Digitized by the Internet Archive

in 2007 with funding from

IVIicrosoft Corporation

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

PROTESTANT BIBLE

ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS

EXAMINED:

XN A TREATISE, SHOWING SOME OF THE ERRORS THAT ARE TO BE FOUND IN THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES, USED BY PROTESTANTS, AGAINST SUCH POINTS OF RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE AS ARE THE SUBJECT OF CONTROVERSY BETWEEN THEM AND THE MEHBERS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH.

In vfhich also,

FROM THEIR MISTRANSLATING 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.

BY THOMAS WARD,

AUTHOR OF THE CELEBRATED POEM, ENTITLED " ENGLAND'S REF0R5IATI0N.'

" For I testify to every one that heareth the -words of the prophecy of this book. If any man shall add to these thirig-s, God shall add upon him the plagues -written in this book, ^nd if any man shall take atvay from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away /as part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things which are written in this book." — Rev. chap. xxii. verses 18, 19.

A NEW EDITION, CAREFULLY REVISED AND CORRECTED.

LONDON, PRINTED IN THE YEAR 1688 :

AND

PHILADELPHIA

RE.PRINTED FOR EOi^NE CUMMISKEY, NO. 182, NORTH FOURTH STREET,

18S4.

LOAN STACK

W3

LIFE OF MR. WARD.

Tkk life of Mr. Ward is greatly involved in obscurity, and though the editor had many •difliculties to encounter in ascertaining its events ; yet he is happy in beng enabled to gratify curiosity, by laying before the public some of the most interesting particulars concerning this extraordinary man — they have been chiefly communicated by a gentle- man in London.

Thomas Ward was the son of a respectable farmer, and was born at Danby Castle, in the Moors of Yorkshire, on the 13th of April, 1652. The early part of his life passed away undistinguished from that of ordinary children, and nothing remarkable of him is. known until his fourteenth year, when we find him at Pickering School, giving the first indications of his genius, and excelling his brothers, of whom he was the eldest, in his taste and knowledge of the classics. Here he was initiated in the first principles of arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy, in which sciences he became a gi-eat proficient. So much was his father pleased with his early propensity to learning, and the abilities which he discovered, that he determined to rescue him from the obscurity of a country life, and destined him for one of the learned professi^ons. Young Ward was accordingly offered his choice to become a clergyman, a physician, or a lawyer ; but, with a mind already matured by study and thinking, he hesitated — and at length declined his father's offers. In the practice of the law, he observed there weie too many temptations to dis- honesty, and he doubted his firmness to resist them. The profession of physic was re- pugnant to the delicacy of his feelings ; and, as a clergyman, he feared that he might contribute more to the destruction than the salvation of his fellow-man. Thus, perhaps, a too fastidious nicety in his conscience and ideas, left him without a calling, and he entered on the world with v«ry little prospects of a permanent subsistence.

About this period his talents and acquirements first began to introduce him Into no- tice, and he accepted an invitation from a gentleman of fortune to hve with him as a com- panion, and tutor to his children. In this retreat he had an opportunity of following the particular bias of his mind, and accordingly he bent himself with incredible apphcation to the study of controversy, then the rage of the day. Church history, the ancient fa- thers, the Scriptures, and the more modern cathohc controversies, always occupied his literary hours ; but he still found occasional recreation and delight in poetry and the classics. He read incessantly, but not with the frivolity of one who skims the surface, and seeks only to arm himself with sublety and sophism for impertinent disputation ; he read to enrich his mind, to correct his understanding, and improve his heart. To this serious disposition and habit of reflection, must be attributed the change in his religious sentiments which immediately took place. His father and all his family were protestants, and he himself was educated in hostiUty to catholic opinions. His liberal and penetrating mind, however, disdained to wear the trammels of prejudice, and he even shook off the authority of a parent, rather than remain a slave, contrary to conscience and conviction, to the false principles he had at first imbibed. He accordingly embraced the catholic faith, which, together with his marrying a young lady of the same persuasion, so highly incensed his father, that at his death, which happened soon after, he bequeathed all lie possessed to his protestant wife and children. This disappointment and blasting of his hopes, with his consequent destitute situation, it might be expected would have produced envy and irritation on his part ; but his was no ordinary mind, and, raising himself above every little paltry consideration of self, in the enthusiasm of charity, he directed his whole endeavours to the conversion of his mother and family. Providence blessed his exertions, and he had the happiness of seeing himself united to them in faith, as well as in affection. To a youth of uncertainty, disquietude, and separaJ;ion from his family, succeeded the calm of domestic peace, and the secufity of competence. For some years he remained buried and contented in this domestic retirement, but hiTf-g-enius opening with age, and expanding with increase of knowledge, began to be restless^ and thirsted for universal information. Sated with books, he wished to know mankind ; a«d, with this intention, having, after much intreaty, obtained his motlier's and wife's consent, he left his own country, and passed over to France. In France he continued for some time, learning the manners and language of the people, and from thence went into Italy, and settled himself at Rome. In this famous city, the wreck and monument of ancient greatness, he had a wide range to gratify his taste, to contemplate the fallen and mutila- ted glories of the ancient a^s : he was continually in the churches, the public buildings, and public Tibraries, and spent a gr^at portjpi^of his time particularly in thp Vatican.

IV LIFE OF MR. WARD.

Here he had an opportunity of seeing some of the best documents respecting the Hhs- tory of England, from which he did not neglect to make numerous and useful quota- tions.— Controversy again became his favourite study, which was soon interrupted be accepting a commission in the pope's guards, in which he remained for five or six years, during which time he served in the maritime war against the Turks. His military career ended with the war, and he returned to England, at the pressing solicitations of his wife and relations, in the 34th year of his age. On his arrival, he was patronized and received on terms of friendship by lords Derwentwater and I.umney, col. Thomas Radcliff, Mr. Thornton, and others, to whom he was recommended by his learning, his wit, and a suavity of manners peculiarly his own. About this period he set about writing his JS;-- rata to the Protestant Jiible, which was published in the year 1688. His Monomachiay or Duel with Dr. TiUotsout appeared next, but anonymously ; which made Dr. Tillotson observe, that it must have been written by some able Jesuit, not imagining that so much force of argument and theological research, could be possessed by a layman. His Tree of Life^ an ingenious device, presenting at one view an epitome of church history, ac- cording to the most exact chronology ; his Controversy of Ordinations truly stated ; his Conference toith Jllr. Bichlew, JMinister of Hexham ; his JVotes on the 39 Jlrticles and the Book of Homilies, all followed one another in rapid succession, and soon after appeared his well known work, the Reformation^ a burlesque poem, in which he imitates Butler with considerable success. The notes to this poem, collected from the most approved historians, as Stow, Camden, Speed, Baker, Burnet, Heylin, Clarendon, 8cc. form a com- plete History of Ecclesiastical Affairs in England, from Henry the Eighth's time to the end of Oates's plot. This was the last publication that came from the pen of Mr. Ward, though he afterwards compiled and wrote the History of England. It is much to be regretted, that a coincidence of untoward circumstances, and, particularly, his being obliged to fly the country and go over to France, prevented this work from being ever given to the world : the documents for it were collected by him with great diligence, and he himself esteemed it his best production. The manuscript is now in possession of the editor, and may, perhaps, in due time, be offered to the public.

He died in the 56th year of his age, anno 1708, and was buried at St. Germain's, in France, where his obsequies were performed with a solemnity becoming so pious and learned a man. The enemies of Mr. Ward, who, on account of his religious opinions, and his boldness in defending them, were many, seem to have conspired against his character, and have maliciously confounded him with another of the same name, a man of dissolute morals, and no education, but of a prolific turn in producing works of low ribaldry and shameful obscenity. The productions of this man, whose name was Ed- ward, and who all his life kept a public-house in Moorfields, have been attributed to our author by Jacob, Oldyss, and even the writers of the Biographical Dictionary, pub- lished in London, in 1798. The London Spy, a book entitled Apollo's M^aggot, a drama- tic piece called the Humours of a Coffee-House, Don Quixote, turned into Hudibrastic verse, are among the number of those publications, which have been always, though wrongfully, imputed to the wrfter of the Reformation. There is, moreover, a gi*eat dif- ference as to the time of their death, for Edward Ward lived to the year 1731, and we find a poetical will of 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 cul- tivated studies of an almost opposite nature. He possessed a deep fund of ancient and modern learning. He knew the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin languages, and was well skilled in French and Italian. He was one of the best controvertists of his time, as Til- lotson and Burnet both acknowledged. He loved poetry, particularly of the burlesque kind, to which a lively eccentric fancy strongly inclined him. He often indulged in it for amusement ; and perhaps he chose that ludicrous channel for conveying the history of the Reformation to the public, because he saw it most adapted to the taste of the times, and most agreeable to common conception. His Errata to the Protestant Bible, though little known, for want of publication in a country to which It was obnoxious, Is a work of such learned merit, such nice arrangement, and such clear disquisition in all the controverted points of religion and Scripture, that it will convey Mr. Ward's name to the latest posterity as a man of genius, judgment and erudition. His disposition was generous and mild, though not incapable of being provoked to resentment : he even fought two duels in his youth, from which his religion would certainly have restrained him, if he had courage enough to be a coward. When in the army, he was the model of^a Chris- tian soldier ; he joined piety to bravery ; he fought and prayed ; and his Intervals of leisure from duty, were filled up by reading. He was, in fine, a theologian, a poet, and a soldier ; and passed his life with fame and honour to himself.

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

PREFACE

Amoxo the many and irreconcilable differences between Roman catholics and the sectaries of our days, those about the Holy Scriptures claim not the least place on the stage of controversy : As, first, whether the Bible is the sole and only rule of faith ? Secondly, whether all thing's necessary to salvation are contained in the Bible ? Or, whether we are bound to believe some things, as absolutely necessary to salvation, which are either not clear in Scripture, or not evidently deduced out of Scripture ? — • Thirdly, whether every individual person, of sound judgment, ought to follow his own private interpretation of the Scripture ? If so, why one party or profession should con- demn, 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 if protestants think, the letter was safe in the custody of the Roman catholic church, from which they received it, how can t'hey suspect the purity of that sense, which was kept and delivered to them by the same church and authority ? With several other such like queries, frequently proposed by catholics; and never yet, nor ever likely to be, solidly answered by any sectaries whatever.

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

As it has been the custom of heretics in all ages to pretend to Scripture alone for their rule, and to reject the autliority of God's holy church ; so has it also ever been their practise to falsify, corrupt, and abuse the same in divers manners.

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

2. Another way is, to call in question at the least, and make some doubt of the autho- rity of certain books of holy Scriptures, thereby to diminish their credit : So did Manicheus affirm, that the whole New Testament was not written by the apostles, and particularly St. Matthew's Gospel : So does Luther discredit the epistle of St. James -. so did Marcion and the Arians deny the epistle to the Hebrews to be St. Paul's ; in which they were followed by oar first Enghsh protestant translators of the Bible, who pre- sumed to strike St. Paul's name out of the very title of the said epistle.*

3. Another way is, to expound the Scripture according to their own private spirit, and to reject the approved sense of the ancient holy fathers, and catholic church: So do all heretics, who seem to ground tticir errors upon the Scriptures ; especially those, who will have Scripture, as by themselves expounded, for their only rule of faith.

^ 4. Another way is, to alter the very original text of the holy Scriptures, by adding, diminishing, and changing it here or there for their purpose : So did the Arians, Nes- torians, &c. and also Marcion; who is therefore called Mus Ponticus, from his gnawing, as it were, certain places with his corruptions ; and for the same reusoii, may Bezu not improperly he called the Mouse of Geneva.

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

* See Bibles, 15/9, 15'80.

Tl PREFACE.

Yet, before I proceed any farther, let me assure my reader, that this work is not uii' dertakeii with any design of lessening the credit or authority of the holy Bible, as per- haps some may be ready to 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 they endeavour to lessen the credit and autho- rity of the holy Bible. Thus possessing the poor deluded people with an ill opinion of catliolics, as if they rejected, and trod under feet, the written word : whereas it is evi- dent to all, who know them, that none can have a greater respect and veneration for the holy Scripture, than catholics have, receiving, reverencing, and honouring the same, as the very pure and true 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 en- during 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 behaviour the Scripture is ordinarily handled among protestants, will not, I am confident, say, that catlioUcs have a less regard for 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 subject has extorted from me sueh 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 un- wary reader.

The holy Scriptures were written by the prophets, apostles^ and evangelists; the Old Testament in Hebrew, except only some few parts in Chaldee and Syriac; the greatest part of the New Testament was writtten in Greek, St. Matthew's Gospel in Hebrew, and St. Mark's in Latin. We have not at this day the original writings of these pro- phets 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 apjjroved of by the church, is suffi- ciently authentic. For what avails it for a Christian to believe, that Scripture is the word of God, if he be uncertain which copy and translation is true ? Yet, 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 all their books of controversy ; seeing therein they condemn the council of Trent, for declaring that the old translation is authentic, and yet them- selves name no other for such. And, therefore, though the Lutherans fancy Luther's translation ; the Calvinists 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 con- fession of the uncertainty of their own translations, that they have no certainty of Scrip- ture at all, nor even of faith, which they ground upon Scripture alone.

That the Vulgate of the Latin is the most true and authentic copy, has been the judg- ment of God's church for above those 1300 years; during which time, the church has always used it ; and therefore it is, by the sacred council* of Trent, declared authentic and canonical in every part and book thereof.

Most of the Old Testament, as it is in the said Latin Vulgate, was translated! out of Hebrew by St. Hierom ; and the New Testament had been before his time translated out of Greek, but was by himt reviewed ; ami such faults as had crept in by the negh- gence of the transcribers, were corrected by him by the appointment of Pope Damas- us. ** You constrain me," says he, " to make a new work of an old, that I, after so many copies of the Scriptures dispersed through the world, should sit as a certain judge, which of them agree with the true Greek. 1 have restored the New Testament to the truth of the Greek, and hftve translated the old according to the Hebrew. Truly, I will affirm it confidently, and will produce many witnesses of this work, that I have changed no^liingfrom the truth of the Hebrew," &.c.§

* Con. Trident. Sess. 4. f S. Hierom. in lib. de vlrls Illustr. extreme, & in Pra^fat, libronim quos Latinos fecit, t Hier. Ep. 89. ad Aug. qusest. 11. inter Ep. Aug. § See his preface before the New Testament, dedicated to pope Darnasus, and his Catalogue in fine.

PREFACE. Vll

And for sufficient testimony of the sincerity of the translator, and commendations of his translation, read these words of the g-reat doctor St. Augustine : " There was not wanting," says he " in these our days, Hierom the priest, a man most learned and skilful in all the three tongues; who not from the Greek, but from the Hebrew, translated the same Scriptures into Latin, whose learned labour the Jews yet confess to be true."f

Yea, the truth and purity of this translation is such, that even the bitterest of protest- ants 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 1 confess to be godly and profitable to the church. "4:

Dr. Dove says thus of it : " We grant it fit, that for uniformity in quotations of places, 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,*'§

And for tlie antiquity of it. Dr. Covel tells us, " that it was used in the church 1300 years ago :" not doubting but to prefer that translation before others. ]|

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 ignorance." t

In regard of which integrity and learning, MoHnccus signifies his good esteem thereof, saying,** " I cannot easily forsake the vulgar and accustomed reading, which also I am accustomed earnestly to defend :*' yea,f f " 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,

Conradus Pellican, a man commended by Bucer, Zuinglius, Melancthon, and all the fa- mous protestants about Basil, Tigure, Berne, &c. gives it a far higher commendation, in these words :+t " I find the vulgar edition of the Psalter to agree for the sense, with such dexterity, learning, and fidelity of the Hebrew, that I doubt not, but the Greek and Latin 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 honour- able testimony of our vulgar translation : " I confess," says 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."§§

You see, how highly our Vulgate in Latin is commended by these learned protestants : see likewise, how it has been esteemed by the ancientj|j| fathers : yet notwithstanding all this is not sufficient to move protestants to accept or acquiesce in it; and, doubtless the very reason is, because they 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 anyone translation to have been authentic, they certainly could never have had the impudence so wickedly to have corrupted it, by adding, omitting, and changing, which they could never have pretended the least excuse for, in any copy by themselves held for true and authentic.

Obj. But however, their greatest objection against the Vulgate Latin is, that we ought rather to have recourse to the original langiiages, 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.

