xlvii.3 1  .JKa»  wgwHa>m)- 

TO  zxroy  t*i; 

^»itt>»  tnrm>'i 


Ps.  xcix.  5. 


rut*  9tg^_v  a^ra 

i    »Tl  «^(0{   tf(. 


lb. 


CXXX11.  7. 


w^aa'Jtwxff'WiLtE* 

!/{   TO*      TOWGV      t 


Fide  Jacob,  j  Ry  faith,  Jacob 
ii"  i-i<  us,;ii! ;-u-|  dying,  blessed 
losfiliojum  Jo-  every  one  of  the 
seph  benedixit:  sons  of  Joseph, 
&  adoravit  fas-  and  adored  the 
tigiuin  virgae  top  of  his  rod. 
ejus.  The  Vulg. 
text,  according 
to  Mont,  ado- 
ravit  super  fas- 
tigiuin,  &c. 


Adoravit  Israel 
Deum  corner 
sus  ad  lectuli 
caput.  Pagn. 
et  incurvavitse 
Israel  ad  caput 
lecti. 


EtadorateSca- 
bellum  pedum 
ejus,    quoniam 

sanctum  est. 
PAGN.etincur- 
vatc    vos    sca- 

l)ello  pedum 

ejus,   sanctum 

quod  est. 


Adorabimus  in 
loco,  ubi  stete- 
runt  pedes  ejus. 
PAGN.incurva- 
bimus  nos  sca- 
belio  pedum 
ejus. 


Israel  adored 

God,    turning   to 

the  bed's  head. 


And  adore  ye  his 
footstool,  because 
it  is  holy.  Acord- 
ing  to  Ward,  '  the 
footstool  of  his 
feet: 


We  will  adore  in 

the  place  where 

his  feet  stood. 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


Per  fidem,  Jacob 
moriens  singulis 
filiis  Joseph  be- 
nedixit :  et adora- 
vit super  extremo 

baculo  suo. 
Mont,  ren- 
ders it,  super  sum- 

mitatem  virgae 
siuc. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568, 


Mont,  prefers 
super  to  'ad.' 


and  '  leaning  on 
the  end  of  his 
staff",  worshipped 
God.' 


Israel  <  worship- 
ped' God  '  to- 
wards' the  bed's 
head. 


K.James'sBihleih'ii 


By  faith  Jacob, 
when  he  was  a  dy- 
ing, blessed  both 
the  sons  of  Joseph; 
and  *  worshipped, 
leaning  upon  the  top 
of  his  staff'.' 

(57) 


and     '  fall    down 
before  '   his  foot 
stool,    for    he   i 
holy. 


And  Israel  c  bowed 
himself  upon  '  the 
bed's  head. 

(58) 


we  will  <  fall 

down   before   his 

footstool.' 


'  And  worship  at ' 
his  footstool,  for  he 
is  holy. 

(59) 


We  will    c  worship 
at  his  footstool.' 

(60) 


57.  Ew?QV*      "  Both  the  sons,"  intimates  Ephraim  and  Manasseh,  the  rulers  of  the  two 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH   VERSION  OF  TIIEM   IX    icii.  :,i 

tribes  ;  whereas,  «  every  one  of  the  sons  "  would  imply  that  Joseph  had  more  than  two  And  as  to 
the  concluding  part  of  this  verse,  it  evidently  sets  aside,  instead  of  establishing,  the  doctrine  of  in- 
fenor  worship,  or,  as  the  Romish  Church  denominates  it,  dulia.  For  as  St.  Paul  cites  the  passage 
in  the  sense  it  hears  in  the  *lxx.  and  as  the  preposition  «»  is  introduced  there,  it  must  if  it  have- 
any  signification,  mean  upon.  Besides,  the  Hebrew  word  nBD  is  either  <  staff,'  or  <  bed,'  according  to 
its  punctuation,  which  Ward  himself  is  forced  to  confess.  If  the  former  acceptation  be  adopted  it 
Will  follow,  that  Jacob  required  support  on  account  of  his  infirmities;  if  the  latter,  that  he  turned 
away  his  face  from  the  obtrusion  of  external  objects  to  his  bed's  head,  the  better  to  indulge  his  deep 
meditations.  In  fine,  the  passage  manifestly  indicates  Jacob's  posture  in  worship,  and  not  the  obiect  of 
his  worship.  1  Grotius,  in  his  comments,  thus  pertinently  expresses  himself:  «  videtur  Jacobus  quo 
majorem  Deo  honorem  haberet,  preces  facturus,  ex  lecto  surrexisse,  et  ineo  consedisse,  fowuwsdpioni, 
qui  gestus  egregiam  habct  fidei  imaginem." 

'  But  here/'  says  Ward,  «  they  add  two  words  more  than  are  in  the  Greek  text,  leaning  and  God. 
■■<  forcing  «™to  signify  i™,  &c."  This  is  of  the  same  complexion  with  his  other  charges,  since  those 
very  words  were,  in  the  first  Protestant  Translations,  printed  in  italics,  to  shew  that  they  had  not  cor- 
responding ones  in  the  original ;  even  without  them,  the  sense  would  not  be  at  all  affected.  So  blinded 
was  this  man  by  his  zeal  to  attach  error  to  the  last  Protestant  Translation  of  the  Bible,  that  although  he 
gives  its  Jreadingof  this  text,  in  which  only  one  of  the  terms  objected  to  by  him  occurs,  yet  he  quotes 
the  above  cavil  against  §both  words,  nearly  in  the  very  form  in  which  Gregory  Martin  made  his  objec- 
tion in  the  preceding  century. 

If,  then,  the  ||preposition  had  no  meaning,  the  Apostle  would,  it  may  be  fairly  presumed,  have 
omitted  it;  or,  if  he  had  designed  to  express  nothing  more  than  the  adoration  of  Joseph's  sceptre,  he 
would  not  have  exclusively  referred  to  its  top,  or  extremity;  there  being  no  more  reason,  why  that 
particular  part  should  be  adored,  than  any  other.  Hence  manifestly  appears  the  propriety  o(  retaining 
the  explanatory  word  leaning.  But  admitting  the  correctness  of  the  Popish  interpretation..  «  towards 
the  top  of  his  sceptre,"  which,  as  Ward  says,  « is  according  to  the  Greek  ;"  yet  that  would  not 
warrant  the  worshipping  of  images,  which  is  expressly  forbidden  by  the  second  commandment. 

As  to  avw,  it  is  not,  as  he  says,  forced  to  signify  «i>ts,  nor  is  it  (i  as  rare  as  virgae  ejus  for  virgaj 
sua"  since  it  is  frequently  used  for  it,  except  when  a  second  antecedent,  to  which  it  is  referred, 
occurs  ;  then,  to  avoid  ambiguity,  avn  is  used. 

"  But  why  is  it,''  continues  Ward,  «  that  they  boldly  add  (leaned  and  God)  in  one  place,  and 
take  away  (God)  in  another  ?"  The  fact  is,  the  word  God  does  not  occur  in  the  original  of  either 
text,  although  it  may  be  fairly  considered  as  understood,  which  caused  the  early  translators,  guided  as 
they  were  by  the  meaning,  to  introduce  it  in  both  places,  and  to  mark  it,  as  was  before  observed,  in 
italics.  The  last  Translators,  however,  keeping  closer  to  the  original,  omitted  the  word  in  one  place, 
as  it  was  not  expressed,  though  understood,  and  therefore  consistently  did  so  in   the  other.     So  that 

*  Genesis,  c.xlvii.  v.  31.  f  Vid.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc.  *  Errata  fifth  column,  Page  00. 

§  Saepe  usitatur  pro  ihxt^ov  vel  a^u.     See  Whitby  in  loc. 
||  Ett»  super  has  not  been  translated  by  the  Rhemists.  %  Errata,  page  6l . 

H  2 


52  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH   REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

the  charge  is  false,  whether  directed  against  these,  or  those  translators.  Besides,  the  early  translators, 
if  the\  added  '  leaned  and  God'  in  one  text,  did  not  suppress  '  worshipped  God,"  in  the  other  ;  and 
their  successors  not  having  added  '  God,"  in  one  case,  could  not  be  said  to  omit  it  in  the  other.  To 
satisfy  himself  in  this,  the  reader  need  but  consult  the  last  two  columns  belonging  to  numbers  57  and 
3S,  where  he  will  find  the  identical  reading  of  both  English  versions  as  given  by  Ward.  It  will  like- 
wise be  perceived,  under  the  head  Rhemish  Version,  that  the  Popish  translators  introduced  the  word 
'  God'  into  their  translation  of  the  Hebrew  passage,  while  they  omitted  it  in  their  translation  of  the 
Greek  one!  This  is  the  more  remarkable,  as  the  corresponding  word  is  not  in  the  Hebrew,  to  which 
language,  Ward  himself,  on  this  occasion,  appeals  ;  indeed,  he  even  quotes  the  very  passage  itself,  as 
if  to  shew  that  it  was  not  there.     So  much  for  the  consistency  of  Popish  controvertists  ! 

58.  \">-  E/H.  The  passage,  in  which  the  foregoing  Hebrew  word  is  found,  is  the  very  one  which 
St.  Paul  had  in  view,  when  speaking  of  Jacob  blessing  Joseph's  sons.  It  is  worth  observing,  that 
that  very  particle,  which  occurs  in  the  original,  is  rendered  **.  in  the  version  of  the  Seventy, 
and  has  also  been  translated  '  to,"  in  the  Douay  O.  T.  ;  while  the  translation  of  an  is  suppressed  in  the 
Rhemish  New  Testament.  In  the  ffirst  Book  of  Kings,  the  Hebrew  (of  which  the  following  is  the  Sep- 
tuagint  Greek,  **»  w^rm^c-iv  S /3«<«A£i/c  ««■»  [V*]  w*  w.ri;»)  is  translated  by  Jerome,  "  et  adoravit  rex  in  lectulo 
suo;"  and  by  Pagninus,  "  et  incurvavit  se  rex  super  lectum  ;"  and  by  the  Douay  doctors,  "  and  the 
King  adored  in  his  bed."  Thus,  as  it  appears,  that  notice  is  taken  of  the  Hebrew  preposition  in  each  of  the 
different  languages,  into  which  this  text  has  been  translated,  as  well  as  of  that  belonging  to  the  present 
number,  it  is  highh  probable  that  the  Rhemists  passed  it  by,  in  the  ;[.Epistle  to  the  Hebrews,  solely 
with  a  view  to  establish,  as  §  Ward  expresses  it,  "  the  adoration  of  creatures,  named  Dulia;  to  wit, 
of  the  cross  and  of  sacred  images."  The  reader  may  now  easily  determine,  whether  Ward  has  suc- 
ceeded in  his  design,  or  brought  home  the  charge  of  wilful  mistranslation  against  the  Protestant 
Translators. 

59.  6().  I'  TinntPm  K&*  TfPQ&ZVVSlTS*  Ward  insists,  that  in  passages  similar  to  this  in  the 
Psalms,  the  Hebrew  prepositions  have  no  more  force,  than  if  we  should  say  in  English,  with- 
out prepositions,  '  we  will  adore  the  place  where  his  feet  stood;'  '  adore  ye  his  footstool;' 
'  adore  ye  the  Lord  :'  And  because  the  Protestant  Translators  have  rendered  one  'text,  viz.  '  worship 
the  Lord,'  after  this  manner,  his  conclusion  is,  "  that  in  these  places  their  translation  is  corrupt  and 
wilful,  when  they  say,  •'  we  will  fall  down"  before  or  at  his  footstool,  &x.''  If  the  English  Translators 
committed  anv  fault  here,  in  not  noticing  the  Hebrew  particle,  it  must  be  allowed  to  be  one  of  a  perfectly 
venial  nature,  as  the  worship  is  only  referred  to  the  Lord  himself.  It  is  a  very  different  thing  to  fall 
down  i/i,  at,  or  before,  a  place  where  God  appointed  his  worship  to  be  kept,  as  in  the  Temple, 
Tabernacle,  Mount  Sion,  c\c.  and  to  bow  down  to  them,  for  the  purpose  of  paying  them  worship. 
The  Jews  were  expressly  enjoined  the  former  practice;  while,  on  the  contrary,  Christians  are  no  where 
directed  to  worship  at  or  before  the  crucifix,  relics,  images,  &c.  he. 

*  hv    in   the  translation  made  from  the  Chaldce   Paraphrase,  is  rend*  red  super.     In   Sixtus  Vlh.'s  bible,  the  same  reading 
obtains.     It  is  by  this  Hebrew  word,  too,  that  Beza  determines  the  meaning  of  nt\,  in  Hebrews,  c.  xi.  v.  21.    "  E™    nihil  aliud 
hie  declarat  quarn  super  :   ut sit  hie  sensus,  Jacobum  adorasse  super  extremo  bacnlo,  id  est,  bacnlo  intilxum  ;    quod  unus  ex  vete- 
libus  Aueustinus  vidit  :   ut  si  in  vernaculo  scrmone  nostro  dicas,  sur  It  tout  de  ivn  l.itnn."   Bez.  Avnot.  page  42t). 
f  C.  i.v.  4".  +  C.  xi.  v.  21.  §  Errata,  page  ol. 

I   From  "r-?  To  fall  prostrate  on  the  ground.     Fakkh.  \   Psal.  xlr.  v.  2 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  53 

But  as  Ward,  in  bringing  forward  the  above  texts,  has  endeavoured  to  make  out  that  «r»  means 
1  towards/  or  rather  that  it  lias  no  meaning  at  all,  by  determining  its  acceptation  from  the  correspond- 
ing Hebrew  word,  it  is  fit  to  meet  him  on  his  own  ground,  as  even  there,  it  can  be  shewn  that  he  is 
totally  wrong.  It  is,  however,  first  necessary  to  state,  that  the  Hebrew,  to  which,  in  the  beginning,  he 
referred  i™  was  the  particle  br;  and  that  finding  he  must,  in  that  case,  attach  some  sense  or  other 
to  it,   he  then  refers  it  to  the  prefix  s 

On  inspecting  the  texts  belonging  to  numbers  5<).  60.  in  the  columns,  the  reader  will  perceive,  that 
even  in  the  Popish  translation,  (s)  k  is  net  an  expletive  in  the  latter  number.  The  original  *le  hadom 
raglah  is  precisely  the  same  in  both  texts,  and  consequently  so  are  the  translations  of  them  in  the 
Protestant  Bible.  The  ancient  translators  rendered  h  before,  and  the  late  ones  at,  in  either  text ; 
while  the  Popish  renderings  of  the  two  texts  are  inconsistent  with  each  other  ;  so  that  if  one  he  right, 
the  other  must  be  wrong.  For,  in  the  -[-first  of  them,  the  prefix  h  is  converted  into  a  mere  expletive, 
while  in  the  .^second,  it  is  made  significant,  and  of  the  same  import  as  that,  which  it  receives  in  the 
English  Translation  of  l6ll;  and  although  not  construed  by  the  same  word  at,  yet  by  a  circumlocu- 
tion, it  is  made  to  bear  the  same  meaning,  viz.  "  in  the  place  where."  This  is  another  instance  of 
Ward's  fairness,  in  censuring  the  Protestant  Translators  for  making  the  prefix  le  significant,  by  render- 
it  at  in  both  those  texts,  while  his  own  translation  of  one  of  them  justifies  that  use  of  the  word. 

The  exact  translation  of  the  Hebrew  word  at  the  head  of  this  article  is,  "  fall  prostrate  on  the 
ground."  This  was  the  profoundest  act  of  adoration  in  the  East,  whether  civil  or  religious  :  yet  it  is 
also  used  to  express  humility  of  mind,  as  in  Psal.  xlii.  v.  5.  "  why  art  thou  cast  dotal.  O  my  soul  ?" 
and  also  in  different  other  places.  The  Greek  word  vpcnvnu  is  used  by  Herodotus,  to  express  that 
abject  prostration  before  the  Persian  Monarch,  which  was  exacted  by  him  from  his  subjects,  and  has 
been  applied  where  profound  reverence  is  said  to  be  required  for  the  prince,  or  civil  magistrate;  but 
that  surely  cannot  warrant  adoration  in  a  religious  sense.  Beside  the  commandment,  the  express 
words  of  Christ  condemn  it  ;§  "  thou  shalt  worship  the  Lord  thy  God,  and  him  only  shalt  thou  serve." 
Here  evidently  is  the  distinction  drawn  by  Papists  between  \\Dulia  and  Latvia  done  away ;  since  it 
was  the  former  Satan  required,  when  Christ  told  him,  that  religious  worship  was  due  to  God  alone. 

That  '•  worship  at  his  footstool,"  &c.  is  no  mistranslation,  may  be  proved  from  the  conclusion  of 
the  Psalm  itself.  In  one  place,  the  prophet  used  these  words,  and  added  as  a  reason,  "  for  he  is  holy." 
In  the  other,  he  says,  "  worship  at  his  holy  hill;  for  the  Lord  our  God  is  holy."  If  the  Greek  be 
followed,  it  is  clear  enough,  that  the  word  «?.»?,  in  the  former  text,  refers  to  the  object  of  worship, 
scil.  *:.-.*?,  and  not  to  vaomhu,  which  is  of  a  different  gender.  In  the  latter  text,  the  doubt  is 
removed,  as  %v^l  ^  is  expressed.  This  is  further  confirmed  by  the  Hebrew,  the  source  and  spring, 
whence  the  meaning  of  the  Royal  Psalmist  may  be  best  derived  ;  since  instead  of  win  r-p,  Lxx. 
ay^  £-',  "  he  is  holy  :"  he,  immediately  after,  more  fully  expresses  himself  thus,  mn»  v)np,  Lxx.  uyios 
kvms  I  ho<,  "  the  Lord  our  God  is  holy."  These  words,  therefore,  remove  any  ambiguity  which  might 
be  supposed  to  exist  in  those.     The  Prophet,  in  mentioning  the  "  holy  hill,"  but  points  out  where  the 

*  vb:-\  ci7]b  t  Seecol.  Rhem  Vers.  \o.5Q.  $  Ibid.  No.  60. 

§  K.W.V  ro),  ©£cv  tra  vpwvvnvsis,  y.x.  avru  MONO  axt^ich:.     Matt.  c.  iv.  v.  10.  and  Luke,  c.  iv.  v.  3. 

||  The  terns  Latreia  and  Duleia  ore  borrowed  from  the  Greek,  n  circum-t  nxe  no  way  creditable  to  the  authority  ascribed 
by  the  Popish  Church  to  the  Latin  Vulgate.  They  are  not  so  much  as  mentioned  in  the  Trent  Catechism,  nor  is  the  distinction 
assigned  them,  any  where  observed  in  the  New  Testament. 


54         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

*footstool  of  God  lay.  His  view  was  solely  directed  to  the  ark  of  the  covenant,  on  the  rover  o(  which, 
under  the  representation  of  the  Cherubims,  the  -j  Lord  seemed  to  rest,  as  on  a  throne ;  but  he  no  more 
designed  that  it  should  be  adored,   than  the  hill  on  which  it  stood. 

Ward,  most  barefacedly,  misrepresents  St.  Augustine's  interpretation  of  the  text,  when  he 
says,  that  that  lather  inferred  from  it,  "that  the  blessed  sacrament  must  be  adored,  and  that  no  good 
Christian  takes  it,  before  he  adores  it."  St.  Augustine's  words  are,  that  the  humanity,  or  body,  of 
Christ  must  be  adored,  but  not  the  blessed  sacrament.  And  that  he  did  not  consider  his  humanity,  or 
body,  inherent  in  the  sacrament,  is  evident  from  what  he  conceived  a  sacrament  to  be.  "  In  ^sacra- 
ments," says  he,   "  we  are  to  see,  not  what  they  are,  but  what  they  signify." 

Lastly,  Jerome  says,  that  to  adore  any  creatures  is  downright  idolatry.  And  on  the  passage  in 
question  he  remarks,  '  We  do  not  worship,  but  iionour  the  religious  martyrs;  for  this  reason,  that  we 
might  adore  him  whose  martyrs  they  are.'  Thus  does  lie  decidedly  condemn  the  Dulia,  inasmuch  as 
he  makes  adoration  proper  only  to  God. 


SECTION  XL— SACRED  IMAGES,  AND  THE  USE  OF  THEM. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver. 


Oiiir.  Greek, 


Col.  iii.  5. 


y.cc>    tt,v   nhiciii- 
$»  %  i  1 


Lpll,  V.     5.     *l  ^iomTT,;,   Is 


Vulgate  Text.  Rhemish  Version 


et  avaritiam     And  avarice, 

quae  est      which    is    the 

simulachrorum  service  of  idols. 


servitus. 


aut  avarus 
quod  est  ido- 

orum  servi- 
tus. (alii  le- 
gunt,  serins.) 


Later  editions 

have'eovetous- 

ness.' 


or  covetous 
person   which 

is    the  ser- 
vice  of  idols, 
(others  i  serv- 
ing of) 


et  avaritiam, 

qua?  est  idolo- 

latria. 

Mont. 

idololatria. 


Beza's  LatinText  Bps.  Bible,  1568.  K.James'sBibleiGn 


aut  avarum, 

qui  est 
idololatra. 


Mont. 
qui     est    idolo- 
latra. 


*And  covet-j     And  covetous- 
ousness    which  ness,    which   is 
is    '  the     wor-|        '  idolatry.' 

shipping  of     ! 


images. 


(60 


*And  covet)    nor  covetous 
ous  man 'which  man    'who  is  an 
is  a  worshipper|       '  idolater.' 

of  images.' 


(62) 


Marked  thus-*  were  altered  to  their  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 


*  The  Ark  so  called.   See  Chron.  c.  xxviii.  v.  2. 
f  "  Quod  alls  Cherubim,  mutuo  expansis  ac  se  contingentibus,  tanquam  sedili  vel  throno  videbatur  insidere  DomiiiUS,  pedibus 
Arcx  operculo,  tanquam  scabello  impositis.  Vid.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc. 

%  "  In  sacramentis  videndurn  est,  non  quod  sint,  sed  quol  significant." 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  55 

61.  62.  El^KoXctT^.  The  worship  of  images  consists  of  two  kinds ,  cither  when  they  arc 
worshiped  as  Gods,  as  by  the  ignorant  devotees  of  the  present  clay,  in  opposition  to  the  first  command- 
ment;  or,  when  men  pretend  to  worship  God  by  then,,  as  the  better  informed  Romanists  do  in  vio 
Iation  of  the  second  commandment  Thus  it  happens,  that  this  description  of  worshippers  allhooeh 
they  do  not  believe  their  saints  and  angels  to  be  God,  yet  by  paying  then,  the  inward  worship  of  the 
son!  are  as  guilty  of  idolatry,  as  if  they  did  believe  them  to  be  Gods ;  since  they  ascribe  to  them  that 
which  peculiarly  belongs  to  God. 

It  may  be  owing  to  the  similitude  which  the  Apostle  discovered  between  these  characters,  that  he 
calls  the  covetous  man  <  a  worshipper  of  images,'  or,  as  it  is  in  later  editions    of   the  Protestant  Bible 
an   'idolater;    for,  evidently,  the  man   who  depends  more  on   his   riches,   for  the  support  of  his  life' 
than  on  God,  should  be  deemed  one.  ' 

It  is  unaccountable,  what  a  propensity  to  cavil  manifests  itself  in  every  page  of  the  Errata      In  his 
observations  on  the  present  text,  Ward  sets  out  with  inveighing  against  the  first  English  Translations  of 
it;  andaheratorrentofabi.se,  not  only  on   the  Translators,  but  the  Protestant  Clergy,  concludes 
with  saying,  because  they  have  -  latterly  mended  the  matter,  I  will  say  no  more  about  it."'  So  that  he 
m  a  manner  admits,  that  he  cavils  for  cavilling  sake.  But  he  has  gratified  his  humour,  in  this  respect  at 
the  expence  of  his  knowledge  ;   since  simulachrum,  the  word  used  by  Jerome,  denotes  an   <  image  ''  as 
much  as  imago.     Thus  in   the  Vulgate  version   of  a  next,  in  the  first  book  of  Samuel,  simulachrum 
does  not  signify  an  idol  worshipped  for  God,  but  the  very  thing  expressed  by  imago.     Several  of  the 
Fathers  take  it  in  the  same  sense;  and,  of  profane  authors,  fCicero  applies  simulachrum,  imago,  and 
statua,  alike.     It  may  now  be  fairly  collected,  that  «  image'  is  no  mistranslation  of  ,*W,  much  less  a 
wilful  corruption  ;  and  therefore  that  Ward  was  not  justifiable  in  drawing  up  so  severe  a  stricture  on 
the   first    Protestant  Translation  of  the  texts  belonging  to  the  numbers  prefixed  to  this  article.      In  a 
confident  tone,  he  asks,   J"  when  the  cross  stood  many  years  upon  the  table  in  Queen  Elizabeth's  cha- 
pel, was  it  against  this  (the  first)  commandment?"     He  should  have  known,  that  it  is  not  the  having 
images  in  churches  and  chapels,  which  is  contrary  to  the  commandment  ;  but  the  converting  them  to 
a  religious  use.     And  if,  as  he  says,  «  the  Lutherans  beyond  seas"  had,  in  their  churches,    images  of 
the  Virgin  Mary  and  St.  John  ;  it  was  not  for  the  purpose  of  worshipping  them.     However,  if  they 
deviated  in  the  slightest  degree  from  the  word  of  God,  they  are  no  more   to  be  excused,  than  the  Ro- 
manists themselves.     Ward  concludes  his  remarks  on  this  head  with  one  other  enquiry.    "  Tor  do  they 
not  know,  that  God  many  times  forbad  the  Jews  either  to  marry  or  converse  with    the    Gentiles,  lest 
they  might  fall  to  worship  their  idols?"     The   cases    are  by  no   means  parallel;  as  there  is  a  positive 
commandment  in  the  one  case,  and  in  the  other  a  simple  prohibition,  against  intermarriage,  or  con- 
versation with  the  heathen. 


-  C,  xix.  In  the  sixteenth  verse,  that  is  called  simulachrum  which  was  called  statua  In  the  thirteenth.  Sec  also  Genesis,  c.  i,  v,  26. 

t  Pro  Archia  Poeta.  +  E,Tvita,  page  65: 


A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.  Orig.  Greek 


2  Cor.  vi.  16. 


John 
21. 


Tt;  &  avfy.xrx- 
una  udvhtiv. 


Vulgate  Text. 


RhemishVcrsion. 


Quis  (alii, 
qui)  autem 
consensus 
Tern  pi  o   Dei 
cum  Idolis  ? 


l  Cor.  x.  7- 


Tgxtyni?Qt,xx- 
Q«$  rut;  cevruv. 


I  Cor.  v.  10. 


Ibid 11. 


Ttaviu,  <pv-  |Filioli,custo- 

Xx^xri ixvrUf 


And  what 
agreement  hath 
the  Temple  of 
God  with  idols? 


et  quae  consen- 
sio  templo  Dei 

cum    simula- 
chris? 


cc%»  rtov  aou- 


dite  vos  a  si- 
mulachris. 


»j  i^wtohxrgM; 


n  uia\okxTfii 


Beza's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  1568.  K.James'sBfl>lci6ii 


How  agreeth        And    what 
the    temple    of  agreement  hath 


My  little  chil-   Filioli,  cavete 
dren,    keep     vobis  ab  idolis 


yourselves  from 
idols. 


Neque  idolo- 

latrae   efficia- 

mini,  sicut 

quidam    ex 

ipsis. 


aut  idolis  ser- 
vientibus. 


aut  idolis  ser- 
viens. 


Neither  be- 
come ye  idola- 
ters, as  certain 
of  them. 


or  the   servers 
of  idols. 


or  a   server  of 
idols. 


Mont. 

vos  ipsos  ab 

idolis: 


Ne  igitur  idolo 
latrae  fiatis, 
sicut  quidam 
eorum. 


aut  idololatris 

Mont. 

idololatris. 


idololatra. 

Mont. 
idololatra. 


God  with 
1  images? 


the      Temple    oi 
God  with 
'  idols:' 

(63) 


....  'keep 
yourselves  from 
images.' 


*Be  not '  wor- 
shippers of 
images,'  as 

some  of  them. 


idolaters 


*a  worshipper 
of  images. 


little   children, 

keep   yourselves 

from  '  idols/ 

(64) 


Neither  be  ye 
«  idolaters,'   as 
were  some  of 
them. 

(65) 


or  with  'idolaters' 


(66) 


or  an  idolater. 


(67) 


Marked  thus  *  were  altered  to  their  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 
6% 67.   Ef(5wA0V.    It  is  to  no  purpose  that  the  Protestant  Translators  of  1611  conformed 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  57 

their  version  of  the  texts  connected  with  the  foregoing  numbers  to  the  Popish  one,  as  this  circum- 
stance is  not  even  noticed  by  Ward,  while  he  inveighs  with  peculiar  acrimony  against  their  prede- 
cessors for  having,  with*"  malicious  intent,  and  set  purpose  of  deluding  the  poor  simple  people  ' 
preferred  images  to  idols;  as  if  «  images  might  not  be  had  without  sin."  He  then  subjoins  for 
<<  we  see  the  Jews  had  the  images  of  the  cherubims,  and  the  figures  of  the  oxen  in  the  temple/ and 
the  image  of  the  brazen  serpent  in  the  wilderness,  by  God's  appointment."  There  cannot  be  a 
weaker,  or  more  futile  objection,  than  that,  which  he  has  here  advanced.  For,  in  the  first  place  how 
could  any  delusion  be  intended,  when  it  was  admitted,  at  the  very  time,  and  set  forth  in  the  marginal 
notes  to  the  English  Bibles,  that  the  Translators  considered  <  worshippers  of  images/  and  'idolaters  ' 
to  imply  one  and  the  same  thing?  Next,  if  God  appointed  the  cherubims,  the  oxen,  and  the 
pomegranates,  to  be  made,  it  was  not  that  He  should  be  worshipped  in,  or  through  them ;  they  were 
merely  ornaments,  and  only  designed  for  decorating  and  tbeautifying  the  temple.  So  that  the  com- 
mandment, «  thou  shalt  not  make  to  thyself  any  graven  image,  &c.'  imposes  a  restraint  on  men  not 
to  make  images  for  religious  purposes,  which  are  the  device  of  their  own  imaginations,  or  unautho- 
rised  by  God.  Against  such  the  Apostle  spoke,  and  nothing  more  was  intended  by  the  Protestant 
Translators.  And,  lastly,  as  to  the  brazen  serpent,  it  was  ||||broken  in  pieces,  when  the  people  be™, 
to  worship  it.  r         & 

:|;l)octor  Milner,  whose  zeal  in  the  cause  of  Popery  has  scarcely  been  exceeded  by  that  of  Ward 
attempts  to  give  a  colour  to  image-worship,  by  citing  the  following  passage  from  Bede's  §works.     «  If 
it  was  lawful  to  make  twelve  oxen  of  brass  to  support  the  brazen  sea,  it  cannot  be  amiss  to  paint  the 
twelve  Apostles  going  to  preach  to  all  nations."     From  these  words,  nothing  beside  the  lawfulness  of 
having  images  in  churches,  is  alluded  to;  a  point  which  Protestants  will  as  readily  concede  to  Doctor 
Milner,  (since  there  exist  images  at  this  day  in  several  of  their  churches,)  as  they  do,  that  of  the  Jews 
having   had   the  images    prescribed   them,  without  sin,  to  his  favourite  author,  Ward.     There  is  no 
doubt  of  that  Father's  principles  having  been  misrepresented,  as  he  elsewhere  unequivocally  llcondemns 
the  honour  and  worship  paid  to  images.     It  makes  no  difference,  that,  in  the  passage  quoted,  he  speaks 
of  heathens;  his  language  is  equally  directed    to    the  worshippers  of   Popish  Saints,  &c       UTer- 
tulhan,   in  his  commentary  on  1  St.  John,  v.  21.  (Number  04)  thus  forcibly  expresses  himself,  when  he 
desires  them  to  keep  away,  -  not  now  from  idolatry,  as  from  the  service  ;  but  from  the  idols  themselves, 
that    is,   from  the  very  image  or  shape  of  them.     For,  it  is  unworthy  that  the  image  of  the  living  God 
should  be  made  the  image  of  an  idol,  and  that  being  dead." 

*  Errata,  page  63.  +  Sec  Ezra  vii.  2;.     Isa.  lx.  13.     2  Chron.  iii  6. 

Illl  Quern  sane  serpentem  (says  St.  Austin)  propter  fact!  memoriam  reservatum,  cum  postea  ponulus  errans,  tanquam  idolum 
colere  caepisset,  Ezechias  fregit,  &c.  De  civit.  Lib.  x.  c.  8.  Refer  particularly  to  2  Kings  xviii.  4.  Hezekiah  is  there  said  to 
have  "removed  the  high  places,  and  brake  the  images,  and  cut  down  .he  groves,  and  brake  in  pieces  the  braien  serpent, 
that  Moses  had  made  :    for  the  children  of  Israel  did  burn  incense  to  it." 

X  See  Inquiry,  page  146.  §  De  templo  Salom.  cap.  19. 

||  Existit,  nescio  quis  dictator,  et  dicit,  non  ego  ilium  lapidetn  colo,  nee  illud  simulachrum  quod  est  sinesensu.  Non  e^o  illud 
colo,  sed  adoro  quod  non  video,  et  servio  ei  quern  non  video.  Quis  est  iste  ?  Numen  quoddam,  inquit,  invisible,  quod  prsesidet  simu- 
lachro.  Hoc  modo,  reddendo  rationem  de  simulachro,  suis  diserti  videntur  quia  non  colunt  idola,  et  colunt  damonia.  Bede,  ad 
Cor.  c.  x. 

%  Non  jam  ab  idololatria,  quasi  ab  officio,  sed  ab  idolis,  id  est,  ab  ipsa  effigie  eorum.  Indignum  enim,  ut  ima-o  Dei  vivi.  imag* 
idoli  et  mortui  fiat,  &c. 


I 


58 


A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


Book.  Ch.  Vcr. 

Orig.  Greek 

Vulgate  Text.  Rhemish Version.  Beza'sLatinText.  Bps.  Bible,  1568. 

K.James'sBibleiGn 

Horn.  xi.  4. 

KaT£?..7T.V    i 

Reliqui  mihijl  have  left   me  Feci  ut  reman- 

I   have  reserved 

iA.os.fru  mia-dia- 

septem  milliaseven  thousand|serint  mini  sep- 

. 

to  myself  seven 

virortim  qui 
non  curvave- 

men  that  have  tern  millia  viro 
not  bowed        rum  qui  non 

'to    the  image' 
of  Baal. 

thousand    men, 
who    have   not 

BaaA. 

runt  genua 

their   knees    to(flexerunt  genu 

bowed    the  knee 

ante  Baal. 

Baal. 

hnagini  Baal. 

'  to   the    image" 
of  Baal. 

(68) 

Acts.  xix.  35. 

A              ^ 

Cultricern 
esse  magna? 

A  worshipper 
of  great  Diana 

iEdituam  mag- 
na: Deae  Diana?. 

1  the  image  ' 
which   came 

A  worshipper    of 
the   great  God- 

Ttf   Al&Wf1«5. 

Dianae  et 

and  Jupiter's 

et   a  Jove  de- 

down  from 

dess   Diana,    and 

Jovis  prolis. 

Child. 

(Some 
editions    read 

<  offspring:) 

lapsi    simu- 
laehri. 

Jupiter. 

of  '    the    image  ' 

which   fell  down 

from  Jupiter. 

(69) 

68.  Tj)  BaaA.  These  words  of  St.  Paul  are  found  in  the  Septuagint  reading  of  the  *first 
book  of  Kings,  whence  they  are  manifestly  taken.  As  the  article  is  feminine,  Erasmus  supplies  «*«», 
and  Estius  rity  which  term,  according  to  the  lxx.  signifies  an  image  or  statue ;  thus  in  the  tsecond 
book  of  Kings,  the  *  statue  (or  image)  of  Baal.' 

In  Montanus's  bible,  the  ante  is  transferred  to  the  margin  from  the  Vulgate  Text,  as  not  having  a 
corresponding  preposition  in  the  Greek.  Ward  is  offended  with  the  Protestant  Translators  for  "  falsi- 
fying and  corrupting  the  scripture,  by  introducing  the  word  image  into  the  text."  It  is,  however, 
left  to  the  reader  to  judge ;  whether  image  worship  be  the  less  condemned  by  its  omission,  or  its 
votaries  less  liable  to  the  Divine  vengeance,  than  the  apostate  tribes  were,  among  the  Jews.     In  the 


*  C.  xix.  v.  18. 


1  C.  x.  v.  26,  2/. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION   OF  THEM   IN   1611.  r>:> 

•allusion  made  to  the  destruction  of  Jerusalem  by  Nebuchadnezzar,  the  sentence  pronounced  on  them 
was, — that  whether  Baal  were  worshipped  under  the  representation  of  the  *male  or  the  female  sex 
its  worshippers  would  be  cut  off,  while  the  faithful  few  would  be  ^exempted. 

6g.  @SCt.  Although  this  is  a  most  remarkable  word,  yet  it  has  been,  somehow,  unaccountably 
passed  over  by  the  Rhemish  Translators.  It  is  true,  it  was  generally  known  that  Diana  was  esteemed 
a  Goddess,  yet,  that  did  not  warrant  the  suppression  of  her  appropriate  title  ;  this  is  the  less  excusable, 
on  account  of  the  accuracy,  with  which  Ward  boasts  they  executed  their  version  of  the  New  Testa- 
ment, How  unfair,  then,  was  it  in  him,  with  this  fact  before  his  eyes,  to  accuse  the  Protestant 
Translators  of  "  intruding  the  word  image  into  the  text,  although,"  he  says,  "  they  knew  full  well 
it  was  not  in  the  Greek?"  The  reader  must  have  already  seen,  that  many  of  his  charges  are  of  this 
description,  unfounded  and  absurd ;  or  about  points,  in  themselves,  of  the  most  trifling  import. 

Now,  as  to  the  translation  of  {^WeV,  it  is  maintained,  that  one  more  literal  could  not  be  given,  than 
that  which  Ward  calls  corrupt;  and  let  the  subject,  to  which  it  refers,  be  an  image,  a  shield,  or  any 
other  object  of  heathen  adoration,  its  own  strict  and  lawful  meaning  is,  "  what  had  fallen  down  from 
Jupiter,"  or  from  Heaven  ;  and,  therefore,  is  not  of  any  consequence  to  the  Christian,  one  way  or  the 
other.  Isidorus  Clarius  himself,  who  restored  the  ancient  Latin  copy,  by  correcting  it  from  the  ori- 
ginal, rejected  Jovis  prolis,  as  in  the  Vulgate  text,  and  substituted,  with  the  consent  of  the  deputies 
of  the  Council  of  Trent,  these  words  :  a  §Jove  delapsi  simulachri.  The  word  image  is,  therefore 
necessarily  understood  in  the  original,  and  is,  with  great  propriety,  introduced  into  the  text  of  the 
English  Translation.  Indeed,  it  would  be  unpardonable  to  omit  it,  as  the  concurrent  voice  of  history 
testifies  the  belief,  which  prevailed  among  the  Ephesians,  that  an  image  of  Diana  had  actually  dropt 
down  from  heaven  into  their  city.  The  erection  of  a  splendid  temple,  which  was  the  wonder  of  the 
world,  and  the  immense  sums  which  were  spent  in  beautifying  and  adorning  it ;  not  only  shew  how  pecu- 
liarly addicted  the  Ephesians  were  to  the  worship  of  Diana;  but,  likewise,  the  existence  of  her  image. 
Pliny  relates  the  matter  at  large,  Lib.  xvi.  cap.  40. 

*  In  some  copies  of  the  lxx.  the  reading  is  ry  Bxa.}.. 
f  Grotius  says,  "  EfFecturum  Deum,  ut  cladibus  illis  super  Tribus  Decern  Venturis,  intacti  manerent,  qui  Baalis  imagini,  nee  genua 
flexerant,  nee  osculum  dederant;  plane  sicut  qui  Legem  observarunt,  exempti  sunt  ab   excidio  Hieros.  facto  per  Nabuchodono- 
sorem."    Vid.  Pol.  SYNors.  in  loc.  Also,  Bishop  Patkick/s  Commentary  on  1  Kings,  c.  xix.  v.  IS.  and  2  Kings,  c.  x.  v.  20,  2~ . 

%   A  Jove  delapsus,  qui  caelitus  descendit.  Scap. 
4  Vel  caelitus,  constat  enim  Jovem  pro  ccvlo  dici  frequens  Grsecis  Pol  Synopv  in  loe. 


i  2 


CO 


A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.Orig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text.  Rhemish  Version. jBeza's  Latin  Text 


Bps.  Bible,  1568. 


Exod.  xx.  4.  j    °w  "■<""«•«     Non  facies     Thou  shalt  not 
fftanu  iA*5».Lbi  sculptilc.make  to  thee  a 

graven  thing. 


Isa.  xxx.  22. 


Ei^wAa     T:X    WE- 

Xfltf      TTEjIXE- 

vpytrfc'/x.Ei'^  AeTT- 
T«  7TCHJO->3{. 


1  lab.  ii.   1 8.   t.  «<pEX£t  yx«» 

T0»  (bD2) 
i    oti    fiAt^av 
(lbDS) 

iJ/EfJi). 


Et  contami 
nabis  laminasl 

sculptilium 

argenti  tui 
et    vestimen- 
tum  conflati- 

lis  auri  tui. 

Pagn.    Con- 
taminabitis 
operi  men- 
turn    sculpti- 
lium   argenti 
tui,  et  operi- 
mentuin  pre- 
tiosum    con 
flatilis    auri 
tui. 


And  thou  slialt 
contaminate  I 
the  plates  of  the 
sculptils  of  thy 
silver,  and  the 
garment  of  the 
molten  of  thy 
gold. 


any  graven 
'  image.  ' 


K.James'sBibleifin 


thou   shalt   not 

make   unto 
thee    any  graven 
'  image.'         (70) 


Dan.  xiv.  4. 


uou7\ot 


Quid  prodest 
sculptile,quia 
sculpsit  illud 
fictor  suus, 
conflatile  et 
'  imaginem 
falsam  ? ' 

Pagn. 
docens  men- 

dacium. 


Idola  manu- 


Mont.        The  covering  |  Ye    shall    defile 

makes  no      of  thy  «  graven  also  the  covering 

[change  in  Pag-  images '  of  sil-  0f    thy    'graven 

ninus's  version,    ver,  and  the    images'  of  silver, 

except  ornament   of  ancJ  the  ornament 

in    reading      thy    '   molten  0f    thy  '  molten 

super humer ale      images'  of     images'  of  gold. 

for  operimen-  gold 

turn  pretiosum. 


What  profiteth 
the  thing  en- 
graven, that  the 
forger  thereof 
hath  graven  it, 
a  molten,  and  a 
false  image 


facta. 


Idolsmadewithj 
hands. 


(70 


What  profiteth    What   profiteth 
the  image,   for     the   '  graven 
the  maker      image,"   that    the 
thereof  hath      maker    thereof 
made    it    an    |hath   graven    it  ; 
image,  and  a  the  molten  image 
teacher  of  lies  .-and  a  teacher  of 
lies? 


Apocryphal. 


(72) 


Apocryphal. 


(73) 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  ni 


r> 


70.  *?DD  fSlCWAOV.  Whether  thing  or  image  be  admitted  as  the  literal  English,  no  change 
is  given  thereby  to  the  commandment  against  idolatry.  The  Hebrew  word  means  what  is  hewn  or 
carved  ;  so  that  whether  the  representation  of  any  living  or  inanimate  thing,  which  was  worshipped, 
were  cast,  painted,  or  carved,  its  worship  was  alike  forbidden.  With  respect  to  those  things  com- 
manded by  God,  as  the  Cherubims,  Oxen,  Brazen  Serpent,  &c.  there  is  not,  in  scripture,  one  word 
of  command,  or  even  of  intimation,  that  he  would  have  them  worshipped. 

Ward,  it  must  be  observed,  only  quotes  the  first  clause  of  the  commandment,  J"  thou  shalt  not 
make  to  thyself  any  graven  thing"  The  reason  is  obvious,  for  had  he  annexed  what  immediately 
follows,  "  nor  the  likeness  of  any  thing,  &c."  "  thou  shalt  not  bow  thyself  down  to  them,  &c."  it 
would  have  overturned  his  arguments  for  a  distinction  between  idols  and  images,  which  are  bowed 
down  to,  and  reverenced,  for  the  sake  of  what  they  represent.  It  would  also  shew  the  signification 
of  pesel,  and  that  the  meaning  of  the  whole  sentence  is  precisely  the  same,  whether  it  be  rendered 
graven  thing,  or  graven  image.  The  reader  will  also  perceive  that,  in  the  passage  omitted  by  Ward, 
the  prohibition  against  bowing  down  to  images  is,  if  possible,  more  strongly  expressed  in  the  Hebrew 
and  Greek  than  in  the  English  translation,  as  the  word  ^  and  wawo?  signify  '  any  at  all;  or  *  whatever* 
The  Protestant  Translators,  however,  deeming  "  any"  expressive  enough,  dispensed  with  the  use  of 
these  adjuncts.  Indeed,  the  use  of  them  would  evidently  be  redundant.  So  that  the  words  which 
immediately  follow  «$«*»,  viz.  »&  riANTOs  Spot*,** ;  or,  to  refer  even  to  the  Vulgate,  those  subjoined 
to  "  sculptile,"  viz.  "  neque  omnem  similitudinem,"  clearly  prove,  that  neither  the  Seventy  nor 
Jerome  took  pesel,  generally,  for  any  graven  work.  §Origin  says,  that  neither  a  picture  drawer,  nor 
a  statuary  was  allowed  in  the  Jewish  state.  His  words  are,  $wa?o$,  uTtarya^rimtwn^vikmutcuntn,  &c. 
This  passage  fully  declares  his  meaning. 

*  To  cut  with  a  tool,  and  as  a  noun,  a  graven  or  carved  image.  Parkh. 
f  From  :iSo?,  an  image  or  representation,  whether  corporeal  or  mental,  of  some  other  thing.— Parkh.  Tertullian  calls  it 
formula,  (dim.  a  forma)  deriving  it,  however,  from  the  same  word  uhc,  and  most  pointedly  condemns  every  kind  of  idolatry. 
"  Igitur  omnis  forma  (scil.  a^?>vel  formula  («}»*<>»)  idolum  se  dici  exposcit.  Inde  idololatria,  omnis  circa  idolum  famulatus,  et 
servitus"  Tert.  de  idololatria.  c.  iii.  As  it  is  here  determined,  that  every  description  of  serviceable  attendance  (famulatus)  on 
an  idol,  is  idolatry,  and  that  idol  is  but  the  generic  appellation  of  forms  of  things,  great  or  small j  the  attempt  is  vain  to  distinguish 
between  idols  and  images.     Homer,  too,  determines  t.^cv  to  be  synonymous  with  image  : 

An^'o  EIAnAONT«t>!'ag7t/goTo£of  AmXku*.     IK.E.44Q.         And  again,         T»Xe  p  a^yao-tv  ¥t'%a»  EIAfiAA  Kxyjovrm.     IK  V.  72. 
Pope,  in   explaining  the  /Egyptian  philosophy  followed  by   Homer,  observes,   that  «&v*oy  "  is  properly  the  image  of  the  body  in 
which  it  was  inclosed."   Transl.  vol.  iv.  p.  l6(j,     And  Wolfius  says,  nunc  pro  simulachro,  nunc  pro  defunctorum  sou  inferorum 
innlris  spectrisve  sumitur.     Cukte.  Philol.  vol.  iii.  p.  421. 

+  Ward  says,  that  the  clauses,  "  thou  shalt  not  make  to  thyself  any  graven  thing,  &c."  belong  to  the  first  commandment ; 
yet  in  Butler's  Catechism  they  are  suppressed.  But  whether  they  be  suppressed,  or  moulded  into  one,  with  the  first  command- 
ment, a  division  of  the  tenth  necessarily  follows,  in  order  to  make  out  the  ninth,  which  would  otherwise  be  wanting.  Let  the 
reader  now  compare  Exod.  xx.  17.  with  Deut.  v.  21.  and  he  will  see  that  the  clause,  "  thou  shalt  not  covet  thy  neighbour's 
wife,"  which  the  Popish  Church  sets  down  as  the  ninth  commandment,  occurs  second  in  order  in  the  former  place,  andf  rst  in  the 
latter.  Can  there  be  a  plainer  proof  than  this,  that  God  designed  that  the  commandment  relative  to  coveting  should  be  one  and 
the  same  3  and,  therefore,  that  the  clauses,  in  which,  the  making,  and  worshipping,  graven  images  are  forbidden,  should  neither 
be  suppressed,  nor  made  a  part  of  the  first  commandment  i      Reader,  examine  and  judge. 

§  Orjg.  cont.  Cels.  Lib.  iv.  p.  181. 


62         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

71.  ^D9— .rcpB  The  prophetic  admonition,  which  amounts  to  this,  that  one  God  be  worship- 
ped, and  all  heathen  superstition  he  abolished,  is  alike  contained  in  cither  the  Douay  or  Protestant 
Version,  and  has  equally  a  reference  to  the  images  now  used  by  the  Romanists,  as  it  had,  when  delivered, 
to  pagan  idols;  both  tending  to  withdraw  the  minds  of  men  from  the  worship  of  God.  It  does  not 
require  much  penetration  to  perceive  that  the  Protestant  translation  is  the  true  one,  and  that  that  of 
Douay  is  less  clear  and  satisfactory,  notwithstanding  that  Ward  affects  to  disprove  it.  He  ushers  in 
the  article  with  observing,  *"  the  two  Hebrew  words  pesilim  and  massechoth,  which  in  the  Latin 
signify  sculpt  ilia  and  conflatilia,  they  in  their  translation  render  into  English  by  the  word  images, 
neither  word  being  Hebrew  for  an  image?  The  asseveration  contained  in  this  last  clause  is  made  in 
direct  opposition  to  the  opinions  of  the  best  Hebraists,  who  consider  them  to  signify  nothing  else, 
except  graven  or  cast  images,  and  by  the  figure  synecdoche,  as  taken  generally  for  every  description  of 
images.  "  But,"  continues  Ward,  "  if  one  should  ask,  what  is  the  Latin  for  image?  and  they  should 
tell  him  sculplile:  whereupon  he  seeing  a  fair  painted  image  on  a  table,  might  perhaps  say,  ecce  egre- 
gium  sculptile ;  which  doubtless  every  boy  in  the  grammar  school  would  laugh  at." 

Now  if  the  question  were  put,  "  what  is  the  Latin  for  an  image?"  sculptile,  evidently,  would 
not  be  the  answer;  and  again,  if  it  should  be  asked,  what  pesilim  and  massechoth  signify? 
neither  would  the  answer  be  '  a  graven  thing,'  or  '  a  molten  thing  ;'  as  the  prophet  could  not  have 
had  in  view  generally  things  molten  or  engraved,  such  as  urns,  emblematical  devices,  <kc.  In  short, 
the  question  is  not,  by  what  artizan,  whether  "  the  painter,  or  the  embroiderer,"  images  were  made ; 
but,  whether  they  were  not  converted  to  purposes  which  were  in  themselves  unlawful.  This  may 
account  for  the  difference  of  the  Hebrew  words  not  being  preserved  in  the  different  translations. 

71.  btt  Ward  maintains  that  yXvttlo*  in  the  Greek,  and  sculptile  in  the  Latin,  signify  a  "  thing 
different  from  an  image  ;'*  and  that  those  "  false  and  heretical  translators"  formed  their  version  in  the 
present  instance,  for  the  purpose  of  bringing  all  holy  images  into  contempt.  He  repeats  the  same 
charge  of  falsehood  and  heresy,  respecting  the  translation  of  conjlatile.  A  few  words,  however,  will 
prove  it  to  be  utterly  unfounded,  and  that  pesel  and  massecah  signify  one  and  the  same  thing,  viz. 
image.  The  Prophet  asks,  "  what  profiteth  the  graven  image,  (bos)  that  the  maker  (nv)  hath  graven 
it?"  then  follows  in  apposition,  -sro  il  molten  image.''  From  this,  it  appears,  that  although  one  of  the 
Hebrew  words  imports  an  image,  which  is  '  graven,'  and  the  other  an  image,  which  is  molten  ;  yet, 
without  distinction,  they  both  refer  to  one  and  the  same  image.  Even  the  Douay  Translation  of  this 
text  admits  of  a  similar  inference,  inasmuch  as  *  the  graven  thing,'  and  the  molten  image,  are  identi- 
fied by  those  words.  Besides,  it  would  be  absurd  to  suppose,  that  the  Hebrew  terms,  expressive  of  what 
was  graven  or  molten,  could,  for  instance,  mean  domestic  utensils,  rather  than  'images/  to  which  they 
are  evidently  appropriated. 

In  the  prophecy  of  tJeremiah,  a  passage  occurs,  which  confirms  the  truth  of  the  preceding  remarks, 

*  Errata,  page  67. 

t   "  Every  founder  is  confounded   by  the  graven  ivmge ;  for  his  molten  image  is  falsehood,  and  there  is  no  breath  in 
'.hem."     C.  x.  v.  14. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  63 

This  prophet,  too,  uses  two  different  words ;  the  one  signifying  what  is  'graven,'  "jdbo,  and  the  other 
what  is  '  melted/  isdj  :  and  yet  he  does  not  preserve  the  distinction.  Neither  is  it  observed  in  any  of 
the  translations,  since  they  generally  declare  an  image  to  be  intimated.  The  Vulgate  reading,  sculptile 
and  conflatile,  and  even  the  Douay  translation,  viz.  "  every  craftsman  is  confounded  in  the  sculptil ; 
because  it  is  false  that  he  hath  melted,  and  there  is  no  spirit  in  them,"  expose  Ward's  ignorance  and 
presumption,  in  asserting  the  Protestant  Version,  viz.  c  image,'  to  be  false.  Is  more  than  one  thing 
here  meant  by  both  words ;  or,   what  other  thing  can  that  be,  except  an  image  ? 

"  Where,"  observes  *Ward,  "  they  should  translate  image,  as  imagit/em  falsam,  a  false  image, 
they  translate  another  thing,  without  any  pretence  either  of  Hebrew  or  Greek."  A  Hebrew  con- 
cordance will  convince  any  of  Ward's  popish  readers,  who  can  use  it,  that  this  charge  is  unsubstan- 
tiated by  fact.  That  the  Hebrew  term  n-ra  never  signifies  imago,  as  Jerome ;  nor  (pxmurux.  as  the  lxx, 
translated  it,  is  attested  by  Isidorus  Clarius.  In  his  comments  on  this  text  he  observes,  t"  that  he 
(the  prophet)  says  a  false  image  ;  in  the  Hebrew  it  is  teaching  or  shewing  forth  a  lie."  Pagninus  ren- 
ders the  Hebrew  phrase  X  nptf  n-na  §docens  mendacium,  which  is  approved  bv  Montanus.  Thus,  ac- 
cording to  the  only  criterion  by  which  the  matter  can  be  judged,  that  of  the  original  languages,  the 
distinction  of  true  and  false  images  falls  to  the  ground ;  since  all  images,  which  are  used  in  religion, 
are  false,  and  teachers  of  falsehood.  Here  it  may  be  said,  that  a  comparison  cannot  be  drawn  between 
a  heathen  idol,  and  a  popish  image;  as  that  may  be  the  representative  of  a  devil,  this,  of  an  angel. 
However  true  this  may  be,  they  are  alike  objectionable  ;  and  although  the  prophet  had  only  in  view 
the  condemnation  of  pagan  idols,  which  were  unavailing  even  to  their  very  votaries  in  the  day  of  cap- 
tivity ;  yet  when  Ward  quotes  the  passage,  for  the  purpose  of  founding  the  doctrine  of  image  worship 
on,  what  he  calls,  the  pure  and  genuine  interpretation  of  the  college  at  Douay,  he  brings  down  the 
same  censure  on  the  popish  worshippers  of  images,  which  was  denounced  against  the  idolatrous 
Jews. 

Calvin's  note  on  the  passage  is  too  concise  and  appropriate  to  be  omitted.  He  thus  explains  it, 
"  mera  illusio,  idolum  quodvis,  quod  /also  docet ;''  as  inducing  the  ignorant  to  think  that  God  is  like 
the  work  of  men's  hands.  It  is,  therefore,  manifest  that  the  Protestant  Translation  of  the  passage, 
which  Ward  brands  as  erroneous,  is  correct;  and  that  its  faithfulness  is  sanctioned  by  some  of  the 
most  eminent  authorities. 

73.  Apocryphal.  It  would  not  be  necessary  to  offer  any  remark  on  this  text,  as  the  chapter  in 
which  it  is  found  is  uncanonical,  but  for  an  observation  which  Ward  has  thought  proper  to  make. 
"  They  proceed  so  far  as  though  Daniel  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."  Nothing  can  be  clearer  than  that  neither  of  the  two  first  was  to  be  worshipped,  as  they  were 
X£tgo™»T*j  made  with  hands ;  and  that  God  only  was  to  be  worshipped,  where  they  were ;  while  they 

*  Errata,  page  QJ. 
f  "  Quod  ait  imaginem  falsam,  Hebraice,  est  docens  vel  annuncians  mendacium." 
%  ipw  fallacker  dicere  vel  agere.    Buxt.  also  Taylor's  Concord.  $  See  Column  Vulcatr  Text* 


64  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

were  to  be  but  reverently  esteemed.  As  to  the  Cross,  there  is  no  reason  why  it  should  be  worshipped, 
were  it  even  possible  to  find  it ;  and  not  rather  be  broken  in  pieces,  as  the  brazen  Serpent  was  by 
*Hezekiah.  It  was  held  in  no  estimation  by  the  Apostles,  and  when  Nicodemus  and  Joseph  of  Ari- 
mathea  had  it  in  their  power,  they  neglected  its  preservation.  But  as  it  is  reported  to  have  been 
found,  (Doctor  Milner  himself  gravely  tells  his  readers  that  he  has  a  precious  fragment  of  i  )  it  is 
proper  to  state  the  opinion  of  St.  Ambrose  respecting  it.  f"  Helena  worshipped  the  king,  not  indeed  the 
wood,  for  this  is  an  heathenish  error,  and  the  vanity  of  ungodly  men."  It  is  not  possible  for  language 
to  convey  a  more  express  condemnation  of  the  popish  custom  of  paying  adoration  to  the  Rood. 

The  story  respecting  its  invention  is  one  which  shews,  as  forcibly  as  any  thing  can,  the  degraded 
state  into  which  the  reason  of  a  man  may  be  sunk,  whose  mind  is  enveloped  by  the  mists  of  super- 
stition. Of  this  Doctor  Milner  is  a  melancholy  instance  ;  a  gentleman  who,  on  every  subject  uncon- 
nected with  religion,  speaks  like  a  man  of  talent  and  erudition  ;  but  when  he  discusses  theological 
points,  he  not  unfrequently  exhibits  the  most  manifest  signs  of  an  impaired  intellect. 

In  a  Jletter  addressed  to  a  friend  from  Cashel,  dated  July  21st,  1807,  on  the  subject  of  the  ruins 
of  the  Holy  Cross  in  the  county  of  Tipperary,  he  thus  expresses  himself:  "  You  will  be  surprised, 
Sir,  when  I  tell  you,  that  the  identical  portion  of  the  true  Cross,  for  the  sake  of  which  this  splendid 
fane  was  erected,  is  now  in  the  possession  of  my  respected  friend  and  fellow  traveller."  Then,  after 
accounting  for  the  manner  of  its  preservation,  and  declaring  himself  satisfied  with  the  authenticity 
of  the  vouchers  about  this  fact,  he  observes,  "  it  is  by  far  the  ^largest  piece  of  the  Cross  I  ever  met 
with,  being  about  two  inches  and  a  half  long,  and  about  half  an  inch  broad,  but  very  thin.  It  is 
inserted  in  the  lower  shaft  of  an  archiepiscopal  cross,  made  of  some  curious  wood,  and  inclosed  in  a 
gilt  case."  What  a  fatuity  ;  either  that  Doctor  Milner  should  himself  believe,  or  attempt  to  palm  on 
others,  so  gross  a  fabrication !  ||Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  whom  he  quotes,  certainly  speaks  of  the  dis- 
covery of  the  Cross  in  the  reign  of  Constantine,  but  unaccountably  attributes  its  appearance  in  the 
midst  of  the  heavens,  to  the  reign  of  his  successor  Constantius.  Here  the  pious  bishop's  ignorance 
of  the  period  in  which  the  miraculous  Cross  really  appeared,  betrays  itself,  and  the  contradiction, 
which  shews  itself  on  the  face  of  the  matter,  and  which  cannot  be  reconciled  either  by  him  or  his 
Irish  Episcopal  Brethren,  deservedly  sinks  the  credit  of  the  Father's  testimony.  Besides,  what  credit 
is  due  to  Cyril,  whose  rhetorical  flourishes,  on  this  and  other  subjects  connected  with  it,  seem  to  be 
the  only  foundation  for  Paulinus's  improving  them  into  real  facts,  when  Eusebius,  the  ecclesiastical 
historian  of  the  day,  is  silent  about  the  matter ;  when  not  even  a  word  is  spoken  of  Helena ;  nor  so 
much  as  an  allusion  is  made  to  her  by  him  ? 

*  2  Kings,  c.  xviii.  v.  4.    .  t  De  obit.  Theodosii.  %   Inquiry,  page  128. 

§  When  Doctor  Milner  can  seriously  declare,  that  he  has  seen  fragments  of  the  accursed  instrument  of  our  Saviour's  suffer- 
ing, who  dare  disbelieve  his  narrative  of  the  miraculous  cure  of  Winifred  White  ?  Who,  after  this,  can  imply  a  doubt  of  the 
supernatural  privilege  communicated  to  the  Virgin's  milk  j  of  her  image  at  Erbach  shedding  tears  at  the  return  of  Easter ;  of  the 
flight  of  the  chapel  of  Loretto  through  the  air  ;  and  of  the  three  heads  of  John  the  Baptist,  as  mentioned  by  Fleury,  shewn  at 
three  different  places  at  the  same  time; — since  they  are  stories  which  are  equally  well  authenticated  ?  At  least,  the  poor  credu- 
lous Irish,  who  have  ever  been  the  dupes  of  juggling  impostors,  will  swallow  all  his  lying  wonders  as  undoubted  facts,  reported 
as  they  are  by  the  accredited  agent  of  their  Hierarchy,  a  Vicar  Apostolic,  a  Bishop  Castalalensis  Ipse  ! 

