ERRATA

PROTESTANT BIBLE;

TRUTH OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS EXAMINED;

IN A TREATISE,

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

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

RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE AS ARE THE SUBJECT OF CONTROVERSY BETWEEN

THEM AND THE MEMBERS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH ;

IN WHICH ALSO,

FROM THEIR MISTRANSLATING THE TWENTY-THIRD VERSE OF THE FOURTEENTH CHAPTER

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

THE FIRST PROTESTANT ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY,

IS OCCASIONALLY CONSIDERED.

BY THOMAS WARD, ESQ.

A NEW EDITION, CAREFULLY REVISED AND CORREC

TO WHICH ARE ADDED,

THE CELEBRATED PREFACE OF THE REV. D OCTORLINGARD

IN ANSWER TO RYAN'S " ANALYSIS,

AND

A VINDICATION, BY THE RIGHT REV. DOCTOR MILNER,

IN ANSWER TO GRIER'S " REPLY."

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

NEW YORK:
PUBLISHED BY D & J. SADLIER,

No. 58 GOLD STREET.
1847.

LOAN STACK

1 2^7

TO THE

RIGHT REVEREND JOHN FENNELLY,

VICAR APOSTOLIC OF MADRAS,

BISHOP OF CASTORIA,

THIS EDITION OF SARD'S INVALUABLE WORK,

AGAINST

THE GROSSEST OF ALL CORRUPTIONS,

THE CORRUPTION OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES,

MOST RESPECTFULLY INSCRIBED,

AS A SMALL TESTIMONY OF THE HIGH ESTEEM AND VENERATION

IN WHICH HIS LORDSHIP IS HELD,

HIS LORDSHIP S

MOST OBEDIENT HUMBLE SERVANTS,

THE EDITOR AND PUBLISHER.

25, Anoleska-street, Dublin,
1*< July, 1841.

961

CONTENTS.

Preface to the Fourth Edition, .

The Author's Preface,

The Truth of Protestant Translations of the Bible examined,

Of the Canonical Books of Scripture,

Of Books rejected by Protestants for Apocryphal,

Protestant Translations against the Church,

" " against the Blessed Sacrament and Sacrifice of the Mass,

" " against the Blessed Sacrament and the Altar,

" " against Priests and Priesthood,

" " against Priesthood and Holy Orders,

" " against the Authority of Priests,

" " against Episcopal Authority,

« " against the Single Lives of Priests,

" " against the Sacrament of Baptism,

" " against Confession and the Sacrament of Penance,

" " against the Honour of our Blessed Lady and other Saints,

'« " against the Distinction of Relative and Divine Worship,

" 9 against Sacred Images,

" " against the Use of Sacred Images,

" " against Limbus Patrum and Purgatory, ...

" " against Justification and the Reward of Good Works,

" " against Merits and Meritorious Works,

" " against Free Will,

" " against Inherent Justice,

" " in defence of the Sufficiency of Faith alone,

" '* against ApOstolical Traditions,

" " against the Sacrament of Marriage,

Protestant Corruptions by adding to the Text
Considerations on the Lambeth Records,
Protestant Translation against the Perpetual Sacrifice,

" Corruptions of the Scripture,

" Absurdities in turning Psalms into Metre,
A Vindication of the Roman Catholics,
A Vindication of Ward's Errata, in Reply to Grier, by the Right Rev. Dr. Milner,

PAGE

-14

15-

-24

25-

-31

33-

-39

40,

42,

44,

46,

48,

50,

52,

54,

56,

58,

60,

62,

64,

66-

-69

70-

-73

74,

76,

78,

80,

82,

84-

-86

88-

-90

91-

-97

98-

-101

102-

■107

108-

-111

112,

113

114-

■118

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

BY DR. LINGARD.

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

It is not for man to dispute the wisdom of
Providence, and arraign at the bar of his private
judgment the means which God may choose for
the diffusion of religious knowledge. Otherwise,
I must confess, there appears to me something
very unaccountable in the scriptural blunders of
the apostles of the reformation. The object, they
said, of their mission was the dissemination of
evangelic truth. If the Holy Spirit selected them
for this important office, he must also have gifted
them with the true knowledge of the scriptures,
and, if he gifted them with the true knowledge
of the scriptures, it seems to follow that he
ought also to have granted them the power to
make a true translation of the scriptures. The
apostles of Jesus received the knowledge of
tongues, that they might instruct the different
nations of the earth : the apostles of the church
of England and Ireland ought to have received
the knowledge of, at least, the Hebrew and
Greek tongues, that they might form an accurate
version of the scriptures. Such a version was
as necessary to that church, as the instructions
of the first apostles could be to the primitive
churches of Christianity. If they were apostol-
ical, she was scriptural. However, without
speculating on the cause, the fact is certain, not
only from the arguments of Ward, but even

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

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

(a) Ryan's Analysis, p. 5. Simon, however, in the pas-
sage referred to, does not speak of the English translator
in particular, but of the Protestant translators in general.
This Dr. Ryan has thought fit to conceal from his readers.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

religious calumny, " it was the work of one
hundred and twenty Popish priests leagued to
put down Protestantism." Such nonsense
hardly deserves notice. If facts are to be hidden
from the eye of the public, because they reflect
on the character of our predecessors, let history
at once be condemned to the flames. The
evangelists did not conceal the treachery of Ju-
das : why should Protestant divines wish to
conceal the blunders or the frauds of the fathers
of their church ?

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

Among the opponents of Ward, the fiercest
and the only one who has attempted a full refu-
tation of the " Errata," is Dr. Ryan. His at-
tempt is a consequence of the grant of Ireland
which Adrian IV. made to Henry II. Nay,
start not, gentle reader ; the most important
events may often be traced to remote and almost
imperceptible causes. The attempt of Dr.
Ryan is a consequence of the grant of Ireland
by Adrian IV. to Henry II. By that grant
the Ryans lost an extensive property ;(a) and the
present Dr. is the champion reserved by heaven

(e) Anal., p. 58.

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

THE CHURCH.

Under this head Ward has adduced no less
than seven texts in which the English translators
had substituted the word congregation for
church ; to which Dr. Ryan replies, " that the
former mistranslations of these seven texts,
having been corrected in the present Bible,
should have been excluded from the catalogue
of the ' Errata.' "(b) This plea has, I trust, been
sufficiently refuted in the preceding observations.
That the correction has taken place, is indeed
an improvement in the present Bible ; but it is
at the same time a condemnation of its prede-
cessors. After the correction, Ward should
not have imputed these errors to the corrected
copies ; neither has he done so : he should have
imputed them to the more ancient copies, and
in doing so, he is justified by the very concession
of his adversary. " But," continues the Dr.,
" he produces an eighth text to show that we
have been guilty of misconstruction to injure
his church. In the Romish version it is written :
my dove is one ; (Cant. xi. 8 :) in ours, my dove
is but one ; a curious proof of malice to his
church ! Many of his errata are of this kind ;
frivolous in themselves ; and affording no proof
or but feeble proofs of the propositions he main-
tains. "(c) Now, readei. what canst thou infer
from this passage, but that Ward had censured
the Protestant version for having adopted the
reading, my dove is but one 1 The reverse,
however, is the truth. Ward did not censure,
he approved that reading. His censure was
levelled against the more ancient reading in the
English Bibles, my dove is alone. " But this,"
he adds, "is also amended." Such was the
candour of Ward, that he carefully pointed out
to his reader every correction. Of the candour
of Dr. Ryan I wish I could speak with equal
commendation. But he has begun his analysis
with an artifice, which it will be impossible for
him to palliate, much less to justify. He has
suppressed the real assertion of his adversary,
which he could not controvert, and has substi-
tuted in its place an assertion so palpably
absurd that it could not fail to make an impres-
sion on the mind of the uninformed reader highly
prejudicial to the character of Ward. Nor
has the Dr. left his artifice to work its own
effect. He has aided it by his own observations :
and has of consequence charged the author of

(b) Ibid., p. 11.

(e) Ibid.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

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

Serveter ad imum,
Qvalii rib incccpto proccsserit, et sibi constet.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

THE BLESSED SACRAMENT, AND
THE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.

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

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

(a) Anal., p. 11.

(6) Ibid., p. 12.

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

2d. The second passage is very differently ren-
dered in the Catholic and Protestant versions : in
the former, Let us cast wood upon his bread :
in the latter, Let us destroy the tree with the
fruit thereof. It must be acknowledged that
the Catholic rendering is not conformable to the
present Hebrew : j»n>a y? wnrn». But then
it is conformable to the more ancient ver-
sions, the Greek, the Vulgate, and the Arabic,
and the consent of these versions proves that
the modern reading of the Hebrew is false, (c)
The Protestant translators, on the contrary,
: have chosen to follow that reading, and accor-
i dingly have rendered 75 nrrrros, let us destroy
! the tree ; but then, to make sense, they have
; been compelled to give to orb a meaning,
: which, I believe, it has not in any other part of
! scripture, and under -jttr£ the fruit thereof
\ instead of his bread. Ward, therefore, was
j justified in numbering this in his catalogue of
errata. If it be asked why he placed it under
the head of false translations against the sacra-
ment, he answers because he suspected it to have
been adopted in order to elude the force of a
passage in the works of St. Jerom, who had re-
ferred the original text to the holy Eucharist, (d)
3rd. The difference in the third text, Gen.
xiv. 18, depends on the meaning which ought
to be given to the Hebrew particle 1. The
Vulgate and the English Catholic version have
rendered it for ; and that it is susceptible of this
meaning is evident from the Protestant trans-
lators themselves, who in similar passages have
rendered it in the same manner. (Gen. xx. 3 :
Thou art but a dead man for the woman which
thou hast taken ; i>3>3 rfrs mm, for she is a
man's wife. And Isaiah lxiv. 5 : Behold thou
art wroth, vx.rrs\ for we have sinned.) In the
present instance, they have rendered it and,
which Ward ascribes to their wish to elude the
argument that Catholic theologians had been
accustomed to draw from Melchizedeck's typical
sacrifice of bread and wine.

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

(d) Errata, No. II.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

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

(a) Anal., p. 1 2.

(6) Rom. ti. 10 ; Heb. vii. 28 ; ix. 12.

U) Anal., p. 13.

xaO IxuoiTjv f^eqav ov nqoocpeooiiEv ; nooaqieoofiEv,
ukh duvaftvrjoiv noiovpEvoi, iov davuiov dviov xat
juai iojiv &utt] xai 6v noXXat .... iov yuq tivrov
dft nqocq>EpojXEv bu vvv (jev eieqov, uvqiov devze-
qov, aW (iet to uvio. 6>otb fiia turtv ^ &voia. In
Epist. ad Heb. c. ix. horn. xvii.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

THE BLESSED SACRAMENT, AND
THE ALTAR.

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

" The first Protestant translators need not
have been afraid of the word altars .'" Why
then did they substitute temple in its place ? Dr.
Ryan cannot here have recourse to his former
plea of their ignorance of the original languages.
The veriest smatterer in the Greek tongue
could have informed them that duoiaciiqiov meant
not a temple but an altar. Their own conduct
in falsifying these texts shows, that they were
afraid of the word. For what but fear, and
that too of a very urgent nature, could have
impelled men, who had assumed the office of
apostles, and whose existence as such depended
on their reputation, to pollute that office, and
hazard that reputation, by thus wilfully and de-
liberately corrupting the sacred volumes 1

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

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

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

PRIESTS, PRIESTHOOD, AND HOLY
ORDERS.

On this subject Dr. Ryan observes : " Accord-
ing to Ward we misconstrued six texts, by
rendering the Greek word elder instead of priest :
he says, we did so, lest the term priest should
2

reflect honour on the Catholic clergy." (a)
Reader, consult Ward, and thou wilt find he says
no such thing. Ward attributes the suppression
of the word priest to the suppression of the
sacrifice of the mass. Where there is no altar
or sacrifice, there is no need of a priest. But
Dr. Ryan has forged the reason which he here
gives to Ward, as an introduction to the sarcasm
against the Catholic clergy, which immediately
follows it. " Elder," he also tells us, " is a
more literal translation of the Greek word than
priest, and presbytery than priesthood : so that
the Protestant translators are not chargeable
with a mistranslation of these words, (b) He
will, however, allow me to ask, what kind of men
they were, whom the sacred writers designate
by the term nosa8vTSQOi,1 Were they not ministers
of religious worship ordained for that purpose
by the apostles ? As a minister of the Estab-
lished Church, he must answer in the affirmative.
But if they were, what is the proper term
by which such ministers are described in the
English language ? Not only common usage,
but the very language of the Church of England
decides in favour of the word priest. If then the
translators of the Bible meant to speak a
language intelligible to their readers, they ought
to have translated the Greek word priests and
not elders. Were I to request the favour of
Dr. Ryan to translate the following Latin sen-
tence : " Episcopus Londinensis cum major*
civitatis et duobus ecclesiae presbyteris visitavit
universitatcm Oxonicnsem," would he prefer as
more literal such a version as this : the overseer
of London, with the greater of the city, and two
elders of the church, visited the generality of
Oxford \

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

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

(a) Anal.
(fi) Ibid.

p. 14.

(d) Anal., p. 15.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

AGAINST

THE AUTHORITY OF PRIESTS AND
BISHOPS.

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

(a) In the late Bibles the words Atanovov and AyyiKoa
are sometimes rendered properly.

In 1 Peter ii. 13, we read in the Catholic
version, Be subject.... whether it be to the king,
as excelling : in the Protestant, whether it be to
the king, as supreme. Dr. Ryan observes, " the
Greek word vkeqsxoj signifies supreme as well as
excelling ; so that it is not very material, which
way it is rendered."(£) It should, however, be
observed that in the more ancient version, to
afford some scriptural foundation for the king's
claim to the title of head of the church, it was
rendered, to the king, as the supreme head, a
corruption which I trust Dr. Ryan will not have
the temerity to defend. The rendering of the
more modern Bibles is less objectionable, though
it does not in my opinion exactly convey the
meaning of the original to the English reader.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

THE SINGLE LIVES OF PRIESTS.

" Ward," observes Dr. Ryan, " says we mis-
rendered the following text of St. Paul : Have
we not the power to eat and to drink — to lead
about a woman, a sister, as well as the other
apostles? (1 Cor. ix. 5.) We render, a wife, a
sister. The Greek word signifies wife as well as
woman : so that our translators are not charge-
able with misconstruing it." What idea Dr. Ryan
may have formed of the duties of a scriptural
translator, I know not : but the canon which
he has here laid down, is, I conceive, most sin-
gular in its nature, and most pernicious in its
application. There exists hardly a word in any
language which is not susceptible of several
different meanings : and of these meanings it
appears that the translator of the scriptures is at
liberty to select that which may please him best.
Now I think, and I trust every rational man will
think with me, that, when the signification of
a word is determined, as it generally is by the
context, the translator is bound to adopt that
signification : and that, when it is not, he is not at
liberty to select the meaning that may please
him best, but ought to render the ambiguity of the
text by an expression of similar ambiguity in the
version : otherwise he does not offer a faithful
copy of the original : he does not translate but
interpret : he substitutes fallibility for infallibility
and gives the surmises of his own judgment or
prejudice in the place of the real words of the
inspired writer. It is true that the Greek word
ywrj signifies wife as well as woman. It signifies
wife in its secondary, woman in its primary and
more general acceptation. Now, is there any
thing in the context to fix it to its secondary
meaning of wife ? Nothing ; so that the more
ancient writers, whose judgment could not be
biassed by controversial disputes, which did not
arise till many centuries after they were laid
in their graves, without hesitation translate it
woman, and explain it of an unmarried woman.
But even allowing it to be as probable that St.

(b) Anal., p. 17.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION'.

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

The next text is thus rendered in the Catholic
• version: I intreat thee also, my sincere compan-
ion : in the Protestant, my true yoke-fellow. As
Dr. Ryan justly observes, " the two versions
6eems to be the same in substance." But it
should be remembered, that the Protestant transla-
tion was made for the use of the vulgar, and in the
ears of the vulgar yoke-fdlow sounds very much
like wife. Now, why did the Protestant trans-
lators act so very differently in rendering this
and the preceding text ? In the former for a
word of doubtful meaning they gave us another
of determinate signification : in this the meaning
of the expression is evident, (we have Dr. Ryan's
word for it,) and yet they render it by a term, to
say the best of it, of very ambiguous signification.
To solve the problem, Ward asserts that their
object was to teach the people to look with a
more favourable eye on the married clergy : and
whoever reflects on the disputes which then di-
vided the Christian world on that subject, will
not think his opinion devoid of probability.

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
'AGAINST

THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM.
Of the mistranslations in the Protestant Bible
a great number are owing to the peculiar opin-

ions of their authors : and as these are now
forgotten, those are frequently overlooked. It
was the favourite tenet of Beza, that the sacra-
ments of the new and the sacraments of the old
law were of equal efficacy ; and that the baptism
of John was similar to the baptism of Jesus.
Now there occurs a passage of contrary import
in Acts xix. 3. In what, said St. Paul to the
Ephesians. were you baptized ? And they said,
in John's baptism. Eia ti bvv efiamiodrjie ; 6t Ss
hinov. Eia to Iwavvii fianrtofia. After which,
they were baptized in the name of the Lord
Jesus. Eia to ovo/na t» Kvqib Iyou. To elude the
force of this text, Beza translated : Unto what
were ye baptized ? Unto John's baptism : and
explained John's baptism to be a metaphor ex-
pressive of John's doctrine. (a) Beza's opinion
was adopted by the English translators, and with
it was also adopted his version : though in the
fourth verse they render the same Greek words
baptized in and not unto. By this conduct they
have undoubtedly disfigured and corrupted the
text. Of their readers the greater part are
unable to affix to it any meaning at all : and the
few that do understand it, are presented with
an erroneous version. Ward then was correct
in numbering this passage among the Errata.
Dr. Ryan in its defence only alleges, that the
difference between the Catholic and Protestant
versions is too trivial to be noticed : " into, unto,
you and ye ! .'" But I would have him to reflect
that the change of a single syllable will fre-
quently cause a very important change in the
sense : and to recollect that the Catholic version
reads in and not into, as he has thought proper
to assert.

In Titus iii. 5, the Apostle says that we have
been saved " by the laver of regeneration, and
the renovation of the Holy Ghost, whom /*e(God)
has poured upon us." In this text, which
evidently alludes to baptism, the Apostle clearly
says that the Holy Ghost is poured upon us in
that sacrament. But this did not coincide with
the views of Calvin, who therefore boldly ren-
dered Sia kovroov 7ta).iv' t evtaiag, xai uvaxaiviDOEbiz
nvevfiaiog uyw, 6 H-e'/eev lep ^/uag, per lavacrum
regenerationis spiritus sancti quod effudit in nos.
The English translators reversed the authority
of Calvin ; and therefore preferring his version
to the words of the original, they also rendered
it, by the fountain of the regeneration of the
Holy Ghost, which he shed on us." If it be said
that the relative which is ambiguous, and may
be referred either to fountain or Holy Ghost, I
ask, why, where the original is clear, did they
prefer ambiguity? why did they select the veil)
to shed, which alludes rather to the fountain than
the Holy Ghost, and why did they so scrupu-
lously adhere to Calvin's version, as to suppress
the very words which he suppressed ? In the
modern English Bibles, the words originally
suppressed, are indeed restored, and fountain is
changed into washing : but the ambiguous relative
which, and the verb, to shed, are still retained.
Dr. Ryan owns that the Catholic version is
preferable.

(a) Bez. annnt. in Act. xix.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

CONFESSION AND THE SACRAMENT
OF PENANCE.

On this subject the point at issue between
Ward and Dr. Ryan is the true meaning of the
Greek verb psxavosiv. According to the Doc-
tor it implies sorrow for sin with a firm resolu-
tion of amendment, and is therefore properly
rendered by the Protestant translators to repent.
According to Catholics, it implies not only
sorrow and a purpose of amendment, but also
an external demonstration of that sorrow by
good works performed in a penitential spirit,
such as prayer, alms, and fasting, of which nu-
merous instances are recorded in holy writ. The
Catholic translators have therefore rendered it,
to do penance. Now, that their rendering is
accurate I think clear: lstly, from some of the
texts themselves, which mention bodily afflic-
tion as an adjunct to the sorrow and amend-
ment required. Thus we read, Matt. xi. 21,
Luke x. 13, They had done penance (repented
Prot. ver.) in sackcloth and ashes ; 2ndly, from
the ancient Greek ecclesiastical writers, who
probably understood the real import of their
own language as well as the Protestant transla-
tors. Now those always style the performance
of penitential works (isravoux. Thus St. Basil,
speaking of the prayers, the abstinence, the sack-
cloth and ashes of the Ninivites, exclaims :
ToQavri] fy tcov duaQTiaig lve%ouBVb)v juezafoia ;(a)
3d, from the austerities to which in the ancient
church public sinners were subjected, who were
then termed 61 hv ttj ^exavoia aviso ; 4th from the
translator of the Vulgate and the Latin fathers, who
render it by " penitentiam agere." To these I may
add Ausonius the poet in the well known passage,

Sum Dea, quae facti, non factique exigo poenas ;
Scilicet ut poeniteat, sic ^ravoia vocor.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

THE HONOUR OF OUR LADY AND
OTHER SAINTS.

I shall not dwell long on the texts enumerated
under this head, as they are of minor importance.
By Ward they were noticed with no other view
than to show, how scrupulously anxious the
Protestant translators were not to contaminate
the orthodoxy of their version by any approach
towards the language of Catholics. I shall give
one instance. In Psalm exxxix. 17, occurs the
following passage : — Thy friends, O God, are
become exceedingly honourable : their princedom
is exceedingly strengthened. In the Catholic
service this text is applied to the saints ; a suffi-
cient argument for its exclusion from a Protes-
tant Bible. That the Hebrew word •psn ori-
ginally meant thy friends, and tittimn their

(a) St. Bas. hom. in fame et siceitate.

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

THE DISTINCTION OF RELATIVE
AND DIVINE WORSHIP.

In Hebrews xi. 21, it is said of Jacob, nqo-
OGXvvrjaEv em to (xhqoptijo- gufide avxa ; which in
the Catholic translation is rendered, according
to the Vulgate, adored the top of his (Joseph's)
rod : in the Protestant, worshipped, leaning on
the top of his staff. Among the ancient writers
there were two opinions respecting the meaning
of this passage, and that to which it alludes,
Genesis xlvii. 31. St. Augustine expounded
them to mean that Jacob adored God, leaning
on his staff, and St. Jerom countenances this
opinion by translating the Hebrew : " adoravit
Israel deum, conversus ad lectuli caput." But
the general opinion was, that Jacob in this
instance directed his respect not immediately to
God, but to his son Joseph. Those, however,
who held this opinion, were divided in their
manner of explaining it. " He worshipped
Joseph," says Theophylactus, " pointing out the
worship of the whole people. But how did he
worship 1 On the top of his staff : that is, sup-
porting himself on his staff on account of his
age. But some say he worshipped towards the
top of Joseph's rod, signifying by the rod the
sceptre of the kingdom which would be after-
wards worshipped." (b) Of these two opinions
the former was adopted by Theodoret ; " Israel
sat resting on his staff, and worshipped bending

(i) YIpoiTCKVpriae Ttf lonretp t rrjv iravros rov \aov TrpooKWriaiu
bifkodv' ITaxr <5s TTpooSKwr/o-cn ', cirt to &Kpov rr\a paafiov avrov,
tovtmttiv, eiupeioOcia rripa08;o ita to yepaa. Tivea it ttri to
UKpovTrjcr pafiiov tov \wat<p, <pao-i t TrpooCKwrjoe, oijfiawuv to Ttja
0aai\ctaa oxv^rpov <]ta T*)a pa06ov vpoaKW*]OriotaOai jtcWoy.

Theophyl. in cap. xi. ad Hfeb.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

his head on his staff:" (a) the latter by St. Atha-
nasius, who in quoting the passage inserts the
words i5«8 duia " the rod of his son ," (b) and by
St. Chrysostom, who says, " though an old man
he worshipped Joseph, foretelling the future
worship to be rendered by the whole people." (c)
In such diversity of sentiment no translator can
be blamed for adopting either opinion. I would
translate it, He bowed to the top of Joseph's
staff.

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

SACRED IMAGES AND AGAINST THE
USE OF THEM.

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

(a) E«ca9«o-0r7 (iaKTtpia it Ktxpnptvoa liriarijpi^Te dorr).
TlpoacKVvriasv i-rriK^ivaar rrj pafffiu rr\» gt<pa\t)v. Theod. in

Gen. interrog. 109.
(ft) Homil. in St. Patres, 11, p. 693.

(c) Kat ycpwv u>v, f]ir\ itpoetKVvt]Ot to) \biot(p, rr\v vavroa tov
\aov irpoaKwrtuiv <JijXu>y tijv taoptvnv avTco. HoDl. XXVI. in

epia. ad Heb.

pers. No less than thirteen different words in
the Hebrew, and nine in the Greek scriptures,
were invariably rendered image in the English
version : so wonderfully comprehensive is the
meaning of that single word in orthodox lan-
guage. Of the texts, which had been thus cor-
rupted, two proved eminently useful. In 2 Cor.
vi. 16, the Apostle was made to say : How
agrecth the temple of God with images ? and this
corruption furnished every iconoclast preacher
with a most powerful text, when he urged the
credulity of his hearers to deface the ornaments
with which Catholic piety had been accustomed
to decorate religious edifices. The other text
occurred 1 John. v. 22, babes, keep yourselves
from images ; and this, when the house of God
had been purged from every trace of Popish
idolatry, was constantly painted in large cha-
racters within the door. Useful, however, as
these texts have been, they no longer appear in
the sacred volumes. They were suffered to
effect the purpose of their authors, and then
were directly consigned to oblivion. The same
has been the fate of several others of similar
import, as Dr. Ryan acknowledges : " but then,"
he adds, " having been corrected, Ward should
not have inserted them in his list." Why not ?
Did they not originally exist in the Protestant
version T Were they not received by the people
as part of the original text ? Undoubtedly.
Ward then could not have omitted them without
betraying the cause he had undertaken to
defend.

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

(^) Anal., p. 25.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

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

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

LIMBUS PATRUM AND PURGATORY.

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

(a) In the passages usually refered to, 1 Kings xi. G, 10,
it is rendered aSn", inferi, by the ancient translators.
They looked on irtoin his old age, as a figurative ex-
pression for him in Ids old age.

both meanings to the Hebrew word, I can op-
pose to their authority that of the ancient Greek
and Latin interpreters, who as invariably render
Jnjoc lidna, inferi, infernus, as they do i^P,
Taq>oa, (ivr t fia, sepulchrum. It is from them that
the true meaning of this ancient language is to
be learned. If, however, Dr. Ryan refuses to
submit to them, I trust he will not reject the
authority of St. Peter, who in Acts xi. 27,
translates it tidno, and in obedience to wKom the
correctors of the Protestant Bible have in this
instance erased the word grave, by which it had
been rendered in the more ancient editions.

Dr. Ryan wishes to persuade his readers that
Ward introduced the text from Heb. v. 7, as a
proof of the existence of purgatory. Why
should he thus misrepresent his adversary 1 In
discoursing of the foregoing texts. Ward had
occasion to mention that article of the creed, in
which Christians profess their belief in the de-
scent of our Saviour into hell : and this had led
him to censure the opinion of Calvin and Beza
that the descent into hell was only a metaphorical
expression, significative of the anguish of de-
spair, and the horrors of damnation, which Jesus
felt on the cross. To countenance so blasphe-
mous an idea, the Protestant translators added
their mite ; and in rendering that passage, in
which St. Peter alludes to the prayer of Jesus
on the cross, tell us that he was heard in that
which he feared. The Greek is dcaoTvo- LvXuGsiao,
which in the Catholic version is translated,
he was heard for his reverence. What plea
may be offered in defence of the Protestant
rendering I know not. Dr. Ryan has offered
none. I may therefore assume that it is inde-
fensible.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

JUSTIFICATION AND THE REWARD
OF GOOD WORKS.

Dr. Ryan observes that the texts enumerated
by Ward in this section were too obscure to
induce the Protestant translators to misrender
them. But this is shifting the question. The
point in debate is not, whether these texts be
obscure or not ; but whether they be fairly ren-
dered in the Protestant version. Ward asserts
they are not : and I think he has made out a
pretty strong case. The Protestant translators
were violent champions in favor of justification
by faith only, and whoever consults this version
will find that they had two sets of English words
to express the Greek word dixrj and its deri-
vations. When they were united in the scriptures
with the word fax th, then they were rendered by
just, justice, justification ; but if they were united
with words expressive of the reward or practice
of good works, just and justification disappeared,
and righteous and righteousness were adopted
in their place. If nothing unfair were meant,
what motive could they have for this verbal
legerdemain 1 How comes it, that the same

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION'.

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

MERIT AND MERITORIOUS WORKS.

In this section Ward produces five texts
which, he maintains, have been falsely rendered
in the Protestant Bible. In answer, Dr. Ryan
compares these texts as they now stand, with the
same passages in the Catholic version, and very
gravely asks where is the difference 1 But know,
gentle reader, that he quotes from the amended
version, in which the three principal corruptions
have been corrected ; while Ward complains of
the original translation. Such artifices are but
sorry indications of the confidence which Dr.
Ryan professes in the goodness of his cause.

Of the remaining texts, one (Coloss. i. 12),
according to fche Catholic version, declares that
God has made us worthy ; according to the
Protestant, has made us meet to be partakers of
the inheritance of the saints. The Greek is
Ixavooavji \ and as the Protestant translators
have rendered Ixat oa worthy in Matt. Ui. 11,
and viii. 8, I see not why they should here have
rendered it meet, were it not to avoid the Ca-
tholic doctrine of merit. The other passage is
in Ps. cxix. 112, in which 5P» is rendered for
reward, by the Catholic ; unto the end, by the
Protestant version. There is something very
singular in the fate of this word. If in this
passage the Catholic translator has rendered it
for reward, in verse 33 of the same psalm he
has rendered it always : and in like manner, if
in this passage the Protestant translator has ren-
dered it unto the end, in Psalm xix. 12, he has
rendered it reward. In this confusion of ren-
derings I should think it the most prudent to
adhere to the ancient Greek interpreter, rather
than the modern translators. He probably pos-
sessed more accurate MSS-, and certainly was
more intimately acquainted with the original
language.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

FREE WILL.

Of the seven texts enumerated by Ward under
this head, three, according to Dr. Ryan, have
been corrected ; a sufficient proof that in the
original Protestant version they were rendered
corruptly. It will be easy to vindicate Ward's
remarks on the remaining four.

1st. The Greek text, 1 Cor. xv. 10, is sus-
ceptible of two meanings : that the grace of
God laboured alone, or that the grace of God
and the apostle laboured together. The Pro-

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

2nd. Romans v. 6, the apostle says that of
ourselves we were Aodsveia, which the Protestant
version renders without strength. The true
meaning is weak : but weakness does not imply
a total deprivation of strength.

3rd. The Protestant version renders Ai fajoXai
uvtu SaqBiai ax bioiv, 1 John v. 3, his command-
ments are not grievous. Instead of grievous
Ward contends we should read heavy- And
that he is accurate will, I trust, appear by
comparing this passage with that in St. Matt,
xi. 30.

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
AGAINST

INHERENT JUSTICE.

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

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

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

throughout appears attempting to silence a dumb
adversary, to conquer a man who makes no
resistance. Now whence arises this conduct in
Dr. Ryan 1 Was he unwilling to refute Ward's
argument ? But who can suspect of unwilling-
ness in such a cause the self-created representa-
tive of the Ryans, who lost so extensive a terri-
tory by the papal grant of Ireland to Henry II. 1
Was he unable to refute them 1 I believe he
was. However, let his reasons have been what
they may, this is certain, that instead of answer-
ing, he has passed over the arguments of Ward,
as if he had never seen them. But to proceed
to the texts in question.

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

2nd. We are told in the Protestant version,
Rom. iv. 3, that Abraham believed God and
that it was accounted unto him for righteousness.
What is the meaning of these last words, for
righteousness ? Do they not imply the same as
instead of righteousness ? Such, at least, is the
rendering, and the explication of Bezv, the
master of our translators : pro justitia, i. e. vice
et loco justitiaR. Now I appeal to any man ac-
quainted with the Greek and Hebrew languages,
whether such can be the meaning either of St.
Paul, kti>yio6i] uTva lio <5jxo»oaiu'?;v, or of the
writer of Genesis from whom the Apostle quotes,

3rd. In Ephes. i. G, the Apostle says that
God IxocQiTOJO-ftv r^uaq iv TO) i]yanr]fxeva. Ward
has made it sufficiently clear from the ancient
Greek writers, that ex u Q lT0>aev means, has made
us agreeable or pie sing in his eyes. The Pro-
testant translators have rendered it, has made us
accepted. At first sight it may perhaps appear
that the two renderings are nearly alike ; but a
closer inspection will discover that the former is
adverse, the latter favourable to the doctrine of
imputative justice. Ward then was probably
accurate in attributing this rendering to the pre-
judices of the translators in favor of their own
opinion.

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

5th. The two remaining texts, Dan. vi. 22 ;

Rom. iv. 6, are noticed by Ward principally as
instances of the horror which the reformers
seems to have entertained for the word justice.
That they might not pollute their pages with
such a term, they have inserted innocency in the
former, and righteousness in the latter passage.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS
IN FAVOUR OF THE

SUFFICIENCY OF FAITH ALONE.

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

Among the separatists from the Church of
Rome at the period of the reformation, no less
than among the separatists from the Church of
England at the present day, it was a favourite
doctrine, that justification by faith consisted in a
full assurance of salvation. Whoever could work
in himself this conviction, was secure of future
happiness. His assurance was infallible; it would
preserve him from ever falling, so as to forfeit his
claim to the kingdom of heaven. Among the
texts adduced in favour of this opinion was that
of the epistle in the Hebrews, x. 22, with this
difference, that former fanatics could only appeal
to the assurance of faith of the ancient Protestant
version, while modern fanatics may appeal to the
full assurance of faith of the present amended
edition. But does the original text, ev nhjoocpoux.
nTOTewa, warrant such a rendering 1 1 have no
hesitation in asserting, that it does not, and I
found my assertion on the authority of those who
could not have been ignorant of the true meaning
of the Greek language, the ancient doctors of
the Greek Church. By these the nltjQocpoQia
niazso)a is said to be, a full and perfect faith, a
faith that believes without doubting whatever
God has revealed. Tavia, says Theodoret, ijtwo-
i/eiy niorevovTEO, xtxt notaav dixovoiav xr\a ipv/tjcr
e^oQi^ot'isa. Tino yao nl^QOcpogiav ExaXEoev.^a)
It is, according to Theophylact, tiiotio nsnX^^w-
fisvy xcu aduTTctxiog. (6)

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

AGAINST

APOSTOLICAL TRADITIONS.

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

(a) Theod. inEp. adHeb.,c. x. (*) Theod. in eund. loc.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION'.

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

MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES.

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

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

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

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

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

(a) Anal., p. 40.
3

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

CONCLUSION.

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

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

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

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

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

Q. V. Did the Protestant Churches ever pre-
tend to be infallible in these translations or other-
wise ?

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

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

A. The reformers of the old Protestant trans-

(6) Anal., p. 42.

PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION.

lations did correct forty errors, and should have
corrected forty more.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Q. X. Will not the Greek professor at May-
nooth admit that the word Icpanal signifies once
for all 1

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

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

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

A. I do not see how he could, unless he were
married. Our blessed Redeemer was often
attended by holy women of his kindred ; why
might not an apostle also 1

Q. XVI. The word naQamoi\u6. signifies fault
as well as sin. The Romanists render it sin :
why may we not render it fault without being
guilty of misconstruction 1

A. I see no great sin in rendering notQqnio)fi&
fault, nor any great fault in rendering it sin.

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

A. Did not Dr. Ryan undertake to refute
the " Errata," and has he not failed in almost
every point 1

THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE.

. Among the many and irreconcileable differ-
ences between Roman Catholics and the secta-
ries of our days, those about the holy scriptures
claim not the least place on the stage of
controversy : as, firstly, whether the Bible is the
sole and only rule of faith ? Secondly, whether
all things necessary to salvation are contained
in the Bible 1 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 condemn, persecute,
and penal-law another, for being of that per-
suasion 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 exposi-
tion and true sense and meaning of the same ?
Fourthly, whence have we the scripture ? That
is, who handed it down to us from the Apostles,
who wrote it ? And by what 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 author-
ity we receive the letter 1 For if Protestants
think, the letter was safe in the custody of the
Roman Catholic Church, from which they
received it, how can they suspect the purity of
that sense, which was kept and delivered to
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 English Protestant
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 Cath-
olic doctrine, and in favour and advantage of
their own erroneous opinions : for,

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

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 evidently
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 the
Apocrypha.

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

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

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

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

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

(o) See Bibles J 579, 1580.

THE AUTHOR 8' l'KEFACE.

credit or authority of the Holy Bible, as perhaps
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 condemn the
sacred scriptures : that they endeavour to lessen
the credit and authority of the Holy Bible.
Thus possessing the poor deluded people with
an ill opinion of Catholics, as if they rejected,
and trod under feet, the written Word : where-
as it is evident 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 re-
jecting, 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 venera-
tion for it, that they always read it on
their knees with the greatest humility and rev-
erence imaginable, not enduring to see it pro-
faned in any kind ; nor so much as to see the
least torn leaf of a Bible put to any manner of
unseemly use. Those who, besides all this,
consider with what very indifferent behaviour
the scripture is ordinarily handled among Pro-
testants, will not, I am confident, say that
Catholics have a less regard for it, than Pro-
testants ; but, on the contrary, a far greater.

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

The holy scriptures were written by the Pro-
phets, Apostles, and Evangelists ; the Old Tes-
tament in Hebrew, except only some few parts in
Chaldee and Syriac ; the greater part of the
New Testament was written in Greek, St.
Matthew's Gospel in Hebrew, and St. Mark's
in Latin. We have not at this day the original
writings of these Prophets and Apostles, nor of
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 authorised and approved of
by the church is sufficiently authentic. For
what avails it for a Christian to believe that
scripture is the Word of God, if he be uncertain
which copy and translation is true ? Yet, not-
withstanding the necessity of admitting some
true authentic copy, Protestants pretend that
there is none authentic in the world ; as may

be seen in the preface to 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 themselves 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 excep-
tions against the infallibility of the Roman Ca-
tholic Church in declaring or decreeing a true
and authentic copy of scripture, and their con-
fession of the uncertainty of their own transla-
tions, that they have no certainty of scripture at
all, nor even of faith, which they ground upon
scripture alone.

That, the Vulgate of the Latin is the most true
and authentic copy, has been the judgment of
God's Church for above those 1300 years ; dur-
ing which time, the Church has always used it ;
and therefore it is, by the sacred council (a) 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 (b) out of Hebrew
by St. Hierom, or St. Jerom ; and the New-Tes-
tament had been before his time translated out of
Greek, but was by him (c) reviewed ; and such
faults as had crept in by the negligence of the
transcribers, were corrected by him by the ap-
pointment of Pope Damasus. " You constrain
me," says he, " to make a new work of an old,
that I, after so many copies of the scriptures
dispersed through the world, should sit as a
certain judge, which of them agree with the true
Greek. I have restored the New Testament to
the truth of the Greek, and have translated the
old according to the Hebrew. Truly, I will
affirm it confidently, and will produce many
witnesses of this work, that I have changed
nothing from the truth of the Hebrew," &c. (b)

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

Yea, the truth and purity of this translation
is such, that even the bitterest of Protestants
themselves are forced to confess it to be the
best, and 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,

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

(b) S. Hierom. in lib. de Viris Illustr. extremo, et in
Prscfat. librorum quos Latinos fecit.

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

(e) S. Aug. de Civit. Dei. lib. 18, c. 43, et Ep. 80, ad
Hierom c. 3, et lib. 2, Doct. Christi, c. 15.

THE AUTHOR S PREFACE.

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

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." (b)

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

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." (</)

In regard of which integrity and learning,
Molinoeus signifies his good esteem thereof,
saying, (e) " I cannot easily forsake the vulgar
and accustomed reading, which also I am accus-
tomed earnestly to defend :" " Yea, (/) I prefer
the vulgar edition, before Erasmus's, Bucer's,
Bullinger's, Brentius's, the Tigurine transla-
tion ; 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,
<fcc, gives it a far higher commendation, in
these words : (g) " I find the vulgar edition of
the Psalter to agree for the sense, with such
dexterity, learning, and fidelity of the Hebrew,
that I doubt not, but the Greek and Latin inter-
preter was a man most learned, most godly, and
of a prophetical spirit." Which certainly are
the best properties of a good translator.

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

You see, how highly our Vulgate in Latin is
commended by these learned Protestants : see
likewise, how it has been esteemed by the an-
cient (i) 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 scrip-
tures, their new doctrines being condemned by
both. For had they allowed any one translation

(a) Whitaker in his Answer to Reynolds, p. 241.

(b) Dove's Persuasion to Recusants, p. 16.

(c) See Dr. Covel's Answer to Burges, pp. 91, 94.
(«') Dr. Hum. de Ratione Interp., lib. 1. pp. 74.
(e) Molin. in Nov. Test.. Part. 30,

(/) Et in luc. 17.

(g) Pellican in Prafat. in Psalter. An 1584.

(ft) Beza in Annot. in Luc.i. 1 . Et in Praefat. Nov. Test.

(i) S. Hierom et St. Aug.supr.; St. Greg., lib. 70.; Mor.
c. 23. ; Istdor., lib. G. Etyrn. c. 5, 7, et de Divin. Offic.
lib. 1, cap. 12 ; S. Beda in Martyrol. Cassiod. 21 Inst. &c. ;

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

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

Ans. W r hen it is certain, that the originals or
fountains aro pure, and not troubled or corrupt,
they are to be preferred before translations :
but it is most certain, that they are corrupted
in divers places, as Protestants themselves are
forced to acknowledge, and as it appears by
their own translations. For example, Ps. xxii.
ver. 1 G, they translate, " They pierced my hands
and my feet :" whereas, according to the He-
brew that now is, it must be read : " As a lion,
my hands, and my feet;" which no doubt, is not
only nonsense, but an intolerable corruption of
the latter Jews against the passion of our Sa-
viour, of which the old authentic Hebrew was
a most remarkable prophecy. Again, according"
to the Hebrew, it is read, (A) Achaz, king of
Israel ; which being false, they in some of their
first translations read, Achaz, king of Juda, ac-
cording to the truth, and as it is in the Greek
and Vulgate Latin. Yet, their Bible of 1579, as
also their last translation, had rather follow the
falsehood of the Hebrew against their own
knowledge, than to be thought beholden to the
Greek and Latin in so light a matter. Likewise,
where the Hebrew says, Zedecias, Joachin's
brother, they are forced to translate Zedecias, his
father's brother, as indeed the truth, is according
to the Greek. (/) So likewise in another place,
where the Hebrew is, " He begat Azubahis 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 with-
out multiplying examples, it is sufficiently known
to Protestants, and by them acknowledged, how
-intolerably the Hebrew fountains and originals
'are by the Jews corrupted : amongst others, Dr.
Humphrey says, "The Jewish superstition, how
many places it has corrupted, the reader may ea-
sily find out and judge." [in) 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." (n)

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

(it) 2 Chron. xxviii. 19.

(I) 4 Kings xxiv. 17, 19.

(?/t) Humph. 1. 1. de Rat. interp. p. 178.

(?i) Lib. ii. p. 219.

THE AUTHORS PREFACE.

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

I would gladly know of our Protestant trans-
lators of tbe Bible, what reasons they have to
tbink tbe Hebrew fountain they boast of so pure
and uncorrupt, seeing not only letters and sylla-
bles have been mistaken, texts depraved, but
even whole books of the Prophets utterly lost
and perished ? How many books of the ancient
Prophets, sometime extant, are not now to be
found 1 We read in the old Testament, of a
Liber bellorum Domini, " The Book of the Wars
of our Lord ; the Book of the Just Men
(Protestants call it the Book of Jasher ;) the
Book of Jehu the son of Hanani ; the Books of
Semeias the Prophet, and of Addo the Seer ;
and Samuel wrote in a book the law of the
kingdom, how kings ought to rule, and laid it
up before our Lord : and the works of Solomon
were written in the Book of Nathan the Pro-
phet, and in the Books of Ahias the Shilonite,
and in the Vision of Addo the Seer." (b) With
several others, which are all quite perished : yea,
and perished in such time, when the Jews were
" the peculiar people of God," and when, of all
nations, " they were to God a holy nation, a
kingly priesthood :" and now, when they are no
national people, have no government, no king,
no priest, but are vagabonds upon the earth, and
scattered among all people : may we reasonably
think their divine and ecclesiastical books to have
been so warily and carefully kept, that all and
every part is safe, pure, and incorrupt 1 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 alter the
whole sense ? As, for example, this very letter
vau for: jod, (c) has certainly made disagreement
in some places ; as where the Septuagint read,
za xouioo- fi5 owog ere qnuAuifty, Fortitudinem meam
ad te custodiam, " My strength I will keep to
thee ;" which reading St. Hierom also followed.
It is now in the Hebrew 3>?. fortitudinem ejus,
" His strength I will keep to thee." (d) Which
corruptions our last Protestant translators fol-
low, reading, " Because of his strength will I
wait upon thee ;" and to make sense of it they
add the words, " because of," and change the
words, "keep to" into " wait upon," to the great
perverting of the sense and sentence. A like
error is that in Gen. iii. (if it be an error, as
many think it is none,) Ipsa lonteret caput tuum,
for Ipse or Ipsum, about which Protestants keep
up such a clamour, (e)

As the Hebrew has been by the Jews abused

{a) Conrad. Pell. Tom. 4, in Psal. Ixxxv. 9.

