(navigation image)
Home American Libraries | Canadian Libraries | Universal Library | Community Texts | Project Gutenberg | Children's Library | Biodiversity Heritage Library | Additional Collections
Search: Advanced Search
Anonymous User (login or join us)
Upload
See other formats

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"

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. I 1 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 . 1 i, , - C ; 1 r ■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 . *|j cua ,j ons ot j llS 

;ij m il.-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 • 




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 t o 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 P I° P y Catho]ics 5 and never Y et > nor ever likely to be, solidly answered by any Secta- 

rW is " 0t .? cdesi fi n ° f * his [ oIlowIn S 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 a nd Ut h° ri r ' 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° f 6 " 7 Wh °'' b £u ks th f, re ° f ' ° r P arts of books > when the V 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 GoS P C ' S > Sa ^> That St " J oh "' s is ** °i 
true Gospel , and so do our English Protestants those books which they call Apocrypha. 

c-min bo^rnf V f f J'' <T - Ca ," ^ qU K Sti °u at th ? !eaSt ' aml " ,ake SOme doubt of the Authority of 
iha he whnl M ""I 7 S "'P tmes > 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. 
W r e 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."(2 5 ) 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 i 5 8o ; _ 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 Hc r J>. 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 , ell se 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. i 

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 - Be J hrr : 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 ' 



2 o Protestant Translations 

of St. Paul, " Have not we power to lead about a woman, a sister, as also the rest of the 
Apostles »(i 3 ) 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 J S 

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 Idihm 9 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 , E M< 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. 



3 o 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 * ilw s 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 r d 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. n e 
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. A T otas. (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( 3 i) 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,(3 5 ) that "the Decalogue was not to be' taught in 
t«e Church : ' And from him came( 3 6j 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 . /, M a„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" t nt 6" 1 ot H 1 * 39 
Articles. ( 4 g) 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. 

t 7 7 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> 

ious l Chnrch,'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.s v ^-(67) 

Z 7 / ipsum dealt Ca- 



. 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 /r t /^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/ctur iJ 



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.( l JO > ) 



S$uem oportet qui- 
dem Calum i susci- 
pcre i 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 p n est 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 . 

v 4 



$ 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? 9 y :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 su Pr cr 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 fo lt ,l le w«h a >vpe ol on. Lord's S3cvif.cc, 

place. ." 1 he Holy 01 est s 5s b . j Cypua 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 " "' , r 1 1 . ; -,to An/1 inc-md of Or. contrary both rr the Greek and 

( 7 6, In this place, they very falsely It as, a. A ml. n. -- 1" »» ) . , ... ^ ^ 

LThi en S An o°,mc J 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,dv U „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» J m P^J ^ tUan T bj as al] the Ancienl tathe r S wee accustomed to 

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

SP T 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. y P v,an ... de 1 P s s, 
jui n 4. Euseb.Eccl.Hist.l.6.c. 3 6. 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 V er - 

..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 <4 E!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 o ive 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 L P . 45 , q . 3 . ( X ) Psa l iio.ver.4. Heb. C vtr. 20. andchap. 7 ,*r, i 5 ,- 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 
l Gratiam [^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 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. 
- r er. 10. 



< Luke, 

U <- ha P- 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 e uia?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. M or ' 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, c J>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 
sond 1 Chrtili\a W ' WMlta \ '.Person" of Christ. 
x flfS .] 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> 

g er - 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? '/^/XO? SV 

■crao-i, y t bonis WDMl- 

culatus. 



( 15) J^H/ fifr.Y/7 ?7- 
//>, ' A T <5« 0/«tf£f £<?/>/'- 

#;;/' verbum istud, 

a waVnf x u ^ 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»x M 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. r 

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" a 1 wom . 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 ,?' Iarria S e T hon0l,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 . 

