Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2007 with funding from IVIicrosoft Corporation http://www.archive.org/details/errataofprotestaOOwardrich PROTESTANT BIBLE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS EXAMINED: XN A TREATISE, SHOWING SOME OF THE ERRORS THAT ARE TO BE FOUND IN THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS OF THE SACRED SCRIPTURES, USED BY PROTESTANTS, AGAINST SUCH POINTS OF RELIGIOUS DOCTRINE AS ARE THE SUBJECT OF CONTROVERSY BETWEEN THEM AND THE MEHBERS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. In vfhich also, FROM THEIR MISTRANSLATING THE TWENTY-THIRD VERSE OF THE FOURTEENTH CHAPTER OF THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, THE CONSECRATION OF DOCTOR MATTHEW PARKER, THE FIRST PROTESTANT ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, IS OCCASIONALLY CONSIDERED. BY THOMAS WARD, AUTHOR OF THE CELEBRATED POEM, ENTITLED " ENGLAND'S REF0R5IATI0N.' " For I testify to every one that heareth the -words of the prophecy of this book. If any man shall add to these thirig-s, God shall add upon him the plagues -written in this book, ^nd if any man shall take atvay from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away /as part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from these things which are written in this book." — Rev. chap. xxii. verses 18, 19. A NEW EDITION, CAREFULLY REVISED AND CORRECTED. LONDON, PRINTED IN THE YEAR 1688 : AND PHILADELPHIA RE.PRINTED FOR EOi^NE CUMMISKEY, NO. 182, NORTH FOURTH STREET, 18S4. LOAN STACK W3 LIFE OF MR. WARD. Tkk life of Mr. Ward is greatly involved in obscurity, and though the editor had many •difliculties to encounter in ascertaining its events ; yet he is happy in beng enabled to gratify curiosity, by laying before the public some of the most interesting particulars concerning this extraordinary man — they have been chiefly communicated by a gentle- man in London. Thomas Ward was the son of a respectable farmer, and was born at Danby Castle, in the Moors of Yorkshire, on the 13th of April, 1652. The early part of his life passed away undistinguished from that of ordinary children, and nothing remarkable of him is. known until his fourteenth year, when we find him at Pickering School, giving the first indications of his genius, and excelling his brothers, of whom he was the eldest, in his taste and knowledge of the classics. Here he was initiated in the first principles of arithmetic, geometry, and astronomy, in which sciences he became a gi-eat proficient. So much was his father pleased with his early propensity to learning, and the abilities which he discovered, that he determined to rescue him from the obscurity of a country life, and destined him for one of the learned professi^ons. Young Ward was accordingly offered his choice to become a clergyman, a physician, or a lawyer ; but, with a mind already matured by study and thinking, he hesitated — and at length declined his father's offers. In the practice of the law, he observed there weie too many temptations to dis- honesty, and he doubted his firmness to resist them. The profession of physic was re- pugnant to the delicacy of his feelings ; and, as a clergyman, he feared that he might contribute more to the destruction than the salvation of his fellow-man. Thus, perhaps, a too fastidious nicety in his conscience and ideas, left him without a calling, and he entered on the world with v«ry little prospects of a permanent subsistence. About this period his talents and acquirements first began to introduce him Into no- tice, and he accepted an invitation from a gentleman of fortune to hve with him as a com- panion, and tutor to his children. In this retreat he had an opportunity of following the particular bias of his mind, and accordingly he bent himself with incredible apphcation to the study of controversy, then the rage of the day. Church history, the ancient fa- thers, the Scriptures, and the more modern cathohc controversies, always occupied his literary hours ; but he still found occasional recreation and delight in poetry and the classics. He read incessantly, but not with the frivolity of one who skims the surface, and seeks only to arm himself with sublety and sophism for impertinent disputation ; he read to enrich his mind, to correct his understanding, and improve his heart. To this serious disposition and habit of reflection, must be attributed the change in his religious sentiments which immediately took place. His father and all his family were protestants, and he himself was educated in hostiUty to catholic opinions. His liberal and penetrating mind, however, disdained to wear the trammels of prejudice, and he even shook off the authority of a parent, rather than remain a slave, contrary to conscience and conviction, to the false principles he had at first imbibed. He accordingly embraced the catholic faith, which, together with his marrying a young lady of the same persuasion, so highly incensed his father, that at his death, which happened soon after, he bequeathed all lie possessed to his protestant wife and children. This disappointment and blasting of his hopes, with his consequent destitute situation, it might be expected would have produced envy and irritation on his part ; but his was no ordinary mind, and, raising himself above every little paltry consideration of self, in the enthusiasm of charity, he directed his whole endeavours to the conversion of his mother and family. Providence blessed his exertions, and he had the happiness of seeing himself united to them in faith, as well as in affection. To a youth of uncertainty, disquietude, and separaJ;ion from his family, succeeded the calm of domestic peace, and the secufity of competence. For some years he remained buried and contented in this domestic retirement, but hiTf-g-enius opening with age, and expanding with increase of knowledge, began to be restless^ and thirsted for universal information. Sated with books, he wished to know mankind ; a«d, with this intention, having, after much intreaty, obtained his motlier's and wife's consent, he left his own country, and passed over to France. In France he continued for some time, learning the manners and language of the people, and from thence went into Italy, and settled himself at Rome. In this famous city, the wreck and monument of ancient greatness, he had a wide range to gratify his taste, to contemplate the fallen and mutila- ted glories of the ancient a^s : he was continually in the churches, the public buildings, and public Tibraries, and spent a gr^at portjpi^of his time particularly in thp Vatican. IV LIFE OF MR. WARD. Here he had an opportunity of seeing some of the best documents respecting the Hhs- tory of England, from which he did not neglect to make numerous and useful quota- tions. — Controversy again became his favourite study, which was soon interrupted be accepting a commission in the pope's guards, in which he remained for five or six years, during which time he served in the maritime war against the Turks. His military career ended with the war, and he returned to England, at the pressing solicitations of his wife and relations, in the 34th year of his age. On his arrival, he was patronized and received on terms of friendship by lords Derwentwater and I.umney, col. Thomas Radcliff, Mr. Thornton, and others, to whom he was recommended by his learning, his wit, and a suavity of manners peculiarly his own. About this period he set about writing his JS;-- rata to the Protestant Jiible, which was published in the year 1688. His Monomachiay or Duel with Dr. TiUotsout appeared next, but anonymously ; which made Dr. Tillotson observe, that it must have been written by some able Jesuit, not imagining that so much force of argument and theological research, could be possessed by a layman. His Tree of Life^ an ingenious device, presenting at one view an epitome of church history, ac- cording to the most exact chronology ; his Controversy of Ordinations truly stated ; his Conference toith Jllr. Bichlew, JMinister of Hexham ; his JVotes on the 39 Jlrticles and the Book of Homilies, all followed one another in rapid succession, and soon after appeared his well known work, the Reformation^ a burlesque poem, in which he imitates Butler with considerable success. The notes to this poem, collected from the most approved historians, as Stow, Camden, Speed, Baker, Burnet, Heylin, Clarendon, 8cc. form a com- plete History of Ecclesiastical Affairs in England, from Henry the Eighth's time to the end of Oates's plot. This was the last publication that came from the pen of Mr. Ward, though he afterwards compiled and wrote the History of England. It is much to be regretted, that a coincidence of untoward circumstances, and, particularly, his being obliged to fly the country and go over to France, prevented this work from being ever given to the world : the documents for it were collected by him with great diligence, and he himself esteemed it his best production. The manuscript is now in possession of the editor, and may, perhaps, in due time, be offered to the public. He died in the 56th year of his age, anno 1708, and was buried at St. Germain's, in France, where his obsequies were performed with a solemnity becoming so pious and learned a man. The enemies of Mr. Ward, who, on account of his religious opinions, and his boldness in defending them, were many, seem to have conspired against his character, and have maliciously confounded him with another of the same name, a man of dissolute morals, and no education, but of a prolific turn in producing works of low ribaldry and shameful obscenity. The productions of this man, whose name was Ed- ward, and who all his life kept a public-house in Moorfields, have been attributed to our author by Jacob, Oldyss, and even the writers of the Biographical Dictionary, pub- lished in London, in 1798. The London Spy, a book entitled Apollo's M^aggot, a drama- tic piece called the Humours of a Coffee-House, Don Quixote, turned into Hudibrastic verse, are among the number of those publications, which have been always, though wrongfully, imputed to the wrfter of the Reformation. There is, moreover, a gi*eat dif- ference as to the time of their death, for Edward Ward lived to the year 1731, and we find a poetical will of his printed In Appleby's Journal in the September of that year.* Mr. Ward was a man of a comprehensive and versatile genius, that embraced and cul- tivated studies of an almost opposite nature. He possessed a deep fund of ancient and modern learning. He knew the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin languages, and was well skilled in French and Italian. He was one of the best controvertists of his time, as Til- lotson and Burnet both acknowledged. He loved poetry, particularly of the burlesque kind, to which a lively eccentric fancy strongly inclined him. He often indulged in it for amusement ; and perhaps he chose that ludicrous channel for conveying the history of the Reformation to the public, because he saw it most adapted to the taste of the times, and most agreeable to common conception. His Errata to the Protestant Bible, though little known, for want of publication in a country to which It was obnoxious, Is a work of such learned merit, such nice arrangement, and such clear disquisition in all the controverted points of religion and Scripture, that it will convey Mr. Ward's name to the latest posterity as a man of genius, judgment and erudition. His disposition was generous and mild, though not incapable of being provoked to resentment : he even fought two duels in his youth, from which his religion would certainly have restrained him, if he had courage enough to be a coward. When in the army, he was the model of^a Chris- tian soldier ; he joined piety to bravery ; he fought and prayed ; and his Intervals of leisure from duty, were filled up by reading. He was, in fine, a theologian, a poet, and a soldier ; and passed his life with fame and honour to himself. * See the Perth edition of the Encyclopoedia, article Ward, where they are properly discriminated. PREFACE Amoxo the many and irreconcilable differences between Roman catholics and the sectaries of our days, those about the Holy Scriptures claim not the least place on the stage of controversy : As, first, whether the Bible is the sole and only rule of faith ? Secondly, whether all thing's necessary to salvation are contained in the Bible ? Or, whether we are bound to believe some things, as absolutely necessary to salvation, which are either not clear in Scripture, or not evidently deduced out of Scripture ? — • Thirdly, whether every individual person, of sound judgment, ought to follow his own private interpretation of the Scripture ? If so, why one party or profession should con- demn, persecute, and penal-law another, for being of that persuasion he finds most agreeable to the Scripture, as expounded according to his own private spirit ? If not, to what interpreter ought they to submit themselves, and on whom may they safely and securely depend, touching the exposition and true sense and meaning of the same ? — Fourthly, whence have we the Scripture ? That is, who handed it down to us from the apostles who wrote it ? And by what authority we receive it for the word of God ? And, whether we ought not to receive the sense and true meaning of the Scripture, upon the same authority we receive the letter ? For if protestants think, the letter was safe in the custody of the Roman catholic church, from which they received it, how can t'hey suspect the purity of that sense, which was kept and delivered to them by the same church and authority ? With several other such like queries, frequently proposed by catholics; and never yet, nor ever likely to be, solidly answered by any sectaries whatever. It is not the design of this following treatise to enter into these disputes; but only to show thee. Christian reader, that those translations of the Bible, which the Enghsh pro- testant clergy have made and presented to the people for their only rule of faith, are in many places not only partial, but false, and disfigured with several corruptions, abuses, and falsifications, in derogation to the most material points of catholic doctrine, and in favour and advantage of tlieir own erroneous opinions : for, As it has been the custom of heretics in all ages to pretend to Scripture alone for their rule, and to reject the autliority of God's holy church ; so has it also ever been their practise to falsify, corrupt, and abuse the same in divers manners. 1. One way is, to deny whole books thereof, or parts of books, when they are evi- dently against them : So did, for example, Ebion all St. Paul's Epistles; Manicheus the Acts of the Apostles; Luther likewise denied three of the four Gospels, saying, that St. John's is the only true Gospel ; and so do our English protestants those books which they call Apocrypha. 2. Another way is, to call in question at the least, and make some doubt of the autho- rity of certain books of holy Scriptures, thereby to diminish their credit : So did Manicheus affirm, that the whole New Testament was not written by the apostles, and particularly St. Matthew's Gospel : So does Luther discredit the epistle of St. James -. so did Marcion and the Arians deny the epistle to the Hebrews to be St. Paul's ; in which they were followed by oar first Enghsh protestant translators of the Bible, who pre- sumed to strike St. Paul's name out of the very title of the said epistle.* 3. Another way is, to expound the Scripture according to their own private spirit, and to reject the approved sense of the ancient holy fathers, and catholic church: So do all heretics, who seem to ground tticir errors upon the Scriptures ; especially those, who will have Scripture, as by themselves expounded, for their only rule of faith. ^ 4. Another way is, to alter the very original text of the holy Scriptures, by adding, diminishing, and changing it here or there for their purpose : So did the Arians, Nes- torians, &c. and also Marcion; who is therefore called Mus Ponticus, from his gnawing, as it were, certain places with his corruptions ; and for the same reusoii, may Bezu not improperly he called the Mouse of Geneva. 5. Another way, not unlike this, is, to make corrupt and false translations of the Scriptures for the maintenance of their errors : So did the Arians and Pelagians of old, and so have the pretended reformers of our days done, which I intend to make the -sub- ject of this following treatise. * See Bibles, 15/9, 15'80. Tl PREFACE. Yet, before I proceed any farther, let me assure my reader, that this work is not uii' dertakeii with any design of lessening the credit or authority of the holy Bible, as per- haps some may be ready to surmise : For indeed, it is a common exclamation among our adversaries, especially such of them as one would think should have a greater respect for truth, that catholics make light of the written word of God : that they undervalue and contemn the sacred Scriptures : that they endeavour to lessen the credit and autho- rity of the holy Bible. Thus possessing the poor deluded people with an ill opinion of catliolics, as if they rejected, and trod under feet, the written word : whereas it is evi- dent to all, who know them, that none can have a greater respect and veneration for the holy Scripture, than catholics have, receiving, reverencing, and honouring the same, as the very pure and true word of God ; neither rejecting, nor so much as doubting of the least tittle in the Bible, from the beginning of Genesis, to the end of the Revelations; several devout catholics having that profound veneration for it, that they always read it kneeling on their knees with the greatest humility and reverence imaginable, not en- during to see it profaned in any kind ; nor so much as to see the least torn leaf of a Bible put to any manner of unseemly use. Those who, besides all this, consider with what very indifferent behaviour the Scripture is ordinarily handled among protestants, will not, I am confident, say, that catlioUcs have a less regard for it, than protestants ; but, on the contrary, a far greater. Again, dear reader, if thou findest in any part of this treatise, that the nature of the subject has extorted from me sueh expressions, as may perhaps seem either spoken with too much heat, or not altogether so soft as might be wished for ; yet, let me desire thee, not to look upon them as the dictates of passion, but rather as the just resentments of a zealous mind, moved with the incentive of seeing God's sacred word adulterated and corrupted by ill-designing men, on purpose to delude and deceive the ignorant and un- wary reader. The holy Scriptures were written by the prophets, apostles^ and evangelists; the Old Testament in Hebrew, except only some few parts in Chaldee and Syriac; the greatest part of the New Testament was writtten in Greek, St. Matthew's Gospel in Hebrew, and St. Mark's in Latin. We have not at this day the original writings of these pro- phets and apostles, nor of the seventy interpreters who translated the Old Testament into Greek, about 300 years before the coming of Christ ; we have only copies ; for the truth and exactness whereof, we must rely upon the testimony and tradition of the church, which in so important a point God would never permit to err: So that we have not the least doubt, but the copy, authorized and apjjroved of by the church, is suffi- ciently authentic. For what avails it for a Christian to believe, that Scripture is the word of God, if he be uncertain which copy and translation is true ? Yet, notwithstand- ing the necessity of admitting some true authentic copy, protestants pretend, that there is none authentic in the world, as may be seen in the preface to the Tigurine edition of the Bible, and in all their books of controversy ; seeing therein they condemn the council of Trent, for declaring that the old translation is authentic, and yet them- selves name no other for such. And, therefore, though the Lutherans fancy Luther's translation ; the Calvinists that of Geneva ; the Zuinglians that of Zuinglius; the English, sometimes one, and sometimes another : Yet, because they do not hold any one to be authentic, it follows, from their exceptions against the infallibility of the Roman catholic church in declaring or decreeing a true and authentic copy of Scripture, and their con- fession of the uncertainty of their own translations, that they have no certainty of Scrip- ture at all, nor even of faith, which they ground upon Scripture alone. That the Vulgate of the Latin is the most true and authentic copy, has been the judg- ment of God's church for above those 1300 years; during which time, the church has always used it ; and therefore it is, by the sacred council* of Trent, declared authentic and canonical in every part and book thereof. Most of the Old Testament, as it is in the said Latin Vulgate, was translated! out of Hebrew by St. Hierom ; and the New Testament had been before his time translated out of Greek, but was by himt reviewed ; ami such faults as had crept in by the negh- gence of the transcribers, were corrected by him by the appointment of Pope Damas- us. ** You constrain me," says he, " to make a new work of an old, that I, after so many copies of the Scriptures dispersed through the world, should sit as a certain judge, which of them agree with the true Greek. 1 have restored the New Testament to the truth of the Greek, and hftve translated the old according to the Hebrew. Truly, I will affirm it confidently, and will produce many witnesses of this work, that I have changed no^liingfrom the truth of the Hebrew," &.c.§ * Con. Trident. Sess. 4. f S. Hierom. in lib. de vlrls Illustr. extreme, & in Pra^fat, libronim quos Latinos fecit, t Hier. Ep. 89. ad Aug. qusest. 11. inter Ep. Aug. § See his preface before the New Testament, dedicated to pope Darnasus, and his Catalogue in fine. PREFACE. Vll And for sufficient testimony of the sincerity of the translator, and commendations of his translation, read these words of the g-reat doctor St. Augustine : " There was not wanting," says he " in these our days, Hierom the priest, a man most learned and skilful in all the three tongues; who not from the Greek, but from the Hebrew, translated the same Scriptures into Latin, whose learned labour the Jews yet confess to be true."f Yea, the truth and purity of this translation is such, that even the bitterest of protest- ants themselves are forced to confess it to be the best, and to prefer it before all others, as also to acknowledge the learning, piety, and sincerity of the translator of it; which Mr. Whitaker, notwithstanding his railing in another place, does in these words : " St. Hierom, I reverence ; Damasus, I commend ; and the work 1 confess to be godly and profitable to the church. "4: Dr. Dove says thus of it : " We grant it fit, that for uniformity in quotations of places, in schools and pulpits, one Latin text should be used : and we can be contented, for the antiquity thereof, to prefer that (the Vulgate) before all other Latin books,*'§ And for tlie antiquity of it. Dr. Covel tells us, " that it was used in the church 1300 years ago :" not doubting but to prefer that translation before others. ]| Dr. Humphrey frees St. Hierom, both from malice and ignorance in translating, in these words : " The old interpreter was much addicted to the propriety of the words, and indeed with too much anxiety, which I attribute to religion, not to ignorance." t In regard of which integrity and learning, MoHnccus signifies his good esteem thereof, saying,** " I cannot easily forsake the vulgar and accustomed reading, which also I am accustomed earnestly to defend :*' yea,f f " I prefer the vulgar edition, before Erasmus's, Bucer*s, Bullinger's, Brentius's, the Tigurine translation ; yea, before John Calvin's, and all others.'* How honourably he speaks of it ! And yet, Conradus Pellican, a man commended by Bucer, Zuinglius, Melancthon, and all the fa- mous protestants about Basil, Tigure, Berne, &c. gives it a far higher commendation, in these words :+t " I find the vulgar edition of the Psalter to agree for the sense, with such dexterity, learning, and fidelity of the Hebrew, that I doubt not, but the Greek and Latin interpreter was a man most learned, most godly, and of a prophetical spirit." Which certainly are the best properties of a good translator. In fine, even Beza himself, one of the greatest of our adversaries, affords this honour- able testimony of our vulgar translation : " I confess," says he, " that the old interpreter seems to have interpreted the holy books with wonderful sincerity and religion. The vulgar edition I do, for the most part, embrace and prefer before all others."