(b) Numb. xxi. 14 ; Josh. x. 13 ; Kings i. 18 ; 2 Paral.
XX. 34 ; xii. 15 ; 1 Kings x. 25 ; 2 Paral. ix. 29.

(d) Psal. lviii. 10, in Prot Bible it is Paa 1 . lix.9.
(c) Gen. iii. 15.

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 Chris-
tian doctrine, insomuch that Protestants them-
selves, who pretend so great veneration for it,
dare not follow it in many places, but are forced
to fly to our Vulgate Latin, as is observed in
the preface to the Rhemish Testament ; where
also you may find sufficient reasons why our
Catholic Bible is translated into English rather
from the Vulgate Latin than from the Greek.

To pass by several examples of corruptions
in the Greek copy, which might be produced, I
will only, amongst many, take notice of these
two following rash and inconsiderate additions ;
first, John viii. 59, after these words, Exivit e
lemplo, " Went out of the temple ;" are added,
Transiens per medium corum, sic prceteriit ;
" 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 Eras-
mus, that the first part, ' going through the
midst of them,' is taken out of Luke iv. 30, and
crept into the text by fault of the writers, who
found that written in the margin : and that
the latter part, ' and so passed by,' was added
to make this chapter join well with the next.
And I am moved thus to think, not only because
neither Chrysostom nor Augustine (he might
have said, nor Hierom) make any mention 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. (g) Thus Beza dis-
putes against it ; for which cause, 1 suppose, it
is omitted by our first English translators, who
love to follow what their master Beza de-
livers to them in Latin, though forsooth they
would have us think they followed the Greek
most precisely ; for in their translations of the
year 1561, 1562, 1577, 1579, they leave it out,
as Beza does ; yet in their Testament of 1580,
as also in this last translation (Bible 1683), they
put it in with as much confidence, as if it had
neither been disputed against by Beza, 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 king-
dom, the power, and the glory, for ever and ever,
Amen,'" which not only Erasmus dislikes, (h)
but Bullinger himself holds it for a mere
patch sowed to the rest, " by, he knows not
whom;" (i) and allows well of Erasmus's judg-
ment, reproving Laurentius Valla for finding
fault with the Latin edition, because it wants it :
" There is no reason," says he, " why Laurentius
Valla should take the matter so hotly, as though
a great part of the Lord's Prayer were cut

(_/*) Aie'XQow <5<<z jieCH (inruii kcu Trapr)ytv suuj.

(g) Beza in Job. viii. 59.

(A) Erasm. in Annot.

(i) Bullinger, Decad. v. Serm. 5.

THE AUTHOR S PREFACE.

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

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

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

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

(a) Beza in Praefat. Nov. Test., Anno 1556.

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

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

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

Ans. Some books of the Vulgate edition have
Ipsa, and some others Ipse ; and though many
Hebrew copies have Ipse, yet there want not
some which have Ipsa : and the points being
taken away, the Hebrew word maybe translated
Ipsa : yea the holy fathers (e) St. Augustine,
St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostom, St. Gregory,
St. Bede, &c, read it Ipsa, and I think we
have as great reason to follow their interpreta-
tion of it as Cheminitius's, or that of the Pro-
testants of our days ; and though the word con-
teret in the Hebrew is of the masculine gender,
and so should relate to Semen, which also in
the Hebrew is of the masculine gender, yet it is
not rare in the scriptures to have pronouns and
verbs of the masculine gender, joined with nouns
of the feminine, as in Ruth i. 8 ; Esther i. 20 ;
Eccles. xii. 5. The rest of Cheminitius's cavils
you will find sufficiently answered by the
learned Cardinal Bellarmine, lib. ii. de Verb,
Dei, cap. 12, 13, 14.

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

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

(d) Gen. iii.

(e) St. August., lib. 2, deGen.cont. Manich ,c.xviii.l.
11, de Gen. ad Literam, cap. xxxvi. ; St. Ambr. lib. de
Fu»a Sseculi, cap. vii.; St. Chrysost. in Horn. 17, in Gen
St. Greg. lib. i.; Mor. cap. xxxviii.; Beda et alii in hunc
locum.

(/) 1 Cor. xv. 54.

(g) See Dr. Reynolds' Refutation of Whitaker's Re-
pichension3, chap. x.

THE AUTHOR S PREFACE.

on immortality." Where you see the words,
which I have put down, inclosed with paren-
thesis, are contained most expressly in the fore-
going sentence, which is in all our Testaments ;
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 unfaithful dealing, see-
ing he put the self-same words and sense in the
next lines immediately preceding? And that it
was not corrupted since, appears by the common
reading of most men, in all after ages. St. Am-
brose, in his commentary upon the same place
reads as we do. So does St. Augustine, De Ci-
vitate Dei, cited by St. Bede, in his commentary
upon the same chapter, (a) So read also the rest
of the Catholic interpreters, Haymo, Anselm, &c.

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

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

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

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

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

(a) St. Beda in 1 Cor. c. xv.
(ft) Zuing. t. 2, ad Luth., lib. de S.
(c) Keckerman, Syst. 8; Theol., lib. 2, p. 188; IS.
Jon. v. 7.

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. iii. 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 cor-
ruption being admonished, he persisted obstinate
and wilful, saying, " So I will, so I command ;
let my will be instead of reason," &c. (d) Lu-
ther will have it so ; and at last thus concludes,
" The word alone must remain in my New Tes-
tament ; although all the Papists run mad, they
shall not take it from thence : it grieves me,
that I did not add also those two other words,
Omnibus et omnium, sine omnibus operibus, om-
nium legum ; without all works of all laws."

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

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

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 there-

of-" (g)

Beza reproves the translation set forth by
Oecolampadius, 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
(h) 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."

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

(d) To. v. Germ. fol. 141, 144.

(e) See Zuing. Tom. 2, ad Luth. lib. de Sacr.,fol.388,
389.

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

(g) Hospin. in Concord. Discord, fol. 138.

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

(i) In sua Translat. Nov. Test. Part. IS, fol. 1 10.

THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE.

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

In short, Bucer and the Osianderians rise up
against Luther for false translations ; Luther
against Minister ; Beza against Castalio, and
Castalio against Beza ; Calvin against Servetus ;
lllyricus against both Calvin and Beza. (6)
Staphylus and Emserus noted in Luther's Dutch
translations of the New Testament only, about
one thousand four hundred heretical corrup-
tions, (c) And thus far of the confessed cor-
ruptions in foreign Protestant translators.

If you desire a character of our English Pro-
testant versions, pray be pleased to take it from
the words of these following Protestants ;
some of the most zealous and precise of whom,
in a certain treatise, entitled, " A petition di-
rected to his most excellent majesty King
James the First," complain, " that our transla-
tion of the Psalms, comprised in our Book of Com-
mon Prayer, doth, in addition, subtraction, and
alteration, differ from the truth of the Hebrew
in, at least, two hundred places." If two hun-
dred corruptions were found in the Psalms 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 ; remain-
ing doubtful, " whether a man may, with a
sale conscience, subscribe thereto :" yea, they
wrote and published a particular treatise, en-
titled, " A Defence of the Ministers' Reasons
for refusal of Subscribing ;" the whole argument
and scope whereof, is only concerning mis-
translating ; yea, the reader may see. in the
beginning of the said book, the title of every
chapter, twenty-six in all, pointing to the
mistranslations there handled in particular.

(<0 (0

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

(a) In Test. Part. 20, 30, 40, 64, 65, CO, 71,99, et Part. 8,
13, 14,21, 23.

(b) In Defens. tians.,p. HO.

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

(e) That Christ descended into hell, p. 116, 117,118,
121, 151.

said otherwise, but that some things may be
amended." (/)

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, " a trans-
lation which is absurd and senseless, pervert-
ing, in many places, the meaning of the Holy
Ghost." (g)

For which cause, Protestants of tender con-
sciences made great scruple of subscribing
thereto : " How shall I," says Mr. Barges*
" 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 V (fi)

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

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

Now these our Protestant English transla-
tions being thus confessedly " corrupt, absurd,
senseless, contrary, and preverting the meaning
of the Holy Ghost ;" had not King James the
First just cause to affirm, " that he could never
see a Bible well translated into English ?'' (/)
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, 1 refer to
the judgment of the world ; and do freely asseit
with Doctor Whitaker, a learned Protestant.

(/) Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, p. 255.

(i>) See the Abridgment, which the Ministers of Lincoln
Diocess delivered to his Majesty, p. 11, 12, 13.

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

(/') See the Triple Cord, p. 147.

(A) Seethe Conference before the King's Majesty, p. 4t>,
47. Apologies concerning Cbriffs descent into hell at
Ddd.

(I) Conference before his Majesty, p. 40.

THE AUTHOR S PREFACE.

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

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

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

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

(«) Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, p. 235.

(b) Dr. Gregory Martin wrote a whole Treatise against
them

(e) Bishop Tunstal discovered in Tyndal's New Testa-
ment only, no less than 2000 corruptions.

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

They have also corrected that most absurd
and shameful corruption, grave ; and, as they
ought to do, have instead of it translated hell,
so that now they read, " Thou wilt not leave my
soul in hell ;" whereas Beza has it, " Thou wilt
not leave my carcase in the grave." Yet 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 there-
by be forced to admit of Liinbus Patrum, where
Jacob's soul was to descend, when he said, " I
will go down to my son into hell, mourning,"
&c. And to balance the advantage they think
they may have given Catholics where they have
corrected it, they have (against purgatory and
Limbus Patrum) in other places 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," (d) they translate,
" Quickened by the spirit, by which also he went
and preached unto the spirits in prison." This
was so notorious a corruption, that Dr. Mon-
tague, afterwards Bishop of Chichester and
Norwich, reprehended Sir Henry Saville for it,
to whose care the translating of St. Peter's
epistle was committed ; Sir Henry Saville told
him plainly, that Dr. Abbot, archbishop of
Canterbury, and Dr. Smith, bishop of Glou-
cester, corrupted and altered this translation of
this place, which himself had sincerely performed.
Note here, by the bye, that if Dr. Abbot's con-
science could so lightly suffer him to corrupt the
scripture, his, or his servant Mason's forging
the Lambeth Records, could not possibly cause
the least scruple, especially being a thing so
highly for their interest and honour.

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

(d) 1 Peter iii. 18, 19.

THE AUTHOR S PREFACE.

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

We see how they endeavour here to persuade
the king and the world, that Catholics are desi-
rous to conceal the light of the Gospel : whereas
on the contrary, nothing is more obvious, than
the daily and indefatigable endeavours of Ca-
tholic missioners and priests, not only in preach-
ing and explaining God's holy word in Europe ;
but also in forsaking their own countries and
inconveniences, and travelling with great diffi-
.culties and dangers by sea and land, into Asia,
Africa, America, and the Antipodes, with no
other design than to publish the doctrine of
Christ, and to discover and manifest the light 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
brethern, who run their own wavs 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 tbcy slick 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 an-
cient church, as that of their self-conceited bre-
thren the Presbyterians, and others, is acknow-
ledged to be ? And yet they are neither more
learned nor more skilful in the tongues, nor
more godly than those they so much contemn
and blame.

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

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

" The author of the book of Ecclesiastes," says
one of them, " had neither boots nor spurs, but
rid on a long stick, in begging shoes." Who
scoff at the book of Judith : compare the Ma-
cabees to Robin Hood, and Bevis of Southamp-
ton : call Baruch, a peevish ape of Jeremy :
count the Epistle to the Hebrews as stubble :
and deride St. James's, as an epistle made of
straw : contemn three of the four Gospels.
What ridiculing is this of the w r ord of God !
Nor were the first pretended reformers only
guilty of this, but the same vein has still con-
tinued in the writings, preachings, and teachings
of their successors ; a great part of which are
nothing but a mere mockery, ridiculing, and
misrepresenting of the doctrine of Christ, as is
too notorious and visible in many scurrilous and
scornful writings and sermons lately published
by several men of no small figure in our English
Protestant Church. By which scoffing strata-
gem, when they cannot laugh the vulgar into a
contempt and abhorrence of the Christian reli-
gion, they fly to their other weapons, to wit,
" imposing upon the people's weak understand-
ing, bv a corrupt, imperfect, and falsely trans-
lated Bible." (a)

Tertullian complained thus of the heretics of
his time, lata hcr.resis non recipit quasdum scrip-
luras, &c. " These heretics admit not some
books of scriptures ; and those which they do
admit, by adding to, and taking from, they per-
vert to serve their purpose ; and if they receive
some books, yet they receive them not entirely ;
or if they receive them entirely, after some sort
nevertheless they spoil them by devising divers
interpretations. In this case, what will you do,
who think yourselves skilful in scriptures, when
that which you defend, the adversary denies ; and
that which you deny, he defends ?" Et tu
quidem nihil perdrs nisi vocem de r.ontentionc,
nihil conscqueris nisi bilem de hlasphematione :
" And you indeed shall lose nothing but words
in this contention ; nor shall you gain any thing
but anger from his blasphemy." How fitly may
these words be applied to the pretended refor-
mers of our days ! who, when told of their abu-
sing, corrupting, and misinterpreting the holy
scriptures, are so far from acknowledging their
faults, that on the contrary they blush not to
defend them. When Dr. Martin in his disco-
very, told them of their falsifications in the
Bible, did they thank him for letting them see
their mistakes, as indeed men endued with the
spirit of sincerity and honesty would have done ?
No, they were so far from that, that Fulk, as
much as in him lies, endeavours very obstinately
to defend them: and Whitaker affirms, that
" their translations are well done." Why then
were they afterwards corrected 1 and that all the
faults Dr. Martin finds in them are but trifles :
demanding what is there in their Bibles that can
be found fault with, as not translated well and
truly 1 (b) Such a pernicious, obstinate, and
contentious spirit, are heretics possessed with,

(a) Dr. St , Dr. S., Dr. T., Mr. W., &c.
(£) Whitaker, p. 14.

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 con-
trary, are willing to embrace it.

How many innocent, and well-meaning people,
are there in England, who have scarcely in all
their life-time, ever heard any mention of a
Catholic, or Catholic religion, unless under
these monstrous and frightful terms of idolatry,
superstition, antichristianism, &c. 1 How many
have ever heard a better character of Catholics,
than bloody-minded people, thirsters after blood,
worshippers of wooden gods, prayers to stocks
and stones, idolators, antichrists, 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 enter-
tain a strange prejudice against religion, and a
detestation of Catholics ?

Whereas, if these blindfolded people were
once undeceived, and brought to understand,
that all these monstrous scandals are falsely
charged upon Catholics ; that the Catholic
doctrine is so far from idolatry, that it teaches
quite the contrary, viz., That whosoever gives
God's honour to stocks and stones, as Protes-
tants phrase it, to images, to saints, to angels,
or to any creature ; yea, to any thing but to
God himself, is an idolater, and will be damned
for the same ; that Catholics are so far from
thirsting after the blood of others, that on the
contrary, their doctrine teaches 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 repre-
sented, that on the contrary, Faith, Hope, and
Charity, are the three divine virtues it teaches
us ; Prudence, Justice, Fortitude, and Tem-
perance, are the four moral virtues it exhorts
us to : which christian virtues, when it happens
that they are, through human fraility, and the
temptations of our three enemies, the world, the
flesh, and the devil, either wounded or lost ;
then are we taught to apply ourselves to such
divine remedies, as our blessed Saviour Christ
has left us in his church, viz., his holy sacra-
ments, by which our spiritual infirmities are
cured and repaired. By the sacrament of bap-

THE AUTHOR S PREFACE.

tism 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 mem-
ber : so likewise by the sacrament of penance
all our actural sins are forgiven ; the same holy
Spirit of God working in this to the forgiveness
of actual sin, that wrought before in the sacra-
ment of baptism to the forgiveness of original
sin. We are taught likewise, that by partaking
of Christ's very body, and his 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 judgement, 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
consecrated by the holy sacrament of order, can
consecrate and administer the holy sacraments.
This is our religion, this is the centre it tends
to, and the sole end it aims at ; 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, I say, thousands of well-
meaning Protestants understood this, as also that
Protestancy itself is nothing else but a mere im-
posture begun in Germany and England, main-
tained and upheld by the wicked policy of self-
interested statesmen ; and still continued by mis-
representing and ridiculing the Catholic religion,
by misinterpreting the holy scriptures ; yea, by
falsifying, abusing, and, as will appear is this fol-
lowing treatise, by most abominably corrupting
the sacred word of God : how far would it be
from them obstinately and pertinaciously to ad-
here to the false and erroneous principles, in
which they have hitherto been educated ? How
willingly would they submit their understandings
to the obedience of faith 1 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 doctrine of God's holy
church ? In fine, if once enlightened with a true
faith, and encouraged with a firm hope, what
zealous endeavours would they not use to acquire
such virtues and christian perfections, as might
inflame them with a perfect charity, which is the
very ultimate and highest step to eternal felicity ?
To which, may God of his infinite goodness
and tender mere)'-, through the merits and bitter
death and passion of our dear Saviour Jesus
Christ, bring us all. Amen.

THE TRUTH

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE

EXAMINED.

Our pretended Reformers, having squared and
modelled to themselves a faith contrary to the
certain and direct rule of apostolical tradition,
delivered in God's holy church, were forced to
have recourse to the scripture, as their only rule
of faith ; according to which, the Church of
England has, in the sixth of her Thirty-nine
Articles, declared, " that the scripture compre-
hended in the canonical books (i. e., so many of
them as she thinks lit 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 gen crally practised than the corrupting
of the holy scripture, by false and partial transla-
tions ; by which they endeavoured, right or
wrong, to make those sacred volumes speak in
favour of their new-invented faith and doctrine.

The corruptions of this nature in the first
English Protestant translations, were so many,
and so notorious, that Dr. Gregory Martin com-
posed a whole book of them, in which he dis-
covers the fraudulent shifts the translators were
fain to make use of, in defence of them. Some-
times they recurred to the HebreAV text. ; and
when that spoke against their new doctrine,
then to the Greek ; when that favoured them
not, to some copy acknowledged 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 apoc-
ryphal ; and when that cannot be made prob-
able, they fall downright upon the prophefs
and apostles who wrote them, saying, " that
they might and did err, even after the coming
of the Holy Ghost." Thus Luther, accused by
Zuinglius for corrupting the word of God, had

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

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

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

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

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

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

(b) De Capt. Babil., cap. de Extrem. Unct., torn. 2,
Wittemb.

(d) Cent. 1, 1. ii., c. 10, col. 560.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

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

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

Zanchius mentions some Caivinists, in his
Epist. ad Misc., who said, " If Paul should
come to Geneva, and preach the same hour
with Calvin, they would leave Paul, and hear
Calvin." And Lavatherus affirms, that " some of
Luther's followers, not the meanest among their
doctors, said, they had rather doubt of St. Paul's
doctrine than the doctrine of Luther, or of the
Confession of Augsburgh."(6)

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

Doctor Goad, in his four Disputations with
Father Campion, affirms, that " St. Peter erred
in faith, and that, after the sending down of the
Holy Ghost upon them."(rf) And Whitaker
says, " It is evident, that even after Christ's
ascension, and the Holy Ghost's descending
upon the apostles, the whole church, not only
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 we see these to have
been in the apostles, even after" the Holy Ghost
descended upon them. "(e)

Thus, these fallible reformers, who, to coun-
tenance their corruptions of scripture, grace
their own errors, and authorise their church's
fallibility, would make the apostles themselves
fallible ; but indeed, they need not have gone
this bold way to work, for we are satisfied, and
can very easily believe their church to be falli-
ble, their doctrines erroneous, and themselves
corrupters of the scriptures, without being forced
to hold, that the apostles erred. (f)

(a) Calvin in Galat., c. ii., v. 14, p. 511.

(b) Lavater in Histor. Sacrament, p. 18.

(d) The second dav's conference.

(e) Whitaker de Eccles. contr. Bellar. Controvers. 2
q. 4, pi 223.

(/) Proteinics, to authorise their own errors and fal-

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

PjEMpE I come to particular examples of their
falsifications and corruptions, let me advertise
the 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 : to 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 in London,
in the year 1683.

In all which said Bibles, (g) I shall take
notice sometimes of one translation, sometimes
of another, as every one's falsehood shall give
occasion : neither is it a good defence for the
falsehood of one, that it is truly translated in
another, the reader being deceived by any one,
because commonly he reads but one ; yea, one
of them is a condemnation of the other. And
where the English corruptions, here noted, are
not to be found in one of the first three Bibles,
let. the reader look in another of them ; for if
he find not the falsification in all, he will cer-
tainly find it in two, or at least in one of them :
and in this case, I advertise the reader to be
very circumspect, that he think not, by and by,
these are falsely charged, because there maybe
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 who print them again, dissent or disa-
gree from their masters.

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

libility, would make the apostles themselves erroneous
and fallible.

Or) Bib. 15G2,77,or79.

(h) See the Preface to the Rheims New Testament

OF THE SCRIPTURE.

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

For testimony of which, what greater argu-
ment 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 apos-
tles ?" (a) And in St. Peter, these words,
" Labour, that by good works you may make
sure your vocation and election." Suddenly
.after he had, contrary to his profession, taken
a wife, as he called her, and preached, that all
votaries might do the same : that " faith alone
justified, and that good works were not neces-
sary to salvation." Immediately, I say, after
he fell into these heresies, he began to read and
translate the former texts of scripture accord-
ingly, in this manner : " Have not we power to
lead about a sister, a wife, as the rest of the
apostles ?" and, " Labour that you may make
sure your vocation and election," leaving out
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 er-
rors.

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

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

(a) 1 Cor. \x. 5, Mulierem sororem. 2 Pet. i. 10, Ut
per bona opera certani vestram vocationeui et electio-
nem faciatis.

work, set down the Latin text, as well as the
Greek word whereon their corruption depends ;
yet, where they truly keep to the Greek and He-
brew, 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 Vulgate Latin edition, putting the word that
their English Bibles have corrupted in a dif-
ferent character ; to which I have also added
the Greek and Hebrew words, so often as they
are, or may be necessary, for the better under-
standing of the word on which the stress lies in
the corrupt translation.

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

In the third column you have the corruption,
and false translation, from those Bibles that
were set forth in English at the beginning of
that most miserable revolt and apostacy from
the Catholic church, viz., from that Bible which
was translated in King Edward the Sixth's time,
and reprinted in the year 1562, and from the two
next impressions, made Anno 1577, and 1579.
All which were authorised in the beginning of
Queen Elizabeth's reign, when the Church of
England began to get footing, and to exercise
dominion over her fellow sectaries, as well as
to tyrannize over Catholics ; whence it cannot
be denied, but those Bibles were wholly agree-
able to the principles and doctrines of the said
Church of England in those days, however they
pretend at this day to correct or alter them.

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

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 latter,
it has not always been the effect of plain dealing
and sincerity ; for if such candid intention of
amending former faults had every where pre-
vailed with them, they would not in any place
have made it worse, but would also have cor-
rected all the rest, as well as one or two, that are
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 un-
warrantable proceedings.

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

As for others more learned, I will refer them
to the work itself, that I have made use of
through this whole treatise, viz., to that most
elaborate and learned work of Dr. Gregory
Martin, entitled, a " Discovery of the manifold
Corruptions of the Holy Scriptures," &c,
printed atRheims, Anno 1582, which is not hard
to be found.

Have we not great cause to believe, that our
Protestant divines do obstinately teach contrary
to their own consciences ? For, besides their
having been reproved, without amendment, for
their impious handling the holy scriptures, if
their learning be so profound and bottomless, as
themselves proudly boast in all their works, we
cannot but conclude, that they must needs both
see their errors, and know the truth. And
therefore, though we cannot always cry out to
them, and their followers, " the blind lead the
blind," yet, which is, alas ! a 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 church, than to hear
themselves branded with the general title of
heretics ; so nothing has been ever more com-

mon among Catholics, than justly to stigmatize
such with the same infamous character. I ara
not ignorant how ill the Protestants of our days
resent this term, and therefore do avoid, as much
as the nature of this work will permit, giving
them the least disgust by this horrid appellation :
nevertheless, I must needs give them to under-
stand, that the nature of the hoty scripture is
such, that whosoever do voluntarily corrupt and
pervert it, to maintain their own erroneous doc-
trines, cannot lightly be characterized by a less
infamous title, than that of heretics ; and their
false versions, by the title of heretical transla-
tions, under which denomination I have placed
these following corruptions.

Notwithstanding, I would have the Protestant
reader to take notice, that I neither name nor
judge all to be heretics, as is hinted in my preface,
who hold errors contradictory to God's church,
but such as pertinaciously persist in their errors.
So proper and essential is pertinacity to
the nature of heresy, that if a man should hold
or believe ever so many false opinions against
the truth of Christian faith, but yet not with
obstinacy and pertinacity, he should err, but
not be an heretic. Saint Augustine asserting,
that "if any do defend their opinions, though
false and perverse, with no obstinate animosity,
but rather with all solicitude seek the truth,
and are ready to be corrected when they find
the same, these men are not "to be accounted
heretics, because they have not any election of
their own that contradicts the doctrine of the
church." (a) And in another place, against the
Donatists, " 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 an heretic, unless when the doctrine of the
church is made manifest unto him, he will rather
choose to hold that which he held before, than
yield thereunto. "(5)

Again, " Those," says he, " who in the church
of Christ hold infectious and perverse doctrine,
if when they are corrected for it, they resist
stubbornly, and will not amend their pestilent
and deadly persuasions, but persist to defend
the same, these men are made heretics :"(c) by
all which places of St. Augustine, we see, that
error without pertinacity, and obstinacy against
God's church is no heresy. It would be well,
therefore, if Protestants, in reading Catholic
books, would endeavour rather to inform them-
selves of the truth of Catholic doctrine, and
humbly embrace the same, than to suffer that
prejudice against religion, in which they have
unhappily been educated, so strongly to bias
them, as to turn them from men barely educated
in error, to obstinate heretics ; such as the more
to harden their own hearts, 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

(a) S. Aug. Ep. 162.

(b) Lib- 4, contr. Donat., c. vi.

OF THE SCRIPTURE.

longer secure them from that eternal punishment
to which heresy undoubtedly hurries them : St.
Paul, in his Epistle to Titus, affirming, that " a
man that is an heretic, after the first and second
admonition, is subverted, and sinneth, being
condemned b) r his own judgment." (a)

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

In what can an heretical intention more evi-
dently appear, than in falsely translating and
corrupting the holy Bible, against the Catholic
church, and such doctrines as it has by an unin-
terrupted tradition, brought down to us from the
apostles 1 As for example :

1 . Against the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar.

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

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

4. Against the *\uthority of Bishops.

5. Against the sacred Altar on which Christ's
Body and Blood is offered.

6. Against the Sacrament of Baptism.

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

8. Against the Sacrament of Marriage.

9. Against Intercession of Saints.

10. Against sacred Images.

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

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

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

14. Against Free Will.

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

16. Against Apostolical Traditions.

Yea, against several other doctrines of God's
holy Church, and in defence of divers strange
opinions of their own, which the reader will find
taken notice of in this treatise : all which, when
the 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 ilihandling of the Bible by their translators :
nor have, I am confident, their ministerial guides
ever yet dealt so ingenuously by them, as to tell
them that such and such a text of scripture is

(a) Titus iii. 10.

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

Does it appear to be done by negligence, ig-
norance, 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 cor-
ruption, 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 partiality: and this they frequenllv
do.

What is it else but wilful partiality, when in
words of ambiguous and divers significations,
they will have it signify here or there, as pleases
themselves ? So that in this place it must signify
thus, in that place, not thus ; as Bc/.a, and one
of their En ;lish Bibles, for example, urge the
Greek word yviidy.it to signify wife, and not to
signify wife, both against the virginity and
chastity of priests.

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

That their corruptions are voluntary and
designedly done, is evident in such places where
passives are turned into actives, and actives into
passives ; where participles are made to disagree
in case from their substantives ; where solojcisms
are imagined when the construction is most
agreeable ; and errors prel ended 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
like form and force ; example : if Ulccrosus be
read full of sores, why must not Gratiosa be
translated full of grace ?

When the words, images, shrines, procession,
devotions, excommunications, &c. are used in
ill part, where they are not in the orginal text ;
and the words, hymns, grace, mystery, sacra-
ment, church, altar, priest, Catholic, justifica-
tion, tradition, &c. avoided and suppressed,
where they are in the original, as if no such
words were in the text : is it not an apparent
token of design, and that it is done purposely
to disgrace or suppress the said things and
speeches 1

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

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

by and by, that they do the office of a translator,
not who translates word for word, but who
expresses the sense : so it comes to pass that
whilst every man will rather freely follow his
own judgment, than be a religious interpreter
of the Holy Ghost, he rather perverts many
things, than translates them." This is spoken
well enough, if he had done accordingly. But,
doing quite the contrary, is he not a dissembling
hypocrite in so saying, and a wilful heretic in so
doing 1

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

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

To amend and rectify such, the church (as
you may read in the preface to the Sixtine
edition) has used the greatest industry imagi-
nable. Pope Pius IV. caused not only the
original languages, but other copies to be care-
fully examined : Pius V. prosecuted that la-
borious work ; and by Sixtus V. it was finished,
who commanded it to be put to press, as
appears by his bull, which begins, " Eternus
Me Calcstivrn.? &c, Anno 1585. Yet, notwith
standing the bull prefixed before his Bible, then
printed, the same Pope Sixtus, as is seen in the
preface, made Anno 1592, after diligent exami-
nation, found that no few faults slipped into his
impression, by the negligence of the printers :
and therefore, Censuit atque decrevit, he both
judged and decreed to have the whole work
examined and reprinted ; but that second cor-
rection being prevented by his death, was after
the very short reign of three other popes, un-
dertaken, 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

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

OF THE SCRIPTURE.

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

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

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

Mr. James makes a great deal of noise about
his impertinent comparisons between these two
editions, and that of Louvain : yet among all his
differences, he finds not one contrariety in any
material point of faith or morals : and as for
other differences, such as touch not faith and
religion, arising from the expressions, being
longer or shorter, 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 Louvain Bible gave
the different readings, without determining
which was to be preferred ; and what faults
were shpped 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 comparison, read
the learned James Grester, who sufficiently dis
covers his untruths, with a " Mentito tertio
Thomas James decern millia verborum" &c, after
which, judge whether he hits every thing he
says ; and whether the Yulgate Latin is to be
corrected by the Louvain annotations, or these
by the Yulgate, if any thing were amiss in either 1
In fine, whether, if Mr James's pretended dif-
ferences arise from comparing all with the
Hebrew, Greek, and Chaldee, must we needs
suppose him to know the last energy and force
of every Hebrew, Greek, or Chaldee word,
when there is a controversy, better than the
authors of the Louvain, and correctors of the
Yulgate Latin, the Sixtine- Clementine edition ?
Again, let us demand of him, whether all his
differences imply any material alteration in
faith or morals, or introduce any notable error,
contrary to God's revealed verities ? Or are they
not rather mere verbal differences, grounded on
the obscure signification of original words ? In
fine, if he or any for him, plead any material
alteration, let them name any authentic copy,
either original or translation ; by the indispu-
table integrity whereof these supposed errors
may be cancelled, and God's pure revealed
verities put in their place. But to do this, after
such immense labour and diligence used in the
correction of the Vulgate, will prove a desperate
impossibility. (a)

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

(a) See the Preface to Sixtus V., Edit. Antwerp, 1599 ;
and Bib. Max , Sext., 19, 20 ; Serarius, c. 19.
(&) Rom. iii. 28.
(c) Mark xi. 26.
Id) 1 Thes. iv. 3.
(e) John v. 7.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS OF THE SCRIPTURE.

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

To conclude this point, no man can be cer-
tainly assured of the true scripture, unless he
first come to a certainty of a true church, inde-
pendently of scripture : find out therefore the
true church, and we know, by the authority of
our undoubted testimony, the true scripture ;
for the infallible testimony of the church is ab-
solutely necessary for assuring us of an authen-
tic scripture. And this I cannot see how
Protestants can deny, especially when they
seriously consider, that in matters of religion,
it must needs be an unreasonable thing to endea-
vour to oblige any man to be tried by the scrip-
tures of a false religion ; for who can in pru-
dence require of a Christian to stand in debates
of religion to the decisions of the scripture of
the Turks, " the Alcoran V Doubtless, there-
fore, when men appeal to such 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 ?'.' (a)

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

In like manner, when they are forced to have
recourse to the private spirit in religious mat-
ters, doubtless they design not to appeal to the
private spirit of an Atheist, a Jew, or an He-
retic, but to the private spirit of such as are of
the true religion : and is it possible for them to
know certainly who are members of the true
church ? or what appertains to the true reli-
gion, unless they be certainly informed " which
is the true church ?" So that, 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.

(a) We must of necessity know the true church, be-
fore we be certain either which is true scripture, or which
is the true sense of scripture ; or by what spirit it is to
beexpounded. And whether that church which has con-
tinued visible in the world from Christ's time till this
day, or that which was never known or heard of in the
world till 1500 years after our Saviour, is the true
church, let the world judge.

And of this opinion was the great St. Augus-
tine, when he declared, that " he would not be-
lieve the Gospel, if it was not that the authority
of the Catholic Church moved him to it :" Ego
vero Evangelio non crederem, nisi me Ecclesicp.
Catholicce commoveret authoritas. (b)

OF THE CANONICAL BOOKS OF
SCRIPTURE.

The Catholic Church " setting this always be-
fore her eyes, that, errors being removed, the
very purity of the Gospel 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
discipline 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. (c) These are the words of the
sacred Council of Trent ; which further or-
dained, that the table, or catalogue, of the cano-
nical books should be joined to this decree, lest
doubt might arise to any, which books they are
that are received by the council. They are
these following, viz. :

Of the Old Testament.

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

Joshua, Judges, Ruth.

Four of the Kings.

Two of Paralipomenon.

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

Tobias, Judith, Hester, Job, David's Psalter
of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canti-
cles, Wisdom, Ecclcsiasticus, Isaias, Hieremias,
with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel.

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

The first and second of the Machabees.

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 Evangelist.

Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul, viz., to the,
Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Gala-
tians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians, to
the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, two to
Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews.

Two of St. Peter the Apostle.

(b) S. Aug., lib. contr. Epist. Manich., cap. v.

OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL

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
Catholic Church, and as they are in the old Vul-
gate Latin edition, &c, be he anathema. "

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

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

(a) 3 Concil. Carthag. , Can. 47.

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

(d) S. Aug., lib. de Praedest. Sanct, c. 14.

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

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

THE BOOK OF TOBIAS

Is, by St. Cyprian, " de Oratione Dominica"
alleged as divine scripture, to prove that prayer
is good with fasting and alms. St. Ambrose
calls this book by the common name of scripture,
saying, " he will briefly gather the virtues of
Tobias, which the scripture in an historical
manner lays forth at large ;"(/) calling al&o this
history prophetical, and Tobias a prophet : and
in another place, he alleges this book, as he
does other holy scriptures, to provide that the
virtues of God's servants far excel those of the
moral philosophers. (»-) St. Augustine made a
special sermon of Tobias, as he did of Job. (h)
St. Chrysostom alleges it as scripture, denounc-
ing a curse against the contemners of it. (i)
St. Gregory also alleges it as holy scripture, (k)
St. Bede expounds this whole book mystically,
as he does other holy scriptures. St. Hieroiu
dated it out of the Chaldee language,
•' judging it more meet to displease the Phari-
saical Jews, who reject it, than not to satisfy the
will of holy bishops, urging to have it." Ep.
ad Chromat. et Heliodoriun. To. 3. In fine,
St. Augustine tells us the cause of its being
written, in these words : " The servant of God,
holy Tobias, is given lo 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 but from
him."

OF THE BOOK OF JUDITH.

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

(/) S. Amb., lib. de Tobia. c. i.

(g) Lib. 3, Offic, c. 14.

(A) S. Aug., Scrm., 22G. de Tem.

(») S. Chrysost, Horn. 15, ad Heb.

(i) S. Greg., part. 3, Pastor, curu> admon. 21.

OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL.

sufficient to convince matters of faith in <§ontro-
versy, numbering it with other scriptures, where-
of none doubts, saying, " Ruth, Hester, Judith,
were of so great renown, that they gave names
to the sacred volumes." (a) St. Ambrose, St.
Augustine, St. Chrysostom, and many other holy
fathers, account it for canonical scripture.

PART OF THE BOOK OF HESTER.

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

OF THE BOOKS OF WISDOM.

It is granted, that several of the ancient
fathers would not urge these books of Wisdom,
and others, in their writings against the Jews,
not that themselves doubted of their authority ;
but because they knew that they would be rejec-
ted by the Jews as not canonical : and so St.
Hierom, with respect to the Jews, said these
books were not canonical ; nevertheless, he often
alleged testimonies out of them, as from other
divine scriptures ; sometimes with this paren-
thesis, Si cui tamen placet libnmirecipcre, in cap.
viii. and xii. Zachariae : but in his latter writings
absolutely without any such restriction, as in
cap. i. and Ivi. Isaiae, and in xviii. Jeremise ;
where he professes to allege none but -canoni-
cal scripture, (c) As for the other ancient
fathers, namely, St. Irenaeus, 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 scrip-
ture, divine word, sacred letters, prophetical
sayings, 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

{a) See the Argument in the Book of Judith in the
Doway Bible, Tom. 1.

(6) Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 1.

so long been publicly read in the church of
Christ, and received by all Christians, bishops,
and others, even to the last of the laity, penitents,
and catechumens, cum veneratione Divina au-
thoritatis, with veneration of divine authority 1
Which also the excellent writers, next to the
apostles' times, alleging for witness, nihil se
adhibere nisi divinum testimonium crediderunt,
thought they alleged nothing but divine testi-
mony, (d)

OF ECCLESIASTICUS.

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

Of BARUCH, with the Epistle of JEREMY.

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

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

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

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

(/) St. Hierom., in Praefat. Jeremias.

OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL.

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 judg-
ment, intending to deliver sincerely what he
found in the Hebrew ; yet would he not omit
to insert the rest, advertising withal, that he had
it in Theodotion's translation ; which answer is
clearly justified by his own testimony, in these
words : " Whereas I relate," says he, " what the
Hebrews say against the Hymn of the Three
Children ; he that for this reputes me a fool,
proves himself a sycophant ; for I did not write
what myself judged, but what they are accus-
tomed to say against me." (a)

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

So likewise the History of Susannah is cited
for holy scripture, by St. Ignatius, Tertullian,
St. Cyprian, St. Chrysostom, who in Horn. 7,
fine, has a whole sermon on Susannah, 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 explica-
ting the argument of the book of Daniel, make
express mention of the Hymn of the Three
Children, of the History of Susannah, and of
Bell and the Dragon.

OF THE TWO BOOKS OF
MACCABEES.

Ever since the third Council of Carthage,
these two books of the Maccabees have been
held for sacred and canonical by the Catholic
Church, as is proved by a council of seventy
bishops, under Pope Gclasius ; 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 cano-
nical scripture in Gregory the Great's time,
consequently not before, (c) I will, besides these
councils, refer you to the holy fathers who lived
before St. Gregory's days, and alleged these

(a) S. Hier., lib. 2. c. 9, advers. Ruffin.

(b) Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 2.

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

Judge now, good reader, whether the author
of the second vindication, &c, has not imposed
upon the world in this point of the books of the
Maccabees. And indeed if this were all the
cheat he endeavours to put upon us, it were
well, but he goes yet further, and names eleven
points of doctrine besides this, which he, with
his fellows, quoted in his margin, falsely affirms
not to have been taught in England by St.
Augustine, the Benedictine monk, when he
converted our nation ; telling us, " that the mys-
tery of iniquity," as he blasphemously terms the
doctrine of Christ's holy church, " was not
then come to perfection." For, first, says he,
" the scripture was yet received as a perfect
rule of faith." Secondly, " the books of the
Maccabees, which you now put in your cannon,
were rejected then as apocryphal." Thirdly,
" that good works were not yet esteemed meri-
torious." Fourthly, " nor auricular confession
a sacrament." Fifthly, " that solitary masses
were disallowed by him." And sixthly, " tran-
substantiation yet unborn." Seventhly, " that the
sacrament of the Eucharist was hitherto admi-
nistered in both kinds." What then ? 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." Eleventhly, "that the sacrament
of extreme unction was yet unformed." Then

OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL.

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 thought it to be the forerunner of an-
tichrist 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 antichristian of
unlawful for the Pope, whom (not himself, but)
our Saviour Christ had set and appointed, in
thg person of St. Peter, above all the rest, to
exercise spiritual supremacy and jurisdiction
over all the bishops in the Christian world : but
he thought it antichristian for any bishop to set
up himself, as John, bishop of Constantinople,
had done, by the name or title of universal
bishop, so as if he alone were the sole bishop,
and no bishop but he, in the universe : and in
this sense St. Gregory thought this name or
title not only worthily forborne by his prede-
cessors, and by himself, but terms it profane,
sacrilegious, and antichristian ; and in this sense
the bishops of Rome have always utterly re-
nounced the title of universal bishop ; on the
contrary, terming themselves Servi. Servorum
Dei. And this is proved from the words of
Andrreus Friccius, a Protestant, whom Peter
Martyr terms an excellent and learned man.
" Some there are," says he, " that object to the
authority of Gregory, who says, that such a
title pertains to the precursor of antichrist ; but
the reason of Gregory is to be known, and may
be gathered from his words, which he repeats in
many epistles, that the title of 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 : where-
fore 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 antichrist."
(a) 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. Gre-
gory, 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 Magdeburgian Ccnturists show
us, that the Roman see appoints her watch over
the whole world ; that the apostolic see is head
">f all churches ; that even Constantinople is
ubject to the apostolic see. (b) These Cen-
urists charge moreover the bishop of Rome,
in the very example and person of Pope Gre-
gory, and by collection out of his writings, by
them particularly alleged, " that he challenged

(a) Andrasus Friccius. de Ecclesia. 1 . 2, c. 10, p. 579.
(i) Centur. 6, Col. 425, 420, 427, 428, 429, 438.

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." (c) With much more,
touching the exeroise 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
authority 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 ot
the faith of the see apostolic. That all those
things are false, which are taught contrary to
the doctrine of the Roman Church. That to
return from schism to the Catholic Church, is to
return to the 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
apostolic." (d)

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

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

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

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

OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL.

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

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

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

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

(a) Bale in Act. Rom. Pontif,. Edit. Basil., 1658, p.
44, 45, 46, 47, et Cent. I , Col. 3.

(b) Pageant of Popes, fol. 27.

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

(e) In Coloc. Mensal., c. de Lege et Evan.
(/) Ibid., fol. 118.

(g) Serm. de Mose.

and all heresy will presently cease ; for the ten
commandments are, as it were, the fountain from
whence all heresies spring." (h)

Islebius, Luther's scholar, taught, (i) that
"the decalogue was not to be taught in the
church:" and from this came (k) 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 salva-
tion. 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." (m)

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

Pomeran, a great evangelist among the Luther-
ans, writes thus touching St. James's Epistle :
" 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." (o)

Vitus Theodorus, a Protestant preacher, ot
Nuremberg, 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 doc-
trine throughout is patched together with divers
pieces, whereof no one agrees with another."(p)

The Magdeburgian Centurists say, that " the
Epistle of James much swerves from the analogy
of the apostolical doctrine, whereas it ascribes
justification not only to faith, but to works, and
calls the law, a law of liberty." (q)

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 are chosen." (r)

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

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

(t) See Osiander, Cent. 16, p. 311, 312, 320.

(#) Sleidan, Hist, 1,12, fol. 162.

(I) Vid. Confessio. Mansfieldensium Ministrorum
Tit. de Antinomis, fol. 89, !)0.

(m.) In Serm. Convival. Tit. de Patriarch, et Prophet,
et Tit. de libris Vet et. Nov. Test.

(n) Vid. Beza in Vita Calvini.

(o) Pomeran. ad Rom , c. 8.

(p) In Annot. in Nov. Test , pag. ult.

(?) Cent. I., 1,2, c. 4, Col. 54.

(r) Inst, 1, 2, c. 16. In Matt 27, Harm, in Matt. 20,16.

(s) Victoria Veritalis et Rnina Papattis, Arg. 5.

OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA.

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

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

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 professed Atheists. Yet all
these sacred books were, as is said, received for
canonical in the third Council of Carthage, above
thirteen hundred years ago.

But, with the Church of England, it matters
not by 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, (c)

OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS
CALL APOCRYPHA.

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

Tobit.

Judith. '

The rest of Esther.

Wisdom.

Ecclesiasticus.

Baruch, with the Epistle of Jeremiah.

The Song of the Three Children.

The Idol, Bell, and the Dragon.

The Story of Susannah.

Maccabees I.

Maccabees II.

Manesseth, Prayer of.

Esdras III.

Esdras IV. (e)

(a) Tom. 3, Elench., f. 10. Magdeburg. Cent. 1, 1.
, c. 10. Col. 580.
(6) Defence of the 39 Articles, Art. G.

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

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

(e) The three last are not numbered in the canon of
the scripture.

But if none must 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 for-
merly been doubted of? " Some ancient writers
doubted of the last chapter of St. Mark's Gos-
pel : (/ ) others of some part of the 22nd of St.
Luke ; (g) some of the beginning of the 8th of
St. John ; (A) others of the Epistle to the He-
brews ; (i) and others of the Epistles of St.
James, Jude, the second of Peter, the second
and third of John, and the Apocalypse." (k)

And Doctor Bilson, a Protestant, affirms, that
" the scriptures were not fully received in all
places, no, not in Eusebius's time." He says,
" the Epistles of James, Jude, the second of
Peter, the second and third of John, are contra-
dicted, as not written by the apostles. The
epistle to the Hebrews was for a while contra-
dicted," &c. The churches of Syria did not re-
ceive the second Epistle of Peter, nor the second
and third of John, nor the Epistle of Jude, 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 receive
them now, because they were formerly doubted
of? Thus Docter Bilson. (I)

And Mr. Rogers confesses, that " although
some of the ancient fathers and doctors accepted
net all the books contained in the New Testa-
ment for canonical ; yet in the end, they were
wholly taken and received by the common con-
sent of the Church of Christ, in this world, for
the very Word of God," &c. (m)

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

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

(g) S. Hilar. 1 10, de Trin., et Hierom, 1. 2, contr.
Pelagian.