Ansto. When it is certain, that the originals or fountains are pure, and not troubled or corrupt, they are to be. preferred before translations: but it is most certain, that they are corrupted in divers places, as protestants themselves are forced to acknowledge, and as it appears by their own translations. For example, Psal. 22. ver. 16. they trans- late, " they pierced my hands and my feet :" 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 later Jews against the passion of our Saviour, of which the old authentic Hebrew was a most remarkable prophecy. Again, according to the Hebrew, itisread,11[ Achaz, king of Israel; which being fajse, they in

t St. Aug. de Ciyit. Dei, lib. 18. c. 43. & Ep. 80. ad Hierom c. 5. & lib. 2. Doct. Christi, c. 15. t Whitaker in his answer to Reynolds, page 241. § Dove, Persuasion to Recusants, p. 16. || See Dr. Covel's Answer to Burges, page 91, 94. t Dr. Hum. de Ratione Interp. lib. 1. page 74. ** Molin in Nov. Test. Part. 30. ff Et in Luc. 17. ♦* Pellican \n Praefat. in Psalter, ann. 1584. §§ Beza in Annot. in Luc. 1. 1. Et in Prae- fat. Nov. Test. |{{i S. Hierom. & St. Aug. supr. St. Greg. lib. 70. Mor. c. 23. Isidor. lib. 6. Etym. c. 5. 7. & de DivinOffic. lib. 1. cap. 12. S. Bedain Martyrol. Cassiod.21. Inst. &c. ^1 2 Chron. 28, ver. 19.

via PREFAClf.

some of their first translations read, Achaz, Icing 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 transla- tion, had rather follow the falsehood of the Hebrew against their own knowledge, than to be thought beholden to the Greek and Latin in so light a matter. Likewise, where the Hebrew says, Zedecias, Joachin's brother, they are forced to translate Zedecias his father's brother, as indeed the truth is according to the Greek.* 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 originals are by the Jews corrupted : amongst others. Dr. Humphrey says, •' The Jewish superstition, how many places it has corrupt- ed, the reader may easily find out and judge."f And in another place ; " I look not,'* says he, " that men should too much follow the rabbins, as many do ; for those places, which promise and declare Christ the true Messias, are most filthily depraved by them. i:"

" 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 dihgence in the antiquaries, and faith in the Jews ; who, both before Christ's coming and since, seem to be less careful of the Psalms, than of their Talmudical Songs."§

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 only let- ters 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 Bellorum Domini^ " The Book of the Wars of our Lord ; the Book of the Just men, protestants call it the Book of Jasher. The Book of Jehu the Son of Hanani ; the Books of Semeias the Prophet, and of Addo the Seer : and Samuel wrote in a book the law of the king- dom, how kings ought to rule, and laid it up before our Lord : and the works of Solomon were written in the book of Nathan the Prophet, and in the books of Ahias the Shilon- ite, and in the vision of Addo the Seer."|| 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 priest- hood :" 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 rea- sonably 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 misplaced, but all sincere, perfect, and absolute .■*

How easy is it, in Hebrew letters, to mistake sometimes one for another, and so to al- ter the whole sense .? As for example, this very letter vau for jo</,1 has certainly made disagreement in some places ; as where the Septuagint read, to Kpd.T®' /um irpoi a-i (pvya^u, Fortitudinem meam ad te ciistodiam, " My strength I will keep to thee;" which reading- St. Hierom also followed : it is now in the Hebrew "i];; fortitudinem ejus, " His strength 1 will keep to thee."** 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 hke error is that in Gen. 3. (if it be an error, as many think it is none) Ipsa conteret caput tuum, for Ipse or Ipsumy about which pro- testants keep such a clamour.-|-|-

As the Hebrew has been by the Jews abused and falsified against our blessed Saviour Christ Jesus, especially in such places as were manifest prophecies 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 protestant themselves, who pretend so great veneration for it, dare not follow it in many places ; but are forced to fly to our Vulgate Latin, as is observed in the preface to the Rhemish Testament ; where also you may find sufficient reasons, why our catholic Bible is translated into Enghsh rather from the Vulgate Latin, than from the Greek.

To pass by several examples of corruptions in the Greek copy, which might be pro- duced, I will only, amongst many, take notice of these two following rash and incon- siderate additions : first, J oh. 8. ver. 59. after these words, exivit e temploy " Went out

• 4 Kings, 24. ver. 17, 19. f Humph. 1. 1. de Rat. interp. pag. 178. + Lib 2. p. 219. § Conrad. Pell. Tom. 4. in Psal. 85. v. 9. || Numb. 21. v. 14. Josh. 10. v. 13. 2 Kin.g^s, 1. v. 18. 2 Paral. 20. ver. 34. 12. ver. 15. 1 King. 10. v. 25. 2 Paral. 9. ver. 29. ^ '^ |«\n Nin ** Psal. 58. v. 10. in Prot. Bible, it is Psal. 59. ver. 9. ff Gen. 3. v. 15.

PREFACE. IX

of the temple ;*' are added, transiens per medium coruniy sic prateriit ; " Going" through the midst of them, and so passed by.'** Touching- which addition, Beza writes thus : " These words are found in very ancient copies ; but I think, as does Erasmus, that the first part, * going through the midst of them,' is taken out of Luke 4. ver. 30. and crept into the text by fault of the writers, who found that written in the margin : and that the latter pait, * and so passed by,' was added to make this chapter join well with the next. And I am moved thus to think, not only because neither Chrysostom, nor Augustine, (he might have said, nor Hiez-om) make any mention of this piece, but also, because it seems not to hang together very probably ; for, if he withdrew himself out of their sight, how- went he through the midst of them ?" &c.f Thus Beza disputes against it ; for which cause, I suppose, it is omitted by 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 of the year 1561, 1562, 1577, 1^79, they leave it out, as Beza does : Yet in their Testament of 1580, as also in this last translation, (Bible 1683,) they put it in with as much confidence, as if it had neither been disputed against by Beza, 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 Prayer, " For thine is the kingdom, the power and the glory, for ever and ever, Jttnen," which not only Erasmus dislikes,^ but Bulhnger himself holds it for a mere patch sowed to the rest, " by he knows not whom ;"§ 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 hotly, 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 my 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, does Erasmus blame the old interpreter, as dissenting from the Greek ! He dis- sented, 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 otlier Greek copies, and those most ancient : yea, in some number of places we have observed, that the reading of the Latin text of the old interpreter, though it agree not sometimes with our Greek copies, yet it is much more convenient, for that it seems to follow some truer and better copy."|l

Now, if our Latin Vulgate be framed exactly, though not to the Vulgar Greek exam- ples now extant, yet to more ancient and perfect copies ; if the Greek copies have many- faults, errors, corruptions, and additions in them, as not only Beza avouches, but as our protestant translators confess, and as evidently appears by their leaving the Greek, and following the Latin, with what reason can they thus cry up the fountains and originals, as inconnjpt and pure ? With what honesty can they call us from our ancient Vulgar Latin, to the present Greek, from which themselves so licentiously depart at pleasure, to follow our Latin ?t

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

Let protestants only consider, whether it be more credible, that St. Hierom, one of the greatest doctors of God's church, and the most skilful in the languages wherein the Scripture was written, who lived in the primitive times, when perhaps some of the origi- nal writings of the apostles were extant, or at least the true and authentic copies in Hebrew and Greek better known than they are now : let us then consider, I say, whether is more credible, that a translation made and received by this holy doctor, and then ap- proved 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 note riously wicked lives, but from copies corrupted by Jews, Arians, and other Greek heretics, should be so ?**

A/f\6(yv Six (j-ie-a ivruv xcu ^apwyav uTug, t Beza in Joh. cap. 8. v. 59. t Erasm. in Annot. § BuUinger, Decad. 5. Serm. 5. II Beza in Prsf. Nov. Test. Anno 1556.

1 See the Pref. to the Rhemish Testament. Dr. Martin's Discoveiy. Reynold's RC" futation of Whitaker, cap. 13. ** Such were Luther, Calvin, Beza, Bucer, Cranmcr, Tindal, 8fc.

b

X PREFACt.

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 difference, 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^* are cor- rupted, thereby to prove the intercession of the blessed Virgin Mary ; and that instead thereof, we should read, ipsum conteret caput tuujn, seeing it was spoken of the seed, which was Christ, as all ancient writers teach.

Ansiv. Some books of the vulgate edition, have ipsa,Sind 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 holy fathersjf St. Augustine, St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostom, St. Gregory, St. Bede, &c. read it ipsa, and, I think, we have as great reason to follow their 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 mascuhne 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, 8. Esther 1. 20. Eccles. 12. 5. 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,i: " 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 cor- rupted afterwards."

I answer to this, with doctor Reynolds,^ that this omission (if it be any,) could not proceed from malice or design, seeing there is no loss or hindrance to any part of doc- trine, 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 incor- ruption; and this mortal, do on immortality : and when this (corruptible, has done on incorruption, and this) 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, if 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 un- faithful dealing, seeing he put the self-same words and sense in the next lines immedi- ately preceding ? and that it was not corrupted since, appears by the common reading of most men, in all after-ages. St. Ambrose, in his commentary upon the same place, reads as we do. So does St. Augustine, l)e Civitate Dei, cited by St. Bede, in his com- mentary upon the same chapter.|| So read also the rest of the catholic interpreters, Haymo, Anselm, &c.

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

Whether these vain and frivolous objections are sufficient grounds for their rejecting our Vulgate Latin, and flying to the original (but now impure) fountains, 1 refer to the judicious reader.

* Gen. 3. f St. August, lib. 2. de Gen. cont. Manich. c. 18.1. 11. de Gen. ad Literam, cap. 36. St. Ambr. lib. de Fuga Sseculi, cap. 7. St. Chrysost. in Horn. 17. in Gen. St, Greg. lib. 1. Mor. cap. 38. Beda, & alii in hunc locum, i-1 Cor. c. 15. ver. 54.

§ See Dr. Reynold's Refutation of Whitakcr's Reprehensions, chap. 10.

II St. Beda, in 1 Cor. c. 15.

PREFACE. XI

But now, how clear, limpid, and pure, tlie streams are, that flow from the Greek and Hebrew fountains, through the channels of protestant pens, the reader may easily guess without takiiTg- 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 ;* "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 beyond all measure, and prove thee to be such a man !"

Luther's Dutch translation of the Old Testament, especially of Job and the prophets, has its blemishes, says Keckerman, and those no small ones,f 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."4: Luther will have it so ; and at last thus con- cludes, " 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 & omnium, sine 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, unti-christs, deceivers, &c.§ and indeed, not without cause ; for what could be more deceitful and anti-christian, than instead of our Saviour's words, " this is my body," to translate " this signifies my body," as Zuinglius did, to maintain his figurative signification of the words, and cry down Christ's real presence in the blessed sacrament.

When Froscheverus, the Zuinglian printer of Zurich, sent Luther a bible translated by the divines there, he would not receive it ; but as Hospinian and Lavatherus witness, sent it back, and rejected it.||

The Tigurine translation was, in like manner, so distasteful to other protestants, "that the elector of Saxony in great anger rejected it, and placed Luther's translation in room thereof."!

Beza reproves the translation set forth by Oecolampadlus, and the divines of Basil ; affirming, " 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** 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 Bible, not only as unlearned, but also as wicked, and differing in many places from the mind of the Holy Ghost."

That learned protestant, Mollnoeus, 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."ff

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 en*ors, for that would require too large a volume."4:t

In short, Bucer and the Osiandrians rise up against Luther for false translations ; Lu- ther against Munster; Beza against Castalio ; and Castalio against Beza; Calvin against Sei'vetus ; lllyricus both against Calvin and Beza.§§ Staphylus and Emserus noted in Luther's Dutch translation of the New Testament only, about one thousand four hundred heretical corruptions. |||| 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 Ma-

* Zuing. T. 2. ad Luth. lib. de S. f Keckerman, Syst. 8. Theol. lib. 2. p. 188. 1. S. Joh.^5. 7. i To. 5. Germ. fol. 141, 144. § See Zuing. Tom. 2. ad Luth. lib. de Sacr. fol. 388, 389. II Hosp. Hist. Sacram. part. ult. folio 18o. Lavath. Hist. Sacram. 1. 32. 1 Hospin. in Concord. Discord, fol. 138. ** In Respons. ad Defens. &, Respons. CastaL in Test. 1556. in prxf. & in Annot. in Mat, 3. & 4. Luc. 2. Act. 8. & 10. 1 Cor. 1. ff In sua Translat. Nov. Test. part. 12. fol. 110. ^ In Test. part. 20, 30, 40, 64, 65, 66, 74, 99, & part. 8, 13, 14, 21, 23. §§ In Defens. Trans, p. 170. ||i| See Lind. Dub. p. 84, 85, 96, 98.

Xll PREFACE.

jesty 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 ex- amined by 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 conscience, subscribe thereto :'* Yea, they wrote and pubhshed a particular treatise, entitled, " A Defence of the Minister's Reasons for refusal of subscribing ;" the whole argument and scope whereof, is only concerning mis-translating : Yea, the reader may see, in the beginning of the said book, tlie title of every chapter, twenty -six in all, pointing to the mis-translations tliere handled in particular.* f

Mr. Carlile avouches, " that the English translators have depraved the sense, ob- scured the truth, and deceived the ignorant : that in many places they detort the Scrip- tures from the right sense, and that they show themselves to love darkness more than light ; falsehood more than truth :" which Doctor Reynolds objecting against the church of England, Mr. Whitaker had no better answer than to say, " Wliat Mr. Carlile, with some others, has written against some places translated in our Bibles, makes nothing to the purpose; 1 have not said otherwise, but that some things may be amended."i:

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 meaning of the Holy Ghost;" calling it yet further, " ^ translation which is absurd and senseless, perverting, in many places, the meaning of the Holy Ghost."§

For which cause, protestants of tender /consciences made great scruple of subscribing thereto : " How shall J," 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 ?"||

This great evil of corrupting the Scripture, being well considered by Mr. Broughton, one of the most zealous sort of protestants, obliged him to write an epistle to the Lords of the council, desiring them with all speed to procure a new translation : *' Because," says he, " that which is now in England is full of errors."! And in his advertisements of corruptions, he tells the bishops, " that their pubhc 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 fur- ther affirmed, " that in the marginal notes annexed to the Geneva translation, some are very partial, untrue, seditious, &,c.'*** 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 mar- gin, or else utterly prohibittd."

Now these our protestant English translations being thus confessedly " corrupt, ab- surd, senseless, contrary, and perverting the meanij>g of the Holy Ghost';" had not King James the First just cause to affirm, " that he could never see a Bible well translated into English ?"|f And whether such falsely translated Bibles ought to be imposed upon the ignorant people, and by them received for the very Word of God, and for their only rule of faith, I refer to the judgment of tlie world ; and do freely assert with Doctor Whitaker, a learned protestant, '* that translations are so far only the word of God, as they faithfully express the meaning of the authentical text."i:+

The English protestant translations having been thus exclaimed against, and cried down not only by catholics, but even by the most learned protestants, §§ as you have seen ; it pleased his majesty, King James the First, to command a review and reforma- tion of those translations which had passed for God's word in King Edward the Sixth, and Queen Elizabeth's days.|il| Which work was undertaken by the prelatic clergy, not

* Petition directed to his ^^ajesty, pag. 75, 76. f That Christ descended into Hell, pag. 116, 117, 118. 121. 154. i Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, pag. 255. § See the Abridgment which the Ministers of Lincoln diocess deUvered to his ^Lajesty, pag. 11, 12, 13. II Burges Apol. sect. 6. and in Covel's Answ. to Burges, pag. 93. t See the Triple Cord, pag. 147. ** See the Conference before the King's Majesty, pag. 46 and 47. Apologies concerning Christ's Descent into Hell at Ddd. ff Conference before his Majesty, pag. 46. i^ Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, pag. 235. §§ Dr. Gre- gory Martin wrote a whole treatise against them. |ill Bishop Tunstal discovered in Tin- dal's New Testament only, no less than 2000 corruptions.

PREFACE. Xlll

iotnuch, it is to be feared, for the zeiil 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 puritani- cal part of protestants (Presbyterians) against the usurped authority, pretended episco- pacy, ceremonies, and traditions of the prelatic party. For example: the word " con- gregation" in their first Bibles, was the usual and only English word they made use of for the Greek and Latin word fKKXHciit ecclesia^ because then the name of church was most odious to them ; yea, they could not endure to hear any mention of a church, be- cause of the catholic church, which they had forsaken, and which withstood and con- demned them. But now, being grown up to something (as themselves fancy) like a church, they resolve in good earnest to take upon them the face, figure, and grandeur of a church ; to censure and excommunicate, yea, and persecute their dissenting brethren ; rejecting therefore that humble appellation, which their primitive ancestors were con- tent with, viz. coiigregation, 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 to vindicate several ceremonies of theirs against their puritanical brethren ; as in behalf of 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 appears 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 they had done something. Seeing they have not corrected it in all places, expecially in the Old Testament, Exod. 20. where they yet read image, " Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image ;'* the word in Hebrew being pesel, the very same that scidptile 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, contrary 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 you will see hereafter; which they would not do, especially in Genesis, lest they should thereby be forced to admit of Limbics Patrum, where Jacob's soul was to descend, when he said, " I will go down to ray son into Hell mourning," &c. And to balance the ad- vantage they think they may have given catholics where they have corrected it, they have (against Purgatory and Limbns Patriim) in another place most grossly corrupted the text : for whereas the words of our Saviour are, " Quickened in spirit or soul. In the which spirit coming, he preached to them also that were in prison,"* they translate, " Quickened by the spirit, by which also he went and preached unto the spirits in pri- son." This was so notorious a corruption, that Dr. Montague, afterviards bishop of Chichester and Norwich, rcpreliended Sir Henry Saville for it, to whose care the trans- lating of St. Peter's Epistle was committed : Sir Henry Saville 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 stifFer him to corrupt the Scripture, his, or his servant Mason's forging the Lambeth Records, could not possibly cause tlie 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 with what sinister designs they have amended them, appears visible enough ; to wit, either to keep their authority, and gain credit for their new-thought-on episcopal and priestly chai'acter and ceremonies against puritans or presby terians ; or else, for very shame, urged thereto by the exclamations of catholics, daily inveighing against such intolerable falsifications. But because they resolved not to correct either ail, or the tenth part of the corruptions of the former translations ; therefore, fearing their over-seen falsifications would be observed, both by puritans and catholics, in their Epistle Dedicatory to the King, they desire his majesty's protection, for that " on the one side, we shall be tra- duced, say they, by popish persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor instruments to make God's holy truth to be yet more known unto

♦ 1 Peter 3. ver. 18, 19.