§§ You see, how highly our Vulgate in Latin is commended by these learned protestants : see likewise, how it has been esteemed by the ancientj|j| fathers : yet notwithstanding all this is not sufficient to move protestants to accept or acquiesce in it; and, doubtless the very reason is, because they would have as much liberty to reject the true letter, as the true sense of Scriptures, their new doctrines being condemned by both. For had they allowed anyone translation to have been authentic, they certainly could never have had the impudence so wickedly to have corrupted it, by adding, omitting, and changing, which they could never have pretended the least excuse for, in any copy by themselves held for true and authentic. Obj. But however, their greatest objection against the Vulgate Latin is, that we ought rather to have recourse to the original langiiages, the fountains of the Hebrew and Greek, in which the Scriptures were written by the prophets and apostles, who could not err ; than to stand to the Latin translations, made by divers interpreters, who might err. Ansto. When it is certain, that the originals or fountains are pure, and not troubled or corrupt, they are to be. preferred before translations: but it is most certain, that they are corrupted in divers places, as protestants themselves are forced to acknowledge, and as it appears by their own translations. For example, Psal. 22. ver. 16. they trans- late, " they pierced my hands and my feet :" whereas, according to the Hebrew that now is, it must be read, " As a lion, my hands, and my feet ;'* which no doubt, is not only nonsense, but an intolerable corruption of the later Jews against the passion of our Saviour, of which the old authentic Hebrew was a most remarkable prophecy. Again, according to the Hebrew, itisread,11[ Achaz, king of Israel; which being fajse, they in t St. Aug. de Ciyit. Dei, lib. 18. c. 43. & Ep. 80. ad Hierom c. 5. & lib. 2. Doct. Christi, c. 15. t Whitaker in his answer to Reynolds, page 241. § Dove, Persuasion to Recusants, p. 16. || See Dr. Covel's Answer to Burges, page 91, 94. t Dr. Hum. de Ratione Interp. lib. 1. page 74. ** Molin in Nov. Test. Part. 30. ff Et in Luc. 17. ♦* Pellican \n Praefat. in Psalter, ann. 1584. §§ Beza in Annot. in Luc. 1. 1. Et in Prae- fat. Nov. Test. |{{i S. Hierom. & St. Aug. supr. St. Greg. lib. 70. Mor. c. 23. Isidor. lib. 6. Etym. c. 5. 7. & de DivinOffic. lib. 1. cap. 12. S. Bedain Martyrol. Cassiod.21. Inst. &c. ^1 2 Chron. 28, ver. 19. via PREFAClf. some of their first translations read, Achaz, Icing of Juda, according to the truth, and as it is in the Greek and Vulgate Latin. Yet their Bible of 1579, as also their last transla- tion, had rather follow the falsehood of the Hebrew against their own knowledge, than to be thought beholden to the Greek and Latin in so light a matter. Likewise, where the Hebrew says, Zedecias, Joachin's brother, they are forced to translate Zedecias his father's brother, as indeed the truth is according to the Greek.* So likewise in another place, where the Hebrew is, " He begat Azuba his wife and Jerioth ;" which they not easily knowing what to make of, translate in some of their Bibles, " He begat Azuba of his wife Jerioth ;" and in others, " He begat Jerioth of his wife Azuba." But without multiplying examples, it is sufficiently known to protestants, and by them acknowledged, how intolerably the Hebrew fountains and originals are by the Jews corrupted : amongst others. Dr. Humphrey says, •' The Jewish superstition, how many places it has corrupt- ed, the reader may easily find out and judge."f And in another place ; " I look not,'* says he, " that men should too much follow the rabbins, as many do ; for those places, which promise and declare Christ the true Messias, are most filthily depraved by them. i:" " The old interpreter," says another protestant, " seems to have read one way, whereas the Jews now read another ; which I say, because I would not have men think this to have proceeded from the ignorance or slothfulness of the old interpreter : rather we have cause to find fault for want of dihgence in the antiquaries, and faith in the Jews ; who, both before Christ's coming and since, seem to be less careful of the Psalms, than of their Talmudical Songs."§ I would gladly know of our protestant translators of the Bible, what reason they have to think the Hebrew fountain they boast of so pure and uncorrupt, seeing not only let- ters and syllables have been mistaken, texts depraved, but even whole books of the prophets utterly lost and perished ? How many books of the ancient prophets, sometime extant, are not now to be found ? We read in the Old Testament, of a Liber Bellorum Domini^ " The Book of the Wars of our Lord ; the Book of the Just men, protestants call it the Book of Jasher. The Book of Jehu the Son of Hanani ; the Books of Semeias the Prophet, and of Addo the Seer : and Samuel wrote in a book the law of the king- dom, how kings ought to rule, and laid it up before our Lord : and the works of Solomon were written in the book of Nathan the Prophet, and in the books of Ahias the Shilon- ite, and in the vision of Addo the Seer."|| With several others, which are all quite perished ; yea, and perished in such a time, when the Jews were " the peculiar people of God," and when, of all nations, " they were to God a holy nation, a kingly priest- hood :" and, now, when they are no national people, have no government, no king, no priest, but are vagabonds upon the earth, and scattered among all people ; may we rea- sonably think their divine and ecclesiastical books to have been so warily and carefully kept, that all and every part is safe, pure, and incorrupt } that every parcel is sound, no points, tittles, or letters lost, or misplaced, but all sincere, perfect, and absolute .■* How easy is it, in Hebrew letters, to mistake sometimes one for another, and so to al- ter the whole sense .? As for example, this very letter vau for jog of the Holy Ghost';" had not King James the First just cause to affirm, " that he could never see a Bible well translated into English ?"|f And whether such falsely translated Bibles ought to be imposed upon the ignorant people, and by them received for the very Word of God, and for their only rule of faith, I refer to the judgment of tlie world ; and do freely assert with Doctor Whitaker, a learned protestant, '* that translations are so far only the word of God, as they faithfully express the meaning of the authentical text."i:+ The English protestant translations having been thus exclaimed against, and cried down not only by catholics, but even by the most learned protestants, §§ as you have seen ; it pleased his majesty, King James the First, to command a review and reforma- tion of those translations which had passed for God's word in King Edward the Sixth, and Queen Elizabeth's days.|il| Which work was undertaken by the prelatic clergy, not * Petition directed to his ^^ajesty, pag. 75, 76. f That Christ descended into Hell, pag. 116, 117, 118. 121. 154. i Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, pag. 255. § See the Abridgment which the Ministers of Lincoln diocess deUvered to his ^Lajesty, pag. 11, 12, 13. II Burges Apol. sect. 6. and in Covel's Answ. to Burges, pag. 93. t See the Triple Cord, pag. 147. ** See the Conference before the King's Majesty, pag. 46 and 47. Apologies concerning Christ's Descent into Hell at Ddd. ff Conference before his Majesty, pag. 46. i^ Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, pag. 235. §§ Dr. Gre- gory Martin wrote a whole treatise against them. |ill Bishop Tunstal discovered in Tin- dal's New Testament only, no less than 2000 corruptions. PREFACE. Xlll iotnuch, it is to be feared, for the zeiil of truth, as appears by their having corrected so very few places, as out of a design of correcting- such faults as favoured the more puritani- cal part of protestants (Presbyterians) against the usurped authority, pretended episco- pacy, ceremonies, and traditions of the prelatic party. For example: the word " con- gregation" in their first Bibles, was the usual and only English word they made use of for the Greek and Latin word fKKXHciit ecclesia^ because then the name of church was most odious to them ; yea, they could not endure to hear any mention of a church, be- cause of the catholic church, which they had forsaken, and which withstood and con- demned them. But now, being grown up to something (as themselves fancy) like a church, they resolve in good earnest to take upon them the face, figure, and grandeur of a church ; to censure and excommunicate, yea, and persecute their dissenting brethren ; rejecting therefore that humble appellation, which their primitive ancestors were con- tent with, viz. coiigregation, they assume the title of church, the church of England, to countenance which, they bring the word church again into their translations, and banish that their once darling congregation. They have also, instead of ordinances, institutions, &c. been pleased in some places to translate traditions ; thereby to vindicate several ceremonies of theirs against their puritanical brethren ; as in behalf of their character, they rectified, " ordaining elders, by election." The word (image) being so shameful a corruption, they were pleased likewise to correct, and instead thereof to translate (idol,) according to the true Greek and Latin. Yet it appears that this was not amended out of any good design, or love of truth ; but , either merely out of shame, or however to have it said that they had done something. Seeing they have not corrected it in all places, expecially in the Old Testament, Exod. 20. where they yet read image, " Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image ;'* the word in Hebrew being pesel, the very same that scidptile is in Latin, and signifies in English a graven or carved thing ; and in the Greek it is eidolon^ (an idol) : so that by this false and wicked practice, they endeavour to discredit the catholic religion ; and, contrary to their own consciences, and corrections in the New Testament, endeavour to make the people believe, that image and idol are the same, and equally forbidden by Scripture, and God's commandments ; and consequently, that popery is idolatry, for admitting the due use of images. They have also corrected that most absurd and shameful corruption, (grave) ; and, as they ought to do, have instead of it translated (hell,) so that now they read, " Thou wilt not leave my soul in Hell ;" whereas, Beza has it, " Thou wilt not leave my carcass in the grave." Yet we see, that this is not out of any sincere intention, or respect to truth neither, because they have but corrected it in some few places, not in all, as you will see hereafter; which they would not do, especially in Genesis, lest they should thereby be forced to admit of Limbics Patrum, where Jacob's soul was to descend, when he said, " I will go down to ray son into Hell mourning," &c. And to balance the ad- vantage they think they may have given catholics where they have corrected it, they have (against Purgatory and Limbns Patriim) in another place most grossly corrupted the text : for whereas the words of our Saviour are, " Quickened in spirit or soul. In the which spirit coming, he preached to them also that were in prison,"* they translate, " Quickened by the spirit, by which also he went and preached unto the spirits in pri- son." This was so notorious a corruption, that Dr. Montague, afterviards bishop of Chichester and Norwich, rcpreliended Sir Henry Saville for it, to whose care the trans- lating of St. Peter's Epistle was committed : Sir Henry Saville told him plainly, that Dr. Abbot, archbishop of Canterbury, and Dr. Smith, bishop of Gloucester, corrupted and altered the translation of this place, which himself had sincerely performed. Note here, by the bye, that if Dr. Abbot's conscience could so lightly stifFer him to corrupt the Scripture, his, or his servant Mason's forging the Lambeth Records, could not possibly cause tlie least scruple, especially being a thing so highly for their interest and honour. These are the chiefest faults they have corrected in this their new translation ; and with what sinister designs they have amended them, appears visible enough ; to wit, either to keep their authority, and gain credit for their new-thought-on episcopal and priestly chai'acter and ceremonies against puritans or presby terians ; or else, for very shame, urged thereto by the exclamations of catholics, daily inveighing against such intolerable falsifications. But because they resolved not to correct either ail, or the tenth part of the corruptions of the former translations ; therefore, fearing their over-seen falsifications would be observed, both by puritans and catholics, in their Epistle Dedicatory to the King, they desire his majesty's protection, for that " on the one side, we shall be tra- duced, say they, by popish persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor instruments to make God's holy truth to be yet more known unto ♦ 1 Peter 3. ver. 18, 19. XIV PREFACE- the people whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness : on the other sidls, we shall be maligned by self-conceited brethren, who run their own ways, Sic," We see how they endeavour here to persuade the king and the world, that catholics are desirous to conceal the light of the Gospel : whereas, on the contrary, nothing is more obvious, than the daily and indefatigable endeavours of catholic missioners and priests, not only in preaching and explaining God's holy word in Europe ; but also in forsaking their own countries and conveniencies, and travelhng with great difficulties and dangers by sea and land, into Asia, Africa, America, and the Antipodes, with no other design than to publish the doctrine of Christ, and to discover and manifest the ligiit of the Gospel to infidels, who are in darkness and ignorance. Nor do any but catholics stick to the old letter and sense of Scripture, without altering the text, or rejecting any part thereof, or devising new interpretations; which certainly cannot demonstrate a desire in them to keep people in ignorance and darkness. Indeed, as for their self- conceited presbyterian and fanatic brethren, who run their own ways in translating and interpreting Scripture, we do not excuse them, but only say, that we see no reason why prelatics should reprehend them for a fault, whereof themselves are no less guilty. Do not themselves of the church of England run their own ways also : as well as those other sectaries in translating the Bible ? Do they stick to either the Greek, Latin, or Hebrew text ? Do they not leap from one language and copy to another ? Accept and reject what they please ? Do they not fancy a sense of their own, every whit as contrary to that of the Catholic and ancient church, as that of their self-conceited brethren the pres- byterians, and others, is acknowledged to be ? And yet they are neither more learned nor more skilful in the tongues, nor more godly than those they so much contemn and blame. All heretics that have ever waged war against God's Holy church, whatever particu- lar weapons they have had, have generally made use of these two, viz. " Misrepresenting and ridiculing the doctrine of God's church ;" and, " Corrupting and misinterpreting his sacred word, the Holy Scripture :" We find not any since Simon Magus's days, that have ever been more dexterous and skilful in handling these direful arms, than the here- tics of our times. In the first place, they are so great masters and doctors in misrepresenting, mocking, and deriding rehgion, that they seem even to have solely devoted themselves to no other profession or place, but " cathedrae irtisortim,'* the school or " chair of the scorn- ers," as David terms their seat : which the holy apostle St. Peter foresaw, when he fore- told, that " There should come in the latter days, illusores, scoffers, walking after their own lusts." To whom did this prophecy ever better agree, than to the heretics of our days, who deride the sacred Scriptures ? " The author of the book of Ecclesiastes, says one of them, had neither boots nor spurs, but I'id on a long stick, in begging shoes:'* Who scoff at the book of Judith: compare the Maccabees to Robin Hood and Bevis of Southampton; call Baruch, a "peevish ape of Jeremy:" count the Epistle to the Hebrews as stubble : and deride St. James's, as an epistle made of straw : contemn three of the four Gospels. What ridiculing is this of the word of God! Nor were the first pre- tended reformers only guilty of this, but the same vein has still continued in the writings, preachings, and teachings of their successors ; a great part of which are nothing but a mere mockery, ridiculing, and misrepresenting of the doctrine of Christ, as is too noto- rious and visible in the many scurrilous and scornful writings and sermons lately pub- lished by several men of no small figure in our English protestant church. By which scoffing stratagem, when they cannot laugh the vulgar into a contempt and abhorrence of the Christian religion, they fly to their other weapons, to wit, " imposing upon the people's weak understanding, by a corrupt, imperfect, and falsely translated Bible."* Tertullian complained thus of the heretics of his time, Ista haeresis non recipit quaadam Scnpturasy &c. " These heretics admit not some books of Scriptures ; and those which they do admit, by adding to, and taking from, they pervert to serve their purpose : and if they receive some books, yet they receive them not entirely ; or if they receive them entirely, after some sort, nevertheless, they spoil them by devising divers interpretations. In this case, what will you do, that think yourselves skilful in Scriptures, when that which you defend, the adversary denies ; and that which you deny, he defends ?" Et tu qnidem nihil per des nisi vocem de contentione, nihil consequeris nisi hileyn de blasphentatione : •* And you indeed shall lose nothing but words in this contention ; nor shall you gain any thing but anger from his blasphemy." How fitly may these words be apphed to the pre- tended reformers of our days ! who, when told of their abusing, corrupting, and misin- terpreting the Holy Scriptures, are so far from acknowledging their faults, that on the contrary they blush not to defend them. When Mr.. Martin, in his Discovery, told them of their falsifications in the Bible, did they, thank him for letting them see their mistakes, * Dr. St. Dr. T. Dr. S. Dr. T. Mr. W. &c. PREFACE. XV as Indeed men, endued with the spirit of sincerity and lionesty would have done ? No, they were so far from that, that Fulk, as much as in him hes, endeavours very obstinate- ly to defend them : and VVhitaker affirms, that " their translations are well done,*' (why then were they afterwards corrected ?) " and that all the faults Mr. Martin finds in them are but trifles ; demanding what there is in their Bibles that can be found fault with, as not translated well and truly ?"* Such a pertinacious, obstinate, and contentious spirit, are heretics possessed with, which indeed is the very thing- that renders them heretics ; for with such I do not rank those in the list, who, though they have even with their first milk, as I may say, imbibed their errors, and have been educated from their childhood in erroneous opinions, yet do neither pertinaciously adhere to the same, nor obstinately resist the truth, when proposed to them ; but, on the contrary, are willing to embrace it. How many innocent, and well-meaning people, are there in England, who liave scarce in all their hfe-time, ever heard any mention of a cathoUc, or catholic religion, unless under these monstrous and frightful terms of idolatry, superstition, antichristianism, &.c. ? How many have ever heard a better character of catholics, than bloody-minded people, thirsters after blood, worshippers of wooden gods, prayers to stocks and stones, idola- ters, anti-christs, the beast in the Revelations, and what not, that may render them more odious than Hell, and more frightful than the Devil himself, and that from the mouths and pens of their teachers, and ministerial guides ? Is it then to be wondered at, that these so grossly deceived people should entertain a strange prejudice against religion, and a detestation of catholics ? Whereas, if these bfind-folded people were once undeceived, and brought to under- stand, that all these monstrous scandals are falsely charged upon catholics ; that the catholic doctrine is so far from' idolatry, that it teaches quite the contrary, viz. That who- soever gives God's honour to stocks and stones, as protestants phrase it, to images, to saints, to angels, or to any creature ; yea, to any thing but to God himself, is an idolater, and will be damned for the same ; that catholics are so far from thirsting after the blood of others, that, on the contrary, their doctrine teaches them, not only to love God above all, and their neighbour as themselves, but even to love their enemies. In short, so far different is the Roman catholic religion from what it is by protestants represented, that, on the contrary, faith, hope, and charity, are the three divine virtues it teaches us : pru- dence, justice, fortitude, and temperance, are the four moral virtues it exhorts us to : which Christian virtues, when it happens that they are, through human frailty, and the temptations of our three enemies, the world, the flesh, and the Devil, either wounded or lost ; then are we taught to apply ourselves to such divine remedies, as our blessed Saviour Christ has left us in his church, viz. his holy sacraments, by which our spiritual infirmities are cured sjxd repaired. By the sacrament of baptism we are taught, that original sin is forgiven, and that the party baptized is regenerated, and born anew unto the mystical body of Christ, of which by baptism he is made a lively member : so like- wise by the sacrament of penance all our actual sins are forgiven ; the same holy Spirit of God working in this to the forgiveness of actual sin, that wrought before in the sacra- ment of baptism to the forgiveness of original sin. We are taught, likewise, that by partaking of Christ's very body, and his very blood, in the blessed sacrament of the Eucharist, we by a perfect union dwell in Him, and He in us ; and that as himself rose again for our justification, so we, at the day of judgment, shall in him receive a glorious resurrection, and reign with him for all eternity, as glorious members of the same body, whereof himself is the head. It further teaches us, that none but a priest, truly con- secrated by the holy sacrament of order, can consecrate and administer the holy sacra- ments. — This is our religion, this is the centre it tends to, and the sole end it aims at j which point, we are further taught, can never be gained but by a true faith, a firm hope, and a perfect charity. To conclude, if, 1 say, thousands of well-meaning protestants understood this, as also that protestancy itself is nothing else but a mere imposture begun in England, main- tained and upheld by the wicked policy of self-interested statesmen ; and still continued by misrepresenting and ridiculing the catholic religion, by misinterpreting the holy Scriptures; yea, by falsifying, abusing, and, as will appear in this following treatise, by most abominably corrupting the sacred word of God : how far would it be from them obstinately and pertinaciously to adhere to the false and erroneous principles, in which they have hitherto been educated ? how wilfingly would they submit their understand- ings to the obedience of faith ? how earnestly would they embrace that rule of faith, which our blessed Saviour and his apostles, left us for our guide to salvation ? with what diligence would they bend all their studies, to learn the most wholesome and saving doc- trine of God's holy church ? In fine, if once enlightened with a true faith, and encouraged * Whitaker, page 14. XVI PREFACE. with a firm hope, what zealous endeavours would they not use to acquire such virtues and Christian perfections, as might enflanie tliem with a perfect charity, which is the very ultimate and highest step to eternal felicity ? To which, may God of his infinite g'oodness, and tender mercy, through the merits and bitter death and passion of our dear 'saviour, Jesus Christ, bring us all. Amen. THE OF PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE EXAMINED. VjUR pretended reformers, having- squared and modelled to themselves a Faith, con- trary to the certain and direct Rule of apostolical traditio?i, delivered in God*s holy church, were forced to have recourse to the scripture, as their 07ily mle of faith ,- according^ to which, the church of England has, in the sixth of her 39 Articles, declared, that the scripture comprehended in the canonical books (i. e. so many of them as she thinks fit to call so) of the Old and New Testament, is the rule of faith so far, that whatsoever is not read therein, or cannot be proved thereby, is not to be accepted as any point of faith, or needful to be followed. But finding- themselves still at a loss, their new doc- trines being- so far from being contained in the Holy Scripture, that they were directly opposite to it ; they were fain to seek out to themselves many other inventions ; amongst which, none was more generally practised, than the corrupting of the Holy Scripture by false and j&ar^ia/ translations ; by which they endeavoured, right or wrong, to make those sacred volumes speak in favour of their new-invented faith and doctrine. The corruptions of this nature, in the first EngUsh Protestant translations, were so many, and so notorious, that Dr. Gregory Martin composed a whole book of them, in which he discovers the fraudulent shifts the translators were fain to make use of» in de- fence of them. Sometimes they recurred to the Hebrew text ; and when that spoke against their new doctrine, then to the Greek ; when that favoured them not, to some copy acknoivledged by themselves to be corrupted, and of no credit : and when no copy at all could be found out to cloak their corruptions, then must the book or chapter of scripture contradicting them, be declared Apocryphal : and when that cannot be made probable, t'ley fall downright upon the Prophets and Apostles that wrote theiji, saying-. That they night, and did err, even after the coming of the Holy Ghost.