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

({) Id, 1. 3, c. 3.

(k) Et, c. 25, 28. Hierom Divinis Illust, in P. Jac.
Jud. Pet. et Joan., et Ep. ad Dardan.

(I) Survey of Christ. Suff, p. 664. Vid. 1st and 4th
day's Confer, in the Tower, anno 1581.

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

(n) Third Council of Cartha-e, Can. 47.

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

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

(q) Tom. 1, Cone. Decret. cum 70 Episcop.

OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA.

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

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. "(b)

So that what Christ's Church receives as
canonical, we are not to doubt of: Doctor Fulk
avouches, that " the Church of Christ has judg-
es) Brentius Apol. Conf. Wit. Bucer's scripts. Ang.,
p. 713.
(b) Covel cont. Burg., pp. 76, 77, 78.

ment 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."
(c) And Jewel says, " the Church of God has
the spirit of wisdom to discern true scripture
from false. "(d)

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

re) Fulk An. to a Countr. Cathol., p. 5.

(i) Jewel Def. of the Apol., p. 201.

(e) Concil. Trid., Sess. 4, Deer, de Can. Scrip

I. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

The true English accord-

Corruptions in the Pro-

The last Translation of

Chapter,

The Vulgate Latin Text.

ing to the Rhemish

testant Bibles, printed

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

and Verse.

Translation.

A. D. 1562, 1577. 1579.

Lon., an. 1683.

St. Matth.

Et ego dico tibi,

And I say to

Instead of church

It is corrected in

chap. xvi.

quia tu es Petrus,

thee, that thou art

they translate " con-

this last translation.

verse 18.

et super hanc Pet-

Peter, and upon this

gregation." Upon

ram adificabo " ec-

Rock will I build

this Rock will I build

clesiam meam," fta

my " church."

my " congregation."

xty ixxXtjaiap. (1)

(1)

St. Matth.

Quod si non au-

And if he will

If he will not hear

Corrected.

chap, xviii.

dierit eos, die " Ec-

not hear them, tell

them, tell the " con-

verse 17.

clesiee," ixxXrjola- si

the " church ;" and

gregation ;" and if

autem " ecclesiam,"

if he will not hear

he will not hear the

txxXqolus, non audie-

the " church," let

"congregation," &c.

rit, sit tibi sicut eth-

him be as an hea-

nicus et publicanus.

then, and as a pub-
lican.

Ephesians

Viri, diligite uxores

Husbands, love

Corrected.

chap. v.

vestras, sicut et

your wives, as Christ

your wives,as Christ

verses 23,

Christies dilexit " ec-

loved the " church,"

loved the " congre-

24, 25, 27,

clesiam."

verse 25.

gation."

29, 32.

lit exhiberet ipsi

That he might

Corrected

sibi gloriosam " ec-

present to himself a

present to himself

clesiam."

glorious " church,"
verse 27.

a glorious " congre-
gation."

u Sacramenlum "

For this is a

For this is a great

Corrected

hoc est magnum ;

great " sacrament ;"

"secret," for I speak

ego autem dico in

but I speak in Christ,

in Christ, and in the

Christo et "ecclesia"

and in the "church,"

" congregation."

ixxXrjalav.

ver. 32, &c.

Hebrews

Et ecclesiam pri-

And the " church"

And the " con-

Corrected.

chap. ii.

mitivorum, ixxXnala.

of the first-born.

gregation" of the

verse 23.

first-born.

Canticles

Una est columba

My dove is " one."

My dove is "alone."

My dove it M but

chap. vi.

mea . nnx fi(a. (2)

(2)

one."

verse 8.

Ephesians

Et ipsum dedit

And hath made

And gave him to

chap. i.

caput supra omnem

him head over all

be the head over all

be the head over

verses 22,

" ecclesiam" qum est

the "church," which

things to the " con-

all things to the

23.

corpus ipsius, et

is his body, the ful-

gregation," which is

" church," which is

plenitudo ejus, qui

ness of him " which

his body, the fulness

omnia in omnibus

is filled," all in all.

of him "thatfilleth"

of him " that filleth"

" adimpletur, " to

all in all. (3)

all in all.

nXrjPB/jiva. (3)

THE CHURCH.

The two English Bibles, (a) usually read in
the Protestant congregations at their first rising
up, left- out the word Catholic in the title of
those epistles which have been known by the
name of Catholic® Epistolce, ever since the
apostles' time : (b) and their latter translations,
dealing somewhat more honestly, have turned
the word Catholic into " General," " 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 Catholicum ?
we must translate it, which is the way to the
general? And when St. Hierom says, if we agree
in faith with the bishop of Rome, ergo Catholici
sumus ; we must translate, " then we are gene-
rals." Is not this good stuff?

(1) And as they suppress the name Catholic,
even so did they, in their first English Bible,
the name of church itself :(c) because at their
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 sup-
pressed the word church, that it is not once to
be found in all that Bible, so long read in their
congregations : because, knowing themselves not
to be the church, they were resolved not to
leave God Almighty any church at all, where
they could possibly root it out, viz., in the Bible.
And it is probable, if it had been as easy for
them to have eradicated the church from the
earth, as it was to blot the word out of their
Bible, they would have prevented its "continuing
to the end of the world."

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

Our blessed Saviour says : " Upon this rock I
will build my church ;" but they make him say,
" Upon this rock I will build my congregation."
They make the Apostle St. Paul say to Timothy,
1 Ep. c. iii. " 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

(a) Bib. 1562, 1677.

(b) Euseb., Hist. Eccles., lib. 2, c. 23, in fine.

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 con-
gregation, which is the body :" and in another
place, " The congregation of the first-born : M
where the apostle mentions heavenly Jerusalem,
the city of the living God, &c; so that by this
translation there is no longer any church mili-
tant and triumphant, but only congregation ; in
which they contradict St. Augustine, who
affirms, that " though the Jewish congregation
was sometimes called a church, yet the apostles
never called the church a congregation." But
their last translation having restored the word
church, I shall say no more of it in this place.

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

(3) Nor was it enough for them to corrupt the
scripture against the church's unity ; for there
was a time when their congregation was invisi-
ble ; that is to say, when " they were not at all :"
and therefore, because they will have it, that
Christ may be without his church, to wit, a head
without a body, (d) they falsify this place in the
Epistle to the Eph., xi. 21, 23, translating,
" he gave him to be the head over all things to
the church," congregation with them, " which
(church) is his body, the fulness of him that
filleth all in all." Here they translate actively
the Greek word t5 nXrjoufievu, when, according to
St. Chrysostom, and all the Greek and Latin
doctors' interpretation, it ought to be translated
passively ; so that instead of saying, " and 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.

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

II. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

St. Matth.
chap. xxvi.
verse 26.

St. Mark,
chap. xiv.
verse 22.

Acts of
the Apos.
chap. iii.
verse 21.

Jeremiah
chap. xi.
verse 19.

Genesis
chap. xiv.
verse 18.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Accepit Jesus pa-
rtem et " benedixit,"
xai ivXoyricrag, ac /re-
git, dedilque, <$fc.(\)

Accepit Jesus pa-
rtem et "benedicens,"
xai £vXoyJ[Oag : <$-c.(2)

Quern oportet qui-
dem ccelum " sicsci-
pere" usque in tem-
pora restitutions
omnium, dv del dgd.
vov di^aadai. (3)

Mittamus lignum
in pancm ejus. (4)

At vero Melchize-
dek, sex Salem, pro-
ferens panem et vi-
num, " erat enim
sacerdos Dei Altis-
simi." (5)

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

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

Jesus took bread,
and "blessing," &c.

Whom heaven tru-
ly must " receive,"
until the times of
the restitution of all
things.

Let us cast wood
upon his bread.

And Melchizedek,
king of Salem,
brought forth bread
and wine ; " for he
was the priest of
God most high."

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

Instead of " bless-
ed," they translate,
" and when he had
given thanks." (1)

Instead of " bless-
ing," they say, "and
when he had given
thanks." (2)

Instead of "receive,"
they say, whom hea-
ven must " contain."
And Beza, " who
must be contained
in heaven." (3)

" We will destroy
his meat with wood."
In another Bible,
" Let us destroy the
tree with the fruit."
(4)

Instead of " for
he was the priest,"
they translate, "and
he was the priest,"
&c. (5)

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 10*83,

Corrected.

Let us destroy the
tree with the fruit
thereof.'

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

THE BLESSED SACRAMENT AND SACRIFICE OF THE MASS.

(1) The turning of blessings into bare thanks-
giving, was one of the first steps of our pre-
tended reformers, towards denying the real pre-
sence. By 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
in translating thanksgiving for blessing, but also
in urging the word eucharist, to prove it a mere
thanksgiving ; though we find the verb Bv/ugigsiv
used also transitively by the Greek fathers,
saying, iov aoxov ivxaQiq^devia, panem, et chali-
cem eucharistisatos ; or, panem, in quo gratia? actee
sunt ; that is, " the bread and cup made the
eucharist ;" " the bread, over which thanks are
given ;" that is, " which, by the word of prayer
and thanksgiving is made a consecrated meat,
the flesh and blood of Christ." (a) St. Paul
also, speaking of this sacrament, calls it, (1 Cor.
x.) " the chalice of benediction, which we do
bless ;" which St. Cyprian thus explicates, " the
chalice consecrated by solemn blessing." St.
Basil and St. Chrysostom, in their liturgies, say
thus, " Bless, O Lord, the sacred bread ;" and
"bless, O Lord, the sacred cup, changing it by
thy Holy Spirit :" where are signified the conse-
cration and transmutation thereof into the body
and blood of Christ.

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

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

(«) St. Justin in fine, 2 Apolog., St. Irenaeus, lib. 4, 34.
(b) Horn. 2, ad popul. Antioch., lib. 3, de Saceidotio.

sence 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 chalice is
shed for you." (c) According to the Greek, ro
noTTjQiov to Exxuvofisvov, the word "which" must
needs be referred to the chalice : in which
speech chalice cannot otherwise be taken, than
for that in the chalice ; which sure, must needs
be the blood of Christ, and not wine, because his
blood only was shed for us ; according to St.
Chrysostom, who says : " That which is in the
chalice is the same which gushed out of his
side." (d) And this deduction so troubled Beza,
that he exclaims against all the Greek copies in
the world, as corrupted in this place.

(4) " Let us cast wood upon his bread ;"
" that is," saith St. Hierom, (c) " the cross upon
the body of our Saviour ; for it is he that said,
I am the bread that descended from heaven."
Where the prophet so long before, saying bread,
and meaning his body, alludes prophetically to
his body in the blessed sacrament, made of
bread, and under the form of bread ; and there-
fore also called bread by the apostle, (1 Cor. x.)
so that both in the prophet and the apostle, his
bread and his body is all one. And lest we
should think the bread only signifies his body,
he says, " Let us put the cross upon his bread ;"
that is, upon his very natural body that hung on
the cross. It is evident, that the Hebrew verb
is not now the same with that which the seventy
interpreters translated into Greek, and St
Hierom into Latin ; but altered, as may be sup-
posed, by the Jews, to obscure this prophecy of
their crucifying Christ upon the cross. And
though Protestants will needs take the advan-
tage of this corruption, yet so little does the
Hebrew word, that now is, agree with the words
following, that they cannot so translate it, as to
make any commodious sense or understanding
of it ; as appears by their different translations,
and their transposing their words in English,
otherwise than they are in the Hebrew. ( f)

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

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

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

(/) Genes, xx. 3 ; Gen. xxs 27 ; Isaiah lxiv. 5.
(g) St. Cypr., Epist. 63, Epiphan. Hasr. 55 et 79. St.
Hierom. in Matth. xxvi., et in EpLst. ad Evagrium.

III. TROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

Proverbs
chap. ix.
verse 5.

Proverbs
chap. ix.
verse 1.

1 Corinth,
chap. xi.
verse 27.

1 Corinth,
chap. ix.
verse 13.

1 Corinth,
chap. x.
verse 18.

Daniel
chap. xiv.
verse 12.

Et verse 17

Et etiam
verse 20.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Venite comedite pa-
rtem meum, et bibite
vinum quod "miscui"
vobis, xsxe§vcxa f *lo'n.

(1)

Immolavit victimas
suas, miscuit vinum,
exsQuoEV. (2)

Itaque quicunque
manducaverit panem
hunc, vel, r\, biberit
calicem domini in-
digne, <$fc. (3)

Et qui altari de-
serviunt cum altari
participant, Ovaiagr^-

Nonne qui edunt
hostias participes,
sunt altaris ? duai-
agyqiu. (5)

Quia fecer ant sub-
mensa absconditum
introitum, Tqane'Qct.
(6)

Intuitus rex men-
sam.

Et consumebant
qua erant sypcr men-

Thc true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

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

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

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

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

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

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

The king behold-
ing the " table."

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

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

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

She hath "drawn"
her wine. (2)

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

Partakers of the
" temple. (5)

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

The king behold-
ing the " altar."

Which was upon
the " altar."

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 1683.

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

She hath killed
her beasts, she hath
mingled her wine.

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

Corrected.

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

THE BLESSED SACRAMENT AND THE ALTAR.

(1, 2) These prophetical words of Solomon
are of great importance, as being a manifest
prophecy of Christ's mingling water and wine
in the chalice at his last supper ; which at this
day, the Catholic Church observes : but Pro-
testants, counting it an idle ceremony, frame
their translation accordingly ; suppressing alto-
gether this mixture or mingling, contrary to the
true interpretation both of the Greek and He-
brew : as also, contrary to the ancient fathers'
exposition of this place. " The Holy Ghost
(says St. Cyprian) by Solomon, foreshoweth a !
type of our Lord's sacrifice, of the immolated j
host of bread and wine ; saying, Wisdom hath I
killed her hosts, she hath mingled her wine into J
the cup ; come ye, eat my bread, and drink the
wine that I have mingled for you." (a) Speak- |
ing of wine mingled (saith this holy doctor) he i
foreshoweth prophetically, the cup of our Lord
mingled with water and wine, (b) St. Justin, |
from the same Greek word, calls it, xqaftu ; that ]
is, (according to Plutarch) wine mingled with !
water : so likewise does St. Irenaeus. (c) See
also the sixth general council, (J) 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., mywvat.

(3) In this place, they very falsely translate
" and," instead of " or," contrary both to the
Greek and Latin. And this they do on purpose,
to infer a necessity of communicating under both
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 also of the apostles themselves.
(Act. ii. 42, and xx. 7.)

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

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

(a) Ep. 63, 2.

(6) Apol. 2, in fine.

(d) Concil. Constantinop., 6, Can. 32,

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

(/) Hier. Epitaph. Pauke. Beda. Theophylact. St. Cy-
prian'. 1. de lapsis, n. 10 ; Tertul , 1. 2, ad Ux., n. 4 ;
Euseb. Eccl. Hist, 1. 6 c. 36; St. Basil, Ep. ad Ceesa-
riara Patritiam.

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

For whole Christ is really present, under
either kind, as Protestants themselves have
confessed : read their words in Hospinian, (g)
a Protestant, who affirms, " that they believed
and confessed whole Christ to be really present,
exhibited and received under either kind ; and
therefore under the only form of bread : neither
did they judge those to do evil, who communi-
cated under one kind." And Luther, as alleged
by Hospinian, {h) says, " that it is not needful to
oive 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."

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

(6) Where the name altar should be, they
suppress it ; and here, where it should not be,
they put it in their translations ; and that thrice
in one chapter ; and that either on purpose to
dishonour Catholic altars, or else to save the
credit of their communion table ; as fearing, lest
the name of Bell's table might redound to the
dishonour of their communion table. Wherein
it is to be wondered, how they could imagine
it any disgrace either for table or altar, if the
idols also had their tables and altars ; whereas
St. Paul so plainly names both together : " The
table of our Lord, and the table of devils, (i)
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.

(#) Hospin. Hist. Sacram., p. 2, fol. 112.
(A)Ib.,fol. 12.
(i) 1. Cor. x. 21.

IV. rROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

Acts of
the Apos.
chap. xv.
verse 2.

Titus,
chap. i.
verse 5.

1 Timoth.
chap. v.
verse 17.

1 Timoth.
chap. v.
verse 19.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

St. James,
chap. v.
verse 14.

Statuerunt ut as-
ccnderent Paulus et
Barnabas, et quidain
alii ex aliis ad Apos-
tolos ct "p?-psbyteros"
nQEcrfivteQug, in Jeru-
salem, <$fC.

Hujus rei gratia
rcliqui te Cretan, ttt
ca quae desunt corri-
gas, et constituas per
civitates " presbyte-
ros," sicut et ego dis-
posui tibi.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhcmish
Translation.

Qui bene preesunt
11 presbyteri," duplici
honore dignihabean-
tur.

Adversus " pres
byterwn" accusatio-
nem noli recipere, Sfc.

Infirmatur quis in
vobis? inducat "pres-
byteros ecclesia" et
orent super eum.

They appointed that
Paul and Barnabas
should go up, and
certain others of the
rest, to the apostles
and " priests" unto
Jerusalem.

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

For this cause
left I thee in Crete,
that thou shouldest
reform the things
that are wanting,
and shouldest ordain
" priests," by cities,
as I also appointed
thee.

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

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

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

Instead of "priests,"
they translate " el-
ders."

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 1683.

For "priests" they
say here also " el-
ders."

Instead of "priests."
they translate " el-
ders."

For "priests" they
say " elders."

The " elders" that
rule well, &c.

Against an "elder"
receive not accusa-
tion, &c.

Let him

bring in the "elders"
of the " congrega-
tion, &c.

" Elders" also in.
tliis Bible

Instead of "priest'
they put " elder *'

Elders for "priests"
here also.

PRIESTS AND PRIESTHOOD.

St. 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 evangelical, but also from the
prophetical writings." (a) A truth most certain ;
our sacrifice of the New Testament being most
clearly proved from the sacrifice of Melchizedek
in the Old Testament ; of whom, and whose
sacrifice, it is said, " But Melchizedek, king of
Salem, brought forth bread and wine ; for he
was the priest of God most high, and he blessed
him," &c. And to make the figure agree to the
jhing figured, and the truth to answer the figure
of Christ, it is said, " Our Lord hath sworn, and
it shall not repent him ; thou art a priest for
ever, according to the order of Melchizedek." In
the New Testament, Jesus is made an " high
priest, according to the order of Melchizedek."
For according to the similitude of Melchizedek,
there arises another priest, who continues for
ever, and has an everlasting priesthood. Whence
it is clearly proved, that Melchizedek was a
priest, and 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 scrip-
ture ; but they also suppressed the name priest,
in all their translations, turning it into elder ; (b)
well knowing that these three, priest, sacri-
fice, and altar, are dependents and consequents
one of another ; so that they cannot be separ-
ated. If there be an external sacrifice, there
must be an extenal priesthood to 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 sacri-
fice, to continue in his church for ever, in com-
memoration and representation of his death,
therefore, did he ordain his apostles priests, at
his last supper ; where and when he instituted
the holy order of priesthood or priests, (saying,
hoc facite, " do this,") to offer the self-same
sacrifice in a mystical and unbloody manner,
until the world's end.

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

(a) St. August., Ep. 49, q. 3.

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

when mention is made either of the priests of the
Jews, or the priests of the Gentiles, especially
when such are reprehended or blamed in the
holy scripture ; and in such places they are sure
to name priests in their 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, (c)
one of their great champions, freely avouches,
directly contrary to St. Augustine, who, in one
brief sentence, distinguishes priests, properly so
called in the 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 the word Presbyteros " priests,"
but " elders ;" and that with so full and general
consent in all their English Bibles, that, as the
Puritans plainly confess, and Mr. Whitgift de-
nies it not, a man would wonder to see how
careful they are, that the people may not once
hear of the name of any such priest in all the
holy scriptures : and even in their latter trans-
lations, though they are ashamed of the word
" eldership," yet they have not the power to put
the English word priesthood, as they ought to
do, in the text, that the vulgar may understand
it, but rather the Greek word presbytery : such
are the poor shifts they are glad to make use
of.

- - IL j

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

(c) Whitaker, p. 199; St. Aug., lib. 20, de Civit. Dei,
cap. 10. See the Puritan's Reply, p. 159, and Whitgift's
Defence against the Puritans, p. 722.

(i) St. Hierom. in cap. lviii. Esai.

V. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

Acts of
the Apos.

chap. xiv r .
verse 22.

1 Timoth.
chap. iv.
verse 14.

2 Timoth.
chap. i.
verse 6.

1 Timoth.
chap. iii.
verse 8.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Et verse 12

Et cum constitu-
issent, xetqoxovTjoav-
tsq, Mis per sin-
gulas " ecclesias"
"presbyteros," Ttqea-
pvtsga;, (1)

Noli negligere
"gratiarn" xctQiofia-
too, qua in te est,
qucs data est tibiper
prophetiam cum im-
positions manuum
*' presbyterii." (2)

Propter quam cau-
sam admoneo te, ut
resuscitcs "gratiarn"
Dei, quce in te est
per impositionem
manuum mearum.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

" Diaconos" si-
militer " pudicos,"
non bilingues, SfC,
Jiaxovsg. (3)

Aiaxovoi, diaconi.(4)

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

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

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Bibles, printed
a. d. 15C2, 1577, 1579.

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

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

Deacons.

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

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

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 1683.

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

" Ministers"
" deacons." (3)

for

Deacons. (4)

"Elders" set in the
stead of " priests."

For the word
" grace" they say
" gift ;" and " pres-
bytery," the Greek
word, rather than
the English word,
" priesthood."

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

Likewise must
the " deacons" be
" grave."

Deacons.

PRIESTHOOD AND HOLY ORDERS.

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

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

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

(6) See Dr. Burnet's Hist, of the Refor.; see Stilling-
fleet Irenicon, p. 392.

its place again among the sacraments : and
therefore both Dr. Bramhall and Mr. Mason
reckon it for a sacrament, though quite contrary
to their scripture translators, (d) who, lest it
should be so accounted, do translate " gift" in-
stead of " grace ;" lest it should appear, that
grace is given in holy orders. I wonder they
have not corrected this in their latter transla-
tions : 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 V To which I an-
swer, " that this is nothing to them, who profess
to translate the Greek, and not our Latin ; and
the Greek word they know is txqeo^vieqho presby-
tcros. 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
ancient, when we find it so in Latin : being well
assured, that by sundry words he meant but one
thing, as in Greek it is but one. St. Hierom
reads, Presbyteros ego compresbyter, (e) in 1 ad
Gal., proving the dignity of priests : and yet
in the 4th of the Galatians, he reads according
to the Vulgate Latin text : Seniores in vobis 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.

(3) In this place they thrust the word minis-
ter into the text, for an ecclesiastical order : so
that, though they will not have bishops, priests,
and deacons, yet they would gladly have bishops,
ministers, and deacons ; yet the word they
translate for minister, is diuxdvoo, diaconus ; the
very same that, a little after, they translate
deacon, (c) And so because bishops went
before in the same chapter, they have found
out three orders, bishops, ministers, and deacons.
How poor a shift is this, that 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 V &c, for which cause they had rather say
grave than chaste.

(d) Dr. Bramh. p. 96 ; Mason, lib. 1.
(c) St. Hier., Ep. 85, ad Evagr.
(/) 1 Cor. ix. 5.

VI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

The true English accord-

Corruptions in the Pro-

The last Translation of

Chapter,

The Vulgate Latin Text.

ing to the Rhemish

testant Bibles, printed

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

and Verse.

Translation.

a. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

Lon., an. 1683.

Malachi

Labia enim sacer-

The priest's lips

For " shall" they

chap. ii.

dotis cuslodient sci-

" shall" keep know-

"should keep

translate " should."

verse 7.

entiam, et legem re-

ledge, and they

knowledge,and they

And for " angel"

quirent ex ore ejus :

" shall" seek the

" should" seek the

"messenger," in this

quia " angelus" Do-

law at his mouth ;

also.

mini exercituum est.

because he is the

(1)

" angel" of the
Lord of hosts.

" messenger" of the
Lord of hosts. (1)

Apocalyp.

" Angelo" Ephesi

To the "angel"

To the " messen-

Corrected.

chap. ii. iii.

eccIesicB scribe.

of the church of

ger" of, &c, instead

verses 1, 8,
12.

Ephesus,write thou.

of " angel."

Malachi

Ecce, ego mitto

Behold, I send

" Instead of " an-

The same also

chap. iii.

" angelum" meum,Top

mine " angel," and

gel," they say "mes-

they translate here,

verse 1 .

uyyelov fib, et pr<B-

he shall prepare the

senger." And for

without any correc-

parabit viam ante

way before my face.

" Angel" of the tes-

tion.

faciem mcam. Et

And the Ruler

tament, they trans-

statim veniet ad tem-

whom ye seek, shall

late, " Messenger"

plum suum Domina-

suddenly come to

of the covenant. (2)

tor, quern vos qu&ri-

his temple, even the

tis, et "Angelus"

" Angel" of the

testamenti, quern

testament, whom ye

vos vultis. (2)

wish for.

St. Matth.

Hie est enim de

For this is he of

For " angel" they

Instead of " an-

chap. xi.

quo scriptum est,

whom it is written,

say " messenger."

gel," they say "mes-

verse 10.

ecce, ego mitto " an-
gelum" meum ante

Behold, I send mine
" angel" before thy

senger."

faciem tuam.

face.

Luke

Hie est de quo

This is he of

— Behold, I send

For " angel, "

chap. vii.

scriptum est, ecce,

Whom it is written,

my " messenger,"

" messenger."

verse 27.

mitto " angelum "
meum, <Sfc.

Behold, I send mine
" angel," &c.

&c.

2 Corinth.

Si quid donavi

If I pardoned any

— In the " sight"

Corrected.

chap. ii.

propter vos in " per-

thing for you in the

of Christ. (3)

verse 10.

sona" Christi,sv noo-
aoinoi Xqigu. (3)

" person" of Christ.

THE AUTHORITY OF PRIESTS.

(1) Because our pretended reformers teach,
" That order is not a sacrament ;" " that it
has neither visible sign," (what is imposition of
hands ?) " nor ceremony ordained by God ; nor
form ; nor institution from Christ;" (a) con-
sequently, that it cannot imprint a character on
the soul of the person ordained ; they not only
avoid the word " priests," in their transla-
tions, but, the more to derogate from the pri-
vilege and dignity of priests, they make the
scripture, in this place, speak contrary to the
words of the prophet ; as they are read both in
the Hebrew and Greek, (pvl&Zsiai ix&Trpoow,
TOpn -1 nEB" 1 ; where it is as plain as can be spoken,
that " the priest's lips shall keep knowledge, and
they shall seek the law at his mouth ;" which is
a wonderful privilege given to the priests of
the old law, for true determination in matters
of controversy, and rightly expounding the law,
as we may read more fully in Deuteronomy the
17th chapter, where they are commanded, under
pain of death, to stand to the priest's judgment :
which, in this place, verse 4, God, by his pro-
phet Malachi, calls, " His covenant with Levi,"
and that he will have it stand, to wit, in the
New Testament, where St. Peter has such pri-
vilege for him and his successors, that his faith
shall not fail ; and where the Holy Ghost is
president in the councils of bishops and priests.
All which, the reformers of our days would
deface and defeat, by translating the words
otherwise than the Holy Ghost has spoken them.
And when the prophet adds immediately the
cause of this singular prerogative of the priest :
" because he is the angel of the Lord of hosts,"
which is also a wonderful dignity to be so called ;
they translate ; " because he is the messenger of
the Lord of hosts." So do they also, in the
Revelations, call the bishops of the seven
churches of Asia, messengers.

(2) And here, in like manner, they call St.
John the Baptist, messenger ; where the scrip-
ture, no doubt, speaks more ho* .urably 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 wonderful dignities of St. John,
and that he was more than a prophet, cites this
place, and gives this reason, " For this is he of
whom it is written, Behold, I send my angel be-
fore thee :" which St. Hierom calls, meritorum,
aliSijot*, the " increase and augmenting of John's
merits and privileges." (b) And St. Gregory,
" He who came to bring tidings of Christ him-
self, was worthily called an angel, that in his
very name there might be dignity." And all

(a) Twenty. fifth of the Thirty-nine Articles. Roger's
Defence of the same, p. 155.

(b) St. Hierom, in Comment, inhunc locum. St. Greg.,
Horn. 6- in Erang. a

the fathers conceive a great excellency of this
word angel ; but our Protestants, who measure
all divine things and persons by the line of their
human understanding, translate accordingly ;
making our 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 " messenger of the
covenant."

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

(3) But, great is the authority, dignity, excel-
lency, and power of God's priests and bishops :
they do bind and loose, and execute all ecclesi-
astical functions, as in the person and power 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 ol Christ ;" (c) they falsely trans-
late, " in the sight of Christ ;" " that is, as
St. Ambrose expounds 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 tht,
name, and by virtue of our Lord Jesus
Christ." (d) 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 pil-
lar 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." (e)

(d) 1 Cor. v. 4.

(e) Part 2, Acts iii.

VII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

The true English accord-

Corruptions in the Pro-

The last Translation of

Chapter,

The Vulgate Latin Text.

ing to the Rhemish

testant Bibles, printed

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

and Verse.

Translation.

a. d. 1562, 1577, 1579.

Lon., an. 1683.

St. Matth.

Ex te enim exiet

For out of thee

Instead of " rule,"

Corrected

chap. ii.

dux, qui " regal"

shall come forth the

the NewTestament,

verse 6 ;

populum meum Is-

Captain, that shall

printed anno 1580,

Micah.

rael. Jranorvrrfc, tS

" rule" my people

translates " feed. "

chap. v.

elvab slg (xgxdvTa re

Israel.

verse 2.

'Iffgaijl. (1)

1 Peter

Subjecti igitur

Be subject there-

In the latter end

Submit yourselves

chap. ii.

estote " omni hu-

fore " to every hu-

of king Henry VIII.

"to every ordinance

verse 13.

mancs creatura"

man creature" for

and in Edward VI.

of man," for the

n&or) dcvd(ih)7Tlvr}

God, whether it be

times, they transla-

Lord's sake,whether

xitoei,propter Deum,

to the " king, as

ted, " submit your-

it be to the " king,

sive "regi quasi praz-

excelling," &c.

selves unto all man-

as supreme.

cellenti" sive duci-

ner of ordinance of

bus, <fyc, fiagdEl <W

man," whether it be

insqixovri. (2)

;

unto the " king, as
to the chief head."
IntheBibleof 1577,
to the "king, as hav-
ing pre-eminence."
In the Bible of 1579,
to the " king, as the
superior." (2)

Acts of

Attendite vobis et

Take heed to

— Wherein the

the Apos.

universo gregi, in

yourselves, and to

Holy Ghost hath

chap. xx.

quo vos Spiritus

the whole flock,

made you " over-

verse 28.

Sanctus posuif'epis-

wherein the Holy

seers, to feed the

copos regere eccle-

Ghost hath placed

congregation" of

church" of God.

sium" Dei. "'Enia-

you " bishops to

God. (3)

xonvg noi/ndireiv t»)»'

rule the church" of

Ixxhjolccv to 0ee.(3)

God.

•

EPISCOPAL AUTHORITY.

(1) It is certain, that this is a false translation ;
because the prophet's words (Mich, v., 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, com-
pared to the least corruption ; or else it is done
on purpose ; which I rather think, because they
do the like in another place, (Acts, xx.) as you
may see below. And that to suppress the signi-
fication 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, noijualvco ; to wit, that Christ
ou" Saviour shall rule and feed, (a) yea, he
shall rule with a rod of iron ; and from him, St.
Peter, and the rest, by his commission given in
the same word, noiuaive, feed and rule my
sheep ; yea, and that with a rod of iron : as when
he struck Ananias and -Sapphira with corporal
death ; as his successors do the like offenders with
spiritual destruction, (unless they repent) by the
terrible rod of excommunication. This is import-
ed in the double signification of the Greek word,
which they, to diminish ecclesiastical authority,
rather translate "feed," than " rule or govern."

(2) For the diminution of this ecclesiastical
authority, they translated this text of scripture,
in King Henry VIII. and King Edward VI.
times, " Unto the king, as the chief head,"
(I Pet. ii.) because 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 Eliza-
beth's time, being, it seems, better advised in
that point, (by Calvin, I suppose, and the Ma<j-
deburgenses, who jointly inveighed against that
title ; (b) and Calvin, against that by name, which
was given to Henry VIII.,) 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 established; they be-
gan to suppress this title in their translations, and
to say, " To the king, as having pre-eminence,"
and, " To the king, as the superior ;" endeavour-
ing, as may be supposed by this translation, to
encroach upon that ecclesiastical and spiritual ju-
risdiction they had formerly granted to the Crown.

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

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

(b) Calvin in cap. \ii. Amos : Magdebur. in Prat".
Cent. 7, fol. 9, 10, 11.

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

And we have reason to judge, that Matthew
Parker, and the rest of Queen Elizabeth's new
bishops, were no otherwise iv de; than by the
queen's letters patent ; seeing that the form
devised by King Edward VI. being repealed by
Queen Mary, was not again revived till the 8th
of Queen Elizabeth. To say nothing of the
invalidity of the said form, as having neither
the name of bishop nor priest in it, the like doubt
of their consecration arises from the many and
gTeat objections made by Catholic writers (f)
against their pretended Lambeth Records and
Register; as also from the consecrators of M.
Parker, viz., Barlow, Scorey, &c, whom we
cannot believe to have been consecrated them-
selves, unless they can first show us records of
Barlow's consecration ; and secondly, tell us,
by what form of consecration Coverdale and
Scorey were made bishops ; the Rom. Cath. ordi-
nal having been abrogated, and the new one not
yet devised, at the time that Mason says they were
consecrated, which was Aug. 30, 1551. And as
for the suffragan, there is such a difference about
his name, (g) some calling him John, some Rich-
ard ; and about the place where he lived, some
calling him suffragan of Bedford, (A) some of
Dover, (i) that it is doubtful whether there was
such a person present at that Lambeth cerenn-ny.
But these things being fitter for another treatise,
which, I hope, you will be presented with ere
long, I shall say no more of them in this place.

(d) K. Edw. VI. Let. Pat. Jo.Utenti. p. 71;Regist. Ec-
cles. peregr. Londin. Calvin, p. 327, Resp. ad Pcrsecul.
Angl.

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

( f) Fitzherb. Dr. Champ. Nullity of the English
Clergy Prot. demonst. &c.
(s) See Dr. Brainhall, p. 98.
(k) Mason, Bramhall, &c.
(>') Dr. Butler Epist. de Consecrat. Minist.

VIII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

The true English accord-

Corruptions in the Pro-

The last Translation of

Chapter,

The Vulgate Latin Text.

ing to the Rhernish

testant Bibles, printed

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

and Verse.

Translation.

A. n. 1562, 1577, 1579.

Lon., an. 1683.

1 Corinth.

Numquid non ha-

Have not we

Instead of " wo-

chap. ix.

bemus potestatem

power to lead about

man," they trans-

verse 5.

" mulierem," soro-

a "woman," a sis-

a " wife," a sister 1

late " wife," here

remfideXyty yvvalxa,

ter? &c.

&c. (1)

also.

circumducendi 1 fyc.

(1)

Philipp.

Etiam rogo et te

Yea, and I be-

For companion,

— " Yoke-fellow."

chap. iv.

germane " compar"

seech thee, my sin-

they say, " yoke-

verse 3.

avt,vys yv^aiB. (2)

cere " companion."

fellow." (2)

Hebrews

" Honorabile con-

" Marriage hon-

"Wedlock is hon-

" Marriage is hon-

chap. xiii.

nubium in omnibus"

ourable in all," and

ourable among all

ourable in all."

verse 4.

rlfiiog 6 yd/nog iv nqoi,
et thorns immacula-
tus. (3)

the bed undefiled.

men," &c. (3)

St. Matth.

Qui dixit Mis,

Who said to them,

— " All men can-

chap. xix.

" Non omnes capi-

"Not all take this

not receive this say-

verse 11.

unt" verbum istud,
j* n&vtsg ^w^Sfft, sed
quibus datum est.{4)

word," but they to
whom it is given.

ing," &c. (4)

ing," &c. ,

St. Matth.

Et sunt "enunchi,"

And there are

There are some

Corrected.

chap. xix.

qui seipsos cast rave-

" eunuchs," who

" chaste," which

verse 12.

runt, ivvu%oi oiTiveg,

have made them-

ivv&/ioav eav Toig,

selves " eunuchs"

selves " chaste" for

propter regnum coz-

for the kingdom of

the kingdom of hea-

lorum. (5)

heaven.

ven. (5)

THE SINGLE LIVES OF PRIESTS.

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

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

(a) St. Hierom., lib. coatr. Jovin., cap. 19 ; 1 Cor.
vii. 5, 35.

(b) Lib. 1, adversus Jovin., de Op.Mon., cap. 4 ; Lib.
2, eap. 24.

Protestants give us a reason out of the Greek
text, why they translate the words following, by
way of exhortation, " Let your conversation be
without covetousness ;" and not these words also
in like manner, " Let marriage be honourable in
all." The phraseology and construction of both
are similar in the Greek.

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

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

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

(e) St. Basil, Ep. 1, ad Amphiioch. ; Ep. 17, ad Pare-
gor. Presbyt. Con. Nice, in Cod. Grae. Can. 6.

IX. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

Acts of
the Apos.
chap. xix.
verse 3.

Titus
chap. iii.
verses 5, 6.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

" In quo, *H il,
ergo baptizati estis?
qu> dixerunt, " In"
Johannis baptismate.
(1)

Non ex operibus
justitiee, qua fecimus
nos, sed secundum
suam rnisericordiam
salvos nos fecit ; per
lavacrum regenera-
lionis et renovation-
is Spiritus Sancti,
"quern effudit" in nos
abunde per Jesum
Christum Salvato-
rem nostrum. (2)

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

" In" what then
were you baptized 1
who said, " In"
John's baptism.

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

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

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

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

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 1683.

" Unto" what then
were ye baptized ?
And they said, "Un-
to" John's baptism.

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

THE SACPAMENT OF BAPTISM.

In the beginning of the reformation, the_. not
only took away five of the se^en sacraments,
but also deprived the rest of all grace, virtue,
and efficacy ; making them no more than poor
and beggarly elements ; at the most, no better
than those of the Jewish law. And this, be-
cause they would not have them bv any means
helpful, or necessary towards our salvation ; for
the obtaining of which, they held and asserted,
that " faith alone was sufficient." (a)

For which reason Beza was not content to
say, with the apostle, (Rom. iv. 11,) "That
circumcision was a seal of the justice of faith ;"
but because he thought that term too low for
the dignity of circumcision, he (to use his own
words) " gladly avoids it ;" putting the verb
instead of the noun, quod obsignaret, for sigil-
lum. And in his annotations upon the same
place, he declares the reason of his so doing to
be, the dignity of circumcision equal with any
sacrament in the N?w Testament. His words
are, " What could be more magnificently spoken
of any sacrament 1 Therefore, they that make
a real difference between the sacraments of the
Old Testament and ours, never seem to have
known how far Christ's office extendeth :" which
he says, not to magnify the old, but to disgrace
the new.

(1) This is also the cause, why the firstEnglish
Protestant translators corrupted this place in
the Acts, to make no difi'erence between John's
baptism and Christ's, saying : " Unto what then
were you baptized ? And they said, Unto John's
baptism." Which Beza would have to be spoken
of John's doctrine, and not of his baptism in
water ; as if it had been said, " What doctrine
do ye profess ?" and they said, " Johns ;"
whereas, indeed, the question is, " In what
then ?" or " wherein were you baptized ?" and
they said, " In John's baptism ;" as if they would
6ay, we have received John's baptism, but not the
Holy Ghost, as yet : whence immediately follows,
■* then they were baptized in the name of
lesus :" and after imposition of hands, " the
Holy Ghost came upon them :" whence appears,
the insufficiency of John's baptism, and the great
difference between it and Christ's. And this so
much troubles the Bezaites, that Beza himself
expresses his grief in these words : " It is not-
necessary, that wheresoever there is mention of
John's baptism, we should think it the very
ceremony of baptism ; thereiore they, who
gather that John's baptism differs from Christ's,
because these, a little after, are said to be bap-
tized in the name of Jesus Christ, have no sure
foundation." See his annotations on Acts xix.
Thus he endeavours to take away the foundation

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

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

Beza confesses, that the Greek els i* is often
used for " wherein" or " wherewith :" as it is in
the Vulgate Latin, and Erasmus ; but he, and
his followers, think it signifies not so here ;
though but the second verse after, (verse 5,)
the very same Greek phrase els *6 ovofxa is by
them translated " In ;" where they say, " that
they were baptized in," not unto, the name of
Jesus Christ.

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

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

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

X. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

St. James
chap. v.
verse 16.

St. Matth.
chap. xi.
verse 21 ;
St. Luke
chap. x.
verse 13.

St. Matth.
chap. iii.
verse 2.

St. Luke
chap. iii.
verse 3.

St. Luke
chap. iii.
verse 8.

Acts of
the Apos.
chap. ii.
verse 38.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

" Confitemini, "
k^ofioXoyeiodp, ergo,
alter utrum " pec-
cata" vestra. (1)

— Si in Tyro et
Sidone facta essent
virtutes, qua facta
stent in vobis, olim in
cilicio et cinere " pce-
nitentiam egissent"

(IBTBVOTjOaV, (2)

u Pcenitentiam agite,"
appropinquabit enim
regnum cozlorum.

Predicans baptis-
mum " poznitentia."

Facite ergo fructus
dignos "patnitentia"

Petrus vero ad
illos " pcenitentiam
{inquit) agite," et
baptizetur unusquis-
que vestrum in no-
mine Jesu Christi.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

" Confess," there-
fore,your "sins" one
to another.

— If in Tyre and
Sidon had been
wrought the mira-
cles that have been
done in you, " they
had done penance"
in sackcloth and
ashes, long ere now.

" Do penance," for
tne kingdom of hea-
ven is at hand.

— Preaching the
baptism of " pe-

Yield, therefore,
fruits worthy of
" penance."

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Bibles, printed
a. d. 1562, 1577, 1579.

But Peter said to
them, "do penance,"
and be every one of
you baptized in the
name of JesusChrist.

" Acknowledge "
your " faults " one
to another. (1)

Beza in all his
translations has,
" they had amended
their lives." And
our other transla-
tions say, " they
would have repen-
ted." (2)

" Repent," for the
kingdom of heaven
is at hand.

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 1683.

Preaching the bap-
tism of " repen-
tance."

— Worthy of "re-
pentance." Beza
says, " Do fruits
meet for them that
amend their lives."

— " Repent," and
be every one of you
baptized, &c.

" Confess " your
faults," &c.

Instead of " they
had done penance,"
they say, " they
would have repen-
ted."

" Repent," &c.

— Preaching the
baptism of " repen-
tance."

— Fruit worthy of
repentance."

— " Repent," and
be baptized, &c.

CONFESSION AND THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE.

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

(2) As for penance, and satisfaction for sins,
they utterly deny it, upon the heresy of, " only
faith justifying and saving a man." Beza pro-
tests, that he avoids these terms, [teiavoia,
pwnitentia, and fieiaroeijs, pcenitentiam agile,
of purpose : and says, that in translating these
Greek words, he will always use, resipiscentia
and resipiscite, " amendment of life," and " amend
your lives." And our English Bibles, to this
day, dare not venture on the word penance,
but only repentance ; which is not only far
different from the Greek word, but even from
the very circumstance of the text ; as is evi-
dent from those words of St. Matth. xi., and
Luke x., were these words, " sackcloth and
ashes," cannot but signify more than- the word
repentance, or amendment of life can denote ;
as is plain from these words of St Basil, (d)

(a) Visitation of the Sick.

(b) Survey of the Common Prayer-Book.

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

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

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

,c) Socrat., lib. 5, cap. 19.

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

(#) 1 Council cf Nice, Can. 12.

(h) St. Basil, cap. 1, ad Amphiloch.

(i) St. August., Ep. 108.

XI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

The true English accord-

Corruptions in the Pro-

The last Translation of

Chapter,
and Verse.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

ing to the Rhemish

testant Bibles, printed

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Translation.

a. D. 15G2, 1577, 1579.

Lon., an. 1683.

St. Luke

Ave, " giulia

Hail, « full of

Hail, " ihou that

In Bib. 1637

chap. i.

plena," Dominus te

grace," our Lord is

art freely beloved."

Hail, " thou that art

verse 28.

cum, xexocoixw/xivTj.

with thee.

In Bib. 1577, "thou

highly favoured." In

(1)

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

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

St. Matth.

Et " vocavit" no-

And " called" his

And " he" called

chap. i.

nomen ejus Jesum,

name Jesus.

his name Jesus. (2)

his name Jesus.

verse 25.

xc exaXsoe to ovo/ua
ccvth Ij]ohv. (2)

Genesis

" 7psa" conteret

"She" shall bruise

" It" shall bruise

"It" shall bruise

chap. iii.

caput tuum, et tu

thy head in pieces,

thy head, and thou

verse 15.

" insidiaberis" cal-

and " thou shalt lie

shalt " bruise his

caneo ejus. (3)

in wait for her heel."

heel." (3)

heel."

2 St. Peter

Da bo autem operant

And I will do my

I will endeavour

I will endeavour,

chap. i.

et frequenter habere

endeavour ; you to

that you may be

verse 15.

vos post obitum mc-

have often after my

able, after my de-

able after my de-

um, ut "'horum me-

decease also, that

cease, to have these

cease,to have "these

moriarn" faciatis.{4)

you may keep a

things " always in

things always in re-

" memory of these

remembrance." (4)

membrance."

things."