XIV PREFACE-

the people whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness : on the other sidls, we shall be maligned by self-conceited brethren, who run their own ways, Sic,"

We see how they endeavour here to persuade the king and the world, that catholics are desirous to conceal 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 and conveniencies, and travelhng with great difficulties and dangers by sea and land, into Asia, Africa, America, and the Antipodes, with no other design than to publish the doctrine of Christ, and to discover and manifest the ligiit of the Gospel to infidels, who are in darkness and ignorance. Nor do any but catholics stick to the old letter and sense of Scripture, without altering the text, or rejecting any part thereof, or devising new interpretations; which certainly cannot demonstrate a desire in them to keep people in ignorance and darkness. Indeed, as for their self- conceited presbyterian and fanatic brethren, who run their own ways in translating and interpreting Scripture, we do not excuse them, but only say, that we see no reason why prelatics should reprehend them for a fault, whereof themselves are no less guilty. Do not themselves of the church of England run their own ways also : as well as those other sectaries in translating the Bible ? Do they stick to either the Greek, Latin, or Hebrew text ? Do they not leap from one language and copy to another ? Accept and reject what they please ? Do they not fancy a sense of their own, every whit as contrary to that of the Catholic and ancient church, as that of their self-conceited brethren the pres- byterians, and others, is acknowledged to be ? And yet they are neither more learned nor more skilful in the tongues, nor more godly than those they so much contemn and blame.

All heretics that have ever waged war against God's Holy church, whatever particu- lar weapons they have had, have generally made use of these two, viz. " Misrepresenting and ridiculing the doctrine of God's church ;" and, " Corrupting and misinterpreting his sacred word, the Holy Scripture :" We find not any since Simon Magus's days, that have ever been more dexterous and skilful in handling these direful arms, than the here- tics of our times.

In the first place, they are so great masters and doctors in misrepresenting, mocking, and deriding rehgion, that they seem even to have solely devoted themselves to no other profession or place, but " cathedrae irtisortim,'* the school or " chair of the scorn- ers," as David terms their seat : which the holy apostle St. Peter foresaw, when he fore- told, that " There should come in the latter days, illusores, scoffers, walking after their own lusts." To whom did 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 I'id on a long stick, in begging shoes:'* Who scoff at the book of Judith: compare the Maccabees to Robin Hood and Bevis of Southampton; call Baruch, a "peevish ape of Jeremy:" count the Epistle to the Hebrews 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 pre- tended reformers only guilty of this, but the same vein has still continued in the writings, preachings, and teachings of their successors ; a great part of which are nothing but a mere mockery, ridiculing, and misrepresenting of the doctrine of Christ, as is too noto- rious and visible in the many scurrilous and scornful writings and sermons lately pub- lished by several men of no small figure in our English protestant church. By which scoffing stratagem, when they cannot laugh the vulgar into a contempt and abhorrence of the Christian religion, they fly to their other weapons, to wit, " imposing upon the people's weak understanding, by a corrupt, imperfect, and falsely translated Bible."*

Tertullian complained thus of the heretics of his time, Ista haeresis non recipit quaadam Scnpturasy &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 qnidem nihil per des nisi vocem de contentione, nihil consequeris nisi hileyn de blasphentatione : •* And you indeed shall lose nothing but words in this contention ; nor shall you gain any thing but anger from his blasphemy." How fitly may these words be apphed to the pre- tended reformers of our days ! who, when told of their abusing, corrupting, and misin- terpreting 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,

* Dr. St. Dr. T. Dr. S. Dr. T. Mr. W. &c.

PREFACE. XV

as Indeed men, endued with the spirit of sincerity and lionesty would have done ? No, they were so far from that, that Fulk, as much as in him hes, endeavours very obstinate- ly to defend them : and VVhitaker 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 ?"* 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 many innocent, and well-meaning people, are there in England, who liave scarce in all their hfe-time, ever heard any mention of a cathoUc, 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, idola- ters, 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 ? Is it then to be wondered at, that these so grossly deceived people should entertain a strange prejudice against religion, and a detestation of catholics ?

Whereas, if these bfind-folded people were once undeceived, and brought to under- stand, that all these monstrous scandals are falsely charged upon catholics ; that the catholic doctrine is so far from' idolatry, that it teaches quite the contrary, viz. That who- soever 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 idolater, and will be damned for the same ; that catholics are so far from thirsting after the blood of others, that, on the contrary, their doctrine teaches them, not only to love God above all, and their neighbour as themselves, but even to love their enemies. In short, so far different is the Roman catholic religion from what it is by protestants represented, that, on the contrary, faith, hope, and charity, are the three divine virtues it teaches us : pru- dence, 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 sjxd repaired. By the sacrament of baptism we are taught, that original sin is forgiven, and that the party baptized is regenerated, and born anew unto the mystical body of Christ, of which by baptism he is made a lively member : so like- wise by the sacrament of penance all our actual sins are forgiven ; the same holy Spirit of God working in this to the forgiveness of actual sin, that wrought before in the sacra- ment of baptism to the forgiveness of original sin. We are taught, likewise, that by partaking of Christ's very body, and his very blood, in the blessed sacrament of the Eucharist, we by a perfect union dwell in Him, and He in us ; and that as himself rose again for our justification, so we, at the day of judgment, shall in him receive a glorious 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 con- secrated by the holy sacrament of order, can consecrate and administer the holy sacra- ments.— This is our religion, this is the centre it tends to, and the sole end it aims at j which point, we are further taught, can never be gained but by a true faith, a firm hope, and a perfect charity.

To conclude, if, 1 say, thousands of well-meaning protestants understood this, as also that protestancy itself is nothing else but a mere imposture begun in England, main- tained and upheld by the wicked policy of self-interested statesmen ; and still continued by misrepresenting and ridiculing the catholic religion, by misinterpreting the holy Scriptures; yea, by falsifying, abusing, and, as will appear in this following treatise, by most abominably corrupting 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 wilfingly would they submit their understand- ings to the obedience of faith ? how earnestly would they embrace that rule of faith, which our blessed Saviour and his apostles, left us for our guide to salvation ? with what diligence would they bend all their studies, to learn the most wholesome and saving doc- trine of God's holy church ? In fine, if once enlightened with a true faith, and encouraged

* Whitaker, page 14.

XVI PREFACE.

with a firm hope, what zealous endeavours would they not use to acquire such virtues and Christian perfections, as might enflanie tliem with a perfect charity, which is the very ultimate and highest step to eternal felicity ? To which, may God of his infinite g'oodness, and tender mercy, through the merits and bitter death and passion of our dear 'saviour, Jesus Christ, bring us all. Amen.

THE

OF

PROTESTANT

TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE EXAMINED.

VjUR pretended reformers, having- squared and modelled to themselves a Faith, con- trary to the certain and direct Rule of apostolical traditio?i, delivered in God*s holy church, were forced to have recourse to the scripture, as their 07ily mle 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 (i. e. so many of them as she thinks fit to call so) of the Old and New Testament, is the rule of faith so far, that whatsoever is not read 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 doc- trines being- so far from being contained in the Holy Scripture, that they were directly opposite to it ; they were fain to seek out to themselves many other inventions ; amongst which, none was more generally practised, than the corrupting of the Holy Scripture by false and j&ar^ia/ 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 EngUsh Protestant translations, were so many, and so notorious, that Dr. Gregory Martin composed a whole book of them, in which he discovers the fraudulent shifts the translators were fain to make use of» in de- fence 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 acknoivledged by themselves to be corrupted, and of no credit : and when no copy at all could be found out to cloak their corruptions, then must the book or chapter of scripture contradicting them, be declared Apocryphal : and when that cannot be made probable, t'ley fall downright upon the Prophets and Apostles that wrote theiji, saying-. That they night, and did err, even after the coming of the Holy Ghost.* Thus Luther.f accused by Zuinglius for corrupting the word of God, had no way left to defend his impiety, bu: by impudently preferring himself, and his own spirit, before that of those who wrote the Holy Scriptures, saying, Be it that the church, Augustine and other doc- tors, also Peter and Paul, yea, an angel from heaven, teach otherwise, yet is my doctrine

* Vid. Supr.

t Tom. 5. Wittemb. fol. 290. & in Ep. ad Galat. cap. 1.

^ fllOTESTANT tRANSLAtlONS

such as sets forth God's glory, &c. Peter, the chief of the ApostlcB, lived and taugltt (extra verbum dei,) besides the word of God.

And against St. James's mentioning the sacrament of extreme unction :* But though, (says he,) this were the Epistle of James, I would answer, that it is not lawful for an apostle, by his authority, to institute a sacrament ; this appertains to Christ alone. As though that blessed Apostle would publish a sacrament without warrant from Christ ! Our churcJi 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 yet [viz. in the days of Gregory the Great,] unformed.f As though the apostle St. James had spoken he knew not what, wlicn he advised. That the sick should be, by the priests of the church, anointed with oil in the name of our Lord.

Nor was this Luther's, shift alone ; for all Protestants frjliow their first pretended re- former in this point, being 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 pei*suasion of James. +

Brentius also (whom Jewel terms a grave and learned father,) affirms, That St. Peter, the chief of the apostles, and also Barnabas, after tlie Holy Ghost received, together with the church of Jerusalem, en^ed.

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 150, he reprehends Peter and Barnabas, and others.

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 Lavatherusll 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.

This desperate shift being so necessar}', 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 for- mer century ; otherwise it must be said, that God's providence and promises were limited to few years, and Himself so partial, that he regards not the necessities of his chureh, nor the salvation of 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, T[ affirms. That St. Mark mistook Abiathar for Abimelech ; and St. Matthew, Hieremias for Zacharias. And Mr. Fulk against the llhemish Testament, in Galat. 2. fol. 322, charges Peter with error of ignorance against the gospel.

Dr. 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. And Whitaker says,f f It is evident, that even after Christ's ascension, and the Holy Ghost's descending 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, &.c. And these were great errors ; and yet Ve Si,ee these to have been in the apostles, even after the Holy Ghost descended upon tliem.

I'rai^stants to authorize their own errors andfaUibility, tvoxdd make the apostles themselves erroneoj^^and fallible. — Thus these fallible reformers, who, to countenance their corrup- tions of Scripture, grace their own errors, and authorize their church's fallibility^ would make the apostles themselves/a7Z/Afe ,• but, indeed, they need not to have goae this bold way to work, for we are satisfied, and can very easily believe their church tohQ fallible f their doctrines erroneous, and themselves corrupters of the Scriptures, witkout being forced to hold, that the apostles erred.

* De Capt. Babil. cap. de Extrem. Unct. Tom. 2. Wittemb. i

f See the second Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Chuijch of Eng- land, &c.

i Cent. 1.1.2. c. 10. col. 580.

§ Calvin in Galat. c. 2, v. 14, p. 511.

II Lavater. in Histor. Sacrament, page 18,

U Page 361.

** The second day's conference.

ft Whitaker de Eccles. ccintr. Bellar. Controvers. 2. q, 4, p, 223.

OF THE SCRIPTURES. 3

And truly, if, as they say, the apostles were not only fallible, but taught errors in manners, and matters of faith, after the Holy Ghost's descending* upon them, their wri- tings 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 pro- testant 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 intolerably abusing it, how little esteem and slight regard they have for the sacred Scripture ; though they make their ignorant flock believe, that, as they have translated it, and delivered it to them, it is the pure and infaUible word of God.

Before I come to particular examples of their falsifications and corruptions, let me ad- vertise my reader, that my intention is to make use only of such English translations, as are common, and well known in England even to this day, as being yet in many men's hands ; io wit, those Bibles printed in the years 1562, 1577, and 1579, in the beginning of queen Elizabeth's reign ; which I will confront with their last translation made in king James the first's reign, from the impression printed at London in the year 1683.

In all which said Bibles, I shall take notice sometimes of one translation, sometimes of another, as every one's falsehood shall give occasion : neither is it a good defence for the falsehood of one, that it is truly translated in another, the reader being deceived by any one, because commonly he reads but one ; yea, one of them is a condemnation of the other. And where the English corruptions, here noted, are not to be found in ona of the first three Bibles, let the reader look in another of them ; for if he find not the falsification in all, he will certainly find it in two, or at least one of them : and, in this case, I advertise the reader to be very circumspect, that ho think not, by and by, these are falsely charged, because there may be found perhaps some later edition, wherein the same error we noted, may be corrected ; for it is their common and known fashion, not only in their translations of the Bible, but in their other books and writings, to alter and change, add and put out, in their later editions, according as either themselves are ashamed of the 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 Vulgar Latin Bible, which has always been of so great authority in the church of God, and with all the ancient fathers,* as 1 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 ; so 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 Luther, who before had always read with the Catholic church, and with all antiquity, these words of St. Paul, Have not we power to lead about a woman, a sister, as also the rest of the apostles ?f And in St. Peter, these words. Labour, that by good worlcs, 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 : imme- diately, I say, after he fell into these heresies, he began to read and translate 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 vocation 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 they hold the self-same errors.

I would gladly know of our English protestant translators, whether they reject the Vulgar Latin text, (so generally liked and approved by all the primitive fathers) purely out of design to furnish us with a more sincere and simple version into English from the Greek, than they thought they could do from the Vulgar Latin ? If so, why do they not stick close to the Greek copy, which they pretend to translate, but (besides their cor- rupting of it) fly from it, and have recourse again to the Vulgar Latin, whenever it may seem to make more for their purpose : whence may be easily gathered, that their pretending to translate the Greek copy was not of any good and candid design, but rather, because they knew it was not so easy a matter for the ignorant to discover their false dealings from it as from the Latin ; and, also, because they might have the fairer

* See the preface of the Rheims New Testament, t 1 Cor. 9. V. 5. MuUerem Sororem.

^ 2 Pet. 1. ver. 10. Ut per bona opera certam vestram vocationem & electionem faciatis.

4 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

pretence for their turning and winding 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 Vulgar Latin translation, which had so long, and with so general a consent, been received and ap- proved in the church of God, and authorized by the general Council of Trent, for the only best and most authentic text.

Because therefore I find they will scarcely be able to justify their rejecting the Latin translation, unless they had dealt more sincerely with the Greek, I have, in the following work, set down the Latin text, (as well as the Greek word whereon their corruption de- pends ;) 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 corruptions.

The left-hand page I have divided Into four columns, (besides the Margin, in which I have noted the book, chapter, and verse.) In the first I have set down the text of Scripture from the Vulgar Latin edition, putting the word that their English Bibles have corrupted 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 EngUsh text from the Roman Catho- lic translation, made by the Divines of Rheims and Doway ; which is done so faithfully and candidly from the authentic Vulgar 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 trans- lation, 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 altered one syllable of 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 apos- tacy from the Catholic church, viz. from that bible which was translated in king Ed- ward 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 queen Eliza- beth's reign, when the church of England began to get footing, und to exercise domiuv ion over her fellow-sectaries, as well as to tyrannise 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 day to correct or alter them.

In the fourth column you find one of the last Impressions of their protestant Bible, viz. that printed at London by the assigns of John Bill deceased, and by Henry Hills and Thomas Newcomb, printers to the king's most excellent majesty, anno dom. 1683. In which Bible, wherever I find them to have corrected and amended the place cor- rupted in their former translations, 1 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 have been corrected in the lat- ter, it has not always been the effect of plain-dealing and sincerity ; for if such candid intention of amending former faults had everywhere 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, knowing that there are many, who are either not able, or at least nbt wIHing to go to the price of a great volume. And because my desire is to be beneficial to all, I have accom- modated it not only to the purse of the poorest, but also, (as near as possible) to the capacity of the most ignorant; for which reasons also, I have past by a great many learn- ed arguments brought by my author,* from the significations, etymologies, derivations, uses, &c. of the Greek and Hebrew words, as also from the comparing of places corrupt- ed, with other places rightly translated from the same word, in the same translation ;

* Dr. Mjirtin.