* Thus Luther.f accused by Zuinglius for corrupting the word of God, had no way left to defend his impiety, bu: by impudently preferring himself, and his own spirit, before that of those who wrote the Holy Scriptures, saying, Be it that the church, Augustine and other doc- tors, also Peter and Paul, yea, an angel from heaven, teach otherwise, yet is my doctrine * Vid. Supr. t Tom. 5. Wittemb. fol. 290. & in Ep. ad Galat. cap. 1. ^ fllOTESTANT tRANSLAtlONS such as sets forth God's glory, &c. Peter, the chief of the ApostlcB, lived and taugltt (extra verbum dei,) besides the word of God. And against St. James's mentioning the sacrament of extreme unction :* But though, (says he,) this were the Epistle of James, I would answer, that it is not lawful for an apostle, by his authority, to institute a sacrament ; this appertains to Christ alone. As though that blessed Apostle would publish a sacrament without warrant from Christ ! Our churcJi of England divines having unadvisedly put St. James's epistle into the canon, are forced, instead of such an answer, to say. That the sacrament of extreme unction was yet [viz. in the days of Gregory the Great,] unformed.f As though the apostle St. James had spoken he knew not what, wlicn he advised. That the sick should be, by the priests of the church, anointed with oil in the name of our Lord. Nor was this Luther's, shift alone ; for all Protestants frjliow their first pretended re- former in this point, being necessitated so to do for the maintenance of their reformations and translations, so directly opposite to the known letter of the Scripture. The Magdeburgians follow Luther, in accusing the apostles of error, particularly St. Paul, by the pei*suasion of James. + Brentius also (whom Jewel terms a grave and learned father,) affirms, That St. Peter, the chief of the apostles, and also Barnabas, after tlie Holy Ghost received, together with the church of Jerusalem, en^ed. John Calvin§ affirms. That Peter added to the schism of the church, to the endanger- ing of Christian liberty, and the overthrow of the grace of Christ : and in page 150, he reprehends Peter and Barnabas, and others. Zanchius mentions some Calvinists in his Epist. ad Misc. who said. If Paul should come to Geneva, and preach the same hour with Calvin, they would leave Paul, and hear Calvin. And Lavatherusll affirms, that some of Luther's followers, not the meanest among their doctors, said. They had rather doubt of St. Paul's doctrine, than the doctrine of Luther, or of the confession of Ausburg. This desperate shift being so necessar}', for warranting their corruptions of Scripture, and maintaining the fallibility of the church in succeeding ages, (for the same reasons which conclude it infallible in the apostle's time, are applicable to ours, and to every for- mer century ; otherwise it must be said, that God's providence and promises were limited to few years, and Himself so partial, that he regards not the necessities of his chureh, nor the salvation of any person that lived after the time of his disciples ;) the church of England could not reject it without contradicting their brethren abroad, and their own principles at home. Therefore Mr. Jewel, in his Defence of the Apology for the Church of England, T[ affirms. That St. Mark mistook Abiathar for Abimelech ; and St. Matthew, Hieremias for Zacharias. And Mr. Fulk against the llhemish Testament, in Galat. 2. fol. 322, charges Peter with error of ignorance against the gospel. Dr. Goad, in his four Disputations with F. Campion, affirms,** That St. Peter erred in faith, and that, after the sending down of the Holy Ghost upon them. And Whitaker says,f f It is evident, that even after Christ's ascension, and the Holy Ghost's descending upon the apostles, the whole church, not only the common sort of Christians, but also even the apostles themselves, erred in the vocation of the Gentiles, &c. Yea, Peter also erred. He furthermore erred in manners, &.c. And these were great errors ; and yet Ve Si,ee these to have been in the apostles, even after the Holy Ghost descended upon tliem. I'rai^stants to authorize their own errors andfaUibility, tvoxdd make the apostles themselves erroneoj^^and fallible. — Thus these fallible reformers, who, to countenance their corrup- tions of Scripture, grace their own errors, and authorize their church's fallibility^ would make the apostles themselves/a7Z/Afe ,• but, indeed, they need not to have goae this bold way to work, for we are satisfied, and can very easily believe their church tohQ fallible f their doctrines erroneous, and themselves corrupters of the Scriptures, witkout being forced to hold, that the apostles erred. * De Capt. Babil. cap. de Extrem. Unct. Tom. 2. Wittemb. i f See the second Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Chuijch of Eng- land, &c. i Cent. 1.1.2. c. 10. col. 580. § Calvin in Galat. c. 2, v. 14, p. 511. II Lavater. in Histor. Sacrament, page 18, U Page 361. ** The second day's conference. ft Whitaker de Eccles. ccintr. Bellar. Controvers. 2. q, 4, p, 223. OF THE SCRIPTURES. 3 And truly, if, as they say, the apostles were not only fallible, but taught errors in manners, and matters of faith, after the Holy Ghost's descending* upon them, their wri- tings can be no infallible rule, (or, as themselves term it, perfect rule of faith,) to direct men to salvation : which conclusion is so immediately and clearly deduced from this pro- testant doctrine, that the supposal and premises once granted, there can be no certainty in the Scripture itself. And, indeed, this (we see) all the pretended reformers aimed at, though they durst not say so much, and we shall in this little tract make it most evidently appear from their intolerably abusing it, how little esteem and slight regard they have for the sacred Scripture ; though they make their ignorant flock believe, that, as they have translated it, and delivered it to them, it is the pure and infaUible word of God. Before I come to particular examples of their falsifications and corruptions, let me ad- vertise my reader, that my intention is to make use only of such English translations, as are common, and well known in England even to this day, as being yet in many men's hands ; io wit, those Bibles printed in the years 1562, 1577, and 1579, in the beginning of queen Elizabeth's reign ; which I will confront with their last translation made in king James the first's reign, from the impression printed at London in the year 1683. In all which said Bibles, I shall take notice sometimes of one translation, sometimes of another, as every one's falsehood shall give occasion : neither is it a good defence for the falsehood of one, that it is truly translated in another, the reader being deceived by any one, because commonly he reads but one ; yea, one of them is a condemnation of the other. And where the English corruptions, here noted, are not to be found in ona of the first three Bibles, let the reader look in another of them ; for if he find not the falsification in all, he will certainly find it in two, or at least one of them : and, in this case, I advertise the reader to be very circumspect, that ho think not, by and by, these are falsely charged, because there may be found perhaps some later edition, wherein the same error we noted, may be corrected ; for it is their common and known fashion, not only in their translations of the Bible, but in their other books and writings, to alter and change, add and put out, in their later editions, according as either themselves are ashamed of the former, or their scholars that print them again, dissent or disagree from their masters. Note also, that though I do not so much charge them with falsifying the Vulgar Latin Bible, which has always been of so great authority in the church of God, and with all the ancient fathers,* as 1 do the Greek, which they pretend to translate : I cannot, how- ever, but observe, that as Luther wilfully forsook the Latin text in favour of his heresies and erroneous doctrines ; so the rest follow his example even to this day, for no other cause in the world, but that it makes against their errors. For testimony of which, what greater argument can there be than this, that Luther, who before had always read with the Catholic church, and with all antiquity, these words of St. Paul, Have not we power to lead about a woman, a sister, as also the rest of the apostles ?f And in St. Peter, these words. Labour, that by good worlcs, you may make sure your vocation and election :+ suddenly after he had, contrary to his profession, taken a wife, (as he called her,) and preached, that all other votaries might do the same : that faith alone justified, and that good works were not necessary to salvation : imme- diately, I say, after he fell into these heresies, he began to read and translate the former texts of Scripture accordingly, in this manner, — Have not we power to lead about a sister, a wife, as the rest of the apostles ? And, Labour, that you may make sure your vocation and election ; leaving out the other words, [by good works.] And so do both the Calvinists abroad, and our English protestants at home, read and translate even to this day, because they hold the self-same errors. I would gladly know of our English protestant translators, whether they reject the Vulgar Latin text, (so generally liked and approved by all the primitive fathers) purely out of design to furnish us with a more sincere and simple version into English from the Greek, than they thought they could do from the Vulgar Latin ? If so, why do they not stick close to the Greek copy, which they pretend to translate, but (besides their cor- rupting of it) fly from it, and have recourse again to the Vulgar Latin, whenever it may seem to make more for their purpose : whence may be easily gathered, that their pretending to translate the Greek copy was not of any good and candid design, but rather, because they knew it was not so easy a matter for the ignorant to discover their false dealings from it as from the Latin ; and, also, because they might have the fairer * See the preface of the Rheims New Testament, t 1 Cor. 9. V. 5. MuUerem Sororem. ^ 2 Pet. 1. ver. 10. Ut per bona opera certam vestram vocationem & electionem faciatis. 4 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS pretence for their turning and winding to and fro from the Greek to the Latin, and then again to the Greek, according as they should judge most advantageous to them. It was also no little part of their design, to lessen the credit and authority of the Vulgar Latin translation, which had so long, and with so general a consent, been received and ap- proved in the church of God, and authorized by the general Council of Trent, for the only best and most authentic text. Because therefore I find they will scarcely be able to justify their rejecting the Latin translation, unless they had dealt more sincerely with the Greek, I have, in the following work, set down the Latin text, (as well as the Greek word whereon their corruption de- pends ;) yet, where they truly keep to the Greek and Hebrew, which they profess to follow, and which they will have to be the most authentic text, I do not charge them with heretical corruptions. The left-hand page I have divided Into four columns, (besides the Margin, in which I have noted the book, chapter, and verse.) In the first I have set down the text of Scripture from the Vulgar Latin edition, putting the word that their English Bibles have corrupted in a different character; to which I have also added the Greek and Hebrew words, so often as they are, or may be necessary for the better understanding of the word on which the stress lies in the corrupt translation. In the second column I have given you the true EngUsh text from the Roman Catho- lic translation, made by the Divines of Rheims and Doway ; which is done so faithfully and candidly from the authentic Vulgar Latin copy, that the most carping and critical ' adversary in the world cannot accuse it of partiality or design, contrary to the very true meaning and interpretation thereof. As for the English of the said Rhemish trans- lation, which is old, and therefore must needs differ much from the more refined English spoken at this day, the reader ought to consider, not only the place where it was written, but also the time since which the translation was made, and then he will find the less fault with it. For my part, because I have referred my reader to the said translation made at Rheims, I have not altered one syllable of the English, though indeed I might in some places have made the word more agreeable to the language of our times. In the third column you have the corruption, and false translation, from those bibles that were set forth in English at the beginning of that most miserable revolt and apos- tacy from the Catholic church, viz. from that bible which was translated in king Ed- ward the sixth's time, and reprinted in the year 1562, and from the two next impressions, made anno 1577, and 1579. All which were authorized in the beginning of queen Eliza- beth's reign, when the church of England began to get footing, und to exercise domiuv ion over her fellow-sectaries, as well as to tyrannise over Catholics: whence it cannot be denied, but those bibles were wholly agreeable to the principles and doctrine of the said church of England in those days, however they pretend at this day to correct or alter them. In the fourth column you find one of the last Impressions of their protestant Bible, viz. that printed at London by the assigns of John Bill deceased, and by Henry Hills and Thomas Newcomb, printers to the king's most excellent majesty, anno dom. 1683. In which Bible, wherever I find them to have corrected and amended the place cor- rupted in their former translations, 1 have put down the word [corrected ;] but where the falsification is not yet rectified, I have set down likewise the corruption : and that indeed is in most places, yea, and in some two or three places, they have made it rather worse than better : and this Indeed gives me great reason to suspect, that in those few places, where the errors of the former false translations have been corrected in the lat- ter, it has not always been the effect of plain-dealing and sincerity ; for if such candid intention of amending former faults had everywhere prevailed with them, they would not in any place have made it worse, but would also have corrected all the rest, as well as one or two that are not now so much to their purpose, as they were at their first rising. In the right-hand page of this treatise, I have set down the motives and inducements, that (as we may reasonably presume) prompted them to corrupt and falsify the sacred text, with some short arguments here and there against their unwarrantable proceedings. All which I have contrived in as short and compendious a method as I possibly could, knowing that there are many, who are either not able, or at least nbt wIHing to go to the price of a great volume. And because my desire is to be beneficial to all, I have accom- modated it not only to the purse of the poorest, but also, (as near as possible) to the capacity of the most ignorant; for which reasons also, I have past by a great many learn- ed arguments brought by my author,* from the significations, etymologies, derivations, uses, &c. of the Greek and Hebrew words, as also from the comparing of places corrupt- ed, with other places rightly translated from the same word, in the same translation ; * Dr. Mjirtin. OF THE SCRIPTURES. S with several other things, whereby he largely confutes their insincere and disingenuous proceedings : these, I say, I have omitted, not only for brevity sake, but also as things that could not be of any great benefit to tlie simple and unlearned reader. As for others more learned, 1 will refer them to the work itself, that I have made use of through this whole treatise, viz, to that most elaborate and learned work of Mr. Gre- gory Martin, entitled, A Discovery of the manifold Corruptions of the Holy Scriptures, &c. printed at Rheims, anno 1582, which is not hard to be fo\nid. Have we not great cause to believe, that our Protestant divines do obstinately teach contrary to their own consciences ? J'or, (besides their having been reproved, without amendment, for their impious handling the Holy Scripture,) if their learning be so pro- found and bottomless, as themselves proudly boast in all their works, we cannot but con- clude, that they must needs both see their errors, and know the truth. And therefore, though we cannot always cry out of them, and their followers, [the bUud lead the bhnd,] yet, which is, alas ! a thousand times more miserable, we may justly exclaim, [those who see, lead the blind, till with themselves they fall into the ditch !] As nothing has ever been worse resented by such as forsake God's holy chtirch, than to hear themselves branded with the general title of heretics ; so nothing has been ever more common among catholics, than justly to stigmatize such with the same infamous character. I am not ignorant, how ill the protestants of our days resent this term, and therefore do avoid, as much as the nature of this work will permit, the giving them the least disgust by this horrid appellation : nevertheless I must needs give them to under- stand, that the nature of the Holy Scripture is such, that whosoever do voluntarily cor- rupt and pervert it, to maintain their own erroneous doctrines, cannot lightly be charac- terized by a less infamous title, than that of heretics ; and their false versions by the title of heretical translations, under which denomination I have placed these following cor- ruptions. Notwithstanding, I would have the protestant reader to take notice, that I. neither name nor judge all to be heretics (as is hinted in my preface,) who hold errors contra- dictory to God's church, but such as pertinaciously persist in their errors. So proper and essential is pertinacity to the nature of heresy, that if a man should hold or beheve ever so many false opinions against the truth of Christian faith, but yet not with obstinacy and pertinacity, he should err, but not be a heretic. Saint Augustin asserting,* That if any do defend their opinions, though false and perverse, with no ob- stinate animosity, but rather with all solicitude do seek the truth, and are ready to be corrected when they find the same, these men are not to be accounted for heretics, be- cause they have not any election of their own that contradicts the doctrine of the church. And in another place, against the Donatists :-j- Let us (says he) suppose some man to hold that of Christ at this day, which the heretic Photinus did, to wit, That Christ was only man, and not God, and that he should think this to be the Catholic faith ; I will not say that he is a heretic, unless when the doctrine of the church is made manifest unto him, he will rather choose to hold that which he held before, than yield thereunto. Again, those, says he,:t: who in the church of Christ, hold infectious and perverse doc- trine, if, when they are corrected for it, they resist stubbornly, and will not amend their pestilent and deadly persuasions, but persist to defend the same, these men are made heretics: by all which places of St. Augustin, we see thaterroj' without perimacity, and obstinacy against God's church, is no heresy. It would be well, therefore, if Protestants, in reading Cathohc books, would endeavour rather to inform themselves of the truth of Catholic doctrine, and humbly embrace the same, than to suflfer that prejudice against rehgion, in which they have unhappily been educated, so strongly to biass them, as to turn them from men barely educated in error, to obstinate heretics; such as the more to harden their own hearts, by how much the more clearly the doctrine of God's Holy church is demonstrated to them. When the true faith is once made known to men, ignorance can no longer secure them from that eternal punishment to which heresy un- doubtedly hurries them: St. Paul, in his epistle to Titus, affirming,^ that "a man that is a heretic after the first and second admonition, is subverted, and sinneth, being con- demned of his own judgment." Whatever may be said, therefore, to excuse the ignorant, and such as are not obsti- nate, from that ignominious character; yet as for others, especially the leaders of these misguided people, they will scarcely be able to free themselves either from it, or escape the punishment due to such, so long as they thus wilfully demonstrate their pertinacity, rot only in their obstinately defending their erroneous doctrines in their disputes, ser- * S. Aug. Ep. 162. f Lib. 4. contr. Donat. c. 6. 4 De Civit. Dei, lib. 18. c. 51. § Titus, cap. 3. ver. 10. 6 l»llOTESTANT TRANSLATIONS mons, and writings ; but even in corrupting the Word of God, to force that sacred book to defend the same, and compel that divine volume tx) speak against such points of Ca- tholic doctrine as themselves are pleased to deny. In what can a heretical intention more evidently appear, than in falsely translating and corrupting the Holy Bible, against the Catholic church, and such doctrines as it has, by an uninterrupted tradition, brought down to us from the apostles? as for example : A^Inst the holy sacrifice of the altar 1 Against the real presence of Christ's body and blood in the eucharist 2 Against priests, and the power of priesthood • • • 3 Against the authority of bishops ••••••••••• •••.. 4 Against the sacred altar on which Christ's body and blood is offered 5 Against the sacrament of baptism 6 Against the sacrament of penance, and confession of sins 7 Against the sacrament of marriage 8 Against intercession of saints ..•• ...••. 9 Against sacred images •••.•••••.•••.•• •...••.•..< • lo Against purgatory, hmbus patrum, and Christ's descent into hell 11 Against justification, and the possibility of keeping God's commandments 1^ Against meritorious works, and the reward due to the same .••... 13 Against free will ••.••.....••••• ..14 Against true inherent justice, and in defence of their own doctrine, that faith alone is sufficient for salvation • T5 Against apostolical traditions *. •.••.•...••••....•..••. 16 Yea, against several other doctrines of God's holy church, and in defence of divers strange opinions of their own, which the reader will find taken notice of in this treatise : all which, when the unprejudiced and well-meaning protestant reader has considered, I am confident he will be struck with amazement, and even terrified to look upon such abominable corruptions ! Doubtless the generality of protestants have hitherto been ignorant, and more is the pity, of this ill-handling of the Bible by their translators :. nor have, I am confident, their ministerial guides ever yet dealt so ingenuously by them, as to tell them that such and such a text of Scripture is translated thus and thus, contrary to the true Greek, He- brew, or ancient Latin copies on purpose, and to the only intent, to make it speak against such and such points of Catholic doctrine, and in favour of this or that new opinion of their own. Does it appear to be done by negligence, ignorance, or mistake, as perhaps they would be willing to have the reader believe, or rather designedly and wilfully, when what they in some places translate truly, in places of controversy between them and us, they grossly falsify, in favour of their errors ? Is it not a certain argument of a wilful corruption, where they deviate from that text, and ancient reading, which has been used by all the Fathers, and, instead thereof, to make the exposition or commentary of some one doctor, the very text of Scripture itself? So also when in their translations they fly from the Hebrew or Greek to the Vulgate Latin, where those originals make against them, or not so much for their purpose, it is a manifest sign of wilful partiahty : And this they frequently do. What is it else but wilful partiality, when in words of ambiguous and divers significa- tions, they will have it signify here or there, as pleases themselves ? So that in this place it must signify thus, in that place, not thus ; as Beza, and one of their English Bibles, for example, urge the Greek word ywctlitA to signify wife, and not to signify wife, both against the virginity and chastity of Priests. What is it but a voluntary and designed contrivance, when in a case that makes for them, they strain the very original signification of the word ; and in the contrary case, neglect it altogether ? Yet this they do. That their corruptions are voluntary and designedly done, is evident in such places where passives are turned into actives, and actives into passives , where participles are made to disagree in case from their substantives ; where solecisms are imagined when the construction is most agreeable ; and errors pretended to creep out of the margin into the text : But Beza made use of all these, and more such like quirks. Another note of wilful corruption is, when they do not translate alike such words as are of hfce form and force : Example — if Ulcerosus be read full of sores, why must not Gratiosa be translated full of grace ? When the words, images, shrines, procession, devotions, excommunications, &c. are used in ill part, where they are not in the original text; and the words hymns, grace, OF THE SCRIPTURES. 