Psalm

Nimis honorijicati

Thy friends,

How dear are

How precious also

cxxxviii.

sunt amici tut, ""'"T" 1 ,

God, are become

thy counsels (or

are thy thoughts un-

Eng. Bib.,

oi cpiloi on, Deus ; ni-

exceedingly honour-

thoughts) to me ?

to me, God! How

cxxxix.

mis confortalus est

able ; their prince-

! how great is the

great is the sum of

verse 17.

principatus eorum,

arrnDJCl "jD^3>, at, aQxoit,

aVTOiV. (5)

dom is exceedingly
strengthened.

sum of them ? (5)

them !

THE HONOUR. OF OUR BLESSED LADY AND OTHER SAINTS.

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

If they say, the Greek word does not signify
so : I must ask them, why they translate ^Ixom
fihoa, (e) ulcernsus, " full of sores," and will
not translate xexngnwuivT], gratiosa, " full of
grace V Let them tell us what difference there is
in the nature and significancy of these two words.
If ulcerosus, as Beza translates it, be " full of
sores," why is not gratiosa, as Erasmus trans-
lates it, " full of grace ?" seeing that all such
adjectives in osus signify fulness, as periculosus;
arumnosus, &c, as every school-boy knows.
What syllable is there in this word, that seems
to make it signify " freely beloved?" St. Chry-
sostom, and the Greek doctors, who should best
know the nature of this Greek word, say, that
it signifies to make gracious and acceptable.
St. Athanasius, a Greek doctor, says, that our
blessed Lady had this title, xexotQircj/jiyj}, be-
cause the Holy Ghost descended into her, filling
her with all graces and virtues. And St. Hierom
reads gratia plena, and says plainly, she was so
saluted, " full of grace," because she conceived
him in whom all fulness of the Deity dwelt
corporally. (/)

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

(a) Cone. Eph., cap. 13. (£) St. Luke i. 18.

(c) St. Luke i. 15. (dy Acts vii. 8. (e) Luke xvi. 20.
(/) St. Chys. Comment, in Ep. 1 ; St. Athan. de S.
Deipar; St. Hierom. in Ep. 140 in Expos. Psal. xliv.
9

that " he (viz. Joseph) called his name Jesus."
And why not she, as well as he 1 For in St.
Luke, the angel saith to our Lady also,
" Thou shalt call his name Jesus." Have
we not much more reason to think that the
blessed Virgin, the natural mother of our
Saviour, gave him the name Jesus, than Joseph,
his reputed father ; seeing also St. Matthew,
in this place, limits it neither to him nor her ?
And the angel revealed the'hame first unto her,
saying, that she should so call him. And the
Hebrew word, Isa. vii., whereunto the angel
alludes, is the feminine gender ; and by the great
Rabbins referred unto her, saying expressly,
in their commentaries, et vocabit ipsa puella,
&c, " and the maid herself shall call his name
Jesus." (g)

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

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

(5) In fine, this verse of the Psalms, (i)
which is by the church and all antiquity read
thus, and both sung and said in honour of the
holy apostles, agreeably tothat in another Psalm,
" Thou shalt appoint them princes over all the
earth," they translate contrary both to the
Hebrew and the Greek, which is altogether
according to the said ancient Latin translation,
" How are the heads of them strengthened, or
their princedoms ?" And this they do, pur-
posely to detract from the honour of the apos-
tles and holy saints.

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

XII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

CI inter,

and Vorse.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

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

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 1683.

Hebrews
chap. xi.
verse 21.

Fide, Jacob mo-
riens, singulos filio-
rum Joseph bene
dixit, et " adoravit
fastigiu m virg &
ejus" nQoasxvvTjcrsv
ini to &xqov ttj? qa@dis
&VT8. (1)

By faith, Jacob
dying, blessed every
one of the sons of
Joseph, and "adored
the top of his rod."

— And " leaning
on the end of his
staff, worshipped
God." (1)

By faith Jacob,
when he was a-dy-
ing, blessed both the
sons of Joseph, "and
worshipped, leaning
upon the top of his
staff."

Genesis
chap, xlvii.
verse 31.

" Adoravit Israel
Deum, conversus ad"
lectuli caput.

" Israel adored
God, turning to" the
bed's head.

" Israel worship-
ped God towards"
the bed's head. (2)

And "Israel bowed
himself upon" the
bed's head.

Ps. xcviii.
verse 5.
Eng. Bib.,
xcix.

Eocaltate Domi-
num Deum nostrum-
" et adorate scabel,
lum pedum ejus,"
quoniam sanctum est.

Exalt the Lord
our God, " and
adore ye the foot-
stool of his feet,"
"because it" is holy.

Exalt the Lord
our God, and "fall
down before" his
footstool, "for he"
is holy.

Exalt the Lord
our God, and " wor-
ship at his footstool,"
" for he" is holy.

Ps. cxxxi.
verse 7.
Eng. Bib.,
cxxxii.

Introibimus in
tabernaculum ejus,
" adorabimus in loco
ubi steterunt pedes
ejus."

We will enter in-
to his tabernacle,
we will " adore in
the place where his
feet stood."

— We will " fall
down before his foot-
stool."

We will go into
his tabernacles, we
will "worship at his
footstool."

THE DISTINCTION OF RELATIVE AND DIVINE WORSHIP.

(1) The sacred Council of Trent decrees, that
" the images of Christ, of the virgin mother of
God, and of other saints, are to be had and re-
tained, especially in churches ; and that due
honour and worship is to be imparted unto them :
not that any divinity is believed to be in them ;
or virtue, for which they are to be worshipped ;
or tnat any thing is to be begged of them ; or
that hope is to be put in them ; as, in times past,
the Pagans did, who put their trust in idols ; but
because the honour which is exhibited to them,
is referred to the archetype, which they resem-
ble : so that, by the images which we kiss, and
before which we uncover our heads, and kneel,
we adore Christ and his saints, whose likeness
they bear." (a) And the second Council of
Nice, which confirmed the ancient reverence
due to sacred images, tells us, " That these
images the faithful salute with a kiss, and give
an honorary worship to them, but not the true
latria, or divine worship, which is according to
faith, and can be given to none but to God him-
self." (b) Between which degree of worship,
latria and Julia, Protestants arc 60 loath to make
any distinction, that, in this place, they restrain
the scripture to the sense of one doctor ; inso-
much that they make the commentary of St.
Augustine, (peculiar to him alone,) the verv text
of scripture, in their translation ; thereby exclu-
ding all other senses and expositions of other
fathers ; who either read and expound, that
" Jacob adored the top of Joseph's sceptre ;" or
else, that " he adored towards the top of his
sceptre :" besides which two meanings, there is
no other interpretation of this place, in all anti-
quity, but in St. Augustine only, as Beza him-
self confesses. And here they add two words
more than are in the Greek text, " Leaning
an' 1 God." fV >rcing dirou to signify dviov, which
may be, but is as rare as vtrgas ejus, for virgas
surp. ; and turning the other words clear out of
their order, place, and form of construction,
which they must needs have correspondent and
answerable to the Hebrew text, from whence
they were translated ; which Hebrew words
themselves translate in this order, " He wor-
shipped towards the bed's head ;" and if so,
according to the Hebrew, then did he worship '
" towards the top of his sceptre," according
to the Greek ; the difference of both being onlv
in these words, sceptre and bed ; because the
Hebrew is ambiguous as to both, and not in the
order and construction of the sentence.

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

(a) Concil. Trident., Sess. 25.
(£) Concil. Nicen., Act 7.

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

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

XIII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

Coloss.
cliap. iii.
verse 5.

Ephesians
chap. v.
verse 5.

2 Corinth,
chap. vi.
verse 16.

1 Ep. John
chap. v.
verse 21.

1 Corinth,
chap. x.
verse 7.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Et avaritiam, qucs
est " simulacrorum
servitus," eidwloXur.
gsia. (1)

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

Quis autem
sensus templo

con-
Dei
cum "idolis?"6idwXo)P

(2)

Filioli, custodite
vos a " simulacris."
BiditjXcoy.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

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

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

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

My little children,
keep yourselves
from " idols."

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Bibles, printed
a. d. 1562, 1577, 1579.

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

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

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 1683.

— And covetous-
ness, which is "ido-
latry.'

Corrected.

How agreeth the
temple of God with
" images 1" (2)

Babes, keep your-
selves from " im-

" Neque idolatry
EidwXoXaTQcu, efflcia-
mini," sicut quidam
ex ipsis.

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

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

Corrected.

Corrected also in
this.

SACRED IMAGES.

(1) Before I proceed in this, let me ask our
English translators, what is the most proper,
and best English of 'didwlov, cidwloWrpi?;, sldwXo.
XaTQsla ; idolum, idolatra, idolatria ? Is it not
idol, idolator, idolatry 1 Are not these plain
English words, and well known in our lan-
guage ? Why then need they put three words
for one, " worshipper of images," and " wor-
shipping of images ?" Whether is the more
natural and convenient speech, either in our
English tongue, or for the truth of the thing to
say, as the holy scripture does, "covetousness
is idolatry ;" and consequently, " the covetous
man is an idolator ;" or to say, as their first ab-
surd translations have it, " covetousness is
worshipping of images," and the " covetous man
is a worshipper of images ?" I suppose they will
scarcely deny, but that there are many covetous
Protestants, and, perhaps, of their clergy too,
that may be put in the list with those of whom
the apostle speaks, when he says, there are
some " whose belly is their god." And though
these make an idol of their money, and their
bellies, by covetousness and gluttony, yet they
would doubtless take it ill of us, if in their
own scripture language, we should call them
" worshippers of images." Who sees not,
therefore, what great difference there is be-
tween " idol" and " image," " idolatry" and
" worshipping of images ?" even so much is
there between St. Paul's words, and the Pro-
testant translation ; but because in their latter
translations they have corrected this shameful
absurdity, I will say no more of it.

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

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

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

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

(a) Why might not a cock (the animal by which our
Saviour was pleased to admonish St. Peter of his sins)
have been placed upon Covent Garden Church, rather
than a serpent ? ora cross on Bow Church, rather than
a dragon 1

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

XIV. — PROTECTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book.

Chapter,

and Verse.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

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

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon. an. 1683.

1 Corinth,
chap. v.
ver. 9. 10.

Romans
chap. xi.
verse 4.

Acts of
the Apos.
chap. xix.
verse 35.

Exodus
chap. xx.
verse 4.

Scripsi vobis in
epislola, ne commis-
ceamini fornicariis,
non vtique fornica-
riis hujus mundi, aut
avaris, aut rapaci-
bus, aut " idolis ser-
vientibus." eldojlol&j-
Qulg, alioquin dcbue-
ratis de hoc mundo
eociissc : nunc autem
scripsi vobis non
commisceri ; si is qui
frater nominatur, est
fornicator, aut ava-
rus, aut " idolis ser-
viens" <fyc, slduloXdcT.
ooctg. (1)

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

Viri Ephesi, quis
enim est hominum,
qui nesciat Ephesio-
rum civitatem cultri-
cem esse magna
Diana et " Jovis
prolix?" tS dion g tug ?

Non fades tibi
"sculptile, ,y ^25, El'dw-

1.0V.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Thou shalt not
make to thyself any
graven thing-."

Thou shalt not
make to thyself any
graven image."

It is corrected in
this Bible.

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

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

Thou shalt not
make to thee any
" graven image."

THE USE OF SACRED IMAGES.

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

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

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

fades till sculptile, coincide with those words
that go before, " Thou shalt have no other gods
but me." For so to have an image, as to make it
a god, is to maice it more than an image : and
therefore when it is an idol, as were the idols of
the Gentiles, then it is forbidden by this com-
mandment. Otherwise, when the cross stood
many yetrs upon the table, in Queen Elizabeth's
chapel, pray was it against this commandment ?
or was it idolatry in her majesty, and her coun-
sellors, that appointed it there ? Or do their
brethren the Lutherans beyond seas, at this day,
commit idolatry against this commandment, who
have in their churches the crucifix, and the holy
images of the mother of God, and of St. John
the evangelist 1 Or if the whole story of the
Gospel concerning our Saviour Christ, were
drawn in pictures and images in their churches,
as it is in many of ours, would they say, it were
a breach of this commandment ? Fie for shame !
fie for bhame ! that they should with such into-
lerable impudence and deceit abuse and bewitch
the ignorant people against their own knowledge
and consciences.

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

(a) 3 Kings xii. 28; Psal. cv. 19.

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

JLV, PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

Isaiah
chap. xxx.
verse 22,

Habba
chap. ii.
verse 18.

Daniel
chap. xiv.
verse 4.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Et contaminabis
laminas " sculptili-
um" argenti tui, et
vestimenlum " con-
flatilis" auri tui, fye.
(1)

Quid prodest
" sculptile" quia
sculpsit Mud fictor
suus " C07ijlatile," et
"imaginemfalsam?

w ~\ ylvmov <
2 ' J x arFV / xa -

Quia non colo
" idola" rnanufacta,
eido)i.a XBiQononjia.

(2)

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

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

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

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

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

Ye shall defile
also the covering of
the "graven images"
of silver, and the or-
nament of thy "mol-
ten images" of gold.
(0

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

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

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 1683.

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

What profiteth
the "graven image,"
that the maker there-
of hath graven it,
the "molten image,"
and a " teacher of
lies ?"

Though they have
corrected it, yet the
two last chapters are
omitted in their
small impressions
for Apocrypha.

THE USE OF SACRED IMAGES.

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

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

and therefore make the holy scriptures to speak
herein according to their own fancies. What
monstrous and intolerable deceit is this !

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

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

The reason they give for rejecting them is,
as I told you above, " that they have formerly
been doubted of;" but if you demand, why they
do not, for the same reason, reject a great many
more in the New Testament? the whole Church
of England answers you in Mr Rogers' words,
and by him, " Howbeit we judge them (viz.,
books formerly doubted of in the New Testa-
ment) canonical, not so much because learned
and godly men in the church so have, and do
receive and allow of them, as fox that the Holy
Spirit in our hearts doth testify that they are
from God." See Rogers' Defence of the Thirty-
nine Articles, pages 31, 32. So that Protestants
are purely beholden to the private spirit in the
hearts of their convocation-men, for almost half
the NeAV Testament ; which had nei r er been ad-
mitted by them in the canon of scripture,if the said
" private spirit in their hearts had not testified
their being from God ;" no more than the rest
called Apocrypha, which they not only thrust
out of the canon, but omit to publish in their
smaller impressions of the Bible ; because,
forsooth, the holy private spirit in their hen Us
testifies them to speak too expressly against their
heretical doctrines.

XVI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemiih
Translation.

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

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon. an. 1683.

Acts of
the Apos.
chap. ii.
verse 27.

Genesis
ch. xxxvii.
verse 35

Genesis
chap. xlii.
verse 38.

Genesis
chap. xliv.
verses 29,
31.

Quoniam non de-
relinques " animam
meam in inferno."

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

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

Thou wilt not
leave my " soul in
the grave." — (Bible
1579.) (1)

It is corrected in
this translation.

Desccndam adfi-
lium meum lugens in
" infernum, " ^»,
&drjg, infernus ; for
so are the Hebrew,
Greek, and Latin
words for hell. (2)

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

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

I will go down
into the " grave."

Deducetis canos
rneos cum dolore ad
" inferos."

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

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

Deducetis canos
meos cum mozrore ad
" inferos."

— With sorrow
unto " hell."

— With sorrow
unto " the grave."

3 Kings
chap. ii.
verses 6, 9.

— Ad " inferos."

— Unto "hell."

— "To the grave."

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

— With sorrow
unto the " grave."

— " To the grave."

LIMBUS PATRUM AND PURGATORY,

The doctrine of our pretended reformers is,
that "there was never, from the beginning of
the world, any other place for souls, after this
life, but only two, to wit, heaven for the blessed,
and hell for the damned." This heretical doc-
trine includes many erroneous branches : First,
that all the holy patriarchs, prophets, and other
noly men, of the Old Testament, went not into
the third place, called Abraham's bosom, or
limbus patrum ; but immediately to heaven :
that they were in heaven before our blessed Sa-
viour had suffered death for their redemption ;
whence it will follow, that our Saviour was not the
first man that ascended, and entered into heaven.
Moreover, by this doctrine it will follow, that
our Saviour Christ descended not into any
third place, in our creed called hell, to deliver
the fathers of the Old Testament, and to bring
them triumphantly with him into heaven : and
so, that article of the Apostle's Creed, con-
cerning our Saviour's descent into hell, must
either be put out, as indeed it was by Beza in
the confession. of his faith, printed anno 1564,
or it must have some other meaning ; to wit,
either the lying of the body in the grave, or, as
Calvin and his followers will have it, the suf- j
fering of hell torments, and pains upon the
cross, (a)

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

And though our English translators are
ashamed of this foul and absurd corruption, yet
their intention appears to come not much, if any
thing at all, short of Beza's ; for, in their Bible
of 1579, they have it in the text, "Thou wilt
not leave my soul in the grave," and in the
margin they put, " or life, or person ;" thereby

(a) Calvin's Instit, lib. 2, c. 16, sect. 10, and in his
Catechism.

(b) Psal.xv. 10.

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

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

(d) St. Chrys. in Eph. iv.

(e) S. Irenaeus, lib. 5, fine.

XVI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Rook,

Chapter,

and Verse.

Ps. lxxxv.
verse 13.

Ps. lxxxix.

verse 49.

Hosea
chap. xiii.
verse 14.

1 Corinth,
chap. xv.
verse 55.

Psalm vi.
verse 5.

Proverbs
ch. xxvii.
verse 20.

Hebrews
chap. v.
verse 7.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Et eruisti animam
meam ex " inferno
inferiori." (1)

Eruit animam
suam manu " in-
feri r (2)

Ero mors tua, O
mors, morsus tuns
ero " inferne," ^"SW-

Ubi est, murs, sti-
mul'S tuus? ubi est
" inferne" victoria
tua? adq.

In "inferno" autem
quis conftebitur libi ?

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

" Qui" in diebus
carnis sum preces
supplicationesque ad
eum, qui possit ilium
salvum facere a
morte, cum clamore
valido et lachrymis
offer ens, exauditus
est "pro sua reve-
renfia," &nb ttj? £vXot-
§sla?. (3)

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

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

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

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

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant BiUes, printed
a. D. 1562, 1577, 1579.

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

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

" Hell and de-
struction are never
full.

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

Thou hast deli-
vered my soul from
the " lowest grave."
(1)

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

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

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

They say, " in the
grave."

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

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

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 1683.

Instead of "lower"
hell, thev say, "low-
est" hell"!

Shall he deliver
his soul from the
hand of the "grave 7 "

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

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

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

Corrected

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

LIMBUS PATRUM AND PURGATORY.

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

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

(a) Heb. ix. 8; x. 20.

(b) Epitaph. Nepot. cap. 3.

sentence of Tertullian : I know that the bosom
of Abraham was no heavenly place, but only the
higher hell, or the higher part of hell." (d) Nor
can I believe, but they must have read these words
in St. Chrysostom, upon that place of Esai : " I
will break the brazen gates, and bruise the iron
bars in pieces, and will open the treasure dark-
ened," <fcc So he (the prophet) calls hell, says
he ; " for although it were hell, yet it held the
holy souls, and precious vessels, Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob." (e)

(2) And thus all along, wherever they find
the word hell, that is, where it signifies the
place in which the holy fathers of the Old
Testament rested, called by the church li?nbus
palrum, they are sure to translate it grave ; a
word as much contrary to the signification of
the Greek, Hebrew, or Latin words, as bread is
to the Latin word lac. If I ask them, what is
Hebrew, Greek, or Latin for hell, must they
not tell me, ^jx, y dng, infernus ? If I ask them,
what words they will bring from those languages
to signify grave, must they not say, "OP, i&<fog,
sepulchrum ? With what face then can they look
upon these wilful corruptions of theirs 1

(3) Note here another most damnable corrup-
tion of theirs ; instead of translating as all anti-
quity, with a general and full consent, has ever
done in this place, " that Christ was heard of his
Father, for his reverence ;" they read, " that
he was heard in that which he feared ;" or, as
this last Bible has it, " and was heard in that he
feared." And who taught them this sense of
the text ? Doubtless Beza ; whom, for the most
part, they follow ; and he had it from Calvin,
who, he says, was the first that ever found out
this interpretation. And why did Calvin invent
this, but to defend his blasphemous doctrine,
" that our Saviour Jesus Christ, upon the cross,
was horribly afraid of damnation : and that he
was in the very sorrows and torments of the
damned : and that this was his descending into
hell : and that otherwise he descended not."
Note this, good reader, and then judge to what
wicked end this translation tends. Who has
ever heard of greater blasphemy ; and yet they
dare presume to force the scripture, by their
false translation, to back them in it; " he was
heard in that which he feared ;" as if they should
say, he was delivered from damnation, and the
eternal pains of hell, of which he was sore
afraid. What dare they not do, who tremble not
at this 1

(d) Tertul. 1, 4, adversus Marcion.

XVII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

Romans
chap. ii.
verse 26.

St. Luke
chap. i.
verse 6.

Apocalyp.
chap. xix.
verse 8.

2 Tiinoth.
chap. iv.
verse 8.

2 Thessal.
chap. i.
verses 5, 6.

Hebrews
chap. vi.
verse 10,

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Si igitur prceputium
"justitias," dixaiw.
/uecTuJegis custodial,

4-c. (i)

Erant autem "justi,"
dixawl, amho ante
Dcum, incedentes in
omnibus mandatis et
" justificationibus, "
xai dixixiw/.taoi, Domi-
ni sine querela.

Byssinum enim
"justificationes" sunt
sanctorum,T« dixaib)-

fllXTOC.

In reliquo, reposita
est mihi,corona *'jus-
titice," rtjs Sixmoov-
vr\g,quam reddet mihi
Dominus in ilia die
"Justus" judex, 6
dixaiog xqnrjg andw-
oaei, (SfC (2)

— In exemplum
" justi" dixmag, ju-
dicii Dei, ut digni
habeamini in regno
Dei, pro quo et
patiamini, si tamen
justum est, dtxatvot'
sgi,apud Deum,retri-
buere tribulationem
Us qui vos tribulant.

Non enim " injus-
tus," adixog, Deus,
ut obliviscatur operis
vcslri, <$fc.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Bibles, printed
a. d. 1562, 1577, 1579.

If then the pre-
puce keep the "jus-
tices" of the law,&c.

And they were
both "just" before
God, walking in all
the commandments
and "justifications"
of our Lord, without
blame.

For the silk are
the "justifications"
of saints.

Concerning the
rest, there is laid
up for me a crown
of "justice," which
our Lord will ren-
der to me in that
day, a just Judge.

For an example
of the "just" judg-
ment of God, that
you may be counted
worthy of the king-
dom of God, for
which you suffer,
that yet it be "just"
with God to repay
tribulations to them
that vex you, and
to you that are vex-
ed, rest with us, &c.

For God is not
" unjust," that he
should forget your
works, &c.

If the uncircum-
cision keep the "or-
dinances"of the law.
(1)

And they were
both "righteous" be-
fore God, walking
in all the command-
ments and " ordi-
nances" of the Lord
blameless.

For the "fine linen"
are the " righteous-
ness" of saints.

Henceforth there
is laid up for me a
crown of righteous-
ness," which the
Lord the " righte-
ous"Judge shall give
me, &c. (2)

Rejoice, &c

which is a token
of the " righteous"
judgment of God,
that you may be
counted worthy of
the kingdom of God,
for which ye suffer.
For it is a " righte-
ous"thing with God,
to recompence tri-
bulation to them
that trouble you, and
to you that are
troubled, rest.

God is not "un-
righteous" to forget
your good works
and labour.

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon. an. 1C83.

If therefore the
uncircumcision keep
the "righteousness"
of the law.

And they were
both "righteous" be-
fore God, walking
in all the command-
ments and " ordi-
nances" of the Lord
blameless.

For the " fine
linen" is the " righ-
teousness" of saints

For " justice,
they translate "righ-
teousness :" and for
a "just" judge, they
say a " righteous"
judge.

Here also they say
" righteous" judg-
ment, and " righ-
teous thing," instead
of "just," &c.

For God is not
" unrighteous," &c.

JUSTIFICATION, AND THE REWARD OF GOOD WORKS.

(1) As the article of justification has many
/anches, and as their errors therein are mani-
oklj so are their English translations accord-
ingly in many respects false and heretical : first,
against justification by good works, and by
keeping the commandments, they suppress the
very name of justification in all such places
where the word signifies the commandments,
or the law of God ; and where the Greek signi-
fies most exactly justices and justifications,
according as our Vulgate Latin translates,
justitias and justificationes, there the English
translators say, statutes or ordinances ; as you
see in these examples, where their last transla-
tion, because they would seem to be doing,
though to small purpose, changes the first cor-
ruption, " ordinances of the law," into righ-
teousness ; another word, as far from what it
should have been, in comparison, as the first :
and to what end is all this, but to avoid the
term justifications ? they cannot be ignorant how
different this is from the Greek, which they
pretend to translate. In the Old Testament,
perhaps they will pretend that they follow the
Hebrew word, which is fprt ; and therefore, they
translate statutes and ordinances ; (righteousness
too, if they please ;) but even there also, are not
the seventy Greek interpreters sufficient to
teach them the signification of the Hebrew
word, who always interpret it, dixatojuaia ; in
English, justifications ?

But admit that they may control the Septua-
gint in the Hebrew ; yet in the New Testament
they do not pretend to translate the Hebrew,
but rather the Greek. What reason have they
then for rejecting the word just and justifica-
tions ? Sureiy, no other reason, but that which
their master Beza gives for the same thing ;
saying, that " he rejected the word justificationes,
on purpose to avoid the cavils that might be
made from this word, against justification by
faith. "(a) As if he should say, this word,
truly translated according to the Greek, might
minister great occasion to prove, by so many
places of scripture, that man's justification is not
by faith only, but also by keeping the law, and
observing the commandments of God ; which,
therefore, are called according to the Greek
and Latin, justificationes, because they concur
to justification, and making a man just : as by
St. Luke's words, also, is well signified ; which
have this allusion, that they were both just, be-
cause they walked in all the justifications of our
Lord ; which they designedly suppress by other
■words.

(2) And hereof it also rises, that when Beza

(a) Beza Annot. in Luk. i.

could not possibly avoid the word in his transla-
tion, Apoc. xix. 8, " the silk is the justification of
saints;" he helps the matter with this commenta-
ry, " That justifications are those good works,
which are the testimony of a lively faith."(6)
But our English translators have found another
way to avoid the word, even in their transla-
tions : for they, because they could not say
ordinances, translate, " the righteousness of
saints;" abhorring the word "justifications of
saints ;" because they know full well, that this
word includes the good w r orks of saints : which
works, if they should in translating, call their
justifications, it would rise up against their " jus-
tifications by faith only :" therefore, where they
cannot translate ordinances and statutes, which
are terms farthest off from justification, they
say, righteousness, making it also the plural
number ; whereas the more proper Greek word
for righteousness is evfli/xj?.;, (Dan. vi. 22,) which
there some of them translate, unguiltiness,
because they will not translate exactly if you
would hire them.

And by their translating righteous, instead of
just, they bring it, that Joseph was a righteous
man, rather than a just man ; and Zachary and
Elizabeth were both righteous before God,
rather than just ; because when a man is
called just, it sounds that he is so indeed, and
not by imputation only. Note also, that where
faith is joined with the word just, they omit
not to translate it just, " the just shall live by
faith," to signify, that "justification is by faith
alone, "(c)

(3) These places, (2 Tim., 2 Thess., and
Heb.) do very fairly discover their false and
corrupt intentions, in concealing the word jus-
tice in all their Bibles ; for, if they should
translate truly, as they ought to do, it would
infer, (d) that men are justly crowned in heaven
for their good works upon earth, and it is God's
justice so to do ; and that he will do so, because
he is a just Judge, and because he will show
his just judgment ; and he will not forget so to
do, because he is not unjust; as the ancient fathers
do interpret and expound. St. Augustine most
excellently declares, that it is God's grace,
favour, and mercy in making us, by his grace,
to live and believe well, and so to be worthy of
heaven ; and his justice and just judgment,
to render and repay eternal life for those works
which himself wrought in us : which he thus
expresses, " How should he render or repay
as a just judge, unless he had given it as a mer-
ciful Father ?" (e)

(b) Beza Annot. in Apoc. xix.

(</) St. Chrys. Theodoret, Oecumen.upon these places.
(e) St. Aug. de Gra. et lib Arbitr., cap. Q.

XVIII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

Romans
chap. viii.
verse 18.

Hebrews
chap. x.
verse 29.

Coloss.
chap. i.
verse 12.

Ps. cxviii.
verse 112.

Hebrews
chap. ii.
verse 9.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

"Existimo," Xoyl'Qo-
ftai, enim quod non
sunt "condignce pas-
siones" hujus tempo-
ris ad futuram glo-
riutn, 6fC, ax «£t«
nyog xi]v neXXaoav
do^av. (1)

Quanto magis pu-
tatis " deteriora me-
reri, supplicia," noaot
Xeiqovog «£ loid^a ex at,
TiftoQiag, qui Filium
Dei conculcaverit,
eye. (2)

Gratias agentes
Deo Patri, qui " dig-
nos" ixuiioaavTi^nos
fecit in partem "sor-
tis" sanctorum in lu-
mine. (3)

" Inclinavi" cor
meum ad faciendas
"justifications tuas
in eternum, propter
retributionem" (4)

Eum au tern qui
modico quam angeli
" minoratus est," vi-
demus Jesum, prop-
ter "passionem" mor-
tis gloria el honor e
coronatum. (5)

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

For "I think"
that the " passions"
of this time are not
" condign to" the
glory to come, that
shall be revealed in
us.

How much more,
think you, doth
he " deserve worse
punishments," who
hath trodden the
Son of God under-
foot?

Giving thanks to
God the Father,
who hath made us
" worthy" unto the
part of the " lot" of
the saints in the
light.

I have " inclined"
my heart to do thy
"justifications for
ever for reward."

But him that was
a little " lessened
under" the angels,
we see Jesus, be-
cause of the " pas-
sion'^ death,crown-
ed with glory and
honour.

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

For I am " cer-
tainly persuaded,"
that the "afflictions"
of this time are not
"worthy of" the
glory which shall be
in us. (1)

How much "sorer
shall he be punish-
ed," which treadeth
under-foot the Son
of God ? (2)

Giving thanks to
God the Father,
" that" hath made
us " meet to be par-
takers" of the " in-
heritance" of the
saints in light. (3)

I have " applied"
my heart to fulfil
thy "statutes always
even unto the end."
(4)

We see Jesus
crowned with glory
and honour," which"
was a " little infe-
rior to" the angels,
" through" the "suf-
fering" of death.

(5)

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon. an. 1683.

For " I reckon"
that the sufferings
of this present time,
are not " worthy to
be compared with"
the glory which shall
be revealed in us.

Of how much
"sorer punishment,"
suppose ye, shall he
be thought " wor-
thy" who hath trod-
den under-foot the
Son of God.

Giving thanks un-
to the Father that
hath made us"meet,"
&c.

— " Even unto the
end."

But we sec Jesus,
who was made a
"little lower than"
the angels, for the
" suffering" of death
crowned with glory
and honour.

MERITS, AND MERITORIOUS WORKS.

(1) I shall not say much of this gross cor-
ruption, because they have been pleased to correct
it in their last translation : nor will I dwell on
their first words, " I am certainly persuaded,"
which is a far greater asseveration than the
apostle uses ; I wonder how they could thus
translate that Greek word hylZo/uxi ; but that
they were resolved nor only to translate the
apostle's words falsely, against meritorious
works, but also to avouch and affirm the same
forcibly. And for the words following, they
are not in Greek, as they translate in their first
English Bibles, " the afflictions are not worthy
of the glory," &c, because they will not have
our suffering here, though for Christ's sake, to
merit eternal glory ; but thus, " The afflictions
of this time, are not equal, correspondent, or
comparable to the glory to come," because they
are short, but the glory is eternal ; the afflic-
tions are small and few, in comparison ; the
glory great and abundant, above measure. By
this the apostle would encourage us to suffer ;
as he does also in another place very plainly,
when he says, " Our tribulation which presently
is for a moment and light, worketh (' prepareth,'
says their Bible, 1577, with a very false mea-
ning) above measure exceedingly, an eternal
weight of glory in us." See you not here, that
short tribulation in this life " works," that is
causes, purchases, and deserves an eternal
weight of glory in the next ? And what is that,
jut to be meritorious, and worthy of the same ?
As St. Cyprian says, (a) " O what manner of
day shall come, my brethren, when our Lord
shall recount the merits of every one, and pay
us the reward, or stipend of faith and devotion !"
Here you see are merits, and the reward for the
same. Likewise St. Augustine : (b) " The ex-
ceeding goodness of God has provided this,
that the labours should soon be ended, but the
rewards of the merit shall endure without end ;
the apostle testifying, the passions of this time
are not comparable," &c. " For we shall re-
ceive greater bliss, than are the afflictions of all
passions whatsoever."

(2) How deceitfully they deal with the scripture
in this place ! One of their Bibles (c) very falsely
and corruptly leaving out the words " worthy
of," or " deserve," saying, " How much sorer
shall he be punished ?" &c. And the last of
their translations adding as falsely to the text
the word " thought :" ** How much sorer pun-
ishment shall he be thought worthy of," &c. ;
and this is done to avoid this consequence, which
must have followed by translating the Greek
word sincerely ; to wit, if the Greek here, by
there own translation, signifies " to be worthy
of," or " to deserve," being spoken of pains or
punishments deserved ; then must they grant
us the same word to signify the same thing
elsewhere in the New Testament, when it is
spoken of deserving Heaven, and the kingdom

(a) St. Cyprian, Ep. 56, v. 3.

(b) St. August. Serm. 57, de Sanct.

of God, as in Luke, xx., xxi., where, if they
translate according to the Greek, which they
pretend to, they should say, " may be worthy,"
and " they that are worthy ;" and not according
to the Vulgate Latin, which I see, they are
willing to follow, when they think it may make
the more for their turn.

(3) The Greek word Ixavuoui, they translate to
make " meet" in this place, but in other places
(viz. Mat. iii. 8, 11, and viii. 8,) they translate
Ixavbg, " worthy." And why could they not
follow the old Latin interpreter one step further ?
seeing this was the place where they should have
showed their sincerity, and have said, that God
made us " worthy" of heavenly bliss ; because
they cannot but know, that if Ixuvdg, be "worthy,"
then Ixuribaon must needs be " to make worthy."
But they follow their old master, Beza, (d) who
tells them, that here, and there, and soforth,
1 have followed the old Latin interpreter, trans-
lating it " worthy," but in such and such a place
(meaning this for one) I choose rather to say
" meet." What presumption is here ! The
Greek fathers interpret it " worthy." St. Chry-
sostom, upon this place, says, (e) " God doth
not only give us society with the saints, but
makes us also worthy to receive so great a dig-
nity." And OEcumenius says : that " it is God's
glory to make his servants worthy of such good
things : and that it is their glory to be made
worthy of such things." (/)

(4) Here is yet another most notorious cor-
ruption against " merits :" " I have applied my
heart to fulfil thy statues, always, even unto the
end ;" and for their evasion here, they fly to the
ambiguity of the Hebrew word Sp?> as if the
seventy interpreters were not sufficient to de-
termine the same ; but because they find it am-
biguous, they are resolved to take their liberty,
though contrary to St. Hierom, and the ancient
fathers, both Greek and Latin.

(5) In fine, so obstinately are they set against
merits, and meritorious works, that some of
them think, (g) that even Christ himself did not
merit his own glory and exaltation : for making
out of which error, I suppose, they have trans-
posed the words of this text, thereby making
the apostle say, that Christ was inferior to
angels by his suffering death ; that is, says Beza,
" for to suffer death ;" by which they quite ex-
clude the true sense, that, " for suffering death,
he was crowned with glory ;" which are the
true words and meaning of the apostle. But in
their last translations they so place the words
that they will have it left so ambiguous, as yoi
may follow which sense you will. Intolerable
is their deceit !

(J) Beza Annot. in Matth. iii. Nov. Test. 1556.

(e) Oecum. in Caten.

(/) St. Bazil. in Orat. Litnr.

(g) See Calvin, in Epist. ad Philip.

XIX. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

St. John
chap. i.
verse 12.

1 Corinth,
chap. xv.
verse 10.

Ephesians
chap. iii.
verse 12.

2 Corinth,
chap. vi.
verse 1.

Romans
chap. v.
verse 6.

1 Ep. John
chap. v.
verse 3.

St. Matth.
chap. xix.
verse 11.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Quotquot autem
receperunt cum, de-
dit eis " potestatem"
cSuoluv, jilios Dei
fieri. (1)

— Scd abundan-
tius Mis omnibus la-
bor avi : non ego au-
tem, sed gratia Dei
" mccum," i) x&Q l Z T «
Oeu )) ovv ifxoi. (2)

In quo habemus
•' Jiduciam" ct " ac-
cessum" in confiden-
tia per fidem ejus.
(3)

" Adjuvantes," ov-
vEoyovvTEg,autem ex-
hortamur, ne in va-
cuum gratiam Dei
recipiatis. (4)

TJt quid enim
Christ us, cum adhuc
" infirmi essemus,"
ovtwv Tjfiwv <bodevibv :
secundum tempuspro
" impiis" mortuus
est. (5)

Hcbc est enim
charitas Dei, ut
mandata ejus custo-
diamus : et mandata
ejus " gravia" non
sunt, ai iiToXul fia-
qslui sx elalv. (6)

Qui dixit illis,
" non omnes capiunt,
d n&vreg /htouai, ver-
'um istud, sed qui-
bus datum est. (7)

The true English accord-
ing to the Khemish
Translation.

But as many as
received him, he
gave them " power"
to be made the
sons of God.

— But I have la-
boured more abun-
dantly than all they;
yet not I, but the
grace of God " with

In whom we have
" affiance" and " ac-
cess" in confidence,
by the faith of him.

And " we help-
ing," do exhort, that
you receive not the
grace of God in
vain.

For, why did
Christ, when we as
yet " were weak,"
according to the
time, die for the
" impious."

For this is the
charity of God, that
we keep his com-
mandments : and his
commandments are
not " heavy."

— All men " do
hot" receive this
saying.

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Bibles, printed
a. d. 1562, 1577, 1579.

But as many as
received him, he
gave them " prero-
gative" (" Dignity,"
says Beza) to be the
sons of God. (1)

— Yet not I,

but the grace of

God " which is"
with me. (2)

" By" whom we
have "boldness" and
"entrance, with the"
confidence " which
is" by the faith of
him ; or " in him,"
as Beza has it. (3)

And wo " God's
labourers," &c. In
another Bible, We
" together are God's
labourers." (4)

Christ, when we
were yet of " no
strength," died for
the " ungodly." (5)

— And his com-
mandments are not
" grievous." (6)

— All men " can-
not" receive this
saying. (7)

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an, 1683.

Corrected.

— Yet not I, but
the grace of God
" which was" with
me.

Corrected.

For when we
were yet " without
strength," in due
time Christ died for
the " ungodly "

— Instead of, his
commandments are
not " heavy," they
say, are not " grie-
vous."

— All men " can-
not" receive this
saying.

FREE WILL.

(1) Against free will, instead of power,
they, in their translation, use the word preroga-
tive ; and Beza, the word dignity ; protesting
(a) that whereas, in other places, he often trans-
lated this Greek word, power and authority,
here he jejected both indeed against free will ;
which, he says, the sophists would prove out of
this place, reprehending Erasmus for following
them in his translation. But whereas the Greek
word is indifferently used to signify dignity or
liberty, he that will translate either of these, and
exclude the other, restrains the sense of the
Holy Ghost, and determines it to his own fancy.
Now we may as well translate liberty, as Beza
does dignity ; but we must not abridge the sense
of the Holy Ghost to one particular meaning,
and therefore we translate potcstas and power,
words indifferently signifying both dignity and
liberty. But in their last Bible it is corrected.
It would have been well, if they had corrected
this next, though I think of the two, they have
made it worse ; translating, " not I, but the
grace of God which was with mc," (" which is
with me,) say their old Bibles."

(2) By which falsity, they here also restrain
the sense of the Holy Ghost ; whereas, if they
had translated according to sincerity, " Yet
not I, but the grace of God with me," the text
might have had not only the sense they confine
it to, but also this, " not I, but the grace of
God which laboured with me." So that, by this
latter, it may be evidently signified, that the
grace of God, and the apostle, both laboured
together ; and not only grace, as if the apostle
had done nothing, like unto a block, or forced
only; but that the grace of God did so concur,
as the principal agent, with all his labours, that
his free will wrought with it : and this is the
most approved interpretation of this place,
which their translation, by putting, " which is,"
or, " which was," into the text, excludes.

But they reprehend the Vulgate Latin inter-
preter for neglecting the Greek article, not con-
sidering that the same many times cannot be
expressed in Latin ; the Greek phrase having this
prerogative above the Latin, to represent a thing
more briefly, commodiously, and significantly
by the article, as Jacobus Zr.bedmi, Jacobus
Alplicei, Judas Jacobi, Maria C/eophce : in all
which, though the Greek article is not expressed,
yet they are all sincerely translated into Latin.
Nor can the article be expressed without adding
more than the article, and so not without adding
to the text, as they do very boldly in such
speeches, throughout the New Testament.
Yea, they do it when there is no article in the
Greek, and that purposely : as in this of the
Ephesians, (3) where they say, " Confidence is
by faith," as though there were no "confidence by
works." The Greek, f v lenoidrjosi. dia itj$ mqeoi;,
bears not that translation, unless there were an
article after confidence, which is not ; but they
add it to the text : as also Beza does the like, in
Rom. viii. 2, and their English Geneva Testa-

(a) Beza Nov. Test 1580.

ments after him, to maintain the heres)' of im-
putative justice : as in his annotations he plainly
deduces, saying confidently, " I doubt not, but
a Greek article must be understood ;" and
therefore, forsooth, put into the text also. He
does the same in St. James ii. 20, still debating
the case in his annotations, w r hy he does so ; and
when he has concluded in his fancy, that this or
that is the sense, he puts it so in the text, and
translates accordingly. But if they say, that in
this place of the Corinthians there is a Greek
article, and therefore they do well to express it :
I answer, first, the article may then be expressed
in translation, when there can be but one sense
of the same. Secondly, it must be expressed,
when we cannot otherwise give the sense of the
place, as Mat. i. 6- sx irjg is 'Ovals, Ex ea qua
fuit Uria, where the Vulgate interpreter omits
it not ; but in this of St. Paul, which we now
speak of, where the sense is doubtful, and the
Latin expresses the Greek sufficiently otherwise,
he leaves it also doubtful and indifferent, not*
abridging it, as they do, saying, " the grace of
God which is wiih me."

(1) Again, in this other place of the Corin-
thians, where the apostle calls himself and his
fellow preachers, " God's co-adjutors, co-la-
bourers," or such as labour and work with God,
how falsely have their first translators made it,
let themselves, who have corrected it in their
last Bible, judge.

(5) And in this next, the apostle's words do
not signify, that " we had no strength," or,
" were without strength ;" but that we were
" weak, feeble, infirm :" and this they corrupt to
defend their false doctrine, " that free will was
altogether lost by Adam's sin." (b) (c)

(6) When they have bereaved and spoiled a
man of his free-will, and left him without all
strength, they go so far in this point, that they
say, the regenerate themselves have no free -will
and ability ; no, not by and with the grace of
God, to keep the commandment. To this pur-
pose, they translate, his commandments are not
" grievous," rather than " are not heavy ;" for
in saying, " they are not heavy," it would follow,
they might be kept and observed ; but in saying
" they are not grievous," that may be true, were
they never so heavy or impossible, through pa-
tience ; as when a man cannot do as he would ;
yet it grieves him not, being patient and wise,
because he is content to do as he can, and is
able.

(7) Our Saviour says not in this place of St.
Matthew, as they falsely translate, " All men
cannot," but, " All men do not ;" and therefore,
St. Augustine says, " Because all will not." (J)
But when our Saviour says afterwards, " He
that can receive, let him receive :" he adds
another Greek word to express that sense,
6 dwauEvog xwoetv xcogsiTw whereas by the Pro-
testant translation, he might have said, 6 xmqmv
Xuqeitci). Vide above.

(b) Whitaker, p. 18.

(d) St. August, de Gra. et lib. Arbitr. cap. 4.

XX. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

Corruptions in the Pro
testant Bibles, printed
A. d. 1562, 1577, 1573.

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon. an. 1683.

Romans
chap. v.
verse 18.

Romans
chap. iv.
verse 3.

2 Corinth,
chap. v.
ver. ult.

Ephesians
chap. i.
verse 6.

Daniel
chap. vi.
verse 22.

Romans
chap. iv.
verse 6.

" Tgitur" sicut per
unius delictum in
omnes homines in
condemnationsrn : sic
etptr unius juslitium
in omnes homines in
just.fcationem vitce.
(1)

Credidit Abraham
Deo, et reputatum
est Mi "adjustitiam"
eig SixuioovvTjv. (2)

— Ut nos effice-
remur "justitia" Dei
ipso, Sutaioavvrj Qeu
sv at/io). (3)

In qua " gratifi-
cavit,exotQiTcoasv, nos
in dilecto filio suo.

— Quia coram co
"justitia inventa est
in me." (5)

Sicut et David
dicit, i-sysl, beatitu-
dinem hominis cui
Dcus accepto fert
justitiam sine operi-
bus, (6)

Therefore, as by
the offence of one,
unto all men to con-
demnation : so also
by the "justice" of
one, unto all men to
justification of life.

Abraham believed
God, and it was re-
puted him " to jus-
tice."

— That we might
be made the "jus-
tice" of God in him.

Wherein he hath
" gratified us" in his
beloved Son.

— Because before
him "justice was
found in me."