H  Apud  Baron.  A.  D.  353.  No.  2f3. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  1\   1611.  <;, 

Had  Doctor  Milner  consulted  Basnage's  history  of  the  Jews,  he  would  have  perceived,  that  the 
Empress  Helena,  who,  he  roundly  affirms,  found  the  true  Cross,  was  not  converted  to  Christianity  at 
the  time  fixed  on  by  popish  writers  for  its  discovery,  and  that  this  want  of  chronological  coincidence 
proves  the  tradition  respecting  the  Cross  entirely  groundless.  That  author,  in  his  "Continuation  of 
Josephus,  brings  forward  the  most  incontrovertible  proofs,  that  the  merit  of  discovering  the  wood 
upon  which  Jesus  Christ  suffered,  is  to  be  ascribed  to  a  Jew  named  Judas,  and  not  to  Helena.  For 
first,  he  argues  from  Eusebius*s  taking  no  notice  of  the  matter,  although  reported  to  have  taken  place 
in  the  immediate  neighbourhood  of  his  bishoprick,  which  he  would  not  have  done,  had  Helena,  the 

mother  of  his  hero,   really  made  the  discovery,  and  had  God  recognised  her  zeal  by  a  public  miracle 

such  as  that  of  re  animating  a  dead  body  when  placed  on  the  Cross  on  which  Christ  suffered;  a  cir- 
cumstance which  distinguished  it  from  those  of  the  thieves.  He  then  adduces  the  testimony  of  Gre- 
gory of  Tours,  the  most  ancient  historian  of  any  who  have  spoken  of  the  discovery  of  the  Cross. 
This  writer  gives  the  glory  of  it  to  Judas.  Basnage,  afterwards,  proceeds  to  say,  that  Schelstrate,  the 
Vatican  librarian,  thinks  that  Gregory  of  Tours  took  this  fact  from  an  ancient  catalogue  of  the  Popes, 
in  which  the  discovery  of  the  Cross,  and  baptism  of  Judas,  are  placed  under  the  Pontificate  of  Euse- 
bius.  The  same  observation  is  made  by  Holstenius,  another  Vatican  librarian.  "  These  proofs/1 
observes  Basnage,  "  arc  not  questionable  — they  come  from  good  hands.  The  ancient  historians  of 
the  Popes  furnish  them,  and  their  librarians  publish  them,  and  at  the  same  time  give  glory  to  the 
truth.'5  The  matter,  then,  as  to  time  and  circumstance,  stands  briefly  thus  :  Eusebius  was  Pope  before 
Constantine  was  a  Christian  :  Judas  found  the  Cross  of  Christ,  in  Eusebius's  Pontificate  ;  therefore 
Helena,  who  was  still  an  idolater  and  an  heathen,  could  not  have  had  any  part  in  the  transaction.  So 
that  the  historian  has  committed  a  gross  error  in  not  accurately  computing  the  years  of  Constantine,  and 
his  conversion.  Ur.  Milner  and  his  Irish  Episcopal  Brethren  will,  no  doubt,  endeavour,  as  Baronius  has 
attempted  to  do,  to  get  over  this  difficulty,  by  associating  Helena  with  Judas,  and  by  giving  to  one  the 
glory  of  pointing  out,  and  to  the  other,  that  of  honouring,  the  Cross  of  our  Saviour.  But  their 
attempt  will  prove  abortive,  since  it  must  be  founded,  as  has  been  just  shewn,  on  a  perfect  ana- 
chronism. 

As  Judas  has  not  in  any  way  accounted  for  the  preservation  of  the  Cross  for  the  period  of  three 
hundred  years  it  had  remained  under  ground,  the  world  would  have  still  continued  in  ignorance,  on 
this  head,  had  not  another  Jew,  who  persevered  in  his  religion,  obligingly  communicated  the  following 
particulars.  "Abraham,"  he  says,  "  being  one  day  at  the  conflux  of  the  rivers  Jor  and  Dan,  and 
perceiving  a  man  weeping,  he  advised  him  to  plant  three  firebrands,  and  to  water  them  with  forty  buck- 
ets of  water,  until  they  struck  root,  when  God  would  be  appeased.  The  penitent  obeyed,  and  after- 
wards related,  that  the  firebrands  not  only  shot  out,  but  that  after  they  were  transplanted  into  different 
places,  they  united  and  made  but  one  tree  !v  The  Jew's  design  was  to  make  the  Patiiarch  Abraham 
the  author  of  a  miracle.  And  surely  the  story  he  tells  respecting  the  firebrands  is  as  credible  as  that 
of  Doctor  Milner  about  a  piece  of  the  real  cross  being  still  in  existence. 

*  Book  vi.  c.  xiv.  p.  543. 
K 


66         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


SECTION  NIL—THE  LIMBUS  PATRl'M  AND  PURGATORY. 


Book   Ch.Vcr.'Orig.  Greek.  Vulgate  'Text.  'RhemishVersion.lBeza's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  1568.  K.JamcssBiblciGii 


•\ets   ii.    *>7.  j'OriKt  eyxatTa- quoiiiam  lion  because  thou    i  quoniam   non 

"   dcrclinques  J  wilt   not    leave     derelinques 
uuiinam      mv  soul  in  hell,  animam   mean: 
tneain  in   in  apud  inferos, 

ferno. 


yr,v  uM  a-  o-5<i . 


Genesis 

xxxvii.  25. 


K«Tac))<ro/xai    descendam 
ad  f ilium 
meumlugens 
in   infernum. 

Pag \. ad 
I  .sepulchrum. 


I    will   descend 

unto     mv    son 

into  hell 

mourning. 


J  bid.  xlii.  48. j  Kara^™  u». 

?X7ir,(,  i^  'ctdu. 


Ibid.  xliv. 
•29.31. 


]  Kings  ii. 

G.  9. 


deducetis  ca-  you  shall  bring 
nos   meos     down   my  hoar 
cum  dolore  'hairs  with  sor- 
ad  inferos,    row  unto  hell. 
Pagn.  ad    j 
sepulchrum.  \ 


EI5   aeon. 


liq    a, a. 


ad  inferos. 
Pagn.    ad 

sepulchrum. 


ad  inferos. 
Pagn.  ad 
sepulchrum. 


unto  hell. 


unto  hell. 


.    because  thou  wilt 
leave  mv  s 
in  '  hell.' 


*in  the    grave,  not  leave  mv  soul 


(74) 


ntothe'grave.'j     I  will  go  down 

into  the    '  grave  ' 

unto    my    sou 

mourning. 


(75) 


'  grave.' 


'  grave. ' 


Then   shall   ve 
bring     down    my 
gray     hairs     with 
sorrow   to   the 


grave. 


(76) 


to    the   grave. 


(77) 


to  the   'grave.' to   the  'grave.' 


(78) 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  the  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1  Gil.  6/ 

74.  *  ,™w  AcV.  Not  one  of  the  twelve  texts  adduced  here  by  Ward  establishes  the  doctrine 
of  Limbus  Patrum,  or  Purgatory  ;  since,  even  according  to  the  Rhemish  translation,  it  is  obscure. 
Where  the  Hebrew  word  Sheol  is  not  rendered  sepulchrum  in  the  Vulgate,  Pagninus  usually  adopts 
it,  as  preferable  to  infernum  ;  and  in  the  (Psalms,  Montanus  substitutes Joved  for  inferno.  ;j  It  is  a 
collective  term  for  all  the  parts  of  the  earth  and  sea,  which  are  below  the  surface  of  the  one,  or  the 
bottom  of  the  other:  e.  g.  Jonah  was  said  to  be  in  the  midst  of  Sheol,  when  carried  by  the  whale 
into  the  depths  of  the  sea.  It  also  signifies  the  invisible  world,  and  but  very  seldom  the  state  of  the 
damned.  §Rivetus  pertinently  observes  that  the  word  was  understood  by  the  Hebrews  to  signify,  in 
general,  the  place  of  the  dead.  In  this  sense  it  is  understood  by  the  first  commentators,  and  in  the 
best  lexicons.  In  short,  St.  Peter  interprets  the  phrase,  as  of  the  resurrection  of  Christ.  j| David 
says,  "  thou  wilt  not  leave  my  soul  in  hell ;"  i.  e.  my  life  in  the  grave:  and  this  he  said  in  a  prophe- 
tical spirit,  not  of  himself,  but  of  Christ.  For  iwn  anima  is  as  often  taken  for  the  body  of  a  dead 
man,  as  hell  is  for  the  grave. 

According  to  f  Ward,  the  heretical  doctrine  of  the  Protestants  "  includes  many  erroneous 
branches:  that  all  the  holy  Patriarchs,  Prophets,  and  other  holy  men,  of  the  Old  Testament,  went 
not  into  the  third  place  ;  but  that  they  were  in  heaven,  before  our  Blessed  Saviour  had  suffered  death 
for  their  redemption."  However  Ward  might  think,  it  is  perfectly  reconcilable  with  scripture,  (see 
texts  Matt.  c.  viii.  v.  11.  and  Luke,  c.  xiii.  v.  528.)  that  Christ's  death  should  be  considered  to  have  a 
retrospective  as  well  as  a  prospective  efficacy;  inasmuch  as  he  was  the  lamb  slain  from  the  foundation 
of  the  world.  For,  those  who  were  justified  by  faith  in  his  blood,  before  it  was  actually  shed,  re- 
ceived the  same  reward  for  their  righteousness,  which  those  will,  who  have  since  been  justified  by  the 


same  means. 


**St.  Augustine,  on  this  text,  says,  "  we  arc  entirely  ignorant  of  a  third  place ;  neither  do  we 
in  the  holy  scriptures  discover  it  to  exist."  Thus,  Protestants  do  not  believe  that  Christ  descended 
into  any  third  place  after  h;s  death  ;  and  if,  as  is  contained  in  an  article  of  their  creed,  they  profess  a 
belief  that  he  descended  into  hell,  it  is,  |  j •«•  that  dying  in  the  similitude  of  a  sinner,  his  soul  went  to 
the  place  where  the  souls  of  departed  men  were,  thus  wholly  undergoing  the  law  of  death  :"  or,  to  use 
the  words  of  Jjanother  eminent  Prelate  of  their  Church,  "  Christ  was  in  that  invisible  place,  which 
is  the  appointed  habitation  of  departed  souls,  in  the  interval  between  death  and  the  general  resurrec- 
tion."    But,  besides,    that  Abraham's  bosom  is  not  that  place  which  Papists  denominate  Limbus  Pat- 

*  From  Wr  to  crave,  parkh.  It  is  rendered  sepulchrum  by  Buxtorfj  pulvis  and  sepulchrum  in  two  versions  in  Walton's 
Polyglott.  'Aon  is  rendered  Orcus,  Tartarus,  mors,  locus  tenebrosus,  by  Hedericus  and  Scapula,  and  Infernus,  in  the  Vulgate 
Latin  reading.    It  is  also  rendered  "  Orcus,  fovea,  in  qua  conduntnr  mortui,"  by  Faber,  in  his  Thesaurus. 

t  86.  v.  13.  *  See  Taylor's  Hrb.  Concord. 

§  "  Ebneis  signiiicat  locum  mortuorum,  secundum  corpus  <■'.  secundum  animam."     Yid.   Pol.   Synops.  in  lor 

i!  Psalm,  xvi.   v.  10.  «;"  Errata,  page  Op. 

**  "  Tcrtium  penitus  ignoramus,  imo  nee  esse  in  Sanctis  Serip'uris  invenimus." 

t  (•  Pearson   on  the  Crekd. 

XX  Sermon,  in  1904,  on  1  Pet.  c.  hi,  v.  20.  bv  the  Lord  Bishop  of  St.  Asaph 

K    '1 


««         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

hum,  appears  from  'St.  Lukes  Gospel,  where  Christ,  addressing  the  penitent  thief,  tells  him,  ':  to 
day  thou  shall  be  with  me  in  paradise/'  Now  St.  Paul  determine.*,  paradise  to  imply  a  plaee  of  ascent, 
and  not  of  descent  ;  as  he  speaks  of  being  t"  caught  up  into  paradise.'1  Secondly,  Abraham's 
bosom,  instead  of  being  on  the  border,  as  the  word  limbus  implies,  is  Xj'ar  distant  from  hell. 
Thirdly,  it  is  a  place  of  comfort  ;  and,  lastly,  there  is  a  great  gulph  intervening.  All  these  circum- 
stances shew,  that  the  doctrine  of  an  intermediate  state  of  suffering,  from  which  the  merits  of  Christ 
cannot  redeem  sinners,  is  not  only  not  warranted  by,  but  is  even  contrary  to  scripture.  This  tenet  has 
been  maintained  by  the  Popish  Church  from  the  seventh  century,  since  which  period  it  has  been  a 
prolific  source  of  gain  to  its  clergy. 

75.  76.  77.  "  How  absurd,  also,"  says  §Ward,  "  is  this  corruption  of  theirs,  I will  go  dozen 
into  the  grave  unto  my  sou  ;  as  though  Jacob  thought  that  Joseph  his  son  had  been  buried  in  a  grave  ; 
whereas,  a  little  before,  he  said,  that  some  uild  beast  had  devoured  him?  By  the  former  expression 
of  Jacob  is  merely  meant,  that  he  would  die,  and  consequently  be  united  to  his  son  in  soul,  though 
not  in  body.  The  same  form  of  expression  is  often  used  when  men  speak  of  going  to  their  departed 
friends,  although  their  bodies  may  have  been  burned,  drowned,  or  otherwise  lie  unburied.  Thus 
|jLeigh  judiciously  observes,  that  "Jacob  would  go  down  mourning  into  Sheol  to  his  son,  nei- 
ther to  the  place  of  the  damned,  nor  into  the  grave  properly  so  called ;  but  into  the  general  recep- 
tacle of  the  dead."  Moreover,  where  gray  hairs  are  spoken  of,  Jacob  must  mean  his  body,  and  con- 
sequently the  grave,  and  not  hell ;  as  it  might  naturally  be  asked,  whither  should  the  hoary  head  go, 
but  to  the  grave?  Isidorus  Clarius  himself  renders  w  in  the  text,  Gen.  xxxvii.  35.  sepulchrum ; 
and  when,  in  other  places,  he  uses  in/emus,  he  usually  explains  it,  by  a  note,  to  signify  sepulchrum. 
It  is  now  submited  to  the  reader,  whether  the  Protestant  Translation  of  the  word  deserve  the  appellation 
of  an   "  absurd  corruption"  or  not 

78.  Here  David  meant  no  more,  than  that  his  son  should  slay  Joab  for  his  crimes.  When  he 
speaks  of  Shimei,  he  lays  on  Solomon  a  similar  injunction:  "but  his  hoar  head  bring  thou  down  to 
the  grave  with  blood."  This  sentence  evidently  cannot  be  understood  of  his  soul  going  to  hell, 
from  the  mention  made  of  '  blood,''  and  can  only  signify  his  old  body.  In  Pagninus's  Lexicon, 
although  Sheol  be  indifferently  rendered  hell  and  grave  {in/emus  et  sepulchrum),  vet  in  this  text 
its  signification  is  confined  to  the  latter  term.  The  following  passage  from  ^[Numbers  is  not  less  to 
the  point,  than  the  above  instances,  since  in  it  the  earth  is  said  to  have  opened  her  mouth,  and  to 
have  swallowed  up  the  rebels  ;  "  and  they,  and  all  that  appertained  to  them,  went  down  alive  into 
(  n-K- )  Sheol."  As,  then,  it  cannot  be  said,  that  the  men,  their  tents  and  cattle,  went  down 
to  '  hell/  what  other  interpretation,  than  pit  or  grave,  can  the  word  receiver 

**St.  Augustine,  on  the  text  just  cited,  makes  the  following  comment:   "  and  they  themselves, 

*  C.  xxiii.  v.  ^13.  f  2  Cor.  c.  xii.  v.  4.  }  Luke,  c.  xvi.  v.  23. 

§  Errata,  page  69.  |  Vid.  Crit.  Sacra,  p.  238.  %  C.  xvi.  v.  23. 

**  Et  descenderunt  ipsi,  et  omnia  quaecunque  sunt  eis,  viventes  ad  inferos,     Notandum  secundum  locum   terrenum,  dictos 
esse  inferos,  hoc  est,  &c."     Quest,  super  Num.  lib.  iv.  c.  2[ I. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  69 

and  all  that  they  had,  descended  alive,  into  (Inferos)  the  lower  parts.  It  is  to  be  noted,  that  Infeiu 
is  spoken  of  as  an  earthly  place,  that  is,  the  lower  parts  of  the  earth,  &c."  Thus  he  shews  that 
Injernus  and  Inferi  do  not  always  signify  hell ;  while  Ward  maintains  they  are  as  proper  for  hell  as 
panis  is  for  bread.  There  can  be  no  question  as  to  whose  authority  the  preference  is  to  be  given. 
Lastly,  in  the  •  Psalms  a  passage  much  to  the  purpose  occurs:  "  Our  bones  are  scattered  at  the 
grave's  (Sjieol)  mouth."  This  is  without  dispute  a  more  suitable  place  for  dead  men's  bones  than 
'  hell,'  as  it  is  translated  in  the  Douay  Bible. 


i 
Book.  Ch.Ver.jOrig-.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text.  RhemishVersion.iBeza's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  1568 


i 

Psalm  Ixxxvi.**'  «esw«  wiet  eruisti  ani- 


13. 


Xid  KXTUTUTH. 


Ibid.    Ixxxix.  I     fvacTxt   rx; 

4  s;.         {fax**  a/-'TS 


mam  in  earn 

ex  inferno 

inferiori. 


Eruet(Ward 

reads   emit) 

animam 

suam  inanu 

inferi. 


Thou  hast  de-        Mont. 
livered  my  soulex    fovea     in- 


from  the  lower 
hell. 


feriori. 


Shall  he  deliver 

his    soul    from 

the    hand    of 

hell. 


'  lowest  grave. ' 


KJames'sBibleUiii 


And  thou  hast 
delivered  my  soul 
from  the  '  lowest 
hell.  ' 


(79) 


of  the  *  grave. 


Shall  he  deliver 
his  soul  from  the 
hand   of    the 


grave. 


(80) 


79-  rmnn  KttTWTCLTV.  In  whatever  sense  the  words  of  the  Royal  Psalmist  be  taken, 
whether  he  were  rescued  from  the  greatest  dangers,  or  eternal  death ;  the  limb  us  patrum  cannot  be 
considered  as  hinted  at  in  the  most  distant  manner.  The  Douay  Jesuits,  in  conformity  with  the 
Vulgate,  adopted  (inferiori)  '  lower,'  the  comparative  degree,  which  Ward  would  never  have  termed 
the   '  true '  translation,  were  he  not  radically  ignorant  of  the  Hebrew  language ;  alike  disregarding 

*  cxli.  v.  7. 


-o         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

the  import  of  the  Hebrew  term,  which  simply  implies  deep,  low,  &c. ;  and  the  Septuagint  version  of 
ir,  viz.  *aT*>T«Ts,  lowest,  deepest.  Admitting,  then,  their  consistency  in  this  instance,  in  being  guided 
by  the  Latin  copies,  and  totally  rejecting  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  ;  how  comes  it  to  pass  that  in  trans- 
lating a  parallel  passage  in  ^Deuteronomy,  they  overlook  the  '(Vulgate  reading,  at  least  that  edited  by 
Pope  Sixtus,  (viz.  deorsim)  and  following  the  Hebrew  and  Greek,  which  are  critically  the  same  as 
those  in  the  above  text,  give  their  translation  in  the  superlative  degree?  This  strange  and  arbitrary 
way  of  proceeding,  likewise  observable  in  many  other  places,  forms  a  striking  contrast  with  the  conduct 
of  the  Protestant  Translators,  whose  undeviating  aim  has  been  to  elicit  the  divine  meaning,  and  then 
convey  it  in  literal,   plain,   and  unsophisticated  language,   without  regard  to  any  particular  purpose. 

According  to  jVVard,  St.  Jerome  says,  "  Before  the  coming  of  Christ,  Abraham  was  in  hell  : 
after  his  coming,  the  thief  was  in  paradise."  Ward  acts  unfairly  towa.rds  the  Father,  by  introducing 
his  words  in  the  shape  of  a  decided  opinion,  whereas  he  himself  turned  them  into  an  allegory  to  set 
forth  the  virtue  of  Christ's  redemption.  But  had  he  pronounced  authoritatively  on  the  subject,  that 
would  not  alter  the  state  of  the  case  as  there  is  no  intimation  in  scripture,  that  the  Patriarchs  and 
Prophets  were  removed  to  a  different  place,  after  the  death  of  Christ,  from  what  they  had  been  in 
before  that  event  took  place.  In  §St.  Matthew's  Gospel,  it  is  said,  "  many  shall  come  from  the  east 
and  from  the  west,  and  shall  sit  down  with  Abraham,  and  Isaac, and  Jacob,  in  the  kingdom  of  Heaven." 
l!St.  Luke  likewise  records,  that,  at  the  gathering  in  of  the  Gentiles,  those  Patriarchs  were  in  the 
kingdom  of  Heaven,   and  consequently  were  found  in  the  same  place  by  them,  as  by  Lazarus. 

%"■  But,"  says  Ward,  "  the  same  holy  doctor  (viz.  Jerome)  resolves  it,  that  Abraham  and  Lazarus 
also  were  in  hell,  but  in  a  place  of  great  rest  and  refreshing."  Having  thus  endeavoured  to  obviate 
the  objections  that  both  Abraham  and  Lazarus  were  in  Heaven,  he  then  subjoins  what  he  calls  St. 
Augustine's  interpretation  of  the  text,  "  that  the  lower  hell  is  the  place  wherein  the  damned  are  tor- 
mented; the  higher  hell  is  that  wherein  the  souls  of  the  just  rested,  calling  both  places  by  the  name 
of  hell."  Now,  as  to  Jerome,  he  does  not  explicitly  declare  himself  on  the  subject ;  indeed,  he  makes 
but  a  slight  allusion  to  it  ;  while  Augustine,  at  the  very  commencement  of  the  discussion  of  the 
question  relative  to  the  nethermost  lull,  declares  his  ignorance,  and  goes  no  farther,  at  most,  than 
a  bare  conjecture.  Me  sets  out  with  a  supposition,  that  the  world,  in  which  we  live,  is  inferxum 
superius;  and  the  place,  whither  the  dead  go,  infernum  inferius  :  that  Christ  came  to  the  former 
by  his  birth,  and  to  the  latter  bv  his  deafh.  He  then  adds,  **u  perhaps  even  in  hell,  there  is  some 
part  lower,  in  which  the  ungodly,  which  have  much  sinned,  are  delivered,  &c."  His  conclusion  is 
equally  uncertain  :  "  therefore,  perhaps,  between  these  two  hells,  in  one  of  which  the  souls  of  the 
righteous  rested  ;  in  the  other,  the  souls  of  the  wicked  are  tormented,  &c."  He  then  winds  up  the 
whole  with  an  argument,  a  for:iori,  to  prove,  th.it  Paradise,  or  Abraham's  bosom,  is  Heaven: 
;'  how  much  moie,    then,  may  that  bosom  of  Abraham,    after  this   life,  be   called  paradise."     Tertul- 

*  C   xxxii.  v.  22.  f  Some  copies  have  '  biferiorem.  +  Errata,  page  /]. 

§  C.  viii.  v.  11.  [  C.  xiii  v.  28.  ^f  Errata,  page  /l. 

**  Fortassis  enim  a  pud  inferos  est  aliqua  pars  inferior,  iXc. .  .  .  Ergo  inter  isla  fortasse  duo  interna  quorum  in  uno,  &c."  St. 
Au2.  in  l'sal.  Ixxxv   \.  ij. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  71 

lian  speaks  a  language  the  very  reverse  of  that  attributed  io  him  by  Ward  :  "  his  words  are,  "  hell  is 
one  thing,  as  I  think,  and  Abraham's  bosom  another  thing,  t\c."  And  as  for  Chrysostom,  who  is 
brought  forward  on  the  oeeasion,  he  may  be  considered  as  speaking  allegorically  of  the  effect  of 
Christ's  death  and  redemption. 

From  the  text  itself,  part  of  which  is  prefixed  to  this  article,   Protestants  infer,   that   the  souls  of 
all  the  faithful  are  delivered  from  hell;  that  is,  that  their  deliverance  is  such  as  that  for  which  David   in 
his  life  time,  praised  God.     The  receptacle  of  the  reprobate  souls,  in  the  Hebrew,  is  called  Gehinnom 
orToPHETH;   they   are,    however,   properly,    the  appcl  ations  of  the   place  where  the  idolatrous  Jews 
burned  their  children  alive  to  Moloch.     In  Greek  and  Latin,  gehauia  is  used  for  the  same. 

80.  E/i  'YBIOOC.  From  the  hand;  i.  e.  from  the  violence  of  hades,  or  the  grave.  Such  is  the 
obvious  sense  of  the  passage;  for  the  last  clause  of  the  verse  is  but  a  repetition  of  the  pieceding  one. 
Moreover,  what  confirms  the  strict  propriety  of  preferring  the  word  '  grave,'  as  a  translation  to  the 
word  'hell,'  is,  that  the  Hebrew,  «wa  which  is  rendered  *  soul/ does  not  signify  the  spiritual  part,  or 
reasonable  *souI,  but  the  life,  or  the  whole  person  of  man  ;  who,  therefore,  may  more  fitly  be  said  to 
be  delivered  from  the  hand,  or  power  of  the  grave. 

The   doctrine  concerning  the  purification   of    departed   souls   by  a  certain   fire,    was  well  un- 
derstood by  the  heathen  Poets  and  Philosophers.     Eusebius  relates  that  it  was  held  by  Plato;  their  works 
testify  the  same  thing  of  Homer  and  Virgil.     To  a  period  therefore  of  400  years,  at  least,  before  Christia- 
nity, may  the  origin  of  this  doctrine  be  traced.     Certain  it  is  that  it  had  no  foundation  in  the  primitive 
Church;  and  although  attempts  were  made  to  introduce  it  in  the  fifth  century,  yet  Pope  Gregory  the 
Great  first  gave  it  countenance.     The  invasions  of  the  Barbarians  from  the  north,  and  the  almost  total 
extinction  of  learning,  contributed  not  a  little  to  its  reception  into  the  Church,  which  now  became  influ- 
enced by  visions  and  miracles.     The  fires  of  ./Etna  and  Vesuvius  were  at  this  time  also  supposed  to  be 
kindled  to  torment  departed  souls.     Some  were  seen  broiling  on  gridirons,   and  others  roasting  on  spits. 
Nay,  the  very  ways  to  purgatory  were  discovered  ;   one  in  Sicily,  another  in  Italy,  and  a  third  in  Ireland  ! 
In  the  succeeding  centuries  it  gradually   gained  ground,  until  at  last,   assuming  a  settled  shape,  it  sunk 
into  an  article  of  faith  at  the  Council  of  Trent,  in  the  sixteenth  century,  continuing  from  its  first  propa- 
gation to  that  time,  and  indeed  to  the  present  day,  to  heap  riches  on  its  professors.     It  is,  however,  but 
fair  to  state,  that  this  absurd  doctrine  has,  from  time  to  time,  been  protested  against  ;  nay,  openly  ridi- 
culed by  men  of  eminence  in  the  Popish  communion.     Claud,  Bishop  of  Turin,  and  Peter  Bruges,  &c. 
opposed  it,  and  even  Richelieu   himself  of  later   times,  sported  with  it  as  a  fit  subject   of  merriment. 
His  pleasantry  is  thus  spoken  of:   "  |  How  many  Masses"  says  he  to  his  chaplain,  "  would  serve  to  fetch 
a  soul  out  of  purgatory  ?''     Perceiving   his  hesitancy,    the  Cardinal  solves  his  doubt  in  this  humorous 
way  ;  (i  just  so  many  would  serve  to  fetch  a  soul  out  of  purgatory,  as  snow  balls  would  serve  to  heat  an 
oven." 

*  "  There  is  no  passage  where  irsfl  hath  unduidtcdhj  this  meaning."       Parkh.  in  loc. 
-j-  See  Anccd.  of  distinguished  Persons,  and  Preserv.  against  Popery,  Vol.  ii.  Tit.  viii.  p.  tl6. 


A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


Book  Ch.Ver 


Orig.  Greek. 


Hos.  xiii.  14 


1   Cor.    xv. 
55. 


Ps.  vi.   5. 


Prov.  xxvii. 
20. 


Vulgate  Text.   RhemishVersion. 


Sym.  legit,  ero  mors  tua, 
stromal  t>  n\yyr,  O  mors;mor- 


<7«  d«KXT£,  wo 

pen  'aJrj,  Sec. 


sus  tuus  ero, 
inferne. 


I    will    be    thy  Mont,  ero  pes- 
death,  O  death,  tis  tua,   mors 
thy  bite  (Ward  ero  excisio  tua. 
reads     '  sting')        inferne. 
willl  be, Obeli. 


TO     XEVT^OV  J    7T8 

cry,  'ocori,   to 


£y     Ss     TU     'aoN 

T»s  i^OfAi^oyYiui- 
T«<    cot  ; 


Ubi  est, mors, 
stimulus 

tuus  ?  ubi  est, 
inferne,  vic- 
toria tua  ? 

N.  B.   In  se- 
veral copies 

of  the  Vulg. 

the  reading  is 

'mors,'&  not 

inj'erna,   as 

quoted  by 

Ward. 

in  inferno 

autem  quis 

confitebitur 

tibi  ?    Pagn 

in  sepulclwo. 

&c. 


eA^uf  Y.a\,  ana-  infernus  et 
x»«  "^"••"-perditionun- 
quam    lm- 
plentur. 
Pagn.  sepul- 
chrum  (bw) 
et  perditio 
non    satura- 
buntur. 


Beza's  LatinText 


Bps.  Bible,  1508 


O 


grave. 


Where  is,   O 
death,thy  sting? 

where  is,  O  hell, 

thy  victory? 

N.  B.     The 
reading  is    '  O 
death,'  and  not  Mont,  renders 


Ubi   tua,     O 
mors,  victoria? 
ubi  tuus,  O  se 
pulchrum,  sti- 
mulus ? 


O  '  grave.' 


hell,  in  the  Rh. 

N.  T.   1582. 

Also  in    the 

Edinb.  edit,  of 

1 804. 


and  in  hell  who 

shall  confess  to 

thee  ? 


hell   and   de- 
struction are 

never  full. 

Edinb.  edit. 

1610,— Hell  & 

perdition  are 

never  filled. 


a  if} 

sepulchrum. 


in  the  '  grave.' 


*the  'grave.' 


K.Jamcs'sBibleiGn 


O  death,  I  will  be 
thy  piagues  ;  O 
grave,  I  will  be  thy 
destruction. 

(81) 


O  death,  where 
is  thy  sting  ?  O 
'  grave,  '  where 
is  thy  victory?- 


(82) 


grave ' 


in     the 

who     shall    give 

thee  thanks  ? 


(83) 


hell  and  destruc- 
tion  are   never 
full. 


(84) 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  the  present  reading  A.  D.  1611, 


81.  **?  *Destruction.     The  Lxx.  rendered  this  word  x»q»;  but  '  sting,'  which  that  Greek  term 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611,  73 

implies,  is  not  forcible  enough  ;  as  the  Hebrew  word,  according  to  the  best  ^authorities,  signifies 
what  destroys  at  the  same  time  that  it  pierces:  consequently  '  destruction  '  is  the  best  interpretation 
that  can  be  given  it,  being  comprehensive  enough  to  take  in  the  full  import  of  the  original  term,  yuw 
'ahi  here  also  can  only  mean  grave  ;  for  the  prophet  declares  to  the  people,  that  if  they  repented,  God 
would  redeem  them  from  the  jaws  of  death  and  the  'grave;'  or,  that  he  would  not  cut  them  off  in 
such  numbers,  that  they  should  be  thrown  confusedly  into  (  Ufa  scil.  fovea)  a  tpit,  as  the  slain  are  in 
battle.     Besides,   he  is  not  here  speaking  of  the  state  of  the  dead. 

"  If,"  says  ;];Ward,  "  I  ask  them  what  is  Hebrew,  Greek,  or  Latin,  for  hell,  must  they  not  tell 
me  ,yttwtAhtt  Infernus?"  It  has  been  already  shewn,  that  the  Hebrew  word  primarily  signifies  a 
grave,  or  a  receptacle  of  dead  bodies,  and  but  seldom  hell,  and  even  then  only  in  a  figurative  sense. 
In  fact,  there  is  no  proper  word,  in  any  of  the  three  languages,  for  that  invisible  place,  in  which  the 
souls  of  the  wicked  are  kept. 

Although  it  be  of  little  consequence,  in  what  acceptation  the  Greek  and  Latin  terms,  which  are 
themselves  but  translations,  are  taken  ;  yet,  as  Ward's  assertion  respecting  them  may  be  disproved  by 
a  few  references,  it  may  not  be  improper  to  advert  to  them.  That  Uhc,  then,  is  not  used  exclusively 
for  '  hell,'  may  be  ascertained  in  the  Apocryphal  writings.  In  the  book  of  §  Wisdom,  the  Vulgate 
translation  of  it  is  mors,  in  one  passage;  and,  inferi,  which  is  given  it  in  the  ||other,  implies  the 
same  thing ;  as  the  wicked  and  ungodly  are  spoken  of,  who  held  the  mortality  of  the  soul,  and  its  dis- 
appearance into  thin  air  like  vapour,  and  said,  that  "none  was  known  to  return  from  the  (i&j)  grave." 
In  the  Hfirstbook  of  Samuel,  and  in  the  book  of  '-*Tobit,  the  word  bears  precisely  the  same  significa- 
tion. In  the  book  of  ffBaruch  too,  it  is  taken  for  '  grave ;'  as  he  says,  the  dead  who  are  in  (Sheol) 
«&k,  shall  not  praise  God ;  whereas  the  souls  of  the  righteous,  which  were  in  Paradise,  did  so. 
Hence  it  is  manifest  that  »&>$,  in  its  general  sense,  means  a  place  to  receive  the  dead.  With  the  Latin 
word  infernus,  which  implies  any  low  place,  the  Protestant  Translators  had  as  little  to  do  as  with  the 
Greek,  since  it  was  not  from  that  language  they  made  their  translation.  However,  there  are  not 
authorities  wanting  to  prove,  that  it  too  is  not  exclusively  confined  to  the  word  "  hell."  St.  Jerome 
himself,  whom  the  Popish  doctors  so  implicitly  follow,  takes  it,  in  a  general  sense,  to  mean  any  place 
which  receives  the  souls  of  the  departed,  and  not  where  they  were  included  before  the  coming  of 
Christ;  thus  giving  no  intimation  whatever  concerning  the  limbics.  He  expresses  himself  clearly  on 
this  head:   XX"  whatever  separates  brothers,  is  to  be  called  hell,  &c." 

§§Ward  concludes  his  interrogatories,  respecting  these  words,  in  the  following  manner :  "  If  I 
ask  them  what  word  they  will  bring  from  those  languages  to  signify  '  grave,'  must  they  not  say,  "  ->ar>, 
vxfot;,  Sepulchrum  ?"  Surely  it  cannot  be  looked  on  as  a  proof  that  Sheol  must  signify  '  hell,'  because 
the  words  just  cited,  in  their  respective  languages,  signify  grave,  as  if  there  could  not  be  several 
words  expressive  of  the  same  thing.     So  far  from  Sheol  and  Keber  signifying  different  things,  that 

*  Rivetus  says,  "  quicquid  pertundendo  et  perfodiendo  repente  penetrat."     Pol.  Sykops  in  loc. 
f  "  Sepulchrum  hie  intelligit  fossam,  in  quam  toti  populi  conjiciuntur,  ut  fit  in  publicis  cladibus."     Gkotius. 
i  Errata,  page  71.  §  C.  xvi.  v.  13.  f|  C.  ii.  v.  1.  %  C.  ii.  v.  6.  **  C.  xiii.  v.  2.  ff  G  ii.  v.  J/, 

$X  "  Quicquid  igitur  separat  fratres,  infernus  est  appellandus,"  See.  §§  Errata,  page  7 1. 

L 


:  j  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

they  arc  sometimes  joined  together  to  express  the  *same  thing :  Scil.  *  grave.'  This  is  a  further 
proof,  were  any  necessary,  that  Sheol,  except  in  a  secondary  sense,  does  not  bear  any  other  signifi- 
cation than  grave  or  pit.  The  '(Rabbi  Solomon,  too,  says  that  Keber  is  the  proper  interpretation  of 
Sheol. 

82.  Adi%  It  is  evident  that  the  prophet,  in  the  text  belonging  to  the  preceding  number,  foretold 
even  greater  than  temporal  deliverances  from  the  power  of  death,  in  the  gospel  state  ;  it  being  in  this 
sense  St.  Paul  interprets  his  words,  when  he  exclaims,  "  ()  death,  where  is  thy  sting,  &c."  ;|;St.  Jerome, 
m  handling  the  present  text,  makes  the  following  inference:  "  therefore,  that  which  the  Apostle  hath 
interpreted  of  our  Lord's  resurrection,  we  neither  can,  nor  dare  we,  interpret  it  otherwise."  Thus, 
in  the  opinion  of  that  father,  as  the  passage  alludes  to  the  resurrection  of  Christ,  it  is  fitter  to  use  the 
word  -'grave/  than  '  hell.'  Moreover,  the  word  'grave,"  coming  immediately  after  the  word  'death/ 
(with  which  it  is  immediately  connected)  in  the  very  next  clause  of  the  sentence,  but  more  fully 
points  out  the  earnestness  of  the  speaker. 

As  neither  the  reading  of  the  Vulgate,  nor  of  the  Rbemish  version,  which  Ward  used,  is  the  same 
as  those  extant,  it  would  be  desirable  to  know  what  copies  he  employed.  There  are  strong  grounds  for 
suspecting  him  to  have  forged  these  extracts,  for  the  purpose  of  making  out  his  case  ;  but.  it  is  hoped. 
Doctor  Milner,  or  some  nf  his  '  Episcopal  Brethren/  will  step  forward  to  vindicate  his  character, 
by  affording  the  necessary  information. 

The  reader  will  perceive,  on  inspecting  the  texts  belonging  to  this  number  in  the  columns,  that 
the  order  of  the  words  is  not  the  same  in  all.  This  difference  is  not  greater  than  what  is  found  to 
exist  in  some  Greek  manuscripts  ;  e.  g.  the  Vatican,  §Codex  Ephremi,  &c.  and  will  account  for  the 
text,  in  the  Protestant  Bible  of  l6j  1,  varying  in  its  arrangement  from  the  Latin  text  of  Beza. 

83.  \\E^OfJL07\0yi]TBrccl,  The  Douay  translation  of  this  text  is,  "  In  hell  who  shall  con- 
fess thee?"  This,  if  admitted  as  the  true  one,  would  decidedly  make  against  the  error  of  limbus 
i'ATRUM.  For  as  the  word  '  hell/  in  the  Popish  sense,  means  Abraham's  bosom,  a  place  of  joy  and 
happiness ;  with  what  truth  can  it  be  said,  that  the  souls  of  the  faithful,  who  are  conveyed  thither, 
should  be  so  ungrateful  as  not  to  confess  unto  God,  to  acknowledge  his  mercy,  and  praise  him  for  the 
benefits  he  conferred  on  them  ?  Nothing,  therefore,  can  be  more  evident,  than  that  by  Sheol,  here 
also,  is  meant  the  '  grave/  or  place  of  death,  in  which  no  man  '  confesses'  or  gives  thanks  to  God; 
and  that  it  is  for  this  cause  alone  David  asks  for  life,  that  he  may  offer  his  praises  to  God,  in  his 
church.  His  reasoning  seems  to  be  this,  preserve  me  from  Sheol,  or  «o».«.;  there  being  neither  wis- 
dom nor  remembrance  of  God  there ;  for,  if  I  die,  who  will  remain  '  to  praise  you/  or  '  to  give  you 
thanks.'     However,   neither  the  one  translation   nor  the  other  decides  the  disputed  point;  since  the 

*  Rabbi  Abraham  on  Job,  c.  xvii.  v.  13.  |  Comment,  in  Gen.  c.  xxxvii.  v.  .'55. 

1  "  Itaquequod  iile  in  resurrectionem  interpretatus  est  Domini,  nos  aliter  interpretari,  nee  possumus,  nee  audemus." 

%  "  Locum  permutant  xc>t£o»  et  hxoj  in  E.  C."  See  Gkiesbach's  New  Testament,  vol.  ii.  p.'2S5. 
|j   St.  Matthew  uses  the  same  verb  in  c.  xi.  v.  2.5,    of  his  Gospel,    which    Beza   thus  explains,  "  laudo,   et  gratias  ago,  gra- 
tuior,  vel  gloriam  till  triluo."  Vid.  Annot.  in  loc.     Parkhurst  says,  the  Lxx.  generally  apply  it  in  the  last  sense ;  viz.  to  glorify, 
afjwermg  to  the  Hebrew  n*r«,  which  they  frequently  render  by  *i>a»  to  praise. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  161  k  75 

non-existence  of  purgatory  is  as  far  from  being  determined  by  the  Protestant,  as  its  existence  is  by 
the  Popish  version. 

84.  Ad7]£.  Although  this  term  be  rendered  alike  in  both  Protestant  and  Popish  Bibles;  yet 
that  gives  no  colour  whatever  for  establishing  a  doctrine  so  offensive  to  reason  and  common  ser^e 
as  that  of  purgatory.  It  is  extraordinary  enough  that,  in  this  passage,  there  exists  a  discordance 
(trifling  it  is  to  be  sure,  but  still  it  is  sufficient  to  shew  the  great  inaccuracy,  if  not  the  dishonesty, 
which  he  practised  in  making  quotations;)  between  that  which  Ward  gives  as  the  reading  of  the 
Douay  Bible,  and  what  is  really  there :  both  are  given  in  the  proper  *column. 


Book.  Cli.  Ver, 


Heb.  v.  7. 


Orig.  Greek 


Vulgate  Text. 


x«i  £io-aHo^6ndexauditus  est 

cctto    ™    nte-  sufl  reye. 

rent  >a. 


RhemishVersion 


was    heard   for 
his  reverence. 


Beza's Latin  Text 


et  exauditus 
precibus,  libera- 
tus  ex  metu. 


lips.  Bible,  15fi8.K.James'sBiblei6u 


'  in  that  which  and  was  heard  '  in 
he  feared.'     j that  he  feared.' 

I 

L  (65) 


85.  EyAab£fa£.  This  term  seems  to  express  fear  of  any  kind,  but  here,  a  horrid  fear;  it 
also  implies  a  religious  reverence,  namely,  to  God.  The  Protestant  Translators  in  rendering1  it,  "  in 
that,"  i.  e.  inasmuch  as,  "he  feared,"  were,  it  is  obvious,  desirous  of  avoiding  the  ambiguity  of  the 
original.  And  when  they  perceived  the  text  admitted  of  the  Popish  interpretation,  viz.  •'  for  his 
piety,''  they,  with  their  accustomed  fairness  and  candour,  inserted  it  in  the  margin  of  their  own  bible. 
Et**0r,0iij  in-  the  tEpistle  to  the  Hebrews,  is  rendered  by  them  "  moved  with  fear,"  and  by  the  Rhe- 
mists,  '  fearing.'  But  in  the  fActs  particularly,  the  fear  entertained  by  the  chief  captain  'for  Paul's' 
safety,  evidently  does  not  mean  a  pious,  or  religious  fear ;  which  sense  Jerome  confirms  by  rendering 
ivne&nh*,  metuens.  The  same  translator  gives  timoratus  for  tv\*Gi$  in  §St.  Luke's  Gospel.  Montanus 
renders  it  Veritas,  and  the  Protestant  and  Popish  translators,  "  fearing."  II In  Joshua,  too  the 
Septuagint  reading  is  «»««  &>*£»(*<,  which  Pagninus  renders  timore,  and  Montanus,  pro;  solicitudine. 
The  Protestant  translation  of  the  text  is  i(  for  fear;"  while  the  Douay  one  is,  strange  to  say,  "  with 
that  meaning."  This  last  signification  is  most  arbitrary,  and  differs  widely,  as  well  from  the  Hebrew 
as  from  the  Greek.  It  may,  therefore,  be  fairly  concluded,  that  a  more  perfect  version  of  the  passage 
could  not  be  given,  than  that  which  it  obtains  in  the  Protestant  Bible  :  nor  a  more  natural  interpre- 
tation than  the  following  one  which  is  assigned  it  by  the  Protestant  Church — that  it  did  not  arise 
from  that  religious  reverence  which  he  possessed,  but  from  the  actual  terror  of  the  trial  he  had  to 
encounter,  "  that  he  was  heard,"  and  assurance  given  him  by  his  father,  that  he  would  raise  him  from 
the  dead,  and  thus  deliver  him  from  his  fear  of  being  under  the  dominion  of  death.  Fulke  defends 
the  genuineness  of  the  version  "  in  that  he  feared"  against  the  attacks  of  the  Rhemists,  with  great 
success.     Having  referred  to  the  Syrian  translation,  where  the  text   in  question    is  rendered  "  from 


t  C.  xl  v.  7. 


*  See  column,  '  Rhemish  Version/  number  84 
+  C.  xxiii.  v.  10.  §  C.ii.  v.  25, 

L  2. 


t)  C.  xxii.  v.  24. 


76  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

fear,"  he  proves,  from  parallel  passages  in  the  Scriptures,  and  from  the  expositions  of  several  of  the 
ancient  Fathers,  that  the  Protestant  rendering  is  the  only  one  of  which  the  passage  would  admit.  He 
then  concludes  with  observing,  "  our  interpretation  is  agreeable  to  the  analogy  of  faith,  and  confirms 
an  article  of  it,  that  Christ  descended  into  hell,  and  not  only  suffered  bodily  pains  but  also  great 
sorrow  and  anguish  of  soul :  that  these  sufferings  were  necessary  for  our  redemption,  and  that  he 
obeyed,  because  death  was  a  necessary  part  of  his  obedience  and  sacrifice."  Beza,  in  his  annotations,  says, 
that,  notwithstanding  Christ's  deep  humility,  yet  "  Nee  despondit  animum,  aut  desperavit,  spci  nostrae 
auctor."  And  *Junius,  no  less  eminent  as  a  commentator,  thus  sums  up  the  sense  of  the  passage  : 
"  Ita  acceptus  fuit  deo,  ut  quern  metum  ex  peccatis  nostris,  psenisque  mentis,  et  sponsione  sua,  secun- 
dum hominem  conceperat,  is  a  Deo  Patre  levaretur  absolutissime,  testata  remissione  peccatorum  ad 
abolendam  maledictionem  nostram.*'  After  this  clear  and  impartial  exposition  ;  can  any  be  found 
weak  enough  to  subscribe  to  Ward's  opinion,  that  the  Protestant  translation  of  it  is  a  -\-most  damnable 
corruption ;  or  believe  him  when  he  says,  that  the  sense  in  which  Protestants  understand  this  text, 
was  invented  by  Calvin,  to  defend  his  "  blasphemous  doctrine,  that  our  Saviour  Jesus  Christ,  upon 
the  cross,  was  horribly  afraid  of  damnation,  and  that  he  was  in  the  very  sorrows  and  torments  of  the 
damned  :  and  that  this  was  his  descending  into  hell :  and  that  otherwise  he  descended  not  ?"  Although 
it  be  foreign  from  the  object  of  these  pages,  to  vindicate  any  other  tenets  than  those  of  the  Church 
of  England,  yet  so  palpable  an  injustice  is  done  to  Calvin,  that  a  regard  to  truth  suggests  the  neces- 
sity of  giving  a  brief  statement  of  his  view  of  the  matter.  He  distinctly  says,  that  Christ's  feat- 
arose  not  from  distrust,  but  from  the  sense  of  his  human  nature,  in  feeling  the  wrath  of  God,  which 
was  infinitely  more  heavy  on  his  soul,  than  any  torments  were  on  his  body.  He  likewise  says,  that 
from  the  same  source  proceeded  his  astonishment,  tears,  strong  cry,  drops  of  blood,  his  soul  being 
"  exceeding  sorrowful,"  as  is  so  afFectingly  described  by  ^Matthew  and  §Mark  ;  and  lastly,  an  angel 
appearing  from  heaven  to  strengthen  him  in  the  last  sad  conflict,  when  he  cried,  "  my  God,  my  God, 
why  hast  thou  forsaken  me  ?"  So  far  from  this  being  a  blasphemy,  Calvin  contended,  and  with 
justice  too,  that  it  is  a  true,  holy,  and  comfortable  doctrine,  that  Christ,  for  the  redemption  of  the 
souls  of  men,  suffered  so  severely  in  his  own  soul,  as  was  unequivocally  declared  by  the  forementioned 
signs. 

It  has  been  already  llstated  at  large,  that  Protestants  understand  that  article  of  their  creed,  which 
sets  forth  the  descent  of  Christ  into  hell,  to  signify  his  entering  into  the  Estate  of  the  dead,  and 
thereby  undergoing  the  law  of  death.  There  is  nothing  more  certain,  than  that  the  Evangelists  would 
not  have  passed  over  in  silence  so  important  an  article  as  that  held  by  the  Popish  Church,  viz.  Christ's 
going  into  hell,  and  delivering  thence  the  souls  of  the  Patriarchs,  and  other  righteous  persons,  had 
there  been  any  grounds  for  their  recording  it.  Protestants,  by  their  interpretation,  ascribe  a  more 
exalted  triumph  to  Christ  over  hell,  than  the  Papists;  indeed,  were  he  supposed  only  to  have  descended 
(as  the  latter  say)  into  the  limbus  patrum,  a  place  of  rest;  he  could  scarcely  be  said  to  have  gained 
any  triumph  whatever. 

*  Vid.  Pol.  Synops.in  loc.  f-  Errata,  page  71. 

X  C.  xxvi.  v.  38.  §  C.  xiv.  v.  34.  II  See  number  74. 

^f  The  English  language  does  not  supply  a  single  "word  expressive  of  this  meaning.  Hell  in  its  present  acceptation  implies 
the  place  of  punishment,  although  it  is  said  originally  to  have  implied  a  place  of  concealment,  being  derived  from  the  Saxbn  frelan 
to/iide.  See  Diction.  Sax.  et  Goxn.  Lat. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERNON  OF  THEM , IN  1611 


11 


SECTION  XIII.— JUSTIFICATION  AND  THE  REWARD  OF  CiOOD  WORKS, 


Book.  Ch.  Ver, 


Horn,  ii.  6. 


Orlg.  Creek.  Vulgate  Text. 


Focv  My    r,    cck.o- 


<f)'j}\X<T<TD. 


Luke  i.  6. 


Hcrccv  oi  oixaiot 
a/*p<>TE§oi  iVQ)- 
TTlOt  Ttf  Ota.  ito- 

»tV0(JLtD0l    It   7TX- 


Si  igitur  pra3 
putium  justi 
tias  legis  cus- 
todial. 


Rhemish  Version.  Beza's  Latin  Text  |Bps.  Bible,  1568 


If  then    the 
prepuce  keep 


Itaque   si   pru-i   If  the   uncii 
putium  jura  jcumcision  keep 


K.Jamcs\sBiblei6n 


Therefore   if  the 
uncircumcision 


the  justices  ofjlegis  observet.      «  the   ordi-      keep    the    '  rieh- 

*K   .    1 j         /•      i         .  r  ^  b. 


the  law 


Erant  autem 

justi  ambo 

ante    Deum, 

incedentes  in 

omnibus 

mandatis  et 

justification  i- 

bus    Domini 

sine 

querela. 


And  they  were 
both   just   be 
fore  God,  walk 

g   in    all  the 

command- 
ments and  jus 

tifications  of 
our  Lord  with 

out  blame. 


(nances '  of  the 
law. 


erant   autem      '  both  righ- 
justi    ambo    in  teous,'  &c.  in  all 
conspectu  Dei, 'the   command 


incedentes  in 
omnibus   man- 
datis et  ritibus 
Domini    incul- 
pate. 


ments  and 

'  ordinances,1 

&c. 


teousness '  of  the 
law. 


(sO) 


And  they  were 
both  righteous  be- 
fore God,  walking- 
in  all  the  com- 
mandments and 
ordinances  of  the 
Lord  blameless. 


(87) 


86.  AutOLlWIACCTCL.  The  precepts  or  righteousness  ;  i.  e.  the  righteous  acts  of  the  law,  whe- 
ther moral  or  ceremonial.  This  text  by  no  means  ascertains  the  sufficiency  of  works,  neither  does  it 
appear,  from  the  way  in  which  it  is  translated  in  the  Protestant  Bible,  that  faith  is  held  up  in  oppo- 
sition to  works.  When  it  is  considered  what  stress  Protestants  lay  on  works,  as  well  as  on  faith,  and 
that  there  is  an  obscurity  in  the  passage  itself,  which  renders  it  difficult  to  determine  the  disputed  point, 


78         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

the  charge  made  by  *Ward,  of  their  translation  being  "  false  and  heretical,"  goes  for  nothing.  With 
the  intent  of  supporting  this  charge  of  heresy  and  falsehood  against  the  Protestant  Translators,  he 
shifts  his  ground  to  the  Old  Testament,  where,  he  says,  "  perhaps  they  will  pretend  that  they  follow 
the  Hebrew  word,  which  is  D?n :  and,  therefore,  they  translate  statutes  and  ordinances  ;  (righteous, 
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,  «w.^n«;  in  English,  justifications." 
It  is  very  singular,  that  there  is  not  an  article  throughout  Ward's  book,  in  which  assertions  are  not 
made,  supported  with  all  the  positiveness  of  truth,  which,  on  examination,  are  found  to  spring 
from  one  or  other  of  these  two  sources ;  ignorance,  or,  what  is  worse,  an  intention  to  deceive. 
That  this  is  the  case  in  the  present  instance,  shall  be  made  to  appear  from  a  few  references.  First, 
then,  in  the  book  of  f-Exodus,  the  Hebrew  word  chukim  occurs,  and  is  rendered  by  the  lxx  nrfwrxytuKt^ 
end  by  Jerome  ceremonias.  Again,  in  the  book  of  J  Deuteronomy,  it  is  to  be  met  with,  and  obtains  the 
same  Greek  and  Latin  translation  ;  in  §Jeremiah,  it  is  rendered  »•/«»  and  legem  \  in  the  book  of 
"'Numbers,  rv?n  obtains  »,*«  as  a  translation  in  the  Septuagint,  and  ceremonias  in  the  Vulgate;  in  the 
5;  First  book  of  Kings,  it  is  translated  or***;,  nt^^tuy^rx,  ceremonias.  It  is  to  be  observed,  that  even 
the  word  justijicatio,  about  which  Ward  speaks  so  much,  is  the  vulgar  Latin  for  nymfum  while  cere- 
monias is  that  adopted  for  Ax«i«/*«t«.  If  necessary,  several  other  instances  might  be  adverted  to. 
where  the  lxx  render  the  same  Hebrew  word,  not  only  justifications,  but  commandments,  precepts,  sta- 
tutes,  ordinances,  &c.  and  where  Jerome  renders  it,   ceremonias, prctcepta,  legem. 

87.  /\l%CtlQl.  Ward  says,  according  to  St.  Luke's  wordi,  "  they  (Zacharias  and  Elizabeth)  were 
both  just,  because  they  "walked  in  all  the  justifications  of  the  Lord  blameless."'  It  is  very  true,  that 
Christian  walking  justifieth  before  men,  but  justifieth  no  man  in  the  sight  of  God,  who  sees  further 
into  his  heart  than  others  can,  or  than  he  does  himself.  If  Zacharias  was  justified,  why  should  he 
offer  sacrifices  in  the  temple,  not  only  for  the  sins  of  the  people,  but  even  for  his  own  ?.  *:* David  himself 
entreats  God  not  to  enter  into  judgment  with  his  servant,  as  in  his  sight,  'no  man  living  could  be  jus- 
tified*  This  is  directly  opposite  to  the  Popish  interpretation,  and  points  out  with  what  little  reason  the 
justification  of  man  is  inferred  from  the  observance  of  the  commandments.  Nothing  can  be  more  ob- 
vious than  the  fallaciousness,  and  pernicious  tendency  of  this  doctrine. 

Ward,  in  continuation,  observes,  "  these  places  (viz.  the  texts  attached  to  numbers  89.  90.  91. 
in  the  next  page)  do  very  fairly  discover  their  false  and  corrupt  intentions,  in  concealing  the  word: 
justice,  in  their  Bibles;*'  as  it  would  tend  to  prove  "  that  men  are  justly  crowned  in  Heaven  for 
their  good  works  upon  earth."  Here  are  the  English  Translators  charged  with  corrupt  intentions, 
although  no  doctrine  can  be  inferred  from  just,  and  justice,  which  may  not,  with  equal  advantage, 
be  derived  from  righteous  arid  righteousness.  For,  if  God  as  a  *  just '  Judge,  reward  the  good  works 
of  those  whom  he  freely  justifies  by  his  grace,  through  the  merits  of  Christ,  and  not  through  the 
merits  of  works;  it  neither  proves  justification  by  works,  nor  the  merit  or  worthiness  of  them. 
Therefore,  the  crown  of  righteousness  (or,  as  the  Popish  expositors  interpret  it,  of  justice,)  is 
conferred  on  Christians,  because  it  has  been  promised  them  for  Christ's  sake,  and  not  because  it 
can  be  purchased  by  any  works  of  theirs. 

*  Errata,  page;  1.  f  C.  xviii.  v.  20.  jCxi.V.32.  §  C.  xxxi.  v.  36.  ||C.ix.v.3. 

%  C.  ii.  v.  3.  and  c.  viit.  v.  5S.  **  Psalm  cxliii.  v.  ii. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611 


/y 


Book.  Ch.  Vcr, 


Ori£.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text. 


Apoc.  xix.  8. 


2  Tim.  iv.  8 


%x,  o  frix-zoj  y.p\ 


ii  Thess.  i.  5. 


•Heb.  vi.  10. 


yxi>  pva-<ruov 
rx  dixasi  vuxTx 
£J"i  Tun  uywv 


Byssinum 

|enim   justifi- 

cationes  sunt 

sanctorum. 


Rhemish  Version. (Beza's  Latin  Text 


for  the  silk  (in)  byssus  enim 
some    editions,!  justificationes 
fine  linen)  are)    sunt  sancto- 
the    justifica-  \         ram. 
tions  of  saints.: 


Bps.  Bible,  15G8.  K.James'sBihleiGn 


for  the  fine 
linen  is  the 
righteousness' 


Ao/ttox,  atTroxii- 


In  rel 


lquo, 


reposita  est 


corona 

cru  po\  o  Kt/fi«d      justitias, 

e»  Hum)  tt,  ipr  quam  reddet 
mihi    Domi- 


nus  in  ilia  die, 
Justus  judex. 


for  the  fine  linen 
is  the  '  righteous 
ness '   of  saint? 


(8S> 


Concerning  the  quod  reliquuml  a  crown  of  | Henceforth  there 
rest,  there  is  est,  reposita  est! 'righteousness 'j is  'a1^  up  for  me 
laid   up  forme  mihi    justitiaj  i         &c.  ja  crown  of  '  righ- 

a  crown  of  jus-  corona   quam   the  'righteous  iteousness,'  which 


tice,  which  our!    reddet  mihi 
Lord  will   ren-jDominus  in  ilia 
der  unto  me  in  die,   Justus   ille 
that  day,  a  just!       judex, 
judge. 


judge. 


o\v.x\x$    y.ptaiut; 
tx  Que,  ike. 


El7TE£     $IXX10> 


In  exemplum 
justi  judicii 
Dei,   &c. 

Si  tamen  jus- 
turn  est  apud 
Deum,  &c. 


Ov  yxg  xoiv.rx;  o 
Ssor,    t7TiXx()tu- 

I  (AWV. 


Non  enim 
injustus 

Deus  ut  ob- 
liviscatur 

operis  vestri, 


the    Lord    the 

'righteous' judge 

&c. 


(80> 


For  an  example; Qiue  res  mani-    '  righteous  *    \TVhich  is  a  mani- 
of    the  just  jfesto  est  indicio judgment,    &c.]fest  token  of  the 


judgment   of  iusti  judicii  Dei, 


God,  &c. 

That  yet  it  be 

just  with  God, 

Ike. 


Sec. 

Si  quidem  jus 

turn    est    apud 

Dcum,  <Scc. 


righteous 
thing,    &c. 


For  God  is  notjNon  enim    in- 
unjust  that  he  Justus  est  Deus, 
should  forget  jut    obliviscatur 
your  work.       operis  vestri 


For  God  is  not 

'  unrighteous,  ' 

&:c. 


''righteous' judg- 
jmentofGod,that 
ye  may  be  counted 
!  worthy  of  the 
■  kingdom  of  God, 
for  which  ye  also 
•suffer ;  seeing  it 
[is  a  '  righteous  ' 
'thing  with  God. 
(90) 

For  God    is  not 

unrighteous,    to 

forget  vour  work, 

*&c. 


(91) 


88.  BvCTVlVOV.     A  more  rational  exposition  cannot  be,  than  that  given  b\    Grohus,  viz  "digni  sunt 

*  Vid.  Pol,  Synops.  i«  Uu* 


SO  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

qui  sic  vestiantur;  actiones  enim  eorum  vestitui  respondent ;  sunt  enim  et  splendidae  et  pura."  Ac- 
cording to  it,  the  fine  linen  is  emblematical  of  the  purity  of  those  who  wear  it,  but  does  not,  as  the 
Rhemists  insist,  confer  justification.  Good  works  are  indeed  the  justifications  of  saints,  because  they 
declare  them  to  be  just,  not  because  they  make  them  just.  The  "'publicans  justified  God,  yet  they  did 
not  make  God  just ;  and  the  lawyers  call  that  a  man's  justification,  which  neither  makes  the  man,  nor 
his  cause,  just,  but  declares  them  to  be  so. 