OF THE SCRIPTURES. S

with several other things, whereby he largely confutes their insincere and disingenuous proceedings : these, I say, I have omitted, not only for brevity sake, but also as things that could not be of any great benefit to tlie simple and unlearned reader.

As for others more learned, 1 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. Gre- gory Martin, entitled, A Discovery of the manifold Corruptions of the Holy Scriptures, &c. printed at Rheims, anno 1582, which is not hard to be fo\nid.

Have we not great cause to believe, that our Protestant divines do obstinately teach contrary to their own consciences ? J'or, (besides their having been reproved, without amendment, for their impious handling the Holy Scripture,) if their learning be so pro- found and bottomless, as themselves proudly boast in all their works, we cannot but con- clude, that they must needs both see their errors, and know the truth. And therefore, though we cannot always cry out of them, and their followers, [the bUud lead the bhnd,] yet, which is, alas ! a thousand times more miserable, we may justly exclaim, [those who see, lead the blind, till with themselves they fall into the ditch !]

As nothing has ever been worse resented by such as forsake God's holy chtirch, than to hear themselves branded with the general title of heretics ; so nothing has been ever more common among catholics, than justly to stigmatize such with the same infamous character. I am not ignorant, how ill the protestants of our days resent this term, and therefore do avoid, as much as the nature of this work will permit, the giving them the least disgust by this horrid appellation : nevertheless I must needs give them to under- stand, that the nature of the Holy Scripture is such, that whosoever do voluntarily cor- rupt and pervert it, to maintain their own erroneous doctrines, cannot lightly be charac- terized by a less infamous title, than that of heretics ; and their false versions by the title of heretical translations, under which denomination I have placed these following cor- ruptions.

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 contra- dictory 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 beheve ever so many false opinions against the truth of Christian faith, but yet not with obstinacy and pertinacity, he should err, but not be a heretic. Saint Augustin asserting,* That if any do defend their opinions, though false and perverse, with no ob- stinate animosity, but rather with all solicitude do seek the truth, and are ready to be corrected when they find the same, these men are not to be accounted for heretics, be- cause they have not any election of their own that contradicts the doctrine of the church. And in another place, against the Donatists :-j- Let us (says he) suppose some man to hold that of Christ at this day, 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 say that he is a heretic, unless when the doctrine of the church is made manifest unto him, he will rather choose to hold that which he held before, than yield thereunto.

Again, those, says he,:t: who in the church of Christ, hold infectious and perverse doc- trine, 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 heretics: by all which places of St. Augustin, we see thaterroj' without perimacity, and obstinacy against God's church, is no heresy. It would be well, therefore, if Protestants, in reading Cathohc books, would endeavour rather to inform themselves of the truth of Catholic doctrine, and humbly embrace the same, than to suflfer that prejudice against rehgion, in which they have unhappily been educated, so strongly to biass them, as to turn them from men barely educated in error, to obstinate heretics; such as the more to harden their own hearts, by how much the more clearly the doctrine of God's Holy church is demonstrated 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 un- doubtedly hurries them: St. Paul, in his epistle to Titus, affirming,^ that "a man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition, is subverted, and sinneth, being con- demned of his own judgment."

Whatever may be said, therefore, to excuse the ignorant, and such as are not obsti- nate, from that ignominious character; yet as for others, especially the leaders of these misguided people, they will scarcely be able to free themselves either from it, or escape the punishment due to such, so long as they thus wilfully demonstrate their pertinacity, rot only in their obstinately defending their erroneous doctrines in their disputes, ser-

* S. Aug. Ep. 162. f Lib. 4. contr. Donat. c. 6.

4 De Civit. Dei, lib. 18. c. 51. § Titus, cap. 3. ver. 10.

6 l»llOTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

mons, and writings ; but even in corrupting the Word of God, to force that sacred book to defend the same, and compel that divine volume tx) speak against such points of Ca- tholic doctrine as themselves are pleased to deny.

In what can a heretical intention more evidently appear, than in falsely translating and corrupting the Holy Bible, against the Catholic church, and such doctrines as it has, by an uninterrupted tradition, brought down to us from the apostles? as for example :

A^Inst the holy sacrifice of the altar 1

Against the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the eucharist 2

Against priests, and the power of priesthood • • • 3

Against the authority of bishops ••••••••••• •••.. 4

Against the sacred altar on which Christ's body and blood is offered 5

Against the sacrament of baptism 6

Against the sacrament of penance, and confession of sins 7

Against the sacrament of marriage 8

Against intercession of saints ..•• ...••. 9

Against sacred images •••.•••••.•••.•• •...••.•..< • lo

Against purgatory, hmbus patrum, and Christ's descent into hell 11

Against justification, and the possibility of keeping God's commandments 1^

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

faith alone is sufficient for salvation • T5

Against apostolical traditions *. •.••.•...••••....•..••. 16

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 abominable 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, He- brew, 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 truly, in places of controversy between them and us, they grossly falsify, 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 itself?

So also when in their translations they fly from the Hebrew or Greek to the Vulgate Latin, where those originals make against them, or not so much for their purpose, it is a manifest sign of wilful partiahty : 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 ywctlitA to signify wife, and not to signify wife, both against the virginity and chastity of Priests.

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 they do.

That their corruptions are voluntary and designedly done, is evident in such places where passives are turned into actives, and actives into passives , where participles are made to disagree in case from their substantives ; where solecisms are imagined when the construction is most agreeable ; and errors pretended to creep out of 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 hfce form and force : Example — if Ulcerosus be read full of sores, why must not Gratiosa be translated full of grace ?

When the words, images, shrines, procession, devotions, excommunications, &c. are used in ill part, where they are not in the original text; and the words hymns, grace,

OF THE SCRIPTURES. 7

Jnystery, sacrament, church, altar, priest, Catholic, justification, tradition, &.C. avoided and suppressed, where they are in the original, as if no such words were in the text : Is it not an apparent token ot'desig-n, and that it is done purposely to disgrace or suppress the said things and speeches.

Though Bcza ami Wiiitakcr made it a good rule to translate according to the usual signification, and not the original derivations of words ; yet, contrary to this rule, they translate idoluvty an image ; presbyter^ an elder ; diaconus, a minister ; episcopus, an over- seer, &c. Wlio sees not therefore but tliis is wilful partiality ?

If where the apostle names a pagan idolator, and a Christian idolator, by one and the same Greek word, in one and the same meaning ; and they translate the pagan, (idola- tor) and the Christian, (worshipper of images) by two distinct words, and in two divers meanings, it must needs be wilfully done.

No less appears it to be less designedly done,to translate one and the same Greek word [tirAfatSofic] Tradition, whensoever it may be taken for evil traditions ; and never so, when it is spoken oi' good and apostolical traditions.

So likewise when they 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 translated an author of sects .• This cannot be excused for voluntary corruption.

But why should I multiply examples, when it is evident from their own confessions and acknowledgments ? For instance, concerning /ms7*vc«t«, which the Vulgar Latin and and Erasmus translate, Agite Poenitentiam, 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 safis/acfoo?^, wherewith the church is troubled at this day.

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, Plhiy, Tully, Virgil, and Terence, and reject the ecclesiastical use of words in the Scriptures and Fathers ; which is Beza's usual custom, whom our English translators follow* But to note all their marks were too tedious a work, neither is it in this place necessary : These are sufficient to satisfy the impartial reader, that all those corruptions and falsifi- cations were not committed either through negligence, ignorance, over-sight, or mis- take, as perhaps they will be glad to pretend ; but designedly, wilfully, and of a mali- cious purpose and intention, to disgrace, dishonour, condemn, and suppress the churches catholic and apostolic doctrines and principles ; a,nd to favour, defend, and bolster-up their own new-devised errors and monstrous opinions. And Beza is not far from con- fessing 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 that translates word for word, but that expresses the sense : So it comes to pass, that whilst eveiy man will rather freely follow his own judgment, than be a religious inter- preter 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 dissembhng hypocrite in so saying, and a wilful heretic in so doing ?

Our quarrel with Protestant translators is not for trivial or slight faults, or for such verbal differences, or little escapes as may happen through the scarce-unavoidable mis- takes of the transcribers or printers : No ! we accuse them o^ ■wilfully corrupting and/a/- ^ifyi'ig the sacred text, against points of faith and manners.

We deny not that several immaterial faults and depravations may enter a translation, nor do we pretend that the Vulgate itself was free from such, before the correction of Sixtus V. and Clement VIII. which through the mistakes of printers, and, before print- ing, of transcribers, happened to several copies : So that a great many verbal differences, and lesser faults, were by learned men discovered in different copies :* (Not that any material corruption in points of faith were found in all copies ; for such God Almighty's providence, as protestants themselves confess, would never suffer to enter :) And in- deed these lesser depravations are not easily avoided, especiaily after several transcrip- tions of copies and impressions from the original, as we daily see in other books.

* See a book entitled, Reason and Religion, cap. 8. wKerethe Sixtine and Clementine Bibles are more fully treated of.

S PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

To amend and rectify such, the church (as you may read in the preface to the Slxtinc edition) has used the greatest industry imaginable. Pope Pius IV. caused not only the orig-inal languag-es, but other copies to be carefully examined : Pius V. prosecuted that laborious work: and by Sixtus V. it was finished, w4io commanded it to be put to the press, as appears by his bull, which begins, Eternus ille ccclestum, &,c. anno 1585. Yet, notwithstanding- the bull prefixed before his Bible (then printed) the same Pope Sixtus (as is seen in the preface made anno 1592) after diligent examination, found no few faults slipped into his impression by the negligence of the printers : And therefore Censuit at- que decrevit, both judg-ed and decreed to have the whole work examined and reprinted j but that second correction being prevented by his death, was (after the very short reign of three other popes) undertaken, and happily finished by his successor Clement VIII. answerable to the desire and absolute intention of his predecessor, Sixtus : Whence it is that the Vulgate now extant is called the correction of Sixtus, because this vigilant pope, notwithstanding the endeavours 'of his two predecessors, is said to have begun it, whicli 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 S.crip- ture, and is the very best corrected copy in the latin Vulgate.

And whereas pope Sixtus's bull enjoined that his Bible be read in all churches, with- out 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 o^ faith, unalterable , but may and ought to be changed according to the legislator's prudence. What I say here is indispu- table ; for how could pope Sixtus, after a sight of such faults as caused him to intend an- other impression, enjoin no alteration, when he desired one, which his successor did for him : So that if pope Sixtus had hved longer, he would as well have changed the breve as amended his impression.

And whereas there were sundry different lections of the Vulgar 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 determin- ing which reading was best, or to be preferred before others ; as knowing well, that the decision of such causes belongs to the public judicature and authority of the church. Pope Clement, therefore, omitting no human diligence, compared lection with lection ; and after 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 church, approved of by the see apostolic. And from this arises that villanous calumny and open slander of Dr. StiUingfleet ; who affirms, That the pope took where he pleased the marginal annotations in the Lovain Bible, and inserted them into the text : Whereas, (I say) he took not the annotations or commentaries of the Lovain doc- tors, but the different readings of Scripture found in several copies.

Mr. James makes a great deal of noise with his impertinent comparisons between these two editions, and that of Lovain : Yet among all his differences he finds not one contrariety in any material point o{ faith ov manners : and as for other differences, such as touch not faith and religion, arising from the expressions, being longer or shorter, less clear in the one, and more significant in the other ; or happening through the negligence of printers, they give him no manner of ground for his vain cavils ; especially seeing (I say) the Lovain Bible gave the different readings, without determining which was to be preferred ; and what faults were slipped into the Sixtine edition were by him observed, and a second correction designed, which in the Clementine edition was perfected, and one uniform reading approved of.

Against Thomas James's comparisons, read the learned James Gretser, who sufficient- ly discovers his untruths, with a Mentito tertio Thomas James decem milia verborum, &c. after which, judge whether he hits every thing he says; and whether the Vulgar Latin is to be corrected by the Lovain annotations, or these by the Vulgar, if any thing were amiss in either? In fine, whether, if Mr. James's pretended differences arise from comparing all with the Hebrew,Greek, and Chaldee, must we needs suppose him to know the last energy and force of every Hebrew, Greek, or Chaldee word (when there is con- troversy) better than the authors of the Lovain, and correctors of the Vulg-ar Latin [the Sixtine-Clementine edition.] Again, let us demand of him, whether all his differences imply any material alteration in faith or manners, or introduce any notable error, contrary to God's revealed verities : Or are rather mere verbal differences, grounded on the ob- scure signification of original words. In fine, if he, or any- for him, plead any material alteration, let them name any authentic copy, either original or translation ; by the in- disputable integrity >yhereof these supposed errors may be cancelled, uud God's pure re-

OF THE S'C^lPTURES. ,9

vealed verities put in their place. But to do this, after such i^nmense labour and diligence used in the correction of the Vulg-ar, will prove a desperate impossibility.*

Indeed Mr. James might have had 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,j- to maintain his heresy of faith alone justifying; and omits that verse,t [But if you do not forgive, neither will your father, which is in heaven, forgive your sins.] He also omits these words,§ [That you abstain from fornication :] And because the word Trinity sounded coldly with him, he left out this sentence,!! which is the only text in the Bible that can be brought to prove that great mystery, [There are three who bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.] Or if Mr. James had found such gross corruptions, as that of Zuinglius, when instead of our blessed Saviour's positive words [This is my body] he translates. This is a sign of my body, to avoid the doctrine of the real presence, or such as are hereafter discovered in Protestant English translations ; If, 1 say, he had met with such wilful and abominable corruptions as these, he might have had good cause of complaint ; but seeing the most he can make of all his painful 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 employed his time in correcting the gross and most intolerable corruptions of the Pro- testant translation, than to have busied himself about so unnecessary a work : But there are a certain sort of men, that had rather employ themselves in discovering imaginary 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- fore, the true church, and we know, by the authority of our undoubted testimony, the true Scripture ; for the infalUble testimony of the church is absolutely necessary for as- suring us of an authentic Scripture. And this I cannot see how Protestants can deny, especially when they seriously consider, that in matters of religion, it must needs be an unreasonable thing to endeavour to oblige any man to be tried by the Scriptures of a false religion : For who can in prudence require of a Christian to stand in debates of re- ligion to the decisions of the Scripture of the Turks, " the Alcoran ?" Doubtless, there- fore, 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 by the true church, unless we know which is the true church Pf

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 : For who would be tried by Scriptures understood in a wrong sense ? Now when contests arise between them and others of different judgments concerning the right meaning of it ; certainly they will not deny, but the judge to decide this debate must appertain to the true religion : For what Christian will apply himself to a Turk or Jew to decide matters belonging to Christianity ? Or who Would go to an atheist to determine matters of religion ?

In like manner, when they are forced to have recourse to the private spirit in reli- gious matters, doubtless they design not to appeal to the private spirit of an atheist, a Jew, or a heretic, but to the private spirit of such as are of the true religion : And is it possible for them to know certainly who are members of the true church ? Or what ap- pertains to the true rehgion, 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 true Scripture ; or of the right sense and true meaning of Scripture, unless he first come to a certainty of the true church. And of this opinion was the great St. Au- gustine, when he declared, that " he would not beheve the Gospel, if it was not that the authority of the Catholic church moved him to it :" Ego vero Evangelio non crederem, nisi me ecclesine Catholicce commoveret authoritas.**

* See the Preface to Sixtus V. edit. Antwerp, 1599. And Bib. Max. Sect. 19, 20. Se- rarius, c. 19.

t Rom. 3. 28. + Mark 11. 26. § 1 Thes. 4. 3. (| John 5. 7.

1 We must of necessity know the true church before we be certain either which is true Scripture, or which is the true sense of Scripture ; or by what spirit it is to be ex- pounded. And whether that church, which has continued visible in the world from Christ's time till this day, or that which was never known or heard of in the world tilt 1500 years after our Saviour, is the true chnrch, let the world judge,

** St. Aug. lib. contr .Epist. Manich. cap. 5.-

3

10 OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHALJ

OF THE CANONICAL BOOKS OF SCRIPTURE.

The Catholic church " setthig this always before her eyes, that, errors being removed, the very purity of the Gospel may be preserved in the church ; which being- promised before by the prophets, in the holy Scriptures, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, first published with his own mouth, and afterwards commanded to be preached to every creature, by the apostles, as the fountain of all the wholesome truth, and moral disci- pline contained in the written books, and in the traditions not written, &c. following- the example of the orthodox fathers, and affected with similar piety and reverence ; doth receive and honour all the books both of the Old and New Testament, seeing one God is the author of both,"* &c. These are the words of the sacred council of Trent i which further ordained, that 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 re- ceived by the council. They are these following, viz.

OF THE OLD TESTAMENT.

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

Joshua, Judges, Ruth.

Four of the Kings.

Two of Paralipomenon.

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

Tobias, Judith, Hester, Job, David's Psalter of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes^ Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Hieremias, with Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel.

Twelve lesser prophets ; that is, Osea, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Michaeas, Nahunij Abacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Malachias.