7 Jnystery, sacrament, church, altar, priest, Catholic, justification, tradition, &.C. avoided and suppressed, where they are in the original, as if no such words were in the text : Is it not an apparent token ot'desig-n, and that it is done purposely to disgrace or suppress the said things and speeches. Though Bcza ami Wiiitakcr made it a good rule to translate according to the usual signification, and not the original derivations of words ; yet, contrary to this rule, they translate idoluvty an image ; presbyter^ an elder ; diaconus, a minister ; episcopus, an over- seer, &c. Wlio sees not therefore but tliis is wilful partiality ? If where the apostle names a pagan idolator, and a Christian idolator, by one and the same Greek word, in one and the same meaning ; and they translate the pagan, (idola- tor) and the Christian, (worshipper of images) by two distinct words, and in two divers meanings, it must needs be wilfully done. No less appears it to be less designedly done,to translate one and the same Greek word [tirAfatSofic] Tradition, whensoever it may be taken for evil traditions ; and never so, when it is spoken oi' good and apostolical traditions. So likewise when they foist into their translation the word tradition, taken in ill part, where it is not in the Greek ; and omit it where it is in the Greek, when taken in good part; it is certainly a most wilful corruption. At their first revolt, when none were noted for schismatics and heretics but themselves, they translated division and sect, instead of schism and heresy ,- and for heretic translated an author of sects .• This cannot be excused for voluntary corruption. But why should I multiply examples, when it is evident from their own confessions and acknowledgments ? For instance, concerning /ms7*vc«t«, which the Vulgar Latin and and Erasmus translate, Agite Poenitentiam, do penance : This interpretation (says Beza) I refuse for many causes ; but for this especially. That many ignorant persons have taken hereby an occasion of the false opinions of safis/acfoo?^, wherewith the church is troubled at this day. Many other ways there are, to make most certain proofs of their wilfulness ; as when the translation is framed according to their false and heretical commentary ; and when they will avouch their translations out of prophane writers, as Homer, Plutarch, Plhiy, Tully, Virgil, and Terence, and reject the ecclesiastical use of words in the Scriptures and Fathers ; which is Beza's usual custom, whom our English translators follow* But to note all their marks were too tedious a work, neither is it in this place necessary : These are sufficient to satisfy the impartial reader, that all those corruptions and falsifi- cations were not committed either through negligence, ignorance, over-sight, or mis- take, as perhaps they will be glad to pretend ; but designedly, wilfully, and of a mali- cious purpose and intention, to disgrace, dishonour, condemn, and suppress the churches catholic and apostolic doctrines and principles ; a,nd to favour, defend, and bolster-up their own new-devised errors and monstrous opinions. And Beza is not far from con- fessing thus much, when, against Castalio, he thus complains : The matter (says he) is now come to this point, that the translators of scripture out of the Greek into Latin, or into any other tongue, think that they may lawfully do any thing in translating ; whom if a man reprehend, he shall be answered by and by. That they do the office of a translator, not that translates word for word, but that expresses the sense : So it comes to pass, that whilst eveiy man will rather freely follow his own judgment, than be a religious inter- preter of the Holy Ghost, he rather perverts many things than translates them. This is spoken well enough, if he had done accordingly. But doing quite the contrary, is he not a dissembhng hypocrite in so saying, and a wilful heretic in so doing ? Our quarrel with Protestant translators is not for trivial or slight faults, or for such verbal differences, or little escapes as may happen through the scarce-unavoidable mis- takes of the transcribers or printers : No ! we accuse them o^ ■wilfully corrupting and/a/- ^ifyi'ig the sacred text, against points of faith and manners. We deny not that several immaterial faults and depravations may enter a translation, nor do we pretend that the Vulgate itself was free from such, before the correction of Sixtus V. and Clement VIII. which through the mistakes of printers, and, before print- ing, of transcribers, happened to several copies : So that a great many verbal differences, and lesser faults, were by learned men discovered in different copies :* (Not that any material corruption in points of faith were found in all copies ; for such God Almighty's providence, as protestants themselves confess, would never suffer to enter :) And in- deed these lesser depravations are not easily avoided, especiaily after several transcrip- tions of copies and impressions from the original, as we daily see in other books. * See a book entitled, Reason and Religion, cap. 8. wKerethe Sixtine and Clementine Bibles are more fully treated of. S PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS To amend and rectify such, the church (as you may read in the preface to the Slxtinc edition) has used the greatest industry imaginable. Pope Pius IV. caused not only the orig-inal languag-es, but other copies to be carefully examined : Pius V. prosecuted that laborious work: and by Sixtus V. it was finished, w4io commanded it to be put to the press, as appears by his bull, which begins, Eternus ille ccclestum, &,c. anno 1585. Yet, notwithstanding- the bull prefixed before his Bible (then printed) the same Pope Sixtus (as is seen in the preface made anno 1592) after diligent examination, found no few faults slipped into his impression by the negligence of the printers : And therefore Censuit at- que decrevit, both judg-ed and decreed to have the whole work examined and reprinted j but that second correction being prevented by his death, was (after the very short reign of three other popes) undertaken, and happily finished by his successor Clement VIII. answerable to the desire and absolute intention of his predecessor, Sixtus : Whence it is that the Vulgate now extant is called the correction of Sixtus, because this vigilant pope, notwithstanding the endeavours 'of his two predecessors, is said to have begun it, whicli was, according to his desire, recognized and perfected by Clement VIII. and therefore is not undeservedly called also the Clementine Bible : So that pope Sixtus's Bible, after Clement's, recognition, is now read in the church, as authentic true S.crip- ture, and is the very best corrected copy in the latin Vulgate. And whereas pope Sixtus's bull enjoined that his Bible be read in all churches, with- out the least alteration ; yet this injunction supposed the interpreters and printers to have done exactly their duty every way, which was found wanting upon a second review of the whole work. Such commands and injunctions, therefore, where new difficulties arise (not thought of before) are not like definitions o^ faith, unalterable , but may and ought to be changed according to the legislator's prudence. What I say here is indispu- table ; for how could pope Sixtus, after a sight of such faults as caused him to intend an- other impression, enjoin no alteration, when he desired one, which his successor did for him : So that if pope Sixtus had hved longer, he would as well have changed the breve as amended his impression. And whereas there were sundry different lections of the Vulgar latin, before the said correction of Sixtus and Clement, the worthy doctors of Lovain, with an immense labour, placed in the margin of their Bible these different lections of Scripture ; not determin- ing which reading was best, or to be preferred before others ; as knowing well, that the decision of such causes belongs to the public judicature and authority of the church. Pope Clement, therefore, omitting no human diligence, compared lection with lection ; and after maturely weighing all, preferred that which was most agreeable to the ancient copies, a thing necessary to be done for the procuring one uniform lection of Scripture in the church, approved of by the see apostolic. And from this arises that villanous calumny and open slander of Dr. StiUingfleet ; who affirms, That the pope took where he pleased the marginal annotations in the Lovain Bible, and inserted them into the text : Whereas, (I say) he took not the annotations or commentaries of the Lovain doc- tors, but the different readings of Scripture found in several copies. Mr. James makes a great deal of noise with his impertinent comparisons between these two editions, and that of Lovain : Yet among all his differences he finds not one contrariety in any material point o{ faith ov manners : and as for other differences, such as touch not faith and religion, arising from the expressions, being longer or shorter, less clear in the one, and more significant in the other ; or happening through the negligence of printers, they give him no manner of ground for his vain cavils ; especially seeing (I say) the Lovain Bible gave the different readings, without determining which was to be preferred ; and what faults were slipped into the Sixtine edition were by him observed, and a second correction designed, which in the Clementine edition was perfected, and one uniform reading approved of. Against Thomas James's comparisons, read the learned James Gretser, who sufficient- ly discovers his untruths, with a Mentito tertio Thomas James decem milia verborum, &c. after which, judge whether he hits every thing he says; and whether the Vulgar Latin is to be corrected by the Lovain annotations, or these by the Vulgar, if any thing were amiss in either? In fine, whether, if Mr. James's pretended differences arise from comparing all with the Hebrew,Greek, and Chaldee, must we needs suppose him to know the last energy and force of every Hebrew, Greek, or Chaldee word (when there is con- troversy) better than the authors of the Lovain, and correctors of the Vulg-ar Latin [the Sixtine-Clementine edition.] Again, let us demand of him, whether all his differences imply any material alteration in faith or manners, or introduce any notable error, contrary to God's revealed verities : Or are rather mere verbal differences, grounded on the ob- scure signification of original words. In fine, if he, or any- for him, plead any material alteration, let them name any authentic copy, either original or translation ; by the in- disputable integrity >yhereof these supposed errors may be cancelled, uud God's pure re- OF THE S'C^lPTURES. ,9 vealed verities put in their place. But to do this, after such i^nmense labour and diligence used in the correction of the Vulg-ar, will prove a desperate impossibility.* Indeed Mr. James might have had just cause to exclaim if he had found in these Bibles such corruptions, as the Protestant apostle, Martin Luther, wilfully makes in his translations: As when he adds the word [alone] to the text,j- to maintain his heresy of faith alone justifying; and omits that verse,t [But if you do not forgive, neither will your father, which is in heaven, forgive your sins.] He also omits these words,§ [That you abstain from fornication :] And because the word Trinity sounded coldly with him, he left out this sentence,!! which is the only text in the Bible that can be brought to prove that great mystery, [There are three who bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.] Or if Mr. James had found such gross corruptions, as that of Zuinglius, when instead of our blessed Saviour's positive words [This is my body] he translates. This is a sign of my body, to avoid the doctrine of the real presence, or such as are hereafter discovered in Protestant English translations ; If, 1 say, he had met with such wilful and abominable corruptions as these, he might have had good cause of complaint ; but seeing the most he can make of all his painful compa- risons comes but to this, viz. that he notes such faults as Sixtus himself observed, after the impression was finished, and as Clement rectified : I think he might have better employed his time in correcting the gross and most intolerable corruptions of the Pro- testant translation, than to have busied himself about so unnecessary a work : But there are a certain sort of men, that had rather employ themselves in discovering imaginary motes in their neighbour's eyes, than in clearing their own from real beams. To conclude this point, no man can be certainly assured of the true Scripture, unless he first come to a certainty of a true church, independently of Scripture. Find out, there- fore, the true church, and we know, by the authority of our undoubted testimony, the true Scripture ; for the infalUble testimony of the church is absolutely necessary for as- suring us of an authentic Scripture. And this I cannot see how Protestants can deny, especially when they seriously consider, that in matters of religion, it must needs be an unreasonable thing to endeavour to oblige any man to be tried by the Scriptures of a false religion : For who can in prudence require of a Christian to stand in debates of re- ligion to the decisions of the Scripture of the Turks, " the Alcoran ?" Doubtless, there- fore, when men appeal to Scripture for determining religious differences, their intention is to appeal to such Scriptures, and such alone ; and to all such as are admitted by the true church : And how can we know what Scriptures are admitted by the true church, unless we know which is the true church Pf So likewise, touching the exposition of Scripture, without doubt, when Protestants fly to Scriptures for their rule, whereby to square their religion, and to decide debates be- tween them and their adversaries, they appeal to Scriptures as rightly understood : For who would be tried by Scriptures understood in a wrong sense ? Now when contests arise between them and others of different judgments concerning the right meaning of it ; certainly they will not deny, but the judge to decide this debate must appertain to the true religion : For what Christian will apply himself to a Turk or Jew to decide matters belonging to Christianity ? Or who Would go to an atheist to determine matters of religion ? In like manner, when they are forced to have recourse to the private spirit in reli- gious matters, doubtless they design not to appeal to the private spirit of an atheist, a Jew, or a heretic, but to the private spirit of such as are of the true religion : And is it possible for them to know certainly who are members of the true church ? Or what ap- pertains to the true rehgion, unless they be certainly informed " which is the true church ?" So that, I say, no man can be certainly assured which or what books, or how much is true Scripture ; or of the right sense and true meaning of Scripture, unless he first come to a certainty of the true church. And of this opinion was the great St. Au- gustine, when he declared, that " he would not beheve the Gospel, if it was not that the authority of the Catholic church moved him to it :" Ego vero Evangelio non crederem, nisi me ecclesine Catholicce commoveret authoritas.** * See the Preface to Sixtus V. edit. Antwerp, 1599. And Bib. Max. Sect. 19, 20. Se- rarius, c. 19. t Rom. 3. 28. + Mark 11. 26. § 1 Thes. 4. 3. (| John 5. 7. 1 We must of necessity know the true church before we be certain either which is true Scripture, or which is the true sense of Scripture ; or by what spirit it is to be ex- pounded. And whether that church, which has continued visible in the world from Christ's time till this day, or that which was never known or heard of in the world tilt 1500 years after our Saviour, is the true chnrch, let the world judge, ** St. Aug. lib. contr .Epist. Manich. cap. 5.- 3 10 OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHALJ OF THE CANONICAL BOOKS OF SCRIPTURE. The Catholic church " setthig this always before her eyes, that, errors being removed, the very purity of the Gospel may be preserved in the church ; which being- promised before by the prophets, in the holy Scriptures, our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, first published with his own mouth, and afterwards commanded to be preached to every creature, by the apostles, as the fountain of all the wholesome truth, and moral disci- pline contained in the written books, and in the traditions not written, &c. following- the example of the orthodox fathers, and affected with similar piety and reverence ; doth receive and honour all the books both of the Old and New Testament, seeing one God is the author of both,"* &c. These are the words of the sacred council of Trent i which further ordained, that the table, or catalogue, of the canonical books should be joined to this decree, lest doubt might arise to any, which books they are that are re- ceived by the council. They are these following, viz. OF THE OLD TESTAMENT. Five books of Moses ; that is. Genesis, Exodus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. Joshua, Judges, Ruth. Four of the Kings. Two of Paralipomenon. The first and second of Esdras, which is called Nehemias. Tobias, Judith, Hester, Job, David's Psalter of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes^ Canticles, Wisdom, Ecclesiasticus, Isaias, Hieremias, with Baruch, Ezekiel, Daniel. Twelve lesser prophets ; that is, Osea, Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, Michaeas, Nahunij Abacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zacharias, Malachias. The first and second of the Maccabees. OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. Four Gospels, according to St. Matthew, St. Mark, St. Luke, and St. John. The Acts of the Apostles, written by St. Luke the Evangehst. Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul ; viz. to the Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Galatians, to the Ephesians, to the Phihppians, to the Colossians, to the Thessalo- nians, two to Timothy, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews. Two of St. Peter the Apostle. Three of St. John the Apostle. One of St. James the Apostle. One of St. Jude the Apostle. And the Apocalypse of St. John the Apostle. To which catalogue of sacred books is adjoined this decree ; But if any man shall not receive for sacred and canonical these whole books, with all their parts, as they are accustomed to be read in the CathoUc church, and as they are in the old Vulgar Latin edition, 8cc. be he anathema. The third council of Carthagcf after having decreed. That nothing should be read in the church under the name of Divine Scriptures, but canonical Scriptures, says, That the canonical Scriptures are. Genesis, Exodus, Sec. so reckoning up all the very same books, and making particularly the same catalogue of them, with this recited out of the Council of Trent. St. Augustin, who was present at, and subscribed to this council, also numbers the same books as above ; Vid. Doctr. Christian. Lib. II. cap. 8. Notwithstanding which, several of the said books are by the Protestants rejected as Apocryphal ; their reasons are, because they are not in the Jews canon, nor were ac- cepted for canonical in the primitive church ; reasons by which they might reject a great many more, if it pleased them : but indeed the chief cause is, that some things in these books are so manifestly against their opinions, that they have no other answer but to • Concil. Trident. Sess. 4. Decret. de Canonicis Scripturis. Mark, c. ult' t 3 Concil. Carthag. Can. 47, OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. II reject their authority ; as appears very plainly from these words of Mr. 'Whitaker's :* We pass not, says lie, for that Raphael mentioned in Tobit, neither acknowledge we these seven ang-els whereof he makes mention ; all that differs much from canonical Scripture, which is reported of that Raphael, and savours of I know not what supersti- tion. Neither will I believe freewill, although the book of Ecclesiasticus confirm it a hundred times. This denying of books to be canonical, because the Jews received them not, was also an old heretical shift, noted and refuted by St. Augustin,j- touching the Book of Wisdom ; which some in his time refused, because it convinced their errors : but must it pass for a sufficient reason amongst Christians to deny such books, because they are not in the canon of the Jews ? Who sees not that the canon of the church of Christ is of more authority with true Christians, than that of the Jews ? For a canon is an assured rule and warrant of direction ; whereby, says St. Augustin, the infirmity of our defect in knowledge is guided, and by which rule other books are known to be God*s word : his reason is,4: Because we have no other assurance that the Books of Moses, the four gospels, and other books, are the true word of God, but by the canon of the church. Whereupon the same great doctor uttered that famous say- ing, I would not believe the gospel, except the authority of the Catholic church moved me thereunto. And that these books which Protestants reject, are by the church numbered in the sacred canon, may be seen above : However, to speak of them, in particular, in their order. THE BOOK OF TOBIAS Is by St. Cyprian, de Oratione Dominica, alleged as divine Scripture, to prove that prayer is good with fasting and alms. St. Ambrose^ calls this book by the common name of Scripture ; saying, He will briefly gather the virtues of Tobias, which the Scripture in historical manner lays forth at large : calling also this history Prophetical, and Tobias a prophet : and in another place,|| alleges this book as he does other holy Scriptures, to prove that the virtues of God's servants far excel the moral philosophers. St. Augustint made a special sermon of Tobias, as he did of Job. St. Chrysostome** alleges it as Scripture, denouncing a curse to the contemners of it. St. Gregoryj-j- also alleges it as holy Scripture. St. Bede expounds this whole book mystically, as he does other holy Scriptures. St. Hierom translated it out of the Chaldee language, judging it more meet to displease the pharisaical Jews who reject it, than not to satisfy the will of holy bishops, urging to have it. Ep. ad Chromat. & Heliodorum. To. 3. In fine, St. Augustin tells us the cause of its being written in these words, — The servant of God, holy Tobias, is given to us after the law, for an example, that we might know how to practise the things which we read. And if temptations come upon us, not to depart from the fear of God, nor expect help from any other than from him. OF THE BOOK OF JUDITH. This book was by Origen, Tertulhan, and other fathers, whom St. Hilary cites, held for canonical, before the first general council of Nice ;^t yet St. Hierom supposed it not so, till such time as he found that the said sacred council reckoned it in the number of canonical Scriptures ; after which he so esteemed it, that he not only translated it out of tlie Chaldee tongue, wherein it was first written, but also, as occasion required, cited the same as Divine Scripture, and sufficient to convince matters of faith in controversy, numbering it with other Scriptures, whereof none doubts, saying, Ruth, Hester, Judith, were of so great renown, that they gave names to sacred volumes. St. Ambrose, St. Augustin, St. Chrysostome, and many other holy fathers, account it for canonical Scripture. * Whit. Contra Camp. p. 17. f S. Aug. lib. de Praedest. Sanct. c. 14. \ S. Aug. hb. 11. c. 5. contra Faustum, & lib. 2. c. 32. contra Cresconium. § S. Amb. lib. de Tobia. c. 1. II Lib. 3. Offic. c. 14. t S. Aug. Serm. 226. de Tern. ** S. Chrysost. Horn. 15. ad Heb. ff S. Greg. part. 3. Pastor, curse admon. 