8Q.  90.  91.  Ward  says,  the  English  translators  prefer  righteousness  to  justification,  "  because  the) 
know  full  well,  that  this  word,  including  the  works  of  Saints,  would,  by  its  adoption,  rise  up  against  their 
justification  by  faith  only."  The  charge  preferred  here,  has  been  anticipated  in  the  preceding  numbers, 
and  refuted  by  a  simple  statement  of  the  doctrine  of  the  Church  of  England  on  this  head.  (Tie 
next  proceeds  to  say,  that  "  by  their  translating  righteous,  instead  of  just,  they  bring  it,  that  Joseph 
was  a  righteous  man,  rather  than  just ;  because,  when  a  man  is  just,  it  sounds  that  he  is  so  indeed, 
and  not  by  imputation  only."  The  following  references  to  the  Protestant  Bible,  will  shew  that  its 
translators  designed  no  fraud  when  they  adopted  the  term  '  righteousness,"  inasmuch  as  it  conveys  the 
same  meaning  as  '  justice  ;*  and  that  they  indiscriminately  used  the  words  justice,  and  righteousness. 
JSt.  Luke,  speaking  of  Simeon,  says,  "  and  the  same  was  (&x«w)  just  and  devout."  §St.  Matthew 
observes,  that  "  Joseph  her  husband,  being  (&**»;)  a  just  man."  Who  has  ever  conceived  a  distinc- 
tion to  exist  between  a  righteous  man,  and  a  just  one}  It  would  but  weary  the  patience  of  the 
reader  to  say  more  on  the  subject. 

Ward  concludes  the  article  with  a  "  note  also,  that  where  faith  is  joined  with  the  word  just,  they 
omit  not  to  translate  it  just,  viz.  the  just  shall  live  by  faith,  to  signify  that  justification  is  by  |jfaith 
alone."  Of  the  many  he  has  advanced,  he  has  not  uttered  a  more  barefaced  falsehood  than  this, 
nor  one  that  betrays  a  more  radical  ignorance  of  the  subject  which  he  attempts  to  discuss.  As  has 
been  observed,  no  difference  exists  in  the  English  language  between  'just,'  and  '  righteous  ;'  *  justifi- 
cation' and  '  righteousness;'  neither  do  the  English  Translators,  as  is  insinuated,  join  just  with  faith, 
and  righteous  with  works,  exclusively.  The  fact  is,  they  applied,  as  was  just  remarked,  both  words 
indifferently,  as  appears  from  the  following  texts,  viz.  ^Romans,  "  for  therein  is  (a****™*)  the  righ- 
teousness of  God  revealed  from  faith  to  faith,  as  it  is  written  (5  S«xa<os)  the  just  shall  live  by  faith." 
~*Again,  "  even  the  righteousness  of  God,  which  is  by  faith  of  Christ."  An  inspection  into  his 
concordance  will  satisfy  the  reader,  that  there  are  numerous  passages  in  which  the  Protestant  trans- 
lators rendered  &jx«k>«,  and  Jtauora*,  sometimes  by  the  one,  and  sometimes  by  the  other,  word. 

*  See  Cartwright's  Annot.  on  the  Rhem.  New  T.  f  Errata,  page  73.  %  C.  ii.  v.  25.  §  C.  i.  v.  19. 

j|  The  Lori>  Bishop  of  Lincoln  has,  in  his  last  publication,  demonstrated  the  perfect  consistency  of  justification  by 
faith  alone,  with  the  necessity  of  personal  righteousness.  The  exposition  of  the  learned  Prelate,  although  in  the  first  instance, 
directed  against  those  who  keep  "  works  "  out  of  sight,  yet  is  equally  applicable  to  those  who  ascribe  to  them  too  great 
an  efficacy,  as  one  of  the  prescribed  conditions  of  salvation.  Besides,  it  goes  the  full  length  not  only  of  disproving  Ward's 
assertions  respecting  this  particular  doctrine,  but  rendering  the  repetition  of  them  by  Dr.  Milner,  or  any  of  his  '  Episcopal  Bre- 
thren/ at  any  future  period,  extremely  improbable. 

"To  the  much  agitated  question,  therefore,"  observes  his  lordship,  "  whether  works  be  necessary  to  justification,  we 
answer,  that  if  by  justification  be  meant  the  first  entrance  into  a  state  of  justification,  works  arc  not  necessary ;  if,  by  justifi- 
cation be  meant  the  continuance  in  a  state  of  justification,  works  are  necessary.  By  this  distinction,  we  support  the  fundamental 
principle  of  the  gospel,  justification  lij  faith  in  Christ ;  and  at  the  same  time,  secure  the  main  purpose  of  our  Saviour's  incarna- 
tion and  death."     Refutation  of  Calvinism,  c.  iii.  p.  124. 

f  Ci.  v.  17.  **C.iii.v.22. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN   imi 


81 


SECTION  XIV.— MERIT  AND  MERITORIOUS  WORKS. 


Rook.  Ch.  Vcr.  Orig.  Greek 


Rom.  viii. 
18. 


Jleb.  x.  129. 


Col.  i.  12. 


<m  ««   a.£tx  ice 

ito&ri^xix    t« 

oo^un,  Skc. 


O-iTCLi  'Hy.U^lXC 
rot   VIOV  T«    ©EH 
y.X-rtZTIOCTnJU; 


Vulgate  Text. 


Existimo 

enim  quod 
nonsuntcon- 
dignae  pas- 

siones,  &c. 

hujus  tempo- 

ris,    &c. 


&C. 


Ouanto  ma- 
gis  putatisde 
teriora  me- 
reri  supplicia. 
qui  Filium 
Dei  concul- 
caverit,  &c. 


Gratias 

agentes  Deo 

Patri,   qui 

dignos  nos 

fecit,  &c. 


Rhemish  Version. 


For  I  think- 
that  the   cas- 
sions  of  this 
time  are  not 
condigne  to  the 
glory  to  come. 
&c. 


How  much 
more  think  you 
doth  he  deserve 
worse  punish- 
ments who  hath 
trodden  the 
Son  of    God 
under  foot. 


Giving   thanks 
to  God   the 
Father,  who 

hath    made   us 
worthy,  i\c. 


Beza's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  1568. 


Nam   statuo 

mini  me  esse  pa- 

ria     quae    pra* 

senti  tempore 

perpetimur, 

futura  gloria:, 

Sec. 


Quanto  puta- 

tis   acerbiore 

supplicio   dig- 

nus  censebitur, 

qui  Filium  Dei 

conculcarit, 

&c. 

Mont. 
Quanto  putatis 
deteriori  digntts 
judicabitursitp 
pliao,  Sec. 


Gratias  agentes 
Patri,  qui  ido- 
neos  nos  fecit, 

cScC. 

Mont. 

Patri,    Mi    ido- 

neos  facienti 

nos,  &c. 


are  not  '  wor- 
thy/ 


How  much 
sorer  shall  he 
be  punished,' 
&c. 


K.James'sBibleiGii 


made  us  'meet, 
&c. 


For  I  reckon  that 
the  sufferings  of 
this  present  time 
are  not  '  worthy  ' 
to     be     compared 

with  the  glory 
which    shall  be 

revealed  in  us. 

(92) 


Of  how   much 

sorer  punishment 

suppose   ye  shall 

he    be    thought 

'  worthy,'  who 
hath  trodden  un- 
der foot  the  Son 
of  God,  &c. 


(93) 


Giving  thanks 
unto  the  Father, 
which  hath  made 
us  '  meet,'  &c. 


(94) 


M 


52  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

02.  A^IQL.  The  Protestant  Translation  of  this  passage  is,  "  worthy  to  be  compared ;"  that  of 
the  Rhemists  "  condigne."  This  term,  'Ward  says,  means  "  equal,  correspondent,  or  comparable 
to"&c.  From  this  very  interpretation,  which  speaks  the  language  of  Protestants  on  the  subject, 
an  invincible  argument,  against  human  merit,  may  be  deduced.  For,  if  tribulation  in  this  life,  be 
not  comparable  to  happiness  in  the  one  to  come,  (and  it  is  evident  the  Apostle  intended  nothing  more, 
neither  to  exalt,  nor  abase  the  merit  of  works  by  a  comparison  with  the  excellency  of  the  glory  ;)  it  fol- 
lows that  present  tribulation  docs  not  deserve  that  future  happiness  ;  and,  inasmuch  as  desert  implies 
performance  adequate  to  the  reward,  if  the  tribulation  be  not  equal,  (and  on  Ward's  own  admission 
it  is  not)  to  that  future  happiness  or  glory,  it  cannot  be  said  to  deserve  either.  A  man's  country  may 
exalt  him,  for  one  day's  distinguished  service  in  war,  to  the  most  exalted  rank  ;  it  may,  then,  with  truth, 
be  said  that  that  day's  service  effected  for  him  this  great  reward,  but  it  cannot  be  said  that  it  adequately 
purchased  or  deserved  it,  for  so  every  person,  whose  merit  was  equal  to  his,  would  deserve  a  similar 

reward. 

On  the  ttext  in  the  Rhemish  Testament,  "  for  that  our  tribulation  is  momentary  and  light, 
vvorketh  above  measure  exceedingly  an  eternal  weight  of  glory  in  us;"  Ward  remarks,  "  see  you  not 
here,  that  short  tribulation  in  this  life  works,  that  is,  causes,  purchases,  and  deserves  an  eternal  weight 
of  glorv  in  the  next'  And  what  is  that  but  to  be  meritorious  and  worthy  of  the  same."  The  fore- 
going observations  equally  apply  here,  since  the  reward  of  eternal  life,  spoken  of  by  the  Apostle, 
which  is  the  gift  of  God,  is  infinitely  greater  than  the  affliction  endured  in  the  present  one,  and  fol- 
lows not  from  the  desert  of  the  sufferer,  but  from  the  liberality  of  the  giver.  It,  therefore,  amounts  to 
the  same  thing,  whether  '  worthy,'  according  to  the  Protestant,  or  '  condign,'  i.  e.  equal,  &c.  accord- 
ing to  the  Rhemish  version,  be  adopted.  For  if  the  heavenly  glory  be,  beyond  comparison,  greater 
than  the  afflictions  of  this  life,  it  necessarily  follows,  that  the  afflictions  of  this  life  deserve  not,  that 
is,  are  not  any  way  equal  to  the  heavenly  glory.  Thus  it  appears  that  the  main  difference  does  not 
consist  in  the  English  given  for  «£<«,  but  in  the  way  in  which  it  is  expounded  ;  as  the  Popish  trans- 
lation cannot  be  said  to  speak  for,  nor  the  Protestant  one,  against  works.  It  is  obvious,  that  the 
former,  so  arrogantly  preferred  by  Ward,  is  calculated  to  impart  to  weak,  imperfect  man,  a  confidence 
in  his  own  deserts,  at  the  same  time  that  he  is  admonished,  in  the  language  of  Scripture,  that  after  his 
very  best  endeavours,  he  should  look  upon  himself,  only  as  an  unprofitable  servant. 

I  Ward  gives  a  mutilated  quotation  from  §St.  Cyprian,  if  for  no  other  purpose,  at  least  for  that 
of  uniting  the  reward  spoken  of,  with  the  word  '  merits,'  which  the  father  takes  in  a  general  sense 
to  signify  works.  The  words  included  in  the  brackets,  are  those  suppressed  by  Ward  :  "  O  what, 
and  how  great  a  day  shall  come,  my  dearest  brethren,  when  the  Lord  shall  begin  to  recount  [his  peo- 
ple, and  by  examination  of  the  divine  knowledge,  consider]  the  merits  of  every  one  ;  [to  send  into 
hell  ffte  the  guilty,  and  to  condemn  our  persecutors  with  perpetual  burning  of  penal  flame]  and  pay 

*  Errata,  page /o.  t  2  Cor.  c.  iv.  v.  i;  *  Errata,  page  75. 

§  "  O  dies  ille  qualis  et  quantus  adveniet,  fratrcs  dilectissimi,  cum  cseperit  [popuium  suum  Dominus]  recensere,  [et  divinse 
eognUionis  examine]  singulorum  meritum  [recognoscere  ;  mittere  in  gehennam  noccntes,  et  persecutors  nostras,  flamma  paena- 
lis  perpetuo  ardcre  damnare,.]  nobis  vero  mercedem  fidei  et  devotionis  exsolvcre."     St,  Cyn.  Epis.  Ivi.  v.  3. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN   1GH. 

lis  the  reward  of  faith  and  devotion."     Here,  observes  Ward,  are  merits  and  the  reward  of  the  same 
So  much    indeed,  on   reading  it  over,   may  he  collected  from  the  passage,  by  omitting  those  parts  of 
it,  which  he  within   the  brackets.      But   even   if  Cyprian   meant   deserts,    he  speaks  only  of  the  retri 
button  rendered  in  proportion  to  them ;   but  not  at  all  of  «  an  eternal  weight  of  glory,"  as  their  reward 
Although   ,t  happens   that  his   meaning   is    not   materially  affected  by  the  suppression,    yet  the  prac' 
t.ce,   so  common  with  Popish  controvertists,  of  withholding  some  part  or  other  of  what  they  affect  to 
quote,  as  it  argues  the  extreme  of  unfair  dealing,  cannot  be  too  severely  condemned. 

St.  Augustine,  too,  is  cited  by  Ward  as  a  favourer  of  his  doctrine;  but,  as  the  ^writings  he 
adverts  to  arc  deemed  spurious,  it  is  unnecessary  to  notice  them.  However,  in  what  is  considered  a 
genuine  production  of  that  father -the  commentary  on  the  Lxxth  Psalm,— his  sentiments  on  the 
doctrine  of  human  merit  are  clearly  stated.  His  words  are,  f«  thou  art  nothing  by  thyself;  call  upon 
God  ;  thine  are  the  sins,  the  merits  are  God's;  to  thee  punishment  is  due,  and  when' the  reward  shall 
come,  he  will  crown  his  gifts,  not  thy  merits:'  Here,  this  father  absolutely  denies,  that  the  reward, 
which  is  of  grace,  is  due  on  the  score  of  merit  or  meritorious  works. 

93.   "  If,"  says  Ward,  «  they  translate    according   to  the  Greek,  as  they  pretend  to,  they  should 
say  in  Luke,  c.  xx.  v.  35.  and  xxi.  36,  may  be  worthy,    and  they  that  ark  worthy;    and  not 
according  to  the  Vulgate  Latin,  which,  I  see,  they  are  willing  to  follow,  when  they  think  it  may  make 
the  more  for  their  turn."     Can  any  thing  be  more  creditable  to  the  intentions  of  the  Protestant 
Translators,   than  this  very  circumstance  which  he  censures ;  or  exhibit  his  inconsistency,  and  absur- 
dity, in  a  more  striking  point  of  view  ?      They  consulted  the  Vulgate,  (which  in  the  present  instance 
the  Rhemists  departed  from  ;)  and  if  the  original  warranted  that  version,  they  unhesitatingly  followed 
it.     This  was  the  principle  on  which  they  went;  to  make  every  version  to  which  they  could  get  access, 
auxiliary  to  their  design.     They  cannot,  therefore,  with  justice,  be  charged  with  having  followed  this  or 
that  translation,  in  preference  to   the  other;  while  the  Rhemists,  in  overlooking  the  Latin,  and  in 
translating  from  the   Greek  text,  justly  expose    themselves  to  the  charge  of  having  done  so',  to  use 
Ward's  own  expression,  because  it  may  have  made  more  for  their  turn.     The  Greek  &*»&*«,  implies, 
"  that  you  may  be   counted  (judged  or  reputed)  worthy,"  and  not  "  that  you  may  be  worthy."     The 
latter  is  the  Rhemish  Translation,  according  to  which  man  is  represented  «  to  be  worthy  of,"  that  is, 
'■<  to  deserve  "  heaven  on  account  of  his  own   merits.     According  to  the  former,    the  righteous  are 
"  counted  worthy,"  and  are  so  indeed,  not  through  their  own   merit,   but  for  Jesus  Christ's  sake. 
From  these  different  expositions,  the  reader  is  enabled  to  judge,  which  is  most  agreeable,   not  only  to 
right  reason,  but  to  the  word  and  meaning  of  Scripture. 

94.  Tw  MMUrCLVTl,    If  the  Popish  expositors  have  not  been  able  to  deduce  the  doctrine  of 

*  Serm.  de  Sanctis. 

t  "  Nihil  es  per  te,  Deum  invoca  ;  tua  peccata  sunt,  merita  Dei  sunt,  supplicium  tibi  defaetur,  et  cum  pramium  vcnerlt 
suadona  coronabit,    non  merita  tua."  Comment  i.  Psal.  Jxx. 

X  xMTxfau  to  think  worthy,     Paekh 
M   2 


84  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

human  merit  from  «|w;,  which  properly  signifies   'worthy,'  they  will   find  it  much  more  difficult  to 
extract  it  from  W*w,  which  implies    '  apt,'  *  meet,'  and  sometimes  '  sufficient.' 

"  Thev  cannot  but  know,'  says  *Ward,  "  that  if  W;  be  *  worthy,'  then  'mmurcu  must  needs  be 
'  to  make  worthy/  "  According  to  this  rule,  Wws  may  be  rendered  '  to  magnify,'  or  «  to  make  great;' 
because  W»«  sometimes  signifies  <  great'  or  '  much.'  Another  invariable  practice  of  the  translators, 
was  this  :  when  a  verb  was  derived  from  a  noun  of  different  significations,  they  took  it  in  that  which 
was  most  usual.  But  even  were  ;«»»«  translated  after  the  Vulgate,  viz.  "  to  make  worthy,"  that 
would  not  determine  the  point ;  for  it  is  God  who  makes  us  worthy  by  his  grace,  and  not  by 
desert  of  our  own  works;  as  no  man  could  be  saved  who  trusted  to  his  own  worthiness,  inasmuch  as 
all  deserve  death.  The  tparable  of  the  labourers  most  strongly  exemplifies  this  ;  since,  if  reward 
necessarily  sprang  from  merit,  they  who  came  first  in  the  morning  into  the  vineyard,  should,  as  their 
labour  was  greater,  have  received  more  than  those  who  came  at  the  last  hour  ;  so  that  it  is  by  no  means 
clear,  although  reward  be  conferred  on  works  ;  that  works  deserve  it.  In  ibis  light,  X Ambrose 
viewed  the  matter,  when  he  said,  i(  whence  should  I  have  so  great  merit,  who  have  mercy  for  my 
crown."  §Chrysostom  likewise  observes  "  no  man  pursues  such  a  course  of  life,  as  to  be  worthy  of 
the  kingdom  ;  but  this  gift  is  altogether  from  God  ;  therefore,  he  says,  when  ye  have  done  all  things, 
say,  we  arc  unprofitable  servants.'1  Theodoret  speaks  to  the  same  effect;  so,  in  fact,  do  all  the  ancient 
Fathers.  The  novel  doctrine  of  merit  and  meritorious  works  was  not  thought  of  before  the  eleventh, 
nor  can  it  be  said  to  have  received  powerful  support  until  the  fourteenth  century,  when  Thomas 
Aquinas  became  its  able  and  successful  advocate.  In  the  sixteenth  century,  the  Council  of  Trent 
sanctioned  it,  and  at  the  same  time  anathematized  all  those  who  denied,  that  a  man  justified  by  good 
works  is  deservedly  entitled  to  eternal  life.  Hence  flowed  what  the  Popish  Church  calls  "  Counsels  of 
perfection  ;"  i.  e.  rules  which  guide  men  to  a  higher  degree  of  perfection  than  is  necessary  to  salvation  ; 
while  these,  in  their  turn,  produced  the  doctrine  which  relates  to  || works  of  supererogation.  When 
to  all  this  are  added  the  refinements  of  the  schoolmen,  and  their  invention  of  two  sorts  of  merit,  .the 
fmerit  of  condignity,  and  the  merit  of  congruity;  it  cannot  but  excite  astonishment,  how  a 
church,  calling  itself  christian,  can  so  long  continue  to  countenance  so  gross  a  perversion  of  scripture 
doctrine.  It  must  be  observed,  however,  that  in  every  age  since  its  first  propagation,  Popish  divines, 
of  the  greatest  celebrity,  have  given  it  their  decided  opposition. 


*  Errata,  page  75.  t  C.  xx.  v.  1. 

"  Unde  mihi  tantum  meriti,  cui  indulgentia  est  pro  corona."     Ambros.  ad  virg.  in  exhor. 
$  aoii;  yxp    T&iavT*i»  ttrt&MK'T.M  nfonuav  u?t  frxv^xc    x^u%vxi,  aXXa    tjj;   AYTOY  SWgeaj  in  to  <nav.  hx   thto  Qvo-tv,  '*txv   irxnct 
TOiVr/rs,  foyers  oTt  xygum  £fc>.o»  fcr^EC      Hom.  n.  in  Ep.  ad  Col. 

II  According  to  this  most  presumptuous  and  unscriptural  tenet,  when  a  person  has  performed  more  than  is  necessary  to 
ensure  his  salvation,  he  can  apply  the  surplusage  of  his  deserts  to  the  wants  of  others  !  !  ! 

%  Merit  ex  condigno  implies  a  good  work,  to  which  a  divine  reward  is  due  on  a  principle  of  justice  j  as  well  on  account  of 
the  value  or  merit  of  the  work,  as  of  the  person  who  performed  it.  Merit  ex  congruo,  signifies  a  good  work,  which  deserves  a 
ci  ine  reward,  not  through  any  obligation  on  the  score  of  justice,  but  on  a  principle  of  fitness. 


+ 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN   1611. 


85 


Book.  Ch.  Vcr. 


Or  ig.  Greek 


Psalm  cxix. 
J12. 


Ileb.  ii.  0. 


Ev.?iiva  t>]v  y.txp- 

OtXV  JJ.H  T«  7TOH5' 

Oiy.xwfjiocTcc 
(Tpn) 

era  ti-  rou  oausa 


Tot  Je  C^a^t;  Tt 
itxp  a.yys\>J$ 
rihotTlQf/.tiioypXe- 
TTOfj.tv  Iri'jH';,  otcc 
to  T.a.fyf)^a.  th 
8avaT8,  oo£y  :'.ai 
ti^i>)   irt(pot.vu- 

fJ.tiOn'    &C. 


Vulgate  Text. 


Inclinavi   cor 
me  am  ad   fa 
ciendas  justi- 

ficationes 
tuas  in  aeter 
num  propter 
retributionem 

Pagx.  ad 

faciendum 
statula   tun, 
in  seculum 
usque  in 

Jinem. 


RhemishVersion.'Beza'sLatinText 


Eum  autem, 
qui   modico 

quam 
angeli  mino- 
ratus  est,  vi- 
demuc  Jesum 
propter  pas 
sionem  mor- 
tis, gloria  et 
honore  coro- 
n  at  urn,  &c. 


I  have  inclined 
my  heart  to  do 
thy   justifica- 
tions for  ever. 


But   him    that 
was  a  little  les- 


Mont.  renders 

npv  culccm. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568.  K.James'sBiblei6n 


to  fulfil 
'  statutes 
ways, '  even  un 
to  the  end.' 


thy 
al- 


Sed  Jesum  il- 
ium   videmus 


sened  under  the  gloria  et  honore 
angels,    we   see'eoronatum,  qui 


Jesus,    because 
of   the  passion 

of  death, 
crowned   with 
glory    and    ho- 
nour, &c. 
N.  B.   In  some 
late  editions  of 
the   R.  T.    the 
foregoing  text 
has    been    ar- 
ranged  in   the 
order  of  that  in 
the  Prot.  N.  T. 


parumper  fuit 
inferior  angelis 
factus,    propter 
mortis    perpes- 

sionem,  <kc. 

Mont.  Eum 
autem    breve 
quidprcs  angelis 
minoratum,  &c. 


We  see    Jesus 
crowned  with 
glory  and  ho 
nour,  &c. 


I  have   inclined 
mine  heart  to  per- 
form   thy   '   sta- 
tutes'  alway, 
'  even   unto   the 
end.' 

(95) 


But  we  see  Jesus, 
who  was  made  a 
little  lower  than 
the  angels,  for 
the  suffering  of 
death,  crowned 
with  glory  and 
honour,  &c. 


(96) 


Q5.  **?v  1  The  end.     The  farther  a  person  advances  into  Ward's  work,  the  more  he  will  be  con- 


*  In  Josh.  c.  viii.  v.  13.  apy  is  rendered  in  the  Vulgate  novissime,  and  in  the  Septuagint  Greek  tv^arx;  and  in  Prov.  c.  xxil. 
v.  A.  Vulg.  Jinis.    Lxx.  ym». 

t  Vid.  Parkh,  Heb,  Lex,  in  loc. 


36  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WJ         REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

vinced,  that  he  cavils  for  cavilling  sake.  Now  granting  the  Popish  translation  to  he  the  best,  the 
merit  of  good  works  will  not  be  a  whit  the  sooner  established ;  as  reward  docs  not  necessarily  imply 
the  desert  of  him  who  is  rewarded,  it  more  frequently  implies  the  liberality  of  the  rewarder.  Isidorus 
Clarius,  whose  eminence  as  a  scholar  will  not  be  questioned  by  the  Popish  Doctors,  in  commenting 
on  this  text,  assigns  his  reasons  why  the  Hebrew  word  i?»  should  not  be  translated  (propter  retri- 
butionem)  "  for  reward."  He  remarks,  that  there  is  no  word  in  the  Hebrew  text,  correspondent  to 
the  Latin  phrase  just  quoted,  and,  consequently,  that  it  should  be  omitted.  *"  That  it  is  too 
servile  a  thing,  and  not  becoming  so  great  a  prophet,  to  obey  God's  commandments  for  reward  and 
hope  of  retribution,  and  lastly,  that  he  does  not  deserve  the  title  of  a  Christian,  who  serves  Christ, 
with  this  mind,  &c."  tMuis  may  be  added  to  the  foregoing  commentators,  as  justifying  the  Protes- 
tant version,  and  as  shewing  that  no  unwarrantable  liberty  has  been  taken  with  the  sacred  text. 
Notwithstanding  this,  Ward,  on  his  own  unsupported  authority,  pronounces  the  Protestant  Trans- 
lation of  the  passage,  "  a  most  notorious  corruption  against  merits.''''  This  is,  however,  but  one  of 
his  many  proofless  assertions;  indeed,  in  the  very  next  sentence,  he  himself  admits  the  ambiguity  of 
the  Hebrew  term,  which  the  lxx  have  rendered  an-a/*^'"- 

g6.  "  In  fine,"  says  jWard,  "  so  obstinately  are  they  set  against  merits,  and  meritorious  works, 
that  some  of  them  think,  that  even  Christ  himself  did  not  merit  his  own  glory  and  exaltation." 
Protestants,  with  justice,  maintain,  that  Christ  was  under  no  necessity  of  meriting  it,  he  himself 
being  the  Lord  op  Glory  ;  yet  their  entire  comfort  rests  in  his  merits,  as  through  them  they  hope 
for  eternal  glory. 

Ward  concludes  this  article  with  a  charge  of  "  intolerable  deceit''  against  the  Protestant  Trans- 
lators ;  who,  he  says,  have  arranged  the  words  of  this  text  in  so  ambiguous  a  way,  that  the  reader  may 
follow  "  which  sense  he  will."  Such  is  the  general  tenor  of  the  language  throughout  the  Errata, 
as  the  reader  must  have  already  perceived  by  the  quotations  made  from  it ;  and  yet,  strange  to  say, 
it  is  held  up,  at  the  present  day,  as  a  work  of  unrivalled  merit,  by  the  Popish  clergy,  who,  either  from 
ignorance,  are  incompetent  to  decide,  or,  from  unwillingness,  will  not  explore  the  sacred  source  itself; 
and  who,  without  resting  on  Ward's,  or  any  other  person's  authority,  will  not  satisfy  themselves,  whe- 
ther his  objections  be,  or  be  not,  controvertible,  and  warranted  by  Scripture.  The  ambiguity,  of 
which  this  impugner  of  the  Protestant  faith  complains,  is  merely  apparent,  as  may  be  seen  by  con- 
necting the  words,  "  for  the  suffering  of  death,"  with  those  which  follow.  The  sense  of  the  pas- 
sage is  thus  clearly  expressed  by  §one  of  Pole's  Annotators :  "  Videmus  Jesum,  coronatum  propter 
passionem  mortis,  qua  nimirum  passione  mortem  gustavit,  &c.  Non  quomodocunque,  sed  gratia  dei, 
sive  ex  charitate."  ||  Another  of  them  as  pertinently  observes,  "  tantum  abest  ut  crux  fuerit  igno- 
minia  Christi,  quod  fuit  ejus  corona  et  gloria." 

*  "  Servile  hoc  videtur,  et  tanto  Propheta  sane  indignum,  ice."    Com.  in  Psal.  cxviii.  v.  112. 
t  "  Deo  serviendum  etiam  absque  mercede,  et  quia  ipsum  per  se  amabile  est."    Pol.  Synops.  in  Ioc 
$  Errata,  page  75.  §  Estius.  ||  Tena. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


SECTION  XV.— FREE  WILL. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.  Orhr.  Greek. 


John  i.    12.1'Oo-oiSie  aa.$o 

!    ocvTOv,  iwxy.it 

\  avion;  iS.da\a.y 

WixMx.Qtisytvia- 

6stt,  ron  tririv 

a  (Tit  a;  to 

no  pet  cevra. 


Vulgate  Text. 


Quotquot 
autern    rece- 

perunt    eum, 
dedit  eis  po- 

testatem   n* 
lios  Dei  fieri, 

his  qui  cre- 

dunt   in    no 

mine  ejus. 


RhemishVersion.  Eeza's  Latin  Text 


But  as  many  as 
received    him, 
he   gave   them 
power   to    be 
made  the  sons 
of  God. 


Quotquot    au- 
tern eum  exce- 

perunt,   dedit 
eis    hoc  jus  ut 

filii    Dei  facti 

sint,   nempe  iis 

qui  credunt  in 

nomen  ejus 


Bps.  Bible,  1568.  K.James's Biblei6n 


*'  prerogative, 
&c. 


"or.  xv.  lO.oMa  *««•'«-  Sedabundan- But  I  have  la 

s  itius  lllis  om- 

\ovKiyuh,ea^\  nibus   labo- 
h  %*£<?  tcv  jravi,  non  ego 
autem,   sed 
gratia  Dei 
mecum. 


I      QtoV,   VI   Clt 

turn. 


Epb.  iii.  12. 


E'-«^»|In  quohabe- 

KOU  tt,V     ITpOCCX' 

yuyw  iv  77£7roi!  et  accessum 
h™  lx  tv,c  I  jn  confiden- 

TTiriUC  U.VTOV 


bo u red    more 
abundantly 

than    all  they  ; 

yet  not  J,  but 
the  grace  of 
God  with  me. 


Sed   amplius 

quam    illi    om- 

nes   laboravi : 

son  ego  tamen, 

ed  gratia   Dei 

quae  in  me  col- 

lata  est. 

Mont,   quce 

cum  me. 


the   grace  of 

God  '  which  is 

with  me. 


fiduciary     have  affiance 
and     access   in 


In  whom  we  In  quo  habe- 
mus  libertatem 
et   aditum  cum 


1  Cor.  vi.   1 


"Zv ttpyovm$   h 
y.ui    wapccHot- 

}.Ot[Ai.'j  y.V,  £JJ   Ki- 

voi  tv,i  yocPiinov 
vpu<;. 


fiduciu,   per   fi 
dem  ipsius. 


,  confidence  by 
tia,  per  fidem  the  faith  of 
^ins-       j  him. 

N.  B.  Accord- 
ing to  others, 
'  boldness.'  <Sec. 


Adjuvantes  And  whelping  Sed  et,  ut  oPe- 
autem  exhor- do  cxhort  that I  m  nostran|ei 
tamus,  ne  in  you  reCeive  notlaccommodantes 

Z™™J™~\  the   Srace   of  i  hortamur   ne 
God  in  vain,    frustra  <rratiam 


tiam  Dei  re- 


mand '  entrance' 
by   the  confi- 
dence   '  which 
is'  by  the  faith 
of  him. 


But  as  many  as 
received  him,  to 
them  gave  he 
'  power  '  to  be- 
come the  sons  of 
God,  even  to  them 
that  believe  on 
his  name. 

(97) 

But    I    la- 
boured   more 
abundantly  than 
they  all:  yet  not 
I,  but  the  grace 
of  God    *  which 
was '   with  me. 


(9«) 


In  whom  we  have 
boldness  and  ac- 
cess with  confi- 
dence by  the  faith 
of  him. 


cipiatw 


Dei  vos  recepe- 
ritis. 

Mont. 
cooper  antes. 


(99) 


*<  We  together      We  then,  as 

as    God  s    la-  |  <  workers    toge- 

bourers,  &c.'  Jther    xdth    him; 

jbeseech  you  also 

■that    ye     receive 

not    the  grace  of 

God  in  vain. 


Marked  thus  *  were  altered  to  their  present  reading  A.  D.  1611 


(100) 


ss 


A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


07.  TL^ZTICLV.  As  the  English  translations  of  this  term  are,  and  have  been,  the  same,  both 
in  Protestant  and  Popish  Bibles,  for  the  last  two  centuries ;  it  becomes  necessary  to  state  the  grounds 
on  which  Ward  makes  his  charge.  He  sets  up  the  Rhemish  translation  as  the  standard  of  truth, 
indues  by  this  criterion  the  earliest  versions  of  the  Protestant  Bibles  in  English,  and  passing  over  King 
James's  Bible,  the  last  authorised  one,  and  which  was  in  existence  full  seventy  years  before  the  publica- 
tion of  his  work;  visits  on  it  the  deviations  of  those  early  versions  from  this  standard.  There  can- 
not surely  be  a  stronger  instance  of  unfairness  or  want  of  candour.  But  '  prerogative,'  or  <  privi- 
lege/ with  which  Ward  finds  fault,  are  not  mistranslations  of  *!««*;  neither  do  they  overturn,  nor 
does  '  power,'  the  present  reading,  confirm  the  doctrine  for  which  he  contends.  In  the  *first  Epistle 
to  the  Corinthians,  .*»»  is  rendered  « liberty,'  as  well  in  the  Rhemish,  as  in  the  Protestant  New 
Testament,  for  which  Ward  offers  an  apology,  when  he  says,  "  now  we  may  as  well  translate  '  liberty/ 
as  Beza  does  dignity."     This,  however,  on  so  serious  an  occasion,  is  but  mere  trifling. 

08.  f\   (T'JV   21JL0U    In  addition  to  falsifying  the  word  of  God,  Ward  alleges,  that  the  Protestant 
Translators  acted  here  with  insincerity.     The  reader  will  presently  perceive,  how  unsupported  by  fact 
this   assertion  is,  and  that  the  Popish    translation   of  the  passage,  no  more  establishes  the  doctrine 
of  free  will,  than  the  other  controverts  it.     He   says,  the  sense  to  which  Protestants  confine  the  text, 
is,    I"  only  grace,   as  if  the   Apostle  had  done  nothing,  like  unto  a  block  or  forced  only."     It  is  but 
fair   to  understand  the  words  '  only  grace/  as  it  may  be  presumed  Ward  did,  to  signify  grace  alone,  or 
unassisted  grace.     But,   surely,   according  to   this  interpretation,  Protestants  are  shamefully  misrepre- 
sented.    Their  translation   of  the  passage,  "  I  laboured  more  abundantly  than  they  all,"  points  out 
his  (St.  Paul's)   superior  success  in   spreading   the  gospel,  and  shews  with  what  little  regard  to  truth, 
Ward  says,  they  consider  the  "  Apostle  as  a  mere  block."     Besides,  the  form  of  expression,  viz.  "  the 
o-race  of  God  which  laboured  with  me,"  cannot  be  considered  unobjectionable,  as  in  it  is  included  an 
useless  tautology  ;  so  that  by  correcting,  as  it  were,  what  he  had  said  relative  to  his  labouring,  by  the 
use  of  the  exceptive  sentence,  "  yet  not  I,"  and  by  thus  modestly  ascribing  all  he  did  to  the  grace  of 
God  ;  he  proves  himself  to  be  rather  a  willing  and  painful  labourer,  than  as  one  acted  on  by  violence, 
as  if  he  were  an  automaton,  or  a  mere  machine.     He  laboured  as  a  man  endued  with  life,  sense,  and 
reason;  and  yet  he  did  not  labour  by  his  own  strength,  or  virtue,  but  by  the  <  grace  of  God.'     Such  is  the 
rational  exposition  given  the  passage   by  the  most  eminent  Protestant  Divines:— men,  whose  prin- 
ciples and  opinions,  respecting  the  doctrine  of  free- wilt.,  are  not  more  abhorrent  from  the  Calvinis- 
tic  error  of  the  irresistibility  of  divine  grace  ;  than  they  are  from  the  Popish  one,  according  to  which, 
the  free   agency   of  man  is   too  highly  extolled,   and    the   powers   of  the  human  mind  are  overrated. 
The   latter   is   not,  properly  speaking,  of  Popish  growth,  as  it  may  be  traced  to  +Pelagius;   so  also  the 
former   derives   not   its   origin    from  Calvin,  as  it  was   taught   by  §Goteschalc    in   the    ninth    century, 
and  claims  for  its  first  propagator,   no  less  a  character  than  || Saint   Austin    himself.     The   Church 

*  C.  viii.  v.  9.  See  Whitby's  and  Macknight's  Commentaries  on  this  text. 
|  Errata,  p.  77.  %  Mosh.  Eccl.  Hist.  vol.  ii.  p.  86.  §  Ibid.  vol.  ii. p.  315. 

I1  Ibid.  vol.  ii.  p.  38. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611 


83 


of  England   utrinque  reducta  holds,    as   it  does   in  most  other  particulars,  a  happy   mean  between 
these  opposite  extremes. 

«  But  they  reprehend,"  says  *Ward,  -  the  Vulgate  Latin  interpreter  for  neglecting  the  article  i-" 
and,  although  in  the  following  phrases,  «  Jacobus  Zebedcei,  Judas  Jacobi.  Maria  Ckophce  the  Greek 
article  cannot  be  expressed,  yet  they  are  all  sincerely  translated  into  Latin/'  Protestants  censure 
Jerome's  text  for  the  omission  of  the  article,  where  it  should  be  inserted;  but  never  where  it  may  he 
either  impossible,  or  unnecessary,  to  express  it.  They  themselves  closely  adhered  to  this  rule  arcj 
never  added  an  iota  to  the  text,  but  what  was  necessarily  understood.  It  is  idle  to  say  that  \l  was 
for  the  sake  of  precision,  that  the  Rhemists  translated  Judas  Zebedai,  "Judas  of  Zebedee'; '  omitting 
the  word  'Son;'  or,  if  that  were  the  cause,  how  does  it  happen  that  in  the  t  Acts,  they  rendered 
curaverunt  Stephanum,  «  they  took  order  for  Stephen's  funeral;"  and  Jagain,  ecce  ego  Domine  -  lo' 
here  I  am  Lord?"  Numberless  other  instances  of  this  kind  might  be  pointed  out,  where  the  Rhemish 
Translators  without  necessity  added  to  the  text.  It  is  manifest,  therefore,  that  the  translation  of  the 
article  in  the  phrase  h  »,  ^  does  not  come  under  the  limitations,  adverted  to  by  Ward. 

But  the  additions  made  by  the  Rhemists,   are  not  more  remarkable,  than  their  suppressions  of 
the  sacred  text.     In  the  Epistle  to  the  Romans,  a  singular  contrivance  of  this  kind  occurs,  •  solely  for 
the  purpose  of  making  Scripture  speak  in  behalf  of  <  works,'  to  the  prejudice  of  <  grace.'  '  Through- 
out  their  entire  labours,  their  dishonesty  is  no  where  more  palpable,  as  the  omission  complained  of 
is  not  that  of  a  letter  or  a  syllable,  but  of  an  entire  sentence,  consisting  of  no  fewer  than  fifteen  words 
in  the  §original.    In  the  Protestant  version,  (the  only  English  one  of  it  extant)  it  runs  thus  :  «  But  if  it 
be  of  works,  then  it  is  no  more  grace;  otherwise  work  is  no  more  work."     Montanus  acknow- 
ledges, that  this  passage  belongs  to  the  Greek  text,  and  thus  renders  it :    «  Si  autem  ex  operibus 
non  amplius  est  gratia:  alioqui  opus,  non  amplius  est  opus."     ||Griesbach  who  cannot  be  accused  of 
favouringorthodoxy,  admits  that  it  belongs  to  the  original.  He  quotes  the  several  MSS.  which  he  collated 
as  possessing  it.     R.  Stephanus,  Wetstein  and  Mills,  having  incorporated  it  in  the  text  of  their  respect 
tive  Greek  Testaments,  clearly  proves  that  they  considered  it  to  contain  the  very  words  of  St.  Paul. 

99-  100.  XwepyZPTSg.  Although  Ward  allows'  that  the  texts  belonging  to  these  two 
numbers,  have  been  corrected  in  the  later  editions  of  the  Protestant  Bible,  he  yet  revives  all  the 
ribaldry  and  abuse,  which  Gregory  Martin  heaped  on  those  which  were  published  in  his  day.  With 
less  scurrility,  but  certainly  with  no  less  acrimony,  Doctor  Milner  not  only  lavishes  his  censures  on  the 
Protestant  Bible,  but  vindicates  all  the  <  erudite  criticism,'  as  he  calls  it,  contained  in  <  Ward's 
Polyglott.'  To  this  gentleman,  then,  who  is  avowedly  the  Spokesman  of  his  '  Episcopal  Brethren' 
in  Ireland,  it  becomes  necessary  to  direct  a  few  observations.  Is  he  aware  of  the  inconsequences 
of  charging  with  mistranslation  and  error,  a  work  which  has  been  the  joint  production  of  the  most 
eminent  scholars  ?  And,  as  he  avows  himself  to  be  unacquained  with  the  Hebrew  language,  and  as 
his  knowledge  of  Greek  appears  from  those  instances  in  which  he  has  exercised  it  in  making  quota- 

*  Errata,  page  77.  t  C.  viii.  v.  ii.  {   C.  ix.  v.  10. 

§  El  $i  i|  epyuv,  hk  £ti  irt  Xaf^'  «wt»  to  spyov  ux.  m  tnv  spytv.     Rom.  C.  XI.  V.  6. 

H   Vid.  Nov.  Test.  Grace,  vol.  ii.  p.  200. 


N 


90  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

tions,  to  be  extremely  imperfect,  is  he  not  most  unfit  to  pass  any  opinion,  but  particularly  an  unqua- 
lified one,  on  a  subject  which  requires  a  radical  knowledge  of  those  languages?  He  is  therefore  called 
on  in  the  name  of  candour,  to  retract  his  charge,  and  to  reconsider  the  grounds  on  which  he  made  it. 
He  is  enjoined  in  the  name  of  common  sense  to  make  a  careful  enquiry,  whether  the  English  Bible 
of  his  own  Church  be  as  perfectly  translated  as  it  might ;  even  in  many  places  in  which  doctrinal 
points  are  not  concerned.  In  order  to  make  this  appeal  efficacious,  the  few  following  passages 
selected  from  many  others  which  may  be  met  with  in  the  Rhemish  Testament,  are  at  least  entitled 
to  his  revision.  They  are  quoted,  not  for  the  purpose  of  recrimination,  which  could  serve  no  good 
end,  but  as  affording  proofs  of  the  caution  and  delicacy  which  should  be  observed,  where  Scripture 
is  at  all  concerned. 


Greek    Text.  Vulgate  Text. 

No.   1.   1  Cor.  c.  xiv.  v.  31.     n-am?  itu^yoO  ■x:tu.\.  \  ornnes  exhortentur 

2.  Id.  V.35.     tt  (AuBen  Bthaa-i, 

3.  Acts,  C.  XXV.  V.  4.         i:rliv,^ai  sv  KajcrjtpsKfc, 

4.  Heb.  c.  vii.  v.  28.        avSpawa?, 

5.  Acts,  C.  X.  V.  41.  pagTverJ     toi;    Trsoy.iyjiroTcirii/.ivQti;  ~\ 

17>0   10V  ©ECU.  J 


Si  volant  discere 
Servari  in  Cyesareu 
homines 

testibus  prseordinati?  a  Deo. 


Rhemish   Version. 

all  may  beexhor  ed 
if  they  learn 
is  in  Caesarea 
them 

(entirely  omitted  ) 


Doctor  Milner  will  scarcely  venture  to  affirm  that  the  Rhemists  did  justice  to  the  four  first  texts  ; 
the  fifth  is  added  for  the  purpose  of  shewing,  that  however  consistent  they  were  in  omitting  the 
passage  in  Romans,  c.  xi.  v.  5.  alluded  to  in  the  preceding  number,  as  not  being  recognised  by  the 
author  of  the  Vulgate  ;  they  have  not  the  shadow  of  a  pretext  for  not  noticing  the  words  "  testibus  prce- 
ordinatis  a  Deo."  Their  advocates  but  make  the  matter  worse,  when  they  say,  these  errors  have  been 
partly  rectified  in  the  Edinburgh,  and  other  late  editions  of  the  Rhemish  Testament,  as  they  thereby 
put  infallibility  still  more  at  variance  with  itself.  It  cannot  have  escaped  the  reader's  observation,  that  in 
the  fourth  text,  in  which  them  is  substituted  for  men,  the  contrast,  between  the  priesthood  of  men, 
and  that  of  the  Son  of  God,  (designed  by  the  use  of  the  word  '  men,')  is  entirely  done  away. 

On  the  text,  c.  iii.  v.  12,  of  St.  Paul  to  the  Ephesians,  attached  to  number  99,  Ward  observes, 
that  the  Protestant  Translators  say,  "  confidence  is  by  faith,"  as  though  there  were  "no  confidence 
by  works."  From  what  the  Apostle  says  in  that  text,  confidence  by  works  can  neither  be  understood 
nor  proved.  It  may  be  seen,  on  inspecting  the  parallel  readings,  how  inconsiderable  the  variance  is, 
between  the  early  and  late  English  versions.  And  although  the  same  observation  is  applicable  to  those 
of  <™»§7am?)  in  number  100,  yet  Ward  remarks,  *"  how  falsely  their  first  English  Translators  made 
it,  let  themselves,  who  have  corrected  it  in  their  last  Bibles,  judge."  The  '(present  reading  is,  no 
doubt,  clearer,  and  better  connected,  than  the  preceding  ones  ;  yet,  however  imperfect  these  may  be, 
they  are  far  from  being  <  false'  representations  of  the  original,  and  must,  to  the  eye  of  candid  cri- 
ticism, appear  preferable  to  J"  co-adjutors,  or  co  labourers  "  of  God,  which,  according  to  Ward, 
is  what  "  the  Apostle  calls  himself  and  his  fellow- preachers."  Nor  is  this  decision  only  to  be  had  from 
the  Greek  text ;  it  is  further  confirmed  by  the  Latin  interpretations  of  the  Syriac  version,  and  of  the 
Arabic  paraphrase. 

*  Errata  p.  yj. 
|  In  1  Cor.  iii.  ix.  the  rendering  differs  but  in  a  trifling  degree  from  that  objected  to  by  Ward  ;  yet  he  does  not  notice  it. 
X  Beza,   in  his  comments  on  this  interpretation  of  the  Rhemists,  properly  observes,  "  dicimur  enim   eum  adjuvare,  cui 
vires  non  sufficiunt ;   quis  autem  hoc  de  Deo  dual  ?" 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611 


91 


Book.  Ch.  Vcr 


Rom.  v.   6. 


Orig.  Greek.)  Vulgate  Text. 


m 


OVTCtJ]/    -n^tilt     0L7- 

BetiutyKccrx  Kx\- 


1  John  v.  iii 


Mat.  xix.  1 1 


tva.  t«;  tvroXcu; 

KCM      O.I      UTO?\CLl 
XXJTH  @CC£UM  UK 

ftcri. 


Ov  warn?  yu- 

povcTi  to*   Koyov 

tovtov,    a^A 

on;  frcfroTM. 


Utqtiidenim 

Christus, 
en  m   adhuc 
infirm i    esse 
mus,   secun- 
dum  lempu* 

pro  impiis 
mortuus  est : 


ut   mandata 
ejuscustodia 

mus :    et 

mandata  ejus 

gravia    non 

sunt. 


lemi&h  Version.  Seza's  Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  15G8. 


For   why    d:d 
Christ,    when 
we  as    yet  were 
weak,    accord- 
rig  to  the  time 
die  for  the 


impious 


Non  omnesr 
capiunt   ver- 
bum   istud, 
sed  quibus 
datum  est. 


Others   read 
ungodly. 

that   we   keep 
his  command 
ments  :  and  his 

command- 
ments are  not 
heavy. 


Christus  enim, 
quum    ad  hue 
nullis   viribus 
esse  mus,   pras- 

stituto  tempore 

pro  impiis  mor- 
tuus  est. 
Mont. 
existent  ib  us 

nobis  injirmis. 

ut   mandata 
ejus  servemus; 

et  mandata 

ejus  gravia  non 

sunt. 


Not  all  take 
this  word,   but 

they   to 

whom     it    is 

given. 

N.  B.  Some 
late  editions  of 
the  R.  T.  agree 
with  the  read- 
ing quoted   by 

Ward  ;    viz. 
"  All   men    do 
not  receive  tins, 

saying,  &c.'' 


when  we  were 

yet  of    '    no 

strength,  died' 

for   the  un 

godly.' 


are  not  c  griev- 
ous.' 


K.James'sBibleiGn 


For  when  we 
were  yet  '  with- 
out strength,'  in 
due  time  Christ 
died  for  the  un- 
godly. 

("Hi 


non  omnes  sunt 

ca  paces  hujus 

sermonis,  sed 

ii  quibus  datum 

est. 


c  cannot    re- 
ceive.' 


that  we  keep  his 
commandments: 
and    his   com- 
mandments are 
not  '  grievous.' 
(102) 


Ml  men  '  cannot 
receive'  this  say- 
ing, save  they  to 
whom  it  is  given-. 


(103) 

101.  A<r8eV(t)V,  *Ward  says,  "  they  corrupt  this  text,"  by  rendering  it  were  without  strength  ; 
"  to  defend  their  false  doctrine,  that  free  will  was  altogether  lost  by  Adam's  sin."  The  word  in  its 
primary  acceptation  implies,  according  to  the  Protestant  Translators,  <  privation  of  strength,'  and 
sometimes  '  of  all  strength  ;'  by  these  means,  they  very  properly  represented  the  fall  of  man  by  sin ; 
and  although  '  weak,'  be  admitted  as  fit  English,  the  former  interpretation  is  to  be  preferred.  But, 
were  the  preference  given  to  the  Rhemish  Translation,  yet  the  doctrine  of  free-will  could  not  be  thence 
deduced.  In  the  t first  Epistle  to  the  Corinthians,  in  the  +Epistle  to  the  Galatians,  and  in  §that  to 
the  Flebrews,  the  word  aw-Sew?,  signifies  that  which  is  so  weak  as  to  possess  no  strength.  According 
to  the  first  text,  the  dead  body  is  '  sown  in  weakness;'  in  which  it  cannot  be  said  that  any  ||strength 
exists.  In  the  second,  the  disused  ceremonies  of  the  Mosaic  law  are  termed  "  weak  (*^m)  and 
*  Errata,  page  77.  f  C.  xv.  v.  48.  +  C.  iv.  v.  9.  §  C.  vii.  v.  IS. 

||  "  Spiritualibus  donis  et  viribus  peaiitus  destituti  sumus,  sicut  cadaver  dicitur  eurSutt."     Annot.  Bez.  in  loc. 

N  2 


92         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

beggarly  elements;"  as  being  destitute  of  strength  for  the  justification  of  a  sinner;  and  in  the  last, 
the  commandment  of  the  Levitical  Priesthood  is  abolished,  (J»«  to  «*$««*)  on  account  of  its  "  weakness 
and  unprofitableness,"  without  Christ.  The  reader  will  perceive  from  a  comparison  of  the  text  in 
question,  with  the  parallel  passages,  that  free-will,  generally  speaking,  is  not  denied  to  men  ;  it  is  only 
the  impious  who  may  be  said  to  have  no  strength,  and  therefore  to  possess  no  freedom  of  will  unto 
£Ood,   inasmuch  as,  thev  are  dead  in  sin. 

# 

102.  BftpU£«  Although  this  word  signifies  '  heavy,'  yet  '  grievous,'  '  afflictive,'  &c.  is  the 
more  suitable  construction.  Ward  says,  "  to  this  purpose  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."  Such  is  the  conclusion  of  a  charge,  according  to  which  Protestants  "  have 
bereaved,  and  spoiled  man  of  his  free-will.""  Nothing,  surely,  can  be  more  distant  from  the  truth  than 
this :  for,  first  from  their  translation  of  the  text  belonging  to  this  number,  and  the  '(others  con- 
nected with  it,  it  cannot  be  inferred  that  free-will  is  denied  to  man.  Next,  in  several  parts  of  her 
liturgy,  this  doctrine  is  fully  set  forth  by  the  Church  of  England.  And  lastly,  in  Jone  of  her 
public  formularies,  and  by  her  earliest  ^Divines,  the  same  doctrine  is  clearly  and  explicitly  declared,  and 
the  due  value  set  on  human  exertions,  without  countenancing  that  spiritual  pride,  which  the  Popish, 
or  that  despondency  which  the  Calvinistic  interpretation  is  calculated  to  produce.  So  that  if  in  some 
cases,  a  little  indulgence  be  conceded  to  Ward  on  the  score  of  prejudice,  he  is  here  inexcuseable,  as  he 
makes  accusations,  which,  the  documents  adverted  to,  prove  to  be  no  less  false  than  impudent. 

j|St.  Luke  says,  the  yoke  of  the  law  is  such  a  '  burthen,"  as  neither  "  we,  nor  our  fathers," 
were  able  to  bear ;  so  the  commandments  are  not  grievous  to  him  who  is  "  born  of  God,"  and  who 
overcomes  the  world  by  faith  ;  that  is,  the  observance  of  them,  although  '  heavy '  and  burthensome 
to  a  good  man,  is  not  '  grievous,'  being  that  in  which  his  soul  delights.  In  the  ^[second  Epistle  to 
the  Corinthians,  where  both  the  Greek  and  Latin  are  the  same,  (viz.  B«§i»a»,  graves)  as  in  the  text 
under  consideration,  the  Rhemists  rendered  it  sore  ;  thus  "  his  Epistles  are  sore,"  or  weighty.  In 
effect,  however,  the  difference  is  very  inconsiderable  between  it  and  the  Protestant  translation. 

103.  Qy  TTctnsg  ^60p8(H.  To  judge  whether  '  cannot/  or  £  do  not,'  best  convey  the 
sense  of  the  passage,  see  the  observations  made  in  number  42,  where  Doctor  Milner's  opinion,  not 
less  than  Ward's,  viz.  "that  these  words  imply  the  possibility  of  all  men  leading  a  continent  life;" 
is  shewn  to  be  utterly  unfounded.  That  continency  proceeds  from  man's  free-will,  is  no  where  stated 
in  Scripture,  while  it  is  here,  and  in  other  texts,  mentioned  to  be  the  gift  of  God.  It  would  surely 
be  needless,  even  for  the  best  men,  to  ask  it  as  a  divine  favour,  if  they  could  impart  it  to  themselves, 
or  to  seek  that  from  without,  which  they  possessed  from  within.  Besides,  that  which  all  men  may 
obtain  by  ordinary  means,  cannot  be  called  a  speeial  g\(l;  that  is,  a  gift  proper  to  some,  which,  the 
words  "  to  whom  it  is  given,"  imply. 

*  Gravis,  odiosus.     Scap.   grievous,  oppressive.  Parkh. 
I  See  last  column  for  the  translation  of  atirStvm,  and  yu^vn.   Numbers  101,  103. 
+  "  Absque  gratia  Dei  nos  prxveniente,  ut  velimus,  et  cooperante,  dum  volumus,  &c."  Article   x. 
§  "  Neither  so  preach  the  grace  of  God,  as  thereby  to  take  away  free-will ;  nor,  on  the  other  side,  so  extol  free-will,  that 
injury  be  done  to  the  grace  of  God."     Cranmer's  Necessary  Erudition. 

||  Acts,  c.  xv.   v.  10.  y\  C.  x.  v.  10. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


93 


SECTION  XVI.— INHERENT  JUSTICE. 


Book.Ch.  Ver 


Horn.  V.  18. 


Ibid.  iv.   3. 


2  Cor.  v.  21. 


Orig.  Greek 


^£X    ovv    co$    oi 

jyi.oc.7Qt;    en;  Ttocv- 
rxt;    a.v$gco7rov;, 

£l;  XXTXX^i/J.X' 

'tjTW  xcti  o\  'ivot. 
6iy.oc.iuifj.xT0i  £».; 
fzxvjxt;  av§pu- 
7rst/5,  u<;0ixziu- 
tjiv    ^UTji;. 


Afc^aa/*    to 
3tw,    y.x*    iKo- 
yHT§r>    ocvtu)    lli 

hy.uiocvry*. 


'hx  *!u.fi5  yum- 

fj.t^X   OiKXlQOV- 
\/r>  0£«  it  uv-tu 


Vulgate  Text.  Rhemish Version. 


Igitur  sicuti  Therefore,  as 
per  unius  de-jby  the  offence 
lictum  inom-of  one,  unto 
nes  homines  all  men  to  con- 
in  condem-  :dem nation  :  so 
nationem:  sic  also,  by  thejus- 
et  per  uniusi  tice  of  one, 
justitiam  in  unto  all  men  to 
justification   of 


omnes  homi 

nes  in  justi 

ficationem 

V'itcL'. 


Credidit 

Abraham 

Deo,  et  repu- 

tatum  est  illi 

ad  justitiam. 


ut  nos  effice- 
rcmur    justi- 
tia  Dei  in 
ipso. 


life. 


Abraham  be- 
lieved God,  and 
it  was  reputed 
him  to  justice. 


that  we 
be    made     the 
justice  of  God 
in  him. 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


Nempe  igitur 
sicut  'perunam 
offensam  '  rea 
tusvenit  in  om 
nes  homines  ad 

condemna- 

tionem  :  ita 
c  per  unam  jus 
tificationem' £e 
nejicium  redun 
davit  in  omnes 
homines  ad  jus 

tificationem 
vita3. 

Mont.  l  per 
unam  offensam, 

&c. 
1  per  unam  jus- 

tificationem.' 

Credidit  autem 

Abraham  us 

Deo,  et  impu- 

tatum  est  ei  ad 

justitiam. 


might  ut  nos  efficere- 


mur    justitia 
Dei  in  eo. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568 


Likewise  then 
as  by  the  of 
fence    of    one, 

the  fault  came 
on    all  men, 

&c. 
so   the  '  bene 
fit   aboundeth ' 

to   all    men, 
&c. 


It  was  reputed 
to  him  'for  jus- 
tice.' 


'  righteous- 
nesss,1  &c. 


K.Jamcs'sBibleitiii 


Therefore  as  by 
the  offence  of  one 
judgment  came* 
upon  all  men  to 
condemnation; 
even  so  by  the 
righteousness   of 
one  the  free  gift 
came  upon   all 
men  unto  justifi- 
cation of  life. 


(104) 

Abraham   be- 
lieved God,  and  it 
was  counted  unto 
him   for    *  right- 
eousness.' 


(105) 


That  we  might 
be  made  '  the 
righteousness '  of 
God  in  him. 


(106) 


1)4        A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

104.  *Ward,  in  noticing  the  construction  given  to  this  text  by  the  Protestant  Translators,  animad- 
verts on  their  unwillingness,  "  to  suffer  the  Holy  Scripture  to  speak  in  be-half  of  inherent  justice." 
He  repeats  neatly  the  same  charge  in  each  of  the  five  succeeding  numbers.  What  ignorance  and 
presumption!  rlhe  English  f  version  to  which  he  objects,  is  more  explicit,  and  at  the  same  time, 
comes  nearer  to  the  original  than  the  Popish  one  ;  neither  in  this  instance,  does  this  uphold,  or  that 
deny  justice. 

"  Beza's  false  translation,  you  pee,"  continues  he,  "  our  English  Bibles  follow,  and  have  added  no 
fewer  than  six  words  in  this  one  verse/'  The  reader  will  perceive  that  the  verse  is  elliptical,  and 
requires  its  sense  to  be  completed  from  a  preceding  one,  viz.  the  15th,  to  which  it  must  be  referred 
for  explanation.  No  word,  therefore,  has  been  added,  which  has  not  been  conducive  to  this  end. 
But,  instances  are  not  wanting  of  additions  being  made  in  the  Rhemish  New  Testament,  which  are 
not  authorised  by  the  Vulgate,  and  even  where  tiie  sense  does  not  require  it ;  as  '  after  some  days/ 
for  post  dies ;  "  in  all  his  goods,"  for  in  omnibus  bonis.  Lastly,  in  the  Jfirst  Epistle  to  the  Corin- 
thians, they  give  eleven  English  for  four  Latin  words  :  "  I  did  away  the  things  that  belonged  to  a  little 
one/'  for  evacucrci  qua,  erant  parvuli,  &c.  And  yet  it  were  well,  that  it  could  be  found  fault  with 
only  for  supplying  such  or  such  words,  in  passages  which  absolutely  required  them,  or  where  they  did 
not  in  any  degree  affect  the  sense  of  Scripture. 

105.  ^EXoyurSYI  CLVTW  Sig.  Ward  alleges  that  the  Protestant  Translators  added  <  for  ' 
to  .the  text,  that  they  might  take  "  away  true  inherent  justice,  even  in  Abraham  himself."  Not  only 
St.  Paul,  in  the  present  instance,  but  ||St.  James,  in  a  parallel  passage,  uses  the  preposition  us,  which 
signifies  '  into,'  or  '  for.'  This  translation  only  declares  that  Abraham  was  not  justified  by  works,  i.  e. 
by  <  justice  inherent ;'  but  by  faith  which  embraced  the  mercy  of  God  in  the  promised  seed,  in  which 
he,  and  all  the  nations  of  the  earth,  should  be  blessed.  Independently  of  this,  there  was  nothing  in 
Abraham  which  God  accounted  for  justice. 