The first and second of the Maccabees.

OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Four Gospels, according to St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John.

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

Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul ; viz. to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Phihppians, to the Colossians, to the Thessalo- nians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews.

Two of St. Peter the Apostle.

Three of St. John the Apostle.

One of St. James the Apostle.

One of St. Jude the Apostle.

And the Apocalypse of St. John the Apostle.

To which catalogue of sacred books is adjoined this decree ;

But if any man shall not receive for sacred and canonical these whole books, with all their parts, as they are accustomed to be read in the CathoUc church, and as they are in the old Vulgar Latin edition, 8cc. be he anathema.

The third council of Carthagcf after having decreed. That nothing should be read in the church under the name of Divine Scriptures, but canonical Scriptures, says, That the canonical Scriptures are. Genesis, Exodus, Sec. so reckoning up all the very same books, and making particularly the same catalogue of them, with this recited out of the Council of Trent. St. Augustin, who was present at, and subscribed to this council, also numbers the same books as above ; Vid. Doctr. Christian. Lib. II. cap. 8.

Notwithstanding which, several of the said books are by the Protestants rejected as Apocryphal ; their reasons are, because they are not in the Jews canon, nor were ac- cepted 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

• Concil. Trident. Sess. 4. Decret. de Canonicis Scripturis. Mark, c. ult' t 3 Concil. Carthag. Can. 47,

OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. II

reject their authority ; as appears very plainly from these words of Mr. 'Whitaker's :* We pass not, says lie, for that Raphael mentioned in Tobit, neither acknowledge we these seven ang-els whereof he makes mention ; all that differs much from canonical Scripture, which is reported of that Raphael, and savours of I know not what supersti- tion. Neither will I believe freewill, although the book of Ecclesiasticus confirm it a hundred times. This denying of books to be canonical, because the Jews received them not, was also an old heretical shift, noted and refuted by St. Augustin,j- touching the Book of Wisdom ; 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 canon of the Jews ? Who sees not that the canon of the church of Christ is of more authority with true Christians, than that of the Jews ? For a canon is an assured rule and warrant of direction ; whereby, says St. Augustin, the infirmity of our defect in knowledge is guided, and by which rule other books are known to be God*s word : his reason is,4: 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. Whereupon the same great doctor uttered that famous say- ing, I would not believe the gospel, except the authority of the Catholic church moved me thereunto.

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

THE BOOK OF TOBIAS

Is by St. Cyprian, de Oratione Dominica, alleged as divine Scripture, to prove that prayer is good with fasting and alms. St. Ambrose^ calls this book by the common name of Scripture ; saying, He will briefly gather the virtues of Tobias, which the Scripture in historical manner lays forth at large : calling also this history Prophetical, and Tobias a prophet : and in another place,|| alleges this book as he does other holy Scriptures, to prove that the virtues of God's servants far excel the moral philosophers. St. Augustint made a special sermon of Tobias, as he did of Job. St. Chrysostome** alleges it as Scripture, denouncing a curse to the contemners of it. St. Gregoryj-j- also alleges it as holy Scripture. St. Bede expounds this whole book mystically, as he does other holy Scriptures. St. Hierom translated it out of the Chaldee language, judging it more meet to displease the pharisaical Jews who reject it, than not to satisfy the will of holy bishops, urging to have it. Ep. ad Chromat. & Heliodorum. To. 3. In fine, St. Augustin tells us the cause of its being written in these words, — The servant of God, holy Tobias, is given to us after the law, for an example, that we might know how to practise the things which we read. And if temptations come upon us, not to depart from the fear of God, nor expect help from any other than from him.

OF THE BOOK OF JUDITH.

This book was by Origen, Tertulhan, and other fathers, whom St. Hilary cites, held for canonical, before the first general council of Nice ;^t yet St. Hierom supposed it not so, till such time as he found that the said sacred council reckoned it in the number of canonical Scriptures ; after which he so esteemed it, that he not only translated it out of tlie Chaldee tongue, wherein it was first written, but also, as occasion required, cited the same as Divine Scripture, and sufficient to convince matters of faith in controversy, numbering it with other Scriptures, whereof none doubts, saying, Ruth, Hester, Judith, were of so great renown, that they gave names to sacred volumes. St. Ambrose, St. Augustin, St. Chrysostome, and many other holy fathers, account it for canonical Scripture.

* Whit. Contra Camp. p. 17.

f S. Aug. lib. de Praedest. Sanct. c. 14.

\ S. Aug. hb. 11. c. 5. contra Faustum, & lib. 2. c. 32. contra Cresconium.

§ S. Amb. lib. de Tobia. c. 1.

II Lib. 3. Offic. c. 14.

t S. Aug. Serm. 226. de Tern.

** S. Chrysost. Horn. 15. ad Heb.

ff S. Greg. part. 3. Pastor, curse admon. 21.

+t Sec the Argument in the Book of Judith in the Doway Bible, Tom, 1,

12 OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHALJ

PART OF THE BOOK OF HESTER.

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

OF THE BOOKS OF WISDOltf.

It is granted, that several of the ancient fathers would not urge these books of Wis- dom, 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 canonical : and so St. Hierom, in respect of the Jews, said these books were not canoni- cal ; nevertheless, he often alleged testimonies out of them, as of other divine Scrip- tures ; sometimes with this parenthesis (si cui tamen placet librum recipere) in cap. 8. and 12. Zacharix : but in his latter writings absolutely without any such restriction, as in cap. 1. and 56. Isaise, and in 18. Jeremise ; where he professes to allege none but canonical Scripture.-j' As for the other ancient fathers, namely, St. Irenacus, St. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, St. Athanasius, St. Basil, St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Gregory Nyssen, St. Epiphanius, St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, &c. they make no doubt at all of their being canonical Scripture, as appears by their express terms, " Divine Scripture, Divine Word, Sacred Letters, Prophetical Saying, the Holy Ghost saith, and the like." And St. Augustine affirms, that, " The sentence of the books of Wisdom ought not to be rejected by certain, inclining to pelagianism, which has so long been pubhcly 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 vene- ratione divinse authoritatis," with veneration of divine authority ? Which also the excel- lent writers, next to the apostle's times, alleging for witness, nihil se adhibere nisi divi- nam testimonium crediderunt, thought that they alleged nothing but divine testimony ."t

OF ECCLESIASTICUS,

What has been said of the foregoing book, may be said also of this. The holy fathers above named, and several others, as St. Cyprian, de opere & eleemosyna, St. Gregory the Great, in Psal. 50. It is also reckoned for canonical by the third council of Carthage, and by St. Augustine, in lib. 2. c. 8. Doct. Christian. & lib. 17. c. 20. Civit. Dei.

OF BARUCH, WITH THE EPISTLE OF JEREMY.

Many of the ancient fathers supposed this prophecy to be Jeremiah's, though none of them doubted but Baruch his scribe was the writer of it ; not but that the Holy Ghost directed him in it : and, therefore, by the fathers and councils, it has ever been accepted as divine Scripture. The council of Laodicea, in the last canon, expressly names Ba- ruch, Lamentations, and Jeremiah's Epistle. § * St- Hierom testifies, that he found it in liie 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.H It is by the councils of Florence and Trent expressly defined to be canonical Scripture.

♦Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 1.

f Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 2. And Jodoc. Coce. Tom. 1. Thesau. li. 6. Art. 9. ^ S. Aug. in lib. de Praedestinat. Sanct. cap. 14. Et lib. de Civit. Dei. 17. c. 20» § See the Argument of Baruch's Prophgcy in the Doway Bible, Tom. 2. II St. Hierom. in Prsefat. Jeremisc,

OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROfESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. 13

OF THE SONG OF THE THREE CHILDREN, THE IDOL, BELL AND DRAGON, WITH THE STORY OF SUSANNA.

It 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 sometime 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 Septuagint, Theodotion, Symmachus, and Aquila translate them ? In whose editions St. Hierom 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 sin- cerely what he found in the Hebrew : yet would he not omit to insert the rest, adver- tising 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 foi' this reputes me a fool, proves himself a sycophant ; for I did not write what myself judged, but what they are accus- tomed to say against me."*

The prayer of Azarias is alleged as divine Scripture by St. Cyprian, St. Ephrem, St. Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius, and others.f The Hymn of the Three Children is alleged for divine Scripture by divers holy fathers, as also by St. Hierom himself, in cap. 3. ad Gallatos & Epist. 49. de Muliere Septies icta; also, by St. Ambrose, and the council of Toledo, c. 13.

So hke wise the history of Susanna is cited for holy Scripture by St. Ignatius, Tertul- lian, St. Cyprian, St. Chrysostom, who in Horn. 7. fine, has a whole sermon on Susanna, as upon holy Scripture : St. Ambrose and St. Augustine cite the same also as canonical.

The history of Bell and the Dragon is judged to be divine Scripture ; St. Cyprian, St. Basil, 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, and of Bell and the Dragon.

OF THE TWO BOOKS OF MACCABEES.

Ever since the third council of Carthage, these two books of the Maccabees have been held for sacred and canonical by the Catholic church, as is proved by a council of seventy bishops, under pope Gelasius ; and by the sixth general council, in approving the third of 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,^ I will, besides these councils, refer you to the holy fathers, who hved before St. Gregory's days, and alleged these two books of the Maccabees as divine Scripture : namely, St. Clement Alexandrinus, Hb. 1. Stromat. St. Cyprian, hb. 1. Epistolarum Ep. 3. ad Cornehum, hb. 4. Ep. 1. & de Exhort, ad Marty- rium, c. 11. St. Isidorus, Hb. 16. c. 1. St. Gregory Nazianzen has also a whole oration concerning the seven Maccabee martyrs, and their mother. St. Ambrose, lib. 1. c. 41. Office. See in St. Hierom's Commentaries upon Daniel, c. 1. 11, and 12. in how great esteem he hj^d 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 hb. 2. c. 8. de Doctrina Christiana, & lib. 18. c. 36. de Civit. Dei, most' clearly avouches, that, " Notwithstanding the Jews deny these books, the church holds them canonical." And whereas, one Gaudentius, a heretic, alleged, for defense of his heresy, the example of Razias, who slew himself, 2 Mac. 14. St. Augustine denies not the authority of the book, but discusses the fact, and admonishes, that it is not unprofitaWy received by the church, " If it be read or lieard soberly," which was a necessary admo- nition to those donatists, who, not understanding the holy Scriptures, depraved them, as §tt. Peter^says of like heretics, to their own perdition, i^hich testimonies, I think, may be sufficient to satisfy auy one who is not pertinacious and obstinate, that these two

* S. Hier. hb. 2. c. 9. advers. Ruffinum. t Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 2.

+ See the S^con4 A^indicatioij of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of £nglund.

14 OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL.

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 fur- ther, and names eleven points of doctrine besides this, which he, with his fellows, quoted in his margin, falsely affirms not to have been taught in England by St. Augustine, the Benedictine monk, when he converted our nation ; telling us, " That the mystery of iniquity," as he blasphemously terms the doctrine of Christ's holy church, " was not then come to perfection." For first, says he, "The Scripture was yet received as a perfect rule of faith." Secondly, " The books of the Maccabees, which you now put in your 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 certainty 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. Elev- enthly, " That the sacrament of extreme unction was yet unformed." Then you must, with your master Luther, count St. James's 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 tliought it to be the forerunner of anti-christ 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 misapplies the words of St. Gregory the Great, to the deluding of his reader : whereas St. Gregory did not think it anti-christian 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 anti-christian 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 prede- cessors, and by himself, but terms it prophane, sacrilegious, and anti-christian ; and in this sense the bishops of Rome have always utterly renounced the title of universal bishop ; on the contrary, terming themselves servi servorum Dei. And this is proved from the words of Andrseus Friccius, a Protestant, whom Peter Martyr terms an excel- lent 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 anti-christ ; but the rea- son of Gregory is to be known, and may be gathered from his words, which he repeats in many epistles, that the title of universal bishop is contrary to, and doth gainsay 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, &c. But it is nevertheless evident by other places, that Gregory thought that the charge and principality of the whole church was committed to Peter, &c. And yet for this cause Gregory thought not that Peter was the forerunner of anti-christ."* 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 prove the bishop of Rome to have had and exercised a power and jurisdiction, not only over the Greek, but over the universal church. The Magdebur- gian centurists show us, that the Roman see appoints her watch over the whole world ; that the apostoUc see is head of all churches; that even Constantinople is subject to the apostolic see.-j- These centurists charge moreover the bishop of Rome, in the very example and person of pope Gregory, and by collection out of his writings, by them par- ticularly alleged, " That he challenged to himself power to command all archbishops, to ordain and depose bishops at his pleasure." And, " That he claimed a right to cite archbishops to declare their cause before him, when they were accused." And also, " To excommunicate and depose them, giving commission to their neighbour bishops to proceed 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."4: With much more, touching the exercise of his supremacy. To which doctor Saunders adds yet more out of St. Gregory's own works, and in his own words, as, " That the see apostolic, by the autho-

* Andrseas Friccius de ecclesia, 1. 2. t. 10. page 579, i: Vid. prseced. Notas.

t Centur. 6 Col. 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 438.

OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYf»HAL. 15

Tity of God, is preferred before all churches. That all bishops, if any fault be found in them, are subject to the see apostolic. That she is the head of faith, and of all the faithful members. That the see apostolic 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 schism to the Catholic church, is to return to the communion of the bishops of Rome. That he who will not have St. Peter, to whom the keys of heaven were committed, to shut him out from the entrance of life, must not in this world be separated from his see. That they are perverse men, who refuse to obey the see apos- toHc."*

Considering all these words of pope Gregory, does not this vindicator of the church of England's doctrine show himself a grand impostor, to offer to the abused ju4gment of his unlearned readers, an objection so frivolous and misapplied, by the advantage only of a naked, sounding resemblance of mistaken words ? To conclude, therefore, in the words of doctor Saunders : " He who reads all these particulars, and more of the same kind that are to be found in the works of St. Gregory, and 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 govern- ment of the whole militant church ; that man, says he, seems to me either to have cast off all understanding and sense of a man, or else to have put on the obstinate perverse- ness of the devil.*'f

It is not my business in this place, to digress into particular replies against his other false instances^^ 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 protest- ant bishop, against this protestant ministerial guide, and so submit them to the consider- ation of the judicious reader.

John Bale, a protestant bishop, affirms,^ that « The religion preached by St. Augus- tine to the Saxons was, altars, vestments, images, chalices, crosses, censers, holy vessels, holy waters, the sprinkling thereof, reliques, translation of reliques, dedicating of churches to the bones and ashes of saints, consecration of altars, chalices and corporals, consecration of the font of baptism, chrysm and oil, celebration of mass, the archiepis- copal 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."l| In another place he says, that " Pope Leo the first decreed, that men should worship the images of the dead, and allowed 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, reliquium pontificics s-uperstitionis chaos, even the whole chaos of popish super- stitions." He tells us, that " Pope Innocent, who lived long before St. Gregory's timgs made the anointing of the sick to be a sacrament."f

These are bishop Bale's words ; which this vindicator would do well to reconcile with his own. The fike may be found in other protestants; namely, in doctor Humfrey in Josuitismif part II. The centurists, &c.

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 these books, which protestants reject, to be canonical: yet, if a thousand times more were said, it would be all the same with the perverse innovators of our age, who are resolved to be obstinate, and, after their bold and licentious manner, to receive or reject what they please ; still following the steps of their first masters, who tore out of the Bible, some one book, some another, as they found them contrary to their erroneous and heretical opinions. For example :

Whereas Moses was the first that ever wrote any part of the Scripture, and he who wrote the law of God, the ten commandments ; yet Luther thus rejects both him and his ten commandments:** "We will neither hear nor see Moses, for he was given only to the Jews; neither does he belong in any thing to us." — "I," says he, "will not re- ceiveff Moses with his law ; for he is the enemy of Christ.''^:}: " Moses is the master of

* Dr. Saund. Visit. Monar. lib. 7. a N. 433. 541. f Dr. Saunders supra.

t You will find some of them hinted at in other places as occasion offers.

§ Bale in act. Rom. pontif. edit. Basil. 1658. p. 44, 45, 46y 47. & cent. I, Col. 2,

)i Pageant of popes, fol. 27. t lb. fol. 26.

** Tom. 3. Germ. fol. 40, 41. & in Colloq. Mensal. Ger. fol. 152, 153.

ft In Coloc. Mensal. c. de Lege & Evan.

n Ibid. fol. 118.