As David also
"termeth" the bless-
edness of a man, "to
whom" God " repu-
teth justice" with
out works.

" Likewise then,"
as by the offence of
one, " the fault
came on" all men
to condemnation : so
by the " justifying"
of one " the benefit
aboundeth towards"
all men, to " the"
justification of life.
(1)

Abraham believed
God, and it was re-
puted to him " for
justice." (2)

That we " by his
means" should be
" that righteousness
which before" God
" is allowed." (3)

Wherein he hath
"made us accepted,"
(or " freely accep-
ted") in his beloved
Son. (4)

Because before
him, " my justice
was found out." (5)

As David " de-
scribeth" the bless-
edness of "the" man,
"unto whom" God
" imputeth righte-
ousness." (6)

Therefore, as by
the offences of one,
"judgment came up-
on" all men to con-
demnation : even so
by the " righteous-
ness of of one,"the
free gift came upon"
all men unto justifi-
cation of life.

And it was ac-
counted unto him
"for righteousness."

That we might be
made the " righte-
ousness" of God in
him.

Wherein he hath
made us "accepted"
in the Beloved.

Forasmuch as be-
fore him"innocency
was found in me."

Instead of " ter-
meth" they say,"de-
scribeth ;" and for
justice," they have
" righteousness."

IXIIEREXT JUSTICE.

(1) Beza, in his annotations on Rom. v. 18,
protests, that his adding to this text is especially
against inherent justice, which, he says, is to be
avoided as nothing more. His false translation
you see our English Bibles follow ; and have
added no fewer than six words in this one verse ;
yea, their last translations have added seven, and
some of these words much different from those
of their former brethren ; so that it is impossible
to make them agree betwixt themselves. I
cannot but admire to see how loath they are to
suffer the holy scripture to speak in behalf of
inherent justice.

(2) So also in this next place, where they add
the word " for" to the text, " and it was reputed
to him for justice," for " righteousness," says
their last righteous work ; for the longer they
live, the further they are divided from justice ;
because they would have it to be nothing else,
but instead and place of justice : thereby taking
away true inherent justice, even in Abraham
himself. But admit this translation of theirs,
which, notwithstanding in their sense, is false,
must it needs signify not true inherent justice,
because the scripture says, it was reputed for
justice ? Do such speeches import, that it is not so
indeed, but is only reputed so? Then if we should
say, this shall be reputed to thee " for" sin, "for"
a great benefit, &c, it should signify it is no sin
indeed, nor great benefit. But let them remem-
ber, that the scripture uses to speak of sin and
of justice alike, reputabitur tibi in peccatum,
" It shall be reputed to thee for sin," as St.
Hierom translates it. (a) If then justice only
be reputed, sin also is only reputed : if sin be in
us indeed, justice is in us indeed. And the
Greek fathers make it plain, that " to be re-
puted unto justice," is to have true justice indeed ;
interpreting St. Paul's words, that " Abraham
obtained justice," " Abraham was justified ;" for
that is, say they, " It was reputed him to justice."
And St. James testifies, that " In that Abraham
was justified by faith and works, the scripture
was fulfilled," which says, " It was reputed him
to justice," Gen. xv. 6, in which words of
Genesis there is not " for justice," or " instead
of justice," as the English Bibles have it, for the
Hebrew np-& "6 mom should not be so trans-
lated, especially when they meant it was so
counted or reputed for justice, that it was not
justice indeed.

(3) Again, how intolerably have their first
translations corrupted St. Paul's words, 2
Cor. v., which though their latter Bibles have
undertaken to correct, yet their heresy would
not suffer them to amend also the word

(a) Deut, xxiii. andxxiv.; CEcum. in Caten. Photius,
chap. ii. ver. 23.

" righteousness !" It is death to them to hear
of justice.

(4) Here again they make St. Paul say, that
God made us " accepted," or " freely accepted in
his beloved Son," (their last translation leaves out
Son very boldly, changing the word his into the,
" accepted in the Beloved,") as if they had a mind
to say, that " in, or among all the beloved in
the world, God has only accepted us :" as they
make the angel in St. Luke say to our blessed
Lady, " Hail ! freely beloved," to take away all
grace inherit and resident in the blessed Virgin,
or in us : whereas the apostle's word signifies
that we are truly made grateful, or gracious and
acceptable ; that is to say, that our soul is
inwardly endued and beautified with grace, and
the virtues proceeding from it ; and conse-
quently, is holy indeed before the sight of God,
and not only so accepted or reputed, as they
imagine. Which St. Chrysostom sufficiently
testifies in these words : " He said not, which he
freely gave us, but, wherein he made us grate-
ful ; that is, not only delivered us from sins, but
also made us beloved and amiable, made our
soul beautiful and grateful, such as the angels
and archangels desire to see, and such as him-
self is in love withal, according to that in the
Psalm, the king shall desire or be in love with
thy beauty." (b) St. Hierom speaking of bap-
tism, says : " Now thou art made clean in the
layer : and of thee it is said, who is she that
ascends white 1 and let her be washed, yet she
cannot keep her purity, unless she be strength-
ened from our Lord ;" (c) whence it is plain,
that by baptism original sin being expelled, in-
herent justice takes place in the soul, rendering
it clean, white, and pure ; which purity the soul,
strengthened by God's grace, may keep and
conserve.

(5) Another falsification they make here in
Daniel, translating : "My justice was found out ;"
and in another Bible, " My unguiltiness was
found out," to draw it from inherent justice,
which was in Daniel. In their last edition you
see they are resolved to correct their brethren's
fault; notwithstanding though they mend one,
yet they make another ; putting innocency in-
stead of justice. It is very strange that our
English Protestant divines should have such a
pique against justice, that they cannot endure
to see it stand in the text, where the Chaldee,
Greek, and Latin place it.

(6) It must needs be a spot of the same
infection, that they translate " describeth" here ;
as though imputed righteousness (for so they had
rather say, than justice) were the description of
blessedness.

(6) St. Chrys. in this place of the Ephesians.
(c) St. Hierom., lib. 3, contra Pelagianos.

XXI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS IN

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

Hebrews
chap. x.
verse 22.

1 Corinth,
chap. xiii.
verse 2.

1 Corinth.
chap. xii.
verse 31,

St. James
chap. ii.
verse 22.

St. Luke
chap, xviii.
verse 42.

St. Mark
chap. x.
verse 52,
and

chap. viii.
verse 48.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

" Accedamus" cum
vero corde in"pleni-
tudine" fidei, ix nlrj-

Et si habuero
"omnem" naaav,fi.
dem, ita ut monies
transferam charita-
tem autem non ha-
buero, nihil sum. (2)

Et adhuc " exccl-
lentiorem viam" vo-
bis demonstro.

Vides quoniam
fides " co-operaba-
tur," ow^oyet, operi-
bus illius. (3)

Et Jesus dixit
Mi, respice, fides
tua te " salvum fe-
cit," ■§ nlgig ad asam-
xi ae. (4)

Vade, fides tua "te
salvum fecit."

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

Let us "approach"
with a true heart, in
" fulness" of faith.

And if I should
have " all" faith, so
that I could remove
mountains,and have
not charity, I am
nothing.

And yet I show
you a " more excel-
lent way."

Seest thou that faith
" did work with" his
works.

— Thy faith hath
" made thee whole."

— Thy faith hath
" made thee safe."

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

Let us " draw
nigh" with a true
heart, in " assu-
rance" of faith. (1)

If I should have
"whole" faith. "To-
tam fidem " saith
Beza, for " omnem
fidem." (2)

Beza, in Testa-
ment, 1556, trans-
lates it : " Behold,
moreover also," I
show you a way
" most diligently."
And in another, viz.,
of 1565: And "be-
sides," 1 show you a
way"to excellency."

Thou seest that
faith " was a helper
of" his works. —
Beza. (3)

— Thy faith hath
" saved thee." (4)

— Thy faith hath
" saved thee."

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon., an. 1683.

Let us " draw
near" with a true
heart, in " full as-
surance" of faith.

"All" faith.

•

Corrected.

— Thy faith hath
" saved thee."

Corrected.

DEFENCE OF THE SUFFICIENCY OF FAITH ALONE.

All other means of salvation being thus taken
away, as you have already seen, their only and
last refuge is faith alone : and that not the
Christian faith contained in the articles of the
creed, and such like ; but a special faith and con-
fidence, whereby every man must assuredly
believe, that himself is the son of God, and one
of the elect predestined to salvation. If he be
not, by faith, as sure of this, as of Christ's incar-
nation and death, he shall never be saved.

(1) For maintaining this heresy, they force
the Greek text to express the very word of
assurance and certainty thus : " Let us draw
high with a true heart, in assurance of faith :"
their last translation makes it, " in full assurance
of faith ;" adding the word full to what it was
before ; and that, either because they would be
thought to draw that word from the original, or
else because they would thereby signify such an
assurance or certainty, as should be beyond all
manner of doubt or fear ; thereby excluding not
only charity, but even hope also, as unneces-
sary.

(2) The word in the Greek is far different
from their expression ; for it signifies, properly,
the fulness and completion of any thing ; and
therefore, the apostle joins it sometimes with
faith, sometimes with hope, (as in Heb. vi. II,)
sometimes with knowledge or understanding,
(Col. ii. 2,) to signify the fulness of all three, as
the Vulgate Latin interpreter most sincerely
(Rom. iv. 21,) translates it. Thus when the
Greek signifies " fulness of faith," rather than
" full assurance," (or, as Beza has it, " certain
persuasion,") " of faith ;" they err in the precise
translation of it ; and much more do they err in
the sense when they apply it to the " certain "
and " assured faith," that every man ought to
have, as they say, of his own salvation. Whereas
the Greek fathers expound it of the " fulness of
faith," that every faithful man must have all such
things in heaven, as he sees not ; namely, that
Christ is ascended thither, that he shall come
with glory to judge the world, &c, (a) adding
further, and proving out of the apostle's words
next following, that (the Protestants) " only
faith is not sufficient, be it ever so special or
assured. "(6) For the said reason do they
also translate, " The special gift of faith," (Sap.
iii. 14,) instead of " The chosen gift of faith."
Another gross corruption they have in Ecclesi-
asticus, v. 5. But because, in their Bibles of
the later stamp, they have rejected these books,
as not canonical, though they can show us no
more reason or authority for their so doing, than
for altering and corrupting the text, I shall be
content to pass it by.

(3) Beza, by corrupting this place of the
Corinthians, translating totam Jidem for omnem

(a) St. Chrysost.,Theodoret.,Theophyl. upon Rom. x.

(b) St. Chrysost., Horn. 19, c. 10, ad Heb.

Jidem, thinks to exempt from the apostle's words,
their special justifying faith ; whereas it may be
easily seen, that St. Paul names and means
" all faith," as he doth " all knowledge," and
" all mysteries," in the foregoing words. And
Luther confesses, that he thrust the word
" only," (only faith) into the text.(c)

(4) Also by his falsifying this text of St.
James, he would hafe his reader think, as he
also expounds it, " That faith was an efficient
cause, and fruitful of good works ;" whereas the
apostle's words are plain, that faith wrought
together with his works ; yea, and that his faith
was by works made perfect. This is an impu-
dent handling of scripture, to make works the
fruit only, and effect of faith ; which is their
heresy.

(5) Again, in all those places of the Gospel,
where our blessed Saviour requires the people's
faith, when he healed them of corporal diseases
only, they gladly translate, " Thy faith hath
saved thee," rather than, " Thy faith hath healed
thee," or, " Thy faith hath made thee whole."
And this they do, that by joining these words
together, they may make it sound in the ears of
the people, that faith saves and justifies a man :
for so Beza notes in the margin, fides salvat,
" faith saveth ;" whereas the faith that was here
required, was of Christ's power and omnipotence
only ; which, as Beza confesses, may be pos-
sessed by the devils themselves ; and is far from
the faith that justifies. (d)

But they will say, the Greek signifies as they
translate it : I grant it does so ; but it signi-
fies very commonly to be healed corporally, as,
by their own translation, in these places, Mark
v. 26 ; Luke viii. 36, 48, 50 ; and in other places,
where they translate, " I shall be whole," " they
were healed ;" " he was healed ;" " she shall be
made whole." And why do they here translate
it so ? Because they know, " to be saved,"
imports rather the salvation of the soul : and
therefore, when faith is joined with it, they
translate it rather "saved" than "healed," to
insinuate their justification by " faith only."

But how contrary to the doctrine of the
ancient fathers this Protestant error of " faith
alone justifying" is, may be seen by those who
please to read St. Augustine, De Fide el Opere,
c. 14.

To conclude, I will refer my Protestant
SoLiFiDiANto the words of St. James the apos-
tle ; where he will find, that faith alone, without
works, cannot save him.

XXII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

2 Thessal.
chap. ii.
verse 15.

2 Thessal.
chap. iii.
verse 6.

I Corinth,
chap. xi.
verse 2.

Coloss.
chap. ii.
verse 20.

1 Peter
chap. i.
verse 18

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Itaque fratres,
state et tenete " tra-
ditiones"rtuQixdoaeig,
quas didicistis, sive
per sermonem, sive
per epistolam nos-
tram. (1)

— Vt subtraliatis
vos ab omni fratre
ambulante inordi-
nate, et non secun-
dum " tradilionem,"
quam acceperunt a
nobis.

Laudo autem vos
fratres, quod per
omnia mei memores
estis, et sicut " tra-
didi" vobis,prcEcepta
mea tenclis, xadwg
naQsdoxa, jag naqa-
Soaeig xoctsxets.

Si ergo mortui estis
cum Christo ab " ele-
mentis^hujus tnundi:
quid adhuc tanquam
viventes in mundo de-
cernitis 1 n doyfiaji-
Zsods. (2)

Scientes quod non
corruptibilibus auro
vel argento redempti
estis de vana vestra
conversatione " pa-.
terncB traditionis" ix
ji]g /LtuTixiag ifiwv
avac,Qoq>i}g nctiQorru-
QCtdoTU. (3)

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

Therefore, bre-
thren, stand and
hold the " tradi-
tions" which you
have learned, whe-
ther it be by word,
or by our epistle.

— That you with-
draw 3 T ourselves
from every brother
walking inordinate-
ly, and not accord-
ing to the " tradi-
tions" which they
have received of us.

And I praise you
brethren, that in all
things you be mind-
ful of ine, and as I
have " delivered"
unto you, you keep
my " precepts."

If then you be
dead with Christ
from the "elements"
of this world, why
do you yet "decree"
as living in the
world ?

Knowing that not
with corruptible
things, gold or sil-
ver, you are re-
deemed from your
vain conversation of
" your fathers' tradi-
tion."

Corruptions in the Pro-
testant Bibles, printed
a. D. 1562, 3577, 1579.

For " traditions,"
they say " ordinan-
ces.'^!)

Instead of " tradi-
tions," they trans-
late, " instructions."

— And " keep the
ordinances," as I
have " preached"
unto you.

If " ye" be dead
with Christ from
the " rudiments" of
" the" world, why,
" as though" living
in the world, " are
ye led with tradi-
tions ?" And, " are
ye burthened with
traditions?" (2)

" You were" not
redeemed with cor-
ruptible things, gold
or silver, from your
vain conversation
" received by the"
tradition of the" fa-
thers. (3)

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

L6n., an. 1683.

Corrected.

Corrected

— And keep the
" ordinances," as I
have delivered them
to you.

— Why, as though
living in the world,
are you " subject to
ordinances ?"

— From your
vain conversation
" received by tradi .
tion from your fa
thers."

APOSTOLICAL TRADITIONS.

A general mark, wherewith all heretics that
have ever disturbed God's church have been
branded, is, " to reject apostolical traditions,"
and to fly to the scripture, as by themselves ex-
pounded, for their " only rule of faith" We
read not of any heresy since the apostles' time,
on which this character has been more deeply
stamped, than in those of this last age, especially
the first heads of them, and those who were the
interpreters and translators of the scriptures ;
whom we find to have been possessed with such
prejudice against apostolical tradition, that
wheresoever the holy scripture speaks against
certain traditions of the Jews, there all the Eng-
lish translations follow the Greek exactly, never
omitting to translate the Greek word nuqudooi;,
" tradition." On the contrary, wheresoever the
sacred text speaks in commendation of tradi-
tions, to wit, such traditions as the apostles de-
livered to the church, there (1) all their first
translations agree not to follow the Greek,
which is still the self-same word ; but for tradi-
tions, use the words ordinances or instructions,
preachings, institutions, and any word else,
rather than traditions : insomuch, that Beza,
the master of our English scripturists, translates
the word 7i(xQO)d6aeig, traditam doctrinam, " the
doctrine delivered," putting the singular number
for the plural, and adding " doctrine" of his own
accord, (a)

Who could imagine their malice and partiality
against traditions to be so great, that they should
all agree, in their first translations I mean ;
for they could not but blush at it in their last,
with one consent so duly and exactly, in all
these places set down in the former page, to
conceal and suppress the word tradition, which,
in other places, they so gladly make use of? I
appeal to their consciences, whether these things
were not done on purpose, and with a very
wicked intention, to signify to the reader, that all
traditions are to be reproved and rejected, and
none allowed.

(2) In some places they do so gladly use this
word tradition, that rather than want it, they
make bold to thrust it into the text, when it is
not in the Greek at all ; as you see in this place
of the Epistle to the Colossians, (b) " Why, as
though living in the world, are you led with
traditions ?" And as another English Bible reads
mere heretically, " Why are ye burthened with
traditions ?" Doubtless, they knew as well then,
as they do now at this day, that this Greek word
Soyfiu, doth not signify tradition ; yea, they were
not ignorant, when a little before, in the same

(a) 2 Thes. ii. 3.

(b) Bib. 1579.

1 chapter, and in other places, themselves trans-
late doyuaia, " ordinances," " decrees." (c)
Was not this done then to make the very name
of tradition odious among the people 1

And though some of these gross corruptions
are corrected by their last translators, yet we
have no reason to think they were amended out
of any good or pure intention, but rather to de-
fend some of their own traditions, viz., wearing
of the rocket, surplice, four-cornered cap, keep-
ing the first day in the week Loly, baptizing in-
fants, &c, all which things being denied by
their more refined brethren, as not being clearly
to be proved out of scripture, and they having
no other refuge to fly to but tradition, were forced
to translate tradition in some places, where it is
well spoken of. But, I say, this could not
be from any pure intention of correcting their
corrupted scripture ; but rather for the said self-
end ; which appears evidently enough from
their not also correcting other notorious falsifi-
cations, (as 1 Pet. i. 18,) (3) " You were not re-
deemed with corruptible things, from your vain
conversation received by tradition from your
fathers ;'■' where the Greek in tTjj juaxala; ifttov
uiutgooyrig TuiTQonaQodoiH, is rather to be thus
translated, and it is the Greek they pretend to
follow, and not our Vulgate Latin which they
condemn : " From your vain conversation de-
livered by the fathers ;" but because it sounds
with the simple people, to be spoken against the
traditions of the Roman Church, jhey were as
glad to suffer it to pass, as the lormer translators
were, for the same reason, to foist in the word
tradition ; and for delivered, to say received. I
say, because it is the phrase of the Catholic
Church, that it has received many things by
tradition, which they would here control by like-
ness of words, in their false translations. But
concerning the word tradition, they will tell us
perhaps, the sense thereof is included in the
Greek word, delivered. We grant it: bu*
would they be content, if we should always ex-
pressly add tradition, where it is so included ?
Then should we say in the Corir.'hians, " I praise
you, that as I have delivered to you, by tradition,
you keep my precepts or traditions." And again,
" For I received of our Lord, which also I de-
livered unto you, by tradition." (d) And in
another place, " As they, by tradition, delivered
unto us, which from the beginning saw," &c,
and such like, by their example, we should
translate in this sort. But we us>; not this licen-
tious manner in translating the holy scriptures ;
neither is it a translator's part, but an interpre-
ter's, and his that makes a commentary : nor
does a good cause need any other translation
than the express text of the scripture.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST APOSTOLICAL TRADITIONS.

But if you say, (a) that our Vulgate Latin
has, in this place, the word tradition ; we grant
it has so, and therefore, we also translate accor-
dingly : but you, as I hinted above, profess to
translate the Greek, and not our Vulgate Latin,
which you condemn as papistical, and say it is
the worst of all, though Beza, your master,
pronounces it to be the best, (b) And will you,
notwithstanding, follow the said Vulgate Latin,
rather than the Greek, when you find it seems
to make for your purpose ? This is your par-
tiality and inconstancy. One while you will
follow it, though it differ from the Greek ; and
another time you reject it, though it agree with
the Greek most exactly ; as we have shown you
above, (Col. ii. 20,) where the Vulgate Latin
hath nothing of traditions, but, quid decernitis, as
it, is in the Greek ; yet there your sincere breth-
ren translate : " Why are ye burthened with
traditions ?"

Is not all this to bolster up their errors and
heresies, without sincerely following either the
Greek or Latin 1 The Greek, at least, why do
they not follow? Doth the Greek nagoid'joeig,
induce them to say, ordinances for traditions ?
Or ddyfiuTu lead them to say, traditions for de-
crees 1 Or dtxouw/uotTa, nQeoflvTSQog, udrjg, ei'dwloi 1 ,
&c, force them to translate ordinances for jus-
tifications, elder for priest, grave for hell, image
for idol, &c. ? No ! Where they are afraid of
being disadvantageous to their heresies, they
scruple not to reject and forsake both the Greek
and Latin.

Though Protestants, in their last translation of
the Bible, have indeed corrected this error in
several places, not in all, on purpose, thereby to
defend themselves against their Puritanical bre-
thren, when they charge them with several Po-
pish observances, ceremonies, and traditions,
which they cannot maintain by scripture alone,
without being forced, as is said, to fly to unwrit-
ten traditions : yet, when they either dispute
with, or write against Catholics, they utterly
deny traditions, and stick fast to the scripture
alone, for their " only rule of faith :" falsely
asserting, that the scripture was received by the
primitive church as a " perfect rule of faith."

These are the words of a late ministerial (c)
guide of the Church of England, " The scrip-
ture was yet (viz., when St. Augustine was sent

(a) Discovery of the Rock, p. 147.

(b) Beza, Praef. in Nov. Test., 1556.

(c) See the Pamphlet called a Second Defence of the
Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of England,
&c.,p. 13, n. 24.

into England) received as a perfect rule of
faith :" for which he cites another authority like
his own. But how true this is, let the holy
fathers of the first five hundred years satisfy us.

St. Chrysostom, expounding the words of St.
Paul, (2 Thess. xv.) affirms, that " Hereby it
appears, that the apostles did not deliver all
things by epistle, but many things without wri-
ting ; and these are worthy of faith : wherefore
also, let us esteem the tradition of the church
to be believed. It is a tradition, seek no fur-
ther." (d)

And the same exposition is given by St. Basil,
Theophylact, and St. John Damascene : as also
by St. Epiphanius ; who says, " We must use
tradition, for all things cannot be received from
divine scripture ; wherefore the ] ly ap^cles
have delivered some things by tradition : even
as the holy apostle says, as I have delivered to
you, and elsewhere ; so I teach, and have de-
livered in the churches." (e)

St. Augustine, proving that those who were
baptized by heretics should not be re-baptized,
says, " the apostles commanded nothing hereof;
but that doctrine which was opposed herein
against Cyprian, is to be believed to proceed
from their tradition, as many things be, which
the church holds ; and are therefore, well be-
lieved to be commanded of the apostles, al-
though they are not written." (f) These words
of this great doctor are so clear, that Mr. Cart-
wright, (g) a Protestant, speaking thereof, says,
" To allow St. Augustine's words, is to bring in
Popery again." And in another place, (A) " If
St. Augustine's judgment be a good judgment,
then there be some things commanded of God,
which are not in the scriptures, and thereupon
no sufficient doctrine contained in the scriptures."
How to make all this agree with the doctrine of
our present ministerial guides of the Church
of England, who teach that in those primitive
times, " the scripture was received as a perfect
and only rule of faith," will be a task that, I am
confident, no wise man, who has either honour,
credit, or respect for truth, will venture to un-
dertake.

{d) St. Chrys. in 2 Thes. Horn. 4.

(c) See St. Basil de Spirit. Sanct., c. 20 ; Theophil. in
2 Thess. ii. ; St. Damasc, cap. 17, de Imag. Sanct. ; St
Epiph. Hctr. 61.

(/) St. Aug. de Bapt. contra Don., lib. 5, cap. 23.

Qr) In Whitg. Def., p. 103.

(A) And his Second Reply against Whitg., part L, pp.
84, 85, 86.

XXIII. PROTESTANT TRANSLATION' AGAINST THE SACRAMENT OF MARRIAGE.

The Book,

Chap -,

and Verse.

Ephesians
chap. v.
verse 32.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

" Sacramentum "
(iv^qiov, hoc mag-
num est. (1)

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

This is a great
" sacrament."

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

This is a great
" secret." ( 1 )

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon. an. 1683.

This is
" mystery.'

great

(1) The church of God esteems marriage a holy
Sacrament, as giving grace to the married per-
sons, to live together in love, concord, and
fidelity. But Protestants, who reckon it no
more than a civil contract, as it is amongst in-
fidels, translated this text accordingly, calling it,
in their first translations, instead of a " great
sacrament," or " mystery," as in the Greek, a
" gr?at secret."

But we will excuse them for not translating
" sacrament," because they pretended not to
translate the Latin but the Greek : yet, however,
we must ask them, why they call it not " mys-
tery," as it is in the Greek ? Doubtless, they
can give us no other reason, but that thev
wished only to avoid both those words, which
are used in the Latin and Greek Church, to sig-
nify sacrament ; for the word mystery is the
same in Greek, that sacrament is in Latin ; and
in the Greek church, the sacrament of the body
and blood itself, is called by the name of mys-
tery, or mysteries ; so that, if they should have
called matrimony by that name, it would have
sounded equally well as a sacrament also : but
in saying, " it is a great secret," they are sure it
shall not be taken for a sacrament.

But perhaps, they will say, is not every sacra-
ment and mystery, in English, " a secret ?" Yes,
as angel is a " messenger ;" priest, an " elder ;"
apostle, " one that is sent ;" baptism, " washing ;"
evangelist, " a bringer of good news ;" Holy
Ghost, " Holy Wind ;" bishop, " overseer or
superintendent." But when the holy scripture
uses these words to signify more excellent and
divine things than those of the common sort,
pray does it become translators to use profane,

instead of ecclesiastical terms, and thereby to
disgrace the writing and meaning of the Holy
Ghost ?

The same Greek word, in all other places, (a)
they translated mystery ; who, therefore, can
imagine any other reason for the translating of it
" secret" in this place, than lest it might seem to
make against their heretical opinion, " That
marriage is no sacrament V though the apostle
makes it such a mystery, or sacrament, as repre-
sents no less than the conjunction of Christ and
his church, and whatsoever is most excellent in
that conjunction.

And St. Augustine teaches, that " a certain
sacrament of marriage is commended to the
faithful that are married ; whereupon the
apostle says : ' Husbands, love your wives ; as
Christ loved the church.' " (b) And Fulk grants,
that " Augustine and some others of the ancient
fathers take it, that matrimony is a great mystery
of the conjunction of Christ and his church." (c)

But because they have kept to the Greek in
their last translation, I shall say no more of it ;
nor should I indeed have thus much noticed it
here, but to show the reader how intolerably
partial and crafty they were in their first trans-
lations.

(a) Tim. iii.; Col. i. 26; Eph. iii. 9; 1 Cor. xv. 15.

(b) St. Aug. de Nupt. et Concup., lib. i. c. 10.

Here follow several heretical additions, and other notorious falsifications, 6fc.

XXIV. PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS

The Book,

Chapter,

and Verse.

2 Paralip.
or Chron.
ch. xxxvi.
verse 8.

Acts of
the Apos.
chap. ix.
verse 22.

1 St. Peter
chap. i.
verse 25.
See the
like addi-
tion in
1 Corinth,
chap. ix.
verse 17.

St. James
chap. iv.
verse 6.

Colossians
chap. i.
verse '23.

The Vulgate Latin Text.

Reliqua autem
verborum Joahim, et
abominationum ejus,
quas operatus est,
u et qua inventa sunt
in eo" continentur in
libro regum Jud<B el
Israel. (1)

Et confundebat
JudxQS qui habita-
bant Damasei, affir-
mans quoniam hie est
Christus. (2)

Vcrbum autem
Do; dni manet in
(Sternum : hoc est
auttrm verbum quod
" evangelizatum est"
in vos. (3)

Majorem autem
dat gratiam. (4)

Si tamen permane-
tis in fide fundati et
s tallies, et immobiles
a spe evangelii quod
audistis, quod prmdi-
catum est in universa
crealura que sub
cozh est. (5)

The true English accord-
ing to the Rhemish
Translation.

But the rest of
the words of Joakim,
and of his abomi-
nations which he
wrought, " and the
things that were
found in him," are
contained in the
book of the kings of
Judah and Israel.

And confounded
the Jews, &c, affirm-
ing that this is
Christ.

But the word of
our Lord remaineth
for ever : and this
is the word that
" is evangelized "
among you.

And giveth greater
graces.

If yet ye continue
in the faith ground-
ed and stable, and
unmoveable from
the hope of the gos-
pel which you have
heard, which is
preached among all
creatures, &c.

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

The rest of the
acts of Jehoakin,
and his abomina-
tions which he did,
" and carved images
that were laid to his
charge,"behold they
are written in the
book of the kings of
Judah and Israel.
(1)

Saul confounded
the Jews, proving,
" by conferring one
scripture with ano-
ther," that this is
very Christ. (2)

The word of the
Lord endureth for
ever : and this is the
word which " by the
gospel" was preach-
ed unto you. (3)

But " the scrip-
ture" offereth grea-
ter grace. (4)

If ye continue
established in the
faith, and be not
moved away from
the hope of the
gospel, which you
have heard " how it
was" preached. Or,
" whereof" ye have
heard "how that it"
is preached. Or,
" whereof" ye have
heard " and which
hath been"preached.
(5)

The last Translation of

the Protestant Bible, Ed.

Lon. an. 1683.

Corrected.

— And this is
the word, which
" by the gospel" is
preached unto you.

But "he" giveth
more grace.

Which ye have
heard, " and which
was" preached to
every creature

BV ADDING TO THE TEXT.

(1)1 have not set down these few examples
of their additions, as if they were all the only
places in the Bible that were corrupted after
this manner ; for if you observe well in the fore-
going chapters, you will find both additions and
diminutions ; and that so frequently done, and
with such wonderful boldness, as if these trans-
lators had been privileged by especial license to
add to, or diminish from, the sacred text at
their pleasures : or, as if themselves had been
only excepted from that general curse denounced
against all such as either add to, or diminish
from it, in the close of the Holy Bible (Apo-
calypse xxii. 18, 19,) in these words, " For I
testify to every one, hearing the words of the
prophecy of this book : If any man shall add to
these things, God shall add unto him the plagues
written in this book. And if any man shall
diminish of the words of the book of this pro-
phecy, God shall take away his part out of the
book of life, and out of the holy city, and of
these things that be written in this book."

Against holy images they maliciously add to
the text these words " carved images, that were
laid to his charge." And to what intent is this,
but to deceive the ignorant reader, and to fo-
ment his hatred against the images of Christ,
and his saints ? as they have done also in another
place, (Rom. xi. 4,) where they maliciously add
the word " image" to the text, where it is not in
the Greek, saying, instead of " I have left me
seven thousand men, who have not bowed their
knees to Baal," thus, " I have left me seven
thousand men, who have not bowed their knee to
the image of Baal." (a)

(2) " By conferring* one scripture with
another:" this is- added more than is in the
Greek, in favour of their presumptuous opinion,
that the comparing of the scriptures is enough
for any man to undertsand them himself, solely
by his own diligence and endeavour ; and thereby
to reject both the commentaries of the doctors,
and the exposition of holy councils, and the Ca-
tholic Church, (b)

(3) "By the gospel:" These words are
added deceitfully, and of ill intent, to make the
simple reader think, that there is no other word
of God, but the written word ; for the common
reader, hearing this word gospel, conceives
nothing else. But indeed all is gospel, what-
soever the apostles taught, either by writing, or
by tradition, and word of mouth.

It is written of Luther, (c) that in his first
translation of the Bible into the German tongue,
he left out these words of the apostle clearly :
" This is the word which is evangelized to you ;"
because St. Peter does here define what is the
word of God, saying : " That which is preached"
to you, and not that only which is written.

(a) Bible 1562.

(b) Bible 1577.

(4) In this place they add to the text the
words " the scripture ;" where the apostle may
as well, and indifferently say : " The Spirit," or,
" Holy Ghost," gives more graces, as is more
probable he meant, and is so expounded by
many. And so also this last translation of theirs
intimates, by inserting the word He : " But He
giveth more grace :" though this is more than
they can stand by. But they will never be pre-
vented from inserting their commentary in the
text, and restraining the " Holy Ghost" to one
particular sense, where his words seem to be
ambiguous, which the Latin interpreter never
presumed to do, but always leaves it as open to
either signification in the Latin, as he found it
in the Greek.

(5) Lv this last place they alter the apostle's
plain speech with certain words of their own ;
for they will not have him say, "Be immoveable
in the faith and gospel, which you have heard,
which has been preached ;" but, " whereof you
have heard how it was preached ;" and though
he spoke not of the gospel preached to them,
but of a gospel which they had only heard of,
that was preached in the world.

The apostle exhorts the Colossians to con-
tinue grounded in the faith and gospel, which
they had heard and received from their apos-
tles. (<l) But our Protestants, who with Hy-
menals and Alexander, and other old heretics,
have fallSh from their first faith, approve not of
this exhortation.

It is certain that these words, " whereof you
have heard how it was preached," are not so in
the Greek ; but, " which you have heard, which
has been preached :" as if it were said, that
they should continue constant in the faith and
gospel, which themselves had received, and
which was then preached and received in the
whole world.

In Cor. xiv. 4, where it is said, " He that
speaketh with tongues, edifieth himself;" the
Bible printed 1633, translates thus : " He that
speaketh in an unknown tongue, edifieth him-
self;" so likewise in the 13th, 14th, 19th, and
27th verses, they make the same addition ; so
that in this one chapter they add the word " un-
known" no less than five times to the text, where
it is not in the Greek. And this they do, on pur-
pose to make it seem to the ignorant people, that
mass and other ecclesiastical offices ought not to
be said in Latin : whereas there is nothing here
either written or meant of any other tongues,
but such as men spoke in the primitive church
by miracle ; to wit, barbarous and strange
tongues, which could not be interpreted com-
monly, but by the miraculous gift also of inter-
pretation : and though also they might by a
miracle speak the Latin, Greek, or Hebrew
tongues ; yet these could not be counted unknown

(d) I Tim. i. 6.

PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS BY ADDING TO THE TEXT.

tongues, as being the common languages of the
world, and of the learned in every city ; and in
which also the scriptures of the Old and New
Testament were written ; which could not be
said to have been written in an unknown tongue,
though they were not penned in the vulgar lan-
guage, peculiar to all people ; but in a learned
and known speech, capable of being interpreted
by thousands in every country, though not by
every illiterate person.

I would gladly know irom our translators,
what moved them to add the word " unknown"
in some places, and not in others, where the
Greek word is the same in all ? For instance, in
the fifth verse of this chapter, where the apos-
tle wishes that all should speak with tongues ;
they translate exactly according to the Greek,
without adding to the text ; when in all the
other places, where they think there may be
some shadow or colour of having it meant of
the general tongue, and known language of
the church, they partially, and with a very ill
meaning, thrust in the word " unknown." See
the annotations upon this place, in the Rhemish
Testament

Again, Rom. xii. 6, 7, where the apostle's
words are, " Having gifts according to the grace
that is given us, different, either prophecy ac-
cording to the rule of faith : or ministry, in
ministering ; or he that teaches, in doctrine ;"
they, by adding several words of their own, not
found in the Greek, and altering others, make
the text run thus ; " Having then gifts, differing
according to the grace that is given us, whether
prophecy (let us prophecy) according to the
proportion of faith ; or ministry (let us wait on
our) ministering ; or he that teaches on teach-
ing."

Besides their additions here, they pervert the
text, by changing the word " rule" of faith into
" proportion" of faith ; whereby they would have
their readers to gather no more from this place,
than only that their new ministers are to pro-
phecy or preach, and wait on their ministering
according to the measure or proportion of faith
or ability, less or more, that they are endued
with. Whereas by this text, as also by many
other places of holy writ, we may gather that
the apostles, by inspiration of the Holy Ghost,
before they divided themselves into divers na-
tions, made among themselves a certain rule and
form of faith and doctrine, containing not only the
twelve Articles of the Creed ; but all other prin-
ciples, grounds, and the whole platform of the
Christian Religion ; which rule was before any
of the books of the New Testament were writ-
ten, and before the faith was preached among the
Gentiles ; by which rule not only the doctrine
of all other inferior teachers was to be tried, but
also the preaching, writing, and interpreting,
which is here called prophecying, of the apos-
tles and evangelists themselves, wore by God's
Church approved and admitted, or reproved and
rejected according to this rule of faith. This

form or rule every apostle delivered by word of
mouth, not by scripture, to the country by them
converted, which was also by the apostolical
men, and those who received it entire from the
apostles, delivered also entire to the next follow-
ing age ; which also receiving it from them, de-
livered it as they had received it, to the succeed-
ing age, &c, till this our present age.

And this is the true analogy of faith, set down
and commended to us everywhere for apostolical
tradition ; and not the fantastical rule or square,
which every ministerial guide, according to his
great or small proportion of faith, pretends to
gather out of the scriptures, as understood by
his own private spirit, and wrested to his own
heretical purpose ; by which he will presume to
judge of, and censure the fathers, councils,
church, yea, the scripture itself. In the primi-
tive church, as also in the church of God, at
this day, all teaching, preaching, and prophecy-
ing are not measured according to the proportion
of every man's private and public spirit, but by
this rule of faith, first set down and delivered by
the apostles : and therefore, whatsoever novelties
or prophecyings will not abide this text, they
are justly, by the apostles, condemned, as con-
trary and against the rule of faith thus delivered.

I cannot omit taking notice, in this place, of
two " notorious and gross corruptions" in their
first, translation, seeing they much concern the
Church of England's " priesthood." The first is
in Acts i. 26, where, instead of saying : " He,
Matthias, was numbered with the eleven ;" they
translate it, " He was, by a common consent,
counted with the eleven." The other, already
mentioned, is, " Acts, xiv. 22, where, for, " When
they had ordained to them priests in every
church," they say : " When they had ordained
elders by election in every congregation." In
one of these texts, the words, " by a common
consent," and in the other, " by election," are
added on purpose to make the scripture speak in
defence of their making superintendents and el-
ders by election only, without consecration and
ordination, by imposition oi bands : by which
corrupt additions it evidently appears to have
been the doctrine of the Church of England, in
those days, that election only, without conse-
cration, was sufficient to make bishops and
priests.

But in their last translation, made in the be-
ginning of King James the First's reign, they
have corrected these places, by expunging the
words formerly added. And this was done by
the bishops and clergy, for their great honour,
dignity, and authority ; knowing that consecra-
tion, which they thought now high time to pre-
tend to, must needs elevate them much above
the sphere of a bare election, in which they for-
merly moved. And perhaps, another no less
prevalent reason was, that they might more se-
curely fix themselves in their bishoprics and
benefices ; thinking, perhaps, that bishops con-
secrated, might pretend to that jure divino,

CONSIDERATIONS ON T THE LAMBETH RECORDS.

which men only elected by the congregation or
prince, held at the mercy and good liking of the
electors : what other motives induced them to
this, matters not. However, they thought it
now convenient to pretend to something more
than a bare election ; to wit, to receive an epis-
copal and priestly character, by the imposition
of hands : whereas we find not, that their prede-
cessors, Parker, Jewel, Horn, &c, ever pre-
tended to any other character, but what they
received by the Queen's letters patent, election,
and an act of parliament ; as is plain from the
23rd and 25th of their 39 Articles, as well as
from the statute 8 Eliz. I., and therefore were
content to have the scripture read, " He was, by
a common consent, counted with the eleven ;"
and, " When they had ordained elders by elec-
tion."^)

And whereas our present ministerial guides of
the Church of England, would gladly have
le believe them to have a succession of
bishops from the apostolic times to this day ; yet
so far was Mr. Parker, Jewel, and the rest of
their first bishops, from pretending to any such
episcopal succession, " if they had been truly
consecrated, they must of necessity have owned
and maintained a succession among them," that,
on the contrary, they published and preached
many things to discredit the same : and to that

purpose, falsified and corrupted the scripture
against succession, for in the defence of the
apology of the Church of England, they write
thus : " By succession Christ saith, that desola-
tion shall sit in the holy place, and anti-christ
shall press into the room of Christ ;" for proof
of which, they note in the margin, Matt. xxiv.
And in another place of the same defence, they
say of succession : St. Paul says to the faithful at
Ephesus : " I know that after my departure
hence, ravening wolves shall enter and succeed
me ; and out of yourselves there shall, by suc-
cession, spring up men speaking perversely ;"
whereas St. Paul has never a word about suc-
cession or succeeding ; nor is succession named
in the 24th of St. Matthew. (c) So that you
see, the first bishops of the Church of England,
not only corrupted the sacred text, in translating
many places of the Bible against ordination ;
but also in their other writings, falsified the scrip-
ture with their corrupt additions against succes-
sion. (J) Two sufficient reasons for us to believe,
that they neither had nor pretended to either con-
secration, or episcopal succession in those days ;
consequently were not consecrated at Lambeth,
by such as had received their consecration and
character from Roman Catholic bishops, who
claim it no otherwise than by an uninterrupted
succession from the apostles, and so from Christ.
And this obliges me to digress a little into (d)

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE LAMBETH RECORDS,

BY WHICH PROTESTANT BISHOPS ENDEAVOUR TO PROVE THE CONSECRATION OF THKIR FIRST
ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, DR. MATTHEW PARKER.

(b) In the beginning of King James the
First's reign, a new translation of the Bible being
undertaken, the said falsifications of scripture
corrected, and a full resolution put on of
assuming to themselves the character of conse-
crated bishops and priests ; they thought it
absolutely necessary to derive this character
from such bishops as had been, as they thought,
consecrated by Roman Catholic bishops ; by
whose hands they would now make the world
believe, the first of their predecessors, Matthew
Parker, was consecrated with great solemnity
at Lambeth. To which purpose, they presume
to obtrude upon the world certain, before un-
heard of, records or registers. But the age in
which the sun first shone upon these records,
viz., anno 1613, not being so easily imposed upon
as was expected, the said Lambeth Register
became suspected, and, for divers reasons,
detected as a forged instrument. Fitzhcrbert,
a man of gr at sincerity and authority, writ
against these Lambeth Records, in the very year

(a) Dr. Tenison and A. B., in the Speculum Considered,
p. 4!), tell us, " That in the Church of England they have
a succession of bishops continued down from the apos-
tolic time3 to this day ; but to name or number them,"
they say, " is neither necessary nor useful." They might
have added, not possible.

(6) The Lambeth Records Considered.

that Mr. Mason, workman to Dr. Abbot,
archbishop of Canterbury, first published them
to the world. These are his words : («.•) " It
was my chance to understand, that one Mr.
.Mason, lately published a book, wherein he
endeavours to prove the consecration of the
first Protestant bishops, by a register, testifying,
that four bishops consecrated Matthew Parker,
the first archbishop of Canterbury. Thou shalt
therefore understand, good reader, that this our
exception, touching the lawful vocation and
consecration of the first Protestant bishops in
the late queen's day, is not a new quarrel, now
lately raised, but vehemently urged divers times
heretofore, by many other Catholics, many years
ago ; yea, in the very beginning of the late
queen's reign : as namely, by two learned doc-
tors, Harding and Stapleton, who mightily
pressed them with the defect of due vocation
and consecration, urging them to prove the same,
and to show how, and by whom they were made
priests and bisheps." Thus he.

(d) The first Protestant bishops and clergy were so far
from pretending to either consecration or succession, that
they corrupted the scripture against both.

(e) See Fitzherbert's Appendix to the Discovery of
Dr. Andrews' Absurdities, Falsities, and Lies, printed
anno 1613.

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE

And to give you the words of the said doc-
tors : thus writes Dr. Harding to Mr. Jewel,
pretended bishop of Salisbury : " It remains,
Mr. Jewel, you tell us, whether your vocation
be ordinary or extraordinary : if it be ordinary,
show us the letters of your orders ; at least,
show us that you have received power to do the
office you presume to exercise, by the due order
of laying on of hands, and consecration : but
order and consecration you have none ; for
which of all these new ministers, howsoever else
you call them, could give that to you, which he
has not himself ?" These are his very words to
Mr. Jewel ; having but a little before urged
him also, in the words of Tertullian, thus :
" You know what Tertullian says of such as you
be, Edant origines ecclesiarurn suarum ; we sav
likewise to you, Mr. Jewel ; and what we say to
you, we say to each one of your companions :
tell us the original, and first spring of your
church ; show us the register of your bishops
continually succeeding one another from the
beginning ; so as that the first bishop may have
some one of the apostles, or of the apostolical
men, for his author, and predecessor, &c.(a)
Therefore, says he, to go from your succession,
which you cannot prove, and to come to your
vocation : How say you, sir ? you bear yourself,
as though you were bishop of Salisbury ; but how
can you prove your vocation ? by what authority
usurp you the administration of doctrine and
sacraments ? what can you allege for the right
and proof of your ministry 1 who has called you ?
who has laid hands on you ? by what example
has he done it 1 how, and by whom are you con-
secrated ? who has sent you 1 who has committed
to you the office you take upon you ?" &c. In
this manner was Mr. Jewel urged : to all which
he never replied, by sending Dr. Harding to
any register of his, or his metropolitan's conse-
cration : or by telling him, that their consecration
at Lambeth, was upon record : or that they had
authentic testimonies to show who imposed hands
upon them. And how easily had such answers
been given to these hard questions, if there had
then been extant any authentic register or
records of his own, or of Matthew Parker's
consecration at Lambeth.