"  But  let  them  remember,"  says  Ward,  «  that  the  Scripture  usjss  to  speak  of  sin  and  justice 
alike;  repulabitur  tibi  in  peccatum,  as  St.  Hierom  translates  it.  If* then  justice  only  be  reputed, 
sin  also  is  only  reputed,  if  sin  be  in  us  indeed,  justice  is  in  us  indeed."  Now  although  Jerome 
adopted  the  verb  reputor  in  his  version,  the  -[[original  by  no  means  warrants  it;  for,  according  to  it, 
the  verb  substantive  would  have  been  more  appropriate.  It  is  true,  sin  is  inherent,  and  so  would 
perfect  **  justice,  if  men  could  observe  all  the  commandments  of  God.  It  was  not,  therefore,  this 
single  instance  of  feith  in  Abraham  recorded  by  Moses,  but  the  Whabkual  exercise  of  it,  that  "  was 
counted  unto  him  for  righteousness ;"  yet,  it  was  so  only  by  the  grace  of  God,  through  Jesus'  Christ,  that 
is,  on  account  of  what  Christ  did  to  obtain  for  him  that  favour.  HGomarus  says,  «  Legaliter  enim, 
non  est  Justus,   qui  unum  actum  justitias  fecit,   sed  tantum  qui  manserit  in  omnibusr     This  is  the 

*  Errata,  page  79.  f  Viz.  Rom.  c.  v.  v.  IS.  ♦  C.  xiii.  v.  1 1. 

§  Ary^/xa,  implies  as  well  '  to  state  an  account,'  as  '  to  value.'     Parkh.  ||  C.  ii.  v.  23. 

%  -  m  Deut.  c.  xxiii.  v.  21.     Pagninus  renders  this  Hebrew  word,  et  erit ;  which  translation  Montanus  approves. 

**  See  Deut.  c.  vi.  v.  25.  ff  Gal.  c.  iii.  v.  10. 

ti  Vid.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  95 

Uniform  doctrine  of  Scripture  on  this  point,  as  is  elaborately  stated  by  Macknight  in  his  commentary 
on  the  Epistles. 

But,  concludes  Ward,  u  the  ^Hebrew  rp-r*  ib  rnvm  should  not  be  so  translated,  (viz.  for,  or  instead 
of  justice,  as  the  English  Bibles  have  it)  especially  when  they  meant  it  was  so  counted,  or  reputed 
for  justice,  that  it  was  not  justice  indeed."  It  has  been  already  remarked,  that  SS.  Paul  and  James, 
interpret  the  passage  with  the  preposition  ik;  which  circumstance  should  be  a  guide  to  all  other  exposi- 
tors, as  to  the  sense  they  attach  to  it.  Thus  it  appears  that  the  Protestant  Translators  have  in  this 
instance  also  faithfully  executed  their  trust;  while  Ward,  in  setting  down  their  translation  as  erro- 
neous, must  have  been  radically  ignorant  or  the  subject  on  which  he  treated;  to  say  the  least  of  it, 
he  was  rather  led  on  under  the  influence  of  a  blind  and  devoted  zeal,  than  by  the  dictates  of  an 
honest  judgment.  It  is  proper  to  remark  that  he  has  misquoted  the  Douay  translation  of  the  fore- 
going text  of  Genesis  ;  a  practice  no  way  unusual  with  him. 

106.    /^I'fiCLlOT'JVT^     Righteousness   and  justification   (which,  in  a  preceding   number,   were 
observed   to  be  convertible  terms)  of  God,  in  St.  Paul's  style,  always  signifies  the  righteousness  of 
faith   in  Christ,  dying  or  shedding  his  blood  for  men.     tWard  condemns  this  exposition  as  heretical ; 
his  words  are,  "  though  their  latter  Bibles  have  undertaken  to  correct  some  texts,  yet  their  heresy 
would  not  suffer  them  to  amend  also  the  word  righteousness.     It  is  death  to  them  to  hear  of  justice." 
There  is  not  a  text  in  Scripture  more  decidedly  against  justification  by  inherent  justice  than  this  very 
one  in  question.     For  when  faith  is  accounted  for  '  righteousness,'  or  '  justice,'  it  becomes,  through 
the   grace  of  God,  and  the  merits  of  Christ's  death,  the  means,  because  it  is  the  appointed  condition 
of  justification  ;  and,   consequently,    the  reward  conferred,  does  not  arise  on  account  of  a  man's  own 
works  or  deservings,  or  of  any  justice  inherent  in  him.     Such   is  the   meaning   of  the  Apostles,  and 
such  is  the  language  of  the  Greek  and  Latin   Fathers  of  the  primitive  ages.       It  accords,  too,  with 
the  '^concise  declaration  which   the  Church  of  England  sets  forth  in  her  eleventh  Article,  as  well  as 
with  the  fuller  explanation  given  by  her  in  the  §homily  on  salvation,  to  which  a  reference  is  here  made. 
Let  it   be  observed,  that  although    this  homily  was  drawn  up  in  opposition  to  the  Papistical  notions 
respecting  inherent  justice,  or  the  merit  of  works,  yet  it   equally  guards  against  the  Calvinistic  sup- 
position that  faith   is   the  meritorious  cause  of  salvation.     It  runs  thus  :    "  The  true  understanding  of 
this   doctrine,   we  be  justified  freely  by  faith  without  works,  or  that  we  be  justified  by  faith  in  Christ 
only,  is  not,  that  this  our  own  act  to  believe  in  Christ,  or  this  our  faith  in  Christ  which  is  within  us, 
doth  justify  us,  (for  that  were  to  count  ourselves  to  be  justified  by  faith  by  some  act  or  virtue  that  is 
within  ourselves;)  but  the  true  understanding  and  meaning  thereof  is,  that  although  we  hear  God's 
word  and  believe  it;    although   we  have  J  ait  h,    hope,  charity,   repentance,    dread   and  j  ear  of  God 
within  ns,  and  do  never  so  many  good  ivories  thereunto ;  yet  we   must   renounce  the  merit   of  all    our 
said  virtues  of  faith,  hope,  and  charity,  and  all  other  virtues  and  good  dads,  which  we  either  have  done, 
shall  do,  or  can  do,  as  things  that  be  far  too  weak,  and  insufficient,  and  imperfect,  to  deserve  remission 
of  our  sins  and  our  justification. 

*  Gen.  c.  xv.  v.  6.  f  Errata,  page  79. 

+   "  Tantum  propter   meritum  Domini,  ac  Servatoris  nostri  Jesu  Christi,   per  fidem,  r.on  propter  opera  et  merita  nostra, 
justi  coram  Deo  reputamur."     Article  xi. 

§  See  Third  Homily,  Second  Part,  p.  22. 


06         A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


Book.  Ch.Vcr 


Epb.  i.  6\ 


Dan.  vi.   22. 


Rom.  iv.  6. 


O  rig.  Greek. 


Eli  r,  tyccpiTuiTii 


'Otj   xecrtvccni 

ccvtov   cvBmr,c 

EI'£e9*   E/X9J. 


/A.xy.cioia'f/.oy  rov 

tX.V"jpW7tliV,  'u    c 

Seu;  Aoyi^£T«» 


Vulgate  Text. 


In  qua  grati 

ficavit  nos  in 

dilecto  filio 

suo. 


Quia    coram 

eo  justitia  in- 

venta  est  in 

me. 


Sicut  et  Da 
vid  dicit  bea 

titudinem 

hominis,    cui 

Deus  accepto 

fert  justitiam 

sine  operi- 

bus. 


R] 


\\ 


leinisii  v  ersion. 


Wherein   he 
hath  gratified 
us   in    his   be- 
loved Son. 
Others   read 
'  graced  us,' &c. 


Because  before 

him  justice  was 

found  in  me. 


As  David  also 
termeth    the 
blessedness  of 

a  man,  to  whom 
God  repute th 

justice  without 
works. 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


Qua  nos  gratis 

sibi  acceptos  ef 

fecit;  in    illo 

dilecto. 
Mont,  too, 
omits    '  Jilio 
suo.' 


Mont,   ren- 
ders   m    (Lxx 
vSwm;)     by  pit- 
vitas. 


Bps.  Bible,  15G8 


'  made  us   ac- 
cepted,' 8cc. 


Sicut    etiam 
David  de- 
clarat    beatum 
eum  hominem, 
cui  Deus  impu 
tat  justitiam 
absque 
operibus. 

Mont,  impu- 
tat. 


1  my  justice  was 
found  out.' 


as  David   i  de- 
scribeth,'  &c. 

unto  whom 
God    imputeth 

*  righteous- 
ness.' 


K.James'sBibleiGu 


Wherein  he  hath 
'  made  us  accept- 
ed '    in    the    be- 
loved. 


(107) 

Forasmuch  as  be- 
fore   him  c  inno- 
cency '  was  found 
in    me. 


(108) 


Even  as  David 
also  '  describeth ' 
the  blessedness  of 
the    man    unto 
whom    God    im- 
puteth righteous- 
ness  without 
works. 


(109) 


107.    Hya7n}^t£l/W.  Although  the  word  v»«  be  not  in  the  original,  yet  Protestant  commenta- 
tors have  always  considered    '  beloved,'   as  applicable  only  to  the  '  Son.'     But  *Ward,  who  will  not 
allow  their  language  to  convey  the  meaning  intended  by  them,  declares  it  to  be  quite  the  reverse  •   for 
that  by  "  accepted  in  the  beloved,  they  seem  inclined  to  say,  that  in,  or  among  all  the  beloved  in  the 


*  Errata,  page  78. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1C1I.  ^ 

world,  God  has  only  accepted  us  ;  as  they  make  the  angel  in  St.  Luke  say  to  our  blessed  lady:  "  hail  ! 
freely  beloved,  to  take  away  all  grace  inherent  and  resident  in  the  blessed  virgin,  or  in  us.''  This  is 
such  a  perversion  of  the  Protestant  interpretation,  that  it  would  be  but  a  waste  of  time  to  say  much 
about  it.  To  say  that  the  blessed  virgin  was  '  freely  accepted/  or  freely  beloved  by  God's  grace  and 
favour,  in,  and  through  his  beloved  Son,  by  no  means  implies  a  diminution  of  the  gracious  gifts 
which  were  imparted  to  her  most  abundantly,  and  to  us  in  an  inferior  degree.  It  is,  surely,  a  most 
extraordinary  thing,  th.it  the  Popish  Doctors  should  ever  lose  sight  of  Christ,  when  they  speak  of 
justice  before  God. 

St.  Chrysostom,  whom  Ward  quotes  as  advocating  the  doctrine  of  inherent  justice,  is  misrepre- 
sented in  a  shameful  manner.  That  Father's  meaning  amounts  to  this,  that  the  virtues  by  which  the 
soul  is  inwardly  endued  and  beautified,  are  not  the  cause  why  men  are  justified  before  God  ;  but  that 
this  ariseth  from  'his  mercy  through  Christ,  for  whose  sake  he  accepts  this  imperfect  holiness,  and  re- 
wards it  with  everlasting  glory.  There  is  nothing  in  all  this  of  justification  on  account  of  virtues,  and 
good  qualities,   inherent  in  men. 

108.  *"12t  This  is  adduced  as  another  "falsification"  of  the  Protestant  Translators,  with  the 
design  of  taking  away  inherent  justice,  which  was  in  Daniel."  The  lxx,  it  may  be  seen,  adopt  the 
word  !i£yT»K  as  best  conveying  the  meaning  of  the  Hebrew  word  ;  while  Montanus  prefers  puritas,  as 
its  translation,  to  the  Vulgate  reading  justitia.  But  'justitia'  is  not  the  only  word  in  the  text  from 
which  the  Popish  commentators  infer  this  doctrine,  since  they  likewise  derive  it  ffom  quia,  as  if  that 
word  were  always  used  as  a  cau>al  conjunction,  t  One  of  Pole's  annotators  clearly  points  out  the 
error  of  supposing  it  to  denote  a  meritorious  cause.  To  return,  however,  to  the  words  of  the  pro- 
phet. In  tone  place  he  says,  "  we  dn  not  present  our  supplications  before  thee,  for  our  righteousness  :" 
thus  he  more  than  intimates,  that  he  does  not  speak  of  his  own  justice,  or  righteousness,  as  he 
expressly,  and  wi.h  peculiar  eloquence,  entirely  disclaims  it.  In  §another. place  it  is  equally  apparent, 
that  he  did  not  speak  of  any  virtue  inherent  in  himself.  "  But  as  for  me,  this  secret  is  not  revealed 
to  me,  for  any  wisdom  that  I  have  more  than  any  living."  Moreover,  how  could  the  justice,  or 
innocency,  which  was  in  Daniel,  diminish,  as  Ward  insinuates,  aught  of  that  which  was  in  Christ  ; 
and  which  justified  him,  and  all  righteous  men,  in  the  sight  of  God.  Hence  it  appears,  that  the  text 
connected  with  the  foregoing  number,  does  not,  as  the  Popish  Doctors  infer,  give  any  countenance 
to  the  doctrine  of  inherent  justice. 

]0Q.  AsySl.  "It  must  needs,"  says  Ward,  "  be  a  spot  of  the  same  infection,  that  they 
translate  describeth  here,  as  though  imputed  righteousness  (for  so  they  had  rather  say,  than  justice) 

*  Puritas,  Buxtori'.        Innocency.   Parkh. 
f  "  Hinc  Papistae  justitiam  operum  et  merita  colligunt,  ex  voce  quia,  et  quod  causam  hie  red  Jit  liberations.     Veium  non 
?ausam  hie  notat  meritoriam,  sed  occasionalem."     Vid.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc. 

}  Lxx.  Vers.  Ot*  «k  ctsi  t«k  hxccuxrvvxn;  rijAun.  Dan.  c.  ix.  v  18.  Pulanus  veil  observes  in  his  comments  on  this  text  : 
"  opponit  Daniel  merita  hominum  et  inisericordiam  Dei,  ut  satis  declaret  hsec  simul  esse  non  posse,  r.ec  mngis  conjungi  posse 
quam  aquam  cum  igtie."    Ibidem. 

§  Otx  u  <ro£.a  t»j  aci\  tt  t^oi  ir»^x  nanas  t»$  ^vra^.  Lxx.  Vers,    Dan.  C.  ii.  V.  30. 

O 


98 


A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE   CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


were  the  description  of  blessedness."  Surely,  what  St.  Paul  says  of  the  righteousness  imputed  by 
God,  is  nothing  but  a  description  of  mans  happiness.  The  verb  Uy*>,  is,  strictly  speaking,  '  to  say,' 
'  to  pronounce;'  nor  is  any  thing  meant  by  the  word  "  described!,'"  but  that  David  sets  forth  or  pro- 
nounces the  blessedness  of  man.  To  say  the  least  of  it,  "  describeth  "  comes  as  near  the  Greek 
*tyi« ;  as  '  termeth  '  does  the  Latin  word  (licit.  Besides,  the  latter  English  version  of  the  word  signi- 
fies to  define,  as  much  as  the  former.  Hence  it  is  concluded,  that  they  only  are  happy,  they  only 
are  saved,  who  are  justified  by  grace,  and  not  on  the  ground  of  merit;  and  that,  through  the  remis- 
sion of  sins,  the  ungodly  are  justified  according  to  grace,  and  that  their  faith,  when  productive- of  good 
works,  is  accounted  unto  them  for  righteousness.  It  may,  then,  be  fairly  presumed,  that  no  candid 
judge  will  declare,  that  the  one  translation  countenances,  or  that  the  other  discountenances,  the  doc- 
trine of  'inherent  justice.' 


SECTION  XVII.— SUFFICIENCY  OF  FAITH  ALONE. 


Book.  Ch.Ver 


Heb.  x.'  22. 


Orig.  Greek. 


1  Cor.  xiii.  c2. 


Ibid.  xii.  31 


Jam. 


ii.  22. 


Katt   ictv  iyw 
vxe-eev  Tint  7r»riv 

►  ElV,    &C. 


Vulgate  Text. 


Rhemish  Version. 


WiTK   <7V>r,py£i 

UVTU. 


in  plenitu- 
line  ridei. 


Et  si  habuero 

omnem   fi- 

dem    ita     ut 

montes 

transferam, 

&c. 


Et  ad  line 

excellentio- 

rem  viam  vo- 

bis  demon- 

stro. 


Vides  quo- 

niam  fides  co- 

operabatur 

operibus 

illius. 


in  fulness  of 
faith. 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


certa  persua- 
sione  fidei. 


And  if  I  should  Et    si    habeam 
have   all    faith,    totam  fi<jem 

so  that  I  could  a(ico  ut  montes 
remove   moun-    transferam, 
tains.    &lc.  &c# 


Bps.  Bible.  1563.  K.James'sBiblei6ii 


'  in   assurance, 
&c. 


*c  whole  faith,' 
&c. 


And  yet  I  shew 

you  a  more  ex 

cellent  way. 


Seest  thou  that 
faiih  did  work 
with  his  works 


Et   porro     iter 
ad  excel lentiam 
vobis  indicabo. 
Mont,  secun- 
dum execikn- 
tiam. 

Vides  fidem  ad 

minisfram 

fuisse  opcrum 

ipsius. 


*a  way  '  to  ex 
cellency.' 


in  full  assurance' 
of  faith. 

(110) 

And  though   I 
have   '  all'  faith, 
so  that    I    could 
remove  moun- 
tains. 

(Ill) 


\nd   yet  I  shew 

unto  you  a  more 

excellent '  way. 


*  that  faith  'was 
a  helper'  of  his 
works. 


(112) 


Seest  thou  how 
aith  '  wrought  ' 
with  his  works. 


(115) 


Marked  thus  *  icere  altered  to  their  present  reading  A.D.  16  J ! 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


VO 


is 


* 
110.  HXr\pO<pOQlCL.  tWard  says,  "all  other  means  of  salvation  being  thus  taken  away, 
their  only  and  last  refuge  is  faith  a/oner  How  sadly  is  the  Church  of  England  here  maligned.  Her 
sentiments  respecting  this  particular  subject,  are,  that  not  only  'faith  alone,'  but  even  when  it 
productive  of  good  works,  is  insufficient  and  imperfect  to  deserve  the  remission  of  a  man's  sins,  and 
ins  justification.  So  inestimable  a  benefit  can  only  flow  from  the  fountain  of  divine  mercy,  through 
ttie  merits  of  a  crucified  Saviour.  This  exposition  shews  to  what  extent  faith  by  itself  is  effectual; 
in  it  is  nothing  of  what  Ward  calls  a  "  special  faith,"  according  to  which,  he  says,  every  man  con- 
siders himself  as  "  the  Son  of  God,  and  one  of  the  elect  predestined  to  salvation." 

It  is  with  more  than  ordinary  satisfaction,  that  reference  is  again  made  to  the  last  and  ablest  pro- 
duction of  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  for  the  purpose  of  removing  such  foul  calumny.  The  work  of  this 
distinguished  prelate  cannot  be  too  highly  appreciated  by  every  sincere  friend  of  the  established  Church, 
as  it  comprehends,  in  its  fullest  extent,  the  clearest  and  most  convincing  arguments  in  defence  of  that 
perfect  form  of  sound  doctrine  which  she  inculcates  ;  and  as  it  is,  in  very  truth,  the  standard  of  orthodoxy 
itself.  As  it  is  not  only  desirable  to  vindicate  the  Protestant,  but  likewise  to  disabuse  the  Papist,  the 
following  passage  is  cited  from  it :  "  JThe  expressions  of  faith  only,  and  faith  without  works,  were 
not  intended  to  exclude  the  necessity  of  works,  as  the  condition  of  salvation."  §  Again,  "  our 
Reformers  excluded  the  merit  of  faith,  as  well  as  the  merit  of  works;  but  they  were  particularly 
anxious,  upon  every  occasion,  to  exclude  the  pretended  merit  of  works,  as  being  the  grand  pillar  which 
supported  the  Church  of  Rome." 

Ward  goes  on  to  say,  "  for  maintaining  this  heresy,  they  force  the  Greek  text  to  express  the 
very  word  of  assurance,  and  certainty,  thus;  in  full  assurance  of  faith.11  The  propriety  of  the  Eng- 
lish given  by  the  Protestant  Translators,  is  confirmed  by  the  best  Lexicons;  besides,  it  varies  from 
that  of  the  Rhemists  in  so  trifling  a  degree,  that  the  controverted  point  will  be  decided  in  a  manner 
as  soon  by  '  fulness,'  the  word  adopted  by  them,  as  by  *  full  assurance.' 

But  he  observes,  "  the  Apostle  joins  the  word  sometimes  with  faith,  sometimes  with  hope, 
and  sometimes  with  knowledge,  to  signify  the  fulness  of  all  three."  Very  true,  St.  Paul  does  so;  for 
why  should  there  not  be  a  certain  assurance  of  hope  and  knowledge,  as  well  as  of  faith  ?  Indeed,  the 
assurance  of  hope  depends  upon  the  assurance  of  faith,  which,  in  its  turn,  rests  on  that  of  knowledge. 
Jerome  himself  renders  \\7r^o(pD^M;  plenissime  sciens,  and  the  Rhemists,  "  most  fully  knowing," 
which,  as  it  signifies  more  than  <  fulness,'  is  going  somewhat  farther  than  what  Ward  desired. 

"  The  Greek  Fathers,"  llhe  says,  "  expound  the  text,  of  the  fulness  of  faith."  This  is  not  the 
case,  as  will  appear  by  quoting,  first,  Ignatius's  words:  "  **The  Church  of  God  the  Father,  being  fully 
assured  in  faith  and  love  :"     and  next  those  of  Basil,  "  ttto  the  full  assurance  of  the  good."    To  the 

*  "  Full  of  conviction  or  assurance."     Parkh.  t  Errata,  page  81. 

X  See  Refutation  of  Calvinism,  C.  iii.  page  153. 
§  Ibidem.  |]  Romans,  civ.  v.  21. 

5[  Errata,  page  81. 

■■*   F.XK^cna  Sf«  •ni'ffhr,p<$Q£/;pm  u  ?nj-«  xai  ayuiry.      IGNAT.  Epist.  ad  SmjT. 

■[f  EisnMgQipcPiM  pit  7ura.yx$wft  Sic.     Basil.  H?ix,  xxvi. 


o 


100        A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

same  effect  Chrysostom  writes  In  the  same  sense  it  is  understood  in  the  Bibiiotheca  Sacra  MargarL. ; 
*"  fully  instructed  in  faith  and  charity,  I  have  known  you  absolutely  perfect,  in  a  stedfast  faith." 

It  will  not  now,  surely,  be  questioned,  that  the  charge  of  misconstruction,  respecting  the  word 
nXvroQ^z,  against  the  Protestant  Translators,  is  as  ill-founded  as  any  preferred  by  Ward,  in  his  cata- 
logue of  Errata. 

111.  112.  The  Protestant  version  has  been  conformed  to  the  Rhemish  one,  as  in  the  texts 
corresponding  with  these  numbers,  when  grounds  sufficient  to  warrant  such  a  procedure  appeared 
to  exist.  In  observing  this  rule,  however,  the  English  Translators  could  only  be  said  to  be  partially 
guided  by  the  Vulgate,  (whence  the  Rhemish  Version  is  derived,)  and  in  a  certain  degree,  to  have  made 
it  auxiliary  to  their  undertaking.  Their  conduct,  in  this  particular,  most  .strongly  evinces  their  impartiality 
and  candour,  and  the  spirit  of  truth  by  which  they  were  actuated. 

1 13.  ^VVTipyBl,  This  number  might  have  been  joined  with  the  two  immediately  preceding,  as 
the  remarks  made  on  them  apply  to  it,  but  that  Ward  has  made  an  observation,  which  requires  to  be 
distinctly  noticed.  "  It  is,"  lie  says,  "  an  impudent  handling  of  Scripture,  to  make  works  the  fruit 
only,  and  effect  of  faith  ;  which  is  their  heresy."  If  it  be  a  heresy,  it  is  one  of  that  description,  the 
foundation  of  which  is  laid  in  the  Apostle's  words:  viz.  t"  seest  thou  how  faith  wrought  with  his  works, 
and  by  works  was  faith  made  perfect  ?"  Works  are  aptly  said  to  spring  from  faith,  as  the  fruit  from  a 
tree;  for  if  the  fruit  be  good,  they  prove  the  tree  to  be  so  :  therefore,  the  life  of  justification  is  faith, 
and  its  fruits  are  good  works.  Thus,  after  Abraham  was  justified  by  faith,  which  "  was  counted  to  him 
for  righteousness"  his  faith  wrought  with  works.  "  A  godly  faith,"  says  tAugustin,  "  will  not  be 
without  hope  and  charity."  And  Bede  on  this  text  observes  ;  "  a  good  life  is  inseparable  from  faith 
which  worketh  by  love."  Protestants,  like  those  Fathers,  conclude  that  justifying  faith  is  never  with- 
out good  works.  For  as  it  is  expressed  in  the  §homily,  quoted  in  the  preceding  Section,  "  as  great  and 
as  godly  a  virtue  as  the  lively  faith  is,  yet  it  putteth  us  from  itself,  and  remitteth  or  appointeth  us  unto 
Christ,  for  to  have  only  by  him  remission  of  our  sins,  or  justification."  II  Again  :  "  we  put  our  faith  in 
Christ,  that  we  be  justified  by  him  only."  If  some  of  the  Reformers  laid  such  stress  on  those  pas- 
sages in  Scripture,  in  which  it  is  said  that  Christians  are  justified  by  faith  only,  as  to  afford  their 
adversaries  reason  to  charge  them  with  denying  the  necessity  of  Good  Works,  their  chief  object  was 
to  persuade  the  people  to  believe  in  Christ,  and  not  in  the  Church  ;  yet  11"  they  all  taught,  that  though 
good  works  were  not  necessary  to  justification,  yet  they  were  necessary  to  salvation.  They  differed, 
also,  from  the  Papists  in  their  notion  of  Good  Works:  the  Church  of  Rome  taught,  that  the 
honour  done  to  God  in  his  images,  or  to  the  Saints  in  their  shrines  and  relics,  or  to  the  priests,  were 
the  best  sort  of  good  works  ;  whereas  the  Reformers  pressed  justice  and  mercy  most,  and  discovered 
the  superstition  of  the  other.  The  opinion  of  the  merit  of  Good  Works  was  also  so  highly  raised, 
that  many  thought  they  purchased  heaven  by  them.  This  the  Reformers  did  also  correct,  and  taught 
the  people  to  depend  merely  upon  the  death  and  intercession  of  Christ." 

*  pier.e  instruct!  in  fide,  et  charitate,  et  cognovi  vos  absolute  perfectos  in  fide  stabili.     Bib.  Sac  Marg. 

|  Japes,  c   ii.  v.  2'2.  +  De  fide  et  oper.  cap.  xxiii. 

i>  Homily  on  Salvation,  Second  Part.  ||  Ibid.  Third  Part.  II  See  Burnet's  Abridgment. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  Jfill 


10} 


Book.  Ch.Ver 


Luke  xviii. 
14. 


Orig.  Greek 


7rifi?  an  cricruxi 


Mark  v.  34.  *  w*r««  <™  <n- 

<TMXB   171, 


Ibid.  x.  52. 


id. 


Vuljrate  Text. 


respice,   fides 
tua  tesalvum 

fecit. 


Fides  tua  te 
salvum  fecit, 


id. 


Rhemish  Version 


receive    thy 
sight;  thy  faith 
hath  made  thee 
whole. 


Thy  faith  hat! 
made  thee  safe 

N.  B,    In 
some  editions, 

"  whole.'' 


"  made   thee 

safe." 
According   to 
others,  "  made 
thee  tvhole? 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


recipito  visum  : 
fides  tua  te  ser 

vavit. 
Mont,  ser  va- 
vit te. 


Fides    tua    te 
servavit. 


Pp<.  Bible,  15GS.;K.Jainr.s*sBiIiIei^ij 


id. 


thy    faith    hall:  receive  thv  si^ht  : 
•  saved  '    thee,  j   thy  faith   hath 
saved  tb.ee. 


(114) 


*hath    c   saved'   Thy  faith  hath 
thee.'         made  thee  whole 


(115) 


*hath   '  saved  i    Thv  faith  hath 
thee.'  made  thee  whole. 


Marked  thus  *  were  altered  to  their  present  reading  J.  D.  16'1 1 


(M6) 


114.  %S<rcrtZS.  Ward  says,  "  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  in- 
sinuate their  justification  by  faith  only."'  Such  a  declaration  could  only  spring  from  a  wilful  perversion 
of  the  truth,  or  the  most  consummate  ignorance.  Protestant  expositors  understand  by  "saved,"  a  *ture 
being  effected,  cured  :  and  do  not  at  all  refer  it  to  the  eternal  salvation  of  the  soul.  In  this  respect 
they  but  follow  the  translators  themselves,  who  indifferently  used  the  words  «  healing,'  J  making  safe  ' 
and  '  making  whole.'  It  therefore  amounts  to  the  same  thing,  whether  the  phrase  be  "  thv  faith  hath 
saved  thee"  or  "  thy  faith  hath  made  thee  whole." 

1 15.  1  lo\  The  texts  connected  with  these  numbers  are  rendered  alike  in  both  'he  Protestant  and 
Rhemish  Versions;  that  circumstance,  however,  is  not  sufficient  to  prevent  the  imputation  of  error 
being  thrown  on  the  former. 

"  To  conclude,"    says  Ward,  "  I  will  refer  any  Protectant  Solifidian  to  the  words  of  St.  James  the 
Apostle,  where  he  will  find,  that  faith  alone  without  works  cannot  save  him.*'     The  eleventh  of  the 
xxxix  articles,  and  the  homily  on  t  justification,  independently  of  every  other  document,  while  they  ex 
press  the  sense  of  the  Church  of  England  on  this  head,  are  the  best  refutation    of  such   censure   it 
being  not  less  contemptible  than  false. 


*  See  Clarke's  Paraph,   on  Luke,  c.   xviii.  v    -42. 
t  The  Third  Homily  is  generally,  although  improperly,  so  called. 


02        A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS-,   WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

SECTION  XVIII.— -APOSTOLIC  TRADITIONS. 


B.mk  Ch.Ver, 


C  Thess.  ii 

15. 


Orig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text.   Rhemish Version.  Bezn\s  LutinText  Bps.  Bible,  1568, 


K$xr:-m  rx;      renete     tlildi 

i  t 

hones,  qaas 

didicistis.sive 
per  sermo- 

nem,  sive  per 

epistolam 

nostram. 


tO\OCC-/(f!rlTi      £ITE 

j\a*cytf,  tin  6i 


Ibid.  iii.  6. 


K«» 

fjt.fi    xccra, 

rr,v 

Tra^ah.r  u 

1)1/ 

r-^,c\  ... 

rra.^      rij>.u,). 

hold  the  tradi-j  retinete    tradi-j*'  ordinances. 

tions  which  Itam  dcctrinam. 
you  have  learn-    quam   edocti 
ed,   whether  itestis,    sive    per 


be   by    word 

or  by 
our  epistle. 


Et  non    se     And    not   ac- 

eundum    tra  cording  to  the 

ditionein,     tradition,  which 

quam  they  have 

acceperunt  a  received  of  us. 

nobis. 


i  Cor.  xi.  ':,  ]**»  xa6fc.'?T««-  et   sicut  tra- 
w^VW  didi  vobis, 

rccftzociriH;    y.a-t 

TfFf,       priecepta  niea 

tenetis. 


sermonem, 
sive  per  episto 
am  nostram. 


Et  non  ex  tra 
dita  doctrina 
quam  accepit 
a  nobis. 


'instruction. 


and  as  I    have;et  sicut  tradidi 
delivered    unto    vobis,    tradi 
you,   you  keep  tiones  retinetis. 

my  '  precepts.' 


N.  B.  Some 
j  editions  have 
!   '  ordinances' 


Mont. 
'  traditiones. ' 


ordinances.' 


K.James'sBible  iGn 


hold  the  '  tradi- 
tions '  which  ye 
have  been  taught, 
whether  by  word 
or  our  epistle. 


(117) 


And  not  after  the 
tradition  which  he 
received  of  us. 


(118) 


and  keep  the  '  or- 
dinances' as  I  de- 
livered them  to 
you. 


(»19) 


Marked  thus  *  icere  altered  to  their  present  reading  A.  D.  1611. 

1 17-  118.  Uapx^OTig.  As  the  Protestant  Translators  in  1611,  conformed  the  English  trans- 
lation of  this  term  to  that  of  the  Rhemists,  it  would  have  been  unnecessary  to  say  a  word,  but  for 
an  observation  made  by  Ward.  «  A  general  mark,"  *he  says,  «  wherewith  all  heretics  that  have 
ever  disturbed  God's  Church,  have  been  branded,  is,  to  reject  apostolical  traditions,  and  to  fly  to  the 

*  Errata,  page  83. 


OF  THC  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IX  i,;ii  m 

Scripture."  This  is  the  sort  of  language  held  by  Doctor  Milner,  Mr.  Fletcher,  and  every  other 
Popish  writer  of  the  present  day.  The  Scripture  with  them  is  nothing  but  a  dead  letter,  a  mere  noti. 
entity,  compared  with  their  traditions,  and  the  living  speaking  authority  of  their  Church.  Nothing 
surely  can  be  conceived  more  absurd  than  this  opinion  of  theirs.  For  what  can  be  a  fitter  criterion 
by  which  to  determine  a  disputed  point,  than  the  written  word  of  (iod  ? 

That  the  tradition  spoken  of  by  the  Apostle,  only  applies  to  the  doctrines  and  precepts,  which 
the  Apostles  delivered  to  the  world  as  Revelations  from  Clod,  is  clearly  ascertained  from  these  word? 
of  St.  Paul:  "  *and  not  after,  (or  according  to)  the  tradition  which  he  received  from  us."  No  doc- 
trine, therefore,  can  he  admitted  as  traditions,  which  do  not  rank  among  those  writings,  which  arc- 
allowed  to  be  the  genuine  productions  of  the  inspired  teachers.  They  are  aptly  called  vapW-, 
because  the  Apostles  received  the  doctrines  of  the  gospel  from  Christ  by  Revelation,  and  as  such, 
delivered  them  to  the  world.  This  view  of  the  matter  decidedly  overthrows  the  Popish  sense  of 
traditions,  as  being  oral  or  unwritten.  Besides,  from  the  ftext  itself,  it  appears  that  traditions 
were  delivered  partly  by  preaching,  and  partly  by  epistle;  so  that  even  here,  the  Popish  sense  is  con 
travened,  inasmuch  as  tradition  is  said  not  to  be  solely  confined  to  oral  communication ;  and  as  the 
doctrine  which  the  Apostle  delivered  orally  was  not  all  contained  in  his  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians  it 
does  not  necessarily  follow,  that  it  was  not  written  in  some  other  part  of  Scripture.  This  will  meet 
the  objection  which  might  be  started  from  the  words  &*  %ey»,  '  by  word/  The  tradition  spoken  of  in 
the  passage  of  the  Epistle  to  the  Thessalonians,  already  quoted,  is  mentioned  a  few  verses  after,  viz. 
"+that  if  any  would  not  work,  neither  should  he  eat."  St.  Paul  inculcates  this  doctrine  in  another 
part  of  his  writings,  where  he  intreats  those  he  addresses,  "  to  §walk  worthy  of  the  vocation,  where, 
with  they  were  called."  To  confirm  this  interpretation,  collateral  evidence  is  not  wanting, 
since  the  testimony  of  Ignatius,  one  of  the  Apostolic  Fathers,  as  recorded  by  Eusebius,  ascer- 
tains what  the  traditions  of  the  Apostles  were.  When  on  his  way  to  Rome,  he  addressed  the 
churches  by  which  he  passed,  and  "  llexhorted  them  to  hold  tenaciously  the  tradition  of  the  Apostles. 
which,  having  testified  that  it  was  now  for  (the  greater)  certainty  committed  to  writing,  he  deemed 
it  necessary  that  it  should  be  plainly  taught."  This  fact,  attested  as  it  is  by  a  disciple  of  the  Apostles. 
is  of  itself  sufficient  to  determine  the  matter  at  issue. 

In  the  Rhemish  New  Testament,  republished  in  Edinburgh,  3797,  a  note  occurs  so  much  in 
the  style  of  Ward's  remarks,  as  to  deserve  particular  notice.  It  is  on  the  passage  in  Thessalonians. 
on  which  he  lavishes  so  much  comment,  and  is  to  this  effect :  "  See  here  that  the  unwritten  tra- 
ditions of  the  Apostles  are  no  less  to  be  received  than  their  Epistles."  The  main  question  has,  to 
be  sure,  been  already  disposed  of;  it  is,  however,  impossible  not  to  observe  the  marked  similarity 
between  the  Papists  of  the  present  day,  and  the  Pharisees  of  old,  who  preferred  the  sayings  of  their 


*  See  last  column,  No.  118.  -f-  2  Thess.  c.  ii.  v.  15. 

%  2  Tbess.  c.  Hi.  v.  10.  ?  Ephes.  c.  iv.  v.  1. 

II  W£«T£S7rsTo  a7Tf(£    t^ia^xi   tu«    run  an-oro?*)*    rrxgz$o0ia;t  yv   iitip  x<T^u\n%     ~r.TVVA<*>2Z    »3V    (Axcrvfoptyi;,  &MTwmer*m  euxyxa-ir 
vy-ire.     F.USRB.ECCL.  Hl^T.  lib.  iii.  C.  25. 


IO-t  A  SYNOPSIS  OK  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

Scribes  ami  Elders,  to  the  word  of  God.  The  *Jewish  historian  says,  "  the  Pharisees  have  delivered 
to  the  people,  by  tradition  from  the  fathers,  many  injunctions  which  are  not  written  in  the  laws  of 
Moses;  for  which  reason,  the  sect  of  the  Sadducees  rejects  them,  saying,  that  what  are  written, 
should  be  esteemed  obligatory,  but  that  they  ought  not  to  observe  those  which  come  by  such  tra- 
dition.'' Christ  himself,  the  highest  possible  authority,  has  not  been  silent  on  the  matter,  as  appears 
from  his  reproof  of*  the  Scribes  and  Pharisees,  when  he  said,  "  fThus  have  ye  made  the  command- 
ment of  God  of  none  effect,  by  your  tradition," 

110.  It  does  nof  admit  of  a  doubr,  but  that  the  Apostles,  from  time  to  time,  verbally  delivered 
the  doctrine  of  the  Gospel  to  the  different  churches;  but  no  evidence  whatever  can  be  adduced  to 
prove,  that  they  taught  or  delivered  any  necessary  to  salvation,  which  is  not  found  either  in  the 
Old,  or  New  Testament.  It  matters  not,  that  they  gave  directions  about  ceremonies,  order,  or 
discipline,  conformable  to  the  general  rules  laid  down  in  Scripture,  as  they  were  about  things  indif- 
ferent in  themselves,  and  changeable  in  their  nature.  So  that,  although  '  precepts'  such  as  those 
alluded  to  by  U  ard,  were  at  first  orally  communicated,  yet  as  they  cannot,  at  this  distanee  of  time, 
be  considered  as  Apostolic,  from  their  not  holding  a  place  in  the  New  Testament,  they  should  conse- 
quentlv  be  rejected.  Will,  then,  the  Popish  Doctors  say  there  is  nothing  traditional  written  ;  although 
having  before  their  eyes  the  doctrine  which  respects  the  death,  burial,  resurrection  of  Christ,  his  mi- 
racles, &c.  as  recorded  by  the  Evangelists  ?  Will  they  maintain  that  there  is  nothing  traditional  in 
their  sacred  narrative?  If  they  will  not,  as  they  cannot,  it  may  be  fairly  concluded,  that  the  tradi- 
tions spoken  of  by  the  Apostle,  were  committed  to  writing  either  by  himself,  or  by  some  of  his  inspired 
brethren  ;  and,  consequently,   that  there  arc  no  extra- scriptural  traditions  in  existence. 

It  ma\  be  proved,  even  from  the  Vulgate  Latin  itself,  that  the  first  translators  of  the  Protestant 
Bible  did  not  '  wilfully'  mistranslate  ^«W,5 ;  much  less  that  they  were  guilty  of  '  heresy  and  corrup- 
tion,' as  Ward  says,  when  they  rendered  the  word— ordinances.  In  the  §text  belonging  to  the  pre- 
sent number,  Jerome  rendered  it  pracepta.  Now  it  is  evident,  that  if  he  did  not  consider  that  term 
and  tradUiows  synonymous,  he  would  not  have  indifferently  used  them  as  a  fit  construction  of  the 
same  Greek  noun.  He  likewise  rendered  jUW^,  praecepta  ;  and  1U,  traditiones  ;  which  proves 
that  he  understood  those  Greek  words  to  bear  the  signification  of  w€«W,  not  less  than  the  Latin  ones 
themselves.  Therefore  it  follows,  that,  as  traditions,  precepts,  ordinances,  &c.  are  the  literal  English 
of  either  the  Greek  or  Latin  terms,  the  use  of  any  of  them  cannot  be  deemed  either  an  error  or 
a  corruption.  So  that  before  Ward  could,  with  any  shew  of  fairness,  have  preferred  a  complaint 
against  the  English  Translators,  he  should  have  shewn  that  Jerome  was  justifiable  in  the  version 
made  by  him.  In  fine,  no  defence  could  be  set  up  for,  nor  charge  made  against  them,  which  is  not  in 
this  [articular  case  also  applicable  to  him. 

*   Noumea  nOAAA  Tt,a    ITAPEAOSAX    rw   Jijutf    '"»•    *««»»'"    w  TlUTpn    £.«^%r,;,    «<BT$  «K  e»ayty^wlan»  T3K  Mtfi'WJ  nfMi,  *M  $M  T«TO 
,,,,*    -ro  ZxV.*r.*M,    yMS    wS*Wt»,*y«    «*.«'*«.    i>«<r$*,    «0Pf»»W   V^^.v*,  T«  ?  «    IIAPAAOSEM    TON     HATPflN.     hn  np».      Jo- 

.•itpuus,  Ant.  lib.  xiii.  cap.  x.  §.  G. 

i    Mat.  c.  xv.   v.  6.  and  Mark,  c.  vii.  v.   13. 

§  Seel  st  column,  No.  1 19.  II  »  Thes?.  c-  lV-  v-  2-  H"  Acts'  c"  vi'  V"  14> 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611 


10.) 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.  Orig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text. 


Col.  ii.  120. 


1    Pet.  i.  18 


UT!     GVV     TU 

f/.8,rt  a>g  ^uvra; 
'->    koct/xu,    ooy- 


Si  ergo  mor- 
tui  estis  cum 


Rhemish Version.  Beza'sLatinTextBps.  Bible,  15G8.  K. James's Bibler6u 


If  then  you  be  Itaque  si   mor- 
dead  with  tui  cum 


why  as 


Wherefore,  if  ye 


though  livingin    be    dead    with 
Chris; o  ab    Christ  from  the  Christo,  liheri  'the  world,  <  are  Christ   from    the 

ye   led   with    -rudiments  of  the 

traditions?'      world,    why,     as 

(though   living  in 


ErfOG7cS  oT(  8 

pdxgroi$,  apyv- 

&vtpu§y)T£   ex. 

Tt)<;  fj.xra.ixg 
VfAut  ocyxf^otpric 
7Ta,T^07tXPcc^07H 


dementis  hu- 
jus  mundi  : 

quid  adhuc 
tanquam  vi- 

ventes  in 
mundo   de- 

cernitis  ? 


elements  (somejestis  abelemen-' 
editions  have  jtis  mundi,  quid' 
rudime?it,s)  of  ut    viventes    in. 


this  world,  why 
do  you  yet  de- 
cree as  living  in 
the  world? 


Scientes 
quod  non 
corruptibili- 
bus  auro  vel 
argento  re- 
dempti  estis 
de  vana  ves- 
tra  conversa- 
tione  pater- 
nal traditio- 
nis. 


Knowing  that 
not  with  cor- 
ruptible things, 
gold  or  silver, 
you  are  re- 
deemed from 
your  vain  con- 
versation of 
your  fathers' 
tradition. 


mundo,    ritibus 


onerammi 


'the  world,  «  are 
ye  subject  to  tra- 
I         ditions?' 


(ICO) 


Ut  qui    sciatis 
vos   non  cadu- 
c\s  I'ebus,  argen- 
to  vel    auro, 
fuisse   redemp- 
tos  ex  vana  illaj 
vestra    conver-: 
satione,    et   a  ' 
patribus  tra-  j 
ditii. 


Mont,  pater- 

na  traditione 

accepta. 


'received  by 

the    tradition 
of  the  fathers.' 


Forasmuch  as  ye 

know  that  ye 
were  not  redeem- 
ed with  corrup- 
tible things,  as 
silver  and  gold, 
from  your  vain 
conversation  *  re- 
ceived by  tradi- 
tion from  your 
fathers.' 


(121) 


120.  *Aoy^,aTj£s<r&£.  fWardsays,  that  the  first  Protestant  Translators  rendered  this  term 
so  as  "  to  make  the  very  name  of  tradition  odious  among  the  people  ;  and  though  some  of  these 
gross  corruptions  are  corrected  by  their  last  translators,  yet  we  have  no  reason  to  think  they  were 
amended  out  of  any  good  or  pure  intention,  but  to  defend  some  of  their  own  traditions,  viz.  wearing 
the  rochet,  surplice,  &c."  From  the  first  English  version  of  the  Greek  verb,  viz.  "  why  are  ye  led  with 
traditions;"  it  appears  the  translators  were  desirous  to  distinguish  between  the  ^commandments  of  God 
and  the  doctrines  of  men.    Their  motive  for  doing  so,  although  the  contrary  is  alleged,  is  one  of  the  purest 

*  Decerno,  dogma  aliquod  introduco,  dico  aliquid  quod  pro  certo  dogmate  habeo.  Scap.  "  To  have  ordinances  imposed 
•n  one  j  to  be  subject,  or  to  submit  to  ordinances.     Parkh. 

f  Errata,  page  83.  +  Matt.  c.  xv.  r.  p.  and  Col.  c.  ii.  v.  72. 


106        A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

and  most  laudable  kind.  Nor  is  their  sincerity  impeached  in  the  slightest  degree,  because  their  succes- 
sors, with  better  judgment,  altered  their  version  to  the  present  reading,  viz.  "  why  are  ye  subject  to 
ordinances."  It  may  be  here  observed,  that  the  reciprocal  use  of  ordinances  and  traditions  is  nothing 
but  what  occurs,  as  has  been  already  shewn  in  the  Vulgate  text,  in  the  use  of  the  terms  pra'cepta  and 
traditiones.  * 

Montanus  understands  the  Greek  verb  in  the  passive  sense,  which  is  in  direct  opposition  to  the 
Rhemish  interpretation.  * Vorstius  assigns  a  most  convincing  reason,  why  it  should  be  translated 
passively  ;  for  that  St.  Paul  did  not  address  the  arrogant  teachers  themselves,  but  the  hearers 
on  whom  they  imposed  restraints.  Erasmus,  Grotius,  and  other  eminent  critics,  take  it  in  the  same 
signification;  and,  impressed  with  the  same  opinion,  the  Protestant  Translators  framed  their  version; 
but,  be  its  acceptation  what  it  may,  it  neither  condemns,  nor  establishes  Popish  traditions. 

It  is  rather  extraordinary  that  Ward  has  not  produced  any  of  the  Fathers  to  support  the  Popish 
exposition  ;  particularly  as  he  is  not  scrupulous  about  bringing  them  forward  in  other  places,  and  in  not 
only  deducing  a  meaning  from  their  writings,  which  they  do  not  bear,  but  in  making  them  say  what 
they  never  said.  But  even  did  grounds  exist  for  accusing  the  English  Translators  with  error,  mistrans- 
lation, and  heresy,  yet  a  regard  for  the  word  of  God  itself,  wherever  found,  should  have  made  the 
Popish  Doctors  more  reserved  in  preferring  charges,  which  may  be  brought  home  to  themselves  in  a 
tenfold  degree.  For,  unquestionably,  the  version  of  the  Scriptures  made  by  the  Divines  of  Douay 
and  Rheims,  but  imperfectly  represents  the  Vulgate,  which  version  itself  is  not  a  perfect  represen- 
tation of  the  original.  It  is  submitted  to  the  learned  reader,  whether  the  following  selections,  from 
numberless  others  in  these  translations,  do  not  fully  prove  the  truth  of  the  assertion. 

tn<t»}o;p«>v;  stabulum.  Xiiou&w,  stabulario.  §fyw«»  -,  confessus  est.  \\nv>ai0*ta*  ■,  cecinimus.  ^fooST<»«i 
faenum.  **n*o»o»;  navicula.  Wide  as  Jerome's  Latin  is  from  the  spirit  of  the  Greek  text,  the  Eng- 
lish of  the  Rhemists  departs  still  farther  from  his  meaning.  Stabulum  ;  an  inn.  Confessus  est ;  promised. 
Cecinimus  ;  piped.  Navicula  ;  a  ship.  Quod  factum ;  which  was  chanced.  Salvamini  ;  save  your- 
selves, &c.  &c.  It  is  to  be  recollected  that  some  of  the  English  terms  are  not  objected  to,  when  com- 
pared with  the  original,  but  when  considered  as  a  literal  translation  of  the  Vulgate  text. 

121.  ttIIaTp0nrapfltd0T8.  %% Ward  brands  this  as  another  '  notorious  falsification,'  and  says, 
that  the  English  Translators,  "  foist  in  the  word  tradition,  and  for  delivered,  say  received;  because 
it  sounds  with  the  simple  people,  to  be  spoken  against  the  traditions  of  the  Roman  Church." 
It  may  be  observed,  that  the  censure,  which  he  here  throws  on  the  Protestant  Translation,  for 
having  the  word  tradition  'foisted'  into   it,  as  he  elegantly  expresses  it  ;  is  equally  applicable  to  the 

*  "  Non  enim  ipsos  imperiosos  doctores,  see!  auditores  tantum,  Paulus  alloquitur,  quibus  illi  leges  imponebant."  Vid. 
Pot.  Synops.  in  loc. 

f  Luke,  ex.  v.  34.  i  Ibid.  v. 35.  §  Acts,  c.  vii.  v.  17.  ||   Matt.  c.  xi.  v.  17. 

%  Matt.  c.  xiv.  v.  19.  **  Luke,  c.  5.  v.  7. 

t|  A  patre  traditus,  quoq.  a  patie  receptus.     Scap. 
++  Errata,  page  83. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


10? 


Ilhemish  one.  Nor  does  he  condemn  one  more  than  the  other,  when  he  gives  a  version  of  his  own 
which  difFers  from  both,  viz.  *«  from  your  vain  conversation  delivered  by  the  Fathers."'  He  uses 
the  words  '  delivered  by ;'  and  the  English  translators  «  received  by ;'  according  to  Scapula,  Park- 
hurst,  Sec.  the  Greek  term  admits  of  either  construction.  All  which  can  be  inferred  from  the  pas- 
sage, however  understood,  is,  that  there  were  then  in  existence,  spurious  traditions;  but  neither 
translation  determines  one  way  or  other,  respecting  supposed  Popish  traditions. 

One  cogent  reason  among  others,  why  the  word  '  tradition  '  has  been  inserted  in  the  English 
text,  seems  to  arise  from  the  abuse  to  which  it  is  converted  by  the  Popish  expositors,  who  limit  it  to 
such  subjects  only,  as  are  delivered  orally,  never  committed  to  writing,  and  handed  down  from  one 
age  to  another.  Is  it  not  after  the  same  manner  that  both  Jews  and  Gentiles  proceeded  ?  The  tra- 
ditions of  the  former,  obscured  the  law  of  God  ;  those  of  the  latter,  taught  them  idolatry ;  hence 
a  strong  argument  in  favour  of  the  false  religion  of  these,  as  well  as  of  the  errors  of  the  true  religion 
of  those — that  they  had  been  handed  down  to  them  by  their  fathers. 


SECTION  XIX.— SACRAMENT  OF  MARRIAGE. 


Book.  Ch.Ver. 


Eph.    V.    32. 


Orig.  Greek, 


To    iAvrr,i>iov 
TtSTo  fxtyx    cr'»' 
eyu  Si    hiyu  f.tc 


Vulgate  Text. 


Sacramen- 
tum  hoc  mag- 
num est,  ego 
autem  dico  in 
Christo  et  in 
ecclesia. 


RhemishVersion 


This  is  a 
great    sacra- 
ment,   but   I 
speak  in  Christ 
and    in    the 
Church. 


Beza's  Latin  Text 


Mysterium 

hoc   magnum 

est :    loquor 

autem  de 

Christo   et    de 

ecclesia. 


Mont. 

in  Christum 
et  in 

eccksiam. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568. 


.This  is  a  great 
1  secret,'  &c. 


K.  James'sBible  1611 


This    is   a   great 

'  mystery,'  but  I 

speak  concerning 

Christ   and  the 

Church. 


(122) 


122.  MfS^p/Oy.  *Ward  says,  "  Protestants  who  reckon  marriage  no  more  than  a  civil  con- 
tract, as  it  is  amongst  Pagans,  translated  this  text  accordingly,  calling  it  in  their  first  translations, 
instead  of  '  a  great  sacrament/  or  c  mystery,"  as  it  is  in  the  Greek  ;  a  great  secret.'1  Now  in  those 
very  translations,  with  which  he  finds  fault,  '  or  mystery,'  is  expressed  in  a  marginal  note  on  the  word 
'  secret.'  But  this  circumstance  he  does  not  acknowledge ;  indeed,  had  he  done  so,  he  could  not 
so  freely  have  indulged  in  his  illiberal  remarks.  Next,  he  never  uttered  a  more  unfounded  accusa- 
tion, than  in  saying  marriage  is  looked  on  by  Protestants,  as  nothing  but  '  a  civil  contract ;"  inasmuch 
as  they  hold  it  to  be  a  holy  and  honourable  estate,  and  a  sacred  ordinance  of  God,  representing  the 

*  Errata,  page  85. 
P  2 


108  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

mystical  union  which  exists  between  Christ  and  his  church.  Nor  is  his  falsehood  more  glaring  than 
his  ignorance,  when  he  says:  *"  for  the  word  mystery  is  the-same  in  Greek,  that  sacrament  is  in 
Latin  ;"  in  other  words,  that  sacramentum  is  equivalent  to  i*vr^»».  For,  the  Latin  word  signifies  an  oath, 
whereas  the  other  does  not ;  and  besides,  it  implies  holiness,  which  is  not  implied  in  the  Greek  word. 
It  is  admitted  that  the  sacraments  are  called  mysteries  ;  but  by  no  means,  that  they  are  convertible 
terms.  For  a  proof  of  this,  the  reader  is  principally  referred  to  the  Latin  Vulgate.  In  the 
book  of  jTobit,  he  will  meet  with  the  words  sacramentum  regis ;  in  the  ^second  Epistle  to  the 
Thessalonians,  mysterium  occurs ;  and  in  ^Revelations,  sacramentum  mulieris,  &c.  as  the  translation 
of  the  same  Greek  word  punpot.  The  first  of  these  texts  is  rendered  by  the  Douay  Translators,  "  the 
Kind's  secret ;"  while  the  Rhemists  render  the  second  and  third  mystery.  But,  according  to  Ward's 
mode  of  arguing,  they  might  as  well  have  made  it  the  King's  sacrament,  the  sacrament  of  the  woman, 
&c.  In  short,  there  is  no  word  in  the  Old  or  New  Testament,  which  agrees  with  the  word  sacrament. 
It  is  a  Latin  word,  and  is  used  in  a  general  sense,  by  the  early  ecclesiastical  writers  of  the  Western 
Church  to  express  any  sacred  ceremony,  rite,  or  mystery.  Such  as  require  fuller  information  on  this 
subject  are  referred  to  Bingham's  Antiquities  of  the  Primitive  Church.  Book  xii.  chap.  i.  sect.  4. 
Thus  it  is  manifest  that  this  wretched  calumniator  not  only  betrays  a  palpable  ignorance  of 
those  languages;  but,  what  is  more  inexcusable,  a  total  unacquaintance  with  the  English  trans- 
lations of  his  own  church. 

But  '  mystery,'  as  a  translation  of  the  text  connected  with  this  number,  is  not  confined  to  the 
margin  of  the  Protestant  Bibles  :  it  is  inserted  in  the  very  body  of  the  text  in  all  those  of  l6ll. 
As  this  is  the  case,  it  is  strange  that  Ward  should  say,  "  if  they  should  have  called  matrimony  by 
that  name,  (viz.  mystery)  it  would  have  sounded  equally  well  as  a  sacrament  also."  It  is  a  fact,  with 
which  he  could  not  have  been  unacquainted,  that  for  several  years  before  he  wrote  his  book,  no 
other  reading  than  that  which'  he  objects  to,  has  been  received  in  the  Protestant  Churches ;  and  it 
must  be  equally  known  to  his  abettors  of  the  present  day,  that  since  his  time,  now  upwards  of  a  cen- 
tury, no  other  has  been  used.  Still  they  seem  as  dissatisfied,  and  as  anxious  as  he  was,  to  invent  and 
propagate  calumny  and  falsehood. 

Protestants,  as  has  been  already  observed,  deem  marriage  a  great  mystery,  as  containing  an 
emblematical  meaning  of  Christ's  love  to  believers,  who  became  his  body;  but  they  consider  the 
setting  it  up  as  a  sacrament,  as  a  perversion  of  the  express  words  of  the  Apostle.  "  But  I  speak," 
says  St.  Paul,  "  concerning  Christ  and  the  Church ;"  this  clause  shews,  that  that  which  precedes  it, 
viz.  "  this  is  a  great  mystery,"  does  not  at  all  relate  to  matrimony.  From  this  exposition,  therefore, 
it  may  be  seen,  how  slender  the  only  prop  is,  on  which  the  Popish  Church  rests  its  sacrament  of 
marriage.  But,  besides,  if  due  enquiry  be  made,  it  will  be  found  not  to  possess  the  remotest  pretensions 
to  be  considered  as  a  sacrament ;  notwithstanding  that  it  was  declared  to  be  such  by  Pope  Eugenius, 
and  subsequently  by  the  council  of  Trent.  It  has  no  outward,  visible  sign,  nor  promise  of  inward, 
spiritual  grace,  which  are  indispensable  requisites  in  a  sacrament. 

*  Errata,  p2ge  65  +  C.  xii.  v.  7.  %  C.  ii.  v.  7.  §  C.  xvii.  v.  7. 

\\  See  this  fully  discussed  in  MacknigUt's  commentary,   vol.  iii.  page  342. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


109 


SECTION  XX.— MISCELLANEOUS  SUBJECTS. 


Book.  Ch.  Ver 


2  Chron. 
xxxvi.  8. 


Acts  ix.   22. 


Orig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text. 


K*  T*  ^ot-rrxl    Reliqua  au 

*»,  toy*,,   \Ux-\  tem     yerbo_ 

KIM,     y.tZt     TTCDITOC', 


a,  tvoiviatv ,  &C 


C-'JfJalQx^WV 


!rum    Joakim 

et  abomina- 

tiones  ejus 

quas  opera  - 

tus  est,  &c. 

affirmans 
quoniam   hie 
est  Christus. 


Rhemish Version.  Beza's Latin  Text  Bps.  Bible,  15^8 


But  the  rest  of 
the  words  of 
Jehoiakim,  and 
of  his  abomina- 
tions, which  he 
wrought,  &c. 


affirming  that 
this  is  Christ. 


collatis  testi- 
moniis  demon- 
strans  eum  esse 
Christum. 

Mont. 
Conferens. 


*and  'carved 
images  that 
were  laid  to  his 
charge,'   &c 


K.James'sBihle  ifin 


affirming,  &c. 


Now  the  rest  of 
the  acts  of  Jehoi- 
akim, and  his  abo- 
minations which 
he  did,  &c. 

(123) 

'  proving '  that 

this  is  very 

Christ. 

(124) 


Marked  thus  *  altered  to  the  prevent  reading  A.  D.  1611. 
123.  This  text  also  was  conformed  to  the   Popish  version  in  1611.     The  acts  of  Jehoiakim, 
(viz.  his  disloyalty,  or  his  worshipping  carved  images,  or  his   having  had  impressions  in  honour  of 
idols  *found  on  his  body)  being  in  a  manner  specified  in  the  first  English  versions  of  the  Protestant 
Bible,  gave  offence  to  the  Popish  clergy. 

124.  f 2l)UoJo&i^y.  J"  By  conferring  one  scripture  with  another.  This  is  added  more 
than  is  in  the  Greek,  in  favour  of  their  presumptuous  opinion,  that  the  comparing  of  the  Scriptures 
is  enough  for  any  man  to  understand  them  himself,  solely  by  his  own  diligence  and  endeavour."  In 
this  confident  tone  does  Ward  accuse  the  Protestant  Translators  of  adding  to  the  English  text, 
more  words  than  the  Greek  warrants;  but  not  with  more  confidence  than  falsehood.  For  that  sen- 
tence in  particular,  is  not  incorporated  with  the  text  in  any  of  the  English  Bibles,  which  were  in  the 
hands  of  Protestants,  antecedent  to  the  publication  of  King  James's  one  ;  but  was  thrown  into  the 
margin,  in  the  form  of  an  explanatory  note.  The  following  are  the  exact  readings  of  the  passage  in 
the  undermentioned  Bibles  ;  in  which  not  one  single  word  of  those  quoted  by  Ward  is  to  be  found. 
Coverdale's  Bi  ble  :  "  And  Saul  confounded  th<;  Jews  which  dwelte  at  Damascus,  affirming  that  this  was  verie  Christ." 

Matthews's  Bible: "  affirming  that  this  was  verie  Christ." 

The  Geneva  Bible: "  confirming  that  this  was  the  Christ." 

The  Bishops  Bible: "  affirming  that  this  was  very  Christ." 

After  the  detection  and  exposure  of  such  vile  misrepresentation,  can  it  be  said  that  the  work 
falsely  called  the  Errata  of  the  Protestant  Bible,  is  entitled  to  the  praises  lavished  on  it  by 
Doctor  Milner,  and  his  Irish  Episcopal  Brethren  ? 

*  Scil.  "  impressiones  quae  invent*  sunt  in  eo  ;  i.  e.  stigmata  quaedam,  quae  imprimi  curaverat  corpori  ipsius  in  honorem 
idolorum."     Vid.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc. 

f  "  Laying  and  comparing  arguments  together."     Pakkh.  J  Errata,  page  §fc    - 


HO        A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


Book.  Ch.  \  er.jOrig.  Greek.  Vulgate  Text.  Rhemish  Version.  Beza's  Lathi  Text 


1    Pet.  i.  «5.|TaTo^  sri  toJHoc  est  au-jAnd  this  is  the  Hoc  autem  est 

verbum  illud, 


|(TJT0^Htem    verbum  word    that   is 
quodevange-j  evangelized 
lizatum  in     among   you. 


i   Cor.  ix.  ]6.  Eav  ?«?  tvay- 
eft   fAot    kxv- 


Jam.  iv.  0. 


Col.  i.  23. 


vos. 


Nam  si  evan- 

gelizavero, 

non  est  mihi 

gloria. 