" a f, C c e Mo"° Urablem - alL "- ^ P h ™ ol ?gy ™» instruction of both are sin Harnthe Greek """ 
(i 5 ) 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^" 
S i 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 ° the y traililare ,/ 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 kJ Me mi S, °& Si ?f , hTXI'u" ill ' ', ^ ^' '° 
««.or £cncra t ,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 a i ,o s e,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?Lih b l T";- 1 ?; ? ? ' ^'v 1 - 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. i 7 . 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 




k 



The Vulgate Latin ! ThetrueEngHshaC- Corruptions in the Pro- 

Text. cording to theRhe- 1 r f '!* Blh >' 8 P r,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- 

ci re »»ci,i« r h « (» n J « *h"« B w*i., « *' *^W.«inJ T« ' O0 l low 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 »« t O v 0/ *« , s by them translated " In ,' : 
7/rV R ^ 7 ' i hat . l f 7 v C ba P t,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 list 1 ^^"SJiSSfid ^im g rTlil?u?Tn^ S 1r dant ' 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 ou S'" 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 * Faults 1 
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 
i Panitentiam (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 c ins '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," c r ' 

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. 



x 5- 



■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, Es 3 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 called 9 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 « he 1 
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 i n 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 


v i ' 


•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 i s 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'" ,» re M ^ f bt ' Au S usc,ne so P ,ecisel y 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 S r 25 a n (K) 2 C ° ncIL Niccn * Act ' 7« (Y) S <- Chry 3 . 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. o f 
the Protest. Bible, 
Edi f . 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 
>xaT f «», 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. 

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 to 1)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 



l 519- 



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 : * And r 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<r es 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, 
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) r T"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. 



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



^asssssssss 



The Vulgate Latin 
Text. 



^5^S3^S5S^^^5S5SS 5S5SSS3S5S«5^©^ 



(s £$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. 



6 9 



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 ic 5 o, makes ca' Sa- 
viour Canst say thus to his Father, non derelmqim cadaver maim in Sepulchro , for ti, / v i lK .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- 

houIdsav W ' K- T° th 7 rSVe ' , u 5"° m J 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 r ated r Srn ' (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 r i"? 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) Q2 1 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 Grave 5 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 n? 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^ ^ ^ *»" *" P icCCS ' 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. 

' -'-"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 o 3 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- 4U 6 C ' 

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 . P no j, 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 s 5 
j% chap. 2. 
8 ver. 9. 



(43) Quant 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, " W r orthy." 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) L 7 / <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, owufi.tv®' %ufu» XujiAa : whereas by the Protestant translation, he might have said 
• X u i av x u f UTU • 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. 
ft 1 



also, l)V the justice 
of one, unto all men 
to justification of 
life. 



(54) ' Likewise j There! ;;e, a 

bv the or'-j l, 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 ft 1 

' 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; 



■g J 



I (S 8 ) — 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 n p^ 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 W A Kh , 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 2 A' CEcUm * '" C ' ate . n * PhdtIu S; 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\ r i ian .-, 



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 r cero 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, in 4 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 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, r cel 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 traditions 9 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, 
r iiat 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,i n tcd 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'vci S . 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 ° C m?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""' rDO ce thereby to defend themselves against their puntanica brethren, when 

• : L 1 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- 

. e d 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, p nn -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 e r istie, 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 

„, u r,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 w ith 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) 



L nU his Sc-u:.d Reply against V.'lutg. Pait 1. pag. ^4> y 5? ^^^ 



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 * 3 2 » \r r, 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, 

l S79» 



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 j s 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 ' E P ,ies - 3- >*r. 9. 1 Cor. 15, ver, i 5 . (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 " 2 3- 

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- 1 a 



to you. 

But 'he 5 giv- 
eth more 
grace. 

—Which ye ft 

have heard, n 
i and which y> 
was' preach- ^ 
ed to every \{ 
creature. $ 



^■^ ,2 S2S3£35£5£/5iS25S5S^ 



BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 



8 7 



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 heard 3 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: 

£> DO 7 ' , 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;" and 3 
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 „ tu u 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 ^ S P^ 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 dl em 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 Kiiv S ptU S :^^;\U^ct a ;; l du^ocation and consecr^, ur g mg f - prove 
Ac same*, and to shew how. and by whom they were made priests and bishops 1 hu he 

An d 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 

traor Lary: 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] ^ 

w i,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 ^" ^ YOU1 Y 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 G f 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 ^ k en t l , 
A Replv, &c. » How chanced then, Mr. Jewel, says he, that you and your fellows beann r 
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 b Y ; n> one 
t)tt hem all ; but bale taken upon you that office, without : Yl^r^oV"^!^ ™ d yo " 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 '^^ to A ^' 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 T e vveland 
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 « 7 th 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 
\„l e 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. Parker 9 



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^hbe e r f&,^ ^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 ^^ be r fore > 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, > w here the Bishops of 
oath, cotjch.ng the Queen's supremacy andotl er r ie eV C 7" T?', f< ? r rcfusin S t0 take th « 
i-head has also the same words, and 'tells us ^^l^^^r^Z a^cef ' ^ 

ble H Cn h Et^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 Paier 7 , 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)sho P' 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! 