After the same manner he is set upon by Dr.
Stapleton, in his answer to Mr. Jewel's book,
entitled, a reply, &c. : " How chanced then, Mr.
Jewel," says he, " that you and your fellows,
bearing yourselves for bishops, have not so much
as this congruity and consent ; I will not say of
the Pope, but of any Christian bishops at all,
throughout all Christendom ; neither are liked
and allowed by any one of them all ; but have
taken upon you that office, without any imposi-
tion of hands, without all ecclesiastical authority,
without all order of canons and right 1 I ask not,
who gave you bishoprics, but who made you
bishops !" Thus he to Jewel. (b)

{a) We also at this day still urge our Protestant bish-
ops to prove their succession. Bat they, instead of doing
it, waive us off with these words : " To name or number
our bishops, is neither useful nor necessary." Vide Supr.

(b) See Stapleton's Return of (Jntruhta. His Challenge
to Jewel and Horn, and his Counterblast against Horn.

And thus again, in his Counterblast against
Horn, pretended bishop of Winchester: "Is
it not notorious," says he to Horn, " that you
and your colleagues, Parker, &c, were not or-
dained according to the prescript, I will not say
of the church, but even of the very statutes ?
How then can you challenge to yourself the
name of the lord bishop of Winchester ?" And
in another place he urges Mr. Horn with his
" being without any consecration at all of his
metropolitan, Parker; himself, poor man," says
he, " being no bishop neither." Who, I say once
again, can imagine Jewel and Horn should have
been so careless of their character and honour,
as not to have produced their Lambeth register
and records, if any such authentic writings
had then been extant, when not only their own
credit, but even the credit of their metropolitan,
Parker, and all the rest of Queen Elizabeth's
new bishops ; yea, the whole succession of that
race, were so miserably shipwrecked ? Yea, in
how great stead would such Lambeth writings
have stood Mr. Horn, when he durst not join
issue with bishop Bonner upon the plea, " That
he was no bishop, when he tendered Bonner the
oath of supremacy."

The case was thus :(c) By the first session of
that parliament, 5 Eliz. I., power was given to
any bishop in the realm, to tender the oath of
supremacy, enacted 1 Eliz., to any ecclesiastical
person within his diocese ; and the refuser was
to incur a premunire. By virtue of this statute,
Mr. Robert Horn, pretended bishop of Win-
chester, tenders the oath to Doctor Bonner,
bishop of London, but deprived by Queen
Elizabeth, and then a prisoner in the Marshal-
sea, which was within the diocese of Winches-
ter : Bonner refuses to take it. Horn certifies
his refusal into the King's Bench ; whereupon
Bonner was indicted upon the statute. He prays
judgment, whether, he might not give in evi-
dence upon this issue, Quod ipse non est inde
culpakilis, eo quod dictus episcopus de Winches-
ter non fait episcopus tempore oblationis sacra-
menti. " That he was not culpable, because
the said Horn, called bishop of Winchester, was
not bishop when he tendered him the oath." And
it was resolved by all the judges at Serjeants'-
Inn, in judge Cattlin, the chief justice's cham-
ber, " that if the verity and matter be so, indeed,
he should well be received to give in evidence
upon this issue, and the jury should try it."
Now, what the trial was, appears by that he was
not condemned, nor ever any further trou-
bled for that case, though he was a man espe-
cially aimed at. And at the next sessions of
that parliament, which was the 8th of Elizabeth,
they were forced for want, you see, of a better
character, to beg they might be declared bish-
ops by act of parliament.

Besides, it is no more credible, that such
knowing and conscientious men, as Dr. Staple-
ton, Dr. Harding, Constable, Kelhson, &c. then
living in England, and probably at London,
would question so public and solemn an action,

LAMBETH RECORDS.

than it is, than a sober man should now call in j]
doubt king James the Second's coronation at
Westminster ; or ask in print, who set the crown
upon his head, pretending he had never been
crowned.

But in answer to these our objections : Dr.
Bramhall falsely affirms, that the said records
were spoken of in the eighth year of queen
Elizabeth : for proof of which, he would gladly
have the world so grossly to mistake the words
of the statute of the 8th of Eliz. as to think that
the mention there made of the records " of her
majesty's father and brother's time, and also for
her own time," have relation to their Lambeth
Register : whereas by the records there spoken
of, is understood only the records of her father's,
brother's, and her own letters patent ; and not
their then unknown Lambeth Register.

But Dr. Bramhall, to make good his false as-
sertion, and to impose upon the unwary reader,
most egregiously falsifies the words of the said
statute ; saying, " The statute speaks expressly
of the records of elections, and confirmations,
and consecrations :" (a) but you will find in the
said statute, expressly these words : " As by her
majesty's said letters patent, remaining on re-
cord, more plainly will appear." Which, if at-
tentively considered, is sufficient to convince the
reader, that " the records of her majesty's said
father's and brother's time, and also of her own
time," relate not to any records or registers of
the archbishop of Canterbury ; but only to the
records of the king's and queen's letters patent.
This device of Bramhall is more fully answered
and refuted by the author of the " Nullity of the
Prelatical Clergy of England ;" whither I will
refer my reader.

Again, Protestants tell us further, (b) that
there is a register of their bishops, found in a
book called " Parker's Antiquitates Britannicae ;'"
which I deny not : but to this I answer, that the
said register is forged and foisted into Parker's
Antiq. Britan. For that edition, printed anno
1605, is the first that ever mentioned any such
thing: the old manuscript of that book, having
no such register at all in it ; as a learned author
(c) who diligently examined the same, affirms
in these words : " In the old manuscript of that
book, Park. Antiq. Brit., which I have seen, and
diligently examined, there is not any mention or
memorial at all of any such register or conse-
cration of Mat. Parker, or any one of those pre-
tended Protestant bishops, as the obtruded re-
gister speaks of. And any man reading the
printed book, will easily see, that it is a mere
foisted and inserted thing ; having no connec-
tion, correspondence, or affinity, either with
that which goes before or follows ; and con-
tains more things done after Mat. Parker had
written that book." Yet this very register

(a) In this statute is expressly mentioned her majes-
ty's " father's and brother's letters patent ;" as also ** her
own remaining on recoid."

(b) Antiq. Brit., edit. Hanov., 1605.

(c) The author of a book, called, " The Judgment of ;
t n e Apostles and first Age, in points of Doctrine," &c-, I
printed in the year 1633. See pp. 209, 211, and 391

mentions not any certain place or form of their
consecration ; so that it might be performed as
well at the Nag's Head as at Lambeth. And
indeed, we deny them not to have had a certain
kind of puritanical consecration, by John Scorey,
at the Nag's Head in Cheapside ; but we deny
the said Nag's Head consecration to be either
valid or legal, both for defect in the form, and
in the minister, John Scorey himself being no
bishop, no more than Barlow and Coverdale, as
is hinted above, in page 53. By reason of which
defects, the queen, it seems, was forced after-
wards to declare, or make them bishops, by act
of parliament. But to pass by these things, and
to come to a closer examination of their Lam-
beth Records : (d)

Mr. Mason, the very first man that ever told
us of this Lambeth Register, urges it in this
manner : («) " Queen Mary died in the year
1558, the 17th of November ; the same day died
cardinal Pool, archbishop of Canterbury ; and
the very same day was queen Elizabeth pro-
claimed. The 1 5th of January next following,
was the day of queen Elizabeth's coronation,
when Dr. Oglcthorp, bishop of Carlisle, was so
happy as to set the diadem of that kingdom upon
her royal head. Now the see of Canterbury
continued void till December following ; about
which time the dean and chapter having received
the conge (Ttlirc, elected master Parker for their
archbishop, juxta rnorcm antiquum et laudabilem
consuetudincm eccle&ice prwdictcB ah antiqua usitu-
tern et incussa observation, proceeding in this
election " according to the ancient manner, and
the laudable custom of the aforesaid church ;"
citing for these words, his new found register,
ex Regist. Mat. Parker. " After which elec-
tion, orderly performed, and signified according
to the law, it pleased her highness to send her
letters patent of commission, for his confirma-
tion and consecration, to seven bishops ;" whose
names, with as much of the commission as is
necessary, he sets down ; after which he tells us,
" That to take away all scruple, he will faithfully
deliver out of authentical records," as he cails
them, putting in the margin ex Regist. M. Par-
ker, with as much confidence as if they had then
been made known to the world, and published or
produced upon all occasions, for fifty years to-
gether, before ever he spoke of them," both the
day when he, Mr. Parker, was consecrated, and
by whom, viz.,

Anno 1559. Mat. Park.
Cant. cons. 17 Decemb.
by

William Barlow,
John Scorey,
Miles Coverdale,
John Hodgkins."

These are Mr. Mason's obtruded records ;
with which let us compare the words of another
recorder, Dr. Bramhall, who, after having told
us of Mat. Parker's being, by conge d'clire,
elected archbishop of Canterbury, says : (/)

{d) Stat. I., 8th Eliz.

(e) Mason, lib. 3, p. 126.

if) Bram. p. 83.

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE

V The queen, accepting this election, was gra-
ciously pleased to issue out two commissions for
the legal confirmation of the said election, and
consecration of the said archbishop ; the former
dated the 9th of September, anno 1559, directed
to six bishops ; Cuthbert, bishop of Durham ;
Gilbert, bishop of Bath ; David, bishop of
Peterborough; Anthony, bishop of Landaff;
William Barlow, bishop ; and John Scorey,
bishop." Which commission he sets down at
large, from Ro., par. 2, 1 Eliz. Dated, Apud
Redgrave, Nono die Septembris anno regni
Elizabeths Anglce, <$fc, primo.

Per breve de privato sigillo,

Examinator, Ri. Broughton.

Then he goes on : (a) " Now if any man de-
sire a reason why this first commission was not
executed, the best account I can give him is this,
that it was directed to six bishops, without an
" Aut minus, or at the least four of you ;" so as
if any one of the six were sick, or absent, or
refused, the rest could not proceed to confirm or
consecrate. And that some of them did refuse,
I am very apt to believe, because three of them,
not long after, were deprived." Thus Dr.
Bramhall.

The three bishops, he means, that were, as
he would have us believe, " shortly after de-
prived," were Cuthbert Tunstal, bishop of Dur-
ham ; Gilbert Bourn, bishop of Bath ; and David
Pole, bishop of Peterborough. But according
to John Stow, (b) and Hollinshead, these three
bishops, with other ten or eleven, all Catholics,
were deprived and deposed from their sees, in
July before, for refusing the oath of supremacy.
" In the month of July," says Stow, " the old
bishops of England, then living, were called and
examined by certain of the Queen's Majesty's
council, where the bishops of York, Ely, and
London, with others, to the number of thirteen
or fourteen, for refusing to take the oath,
touching the Queen's supremacy, and other
articles, were deprived of their bishoprics."
Hollinshead hud also the same words, and tells
us further who succeeded in their rooms and
places."

Hollinshead, in the praises of bishop Tunstal,
of Durham, has these words : " He was, by the
noble Queen Elizabeth, deprived of his bishop-
ric, <fec, and was committed to Matthew Parker,
bishop of Canterbury, who used him very hon-
ourably, both for the gravity, learning, and age
of the said Tunstal : but he, not long remaining
under the ward of the said bishop, did shortly
after, the 18th of November, in the year 1559,
depart this life at Lambeth, where he first re-
ceived his consecration." By this it appears,
that Matthew Parker was bishop of Canterbury,
and lived in the bishop's palace at Lambeth,
consequently installed in the bishopric, which

(a) P. 85.

(b) See John Stow and Hollinshed, in an. 1 Eliz.

he could not be before he was consecrated, if
consecration was then used ; and all this before
the 18th of November, 1559.

And well might he, by this time, be in the
full enjoyment and possession of the bishopric
of Canterbury ; for by Stow and Hollinshead,
we find him called bishop elect on the 9th of
September, when he and others assisted at the
king of France's obsequies. Yea, by Hollins-
head, it evidently appears, that they were elected
immediately, or, however, very shortly after the
deprivation of the old Catholic bishops : for, on
the 12th of August, we find Doctor Grindall
not only called bishop elect, but exercising as
much power, as if he had been more than only
elect. His words are these : " On the 12th of
August, being Saturday, the high altar in Paul's
Church, with the rood, and the images of Mary
and John, standing in the rood-loft, were taken
down ; and this was done by the command of
Doctor Grindall, newly elected bishop of Lon-
don."

The truth of what I have here set down, from
Hollinshead and Stow, is unquestionable : but
if it agree not with Mr. Mason, and Doctor
Bramhall, and their Lambeth Records, shall we
not have just cause to reject these as forged ?
But, before we compare them together, let us
first see what accordance and agreement is
found among the records and recorders them-
selves.

Firstly, in the queen's letters patent, or com-
mission for consecrating Matthew Parker, (c)
the suffragan bishop, there mentioned, is named
Richard, suffragan of Bedford ; whereas by Mr.
Mason and others, he is called John ; yea,
Mason calls him John in one place, and Richard
in another. I suppose those, who made these
records, might be ignorant of the said suffragan's
name ; and therefore for making sure work, calls
him sometimes Richard, sometimes John ; but if
these records had been made while the man
himself was living, and when he imposed hands
on Matthew Parker, he could have satisfied them
of his true name, and the place where he was
saffragan, viz., whether of Bedford or Dover?
And whether there was any other suffragan
there besides himself, if we suppose that the
Lambeth notarius publicus could be ignorant of
such circumstances.

Secondly, Mr. Sutcliff affirms, that Parker
was consecrated by Barlow, Coverdale, Scorey,
and two suffragans. But by our pretended
register, we find but one suffragan at that
solemnity. (</)

Thirdly, Mr. Mason, and his records, style
him suffragan of Bedford ; but by Doctor Butler
he is called suffragan of Dover, (e)

Fourthly, in Mr. Mason, we hear tell but of
one commission from the queen, for the confir-
mation and consecration of Matthew Parker.
But Bramhall, by more diligent search among

\d) Sutcliff* against Dr. Kellison, p. 5.

(e) Butler, Ep. de Consecrat. Minist.

LAMBETH RECORDS.

the records, finds two ; the first dated September
the 9th. (a)

Fifthly, by which commission it appears,
Parker was elected before the 9th of Septem-
ber : but Mr. Mason says, he was elected about
the beginning of December.

Thus they concur one with another : and to
compare them with Richard Hollinshead, and
John Stovv's chronicles, they jump as exactly, as
if the one had been written at China, and the
other at Lambeth : for,

Sixthly, Mr. Mason, I say, affirms, that the
dean and chapter elected Doctor Matthew
Parker about the month of December, But
irf Stow and Hollinshead, we find him and
others called bishops elect, on the 9th of Sep-
tember. Yea, seeing Hollinshead calls Grindall
newly elect on the 12th of August, we may
easily conclude, that Matthew Parker the metro-
politan, was also elected before that time ; which,
you see, is about four months before Mason's
election by conge cTelire.

Seventhly, Mr. Mason affirms, that the see of
Canterbury continued void till December 1559.
On the 17th of which month, according to the
new register, Parker was consecrated. But
in Hollinshead we find, that Matthew Parker
was bishop of Canterbury, and lived in the
bishop's place at Lambeth, where he had bishop
Tunstal committed, prisoner, to his charge, long
before the 17th of December : for on the J 8th
of November, 1559, the said bishop Tunstal
died.

Eighthly, Doctor Bramhall, as is said, from
our new-made records, brings us a commission,
dated on the 9th of September, 1559. And
directed, besides others, to three Catholic
bishops, Cuthbert Tunstal, Gilbert Bourn, and
David Pool, requiring them to confirm and
consecrate Matthew Parker. And he has the
confidence to affirm, that " the said three
bishops were shortly after deprived of their
bishoprics, as he is very apt to believe, for
refusing to obey the said commission." But in
Stow and Hollinshead we find, that the said
three Catholic bishops, with ten or eleven
others, were deprived of their bishoprics in the
month of July before, for refusing the oath of
supremacy ; and Mason himself confirms this, by
acknowledging they were deprived not long
after the feast of St. John the Baptist ; for
which he also cites Saunders, lib de Schismate
Angl. But pray consider, sirs, what can be
more absurd, than to imagine that Queen
Elizabeth would be beholden to such Roman
Catholic bishops, as she had formerly deprived
of their bishoprics, and made prisoners, for the
confirming and consecrating of her new Protes-
tant bishops, who were to be " unlawfully
intruded" into their sees ; especially she having,
as Bramhall says, Protestant bishops enough of
her own ; or if such had been wanting, might,
he says, have easily had store of bishops out of
Ireland, to have done the work ?

Pray give me leave to demand of our English

(a) Bram., p. 83.

prelates, why this first commission was by the
queen directed to those three zealous Catholic
bishops, and not rather to her own Protestant
bishops, to whom she directed the last commis-
sion, dated December 6 ? Her majesty was not
ignorant that their consciences had been too
tender to permit them to swear herself head of
the Church of England : and that rather than
gall their so tender consciences, they were con-
tent to lose their bishoprics, and suffer perpetual
imprisonment : could she, upon revolving this in
her princely thoughts, easily imagine that they
would, without all scruple, impose hands on her
newly elected bishops, whom they knew to be
of a religion as far different from themselves,
as king Edward the YIth was from queen
Mary's 1 Could she suppose, that they would
make bishops in that church, whereof themselves
refused to be members ? Could she think, that
those Catholic bishops would consecrate Parker,
according to king Edward the YIth's form of
consecration, which they had in queen Mary's
days declared to be invalid and null ; and which,
at this time, was also illegal 1 Or could the
queen easily imagine, that Matthew Parker and
the rest of her chosen bishops, who had stood
so much upon their punctilios at Frankfort,
would receive consecration by a form condemned
as superstitious and antichristian ; and from
which, as Mason says, they had pared away so
many superfluities ; yea, so many, as even to
pare out the very name, itself, of bishop ? Let
the impartial reader consider these things.

How our present pretended bishops them-
selves will make all these things agree, will
be hard to imagine ; which, if they cannot do,
let them be content to leave us to our own
liberties, and freedom of thought ; and to excuse
us, if we freely affirm, that " Matthew Parker
was never consecrated at Lambeth : that the
said records are forged : and, that themselves
are but mere laymen, without mission, without
succession, and without consecration."

Ninthly, it is none of the least objections
against Parker's solemn consecration at Lam-
beth, that we find it not once mentioned by the
historians of those times, especially by John
Stow, who professed so particular a kindness
and respect for Parker ; and who was so exact
in setting down all things, of far less moment,
done about London. Doubtless, he omitted it
not through negligence or forgetfulness, seeing
he is not unmindful to set down the consecration
of cardinal Pole, Parker's immediate prede-
cessor, and the very day on which he said his
first mass. Nor does it appear to have been
through forgetfulness, that Hollinshead men-
tions not this notorious Lambeth solemnity,
seeing he tells us, that bishop Tunstal, who died
under Parker's custody, " received his consecra-
tion at Lambeth :" if either he or John Stow had
but given us only such a short hint as this, of
Parker's consecration at Lambeth, we should
never have questioned it further, nor have
doubted of the truth of it, though they had not
been so exact to a hair in every punctilio, as to
have told us of the chapel's being " adorned

CONSIDERATIONS ON THE

with tapestry towards the east ; a red cloth on
the floor, in advent ; a sermon, communion,
concourse of people ; Miles Coverdale's side
woollen gown ; of the queen's sending to see if
all things had been rightly performed." What
care was here taken ? " Of answer being
brought her, that there was not a little amiss,
only Miles Coverdale was in his side woollen
gown, at the very minute of the consecration :
of their assuring her that that could not cause
any defect in the consecration," &c, as our
records mention ; which ridiculous circum-
stances render them not a whit the more cre-
dible, (a)

If now, from what has been said, these
Lambeth records appear evidently to be forged,
to what other refuge will these pretenders to
episcopacy have recourse for their episcopal
character, but to queen Elizabeth's letters
patent, and an act of parliment ? If so, I see
no great reason why they should find fault with
their ancient name and title of parliamentary
bishops. Whoever read of bishops, between
St. Peter's time and Parker's, that stood in need
of an act of parliament to declare them such ?
Doubtless, if they had been consecrated at
Lambeth by imposition of the hands of true
bishops, though all their consecrators had been
in side woollen gowns, and neither tapestry
towards the east, nor red cloth on the floor of
the chapel, and could have shown authentic
records of the same, they would never have
desired the queen to make and declare them
bishops by act of parliament : nor would the
queen, and the wisdom of the nation, have con-
sented to the marking of such a superfluous
act, if their reverences had desired it. No ! no !
there would have been no more need of any such
act for them then, than there had been for
three score and nine preceding archbishops of
Canterbury.

After all this, another query will yet arise ;
to wit, by what form of consecration Matthew
Parker was consecrated ? Our present prelates
and clergy will not say, I suppose, that he was
made bishop according to the Roman Catholic
form, though queen Elizabeth had revived the
act of 25 Henry VIII., 20, which authorized
the same. Nor can they say that king Ed-
ward the Vlth's form was then in being, in the
eve of the law ; for that part of the act of
Edward the Vlth which established the book of
ordination, having been repealed by queen Mary,
was not revived till six years after the pretended
consecration of Matthew Parker, viz., till the
8th of Elizabeth, as is easily proved. For
whereas the act of 5th and 6th Edward VI.. 1,
consisted of two parts ; one, which authorized
the book of common prayer, as it was then
newly explained and perfected ; another which
established the form of consecrated bishops, &c.
and added to the book of common prayer.
This act, as to both these parts, was repealed by
queen Mary ; and this repeal was reversed by

(a) Several ridiculous circumstances mentioned in the
Records, which yet render them less credible.

1 Elizabeth I., as to that part which concerned
the book of common prayer only ; for so ;uns
the act, " The said statute of repeal, and every
thing therein contained, only, concerning the
said book, viz. of common prayer, authorized
by Edward VI. shall be void, and of no effect."
And afterwards, 8th Elizabeth I. was revived
that other part of it, which concerned the form
of ordination, viz., in these words, " Such order
and form for the consecrating of archbishops,
bishops, &c, as was set forth in the time of
Edward VI. and added to the said book of com-
mon prayer, and authorized 5th and 6th of
Edward VI. shall stand, and be in full force ;
and shall from henceforth be used and observed."
By which it is as clear as the sun at noon-day,
that Edward the Vlth's form was not restored
at all by 1 Elizabeth, either expressly or in
general terms, under the name and notion of
the book of common prayer, as Protestants
would have it thought. Nay rather, it was
formally excluded by the said act, 1 Elizabeth.
For that act of Edward VI. consisting of
nothing else but the authorizing of the book
of common prayer, and establishing, and adding
to it the book of ordination ; and the act of
queen Mary having repealed that whole act, as to
both these parts, that act of 1 Eliz. reversing that
repeal, as to the book of common prayer only,
did plainly and directly exclude the repealing of
it, as to the book of ordination ; there being
nothing else to be excluded, by that word only,
but that book. So that it is undeniably evident,
that king Edward the Vlth's form of consecra-
tion was at that day illegal. And must we
imagine, that the queen would suffer her new
bishops to be consecrated by an illegal form,
when she could as easily have authorized it by
the law, as she had done the Roman form, by
reviving the act 25th Henry VIII. 20th ? Yea,
it had been as easy to make that form legal, as
it was afterwards to declare them bishops by
act of parliament ; and doubtless, more com-
mendable.

But admit Matthew Parker, and the rest of
queen Elizabeth's new bishops, were made such
by this, then illegal, form ; yet, if this form
prove invalid, they are but still where they were
before their election, as to their character.
And that it is invalid, is sufficiently and clearly
proved by the learned author of Erastus Senior,
to Avhom I will refer my reader. Yea, the
Protestant bishops and clergy themselves have
judged the said form to be invalid ; and there-
fore thought necessary to repair the essential
defects of the same, by adding the words bishop
and priest. Essential defects, I call the want
of these two words bishop and priest ; for if
they had not been essential, why were they
added 1 Yet this will not serve their turn ; for
before they can have a true clergy, they must
change the character of the ordainers, as well
as the form of ordination. A valid form of
ordination, pronounced by a minister not validly
ordained, gives no more character than if it had
continued still invalid, and never been altered.
The present Protestant bishops, whe changed

LAMBETH RECORDS.

the form of their own consecration, upon their
adversaries' objections of the invalidity thereof,
(for immediately after Erastus Senior was pub-
lished against it, they altered it, viz , anno
1662,) might as well submit to be ordained by
Catholic bishops ; or else, with the Presby-
terians, utterly deny an episcopal character, as
allow, by altering the form after so long a time
and dispute, that it was not sufficient to make
themselves, and their predecessors, priests and
bishops.

What has hitherto been said, concerning the
nullity of their character, is yet further con-
firmed by their altering the 25th of their 39
Articles ; for these first bishops, Parker, Horn,
Jewel, Grindall, &c, understanding the condi-
tion in which they were, for want of consecra-
tion by imposition of hands, resolved in their
convocation, anno 1562, to publish the 39
Articles, made by Cranmer and his associates,
but with some alteration and addition ; especially
to that Article wherein they speak of the sacra-
ments : for,

Whereas Cranmer's 25th or 26th Article says
nothing of holy orders by imposition of hands,
or any visible sign or ceremony required
therein ; Parker, and his bishops, having taken
upon themselves that calling, without any such
ceremony of imposition and episcopal hands, for
I believe they set not much by John Scorcy's
hands and Bible in the Nag's Head, declared,
that " God ordained not any visible sign or
ceremony for the five last, commonly called
sacraments ;" whereof holy orders is one. This
alteration and addition you may see in Doctor
Heylin's appendix to Ecclcsia Restaurata, page
189. In this convocation they denied also holy
orders to be a sacrament ; consequently not
likely to impress any indelible character in the
soul of the party ordained ; which doctrine con-
tinued long among them, as appears by Mr.
Rogers, in bis defence of the 39 Articles, who
affirms, that " none but disorderly Papists will
say that order is a sacrament ;" and demands,
" Where can it be seen in holy scripture, that
orders or priesthood is a sacrament ? what form
has it ? (says he) what promise ? what institution
from Christ ?"(a) But after they began to
pretend to have received an episcopal character
from Roman Catholic bishops, an I to put out
their Lambeth Records in defence of it, they
disliked this doctrine, and taught the contrary,
viz., that ordination is a sacrament. " We
deny not ordination to be a sacrament," says
Doctor Bramhall, " though it be not one of
these two which are generally necessary to sal-
vation."^)

By order of this convocation the Bible of
1562 was printed, where the aforesaid text,
li When they had ordained to them priests," &c,
was translated, " When they had ordained elders
by election ;" which, as soon as they began to
thirst after the glorious character of priests and
bishops, they corrected.

(a) Defence of the Thirty-nine Articles, pp. 154, 155-

(b) See Mason and Dr. Brani., p. 97.

And though Cranmer cared as little for any
visible signs, imposition of hands, or ceremonies
in ordination, as the other first Protestant refor-
mers, and according to their practice had
abjured the priestly and episcopal character,
which he had received among Catholics ; as may
be gathered by his words, related by Fox in his
degradation, thus : " Then a barber clipped his
hair round about, and the bishop scraped the tops
of his fingers, where he had been anointed. "(c)
When they were thus doing ; " All this," quoth
the archbishop, " needed not, I had myself done
witli this geer long ago." And also by his
doctrine ; that, " In the New Testament, he
that is appointed to be a priest or bishop, needs
no confirmation by the scripture ; for election
thereunto is sufficient." Though, I say, Cran-
mer valued not any episcopal consecration,
which he had received in the Catholic Church,
yet he presumed not to make the denial thereof
an article of the Protestant faith ; but queen
Elizabeth's pretended bishops, and English
Church, in their convocation 1562, seeing, they
knew they had no episcopal character by impo-
sition of true bishops' hands, thought fit, to
make it a part of the Protestant belief, " That
no such visible sign or ceremony was necessary,
or instituted by Christ ;" and therefore con-
cluded holy orders not to be a sacrament. And
though, I say, the Church of England now
teaches and practises the contrary, and in king
James the First's reign erased from the text the
word election as an imposture, or gross cor-
ruption, yet this change of the matter does no
more make them now true priests and bishops,
than their last change of the form of ordination,
in the year 1662, soon after the happy restoration
of king Charles the Second.

'• Ecclesia non est, qua sacerdotem non habet.

There can be no church without priests." — St. Jerom.

It is enough, that in this place we have proved
these men without consecration or ordination ;
yet seeing they glory also in assuming to them-
selves the name of pastors, pastor of St. Mar-
tin's, &.C., it may not be unseasonable to propose
a few queries, touching their pastoral jurisdic-
tion.

1 . Whether it is not a power of the keys, to
institute a pastor over a flock of clergy and
people ?

2. Whether any but a pastor can give pas-
toral jurisdiction ?

3. Whether any bishop, but the bishop of the
diocese, or commissioned from him, or his
superior, can validly institute a pastor to any
parochial church, within such a diocese 1

4. Whether any number of bishops can validly
confirm, or give pastoral jurisdiction to the
bishop of any diocese, if the metropolitan, or
some authorized by him, or his superior, be
not one ?

5. Or to the metropolitan of a province, if the

PROTESTANT TRANSLATION AGAINST

primate of the nation, or some authorized by him,
or his superior be not one ?

6. Whether any but the chief patriarch of that
part of the world, or authorized by him, can
validly give' pastoral jurisdiction to the primate
of a nation ?

7. Whether the bishop of Rome is not chief
patriarch of the western church, consequently
of this nation 1

8. Whether Mat. Parker, the first Protestant
pretended archbishop of Canterbury, received
his pastoral jurisdiction from the bishop of
Rome, or from others by him authorized 1
or,

9. Whether those who made Mat. Parker
primate of England, or archbishop of Canter-
bury, had any jurisdiction to that act, but what
they received from queen Elizabeth ?

10. Whether queen Elizabeth had the power
of the keys, either of order or jurisdiction 1

1 1 . Whether it is not an essential part of the
Catholic Church to have pastors ?

12. Whether salvation can be had in a church
wanting pastors ?

13. Whether they do not commit a most
heinous sacrilege, who having neither valid
ordination, nor pastoral jurisdiction, do notwith-
standing take upon them to administer sacra-
ments, and exercise all other acts of episcopal
and priestly functions ?

14. Whether the people are not also involved
with them, in the same sin, so often as they
communicate with them in, or co-operate to,
those sacrilegious presumptions ?

1 5. Whether those, who assume to themselves
the names and offices of bishops and priests,
take upon them to teach, preach, administer
sacraments, and perform all other episcopal and
priestly functions, without vocation, without
ordination, without consecration, without suc-
cession, without mission, or without pastoral
jurisdiction, are not the very men of whom our
blessed Saviour charged us to beware 1 (a)

16. To conclude, whether it is wisdom in the
people of England, to hire such men at the
charge of perhaps above .£1,000,000 [query, now
3 or .£"4,000,000 ?] per annum, to lead them the
broad way to perdition ?

ANOTHER CORRUPT ADDITION AGAINST THE PERPETUAL SACRIFICE OF

CHRIST'S BODY AND BLOOD.

Protestants teach, in the 31st of the 39
Articles, " That the offering of Christ once made,
is that, perfect redemption, propitiation and
satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world,
&c. Wherefore the sacrifice of masses, in
which it was commonly said, that the priests did
offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have
remission of pain and guilt, were blasphemous
fables, and dangerous deceits." By this doctrine
the Church of England bereaves Christians of
the most inestimable jewel and richest treasure,
that ever Christ our Saviour left to his church ;
to wit, the most holy and venerable sacrifice of
his sacred body and blood in the mass, which is
daily offered to God the Father, for a propitia-
tion for our sins. And because they would
have this false and erroneous doctrine of their's
backed by sacred scripture, they mostegregiously
corrupt the text, Heb. x. 10, by adding to the
same two words not found in the Greek or
Latin copies, viz., " For all ;" the apostle's words
being, " In the which will we are sanctified by
the oblation of the body of Jesus Christ once ;"
which they corruptly read, in their last transla-
tion : " By the which will we are sanctified,
through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ
once, for all." By which addition they endea-
vour to take away the daily oblation of the
body and blood of Christ in the holy sacrifice
of the mass ; contradicting the doctrine of God's
holy church, which believes and teaches, " that
our Lord God, although he was once to offer
himself to God the Father upon the altar of the
cross by death, that he might there work eternal
redemption ; yet because his priesthood was not
to be extinguished by death, in the last supper,

which night he was to be betrayed, that he might
leave a visible sacrifice to his beloved spouse the
church, whereby that bloody one, once to be
performed upon the cross, should be represented,
and the memory thereof should remain to the
end of the world, and the wholesome virtue
thereof should be applied for the remission of
those sins which we daily commit, declaring
himself to be ordained a priest for ever, ac-
cording to the order of Melchizedek, he offered
to God the Father his body and blood, under
the forms of bread and wine ; and under the
signs of the same things he gave it to the apos-
tles, whom then he ordained priests of the New
Testament, that they should receive it ; and by
the words he commanded them, and their suc-
cessors in the priesthood, that they should offer
it : " Do ye this in commemoration of me," &c.
And, " Because in this divine sacrifice, which
is performed in the mass, the self-same Christ is
contained, and unbloodily offered, who offered
himself once bloodily upon the altar of the cross :
the holy synod teaches the sacrifice to be truly
propitiatory, &c. Wherefore, according to the
tradition of the apostles, it is duly offered, not
only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions, and
other necessities of the faithful that are living,
but also for such as are dead in Christ, as not yet
fully purged. "(i) This is the Catholic doc-
trine, delivered in the sacred Council of Trent,
which the Church of England calls blasphemous
fables, and dangerous deceits ; and against
which they falsify the sacred text of scripture,

(a) Mat. vii. 15.

(b) Concil. Trid., sess. 22, cap. 1, cap. 2,

THE PERPETUAL SACRIFICE.

by thrusting into it words of their own, which
they find not in any of the Greek or Latin
copies.

But lest they may object, that this is but a
new doctrine, not taught in the primitive church,
nor delivered down to us by the apostles or by
apostolical tradition ; I will give you these fol-
lowing testimonies from the fathers of the first
five hundred years.

St. Cyprian says, (a) " Christ is priest for
ever, according to the order of Melchizedek,
which order is this, coming from this sacrifice,
and thence descending, that Melchizedek was
priest of God most high, that he ofTered bread
and wine, that he blessed Abraham ; for who is
more a priest of God most high, than our Lord
Jesus Christ, who ofTered sacrifice to God the
Father, and offered the same that Melchizedek
had offered, bread and wine, viz., his body and
blood P

And a little after : " That therefore in Gene-
sis the blessing might be rightly celebrated about
Abraham by Melchizedek the priest, the image,
or figure of Chrst's sacrifice, consisting in
bread and wine, went before : which thing our
Lord perfecting and performing, offered bread,
and the chalice mixed with wine, and he, that is
the plenitude, fulfilled the verity of the prefi-
gured image."

The same holy father, in another place, as
cited also by the Magdeburgian Centurists, (Z>)
in this manner, " Our Lord Jesus Christ," says
Cyprian, lib. 2, ep. 3, " is the high priest of
God the Father ; and first offered sacrifice to God
the Father, and commanded the same to be done
in rememberance to him ; and that priest truly
executes Christ's place, who imitates that which
Christ did ; and then he offers in the church a
true and full sacrifice to God." This saying so
displeases the Centurists, that they say, " Cy-
prian affirms superstitiously, that the priest
executes Christ's place in the supper of our
Lord."

St. Hierom : (c) " Have recourse," says he,
" to the book of Genesis, and you shall find
Melchizedek, king of Salem, prince of this city,
who even there, in figure of Christ, offered
bread and wine, and dedicated the Christian
mystery in our Saviour's body and blood."
Again, " Melchizedek offered not bloody vic-
tims, but dedicated the sacrament of Christ in
bread and wine, a simple and pure sacrifice."
And yet more plainly in another place, " Our
ministry," says he, " is signified in the word of
order, not by Aaron, in immolating brute vic-
tims, but in offering bread and wine, that is, the
body and blood of our Lord Jesus."

St. Augustine expressly teaches, that " Mel-
chizedek bringing forth the sacrament, or
mystery, of our Lord's table, knew how to
figure his eternal priesthood." (d) " There

(a) Ep. 53, ad Caecilium.

(b) In the Alphab. Table of the Third Cent., under the
letter S., col. 83.

(d) Ep. 95.

first appeared," says he in another place, "that
sacrifice which is now offered to God by Chris-
tians, in the whole world." (e)

Again, (Cone. 1, in Psal. xxxv.) "There was
formerly," says he, " as you have known, the
sacrifice of the Jews, according to the order of
Aaron, in the sacrifice of beasts, and this in
mystery ; for not as yet was the sacrifice of the
body and blood of our Lord, which the faithful
know, and such as have read the Gospel ; which
sacrifice now is spread over the whole world.
Set therefore before your eyes two sacrifices,
that according to the order of Aaron ; and this,
according to the order of Melchizedek ; for it is
written, our Lord has sworn, and it shall not
repent him, thou art a priest for ever, according
to the order of Melchizedek." And in Cone.
2, Psal. xxxiii., he expressly teaches, "that
Christ, of his body and blood, instituted a sacri-
fice, according to the order of Melchizedek."

Nothing can be more plain than these words
of St. Irenaeus, in which he affirms of Christ,
(/) " Giving counsel also to his disciples, to
offer the first fruits of his creatures to God ; not
as it were needing it, but that they might be
neither unfruitful nor ungrateful, he himself
took of the creature of bread, and gave thanks,
saying, this is my body ; and likewise the chalice,
he confessed to be his blood, which is made of
that creature which is in use amongst us, and
taught a new oblation of the New Testament,
which oblation the church receiving from the
apostles, throughout the whole world, offers to
God, to him who gives us nourishment, the first
fruits of his gifts in the New Testament ; of
whom, amongst the twelve prophets, Malachy
has thus foretold : ' I have no will in you, the
Jews, says our omnipotent Lord, and I will
take no sacrifices at your hands, because, from
the rising of the sun to the setting thereof, my
name is glorified amongst the Gentiles ; and in
every place, incense is offered to my name, and
a pure sacrifice, because my name is groat
among the Gentiles, saith our Lord Almighty,'
manifestly signifying by these things, because
the former people indeed ceased to oiler to God ;
but in everyplace a sacrifice is offered to God, and
this purr, for his name is glorified among the
Gentiles." Thus St. Irenaeus, whose words so
touch the Protestant Centurists, that they say,
" Irenaeus, &c, seems to speak very incommo-
diously, when he says, he, Christ, taught the
new oblation of the New Testament, which the
church receiving from the apostles, offered to
God over all the world."

Eusebius Caesariensis : (g) " We sacrifice,
therefore, to our highest Lord a sacrifice of
praise ; we sacrifice to God a full, odoriferous,
and most holy sacrifice ; we sacrifice after a new
manner, according to the New Testament, a
pure HOST."

St. John Chrysostom expounding the words of

(e) Lib. 16, de Civ. Dei, c. 22. See him also lib. 17, c. 17,
and lib. 18, c. 35; cum Psalm cix., lib. 1, contr. Ad vers.
Leg. et Prophet, c. 20 : Serm. 4, de Sanctis Innocentibus,

(/) Lib. 4, Advers. Haer., c. 32.

{g) Lib. 1, Demonstrat. Evan., c. 10.

100

PROTESTANT TRANSLATION AGAINST

the prophet Malachy, says, (a) " The church,
which every where carries about Christ in it, is
prohibited from no place ; but in every place there
are altars, in every place doctrines ; these things
God foretold by his prophet, for both declaring
the church's sincerity, and the ingratitude of the
other people, the Jews, he tells them, I have no
pleasure in you, &c. Mark, how clearly and
plainly he interprets the mystical table, which is
the unbloody host, and the pure perfume he calls
holy prayers, which are offered after the host.
Thou seest how it is granted, that that angelical
sacrifice should every where be known ; thou
seest it is circumscribed with no limits, neither
the altars, nor the song. In every place incense
is offered to my name ; therefore the mystical
table, the heavenly and exceedingly venerable
sacrifice is indeed the prime pure host."

Is it not a thing to be admired, that the
Church of England should not only corrupt the
sacred scriptures against the great and most
dreadful sacrifice ; but should also make it an
article of her faith, that it is a blasphemous
fable, and dangerous deceit ? When, without
all doubt, she cannot be ignorant, that the holy
fathers call it : (b) " A visible sacrifice ; (c)
" The sacrifice ;" (d) " The daily sacrifice ;"
(e) " The true sacrifice according to the order of
Melchizedek;"(/) "The sacrifice of the body
and blood of Christ ;" (g) " The sacrifice of the
altar ;" (h) " The sacrifice of the church ; (i)
" The sacrifice of the New Testament ;" (k)
" Which succeeded to all sacrifices of the Old
Testament." And that it was offered for the
health of the emperor, Saerificamus pro salute im-
peratoris" says Tertullian, de Scapul. c. 2. That
it was offered for the sick, Pro infirmis etiam sae-
rificamus, says St. Chrysostom, Horn. 27, in Act
Apos. " For those upon the sea, and for the fruits
of the earth," idem. And for the purging of houses
infected with wicked spirits. St. Aug. de Civit.
Die, lib. 22, c. 8, says, that " One went and of-
fered," in the house infected, " the sacrifice of
Christ's body, praying that the vexation might
cease, and by God's mercy it ceasedimmediately."

In the first Council of Nice, can. 14, we find
these words : " The holy council has been in-
formed, that in some places and cities the dea-
cons distribute the sacrament to priests ; neither
rule nor custom has delivered, that they who
have not power to offer sacrifice, should distri-
bute the body of Christ to them who offer."
See also, .concil. 3, Bracarense. can. 3, and

(a) Ad. Psal. xcv.

(b) St. Agu., de Civit. Dei, lib. 10, c. 19.

(d) Aug. Cit. c. 16, et. Cone. Tolet., I. can. 5 ; Origen. in
Num. Horn. 23.

(e) St. Cyprian, 1. 2, <!p. 3, et Aug., lib. 16, c. 22, de
Civit. Dei.

(/) Et lib. 22, c. 8, et lib. 20, contr. Faustum, c. 18 ; et
S. Hierom., lib. 3, contr. Pelag.; Aug. in Psal. xxxiii, con.
2. to. 8; et St. Crys., lib. 1, Cor. Horn, 24.

(jg) S.Aug, in Enchiridion, c. H0,etdeCura pro Mor-
tuis. c. 18.

(A) Et de Civit. Dei, 1. 10, c. 20.

(t) Et de Gratia Novi Test., c. 18, et S. Irenagus, lib. 4,
c. 32.

(k) Aug de Civit. Dei, lib. 17, c. 20.; St. Clement, in
Apost. Constit., edit. 1564, Antverpia 1 , lib. 6, c. 22, fol. 123.

concil. 12, can. 5. Moreover that "this holy
sacrifice," as God's church at this day teaches
and practises, " was offered for the sins of the
living and dead," is a truth so undeniable, that
Crastoius, a learned Protestant, in his book of
the mass, against Bellarmin, page 167, repre-
hends Origen, St. Athanasius, St. Ambrose,
St. Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St Gregory
the Great, and venerab'e Bede, for maintaining
" the mass to be a propitiatory sacrifice for the
sins of the living and of the dead." Consider
then, what truth there is in the words of that
author (I) who affirms, that in Gregory the
Great's time, " Masses for the dead were not
intended to deliver souls from those torments of
purgatory." Doubtless he considered not the
words of St. Augustine, lib. 9, Confess, c. 12,
and De Verb. Apost. Serm. 34, viz. " That the
sacrifice of our price was offered for his mother
Monica, being dead," and, " That the universal
church does observe, as delivered from their
forefathers, to pray for the faithful deceased in the
sacrifice, and also to offer the sacrifice for them."
Nor considered this great vindicator, that great
miracle related by St. Gregory the Great, him-
self, concerning purgatory, and the benefits souls
there receive, by the offering up of this propitia-
tory sacrifice. In his fourth Book of Dialogues,
chap. 55, telling us of a monk called Justus, who
was obsequious to him, and watched with him in
his daily sickness: "This man," says he, "being
dead, I appointed the healthful host to be offered
for his absolution thirty days together, which
done, the said Justus appeared to his brother by
vision, and said, I have been hitherto evil, but
now am well, &c." And the brethren in the mon-
astery counting the days, found that to be the day
on which the 30th oblation was offered for him.

Nor would doubtless this vindicator have told
us, " That transubstantiation was yet unborn,"
to wit, in St. Gregory the Great's time, unless he
had a mind to impose upon his reader, if he had
ever read the doctrine of those fathers, who
lived before St. Gregory's time, for example :

St. Ignatius, martyr, in his epistle to the
people of Smyrna, speaking of the heretics of
his time, men of the same judgment with this
vindicator, writes thus : " They allow not of
eucharists and oblations," says he, " because
they do not believe the eucharist to be the flesh
of our Saviour Jesus Christ, which suffered for
our sins, and which the Father, in his mercy,
raised again from the dead."

St. Justin, martyr, in his apology to the em-
peror Antonius Pius, made for the Christians :
" Now this food," says he, " amongst us, is called
the eucharist, Avhich it is lawful for none to par-
take of, but those who believe our doctrine to be
true, who have been washed in the laver of rege-
neration for the remission of sins; and who regu-
late their lives according to the prescription of
Christ ; for we do not receive this as common
bread, or common drink ; but as by the word of
God, Jesus Christ, our Redeemer, being made

(Z) The author of the Second Defence of the Exposition
of the Doctrine of the Church of England, &c, p. 13.

THE PERPETUAL SACRIFICE.