In  late  editions, 

"  which    hath 

been 

preached." 


quod   evangeli- 

zatum  est 

vobis. 


Bps.  Bible,  1568 


which   c  by 

the  gospel,' 
&c. 


Tv  tvxyfzhiti, 

Vii     V7TV  TOV 
U%XW. 


Majorem  au- 
tem dat  gra 
tiam. 


For   and  if  I 

evangelize,  it  is 

no  glory  to  me. 

The  R.  Test. 

Edinb.  edition, 

1804, 
and  others,  too, 
read, 
"  For   if    I 
preach  the  gos- 
pel," &c. 

And   giveth 
greater  graces 


Etenim  si  evan- 

gelizem,  non 

est  quod  glo- 

rier. 


Evangelii--, 
quod  praedi- 
catum  est  in 
universa  crea- 

tuni,  &c. 


Of  the  gos- 
pel--,   which  is 

preached 
among  all  crea- 
tures. 

In  late  editions, 

(   in    all   the 

creation.* 


K.James'sBibleiGii 


For  though  ' 
preach    the 
gospel.' 


(126) 
Sed  majorem    But  '  the  scrip-  But  'he'  giveth 


And   this   is   the 

word  which   '  by 

the  gospel   is 

preached'  unto 

you. 


(125) 

For  though   I 
preach  the  gospel, 
I  have  nothing  to 
glory  of. 


offert   gratiam. 


Evangelii,  pra> 

dicati  omni 
creaturaa  quae 
sub  caelo  est. 


ture '     offercth 
more  grace 


'  that   it 

was  preached. 


more  grace. 


(127) 


-of  the  gospel—, 
and  which  was 
preached  to  every 
creature. 


(128) 


125.  TLvCLyfeXKrvSl/.  "  By  the  Gospel;  these  words,"  says  *\Vard,  "  are  added  deceitfully, 
and  of  1)1  intent  to  make  the  simple  reader  think,  that  there  is  no  other  word  of  God,  but  the  written 
u/ord ;  for  the  common  reader,  hearing  the  word  gospel,  conceives  nothing  else.     But,  indeed,  all  is 

*  Errata,  page  8/\ 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS -OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611,  HI 

gospel,  whatsoever  the  Apostles  taught,  either  by  writing,  or  by  tradition,  and  word  of  mouth.''  It  is 
the  surest  sign  of  a  weak  cause,  when  abuse  is  substituted  for  argument.  Such  happens  to  be  the 
case  in  the  present  instance,  as  he  attributes  deceit,  evil  intention,  imposture,  ike.  to  the  Protestant 
Translators,  without  advancing  so  much  even  as  one  solitary  proof  to  support  his  assertions.  I  jut, 
independently  of  the  absence  of  every  thing  like  discussion,  the  charge  made  by  him  carries  with  it  its 
own  refutation.  For,  first,  the  ^etymology  of  the  verb  warrants  the  use  of  the  English  given  it.  Next, 
except  it  be  one  whose  mind  is  perverted  by  the  worst  prejudices,  no  reader  capable  of  forming  any 
opinion  on  the  subject,  (for  Ward  designates  this  lowest  class  of  readers  by  the  epithet  «  simple.') 
can,  on  hearing  mention  made  of  the  gospel,  suppose  it  to  be  confined  to  the  historical  narra- 
tive of  the  four  Evangelists,  and  not  to  be  equally  extended  to  the  writings  of  the  Apostles  ;  nay,  even  to 
be  contained  in  such  sermons  and  exhortations,  as  set  forth  the  way  unto  salvation.  And  lastly, 
evangel i zk  ought  to  be  rejected  here,  as  corbana,  pasche,  azymes,  paras-cue,  gazophylace,  tnccenes 
&c.  &c.  ought,  in  the  texts  where  they  occur  in  the  Rhemish  Testament.  Such  terms  are  unintel- 
ligible to  the  generality  of  readers,  and  are  only  calculated  to  excite  a  superstitious  veneration  for  the 
mysteries  of  priest-craft  in  the  minds  of  the  vulgar ;  undoubtedly,  the  principal,  if  not  the  sole  cause 
of  the  Rhemish  Translators  having  adopted  what  they  style  ecclesiastical  or  sacred  words. 

To  this  procedure  of  theirs,  Jerome,  innocently  indeed,  seems  thus  far  to  have  contributed. 
Many  words,  whose  meaning  he  was  unacquainted  with,  he  set  down  in  his  translation  in  Greek 
characters,  rather  than  admit  the  possibility  of  having  the  Scriptures  adulterated  by  a  false  translation. 
And  lo  !  the  effects  of  these  pious  intentions  on  the  Rhemish  Jesuits,  they  not  only  did  not  trans- 
late them  as  they  were  capable  of  doing  into  their  vernacular  dialect,  but  with  superstitious  veneration 
left  them  unchanged,  and  even  dignified  them  with  the  title  of  ecclesiastical.  It  is  to  be  observed, 
that  here,  also,  the  Rhemists  themselves  are  involved  in  the  odious  charge  brought  by  Ward  against 
the  Protestant  Translators  ;  as  they  use  the  obnoxious  term,  and  in  a  passage  strictly  parallel.  The 
text  of  [St.  Matthew,  viz.  pauperes  evangelhantur,  they  translate,  "  to  the  poor  the  Gospel  is 
preached."  It  is  scarcely  credible,  that  he  would  have  used  the  virulent  language  he  did,  or  have  so  laid 
himself  open  to  retaliation,  had  he  been  aware  of  this  circumstance.  But,  surely,  his  ignorance  can  be 
no  plea  for  his  departure  from  truth  and  decency. 

In  two  separate  editions  of  the  Rhemish  New  Testament,  printed  at  Edinburgh  in  1797  and  1804 
the  word  c  evangelise '  has  in  several  texts  been  altered,  and  a  reading  similar  to  that  in  the  Protes- 
tant Bible  substituted.  Plow  astonished  Ward  would  be  at  this,  were  he  now  in  existence  :  or,  could 
he  have  foreseen  it,  would  he  not  rather  have  assumed  any  other  department  of  the  polemic,  than  that 
of  biblical  criticism  ? 

126.  ~EvCLy[s?\tL,0)[JLCLl,  On  this  article,  as  it  is  included  under  the  same  head  with  the  pre- 
ceding one,  scarcely  any  thing  new  can  be  offered  by  way  of  remark  or  illustration  ;  as  the  same  de- 
fence which  was  set  up  for  the  Protestant  Translation,  and  the  same  refutation  of  Ward's  objections 
which  was  there  made,  are  here  equally  applicable.     However,  it  may  not  be  improper  to  subjoin,  that 

*  Ev&y fihor,  and  Gospel   (from  the  Saxon)  equally  imply  '  good  tidings.'  Park.ii. 
f  wwpc&i  iva.yyO~\(^na.\,     Matt.  C,  xi.   V.  5, 


112        A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

although  the  expedient  adopted  by  Jerome  of  turning  into  Latin  characters  any  Greek  word  whose 
meaning  he  found  himself  unable  to  discover,  did  not  originate  with  him,  but  with  the  authors  of  the 
Italic  Version  ;  yet  as  he  possessed  the  same  anxious  desire  which  they  did  of  giving  a  faithful  repre- 
sentation of  the  original,  his  candour  is  not  the  less  praiseworthy.  But  the  Rhetnish  Doctors  have 
had  no  excuse  to  offer,  for  the  barbarous  admixture  of  Greek,  and  Latin  terms,  which  they  have  intro- 
duced into  their  English  Version  of  the  New  Testament.  Were  the  truth  avowed,  they  were  pre- 
vented from  giving  an  exact  and  literal  translation  of  the  Scriptures,  solely  by  their  apprehensions,  lest 
the  existence  of  a  system  which  it  had  taken  ages  to  establish,  and  which  is  so  calculated  in  all  its  points 
and  bearings  to  impose  on  the  vulgar  mind,  should  be,  in  the  slightest  degree,  endangered. 

127.  Although  *Ward  thinks  it  'probable,'  that  the  Apostle  meant  the  '  spirit,'  or  'Holy 
Ghost'  as  imparting  more  grace,  and  observes,  "  it  is  so  expounded  by  many  ;"  yet  he  objects  to  the 
use  of  the  pronoun  he.  They  cannot  be  prevented,  he  says,  "  from  inserting  their  commentary  in 
the  text  and  restraining  the  Holy  Ghost,  to  one  "  particular  sense,  where  his  words  seem  to  be 
ambiguous."  This  objection  originated  in  the  pure  spirit  of  cavil  ;  since  the  use  of  the  pronoun  but 
more  directly  pointed  out  the  source,  whence  the  grace  flowed,  which  if  omitted,  must  be  understood  ; 
as  is  manifest  from  the  last  clause  of  the  verse  immediately  preceding.  The  difference,  however,  is  per- 
fectly frivolous  and  immaterial. 

It  is  not  a  little  remarkable  that  he,  the  introduction  of  which  into  the  Protestant  Version,  Ward 
so  strongly  condemns,  is  inserted  in  the  several  editions  of  the  Rhemish  New  Testament  which  have 
been  published  since  the  year  1752.  According  to  him,  the  reading  of  the  edition  of  1582,  that  first 
published,  is  f  graces  ;'  while  the  Vulgate  Text  is  in  the  singular  number,  viz.  gratiam  ;  and  not 
only  the  original  Greek  is  x«s»,  but  also  the  septuagint  Greek  of  the  +text,  whence  St.  James  made 
his  quotation. 

128.  K.Y\pWY@eVTOt;.  The  sign  «  was'  is  preferable  to  '  is,'  in  a  strict  and  literal  sense,  but  as 
to  the  meaning,  it  is  of  the  most  trifling  consequence,  which  is  adopted  ;  equally  so  is  it,  whether  the 
reading  be  '  every  creature,'  or  «  all  creatures.'  What  Ward  asserts  relative  to  the  meaning  of  the 
first  Protestant  Translations  of  the  passage,  is  grossly  absurd.  His  words  are  "  as  though  he  (the 
Apostle)  spoke  not  of  the  Gospel  preached  to  them,  but  of  a  Gospel  which  they  had  only  heard  of, 
that  was  preached  in  the  world."  Now,  how  could  it  be  possible  that  the  Colossians  should  con- 
tinue in  the  belief  of  a  Gospel  not  preached  to  them  ;  of  which  they  only  had  received  a  report,  that 
it  was  preached  to  others  ?  The  first  Protestant  Translators  did  not  think  so,  neither  can  the  form  of 
expression,  which  they  used,  be  perverted  so  as  to  bear  that  meaning,  except  by  the  most.malignant 
ingenuity. 

*  Errata,  page  8/.  t  Se«  column,  Rhemish  Version. 

t  Prov.  c.  iii.   v.  34. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


113 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.  Orig.  Greek. 


1  Cor.  xiv.  4. 


Rom.  xii.  6. 


Ibid.  viii.  39 


OlKQQOfAU. 


kxtx    rr,>  aix- 


Vulgate  Text. 


Qui  loquitur 
lingua  seip- 
sum  axlificat. 


0CTS0    Ttjj    ocyoc- 


1  Cor.  i.  10 


Gal.  V.  20.         hxorcunai, 
avians,  &C. 


Kxi  fj.n  n  tv 


secundum 

rationem 

fidei. 


a  charitate 
Dei. 


RhemishVersion.  Beza's  Latin  Text 


He  that  speak- 
eth  in  a  tongue 
edifieth  him- 
self. 


according  to 

the   rule   of 

faith. 


Et   non  sint 
in    vobis 
schismata. 


from  the   cha- 
rity of  God. 

In  late  editions, 

"   from    the 

love:' 


rhat  there  be 
*  no  schisms 
among  you. 


Dissen- 
tiones,  sectse 


Qui  loquitur 
ingua,  seipsum 
aedificat. 


prophetemus 

pro  proportione 

fidei. 


a  charitate  Dei 


Bps.  Bible,  1568, 


....  '  unknown,' 
&c. 


K.James'sBiulei6ii 


....  after  the 
measure,'  &c 


He  that  speaketh 
in   an   unknown 
tongue,  edifieth 
himself. 

(129) 


according  to  the 
'  proportion  '  of 
faith. 


from  the  'love.' 


'  heresies,' 

according  to 

Ward. 

'   Sects/  in 
Rhem.T.  1582. 

Late  editions 
also  read 'sects.' 


Et  non  sint  in 

ter   vos  dis- 

sidia. 


Dissidia   ha> 
reses. 


(130) 


from  the    '  love ' 
of  God. 


(131) 


divisions 


1  sects  ' 


And  that  there  be 
no  '  divisions' 
among  you. 

(132) 


seditions,   '  he- 
resies.' 


(133) 


114  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

129-  Y7\UXT(TY\.  *Ward  objects  to  the  adjunct  'unknown,'  which  has  been  added  by  the 
Protestant  Translators  in  the  fEpistle  to  the  Corinthians,  although  explanatory  of  the  Apostle's 
meaning.  His  chief  objection  seems  to  be  this,  that  it  makes  against  the  use  of  a  strange  or  foreign 
language  in  the  service  of  the  Popish  Church.  But,  surely,  without  this  addition,  St.  Paul  is  suffi- 
ciently explicit  in  his  censure  on  the  Pastor's  speaking  in  a  language  not  understood  by  the  people. 
Immediately  after  the  above  quoted  passage,  he  says,  (viz.  1  Cor.  c.  xiv.  v.  11)  "  If  I  know  not  the 
meaning  of  the  voice,  /  shall  be  unto  him  that  speaketh  a  barbarian,  and  he  that  speaketh  shall  be 
a  barbarian  unto  me."  Again:  "  If  I  pray  in  an  unknown  tongue,  my  spirit  prayeth,  but  my  under- 
standing is  unfruitful.  What  is  it  then  ?  I  will  pray  with  the  spirit,  and  I  will  pray  with  the  understanding 

also ElSe  when  thou  shalt  bless  with  the  spirit,  how  shall  he  that  occupieth   the  room   of  the 

unlearned  say,  Amen,  at  the  giving  of  thanks,  seeing  he  understandeth  not  what  thou  sayest."  The 
language  of  Origen  and  Justin  Martyr  has  the  same  tendency.  Jerome  says,  "every  speech  which 
is  not  understood  is  barbarous:'  (Thus  Ovid,  in  exile  among  the  Getas,  observed,  "  Barbaras  hie 
ego  sum,  quia  non  intelligor  ulli.")  So  that  the  Reformers  were  fully  authorised  in  drawing 
up   the   Twenty-Fourth  Article   against  having   public   prayer,  Sec.    "  in  a  to x cue  not  uxder- 

STANDED    OF    THE    PEOPLE." 

130.  jAvaAoyjay.  Ward  asserts  that  it  maybe  collected  from  various  places  in  holy  writ, 
that  there  existed  among  the  Apostles,  "  a  certain  rule  and  form  of  faith  and  doctrine,  containing  the 
whole  platform  of  the  Christian  Religion ;"  before  any  of  the  books  of  the  New  Testament  were 
committed  to  writing.  However,  this  is  all  assertion  without  proof,  for  beside  the  text  attached  to  this 
number,  he  adduces  no  authority  whatever  to  bear  him  out.  The  Protestant  Translators  have  render- 
ed the  Greek  word  faithfully  by '  proportion,'  which  is  the  interpretation  given  it,  in  the  best  Lexicons. 
The  obvious  meaning  of  the  Apostle  is,  that  in  prophesying,  they  should  strictly  limit  themselves  to 
what  was  revealed  to  them  ;  or  prophesy  according  to  the  measure  of  the  miraculous  faith  imparted. 
This  exposition  exactly  answers  the  §f*wSo»wrw«  mentioned  ver.  3,  and  is  further  confirmed  by  Origen, 
who  says,  that  «»«xoy.«  here  does  not  mean  ratio,  as  the  Latins  render  it,  but  mensura  competens,  *  a 
competent  measure.'  The  Rhemists,  in  their  annotations  on  the  passage,  quote  several  || texts  to  prove 
that  a  still  more  comprehensive  creed  than  that  now  extant  was  drawn  up  by  the  Apostles  in  conjunc- 
tion. But  there  is  not  one  of  them,  from  which  any  inference  of  the  kind  can  be  deduced  ;  much 
less  that  the  Popish  traditions,  which  Ward  contends,  were  handed  down  by  the  church  in  unbroken 
succession  "to  the  present  age,''  were  either  antecedent  to,  or  are  of  equal  authority  with  the  Gospels 
themselves. 

131.  h.y0L1tY\$»     llWard  says,  that    this  term   has  been   rendered '  love '  instead  of  '  charity/ 

*  Errata,  pa<*e  89.  t  See  English  Translation  of  this  number. 

%  Proportio.   comparatio.   similis  ratio.     Scap.  et  Constant. 
§  *  Measure  of  faith,'   this   and  '  proportion  of  faith,'   imply  the  same  thing,  viz.   "  so  much  of  that  particular  gift 
which  God  was  pleased  to  bestow  on  any  one."     See  Locke's  Paraph,  also  Macknight's  Com.  Vol.  1.  p.  442. 
||  Rom.  C.  xvi.  v.  17.     1  Tim.  C.  vi.  v.  20.     Gal.  c.  i.  v.  6.  and  Acts,  c.  xv.  v.  6. 

%  Errata,  page   103. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  115 

by  the  Protestant  Translators  ;  because  "they  attribute  salvation  to  faith  alone,"  and  that,  "  they  care 
how  little  charity  may  sound  in  the  people's  cars."  The  tenets  of  the  members  of  the  Church  of 
England  respecting  Faith,  have  been  already  treated  of,  and  are,  moreover,  sufficiently  known  to 
establish  Ward's  bo,.k,  osten:atiously  called,  4  Errata  of  the  Protestant  Bible,'  as  a  mingled  mass  of 
error,  misquotation,  and  calumny.  Indeed,  where  his  charges  carry  malignity  and  falsehood  on  the  face 
of  them,  they  call  for  adequately  harsh  and  severe  language.  It  is  certain  that  expressions,  too  strong, 
cannot  be  applied  to  them,  when  they  are  discovered  to  possess  properties  of  that  description. 
Thus  he  observes,  in  1  Cor.  cap.  xiii.  for  Charity  they  "  eight  times  say  love."  It  so  happens, 
that  hya.s-n  occurs  in  the  original  Greek  nine  times  ;  but  yet  never  received  any  other  construction  than 
'charity,'   from  the  Protestant  Translators,  whether  in  their  ea.liest,  or  latest  versions!! 

It  is  to  be  apprehended,  that,  to  the  perverted  application  of  this  term  it  is  owing,  that  the 
Popish  Clergy  inculcate  the  notion  of  atoning  for  sins  by  almsgiving. 

13-2.  T^yiTUMsTZ*  Another  charge  of  mistranslation  is  made  here  by  Ward,  but  of  the 
same  description  with  the  rest.  He  alleges,  that  the  Protestan's  preferred  'dissensions'  to  'schisms,' 
as  a  translation  of  the  word  o-y^^nu,  "  because  themselves  were  afraid  to  be  accounted  schismatics." 
Now  in  the  first  place,  the  Greek  word  is  rendered  in  the  Protestant  Bible,  '  divisions,'  which  he 
himself  allows  to  be  synonymous  with  schisms.  In  the  next  place,  as  to  the  dread  of  being  styled 
schismatics  ;  Protestants  satisfied  with  the  rectitude  of  the  principle  on  which  their  Reformers  acted, 
alike  contemn  base  epithets  and  unworthy  motives  as  applied  to  themselves.  For,  let  it  be  remembered, 
that  after  the  Church  of  Rome  became  so  corrupt,  as  to  retain  little  of  the  spirit  of  genuine  Chris- 
tianity, a  continuance  in  her  communion,  would  have  been  as  sinful,  as  that  which  really  does  consti- 
tute *schism:  viz.  an  unlawful  breach  of  the  orders  and  institutions  of  the  Christian  Church,  and  an 
unwarrantable  separation  from  its  communion.  In  one  particular  "j'text  where  the  word  ax^y-^x  occurs, 
the  Rhemists  evidently  departed  from  the  Vulgate  translation  of  it,  (scil.  scissuras  ;J  when  they 
rendered  it  'schisms.'  If  it  has  been  rendered  'division'  in  subsequent  editions  of  the  Rhemish 
Testament,  it  is  a  fact  which  points  out  as  forcibly  as  any  thing  can,  the  positive  fallibility  of  that 
production. 

133.  %  AlOSVSl?.  "For  heresy"  he  says,  "as  it  is  in  the  Greek,  they  translate  Sects  in  favout 
of  themselves  being  charged  with  heresy."  A  doubt  can  scarcely  be  entertained,  but  thatthe  republishes 
of  Ward's  book  were  more  culpable  in  reviving  this  and  similar  charges,  than  he  was,  in  first  advancing 
them  ;  for  they  could  not  be  ignorant  that  there  existed  in  most  places  a  coincidence  between  the  Pro- 
testant and  Popish  Versions  of  the  word  ;  but,  particularly  so  in  the  Versions,  which  were  first  published. 
However,  it  is  neither  by  this  circumstance,  nor  by  the  variance  which  occurs  between  the  difFerent 
editions  of  the  latter,  thatthe  correctness  of  the  former  is  to  be  determined,  but  by  the  legitimate 
meaning  of  the  word- itself.  In  difFerent  §places,  the  Greek  is  rendered  in  the  Vulgate  by  Secta,  and  in 
the  Rhemish  Testament  by  '  Sect.' 

*  See   numbers   1    to  5,    inclusive. 
t    1  Cor.  c.  xi.  v.  18.  +    Secta,  haeresis,  optio,  &c.     Sg.\P. 

§   Acts,  c.  xxiv.  v.  5.     c.  xxvi.  v.  5.  and  2  Pet.  c.  ii.  v.  1,  &c. 


116        A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


Book.  Ch. 

Ver. 

Orig.  Greek. 

Vulgate  Text. 

RhemishVersion . 

Beza'sLatinTcxt. 

Bps.  Bible,  1568. 

K.James'sBible  1611 

1  Tim.  iii.  6. 

Mrj  Uiotpmov. 

Non  neophy- 
tum. 

Not  a  neo- 
phyte. 

Non  novitium. 

Not  a  '  young 
scholar.' 

Not  a  '  novice.' 

Mont. 

non  nuper  insi- 
tum. 

(134) 

Tit.  iii. 

8. 

Kx\a>v  tpytiv 

bonis  operi- 

bus  prae- 

esse. 

to  excel  in  good 
works. 

Ut   studeant 
bene  agendo 
prascedere. 

'  To  shew 

forth '   good 

works. 

'  To  maintain' 
good  works* 

Mont. 

pulchris  ope- 
ribus  prcestare. 

(135) 

Jam.  i. 

13. 

'0  yx%  ©so? 

KXKUf. 

Enim  Deus 

intentator 

est  malorum. 

For  God  is 

not  a  tempter 

of  evils. 

Nam  Deus 

tentari  malis 

non  potest. 

God  is  not 

'tempted  with' 

evils. 

For  God  cannot 

be  '  tempted  with' 

evil. 

(136) 

134.  *NsO(pvTQV»  '  Young  scholar,'  to  which  Ward  objects,  is  preferable  even  to  '  Neophyte,' 
a  term  unintelligible  to  the  generality  of  readers.  He  says,  "  Protestants  translate  it  thus,  in  their 
first  Bibles,  as  though  an  '  old  scholar'  could  not  be  a  neophyte."  This  is  a  most  wretched  cavil; 
for  the  term  as  it  stands  in  those  Bibles  does  not  convey  its  usual  signification,  neither  was  it  intended 


*  Chrysostom  explains  tins  term  by  noy.xrx^roi  newly  instructed,  i.  e.  in  the  Christian  Religion. 


OF  THE;  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611.  1 1 7 

that  it  should,  and  does  not  limit,  as  Ward  asserts,  the  application  of  it  to  persons  of  any  one  particu- 
lar age  or  description.  But  why  enter  into  a  vindication  of  the  first  Protestant  Versions,  when  the 
reading  of  the  present  one,  is  '  novice  ?'  It  would  be  altogether  unnecessary  to  have  said  so  much,  but 
that  he  has  suppressed  all  mention  of  the  change  made,  and  has,  most  unwarrantably,  censured  the 
Protestant  Bible  for  a  reading,  which  it  does  not  possess. 

135.  *TLpoi'g'Ct(r9cU.  '  To  maintain,'  is  no  misconstruction  of  this  verb;  since  it  signifies  that 
as  well  as  c  to  preside  over,'  c  to  excel,'  &c. 

136.  A7rSlCCtg'GC.  tWard  grounds  a  charge  on  the  Protestant  Translation  of  this  text,  and 
on  Beza's  exposition  of  it,  of  a  most  malignant  nature.  His  words  are,  "  and  what  is  worse,  if  worse 
can  be,  they  make  God  not  only  a  leader  of  men  into  temptation,  but  even  the  author  and  worker  of 
sin."  It  is  almost  unnecessary  to  observe,  that  such  an  exposition  is,  and  always  has  been,  abhorrent 
from  the  principles  of  the  Church  of  England.  Scripture  itself  furnishes  a  refutation  of  such 
a  charge  ;  for  it  will  not  be  said  because  Herod,  Pilate,  Judas,  &c.  put  Christ  to  death,  which  the 
counsel  of  God  %l  determined  before  to  be  done.'  that  God  was  therefore  the  author  of  murder.  In  like 
manner,  although  God  gave  Judas  over  unto  Satan,  it  does  not  follow  that  he  was  therefore  the  author 
of  Judas's  treason.  This  is  an  absurdity  similar  to  what  Calvinistic  Writers  fall  into,  when  they  treat 
of  the  doctrine  of  irreversible  decrees,  as  is  most  ably  shewn  in  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln's  last  §publica- 
tion  ;  but  it  is  one,  into  which  the  Divines  of  the  Church  of  England  studiously  avoid  being  betrayed. 

Ward  next  remarks,  "  let  no  man  say,  that  he  is  tempted  of  God.  Why  so  ?  Because,  "  say 
the  Protestant  Translators,  God  is  not  tempted  with  evil.  Is  this  a  good  reason  ?  Nothing  less. 
How  then  ?  &c."  This  curious  specimen  of  argumentation,  if  it  deserve  to  be  so  called,  he  completes 
by  drawing  a  conclusion  favourable  to  the  Rhemish  Version.  But  had  he  been  honest  enough  to 
subjoin  the  last  clause  of  the  verse,  (viz.  "neither  tempteth  he  any  man.")  to  those  preceding  it,  and 
the  entire  of  the  next  verse  ;  (viz.  "  But  every  man  is  tempted,  when  he  is  drawn  away  of  his  own  lust, 
and  enticed,")  the  reader  would  at  once  perceive,  that  the  sought  for  reason  is  not  only  explained,  but 
assigned.  By  taking  a^aro?  in  an  active  sense,  Jerome  has  forced  it  irom  its  usual  acceptation.  The 
Rhemists,  too,  have  fallen  into  an  egregious  error  in  translating  this  text  ;  for,  contrary  to  what  the 
Apostle  designed,  they  have  destroyed  the  antithesis,  which  occurs  in  the  two  concluding  sentences, 
and  have  in  consequence  committed  a  most  unmeaning  tautology.  (Ecumenius,  in  his  comments  on 
this  very  passage,  writes  to  the  following  effect :  ||"  God  cannot  be  tempted  with  evil,  &c.  And  Hen- 
tenius,  in  his  remarks  on  that  writer,  likewise  understands  the  word  xm^*re<  in  a  passive  sense. 


*  Antepono.  defendo.  antecello.     Scap.  f  Errata,  page  10J. 

X  Acts,  c.  iv.  v.  28.  §  See   chap.   iv.   passim. 

||  "  Deus  enim  malis  tentari  nequit,  juxta  eum  qui  dixit  (quanquam  externus  sit  a  nobis,  et  a  fide  alienus)  d:\ina  beataque 
natura  neque  molestias  yjstinet,  neque  aliis  prccltl" 


116  A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 


Book.  Ch. 

Ver. 

Orig.  Greek. 

1                                          \ 

Vulgate  Text.  Rhemish Version. 

Beza's  Latin  Text 

Bps.  Bible,  1568. 

K.James'sBiMejGn 

1    Pet.  ii 

.    8. 

FlfTf*  ffy.cctlicL- 

Petra  scan- 

A  rock  of  scan 

Petra  otiendi- 

unto  the  which 

A  rock  of  offence 

Xa'  ci  Tr^co.oflT- 
lacn  Tii  toyu> 

a7TEiSa>T£f,  in;  c 
xxt  trtBr,axy. 

dali  his  qui 

dal  to  them 

culi,  iis  qui  im 

thing  they 

even  to  them 

offend  unt 
verbo,  nee 

that  stumble 
at  the  word  ; 

pingunt,  non 
pare  ii  do  ser  mo- 

' were  or- 
dained.' 

which  stumble  at 
the  word,  being 

credunt  in 

neither  do  be- 

id, immorigeri; 

disobedient  ; 

quo  et  positi 

lieve,  wherein 

ad  quod  etiam 

whereunto  also 

sunt. 

also  they  are 
put. 

constituti  fue- 
rant. 

they  '  were  ap- 
.   pointed.' 

(137) 

Isa.  xxvi. 

18. 

fAtr,   y.x\   ubivn- 
axptv,    y.cti  rri- 
xoufv    TrtiiVfAX. 

Concepi- 

mus,  et  quasi 

parturivimu% 

et  peperimus 

spiritum. 

We  have  con- 
ceived, and  as 
it  were   travail- 
ed, and  brought 
forth  the  spirit. 

As  though  we 
had  brought 
forth    '  wind." 

We  have  been 

with  child,  we 

have  been  in  pain, 

we  have  as  it 

were,  brought 

forth  '  wind." 

(138) 

137.  Ei£  0  ZCll  STS-JTjeraJ'.  If  comparative  clearness  and  intelligibleness  be  faults,  they  are, 
in  the  present  instance,  attributable  to  the  Protestant  Translation  ;  for  most  unquestionably  the  Popish 
Version  possesses  neither  the  one  quality  nor  the  other.  Protestants  do  not  understand  this  passage  to 
signify,  that  the  unbelieving  Jews  were  appointed  by  God  to  disobedience,  thereby,  as  *Ward  insinu- 
ates, making  God  the  author  of  it  :  but  that  being  disobedient  to  the  Gospel,  they  incurred,  as  God 
foresaw  they  would,  a  liability  to  punishment  by  reason  of  that  disobedience,  as  is  concisely  ex- 
pressed by  that  eminent  Prelate  Bishop  Tomline.  t"  These  events,"  (viz  the  hard-hearredness  of  the 
Jews,  their  rejection  of  the  Gospel,  &c.)  says  his  Lordship,  "  did  not  come  to  pass,  because  they 
were  foretold,  but  they  were,  for  the  wisest  purpose,  foretold,  because  it  was  foreseen  they  would 
happen." 

*  Errata,  page  104. 
t  Refut.  cf  Calvinism,  c.  iv.  page  22p< 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1611. 


]  if* 


138.  *mi  -\I\vSVKlCL,  The  Protestant  Translation  of  this  text  is  more  literal  than  that 
which  it  obtains  in  the  Douay  Bible,  and  yet  that  does  not  protect  it  from  censure.  By  ren- 
dering the  Hebrew  term  '  wind,'  the  meaning  of  the  passage  becomes  natural  and  easy  ;  the 
one  part  of  it  explaining  the  other.  We  have  not  been  prosperous,  says  the  Prophet;  all  our  pangs 
and  throes  have  not  wrought  our  ease  and  deliverance  from  our  enemies  ;  we  can  only  expect 
them  from  God.  %To  bring  forth  wind,  is  a  phrase  not  unlike  those  used  by  §Hosea  :  viz.  to  feed 
upon  wind,"  and  "  to  reap  wind  ;"  in  other  words,  to  labour  in  vain.  jjPiscator  pertinently  observes:"' 
anxiis  noslris  consiliis  nil  prof ecimus"  f  Bishop  Stock's  version  of  this  text  is  the  very  same  as  the  Pro- 
testant one.     He  renders  mi  "wind." 

Ward,  not  content  with  the  censures  which  he  has  so  unsparingly  dealt  out  in  treating  of  the 
foregoing  text,  thus  remarks  :  "  it  is  the  custom  of  Protestants,  in  all  such  cases  as  this,  where  the 
more  appropriate  sense  is  of  God's  holy  spirit,  there  to  translate  wind,  as  in  Psalm  cxlvii.  v.  18.' 
The  very  words  of  the  Psalmist,  who  praises  God  for  his  power  over  the  elements,  convey  an 
ample  refutation  of  what  Ward  says,  viz.  "  He  sendeth  out  his  word,  and  melteth  them;  he  causeth 
the  **wind  to  blow,  and  the  waters  flow."  Now,  by  what  other  means  than  the '  wind  '  is  God  here 
said  to  execute  his  own  commands.  Moreover,  it  is  more  rational  to  suppose  that  a  thaw  is  produced 
by  the  wind  which,  "  he  causeth  to  blow  ;"  than  that  he  employs  his  holy  spirit  for  that  purpose. 
In  short,  the  words  which  follow  the  disputed  passage  clearly  determine  the  Popish  sense  of  it  as  inad- 
missible. For  if  the  people  of  Judah  received  the  Holy  Spirit,  they  must  both  have  received  help, 
and  have  been  able  to  impart  it  to  others.  Neither  could  they  in  that  case  have  complained  of  a  con- 
tinuance of  their  misery,  or  have  said,  "  we  have  not  wrought  any  deliverance  in  the  earth,  &c." 


Book.  Ch.  Vex. 

Orig.  Greek. 

Vulgate  Text. 

RhemishVersion. 

Beza's  Latin  Text 

Bps.  Bible,  1568.  K.James'sBibleiGn 

Joel.  ii.  £3. 

d.QTi  louy.iv  vuu> 

t«  ^aijtxaia  in; 

OiKCaoervvyiv. 

quia  dedit 
vobis  docto 
rem  justitiae. 

because  he 
hath  given  you 
a  doctor  of  jus- 
tice.    Accord- 
ing to  Ward, 
'  the  doctrine  ' 

Heb.  npT^b  rrnnn. 

.  .  .  for  he  hath 

given  you 

1  moderate 

rain.' 

for  he  hath  given 
you  '  the  former 
rain  moderately.' 

of  justice. 

(139) 

\3Q.  'n-m    This  term  implies  both  '  doctor,'  and  '  rain  ;'  as  ttMercerus  observes,   "  quia  par  est 


*  Sphitus.  ventus.    Plantin.  Buxt. 

\  "  The  material  spirit ;  the  lxx.  in  several  places,  apply  it  to  signify  the  air  in  motion."     Parkh. 

%  See  Lowth  on  Isaiah,  page  54.  §  C.  viii.  v.  /,  and  C.  iv.  v.  1. 

|j  Vid.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc. 

5f  Translation  of  Isaiah,  c.  xxvi.  v.  18.  by  the  Right  Rev.  Joseph  Stock,  Lord  Bishop  of  Waterford. 

**  The  Hebrew  and  lxx.  Greek  of  this  term,  are  the  same  as  those  in  the  text  connected  with  the  present  numbe: 

t+  Vid.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc. 


120        A  SYNOPSIS  OF  THE  CONTROVERTED  TEXTS,  WITH  REMARKS  ILLUSTRATIVE 

ratio  :  nt  pluvia  e  cado  mittitur,  sic  boni  doctores  Dei  donum."  In  the  former  acceptation  of  the  Hebrew 
word,  Christ '  the  teacher  of  righteousness,'  (as  inserted  in  the  margin  of  the  ancient  Bibles)  is  promised  ; 
and  in  the  latter,  the  <  convenient '  or  '  just '  or  '  right '  quantity  of  rain  necessary  to  bring  the  fruits  of 
the  earth  to  maturity,  would  be  given.  The  Hebrew  wordnp-r^  rendered  '  moderately,1  also  signifies 
according  to  righteousness.  When  it  is  consideied  that  the  sacred  writers  often  designate  spiritual  by 
corporeal  objects,  it  may  be  readily  conceived  that  the  justifying  doctrine  or  Gospel  of  Christ,  is  here 
pointed  out  under  the  appellation  of  rain.  But  in  addition  to  this,  the  suitableness  ot  '  rain'  as  a 
translation,  is  more  evident,  inasmuch  as  the  Prophet  had  before  denounced  a  famine  in  consequence 
of  a  drought. 

There  is  a  marked  inconsistency  between  Ward's  finding  the  same  fault,  in  the  present  instance, 
with  the  Protestant  Translators,  because  they  have  not.  translated  the  Hebrew  term  mm*  teacher;' 
that  he  did  in  a  preceding  number,  for  their  not  having  translated  it  '  image.'  In  the  *one  place, 
he  asks,  "  does  the  Hebrew  word  force  them  to  this  ?"  In  the  fother,  he  says,  "  avoiding  the  name 
of  image,  they  translate  another  thing,  without  any  necessary  pretence  either  of  Hebrew  or  Greek." 
This  last  remark  has  been  already  so  fully  discussed  under  its  proper  thead,  as  to  render  any  further 
observation  on  it  unnecessary  ;  and  as  to  his  enquiry,  if  he  were  sufficiently  versant  with  the  Hebrew 
and  Greek  languages;  or  indeed  with  the  received  English  Translation  of  his  own  church,  he  might 
have  perceived  his  question  answered  by  anticipation  in  the  lxxxivth  Psalm  and  in  §Isaiah.  Pagninus, 
whose  authority  should  carry  conviction  to  the  minds  of  the  Popish  Doctors,  although  he  takes  the 
Hebrew  word  generally  in  either  sense  ;  is  decidedly  of  opinion,  that  in  the  above  mentioned  passage 
in  Joel,    it  signifies  (pluvia)  '  rain.' 


Book.  Ch.  Ver.lOrig.  Greek. 


Isa.  xxxiii.  6. 


ty.ii  a^.ct  y.cti 


Vulgate  Text. 


Et  erit  fides 
in  tempori- 
bus  tuis. 


Pagn. 

renders  toton 
Jirmitas. 


Ithemish  Version. jBeza's  LatinText  Bps.  Bible,  1568 


And  there  shall 

be  faith  in  thy 

times. 


Mont. 

renders  the 

Hebrew  word, 

Veritas. 


a  sure  stablish 
ing  of  thy 
times. 


K.James'sBible  1G11 


And  wisdom  and 

knowledge  shall 

be    '  the  stability 

of  thy  times.' 


(140) 


140.  ||rev3N.    ««  For  a  little  ambiguity  of  the  Hebrew  word,"  says  Ward,  "they   turn  faith   into 


*  Errata,  page  108.  t  Ibid,  page  6j .  *  See  number  72.  §  C.  xxx.  v.  20. 

]|    Firmitas.   constitutio  firma.     Buxt.       Status  Stabilis.      Vitring.       Stability,  certainty,  truth.     PAhKH.       Bishop 
Stock  also  renders  it  '  stability.'      Yid.  Trans,  of  Isaiah. 


OF  THE  CORRECTNESS  OF  THE  ENGLISH  VERSION  OF  THEM  IN  1CU.  121 

stability.'"  Notwithstanding  this,  it  would  appear,  from  a  *note  in  the  margin  of  the  Douay  Bible  on 
the  word  '  faith,'  that  the  translators  were  disposed  to  favour  the  latter  signification.  Lowth,  in  his 
commentary  on  this  passage,  removes  all  uncertainty  about  the  matter.  "The  Prophet,''  he  remarks, 
"  applies  himself  to  Hezekiah,  and  tells  him  that  those  divine  graces  of  wisdom,  knowledge,  and  the 
fear  of  God,  will  be  the  support  of  his  time  and  government,  and  stand  him  in  more  stead,  than  all  the 
forces  and  treasure  in  which  other  princes  place  their  confidence."  '('Another  eminent  expositor  sums 
up  the  sense  of  the  verse  in  these  words  ;  "  neque  vita  stabilis,  neque  firma  salus,  cuiquam  continget, 
nisi  per  fidem,  qme  in  sapientia,  scientiaque  certa  versatur."  Nothing  further  need  be  adduced  to 
]>rove,  that  although  a  very  considerable  difference  exist,  between  the  Protestant  and  the  Popish 
Versions,  the  former  comes  nearest  the  meaning  of  the  inspired  writer. 

The  other  cavils  of  Ward,  which  are  softened  with  an  admission  that,  indeed  the  Protestant  Trans- 
lators rendered  several  passages  so  and  so,  but  "  not  with  any  ill  design  ;"  are  designedly  passed  over 
as  being  too  trifling  for  serious  criticism. 

*  Scil.  fidelity  in  performing  promises  of  good  things  temporal  and  spiritual 
t  Junius.  Vid.  Pol.  Synops.  in  loc. 


{     122    ) 


THE  PERPETUAL  SACRIFICE  OF  CHRIST'S  BODY  AND  BLOOD. 


Ward  having  treated  of  this  subject  separately  under  the  above  title,  it  becomes  necessary  to  accom- 
pany him  here  also  step  by  step,  for  the  purpose  of  shewing,  that  the  same  disputatious  spirit,  the 
same  disregard  to  truth,  and  the  same  disposition  to  impose  on  his  readers,  with  which  he  commenced 
his  work,  have  accompanied  him  to  its  conclusion. 

He  charges  Protestants  with  teaching  a  false  doctrine  in  the  twenty-first  of  their  thirty-nine  articles  ■ 
and,  *says  he,  "  because  they  would  have  it  backed  by  sacred  Scripture,  they  most  egregiously  cor- 
rupt the  text,  Ileb.  x.  10,  by  adding  to  the  same  two  words,  not  found  in  the  Greek  and  Latin  copies, 
;  viz.  for  all,"  &c.  Now,  Protestants  might  readily  concede  this  text,  and  yet  establish  their  point 
from  others,  in  the  writings  of  St.  Paul,  as  well  as  in  those  of  St.  Peter  and  St.  John.  But,  as  he 
accuses  them  of  corrupting  the  above  text,  it  is  of  some  consequence  to  examine,  with  what  justice 
he  does  so  ;  for,  if  it  be  shewn,  that  their  translation  is  the  most  perfect  it  was  capable  of  receiving, 
then  may  the  doctrine,  which  relates  to  the  perpetual  sacrifice  of  Christ's  body  and  blood,  be  enu- 
merated in  the  catalogue  of  errors  and  fabrications  of  the  Popish  Church. 

| Ep«7ra£  "  once  for  all."  The  omission  of  the  two  latter  words,  cannot  warrant  the  daily  obla- 
tion of  Christ's  body  and  blood  in  the  Mass,  as  St.  Paul,  in  a  preceding  ^chapter,  expressly  says, 
"  nor  yet  that  he  should  offer  himself  {ttoXXxx^)  often,  &c."  And  immediately  after,  "  but  now  («*■«£) 
once,  in  the  end  of  the  world,  hath  he  appeared,  &c."  These  are  passages  which  directly  forbid  the 
Popish  interpretation  ;  the  Apostle  reasons  thus :  if  the  repeated  offering  be  necessary,  Christ  must, 
in  that  case,  have  suffered  every  year,  since  the  fall  of  Adam.  The  conclusion  is  obvious.  Moreover, 
must  not  the  pretended  sacrifice  of  the  mass  import,  that  remission  of  sins  is  not  fully  obtained  for 
us  by  our  Lord's  sacrifice  on  the  cross,  contrary  to  another  declaration  of  St.  Paul. — §"  Now,  where 
remission  of  these  is,  there  is  no  more  offering  for  sin ." 

Although  the  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  be  but  of  recent  date,  not  having  been  finally  esta- 
blished before  the  Pontificate  of  Innocent  III.  at  the  commencement  of  the  thirteenth  century ;  yet 
Ward  insists  that  it  was  "  taught  in  the  primitive  Church,  and  delivered  down  to  the  present  time, 
by  the  Apostles,  by  Apostolical  Tradition  ;"  and  to  prove  this,  he  produces  quotations  from  the  Fathers 
who  flourished  in  the  first  five  centuries.     It  is  true,  he  gives  a  few  detached  passages  from  the  works 

*  Errata,  page  98. 
|  Semel  duntaxat.  Steph.  Thesaur.  Once;    Once  for  all.     Parkh.     !?««-«£  opponitur,  wx«S'  'n^^m,  quovls  die  ezpiatorio, 
,$***£,  semel.  actus  iterationem  negans.     Schleusn.  Lex.  in  loc.   Leigh  in  his  Cbitica  Sacra,  says,  "  that  the  single  offei- 
ing  was  so  complete,  that  its  repetition  was  not  only  not  necessary,  but  that  it  would  be  impious." 

t  Heb.  c.  ix,  v,  25,  2(5,  §  Ibid.  c.  x.  v.  18. 


THE  PERPETUAL  SACRIFICE  OF,  &,-.  123 

of  some  of  the  most  eminent  of  them,  but  so  unfairly,  so  distorted  and  mutilated,  and  so  jumbled 
together,  that  they  are  made  to  convey  a  meaning  the  very  opposite  to  the  one  intended.  Among  his 
selections,  one,  from  the  writings  of  St.  Cyril  of  Jerusalem,  lays  claim  to  superior  notice,  owino-to  the 
excellent  specimen  whi«  h  it  affords  of  his  ability  in  the  art  of  garbling,  and  mutilating  passages.  He 
not  only  suppresses  sentences,  but  entire  paragraphs,  and  uniting  those  which  are  whole  pages  asun- 
der, he  gives  them  the  appearance  of  a  contin  tous  connection.  This  is  strikingly  illustrated  in  the 
quotation  alluded  to,  which  is  made  up  of  two  distinct  parts  of  St.  Cyril's  fourth  Catechesis  on  the 
divine  mysteries.  The  reader  cannot  avoid  expressing  his  astonishment  at  the  ingenious  manner 
in  which  this  patchwork  business  is  completed,  and  the  plausibility  with  which  it  is  attempted  to  be 
palmed  on  the  public,  as  an  unbroken  narrative.  As  the  whole  matter  exhibits  such  a  compound 
of  fraud  and  deception,  as  is  not,  perhaps,  easily  to  be  met  with,  except  in  the  Jesuitical  *production  of 
Doctor  Milner,  it  is  hoped  that  its  transcription  will  need  no  apology.  "  fSince,  then  Christ  de- 
clared and  told  us  of  the  bread,  this  is  my  body,  who  shall  venture  any  longer  to  raise  a  doubt  ? 
And  since  he  affirmed  and  said,  this  is  my  blood,  who  shall  doubt,  saying  this  is  not  his  blood  ? 
He  once  changed  water  into  wine  at  Cana  in  Galilee,  by  his  own  power,  and  is  he  not  to  be  believed 
when  he  changes  wine  into  blood?  Being  called  to  a  corporeal  wedding,  he  wrought  this  unexpected 
miracle,  and  shall  he  not  much  rather  be  acknowledged,  when  giving  to  the  children  of  the  bride- 
chamber,  the  fruition  of  his  body  and  his  blood.  So,  then,  with  all  fulness  of  persuasion,  let  us  par- 
take {as  of  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ.  (Ward,  by  suppressing  the  word  "as  "  in  this  last  clause 
gives  the  sentence  an  interpretation  favourable  to  transubstantiation,  which,  in  its  unmutilated  state 
it  does  not  bear.)  For  in  the  type  of  the  bread,  the  body  is  given  thee,  and  in  the  type  of  the  wine 
the  blood  is  given  thee,  that  thou  mayest  become,  by  taking  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  one  ia 
body  and  in  blood  with  him.  Thus  wealso  become  bearers  of  Christ,  his  body  and  blood  being  con- 
veyed into  our  members."  Ward  carries  his  reader  thus  far,  after  having  presented  him,  not  with  a 
translation  like  that  just  quoted,  which  so  fully  expresses  the  Father's  sentiments  ;  but  with  one  in 
every  respect,  weak  and  imperfect.  Besides,  instead  of  giving  the  sentences  which  immediately 
follow,  and  on  which  the  sense  of  all  the  preceding  ones  rests  ;  he  subjoins  a  passage  from  a  different 
part  of  the  same  Catechesis,  and  thus  perverts  the  original  to  advocate  the  doctrine  of  the  '  Perpetual 
Sacrifice,'  contrary  to  its  letter  and  spirit,  and  to  the  meaning  of  its  Author. 

*  Inquiry  into  certain  Vulgar  Opinions.  It  is  not  hazarding  too  much  to  say,  that  that  work  next  to  the  Exiata 
has  contributed  more  than  all  the  other  late  productions  of  the  Popish  press,  to  add  to  the  delusion  under  which  the  lettered 
part  of  the  Irish  Papists  lie.  Mr.  Le  Mesurier,  in  his  treatise  on  the  Eucharist,  has,  by  bringing  to  light  a  fraud  practised  by 
Doctor  Milner,  similar  to  the  one  complained  of  here,  not  only  impeached,  but  absolutely  blasted  the  credit  of  his  mischievous 
performance.  Columbanus  tells  a  curious  anecdote  of  Doctor  Milner.  "  I  once  asked  the  Bishop  of  Castibala,"  says  that 
sensible  writer,  "  how  he  had  nerves  strong  enough  to  refer,  in  his  Winchester,  for  the  history  of  king  Arthur,  to  Gildas,  wh© 
never  once  mentions  his  name.  He  replied,  Gildas  certainly  does  mention  him  r  We  searched  Gale's  edition,  but  in  vain  !  !  " 
This  carries  with  it  its  own  comment.     See  Columbanus,  ad  Hibernos.     Letter  iii.  p.  50. 

f  Errata,  page  101. 
J  urt  (mtx  nxoyti  irXn^oty ogiaj,  'CVZ  cupxTe;  y.an  utpenos  [uneCKix^a^unt  yj^r^-     Ward  renders  if  "  wherefore,  full  of  certaiaty, 
let  us  rcceiue  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ :"  and  thus  omits  the  word  as,  which  corresponds  with  the  original  £,-. 

H  2 


124 


ABJURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED. 


The  translation,  which  Ward  should  have  given,  is  in  the  left  hand  column,  and  is  the  regular 
continuation  of  the  preceding  extract,  commencing  with  its  last  sentence.  The  one  he  has  given  is 
put  in  the  other  column  in  italics,  that  his  dishonesty,  may,  by  the  contrast,  be  the  better  exposed. 


*<c  Thus  we  also  become  bearers  of  Christ, 
his  body  and  his  blood  being  conveyed  into  our 
members,  and  thus,  as  the  blessed  Peter  says,  we 
become  partakers  of  the  divine  nature.  Formerly, 
Christ  discoursing  with  the  Jews  said,  '  unless 
you  eat  my  Flesh,  and  drink  my  blood,  ye  have 
no  life  in  you.'  (John  vi.  53.)  But  they  not 
hearing  (or  not  understanding)  these  things 
which  were  spoken  spiritually,  went  back, 
thinking  that  he  invited  them  to  an  eating  of 

HIS  FLESH,    &C.'? 


"  Thus  we  also  become  Christophers,  that  is, 
Bearers  of  Christ,  receiving  his  Budv  and  Blood 
info  us."'  Ward  stops  here,  and  subjoins  what 
follows,  as  the  genuine  translation  of  the 
Greek  !  !  "  Do  not  therefore  look  on  it  as  mere 
bread  only,  or  bare  wine ;  for  as  God  him- 
self has  said,  it  is  the  Body  and  Blood  of  Christ* 
Notwithstanding,  therefore,  the  information  of 
sense,  let  faith  confirm  thee  ;  and  do  not  judge  of 
the  thing  by  the  taste,  but  rather  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  at  rest  under  the 
right,  I  into  which  you  are  to  receive  so  great 
a  King:  and  in  the  hollow  of  your  hand  take  the 
body  of  Christ,  saying,  Amen." 


ABJURATORY    CLAUSES    EXAMINED. 

It  was  not  at  first  intended  to  take  any  notice  of  the  last  page  of  Ward's  book,  which  contains  what 
is  called,  "  A  Vindication  of  the  Roman  Catholics,  shewing  their  abhorrence  of  certain  tenets 
commonly  laid  at  their  door;''  as  it  was  supposed  it  might  have  been  published  without  the  concur- 
rence of  the  Popish  Clergy,  and  that  they  themselves  would  scarcely  venture  to  disown  principles  in 
one  part  of  a  work,  which  from  the  patronage  they  have  given   it,  may   be   said  to  be    explicitly  ac- 

*  "oitw  yecs  y.x\  wifofoMi  ynouivx  t«  wj-xT'-c,  uvth  yxi  th  cny-x-ro*;  tn;  rx  vusrtgx  aretoitiofjaw  «•?,:)"  oinrw  xxtx  to*  uayxgiov  YltTeo*  Quoit; 
•*Gty«»oi  Qv&tuq  y-'ifl/niGflt.  Hotc  %pifo;  TCt£  I&satoi;  aix}  tyoptvoi  t'hiyit,  txt  f/,ri  (ppyr,~t  pa  T»)v  act-^cc,  yxi  Wir.71  pa  70  cctfj.x,  bx  i"X}"ti  £«.">!»  v>  'i«'* 
Tojj,    fHsivCj    a»j    uar.KOOTii;    riNETMATIKfl2   ru»  7\iyoy.iVMV,     cxanoaTWovsirsj    awrjAOoy    11?    tx   orncu,    rcut£o;Tsf    In    aotrxo^xytap  avriS   Ttevx^ntt- 

rxt.     Cyril,  Cateches.  Mystagog.  iv.  p.  2Q3. 

7  It  is  odd  enough  that  the  Popish  doctors  would  allow  a  passage  setting  forth  an  usage  of  the  primitive  Church  to  continue 
in  a  work  which  has  bad  their  revision,  inasmuch  as  that  usage  is  discontinued  by  their  Church. 


AB JURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED.  125 

knowledged  by  them  in  another.  But,  in  consequence  of  this  very  vindication  having  found  its  way 
into  a  small  *tract  lately  published  in  the  city  of  Cork,  it  becomes,  in  a  manner,  entitled  to  distinct 
consideration.  The  respectability,  not  less  than  the  learning  of  the  gentleman,  under  the  sanction 
of  whose  name  it  comes  recommended  to  the  public,  as  well  as  the  circumstance  of  his  being  a 
member  of  the  established  Church,  impart  to  it  some  pretensions  to  candour  and  truth,  which  it  will 
be  forthwith  necessary  to  investigate. 

Before,  however,  he  enters  into  an  examination  of  a  few  of  the  leading  articles,  the  author 
cannot  avoid  observing,  that  it  has  been  the  invariable  and  constant  practice,  of  late  years,  with  the 
Popish  Clergy,  to  take  advantage  of  that  misjudged  liberality  which  has  sprung  up  among  several 
members  of  the  Church  of  England,  by  making  them  instrumental  in  the  propagation  of  opinions 
which,  however  specious  in  appearance,  are  found  on  examination  to  be  vague  and  indefinite.  It  is 
likewise  observable,  that  two  of  the  most  obnoxious  tenets  with  which  the  Popish  Clergy  are  charge- 
able,  viz  'exclusive  salvatrm,'  and,  '  that  no  faith  is  to  be  kept  with  those  who  are  without  the  pale 
of  their  church,'  are  not  enumerated  among  the  articles  of  the  Vindication.  When  it  is  considered 
how  unimportant  several  of  those  are,  which  they  so  formally  renounce,  it  is  not  a  little  surprising, 
that  they  should  pass  these  over  in  silence  ;  for  as  these  tenets  are  imputed  to  them,  they  are  surely 
entitled  to  the  like  notice  with  the  rest.  Can  any  other  conclusion,  then,  be  drawn,  than  that  they 
hold  these  in  the  same  unlimited  sens?,  in  which  they  were  laid  down  by  the  last  General  Council  of 
Trent?  Uuqu?stionably  not.  And  notwithstanding  that  tan  elaborate  production  has  been  expressly 
written  for  the  purpose  of  removing  so  uncharitable,  or  to  use  a  favourite  term  of  its  author,  so  "  un- 
kindly "  an  imputation,  an  opposite  opinion  cannot  be  entertained,  until  a  council  of  equally  com- 
petent authority,  cancels  its  decrees. 

The  learned  author,  in  the  publication  just  mentioned,  has,  with  modest  reserve,  withheld  his 
name  from  the  public,  and,  in  the  true  spirit  of  Christian  charity,  has  undertaken  to  prove,  that  the 
tenet  of  exclusive  salvation  is  not  imputable  to  the  Popish  Church.  He  is,  however,  far  from  esta- 
blishing his  point;  (-ov  having  set  out  on  a  wrong  principle,  his  many  judicious  observations  and  con- 
clusive arguments  are  consequently  thrown  away. 

Because  ^Doctor  Milner  has,  with  some  colour,  to  be  sure,  of  liberality,  called  a  Protestant 
gentleman  a  -  Christian  ;"  the  Answerer  observes  that  in  this  appellation  there  is  "  an  emphatic  recog- 
nition both  of  the  Christianity  and  the  sal  ability  of  the  party  addressed  :"  and  because  it  is  stated  in 
a  posthumous  publication  of  a  Doctor  Ha  warden,  that  "  wilfulness'5  alone  constitutes  heresy  and 
schism  ;  i.  e.  when  error  against  faith,  and  separation  from  the  Catholic  communion  are  involuntary, 
and  proceed  from  invincible  ignorance,  they  cannot  be  sinful  ;  §he  concludes,  that  according  to  Doctor 
H.  "  they  who  in  appearance  are  heretics,  or  schismatics,  may  in  reality  be  good  men  ;  of  course 
objects  of  God's  favour  here,  and  heirs  hereafter  of  his  everlasting  promises."     But  experience,    and 

*  Synthetical  Arrangement  of  Texts,  selected  from  tlie  Douay  Translation  of  the  New  Testament,  ly  Thomas 
Newenham,  Esg  — This  gentleman  informs  his  readers,  that  the  renunciatory  articles  which  he  has  taken  from  the  fourth  edition 
of  Ward's  Errata,  are  published  by  him  with  the  approbation  of  the  Roman  Catholic  prelates  of  Ireland. 

J-  Ah  Answer  to  the  Right  Hon.  P.  Duigenan's  two  great  arguments  against  Popish  Enfranchisement,  Dublin,  1810, 
{  Inquiry,  p.  48,  §  Answer,  p.  2(5. 


126  ABJURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED. 

the  evidence  of  facts,  the  sentiments  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  the  language  of  its  divines,  forbid 
such  a  conclusion  to  be  drawn.  Indeed,  it  may  be  proved  from  the  internal  evidence,  which,  the  docu- 
ments he  refers  to,  affords,  that  this  assumption  is  founded  in  error. 

In  the  first  place,  could  Doctor  Milner,  when  he  addressed  his  Wexford  correspondent,  in  an 
epistolary  way,  have  done  less  than  use  the  courtesy  above  alluded  to  ?  Could  he  have  so  far  departed 
from  the  established  rules  of  politeness,  or  have  so  much  disregarded  the  dictates  of  common  sense, 
as  to  have  spoken  differently  to  the  person,  with  whom  he  remonstrated  in  a  friendly  manner,  on  the 
impropriety  of  duelling  ?  If  he  could  not,  then  the  passage  in  Doctor  M.'s  letter,  is  but  a  weak  proof 
either  of  his  own  liberal  views  in  this  particular,  or  of  his  church's  disavowal  of  the  tenet  imputed  to  it. 
Besides,  it  is  not  quite  clear  that  Doctor  M.  will  relish  this  sturdy  kind  of  argument,  whereby  he  is 
pressed  with  consequences  drawn  from  his  own  principles.  Had  Doctor  M.  in  no  other  part  of  his 
writings  given  an  opinion  on  this  subject,  the  individual  passage,  which  the  Answerer  has  selected 
from  his  letter,  might,  it  is  true,  bear  the  interpretation  assigned  to  it  ;  but  when,  to  use  his  own 
words,  *"  he  has  repeatedly  published,  that  he  would  rather  lose  his  life,  than  be  instrumental  in 
giving  power,  or  even  influence,  to  an  uncatholic  Government,  over  any  part  of  the  Catholic  Church ;" 
there  is  little  doubt,  that,  when  he  applied  the  term  "  Christian  "  to  a  Protestant  gentleman,  he 
used  it  in  the  ambiguous  manner  of  the  schoolmen,  if  he  intended  it  should  have  any  meaningat  all.  The 
Answerer  must  likewise  know,  that  Doctor  Milner  has  '  repeatedly  '  called  our  venerable  and  truly 
religious  Monarch,  an  UNCATHOLIC  KING.  In  doing  so,  he  most  unequivocally  recognises 
the  exclusive  doctrine.  And  that  the  reader  may  be  convinced  of  this,  it  is  necessary  merely  to  refer 
to  the  arrogant  pretensions  which  he  has  put  forward,  in  a  published  sermon,  in  behalf  of  the  Church 
of  Rome,  maintaining  it  to  be  the  -\only  true  church.  The  very  extract  made  from  it,  at  the  conclu- 
sion of  the  Preface  to  this  work,  justifies  the  opinion,  that  he  did  not  look  beyond  the  pale  of  his 
own  church,  when  he  drew  the  distinction  between  such  revealed  truths  as  related  to  the  nature  and 
authority  of  the  church,  and  those  {fundamental  ones  contained  in  the  Apostle's  creed.  In  his  letters 
to  Doctor  Sturges,  observes  the  kAnswcrer,  he  vindicates  certain  important  doctrines  of  the  Church  of 
England,  against  Bishop  Hoadly  and  his  followers,  and  declares  his  persuasion,  that  true  orthodox 
churchmen  would  prefer  a  Roman  Catholic  to  aHoadlyite.  Doctor  Milner  is  a  very  subtle  adversary, 
and  being  well  aware  of  the  'vantage  ground,  which  he  would  possess,  if,  in  his  controversy  with 
Doctor  Sturges,  he  took  his  stand  in  the  ranks  of  the  Protestant  Clergy,  by  a  skilful  manoeuvre,  he 
comes  over  to  them  for  awhile,  and  wields  their  weapons  to  the  discomfiture  of  his  opponent.  Such 
advocacy  the  Divines  of  the  Church  of  England  have  never  acknowledged,  indeed  never  can.  One 
and  all  exclaim,   hand  tali  auxilio.     And  as  to  his  persuasion,  that  orthodox  churchmen  would  prefer  a 

*  Appendix  to  Instructions  addressed  to  the  English  Catholics,  p.  6, 
t  If  the  Romish  church  be  the  only  true  church,  by  which  is  meant  the  only  church  truly  christian,  it  must  follow  that  the 
members  of  that  church,  are  the  only  true  Christians.     It  remains,  therefore,  for  Dr.  Milner  to  explain  what  he  means  by  Chris- 
tians, that  are  not  true  Christians ;  in  other  words,  Christians  that  are  not  Christians.  In  this  last-named  class  of  Christians,  it 
is  manifest  that  Dr.  Milner's  liberality  has  placed  the  Protestant  gentleman. 

t  Answer,  p.  18. 
§  See  Answer,  Note  3,  p.  53. 


ABJURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED.  127 

Papist  to  a  IToadlyitc,  it  may  be  asked,  what  mark  of  liberality  is   there  in  his  saying  so?     It  is  an 
ingenious  way  of  complimenting  himself,  but  nothing  more. 

Next,  as  to  the  passages  which  have  been  quoted  by  the  Answerer  from  Doctor  Hawarden's  work, 
it  might  he  said,  he  gave  them  the  interpretation,  which  they  were  designed  to  bear,  if  he  could  shew, 
that  that  writer  understood  the  adjunct  '  Catholic,'  in  its  genuine  signification,  viz.  universal;  and 
that  the  Catholic  Church  was  considered  by  him  to  include  the  aggregate  of  all  particular  churches, 
in  which  Catholic  verities  are  inculcated  ;  and  lastly,  that  he  did  not  confine  it  to  that  branch  of  the 
Christian  Church  called  Roman.  But,  until  he  does  so,  the  testimony  adduced  by  him  is  insufficient 
to  establish  his  point.  If  the  Answerer  believes  the  case  to  be,  as  he  represents  it,  it  can  be  for  no 
more  solid  reason  than  that  he  wishes  it ;  but,  surely,  he  cannot  expect  that  others  will  agree  with 
him  in  opinion,  on  such  slight  grounds.  As  a  proof  of  the  fallacy  of  his  reasoning,  it  will  suffice  to 
state,  what  he  says  on  the  subject  of  baptism.  Doctor  Hawarden,  *says  he,  holds  that  sacrament  as 
generally  necessary  to  salvation  ;  that  is,  that  it  is  not  indispensable,  and  luithout  exception  ;  while 
Archbishop  Seeker,  in  treating  of  the  same  subject,  uses  terms  exactly  similar.  "  If,  therefore," 
continues  he,  "  we  are  satisfied  with  that  kindly  interpretation,  by  which  our  own  Church  is  justified 
in  the  one  case;  how,  in  common  consistency,  shall  we  reject  the  charitable  construction,  which  Dr. 
H.  gives  to  the  sentiment  of  the  R.  C.  Church  in  the  other?"  Here  is  his  error,  in  supposing,  from 
the  similarity  which  exisis  be' ween  the  exposition  of  these  divines,  that,  therefore,  each  deemed  the 
baptism  conferred  by  the  other,  valid.  It  may  be  affirmed  of  the  Archbishop ;  but,  most  certainly, 
not  of  Doctor  H.  for,  though  he  has  not  expressed  himself  explicitly  on  the  subject,  yet  there  are 
not  wanting  other  and  weightier  authorities  to  ascertain  in  what  light  the  Popish  Church  views  the 
sacraments,  as  they  are  administered  by  the  Church  of  England.  The  learned  fWard,  as  Doctor 
Milner  calls  him,  sa)s,  that  Protestants  have  deprived  the  two  sacraments,  which  they  retain,  of  u  all 
grace,  virtue,  and  efficacy;  making  'hem  no  more  than  poor  and  beggarly  elements,  like  those  of  the 
Jewish  law."  Here  is  Ward,  versus  Hawarden.  The  open  declaration  of  the  one,  is  opposed  to  the 
guarded  exposition  of  the  other;  in  short,  a  downright  asseveration  is  made  by  Ward,  while  a  kindly 
interpretation  must  be  applied  to  the  words  of  Doctor  H.  to  elicit  the  Answerers  meaning.  It  may, 
therefore,  be  fairly  presumed,  that  when  Doctor  H.  admitted  the  possibility  of  some  being  saved,  who 
are  not  of  the  (Roman)  Catholic  communion;  he  made  his  exception  solely  in  favour  of  the  martyrs, 
who  had  no  opportunity  of  receiving  baptism,  or  of  Catechumens  who  died  before  it  could  be  admi- 
nistered, or  of  such  as  were  unavoidably  mistaken  about,  or  invincibly  ignorant  of  the  necessity  of 
its  being  administered.  But  if,  to  persons  of  this  description  alone,  the  possibility  of  salvation  can, 
in  the  opinion  of  Doctor  H.  be  extended  beyond  the  pale  of  the  Romish  Church,  then  it  still  remains 
to  be  shewn  how  the  non-existence  of  '  exclusive  salvation,'  as  a  tenet  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  is 
proved  by  the  extracts  from  his  writings,  which  are  given  in  the  Answer. 

But  to  return  to  Dr.  Milner  ;  as  much  stress  is  laid  on  a  single  passage  in  his  letter,  which,  probably^ 

*  Answek,  p.  23,  i  See  Errata,  p.  55.  and  No.  44  of  this  work. 


128  ABJURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED. 

like  the  *unfortunate  note  written  by  him  to  Mr.  Ponsonby,  was  sketched  in  a  hasty  manner,  the 
effusion  of  the  moment,  and  not  originally  intended  to  meet,  the  public  eye,  it  is  proper  to  state  the 
opinion  he  has  given  of  an  author,  compared  with  whose  work  the  Errata  is  charity  itself,  and  then 
to  present  a  summary  of  the  work  itself,  that  the  reader  may  be  further  enabled  to  judge,  whether  he 
be  entitled  to  the  credit  given  him  by  the  Answerer,  or  not. 

An  exposition  of  the  prophecies  contained  in  the  Apocalypse,  was  first  published  in  a  clandestine 
manner,  some  thirty  years  back,  under  the  fictitious  title  of  Pastorini  ;  a  name  which  continued  to 
impose  on  the  literary  world,  while  the  real  author  lived.  When  concealment  became  no  longer 
necessary,  fDoctor  Milner  announces  to  the  public,  that  the  work  in  question,  was  not  the  production 
of  an  Italian,  as  was  supposed,  but  of  "  the  late  Rev.  C.  Walmesley,  B.  D.  V.  A.  a  most  mild  and 
enlightened  Christian,"  and  that  "  it  consists  neither  of  folly,  nor  of  blasphemy,  but  of  a  most  inge- 
nious and  learned  exposition  of  the  book  of  Revelations."  This  mild  and  enlightened  expositor  tells 
his  readers,  that  the  fallen  star  mentioned  in  Rev.  ix.  1,  is  emblematical  of  Luther's  apostacy  ;  that 
while  the  keys  of  heaven  were  committed  to  Peter,  to  Luther  was  given  the  key  of  the  bottomless  pit, 
or  hell,  and  that  on  Luther's  opening  the  pit,  a  thick  smoke,  that  is,  "  a  strong  spirit  of  seduction, 
which  was  hatched  in  hell,  burst  out ;"  that  from  the  smoke,  was  produced  a  swarm  of  locusts, 
who  are  the  Reformers  ;  that  some  of  the  locusts  (v.  10)  had  tails  like  scorpions,  with  stings  in  them  ; 
"  which  allegory  describes  emphatically,  the  implacable  enmity  of  Protestants  to  those  of  the  XCatlwlic 
communion  ;"  and  finally,  that  Protestants  are  to  be  extirpated  in  the  year  1825  or  1826  !  However, 
"  before  the  Saviour  of  mankind,  who  only  waits  the  return  of  his  strayed  sheep,  is  forced  to  strike ; 
Protestants  are  conjured  to  lay  down  all  animosity,  against  their  ancient  mother,  to  think  of  reconcilia- 
tion, and  ask  to  be  received  again  into  her  bosom."  What  will  the  Anszvcrer  say  to  this  ?  Does  not 
every  line,  every  word  of  it  breathe  the  spirit  of  that  doctrine,  which  he  has  so  confidently  stated  to 
be  extinct  ?  And  do  not  the  encomiums  bestowed  on  the  author,  and  on  his  work  by  Doctor  Milner, 
afford  incontestable  evidence,  that  the  liberal  interpretation  given  tothe  passage  quoted  from  Doctor  M.'s 
letter,  to  his  Protestant  correspondent  in  Wexford,  is  more  than  it  can  strictly  bear  ? 

The  ^Answerer  next  refers  to  the  tenth  chapter  of  the  catechism,  drawn  up  by  a  former  Titular 
Archbishop  of  Cashel,  and  at  present  taught  in  the  Popish  Church,  as  fully  establishing  what  he  has 
been  labouring  to  evince  from  the  writings  of  Hawarden  and  Milner.  The  first  question,  which  he 
cites  from  it,  is  this  ;  ||"  Are  all  obliged  to  be  of  the  true  church  ?"  Answer  ;  yes,  no  one  can  be  saved 

*  Doctor  Milner's  political  principles,  are  not  of  a  more  protean  cast  than  his  religious  ones.  For  if  the  changeableness  of 
the  former  has  been  exemplified  in  bis  conduct  respecting  the  Veto,  the  unsteadiness  of  the  latter  can  be  instanced  in  the  case 
of  the  Rev.  Doctor  Lingard,  P.  P.  This  gentleman,  in  one  of  his  publications,  advanced  some  points,  which  were  so  offensive 
to  Doctor  Milner,  and  appeared  to  him  to  be  of  so  heretical  a  nature,  that  he  absolutely  denounced  him  to  his  ordinary,  and 
stigmatized  him  as  deserving  the  severest  lash  of  ecclesiastical  censure.  When  Doctor  L.  heard  of  the  intended  rigours,  and 
of  the  cause  for  which  they  were  to  be  imposed,  he  enclosed  Doctor  Milner  some  extracts  from  a  former  thesis  of  his,  in  which 
the  same  sentiments  were  expressed,  and  nearly  the  same  words  were  used,  as  those  for  which  Doctor  M.  would  now  visit  on  him 
the  vengeance  of  the  Church  ! 

f  Inquiry,  page  83. 
%  Is  the  term  Catholic  understood  here  in  the  sense  assigned  to  it  by  the  Answerer  ? 
§  Note  3,  p.  56.  II  Butler's  Catechism,  page  17. 


ABJURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED.  t„9 

out  of  it.     <  I  believe,  says  the  Answerer,  there  is  not  in  the  whole  catechism,  any  thing  more  severe 
than  this  assertion.     But  mark  what  follows  :'     Will  strict  honesty  to  every  one,  and  moral  good  works, 
ensure  salvation,  whatever  church  or  religion  one  professes  ?     No,  unless  such  good  works  be  enliven- 
ed by   faith,   which   vvorketh   by  charity.     <  Instead  of  any  revolting  anathema,'  he  concludes,  "  we 
have  here  nothing,    but  the  prime  principle  of  practical   Christianity."     A  more  erroneous  conclusion 
he  couU  not  arrive  at,  as  the  full  import,  of  these  questions  and  answers  cannot  be  collected  by  taking 
them  abstractedly,  as  he  has  done,  but  as  they  stand  in  connexion  with  those  which  precede  and  follow. 
In  the  beginning  0f  the  xith  chapter,  it  is  asked ;  «  why  is  the  church  called  Roman  ?   Answer.  Because 
the  visible  head  of  the  Church  is  Bishop  of  Rome,"  that  is,  as  is  stated  immediately  after,   "the  Pope, 
who  is  Christ's  Vicar  on  earth,   &c.  while  just  before,  it  is  said  to  be  an  additional  mark  of  the  unity 
of  the  church,   that  it  is  placed  under  that  one  visible  head.     Here  then,  it  is  determined,  as  clearly  as 
any  thing  can,  that  the  true,  and  only    church,  spoken  of  is  Roman;  that  the  Holy  and  Apostolical 
Church  is  Roman  ;  and,  consequently,  that  what  is  meant,  by  the  true  church,  in  the  catechism,  does 
not  take  in,  in  its  "  charitable  embracement,"  alldenominations  of  Christians ;  but  such  only  as  acknow- 
ledge the  bishop  of  Rome,  as  its  supreme  head.     It  is  not,  however,  to  Butler's  Catechism  alone,  that 
the  opinion  is   confined,   "  that  no  one  can  be  saved  out  of  the  Roman  Catholic  Church,"   as  in  Dr 
Troy's  *Catechism   published  in  Dublin,  in    1803,  and  in  |  that  drawn  up  for  the  use  of  the  French 
churches,  and  approved  of  by  the  present  bishop  of  Rome ;  and  in  the  JPapal  Allocution  delivered 
in   October    1804  ;  and  in  the  §oath  of  a  Popish  priest;  and  in  the   ||bull  of  Pope  Pius  V.  issued  in 
1569,  against  Queen  Elizabeth ;  not  to  spe-k  of  the  decision  of  the  council  of  Trent,  which  has  not 

*  Q—  What  do  you  mean  by  the  true  church  ?     A.— The  congregation  of  the  faithful  under  one  visible  head  on  earth. 
q.— Is  there  but  one  true  church  ?     A.— Although  there  be  many  sects,  there  is  but  one  true  religion,  and  one  true  church. 
Q. — Why  is  there  but  one  true  church  ?    A. — Because  there  is  but  one  true  God. 
Q. — How  do  you  call  the  true  church  ?     A. — The  Roman  Catholic  Church. 
Q. — Are  all  obliged  to  be  of  the  true  church  ?     A. — Yes. 

Q.— Why  are  all  obliged  to  be  of  the  true  church  ?     ^.—Because  no  one  can  he  saved  out  of  it. 

Q.— Is  it  easy  to  know  the  true  church  ?     A.— It  is,  the  same  Providence,  which  established  it,  has  made  it  visible  to  ali. 
Q. — How  is  the  true  church  visible  ?     A. — By  certain  distinguishing  characters. 
Q. — Which  are  they  ?     A. — The  true  church  is  one,  Holy,  Catholic,  and  Apostolical. 
Q.— Has  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  the  marks  of  the  true  church  ?     A.— She  has,  and  SHE  ALONE,  &c.  kc. 

f  The  French  Catechism,  translated  by  D.  Bogue,  London,  1807,  contains  the  following  questions  and  answers. 

Q. — What  do  you  understand  by  the  words  I  believe  the  Church  ? 

A. — That  the  Church  may  always  continue,  that  all  it  teaches  must  be  believed,  and  that  to  obtain  eternal  life,  we  must  live 
and  die  in  its  bosom. 

Q. — Why  are  these  articles,  the  communion  of  saints,  the  remission  of  sins,  and  life  everlasting,  placed  after  this,  I  believe  in 
the  Holy  Catholic  Church  ? 

A. — To  shew  that  there  is  neither  holiness,  nor  remission  of  sins,  nor  consequently  any  salvation,  or  eternal  life,  out  of  the 
(Roman)  Catholic  Church. 

X  The  Roman  Catholic  Church  is  the  only  ark  of  salvation. 

§  "  This  true  catholic   (scil.  Roman)  faith^  out  of  which  no  one  can  he  safe,  (extra  qttam  nemo  »alvus  esse  potest)   which 
*t  present  I  freely  profess,  &c."  Pontific  Roi*. 

\\  "  No  salvation  out  of  the  Church  of  Rome." 


ABJURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED. 

been  yet  reversed  ;  nor  of  what  has  no  less  weight,  in  Ireland  at  least,  the  authority  of  *Ward ;  the 
exclusive  doctrine  is  openly  and  unequivocally  declared. 

If  additional  evidence  be  wanting  to  carry  conviction  to  the  mind  of  the  benevolent  and  learned 
author  of  the  Answer,  that  the  odious  tenet  imputed  to  the  Popish  Church,  is  still  maintained  by  it, 
let  him  only  consult  the  unbig-itcd  creed  to  which  Doctor  Coppinger  subscribes  in  his  letter  to  the 
Dublin  Society.  He  will  there  see  it  frankly  avowed,  that  it  is  an  unbending  rule  of  the  Church  of 
Rome,  that  its  members  should  not  join  in  religious  worship  with  those  of  any  other  communion, 
and  that  the  existing  Pontiff  deems  this  ordinance  as  obligatory  as  Benedict  XIV.  did  in  his  day. 
.For,  why  authoritatively  enforce  so  stern  an  inhibition,  if  the  Church  of  Rome  considered  those  of 
a  different  communion,  j"  objects  of  God's  favour  here,  and  heirs  hereafter  of  his  everlasting  pro- 
mises." 

One  of  the  last  observations  made  by  the  Answerer,  is,  that  it  is  undeniable,  that  there  are 
more  +  "  religious  congenialities  "  between  Protestants  and  Romanists,  than  between  the  former  and 
the  misguided  followers  of  Calvin,  who,  for  a  century  past,  have  been  tolerated  without  injury.  The 
case,  notwithstanding,  cannot  be  considered  analogous;  for,  although  more  points  of  contact  were  dis- 
covered on  the  one  side  than  on  the  other;  and  although  §Mosheirri,  whose  authority  he  alludes  to, 
says,  the  decline  of  the  dissenting  interest  in   England  is  chiefly  to  be  attributed  to  the  lenity  and 

*  Ward  asks,  "whether  salvation  can  be  had  in  a  church  without  pastors  V  Errata,  page  9".  He  puts  this  question, 
ainposing  that  he  had  demonstrated  jthat  every  Protestant  Church  is  without  pastors.  One  of  the  Reasons,  too,  assigned,  why  a 
Roman  Catholic  cannot  conform  to  the  Protestant  religion,  (See  Grounds  of  the  Catholic  Doctrine,  Reason  XI.  Wogan,  Dub- 
lin,) is  this,  "  Because,  even  in  the  judgment  of  Protestants,  we  must  be  on  the  safer  side.  They  allow  that  our  Church  does  not  err  in 
fundamentals,  that  she  is  a  part,  at  least,  of  the  Church  of  Christ ;  that  we  have  ordinary  mission,  succession,  and  orders,  from  the 
Apostles  of  Christ  j  they  all  allow  that  there  is  salvation  in  ovr  communion  ;  and  consequently  that  our  Church  wants  nothing 
necessary  to  salvation.  We  can  allow  them  nothing  of  it  at  all,  without  doing  wrong  to  truth  and  our  own  consciences,  &c."  It  ends 
fhus  :  "  In  fine,  they  (scil.  Protestants)  have  no  share  in  the  promise  of  Christ's  heavenly  kingdom  (excepting  in  the  cases  of  invin- 
ille  ignorance),  from  which  the  Scriptures,  in  so  many  places,  exclude  heretics  and  schismatics." 

f  Answer,  page  26. 

■♦  Some  sensible  remarks  occur  in  the  British  Review,  (No.  1,  page  215,)  which  may  be  here  thought  appli- 
cable "  We  cannot  agree,"  says  the  Reviewer,  "  with  those  who  would  persuade  us,  that  the  Church  of  Eng- 
!and,  in  all  inward  and  vital  principles  of  Christian  faith  and  morals,  agrees  better  with  the  Church  of  Rome,  than  with  the 
Lutheran  or  Calvinistic  communions."  Again:  "  But  it  appears  to  us  very  plain;  that  however  the  Calvinist  and  the  Lutheran 
m  i\  di.ler  with  us  concerning  the  ceremonies  and  discipline  of  the  Church,  in  some  one  or  two  articles  of  doctrine,  yet  that  they 
substantially  agree  with  us  in  a  confession  of  the  same  faith.  Indeed,  many  of  their  ablest  expounders  and  professors  have  dis- 
tinctly and  openly  declared  their  concurrence  in  the  doctrines  of  the  Thirty-Nine  Articles."  It  is  added,  also,  that "  Doctor 
Horsley  was  of  opinion  that  the  peculiarities  of  Calvinism  affect  not  the  essentials  of  Christianity,  and  lamented  the  decline  of  it 
among  the  dissenters  ;  that  he  lamented,  also,  as  must  every  honest  Churchman,  the  disorderly  fanaticism  of  the  Methodists,  and 
:heir  attachment  to  uncommissioned,  unauthorized  teachers."  In  this  opinion  the  Reviewer  concurs,  although  he  says,  "  he  is  not 
blind  to  the  errors  of  sectarism,"  and  is  fully  aware  that  the  various  peculiarities  "  of  the  Calvinistic  creed,  with  the  inward  lights, 
»i.'i  inspired  assurances  of  salvation,  and  other  like  tenets  of  the  Methodists,  are  far,  very  far,  from  being  consistent  with  the 
gi  :\-e  and  humble  simplicity  of  our  Church."  He  then  proceeds  (see  pp.  216,  217)  to  notice  the  apparent  agreement,  but  vital 
hsrefmfst.  of  the  Romish  and  the  Established  Church. 

§  Eccl.  Hist.  vol.  vi.  p.  33. 


ABJL'RATORV  CLAUSES  EXAMIXi;,). 


131 


moderation  of  Protestant  Rulers ;  yet,  experience  and  the  language  of  history,  do  not  warrant  him 
in  saying,  that  the  decay  of  Popery  would  result  from  the  most  enlarged  enfranchisement  of  its  pro- 
cessors, or  that  were  ""irritating  circumstances  removed,  our  resembling  practices  could  not  fail  to 
make  a  kindly  and  ever-growing  impression/' 

Archbishop  Wake,  than  whom  no  man  ever  breathed  more  of  the  spirit  of  peace,  souo-ht  a  recon- 
ciliation between  the  Church  of  England  and  the  Gallican  Church  ;  and,  had  the  doctors  of  the 
Sorbonne  been  like  him,  sincere  in  their  desire  to  attain  that  oreat  object,  thev  would  have  met  him 
on  equal  terms.  But  they  would  not  tconccde  an  iota  ;  and,  without  concession,  he  pronounced 
an  union  with  them  impracticable. 

The  Answerer  concludes  with  saying,  that  from  the  course  of  clerical  education  pursued  at  May- 
nooth,  the  principles  which  actuate  the  Roman  Catholic  Church  in  this  country,  respecting  'Papal 
supremacy,  can  be  seen  to  the  very  centre.  Is  it  possible,  he  can  imagine,  that  his  readers  will  be- 
lieve all  this  and  discredit  the  testimony  of  their  senses  ;  or  can  he  suppose  that  the  students  at  the 
College  there  can  avoid  being  imbued  with  ultramontane  notions,  merely  because  it  is  whispered 
to  them  in  a  preliminary  note  to  one  of  their  class  books,  which  is  fraught  with  ultramontanism  -the 
Gallican  Church  says  so  and  so,  or  teaches  contrary  doctrine,  adhere  to  it  ?  This  is  truly  childish  ■ 
indeed,  whoever  reflects  with  what  pertinacity  the  Romanists  refuse  the  ^nomination  of  their  bishops 

*  Answer,  p.  44. 
f  If  the  French  Divines  were  thus  inflexible,  is  it  natural  to  suppose,  that  any  extension  of  political  power  to  the  Irish 
Romanists,  whose  clergy  are  so  many  degrees  below  those  of  the  refined  age  of  Louis  XIV.  would  tend  to  produce  this  identity  of 
views,  tins  amalgamation  of  interests,  but,  above  all,  this  approximation  of  religious  creeds,  which  the  learned  Answerer  so 
fondly  anncpates  ?  For,  if  Popish  Divines  be  believed,  semper  eadem  is  peculiarly  characteristic  of  their  Church  -a  principle 
which  must  serve  as  a  perpetual  bar  to  the  wished-for  change  of  sentiment  in  its  votaries.  The  writer  of  these  remarks  wishes  it 
to  be  d.stinctly  understood,  that  he  does  not  attempt  to  discuss  the  expediency,  or  inexpediency,  of  the  enfranchisement  of  his 
Popish  brethren;  but  merely  to  state,  that  that  measure  does  not  appear  to  him  calculated  to  bring  about  those  happy  conse- 
quences wh:ch  have  been  before  enumerated.  He  conceives  he  has  proved  to  demonstration,  that  the  exclusive  doctrine  so  far 
from  being  inoperative,  »  active  in  its  influence  on  the  members  of  the  Popish  communion.  He  laments  to  say  that  while  it 
cont.nues  so,  he  cannot  console  himself  with  the  hope,  that  any  political  arrangement  can  tend  to  conciliate  their  affections  to  those 
of  the  Established  Church. 

t  The  passage  in  Vehoh's  Rule,  to  which  the  cautionary  note   is  attached,  ends  thus:  «  adeoque  Pontificem  etiam  extra 
concilium  generale,  circa  dubiam  aliquam  fidei  questionem  infallibilitcr  demure."     Tract   Gen   p  o2    Dub    ,-l)6      ^     •'    , 
i,  remarked   in   the  same  tract,  "  Non  posse  errare  Pontificem  (sen  Concilium  Generale)    in  iis  nr.ceptis,  qu*  toti  ecclesi*  prJ 
tcribuntur."   Iain.  p.  371.     Now,  reader,  these  are  some  of  the  extracts,  which,  the  Answerer  says,  were  he  to  make    <<  Fro 
testants  would  read  with  surprise." 

Doctor  Troy  says,  "  the  Pope  is  infallible,  when  his  decrees  and  decisions  are  tacitly  assented  to,  or  not  differed  from  hv 
the  majority  ot  bishops  governing  the  church.  Pastor.  Letter.  Dublin,  l7g3.  Doctor  Milner  expresses  himself  thus  • 
-There  is  not  a  single  prelate  in  England  or  Ireland,  who  is  not  firmly  resolved  to  reject  the  four  articles  commonly  called  the 
liberties  of  the  Church  of  France."  Supplem.  to  a  Pastoral  Letter,  p.  39.  It  should  be  remembered,  that  the  first 
relates  to  the  supremacy,  and  the  fourth  to  the  infallibility  of  the  Pope.  Now  can  it  for  a  moment  be  imagined,  that  the  men  who 
speak  thus  have  not  influence,  over  the  College  of  Maynootb,  sufficient  to  have  the  ultramontane  doctrine  engrafted  on  its  system  of 
education  ? 

§  Gibbon  says,  «  when  the  chair  of  St.  Peter  was  disputed  by  Symmachus  and  Laurence,  they  appeared  at  his  summons 
before  the  tribunal  of  an  Anan  Monarch,  and  he  (Tbeodoric)  confirmed  the  election  of  the  most  worthy,  &c."  Decl.  and  Fala 
of  the  Roman  Empire,  vol.  vii.  page  38. 

S  2 


132  ABJUUATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED. 

to  a  Protestant  Monarch  ;  while  they  have,  on  historic  record,  express  mention  of  Avian  Emperors 
appointing  their  very  Popes,  without  injury  to  their  succession,  cannot,  credit  any  such  thing.  As  to 
the  introduction  of  Veron's  rule  of  faith  into  the  volume  of  theological  tracts,  published  for  the  use 
of  Maynooth  College,  it  is  sufficient  to  observe  that  that  very  tract  so  much  recommended  for  its  mild- 
ness, presents  as  rigid  an  exposition  of  the  tenets  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  favours  as  high 
notions  of  the  Pope's  infallibility,  as  were  ever  entertained  by  that  imperious  Pontiff,  Gregory  the  VHth.j 
In  short,  the  Answerer  describes  things  as  they  ought  to  be,  and  not  as  they  are  ;  and  as  he  views 
them  through  the  medium  of  a  prejudiced,  yet  unquestionably,  of  a  benevolent  mind,  his  report  neces- 
sarily receives  a  wrong  bias. 

Having  dismissed  this  subject,  it  is  now  fit  to  proceed  to  the  examination  of  those  articles  which 
Mr.  Newenham  has  annexed  to  his  Synthetical  Arrangement  of  texts. 

The  first  article  runs  thus  :  "  Cursed  is  he  that  commits  idolatry,  that  prays  to  images  or  relics, 
or  worships  them  for  God." 

This  is  a  grand  argument  with  Romanists  that  they  do  not  worship  or  honour  images  as  God. 
In  like  manner,  idolatry  is  defined  in  the  Trent  Catechism,  to  be,  "  *if  idols  or  images  are  worship- 
ped as  God."  Here  a  single  remark  will  suffice,  that  however  such  men  as  Doctor  Milner  may 
be  able  to  preserve  that  subtile  distinction  necessary  to  be  drawn  for  the  purpose  of  avoiding  a  sinful 
act;  it  is  not  the  case,  nor  can  it  be  expected,  that  the  uninstructed  mind  will  carry  its  thoughts  be- 
yond the  material  object  to  which  its  devotion  is  directed.  The  use  of  images,  even  as  a  medium 
through  which  God  should  be  worshipped,  is  therefore  objectionable  ;  for' admitting  that  the  adoration 
thus  offered  is  really  paid  him,  yet  this  is  only  such  an  excuse  as  an  heathen  might  make.  But  images 
are  not  the  only  object  of  worship ;  since  the  very  material,  substantial  cross  is  addressed  in  prayer, 
as  is  set  forth  in  the  Romish  Ritual. 

O  crux  ave  spes  unica,  C  Hail  cross  !  our  hope  to  thee  we  call, 


In  kac  triimphi  loria ;  )  In  this  triumphant  festival ; 

Piis  adaitge  gratiam,  J  Grant  to  the  just  increase  of  gr 

Reisque  dele  crimina.  C  And  every  sinner's  crimes  efface. 


Here  no  mistake  can  be  made,  as  there  is  nothing  equivocal  in  the  form  of  words  used.  Indeed, 
Christ  himself  could  not  be  invoked  for  more  than  an  increase  of  grace  and  the  remission  of  sins. 

In  the  Roman  Missal,  the  wood  is  entreated  to  save  those  who  are  assembled  to  offer  it  praise. 
Part  of  the  service  for  the  fourteenth  of  September,  is  as  follows,  f"  sweet  wood,  bearing  the  sweet 
nails,  bearing  the  sweet  burthen,  save  this  multitude,"  &c.  A  grosser,  or  a  more  deliberate  act  of 
idolatry,  could  not  be  committed,  than  they  are  guilty  of,  who  join  in  the  celebration  of  this  anthem. 
Of  the  same  description  is  that  mentioned  in  the  Preservative  against  Popery,  in  the  case  of  Imbert  and 
the  officiating  priest.  At  the  exaltation  of  the  cross,  the  latter  desired  the  people  to  worship  the  cross 
itself,  while  the  former  insisted  on  the  contrary.     "  Jesus  Christ,  not  the  wood,"  said  Imbert.    "  No  ! 

*  Si  idola  et  imagines  tanquam  Deus  colaiitur.  t  Vid.  Fest.  die  xivta.  Septembris,  p.  500. 


AB JURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED.  1S3 

No!  the  wood,  the  wood,''  (ecce  lignum  adoremus)  "  behold  the  wood,  let  us  adore  it,'' &c.  replied 
the  Cure.  To  which  Imbert  subjoined,  *"  on  which  the  Saviour  of  the  world  hung  ;  come,  let  us 
adore  this  Saviour  of  the  world."  For  this  addition,  the  unfortunate  Imbert  was  prosecuted,  degra- 
ded without  a  trial,  and  menaced  with  a  dungeon. 

Thus  it  appears,  that  even  what  frepresents  the  real  cross  is  made  the  subject  of  (Latria) 
divine  adoration,  and  that  it  is  addressed  in  terms  which  can  only  be  properly  directed  to  the  Supreme 
Being.  The  legend  relative  to  the  discovery  of  the  true  cross  will  be  found,  in  Section  XI.  No.  7  J,  de- 
tailed at  full  length.  It  need  only  be  added,  that  so  much  wood  has  been  shewn,  as  having  been 
part  of  the  real  cross,  that  to  keep  up  the  imposture,  it  was  necessary  to  have  it  supposed,  that  the 
marvellous  wood  possessed  a  power  of  reproduction,  not  unlike  Fortunatus's  purse,  and  that  its  sub- 
stance, although  suffering  constant  diminution,  still  continued  whole  and  unimpaired. 

Second  Article.  "  Cursed  is  every  goddess  worshipper,  that  believes  the  Virgin  Mary 
to  be  more  than  a  creature  ;  that  honours  her,  worships  her,  or  puts  his  trust  in  her  more  than  in 
God,  and  believes  her  above  her  son,  or  that  she  can  in  any  thing  command  him." 

Since  Romanists  disclaim  the  blasphemous  address,  jure  matris  impera  redemptori,  according 
to  which  they  desire  the  Virgin  Mary  by  virtue  of  her  authority  as  a  mother  to  command  her  son, 
let  them  receive  due  credit  for  it.  The  direct  inference,  however,  from  the  declaration,  that  she  is  not 
honoured,  worshipped  or  confided  in,  more  than  God,  is,  that  she  may  receive  equal  homage  with  him. 
Indeed  this  very  inference  is  warranted  by  Doctor  Milner,  as  in  his  {pastoral  letter  he  recommends 
t:  a  .special  devotion  to  the  Virgin  Mary."  When  she  is  besought,  to  "  loose  the  bonds  of  the  guilty," 
to  "  give  sight  to  the  blind,"  to  "  drive  away  evds ;"  &c.  can  it  be  said  that  the  great  God  himself 
could  receive  superior  adoration  ?     In  the  common  office  for  her,  the  following  §hymn  occurs  : 

"  The  sinner's  bonds  unbind, 
Our  evils  drive  away, 
Bring  light  unto  the  blind, 

For  grace  and  blessings  pray,"  &c. 

In  Advent  she  is  thus  invoked  ;  "||may  the  Virgin  Mary   with  her  pious  son  bless    us."     And 

*  The  Popish  service  for  Good  Friday,  as  it  stands  in  the  Missal,  can  leave  no  doubt  on  the  mind  of  its  having  an  idolatrous 
tendency.  The  account  given  of  it  is  as  follows  :  "  The  morning  prayers  being  finished,  the  priest  receives  from  the  deacon  a 
cross,  prepared  on  the  altar  for  that  purpose.  He  uncovers  it  a  little  at  the  top,  turning  his  face  to  the  people,  and  begins  this  Anti- 
phona,  "  behold  the  wood  of  the  cross  ;"  the  people  then  join,  saying,  «  come  let  us  adore;'  at  which  all  but  the  priest  who  officiates, 
fall  upon  the  ground.  Then  be  uncovers  the  right  arm  of  the  crucifix,  and  holding  it  up,  begins  with  a  louder  voice,  "  behold  the 
wood  of  the  cross ;"  the  rest  sing  and  adore  as  before.  Lastly,  he  goes  to  the  middle  of  the  altar,  and  entirely  uncovering  the 
cross  and  lifting  it  up,  repeats,  in  a  still  louder  voice,  the  same  words  as  before.  This  done,  he  carries  the  cross  to  a  place  prepared 
for  it  before  the  altar,  and  kneeling  down,  leaves  it  there,  Then  he  takes  off  his  shoes,  and  draws  near  to  adore  the  cross,  bowing 
his  knee  three  times  before  he  kisses  it  ;  having  done  this,  he  puts  on  his  shoes  ;  after  him,  the  ministers  of  the  altar,  then  the 
other  clergy  and  the  laity  two  and  two,  in  like  manner,  adore  the  cross.  In  the  mean  time,  while  the  cross  is  adoring,  the  choir 
sings  several  hymns,  one  of  which  begins  thus:  "  we  adore  thy  cross  0  Lord."  The  solemnity  of  the  day's  service  plainly 
shews,  that  the  Roman  Church  adores  the  cross  in  the  strictest  sense  of  the  word.    See  Preserv.  against  Popery,  Tit.  ix.  p.  63. 

f  Thomas  Aquinas,  on  the  question  "  Utrum  Crux  Christi  sit  adoranda  adoratione  Latria  ?"  thus  concludes,  "  Crux 
Christi  in  qua  Christus  crucifixus  est,  turn  propter  representationem,  turn  propter  membrorum  contactum  Latria  adoranda  est  . 
crucis  vero  effigies,  in  alia  quavis  materia,  priori  tantum  ratione  Latuia  .  adoranda  est." 

+  Page  28.  §  Vespers,  page  121.  II  Primer,  p.  75. 


131  AB.TUKATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED. 

again,  «  *Mother  of  Grace,  Mother  of  Mercy,  protect  us  at  the  hour  o(  death."  St.  Joseph's  wor- 
ship, which  was  not  thought  of  until  the  fourteenth  century,  rises  next  in  consequence  to  that  of  his 
spouse,  and  still  further  confirms  the  justice  of  the  foregoing  inference.  "  (Assist  me  in  all  the 
actions  of  my  life,  all  which  I  now  offer  to  the  everlasting  glory  of  Jesus  and  Mary,  as  well  as  your 
own."  Yet  blasphemous  and  idolatrous  as  this  must  appear  to  every  sensible  reader,  it  is  certain  that 
such  is  the  delicious  manna,  with  which  at  this  moment  the  good  Roman  Catholics  of  Ireland  are  fed. 
In  addition  to  this,  as  the  honours  intended  her  by  the  ^Institution  of  the  Rosary  and  Crown  are 
still  shewn  her,  and  as  even  of  late  years,  a  new  and  distinct  ^worship  is  offered  her,  in  consequence  of 
the  many  excellencies  she  has  been  discovered  to  possess,  which  had  escaped  the  notice  of  antiquity; 
it  is  evident  that  the  objection,  against  which  the  preceding  article  was  drawn  up,  is  not  obviated! 
In  short  Diana  was  never  crouched  to  with  more  abject  superstition  by  the  Ephesians,  than  *  our  lady 
of  Loretto'  by  the  Papists. 

Third  Arlicle.  «  Cursed  is  he  that  believes  the  Saints  in  heaven  to  be  his  Redeemers,  that 
prays  to  them  as  such,  or  that  gives  Gods  honour  to  them,  or  to  any  creature  whatever." 

It  is  denied  in  this  article,  that  the  Popish  Church  looks  on  the  Saints  in  the  light  of 
Redeemers.  The  influence,  however,  which  they  possess  as  Intercessors,  not  less  than  the  qualifi- 
cations which  entitle  them  to  canonization,  is  really  surprising.  Cave,  in  his  Lives  of  the  Fathers, 
relates,  that  Apollonia,  a  virgin  and  martyr,  Wing  had  her  teeth  knocked  out,  was  made  the  tutelary 
goddess  of  all  who  had  the  tooth  ache,  (risum  teneatis ?)  and  that  she  was  not  only  prayed  to  as.an 
intercessor,  but  that  through  her  passion,  she  would  obtain  for  them  the  remission  of  all  sins  com- 
mitted by  teeth  or  mouth,  either  through  gluttony  or  evil  speaking! 

It  is  also  recorded,  that  Buonaventure  was  addressed  in  language  which  fell  nothing  short  of 
blasphemy.  But  Thomas  a  Becket  s  merits  exceeded  those  of  all  other  Saints  ;  they  were  such  as 
appear  to  have  superceded  those  of  vChrist  himself.  In  the  following  verse,  it  is  said  that  he  made 
a  voluntary  sacrifice  of  himself,  and  that  Christ  is  prayed  to  for  his  sake. 

Tu,  per  Thomje  sangiiinem, 

Quem  pro  se  impend  it 
Fac,  nos,  Christe,  scandcre 

Quo  Thomas  ascendit. 

But  it  is  also  denied,  that  God's  honour  is  given  to  ths  Saints.  To  this  the  Popish  Missal  gives 
direct  contradiction,  as  it  contains  prayers  which  are  desired  to  be  addressed  to  the  Saints-  and  if 
they  be  prayed  to  as  intercessors  and  mediators,  is  it  not  imparting  to  them  the  honour  of  God  the 
Son?    That  it  is,  a  few  instances  will  abundantly  prove. 

On  the  appropriate  day  of  the  tutelary  Saint  of  Ireland,  God  is  through  his  intercession,  entreated 
to  bestow  certain  blessings. 

«  ||0  God,  who  was  pleased  to  send  blessed  Patrick,  thy  bishop  and  confessor,  to  preach  thy  glory 

*  Primer,  p.  go.  f  Office  of  St.  Jos.  J  See  Sect.  ix.  No.  54.  §  Hvpebdulia 

II  Die  xvii.  Martii.      In  Festo  S.  Patricii,  «  ejus  merits,  et  intercession,  concede  ;   ut  quae  nobis  agenda  prjecipi.    te  misc 
rante  adimplere  possimus."     Missale  Romanum,  p.  372.  ' 


ABJURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED.  135 

to   the  Gentiles,  grant  that  by  his  merits  and  intercession,  we  may  through  tiiy  mercy,  be  enabled  to 
perform  what  thou  commandest." 

On  St.  George  the  martyr's  day,  the  collect  used,  is,  (i  *0  God,  who  by  the  merits  and  prayers  of 
blessed  George,  thy  martyr,  fillest  the  hearts  of  thy  people  with  joy,  mercifully  grant  that  the  blessings 
we  ask  through  him,  we  may  happily  obtain  by  thy  grace."' 

On  the  festival  of  St.  Peter's  chair  at  Rome,  the  collect  for  the  day  concludes  thus:  "  fGrant 
that  by  his  intercession,  we  may  be  freed  from  the  bonds  of  our  sins,  <kc.  Even  stronger  expressions 
are  used  in  the  festivals  of  the  Indian  Apostle,  and  of  St.  1  nomas  of  Canterbury.  A  more  recent 
instance  of  misapplied  supplication  may  be  found  in  the  pastoral  address  of  the  bishop  of  Oporto  to 
his  clergy,  on  the  invasion  of  Portugal,  by  Junot.  They  are  desired  to  offer  up  their  prayers  to  St. 
Joachim,  their  patron  and  saint,  while  the  name  of  God  is  not  once  mentioned  throughout  the  entire 
of  that  extraordinary  and  blasphemous  production.  Popish  devotees  style  themselves  the  ^.servants 
of  this  same  Portuguese  Saint,  in  their  Missal.  They  pray  that  by  the  intercession  of  St.  Ptichard, 
they  may  arrive  "  at  the  glory  of  eternal  bliss :"  and  that  through  the  merits  of  St.  Nicholas,  they 
may  be  "  delivered  from  the  §J!ames  of  hell"  As  a  further  enumeration  of  instances  of  this  kind, 
would  but  prove  wearisome  to  the  reader,  it  will  relieve  him  somewhat  by  presenting  him  with  a  few 
stanzas  of  a  hymn,  which  contain  applications  to  the  saints  no  less  direct  than  those  in  the  collects 
of  the  Missal. 

II  O  you  true  lights  of  human  kind, 

And  judges  of  the  world  design'd, 

To  you  our  hearty  vows  we  show, 

Hear  your  petitioners  below. 

The  gates  of  heaven  by  your  command, 
Are  fasten'd  close,  or  open  stand  ; 
Grant,  we  beseech  you,  then,  that  we 
From  sinful  slav'ry  may  be  free. 

Sickness  and  health  your  pow'r  obey ; 
This  comes,  and  that  you  drive  away  : 
Then  from  our  souls,  all  sickness  chace, 
Let  healing  virtues  take  its  place. 

It  may  now  be  asked,  could  Christ  himself  be  approached  with  deeper  humility,   or  greater  bless- 

*  In  festo  S.  Georgii  martyris,  "concede  propitius ;    ut  quae  per  eum  beneficia  poscimus,  dono  tux  gratis  consequamur 
Miss.  Rom.  p.  386. 

f  In  Festo  Cathedrae  S.  Petri,  "  concede  ut  intercessionis  ejus  auxilio  a  peccatorum  nostrorum  nexibus  liberemur." 
Ibid.  p.  S3Q. 

X  "  Famulis  confer  salutis  opera."  Ibid.  §  Agehennse  incendiis.    Ibid. 


II  Vos  seculorum  judices, 
Et  vera  mundi  lumina, 
Votis  precamur  cordium  ; 
Audite  voces  supplicum. 


Qui  templa  caeli  clauditis, 
Serasque  verbo  solvitis, 
Nos  a  reatu  noxios 
Solvi  j«betej  quacsumus, 


Prsecepta  quorum  protinus, 
Languor  salusque  sentiunt., 
Sanate  mentes  languidas ; 
Augete  nos  virtutibus. 


136  ABJURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED. 

ings  be  asked  from  him,  than  those  here  specified  ?  But,  besides,  in  this  derogation  from  the  dignity 
of  God  the  Son,  do  we  not  find  two  of  his  attributes,  his  omnipresence  and  omiscience,  ascribed  to 
the  particular  saint,  whom  the  worshipper  addresses?  For,  otherwise,  how  could  the  suppliant  be  cer- 
tain that  his  petitions  were  either  heard  or  known  by  him,  to  whom  they  were  offered  ?  To  such  im- 
piety does  this  senseless  custom  lead. 

Therefore,  even  admitting  that  one  Redeemer  only  is  addressed  as  such  in  the  Popish  Church, 
still  that  does  not  get  over  the  objection  of  giving  God's  honour  to  saints  as  intercessors.  For,  as 
there  is  but  one  who  redeemeth,  so  there  is  but  one  who  maketh  intercession  for  mankind. 

Fourth  Article.  "  Cursed  is  he  that  worships  any  breaden  God,  or  makes  Gods  of  the  empty 
elements  of  bread  and  wine." 

As  this  is  one  of  those  points,  respecting  which  so  much  doubt  and  uncertainty  is  entertained  by 
the  infallible  Church  of  Rome,  it  is  proper  to  present  the  reader  with  some  extracts  from  the  Canon 
Missje,  which  proves  the  act  of  adoration,  and  from  the  Canons  of  the  Councils  of  Trent,  where 
the  strange  and  horrible  doctrine  of  transubstantiation  is  solemnly  promulged,  and  then  offer  such 
remarks  as  the  subject  requires. 

The  directions  to  the  Priest  in  the  *Canon  of  the  Mass  are  as  follow :  "  Having  pronounced  the 
words  of  consecration  (this  is  my  body)  he  immediately  adores  the  consecrated  host  on  his  knees  ;  he 
rises,  shews  it  to  the  people,  replaces  it  on  (Corporate)  the  linen  cover,  again  adores  it." 

t FIRST  CANON  OF  THE  COUNCIL  OF  TRENT. 

"  If  any  one  shall  deny  that  in  the  most  holy  Sacrament  of  the  Eucharist  there  is  truly,  really 
and  substantially  contained  the  body  and  blood  of  Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ,  together  with  his  soul  and 
divinity ',  and  consequently  the  whole  Christ ;  but  shall  say,  that  he  is  in  it,  only  as  in  a  sign,  or  by 
a  figure,  or  virtually,  let  him  be  accursed. 

In  the  ^Second  Canon,  the  anathema  is  pronounced  on  those  who  "deny  the  miraculous  and  sin- 
gular conversion  of  the  xvhole  substance  of  the  bread  into  the  body,  and  of  the  wine  into  the  blood,  the 
appearances  only  of  bread  and  wine  remaining. 

And  in  the  ^  Third  Canon,  the  curse  is  extended  to  those  who  deny  "  that  the  whole  Christ 
is  contained  under  each  appearance  andunder  every  individual  particle  of  each  species,  whenever  a  sepa- 
ration takes  place." 

Here  it  is  laid  down  by  the  Council  of  Trent,  that  at  the  solemnization  of  the  Eucharist  the  bread 
and  wine  are  actually  changed  into  the  proper  body  and  blood  of  Christ,  so  as  not  to  retain  even  so 
much  as   a  single  particle  of  their  original  elements.     By  this  singular  decision  the  character  of  the 

*  "  Prolatis  verbis  consecrationis  (Hoc  est  Corpus  Meum)  statim  Hostiam  consecratam  genuflexus  adorat ;  surgit,  oiten- 
dit  populo,  reponit  super  corporate,  ilerum  adorat.1'     Missale  Romanum,  p.  211. 

f  "  Si  quis  negaverit  in  sanctissimo  Eucharist'ne  Sacramento,  contineri  vere,  realiter,  et  substantialiter,  corpus  et  sanguinem 
unh  cum  animd  et  divinitate  Domini  nostri  Jesu  Christi,  et  proinde  totum  Christum,  sed  dixerit  tantummodo  esse  in  eo  ut  in 
signo  vel  figura  aut  virtute,  Anathema  esto." 

X  "  Si  quis  negaverit  mirabilem  et  singularem  conversionem  totius  substantia;  panis  in  corpus,  et  vini  in  sanguinem,  manen- 
tibus  duntaxat  speciebus  panis  et  vini,   Anathema  esto." 

§  u  Si  quis  negaverit  in  venerabili  Sacramento  Eucharistiae  sub  unaquJtque  specie,  et  sub  singulis  cuj usque  speciti  pat tibus . 
separatione  facta,  totum  Christum  contineri,  Anathema  esto." 


ABJURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED.  137 

priest  is  exalted,  his  sanctity  is  pointed  out,  and  the  gift  which  enables  him  to  work  so  astonishing 
a  miracle  is  declared.  But  even  more  than  this  is  effected  by  it,  as  it  is  insinuated,  that  others  may  be 
benefited  by  the  very  act  of  his  officiating.  Hence  masses  as  well  for  the  dead  as  for  the  living,  that 
gainful  source  of  his  emolument.  These,  if  the  truth  were  acknowledged,  are  the  real  causes  of  the 
introduction  of  that  abominable  doctrine  into  the  Popish  Church.  A  miracle  indeed  is  pretended  to 
be  wrought,  but  this  miracle,  unlikeall  others,  is  denied  the  testimony  of  the  senses  for  its  approval. 
In  a  sacrifice  too,  suffering  is  implied  ;  but  in  the  present  case,  the  warmest  advocates  for  the  doctrine 
will  not  go  so  far  as  to  affirm  that  Christ  suffers  :  and  after  the  division,  elevation,  and  worship  of  the 
victim,  instead  of  being  destroyed,  as  it  is  supposed  to  be  by  the  sacrificial  act ;  if  any  be  left,  it  not 
unfrequently  happens,  that  it  becomes  the  food  of  vermin. 

«  Cursed  is  he  that  worships  a  breaden   God,"  says  the  article.     This  surely  is  a  doctrinal   point, 
and  one  on  which,  as  the  *Popish  Church  itself  admits,  it  could  not  pass  an    erroneous  opinion  ;   yet 
no  where  is  it  more  doubtful  or   uncertain.     For,   as  it  has  decreed,   that  the  Sacrament   cannot  be 
valid  if  the  intention  of  the  priest  be  wanting,  (that  is,  if  he  do  not  actually  intend  to  change  the  bread 
and  wine  into  the  body  and  blood  of  Christ,   they  continue  bread  and  wine  after  the  ceremony,)  and 
as  there  can  be  no  moral  certainty  that  such  intention  does  absolutely  accompany  the  act  of  consecration, 
it  is   altogether  impossible  for  the  person,    who  prostrates  himself  in  humble  adoration   before  the 
wafer,  to  know,   but  that,  all  the  time,  he  may  be  worshipping  the  very  flour  and  water  of  which  it  is 
composed,   and  consequently,  be  guilty  of  the  grossest  idolatry.     The  article  is  of  so  equivocal  a  cast, 
and  so  well  calculated  to  strengthen  the  delusion  under  which  the  ignorant  papist  lies,    that   it  is  mere 
trifling  in  those  venerable  prelates  (as  they  are  styled  in  the  Synthetical  Arrangement)  to  send  it  forth 
into  the  world  as  their  solemn  renunciation  of  the  idolatrous  practice  "  laid  at  their  door."    It  is  need- 
less for  them  to  say  that  the  "multitudinous"  laity,   believe,  that  the  consecrated  bread  and  wine  con- 
tain the  body  and  blood,  the  bones  and  all  the  other  appurtenances  of  the  manhood  of  Christ ;   in  other 
words,  that  they  believe  an  impossibility,  since  such  a  belief  is  but  the  proof  of  superlative' faith  and 
devotion,  according  to  the   well-known  maxim  of  believing  a  thing  because  of  its  being  impossible. 
The  dogma  which  enjoined  the  disciples  of  Pythagoras  to  an  abstinence  from  the  use  of  beans,  under 
the  idea,   that  they  contained  the  parts  of  a  man,  has  been  laughed  at ;  how  much  more  deservedly, 
then,   does  the  credulity  of  the  modern  Papist  become  liable  to  ridicule  and  derision  ?     For  it  is  far 
less  wonderful,  that  the  follies  of  a  dark  age  should  have  had  its  votaries,   than  that  the  absurdities, 
the  weakness,  and  the  wickedness  of  priestcraft,  should  not  only  be  maintained,   but  recommended  by 
such  men  as  Troy,    Coppinger,  and   Milner,  at  a  period  distinguished  for  its  learning,  civilization, 
and  a  general  diffusion  of  knowledge. 

fMr.  Fletcher,  another  strenuous  defender  of  Popery,  thus  exhibits  the  meaning  of  the  article 
in  its  true  colours.  "  In  the  Eucharist,"  says  he,  "  we  do  not  adore  the  bread  and  wine;  for  this  plain 
reason,   that  we  do  not  believe  bread  and  wine  to  exist  in  it.     We  adore  only  Christ  himself."     Then,  if 


*  " 


The  Church  is  infallible  in  her  doctrinal  decisions  and  canons,  in  points  of  faith  and  morals ;  and  therefore  the  Catho- 
lics are  obliged  to  adhere,  implicitly,  to  such  decrees  and  canons  of  the  church,  assembled  in  general  councils,  and  confirmed  by 
the  Pope,  as  articles  of  faith."     See  Doctor  Troy's  Pastoral  Letter.  Dublin,  1793. 

t  See  Remarks  on  the  Grounds  of  Separation,  &c 


l3S  ABJURATORY  CLAUSES  EXAMINED. 

after  this  sophistical  renunciation,  it  be  still  urged  that  the  worshippers  of  the  host  incur  the  sin  of  idola- 
try ;  he  thus  evades  such  an  imputation:  "  We  worship  it,"  says  Mr.  F.  "  as  Christ,  it  is  Christ.  But 
even  if  conceiving  that  to  be  Christ,  which  in  reality  is  not  Christ,  I  worship  it  as  Christ,  lam  guilty 
of  a  mistake,  I  am  not  guilty  of  idolatry.*'  A  man's  misconception  or  ignorance,  will  not  surely  make 
the  act  less  an  idolatrous  one  ;  and  however  they  may  plead  in  his  behalf  with  an  all-merciful  God,  they 
never  can  make  that  innocent  which  is  in  itself  criminal.  So  that  whether  Romanists  be  mistaken  in 
supposing  the  wafer  to  be  a  transubstantiated  God  ;  or  whether  they  be  justified  in  their  opinion  ;  the 
worship  of  the  host,  as  an  image  of  God,  in  either  case,  directly  violates  a  positive  command,  and   is 

consequently  idolatrous. 

The  plain  inference  from  all  this  is,  that  the  declaration  made  in  the  fourth  article  is  both 
nugatory  and  calculated  to  deceive.  And  as  all  the  remaining  ones  are  of  the  same  stamp,  drawn  up 
in  imposing  language,  and  methodised  with  Jesuitical  skill,  it  would  be  but  a  waste  of  time  to  proceed 
further  in  their  exposure. 


APPENDIX 

Containing  remarks  on  the  Preface  to  the  fourth  edition  of  the  Errata. 

The  fourth  and  last  edition  of  the  Errata  did  not  come  to  hand,  until  the  body  of  this  work 
had  been  committed  to  the  Printer,  otherwise,  the  following  remarks  on  the  answer  to  Doctor 
Ryan's  Analysis,  which  it  comprises,  should  have  been  ranged  under  the  corresponding  ones  on 
the  Errata  itself.  The  author  of  that  answer  has  not  thought  proper  to  disclose  his  name, 
probably  ashamed  of  the  violence  of  the  language  which  he  uses ;  or  of  the  badness  of  his 
cause,  and  the  impotence  of  his  efforts  to  sustain  it.  He  contents  himself  with  stating,  that  it 
is  written  by  the  Rev.  Doctor  L.  a  Catholic  Priest.  But  with  Ins  motives,  whatever  they 
may  have  been,  the  public  have  no  concern,  as  it  is  alike  indifferent  to  them,  whether  this 
disguised  writer  be  a  member  of  Maynooth  College  ;  or*  Doctor  Lanigan,  so  celebrated  for  his 

*  When  mention  is  made  of  the  R.  Rev.  Doctor Lanigan  of  Kilkenny,  his  four  celebrated  ways  of  evading  the  fulfilment  of 
a  promise  naturally  occur  to  the  mind.  Indeed,  they  are  so  intimately  connected  with  his  name,  that  it  would  be  doing  him  an 
injustice  to  withhold  what  has  given  him  a  character,  which  Dr.  Milner,  with  all  his  exertions,  has  not  yet  been  able  to  attain. 

The  non-observance  of  a  promise,  says  Doctor  L.  may  proceed  from  any  of  these  four  causes,  l.  When  a  person 
promises  what  it  is  impossible  to  perform.  2.  When  observance  of  the  promise  would  be  injurious  to  the  person  to  whom  it 
was  made.  3.  Or,  inconvenient  to  the  person  making  it.  And,  lastly,  a  person  may  violate  an  engagement,  if  circumstances 
afterwards  arise,  which,  had  they  been  foreseen,  he  would  not  ha:e  entered  into  it.  This,  surely,  will  not  shrink  from  a  compa- 
rison with  that  maxim  of  the  Jesuits'  creed,  "  that  the  person  who  takes  an  oath,  or  enters  into  a  contract,  may,  to  elude  the 
force  ot  the  one,  and  the  obligation  of  the  other,  add  certain  mental  additions  and  tacit  reservations."  (See  Mosh.  Eccl. 
Hist.  Vol.  v.  p.  K)2).  Yet  this  is  the  odious  doctrine,  which  is  to  be  taught  throughout  Ireland,  if,  as  the  Public  Papers 
report,  the  revival  of  the  order  of  Jesuits  takes  place.  But,  even  were  the  papal  sanction  obtained,  which  it  seems  is  alone 
wanting  to  the  completion  of  the  measure,  the  rulers  of  the  land  would  not  for  a  moment  tolerate  the  existence  of  such  an 
institution.  When  Louis  XVth.  found  it  imperative  on  him  to  suppress  it  in  France,  and  that  his  cotemporary,  Pope  Clement, 
in  !  ;/3,  set  his  seal  to  its  utter  annihilation  ;  what  ought  to  be  the  caution  used  against  its  introduction  into  a  Protestant  State  ? 
What  ought  to  be  the  opposition  given  to  the  re-establishment  of  an  Order  which  could  be  guided  by  rules  such  as  these? 
"  The  rebellion  of  a  clergyman  against  his  Prince,  is  not  high  treason,  because  he  is  not  subject  to  the  Prince.  If  a  Priest  in 
comession  have  intelligence  of  some  great  danger  intended  to  the  state,  it  is  sufficient  to  give  a  general  warning  to  take  heed. 
He,  also,  against  whom  evil  is  intended,  may  be  warned  to  t.'ke  heed  to  himself,  at  such  a  place  and  time,  so  that  the  penitent 
be  not  in  danger  to  be  discovered  thereby."  Jesuits'  Catechism,  book  ii.  page  71.  But  their  restoration  is  not  to  be  appre- 
hended ;  not\<  I'hstanding  that  it  is  confidently  stated,  that  a  seminary,  in  which  Jesuitical  principles  are  to  be  inculcated,  is  on 
the  eve  of  being  established  in  a  town  (Midleton  perhaps)  not  far  distant  from  Cork. 

The  following  verses  are  a  specimen  of  the  Jesuits  double-faced  creed.  It  will  suit  either  Protestants  or  Papists,  and  has 
been  varied  by  the  exiled  members  of  the  Society,  according  as  the  people  among  whom  they  sojourned,  happened  to  be  one 
01  other,     It  is  an  excellent  translation  of  the  original  Latin,  and  appeared  some  years  ago  in  the  Antijacobin  Review. 

1  hold  for  faith . What  England's  Church  allows. 

What  Rome 's  Church  saith,  ■ My  conscience  disavows. 

Where   the  kings  head,     .   .    The  flock  can  take  no  shame. 

The  flock's  misled . .    Who  holds  the  Pope  supreme. 

Where  the   altars  drest     ■  ■ The  worship's  scarce  divine. 

The  people  s  llest Whose  table's  bread  and  wine. 

He's  tut  an  ass     ■ .  Who  their  communion  flies. 

Who  shuns  the  mass ,     . Is  Catholic  and  wise. 

Who,  after  this,  can  help  exclaiming  with  good  old  Bishop  Kidder  "  from  Jcsuistry,  Papistry,  and  all  such  abominations;" 
or,  in  the  more  emphatic  language  of  the  ancient  liturgy  :  "  from  the  tyranny  of  the  Church  of  Rome,  and  all  her  detestable 
enormities  ;  good  Lord,  deliver  us  ?"     Sec  Book  of  Com.  Prayer.  Ed.  Grafton  and  Whitchurch.  London.  1552. 

T    (1 


•40  APPENDIX. 

ino'C/.iious  metaphysical  distinction  between  a  solemn  and  a  serious  promise;  or  Doctor  Lingard, 
the  English  Roman  Catholic  Priest,  spoken  of  in  a  preceding  *note. 

In  his  introductory,  and,  indeed,  in  his  subsequent  articles,  Ward  is  the  subject  of  Doctor 
L.'s  panegyric,  while  the  respectable  author  of  the  Analysis,  is  made  the  victim  of  his  rancour 
and  abuse.  However,  this  latter  circumstance  should  be  a  matter  of  real  satisfaction  to  Doctor 
Ryan ;  as  nothing  can  more  forcibly  demonstrate  the  merit  of  his  performance,  than  the  rude- 
ness with  which  this  ill-tempered  scholar  treats  him.  Abruptly  commencing  his  attack,  he 
observes,  that  Doctor  Ryan  warmly  contends,  that  the  imputed  errors  in  the  first  English  ver- 
sion of  the  Scriptures  arose  from  ignorance  in  the  Translators.  The  fact  is,  that  Doctor  Ryan 
betravs  no  warmth  whatever  in  discussing  the  subject;  he  simply  states,  that  f Father  Simon 
says,  that  the  Translations  of  the  Protestants  could  not  be  exact, %u  as  most  of  the  first  Trans- 
lators were  not  very  learned  in  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  languages."  Doctor  Ryan  goes  no 
farther,  and  yet  he  is  accused  by  his  reviewer  of  unfairness  in  concealing  from  his  readers,  that 
Father  Simon  spoke  of  the  Protestant  Translators  '  in  general,'  and  not  of  the  English  Trans- 
lators in  particular.  A  reference  to  the  works  themselves  will  satisfy  the  candid  enquirer,  that 
Doctor  Ryan  suppressed  nothing  necessary  to  be  known,  and  that  Father  Simon  points  out  the 
English  Translators  in  particular,  in  the  above  cited  passage  :  for,  he  closes  the  paragraph 
immediately  preceding  it,  with  an  account  of  the  command  issued  at  the  Hampton  Court  confe- 
rence, and  begins  that  which  immediately  follows,  with  shewing  the  necessity  which  existed  of 
making  a  new  translation  from  the  Latin  into  the  Vulgar  tongue,  for  the  use  of  those  of  the 
Popish  communion. 