^7fo r T; 8 s\? w e ;„YH h Jni t ;Te'ad'; e ; , e ^Mim? r sessi ? 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 b J r , Ho j l ' ni *«d it evidently appears, 
"C Bishops : For, on the „,h of Au<4 , Te find SL f' ! • ll ' de P, 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 i t 

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 , d D ; . T llc ' eas b X 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 J a ' ^' " tbe!< ' ,ecor<ls '""' •'«« made while 
'hen, ol his true name, and ti, nla « J e i " , S^ff 'a'' Ma " hCW F"^'' '" : ' :aM '>avc satisfied 

^"^^b:--:£^«£fi^ 

calTeu , &agfnofDo n v , er a .(k, hiS '' eC ° rdS ' ** '"'" Saff "e» of Bedfonl : But by Doctor Btitler be .- 
Fourthly, in Mr. Mason, we hear tell hnt of • ■ 

finds? 11 CO T? ion of Matthew Parke . But B iiln.T'"'"' " ^r """ ^'^ for thc «"'»'«- 
finds two ; the first dated September the 9 th.(l) B "" ah ' U ' '"' mm a,1 'i e "< 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 - * 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 i 7 ch 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, v y- - ■' - . 

.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 „... 

an 1 J , ' iCh ?,fice C o?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 r h « «<> y b ; * A* ^v^^ ^^ c r , .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 . 

iviand ed «he % .nd^^ 

ration ot me, &c. And, Because n • ff, re d himself once bloodily upon the altar 01 

same Christ is contained and unbloodily reeled vvl ■"'««£ £ £*" ^ Wh J cto ? 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 down y to 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 hi 8 gh, 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 P len,tude 5 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:^, l o^^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 

;!,: ^ V V ; ' . ' 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 '- .••'%", •*. , •.„..•.!.,., t i,„ „^,.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 ; ffcrc j 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. e P 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. i 5 5 4 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 th L a, \ kS are S iven b y 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 h V 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 , h l S "^ and | bl T d ; and be, ' ng n ° W P referrcd 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? n Tnh ed ? n'" 8 ' gM ^ 6 ff re8 ' bm DOt the truth itSelf -" A ™^< P 1 ^' 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 

the S w"ld ar LTu3,V^l S ^ n0tSpeak,5 ' Say f he ', " ° f lhe thi "S S 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'-nd 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 b J od? S " lem ; (e) 7 ,< S i" Ce t]ieref ° r J e Christ himself does thus affllm > and sa Y s °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 war er 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 /" Tw gh i 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^ h0 t y r' bl °? d ° f Ch T l '• F ° r U " d£r fhC fo ™ of bill il^en to the t e' 
mavest £ fn iade tl "' p ™^. ^"f ; thaC haVin S ,eceiVed the bod Y and hi ^ d of Christ thou 
"£S?" r° h ? b ° d -r a , nd S ,!00d - Thusweshall become Christophers, that is, 

only or bare win 'for r"?-' 3 b ft and - b °? d . imo US -- Do not therefore iock on it as mere bread 
thereto re the n LjZr ^ t* ^V^' K ' S the bod y and blood of Christ - Notwithstanding, 

but rath e ; take h fo n ! ° f ^t' ,C ^. f ? th C .°? farm thee ' and do " ot J ud S e 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»sJ r ^d^t^ mm Vi l' d , K not come holding both the paln!3 of y° ur hands °p en ' r!or 

Jece ve s g o ,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 " n S i 8,Ver - 39 n inStea u °, f ^ W u' d " Ch ™}Y>" theV ' COlUrar y 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 Iit s o 3 f r^K, « r&.h^iK S e s » ;; v * ™ t f l* an n rr- &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 t fe 

degrees of good works. 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 



t u [ ? 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 P aS ?" 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 "&"; 
- Beca US e 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 B L 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 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 work 1 ' 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(n u\ { u Tlieod -. in * ha - Ga P- «• 00 Beza Test, anno 1565, Bib. 1683, (b) i 55 6. (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 detes r ab! * 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. (h N Isaiah, c. 16. ver. 18. (i) St. Ambrose, lib. 2. de In- 
terpret. c, 4. (k) Chrysostome, in p s al. 7. pi op. fin. (1) See S. Hierom upon this place, (m) J3ib. 1685. 



i S 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 
ma g kes 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 othe 1 ' 
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 „he ra adet! : ,followir K L';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. 