21. +t Sec the Argument in the Book of Judith in the Doway Bible, Tom, 1, 12 OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHALJ PART OF THE BOOK OF HESTER. By tlje councils of Laodicea and Carthage, this book was declared canonical ;* and by most of the ancient fathers esteemed as divine Scripture ; only two or three before the said councils, doubted of its authority. And though St, Hierom, in his time, found not certain parts thereof in the Hebrew, yet in the Greek he found all the sixteen chapters contained in ten : and it is not improbable that these parcels were sometijnes in the Hebrew, as divers whole books which are now lost. But whether they ever were so or not, the church of Christ accounts the whole book of infallible authority, reading as well these parts as the rest in her public office. OF THE BOOKS OF WISDOltf. It is granted, that several of the ancient fathers would not urge these books of Wis- dom, and others, in their writings against the Jews, not that themselves doubted of their authority, but because they knew that they would be rejected by the Jews as not canonical : and so St. Hierom, in respect of the Jews, said these books were not canoni- cal ; nevertheless, he often alleged testimonies out of them, as of other divine Scrip- tures ; sometimes with this parenthesis (si cui tamen placet librum recipere) in cap. 8. and 12. Zacharix : but in his latter writings absolutely without any such restriction, as in cap. 1. and 56. Isaise, and in 18. Jeremise ; where he professes to allege none but canonical Scripture.-j' As for the other ancient fathers, namely, St. Irenacus, St. Clement of Alexandria, Origen, St. Athanasius, St. Basil, St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Gregory Nyssen, St. Epiphanius, St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, &c. they make no doubt at all of their being canonical Scripture, as appears by their express terms, " Divine Scripture, Divine Word, Sacred Letters, Prophetical Saying, the Holy Ghost saith, and the like." And St. Augustine affirms, that, " The sentence of the books of Wisdom ought not to be rejected by certain, inclining to pelagianism, which has so long been pubhcly read in the church of Christ, and received by all Christians, bishops, and others, even to the last of the laity, penitents, and catechumens, cum vene- ratione divinse authoritatis," with veneration of divine authority ? Which also the excel- lent writers, next to the apostle's times, alleging for witness, nihil se adhibere nisi divi- nam testimonium crediderunt, thought that they alleged nothing but divine testimony ."t OF ECCLESIASTICUS, What has been said of the foregoing book, may be said also of this. The holy fathers above named, and several others, as St. Cyprian, de opere & eleemosyna, St. Gregory the Great, in Psal. 50. It is also reckoned for canonical by the third council of Carthage, and by St. Augustine, in lib. 2. c. 8. Doct. Christian. & lib. 17. c. 20. Civit. Dei. OF BARUCH, WITH THE EPISTLE OF JEREMY. Many of the ancient fathers supposed this prophecy to be Jeremiah's, though none of them doubted but Baruch his scribe was the writer of it ; not but that the Holy Ghost directed him in it : and, therefore, by the fathers and councils, it has ever been accepted as divine Scripture. The council of Laodicea, in the last canon, expressly names Ba- ruch, Lamentations, and Jeremiah's Epistle. § * St- Hierom testifies, that he found it in liie Vulgate Latin edition, and that it contains many things of Christ, and the latter times ; though because he found it not in the Hebrew, nor in the Jewish canon, he urges it not against them.H It is by the councils of Florence and Trent expressly defined to be canonical Scripture. ♦Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 1. f Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 2. And Jodoc. Coce. Tom. 1. Thesau. li. 6. Art. 9. ^ S. Aug. in lib. de Praedestinat. Sanct. cap. 14. Et lib. de Civit. Dei. 17. c. 20» § See the Argument of Baruch's Prophgcy in the Doway Bible, Tom. 2. II St. Hierom. in Prsefat. Jeremisc, OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROfESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. 13 OF THE SONG OF THE THREE CHILDREN, THE IDOL, BELL AND DRAGON, WITH THE STORY OF SUSANNA. It is no just exception against these, and other parts of holy Scripture of the Old TeS" tament, to say, they are not in the Hebrew edition, being otherwise accepted for cano- nical by the Catholic church : and further, it is very probable that these parcels were sometime either in the Hebrew or Chaldee ; in which two languages, part in one, and part in the other, the rest of the book of Daniel was written ; for from whence could the Septuagint, Theodotion, Symmachus, and Aquila translate them ? In whose editions St. Hierom found them. But if it be objected, that St. Hierom calls them fables, and so did not account them canonical Scripture ; we answer, that he, reporting the Jewish opinion, uses their terms, not explaining his own judgment, intending to deliver sin- cerely what he found in the Hebrew : yet would he not omit to insert the rest, adver- tising withal, that he had it in Theodotion's translation ; which answer is clearly justified by his own testimony, in these words : " Whereas I relate,*' says he, "what the Hebrews say against the Hymn of the Three Children ; he that foi' this reputes me a fool, proves himself a sycophant ; for I did not write what myself judged, but what they are accus- tomed to say against me."* The prayer of Azarias is alleged as divine Scripture by St. Cyprian, St. Ephrem, St. Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius, and others.f The Hymn of the Three Children is alleged for divine Scripture by divers holy fathers, as also by St. Hierom himself, in cap. 3. ad Gallatos & Epist. 49. de Muliere Septies icta; also, by St. Ambrose, and the council of Toledo, c. 13. So hke wise the history of Susanna is cited for holy Scripture by St. Ignatius, Tertul- lian, St. Cyprian, St. Chrysostom, who in Horn. 7. fine, has a whole sermon on Susanna, as upon holy Scripture : St. Ambrose and St. Augustine cite the same also as canonical. The history of Bell and the Dragon is judged to be divine Scripture ; St. Cyprian, St. Basil, and St. Athanasius, in Synopsi, briefly explicating the argument of the book of Daniel, make express mention of the Hymn of the Three Children, of the history of Susanna, and of Bell and the Dragon. OF THE TWO BOOKS OF MACCABEES. Ever since the third council of Carthage, these two books of the Maccabees have been held for sacred and canonical by the Catholic church, as is proved by a council of seventy bishops, under pope Gelasius ; and by the sixth general council, in approving the third of Carthage ; as also by the councils of Florence and Trent. But because some of the church of England divines would seem to make their people believe, that the Maccabees were not received as canonical Scripture in Gregory the Great's time, consequently not before,^ I will, besides these councils, refer you to the holy fathers, who hved before St. Gregory's days, and alleged these two books of the Maccabees as divine Scripture : namely, St. Clement Alexandrinus, Hb. 1. Stromat. St. Cyprian, hb. 1. Epistolarum Ep. 3. ad Cornehum, hb. 4. Ep. 1. & de Exhort, ad Marty- rium, c. 11. St. Isidorus, Hb. 16. c. 1. St. Gregory Nazianzen has also a whole oration concerning the seven Maccabee martyrs, and their mother. St. Ambrose, lib. 1. c. 41. Office. See in St. Hierom's Commentaries upon Daniel, c. 1. 11, and 12. in how great esteem he hj^d these books ; though, because he knew they were not in the Jewish canon, he would not urge them against the Jews. And the great doctor, St. Augustine, in hb. 2. c. 8. de Doctrina Christiana, & lib. 18. c. 36. de Civit. Dei, most' clearly avouches, that, " Notwithstanding the Jews deny these books, the church holds them canonical." And whereas, one Gaudentius, a heretic, alleged, for defense of his heresy, the example of Razias, who slew himself, 2 Mac. 14. St. Augustine denies not the authority of the book, but discusses the fact, and admonishes, that it is not unprofitaWy received by the church, " If it be read or lieard soberly," which was a necessary admo- nition to those donatists, who, not understanding the holy Scriptures, depraved them, as §tt. Peter^says of like heretics, to their own perdition, i^hich testimonies, I think, may be sufficient to satisfy auy one who is not pertinacious and obstinate, that these two * S. Hier. hb. 2. c. 9. advers. Ruffinum. t Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 2. + See the S^con4 A^indicatioij of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church of £nglund. 14 OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL. books of the Maccabees, as well as others in the New Testament, were received, and held for canonical Scripture, long before St. Gregory the Great's time. Judge now^, good reader, whether the author of the Second Vindication, &c. has not imposed upon the world in this point of the books of the Maccabees. And, indeed, if this were all the cheat he endeavours to put upon us, it were well, but he goes yet fur- ther, and names eleven points of doctrine besides this, which he, with his fellows, quoted in his margin, falsely affirms not to have been taught in England by St. Augustine, the Benedictine monk, when he converted our nation ; telling us, " That the mystery of iniquity," as he blasphemously terms the doctrine of Christ's holy church, " was not then come to perfection." For first, says he, "The Scripture was yet received as a perfect rule of faith." Secondly, " The books of the Maccabees, which you now put in your canon, were rejected then as apocryphal.'* Thirdly, *' That good works were not yet esteemed meritorious." Fourthly, " Nor auricular confession a sacrament." Fifthly, " That solitary masses were disallowed by him." And sixthly, *• Transubstantiation yet unborn." Seventhly, "That the sacrament of the eucharist was hitherto administered in both kinds." What then? so it was also in one kind. Eighthly, "Purgatory itself not brought either to certainty or to perfection." Ninthly, " That by consequence masses for the dead were not intended to deliver souls from these torments." Tenthly, " Nor images allowed for any other purpose than for ornament and instruction. Elev- enthly, " That the sacrament of extreme unction was yet unformed." Then you must, with your master Luther, count St. James's epistle, an epistle of straw. Twelfthly, "And even the pope's supremacy was so far from being then established as it now is, that pope Gregory tliought it to be the forerunner of anti-christ for one bishop to set himself above all the rest.'* I will only, in particular, take notice here of this last of his false instances, because he cites and misapplies the words of St. Gregory the Great, to the deluding of his reader : whereas St. Gregory did not think it anti-christian or unlawful for the pope, whom (not himself, but) our Saviour Christ had set and appointed, in the person of St. Peter, above all the rest, to exercise spiritual supremacy and jurisdiction over all the bishops in the Christian world : but he thought it anti-christian for any bishop to set up himself, as John bishop of Constantinople had done, by the name or title of universal bishop, so as if he alone were the sole bishop, and no bishop but he, in the universe ; and in this sense St. Gregory thought this name or title not only worthily forborne by his prede- cessors, and by himself, but terms it prophane, sacrilegious, and anti-christian ; and in this sense the bishops of Rome have always utterly renounced the title of universal bishop ; on the contrary, terming themselves servi servorum Dei. And this is proved from the words of Andrseus Friccius, a Protestant, whom Peter Martyr terms an excel- lent and learned man. " Some there are," says he, " that object to the authority of Gregory, who says, that such a title pertains to the precursor of anti-christ ; but the rea- son of Gregory is to be known, and may be gathered from his words, which he repeats in many epistles, that the title of universal bishop is contrary to, and doth gainsay the grace which is commonly poured upon all bishops ; he therefore, who calls himself the only bishop, takes the episcopal power from the rest : wherefore this title he would have rejected, &c. But it is nevertheless evident by other places, that Gregory thought that the charge and principality of the whole church was committed to Peter, &c. And yet for this cause Gregory thought not that Peter was the forerunner of anti-christ."* Thus evidently and clearly this Protestant writer explains this difficulty. To this may be added the testimonies of other Protestants, who, from the writings of St. Gregory, clearly prove the bishop of Rome to have had and exercised a power and jurisdiction, not only over the Greek, but over the universal church. The Magdebur- gian centurists show us, that the Roman see appoints her watch over the whole world ; that the apostoUc see is head of all churches; that even Constantinople is subject to the apostolic see.-j- These centurists charge moreover the bishop of Rome, in the very example and person of pope Gregory, and by collection out of his writings, by them par- ticularly alleged, " That he challenged to himself power to command all archbishops, to ordain and depose bishops at his pleasure." And, " That he claimed a right to cite archbishops to declare their cause before him, when they were accused." And also, " To excommunicate and depose them, giving commission to their neighbour bishops to proceed against them." That " In their provinces he placed his legates to know and end the causes of such as appealed to the see of Rome."4: With much more, touching the exercise of his supremacy. To which doctor Saunders adds yet more out of St. Gregory's own works, and in his own words, as, " That the see apostolic, by the autho- * Andrseas Friccius de ecclesia, 1. 2. t. 10. page 579, i: Vid. prseced. Notas. t Centur. 6 Col. 425, 426, 427, 428, 429, 438. OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYf»HAL. 15 Tity of God, is preferred before all churches. That all bishops, if any fault be found in them, are subject to the see apostolic. That she is the head of faith, and of all the faithful members. That the see apostolic is the head of all churches. That the Roman church, by the words which Christ spake to Peter, was made the head of all churches. That no scruple or doubt ought to be made of the faith of the see apostolic. That all those things are false, which are taught contrary to the doctrine of the Roman church. That to return from schism to the Catholic church, is to return to the communion of the bishops of Rome. That he who will not have St. Peter, to whom the keys of heaven were committed, to shut him out from the entrance of life, must not in this world be separated from his see. That they are perverse men, who refuse to obey the see apos- toHc."* Considering all these words of pope Gregory, does not this vindicator of the church of England's doctrine show himself a grand impostor, to offer to the abused ju4gment of his unlearned readers, an objection so frivolous and misapplied, by the advantage only of a naked, sounding resemblance of mistaken words ? To conclude, therefore, in the words of doctor Saunders : " He who reads all these particulars, and more of the same kind that are to be found in the works of St. Gregory, and yet with a brazen forehead, fears not to interpret that which he wrote against the name of universal bishop, as if he could not abide that any one bishop should have the chief seat, and supreme govern- ment of the whole militant church ; that man, says he, seems to me either to have cast off all understanding and sense of a man, or else to have put on the obstinate perverse- ness of the devil.*'f It is not my business in this place, to digress into particular replies against his other false instances^^ of the difference between the doctrine of pope Gregory the Great, and that of the council of Trent : I will therefore, in general, oppose the words of a protest- ant bishop, against this protestant ministerial guide, and so submit them to the consider- ation of the judicious reader. John Bale, a protestant bishop, affirms,^ that « The religion preached by St. Augus- tine to the Saxons was, altars, vestments, images, chalices, crosses, censers, holy vessels, holy waters, the sprinkling thereof, reliques, translation of reliques, dedicating of churches to the bones and ashes of saints, consecration of altars, chalices and corporals, consecration of the font of baptism, chrysm and oil, celebration of mass, the archiepis- copal pall at solemn mass time, Romish mass books; also free will, merit, justification of works, penance, satisfaction, purgatory, the unmarried life of priests, the public invoca- tion of saints and their worship, the worship of images."l| In another place he says, that " Pope Leo the first decreed, that men should worship the images of the dead, and allowed the sacrifice of the mass, exorcism, pardons, vows, monachism, transubstantia- tion, prayer for the dead, offering of the healthful host of Christ's body and blood for the dead, the Roman bishop's claim and exercise of jurisdiction and supremacy over all churches, reliquium pontificics s-uperstitionis chaos, even the whole chaos of popish super- stitions." He tells us, that " Pope Innocent, who lived long before St. Gregory's timgs made the anointing of the sick to be a sacrament."f These are bishop Bale's words ; which this vindicator would do well to reconcile with his own. The fike may be found in other protestants; namely, in doctor Humfrey in Josuitismif part II. The centurists, &c. But now to return to the place where we occasionally entered into this digression : you see by what authority and testimonies both of councils and fathers we have proved these books, which protestants reject, to be canonical: yet, if a thousand times more were said, it would be all the same with the perverse innovators of our age, who are resolved to be obstinate, and, after their bold and licentious manner, to receive or reject what they please ; still following the steps of their first masters, who tore out of the Bible, some one book, some another, as they found them contrary to their erroneous and heretical opinions. For example : Whereas Moses was the first that ever wrote any part of the Scripture, and he who wrote the law of God, the ten commandments ; yet Luther thus rejects both him and his ten commandments:** "We will neither hear nor see Moses, for he was given only to the Jews; neither does he belong in any thing to us." — "I," says he, "will not re- ceiveff Moses with his law ; for he is the enemy of Christ.''^:}: " Moses is the master of * Dr. Saund. Visit. Monar. lib. 7. a N. 433. 541. f Dr. Saunders supra. t You will find some of them hinted at in other places as occasion offers. § Bale in act. Rom. pontif. edit. Basil. 1658. p. 44, 45, 46y 47. & cent. I, Col. 2, )i Pageant of popes, fol. 27. t lb. fol. 26. ** Tom. 3. Germ. fol. 40, 41. & in Colloq. Mensal. Ger. fol. 152, 153. ft In Coloc. Mensal. c. de Lege & Evan. n Ibid. fol. 118. 16 OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHAL.' ' all hangmen."* "The ten commandments belong not to Christians.*' "Let the ten commandments be altogether rejected, and all heresy will presently cease ; for the ten commandments are, as it were, the fountain from whence all heresies spring.'*-)- Islebius, Luther's scholar, taught,t that *' the decalogue was not to be taught in the church :" and from him came§ the sect of antinomians, who publicly taught, that " The law of God is not worthy to be called the word of God : if thou art an whore, if an whore- monger, if an adulterer, or otherwise a sinner, believe, and thou walkest in the way of salvation. When thou art drowned in sin even to the bottom, if thou believest, thou art in the midst of happiness. All that busy themselves about Moses, that is, the ten commandments, belong to the devil, to the gallows with Moses."|| Martin Luther believes not all things to be so done, as they are related in the book of Job : with him it is, " as it were, the argument of a fable."t Castalio commanded the Canticles of Solomon to be thrust out of the canon, as an im- pure and obscene song ; reviling, with bitter reproaches, such ministers as resisted him tsherein.** Pomeran, a great evangelist among the Lutherans, writes thus touching St. James's epistles : " He concludes ridiculously, he cites Scripture against Scripture, which thing the Holy Ghost cannot abide ; wherefore that epistle may not be numbered among other books, which set forth the justice of faith."f-|- Vitus Theodorus, a protestant preacher of Norimberg, writes thus : " The Epistle of James, and Apocalypse of John, we have of set purpose left out, because the Epistle of James is not only in certain places reprovable, where he too much advances works against faith ; but also his doctrine throughout is patched together with divers pieces, whereof no one agrees with another.''^^: The Magdeburgian centurists say, that " the Epistle of Jame« much swerves from the analogy of the apostolical doctrine, whereas it ascribes justification not only to faith, but to works, and calls the law, a law of liberty ."§§ John Calvin doubted whether the Apostles' Creed was made by the apostles. He argued St. Matthew of error. He rejected these words : " Many are called, but few chosen."|lll Clebitius, an eminent protestant, opposes the evangelists one against another : " Mat- thew and Mark," says he, " deliver the contrary ; therefore to Matthew and Mark, bje- ing two witnesses, more credit is to be given than to one Luke,"f f &c. Zuinglius and other protestants affirm, that " all things in St. Paul's epistles are not sacred ; and that in sundry things he erred."*** Mr. Rogers, the great labourer to our English convocation men, names several of his protestant brethren, who rejected for apocryphal the Epistle of Paul to the Hebrews, of St. James, the first and second of John, of Jude, and the Apocalypse. "fff Thus, you see, these pretended reformers have torn out, some one piece or book of sacred Scripture, some another ; with such a licentious freedom, rejecting, deriding, discarding, and censuring them, that their impiety can never be paralleled but by pro- fessed atheists. Yet all these sacred books were, as is said, received for canonical in the third council of Carthage, above thirteen hundred years ago. But, with the church of England, it matters not by what authority books are judged canonical, if the Holy Spirit, in the hearts of her children, testify them to be from God. They telling us, by Mr. Rogers, that they judge such and such books canonical, " not so much because learned and godly men in the church so have, and do receive and allow them, as for that the Holy Spirit in our hearts doth testify, that they are from God." By instinct of which private Spirit in their hearts, they decreed as many as they thought good for canonical, and rejected the rest ; as you may see in the sixth of the thirty-nine articles-^+t * Serm. de Mose. f In Convival. CoUoq. cited by Auri. faber, cap. de Lege. i See Osiander ; Cent. 16. p. 311, 312, 320. § Sleidan Hist. 1. 12. fol. 162. IJ Vid. Confessio. Mansiieldensium Ministrorum Tit. de Antinomis, fol. 89, 90. % In Serm. Convival. Tit. de Patriarch et Prophet, et Tit. de libris Vet. etNov. Test, ** Vid. Beza in Vita Calvini. f\ Pomeran. ad. Rom. c. 8. n In Annot. in Nov. Test. pag. ult. §§* Cent. 1. 1. 2. c. 4. Col. 54. ill! Inst. 1. 2. c. 26. In Matth. 27. Harm, in Matt. 20. 16. ^TI Victoria veritatis et ruina Papatus, Arg. 5. *** Tom. 2. Elench. f. 10. Magdeburg. Cent. 1. 1. 2. c. 10. Col. 580. tit Defence of the 39 Articles, Art. 6. i^^ The private Spirit, not the church, told those protestants who made the 39 arti- cles, what books of Scripture they were to hold for canonical. JOF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA. 17 OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA. The church of England has decreed,* that " such are to be understood canonical books of the Old and New Testament, of whose authority there was never any doubt iu the church :" and, therefore, by this rule she rejects these for apocryphal, viz. Tobit. Baruch, with the Epistle of Jere- Maccabees L Judith. miah. Maccabees II. The rest of Esther. The Song of the Three Children. Manasseth, Prayer of. Wisdom. The Idol, Bell and the Dragon. Esdras III. Ecclesiasticus. The Story of Susanna. Esdras IV.f But if none pass for canonical, but such as were never doubted of in the church, I would know why the church of England admits of such books of the New Testament as have formerly been doubted of? " Some ancient writers doubted of the last chapter of St. Mark's Gospel :t others of some part of the 22d of St. Luke :§ some of the begin- ning of the 8th of St. John: || others of the Epistle to the Hebrews :% and others of the Epistles of St. James, Jude, the second of Peter, the second and third of John, and the Apocalypse."