16 OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL.'

' all hangmen."* "The ten commandments belong not to Christians.*' "Let 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.'*-)-

Islebius, Luther's scholar, taught,t that *' the decalogue was not to be taught in the church :" and from him came§ 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 whore- monger, if an adulterer, or otherwise a sinner, believe, and thou walkest in the way of salvation. When thou art drowned in sin even to the bottom, if thou believest, thou art in the midst of happiness. All that busy themselves about Moses, that is, the ten commandments, belong to the devil, to the gallows with Moses."||

Martin Luther believes not all things to be so done, as they are related in the book of Job : with him it is, " as it were, the argument of a fable."t

Castalio commanded the Canticles of Solomon to be thrust out of the canon, as an im- pure and obscene song ; reviling, with bitter reproaches, such ministers as resisted him tsherein.**

Pomeran, a great evangelist among the Lutherans, writes thus touching St. James's 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."f-|-

Vitus Theodorus, a protestant preacher of Norimberg, writes thus : " The Epistle of James, and Apocalypse of John, we have of set purpose left out, because the Epistle of James is not only in certain places reprovable, 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.''^^:

The Magdeburgian centurists say, that " the Epistle of Jame« 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."|lll

Clebitius, an eminent protestant, opposes the evangelists one against another : " Mat- thew and Mark," says he, " deliver the contrary ; therefore to Matthew and Mark, bje- ing two witnesses, more credit is to be given than to one Luke,"f f &c.

Zuinglius and other protestants affirm, that " all things in St. Paul's epistles are not sacred ; and that in sundry things he erred."***

Mr. Rogers, the great labourer to our English convocation men, names several of his protestant brethren, who rejected for apocryphal the Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews, of St. James, the first and second of John, of Jude, and the Apocalypse. "fff

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

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

* Serm. de Mose. f In Convival. CoUoq. cited by Auri. faber, cap. de Lege.

i See Osiander ; Cent. 16. p. 311, 312, 320. § Sleidan Hist. 1. 12. fol. 162.

IJ Vid. Confessio. Mansiieldensium Ministrorum Tit. de Antinomis, fol. 89, 90. % In Serm. Convival. Tit. de Patriarch et Prophet, et Tit. de libris Vet. etNov. Test, ** Vid. Beza in Vita Calvini. f\ Pomeran. ad. Rom. c. 8.

n In Annot. in Nov. Test. pag. ult. §§* Cent. 1. 1. 2. c. 4. Col. 54.

ill! Inst. 1. 2. c. 26. In Matth. 27. Harm, in Matt. 20. 16. ^TI Victoria veritatis et ruina Papatus, Arg. 5. *** Tom. 2. Elench. f. 10. Magdeburg. Cent. 1. 1. 2. c. 10. Col. 580. tit Defence of the 39 Articles, Art. 6.

i^^ The private Spirit, not the church, told those protestants who made the 39 arti- cles, what books of Scripture they were to hold for canonical.

JOF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA. 17

OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA.

The church of England has decreed,* that " such are to be understood canonical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority there was never any doubt iu the church :" and, therefore, by this rule she rejects these for apocryphal, viz. Tobit. Baruch, with the Epistle of Jere- Maccabees L

Judith. miah. Maccabees II.

The rest of Esther. The Song of the Three Children. Manasseth, Prayer of.

Wisdom. The Idol, Bell and the Dragon. Esdras III.

Ecclesiasticus. The Story of Susanna. Esdras IV.f

But if none pass for canonical, but such as were never doubted of in the church, I would know why the church of England admits of such books of the New Testament as have formerly been doubted of? " Some ancient writers doubted of the last chapter of St. Mark's Gospel :t others of some part of the 22d of St. Luke :§ some of the begin- ning of the 8th of St. John: || others of the Epistle to the Hebrews :% and others of the Epistles of St. James, Jude, the second of Peter, the second and third of John, and the Apocalypse."**

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 of Arabia : " Will you hence conclude," says this doctor, '* that these parts of Scripture, were not apostolic, or that we need not to receive them now, because they were for- merly doubted of?" Thus Doctor Bilson.ff

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,"+i: &c.

And, by Mr. Rogers's and the church of England's leave, so were also those books which they call apocrypha. J or 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. Rogers'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."§§ Vide third council of Car- thage, 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. Augustine subscribed, who,||i| with St. Innocent, *llt Gelasius, and other ancient writers, number the said books in the canon of the Scripture. And protestatits themselves con- fess, they were received in the number of canonical Scriptures.***

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, "fj-}-

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."Ht

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 Holy Ghost. §§§ And Jewel says, "the church of God has the spirit of wisdom to discern true Scripture from false."||||||

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 ac- cursed."^ f^

* In the 6th of the 39 Articles, f The three last are not numbered in the canon of the Scripture. i See St. Hierom Epist. ad Hed. q. 3. § St. Hilar. 1. 10. de Trin. et Hierom. 1. 2. contr. Pelagian. || Euseb. H. 1. 3. c. 39. t Id. 1. 3. c. 3. ** Et c. 25, 28. Hierom divinis Illust. in P. Jac. Jud. Pet. et Joan, et Ep. ad Dardan. if Sur- vey of Christ. SuflT. p. 664. Vid. 1st and 4th days Confer, in the Tower, anno 1581,

n Def. of the 39 Articles, p. 31, Art. 6. 'I^ Third council of Carthage, Can. 47.

lill De Doct. Christian. 1. 2. c. 8. tt Epist. ad. Exuper. c. 7. *** Tom. 1. Cone* Decret. cum 70 Episcop. fff Brentius Apol. Conf. Wit. Bucers scripta Ang. p. 713.

Ui Covel cont. Burg. p. 76, 77y et78. §§§ Fulk An. to a Countr. Cathol. p. 5.

liilll Jewel Def. of the Apol. p. 201. ttif Concil. Trid. Sess. 4. Deer, de Can. Scrip.

3

18

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST THE CHURCH.

The Book, Chapter, and Ver.

St. Matth. chapt. 16,

verse 18.

St. Matth. chapt. 18. verse 17.

Ephesians, ch. 5, ver.

23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 32.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Hebreus, c. 2. V. 23.

Canticles, ch. 6. V. 8.

Ephesians, ch. 1. ver. 22, 23.

Et ego dico tibi, quia tu es Petrus^ et super hanc Pe- tram adificabo ec- cleslam meam, (a* tm uutknarlnv .(a)

Quod si non au- dierit eosy die ec- clesiae hcKXHvU si autem eccle- siam txxx»0-/st; non audierity sit tibi sicut Ethnicus et Publicanus.

Viri diligite ux- ores vestrasy sicut et Christus dilexit ecclesiam.

Ut exhiberet ipsi sibi gloriosam ec- clesiam.

Sacramentum hoc est magnum; ego autem dico in Christo et eccle- sia iMxht^vm.

jE/ ecclesiam />ri. mitivorum aucx«crk.

The true English according to the Rhemish trans- lation.

Una est Colum- ba mea. nnN wia. (6)

Et ipsum dedit caput supra om- nem ecclesiam qua est corpus ipsius, et plenitudo ejus, qui omnia in omni- bus adimpletur a*

5T\»/M</««V».(c)

Corruptions in the protestant Bi- bles, printed A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

And I say to thee, that thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my* church.'

And if he will not hear them, tell the " church ;" and if he will not hear the "church," let him be as a heathen, and as a publican.

Husbands lave your wives, as Christ loved the '* church," V. 25.

That he might present to him- self a glorious « church," V. 27. For this is a great "sacrament;" but I speak in Christ, and in the " church," V. 32, &c.

And the " church" of the First-born.

My dove is one."

And hath made him head over all the « church," which is his body, the fulness of him « which is filled," all in all.

The last transla- tion of the pro- testant Bible, Edit. London, anno 1683.

Instead of church, they trans- late " congrega- tion."— Upon this rock will I build my " congrega- tion."(o)

If he will not hear them, tell the " congregation ;" and if he will not hear the " congre- tion,"Scc.

Husbands love your wives, as Christ loved the " congregation."

That he might present to himself a glorious " con- gregation."

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

And the " con- gregation" of the First-born.

My dove is " alone."(6)

And gave him to be the head over all things to the " congrega- tion," which is his body, the fulness of him « that fiU- eth"allinall.(0

It is corrected in this last trans- lation.

Corrected.

Corrected.

Corrected.

Corrected.

Corrected.

My dove is "but one."

And gave him to be the head over all things to the "church." which is his bo- dy, the fulness ofhim "that fill- leth" all in aU. .

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST THE CHUROH. 19

Thk two English Bibles,* usually read in the Protestant congregations, at their first rising up, left out the word Catholic in the title of those epistles, whith have been known by the name of Catholicx Epistolae, ever since the apostle's time :f and their lat- ter translations, dealing somewhat more honestly, have turned the word Catholic into *' general," saying, " the general Epistle 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 says, that the manner was in cities, where there was liberty of religion, to ask, qua itur ad Catholicam ? we must translate it, which is the way to the general ? And when St. Hierom says, if we agree in faith with the bishop of Rome, ergo Catholici sumus ; we must translate, " then we are generals." Is not this good stuff?

(a) And as they suppress the name Catholic, even so did they, in their first English Bible, the name of church itself:^ because at their first revolt and apostacy from that church, which was universally known to be the only true Catholic church, it was a great objection against their schismatical proceedings, and stuck so much in the people's consciences, that they left and forsook the church, and the church condemned them : to obviate which, in the English translation of 1562, they so totally suppressed the word church, that it is not once to be found in all that Bible, so long read in their con- gregations ; because, knowing themselves not to be the church, 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 hurch from the earth, as it was to blot the word out of their Bible, they would have evented its " continuing to the end of the world."

Another cause for their suppressing the name church was, " that it should never

jund in the common people's ears out of the Scriptures," and that it might seem to

the ignorant a good argument against the authority of the church, to say, ** we find not

this word church in all the Bible :" as in other articles, where they find not the express

words in tlie 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, the 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 Jerusalem, the city of the Uving God, &c. So that by this translation there is no longer any church militant and triumphant, but only congregation ; in which, they contradict St. Augustine, who affirms, that "though the Jewish congregation was some- times called a church, yet the apostles never called the church a congregation." But their last translation having restored the word church, I shall say no more of it in this place. {b) 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 mea ;" that is, " One is my dove," 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 contrary, as properly signifies one, as U71US doth in Latin. But this is also amended in their last translation.

(c) 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, therefore, because they will have it, that Christ may be without his church, to wit, a head without a body,§ they falsify this place in the Epistle to the Eph. c. 11. V. 22, 33. translating, " He gave him to be the Head over all Uiings to the church," congregation with them, '* which (church) is his body, the fulness of him that filleth all in all." Here they translate actively the Greek word t« 'vrKupHfAtvUf when, ac- cording to St. Chrysostom, and all the Greek and Latin doctors' interpretations, it ought to be translated passively ; so that instead of saying, " and filleth all in all," they should say, " the fulness of him which is filled all in all;" all faithful men as members, and the whole church as the body, concurring to the fulness of Christ the head. But thus they will not translate, " because," says Beza, " Christ needs no such compliment." And if he need it not, then he may be without a church ; and, consequently, it is no absurdity, if the church has been for many years not only invisible, but also " not at all." Would a man easily imagine, that such secret poison could lurk in their translations ? Thus they deal with the church ; let us now see how they use particular points of doctrine.

• Bib. 1562, 1577. fEuseb. Hist. Eccles. lib. 2. c.23. in fine. + Bible printed an. 1562. § Protestants will have Christ to be a head without a body, during iUl tbftt time tliat their congregation was invisible, viz. about 1500 year%,

20

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAII^ST THE BLESSED SACRAMENT,

The Book, Chapter, and Ver.

St. Matth. chapt. 26. verse 26.

St. Mark, chapt. 14. verse 22.

Acts Apos. chapt. 3. verse 21.

Jeremiah, chapt. 11. Terse 19.

Genesis, chapt. 14. verse 18.

The Vulgute Latin Text.

Jlccepit Jesus pa- nem et benedix- it, Kcti ivKoyiio-<ti, ac /regit deditgue,

Accepit Jesus pa- nem et benedi- cens, KoCt ivxoyiitrsti,

Quern oportet gui- de m ccelum susci- pere usgue in temp or a restitu- tionis omnium, oy

(0

JMittamus lignum in panem ejus.{d)

Jit vero Melchi- zedek rex Salem, proferens paiiem et vinum ei^at enim sacerdosDei altis- simi,{e)

The true English according to the Rhemish trans- lation.

Jesus took bread and " blessed,"and brake, and gave to his disciples. .

Jesus took bread, and " bless- ing," &c.

Whom heaven truly must " re- ceive,** until the times of the res- titution of all things.

Let us cast wood upon his bread.

And Melchize- dek, king of Sa- lem, brought forth bread and wine ; " for he was the priest of God most high.**

Corruptions in the Protestant Bi- bles, printed A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

Instead of " blessed,'* they translate, " and when he had given thanks."(a)

Instead of bless- ing, they say, " and when he had given thanks.**(6)

Instead of re- ceive, they say, whom heaven must " contain.** And Beza, " who must be contained in heaven.**(c)

"We will de- stroy his meat with wood.*' In another Bible, "Let us de- stroy the tree with thefruit."(d)

Instead of " for he was the priest," they translate, " and he was the priest," &c.

The last transta- lation of the Protestant Bi- ble, Edit. Lon- don,annol683.

Corrected.

Corrected.

Corrected.

Let us destroy the tree with the fruit thereof.

Instead of "for," they translate « and.''

AND SACRIFICE OF THE »f ASS. 2 L

faj The turning of blessing into bare thanksgiving, was one of the first steps of our pretended refornners, towards denying the real presence. By endeavouring to take away the operation 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 iu translating thanksgiving for blessing, but also in urging the word eucharist, to prove it a mere thanksgiving ; though we find the verb wx<*i*Titv used also transitively by the Greek Fathers, saying, t6v afTov «i/;t6eg;s-»6«v7se, panem & chalicem eucharistisatos ; or, panem, in quo gratise acta: sunt ; that is, " The bread and cup made the eucharist ;" " The bread over which thanks are given ;" that is, " Which, by the word of prayer and thanksgiv- ing is made a consecrated meat, the flesh and blood of Christ."* St. Paul also, speak- ing of this sacrament, calls it, (I Cor. 10.) "The chalice of benediction, which we do bless ;" which St. Cyprian thus expUcates, " The chalice consecrated by solemn bless- ing." St. Basil and St. Chrysostom, in their liturgies, say thus, " Bless, O Lord, the sa- cred bread ;" and " Bless, O Lord, the sacred cup, changing it by thy holy spirit ;" where a^e signified the consecration and transmutation thereof into the body and blood of Christ,

CbJ And, by this corrupt translation, they would have Christ so included in Heaven, tha\ he cannot be with us upon the altar. Beza confesses, " That he translates it thus. On purpose to keep Christ's presence from the altar ;" which is so far from the Greek, that not only Illyricus, but even Calvin himself dislikes it. And you may easily judge, how contrary to St. Chrysostom it is, who tells us, " That Christ ascending into 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 protestant faith, which believes no farther than that he is ascended ; and that ttierefore he cannot be present upon the altar, nor dispose of his body as he pleases ? If we should ask them, whether he was also in Heaven, when he appeared to Saul going to Damascus ; or whether he can be both in heaven, and with his church on earth, to the end of the world, as he promised; perhaps, by this doctrine of theirs, they would be put to a stand, fcj

Consider further, how plain our Saviour's words, " This is my body,'* are for the real presence of his body : and for the real presence of his blood in the chalice, what can be more plainly spoken, than — ** This is the chalice, the new testament in my blood, which chahce is shed for you : ^ According to the Greek to <nro'r»ptov to ix.xmoy.mov the word *' which" must needs be referred to the chalice ; in which speech chalice cannot other- wise be taken, than for that in the chalice ; which sure, must needs be the blood of Christ, and not wine, because his blood only was shed for us ; according to St. Chrysos- tom, who says, " That which is in the chalice is the same which gushed out of his side."§ And this deduction so troubled Beza, that he exclaims against all the Greek copies in the world, as corrupted in this place,

CclJ " Let us cast wood upon his bread ;" that is, saith St. Hierom,!| " The cross up- on the body of our Saviour ; for it is he that said, I am the bread that descended from Heaven." Where the prophet so long before, saying bread, and meaning his body, al- ludes 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 put the cross upon his bread ;" that is, upon his very natural body that hung on the cross. It is evident, that the Hebrew verb is not now the same with that which the seventy interpreters translated into Greek, and St. Hierom into Latin ; but altered, as may be supposed, by the Jews, to obscure this prophecy of their crucifying Christ upon the cross. And though protestants will weeds take the advantage of this corruption, yet so httle does the Hebrew word, that now is, agree with the words following, that they cannot so translate it, as to make any cornmodious sense or understanding of it ; as appears by their diff'erent translations, and their transposing their words in English, otherwise than they are in the Hebrew.t

CeJ If protestants should grant Melchizedeck's typical sacrifice of bread and wincj then would follow also, a sacrifice of the New Testament ; which, to avoid, they pur- posely translate " and" in this place ; when, in other places, the same Hebrew particle waw, they translate enimy for ; not being ignorant, that it is in those, as in this place, bet- ter expressed by for or because, than by and. See the eixposition of the fathers upon it/*

* St. Justin in fine. 2 Apolog. St. Irenaeus, lib. 4. 34, f Hom. 2. ad popul. Antiocb, lib. 3. de Sacerdotio. \ Luke 22, v. 20. § St. Chrysost. in 1 Cor. cap. 10. Horn. 24. B St. Hierom. in com. in cap. 11. vers. 19. Hierem Prophetx. % Genes, 20. v. 3. Gen, 30. v. 27. Isaiah, 64. v. 5. ♦* St. Cypr. Epist. 63. Epiphaii, Hxr. 55 and 79, St. Hie- rom. in Matth. 26 & in Epist. ad Evagrium,

22

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book, Chapter, and Ver.