The  Reformers  next  come  under  the  Reviewer's  lash.  "  They,"  says  he,  "  incompetent  to 
the  task,  and  conscious  of  their  incompetency,  still  presumed  to  violate  the  purity  of  the  sacred 
volumes,  and  to  obtrude  on  their  unsuspecting  disciples  an  erroneous  version,  as  the  immaculate 
word  of  God,  and  as  the  sole  and  infallible  guide  to  religious  truth."  This  idle  papistical  cant 
is  the  same  which  Gregory  Martin,  Ward,  and  every  advocate  for  Popery  since  the  era  of  the 
Reformation,  have  been  in  the  habit  of  using.  As,  therefore,  this  is  but  a  bare  repetition  of 
the  charges  brought  forward  in  the  Errata,  and  which  have  been  repelled  in  this  work,  it  would 
be  a  superfluous  undertaking  to  re-examine  them.  With  respect  to  what  Doctor  L.  says  of  the 
Reformers  setting  up  their  version  of  the  Scriptures,  "  as  the  sole  and  infallible  guide  to  reli- 
gious truth ;"  he  is,  in  no  way,  authorised.  For,  so  far  were  the  Reformers  from  arrogating  to 
themselves  any  thing  bordering  on  perfectness,  that,  in  the  true  spirit  of  the  primitive  church, 
they  utterly  disclaimed  the  slightest  pretensions  to  it. 

Doctor  L.  then  proceeds  to  state  how  unjustly  poor  Mr.  Ward  has  been  treated,  and  how 
his  opponents,  overlooking  his  object,  "  affect  to  consider  his  accusation  of  the  clergy  of  Queen 
Elizabeth,  as  directed  against  the  clergy  of  the  present  reign."  This  is  a  very  subtle  way  of 
softening  down  the  harshness  of  Ward's  impeachments,  and  of  making  them  somehow  palat- 

*  See  page  128. 
t  Ceit.  Hist,  of  the  O.  Test.  Book  ii.  c.  1 .  %  Analysis  of  Ward's  Errata  of  the  Protestant  Bible".  Page  5 


APPENDIX.  141 

«tble;  but  it  will  not  do.  The  Divines  of  the  Church  of  England  are  not  disposed  to  be 
captious,  or  to  apply  to  themselves  what  is  not  directed  to  them;  but  in  the  present  instance, 
if  not  immediately,  they  are  mediately  attacked,  and  are  therefore  called  on  to  defend  themselves. 
by  temperate  and  firm  discussion,  against  the  insidious  arts  of  their  adversaries.  After  attri- 
buting crimes  of  "  diabolic  malignity"  to  the  Reformers,  and  applying  language  no  less  coarse 
to  Doctor  Ryan,  without  so  much  as  noticing  his  arguments,  he  concludes  his  leading  paragraph 
in  this  singular  manner.  '  Adrian  IV.  made  a  grant  of  Ireland  to  Henry  II.  by  reason  of  which 
Doctor  Ryan  lost  an  extensive  property;  therefore  his  attempt  to  answer  Ward  is  the  conse- 
quence! !'  With  respect  to  the  former,  the  effects  of  their  pious  labours  have,  in  these  coun- 
tries, been  so  sensibly  felt,  that  their  memories  can  never  suffer  from  the  obloquy  of  their  Popish 
calumniators;  and  as  to  the  latter,  it  is  certain,  that  the  Protestant  public  owe  him  much  for  the 
spirited  stand,  which  he  has  made  in  defence  of  what  has  been  sanctioned  by  the  wisdom  or 
ages — the  existing  version  of  their  Bible. 

The  assertions  repeatedly  made  in  his  strictures  by  Doctor  L.  that  the  reason  why  parti- 
cular passages,  censured  by  Wrard,  have  been  left  unnoticed  in  the  Analysis,  arose  from  the 
author's  inability,  (or  rather  from  the  impossibility,  which  he  found,)  to  defend  them  ;  cannot 
but  convince  such  as  deemed  Ward's  book  undeserving  a  full-length  answer,  that  any  reply 
falling  short  of  it,  would  be  liable  to  the  objections  raised  against  the  Analysis.  To  the  saga- 
city and  penetrating  judgment  of  the  learned  Prelate,  whose  name  sanctions  these  pages,  is  to 
be  attributed  the  anticipation  in  this  work,  of  such  objections.  *"  Tor,"  says  he,  "  if  you  omit 
the  notice  of  any  of  the  texts,  the  cunning  will  contend,  and  the  ignorant  suspect,  that  the 
strongest  objections  lay  among  those  which  did  not  appear."  The  soundness  of  this  remark  has 
been  since  confirmed  by  the  vapouring  of  Doctor  L.  because  Ward  did  not  receive  a  '  detailed' 
answer. 

The  Author  regrets  to  find,  that  his  work  has  already  passed  the  limits  which  he  prescribed 
to  himself  at  the  outset.  He  designed  a  few  pages ;  he  has  written  a  large  book,  and  feels  it 
necessary  still  to  add  to  it.  But  to  such  as  understand  the  nature  of  controversy  this  will  not 
appear  surprising,  as  a  single  objection  may  require  several  pages  for  its  confutation.  *  He  has 
met  WTard  in  every  stage  of  his  enquiry,  and  had  he  confined  himself  solely  to  the  consideration 
of  those  texts  about  which,  and  which  only,  the  established  Church  of  these  countries  has  any 
concern,  as  being  in  the  received  version  of  her  Scriptures,  he  might  have  reduced  his  remarks 
into  a  compass  correspondingly  small  with  that  into  which  those  texts  might  be  collected.  But 
he  has  already  assigned  his  reasons  for  the  enlarged  view  of  the  subject  which  he  has  taken. 
His  immediate  object,  at  present,  is  to  examine,  with  brief  and  critical  accuracy,  the  justice  ot 
Doctor  L.'s  remarks,  contained  in  the  Preface  to  the  fourth  edition  of  Ward's  Errata.  To  it. 
therefore,  he  proceeds. 

''  See  Dedication. 


142  APPENDIX. 


ARTICLE  L 


.Doctor  L.  says,  "  it  is  an  improvement  in  the  present  Bible,"  that  church  is  substituted  for 
congregation  ;  but  that  "  it  is  at  the  same  time  a  condemnation  of  its  predecessors."  In  one  of 
the  earliest  bibles,  that  of  1562,  the  text  Matt.  xvi.  18.  "  Upon  this  rock  I  will  build  my 
congregation,  &c."  is  accompanied  by  a  note  in  the  margin  to  this  effect:  "  I  will  build  my 
congregation  or  Church."  What,  therefore,  it  may  be  asked,  could  the  early  Translators  mean 
by  congregation  but  church;  or  how  could  their  successors  be  said  to  pass  any  censure  on  them 
by  the  mere  substitution  of  a  synonime?  See  Section  I.  No.  1 — 5,  where  this  subject  is 
treated  of  more  at  large. 

On  the  text  Cant.  vi.  8.  he  observes,  Ward's  "  censure  was  levelled  against  the  more 
ancient  reading  in  the  English  bibles," — *  my  dove  is  alone,'  and  not  against  the  present  read- 
ing,— c  my  dove  is  but  one.'  In  this  cavil,  Doctor  L.  like  Ward,  converts  a  mole-hill  into  a 
mountain ;  as  the  word  alone  is  at  least  as  significant  of  the  unity  of  the  Church,  as  the  word 
one;  the  use  of  it  too,  guards  as  much  against  any  misconception  of  the  Church  being  included 
among  the  queens,  the  concubines,  and  the  virgins,  enumerated  by  Solomon  in  the  verse  which 
precedes  that  in  which  it  occurs,  as  the  use  of  the  other. 


ARTICLE  II. 

It  is,  says  Doctor  L.  to  the  ancient  reading  of  *Acts  iii.  21.  "  whom  heaven  must  contain," 
which,  through  artifice,  is  not  noticed  in  the  Analysis,  that  Ward  objected,  and  not  to  the 
modern  one,  "  whom  heaven  must  receive."  Here,  then,  the  only  difference  is  between  contain 
and  receive,  and  although  Doctor  L.  says,  that  the  former  reading  is  a  corruption,  and  relates  to 
the  sacrament,  he  rests  his  proof  on  no  other  foundation  than  on  the  variance  between  it  and 
the  latter.  The  observation,  therefore,  which  Doctor  Ryan  confined  to  the  one,  is  applicable 
to  both  :  viz.  that  they  bear  no  more  relation  to  the  sacrament  than  a  treatise  of  Astronomy. 
For  an  answer  to  the  charge,  which,  Doctor  L.  says,  was  brought  against  Beza  by  Ward;  see 
Section  II.  No.  10. 

The  Protestant  translation  of  Jcr.  xi.  1Q.  "  let  us  cast  wood  upon  his  bread,"  observes 
Doctor  L.  agrees  with  the  modernHebrew,  and  the  popish  one,  with  the  Greek,  the  Vulgate,  aid 
the  Arabic;  therefore,  he  concludes,  the  Hebrew  reading  is  false!  Here,  without  stating  any 
reasons  whatever  why  he  thinks  the  Hebrew  text  corrupt,  and  the  others  not,  except  the  agree- 

*  The  Protestant  Translation  of  5s%ao-Qa,i  is  "  receive;"  and  the  Popish  one  of  suscipere  (the  Vulg.  Lat.)  "  receive," 
Will  Dr.  L.  say,  that  the  latter  is  correct  ? 


APPENDIX. 


14.. 


mcnt  between  these  versions,  he  arrives  per  saltiwi,  at  his  conclusion:  a  mode  of  reasoning 
not  likely  to  satisfy  those  who  ground  their  assent  on  proof,  rather  than  on  assertion.  He 
considers  prwn  as  probably  the  more  ancient  reading.  But  as  to  the  true  sense  of  the  passage,  there 
is  no  material  difference  between  that  word  and  the  received  one.  Besides,  Jerome's  meaning 
may  as  well  be  grounded  on  the  one,  as  on  the  other.  "  They  have,"  says  Doctor  L.  "  been 
compelled  to  give  onb  a  new  meaning,  viz.  fruit  instead  of  bread."  That  word  when  spoken 
of  in  reference  to  a  tree  is  always  rendered  by  *fructus}  so  that  the  translation  given  it  is  neither 
forced,  nor  uncommon.  Doctor  L.  tells  his  readers,  that  Ward  placed  this  text  under  the  head 
of  false  translations  against  the  sacrament,  because  he  suspected  it  (excellent  ground  to  go  on !) 
to  have  been  made  for  that  purpose.  He  then  boasts,  that  Doctor  Ryan  injures  his  cause.  Can 
it  be  said,  that  Dr.  L.  serves  his  own  ?     See  No.  1 1. 

On  two  passage^,  Gen.  xx.  3,  "  thou  art  a  dead  man,  for  the  woman  thou  hast  taken,  (i) 
for  she  is  a  man's  wife :"  and  Isaiah  lxiv.  5.  "  Behold,  thou  art  wrath,  (?)for  we  have  sinned  :': 
Doctor  L.  remarks,  the  Protestant  Translators  have  rendered  the  Hebrew  particle,ybr,  and  vet 
refuse  it  in  Gen.  xiv.  18,  where  they  read  "  and  he  was  the  priest,  &c."  The  justice  of  the 
observation  made  in  No.  12,  is  confirmed  in  the  very  texts  which  he  cites  : — viz.  that  the  meaning? 
of  the  Hebrew  particle  is  determinable  by  the  sense  of  the  passage;  but  that  the  sense  of  the 
passage  is  not  determinable  by  it.  It  is  remarkable  enough,  that  the  Douay  Translators  appeal 
to  the  Hebrew  in  the  above  passage  of  Isaiah,  when  the  Vulgate  translation  of  the  Hebrew 
particle  is  et,  and  overlook  it  in  the  other  case,  when  enlm  is  adopted.  Their  reading  is  "  and 
we  have  sinned  ;"  but  a  marginal  fnote  on  the  word  '  and,'  sets  forth,  that  "  and  sign  diethyl.'* 
They  in  consequence  admit  the  variable  nature  of  vau,  by  having  recourse  to  an  interpretation, 
according  to  which,  a  disjunctive  is  confounded  with  a  copulative  particle,  contrary  to  the  rules 
of  language;  and  thus  inadvertently  not  only  condemn  the  Latin  version,  but  even  their  own. 

After  much  idle  railing  at  Doctor  Ryan,  Doctor  L.  proceeds  to  justify  Ward's  suspicions, 
that  the  Protestant  Translators  added  the  words  for  all  in  the  passage  Heb.  x.  10,  in  support  of 
their  favourite  doctrine  that  Christ  was  not  offered  daily,  and  omitted  them  in  every  other 
passage,  in  which  the  Greek  term  s(poc7ra^  occurs.  As  long  as  suspicions  continue  to  be  substi- 
tuted for  proof,  the  cause  of  the  English  Translators  cannot  be  considered  desperate.  If, 
however,  Doctor  L.  will  only  refer  to  a  note  in  page  122,  which  contains  Schleusner's 
admirable  explanation  of  the  Greek  adverb,  he  will  see  on  what  grounds  the  translators  are 
justified  in  adding  these  words,  in  one  instance,  and  omitting  them  in  the  other  [four  instances, 
in  which  the  Greek  term  is  to  be  met  with. 

Doctor  L.  quotes  Chrysostom  as  establishing  the  daily  sacrifice;  but  like  "Ward  and 
Milner,  he  mutilates  the  text,  and  only  gives  what  is  favourable  to  himself.  Ana^  Tr^oa-^-yJy^ 
kcci   sis   to  asi   ypKso-z ti  av,  &c.  as  below.     He   begins  his  extract  with  the  foregoing 

*  Leigh's  Crit.  Sacr.  in  Loc.  t  Douay  Bible.  Vol.  ii.  p.  542. 

+  Rom.  vi.  10.     Heb.  vil.  27.     lb.  ix.  12.     1  Cor.  xv,  fr 


144  APPENDIX. 

sentence,  which,  it  is  insisted  on,  is  not  in  the  Homily  cited  ;  at  least,  not  in  the  form  which  he 
gives  it :  and  from  the  dotted  space  between  it  and  n  ay,  with  which  it  is  seemingly  connected,  he 
would  lead  his  readers  to  suppose,  that  he  had  omitted  irrelevant  matter.  That  it  is  not 
irrelevant,  however,  will  appear,  by  presenting  the  text  in  unbroken  series  from  the  part  above 
quoted,  with  which  Doctor  L.  sets  out,  to  be  the  end  of  the  Homily.  It  will  be  necessary  to 
recollect,  that  the  portion  within  the  brackets  is  suppressed  by  him,  and  that  where  the  mark  ^[ 
occurs,  he  stops  short,  instead  of  honestly  proceeding  witli  the  sequel.  This  contrivance,  as  it 
has  not  escaped  detection,  shall  not  want  exposure.  The  following  is  an  exact  translation  of  the 
Greek.  "  *What  then  ?  Do  we  not  offer  daily  ?  We  do,  but  we  excite  a  remembrance  of  his  death  ; 
and  this  is  one  sacrifice,  not  many.  [How  is  it  one,  and  not  many?  When  it  was  once  offered. 
it  was  brought  into  the  holy  of  holies.  This  (viz.  the  Jewish  rite)  is  a  type  of  that,  (viz.  the 
grand  offering  ;)  and  this  itself  (viz.  the  daily  sacrifice)  is  a  type  of  that].  For  we  always 
offer  himself ;  not  one  to  day,  another  to-morrow,  but  always  the  same.  Wherefore  there  is 
one  victim.  <[  For  this  reason,  since  he  is  offered  in  many  places,  are  there  many  Christs  ?  By 
no  means.  But  there  is  one  Christ  every  where,  and  he  is  here  full,  and  there  full;  one  body. 
Since,  therefore,  he  being  offered  in  many  places  is  one  body,  and  not  many  bodies,  so  there  is 
one  sacrifice.  He  is  our  High  Priest,  who  offered  that  victim  which  cleanseth  us.  We  offer 
that  now  which  was  then  offered ;  an  inconsumable  (uvuXcotov)  sacrifice.  This  is  done  in 
remembrance  of  that  which  then  happened.  For  he  said  '  do  this  in  remembrance  of  me.'  We 
do  not,  like  the  High  Priest,  offer  different  (Bvo-iccc)  sacrifices,  but  always  the  same;  or  rather 
we  effect  a  commemoration  of  the  sacrifice." 

It  is  now  submitted  to  the  learned  and  candid  reader,  whether  it  can  be  collected,  as  Doctor 
L.  says,  from  that  ancient  father's  words,  "  that  though  Christ  was  offered  once,  and  his  offering 
sufficcth  for  ever,  yet  we  offer  him  daily :  but  that  it  is  one  and  the  same  sacrifice,  because  we 
offer  one  and  the  same  tvictim ;"  and  not,  rather,  that  his  meaning  is  grossly  misrepresented. 
St.  Chrysostom  makes  mention,  it  is  true,  of  a  daily  sacrifice;  (and  Protestants  do  not  object  to 
its  frequency,  if  it  be  taken  in  a  spiritual  sense :)  but  had  he  understood  (3-y<n«)  the  sacrifice,  or 

*  T<  Hy  •  riptis  xa9'  'exoc<;v,v  r/xtP«v  8  irpoatpipo^ii ;  wgocnpEfo^fv,  uK>C  mu^mem  wo«ty«K>(  to  G#vaT«  uvrs'  y.cu  fxtx  £$-»>  avrn 
y.cct  B  TroXXai.  [nut;  (amx  trw,  a  TtaKKcn  ;  E7TEio\)  onia,%  Trpoirnvi^yi ,  ikuvv)  wwiy^rt  £i$  ix  ayia,  Tut  ayiuy.  t«to  txtivra  TTT102  ej-j,  xai  avrr) 
sxEtv/)?]  tcv  yui>  avrov  an  wgoatyigofj.iy'  a  yvy  pty  Ite^ov,  uv^oy  divrigoy,  uM.  an  to  avro.  wry  puct.  irw  h  vvaicc.  ^[  itti  ru  hoyw  t»tw.  iiriuiri 
■^oXhxyji  irpoo-<pieiTXi,  moXt.ci.  XPi^ci  J  (x.rt}au.u^.  ccXX'  'ei;  irctv7xy(H  o  X§»roj,  nctt  trrcttva.  flr^ijs  ay,  xxt  txti  w^^jj,  'ty  awfAot.  'uaitip  a* 
nroKha.ys  irpoo-QipoiAivoi  "ev  auifjiac  Eft,  xiti  «  7roXfac,  cwpxrx,  htu  xa;  \tAct  -jvo-ix.  o  uc^ipivq  ripuy  tx£(j»o$  etiv,  o  tyv  9vt7ia»  tij»  x.uSxipaact.y  i/*aj 
vpoffiysfxuv.  tx.t»r>y  irpoTtytPOfxiy  xcu  yvv  tjjv  tote  Trppaiyiy%tHJxy  tiny  xix\uToy.  thto  it;  uyx^yKo-ty  ytyzrou  re  tote  ytvojAiyti,  tsto  yap  TrcntTe,  (pytn, 
ni  tpr,y  uycc/xyvo-iv.  «x  xX/.rlv  §v<Ttcty  xa$a7T££  o  «f^'Eg£»;,  «Ma  tT,y  xinr,v    an    TSOHSpu  ;   ^xKKoy    h   ANAMNH2IN   tpya.£>opi§x  Sv7ix<;.     ChRYS. 

Bened.  Ed.  In  Epis.  ad  Heb.  c.  ix.   Horn.  xvii. 

•|-  There  is  an  absurdity  in  the  application  of  the  word  victim  into  which  Popish  writers  necessarily  fall.  For  as  it  is 
solely  confined  to  a  dead,  and  not  to  a  living  body,  (the  original  being  hostia,  which  implies  host,  victim.)  how  can  it,  in  any  case, 
be  referred  to  our  Saviour  ?  Gregory  of  Nyssa,  vol.  iii.  p.  389,  speaking  of  Christ  observes,  a  yap  av  yv  ro  a-w^a,  re  kotis 
rcoc  £$w£ijv  itnrt $£<oy  enrto  i^v^ov  yv.     "  For  the  body  of  the  victim  would  not  be  fit  to  eat,  if  it  were  alive." 


APPENDIX.  ,  ,s 

offering,  which  he  speaks  of,  in  the  Popish  sense,  that  is,  as  containing  the  body  and  blood 

of  Christ,  it  is  evident  that  he  would  not  have  called   it,    (TTnOS)   a  *Type   or   Figure. 

Doctor   L.   himself  distinctly   admits,    that  he  would  not,  by   the  very  circumstance  of  his 

suppressing  the  passage  where  that  word  occurs.     Moreover,  the   Father,  in  the  last  sentence 

of  his  discourse,  (so  prudently  kept  out  of  sight  by  Dr.  L.)  where  he  contrasts  the  Christian 

with  the  Jewish  sacrifice,  clearly  determines,  that  he  considered   the  former  not  less  than   the 

latter  as  figurative  or  typical  of  the  sacrifice  of  Christ  himself.     "  We  do   not,"  says    he, 

"  like  the  High  Priest,   make  different  sacrifices,   but  always  the  same:  but  we  rather  make  a 

remembrance;  or,  by  our  act,  cause  a  remembrance  to  be  made  (ANAMNHSI N  epyoc?ous9*)  of  the 

sacrifice.     So  Euscbius,  after  remarking  that  Christians  no  longer  sacrifice,  because  of  the  one 

sacrifice  of  Christ,    which  has   superseded   all   others,    calls  the  elements  symbols:  "  having 

therefore,  received  the  command  to  celebrate  the  memory  of  that  sacrifice  by  the  symbols  of 

his  body,  and  of  his  saving  blood,  we  are,  8rc."     Origen,  a  century  before  him,  used  the  same 

language;  so  have  the  most  eminent  of  the  Latin  fathers;  and,  to  come  down  to  modern  times, 

even  in  the  translation   of  Bossuets  exposition   made   by  the  R.  R.  Doctor  Coppino-er,   where 

the  consecration  is  spoken  of,   he  unwittingly  observes,  "  Jesus  Christ  said  separately,  '  this  is 

my  body,  this  is  my  blood  ;'  which  includes  a  lively  and  efficacious  representation  of  the  violent 

death  which  he  underwent." 

Some  extracts  taken  from  the  work:,   of  iElfric,  a  Saxon  writer  of  the  tenth  century,   by 
the  Rev.  John  Lingard,  in  his  history  of  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church,  seem  so  peculiarly  to  belong 
to  the  present  subject,  that  their  omission  would  be  unpardonable.     After  noticing  that  JElfric 
lias  been  hailed  by  Protestant  writers  as  the  first  of  English  Reformers,  +  Mr.  Lingard  proceeds 
to  give  his  own  translation  of  the  passage  in  JElfric's  sermon  on  the  sat  rif.ee  of  the  mass,  as  also 
the  original  Latin  of  Bertram,  for  the  purpose  of  shewing  that  JElfric's  sentiments  are  perfectly 
Catholic,   i.  e.  Popish.     As  it  strikes   the  writer  of  this  article,  the  language  of  both  accords 
with    that  of    the  Church  of  England,  e.g."  Much   is  there,"    says  JElfric,  "  between  the 
invisible  might  of  the  holy  husel,  (the  ghostly  body  is  called  the  husel)  and   the  visible  appear- 
ance of  its  own  kind.     In  its  own  kind  it  is  corruptible  bread,  and  corruptible  wine;  but  after 
the  might,  of  the  divine  word,  it  it  truly  Christ's  body  and  his  blood,  not  indeed  in  a  bodily,  but 
in  a  ghostly  manner."     Immediately  after, — "  and  therefore  nothing  is   to  be  understood  in  it 
after  a  bodily,  but  all  to  be  understood  afrer  a  ghostly  manner."     And,   "  for   this  reason  the 
holy  husel  is  called  a  sacrament ;   because  one  thing  is  seen  in  it,  and  another  understood."  And, 
"   this  sacrament  is  a  pledge  and  ixjigure;  Christ's  bod)-  is  truth."     Lastly,  "  truly  it  is,  as  we 
said  before,  Christ's  body   and   his  blood,  not  after  a  bodily,   but  after  a  ghostly  manner.      Nor 
.shall  ye  search  how  it  is  made  so:  but  hold  that  it  is  made  so."     By  giving  the  above  passages, 

*  Chrysostom,  (vol.  vii.p.  7&3.)  arguing  against  the  heretic;  of  his  day,  asks,  si  yac  [ly  uin^j.isy  o  IrrHc,  t>vq;  c-iuXo\x 
r«  r&sLLSva  ;    "  For  if  Jesus  had  nqj.  died,  whose  symbols  are  they  which  are  oil!  red  }" 

f  Section  xiv.  p.  100.  %  Ajjtio.  or  the  Anc.Sat.  Church.  Vol.  i.  p   343.  et  ieq. 

U 


U(j  APPENDIX. 

as  they  stand  in  Mr.  Lingard's  book,  alt  the  advantages  derivable  from  a  man's  own  translation 
are  conceded  to  him.  That  they  are  not  inconsiderable,  appears  from  a  comparison  of  his  version 
with  a  transcript  made  from  an  old  English  one  of  the  same  passages  of  the  homily  on  the 
sacramental  doctrine,  which  is  preserved  in  the  Library  of  the  British  Museum. 

As  literal  a  translation  of  Bertram's  Latin  as  the  author  could  make  is  here  offered.  After 
speaking  of  the  natural  body,  he  says,  *  "  but,  indeed,  the  spiritual  flesh,  which  spiritually  feeds 
a  faithful  people,  in  its  external  appearance,  consists  of  grains  of  corn  wrought  by  the  manufac- 
turer ;  jointed  by  no  nerves  and  bones,  &c."  Mr.  Lingard  lays  great  stress  on  the  words  in 
italics,  as  shewing  that  Bertram,  (who  did  not  consider  the  natural  and  eucharistic  body  the 
same,)  confined  the  difference  to  the  manner  in  which  they  exist.  But  he  is  too  clear  and 
explicit  in  other  passages  to  be  misunderstood;  as  when  he  remarks,  that  t"  there  is  nothing  in 
that  food,  nothing  in  that  drink,  to  be  understood  in  a  corporeal  sense,  but  it  must  be  entirely 
apprehended  spiritually."  Anil,  "  J  St.  Isidore  shews,  that  every  sacrament  possesses  within 
itself  some  mystery ;  and  that  there  is  one  thing  which  appears  to  the  sight,  and  another  to  the 
mind."  Again,  "  [(the  outward  thing  which  is  seen  has  a  corporeal  appearance,  but  the  inward 
thing  which  is  understood,  a  spiritual  fruit."  And  lastly,  "  §there  is,  indeed,  a  body  of  Christ, 
but  not  a  carnal  one ;  there  is  a  blood  of  Christ,  not  having  the  properties  of  blood,  (i.  e.  not 
corporeal)  but  spiritual."  These  are  the  extracts  which,  Mr.  Lingard  says,  contain  language 
not  repugnant  to  *  the  Catholic  doctrine.'  Unquestionably  not  to  Catholic  doctrine ;  but  to 
the  learned  it  is  left  to  judge,  whether  it  be  not  directly  hostile  to  Popish  doctrine,  and  to  the 
sentiments  of  the  Popish  Church.  But,  beside  jElfric;  Bertram  and  ^JBerenger,  in  the  century 
immediately  following,  and  the  other  writers  who  denied  the  identity  of  the  natural  and  eucha- 
ristic body  of  Christ,  bear  direct  evidence  in  favour  of  the  principles  of  the  Church  of  England 
at  this  day,   notwithstanding  that  Mr.  Lingard  maintains  the  contrary. 

One  other  passage,  in  iElfric's  Sermon  on  Easterday,  is  so  decidedly  adverse  to  the  doctrine 
of  Transubstantiation,  that  its  insertion  could  not  be  dispensed  with.     It  must  be  observed,  that 

*"  At  vero  caro  spirituals  quae  populum  credentem  spiritualiter  pascit,  secundum  speciem  quam  gerit  cxterius,  frumenti 
granis  manu  artificis  consistit,  nullis  nervis  ossibusque  compacta,  &c." 

f  "  Nihil  in  esca  ista,  nihil  in  potu  isto,  corporaliter  sentiendum,  sed  tetum  spiritualiter  attendendum,  &c." 

%  "  Ostendit  (St.  Isidorus)  omne  sacramentum  aliquid  secreti  in  se  continere,  et  aliud  esse  quod  visibiliter  appareat,  ahud 
\ero  quod  invisibiliter  sit  accipiendum." 

U  "  Exterius  quod  videtur,  speciem  habet  corpoream,  interius  vero  quod  intelligitur,— fructum  spirilualem,  &c." 
§  "  Est  quidem  corpus  Christi,  sed  nen  corporate,  est  sanguis  Christi,  sed  non  corporalis  sed  spiritualis,  &c." 

%  It  is  most  certain,  that  when  Berenger  treated  of  the  presence  of  Christ's  body  in  the  Eucharist,  he  meant  no  more 
than  a  spiritual  presence.  And  although  he  concealed  his  sentiments  under  ambiguous  expressions  to  deceive  his  enemies,  it  is 
impossible  to  mistake  his  meaning  on  this  point.  "  Constat,"  says  he,  "  verum  Christi  corpus  in  ista  mensa  proponi,  sed 
spiritualiter  interiori  homine  verum  in  ea  Christi  corpus  ab  his  duntaxat,  qui  membra  sunt,  incorruptum,  intaminatura, 
inattritumque  spiritualiter  manducari."    Martene'sThesavk.  Tom.  ii.  p.  109. 


Appendix.  h7 

Mr.  Llngard  has  not  noticed  it.  #  "  Now  men  have  often  searched,  and  do  yet  often  search,  how 
bread  that  -is  gathered   of  corne,  and   through  fyers  heate  baked,  maye  be   turned   to  Christ's 
body,  or  how  wyne  that  is  pressed  out  of  many  grapes,  is  turned  through  one  blessin»  to  the 
Lorde's  bloude.     Now  say  we  to  such  men,  that  some  things  be  spoken  of  Christ  by  signification, 
some  thynge  by  certaine.     True  thyng  is,  and  certaine,   that  Christ  was  borne  of  a  maide  and 
suffred  death   of  his  own  accorde,  and  was  buryed,  and  on  this  day  rose  from  death.     He  is  said 
bread  by  significationy  and  a  Lambe,  and  a  Lyoy,  and  a  Mountayne.     He  is  called  bread 
because  he  is  our  life  and  angell's  life.     He  is  sayd  to  be  a  f  lambe'  for  his  innocence.     A  '  lyon ' 
for  strength  wherewith  he  overcame  the  strong  devill.     But  Christ  is  not  so  notwithstanding  afte 
true  nature,  neither  bread,  nor  a   lambe,  nor  a  lyon."     Then,  after  saying  that  the  elements 
are  one  thing  to  the  senses,  and  another  to  the  mind,  he  thus  proceeds,  "  An  heathen  chiide  u 
christened,  yet  he  altereth  not  his  shape  without,  though  he  be  changed  within,  &c." 

The  reader  will  find  a  concise  and  satisfactory  account  of  yElfric,  and  his  opinions 
respecting  the  eucharistic  body,  in  Rapin's  History  of  England,  Vol.  i.  p.  143.  Second  Edit, 
and  also  in  Henry's    History  of  England,  Vol.  ii.  p.  L'02,  4to. 


«■£ 


ARTICLE  III. 

Doctor  L.  asks,  if  the  first  English  Translators  were  not  afraid  of  the  word  altar,  why 
should  they  substitute  temple  in  its  place  as  a  translation  of  Svo-iocsyicuqv  ?  He  further  observes, 
"  when  the  Christian  sacrifice  was  abolished,  altars  were  unnecessary.  They  (the  Reformers) 
had,  of  course,  treated  them  with  every  species  of  indignity,  and  were  too  cautious  politicians 
to  permit  them  to  be  commended  in  the  Scriptures."  How  ungrounded  an  imputation  !  For 
although  Matthews's  Bible  has  the  word  temple  in  one  of  the  texts  quoted  by  Ward  ;  (viz.  1  Cor. 
ix.  13.)  yet  immediately  after,  the  word  altar  occurs,  a  strong  proof  that  the  Translator  intended 
no  fraud,  and  was  not  in  the  remotest  degree  under  the  influence  of  fear.  To  inadvertence, 
then,  alone,  can  the  adoption  of  the  former  word  be  attributed,  as  in  the  very  first  edition  of 
his  Bible,  which  was  printed  by  authority,  the  reading  of  both  passages  appeared  the  same. 

Enough  has  been  said  on  jj  Trmi  in  Section  II.  No.  15,  to  convince  Doctor  L.  that  the 
silence  observed  respecting  that  text  in  the  Analysis,  did  not  originate  in  the  improper  motives 
which  he  attributes  to  its  learned  author;  there  can  be  as  little  doubt  that  it  did  not  proceed 
from  his  want  of  information  on  the  subject,  or  of  ability  to  apply  it. 

*  Guild's  Translation  from  the  Saxon,  p.  30.     Brit.  Mus.  Library. 

U   2 


[48  APPENDIX. 


ARTICLE  IF. 


Instead  of  combating  the  arguments  brought  forward  in  the  Analysis  to  prove  that  elder  is 
a  more  literal  translation  of  7rpi<r@vTspcg  than  priest,  Doctor  L.  substitutes  a  chain  of  interroga- 
tories; a  strange  way  this  is,  either  to  establish  Ward's  positions,  or  to  overturn  those  of  his 
adversary.  He  begins  with  enquiring  "  what  kind  of  men  they  were,  whom  the  sacred  writers 
designated  by  TrpscrfivTspoi  ?  Were  they  not  ministers  of  religious  worship  ordained  for  that 
purpose  by  the  Apostles?  If  they  were,  what  is  the  proper  term  by  which  such  ministers  are 
described  in  the  English  language?  Certainly  priests."  But  not  satisfied  with  this  proof  posi- 
tive of  the  faultincss  of  the  English  version,  he  proposes,  by  way  of  exemplifying  the  truth  of 
what  be  says,  *  a  Latin  sentence  to  Doctor  Ryan  to  translate,  ami  asks  him  whether  lie  would 
prefer  the  following  as  the  more  literal  version.  '  The  overseer  of  London,  with  the  greater  of 
the  city,  and  two  elders  of  the  Church,  visited  the  generality  of  Oxford?'  Here  the  reader  is 
presented  with  the  same  cavils,  the  same  silly  remarks  and  absurd  objections,  which  were  raised 
by  Gregory  Martin  against  the  existing  versions  of  Ids  day.  But  as  these  have  been  already 
disposed  of,  it  will  be  sufficient  to  refer  on  the  subject,  generally,  to  Sections  IV.  and  V.  One 
observation  only  remains  to  be  made,  that  the  Rhemists  do  the  very  thing  which  is  here 
brought  as  a  ground  of  complaint  against  the  Protestant  Translators; — that  of  varying,  accord- 
ing to  circumstances,  their  translation  from  the  restricted  to  the  extended  signification  of  the 
same  word.  Thus  they  render  (SocTrltarpog  (Mark  vii.  4.)  washing,  in  one  place,  and  in  another 
(Ileb.  ix.  10.)  baptism;  en  t<nto7rti  (Luke  xix.  44.)  visitation,  and  again  (Acts  i.  20.)  bishopriek ; 
and  7rps7[3vTspoc  (Matt.  xv.  2.)  ancient,  which  they  elsewhere  render  priest.  This  latter  rendering 
is  certainly  the  more  objectionable,  as  it  implies  a  sacrijicer,  contrary  to  the  intention  of  the 
writers  of  the  New  Testament. 

Doctor  L.'s  other  objections  to  gift,  in  1  Tim.  iv.  14,  and  2  Tim.  i.  6,  and  to  minister  and 
deacon  in  the  early  translations  of  1  Tim.  iii.  8,  will  be  found,  in  the  forementioned  Sections, 
abundantly  refuted. 


ARTICLE  V. 

It  is  very  singular  how  so  sensible  a  writer  as  Doctor  L.  could  waste  his  time  in  giving 
currency  to  the  slanders  and  fabrications  of  Gregory  Martin  and  Ward.  The  same  objections 
which  they  made  to  overseers,  elders,  messengers,  the  renderings  of  the  English  Bibles,  he  calls 
into  notice  again  ;  although  it  might  be  expected,  that  he  would  abate  somewhat  of  that  violence 

*  '  Episcopus  Londinensis  cum  major e  civitatis  et  duobus  ecclesise  preshjteris  visitavit  Universitatem  Oxoniensem.' 


APPENDIX.  u*j 

and  ill-temper  which  characterise  their  writings.  "  Bishop,"  says  Doctor  L.  "  is  rendered  over- 
seer, the  highest  functionary  of  the  church  is  denoted  by  a  term,  which  signifies  a  menial 
servant."  The  fitness  of  overseer  as  a  translation  of  s7r«rxo7rcg  has  been  proved  in  Section-  V. 
Xo.  38  :  and  as  to  its  implying  a  servile  office,  surely  he  can  have  no  objection  to  that.  Did  he 
but  consider,  that  the  head  of  his  own  church,  that  functionary  who  raised  himself  above 
principalities  and  powers,  assumed  the  title  of  *Ficarius  (Jesu  Christi)  i.  e.  a  term  expressing 
the  lowest  rank  of  servitude,  he  would  scarcely  have  hazarded  so  futile  a  remark.  lie  next 
observes,  "  we  are  gravely  told  of  chusing  or  ordaining  elders,  as  if  any  thing  but  time  could,  in 
the  strict  meaning  of  the  word,  make  an  elder."  Can  any  thing  be  more  childish;  as  if  several 
persons  had  not  been  admitted  by  the  Apostles  as  vrpeo-QuTSpot  on  the  score  of  gravity,  judgment,  &c. 
and  not  on  account  of  their  age?  Beside,  Doctor  L.  might  know,  that  if  priest  did  not  signify 
sacrificer,  the  Protestant  Translators  would  have  adopted  it.  They  are  always  consistent  in  their 
translation,  while  the  Rhemists  frequently  use  senior,  ancient,  &c.  as  a  rendering  for  7rp£o-@vTepoct 
as  well  as  priest.  As  to  what  he  says  respecting  deacons,  messengers,  ike.  no  remark  different 
from  what  will  be  found  in  Section  IV.  is  required.  But,  continues  Doctor  L.  the  Reformers 
were  "  politic  to  exclude  bishops,  priests,  and  deacons,  that  the  people,  who  from  habit  had 
been  accustomed  to  reverse  these  orders,  might  not  conceive  there  was  any  foundation  for  them 
in  Scripture.'"  What  an  imputation  !  This  is,  truly,  out-Warding  Ward  ;  for  the  very  readings 
which  obtained  in  the  first  English  Bibles  for  the  Greek  words  |  Mr/o-jwwoj,  7rps<r@vrepoe,  &c.  have 
not  been  changed  to  this  day.  The  very  principles,  too,  on  which  the  Fathers  of  the  English 
Church  set  out,  and  the  apostolic  forms  of  consecration  and  ordination  by  prayer  and  imposition 
of  hands,  which  they  adopted,  are  critically  the  same  as  those  followed  by  their  successors,  and 
maintained  up  to  the  present  time.  So  that,  when  he  roundly  asserts,  that  the  three  foremen- 
tioned  orders  were  suppressed  by  the  Reformers,  he  will  find  but  few,  however  they  may  be  dis- 
posed to  admit  his  modesty,  inclined  to  compliment  him  on  his  scrupulous  regard  to  truth. 

His  concluding  cavil  on  the  word  vtts^x^,    1   Pet.  ii.  13,  has  been  sufficiently  answered  in 
Section  V.   No.  37. 


ARTICLE  VI. 

The  propriety  of  the  Protestant  Translation  a  sister,  a  wife,  (1  Cor.  ix.  5.)  having  been 
fully  proved  in  Section  VI.  No.  39,  more  is  not  here  necessary,"  than  to  notice  the  singular  way, 
in  which,  according  to  Doctor  L.'s  rule,  a  translator  should  get  rid   of  a  difficulty,  when  it 

*  "  Sive  Vicarius  est  qui  servo  paret,  &c."  Hon.  Lib.  ii.  Sat.  ;.    Also,  "  Esse  sat  est  servum,  jam  nolo  vicaeius  esse." 
Maktial.  Epig.  ii. 

|  Matthews's  Version  reads  '  Bishop'  in  Phil.  ii.  1  Tim.  iii.  1  and  2,  Sec. 


150  APPENDIX. 

occurs  in  the  original.  C:  He  ought,"  says  he,  ':  to  render  the  ambiguity  of  the  text  by  an 
expression  of  similar  ambiguity  in  the  version,  otherwise  he  does  not  offer  a  faithful  copy  ot 
the  original;  he  does  not  translate,  but  interpret:  he  substitutes  fallibility  for  infallibility." 
Monstrous  !  First,  to  charge  this  text  in  the  original  with  ambiguity;  next,  to  contend  that  a 
faithful  translator  should  preserve  the  same  ambiguity  in  his  version;  and  lastly,  that  by  so 
doing,  his  version  becomes  infallible. 

In  order  to  establish  the  Popish  argument,  St.  Paul  must  have  been  a  blockhead,  in  not 
being  aware  that  a  sister  must  be  a  woman  ;  nay,  he  exposes  himself  to  the  imputation  of  being 
something  worse,  if  he  be  supposed  to  have  acted  from  design.  Now,  which  of  these  accusa- 
tions would  Doctor  L.  bring  home  to  the  Apostle?  On  the  words  *BvjXns>i  Bsa,  a  female  goddess, 
used  by  Homer,  Lucian  has  exercised  much  satirical  humour,  perhaps  mc^e  than  it  deserved;  as 
a  poetical  genius  may  convert  a  dry  tautology  into  a  beauty.  But  since  this  cannot  be  done  in 
prosaic  composition,  it  must  be  admitted,  if  cchXfpyj  ywvi,  an  expression  nearly  parallel,  be  taken 
in  the  sense  affixed  to  it  by  the  Rhemists,  that  St.  Paul,  so  remarkable  in  general  for  his  senten- 
tious brevity,  and  the  avoidance  of  unnecessary  terms,  exposes  himself  most  deservedly  to 
such  sarcasm  as  the  Grecian  wit  visited  on  the  venerable  Bard. 

What  has  been  said  in  Section  VI.  No.  40,  in  reply  to  Ward's  objections  to  the  Protestant 
rendering  of  c-vtyyt  yawn,  Phil.  iv.  3,  will  apply  to  what  Doctor  L.  adduces  on  the  same 
subject,  as  he  contents  himself  with  a  tame  repetition  of  the  indecent  charges  contained  in  the 
Errata. 

In  bringing  this  Article  to  a  close,  it  may  be  observed,  that  the  celibacy  of  the  clergy  is 
neither  of  divine  nor  apostolical  institution  :  not  of  divine,  as  our  Saviour  no  where  expressly 
commanded  it ;  nor  of  apostolical,  as  it  is  universally  allowed,  that  most,  if  not  all,  the  f  Apostles, 
were  married  men.  It  was  a  practice  not  general  in  its  extent  in  the  Greek  Church  until  the  end 
of  the  seventh  century,  and  even  then,  only  among  bishops.  It  was  limited,  too,  in  the  ancient 
Irish  Church,  and  in  the  Anglo-Saxon  Church,  each  priest  was  allowed  one  concubine  if  placed 
in  the  same  rank  with  a  wife.  The  permission  was  thus  expressed,  X"  if  a  priestforsake  his  con- 
cubine and  take  another,  let  him  be  accursed."  And  in  the  Church  of  Rome  a  total  celibate  was 

*  ©gcvv  Exx\Yi<ria.  §  IV. 
f  It  is  an  undoubted  fact,  that,  for  the  first  three  ages,  no  vow  of  perpetual  celibacy,  nor  abstinence  from  conjugal 
society,  was  required  on  the  part  of  the  clergy,  as  a  condition  of  their  ordination.  It  is  generally  agreed,  that  most  of  the 
Apostles  were  married ;  and  it  is  certain,  that  in  the  ages  which  immediately  followed,  Bishops,  Presbyters,  and  Deacons, 
were  married,  without  any  reproof,  or  mark  of  dishonour  being  set  on  them.  Bingham  enumerates  several  instances.  See 
Antiq.  Book  iv,  c.  v.  sect.  5. 

%  Si  presbyter  concubinam  deserai,  et  aliam  accipiat,  anathema  sit."  Wilkin's  Cokciua,  vol.  i.  p.  219.  Art.  xxxv. 
No  injunction  is  imposed  by  this  rule  to  abandon  the  concubine.  But  the  Popish  cookies  will  say,  it  is  understood,  and  that 
the  curse  extends  to  the  person  who  attaches  himself  to  a  new  companion.  Be  this  as  it  may,  the  LXIVth  Article  of  the  above 
work  proves  that  tho  Northumbrian  Presbyters  were  not  interdicted  marriage,  in  the  tenth  century.  The  laws,  by  which 
they  were  regulated,  were  drawn  up,  A.  D.  950.  That  just  spoken  of  is  as  follows.  ,c  Si  quis  legitimam  suam  uxorem  viven- 
.  m  dimittat,  et  aliam  uxorem  injuste  duxerit,  non  habeat  Dei  misericordiam,  nisi  illud  compenset."  It  is  true,  that  celibacy 
1*  commendable,  when  a  man  embraces  it,  ex  voluntate ;  but  it  is  equally  so,  that  it  is  promotive  of  the  grossest  sensuality 
£ud  vice. 


APPENDIX.  J51 


not  finally  established  before  the  fifteenth  century,  at  the  council  of  Constance.  That  assembly, 
which  consisted  of  346  Bishops,  and  564  Doctors,  was  scandalized  by  the  attendance  of  7000 
prostitutes!  Their  presence  stamped  with  infamy  and  disgrace  so  outrageous  a  violation  of 
nature  as  the  one  which  had  been  there  sanctioned. 


ARTICLE  VIL 

As  Doctor  L.  has  confined  himself  to  a  bare  repetition  of  Ward's  remarks  on  the  Protestant 
translation  of  sk  «,  Acts  xix.  3,  any  observations,  in  addition  to  those  made  in  Section  VIL 
No.  44,  may  be  dispensed  with.  Because  into  has,  through  a  mere  oversight,  been  substituted 
in  the  Analysis  as  the  Rhemish  version  of  sis  m  the  above  text ;  Doctor  L.  as  if  he  had  gained 
any  accession  of  strength  to  his  cause,  from  so  slight  an  inadvertence,  calls  on  him  "  to  reflect 
that  the  change  of  a  single  syllable  will  frequently  cause  a  very  important  change  in  the  sense." 
This,  however,  is  not  one  of  those  cases  in  which  an  important,  or,  indeed,  any  change  in  the 
sense,  as  has  been  already  stated,  could  be  effected  by  the  alteration  of  which  he  complains. 

His  next  cavil  is  to  the  Protestant  rendering  (ivhich  he  shed)  of  *  c^w,  Tit.  iii.  5.  If 
he  wish  to  know,  why  "  the  ambiguous  relative  which,  and  the  verb,  to  shed,  are  still  retained," 
in  the  Protestant  Bible,  he  will  see  a  satisfactory  cause  assigned  in  the  forementioned  Section. 
He  says,  that  "  Doctor  Ryan  owns  that  the  Catholic  version  is  preferable."  Granting  that  he 
made  a  similar  admission  respecting  each  of  the  other  controverted  texts,  yet  that  would  not 
affeet  the  state  of  the  question  an  iota ;  as,  after  all,  it  is  but  the  opinion  of  an  individual. 
Indeed,  Doctor  Ryan  himself  candidly  says  as  much;  since,  with  an  unaffected  modesty  highly 
creditable  to  him,  and  with  great  good  sense,  he  desires  that  "  *  his  errors  here  and  elsewhere 
may  not  be  imputed  to  the  Protestant  Churches;  but  to  the  zeal,  ignorance,  or  weakness  of  an 
individual,  who  writes  without  the  authority  or  solicitation  of  any  person  whatsoever." 


ARTICLE  Fill. 

The  reader  may  satisfy  himself  by  referring  to  Section  VIII.  No.  47 — 51,  that  jujravsw 
does  not  remotely  imply  any  thing  beside  that  thorough  change  of  mind  which  produces  the 
relinquishment  of  evil  habits.  Sorrow  for  sin,  and  purpose  of  amendment,  it  may  embrace; 
but,  certainly,  it  includes  no  external  demonstration  of  that  sorrow.   Achilles,  when  lie  lamented 

*  Anal.  p.  33. 


152  APPENDIX. 

the  fate  of  his  friend  Patroclus,  could  not  be  said  to  have  felt  perauoix ;  and  yet  he  expressed  Ins 
grief  by  those  outward  signs  so  beautifully  depicted  by  *Pope.  The  word  originally  used  by 
our  Saviour,  (which  the  Evangelists  have,  by  translating  it  pirxmx,  properly  referred  to  the 
mind,)  was  IThubu.  This  term,  in  the  Syriac  language,  simply  implies  "  turn  ye."  What  a 
departure,  therefore,  is  there  from  its  primitive  meaning  in  the  use  of  one,  which  conveys  the 
idea  of  mortification,  or  a  punishment  of  body?  Doctor  L.  infers  the  accuracy  of  the  Popish 
rendering  of  that  word,  1st,  "  from  some  of  the  texts  themsefves.  2d.  "  From  the  ancient 
Greek  Ecclesiastical  Writers."  3dly,  "  From  the  discipline  of  the  ancient  church."  And,  4thly, 
(-  from  the  Vulgate  text."  The  merits  of  these  points  have  been  already  discussed  in  so  ample  a 
manner,  and  the  fate  of  Doctor  L.'s  inferences  so  clearly  determined,  that  it  would  be  a  loss 
of  time  to  say  more  here  on  the  subject. 

Doctor  L.  partly  overlooking  Ward,  shifts  his  ground  to  Gregory  Martin.  But  a  brief 
enquiry  will  suffice  to  ascertain  the  advantage  he  derives  from  this  manoeuvre,  and  from  the 
sua'irestion  of  this  fust  and  ablest  of  his  predecessors.  Ausonius,  he  observes,  defines  the  sense 
of  the  word  [aetmoicx.  in  the  well-known  passage  in  his  twelfth  epigram. 

"  Sum  Dea,  cui  nomen  nee  Cicero  ipse  dedit. 

Sum  Den,  quae  facti,  non  factique  exigo  poenas 
Nempe  ut  pouiheat,  sic  METANCEA  vocor." 

Although  Doctor  L.  has  not,  like  G.  Martin,  ventured  so  far  as  to  style  Ausonius  a  Chris- 
tian poet,  yet  he  equally  respects  his  authority,  in  the  present  case.  JBeza  is  of  opinion,  that 
Ausonius  was  confined  to  the  use  of  the  word  by  the  nature  of  epigrammatic  metre,  otherwise, 
that  he  would  have  adopted  fxirocuiXux.  This  opinion  could  not  have  been  founded  in  preju- 
dice; as,  since  his  time,  the  very  ^Jesuits,  who  wrote  the  notes  for  the  Delphin  Edition  of 
Ausonius'' s  poems,  have  entertained  the  same  opinion.  Let  the  reader  now  contrast  the  authority 
of  Lucian,  an  elegant  Greek  writer,  with  that  of  this  obscure  Latin  poet,  (for  as  they  were 
bothjjPagans  that  goes  for  nothing)  and  say  by  which  he  would  be  guided.  Lucian,  in  one  of 
liis  dialogues  introduces  Charon  addressing  the  shades  to  the  following  effect  :   "  If  you  should 

*  Cast  on  the  ground,  with  furious  hands  he  spread 
ri  he  scorching  ashes  o'er  his  graceful  head  ; 
His  purple  garments,  and  his  golden  hairs, 
Those  he  deforms  with  dust,  and  these  he  tears  : 
On  the  hard  soil  his  groaning  hreast  he  threw, 
And  roll'd  and  grovell'd,  as  to  earth  he  grew. 

Lib.  xviii.  v.  2/.  et  seq. 
f  See  Rev.  Dr.  Buchanan's  late  Sermon  on  the  healing  waters  of  Bethesda.  p.  10. 
;   Ausonius  in  illo  suo  epigrammate  omnibus  noto,  fx.nx.jj.o,ti»n  potius  quam  /A£T«»ciav  dicturus  fuerit,  si  versus  pentametri 
ratio  perrhississet."     An  not.  in  Matt.  c.  iii.  v.  2. 

§  "  Graccum  est  uatccvo^,  quod  usurpavit  Ausonius,  cum  latinum  p(rniientia,  hexametri  aut  pentametri  versus  corrjposi- 
tionem,  ingredi  non  posset.     Apud  Ciceronem  nusquam  pirnitentia  legitur."     Vid.  Not.  in  Auson.  Delph.  Ed. 

i|   "  Ausonius  was  a  professed  Pagan."     Gib.  Decl.  vol.  v.  p.  2.     He  thus  speaks,  himself  being  a  Druid.     "  Stirpp 
Druldurn  satus,  si  fama  non  fiillit  iidcm."     Auson.  Vaiior.  Amsteled.  pp.  153.  lGg. 


APPENDIX.  i:,s 

embark  with   these   incumbrances,   I   fear  lest  you  should    hereafter  (jMrx^r^,   surely  it  will 
not  be  said—  do  penance)  repent  it."'     So  much  for  Doctor  L.'s  quotation  from  Ausonius." 

But  if  a  Latin  author  be  at  all  appealed  to,  why  consult  the  profane  pages  of  Ausonius  in 
preference  to  the  Christian  writings  of  St.  Austin?  For  this  obvious  reason,  that  that  -Father 
explains  ptmitentia  as  signifying  a  freturn  to  the  Church,  and  not  a  satisfaction  for  sin;  and, 
therefore,  lie  is  overlooked.  Moreover,  why  is  not  Lactantius,  another  venerable  father,  one 
too  a  particular  favourite  with  the  Romish  Church,  brought  forward  by  Doctor  L?  Evidently 
for  the  same  reason.  In  treating  of  repentance,  he  says,  %"  the  Greeks  apply  a  better  and 
more  torcible  signification  to  psravoia  than  we  can  to  resipiscentia ;  for  he  repents,  (rcsipiscit) 
and,  as  it  were,  recovers  his  mind  from  its  delusion  ;  who  is  grieved  at  his  error.'*  Erasmus 
speaks  to  the  same  effect;  so  that  it  was  in  the  first  instance  wrong  to  adopt  the  Latin  word 
pamitentia  at  all,  and  still  more  so  to  coin  the  term  ^penance,  which  so  emphatically  designates 
one  of  the  grossest  errors  of  the  Church  of  Rome.     It  is   scarcely  doing  Bingham  justice  to 

*  Grreci  melius  et  significantius  pirmom  dicunt,  quam  uos  possumus  resipiscentiam  dicere;  resipiscit  et  mentem  suam 
quasi  ab  insania  recipit,  quern  errati  piget.  Lactan.  de  vero  cultu.  Lib.  vi.  p.  24. 

|  Tom.  ii.  p.  192,  and  Tom.  iii.  p.  383,  et  passim. 

t  "  Pcenitens  nihil  aliud  est  nisi  sibi  iratus."  And  again,  "  pcenitentia  est  renascenlia  animi."  Probably  it  was  with  a 
reference  to  the  latter  passage  in  St.  Austin's  work,  that  the  Rev.  J.  Quarry,  in  his  Visitation  Sermon,  preached  at  Cork  in  1SOS, 
before  his  Grace  the  Archbishop  of  Cashel,  explained  (/.trama,  as  signifying  a  "  spiritual  new  birth,  or  regeneration."  With  great 
deference,  however,  towards  the  opinion  of  so  excellent  a  scholar  and  a  divine,  as  Mr.  Quarry  unquestionably  is, 
the  real  and  only  scriptural  meaning  of  regeneration  is  confined  in  its  application  to  the  state  consequent  on  baptism,  and  by  no 
means  imports  that  species  of  new-birth,  which,  according  to  his  interpretation,  marks  instantaneous  conversion.  Doctor 
Buchanan,  in  his  Sermon  before  alluded  to,  falls  into  the  same  error.  Yet  he  varies  his  exposition  by  a  shade  of  difference 
from  that  of  Mr.  Quarry  ;  as  he  considers  the  change  to  be  progressive,  and  not  sudden  ;  weak  and  imperceptible  almost  at 
first,  but  eventually  effecting  a  regeneration. 

§  In  Section  VIII.  Numbers  4/ — 51,  the  reader  will  find  a  succinct  account  of  the  origin  and  growth  of  the  doctrines 
relating  to  auricular  confession  and  indulgences.  The  Penitential,  or  Registry  of  Pardons  and  Fines,  which  was  first 
published,  is  there  barely  adverted  to.  Here,  then,  it  cannot  be  thought  unseasonable  to  exhibit  an  extract  from  a  work, 
which  should  never  be  overlooked,  when  any  question  occurs  in  which  Popery  is  concerned.  Its  title,  which  is  so  descriptive 
of  its  contents,  runs  thus  «  The  Book  of  Rates  used  in  C!)r  ^U\  CUStOlU  DOUSC  Of  t1)C  CCUTt  ailtJ  t\)t 
(O)Urri)  Of  HvOluT,  By  Anthony  Egane,  B.  D.  formerly  confessor-general  of  Ireland."  Egane's Tract  was 
re-published  in  IS09,  by  the  author  of  Occasional  Essays,  (who  is  reported  to  be  F.  Maseres,  Esq.  Cursitor  Baron  of  the 
Exchequer)  and  has  lately  appeared  in  an  abridged  form  in  Doctor  Hales's  Chronology.  The  motives  which  induced  those  gen- 
tlemen to  develope,  and  to  make  more  generally  known  the  horrible  abuses  and  villanies  practised  under  the  mask  of  religion, 
are  highly  laudable.  "  I  think."  says  the  editor  of  the  Essays,  in  his  advertisement,  "  that  it  can  never  be  unseasonable  to  expose 
a  religion  so  destructive  to  the  peace  and  happiness  of  society,  so  derogatory  to  the  glory  of  God ;  so  contrary  to  the  main  end 
and  purpose  of  Christianity  j  and  that  persecutes  with  such  an  unrelenting  barbarity  (where  it  can)  those  that  have  the  courage 
and  honesty  to  oppose  its  innovations."  To  this  opinion  Doctor  H.  subscribes,  as  must  all,  who  have  the  interests  of  pur» 
religion  at  heart. 

Egane  relates  that  the  book  of  rates  is  studiously  withheld  from  even  the  ordinary  priests,  and  that  as  being  classed 
among  the  arcana  imperii  of  the  Papal  Court,  it  was  made  known  only  to  certain  "  Penitentiaries,  to  whom  the  Absolution  of 
particular  and  heinous  sins  is  committed."  and  that  of  such  persons  there  is  one  or  two  in  every  diocese  in  Ireland. 
Before  these  are  vested  with  power,  he  says,  they  u  must  take  an  oath  of  secrecy  not  to  reveal  the  mysteries  of  their  Church," 
to  either  clergy  or  laity,  or  those  "  suspected  to  be  of  so  acute  parts,  or  of  so  much  learning  and  honesty,  as  might  make  them 
scruple  their  authority.1'    With  respect  to  those  sins  commonly  called  reserved  cases,  "  if  a  man  acknowledge  himself  guilty 


154  APPENDIX. 

condense  what  be  says  respecting  the  penance  of  the  Christian  Church  in  the  first  ages.  The 
nature  of  this  Work  will  not,  however,  admit  of  any  thing  else.     After  giving  an  account  of 

of  any  such  to  an  ordinary  Confessor,  he  can  only  tell  him  where  the  Pope's  Banker  resides,  who  will  absolve  him,  so  he  bring 
with  him  the  price  of  his  sin."  What  Egane  says,  as  to  the  competence  of  the  inferior  clergy  to  absolve  ordinary  sinners, 
while  deep  guilt  must  be  reserved  for  a  higher  tribunal,  is  not  only  confirmed  by  Father  O'Leary's  testimony  ;  (See  O'Leary's 
Caution,  &c.  Cork.  1783)  but  also  by  Seaway,  a  cotemporary  of  his  oun,  and  who,  like  him,  unlocked  ihe  Poke's  Cabinet, 
(this  is  the  title  of  his  book,)  after  he  renounced  the  office  of  Penitentiary  Priest. 

The  following  are  the  most  remarkable  of  the  decreed  imposi  i'ions.     Those  omitted  are  such  as  delicacy  forbids  to  be 
mentioned. 

DISPENSATIONS  FOR  THE   CHANGING  OI    A   VOW. 

J .  A  dispensation  for  such  as  have  vowed  chastity  during  life  is  given  only  by  the  Pope,  or  some  extraordinary  great 

Prelate  ;  but  it  shall  cost • 1*5     6     0 

2.  lie  that  hath  vowed    to   be    a   Monk,   so    that  the  vow  be  not  solemn,  may  be  dispensed  with  according   to 

conscience'  for. '^     ^     * 

;;.   If  a  man  makes  a  solemn  vow  of  chastity  he  may  be  dispensed  with,  paying  the   Prelate, 15     4     O 

4.  For  prolonging  the  term  of  vows  to  go  to  the  Holy  Sepulchre,  or  to  St.  Peters  at  Home,  provided  a  laufulcause 

be  assigned 9  2  9 

5.  If  the  dispensation    be  only  two  years,   it  will  be  but 4  0  1 

6.  For  changing  the  pilgrimage  of  the  Sepulchre  for  another,  you  must  pay 12  3  0' 

;.   Besides  gratifying  the  Prelate,  to  change  one  vow  for  another,  will  cost 6  2  O 

DISPENSATION  OF  OATHS. 
8.  The  dispensation  of  an  oath  or  contract  being  given,  to  the  end  that  one  may  not  le  expelled  from  his  employ- 
ments, will  be  had  for 7     2     3 

t).  But  if  the  Bull  contains  the  inhibitory  clause,  together  with  an  Absolution  from  Infamy,  it  will  cost 50     9     6 

10.  And  if  many  are  comprehended  in  the  same  fact,  each  of  them  must  pay , 3     0     0 

11.  For  the  breach  of  an  oath  which  cannot  be  observed  without  incurring  everlasting  damnation  ;  e.  g.  a  dishonest 

vow,  or  a  wicked  promise t)     2     0 

DISPENSATIONS  OF  CRIMES. 