** And Doctor Bilson, a protestant, affirms, that " the Scriptures were not fully received in all places, no, not in Eusebius's time.'* He says, " the Epistles of James, Jude, the second of Peter, the second and third of John, are contradicted, as not written by the apostles. The Epistle to the Hebrews was for a while contradicted,'' &c. The churches of Syria did not receive the second Epistle of Peter, nor the second and third of John, nor the Epistle of Jude, nor the Apocalypse. The like might be said for the churches of Arabia : " Will you hence conclude," says this doctor, '* that these parts of Scripture, were not apostolic, or that we need not to receive them now, because they were for- merly doubted of?" Thus Doctor Bilson.ff And Mr. Rogers confesses, that " although some of the; ancient fathers and doctors accepted not all the books contained in the New Testament for canonical ; yet in the end, they were wholly taken and received by the common consent of the church of Christ, in this world, for the very word of God,"+i: &c. And, by Mr. Rogers's and the church of England's leave, so were also those books which they call apocrypha. J or though they were, as we do not deny, doubted of by some of the ancient fathers, and not accepted for canonical ; " yet in the end," to use Mr. Rogers's words, "they were wholly taken and received by the common consent of the church of Christ, in this world, for the word of God."§§ Vide third council of Car- thage, which decrees, " that nothing should be read in the church, under the name of divine Scriptures, besides canonical Scriptures :" and defining which are canonical, reckons those which the church of England rejects as apocryphal. To this council St. Augustine subscribed, who,||i| with St. Innocent, *llt Gelasius, and other ancient writers, number the said books in the canon of the Scripture. And protestatits themselves con- fess, they were received in the number of canonical Scriptures.*** Brentius, a protestant, says, " there are some of the ancient fathers, who receive these apocryphal books into the number of canonical Scriptures ; and also some councils com- mand them to be acknowledged as canonical, "fj-}- Doctor Covel also affirms of all these books, that, " if Ruffinus be not deceived, they were approved of, as parts of the Old Testament, by the apostles."Ht So that what Christ's church receives as canonical, we are not to doubt of: Doctor Fulk avouches, that " the church of Christ has judgment to discern true writing from counterfeit, and the word of God from the writings of men ; and this judgment she has of the Holy Ghost. §§§ And Jewel says, "the church of God has the spirit of wisdom to discern true Scripture from false."|||||| To conclude, therefore, in the words of the council of Trent: "If any man shall not receive for sacred and canonical these whole books, with all their parts, as they are read in the catholic church, and as they are in the Vulgate Latin edition, let him be ac- cursed."^ f^ * In the 6th of the 39 Articles, f The three last are not numbered in the canon of the Scripture. i See St. Hierom Epist. ad Hed. q. 3. § St. Hilar. 1. 10. de Trin. et Hierom. 1. 2. contr. Pelagian. || Euseb. H. 1. 3. c. 39. t Id. 1. 3. c. 3. ** Et c. 25, 28. Hierom divinis Illust. in P. Jac. Jud. Pet. et Joan, et Ep. ad Dardan. if Sur- vey of Christ. SuflT. p. 664. Vid. 1st and 4th days Confer, in the Tower, anno 1581, n Def. of the 39 Articles, p. 31, Art. 6. 'I^ Third council of Carthage, Can. 47. lill De Doct. Christian. 1. 2. c. 8. tt Epist. ad. Exuper. c. 7. *** Tom. 1. Cone* Decret. cum 70 Episcop. fff Brentius Apol. Conf. Wit. Bucers scripta Ang. p. 713. Ui Covel cont. Burg. p. 76, 77y et78. §§§ Fulk An. to a Countr. Cathol. p. 5. liilll Jewel Def. of the Apol. p. 201. ttif Concil. Trid. Sess. 4. Deer, de Can. Scrip. 3 18 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST THE CHURCH. The Book, Chapter, and Ver. St. Matth. chapt. 16, verse 18. St. Matth. chapt. 18. verse 17. Ephesians, ch. 5, ver. 23, 24, 25, 27, 29, 32. The Vulgate Latin Text. Hebreus, c. 2. V. 23. Canticles, ch. 6. V. 8. Ephesians, ch. 1. ver. 22, 23. Et ego dico tibi, quia tu es Petrus^ et super hanc Pe- tram adificabo ec- cleslam meam, (a* tm uutknarlnv .(a) Quod si non au- dierit eosy die ec- clesiae hcKXHvU si autem eccle- siam txxx»0-/st; non audierity sit tibi sicut Ethnicus et Publicanus. Viri diligite ux- ores vestrasy sicut et Christus dilexit ecclesiam. Ut exhiberet ipsi sibi gloriosam ec- clesiam. Sacramentum hoc est magnum; ego autem dico in Christo et eccle- sia iMxht^vm. jE/ ecclesiam />ri. mitivorum aucx«crk. The true English according to the Rhemish trans- lation. Una est Colum- ba mea. nnN wia. (6) Et ipsum dedit caput supra om- nem ecclesiam qua est corpus ipsius, et plenitudo ejus, qui omnia in omni- bus adimpletur a* 5T\»/M p. 98. ff Mason, Bramhall, &c. ^% Dr. Butler Ejiist. de Consecrat. Minist. 32 PROtESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAInST The Book, Chapter, and Ver. 1 Corinth, chap. 9. The Vulgate Latin Text. (rt) JVwnquid non habeinus potes- tatem muUerem, sororem eiJtk\MV\.\.verbum istud, K TTAyrii ^upta-t, sed quibus datum est. (e) Et sunt eu- nuchi, qui seipsos castraverunt, tuva- nuToiit, propter Regnum Coelorum. The true EngUsh according- to the Ilhemish trans- lation. Have not we power to lead a- bout a * Woman,' a sister, &,c. Yea, and 1 be- seech thee, my sincere 'compan- ion.' Marriage hon- ourable in all, and the bed undefiled. Who said to them, * Not all take this word ;' but they to whom it is given. And there are ' eunuchs' who have made them- selves * eunuchs' for the kingdom of Heaven. Corruptions in the protestant Bi- bles, printed A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. (a) Have not we power to lead about a " wife," a sister ? &c. (b) For compa- nion, they say, * Yoke-fellow.' (c) 'Wedlock' is honourable a- mong all men, &c. (d) < A men cannot re ceive this saying &c. ( of Heaven is it hand. — Preaching the baptism of * penance.* Yield, therefore, fruits • worthy of Corruptions in the protestant Bi- bles, printed A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. • • penance.* But Peter said to them, * do pe- nance,* and be every one of you baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. The last trans- lation of the protestant Bi- ble, edit. Lon- don, an. 1683. (a) * Acknow- ledge your * faults' one to another. {b) — Beza in all his translations has, ' they had amended their lives.' And our other translations say, ' they would have repented.* * Repent,' for the kingdom of Heaven is at hand. Preaching the baptism of * re- pentance.' — Worthy of '.repentance.* Be- za 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 re- pented.* Kspent, &c. Preaching the baptism of * re- pentance.* Fruit worthy of * re- pentance.* — * Repent,' and be baptized, &c. CONFESSION AND THE SACRAMENT OF PENANCE. 37 (d) To avoid this term, " confession," especially in this place, whence the reader might easily gather " sacramental confession," they thus falsify 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 ;" and for sins, they had rather say faults ; ** acknowledge your faults," to make it sound among the ignorant common people, as different as they cart from the usual catholic phrase, " Confess your sins." What mean they by this ? If this acknowleding of faults one to another, before death, be indifferently made to all men, why do they appoint in theii* common-prayer book,* (as it seems, out of this place,) that the sick person shall make a special confession to tlie minister ; and he shall absolve him in the very same form of absolution that catholic priests use in the sacrament of penance ? — And again, seeing themselves acknowledge forgiveness of sins by the minister, why do they not reckon penance, of which confession is a part, amongst the sacraments ? But, I suppose, when they translated their Bibles, they were of the same judgment with the ministers of the diocese of Lincoln.f who petitioned to have the words of absolution l)lotted 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 neces- sarily be opened unto those, to whom the dispensations of God's mysteries is committed.** St. Ambrose, " If thou desirest to be justified, confess thy sin ; for a sincere confession of sins dissolves the knot of iniquity."^: (b) As for penance, and satisfaction for sins, they utterly deny it, upon the heresy of, *' Only faith justifying and saving a man." Beza protests, that he avoids these terms, ftilxvotoc, pcenitentia, and fj^ilocvoim, pcenitentiam agite^ of purpose : and says, that in trans- lating these Greek words, he will always use, resipiscentia and resipiscite, " amendment of life," and *' amend your lives." And our EngHsh Bibles, to this day, dare not venture on the word penance, but only repentance ; which is not only far different from the Greek word, but even from the very circumstances of the text ; as is evident from those of St. Math. 11. and Luke 10. where these words, " sack-cloth 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, § " Sack -cloth makes for penance ; for the fathers, in old time, sitting in sack-cloth 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 pen- ance ?" which penance St. Augustine thus declares, " There is a more grievous and more mournful penance, whereby properly they are called in the church, that are peni- tents ; 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 partakers thereof, with weeping and lamentations they cast themselves far on the ground : then the bishop, weeping also with compassion, lifts them up ; and, after a certain time enjoined, absolves them from their penance, 'this the priests or bishops of Rome keep, from the very beginning, even until our time." Not only Sozomen, but Socrates|| also, and all the ancient fathers, when they speak of penitents, that confessed and lamented their sins, and were enjoined penance, and per- formed 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 coun- cil of Laodicealj 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 penance, and confessed their fault,** are then to be received : and when the fii'st council of Nice speaks of shortening or prolonging the days of pen- ance : when St. Basilff speaks after the same manner : when St. Chrysostom calls the sack-cloth and fasting of the Ninevites, for certain days, " Tot dierum pcenitentiarriy 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 prescribed 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 interpreter translates, and do all expound the same penance, and doing penance : for example, see St. Augustine, among others -M where you will find it plain, that he speaks of painful or " penitential works, for satisfaction of sins.'' * Visitation of the sick. \ Survey of the Common-prayer Book. + St. Basil, in regulis brevior. Interrogatione 288. St. Amb. lib. de psenit. cap. 6. § St. Basil in Psalm 29, St. Aug. Hom. 27. Inter. 50. H. & Ep. 108. Sozom. lib. 7. cap. 16. See St. Hierom. in Epitaph. Fabiol. || Socrat. lib. 5. cap. 19. \ Council of Laodicea, Can. 2, 9, & 19. •* 1 Council of Nice. Can. 12. ft St. Basil, cap. 1. ad Amphiloch. 4+ St. Aug. Ep. 108. ;8 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST THE The Book, Chapter, and Ver. St. Luke, chapt. 1. verse 28. St. Matth. chapt. 1. Terse 25. Genesis, chapt. 3. Terse 15. 2 St. Peter, chapt. 1. verse 15. Psalm 138. jEng. Bible, 139, verse 17. The Vulgate Latin Text. (a) ^vCf gratia plena, Dominus te- cum %i^a.fiTUfA.m, The true English according to the Rhemish trans- lation. Hail, full of grace, our Lord is with thee. (6) Fa vocavit nomen ejus Jesunti xat txaKia-B to ovofca. UVTV IncTHv. (c) Ipsa conteret caput tuum, et tu insidiaberis calca- neo ejus. (c?) Dabo autem operant et frequen- ter habere vos post obi turn meuniy ut horum memoriam faciatis. And * called' his name Jesus. (e) JVimis hono- rificati sunt amici tuif yyy 01 t»txot a-v. Deus ; nimis coiu fortatns est pHnci- patus eorum Dn^t^Kn JDXy ai ag^ai avTuv. She shall bruise thy head in pieces, and thou shalt 'lie in wait for her heel.' And I will do my endeavour ; you to have often after my decease also, that you may keep a memory of these things. Thy friends, O God, are become exceedingly hon- ourable ; their princedom is ex- ceedingly strengthened. Corruptions in the Protestant Bi- bles, printed A, D. 1562, 1577, 1579. (a) Hail, thou that art freely be- loved. In Bible, 1577. Thou that art in high favour. (b) And Mie' called his name Jesus. (c) It shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt * bruise his heel.* (d) I will en- deavour that you may be able, after my decease, to have these things * always in re- membrance.' (e) How dear are thy councils (or thoughts) to me ? O ! how great is the sum of them ? The last trans- lation of the Protestant Bi- ble, Edit. Lon- don,annol683. In Bible, 1637. Hail, thou that art highly fa- voured. In Bi- ble, 1683. Hail, thou that art highly favoured, our Lord is with thee. And « he' call- ed his name Je- sus. It shall bruise thy head, and thou shalt ' bruise his heel.* I will endea- vour, that you may be able af- ter my decease, to have these things always in * remembrance.* How precious also are thy thoughts unto me, O God ! How great is the sum of them! HONOUR OF OUR BLESSED tADY AND OTHER SAINTS. 39 (a) The most B. 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 ^ives her the transcendant title of the Mother of Go. 132. Introibimu^ in tabernaculum ejus, adorabimus in lo- co, ubi steterunt pedes ejus. We will enter into his taberna- cle, we will ' a- dore in the place where his fee.t stood.' We will * Fall down before his foot-stool.' The last transla- tion of the pro- testant Bible, edit. London, anno. 1683. By faith Ja- cob, when he was a dying, blessed both the sons of Joseph, * And worship- ped, leaning up- on the top of his staff'.' And Israel * Bowed himself upon' the bed's head. Exalt the Lord our God, and ' Worship at his foot-stool, for he' is holy. We will go into his taber^ nacles, we will * Worship at his foot-stool.' TdE DISTINCTION Ot RELATIVE AND DIVINE WORSHIP. (-41 (a) Tni: sacred council of Trent decrees, tliat " the images of Christ, of the Vir^n Mother of God, and of other saints, are to be had and retained, especially in churches ; and that due honour and worehip 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 that 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 resemble : 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.* 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 himselff Between which degrees of worship, Latria et Dulia, protestants are so loth to make any distinction, that, in this place, they restrain the Scripture to the sense of one doctor ; insomuch that they make the commentary of St. Augustine, (peculiar to him alone) the very text of Scripture, in their translation ; thereby excluding all other senses and ex- positions 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 antiquity, but in St. Augustine only, as Beza himself confesses. And here they add two words more than are in the Greek text, " Leaning and God :** forcing avrov to signify dvTov, which may be, but is as rare as virgae ejus. For virg£ suae ; and turning the other words clear out of their order, place, and form of construction, which they must needs have corres- pondent and answerable to the Hebrew text, from whence they were translated ; which Hebrew words themselves translate in this order, " He worshipped towards the bed*s- head ;" and if so, according to the Hebrew, then did he worship " towards the top of his sceptre," according to the Greek ; the difference of both being only in these wofds, sceptre and bed ; because the Hebrew is ambiguous as to both, and not in the order and construction of the sentence. {b) 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, and totally suppress " worshipped God" in another ? Is it not because they are afraid, lest those expressions might war- rant and confirm the catholic and Christian manner of adoring our Saviour Christ, to- wards the holy cross, or before his image, the crucifix, the altar, &c. ? And though.they make so much of the Greek particle, £ct<, as to translate it «* leaning upon**^ rather than " towards ;" yet the ancient Greek fathers^: 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 significa- tion 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 adoration of " the thing;" how come these, our new translators, thus to strain and rack the little particle, izfij to make it signify " leaning upon," and utterly to exclude it from signifying any thing tending towards adoration ? 1 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 prepositions, " Adore ye his holy hill: we will adore the place where his feet stood : adore ye his foot-stool ;" for they know the same preposition is used also, when it is said, " Adore ye our Lord ;" or, as themselves translate it, " Worship the Lord ;'* where there can be no force nor signification of the preposition : and, therefore, in these places, their translation is corrupt and wilful ; when they say, " We will fall down be- fore," or, " at his foot-stool," &.c. Where they shun and avoid, first, the term of adora- tion, which the Hebrew and Greek duly express, by terms correspondent in both lan- ,g-uages throughout 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 " to- wards" these holy things and places : and much more the Hebrew phrase, which is, to adore the very things rehearsed. •' To adore God's foot-stool," as the psalmist saith, ** because it is holy," or, "because he is holy," whose foot-stool it is, as the Greek readeth. And St, Augustine so precisely and religiously reads, " Adore ye liis foot- stool," 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. • Council Trident, sess. 25. f 2 Concil. Nicen. Act. 7. ^ St. Chrys. Occum in Collection, St. Datnasc. lib. 1. pro imaglnib. L^ont. apud Daiuas. 6 42 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINSt The Book, Chapter, and Ver. The Vulgate Latin Colossians, chapt. 3. verse 5. (a)- Et ava- ritiam, que last transla- tion of the protestant Bi- ble, edit. Lon- don, an. 1683. It is corrected in this transla- tion. I will go down into the * grave.* Instead of* Hell, they say * grave.' With sorrow un- to * the grave.' —Unto • Hell. * To the gi-ave.' For « Hell,' they also say, ' grave.' With sorrow unto the * grave.* — To the * grave.* LIMBUS PATRUM AND PtJRGATORY. 49 The doctrine of our pretended reformers is, that " There was never, from the begin- ning 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 doctrine includes many erro- neous branches : first, that all the holy patriarchs, prophets, and other holy men, of the Old Testament, went not into the third place, called Abraham's bosom, or limbus patrum ; but immediately to Heaven : that they were in Heaven before our blessed Saviour had suffered death for their redemption : whence it will follow, 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, concerning our Sa- viour's descent into Hell, must either be put out, as indeed it was by Beza in the Confes- sion 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 suffer- ing of Hell-torments, and pains upon the cross.* (a) 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 derelingues cadaver meum in Sepxdchro ,- for that which tlie Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, and St. Hierom, according to the Hebrew, say, non derelinques animam meam in Inferno : thus the prophet David spake it in Hebrew :f thus the Septuagint uttered in Greek : thus the apostle St. Peter alleges it : thus St. Luke in the Acts of the Apostles : and for this St. Augustine calls him 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 doc- trine of limbus patrum and purgatory. And therefore, because else it would make for the papists doctrine, he translates animam^ carcase ; infernum^ grave. t 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 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 Person in the Grave :" as though either man's soul or life were in the grave, or anima might be translated person. 1 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 corrected 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 turns ? By their putting grave in the text, they design to make it a certain and absolute conclusion, howsoever you interpret soul, that the Holy Scripture, in this place, speaks not of Christ's being in Hell, but only in the grave ; and that according to his soul, life, or person ; or, as Beza says, his carcase. And so his " Soul in Hell," as the Scripture 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 loosed." And the words of St. Irenaeus are equally plain : " During the three days he conversed where the dead were : as the prophecy says of him, he remembered his holy ones who were dead, those who before slept in the Land of Promise ; he descend- ed to them, to fetch them out, and save them."|| (6) 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 ; Avhereas, 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 Grave, and not Hell, as the word is in Hebrew, Greek, and Latin ? But I must demand of our latter translators, why they did not correct this, as they have done the foraier, 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 tlieir ignorant readers believe, that the , patriarch Jacob spoke of his body only to descend into the grave to Josepli's body : for as concerning Jacob's soul, that, by their opinion, was to ascend immediatejiy after his death into Heaven, and not descend into the grave. But if Jacob was 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 de- voured by a beast, and his soul is gone up to Heaven :" well, " I will go down to him into the Grave." * Calvin's Instit. lib. 2. c. 16. Sect. 10. and in his Catechism, f Psal. 15. ver. 10. t SeeBeza's Annotat. in Act. 2. § St. Chrys. in Eph. 4. || S, Irenseus, lib. 5. fine. 7 50 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST The Book, chapter, and Ver. Psalm 85. ver. 13. Psalm 89. ver. 49. Hosea, chap. 13. ver. 14. 1 Corinth, chap. 15. ver. 55. Psalm 6. ver. 5. Proverbs, chap. 27. ver. 20. Hebrews, chap. 5. ver. 7. The Vulgate Latin Text. The true English according to the Rhemish trans- lation. (a) Et eruisti animam ineam ex Inferno inferiori. (b) Emit ani- mam suam manu Inferi ? Ero mors tuat O morSf morsus tuus ero Inferne, SjNa'. Ubi est, morsy sti- mulus tuus ? ubi esty Inferne, victo- ria tua P ciSn. In Inferno au- tern quis cotifitebi- tur tibi ? Infernus & per- ditio nunquam im- plentur. ■ (c) Qui in die- bus carnis suce pre- ces svpplicationes- que ad eum, qtn possit ilium salvnm facere a morte, cian clamor e valido & lachrymis offerens, exauditus est pro sua reverentia, a.'ao T%g iv\a(ieioig. Corruptions in the protestant Bi- bles, printed A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. Thou hast deh- vered my soul from the * lower Hell.* Shall he dehver his soul from the hand of ♦ Hell ?' O death, I will will be thy death, I will be thy sting, O * Hell.* Where is, O death, thy sting ? where is, O *Hell,' thy victory ? But in *HelV who shall confess to thee ? - *Heir and de- struction are never full. Who in the days of his flesh, with a strong cry and tears, offering prayers and sup- plications to him that could save him from death, was heard • for his reverence.' (a) Thou hast delivered my soul from the * lowest Grave.* (b) Shall he de- liver his soul from the hand of the Grave ?' — O * Grave,' I will be thy de- struction. O death, where is thy sting ? O * Grave,* where is thy victory ? The last translS' tion of the pro- testant Bible, edit. London, anno 1683. They say, the Grave.* In * The Grave and destruction are never f":ll. (c) 'Which* in days of his flesh, * offered up' pray ers, with strong 'crying, unto' him that * was able to' save him from death, * and* was heard, * In that which he feared.' Instead of * lower' Hell, they say, ' low- est* Hell. Shall he de- liver his soul from the hand of the « Grave?* O death, I will be thy plagues ,* O « Grave,* I will be thy destruc- tion. For *HelV 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. 