IJ 5 



op the Scripture. 

word, ,n the New, through a„ ee^a „!•,', „ m r ore . 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 w h rd cut *; en r • "'^ ta rf ed V ession - *"*•',," :„?.^ 5^ ,- - 

.'."Sri-iz: h s u= s ; g „t fey, c ^ li t c h^ Ch d^ lcm,s r 1 r ed r 'r 
£^rzt».t r ,™^ 

lose the possession of the things themselves »e)B vl \'ou !« fh« \h W ' ' '""^''i" 

GOOD LORD DELIVER US I 

■try, against the Church of Rome, P ag. 7 & pf 40. (0 Dr. btillingfleefs charge of Idol T 



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\'cs f 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 . nr n rest 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 wo 1 ' 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 thin fe , 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 



v i 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 \st y 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 — c l 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. C T . 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; R JoL J D 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. T 5 " ° ' ^ ^ 

Seton, Anketelle, Es(i. Dublin. xu in r> ,J 

Shanahan, Michael, Esq. T. C D. JfJ^f ^ ° f Ri P»- 

Shaw, Robert, Esq! M P ' '"°' ^ thc L,br ^ of th * College Church, 

ci i> i» , . ' Itipon. 

Shaw, Rev. Robert, Kilkenny. Wn i, 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" K J?"^ 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. .,. U niacke , 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 S P° 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' T Cn ' 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 -r y unfounded one, and 

wm«™ , , s,,,,,, of t,nfa,r„e SS as well a. of divination." R e1ia „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 

q j:TaZ x z r " mme f 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 furtherance 1 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 w T as 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. xx iii 

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 f 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. 2 x i x 

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 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 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> Xi 0,x ' 1 xv-jy-nrarcKreui;. Serm. SeCUUu, de nllO. 
X Horn. 2. ad popul. Antioch, x 1 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 « r o { (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. 
«,W W ) 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, tt Jeromc > 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.f s -*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 ' 8 7«* «* 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 - 2 7- ^ 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 w V a0uTtp S 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 x f, ; 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 



' Eldership 1 



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*s i<r i**> 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 - 2 9- 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~ r jC, 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 



tf To 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 ! 
|reads l, 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. 
§^ E x°"-'- || 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 (^X 11 " 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 hxtomp t . 
The term he did adopt, viz. **r ? or, imports a bath, washing, &c. 

According to the Rhemish version, i|i X «» 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 
calls 4 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 L It , 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 ^„ ( S ratiosa) 
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. 

, ?!' l A iTf 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°P e 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 l me , O God! how 
the ' sum ' ofg reat \ s t i ie < sum ' 
them! ! fthem! (56) 



55.Mvr j lJ,r j V 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. 



'■;l h . '.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 n BD 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, Tvi ta, 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 y x«» 

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- f thy 'graven 

ninus's version, ver, and the images' of silver, 

except ornament of anc J the ornament 

in reading thy ' molten f 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 dea f h. 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. 



e A^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 , yttw t Aht t 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 rendering 1 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 j n 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 
^i ns - j him. 

N. B. Accord- 
ing to others, 
' boldness.' <Sec. 



Adjuvantes And whelping Sed et, ut o P e- 
autem exhor- do cxhort that I m nostran | ei 
tamus, ne in you reC eive notlaccommodantes 

Z™™J™~\ the S race 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. 

I 1 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 X a f^' «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:r l iv,^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! r lhe 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. c 2. 



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<j em 

so that I could a( i co ut mon tes 
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$wf t 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!r l Ti £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 no f 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 $M T«TO 
,,,,* -ro ZxV.*r.* M , y MS wS*Wt»,*y« «*.«'*«. i>«<r$*, «0 Pf »»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. ^foo S T<»«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*,, \ U x-\ 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.|Ta T o^ sri toJHoc est au-jAnd this is the Hoc autem est 

verbum illud, 



|(TJ T0 ^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 

a l so El S e 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*w S o»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£ 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 f 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 
Po pi sh 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 o 2 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. 3 7 1. 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, l 7 g 3 . 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 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 W r ard, 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 W T ard 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 ?