101

flesh, had both flesh and blood for the sake of
our salvation ; just so we are taught, that that
food, over which thanks are given by prayers, in
his own words, and whereby our blood and flesh,
are by a change, nourished, is the flesh and blood
of the incarnate Jesus ; for the apostles, in the
commentaries written by them, called the gos-
pel, have recorded that Jesus so commanded
them."

St. Irenaeus, taking an argument from the
participation of the eucharist, proves the resur-
rection of the flesh, against the heretics of his
time, (a) " As the blessed apostles say : ' Be-
cause we are members of his body, of his flesh,
and of his bones ;' not speaking this of any
spiritual or invisible man, but of that disposition
which belongs to a real man, that consists of
flesh, nerves, and bones ; and is nourished by
the chalice, which is his (Christ's) blood, and
receives increase by that bread which is his body.
And as the vine, being planted in the earth,
brings forth fruit in season : and a grain of
wheat falling upon the ground, and rotting, rises
up with increase by the virtue of God, who com-
prehends all things, which afterwards, by a pru-
dent management, becomes serviceable to men ;
and receiving the word of God, are made the
eucharist, which is the body and blood of Christ ;
so also our bodies being nourished by it, and
laid in the earth, and there dissolved, will rise
at their time ; the word of God working in them
this resurrection, to the glory of God the
Father."

Eusebius Canadensis : (b) " Making a daily
commemoration of him (Christ,) and daiiy cele-
brating the memory of his body and blood ; and
being now preferred to a more excellent sacri-
fice and office than that of the old law, we think
it unreasonable any more to fall back to those
first and weak elements which contained certain
signs and figures, but not the truth itself."
Another place of Eusebius, as quoted by St.
John of Damascene : " Many sinners," says he,
" being priests, do offer sacrifice ; neither docs
God deny his assistance, but by the Holy Ghost
consecrates the proposed gifts. And the bread
indeed is made the precious body of our Lord,
and the cup his precious blood. "(c)

St. Hilary : " We must not speak," says he,
" of the things of God, like men, or in" the sense
of the world : let us read what is written, and
understand what we read, and then we shall be-
lieve with a perfect faith. For what we say of
the natural existence of Christ within us, if we
do not learn from him, we say foolishly and
profanely ; for he himself says : ' My flesh is
meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.'
There is no place left for doubting of the reality
of his flesh and blood ; for now, by the profes-
sion of Christ himself, and by our faith, it is
truly flesh, and truly blood. Is not this truth ?
It may indeed not be true for them, who deny
Christ to be true God."(rf)

(a) Lib. 5, c. 11.

(b) Lib. 1, de Demonstrat. Evang., c. 10.

(d) Lib. 8, deTrinitate.

St. Cyril of Jerusalem :(<?) " Since, therefore,
Christ himself does thus affirm, and says of the
bread, ' This is my body ;' who, from hence-
forward, dare be so bold as to doubt of it 1
And since the same (Christ) does assure us, and
say : ' This is my blood ;' who, I say, can doubt
of it, and say, it is not his blood ? In Cana of
Galilee he once, with his sole will, turned water
into wine, which much resembles blood ; and
does not he deserve to be credited, that he
changed wine into his blood ; for if, when in-
vited to a corporal marriage, he wrought, so stu-
pendous a miracle, have we not much more
reason to confess, that he gave his body and
blood to the children of the bridegroom ?
Wherefore, full of certainty, let us receive the
body and blood of Christ ; for under the form
of bread is given to thee the body, and the blood
under the form of wine ; that having received
the body and blood of Christ, thou mayest be
made partaker with him of his body and blood.
Thus we shall become Christophers, that is,
1 bearers of Christ,' receiving his body and
blood into us. Do not, therefore, look on it as
mere bread only, or bare wine ; for, as God
himself has said, it is the body and blood of
Christ. Notwithstanding therefore, the infor-
mation of sense, let faith confirm thee ; and do
not judge of the thing by the taste, but rather
take it for most certain by faith, without the
least doubt that his body and blood are given
thee. When you come to communion, do not
come holding both the palms of your hands open,
nor your fingers spread ; but let your left hand
be as it were a rest under the right, into which
you are to receive so great a King ; and in the
hollow of your hand take the body of Christ,
saying, amen."(/)

St. Gregory Nyssen :(g) "When we have
eaten any thing that is prejudicial to our consti-
tution, it is necessary that we take something
that is capable of repairing what was impaired ;
that so, when this healing antidote is within us,
it may work out of the body, by a contrary
affection, all the force of the poison. And
what is this antidote 1 It is nothing but that
body which overcame death, and was the origin
of our life. For, as the apostle tells us, as a
little leaven makes the whole lump like itself, so
that body which, by God's appointment, suffered
death, being received within our body, changes
and reduces the whole to its own likeness. And
as when poison is mixed up with any thing that
is medicinal, the whole compound is rendered
useless ; so likewise that immortal body being
within him that receives it, converts the whole
into its own nature. But there being no other
way of receiving any thing within our body
unless it be first conveyed into our stomach by
eating or drinking, it is necessary that by this
ordinary way of nature, the life-giving virtue of
the Spirit be communicated to us. But now,
since that body alone, which was united to the

(e) In Catechis.

(/) It was the custom in those days for the priest to de-
liver the holy sacrament into the hands of the communicant.
(g) In Orat. Cat., c. 37.

102

PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS

Divinity, has received this grace, and it is mani-
fest that our body can no otherwise become im
mortal, we are to consider how it is impossible,
that one body, which is always distributed to so
many thousand Christians over the whole world,
should be the whole, by a part in every one, and
still remain whole in itself."

And a little after : " I do, therefore, now
rightly believe, that the bread sanctified by the
word of God is changed into the body of God
the Word. And here likewise the bread, as
the apostle says, is sanctified by the word of
God and prayer : not so, that by being eaten it
becomes the body of the Word, but because it is
suddenly changed by the word into his body,
by these words : ' This is my body.' And this
is effected by virtue of the benediction, by which
the nature of those things which appear is
transelemented into it."

Again, in another place :(a) " And the bread
in the beginning is only common bread ; but
■when it is sanctified by the mystery, it is made
and called the body of Christ."

St. Hierom : " God forbid," says he, " that
I should speak detractingly of these men,
(priests,) who, by succeeding the apostles in
their function, do make the body of Christ
with their sacred mouth. "(b)

St. Augustine : " We have heard," says he,
" our Master, who always speaks truth, our di-
vine Redeemer, the Saviour of men, recom-
mending to us our ransom, his blood ; for he
spake of his body and blood ; which body he
called meat and which blood he called drink.
The faithful understand the sacrament of the
faithful." " But there are some," says he,
" who do not believe ; they said : ' This is an
hard saying, who can hear him ?" It is an hard
saying but to those who are obstinate ; that is,
it is incredible but to the incredulous. "(c)

The same holy father and great doctor, in his
commentary upon the Thirty-third Psalm,
speaks thus of Christ : " And he was carried in
his own hands ? And can this, brethren, be
possible in man ? Was ever any man carried
in his own hands ? He may be carried by the
hands of others, but in his own no man was
ever yet carried. How this can be literally un-
derstood of David, we cannot discover ; but in
Christ we find it verified ; for Christ was car-
ried in his own hands, when giving his own very
body, he said : ' This is my body ;' for that body
he carried in his own hands." Such is the
humility of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is
much recommended to men. How plain and
positive are the words of these ancient and holy
fathers, for the real presence of Christ's body
and blood in the blessed sacrament of the
eucharist, which Protestants so flatly deny ? 1
would ask our Church of England divines,
whether, if they had been present among the
apostles when Christ said : " Take and eat, this
is my body," they durst have assumed the bold-
ness to have contradicted the omnipotent Word,
and have replied : " It is not thy body, Lord, it
is only bread ?" I believe the most stiff sacra-
mentarian in England would have trembled to
have made such a reply ; though now they dare,
with blasphemous mouth, call the doctrine of
transubstantiation, the " mystery of iniquity."

I have insisted somewhat longer upon these
two points than, perhaps, the reader may think
proper for this treatise ; but when he considers
that the priesthood and sacrifice, against which
Protestants have corrupted the scripture, and
framed their new articles of faith, are two such
essential parts of Christian religion, that if either
of them be taken away, the whole fabric of
God's church falls to the ground, he will not
look upon it as an unnecesary digression.

SEVERAL OTHER CORRUPTIONS AND FALSIFICATIONS

NOT MENTIONED UNDER THE FOREGOING HEADS.

This Treatise increasing beyond what indeed
I designed it at first, will oblige me to as much
brevity as possible, in these following corrup-
tions :

In Romans viii. 39, instead of the word " cha-
rity," they, contrary to the Greek, translate
" love ;" and so generally in all places, where
much is spoken in commendation of charity.
The reason is, because they attribute salvation
to faith alone, they care not how little charity
may sound in the ears of the people. So like-
wise in 1 Cor. xiii. for " charity," they eight
times say "love." In Rom. ix. 16, for this
text : " Therefore it is not of the wilier, nor
the runner, but of God that showeth mercy,"

(a) In Orat. in diem Luminum.
(ft) In Rpist. ad Helibdorum.
(c) Lib. de Verb. Apost. Serm.

they translate in their old Bibles : " So lieth it
not then in a man's will or running, but in the
mercy of God ;" changing of, into in, and
wilier and runner, into will and running ; and
so make the apostle say, that it is not at all in
man's will to consent or co-operate with God's
grace and mercy.

In 1 Corinthians i. J 0, for " schisms," which
are spiritual divisions from the unity of the
church, they translate " dissensions," which may
be in worldly things, as well as religion ; this
is done because themselves were afraid to be
accounted schismatics. So likewise

In Galatians v. 20, for " heresy," as it is in
the Greek, they translate " sects," in favour of
themselves, being charged with heresy ; also

In Titus iii. 10, instead of saying, according
to the Greek, " A man that is an heretic,
<fec, their Bible of 1662 translates, "A man

OF THE SCRIPTURE.

103

that is author of sects ;" favouring that name for
their own sakes, and dissembling it as though
the holy scripture spake not against heresy or
heretics, schism or schismatics.

In 1 Tim. iii. 6, for a " neophyte," (one lately
baptized or planted in Christ's mystical body,)
they translate in their first Bibles, " a young
scholar ;" as though an old scholar could not be
a neophyte, by deferring his baptism, or by long
delaying his conversion to God, which he learn-
ed to be necessary long before.

In Titus iii. 8, instead of these words, " to
excel in good works," they translate, " to show
forth good works ;" and, as their last edition has
it, " to maintain good works ;" against the dif-
ferent degrees of good works.

In Hebrews x- 20, for " dedicated," they
translate, in their first Bibles, " prepared," in
favour of their heresy, that Christ was not the
first who went into heaven, which the word dedi-
cated signifies.

In the two Epistles of Peter, iii. 16, they
force the text to maintain a frivolous evasion,
that " St. Paul's Epistles are not hard," but the
" things in the epistles ;" whereas both the
Greek and Latin texts are indifferent with regard
to both constructions. It is a general custom
of theirs, and where they find the Greek text
indifferent to two senses, there they restrain
it only to that which may be most advantage-
ous to their own error, thereby excluding its
reference to the other sense. And often-
times, where one sense is received, read, and
expounded by the greater part of the ancient
fathers, and by all the Latin church, there they
very partially follow the other sense, not so
generally received.

In St. James i. 13, for " God is not a tempter
of evils," they translate, " God is not tempted
with evils," and " God cannot be tempted with
evils," (a) than which nothing is more imper-
tinent to the apostle's speech in that place. Win-
is it that they refuse to say, " God is not tempted
to evil," as well as the other 1 is it on account
of the Greek word, which is passive ? They
may find in their lexicon, that it is both an active
and passive ; as also appears by the very cir-
cumstance of the foregoing words, " Let no man
say, that he is tempted by God." Why so 1
" Because," says the Protestant translators,
" God is not tempted with evil." Is this a good
reason 1 nothing less. How then ? " Because,
God is not tempted to evil ;" therefore let no
man say, that " he is tempted by God."

This reason is so coherent, and so necessary
in this place, that if the Greek word were only
a passive, as it is not, yet it might have better
beseemed Beza to translate it actively, than it
did to turn an active into a passive, against the
real presence, as himself confesses he did with-
out scruple. But though he might and ought to
have translated this word actively, yet he would
not, because he would favour his own heresy ;
which, quite contrary to these words of the
apostle, says, that " God is a tempter to evil ;" his

(a) A.xetoaao{ kqk&v.

words are, Inducit Dominus in tentationem eos
quos satance arhitrio permiltet, &c. (b) " The
Lord leads into temptation those whom he per-
mits to be at satan's disposal ; or, into whom
rather he leads or brings in satan himself, to fill
their hearts, as Peter speaketh." Note, that he
says, God brings satan into a man to fill his
heart, as Peter said to Ananias : " W r hy has
satan filled thy heart, to lie unto the Holy-
Ghost ?" So that by this doctrine of Beza, God
brought satan into Anania's heart to make him
lie unto the Holy Ghost ; and so leading him
into temptation, was author and cause of that
henious sin.

Is not this to say, " God is a tempter to evil,"
quite contrary to St. James's words ? Or could
he that is of this opinion, translate the contrary ;
to wit, that " God is no tempter to evil ?" Is not
this as much as to say, that God also brought
satan into Judas to fill his heart, and so was
author of Judas's treason, even as he was of
Paul's conversion ? Is not this a most absurd
and blasphemous opinion ? Yet how can they
free themselves from it, who allow and maintain
the aforesaid exposition of " God's leading into
temptation ?" Nay, Beza, for maintaining the
same, translates, " God's providence," instead
of " God's prescience," Acts ii. 23, a version so
false, that the English Bezaites, in their transla-
tion, are ashamed to follow him.

And which is worse than all this, if worse can
be, they make God not only a leader of men into
temptation, but even the author and worker of
sin : yea, that God created or appointed men to
sin ; as appears too plainly, not only in their
translation of this following text of St. Peter's,
but also from Beza's commentary on the same.
Also Bucer, one of king Edward the Vlth's
apostles, held directly, that " God is the author
of sin." (c)

St. Peter says of the Jews, that Christ is to
them, Petra scandali qui offendunt verbo nee
credunt in quo et positi sunt, fls o xal iii&eoar ;
that is, " A rock of scandal to them (the Jews)
that stumble at the word, neither do believe
wherein also they are put," as the Rhemish
Testament translates it : or as it is rendered in
king Edward the Vlth's English translation, and
in the first of queen Elizabeth's, " they believe
not that whereon they were set ;" which transla-
tion Illyricus approves, (d) " This is well to be
marked, lest a man imagine that God himself did
put them, and (as one, meaning Beza, against
the nature of the Greek word, translates and in-
terprets it) that God created them for this pur-
pose, that they should withstand him. Erasmus
and Calvin, referring this word to that which goes
before, interpret it not amiss, that the Jews were
made or ordained to believe the word of God,
and their Messias ; but yet that they would not
believe him ; for to them belonged the promises,
the testaments, and the Messias himself; as St.

(b) Annot. Nov. Test., anno 155G, Matt. vi. 13.

(d) Illyricus's Gloss, in 1 Pet. ii. 8.

104

PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS

Peter says, Acts, ii. 3, and St. Paul, Rom. ix.
And to them were committed the oracles of
God, by witness of the same Paul, Rom. iii."
Thus Illyricus ; who has here given the true
sense of this text, according to the signification
of the Greek word ; and has proved the same
by scripture, by St. Peter and St. Paul, and has
confirmed it by Erasmus and Calvin. Yea,
Luther follows the same sense in this place : so
does Castalio in his annotations to the New
Testament,

Yet Beza, against all these, to defend his
blasphemous doctrine, that " God leads men into
temptation, and brings in satan to fill their hearts,"
translates it thus : Sunt immorigeri ad quod etiatn
conditi feurunt, (a) " They are rebellious,
whereunto also they were created ;" With whom
his scholars, our English translators, are resolv-
ed to agree ; therefore, in their Bible of the
year 1577, they read, " Being disobedient unto
the which thing they were ordained." And in
that of 1572 : " Being disobedient unto the which
thing they were even ordained." This is yet
worse, and with this, word for word, agrees the
Testament of 1580, and the Scottish Bible of
1579. This is also the Geneva translation in
the Bible of 1561, which the French Geneva
Bible follows. And how much our Protestant
last translation differs from these, may be seen
in the Bible printed at London, anno 1683,
where it is read thus : " And a rock of offence,
even to them which stumble at the word, being
disobedient whereunto also they are appointed."

Is not this to say positively, that God is au-
thor of men's disobedience or rebellion against
Christ ? " But, if God," says Castalio against
Beza, " hath created some men to rebellion or
disobedience, he is author of their disobedience ;
as if he has created some to obedience, he is
truly author of their obedience." Yes, this is to
make God the author of men's sin, for which
purpose it was so translated : and thus Beza in
his notes upon the text explains it ; that " men
are made or fashioned, framed, stirred up, crea-
ted or ordained, not by themselves, for that were
absurd, but by God, to be scandalized at him,
and his Son our Saviour ; Christus est eis offen-
diculo, prout etiam ad hoc ipsum a Deo sunt con-
diti .-" and further discourses at large, and brings
other texts to prove this sense, and this translation.

And though Luther and Calvin, as is said, dis-
sented not from the true sense of this text, yet
touching the blasphemous doctrine, (b) that
" God is the author of sin," they, with Zuinglius,
must, for all this, have the right hand of Beza.
" How can man prepare himself to good," says
Luther, " seeing it is not in his power to make
his ways evil 1 For God works the wicked
work in the wicked."

" When we commit adultery or murder," says
Zuinglius, " it is the Avork of God, being the
mover, the author, and inciter, &c. God moves

{a) Vide Castalio in Defensione qua Translat., pp. 153,
154 155.

(b) Lut. To. 2, Wittem. an. 1551, Assert. Art. 36, Vid.
de Servo. Arbit. fol. 195, Edit. 1603. Zuing. To. 10, de
providentia Dei, fol. 365, 366, 367.

the thief to kill, &c. He is forced to sin, &c
God hardened Pharaoh, not speaking hyperbo-
lically, but he truly hardens him, yea, although
he resist." By which, and other of his writings,
he so plainly teaches God to be the author of
sin, that he is therefore particularly reprehended
by the learned Protestant, Grawerus, in Absur-
da Absurdorum, c. 5, de Prcedest., fol. 3, 4.

" God is author," says Calvin, " of all those
things, which these Popish judges would have to
happen only by his idle sufferance." (c) He
also affirms our sins to be not only by God's
permission, but by " his decree and will." Which
blasphemy is so evidently taught by him and
his followers, that they are expressly condemn-
ed for it by their famous brethren : Feming, lib.
de Unioers. Grat.,p. 109.; Osiander, Enchirid.
Controv., p. 104; Scaffman, de Peccat., Causis,
pp. 155, 27; Stizlinus, Desput. Theol. de Pro-
vid. Dei. sect. 141 ; Graver, in Absurda Absurd.,
in Frontisp. Yea, the Protestant magistrates
of Berne made it penal by the laws, for any in
their territories to preach Calvin's doctrine
thereof, or for the people to read any of his
books concerning the same, (d) Are not these
blessed reformers 1 " O excellent instrument of
God !" as Dr. Tenison styles the chief of them.(e)

Protestants denying free will in man, not only
to do good, but even to resist evil, open a very
wide passage into this impious doctrine, of
making God the author of sin.

In 1 St. Peter i. 22, the apostle exhorts
Christains to live as becomes men of so excel-
lent a vocation : " Purifying," says he, " your
souls by obedience of charity," (/) &c. ; a little
before, verse 17, remembering always, that
" God, without exception of persons, judges every
man according to his works." From which place
it appears, that we have free will working with
the grace of God ; that we purify and cleanse
our souls from sin ; that good works are neces
sarily required of Christians : for by many di-
vine arguments St. Peter urges this conclusion ;
Ut anirnas nostras castificemus, " That we purify
our own souls." So the Protestant translation,
made in Edward the Sixth's time, has it, " For-
asmuch as you have purified your souls." {g)
So likewise one of queen Elizabeth's Bibles :
" Even ye which have purified your souls ;" and
so it is in the Greek. Notwithstanding all
which, Beza, in his Testaments of 1556 and
1565, translates it, Animabus vestris purificatis
obediendo veritati per Spiritum : which another
of queen Elizabeth s Bibles renders thus : " See-
ing your souls are purified in obeying the truth,
through the Sprit." So translates also the En-
glish Bible, printed at Geneva, 1561, and the
Scotch, printed at Edinburgh, 1579.

So that these words make nothing at all either
for free will, or co-operation with God's grace,
or value of good works, but rather the con-

(d) Vid. Litteras Senat. Bern, ad Ministros, &c. an.
1555.

(/) Castificantes anhnas vestras in obedientia Charita.tis.

(-)Bib. 1561, 1579.

OF THE SCRIPTURE.

105

trary ; proving that in our justification we
work not, but are wrought ; we purify not our-
selves, but are purified ; we are not active and
doers with God's grace, but passive and suffer-
ers ; which opinion the Council of Trent con-
demns, (a) The Protestant Bible of 1683, has
again corrected this, and translates : " Seeing ye
have purified your souls," &c. ; but whether with
any good and sincere intention, appears by their
having left uncorrected another fault of the same
stamp in Philippians i. 28.

Where St. Paul, handling the same argument,
exhorts the Christians not to fear the enemies
of Christ, though they persecute ever so ter-
ribly, " which to them," says he, " is cause of
perdition, but to you of salvation ;" where he
makes good works necessary, and so the causes
of salvation, as sins are of damnation. But
Beza will have the old interpreter overseen in
so translating : " because," says he, " the afflic-
tion of the faithful is never called the cause of
their salvation, but the testimony." (&) And,
therefore, translates the Greek word tdeitii;,
indicium. And his scholars, the English trans-
lators, render it a " token ;" though, indeed, one
of their Testaments translates it, as we do,
a " cause ;" so do also Erasmus, and the Ti-
gurine translators ; (c) yea, the apostles com-
paring sins with good works, these leading to
heaven, as those to hell, convinces its sense to
be so ; as Theodoret, a Greek father, also
gathers from that word, saying : " That pro-
cures to them destruction, but to you salvation."
(d) So St. Augustine, St. Hierom, and other
Latin fathers.

And that good works are a cause of salvation,
our Saviour himself clearly shows, when he thus
speaks of Mary Magdalen : Remittuntur ei pec-
cata rnulta,quoniam dihxit imdtum : " Many sins
are forgiven her, because she loveth much."
Against which no man living can cavil from the
Greek, Hebrew, or Latin, but that works of
charity are a cause why sins are forgiven ; and
so a cause of our justification and salvation,
which are evidently the words and meaning of
our blessed Saviour. Notwithstanding, Beza
and our English translators have a shift for this
also ; he translates, Remissa sunt peccata ejus
multa ; nam dilexit multum : which in our Eng-
lish Bible is rendered, " Her sins which are
many, are forgiven ; for she loved much ;" (e)
which the reader, perhaps, may think to be a
difference so small as is not worth taking notice
of; but, if well considered, will be found as great
as is between our doctrine and Protestants.
And first, the text is corrupted, by making a
fuller point than either the Greek or Latin
bears, the English making some a colon, (:) and
some a semicolon, (;) where in the Greek there
is only a comma (,) ; and Beza in his Latin, yet
more desperately makes a down and full period, (.)

/a) Sess. 6, cap. 4.

(6) Beza Annot. in ilium locum

(d) Theod. in Phil., cap.

ie) Beza Test-, anno 1565. Bib 168S.

thereby dividing and distracting the latter part
from the former, as though it contained not a
reason of that which went before, as it does, but
were some new matter ; wherein he is controlled
by another of his own translators, and by the
Greek prints of Geneva, Zurich, Basil, and other
German cities, who point it as it is in our Latin
and English. But their falsehood appear^ much
more in turning quoniam into nam, " because"
into " for." (/)

Seeing our Saviour's words are in effect thus :
" Because she loved much, therefore, many sins
are forgiven her ;" which they, by this perver-
sion and mispointing it, make a quite different,
and almost contrary sense ; thus : " Because she
had many sins forgiven her, therefore, she loved
much ;" and this love following was a token of
the remission which she, by only faith, had ob-
tained before ; so turning the cause into the
effect, and the antecedent into the consequent,
hereby utterly overthrowing the doctrine which
Christ by his words and reason gives, and the
church by his words and reason gathers. Beza
blushes not to confess why he thus altered
Christ's words, saying : Nam dilexit, ifi&niioB,
" For she loved :" the Vulgate translation and
Erasmus render it, " Because she loved." " But
I (says he) had rather interpret it as I do, that
men may understand in these words to be shown,
not the cause of remission of sins, but rather
that which ensued after such remission, and that
by the consequent is gathered the antecedent.
And therefore, they who abuse this place, to
overthrow free justification by faith alone, are
very impudent and childish." (g) Thus Beza.
But the ancient fathers, who were neither impu-
dent nor childish, gathered from this text, that
charity, as well as faith, is requisite for obtaining
| remission of sins. St. Chrysostom, Horn. 6, in
I Mat. says, (A) " As first by water and the
i Spirit, so afterwards by tears and confession, we
B are made clean ;" which he proves by this place.
|j So St. Gregory, expounding this same place,
lj says, " Many sins are forgiven her, because she
|| loved much ; as if it had been said expressly,
he burns out perfectly the rust of sin, whosoever
burns vehemently with the fire of love. For so
much more is the rust of sin scoured away, by
how much more the heart of a sinner is inflamed
with the great fire of charity."

And St. Ambrose upon the same words —
" Good are the tears which are able to wash
away our sins. Good are the tears, wherein is
not only the redemption of sinners, but also the
refreshing of the just."

And the great St. Augustine, debating this
story in a long homily, says, (i) " This sinful
woman, the more she owed, the more she loved ;
the forgiver of her debts, our Lord himself, af-
firming so : Many sins are forgiven her, because
she loved much. And why loved she much,

(/) 1556.

(g) Beza in Luc. vii. 47.
(A) Horn. 33, in Evang.
(i) Horn. 23, inter. 50.

10G

PROTESTANT CORRUPTION'S.

but because she owed much 1 Why did she
all these offices of weeping, washing, &c, but
to obtain remission of her sins ?" Other holy
fathers agree in the self-same verity, all making
her love to be a cause going before, and not an
effect or sequel coming after the remission of sins.

I have only taken notice here how Beza and
our English translators have corrupted this
text ; but he who pleases to read Musculus,
in locis Communibus, c. de Justijicat., 11, 5, will
find him perverting it after another strange
manner, by boldly asserting, without all reason
or probable conjecture, that our blessed Saviour
spoke in Hebrew, and used the preterperfect for
the present tense ; and that St. Luke wrote in
the Doric dialect ; so that Musculus would have
it said : " She loved Christ much, and no won-
der ; she had good cause so to do, because many
sins were forgiven her."

But Zuingliiis goes yet another way to work
with this text, and tells us, that he supposes the
word " love" should have been " faith :" his
words are, " Because she loved much. I sup-
pose, that love is here put for faith ; because she
has so great affiance in me, so many sins are
forgiven her. For he says afterwards, Thy
faith hath saved thee ; that is, has absolved and
delivered thee from thy sins." (a) Which one
distinction of his, will answer all the places that
in this controversy can be brought out of scrip-
ture to refute their " only faith." But, to
conclude, what can be more impious than to
affirm, that for obtaining of sins, charity is not
required as well as faith, seeing our blessed
Saviour, if we credit his evangelist, St. Luke,
and I think his authority ought to be preferred
before that of Zuinglius, Beza, Musculus, or
our English sectaries, most divinely conjoins
charity with faith, saying of charity, " Many sins
are forgiven her, because she loved much !"
straightway adding of faith, " Thy faith has made
thee safe ; go in peace."

As you see here, they use all their endeavours
to suppress the necessity of good and charitable
works ; so, on the other side, they endeavoured
to make their first Bibles countenance vice, (b)
so far as to seem to allow of the detestable sin
of usury, provided it were not hurtful to the
borrower. In Deuteronomy xxiii. 19, they
translate thus, " Thou shalt not hurt thy brother
by usury of money, nor by usury of corn, nor by
usury of any thing that he may be hurt withal ;"
by which they would have it meant, that usury
is not here forbidden, unless it hurts the party
that •borrows. A conceit so rooted in most
men's hearts, that they think such usury very
lawful, and therefore frequently offend therein.
But Almighty God, in this place of holy scrip-
ture, has not one word of hurting, or not hurting,
as may be seen in the Hebrew and Greek ; and
as also appears from their having corrected the
same in their Bible of 1 683, where they read, as
it ought to be, " Thou shalt not lend upon usury
to thy brother, usury of money, usury of vic-
tuals, usury of anything that is lent upon usury."

(a) Zuin<r. in Luc. vii. To. 4.
f ,b) Bib. 1562, 1577.

If the Hebrew word signify to hurt by usury,
why did not they, in the very words next fol-
lowing, in the self-same Bibles, translate it thus :
" Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury,
but not unto thy brother V why said they not
rather, " A stranger thou mayest hurt by usury,
but not thy brother ?" is it not all the same in
word and phrase here as before ? The Jews
would have given them thanks for so translating
it ; who, by forcing the Hebrew word as they
do, think it well done, to hurt any stranger, that
is, any Christian by usury, be it ever so great.

Whether the first Protestant translators of
the scriptures were guided by that spirit which
should be in Christian Catholic translators, may
be easily gathered from what follows, as well as
from what you have already seen.

They were so profane and dissolute, that
some of them termed that divine book',
called, Canticum, Canticorum, containing the
high mystery of Christ and his church, " The
Ballad of Ballads of Solomon," as if it were a
ballad of love, between Solomon and his concu-
bine, as Castalio wantonly translated it.

And yet more profanely, in another place,
which even their last translation has not yet
vouchsafed to correct, " We have conceived, we
have born in pain, as though we should have
brought forth wind." (c) I am ashamed to set
down the literal commentary of this their trans-
lation. Was there any thing in the Hebrew to
hinder them from translating it in this manner :
" We have conceived, and as it were travailed to
bring forth, and have brought forth the Spirit ?"
Why should they say wind rather than spirit ?
They are not ignorant, that the Septuagint in
Greek, and the ancient fathers, do all expound
it, (d, e,f,) according to both the Hebrew and
Greek, of the " Spirit of God," which is first
conceived in us, and begins by fear, Avhich the
scripture calls : " The beginning of wisdom :"
insomuch, that in the Greek there are these
godly words, famous in all antiquity, " Through
the fear of thee, O Lord, we conceived, and
have travailed with pain, and have brought forth
the Spirit of thy salvation, which thou hast made
upon the earth :" which excellently sets before
our eyes the degrees of a faithful man's increase,
and proceeding in the Spirit of God. But. to
say, " We have been with child," as their last
translation has it, (g) " and have brought forth
wind," can admit no spiritual interpretation ; but
even as a mere Jew should translate, or under-
stand it, who has no sense of the Spirit of God.
It is the custom of Protestants, in all such cases
as this, where the more appropriate sense is of
God's holy Spirit, there to translate wind, as in
Psalm cxlvii. 18.

Another impropriety similar to this is, that
they will not translate for the angel's honour
that carried Habakuc, " He sent him into
Babylon, over the lake, by the force of hi 3

{d) St. Ambrose, lib. 2, de Interpret., c. 4.
te) Ghrysostom, in Psal. vii. prop. fin.
< f) See S. Hierom upon this place.
(g) Bible 1683.

OF THE SCRIPTURE.

107

spirit ;" but thus : " Through a mighty wind."
So attributing it to the wind, not to the angel's
power, and omitting quite the Greek word, uvju,
" his," which showeth plainly, that it was the
angel's spirit, force, and power. (a)

Again, where the prophet Isaiah speaks most
manifestly of Christ, saying : " And (our Lord)
shall not cause thy doctor to fly from thee any
more, and thine eyes shall see thy master ;"
which is all the same in effect with that which
Christ says, " I will be with you unto the end of
the world ;" there one of their Bibles translates
thus, " Thy rain shall be no more kept back,
but thine eyes shall see thy rain." Their last
translation has corrected this mad falsification, (b)

Again, where the holy church reads : " Re-
joice, ye children of Zion, in the Lord your God,
because he has given you the doctrine of jus-
tice ;"(c) there one of their translations has it,
" The rain of righteousness :" and their last
Bible, instead of correcting the former, makes
it yet worse, if it can be made worse, saying,
" Be glad then, ye children of Sion, &c , for he
hath given you the former rain moderately."
Does the Hebrew word force them to this ?
Doubtless they cannot but know, that it signifies
a teacher or master : and therefore, even the
Jews themselves, partly understand it of Esdras,
partly of Christ's divinity : yet these new and
partial translators are resolved to be more pro-
fane than the very Jews. If they had, as I
hinted above, been guided by a Catholic and
Christian spirit, they might have been satisfied
with the sense of St. Hierom, a Christian doctor,
upon these places, who makes no doubt but the
Hebrew is doctor, master, teacher ; who also in
the psalm translates thus : " With blessings shall
the doctor be arrayed, "(d) meaning Christ ;
where Protestants, with the Jews of latter days,
the enemies of Christ, translate, " The rain covers
the pools." What cold stuff is this in respect of
that other translation, so clearly pointing to
Christ, our doctor, master and lawgiver.(e)

And again, where St. Jerom, and all the
fathers translate and expound, " There shall be
faith in thy times," to express the wonderful
faith that shall be among Christians ; there they
translate, " There shall be stability of thy times."
And their last Bible has it thus, " And wisdom
and knowledge shall be the stability of thy
times." Whereas the prophet reckons all these
virtues singly, viz., judgment, justice, which
they term righteousness, faith, wisdom, knowl-
edge, and the fear of our Lord ; but they, for a
little ambiguity of the Hebrew word, turn faith
into stability.

In Isa. xxxvii. 22, all their first Bibles read,
" O virgin daughter of Sion, he hath despised
thee, and laughed thee to scorn : O daughter of
Jerusalem, he hath shaken his head at thee." In
the Hebrew, Greek, St. Hierom's translation
and commentary, as also in the last Protestant
Bible, printed 1683, it is quite contrary, viz.,

(a) Isa. xxx. 20.

(b) Joel ii. 23.

(d) Psalm lxxxiv. 7.

(e) Isaiah xxxiii. 6.

" The virgin daughter of Sion has despised thee,
O Assur : the daughter of Jerusalem has shaken
her head at thee." All are of the feminine
gender, and spoken of Sion literally triumphing
over Assur ; and of the church spiritually tri-
umphing over heresies, and all her enemies. In
their first Bibles they translated all as of the
masculine gender, thereby applying it to Assur ;
insulting against Sion and Jerusalem. But for
what cause or reason they thus falsify it, will be
hard to determine, unless they dreaded, that by
translating it otherwise it might be applied
spiritually to the church's triumphing over
themselves, as her enemies. We cannot judge
it an oversight in them, because we find it so
translated in the fourth book of Kings, xix. 21,
yea, and in all their first translations.

A great many other faults are found in their
first translations, which might be passed by, as
not done upon any ill design, but perhaps, rather
as mistakes or over-sights, (/) yet however,
touching some few of them, it will not be amiss
to demand a reason, why they were committed :
as for example, why they translated, " Ye abject
of the Gentiles," Isa. xlv. 20, rather than, " Ye,
who are saved of the Gentiles ;" or, as their
translation has it, " Ye that are escaped of the
nations ?" or,

Why, in their Bible of 1 579, did they write
at length : " Two thousand to them that keep the
fruit thereof," rather than " two hundred ;" as
it is in the Hebrew and Greek, and as now their
last Bible has it 1 or,

Why read they in some of their Bibles, " As
the fruits of cedar ;" and not rather according to
the Greek and Hebrew, " Tabernacles of
cedar ;" or however, as their last translation has
it, " Tents of Kedar ?" or,

Why do they translate : " Ask a sign, either
in the depth, or in the height above," rather than,
%Ask a sign, either in the depth of hell," &c, as
the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin has it 1(g) Or,

Why do they translate : " To make ready an
horse," rather than " beasts," as the Greek has
it ; and as also now their edition of 1683 reads
it 1(h) Or,

Why translate they : " If a man on the sab-
bath-day receive circumcision, without breaking
the law of Moses ;" rather than, according to
the Greek, which their last translation has fol-
lowed : " If a man on the sabbath-day receive
circumcision, to the end the law of Moses should
not be broken ?"(i) Or,

Why read they : " The Son of man must
suffer many things, and be reproved of the
elders," for " be rejected of the elders," as
the Greek, and now their Bibles of 1683 have
it ; and as in the Psalm, " The stone which the
builders rejected ;" we say not reproving of the
said stone, which is Christ l(k)

Again, why translate they thus : Many which

(/) Cantica. Canticor-, viii. 12. ; Cantica. Canticor.,i.
4 ; Isa. vii. 11.
(g) Isa. vii. 11.
(A) Acts xxiii. 24.
(i) Jo. vii. 23.
(at) Mark viii. 31.

108

PROTESTANT ABSURDITIES

had seen the first house, when the foundation of
this house was laid before their eyes, wept," &c,
when in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, it is
read thus : " Many who had seen the first house
in the foundation thereof, (i. e., yet standing
upon the foundation, undestroyed,) and this
temple before their eyes, wept ?" I suppose
they imagined, that it should be meant they
saw Solomon's temple when it was first founded ;

which, because it was impossible, they trans-
lated otherwise than it is in the Hebrew and
Greek : they should indeed have considered
better of it.

Though we do not look upon several of these
as done, I say, with any ill design, yet we cannot
excuse them for being done with much more
licentious boldness than ought to appear in sin-
cere and honest translators.

ABSURDITIES IN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE.

Their unrestrained licentiousness is yet fur-
ther manifest, in their turning of David's Psalms
into rhyme, without reason, and then singing
them in their congregations ; telling the people,
from Saint James, v. : " If any be merry, let
him sing psalms ;" being resolved to do nothing
but what they produce a text of scripture for,
though of their own making : for, though the
apostle exhorts " such as are heavy, to pray,"
and " such as are merry, to sing ;" yet he does
not in^ particular appoint David's Psalms to be
sung by the merry, no more than he appoints our
Lord's Prayer to be said by such as he exhorts
to pray, though perhaps, he meant it of both : so
that from any thing our bold interpreters can
gather from the text, &quo animo est ? Psallat.
yxlXsTco, St. James might mean other spiritual
songs and hymns, as well as David's Psalms :
but be it that he exhorted them to sing David's
Psalms, which we have no cause to deny, because
the church of Christ has ever used the same ; yet
that he meant it of such nonsensical rhymes as
T. Sternhold, Joseph Hopkins, Robert Wisdom,
and other Protestant poets have made to be sung
in their churches, under the name of David's

Psalms, none can ever grant, who has read
them. It has hitherto been the practice of God's
church to sing David's Psalms, as truly trans-
lated from the Hebrew into Latin ; but never
to sing such songs as Hopkins and Sternhold
have turned from the English prose into metre :
neither do I think that sober and judicious
Protestants themselves can look upon them as
good forms of praises to be sung in their churches
to the glory, honour, and service of so great, so
good, and so wise a God, when they shall con-
sider how fully they are fraught with nonsense
and ridiculous absurdities, besides many gross
corruptions, viz., above two hundred ;(a) con-
fessed by Protestants themselves to be found in
the Psalms in prose, from which these were
turned into metre, which we may guess are
scarcely corrected by the rhyme. To collect all
the faults committed by the said blessed poets
in their psalm-metre, would be a task too tedious
for my designed brevity ; I will, therefore,
only set down some few of their absurd and
ridiculous expressions ; and for the rest,leave the
reader to compare these psalms in metre with the
others in prose, even as by themselves translated.

PSALMS in Prose, Bible 1683.

Psalm ii. verse 3.
Let us break their bands asunder, and cast
away their cords from us.

Psalm xvi. verses 9, 10.
Theretore, my heart is glad, and my glory re-
joiceth : my flesh also shall rest in hope. For
thou wilt not leave my soul in hell, &c.

Psalm xviii. verse 36.
Thou hast enlarged my steps under me, that
my feet did not slip.

(a) See the Preface.

(b) The reader need not be told why this is added, be-
sides its making up the rhyme.

PSALMS in xMetre, Bible 1683.

Psalm ii. verse 3.

Shall we be bound to them *? say they ;

Let all their bonds be broke,
" And of their doctrine and their law,

Let us reject the yoke."{b)

Psalm xvi. verses 9, 10.
Wherefore my heart and " tongue" also, (c)

Do both rejoice together ;
My " flesh and body" rest in hope,

When I this thing consider :
Thou wilt not leave my soul in " grave,"

For, Lord, thou lovest me, &c.

Psalm xviii. verse 36.

And under me thou makest plain

The way where I should walk :
So that my feet shall never slip,

" Nor stumble at a balk."

" tongue," in rhyme. And for want of one foot to make
up another verse, they thrust in a whole body, " flesh and
body." Again, what in prose is called hell, in rhyme they
term grave; as if souls were left in the grave.

IN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE.

109

PSALMS in Prose, Bible 1G83.

Psalm xviii. verse 37.
I have pursued mine enemies, and overtaken i|
them : neither did I turn again till they were jj
consumed.

Psalm xxii. verse 7.
All they that see me, laugh me to scorn.
They shoot out the lip, they shake the head.

Psalm xxii, verse 12.
Many bulls have compassed me, strong bulls
of Basan have beset me round.

Psalm xxvi. verse 10.
In whose hand is mischief, and their right
hand is full of bribes.

Psalm xlix. verse 20.
Man that is in honour, and understandeth not,
is like the beasts that perish.

Psalm lxxiv. verses 11, 12.
Why withdraweth thou thy hand, even thy
right hand ? Pluck it out of thy bosom.

i
Psalm lxxvii. verse 16.
— He caused waters to run down like rivers.

Psalm lxxviii. verse 57.
— They were turned aside like a deceitful bow.

Psalm Ixxxix. verse 46.
The days of his youth hast thou shortened :
thou hast covered him with shame. Selah.

Psalm xcvii. verse 12.
Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness
to the upright in heart.

Psalm xcix. verse 1.
The Lord reigneth, let the people tremble ; he
sitteth between the cherubims, let the earth be
moved.

Psalm cxix. verse 70.
Their heart is as fat as grease : (As fat as
brawn, in another Bible. But in the Latin
Vulgate, Coagulatum est sicut lac cor eorum.)

Psalm cxix. verse 83.
Por 1 am become like a bottle in smoke.

(a) This warrior lays about him in a different manner
from David.

(i^ We have heard of crafty heads, but never of crafty
hands.

PSALMS ix Metre, Bible 1683.

Psalm xviii. verse 37.
So I suppress and wound my foes,

That they can rise no more :
For at my feet they fall down flat,

I strike them all so sore. (a)

Psalm xxii. verse 7.
All men despise, as they behold

Me walking on the way :
" They grin, they mow, they nod their heads," &c

Psalm xxii. verse 12.
So many bulls do compass me,

That be full strong of head :
" Yea, bulls so fat, as though they had

In Basan-field been fed."

Psalm xxvi. verse 10.
Whose hands are heap'd with " craft {b) and guile,"

Their lives thereof are full,
And their ri<rht hand with " wrench and wile,

For bribes doth pluck and pull."

Psalm xlix. verse 20.
Thus man to honour God hath brought,

Yet doth he not consider ;
But like, brute beast, so doth he live,

" And turn to dust and powder."

Psalm lxxiv. verses 11, 12.
Why dost thou draw thy hand " a back,

And hide it in thy lap V
O pluck it out, and be not slack,

" To give thy foes a rap."(e)

Psalm lxxvii. verse 16.
— Of such abundance that " no floods
To them might be compared."

Psalm lxxviii. verse 57.
— They went astray,
Much like a bow that would not bend,
But slip and start away.

Psalm Ixxxix. verse 46.
Thou hast cut off, and made full short

His youth and lusty days ;
" And rais'd of him an ill report.

With shame and great dispraise. "(d)

Psalm xcvii. verse 12.
And light doth spring up to the just,

With pleasure for his part,
Great joy with gladness, mirth and lust, &c.(e)

Psalm xcix. verse 1.
The Lord doth reign, •' altho at it

The people rage full sore ;"
Yea, he on cherubims doth sit,

" Tho' all the world do roar."

Psalm cxix. verse 70.
Their hearts are swoln with worldly wealth,
As " grease so arc they fat."

Psalm cxix. verse 83.
As a " skin-bottle" in the smoke,
So am I parch'd and dried.

advise him to sing, they might have done as well to have
said rather, " If any would be merry, let him sing psalms."

(i!) To say that God raises an ill report of men, has af-
finity to Beza's doctrine, which makes God the author of
sin. Vid. Supr.

(e) I thought, till now, that lust had been n sin.

110

PROTESTANT ABSURDITIES IN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE.

PSALMS in Prose, B^le 1683.

Psalm cxix. verse 110.
The wicked have laid a snare for me. "

Psalm cxix. verse 130.
The entrance of thy word giveth light : it
giveth understanding unto the simple.

Psalm cxix. verse 150.
They draw nigh that follow after mischief:
they are far from thy law.

Psalm cxx. verse o.
Woe is me, that I sojourn in Mesech, that I
dwell in the tents of Kedar.

Psalm cxxvii. verse 2.
It is in vain for you to rise up early, to sit up
late, to eat the bread of sorrow.

Psalm cxxix. verse 6.
Let them be as grass upon the house-tops,
which withereth before it groweth up.

PSALMS in Metre, Bible 1683.

Psalm cxix. verse 110.
Altho' the wicked laid their nets
" To catch me at a bay."

Psalm cxix. verse 130.
When men first " enter into" thy word,

They find a light most clear;
And very idiots understand,

" When they it read or hear ."(6)

Psalm cxix. verse 150.
My foes draw near, " and do procure

My death maliciously :"
Which from thy law are far gone back,

" And strayed from it lewdly."