5 1 (a) Understand, good reader, that in the Old Testament none ascended Into Heaven. •* This way of the hoUes," as the apostle says, " being not yet made open ;"* 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 Scripture, 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, de- scended not to the grave, which received their bodies only ; but adinferosy " int(.»IIell," a common receptacle for their souls. So we say in our creed, that our Saviour Christ himself descended into Hell, accord- ing to his soul. So St. Hierom, speaking of the state of the Old Testament,! says, « If Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob were in Hell, who was in the kingdom of Heaven V* 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 bo- som, saw the rich glutton afar off in Hell : and that, therefore, both Abraham and Laza- rus seem to have been in Heaven, the same holy doctor resolves it, that Abraham and Laz^us 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,t in the psalm, " Thou hast de- livered my soul from the lower Hell ;" who makes this sense of it, that the lower HeU is the place wherein the damned are tormented ; the higher Hell is that, wherein the soids of the just rested, caUing both places by the name of Hell. To avoid this distinc- tion of the inferior and higher Hell, our first translators, instead of lower Hell, rendered it lowest grave ; which they would not for sharoft \\A\f done, had they not been afraid to say in any place of Scripture (how plain soever) that any soul was delivered or return- ed from HeU, 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 loth were our translators to hear the Scripture speak of Limbus Patrum or Pur- gatory, 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 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."§ 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 darken- ed," &c. So he (the prophet) calls Hell, says lie ; " For although it were Hell, yet it held the holy souls, and precious vessels, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob."|| (6) 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 Limbus Patrum^ they are sure to translate it grave ; a word as much contrary to the sig- nification 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, VjNty oi^m, Iiifernus? If I ask them, what words they will bring from those languages to signify grave, must they not say, ^^p Ta^icr£Ta« TC(tcopiiv <^upulu : whereas by the protestant transla- tion, he might have said, o x.'^pav %ufiiTa. Vide above. * Beza Nov. Test. 1580. -j; Whitaker, page 18. t See Beza's Annot. in Rem. 2. 27. § St. August, de gra. &. lib, iVrbitr, cap. 4. 8 58 PUOTESTAKT TRANSLA'llONb AGAINST The Book, Chapter, and Ver. Romans, chapt. 5. verse 18. Romans, chapt. 4. verse 3. 2 Corinth, chapt. 5. verse ult. Ephesians, chapt. 1. verse 6. Daniel, chapt. 6. verse 22. Komans, chapt. 4. verse 6. 'I'he Vulg-ate Latin Text. (a) Igitur sicut per uiiius delictum in omnes homines in co7idemnationem : sic et per uninsj'us- tiliam in omnes ho- mines in jiistijica- tionem vita. (b) Credidit Abraham DeOf et reputatum est illi ad justitiam. ng Jtv.uio head, these three bishops, with other ten or eleven, all catholics, were deprived and de- posed 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 Uving, 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 thjsir bishoprics." Hollinshead has 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 bishopric, Sec. and was committed to Matthew Parker, bishop of Canterbury, who used him very honourably, 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, de- part this life at Lambeth, where he first received his consecration." By this it appears, that Matthew Parker was bishop of Canterbury, and lived in the bishop's palace at Lam- beth, consequently installed in the bishopric, which he could not be before he was con- secrated, 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. Yeai by Hollinshead it evidently appears, that they wete elected immediately, or, how- ever, 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 London." The truth of wliat I have here set down from Hollinshead and Stow, is unquestiona- ble : but if it agree not with Mr. Mason, and Doctor Bramhall, and their Lambeth re- cords, shall we not have just cause to reject these as forged ? But, before we compare them together, let us first see v^hat accordance and agreement is found among the records and recorders themselves. First, in the queen's letters patent, or commission for consecrating Matthew Parker,^ 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 suflVagan's name ; and therefore for making sure work, call 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 suffragan, viz. whether of Bedford or Do- ver ? And whether tliere was any other suffragan there besides himself, if we suppose that the J^ambeth jYotarius Publicus could be ignorant of such circumstances. Secondly, Mr. Sutchff affirms, that Parker was consecrated by Barlow, Coverdale, Seorey, and two suffragans. But by our pretended register, we find but one suffragan at that solemnity. § * Bram. page 85. f See John Stow and Hollinshead, in an. 1. Eliz, i See D. Bram. p. 87, 89, 90. § Sutclilf against Dr. Kellison, p. 5. 10 " 74 PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS Thirdly, Mr. Mason, and his records, stile him suffragan of Bedford : but by Doctor Butler he is called suffrag-an of Dover.* Fourthly, in Mr. Mason, we hear tell but of one commission from the queen, for the conformation and consecration of Matthew Parker. But Bramhall, by more diligent search among the records, finds two ; the first dated September the 9th.f Fifthly, by which commission it appears, Parker was elected before the 9th of Sep- tember : but Mr. Mason says, he was elected about the beginning of December. Thus they concur one with another : and to compare them with Richard Hollinshead, and John Stow's chronicles, 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 in Stow and Hollinshead, w^e find him and others called bishops elect, on the 9th of September. Yea, seeing Hollinshead calls Grindall newly elect on the 12th of August, we may easily conclude, that Matthew Par- ker, the metropolitan, was also elected before that time ; which, you see, is about four months before Mason's election by Conge d'Elire. Seventhly, Mr^ Mason affirms, that the see of Canterbury continued void till Decem- ber, 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 Canter- bury, and lived in the bishop's palace at Lambeth, where he had bishop Tunstal commit- ted, prisoner, to his charge, long before the 17th of December : for on the 18th of No- vember, 1559, the said bishop Tunstal died. Eighthly, Doctor Bramhall, as is said, from our new-made records, brings us a com- mission, 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 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 Aiigl. 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 protestant 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 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 commission, dated December 6 .'' Her majesty was not ignorant that their consciences had been too tender to permit thera to swear herself head of the church of England : and that rather than gall their so ten- der consciences, they were content to lose their bishoprics, and suffer perpetual impi'i- sonment: could she, ifpon 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 Vlth was from queen Mary's ? Could she suppose, that they would make bishops in that church, whereof themselves refused to be members ? Could she think, that those catho- lic bishops would consecrate Parker, according to king Edward the Vlth's form of con- secration, which they had in queen Mary's days declared to be invalid and null ; and which, at this time, was also illegal ? Or could the queen easily imagine, that Matthew Parker and tlie 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 cat the very name, itself, of bishop .' Let the impartial reader consider these things. How our present pretended bishops themselves wijl 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 " Mat- thew Parker was never consecrated at Lambeth : that the said records are forged : and that themselves are but mere laymen, without mission, without succession, without con- secration," * Butler Ep. dd Consecrat. Minist. f Bram. p. 83, BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 75 Ninthly, it js 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. Doubt- less he omitted it not through negligence or forgetfulness, seeing he is not unmindful to set down the consecration of cardinal Pole, Parker's immediate predecessor, and the very day" on which he said his first mass. Nor does it appear to have been through for- getfulness, that Hollinshead mentions 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 punctiho, as to have told us of the chapel's being " adorned 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 tittle 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 circumstances render them not a whit the more credible.* 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 episco- pal character, but to queen Elizabeth's letters patent, and an act of parliament ? If so, I see no great reason why they should find fault with their ancient name and title of par- liamentary bishops. Who ever 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 consented to the making 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 Mat- thew 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 Eliza- beth had revived the act of 25 Henry VIII. SO. which authorized the same. Nor can they say that king Edward the Vlth's form was then iu being, in the eye of the law ; for that part of the act of Edward the Vlth which established the book of ordination, having been repealed by queen Mary, was not revived till six years after the pretended consecration of Matthew Parker, viz. till the 8th of Elizabeth, as is easily proved. For whereas the act of 5 and 6 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 Com- .mon Prayer. This act, as to both these parts, was repealed 1 queen Mary ; and this re- peal was reversed 1 Elizabeth, 1. as to that part which concerned the Book of Common Prayer only : for so runs the act, " The said statute of repeal, and every thing therein contained, only, concerning the said Book, viz. of Common Prayef, authorized by Ed- ward VI. shall be void, and of no effect." And afterwards^ 8 Elizabeth, 1. 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 Common Prayer, and authorized 5 and 6 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 estabhshing, 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 Elizabeth re- versing that repeal, as to the Book of Common Prayer oxly, did plainly and directly ex- * Several ridiculous circumstances mentioned in the records, which yet render them less credible. 76 tnOTESTANT CORRUPTIONS elude 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 consecration 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 Iloman form, by reviving the act 25 Henry VIJI. 20 ? Yea, it had been as easy to make that form legal, as it was afterwards to declare them bishops by act of parhameiit ; and, doubtless, more commendable. But admit Matthew Parker, and the rest of queen Ehzabeth'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 whom I will refer my reader. Yea, the protestant bishops and clergy themselves have judged the said form to be invalid ; and therefore thought necessary to repair 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 ? 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 charac- ter than if it had continued still invalid, and never been altered. The present protest- ant bishops, who changed the form of their own consecration upon their adversaries ob- jections of the invalidity thereof, (for immediately after Erastus Senior was published against it, they altered it, viz. anno 1662) might as well submit to be ordained by ca- tholic bishops ; or else, with the presbyterians, utterly deny an episcopal character, as allow, by altering the form after so long time and dispute, that it was not sufficient to make themselves, and their predecessors, priests and bishops. What has hitherto been said, concerning the nullity of their character, is yet further confirmed by their altering the 25lh of their 39 articles : for these first bishops, Parker, Horn, Jewel, Grindall, &c. understanding the condition in which they were, for want of consecration 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 addi- tion; especially to that article wherein they speak of the sacraments: for. Whereas Cranmer's 25th or 26tli 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 epis- copal hands, for I beheve they set not much by John Scorey's hands and Bible in the Naggs-Head, declared, that *' God ordained not any visible sign or ceremony for tiie five last, commonly called sacraments ;" whereof holy orders is one. This alteration and addition you may see in doctor HeyUn*s Appendix to Ecclesia Jiestaurata, 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 doc- trine contiimed long among them, as appears by Mr. Rogers, in his Defence of the 39 Articles, who affirms, that " None but disorderly papists will say that order is a sacra- ment ;" and demands, " Where can it be seen, in Holy Scripture, that orders or priest- hood is a sacrament? what form has it ? (says he) what promise ? what institution from Christ ?"* But after they began to pretend to have received an episcopal character from Roman catholic bishops, and to put out their Lambeth records in defence of it, they disliked this doctrine, and taught the contrary, viz. that ordination is a sacrament. " We deny not ordination to be a sacrament," says doctor Bramhall, " though it be not one of these two which are generally necessary to salvation."! By order of this convocation the Bible of 1562 was printed, where the aforesaid text, " When they had ordained to them priests," &,c. was translated, " When they had or- dained elders by election ;" which, as soon as they began to thirst after the glorious character of priests and bishops, they corrected. And though Cranmer cared as little for any visible signs, imposition of hands, or cere- monies in ordination, as the other first protestant reformers, and according to their prac- tice 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."^ When they were thus doing ; " All this," quoth the archbishop, " needed not, I had myself done with this geer long ago." And also by his doctrine ; that, " In the New Testament, he that is appointed to be a priest or * Defence of the 39 Articles, page 154, 155. f See Mason and Dr. Bram. page 97. + Fox's Act and Monuments, fol. 216. BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 77 bishop, needs no confirmation by the Scripture ; for election thereunto is sufficient.** Though, I say, Cranmer 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 imposition of true bishop's 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, concluded holy orders not to be a sacrament. And though, I say, the church of Eng- land 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 corruption, yet this change of the matter does no more make them now true priests and bishops, than their last change of tlie form of ordination, in the year 1662, soon after the happy restoration of king Charles the second. Ecclesia non est, guce 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 or dination ; yet seeing they glory also in assuming to themselves the name of pastors, pas- tor of St. Martin's, &c. it may not be unseasonable to propose a few queries, touching their pastoral jurisdiction. * I. Whether it is not a power of the keys, to institute a pastor over a flock of clergy and people ? II. Whether any but a pastor can give pastoral jurisdiction ? III. Whether any bishop, but the bishop of the diocese, or commissioned from him, or his superior, can validly institute a pastor to any parochial church, within such a dio- cese ? IV. Whether any number of bishops can validly confirm, or give pastoral jurisdic- tion to the bishop, of any diocese, if the metropohtan, or some authorized by him, or his superior, be not one ? V. Or to the metropolitan of a province, if the primate of the nation, or some author- ized by him, or his superior, be not one ? VI. Whether any but the chief patriarch of that part of the world, or authorized by him, can validly give pastoral jurisdiction to the primate of a nation ? VII. Whether the bishop of Rome is not chief patriarch of the western church, con- sequently of this nation ? VIII. Whether Mat. Parker, the first protestant pretended archbishop of Canterbury, received his pastoral jurisdiction from the bishop of Rome, or from others by hfm author, ized ? or, IX. Whether those who made Mat. Parker primate of England, or archbishop of Can- terbury, had any jurisdiction to that act, but what they received from queen Elizabeth ? X. Whether queen EUzabeth had the power of the keys, either of order or jurisdic- tion ? XI. Whether it is not an essential part of the catholic church to have pastors ? XII. Whether salvation can be had in a church wanting pastors? XIII. Whether they do not commit a most heinous sacrilege, who having neither valid ordination,, nor pastoral jurisdiction, do notwithstanding take upon them to administer sacraments, and exercise all other acts of episcopal and priestly fuhctions ? XIV. 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 P , XV. Whether those, who assume to themselves the names and offices of bishops and priests, take upon them to teach, preach, administer sacraments, and perform all other episcopal and priestly functions, without vocation, without ordination, without consecra- tion, without succession, without mission, or without pastoral jurisdiction, are not the very men of whom our blessed Saviour charged us to beware ?* XVI. To conclude, whether it is wisdom in the people of England, to hire such men at the charge of perhaps above 1,000,000^. per annum, to lead them the broad way to perdition ? * Mat. 7. 15. 7s PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS axotheh coniiuPT addition against the tehpetual sacuifice or CHRIST'S BODY AND BLOOD. Protestants teach, in the 31st of the 39 articles, " That the offering* of Clirist 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 churcli of Eng- land 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 pro- pitiation for our sins. And because they would have this false and erroneous doctrine of their*s backed by sacred Scripture, they most egregiously corrupt the text, Heb. x. verse 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 ob- lation of the body of Jesus Christ once :" which they corruptly read, in their last trans- lation, — " By the which will we are sanctified, througli the offering of the body of Jesus Christ once, for all." By which addition they endeavour 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 beheves and teaches, *' That our Lord God, al- though 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, according 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 apostles, whom then he ordained priests of the New Testament, that they should receive it ; and by tlie words he commanded them, and their successors in priesthood, that they should offer it, " Do ye this in commemo- ration 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 oflfered 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 offer- ed, not only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions, and other necessities of the faithful that are living, but also such as are dead in Christ, as not yet fully purged."* This is the catholic doctrine, delivered in the sacred council of Trent, which the church of England calls blasphemies, fables, and dangerous deceit*; and against which they falsify the sacred text of Scripture, 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 by apostolical tradition ; I will give you these following testimonies from the fathers of the first five hundred years. St. Cyprian says,f " 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 offered bread and wine, that he blessed Abraham ; for who is more a priest of God most high, than our Lord Jesus Christ, who offered sa- crifice to God the Father, and offered the same that Melchizedek had offered, bread and wine, viz. his body and blood ?" And a little after: " That therefore in Genesis the blessing might be rightly celebrated about Abraham by Melchizedek the priest, the image, or figure of Christ's sacrifice, consisting in bread and wine, went before ; which thing our Lord perfecting and per- forming, offered bread, and the chalice mixed with wine, and he, that is the plenitude, fulfilled the verity of the prefigured image." ♦ Concil. Trid. sess. 22. cap. 1. cap. 2. f Ep. 53. ad Cseciliuin. BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 79 The same holy father, in another place, as cited also by the Magdeburgian centurists,* in this manner, " Our Lord Jesus Christ," says Cyprian, lib. ii. 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 remembrance of him : and that priest truly executes Christ's place, who imitates that which Clirist did; and then he offers in the church a true and full sacrifice to God." This saying so displeases the centurists, that they say, " Cyprian affirms superstitiously, that the priest executes Christ's place in the supper of our Lord." St. Hierom,f " 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, of- fered bread and wine, and dedicated the Christian mystery in our Saviour's body and blood."- Again, " Melchizedek offered not bloody victims, but dedicated the sacrament of Christ in bread and wine, a simple and pure sacrifice." And yet more plainly in ano- ther place, " Our ministry," says he " is signified in the word of Order, not by Aaron, in immolating brute victims, but in offering bread and wine, that is, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus." St. Augustine expressly teaches, that " Melchizedek bringing forth the sacrament, or mystery, of our Lord's table, knew how to figure his eternal priesthood.":^: — " There first appeared," says he in another place, " that sacrifice which is now offered to God by Christians, in th.e whole world.§ 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 fa'ithful 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 ortler of Melchizedek." And in Cone. 2. psal. xxxiii. he expressly teaches, " That Clirist, of his body and blood, instituted a sacrifice, according to the order of Melchi- zedek." • Nothing can be more plain than these words of St. Irenaeus, in which he affirms of Christ, thatjj " 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 ungrate- ful, 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 Testa- ment ; 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 among the Gentiles; and in every place, incqnse is offered to my name, and a pure sacuifick, because my name is great among the Gentiles, saith our Lord Almighty, manifestly sig- nifying by these things, because the former people indeed ceased to offer to God ; but in every place a sacrifice is offered to God, and this pure, for his name is glorified among the Gentiles." Thus St. Irenseus, whose words so touch the protestant centurists, that they say, "Irenxus, &c. seems to speak very incommodiously, when he says, he, Christ, taught the new oblation of the New Testament, whicii the church receiving from the apostles, offered to God over all the world." • Eusebius Csesariensis.t " 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 purk host." St. Jo. Chrysostome expounding the words of the prophet Malachy, says,** " The church, which every where carries about Christ in it, is prohibited from no place; but in every place there are altars, in eveiy 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, Stc. Mark, how clearly and • Inthe Alphab. Table of the 3 Cent, under the letter S. col. 83. f Ep. ad Marcel, ut Migret. Bethleem. Ep. ad Evagr. Qusest. in Gen. c. 14. + Ep. 95. § Lib. 16. de Ci. Dei, c. 22. See him also lib. 17. c. 17. and lib. 18. c. 35. cum Psalm 109. lib. 1. contr. Advers. Leg. & Prophet, c. 20. Serm. 4. de Sanctis Innocentibus. II Lib. 4. Advers. Haer. c. 32. i Lib. 1. demonstrat. Evang. c. 10, ** Ad. Psal. 95. 80 PROTESTANT COttRUPTIdNS plainly he interprets the mystical table, which is the unbloody host, and the pure per- fume 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 vene- rable sacrifice is indeed tlie prime pure host." Is it not a thing to be admired, that the church of England should riot 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 * " A visible sacri- fice." f " The true sacrifice." t " The daily sacrifice." § " The sacrifice according to* the order of Melchizedek." || " The sacrifice of the body and blood of Clirist."' ^ " The sacrifice of the altar." ** " The sacrifice of the church." |f " The sacrifice of the New Testament." tt " Which succeeded to all sacrifices of the Old Testament." And that it was offered for the health of the emperor, Sacrificamvs pro salute imperatorisy says Tertullian, de Scapul. e. 2. That it was offered for the sick. Pro injirmis etiam sacrijt- catnus, says St. Chrysostome, Horn. 27. in Act Apos. " For those upon the sea, and for tlie fruits of the earth," idem. And for the purging of houses infected with wicked spirits. St. Aug. de Civ-it. Dei, lib. 22. c. 8, says, that " One went and offered," in the house infected, " the sacrifice of Christ's body, praying that the vexation might cease ; and by God's mercy it ceased immediately." In the first council of Nice, can. 14. we find these words, " The holy council has been informed, that in some places and cities the deacons distribute the sacrament to priests : neither rule nor custom has delivered, that they who have not power to offer sacrifice, should distribute the body of Christ to them who offer." — See also, concil. 