Proverbs, chap. 9. ver. 5.

Proverbs, chap. 9. ver. J.

1 Corinth, chap. 11. ver. 2r.

1 Corinth, chap, 9. ver. 13.

1 Corinth, chap. 10. ver. 18.

Daniel, chap. 14. ver. 12,

Etver. 17.

Et etiam vers. 20.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Venite comedite panem meum, & bibite vinum guod miscui vobit. iutxi- pttKo. ^DO fa J

Immolavit victi- mas auas, miscuit vinum. 'itufcts-tvCbJ

Itaque quicun- que manducaverit panem hunc vel n biberit calicem do- mini indigncy &c.

CO

Et qui altari de- serviunt cum alta- ri participant. 6ur-

CdJ

JVonne qui eduni hostias participes sunt altaris. flwc-/-

Quiafecerant sub mensa absconditum introitum. Toa^rt^ct

CfJ

Intuitus rex men. sam.

Et consumebant quae erant super mensam.

The true English according to the Rhemish trans- lation.

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

She hath immo- lated her hostSjShe hath " mingled" her wine.

Therefore, who- soever shall eat this bread, "or** drink the chalice of our Lord un- worthily, &c.

And they that serve the altar, participate with the altar.

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

For they had made a privy en- trance under the ♦• table.**

The king holding the ble.'*

be- 'ta-

And they did consume the things which were upon th§ " table.**

Corruptions in the protestant Bi- ble, printed A. D. 1562, 1577,

1579.

The corruption is. Drink the wine which I have " drawn** ;'* in- stead of " min- gled.'* CaJ

She hath«drawn** her wine, fbj

Instead of altar, they ' translate " temple.** f rfj

Partakers of the temple.'* fej

For, under the table, they say un- der the " altar.*

CO

The king be- holding the " al- tar.**

Which was up- on the " altar.**

The last trans- lation of the protestant Bi- ble, edit. Lon- don, an. 1683.

Come eat of my bread, and drink of the wine which I have " ming- led.'*

She hath kill- ed her beasts ; she hath ming- led her wine.

Wherefore, whosoever shall eat this bread and drink this cup of the Lord unworthily, &c.

Corrected,

Corrected.

The two last chapters they call apocrypha.

THE B. SACRAMENT AND THE ALTAR. 23

^a, bj Thesjb prophetical words of Solomon are of g^eat importance, as being a mani- fest prophecy of Christ's mingling water and wine in the chalice at his last supper; which, at this day, the catholic church observes : but protestants, counting it an idle ceremony, frame their translation accordingly ; suppressing altogether this mixture or mingling, contrary to the true interpetwition both of the Greek and Hebrew; as also, contrary to the ancient fathers' exposition of this place. " The Holy Ghost (says St. Cyprian) by Solomon, foreshoweth a type of our Lord's sacrifice, of the immolated host of bread and wine ; saying, Wisdom hath killed her hosts, she hath mingled her wine into the cup. Come ye, eat my bread, and drink the wine that 1 have mingled for you."* Speaking of wine mingled, (saith this holy doctor) he foresheweth prophetically, the cup of our Lord mingled with water and wine.f St. Justin, from the same Greek word, calls it, KfifABL; tliat is, (accordrng to Plutarch) Wine mingled with water: so likewise does St. Irenaeus^ See also the sixth general council,§ treating largely hereof, and deducing it from the apostles and ancient fathers ; and interpreting this Greek word by another equivalent, and more plainly signifying this mixture, viz. /miyvtivui.

fcj In this place, they very falsely translate And, instead of Or, contrary both to the Greek and Latin. And this they do on purpose, to infer a necessity of communicating under both kinds, as the conjunctive And may seem to do : whereas, by the disjunctive Or it is evident, that we may communicate in one kind only ; as was, in divers cases, the practice of the primitive church ; as alsoof the apostles themselves, (Act. 2. 42.|& 20. 7.)

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

In the primitive times, « It was the custom to administer the blood only to children,'* as St. Cyprian tells us : and, both he and TertuUian say, " That it was their practice, most commonly, to reserve the body of Christ :" which, as Eusebius witnesses, " They were wont to give alone to sick people, for their Viaticum." Also, *• The holy hermits in the wilderness, commonly received and reserved the blessed body alone, and not the blood," as St. Basil tells us.

For whole Christ is really present, under either kind, as protestants themselves have confessed ; read their words in .Hospinian,** a protestant, who affirms, " That they be- lieved and confessed whole Christ to be really present, exhibited and received under either kind : and therefore under the only form of bread : neither did they judge those to do evil, who communicated under one kind." And Luther, as alleged by Hospinian.f f says, " That it is not needful to give both kinds ; but as one alone sufficeth, the church has power of ordaining only one, and the people ought to be content therewith, if it be ordained by the church." Whence it is granted, that, " it is lawful for the church of God, upon just occasions, absolutely to determine or limit the use thereof."

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

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

• Ep. 63. 2. f Apol. 2. in fine. \ St. Irenaeus lib. 5. prop. Init. § Concil. Constan- tinop. 6. Can. 32. |1 Luke 24. ver. 30. lib. 3. de Consensu. \ Hier. Epitaph. Paulac. Beda. Theophylact. St. Cyprian. 1. de lapsis, n. 10. Tertul. 1. 2. ad Ux. n. 4. Euseb. Eccl. Hist. 1. 6. c. 36. St. Basil, Ep. ad Caesariam Patritiam. •• Hospin. Hist. Sacram. P. 2. Fol. 112. tt lb. Fol. 12. t* 1 Cor. 10. ver. 21.

24

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book, Chapter, and Ver.

Acts Apos. chap. 15. ver. 2.

Titus, chap. 1. ver. 5.

1 Timoth. chap. 5. ver. 17.

1 Timoth. chap. 5. ver. 19.

St. James, chap. 5. ver. 14.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Statuerunt ut as- cenderent Paulas & Barnabas, & qitidam alii ex aliis ad aposiolos & presbyteros Trpta-- l^unpift in Jerusa- lerrii &c.

Hujtis ret gratia reliqui te Cretie, ut ea qua desunt cor- rigas, & constituas per civitates pres- byteros, stent & ego disposui tibi.

Qui bene pr<e sunt presbyteri, dvplici honore digni habe- antur.

Adversus pres- byterum accusati- onem noli recipere, &c.

Injirmatnr quis in vobis ? inducat presbyteros eccle- siae, & orent super eum.

The true Enghsh according- to the Rhetnish trans- lation.

They appointed that Paul and Bar- nabas should go up, and certain others of the rest, to the apostles and "priests" unto Je- rusalem.

For this cause left I thee in Crete that thou shouldst reform the things tiiat are wanting, and shouldst or- dain " priests" by cities, as I also ap- pointed thee.

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

Against a " priest" receive not accusation, &.C.

Is any man sick among you ? let him bring in the " priests" of the church, and let them pray over him.

Corruptions in the protestant Bi- bles, printed A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

Instead of " priests," they translate "elders."

Instead of " priests," they translate "elders."

The elders that rule well, 8cc.

Against an " el- der" receive not accusation, 8iC.

Let

him bring in the " elders" of the " congregation," 8cc.

The last transla- tion of the pro- testant Bible, edit. London, anno. 1683.

For " priests," they say here also "elders."

For " priests** they say elders.

" Elders" also in this Bible.

Instead of *♦ priest" they put " elder."

Elders for "priests" here also.

PRIESTS AND PRIESTHOOD. 25

S-r. Augustine affirms, That in the divine Scripture several sacrifices are mentioned, some before the manifestation of the New Testament, &c. and another now, which is agreeable to this manifestation, &c. and which is demonstrated not only from the evan- gehcal, but also from the prophetical writings."* A truth most certain ; our sacrifice of tJie New Testament being most clearly proved from the sacrifice of Melchizedek in the Old Testament, of whom, and whose sacrifice, it is said, *• But Melchizedek, king of Sa- lem, brought forth bread and wine ; for he was the priest of God most high, and he bles- sed him," &c. And to make the figure agree to the thing figured, and the truth to an- swer the figure of Christ, it is said, « Our Lord hath sworn, and it shall not repent him : Ihou art a priest for ever, according to the order of Melchizedek." In the New Testa- ment, Jesus is made a ♦ high priest, according to the order of Melchizedek.* " For ac- cording to the similitude of Melchizedek, there arises another priest— who continues for ever^ and has an everlasting priesthood." Whence it is clearly proved, that Melchize- dek was a priest, and offered bread and wine as a sacrifice ; therein prefiguring Christ 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 holy sacrifice of the mass, did not only take away the word altar out of the Scripture, but they also suppressed the name priest in all their translations, turning- it into elder ;f well knowing that these three, priest, sacrifice, and altar, are dependents and consequents one of another ; so that they cannot be separated. If there be an external sacrifice, there must be an external priest- hood to offer it, and an altar to offer the same upon. So Christ himself being a priest, according to the order of Melchizedek, had a sacrifice, ** his body;" and an altar, "his cross," on which he offered it. And because he instituted this sacrifice, to continue in his church for ever, in commemoration and representation of his death, therefore did he or- dain his apostles priests, at his last supper ; where and when he instituted the holy or- der of priesthood or priests, (saying Hoc facite, " Do this,") to offer the self-same sacrifice in a mystical and unbloody manner, until the world's end.

But our new pretended reformers have made the Scriptures quite dumb, as to the name of any such priest or priesthood as we now speak of; never so much as once nam- ing priest, unless when mention is made either of the priests of the Jews, or tlie priests of the Gentiles, especially when such are reprehended or blamed in the holy Scripture; and in such places they are sure to name priests in their translations, on purpose to make the very name of priests odious among the common ignorant people.— Again, they have also the name priests, when they are taken for all manner of men, women, or children, that offer internal and spiritual sacrifices ; whereby they would falsely signify, that there are no other priests in the law of grace. As Whitaker,^ one of their great champions, freely avouches, directly contrary to St. Augustine, who, in one brief sen- tence, distinguishes priests, properly so called in the church ; and priests, as it is a common name to all Christians. This name then of priest and priesthood, properly so called, as St, Augustine says, they wholly suppress; never translating tlie word presbyte- ros, " priests;" but " elders ;'* and that with so full and general consent in all their EngUsh Bibles, that, as the puritans plainly confess, and Mr. Whitgift denies it not, a man would wonder to see how careful they are, that the people may not once hear of tne name of any such priest in all the holy Scriptures : and even in their latter transla- tions, though they are ashamed of the word " eldership," yet they have not the power to put the English word priesthood, as they ought to do, in the text, that the vulgar may understand it, but rather the Greek word presbytery : such are the poor shifts they aie glad to make use of.

So blinded were these innovators with heresy, that they could not see how the holy Scriptures, the Fathers, and ecclesiastical custom, have drawn several words from their profane and common signification, to a more peculiar and ecclesiastical one ; as episco- pus, which in Tully is an " overseer," is a bishop in the New Testament ; so the Greek word ;^6/po7cve/i', signifying *' ordain," they translate as profanely as if they were translating Demosthenes, or the laws of Athens, rather than the holy Scriptures, when, as St. Hie rom tells them,§ it slgnlfieth clericorum ordinationem ; tjiat is " Giving of holy orders, which is done not only by prayer of the voice, but by imposition of the hand," according to St Paul to Timothy, " Impose hands suddenly on no man," that is, " Be not hasty to give holy orders." In like manner, they translate minister for deacon, ambassador for apostle, messenger for angel, &c. leaving, I say, the ecclesiastical use of the word for the original signification.

* St. August. Ep. 49. q. 3. f Psal. 110. ver. 4. Heb. 6. ver. 20. and chap. 7. ver. 15, 17, 24. + Whitaker, pag. 199. St. Aug. Ub. 20. de Civit. Dei, cap. 10. See the puritan's reply, pag. 159. And \Vhltgift's Defence against the Tui-ilans, pag. 722. § St. Hierom, in cap. 58. Jisai.

4

26

The Book, Chapter, and Ver.

Acts Apos. chap. 14. ver. 22.

-1 Timoth. chap. 4. ver. 14.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

2 Timoth. chap. 1. ver. 6.

1 Timoth. chap. 3. ver. 8.

Et ver. 12.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

(a) Et cum con- stituissent [x^'P°- TovwVavTSf] illis per singulas ecclesias presbyteros.

(6) JN'oli negli- gere gratiam [;^«t- /j/ff-^rtTof] qu(B in te est, quae data est ti- bi per prophetiam cum impositione manuum presbyte- rii.

Propter quam caiisam admoneo te, ut resuscites gra- tiam Dei, quae i7i te est per impositio- nem manuum mea- rum.

(c) Diaconos si- militer pudicos, non belingues, &c.

(d) ^UKOvoi, diU' coni.

The true Enghsh, according to the Rhemish trans- lation.

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

Neglect not the * grace' that is in thee, which is giv- en thee by pro- phecy, with im- position 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 imposition of my hands.

* Deacons' in like manner * chaste,' not double- tongued, &.C.

Deacons.

Corruptions in the protestant Bi- bles, printed A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

(a) And when they had ordained elders by elec- tion,' in every congregatioh.

(b) Instead of grace,' they translate * gift ;' and • eldership' in- stead of * priest- hood.*

Instead of the word 'grace,' they say ' gift.'

(c) * Ministers' for * deacons.'

(</) Deacons.

1

The last transk' tion of the protestant Bi- ble, edit Lon- don, an. 1683.

* Elders' set in the stead of * priests.'

For the vord * grace' they say 'gift ;' and ' pres- bytery,' the Greek word, ra- ther than the English word ' priesthood.'

They trans^ late 'gift,' in the stead of 'grace.'

Likewise must the • deacons be grave.'

Deacon^.

PRIESTHOOD AND HOLY ORDERS. 27

(a) We have heard, in old time, of making priests ; and, of late days, of making ministers ; but who has ever heard in England of making elders by election ? yet, in their first translations, it continued a phrase of Scripture till king James the First's time ; and then they 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 sacraments, than a churchwarden, or consta- ble of the parish ; for, if they denied ordination to be a sacrament,* and, consequently, to give grace, and impress a character, doubtless they could not attribute much to a bare election : and yet, in those days, when this translation 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 a required any consecration of a bishop or priest ? answered thus, under his hand, viz. " In the New Testament, he that is appointed to be a priest or bi- shop, needeth no consecration by the Scripture ; for election thereunto is sufficient,"! 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," page 200, advers. Camp, that is, as he interprets himself, page 210, " This name priest is never in the New Testament peculiarly applied to the minis- ters of the gospel." And we are not ignorant, how both king Edward the Sixth, and queen Elizabeth, made bishops by their letters patent only, let our Lambeth records pre- tend what they will : to authorize which, it is no wonder, if they made the Scripture say, ** When they had ordained elders by election," instead of " priests by imposition of hands ;" though contrary to the fourth council of Carthage, which enjoins, " Tiiat when a priest takes his orders, the bishop blessing him, and holding his hand upon his head, all the priests also that are present, hold their hands by the bishop's hand, upon his head."i: So are our priests made at this day ; and so would now tlie clergy of the church of England pretend to be made, if they had but bishops and priests able to make them. For which purpose, they have not only corrected this error in their last translations, but have also gotten the 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.

(6)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,§ who, lest it should be so accounted, do translate " gift" instead of " grace ;" lest it should appear, that grace is given in holy orders. I wonder they have not corrected this in their latter translations : but, perhaps, they durst not do it, 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 I hear them object, that our Latin translation hath seniores et majores natu ,- and, therefore, why may not they also translate " elders ?" To which 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 TrpivCvlipvs, presbyteros. Again, I say, that if they meant no worse than the old Latin translator did, they would be as indifferent as he, to have said sometimes priest and priesthood, when he has the words presbyteros and presbyterium, as we are indifferent in our translation, saying 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. St. Hierom reads, pres- byteros ego cojnpresbyterl in L ad Gal. proving the dignity of priests: and yet in the 4th of the Galatians, he reads, according to the Vulgate Latin text, seniores in vobis rogo consenior et ipse • whereby it is evident, that senior here, and in the Acts, is a priest ; and not, on the contrary, presbyter, an elder.

(c) 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, ministers, and deacons ; yet the word they translate for minister, is S'lunovoc, diaconus; the very same that, a Uttle after, they translate deacon. (J) And so, because bishops went before in the same chapter, they have found out three orders, bishops, minis- ters, 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,! on purpose to make room for their ministers' wives, for there is no living without them, they translate wife instead of woman, making St. Paul say, " Have not we power to lead about a wife," &c. for which cause they had rather say grave than chaste.