Psalm cxx. verse 5.
Alas! too long I slack,
Within these tents "so black,"

Which Kedars are by '' name ;"
" By whom the flock elect,
And all of Isaac's sect,

Are put to open shame. "(c)

Psalm cxxvii. verse 2.

Though ye rise early in the morn,
And so at night go late to bed,
" Feeding full hardy with brown bread,"

Yet were your labour " lost and worn. "(d)

Psalm cxxix. verse 6.
And made as grass upon the house,
Which withereth " ere it grow. "(e)

I could weary the reader with such like ex-
amples ; they seldom or never speak of God's
covenant with Israel, but they call it God's
trade. (a) As in Psalm lxxviii. 10, where they sing,

For why 1 they did not keep with God,

The covenant that was made ;
Nor yet would walk or lead their lives,
According to his " trade."

Psalm lxxxvii. verse 10.
For why 7 their hearts were nothing bent
To him, nor to his " trade."

Psalm ex. verse 37.
For this is unto Israel
A statute and a " trade."

Psalm lxxxi. verse 4.
And set all my commandments light,
And will not keep my "trade.

Psalm lxxxix. verse 32.
To them be made a law and " trade," &c.
Psalm cxlviii. verse G.

Such stuff as this you will find in other
places. The words " more" and " less" have
also stood them in as good stead as " trade" to
make rhyme with, viz :

All men on earth, both " least" and " most."

Psalm xxiii. verse 8-
All kings, both " more" and " less."

Psalm xlviii. verse 1 1 .
The children of Israel each one both "more" and " less."

Psalm xlviii verse 14.

See also Psalm cix. verse 10; Psalm xi.
verse 6 ; Psalm xxvii. verse 8, &c, &c.

Nor are they a little beholden to an " ever and
for aye ;" " for ever and a day ;" " for evermore
always," and the like.

Besides their turning the psalms into metre,

(a) Perhaps, this word " trade" should have been " tradi-
tion" with them ; but for fear of a Popish term, which they
so much detest they would rather write nonsense than use it. ij

they also made rhyme of the Lord's Prayer, the
Creed, and the Ten Commandments. In which
one thing is remarkable, viz., that in the Creed,
upon the article of Christ's descent into hell
they make a very plain distinction between the
hell of the damned, and that of the fathers of
the Old Testament, Limbus Patrv/n, thus :

And so he died in the flesh, but quickened in the sprite,
His body then was buried, as is our use and right.
His soul did after this descend into the lower parts,
A dread unto the wicked spirits, butjoy to faithful hearts.

Whom do they mean by those " faithful hearts,"
to whom our blessed Saviour's descent into hell
Limbus, was a joy, but those of whom the pro-
phet Zachary spoke, when propheeying of our
Saviour's releasing them, he said : " Thou also
in the blood of thy Testament hast let forth thy
prisoners out of the lake, wherein there is no
water ?" And, whom St. Peter meant, when he
said, that Christ in spirit " coming, preached to
the spirits also that were in prison ; which had
been incredulous sometimes, when they expect-
ed the patience of God in the days of Noe,
when the ark was in building." (f)

The turning of this article into metre is, I
suppose, the very cause why we have not the
Creed printed in metre in their latter impres-
sions ; and consequently, none of the other pray-

(b) By singing thus, they would possess the people that
even the most ignorant of them are capable to understand
the scripture when they read it, or have it read to them.

(c) Why is all this added 1 only for the sake of rhyming
to the word " name," unless they would make Isaac a
sect maker, and his religion a sect like their own.

(d) If brown bread is the bread of affliction, a great
many feeds on it who are able to buy white.

(e) How grass can withpr before it grows, is a paradox.
(/) Zach. ix. 11.

PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS Of THE SCRIPTURE.

Ill

ers and rhymes, which iheir first Bibles had
after the Psalms ; because to put out this and
no more, would have given too shrewd a cause
of suspicion.

Besides the turning of these into metre, they
made also certain other prayers of their own in
rhyme ; in one of which they rank the Pope,
whom their modern divines count a great bishop,
and chief patriarch of the western church, and
from whom they pretend to receive their episcopal
and priestly character, in the same list with the
Turk, as if both were infidels alike, and both
alike enemies to Christ. Robert Wisdom thus
sets out his psalm, which the ignorant people
may be apt to take for one of Davids ; assuring
themselves that David himself prayed to be de-
livered from the Turk and the Pope, and conse-
quently, that the Pope is a dangerous creature :

Preserve us, Lord, by thy dear word,
From Turk and Pope defend us, Lord,
Which both would thrust out of his throne,
Our Lord Jesus Christ, thy dear Son.

But this, with such other like stuff, is also left
out by Protestants in their last impressions, as j
being indeed ashamed of the impiety, malice,
and folly of these gross imposters, especially of
this Robert Wisdom, who, notwithstanding his
name, was doubtless the most ignorant of all
those who ever undertook to turn psalm into
metre. And so it is likely he was looked upon
by Dr. Corbet, sometimes bishop of Norwich,
when he made the following address to his ghost :

TO THE GHOST OF ft. WISDOM.

That once a body, now but air,
Arch-botchcr of a psalm or prayer,

From Carfax (a) come,
And patch us up a zealous lay,
With an old ever and for aye,

Or all and some.

Or such a spirit lend me,

As may an hymn down send me,

To purge my brain.
Then Robin look behind thee,
Lest Turk or Pope do find thee,
And go to bed again.

This may seem too light for a treatise of this
nature ; but the ridiculous absurdity of these
rhymes, the singing of which in the churches,
has, by several learned Protestants, been com-
plained of and lamented, cannot be fully enough
exposed ; that so, if possible, the common peo-
ple's eyes maybe opened, and they may be taken
off from the fondness they seem to have for
them.

Though the ignorance, rather than ill inten-
tion of these busy poets appear in their psalm-
metre ; yet what follows cannot be excused
from being done with a very treacherous design
of the translators ; for what can possibly be a
more sly piece of rjraft to deceive the ignorant
reader, than to use Catholic terms in all such
places where they may render them odious, and
when they must needs sound ill in the people's
ears ? For example, 2 Maccabees vi. 7, this term

(a) The place of his burial in Oxford.

" procession" they very maliciously translate,
saying : " When the feast of Bacchus was kept,
they were constrained to go in procession to
Bacchus." Let the reader see in the Greek
Lexicon if there be any thing in this word,
Tiofinadveiv iw Siovvaoj, like the Catholic Church's
processions, or whether it signify so much as
" to go about," as other of their Bibles translate
it, with perhaps no less ill meaning than that of
1570, though they name not procession, (b)

St. John, ix. 22, 25, where, for " He should
be put out of the synagogue," there first transla-
tions read : " He should be excommunicated," to
make the Jews' doings against them, that con-
fessed Christ, sound like the Catholic Church's
acting against heretics, in excommunicaling
them ; as if the church's excommunication of
such, from the society and participation of the
faithful, were like to that exterior putting out
of the synagogue. And by this they designed
to disgrace the priest's power of excommunica-
tion, whereas the Jews had no such spiritual ex-
communication ; but, as the word only signifies,
did put them out of the synagogue ; and so they
should have translated the Greek word, includ-
ing the very name synagogue. But this trans-
lation was made when the excommunications
of the Catholic church were daily denounced
against them, which they have corrected in their
last Bible, because themselves have begun to
assume such a power of excommunicating their
non-conforming brethren.

In Acts xrii. 23, for " seeing your idols," or
" seeing the things which you Athenians did
worship," they translate, " seeing your devo-
tions," as though devotion and superstition were
all one.

And verse 24, for " temples of Diana," they
translate " shrines of Diana," to make the
shrines of saints' bodies, and other holy relics,
seem odious ; whereas the Greek word signifies
temples. And Beza says: " He cannot see how
it can signify shrines."

Thus they make use of Catholic words and
terms, where they can thereby possibly render
them odious ; but in other places, lest the an-
cient words and names should still be retained,
they change them into their own unaccustomed
and original sound. So in the Old Testament,
out of an itch to show their skill in the Hebrew,
the first translators thought fit to change most of
the proper names from the usual reading, never
considering how far differently proper names of
all sorts are both written and sounded in differ-
ent languages ; but this is in a great part rectified
by the last translators, according to the directions
of king James the First, that in translating the
proper names, they should retain the usual and
accustomed manner of speaking.

Their altering of these proper names in the
Old Tastament, through the pride of being es-
teemed such knowing masters in the Hebrew,
was yet much more tolerable, than the changing
of many other words in the New, through an

(b) Bib. 1562, 1577.

113

A VINDICATION OF

heretical intention of introducing an utter obli-
vion of them among the people.

The words " church, bishop, priest, altar,
eucharist, sacrifice, grace, sacrament, baptism,
penance, angel, apostle, Christ, &c, at their
first revolt, they suppressed, and changed into
" congregation, superintendent, elder and minis-
ter, table, thanksgiving, gift, mystery, washing,
repentance, messenger, ambassador, anointed ;"
several other words and phrases they likewise
altered, as is evident from what goes before.
And for what cause was all this change and al-
teration of Catholic terms and phrases, but that
the sound of the words should vanish with the
substance of the things which they have taken
away ? With bishops they banished the pastoral
care and charge of the Pope and Catholic bish-
ops, and set up a child and a woman for the
heads of their congregation. With priests went
away the office of priest, in offering the holy
sacrifice of Christ's body and blood ; with grace
went away the sacrament of holy orders, and
four or five of the other sacraments ; with altar,
eucharist and sacrifice, they excluded the proper
service of Almighty God, with Christ's sacred
presence in the blessed sacrament ; with the
word penance they banished confession, absolu-
tion, and satisfaction for sins ; they altered the
word church, because they had cut themselves
off from the Catholic church. And what other
design could we suppose them to have had in
leaving out apostles, and putting in ambassadors
or legates ; in leaving out angels, and introduc-
ing messengers ; in putting down the word
anointed, where Christ used to be read ; and in
translating grave for hell ; but in time to ex-
tinguish all faith and memory of apostle, angel,
heaven, hell, Christ, and Christianity ;" and to
bring them to atheism and infidelity, the very
centre to which their reformation tends 1 (a)

This fantastical and impious vanity, in chang-
ing Catholic and Christian terms and speeches
into their profane and heathenish use and signi-
fication, was a thing so detested, even by Beza
himself, notwithstanding his often being guilty
of the same, that he inveighs against it, and
those who use it, in this manner : " The world
is now come to that pass," says he, " that not
only they who write their own discourses, re-
fuse the familiar and accustomed words of scrip-
ture, as obscure, unsavoury, and out of use, but
also those that translate the scripture out of
Greek into Latin, challenge to themselves the
like liberty ; so as while every man will rather
freely follow his own judgment than religiously
behave himself as the Holy Ghost's interpreter,
many things they do not convert, but pervert ,
for which licentiousness and boldness, except
remedy be provided in time, either I am notably
deceived, or within a few years, instead of Chris-
tians we shall become Ciceronians, i. e. Pagans,
and by little and little shall lose the possession
of the things themselves." (b) By this you see,
that though Beza was one of the greatest mas-
ters in this wanton, novel, and licentious art of
changing Christian for Heathen terms and
phrases, yet he foresaw that in the end, with the
words, would be taken away the things signified,
'* sacraments, baptism, eucharists, priesthood,
sacrifice, angels, apostles, and all apostolical
doctrine ;" and that so we should be brought
again from Christianity to heathenism.

From which, and from the Stilungfleetian
error, (c) that, by asserting, M The pagan god,
Jupiter, to be the true God, blessed for ever,
more," throws open the door of Jupiter's temple,
and points out the very pathway to paganism,

COOD LORD, DELIVER US '

A VINDICATION OF THE ROMAN CATHOLICS

AS ALSO THEIR DECLARATION, AFFIRMATION, COMMINATION ; SHOWING THEIR ABHORRENCE
OF THE FOLLOWING TENETS, COMMONLY LAID AT THEIR DOOR. AND THEY HERE OBLIGE
THEMSELVES, THAT IF THE ENSUING CURSES BE ADDED TO THOSE APPOINTED TO BE
READ ON THE FIRST DAY OF LENT, THEY WILL SERIOUSLY AND HEARTILY ANSWER AMEN
TO THEM ALL.

1. Cursed is he that commits idolatry ; that
prays to images or relics, or worships them for
God. R. Amen.

2. Cursed is every goddess worshipper, that
believes the Virgin Mary to be any more than a
creature ; that honours her, worships her, or
puts his trust in her more than in God ; that be-
lieves her above her Son, or that she can in any-
thing command him. R. Amen.

3. Cursed is he that believes the saints in
heaven to be his redeemers, and prays to them
as such, or that gives God's honour to them, or
to any creature whatsoever. R. Amen.

4. Cursed is he that worships any breaden

(a) Change of words induces change of faith.

god, or makes gods of the empty elements of
bread and wine. R. Amen.

5. Cursed is he that believes priests can for-
give sins whether the sinner repent or not : or
that there is any power in earth or heaven that
can forgive sins, without a hearty repentance
and serious purpose of amendment. R. Amen.

6. Cursed is he that believes there is authority
in the Pope or any others, that can give leave to
commit sins ; or that can forgive him his sins
for a sum of money. R. Amen.

7. Cursed is he that believes that, independently

(6) Beza in Act. x. 46, edit anno 1556, but in the lat-
ter ed. of 15G5, some of these words are altered either by
himself or the printer.

THE ROMAN CATHOLICS.

113

oi the merits and passion of Christ, he can merit
salvation by his own good works ; or make con-
dign satisfaction for the guilt of his sins, or the
pains eternal due to them. R. Amen.

8. Cursed is he that contemns the word of
God, or hides it from the people, on design to
keep them from the knowledge of their duty,
and to preserve them in ignorance and error.
R. Amen.

9. Cursed is he that undervalues the word of
God, or that forsaking scripture chooses rather
to follow human traditions than it. R. Amen.

10. Cursed is he that leaves the command-
ments of God, to observe the constitutions of
men. R. Amen.

11. Cursed is he that omils any of the Ten
Commandments, or keeps the people from the
knowledge of any one of them, to the end that
they may not have occasion of discovering the
truth. R. Amen.

12. Cursed is he that preaches to the people
in unknown tongues, such as they understand
not ; or uses any other means to keep them in
ignorance. R. Amen.

13. Cursed is he that believes that the Pope
can give to any, upon any account whatsoever,
dispensation to lie or swear falsely ; or that it is
lawful for any, at the last hour, to protest him-
self innocent in case he be guilty. R. Amen.

14. Cursed is he that encourages sins, or
teaches men to defer the amendment of their
lives, on presumption of their death-bed repen-
tance. R. Amen.

15. Cursed is he that teaches men that they
may be lawfully drunk on a Friday or any other
fasting-day, though they must not taste the least
bit of flesh. R. Amen.

16. Cursed is he who places religion in
nothing but a pompous show, consisting only in
ceremonies ; and which teaches not the people
to serve God in spirit and truth. R. Amen.

1 7. Cursed is he who loves or promotes
cruelty, that teaches people to be bloody-mind-
ed, and to lay aside the meekness of Jesus Christ.
R. Amen.

18. Cursed is he who teaches that it is law-
ful to do any wicked thing, though it be for the
interest and good of mother church : or that any
evil action may be done that good may come of
it. R. Amen.

19. Cursed are we, if amongst all these
wicked principles and damnable doctrines com-
monly laid at our doors, any one of them be
the faith of our church ; and cursed are we, if
we do not as heartily detest all those hellish
practices as those who so vehemently urge them
against us. R. Amen.

20. Cursed are we, if in answering, and saying
Amen to any of these curses, we use any equivo-
cation, mental reservation ; or do not assent to
them in the common and obvious sense of the
words. R. Amen.

And can the Papists then, thus seriously, and

without check of conscience, say Amen to all
these curses ?

Yes, they can, and are ready to do it whenso-
ever, and as often as it shall be required of them.
And what then is to be said of those who either
by word or writing, charge these doctrines upon
the faith of the Church of Rome ? " Is a lying
spirit in the mouth of all the prophets ? are they
all gone aside ? do they backbite with their
tongues, do evil to their neighbour, and take up
reproach against their neighbour ?" I will say no
such thing, but leave the impartial considerer to
judge. One thing I can safely affirm, that the
" Papists" are foully misrepresented, and show in
public as much unlike what they are, as the
Christians were of old by the Gentiles ; that they
lie under a great calumny, and severely smart in
good name, persons, and estates, for such things
which they as much and as heartily detest as those
who accuse them. But the comfort is, Christ
has said to his followers : " Ye shall be hated of
all men." (Math. x. 22,) and St. Paul : " We
are made a spectacle unto the world ;" and we
do not doubt, that he who bears this with pa-
tience, shall for every loss here and contempt
receive a hundred-fold in heaven : " For the base
things of the world, and things which are de-
spised, hath God chosen." 1 Corinth, i. 28.

As for problematical disputes, or errors of
particular divines, in this, or any other matter
whatsoever, the Catholic Church is no way re-
sponsible for them ; nor are Catholics, as Catho-
lics, justly punishable on their accouut. But,

As for the king-killing doctrine, or murder of
princes, excommunicated for heresy ; it is an ar-
ticle of faith in the Catholic Church, and ex-
pressly declared in the General Council of Con-
stance, sess. 15, that such doctrine is damnable
and heretical, being contrary to the known laws
of God and nature.

Personal misdemeanors of what nature soever,
ought not to be imputed to the Catholic Church,
when not justifiable by the tenets of her faith and
doctrine. For which reason, though the stories
of the Paris massacre ; the Irish cruelties, or
powder-plot, had been exactly true, (which yet
for the most parts are mis-related) nevertheless
Catholics as Catholics, ought not to suffer for
such offences, any more than the eleven apostles
ought to have suffered for Judas's treachery.

It is an article of the Catholic faith to believe,
that no power on earth can license men to lie,
forswear, and perjure themselves, to massacre
their neighbours, or destroy their native country,
on pretence of promoting the Catholic cause, or
religion. Furthermore, all pardons and dispen-
sations granted, or pretended to be granted, in
order to any such ends or designs, have no other
validity or effect, than to add sacrilege and
blasphemy to the above-mentioned crimes.

Sweet Jesus, bless our sovereign : pardon
our enemies. Grant us patience ; and establish
peace and charity in our nation.

VERSION OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE :

A VINDICATION OF WARD S ERRATA, IN REPLY TO GRIER, BY THE RIGHT REV. DR. MILNER.

Dear Sir — You have witnessed the failure of
our vicar in his attempt to vindicate the canon
of scripture, without recourse to the authority
of tradition, and this on Protestant, as well as
on Catholic grounds. As to the other point,
which he says he is equally called upon to prove,
on the same condition of net recurring to tra-
dition, namely : " Which are the books that have
been written by Divine inspiration, and, indeed,
that any books at all have been so written, "(a)
he entirely gives it up, in the following terms :
" To pronounce with confidence what books of
the canon, or parts of books, are inspired, and
what not, may consistently belong to Dr. M.,
as being a member of a church which lays claim
to infallibility ; but certainly not to a member
of the Church of England. So that when he
asks, how we have learned, what books have been
written by Divine inspiration, or that any boohs
at all have been so written ? we may answer that,
where the holy scriptures declare that they set
forth a divine revelation, or that they express
the word of God, we believe them to do so :
[thus again grounding a thing to be proved upon
itself!] but as to the fact of their inspiration,
we must, with awe and humility, decline to say,
what we believe no church, ancient or modern,
can attest. "(b) If this were so, I would ask
the vicar, of what great use is the scripture
more than any other good book 1 and why is it
called the word of God ? Again, with what
consistency does the Church of England appeal
to it, in her Articles, as her only rule of faith ?
But the vicar's ideas are evidently confused on
the subject, and therefore, he hastens to another
more familiar to him, since he has already pub-
lished a quarto volume on the fidelity of the
English Bible. However, as the fifty pages he
spends upon it in the present work, consist, for
the most part, of mere declamation in praise of
the translation, its authors, and himself, together
with proportional abuse of its critics, and Dr. M.,
(a style in which I will not contend with the
Rev. Gentleman,) I hope to be able to confine
my reflections within much narrower bounds
than he confines his.

The vicar begins his declamation, dear Sir,
with unlimited abuse of your correspondent.
This he carries on through the greater part of
ten pages, reproaching me with, ignorance, super-
ciliousness, arrogance, superficialness, <y c ( c ) In

(a) Reply, p. 2.

lb) P. 9.

short, he says, that " Dr. M. cannot stand a
competition, on the score of learning and talents,
with even the obscurest," of the fifty-four clergy-
men who were named in the reign of James I.,
to make a new version of the scripture, though
he confesses there are five amongst them of
whom he knows nothing at all, and some others,
of whom he has barely learned something from
the late Dr. Todd.(d) To this abuse I am content
to answer, that as the vicar knows nothing of
me or my attainments, but what he learns from
my publications, which, together with his own,
are before the world, so our respective charac-
ters for learning and talents will not be decided
upon by what we may say of ourselves, but by
what others may judge of us.

The very profession of the vicar, which is to
vindicate, at the same time Tyndal's translation
of the Bible, and king James's correction of it,
as being both of them faultless, carries with it
its own refutation, and betrays his insincerity
and spirit of chicanery. His fellow-labourer,
Dr. Ryan, whose Analysis of Ward's Errata(e)
he has commended, " as decisive to the extent
it goes,"(/) very fairly gives up several corrup-
tions of the sacred text, which disgraced Tyn-
dal's and the other early translations and edi-
tions of the English Bible, during more than
fifty years, as indefensible. Thus, for example,
speaking of Ward, he says : " He produces seven
texts to show that we mistranslated our Bible,
for the purpose of injuring his church, and to
excuse our apostacy from it ; but the former
mistranslations of these seven texts having been
corrected in our present Bible, should have been
excluded from his catalogue of errata. "(g)
With the same fairness Dr. Ryan says : " He
(Ward) produces eight texts, which he accuses
us of misconstruing against the sacrament and
mass ; but five of the eight having been correc-
ted in our version, agreeably to his own, should
have been excluded from the book. "(A) The

(d) P. 66. (e) Dublin, 1808. (/ ) Reply, p. 94.

(g) Analysis, p. 10. In Tyndal's translation, and the
editions of 1562, 1577, 1579, instead of the word church,
the word congregation is used in the. following manner :
Thou art Peter, and upon this rock will I build my con-
gregation, Mat. xvi. 18. If he will not hear them, tell the
congregation ; and if he will not hear the congregation,
let him be to thee as a heathen, &c. Mat. xviii. 17.

{h) Ibid., p. 12. In two of these passages, Mat. xxvi.
and Mark xiv. 22, instead of saying : Jesus blessed the
bread, the old editions say: Having given thanks. In
two other passages, 1 Cor. ix. 13, and 3 Cor. x. 18, the
word temple is used, instead of altar, to exclude the
idea of a sacrifice under the new law.

VERSION" OE THE ENGLISH BIBLE.

115

Doctor proceeds : " Our opponent (Ward)
charges us with misconstruing twelve texts, for
the purpose of proving Catholics guilty of idol-
atry." But six of the twelve being corrected in
our Bible, ought to have been omitted " in his
list." (a) In a word, this advocate of the Eng-
lish Bible challenges the Popish doctors, as he
calls them, to answer him this question : " Did
not the translators of our Bible of the year 1683,
correct forty errors in our old ones ? (£) Such
is the acknowledgment of Dr. Ryan, writing
in defence of the English Bible, against the
learned cavalier Thomas Ward ; but the Rev.
Mr. Grier undertakes equally to vindicate the
pld version and the new one, the corrected and
the uncorrected text ; and even in those very
passages in which the infidelity of the latter is
most glaring, and obnoxious to the English
Church as well as to the Catholic Church. For
example, he defends Tyndal and his followers
in the use of the word congregation, for that of
church, affirming that, in so doing, " they did
not depart from the letter or the meaning of
the Holy Ghost." (c) In a word, he pronounces,
with Seidell's Table- Talker, that " the English
translation of the Bible is the best in the world,
and which renders the sense of the original the
best ; taking in for the English translation the
Bishop's Bible as well as king James's ;" ad-
ding : " The bishops made the preceding Eng-
lish versions of Tyndal and Coverdale, the
models and as it were the basis of their own."
(d) Thus then, according to the vicar, the ver-
sion of the Lutheran Tyndal from the Latin
Vulgate, of the Calvinist Coverdale, from the
Vulgate and the Greek, (e) and the corrected
version of the English divines from the Hebrew
and the Greek, though often differing from each
other in meaning, as well as in other respects,
are each of them " the best translation in the world,
and renders the sense of the original the best."

The vicar, as might be expected, speaks in
high terms of Tyndal, whom John Fox calls
England's apostle, and with equal censure of his
great antagonist, Sir Thomas More. Had the
vicar read and faithfully exhibited the former's

(a) Ibid. p. 24. The following are some of the old
corruptions, which have been since corrected, according
to the original, and the Rheims Testament, Coloss. iii. b,
Covetousness, tch'tch is the worshipping of images, Ephes.
v. 5 ; 2 Cor. vi. 16, How agrceth the temple of God with
iviaues ? 1 John v. 21, Babes, keep yourselves from images.

(b) P. 62. To this the Catholic Doctors answer in the
affirmative. But they add first, that the very circumstance
of their being corrected by Protestants, is a proof that
the latter acknowledged them to be errors : secondly, that
after the forty corrections in question have been made, a
still greater number of corrections remain to be made.

(c) Answer to Ward's Errata, by the Rev. R. Grier,
1812, p. 2. To this, his former work, the vicar refers in
his present Reply, with his usual modesty, as follows : " I
trust the readers of my Answer will credit the truth of the
assertion, that my publication, comprising, as it does, the
ablest arguments of our most learned divines, contains a
full and victorious refutation of pernicious error ; and
that I have successfully established the superior merit of
our standing English text, no less than its fidelity." —
Reply, p. 94. (,/) P. 76.

(e) Coverdale had the chief hand in the Geneva edition,
which was so obnoxious to the Church of England, that
the prelates of the establishment constantly oppose its
publication, as may be seen in Strype.

books, called, The Wicked Mammon, The True
Obedience, and The Answere to Syr T. More,
together with the latter's Confutacion of Tyn-
dale's Answere, dfc, 1 am convinced he must
have lowered his tone of panegyric with respect
to Tyndal into that of extenuation, at least, as
he would have found this pretended apostle's
language to be no less seditious than it is hetero-
dox, and no less injurious to the present Church
of England, than it was to that of former times.
With the most specious pretentions to charity
and submission, he terms, at every turn, those
who were most dignified and venerated in church
and state, " apish, pivish, popish jugglers, thieves,
murtherers, blood-suppers, Pilates, Herods,
priapists, sodomites, hangmen, Christ-killers,
devils, &c." (/) The learned and dignified
author, quoted below, points out, " amonge other
tokens of Tyndale's evill intent in hys transla-
cion, for enswample, that he chaunged common-
lye this woorde churche into this woorde congre-
gacion, and this woorde priest into this woorde
seniour ; and charitie into love, and grace into
favour, confession into knowledge, and penaunce
and repentance, with wordes mo, which he
chaunged and useth dayly, as in turning ydolcs
into ymages, and anonynting into smering, conse-
crating into charming sacramentes into cere-
monys, and ceremonys into witchccraftc, and yet
many moe." (g) Notwithstanding John Fox at-
tributes a splendid miracle (in rendering void
the enchantment of a certain magician,) to the
sanctity of Tyndal, (h) he is far from succeed-
ing in vindicating his religious or his moral
principals. (?) It appears that, though Cover-
dale encouraged his disciple Frith to die for his
belief, yet, it is plain, from his story, that he
himself suffered death, not for that, or his Eng-
lish translation of the Bible, but for treasonable
practises against the government of the Low
Countries, under which he lived. But why does
not the vicar honour the name of the above-men-
tioned Frith, who had so large a share in his
master Tyndal's Bible, with a single notice ? I
can conceive no other motive for this, except
that, when he was burnt in Henry's reign, for
denying the Catholic doctrine of the sacrament,
archbishop Cranmer had the chief hand in bring-
ing him to the stake. The vicar, however, makes
amends for this omission, by the lofty praises he
heaps on the " venerable Coverdale," as he calls
him, who was the most conspicuous character
in giving the early editions of the English Bible.
This apostate friar was of the same religious
order with Luther, and, like him, broke through
his solemn vow of continency, by taking to him-
self a pretended wife, during the confusion of
Edward's reign, at which time also he became
bishop of Exeter. Retiring to Geneva, when
Mary mounted the throne, he sucked in there

(/) Sir Thomas More's Works, London, 1517, p. 336.

(g) Syr T. More's Second Boke, whiche confuteth the
Defence of Tyndall,for his Translacion, p 405.

(h) See Acts and Moriani.

(t) This appears by his attempt to get into Bishop Tun-
6tal's service, after he had declared himself a Protectant,
'■ and by his constant maxim of, bearing with the Uvus

116

VERSION OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE.

the doctrine and prejudices of Calvin, so that,
returning to England when Elizabeth became
queen, he was neither restored to his see, nor
treated as a bishop. It was not without diffi-
culty that he obtained the poor living of St.
Magnus', near London Bridge, and he was, after
some time, turned out of that for non-comformity.
The vicar sets up a most curious proof of the
fidelity of Coverdale's biblical labours, which is
worthy, dear sir, of your notice, as a specimen
of the conclusiveness of his reasoning ; it is
this, Fulk declares as follows : " I myself did
heare that Reverend father, M. Dr. Coverdale,
of holie and learned memorie, in a sermon at
St. Paule's Crosse, upon occasion of some
slaunderous reportes, that then were raised
against his translation, declare his faithful pur-
pose in doing the same, which, after it was
finished and presented to K. Henry VIII., and
by him committed to diverse bishops of that
time to peruse, of which, as I remember, Strphrn
Gardiner was one — they being demanded by
the king, Are there any heresies maintained
thereby ? They answered that there were no
heresies that they could find maintained there-
by." (a) So far Fulke, to whose account of
Coverdale's sermon, the vicar subjoins the fol-
lowing inference : " This single admission of
GuTdiner speaks volumes !" But, dear Sir, I
would ask the -everend gentleman the following
questions ; Of what weight is William Fulkc's
account of Miles Coverdale's sermon in defence
of the old exploded version ? Secondly, What
signify Sttphcn Gardiner's words concerning it,
or any other point during Henry's reign, when he
was as abject a slave to the religious tyrant as
Crunmer himself was ? Thirdly, What proof of
the fidelity of a scriptural translation would the
decision even of a council be, that it maintained
no heresies ; when it might be found censurable
on twenty other theological charges ? And what
then becomes of the reverend vicar's volumes of
evidence, for the purity of Coverdale's version 1
But the simple fact of a new translation of the
whole scripture having been set on foot and ex-
ecuted by authority both of church and state, in
James's reign, is a proof that the former version
of Tyndal and Coverdale, even after it had
been corrected by the bishops was deemed to
be faulty. That it did abound with errors is
demonstrated by the learned Gregory Martin, in
his Discoverie, &c, whom Fulke in vain at-
tempted to answer. The same is again de-
monstrated, together with sufficient proofs that
the present version also abounds with errors, by
the intelligent Thomas Ward, in his Errata,
the success of whose undertaking accounts
for the vicar's unbounded abuse of him. (b)
But what need is there of a further exposure

(a) Reply, p. 73.

(b) There is no expression of hatred and contempt too
strong for the vicar, in speaking of these two able and
learned men, which is the best proof of his being wound-
ed by their pens, and his inability to cope with them. The
fellow students of Gregory Martin, at Oxford, bore a very
different testimony of his learning and merit from that of
Mr. Grier. The celebrated historian of that university re-
latei that, when the Duke of Norfolk, to whose, eldest son

of the latter's absurdity, in attempting to vin
dicate both the old and the new version, the un-
corrected and the corrected one, and to prove
that each of them is the best translation in th*
world, than the vicar's subsequent comparison
between them, and the preference which ho
gives, in an important instance, to the former ? (c)

Proceeding to treat of the new version of the
scriptures, which was made by order of kinp
James I., more than seventy years after the first
appearance of the former, the vicar chiefly con-
fines himself to combating the following pas-
sage in The End of Controversy, where, speak-
ing of the Bibles, " which had been published
by authority or generally used by Protestants- in
this country," the author said : " Those of Tyn-
dal, Coverdale, and queen Elizabeth's bishops,
were so notoriously corrupt, as to cause a gen-
eral outcry against them among learned Protes-
tants, as well as among Catholics, in which
the king himself, James I., joined : and accord-
ingly, he ordered a new version of it to be made,
being the same that is now in use, w ith some few
alterations made in it after the restoration. "(J)

The vicar commences his attack on this pas-
sage with denying, first, that learned divines of
the Church of England, whom alone he ac-
knowledges to be Protestants, objected to the
old version ; and, secondly, that the Puritans,
to whom he refuses that title, raised an outcry
against it. But I would ask him, whether the
subscribers to the Millinary Petition to Parlia-
ment, who therein describe themselves to be
" more than a thousand ministers, that had sub-
scribed the service book" of Common-Prayer,
and whose representatives, at the conference of
Hampton-Court, were Dr. Reynolds, and Dr.
Spark, both of them professors of Oxford Uni-
versity, were not divines of the Church of Eng-
land 1 And whether these representatives did
not then and there petition as follows ; " May it
please your Majesty, that the Bible be newly
translated, such as are extant not answering the
original, which he (Dr. Reynold's) instanced in

Martin was then domestic tutor, visited St. John's College,
he was greeted with a public oration, in which the orator,
speaking of its great ornament, Gregory Martin said :

" Habes, illustrissime Dux, Hcbrceum nostrum , Gracum

nostrum,
Poetam nostrum, decus et sluriam nostrnm."

At hen. Oxon., P. 1, A r . 221.

With respect to Ward, it may be enough to say that,
though a layman, and a military man, he proved himself
to be an overmatch for his different clerical antagonists,
one of whom was Richel, vicar of Hexam; another,
Tennison. A. B., of Canterbury. See his Monomachia.
His Cantos on the Reformation, though written in dogrel
verse, contain such sterling matter, as to have caused the
conversion of many Protestants, and among others, of
the late Rev. Roland Davies, C. A. D. The vicar's pre-
tended Answer to the Errata, was the prototype to his
Reply to the End of Controversy. He writes much about
different subjects, and about them, and makes many bold
assertions and denials, but never once proves the point
which he takes in hand to prove.

(c) Quoting that foolish book, Set/kn's Table-Talk, he
says that " The Bishop's Bible (the old translation,) copied
chiefly from Tyndal and Coverdale, ranks equally high,
as a translation, with king James's, and either of them is
the best translation in the world." — Reply, p. 76.

{d) End of Controversy, Let. ix., p. 71.

VERSION OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE.

117

three particulars." (a) Did not the Lincolnshire
ministers present a petition to the king in De-
cember, 1604, complaining that " the book of
Common Prayer appoints such a translation of
scripture to be used in the churches, as in some
places is absurd, and in others, takes from, per-
verts, obscures, and falsifies the word of God ;
examples of which are produced with the autho-
rities of the most considerable reformers." (b)
Was not Broughton of Cambridge an episcopal
Protestant, and " the greatest scholar of his
age for Hebrew," as Strype testifies ? And yet
he charged the Bible, authorized in his time,
(the Bishops' Bible) with " a great number of
errors," which he called " traps and pitfalls ;"
adding, in his letter to the Lord Treasurer,
that sundry lords and some bishops, and others
of inferior rank, had requested him to bestow
his labour in clearing the Bible translations, (c)
Finally the vicar himself quotes the translators
of the new version as " echoing the words of the
king," when they state that " upon the impor-
tunate petition of the Puritans," the conference
of Hampton-Court was held, in which " they
had recourse at last to this shift, that they could
not with good conscience, subscribe to the Com-
munion Book, since it maintained the Bible as it
was there translated, which was, as they said,
a most corrupt translation." (d) I would now
appeal to any candid reader, of whatever reli-
gion he may be, no less than to yourself, whether
I was not justified in stating, " there was an
outcry against those Bibles, (TyndaPs, Cover-
dale's, and the Bishops') among learned Protes-
tants, as well as Catholics ?" It remains to be
seen whether " king James joined in it or not V
The vicar is forced to acknowledge the truth
of Fuller's and Collier's account of this business ;
who state, that on Dr. Reynolds' petition being
made, his Majesty answered : " I profess I
could never yet see a Bible well translated in
English ; but I think that, of all, that of Geneva
is the worst." (e) This declaration the vicar
says, " can only be supposed to mean that he
never yet had seen an English Bible in which
there were not passages capable of being better
translated ! (f) His pretext for this perversion of
language is, that when the king gave orders for
the new translation, which he represents him to
have done merely to humour a poor empty shift,
a mere shallow pretence (g) of the Church of

(a) These particulars are the following : 1st. Gal. iv. 25,
TVTroiyet, wrong translated bordereth. According to this,
Mount Sina in Arabia, borders upon Jerusalem ! 2ndly,
Ps. cv. 28, They were not disobedient (or they rebelled not,)
contradictorily translated, They were not obedient. 3rdly,
Ps.cvi.20, Phineas executed judgment, wrong translated,
Phineas prayed. See Fuller's Ch. Hist, B. x., p. 14. The
vicar asserts that " the passages at first objected to (by the
non-conformists, and which he calls an empty shift and a
hollow pretence,) have continued in it (the existing version)
without alteration," p. 81. Now the fact is, that each of
them has been altered according to the suggestion of Dr.
Reynolds and his party, as will be seen in the present Eng-
lish Bible.

(b) Neal's Hist, of the Puritans, vol. ii. p. 53.

(d) Reply, p. 80.

(e) Fuller. Eccl. Hist., B. x., p. 14.

</) Ibid., p. 91. (g) Reply, p. 81.

England's enemies, he gave directions that " The
Bishops' Bible be followed, and as little altered
as the truth of the original will permit ; and that
Tyndal's, &c, be used when they agree better
with the text than the Bishops'." (A) And yet
what, else does this signify, except that the
Bishops' Bible is not always conformable to the
truth of the original 1 and that the other editions
sometimes agree better with the text than does
the bishops' ? Such is the vicar's ingenuity in
refuting his own argument ; after which exhi-
bition, he concludes, with his customary self-
complacency, " I have thus disposed of the
royal censure in all its bearings." (i)

The vicar represents it to be a demonstra-
tive proof of the different sects of non-con-
formists and dissenters subscribing to the purity
and excellence of the present version, that
they have never attempted to substitute another
in its place. But is this the fact? Did not
the Grand Committee for Religion, in 1656,
when the Presbyterians were in power, appoint
a sub-committee, " to confer with Dr. Walton
and five others about another translation of the
Bible ! and were not many meetings held on
this subject at secretary Whitlock's house ?" (A)
Again, at the Savoy Conference in 1661, did not
the non-conformist divines object to a great num-
ber of faulty translations of scriptural passages
which occurred in the liturgy, and obtain that
they should be amended ; (/) I need say nothing
by way of answer to the vicar, in justification of
Sir Thomas More's, bishop Tunstall's, and other
Catholics' predictions, as to the consequences to
be expected from the general diffusion of Tyn-
dal's and the other Protestant Bibles without an
expositor, or so much as a commentary or note
upon them, since these were visibly fulfilled in
the sacrilegious confusion of Edward's reign, and
still more in the fanatic rebellion and regicide
fury of that of Charles I., when not a folly or
a crime took place without chapter and verse
being quoted in its vindication. In short, the
Established Church of England, with the vicar
himself, has at last taken just alarm at the
consequences to be apprehended for herself,
as well as for the state, from an unbounded
and indiscriminate diffusion of Bibles, without
the Prayer Book to direct its meaning. I do
not find myself called upon to make any re-
mark on the praises which the twenty-two
Protestant writers, whom he quotes, bestow
on their own Bible. The vicar's citation of
these twenty-two witnesses makes no more for
his cause, than if I were to cite the two hundred
and fifty-two prelates of the Council of Trent
who pronounced upon mine.

Speaking of the last English translation of the
Bible, the one now in use, published by king

(A) P. 91.

(t) P. 92.

(A) Collier's Eccl. Hist., P. ii., p. 869.

(I) For example, in the Epistle of the First Sunday after
Epiph., Rom. xii. 1, the text stood thus : Be ye changed in
your shape. In the Epist. for Sunday before Easter, Philip,
ii. 5, Christ was said to be found in his apparel as a man
Collier, P. ii., p. 878.

118

VERSION OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE.

James I., in 1611, the author of The End of
Controversy said : " Though these new transla-
tors have corrected many wilful errors of their
predecessors, most of which are levelled at Ca-
tholic doctrines and discipline, yet they have left
a sufficient number of these behind, for which I
do not find that their advocates offer any ex-
cuse." Two of these he specified as standing
in direct opposition to the original text, as it is
quoted by those advocates, Dr. Ryan and the
Rev. Mr. Grier. (a) On these two points, one of
them regarding the celibacy of the clergy, the
other, communion under one kind, the last
named gentleman says : " I join issue with Dr.
M." (b) I will state each of them briefly, yet
clearly. Our B. Saviour having condemned
the Jewish practice of divorce, His disciples say
unto him : If the case of a man be so with his
wife, it is not good to marry. But he said
unto them: All men receive not this saying;
in Greek : ov navxeg /coqoogi xov Xoyov iovxov.
Mat. xix. 2. In like manner St. Paul says, 1 Cor.
vii. 7 : / say therefore to the unmarried and
widows : it is good for them if they abide even
as I ; but if they do not contain let them
marry ; in Greek et 8e ovx eyxquxevovxai. Now
in both these passages, the latter as well as the
earlier Protestant translators change do not
into cannot, in excuse for the first reformers'
breach of their vowed celibacy, (c) With re-
spect to the former of these falsifications, Dr.
Ryan derides it, and says : " The Remish ver-
sion agrees nearly with our own !" (d) while
the vicar refers to his former work for a satis-
factory proof that the word cannot " is most
agreeable to the original," (e) which says do not.
As to the second falsification, the vicar says :
" I have been obliged to convict Dr. M. of gross
ignorance of the Greek, no less than a fraudu-
lent application of the Latin, and have proved
to demonstration that the Rhemish version of
this text, st Ss ovx eyqarevovxat, is erroneous."
(/) Now in what does this boasted conviction of
my ignorance, and of the erroneousness of the
Rhemish version, consist ? Why the vicar says

(a) End of Controv., Let. ix., p. 72.

(b) P. 95.

(c) Another falsification of the same kind, which seems to
be levelled at the tenet of free-will, occurs both in the earlier
and later version of Galat. v. 17. The apostle says : You

DO NOT the things that 1J0U would : a av deXrire ravra iroirjre;

this the translators turn thus : So that you cannot do the
things that you would, contrary to the original Greek, the
Latin Vulgate, the Syriac, Arias Montanus, Erasmus,
Beza, Tremellius, &c. It is extraordinary that neither
the editor of the Rheims Testament nor Ward has pointed
out this corruption.

(d) Analysis, p. 19.

(c) Reply, p. 95. On consulting the book and page here
referred to, the only words relating to the translation itself,
consist in a repetition of Ryan's above-quoted falsehood,
namely, he says : ** The Rhemish construction does not
substantially differ from the Protestant one." The rest of
his long dissertation is made up of his own confused expo-
sition of the scripture and the fathers on the subject of
celibacy. See Answer to Ward, pp. 33, 34, 35.

(/) Ibid., p. 95.

that eyoxTsvo/jat, " is a verb of the middle voice,"
and that " the Vulgate reading, which agrees
with it, is, si vero se non continent, (g) that is
to say : if they do not contain themselves ;"
therefore, according to the vicar, the passage
ought to be translated : if they cannot contain,
as in the common Bible ! What is it that chi-
canery and confidence will not attempt to prove !
The other instance of still subsisting error in
the latter translation of the Bible, as well as in
the former, consists in the false translation of
1 Cor. xi. 27, where St. Paul speaking of the
B. Sacrament, says : Whosoever shall eat this
bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord un-
worthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the
blood of the Lord: SIcfxb og av Eodirj xov aqxov
xovxov rj ixivrj xo noxrjqiov tow xvqiov ava^icog, svo-
%o%, eorat xov awfiaxog xai ai/naxaq xov xvqiov.
This text, which is so decisive in favour of the
Catholic doctrine, respecting the body and blood
of Christ being received under either kind in the
B. Sacrament, is, on that account, falsified in
both translations of the English Bible, by turning
the disjunctive article or, into the conjunctive
article and. Dr. Ryan finding this falsification
(which Ward does not fail to expose) too gross
to be defended, very prudently passes it by un-
answered. The vicar had, in his former work,
attempted to prove that r\ and xcu, or and and,
are convertible articles ! At present he con-
tents himself with relating a story about Dr.
Kilbie, who, he says, hearing a certain clergy-
man maintain in the pulpit that there are three
arguments against the translation of a certain
word, in the way it has been translated, an-
swered him that there are thirteen reasons why
it should be translated as it stands ; concluding
thus : " To Dr. M. I leave the application of
the foregoing anecdote ; for it certainly affords
a useful hint to a self-confident critic." Such
is the issue of the contest to which the vicai
challenged me ! And such are his reasons
for showing that the term do not, should
be translated cannot, and why the disjunctive
or, should be changed into the conjunctive
and. I hope you will not forget Dr. Kilbie:
if I do not mistake, the vicar will again intro-
duce him to you. In the mean time, I remain.
Yours, &c,

J. M., D. D

P. S.— The vicar's mode of reasoning on the
corruption in question is of a piece with that
of Luther, quoted by me in Letters to a Pre-
bendary, Let. v., p. 187, when being called to
an account for an undeniable false translation
of scripture, he answered : " Sic volo, sic jubco,
Luther usita vult, et ait se doctorem esse supra
omnes doctores in toto Papatu."

(g) Answer, p. 35.

THE END.

N. B.— For a list of additional errors in late additions of the Protestant Bible, seo the •' Rock of the Church"— Ed.

XW&&* 5