3. Braca- rense, can. 3. and 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 Bellarrain, page 167, reprehends Origen, St. Athanasius, St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostome, St. Augustine, St. Gregory the Great, and venerable Bede, for maintain- ing " 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 §§ who affirms, thai in Gregory the Great's time, " masses for the dead were not intended to dehver 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 himself, concerning Pur- gatory, and the benefits souls there receive, by the offering up of this propitiatory sacri- fice. In his fourth Book of Dialogues, cap. 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 monastery 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 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. Aug. de Civit. Dei, lib. 10. c. 19. f St. Cypr. 1. 2. ep. 3. & St. Aug. cit. c. 20. ^ Aug. cit. c. 16. & cone, tolet. 1 can. 5. Origen. in Num. Horn. 23. § S. Cyprian, 1. 2. ep.3. & Aug. Ub. 16. c. 22. de Civit. Dei. II Et lib. 22. c. 8. et li. 20. contr. Faustum c, 18. et S. Hierom li. 3. contr. Pelag. Aug. in Psal. 33. con. 2. to 8. et. S. Chrys. lib. 1 Cor. Horn. 24. ^ St. Aug. in Enchiridion c. 110. et de Cura pro mortuis, c. 18. ** Et de Civit. Dei. 1. 10. c. 20. tt Et de gratia Novi Test. c. 18. et S. Iren3eus,li. 4. c. 32. +t Aug de Civit. Dei, h. 17. c. 20. St. Clement, in Apost. Constit. edit. 1564 Ajitverptae. li. 6. c. 22. fol. 123. §§ The author of the Second Defence of the Exposition of the Doctrine of the Church ©f England, Stc. p. 13. BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 81 St. Ig-natuis 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 Fa- ther, in his mercy, raised again from the dead." St. Justin Martyr, in his apology to the emperor Antonius Pius, made for the Chris- tians : " Now this food," says he, " amongst us, is called the eucharist, which it is lawful tor none to partake of, but those who believe our doctrine to be true, who have been washed in the laver of regeneration for the remission of sins; and who regulate 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 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 Gospels, have recorded that Jesus so commanded them.*' St. Irenzeus, taking an argument from ttie participation of the eucharist, proves the resurrection of the flesh against the heretics of his time.* " As the blessed apostles say. Because we are members of his body, of his flesli, 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 inci-ease by the virtue of God, who comprehends all things, which afterwards, by a prudent 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 dis- solved, will arise at their time ; the word of God working in tliem this resurrection, to the glory of God the Father." Eusebius Caesariensis.-f- — " Making a dally commemoration of him, (Christ,) and daily celebrating the memory of his body and blood; and being now preferred to a more ex- cellent sacrifice and oflice than that of the Old Law, we think it unreasonable anymore 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 Damas- cene, " Many sinners," says he, " being priests, do offer sacrifice ; neither does God deny his assistance, but by the Holy Ghost consecrates the proposed gifts : And the bread in- deed is made the precious body of our Lord, and the cup his precious blood."t St. Hilary. — '* We must not speak," says he, " of the things of God, hke men, or In the sense of J.he world : Let us read what is written, and understand what we read, and then we shall beheve 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 profession 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."§ St. Cyril of Jerusalem. |1 — " Since therefore Christ himself does thus aiHrm, and says of the bread, " This is my body ;" who, from henceforward, dare be so bold as to doubt of it? And since the same (Christ) doe's assure us and say, " This is my blood," who, 1 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 invited to a corporal marriage, he wrought so stupendous a miracle, have we not much more reason to con- fess, 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 re- ceived 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, " bearers of Christ," re- ceiving 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. Notwith- standing, therefore, the information of sense, let faith /confirm thee ; and do not judge of the thing by the taste, but rather take it for most certain by faith, without the least doubt that his body and blood are given thee. — When you come to communion, do not come * Lib. 5. c. 11. + Lib. 3. Parallel, c. 45. {| In Catecjiis. t Lib. 1.' demonstrat. Kvang, c, 10. § Lib. 8. de Trinitate. ' 11 82 PROTESTANT CORRUPTION'S 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.f — " When we have eaten any thing that is prejudicial to our constitution, it is necessary that we take something that is capable of repairing what was impaired; that so, when this healing antidote is within us, it may work out of the body, by a contrary affection, all the force of the poison. And what is this antidote ? It is nothing but tliat 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 likevi^ise that im- mortal body being within him that receives it, converts the whole into its own nature. But there being no other way of receiving any thing witin our body, unless it be first couveyed 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 Divinity, has received this grace, and it is mani- fest that our body can no otherwise become immortal, we are to consider how it is im- possible, that one body, which is always distributed to so many tiiousand 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 trans-elemented into it." Ag'ain, in another placet — " 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 Clirist." 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 ."§ St. Augustine. !| — " We have heard,'* says he, "our master, who always speaks truth, our divine Redeemer, the Saviour of men, recommending to us our ransom, his blood : for he 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 beUeve they said, " This is a hard saying, who can hear him ?" It is an hard saying but to those who are obstinate ; that is, it is incsedible but to the incredulous."!! The same holy father and great doctor, in his commentary upon the XXXIII Psalm, speaks thus of Christ : " And he was carried in his own hands ? And can this, brethren, be possible in man ? Was ever any man carried in his own hands ? He may be carried by the hands of others, but in his own no mah was ever yet carried. How this can be literally understood of David, we cannot discover; but in Christ we find it verified : for Christ was carried in his own hands, when giving his own very 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 ? I would ask our church of England divines, whether, if they had been present among the apos- tles when Christ said, " Take and eat, this is my body," they durst have assumed the boldness to have contradicted the omnipotent Word, and have replied, " It is not thy body. Lord, itjs only bread ?" I believe the most stiff sacramentarian 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 the longer upon these two points, than perhaps the reader may think proper for this treatise : but when he considers that the priesthood and sacri- fice, against which protestants have corrupted the Scripture, and framed their new ar- ticles 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 unnecessary digression. * It was the custom in those days for the priest to deliver the holy sacrafnent into the hand of the communicant. f In Orat. Cat. c. o7. t In Orat. in diem iuminum. f li\ Epist. ad Heliodorum. U Lib. de Verb. Apost. Serm. OF THE SPniPTURE. 83 SEVERAL OTHER CORRUPTIONS AND FALSIFICATIONS, NOT MENTIONED UNDER THE FOBEGOINfl HEADS. This treatise increasing- beyond what indeed I desig-ned it at first, will oblige me to as much brevity as possible, in these following" corruptions : In Romans 8 ver. 39. instead of the word "Charity," they, contrary to the Greek, translate " Love ;" and so generally in all places, where much is spoken in commenda- tion 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 likewise in the 1 Cor. cap. 13. for " Charity," they eight times say " Love.'* In Rom. 9. ver. 16. for this text, " Therefore it is not of the wilier, nor the runner, but of God that showeth mercy," 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, cap. 1. ver. 10. for " Schisms," which are spiritual divisions from the unity of the church, they translate " Dissentions," which may be in worldly things, a-i well as religion : this is done because themselves were afraid to be accounted schisma- tics. So likewise In Galatians 5. ver. 20. for " Heresy," as it is in the Greek, they translate "Sects," in favour of themselves, being charged with heresy : also ia Titus 3. ver. 10. instead of saying, according to the Greek, " A man that is a here- tic," &c. their Bible of 1662 translates, " A man 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 Timothy, cap. 3. ver. 6. for a '* Neophyte," (one lately baptized or planted in Christ's mystical body) they translate in their first Bibles, *' A young scholar ;" as thoug-h an old scholar could not be a Neophite, by deferring his baptism, or by long de- laying his conversion to God, which he learned to be necessary long before. In Titus 3 ver. 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 different degrees of good works. In Hebrews 10. ver. 20. for "Dedicated," they translate, in their first Bibles, "Pre- pared," in favour of their heresy, that Christ was not the first who went into Heaven, which the word dedicated signifies. In the two Epistles of Peter, cap. 3. ver. 16. they force the text to maintain a frivolous evasion, that " St. Pauls Epistles are not hard," but the " things in the Epistles :" where- as both the Greek and Latin texts are indiff"erent with regard to both constructions : it is a general custom of theirs, that where they find the Greek text indifferent to two senses, there they restrain it only to that which may be most advantageous to their own error, thereby excluding its reference to the other sense. And oftentimes, 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 1. ver. 13. for " God is not a tempter of evils," they translate, " God is not tempted with evils," and " God cannot be tempted with evils,"* than which nothing is more impertinent to the apostle's speech in that place. Why is it that they refuse to say, " God is not tempted to evil," as well as the other ? Is it on account of the Greek word, which is a passive? They may find in their Lexicon, that it is both an active and passive : as also appears by the very circumstance of the foregoing words, " Let no man say, that he is tempted by God." Why so? " Because," say the protestant translators, " God is not tempted with evil." Is this a good reason ? 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 active- ly, than it did to turn an active into a passive, against the real presence, as himself con- fesses he did without scruple. But though he might and ought to have translated this word actively, yet he would not, because he would favour his own heresy ; which, quite contrary to these words of the apostle, says, that " God is a tempter to evil :" his words * ATTU^ttiOf KUKm. 84 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS are, inducit Dominus in tentationem cos qiios Satance arhitrio permittet, &c.* "The Lont leads into temptation those whom he permits to be at Satan's disposal ; or into whom ra- ther he leads or bring-s in Satan himself, to fill their hearts, as Peter speaketh.*' Note, that he says, God bring-s Satan into a man to fill his heart, as Peter said to Ananias, " Why has Satan filled thy heart, to lie unto the Holy Ghost ?" So that by this doctrine of Beza, God broug-ht Satan into Ananias's heart to make him lie unto the Holy Ghost ; and so leading him into temptation, was author and cause of that heinous sin. Is not this to say, " God is a tempter to evil," quite contrary to St. James's words ? Or could he that is of this opinion, translate the contrary ; to wit, that " God is no tempt- er to evil ?" Is not this as much as to say, that God also broug-ht 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 liow can they free themselves from it, who allow and maintain the aforesaid exposition of" God's leading into temptation r'* Nay, Beza, for maintaining the same, translates, f' God's Providence," instead of" God's Prescience," Acts 2. ver. 23. a version so false, that the Enghsh Bezites, in their trans- lation, 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 follow- ing text of St. Peter's, but also from Beza's commentary on the same. Also Biicer, one of king Edward the Ylth's apostles, held directly, that " God is the author of sin."f St. Peter says of the Jews," that Christ is to them, petra scandall qui ojfendunt verba nee credunt in quo & positi sunty «7f o ncti iTiBtTctv ; that is, " A rock of scandal to them (the Jews) that stumble at the word, neither do beligve wherein also they are put," as the Ilhemish 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 beheve not that where- on they were set :" which translation lllyricus approves, saying,^ "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 interprets it) that God created them for this purpose, 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 him- self; as St. Peter says, Acts 2, and 3. and St. Paul, Rom. 9. And to them were com- mitted the oracles of God, by witness of the same Paul," Rom. 3. Thus lllyricus ; 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 immo- rigeri ad quod etiam condiii fuermit,% — " They are rebelhous, whereunto also they were created :" with whom his scholars, our English translators, are resolved to agree : there- fore, 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 transla- tion 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 Lon- don, anno 1683, where it is read thus : " And a rock of offence, even to them which stumble at tlie word, being disobedient, whereunto also they are appointed." Is not this to say positively, that God is author of men's disobedience or rebellion against Christ? " But if God," says Castalio against Beza, " hath created some men to rebellion or- disobedience, he is author of their disobedience ; as if he has created some to obedience, he is truly author of their obedience." Yes, this is to make God the au- thor 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, created 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 offendiculo, prout etiam ad hoc ipsum a Deo sunt conditi ." and further discourses at large, and brings other texts to prove this sense, and this translation. * Annot. Nov. Test. Anno. 1556. Mat. 6. v. 13. f See Bucer's Scripta Anglicana, p. 931. Et in Epist. ad Rom. in p. 1. c. 94. \ Illyricus's Gloss, in 1 Pet. c. 2. ver. 8. § Vid Castalio in defensione quatranslat. p, 153, 154, 155, OF THE SCRIPTURE. 8> > And thoug*]! liUther and Calvin, as is said, dissented not from the true sense of this text, yet touching the blaspliemous doctrine,* that " God is the author of sin," they, with Zulnghus, 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 ? For God works the wicked work in the wicked.*' ♦* When we commit adultery or murder," says Zuinglius, " it is the work of God, be- ing the mover, tiie author, and inciter, &c. God moves the thief to kill. Sec. He is forced to sin, &c. God hardened Pharaoh, not speaking hyperbolically, 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 ht is therefore particularly reprehended by the learned protestant Graweru% in Absurda Msurdonim, c. 5. de Pradest.fol. 3, 4. " God is author," says Calvin, " of all those things, which these popish judges would have to happen only by his idle iufferance."f 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 follower^ that they are expressly condemned for it by their fa- mous brethren; Feming, lib. deunivers. Grat. p. 109. Osiander, Enchirid. Controv. p. 104. Scaffman, de peccat. caiais. p. 155, 2f . Stizlinus disput. Theol. de Provid. 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.+ Are not these blessed reformers ? O excellent instriment of God ! as Dr. Tenison stiles the chief of them.§ Protestants denying free will in man,not only to do good, but even to* resist evil, open a very wide passage. into this impious doitrine, of making God the author of sin. In the 1 St. Peter, cap. 1. ver. 22. t'heiapostle exhorts Christians to live as becomes men of so excellent a vocation : " Purify ng," says he, "your souls by obedience of charlty,"|| &c. a little before, ver. 17. renembfiTring always, that " God, without excep- tion of persons, judges every man according to his works." From which places it ap- pears, that we have free will working with the grace of God ; that we purify and cleanse our souls from sin ; that good works are necessarily required of Christians : for by many divine arguments St. Peter urges this conclmion: Ut animus nostras castijicemusy " That we purify our own souls." So the protesti,nt translation, made in Edward the Vlth's time, has it, " Forasmuch as you have purified your souls."t So likewise one of queen Elizabeth's Bibles, " Even ye which have puriiedyour souls ;" and so it is in the Greek. Notwithstanding all which Beza, in his Testanerlts of 1556 and 1565, translates it, Ani- mabus vestris puHJicatis obediendo veritati per Spwituin : which another of queen Eliza- beth's bibles renders thus : " Seeing your souls ire purified in obeying the truth, through the Spirit." So translates also the English Bblc, printed at Geneva, 1561, and the Scotch, printed at Edinburgh, 1579. So that these words make nothing at all eithe? for free will, or co-operation with God's grace, or value of good works, but rather the ccntiary ; proving that in our justification we work not, but are wrought : we purify not ourselves, but are purified ; we are not active and doers with God's grace, but passive aid sufferers : which opinion the council of Trent condemns.** The protestant Bible of 158.1 has again corrected this, and trans- lates, " 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 Phihppians, cap. 1. ver. 28. Where St. Paul, handling the same argument, exhorts the Christians not to fear the enemies of Christ, though they persecute never S3 terribly, " Which to them," says he, *' is cause of perdition, but to you of salvation :" where he makes good works neces- sary, and so the causes of salvation, as sins are o" damnation. But Beza will have the old interpreter overseen in so translating, " Becmse," says he, " the afiliction of the faithful is never called the cause of their salvation, but the testimony ."ff And, there- fore, translates the Greek word 2\>ahKtTUy St. James might mean other spiritual songs and hymns, as well as David's Psalms : but be it that he ex- horted 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 translated 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 consider how fully they are fraught with nonsense and ridiculous absurdities, besides many gross corruptions, viz. above two hundred ;1| confessed by protestants themselves to be found in the psalms in prose, from which these were turned into metre, which we may guess are scarcely corrected by the thyme : 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 trans- lated. * Isai. 7. V. 11. § Mark 8. 31. t Acts 23. V. 24. II See the Preface. ± Jo. 7. v. 23. 12 9tO PROTESTANT ABSURDITIES' PSALMS IN PROSE, BIBLE 1683. Psalm ii. Verse 3. Let us break their bands asunder, and cast away their cords from us. Psalmxv'i. Verse 9, 10. Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth : 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. Psalm xviii. Verse 37. I have pursued mine enemies, and overtaken them: neither did I turn again till they were consumed. Psalm xai. 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. PSALMS IN METRE, BIBLE 1683. Psalm ii. Verse 3. Shall we be bound to them ? say they ; Let all their bonds be broke, *' And of their doctrine and their law, Let us reject the yoke."* Psahn xvi. Verses 9, 10. Wherefore my heart and " tongue" also,-j' 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." 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.t Psalm xxii. Verse 7' All men despise, as they behold Me walking on the way : " They grin, they mow, they nod their heads," Sec. Psalm xxii. Verse 12. So many buUs do compass me. That be full strong of head : «« Yea, bulls so fat, as tho* they had In Basan-field been fed." Psalm xxvi. Verse 10. Whose hands are heap'd with « craft§ and guile,'' Their lives thereof are full. And their right hand " with wrench and wile. For bribes doth pluck and pull." * The reader need not be told why this is added, besides its making up the rhyme. t What they translate « glory" in prose, they call " 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. ■^ This warrior lays about him at a different rate from David. 4 We have heard of crafty heads, but never of crafty hands* IN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE. PSALMS IN PROSE, BIBLE 1683. Psalm xlix* Verse 20. Man that is in honour, and under- standeth not, is like the beasts that perish. Psalm Ixxiv. Verses 11, 12. Why withdraweth thou thy hand, even thy right hand ? Pluck it out of thy bosom. Psalm Ixxvii. Verse 16. He caused waters to run down like rivers. Psalm Ixxviii. Verse 57. They were turned aside like a deceitful bow. Psalm Ixxxix. Verse 46. The days of his youth hast thou shortened: thou hast covered him with shame. Selah. Psalm xcVii. Verse 12. Lig-ht is sown for the righteous, and l^ladness to the upright in heart. Psalm xcix. Verse 1. Tlie Lord reigneth, let the people tremble ; he sitteth between the che- rubims, 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.) PSALMS IN METRE, BIBLE 1683. 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 Ixxiv. Verses 11, 12. Why dost thou draw thy hand " aback, And hide it in thy lap ?" O pluck it out, and be not slack, " To give thy foes a wrap."* Psalm Ixxvii. Verse 16. Of such abundance, that ** no floods To them might be compared." Psabn Ixxviii. 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. "f Psalm xcvii. Verse 12. And light doth spring up to the just, With pleasure for his part, Great joy with gladness, mirth and lust,:}: &c. 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 witli worldly wegdth. As " grease so are they fat." • In the title page they say, " If any be merry, let him sing psalms." But consider- ing what psalms they are they advise him to sing, they might have done as well to have said rather, " If any would be merry, let him sing psalms." t To say that God raises an ill report of men, has affinity to Beza*s doctrine, which makes God the author of sin. Vid. Supr. i I thought, tiU now, that lust had been a sin, , PROTESTANT ABSUUDITIES PSALMS IN PROSE, BIBLE 1683. Psalm cxlx. Verse 83. For I am become like a bottle in the smoak. Psalfn cxix. Vei'se 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 tliat follow after mischief: they are far from thy law. Psalm cxx. Verse 5. "Wo 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 sor- row. 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 83. As a *' skin-bottle" in the smoak. So am I parch*d and dried. Psalm cxix. Verse 110- Altho' the wicked laid their nets, " To catch me at a bay." Psalm cxix. Vei^se 130. Wlien men first " enter into" thy word. They find a light most clear ; And very ideots understand, ** When they it read or hear."* 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."f 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."t Psalm cxxix. Verse 6. And made as grass upon the house. Which withereth " ere it grow."§ I could weary the reader with such like examples : they seldom or never speak of God's covenant with Israel, but they call it God's trade. |1 As in Psalm Ixxviii. 10. where they sing, * 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. f Why is all this added ? only for the sake of rhyming to the word " name," unless they would make Isaac a sect-maker, and his religion a sect like their own. + If brown bread is the bread of affliction, a great many feeds on it who are able to buy white. z § How grass can wither before it grows, is a paradox. II Perhaps this word " trade" should have been " tradition" with them ; but for fear of a popish term, which th?y so much detest, they would rather write nonsense than use it. ^ y RETURN CIRCULATION DEPARTMENT TO— » 202 Main Library LOAN PERIOD 1 " HOME USE ALL BOOKS MAY BE RECALLED AFTER 7 DAYS Renewals and Recharges may be made 4 days prior to the due date. Books may be Renewed by calling 642-3405 DUE AS STAMPED BELOW ^^^ Q5^E Twrt CIRCULAI ONDEPl yen H99^ UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, BERKELEY FORM NO. DD6 BERKELEY, CA 94720 ®s / Su&^ XC\ 00595- U. C. BERKELEY LIBRARIES i CDSE2b177h A*" 'V St^^ \, y <&«=%