12.  He  that  being  a  soldier,  (i.  e.  a  crusader)  tor  the  Catholic  cause,  and  neither  kills  nor  wounds  any  in  war,  nor 

causeth   any  to  do  it -  •    3"     9     O 

13.  If  any  man  shall  strike  a  Clerk   or  Priest,   he  shall  pay .      6'     2     O 

1.4.   If  an  Abbot  or  Prelate l2     3     ° 

15.  A  simple  absolution  for  a  Simonist,  is ••  30     9     0 

;rj.  Priests  or  Friars  who  have  carnally  sinned  with  a  Nun Id. 

j;.  An  Absolution  for  one  that  keeps  a  W at  bed  and  board,  with  dispensation  to  hold  a  benefice Id. 

16.  Absolution  for  a  Nun  who  played  the  W and  who  is  to  be  restored  to  the  dignity  of  her  order Id, 

10.  Commutation  of  public  to  private  penance  varies  according  to  the  crime  j  that  for  murder 18     4     6 

LICENSES  FOR  INDULGENCES,  &c. 

20.  If  it  be  for  a  College  (such  as  the  intended  one  for  the  Irish  Jesuits.) CO  15  3 

21.  A  Monk  who  intends  to  bequeath  his  property  to  his  relations  and  not  to  the  clergy,  must  pay 12  3  6 

22.  To  exempt  a  Titular  Bishop  from  going  to  Rome 24  6  0 

23.  A  licence  for  the  son  of  a  Monk  that  he  may  have  power  to  make  a  will 34  6  0 

24.  A  licence  for  an  Abbess  and  three  or  four  Nuns,  with  as  many  Friars  to  visit  their  estates  for  a  week  or  two.  . .  24  6  0 

25.  They  may  stay  a  longer  time,  provided  they  always  go  bini  et  linl.  i.  e.  in  pairs,  and  give  no  bad  example,  and  if 

they  do  not  live  (caste)  chastely  j  at  least  they  are  to  live  (caute)  warily Id. 

'26.  To  eat  white  meat  in  lent,  and  other  fasting  days 010    6 

If .  Not  to  be  tied  to  fasting  days 1     4     O 

"  'IV  P.'.pists/'  says  Mr.  Egane,  "  will,  do  doubt,  disown  it,  and  say  that  it  is  a  mere  fiction,  and  that  such  things  are 


APPENDIX. 

the  causes  which  led  to  the  introduction  of  strict  discipline  into  the  Church,  and  the  effect* 
attending  it,  he  comes  to  the  fourth  century.  At  this  period,  he  observes,  the  most  rigorous 
punishments,  even  such  as  an  exposure  to  the  inclemency  of  the  weather,  (inter  In/cmtuitcs  orarc 
severe  fasting,  &c.  were  inflicted  in  the  exercise  of  public  penance.  With  the  Bishop  was  vested 
a  discretionary  power  to  moderate  them,  and  even  to  shorten  the  term  of  their  continuance.  I  lis 
application  of  this  power  conveys   the   true  ancient  notion  of  an    indulgence.     How  this  was  after- 

not  practised  in  their  church  ;  but  I  am  ready  to  prove,  by  my  own  knowledge  and  experience,  all  I  Lor-.'  allege  to  be  true. 
Whoever  will  but  examine,  and  seriously  consider  the  particulars,  will  easily  be  convinced  that  none  but  themselves  could  be 
the  authors  of  it."  It  requires  but  little  penetration  indeed,  to  discover  this  to  be  the  case,  and  that  nothing  but  the  thirst  ol 
lucre  ever  instigated  these  "  merchants  of  souls,"  as  he  calls  them,  to  lay  on  these  abominable  impositions  on  their  credulous 
followers.  The  indulgences  spoken  of  by  Sedway,  in  his  Pope's  Cabinet,  relate  to  pilgrims  who  visit  the  principal  churches, 
altars,  Sec.  at  Rome.  Some  of  these  obtained,  for  this  proof  of  their  piety,  plenary  Indulgences  ;  others,  the  remission  <>< 
part  of  their  sins  ;  while  to  others  was  imparted  the  privilege  of  releasing  souls  out  of  purgatory  ! 

It  must,  however,  be  observed,  that  some  of  the  most  respectable  Popi-.li  writers,  as  Cardinal  Cajetan  and  Durar  ius, 
admit,  that  neither  the  Scriptures  nor  the  primitive  Fathers  of  the  Church,  make  mention  of  indulgences.  'Ihe  forme: 
says,  "  De  ortu  indulgentiarum  si  certitudo  haberi  posset,  veritati  indagandae  opem  ferret ;  verum  nulla  sacrae  scripturae,  nulla 
sacrorum  doctorum  Graecorum  aut  Latinorum  authoritas  scripta  hanc  ad  nostram  deduxit  aetatem."  Opusc.  torn.  1.  tract 
1531.  And  the  latter,  "  De  indulgentiis  pauca  dici  possunt  per  certitudinem  quia  nee  Scriplura  de  lis  exprcsse  loquitur  ; 
sancti  etiam  ut  Ambrosius.  Hil.  Aug.  Hieron.  minime  loquuntur  de  iudulgentiis."  0'4.  dist.  20.  p.  '*. 

To  establish  the  veracity  of  his  publication,  Mr.  Egane  has  subjoined  the  roK>i  ot  absolution  used  by  the  Pen. 
tenjiary,  after  the  penitent  has  confessed  his  sins. 

ABSOLUTION  OF  GRACE. 

"  The  Almighty  God  have  mercy  on  thee,  and  remitting  all  thy  sins,  lead  thee  to  eternal  life.     Amen. 

The  Almighty  and  merciful  God,  grant  thee  indulgence,  absolution,    and  remission  of  all  thy  sins.     Amtn 

Our  Lord  Jesus  Christ  absolve  thee:  and  by  Virtue  of  the  Authority  that  I  hold,  I  do  absolve  the;  First  from 
all  sortsof  Excommunications,  whether  great  or  small  :  (If  the  Penitent  be  a  Clerk,  he  must  say;  from  all  sorts  of  suspen- 
sions and  Interdicts,  if  by  chance  he  hath  incurred  any)  Then  I  absolve  thee  from  all  thy  Sins  and  Torments  due  to  thee  in 
Purgatory  for  thy  Sins  and  Transgressions  j  and  I  receive  thee  into  the  Union  and  Participation  of  the  Church;  and  by 
Virtue  of  a  special  Authority  to  me  committed,  I  restore  thee  into  that  Innocency  in  which  thou  hast  been  when  thou  wert 
baptized  :  And  if  thou  die  not  at  this  Time,  I  reserve  thee  this  Grace,  to  the  Hour  of  thy  Death,  In  the  Name  of  the 
Father,  &c.  and  by  the  Merits  and  Passion  of  our  Lord  and  Saviour  Jesus  Christ  ,  2nd  the  Merits  of  the  ever  blessed  llrgw 
Mary,  and  of  all  the  Saints  and  Virgins;  that  whatsoever  Good  thou  hast  done,  and  whatsoever  Injuries  then  patiently  has 
suffered,  let  them  be  unto  thee  a  Remission  of  thy  Sins,  and  an  Augmentation  to  Grace,  and  a  Prtsmium  ot  Lite  everlast- 
ing.    Amen.      Peace  be  with  you." 

He  then  adds;  N.  B.  "  These  Names  of  Missionaries  and  Penitentiaries  arc  all  one ;  the  Distinction  only  is,  that 
those  Penitentiaries  do  reside  in  the  Court  of  Rome,  and  the  Missionaries  are  those  which  are  dispersed  through  the  World, 
notwithstanding  they  have  the  same  Power  and  Authority  to  absolve,  id  est,  a  Casibus  Reservatis  :  the  Truth  U,  those  do  not 
directly  accumulate,  or  gather  these  Sums,  tut  they  are  to  enlighten  the  Penance  and  Pilgrimage  of  the  Penitents  fur  paying 
ihesej'orementioned  Taxes  to  their  several  Deputies,  appointed  in  all  Places  to  that  Purpose." 

'Hi"  following  is  the  terrific  form  of  the  greater  excotnmuunation  as  it  stand.- in  Boxhornins'i  History  ol  the  lovr 
countries.     It  is  likewise  published  by  Doctor  Hales  in  the  second  volume  of  his  elaborate  Analysis  ol  Chi  ;,nolugy   p,   102-4. 

FORM  OF  EXCOMMUNICATION. 

"  By  the  commandof  the  hyintii,  the  Son,  and  the  Holy  Ghost,  of  the  blessed  Mary,  mother  of  our  Lord 
H'sus  Christ,  ot   St.  Michael,  John  the  Baptist ,  and  Peter  and  Paul,  princes  of  Applies,  ol    St   Stephen  and  all  the   mattyrs, 

x   LZ 


150  APPENDIX, 


wards  abused  has  been  already  *shewn.  The  bare  mention  of  the  terms  contrition  and  attrition 
are  sufficient  to  remind  the  reader  how  the  primitive  doctrine  was  still  further  corrupted.  So  that, 
on  the  whole,  the  pretended  Sacrament  of  Penance,  as  it  is  now  understood  in  the  Popish.  Church, 
is  not  only  a  gross  corruption  of  the  Scripture  doctrine  of  repentance,  but  a  departure  from  the 
usage  of  the  Church  in  the  primitive  ages.     See  Bingham's  Antiq.  Vol.  ii.  p.  233. 


JRTICLE   IX. 

The  Protestant  translation  of  Psalm  cxxxix,  17.  "  How  precious  are  thy  thoughts  untu 
me,  O  God  !  and  how  great  is  the  sum  of  them  :"  is  condemned  by  Dr.  L.  as  nonsense  itself,  He 
has  attempted  to  prove  it  so  by  a  tortuous  explication  ;  and  although  he  affectedly  sneers  at  it  as  a 
fit  subject  of  meditation  for  an  "  orthodox  Churchman,"'  there  is  nothing  in  it,  taken  as  it  stands,  and 
without  reference  to  the  Hebrew,  whence  it  is  derived,  which  savours  of  the  absurd  or  non- 
sensical. "  -.no"  says  Parkhurst,  "  is  a  sum  or  total,  or  head  of  an  account:"  and  -*n  implies 
thoughts,  cogitations.  Yet  Dr.  L.  has  the  modesty  to  set  his  knowledge  of  the  Hebrew  language 
in  opposition  to  such  high  authority,  and  to  assert,  that  these  words  in  the  Hebrew,  originally 
meant,  the  latter,  '  friends,'  and  the  former,  '  princedom.'     Pie  fortifies  himself,  to  be  sure,  by  the 

St.  Sylvester  and  all  the  confessors.  St.  ylldegonde  and  all  the  Virgins,  and  all  the  other  Saints  and  Saintesses  whatsoever, 
both  in  heaven  and  upon  earth. 

"  We  curse  and  cut  off  from  Holy  Mother  Church,  those  who  have  (such  or  such  a  thing,)  or  know  it,  or  advised  it, 
or  had  a  hand  therein.  Let  them  be  cursed  in  their  houses,  their  beds,  their  fields,  their  lands,  and  their  ways,  in  towns 
and  villages.  Let  them  he  cursed  in  woods,  rivers,  and  churches;  cursed  in  their  lawsuits,  and  in  their  quarrels  5  cursed  in 
their  prayers,  in  speaking  and  in  silence  ;  in  eating,  drinking,  and  sleeping}  in  watching,  walking,  standing,  running, 
resting,  and  riding,  cursed  in  hearing,  seeing,  and  tasting,  cursed  in  all  their  actions.  Let  this  curse  strike  their  heads,  their 
eyes,  their  whole  body,  from  the  crown  of  the  head  to  the  sole  of  the  foot. 

"  I  adjure  thee,  Satan,  and  all  thy  agents,  by  the  Father,  Son,  and  Holy  Ghost,  to  take  no  rest,  neither  in 
the  dav,  nor  in  the  night,  till  you  have  brought  a  temporal  and  eternal  confusion  upon  them,  by  contriving  the  matter  so, 
that  thev  may  be  drowned  or  hanged,  or  devoured  by  wild  beasts,  or  torn  by  vultures  or  eagles,  or  consumed  by  fire,  or  killed 
by  their  enemies.  Make  them  odious  to  all  living  creatures.  Let  their  children  he fatherless,  and  their  wives  widows.  Let 
nobody,  for  the  time  to  come,  help  them,  or  take  pity  on  their  fatherless  children.  And  as  Lucifer  was  expelled 
from  heaven,  and  Adam  banished  from  Paradise,  let  them  likewise  be  expelled  and  banished  from  this  world,  being  deprived 
of  their  estates  ;  and  let  them  be  buried  with  the  burial  of  an  ass.  Let  them  be  partakers  of  the  punishment  of  Koran, 
Dathan,  and  Abiram,  of  Judas  and  Pontius  Pi/ate,  and  of  all  those,  who  say  to  the  Lord  their  God,  get  thee  gone  we  will 
have  no  knowledge  of  thy  paths."  Afterwards  he  who  pronounced  these  imprecations,  put  out  two  lighted  candles,  which 
he  held  in  his  hand,  and  added  these  dreadful  words  ;  "  I  adjure  thee,  Satan,  and  all  thy  agents,  to  extinguish  the  light  of 
their  eyes,  as  these  candles  are  extinguished,  unless  they  do  penance,  and  make  full  satisfaction.  Amen,  let  it  be  so, 
Amen." 

*  See  Section  VIII.    No.  47 — 51. 


APPENDIX.  157 

renderings  these  words  obtain  in  the  Greek,  Latin,  (the  vulgate  it  is  to  be  presumed)  Syriac, 
Arabic,  and  Ethiopic,*  versions;  and  the  Chaldaic  Paraphrase.  And,  as  if  it  were  a  matter  before  nil- 
known,  he  says,  that  these  versions  were  executed  before  the  Reformation.  Now  waving  all  reference 
to  the  Eastern  dialects  quoted  by  him  ;  the  veriest  smatterer  in  the  Hebrew  language  can  shew,  that  the 
foremen tioncd  Hebrew  words,  no  and  ■;••  had  not  originally  an  exclusive  signification,  and  that,  too, 
according  to  the  opinion  of  some  of  the  translators  whom  he  quotes,  e.g.  In  Dan.  ii.  30,  >»->  occurs,  and 
is  rendered  Sux.?.oyuTy.o;  by  the  Seventy,  cogitatio  by  Jerome  ;  (Pagninus  and  Montanus  use  the  same 
word)  and  '  cogitation'  by  the  Douay  translators!'  Were  it  necessary,  he  could  be  proved  in  error 
in  what  he  says  respecting  the  original  signification  of  the  other  word  too.  The  very  title 
(Beresith)  of  the  book  of  Genesis  should  have  made  him  cautious  in  hazarding  such  an  opinion. 
Neither  Ins  friends,  the  Syriac,  Arabic,  and  Ethiopic  translators,  nor  even  the  Chaldaic  paraphrast, 
bear  him  out  in  his  assertion  in  this  case;  and  yet  these  writers  had  not  the  misfortune  of  living 
since  the  Reformation. 


ARTICLE  X. 

Dr.  L.  admits  that  St.  Augustine  interpreted  the  passage  in  Hebrews,-^  and  that  in  Genesis* 
to  which  it  refers,  so  as  to  imply.  "  that  Jacob  adored  God  leaning  on  his  staff,"  and  that  "  St. 
Jerome  countenances  this  opinion  by  translating  the  Hebrew  :  adoravit  Israel  Deum  conversus  ad 
lectuli  caput."  This  admission  would  of  itself  acquit  the  first  English  Translators  of  the  charge 
brought  against  them  by  Ward  of  corrupting  the  text  by  additions,  independently  of  what  has  been 
said  for  them  in  Section  x.  No.  57,  where  the  word  leaning  is  shewn  to  render  the  sentence  more 
clear.  As  to  the  word  Deum,  that  corresponding  to  it  does  not  occur  in  the  Hebrew,  which  proves, 
so  far  as  the  authority  of  St.  Jerome  goes,  that  they  were  justified  in  adding  the  word  *  God'  to 
their  translation.  Their  successors,  however,  in  lOlO,  very  properly  omitted  it  both  in  Hebrews 
and  Genesis,  as  not  being  warranted  by  the  original. 

Next  Dr.  L.  adduces  four  ancient  Fathers,  in  opposition  to  Jerome  and  Augustine,  as  favouring 
(observe  Reader,  he  does  not  say  adoration,  but)  the  exhibition  of  religious  respect  to  creatures. 
And,  what  is  singularly  strange,  he  seems  to  set  up  their  difference  of  opinion,  as  a  justification  of 
the  error  of  his  church  !  !     But  before  lie  can  derive  any  advantage  from  this  circumstance,  it  is 

*  Reeves,  in  his  Collation  of  the  Psalms,  and  Geddes,  although  a  Romanist,  in  his  Bible  published  J 80/,  agree  with  the 
Protestant  Version  in  the  rendering  of  Psalm  exxxix.  J/.  Dathe  reads  "  cogitaliones"  and  "  summa,"  and  so  does  Berjin,  the- 
author  of  an  highly-approved  Version  of  the  Psalms,  which  has  lately  been  executed  at  Upsal. 

\  irfoirsK'Jr/taiv  mi  to  uy.^on  ing  ^uQ^a  avru.   c.  xi.  V.  2 J . 

%  Holmes  on  the  Septnagint  version  £77.  to  ay.fov  Sec.  of  Gen.  c.  xlvii.  v.  31,  observes,  "  Lat.  Codd.  nonnulH, 
super  caput ;  alii  in  cacumine ;  alii  super  cacuruen.  Teste  Augusti no  in  extremitatem  in  textu,  in-  suramitatem  in  marg. 
Vid.  Holmes's  Lxx, 


158  APPENDIX. 

necessary  he  should  shew  that  irporxmu,  a  verb  equally  used  by  *all,  is  exclusively  confined  in  its 
signification  to  religious  worship.  This  he  knows  he  cannot  do,  as  the  posture  indicated  by  it, 
whether  the  person  bent  himself  d®wn,  or  prostrated  himself,  was  one  of  ^  civil  reverence  or 
homage,  as  well  as  of  religious  worship.  As  to  sirit  it  is  true,  he  does  not,  like  Ward,  venture  to 
assert,  that  that  wretched  little  particle  has  no  signification  at  all,  and  only  belongs  to  the  phrase  ; 
yet  he  considers  it  nearly  in  the  same  light;  as  in  the  reading  he  prefers,  it  is  rendered  to.  But  as 
its  meaning  is  to  be  determined  by  the  corresponding  Hebrew  word  (-1/)  "  gnal,"  it  must  necessarily 
mean  upon,  and,  therefore,  can  neither  be  understood  as  an  expletive,  nor  as  signifying  to,  or 
towards.  Dr.  L.  says,  that  "  the  Reformers  had  rejected  that  respect,  which  Catholics  allow  on 
religious  motives  to  be  sometimes  paid  to  creatures."  "  Thus,"  continues  he,  "  the  same  phrase 
adopted  different  meanings,  at  the  will  of  the  translator  :  and  the  same  preposition  on  one  occasion 
pointed  out  the  object  of  worship,  at  another  excluded  it,  e  g.  *Thou  shah  nut  how  down  thyself 
(•?)  to  them;  and,  %worship  (v)  at  his  footstool"  The  '  will'  of  the  translator  evidently  has  not 
been  the  guide  in  the  present  instance,  but  the  tendency  or  sense  of  the  passage  ;  and  this  was  to 
be  collected  from  the  context  in  general.  A  solemn  command  delivered  by  a  direct  communication 
from  God,  forbids  worship  to  be  paid  to  any  created  being.  Then  supposing  the  Psalmist,  in  a 
rapturous  strain  of  devotion,  to  say,  §"  adore  ye  his  footstool  ;"  is  that  to  nullify  'the  command  ? 
Unquestionably  not.  Thus  is  this  apparent  contradiction  reconciled.  Now,  as  Doctor  L.  has 
appealed  to  the  Hebrew,  it  is  but  fair  to  ask  him,  that  as  the  Douay  Divines  have  suppressed  the 
particle  •>  entirely  in  both  the  above  texts,  when  they   thus  render  them  ;  "  thou  shalt  not  adore 

*  First  Theophvlart.  rFgoo-sxt'w*  ru  \u7sf,  rr.»  nx no ;  t«  \xh  itfornvncTn  \>mv.  Uu;  2e  imomxcwsw  •  tin  to  etitfot  7n;  c a.$o>i 
rnvru,  tst'  trm,  sve^Krbt^%  $x@§u  o\«  to  y^ct:.  T»ve;  &  e7rk  to  «*§->»,  tht  'tr»,  e«r«gi«rO«K  fy  $x&ouhx  to  y^xc.  Tuts  h  est;  to  xx^oy  t>-; 
fa^w  th  luviy,   (pao-i,  tr^oa-ixviina-e,  ayifj-xiw*  to  rr.f  $xuih.uac,  oDcntl^  Si*  Tn?  pa,2da  irpo-y.wnQycrejQxi  //.tAtov.      In  cap.  xi.   ad.  Heb. 

2.  Tbeodoret.  [f|*i«r«?]  £>:a&£<r&»;  &x>nr,^a  h  wxgnww  i*»rrf»(«To.  [th  po  uy.fV  return  ewei  >.»;/*// evoj  xr,  h&x.  tirixauevov  oe  T» 
vrfotrvirov  $ «£&-v.  rxrStti;  rowv  or  'a.vxa>,  mm  tsj  td«  t*£ «  ivxyytXta]  vprntivweriv  ib-mcXimc;  %  pxBSulw  Ktfxtov.  In.  Gen.  Interred.  10p. 
Dr.  L.  omits  the  text  between  the  brackets. 

3.  The  Homily  of  Athanasius,  to  which  Doctor  L.  refers,  is  pronounced  spurious  by  the  Benedictine  Monks,  who 
edited  the  volume  in  which  it  occurs  !  !  In  a  prefatory  note  they  thus  admonish  the  reader.  "  Hanc  publicam  fecit  Holste- 
nius,  Athanasio  aljudicamtam  putavit,  nee  Injuria  :  est  enim  ineptissimi  hominis  foetus,  ut  primo  aspeciu  aestimabit  eruditus 
lector,  &c."     Is  it  the  part  of  a  man  actuated  by  the  love  of  truth,  as  Doctor  L.  professes  to  be,  to  act  thus  ? 

4.  ChrysostOUl.  [E^eic'e  yy.p  eue-V.ei/  xwo  ru  iZ^xifj.  izvirxabui  fixo-^ev;  tTt^oc,  ha  ruro  <pY,a,,  xxt  TV^<jiv.v\%o-i\>  fW»  to  axpo*  m  ex£$* 
uvxv  :  rar  en,]  xo»  ytpu*  cot,  r,jr,  wponxwyos  rco  \uxn$t  tw  ttx-.to^  th  >.xa  itcojy.wr.a^  ZyMv  T»iv  ujopmi  xvtu.  [txto  i£iQn  ^e>  vfo,  ote  uvtu 
q.  xh?.pi  irpztKviirKTx*.']      Horn.  xxvi.  in  ep.  ad.  Heb. 

The  clauses  (No.  4  .)  between  the  brackets,  which  Dr.  L.  has  suppressed,  are  most  material  to  be  known.  For  in  the  for- 
mer,  it  is  intimated  that  a  K  1  no,  that  is,  that  a  civil  Governor  would  arise  from  Ephraim  ;  and  Jacob,  as  it  were,  presignifying 
the  respect  which  would  be  paid  to  this  future  Monarch,  made  his  obeisance  to  Joseph.  From  the  latter  it  appears,  that 
the  example,  thus  set  by  their  aged  father,  was  followed  by  his  other  sous.  It  is  truly  astonishing,  that  such  men  as  Doctor 
L.,  Doctor  Milner,  kc.  having  all  this  before  their  eyes,  can  be  so  infatuated  as  to  persevere  in  advocating  the  Dulia,  or  the 
adoration  or  creatures,  a  practice  so  intimately  connected  with  rank  idolatry. 

Vid.  Wetstein  on  Matt.  c.  ii.  v.  2.    vpenamu  occurs  upwards  of  forty  times  in   the  X.  T.  and   is  applied  to  express 
civil  nieroue  in  more  than  one- third  of  that  number. 

+  K\oJ.  c.  xx.  v.  5.  ^  r»al   xcix.  v.  3. 


APPENDIX.  159 

them  :"  and,  «  worship  ye  his  footstool:"  how  happens  it  that  they  give  it  significance  in  two  texts 
in  ^Genesis,  and  one  in  ^Numbers?  Shall  it  he  here  observed  of  them,  as  he  has  remarked 
respecting  the  Reformers  in  the  former  case;  it  is  to  be  feared,  lest  "  the  prejudices  of  the  trans- 
lators prevailed  over  their  respect  for  the  original  ?"  Certainly  not ;  as  that  would  be  only  an  idle 
imitation  of  Doctor  L.  whose  chief  object,  in  his  strictures  on  the  Analysis,  seems  rather  to  be,  to 
prove  his  adversary  wrong,  than  himself  right. 


ARTICLE    XL 

In  Section  xr.  Numbers  6l.  62.  the  reader  will  meet  with  an  ample  refutation  of  Doctor 
L.'s  defence  of  image  worship.  When  such  an  acute  linguist,  and  so  able  a  controvertist,  as  Doctor 
L.  undoubtedly  is,  feels  his  inability  to  supply  any  new  matter,  and  is  obliged  to  reproduce  the  stale, 
worn-out  arguments  of  Gregory  Martin,  which  have,  for  upwards  of  two  centuries,  lain  beneath  a 
mass  of  confutation ;  it  is  evident  that  the  cause  which  he  attempts  to  support  is  in  a  declining 
state.  "  No  less,"  says  Doctor  L.,  "  than  thirteen  different  words  in  the  Hebrew,  and  nine  in  the 
Greek  Scriptures,  were  invariably  rendered  image  in  the  English  Version  :  so  wonderfully  compre- 
hensive is  the  meaning  of  that  single  word  in  orthodox  language."  What  a  discovery  !  But  it  so 
happens,  that  its  sole  merit  consists  in  ascertaining  that  the  Hebrew  and  Greek  terms,  which 
Martin  enumerates  in  his  work,  equal  those  numbers.  To  the  superior  richness  of  the  Hebrew 
language  it  is  to  be  attributed,  that  it  can  express  in  so  many  different  forms,  what  the  English 
language  can  only  express  in  two.  "  Wonderfully  comprehensive/'  therefore,  as  the  term  image 
is,  it  arises  from  no  design  in  the  Protestant  Translators,  as  Doctor  L.  insinuates,  but  from  the 
nature  of  the  language  to  which  it  belongs ;  nor  could  it  be  remedied,  except  by  coining  terms  no 
less  ridiculous  than  azymes,  parascuc,  &c.  which  abound  in  the  Rhemish  Testament.  Moreover, 
the  disproportion  between  the  number  of  terms  found  in  those  Eastern  tongues,  and  the  only  two 
which  the  English  affords,  will  lessen  surprise,  when  it  is  considered,  that  there  is  a  diminution  of 
terms,  a  kind  of  descending  series,  in  each  language,  of  more  recent  origin.  For  as  the  Greek  is 
less  copious  than  the  Hebrew,  so  is  the  Latin  than  the  Greek,  and  the  English  than  the  Latin. 
So  that,  in  fact,  the  sound  of  image  in  the  ears  of  a  modern  advocate  for  image  worship,  is  not 
more  annoying,  than  it  was  to  Martin,  who  compared  its  repetition  in  the  English  Bible  to  "  the 
notes  of  the  cuckoo  bird." 

It  has  been  abundantly  proved  in  an  another  place,  that  it  is  immaterial  whether  c  graven  image,' 
or  *  graven  thing,'  be  the  version  of  Pesel  in  the  second  Commandment.  Now  Doctor  L., 
instead  of  shewing  that  this  is  preferable  to  that  reading,  blinks  the  question,  and  cavils  at  an 

« 

*  c.  viii.  v.  2.  s  is  rendered  at,  and  in  c.  xxiv.  v.  55.  to,  as   s^nS. 
f  C.  xi,  v.  10.  ^  is  rendered  at.     Vid.  Douay  Transl.  in  loc 


160  APPENDIX. 

illogical  conclusion,  drawn  by  the  Author  of  the  Analysis.  He  observes,  it  is  true,  that  Protestants 
should  have  preferred  idol  to  image  in  their  translation  :  but  surely  if  religious  reverence  be  paid  to 
an  ima^e,  it  becomes  an  idol,  and  where,  then,  is  the  difference  ?  But  image,  he  says,  isalso  a 
false  rendering,  "  as  it  restrains  the  prohibition  to  images,"  whereas  graven  tiling  includes  "  the 
columns  of  stone,  which  were  the  objects  of  worship  to  many  of  the  ancient  nations."  Could  a 
more  silly  reason  be  assigned  ?  It  certainly  does  not  at  all  apply  in  the  present  instance ;  as  the 
divine  command,  when  it  was  delivered,  did  not  extend  to  any  other  than  the  Jewish  nation. 


ARTICLE    XII. 

It  is  vain  to  look  for  any  thing  like  novelty  in  this  Section  of  Dr.  L.'s  strictures,  any  more  than  in 
those  which  have  preceded,  since  as  in  those,  he  but  repeats  the  trite  and  common-place  remarks  of  his 
predecessors,  Martin  and  Ward.  "  The  point  to  be  determined,"  says  he,  "  is,  whether  the  Hebrew 
word  "jink-  denote  the  grave,  as  it  is  rendered  in  the  Protestant  Version,  or  the  state  of  the  soul  after 
death,  as  it  was  understood  by  the  Catholic  Translators."  If  the  reader  will  only  refer  to  Section 
xii.  Number  74.  et  seq.  he  will  find  it  satisfactorily  proved,  that  the  Protestant  Translators  were 
fully  justified  in  the  meaning  they  attached  to  that  term,  inasmuch  as  it  was  the  only  one  it  would 
bear,  wherever  it  occurred  ;  and  also,  that  it  is  as  proper  for  grave  as  -op.  Will  Doctor  L.  say,  that 
if  keber  does  not  signify  the  '  grave,'  is  it  a  proof  that  sheol  does  not  signify  the  same?  This,  it 
is  presumed,  he  will  scarcely  attempt.  Indeed,  if  he  only  consult  the  Section  and  Numbers 
already  pointed  out,  he  will  discover  strong  reasons  for  admitting,  that  his  research  has  been  rather 
of  a  limited  nature,  when  he  says,  he  cannot  "  find  any  proof  that  '  sheol '  is  ever  employed  in  that 
sense,  (viz.  grave)  in  the  Scriptures;"  and  of  his  being  perfectly  in  error,  when  he  asserts,  that  it 
cannot  bear  the  meaning  ascribed  to  it  by  the  Protestant  Translators,  in  Genesis  xxxvii.  35.  Whe- 
ther the  Author  of  the  Analysis  be  or  be  not  conversant  with  the  Samaritan  Version  of  the 
Scriptures  is  entirely  irrelevant  to  the  disputed  point.  He  has  not  rested  on  that  single  evidence,  as 
*he  has  appealed  to  the  Arabic  Version,  in  which  it  is  rendered  pulvis,  and  to  those  unexceptionable 
authorities,  Walton  and  Robertson. 

Doctor  L.  says,  that  the  author  cf  the  Analysis  has  misrepresented  Ward  by  stating,  that  he 
{i  introduced  the  text  from  Heb.  v.  7,  as  a  proof  of  the  existence  of  purgatory."  So  far  from  any 
thing  of  the  kind  being  stated  in  the  Analysis,  it  is  not  so  much  as  hinted  at !  And  although 
it  be  there  passed  over  unnoticed,  Dr.  L.  may  have  reason  to  conclude,  that  his  assumption  of  the 
Protestant  rendering  (viz.  in  that  he  feared)  being  indefensible,  is  groundless,  on  perusing  No.  85 
of  this  work. 

*  Anal.  p.  28. 


APPENDIX.  i«, 


ARTICLE   XIII. 


'  The  Protestant  Translators;'  says  Doctor  L.,  "  were  violent  champions  in  favour  of  Justi- 
fication  by  Faith  only."     Cranmer,  the  day-star  of  the  Reformation   in   England,   himself  too  a 
translator,  gave  the  same  English  for  Sixt,,  and  its  derivations  in  his  Bible,  with  that  which  it  obtained 
in  Mathews's  and  the  Great  Bible.     No  variation  occurs  in  any  o(  the  succeeding  versions,  even   in 
that   of  161  ].     Now  as  *Cranmer  concludes,   that  man's  justification  was  to  be  ascribed  only  to  the 
merits  of  Christ ;  and  that  those  who  are  justified,  must  have  charity  as  well  as  faith  ;  but  that  neither  of 
these  is  the  meritorious  cause  of  justification;  it  is  a  gross  libel  to  charge  the  Protestant  Translators 
with  maintaining  the  doctrine  of  justification  '  by  faith  only.'     The  fact   is,   that  Doctor  L.,   like 
Ward,  Martin,  &c.  seeing  that  the  Reformers,  by  attaching  merit  neither  to  faith,  nor  to  works, 
had  shaken  one  of  the  chief  pillars,  which  supported  the  Popish  Church,  attributes  to  them,  and, 
consequently,  to  the  Ckurch  of  England,  a  doctrine  which   is  disclaimed  by  both.     The  Church  of 
Rome  not  only  ascribes  to  works  a  power  of  satisfying  God  for  sin,  but  a  virtue  to  deserve  grace  in 
this  life,  and  bliss  in  that  to  come.    As  this  unscriptural  tenet  is  grounded  on  a  decree  of  the  Council 
of  Trent,  which  sets  forth,  that  "  if  any  one  shall  say  that  the  good   works  of  a  justified  man  do 
not  truly  deserve  eternal  life;  let  him  be  accursed:"  the  Reformers  could  not  have  marked  their 
reprobation  of  it  in  too  strong  language,  particularly  as  they  themselves  proceeded  with  prudent 
circumspection,  in  laying  it  down,  that  Faith  and  Works  are  equipollent  conditions  of  salvation. 
After  observing  that  the  Translators  had  two  sets  of  English  words  expressive  of  hm  and  its 
derivations,  he  says,  "  when  they  were  united  with  the  word  faith,  they  were  rendered  by  just, 
justice,  justification  ;  but  if  to  reward,  or  the  practice  of  good  works,  by  righteous,  righteousness." 
That  the  English  Translators  observed  no  such  distinction,  but  applied  either  indifferently,  may, 
beside  tthose  mentioned  in  Section  XIII.  No.  80,  be  proved  from  other  texts,  Xv'iz.  "  not  the 
hearers  of  the  law  are  just  before  God,  but  the  doers  of  the  law  shall  be  justified."    "  ||A  seal  of 
the  righteousness  of  the  faith"     §  "  For   the  promise  was   through   the  righteousness   of  faith" 
%  "  even  the  righteousness  which  is  of  faith.     In  not  one  of  those  texts,  it  may  be  seen,  is  justice 
coupled  with  faith,  or  righteousness  with  works.     As,   therefore,   an  indiscriminate  use  of  those 
terms  might  be  pointed  out  in  several  other  places,   the  fairness  of  the  Protestant  Translators, 
is  as  fully  established,  as  the  futility  of  Doctor  L.'s  remarks. 


ARTICLE  XIF. 

Doctor  L.  censures  the  Author  of  the  Analysis  for  quoting  "  from  the  amended  version"  of 
the  Bible,  three  of  the  texts,  on  which  the  Popish  Church  grounds  the  doctrine  of  merit  and 

.   *  See  Burnet's  Exposition  of  the  xxxix  Articles.  f  Rom.  c.  i.  v.  17.  and  c.  Hi.  v.  22. 

'  Rom.  c.  ii.  v.  13.  II  Ibid.  c.  iv.  v.  II.  §  Ibid.  c. iv.  v.  13.  «tf  Ibid.  c.  ix.  v.  30. 

Y 


162  APPENDIX. 

meritorious  works;  "  while  Ward  complains  of  the  original  translation."  Ward's  cavils  on  this 
head  have  been  completely  set  at  rest  in  Section  XIV.  No.  92,  et  seq.  And  although  lie  lays 
such  stress  on  the  early  English  version  of  A&yi£o,ua»,  which  occurs  in  the  *  first  of  those  three 
texts,  yet  it  is  not  on  it  the  agitated  point  rests.  As  to  the  fother  two,  notwithstanding  what 
Doctor  L.  asserts,  Ward's  comments  are  as  much  directed  against  the  late  as  the  ancient  versions, 
since  they  are  nearly  the  same.  So  that  if  the  later  readings  of  those  texts  have  been  exclusively 
quoted  by  the  Author  of  the  Analysis,  he  has  not  in  consequence  practised  any  artifice,  nor 
betrayed  any  diffidence  in  the  goodness  of  his  cause. 

"  The  Greek,"  says  Doctor  L.  "  is  Ix.mx<towti,  (Coloss.  i.  12.)  and  as  the  Piotestant 
Translators  have  rendered  Ixxvot  worthy,  in  Matt.  iii.  2.  and  viii.  8,  I  see  not  why  they  should 
here  have  rendered  it  meet,  were  it  not  to  avoid  the  Catholic  doctrine  of  merit."  This  is  but  an 
idle  repetition  of  another  of  Gregory  Martin's  objections.  However,  Doctor  L.  will  see  it 
fully  explained  in  No.  94,  why  the  derivative  verb  naturally  partakes  of  the  most  frequent 
acceptation  of  its  root,  and  that  even  were  the  Rhemish  Version  of  ^ai/ua-am  the  best,  what 
he  calls  the  Catholic  (i.  e.  the  Popish)  doctrine,   would  not  be  in  the  least  promoted.   - 

There  is  something  singular,  observes  Doctor  L.  in  the  fate  of  the  Hebrew  word  ^v,  for  if 
in  Psal.  cxix.  112,  "  the  Catholic  Translator  has  rendered  it  for  reward,  he  has  in  the  33d  verse 
of  the  same  psalm  rendered  it  ahvays  ;  while  the  Protestant  Translator,  if  in  this  passage  he  has 
rendered  it  unto  the  end,  in  Psal.  xix.  12,  he  has  rendered  it  reward."  Pie  might  have  added  too 
the  passages  Psal.  xl.  16.  and  lxx.  4,  where  the  same  Hebrew  term  is  rendered  reward  by  the 
Protestant  Translators.  It  will,  however,  appear  on  an  attentive  consideration  of  those  passages 
that  they  did  not  mean  by  reward,  either  desert  or  merit;  but  that  in  adopting  that  term,  they 
simply  designed  to  express,  the  end,  event,  ov  consequence:  and  that  although  it  were  rendered 
reward  in  Psal.  cxix.  1 12,  agreeably  to  the  Popish  version,  it  would  not  warrant  the  ^exposition 
given  that  text  by  the  Douay  Divines  ;  as  reward  there  may  imply,  that  it  is  vouchsafed  accord- 
ing to  promise  by  grace,  and  not  by  desert. 


JRTICLE  XV. 

Because  the  later  readings  of  the  texts  John  i.  12;  Ephesians  iii.  12;  and  2  Cor.  vi.  1; 
corresponding  with  the  numbers  97-  99-  and  100.  in  Skctiox  XV.  vary  from  the  earlier  ones; 
it  is,  in  Doctor  L.'s  mind,  "  a  sufficient  proof  that  in  the  original  Protestant  Version,  they 
were  rendered  corruptly."  This  is  strange  enough,  as  if  it  necessarily  followed,  that  because  two 
translations  differed  from  each  other,  one  must  be  wrong;  and  as  if  there  did  not  exist  degrees 

*  Rom.  c.  viii.  v.  18.  t  Heb-  c-  x-  v-  29-    c-  »•  v-  9- 

i    Viz,  "  A  most  evident  place  that  the  keeping  God's  commandments  merit  reward."     Douai  Bib.  vol.  ii.  p.  22/. 


APPENDIX. 


16. 


of  excellence  in  translations,  so  that  that  which  was  inferior  might  not  convey  the  spirit  of  the 
original;  although  in^a  less  clear  and  concise  manner,  nearly  as  well  as  that  which  possessed 
those  advantages.  An  inspection  into  the  Synopsis  for  the  above  texts  and  numbers,  will  satisfy 
the  reader  that  this  is  the  case  with  respect  to  the  early  and  late  English  Versions,  e.  g.  ^w\% 
not  only  implies  power,  but  also  dignity; prerogative.  (See  remarks  on  97.)  In  number  09,  the 
first  English  Version  is  rather  a  paraphrase,  as  appears  from  the  addition  of  the  words,  «  which 
is;'  still,  however,  retaining  the  full  import  of  the  original.  And  in  number  100,  we  together 
arc  'God's  labourers,'  differs  in  a  very  trilling  degree,  from  <  as  workers  together  with°him.' 
Should  it  be  inferred  from  the  former  rendering,  that  man  became  a  mere  passive  agent,  uncle; 
the  irresistible  control  of  the  Holy  Spirit,  it  would  be  but  a  perversion  of  the  sentiments  of  the 
majority  of  those  engaged  in  making  the  early  versions,  on  that  particular  point.  The  rendering 
'  we  together  are  God's  labourers',  becomes  obscure  from  '  together'  not  being  united  to 
'  labourers,'  so  as  to  express  the  meaning  of  a-wipynvng. 

On  the  remaining  texts,  belonging  to  Section  XV.  (sec  Nos.  98.  101,  102,  103,"  it  would 
be  superfluous  to  offer  a  single  additional  observation;  for,  notwithstanding  that  Doctor  L. 
professes  it  to  be  "  easy  to  vindicate  Ward's  remarks  on  them,"  it  appears  the  substance  of  what 
he  says  is  derived  from  the  Errata,  which  has,  in  its  proper  place,  been  already  noticed. 


ARTICLE  XVI. 

Doctor  L.  comments  with  great  severity  on  the  Author  of  the  Analysis,  for  having  passed 
over  Ward's  arguments,  as  if  he  had  never  seen  them  ;  and  yet  he  himself  commits  the  very 
fault  immediately  after  for  which  he  condemns  him.  lie  does  even  worse,  he  descends  to  perso- 
nality ;  a  mode  of  proceeding  unwarranted  in  legitimate  criticism,  and  every  way  unworthv  a 
gentleman  of  Doctor  L.'s  scholarship. 

The  first  passage,  (Rom.  v.  18,)  from  which  Ward  derives  the  doctrine  of  '  inherent  justice/ 
says  Doctor  L.  "  is  one  of  considerable  obscurity/'  He  then  praises  the  "  scrupulous  fidelity" 
of  the  Rhemish  Translators ;  by  which  he  admits,  what  is  the  case,  the  obscurity  of  their  trans- 
lation. But  this  is  not  all.  "  If,"  continues  he,  "  Ward  complains  of  these  additions,  (such  as 
were  made  by  the  Protestant  Translators)  it  is  probable,  that  his  complaint  was  not  unfounded; 
since,  in  their  corrected  editions,  other  additions  were  substituted,  taken  from  the  16th 
verse.  u  Here,  too,"  he  says,  "  the  alteration  I  think  judicious."  The  matter,  then,  stands  thus. 
Having  in  the  outset  disclaimed  all  concern  about  the  merits  or  demerits  of  the  opinion  respect- 
ing imputative  justice,  he  consequently  betrays  a  diffidence  in  the  soundness  of  Ward's  obser- 
vations ;  for  whence  this  hesitation  to  decide,  if  he  considered  the  strictures  which  are  contained 
in  the  Errata,  on  the  point,  justifiable  ?  Next  comes  his  implied  admission  of  the  obscurity  of 
the  Rhemish  Version,  or  rather,  his  direct  admission  of  the  obscurity  of  the  original;  a  proof 


y  Q 


]G4  APPENDIX. 

positive  that  he  does  not  consider  the  Popish  doctrine  made  out.  by  that  passage.  Thirdly,  the 
weakness  of  the  grounds  on  which  he  sustains  the  justice  of  Ward's  *  complaint,'  being  no 
other  than  that  of  probability.  And  fourthly,  his  indirect  approval  of  the  last  Protestant 
Version  ;  while  Ward  equally  condemns  both  tirst  and  last.  In  all  these  particulars,  he  betrays 
a  distrust  in  the  goodness  of  his  cause.  So  that  altogether,  his  critique  is  rather  against,  than 
favourable  to  Ward ;  while  the  assertion  made  by  the  author  of  the  Analysis,  that  *  "  the  Popish 
Translation  of  the  passage  does  not  recommend,  nor  the  Protestant  one  condemn,-  justice," 
appears,  on  Doctor  L.'s  own  principle,  to  be  the  result  of  an  intimate  knowledge  of  the  subject, 
and  not  to  be  contradicted  except  at  the  expence  of  truth.     (See  No.  104.) 

The  reader  must  surely  be  surprised,  when  he  is  told,  that  Doctor  L.  a  writer  of  unques- 
tionable erudition,  has  not  drawn  on  his  own  stock  of  learning  for  a  single  remark,  but  is 
indebted,  in  every  article  of  his  Review,  to  the  obsolete  cavils  of  Martin  or  Ward.  Thus 
commenting  on  Rom.  iv.  3,  like  them,  he  says,  "  Beza,  the  master  of  our  Translators,  reads  pro 
justitia,  i.  e.  "vice  at  loco  justitiae."  If  Doctor  L.  will  but  consult  Beza's  edition  of  the  New  Tes- 
tament of  1598,  which  may  be  pronounced  genuine  as  being  published  under  his  own  eye,  he 
will  discover  ad  justitiam  occurring  three  times  in  the  t fourth  chapter  of  Romans,  and  once  in 
Jjames,  as  the  translation  of  ug  hxxiovww !  "  Now,  I  appeal,"  continues  the  Doctor,  "  to 
any  man  acquainted  with  the  Greek  and  Hebrew  languages,  whether  such  can  be  the  meaning 
either  of  St.  Paul  iXoyivfa  ug  hxom>mvw,  or  of  the  writer  of  Genesis  whom  the  Apostle  quotes, 
npnsf  -ft  mw."  This,  the  reader  will  perceive,  on  adverting  to  number  105  of  this  work,  to  be 
nothing  but  a  repetition  of  what  is  quoted  there  from  Ward  ;  so  that  this  succ'mct  Review,  as  it 
has  been  affectedly  called,  is  only  a  meagre  abstract  of  the  Errata,  as  that  work  has  been 
^before  stated  to  be  of  Martin's  prior  work.  In  answer  to  the  appeal,  however,  it  is  only  neces- 
sary to  remark,  that  there  is  no  preposition  expressing  for  or  instead  of  in  that  passage  of 
Genesis :  and  as  to  the  Greek,  common  sense  points  out  the  necessity  of  understanding  us  as 
for,  or  as.  ||  "  God,"  says  the  Bishop  of  Lincoln,  "  foreseeing  that  the  faith  of  Abraham  was  of 
that  true  and  lively  nature,  which  would  produce  obedience  whenever  an  opportunity  offered, 
imputed  it  to  him/or  righteousness;  that  is,  as  another  able  commentator  observes,  H"  in  judg- 
ing Abraham,  God  will  place  on  one  side  of  the  account  his  duties,  and  on  the  other  his  perfor- 
mances. And  on  the  side  of  his  performances  he  will  place  his  faith,  and  by  mere  favour  will 
value  it  as  equal  to  a  complete  performance  of  his  duties,  and  reward  him,  as  if  he  were  a  righ- 
teous person."  Thus  are  the  early  and  late  versions  of  the  Protestant  Bible,  in  this  particular 
text,  established  by  those  authorities,  in  competition  with  whom  the  great  Ward,  nay  even 
Doctor  L.  himself,  sinks  into  nothingness. 

His  next  animadversion  is  pointed  at  the  "  false  translation  of  2  Cor.  v.  21,  corrected  in 
the  more  modern  Bibles."  Here,  in  his  anxiety  to  attach  censure  to  the  author  of  the  Analysis, 
,£or  his  silence  respecting   the  early  English   Versions   of  the   Bible,  he  admits,   what   Ward 

*  Anal.  p.  36  j  Viz.  in  the  3d,  5th,  and  Qth  versei.  X  C.  ii.  v.  23.  §  See  Preface. 

K  Refutation  of  Calvinism,  c.  iii.  p.  122.  %  Macinight  on  Romans,  vol.  i.  p.  261 . 


APPENDIX.  165 

certainly  does  not  warrant  him  in  saying,  and  what,  no  doubt,  will  call  down  on  him  the  censure 
of  his  Ordinary;  that  SiK*to<rwn  is  fitly  rendered  by  '  righteousness.'  Ward  equally  condemns 
both  versions,  late  as  well  as  ancient;  so  that  even  an  allusion  to  these  in  such  a  compendious 
work  as  the  Analysis,  could  not  reasonably  be  expected.  The  ancient  English  Version  of  that 
text,  and  at  the  time  too  when  Gregory  Martin  objected  to  it,  was  admitted  to  be  "  a  dissolute" 
rendering.  But  has  the  light  of  the  Gospel  been  lastingly  obscured  by  so  temporary  and  slight 
an  imperfection;  has  a  single  point  of  doctrine,  faith,  or  morals,  depended  on  it  ;  or  has  Popery 
o-ained  the  most  inconsiderable  advantage  by  the  admission  then  and  now  made?  Doctor  L. 
will  scarcely  venture  to  answer  in  the  affirmative;  nor,  indeed,  will  Doctor  Coppinger  honestly 
say  so,  notwithstanding  that  he  affects  to  exult  in  the  *  "  learned,  critique,  and  liberal  concessions, 
of  the  Rev.  Doctor  Ryan,  upon  the  subject  of  corrected  errors." 

What  has  been  offered  in  Numbers  107,  108,  109,  in  answer  to  Ward's  cavils,  applies 
equally  to  those  made  by  Doctor  L.  on  the  texts,  Eph.  i.  6;  Rom.  iv.  6;  and  Dan.  vi.  i2'2;  as  they 
do  not  vary  in  the  smallest  degree  from  each  other. 


ARTICLE  XVII. 

The  objections  set  up  by  Doctor  L.  against  the  Protestant  Version  of  irhrcotpo^a,  Rom.  x.  22, 
so  far  as  they  are  borrowed  from  Ward,  have  been  already  refuted  in  No.  1 10.  It  only  remains, 
then,  to  examine  the  efficiency  of  the  aid  he  has  derived  from  Gregory  Martin;  since  to  one  or 
other  of  those  authors,  he  is  solely  indebted  for  the  subject  matter  of  his  criticism.  Like 
Martin,  he  first  adduces  the  authority  of  -jTheodoret,  to  shew  that  -n-Xn^o^a.  ?nr^  means  a 
full  and  perfect  faith  ;  a  faith  that  believes  without  doubting  whatever  God  revealed;  and  next 
that  of  JTheophvlact,  as  determining  it  to  be  a  perfect  and  indubitable  (xSio-txxtoS)  faith.  It  is 
admitted,  that  both  speak  against  (^ovo/a  t^  tyvxnd  hesitation  of  mind,  and  against  a  doubting 
or  waverino;  faith  :  but  against  '  assurance,'  '  full  assurance,' &c.  of  faith,  not  a  word.  Thus  the 
authority,  in  the  particular  in  which  he  desires  to  apply  it,  is  inadmissible. 

With  the  misrepresentation  of  the  text  in  question  "  by  ancient  or  modern  fanatics,"  the 
Church  of  England  is  no  way  concerned.  And,  notwithstanding  that  this  partial  abuse  may 
have  arisen  from  the  unrestrained  privilege,  vouchsafed  at  the  time  of  the  Reformation  of  inter- 

*  See  Letter  to  the  Dublin  Society.  2d  Ed.  p.   44. 

f  "  Let  us  approach  with  sincere  affection,  believing  that  these  things  are  so,  and  banishing  all  hesitancy  from  our 
minds,  for  this  he  called  (^Xv^ipo^av)  certainty."     Theodor.  in  Epis.ad  Heb.  c.  x.  v.  22. 

X  "  He  instructs  us  by  what  means  we  may  not  be  cast  down  in  our  minds,  if  we  possess  a  wtopo^iam  of  faith,  that  is, 
he  says,  "  a  faith  finished,  and  (jiKwraTw)  moit  perfect."     The  foregoing  sentence  Doctor  L.  for  very  obvious  reasons  over-* 
looks;  while  he  adduces  one  not  at  all  to  the  purpose :  viz,"  therefore  we  have  need  of  a  perfect  and  undoubting  faith." 
Theophyl,  Commek.  in  Heb.  c.  x.  V.  22. 


166  APPENDIX. 

preting  the  Scriptures,  each  in  his  own  way,  that  can  he  no  argument  against  its  use  ;  as  the 
very  hest  gifts  of  God  may,  in  their  application,  be  perverted  from  the  ends,  which  they  were 
designed  to  answer. 

Respecting  the  Protestant  Version  of  the  text,  Luke  xviii.  42,  "  thy  faith  hath  saved  thee," 
Doctor  L.  says,  that  "  that  rendering  is  acknowledged  to  he  false;"  and  yet  in  the  very  next 
sentence  he  asks,  "  why  it  was  first  inserted  in  the  original  version,  and  why  it  is  still  preserved 
in  the  corrected  edition?"  "What  is  this  but  saying  yes  and  no  in  the  same  breath?  The  other 
texts  where  a-twai  occurs,  are  treated  of  in  No.  114. 


ARTICLE  XVIII. 

On  the  subject  of  Apostolical  Traditions,  Doctor  L.  says,  lie  is  "  content  to  refer  the  reader 
to  the  Errata,  (p.  83,)  where  he  will  see  what  reasons  Ward  had  for  censuring  the  Protestant 
Translators."  That  being  the  case,  it  will  be  only  necessary  for  the  reader  to  refer  to  the 
corresponding  Section  in  this  work,  for  a  complete  refutation  of  Ward's  objections.  He  will  there 
find  that  the  cause  of  the  early  Protestant  Translators  is  not  by  any  means  indefensible,  notwith- 
standing that  he  insinuates  as  much,  because  their  labours  have  been  unnoticed  in  the  Analysis. 


ARTICLE  XIX. 

In  every  division  of  his  Review,  Doctor  L.  affects  to  triumph  over  the  author  of  the 
Analysis,  from  his  having  made  no  mention  of  the  early  English  Versions  of  the  Bible;  and 
occasionally  too,  he  intersperses  his  observations  with  some  sallies  of  xvit.  "  Ward,"  he  says, 
il  condemned  the  original  Protestant  rendering  of  Eph.  v.  32.  viz.  e  this  is  a  great  secret :'  a 
rendering  so  very  faulty  that  Doctor  Ryan  was  ashamed  to  notice  it,  and  therefore  endeavoured, 
by  calumniating  his  adversary,  to  keep  it  a  great  secret! /"  Playfulness  like  this  is  calculated  to 
amuse,  and  it  is  not  improbable,  that  it  has  been  exercised  here  with  that  intent.  But  the 
serious  reader,who  prefers  argument,  will  not,  on  an  occasion  like  the  present,  permit  his  attention 
to  be  called  off  by  such  trifling.  He  will  see  it  to  be  rather  a  subterfuge  of  art,  designed  to 
conceal  the  imperfections  of  a  weak  cause,  than  a  well-timed  application  of  an  humorous 
conceit.  The  fact  is,  Doctor  L.  had  no  solid  objection  to  make,  and  therefore  he  impeached  the 
motives  of  his  adversary  for  not  mentioning  in  his  work  the  early  Protestant  Versions.  But 
that  he  does  so  wrongfully,  may  be  collected  from  what  is  said  in  No.  122.  The  motives  of  the 
first  Translators  themselves  have  been  already  vindicated;  and  it  is  only  necessary  to  add,  that 


APPENDIX.  1C7 


in  rendering  ^^m  secret,  they  conceived,  and  justly  too,  that  they  expressed  it  by  one  of 
equivalent  import;  inasmuch  as  the  Greek  term,  abstractedly  taken,  conveys  no  idea  of  holiness, 
and  only  receives  such  an  acceptation  from  the  matter  annexed  to  it.  In  order,  therefore, 
that  the  word  sacrament  might  be  exclusively  appropriated  to  what  signified  the  seals  of 
God's  promises,  such  as  baptism  and  the  Lord's  supper,  they  restricted  it  in  its  use;  while  they 
adopted  the  word  '  secret,'  or  (as  in  the  margin  of  the  first  English  Bibles)  '  mystery,'  where 
they  had  to  express  any  thing  different. 

It  is  proper,  too,  to  observe,  that  the  Ilhemish  Annotators  feeling  the  weak  support  which 
their  *  '  Sacrament  of  Matrimony,'  derives  from  sacramentum  the  Vulgate  reading,  take  then- 
stand  on  the  general  signification  of  the  term  in  those  passages  where  the  word  distinctly  implies 
'  mystery.'  In  this,  however,  they  but  follow  Peter  Lombard  who  first  broached  that  doctrine 
in  the  Xllth  century.  With  respect  to  Doctor  L.  himself,  he  may  with  justice  be  said  to  be 
nothing  more  than  a  mere  repeater  of  what  Ward  says,  his  very  echo  in  abuse,  ringing  the 
changes  from  one  end  of  his  succinct  Review  to  the  other,  on  the  words,  '  Ward  is  right,' 
1  Doctor  Ryan  is  wrong;'  without  establishing  the  truth  of  either  assertion. 


ARTICLE  XX. 


In  Doctor  L.'s  concluding  paragraph,  something  too  remarkable  occurs,  in  his  answers  to, 
and  observations  on,  the  queries  put  forth  in  the  Analysis,  not  to  command  attention. 

"  Doctor  Rvan,"  says  he,  "  asks  how  the  Vulgate  can  be  an  infallible  standard  for  other 
translations.  I  answer,  that  the  Vulgate  is  a  version  deservedly  of  high  authority,  but  I  never 
yet  met  with  a  Catholic,  who  considered  it  as  infallible."  Let  the  reader  now  compare  the 
fore^oino1  answer,  with  the  observation  which  he  subjoins  to  his  answer  to  Doctor  Ryan's  second 
query,  and  judge  whether  they  do  not  convey  a  downright  contradiction. 

Q.  "  Did  the  Protestant  Churches  ever  pretend  to  be  infallible  in  their  translations  or 
otherwise?"  Ans.  "  I  know  not  whether  they  did  or  not."  Then  he  observes;  "  but  this  I 
know,  they  ought  to  have  done  so.  Whence  can  a  Protestant,  ignorant  of  the  original  languages, 
derive  the  knowledge  of  the  Christian  faith,  but  from  the  translation  of  the  Bible?  If,  then, 
that  translation  be  fallible,  how  can  he  have  any  security  that  his  faith  be  true?  Built  on  an 
unsafe  foundation  it  can  never  acquire  stability.  The  translation  of  the  Bible  must  be  infallible, 
or  the  Protestant  in  question  must  always  live  in  uncertainty."  If  Doctor  L.  be  serious,  and 
do  not  intend  to  deceive,  does  he  not  state  that  the  spiritual  state  of  all  the  Papists  who  now 

*  "  It  has  no  visible  sign  ordained  of  God,  nor  any  promise  of  inward  grace,  which  are  essential  to  a  Sacrament.  And 
St.  Paul  in  calling  the  marriage  of  Christ  and  his  Church  MtT*igio»j  by  that  expression  means,  that  Christ  is  not  literally 
married  to  his  Church,  but  only  metaphorkal/y,  or  mystically."     See  Bishop  of  Lincoln's  Exp.  Article  xxv.  p.  428. 


"*  APPENDIX. 


exist,  and  who  have  lived  for  the  last  twelve  centuries,  must  be  deplorable  in  the  extreme,  unless 
they  possessed  a  confidence  that  their  faith  flowed  from  an  unerring  version  of  the  Scriptures. 
It  would,  it  is  insisted  on,  require  the  subtlety  of  Loyola  himself  to  reconcile  this  with  the 
above  answer;   "  that  he  never  met  a  Catholic,  who  considered  the  Vulgate  infallible."     More- 
over, thisjmswer  is  still  less  consistent  with  the  language  of  the  Popish  Church,  which  declares 
h  r  to  be  *  "  infallible  in  her  doctrinal  decisions  and  canons,  in  points  of  faith  and  morals."  And 
that  t  "  Catholics  are  also  obliged  in  like  manner  to  submit  to  similar  decrees  and  decisions  of 
the  Pope,  when  expressly  or  tacitly  assented  to  by  the  majority  of  Bishops  representing  and 
governing  the  church  dispersed."     Now,  Doctor  L.  admits,  that  the  Scriptures  are  the  very  basis 
of  faith  and  morals,  and  if  so,  he  must  believe  that  that  version  of  them  which  his  Church  admits 
as  a  rule  by  which  it  is  to  be  guided,  must  be  infallible;  for,  according  to  his  own  argument, 
if  the  ground-work  be  insecure,   the  superstructure  cannot  possess  stability.     And  as  the  last 
authorised  edition  of  the  Vulgate  has  for  two  centuries  been  received  by  the  majority  of  the 
governing  part  of  the  Church  without  opposition,  it  follows,  that  Clemens,  in  his  decision 
respecting  that  edition,  was  infallible,  and  therefore  that  it  must  have  been,  and  is,  considered  as 
infallible,  by  all  true  members  of  the  Popish  Church,  contrary  to  what  Doctor  L.  so  confidently 
declares  in  the  answer,  which  he  gives  to  the  first  query. 


*Vid.  Pastoral  Lettei,  by  the  R.R.  Doctor  Troy,  1793.  f  Ibid.  &e  also  Veronius's  Rule  of  Faith,  cap.  I. 


_,  ERRATA. 

fagc.  Line. 

17,  22,  for  IEREA,  read  '  iepea.' 

1?,  27,  for  sinnscarnibh,  read  *  sinnsearnibh.' 

29,  for  Focalsir  Gasidhilge,  read  <  Focaloir  Gaoidhilce  * 

25,  1,  for  and,  read  *  Thus.'                                               ' 

32,  19,  for  the  litter,  read  «  either.' 

61,  '20,  for  Origin,  read  *  Origen.' 

64,  27,  forby  him,  read  •  by  Dr.  Milner.' 


t 


G.  Sidney,  Printer, 
Northumberland-street,  Strand. 


PLEASE  DO  NOT  REMOVE 
CARDS  OR  SLIPS  FROM  THIS  POCKET 


UNIVERSITY  OF  TORONTO  LIBRARY