* 25th of the 39 articles, f See Dr. Burnet's Hist, of the Refor. See Stillingfleet Irenicon. p. 392. \ Councils, anno 436. where St. Augustine was present and subscribed. § Dr. Bramh. p. 96. Mason, lib. 1. 1 St. Hier. Ep. 85. ad Evagr. ^ 1 Cor. 9. verse 5.

28

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

The Book, Chapter, and Ver.

Malachi, chapt. 2. verse 7.

Apocalyp. chapt. 2, 3. V. 1, 8, 12.

Malachi, chapt. 3. verse 1.

Matthew, chapt. 11. verse 10.

Luke, chapt. 7. verse 27,

2 Corinth, chapt. 2. verse 10,

The Vulgate Latin Text.

(a) Labia enim sacerdotis custo- dient scientiam, et legem requirent ex ore ejus : quia an- g-elus domini exer- cituum est.

Angelo Ephesi ecclesiae scribe.

(b) Ecce ego mitto angelum me- UTTiy [rov A-yyiXov ^u] et prceparabit viam ante faciem meam. Et statim veyiiet ad templum suum do- minatorf quern vos qneritisf et angelus Testamentif quern vos vultis.

Mc est enim de quo scriptum est, ecce ego mitto an- gehim meum ante faciem iuam.

Hie est de quo scriptum esty ecce mitto angelum me- um^ &c.

(c) Si quid do- navi propter vos in persona Christi. [iv TTfio-uTra X/)/r».]

The true English according to the Rhemish trans- lation.

The priests lips " shall" keep knowledge, and they " shall" seek the law at his mouth ; because he is the " angel" of the Lord of Hosts.

To the « angel" of the church of Ephesus, write thou.

Behold, I send mine " angel," and he shall prepare the way before my face. And the Ru- ler whom ye seek, shall suddenly come to his tem- ple, even the *• an- gel" of the Testa- ment, whom ye wish for.

For this is he of whom it is writ- ten. Behold, 1 send mine " angel" be- fore thy face.

This is he of whom it is writ- ten. Behold, I send mine " angel," &c.

If I pardoned any thing for you in the " person" of Christ,

Corruptions in the Protestant Bi- bles, printed A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

(a) The priests lips " should" keep knowledge, and they " should" seek the law at his mouth ; because he is the " Mes- senger" of the Lord of Hosts.

To the « mes- senger" of, &c. instead of ** an-

gel.'

{b) Instead of " angel," they say " messenger." And for "angel" of the Testament, they translate, " messenger" of the covenant.

For "angel" they say " messen- ger."

— Behold! send my " messenger," &c.

(c) In the

« sight" of Christ,

The last trans- lation of the Protestant Bi- ble, Edit. Lon- don,annol683.

For they

" should

And gel" ger'=

.. " shall" translate

for " an-

" messen-

in this also.

Corrected.

The same also they translate here, without any correction.

Instead of "an- gel," they say " messenger."

For "angel," messenger."

Corrected.

THE AUTHORITY OF PRIESTS. 29

(a) Bec iusE our pretended reformers teach, « That order Is not 1 sacrament ;" " That it has neither visible sign," what is imposition of hands ? " nor ceremony ordained by God; nor form; nor institution from Christ,"* 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 more to derogate from the privilege and dignity of priests, they make the Scripture, in this place, speak contrary to the words of the prophet ; as they are read both in the Hebrew and Greek, <puka^i}au tK^hltKrvtriVt ^JJ'pa* pOE" ; 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, for true determination in matters of controversy, and rightly expoundinjj the law, as we may read more fully in Deuteronomy the 17th, where they are command- ed, under pain of 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 for him and his successors, that his faith shall not fail ; and where the Hofy Ghost is president in the councils of bishops and priests. All which, the reformers of our days would deface and defeat, by translating the words otherwise than the Holy Ghost has spoken them. And when the prophet adds immediately the cause of this singular prerogative of the priest : " Because he is the angel of the Lord of hosts," which is also a wonderful dignity to be so called ; they translate, "Because he is the messenger of the Lord of hosts." So they also, in the Revelations, call the bishops of the seven churches of Asia, messengers.

{b) And here, in like manner, they call St. John the Baptist, messenger ; where the Scripture, no doubt, speaks more honourably of him, as being Christ's precursor, than of a messenger, which is a term for postboys and lacqueys. The Scripture, I say, speaks more honourably of him : and our Saviour, in the Gospel, telling the people the won- derful 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 wrilten, behold, 1 send my angel before thee :" which St. Hierom calls, meritorum ttv^na-tv, the " Increase and augmenting of John's merits and privileges."-|- And St. Gregor/, '* He who came to bring tidings of Christ himself, was worthily called an angel, that i.i his very name there might be digni- ty." And all the fathers conceive a great excellency of this word angel ; but our pro- testants, who measure all divine things and persons by the line of their human under- standing, translate accordingly ; making our Saviour say, that " John was more than a prophet," because he was a messenger. Yea, where our blessed Saviour himself is. called, Angelus Testamenti, the angel of the Testament ; there they translate, the " Mes- senger of the Covenant."(c)

(c) St. Hierom translated not Nuncius, but Angelus, the church, and all antiquity, both reading and expounding it as a term of aiore 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 apostle, legate or ambassador, and the like ? Doubtless, this is all done to take away, as much as possible, the dignity and ex- cellency 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 not hitherto attain to the authority and power of the priesthood. They are but priests in name only ; the power they want, and there- fore are pleased to be content with the ordinary stile of messengers ; not yet daring to term themselves angels, as St. John did the bishops of the seven churches of Asia.

(</) But, great is the authority, dignity, excellency, and power of God's priests and bishops : they do bind and loose, and execute all ecclesiastical functions, as in the per- son and power of Christ, whose ministers they are. So St. Paul says, " That when he pardoned or released the penance of the incestuous Corinthian, he did it in the person of Christ :"i: they falsely translate, " In the sight of Christ ;" that is, as St. Ambrose ex- pounds it, "In the name of Christ," " In his stead," and as " His vicar and deputy :'* and when he excommunicated the same incestuous person, he said, " He did it in the name, and by virtue of our Lord Jesus Christ."§ — 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 sins was given him ; who, in his successors, lives and exercises judgment to this very time, and always."||

* 25th of the 39 articles. Rogers* Defence of the same, page 155. f St. Hierom. In Comment, in hunc locum. St. Greg. Hfim, 6. in Evang. + 2 Cor. 2. ver. 10. § 1 Cor, 5. ver. 4. I| Part. 2. Acts 3.

80

PROTECTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,	The Vulgate Latin
Chapter,	Text.
and Ver.
Matthew,	(a) Ex te enim
chapt. 2.	exiet dux, qui re-
Verse 6.	gat poptchm meum
	Israel.
Micah,	hv^pjw^rh
chapt. 5.	T» tlyett tig ao^ovTA
verse 2.	T« *i(rpxn\.
*! Peter,	(b) Subjecti igi-
chapt. 2.	tur estate omni hu-
verse 13.	manse creaturse
	[israto-j) atv6/)aKT<v«
	KTitnt] propter De-
	um, sive regi quasi
	prxcellentiy sive
	ducibuSf &c.
	{I^AtTlKU OS VTrtf'lX'XIl'
	T/.]
Acts Apos.	(c) Mtendite
chapt. 20.	vobis et universo
verse 28.	gregiy in quo vos
	Spiritus Sanctits
	posuit episcopos
	regere ecclesiam
	Dei.
	['E5r/(rxow«c TroifAai-
	niv T«v iKuXtia-uv t«
	0.«.]

The true English according to the Rhemish trans- lation.

For out of thee shall come forth the captain, that shall " rule" my people Israel.

Be subject therefore " to ev- ery human crea- ture" for God, whe\her it be to the « king" as ex- celling, &c.

Take heed to yourselves, and to the whole flock, wherein the Holy Ghost hath placed you " bishops to rule" the church of God.

Corruptions in the protestant Bi- bles, printed A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

(a) Instead of " rule," the New Testament, print- ed anno 1580, translates " feed."

(b) In the latter end of king Henry the Vni. and in Edward the VI. times, they trans- lated, " submit yourselves unto all manner of ordi- nance of man," whether it be un- to 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 " su- perior."

(c) Where- in the Holy Ghost hath " made you overseers," to " feed the congre- gation" of God.

The last transla- tion of the pro- testant Bible, Edit. London, anno 1683.

Corrected.

Submit your- selves to every ordinance of man, for the Lord's sake, ' " whether it be to the king," as supreme.

Wherein

the Holy Ghost hath made you o verse ers,to feed the church of God.

EPISCOPAL AUtHORITY. - 3t

v'O It is certain, that this is a false translation ; because the prophet's words (Mich. 5. cited by St. Matthew) both in Hebrew and Greek, signify only a ruler or governor, and not a pastor or feeder. Therefore, it is either a great oversight, which is a small matter, compared to the least corrup- tion ; or else it is done on purpose ; which 1 rather think, because they do the Uke in another place, (Acts 20.) as }'ou may see below. And that to suppress the signification of ecclesiastical power and government, that concurs with feeding, first in Christ, and from him in his apostles and pastors of the church ; both which are here signified in this one Greek word, tvoifxalvte ; to wit, that Christ our Saviour shall rule and feed,* yea, he shall rule with a rod of iron ; and from him, St. Peter, and the rest, by his commission given in' the same word, -nro/^a/vs, 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 suc- cessors do the like offenders with spiritual destruction (unless they repent) by the terrible rod of excoinmunication. This is imported in the double signification of the Greek word, which they, to diminish ecclesiastical authority, ratlier translate " feed," than " rule or govern."

{b) For the diminution of this ecclesiastical authority, they translated this text of Scripture, in king Henry VHI. and king Edward VI. times ; " Unto the king as the chief head," (1 Pet. 2.) be- cause then the king had first taken upon him this title of " Supreme head of the church." And therefore they flattered both him and his young son, till their heresy was planted ; making the holy Scripture say, that the king was the " Chief head," which is all the same with supreme head. But, in queen Elizabeth*s time, being, it seems, better advised in thUt point, (by Calvin, I suppose, and the Magdeburgenses, who jointly inveighed against that title ;f and Calvin, against that by name, which was given to Henry the VIHth) and because, perhaps, they thought they could be bolder with a queen than a king ; as also, because then they thought their reformation pretty well esta- blished ; they began to suppress this title in their translations, and to say, ** To the king, as having pre-eminence," and " To the king, as the superior ;" endeavouring, as may be supposed by this translation, 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, 1 will refer them to the words of St. Ignatius, who lived in the apostles' time, and tells us, *• That we must first honour God, then the bishop, then the king ; because in all things, nothing is comparable to God , and in the church, nothing greater than the bishop, who is consecrated to God, for the salvation of the world ; and among magistrates and temporal rulers, none is hke the king."4;

(c) Again, observe how they here suppress the word "Bishop," and translate it " overseers;" Y'hich is a word, that has as much relation to a temporal magistrate, as to a Bishop. And this they do, because in king Edward the VI. and queen Elizabeth's time, they had no episcopal consecra- tion, but were made only by their letters patent ;§ which, I suppose, they will not deny. Howev- er, when they read of king Edward the Vlth making John a Lasco (a Polonian) overseer or sur perintendant, by his letters patent ; and of their making each other superintendants, or pastors at Frankfort, by election ; and such only to continue for a time ; or so long as themselves, or the con- gregation pleased ; and then to return again to the state of private persons, or laymen ; Vid. Hist, of the Troubles at Frankfort ;I| and also of king Edward's giving power and authority to Cranmerj* and how Cranmer, when he made priests, by election only, I suppose, because they wei*e to con- tinue no longer than the king pleased ; whereas priests truly consecrated, are marked with an in- dehble character, pretended to no other authority for such act, but only what he received from the king, by virtue of his letters patent. Fox tom. 2. an. 1546, 1547.

And wehave reason to judge, that Matthew Parker, and the rest of queen Elizabeth's new bishops, were no otherwise made, than by the queen's letters patent ; seeing that the form devised by king Edward VI. being repealed by queen Mary, was not again revived till the 8th of queen Elizabeth. To say nothing of the invalidity of the said form; as having neither the name of bishop nor priest in it, the like doubt of their consecratioiji, arises from the many and great objections made by Ca- tholic writers^ against their pretended Lambeth records and register ; as also from the consecra- tors of M. Parker, viz. Barlow, Scorey, &c. whom we cannot beUeve to have been consecrated themselves, unless they can first show us records of Barlow's consecration ; and secondly, tell us, by what form of consecration Coverdale and Scorey were made bishops ; the Rom. Cath. ordinal having been abrogated, and the new one not yet devised, at the time that Mason says they were consecrated ; which was Aug. 30, 1551. And as for the suffragan, there is such a difference about his name,** some calling him John, some Richard; and about the place where he lived: some calling him suffragan of Bedford.ff some of Dover,^^: that it is doubtful whether there was such a person present at that Lambeth ceremony. But these things being fitter for another treatise, which, 1 hope, you will be presented with ere long, I shall say no more of them in this place.

* Psalm. 2. Apocalvp. 2. v. 27. Job. 21. f Calvin in cap. 7. Amos. Magdebur. in Prxf. Cent. 7. fol. 9, 10, 11. i Ep. 7. ad. Smyrnenses. § K. Edw. VI. Let. Pat. Jo. Utenti. p. 71. Regist. Eccles. peregr. Londin. Calvin, p. 327. Resp. ad. Persecut. Angl. || Hist. Fra. paa;. 51, 60, 62, 63, 72, TZj 74, 87, 97, 99, 125, 126, &c. t Fitzherb. Dr. Champ. Nullity of the Enghsh'ciergy prot. demonst. &c„ *• See Dr. Bramhall> p. 98. ff Mason, Bramhall, &c. ^% Dr. Butler Ejiist. de Consecrat. Minist.

32

PROtESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAInST

The Book, Chapter, and Ver.

1 Corinth, chap. 9.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

(rt) JVwnquid non habeinus potes- tatem muUerem, sororem eiJtk<pm yu- vauKXf circumduceri- di .? &c.

(b) Etiam rogo ^ te germane compar, <r6^vy%

(c) Honor abile connubium in om- nibus, rifAios 0 ytt- juoc h TTita-i, & tho- rns imtnaculatiis.

(J) Qui dixit il- lisy non omnes ca- \>\MV\.\.verbum istud, K TTAyrii ^upta-t, sed quibus datum est.

(e) Et sunt eu- nuchi, qui seipsos castraverunt, tuva-

nuToiit, propter Regnum Coelorum.

The true EngUsh according- to the Ilhemish trans- lation.

Have not we power to lead a- bout a * Woman,' a sister, &,c.

Yea, and 1 be- seech thee, my sincere 'compan- ion.'

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

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

And there are ' eunuchs' who have made them- selves * eunuchs' for the kingdom of Heaven.

Corruptions in the protestant Bi- bles, printed A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

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

(b) For compa- nion, they say, * Yoke-fellow.'

(c) 'Wedlock' is honourable a- mong all men, &c.

(d) < A

men cannot re ceive this saying &c.

(<?) There are some * chaste' which have made themselves * chaste' for the kingdom of Hca- ven.

The last transla- tion of the pro- testant Bible, edit. London, -.lino. 1683.

Instead of ' woman,' they translate * wife' here also.

Yoke-

fello)

* Marriage* Is honourable ia all.

*AI1

men' cannot re- ceive this say- ing, &c.

Corrected.

THE SINGLE LIVES OF PRIESTS, ETC. 33

(a) " If," says St. Hierom, " none of the laity, or of the faithful, can pray, unless he fbrbear conjugal duty, priests, to whom it belongs to offer sacrifices for the people, are always to pray ; if to pray always, therefore perpetually to live single or unmarried."* But our late pretended reformers, the more to ])rofane the sacred order of priesthood, to which continency and single life have always been annexed in the New Testament, and to make it merely laical and popular, will have all to be married men ; yea, those that have vowed to the contrary : and it is a great credit among them, for apostate priests to take wives. And, therefore, by their falsely corrupting tliis text of St. Paul, they will needs have him to say, that he, and the rest of the apostles, " Led their wives about with them," (as king Edward the Sixth's German apostles did theirs, when they came first into England, at the call of the lord protector Seymour ;) whereas the apostle says nothing else, but a woman, a sister ; meaning such a Christian woman as followed Christ and the apostles, to find and maintain them with their substance. So does St. Hierom interpret it,f and St. Augustine also ; both directly proving, that it cannot be translated ** wife." (6) Neither ought this text to be translated " yoke-fellow," as our innovators do, on purpose to make it sound in English, ** man and wife." Indeed, Calvin and Beza translate it in the masculine gender, for a " companion.*" And St. Theophylact, a Greek father, saith, that " If St. Paul had spoken to a woman, it should have been yvna-iccy in Greek." St. Paul says himself, he had no wife, (1 Cor. 7.) And I think we have a little more reason to believe him, than those who would gladly have him married, on