^v 
 
 V ^^^ M k-Sf^* ^^ ^vv* 
 
 ^W 
 
 
 
 X>«j 
 
 KjS > 
 
 
fytull W^mmxi^ Jibat^g 
 
 THE GIFT OF 
 
 ..CrvoA^y^ Co^OUi/..^ 
 
 Aj'^'^j^.^.. 
 
 irj^li^f 
 
Cornell University Library 
 BS470 .W26 1876 
 
 3 1924 029 272 411 ^^^^ 
 olin 
 
Cornell University 
 Library 
 
 The original of this book is in 
 the Cornell University Library. 
 
 There are no known copyright restrictions in 
 the United States on the use of the text. 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/cu31924029272411 
 
ERRATA Cornell CathoUc 
 
 Union Library. 
 
 OF IH£ 
 
 PROTESTANT BIBLE; 
 
 OB THE 
 
 TRUTH OF THE ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS EXAMINED • 
 
 IN A TREATISK, 
 
 SHOWING SOME OF THE EREOBS 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 MEMBERS OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH; 
 
 IN WHICH, ALSO, 
 
 FSOM THEIK MISTRANSLATING THE TWENTY-THIRD VERSE OF THE FODRTEKNTH CHAPTER OP THE 
 
 ACTS OF THE APOSTLES, THE CONSECRATION OP DR. MATTHEW PARKER, THE 
 
 FIRST PROTESTANT ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, IS 
 
 OCCASIONALLY CONSIDERED. 
 
 BY THOMAS WAED, ESQ. 
 
 A NEW EDITION, CAREFULLY REVISED AND CORRECTED. 
 
 TO WHICH AKE ADDED, 
 
 THE CELEBEATED PEEFACE OF THE EEV. DE. LINGAED, 
 
 IN ANSWER TO EYAN'S "ANALYSIS," 
 
 AND 
 
 A VINDICATION, BY THE EIGHT EEV. DE. MILNEE, 
 
 "For I testify to every one that beareth tlie words of the prophecy of this book : If any man shall add to these things, 
 God shall add unto him the plagues written in this book. And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of 
 this prophecy, God shall take away bia part out of the Book of Life, and out of the Holy City, and from these things which 
 are written iu this book." Eetei^tions xxii. 18, 19. 
 
 NEW YOEK: 
 PUBLISHED BY D. & J. SADLIER & CO. 
 
 33 BARCLAY STREET AND 38 PARE PLACE. 
 
TO THE 
 
 RIGHT REVEREND JOHIT FENNELLY, 
 
 'VIOAB APOSTOLIC OF SIASBAS, 
 
 mSHOP OF CASTOBIA, 
 THIS EDITION OP WABD'S INVALUABLE WORK, 
 
 AOAIKST 
 
 THE GROSSEST OF ALL C0EBUPTI0N8, 
 THE OOBBUPTION OF THE SACKED SCBIPXUBES, 
 
 MOST KESPECTFULLY mSCEIBED, 
 
 AS A SMALL TESTIMONY OF THE HIGH ESTEEM AND VENEBATIOS 
 
 IN WHICH HIS LOBDSHIP IS HELD, 
 
 BY 
 
 HIS LOBDSHIP'S 
 
 MOST OBEDIENT HUMBLE SEEYANT3, 
 
 THE EDITOR AND PUBLISHEE. 
 
 36 AKOUISBA tJTBEET, DUBUH, 
 
 1st Jvly, 1841. 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 FAGB 
 
 Preface to the Fotirtli Edition. 1 — 14 
 
 The Author's Preface 15—24 
 
 The Truth of Protestant Translations of the Bible examined 25 — 31 
 
 Of the Canonical Books of Scriptm:e 32 
 
 Of Books rejected by Protestants for Apocryphal 33 — 39 
 
 Protestant Translations against the Church 40, 41 
 
 against the Blessed Sacrament and Sacrifice of the Mass, 42, 43 
 
 against the Blessed Sacrament and the Altar. 44, 45 
 
 against Priests and Priesthood 46, 47 
 
 against Priesthood and Holy Orders 48, 49 
 
 against the Authority of Priests 60, 51 
 
 against Episcopal Authority 52, 53 
 
 against the Single Lives of Priests 54, 55 
 
 against the Sacrament of Baptism 66, 57 . 
 
 against Confession and the Sacrament of Penance, , 58, 59 
 
 against the Honour of Our Blessed Lady and other Saints .... 60, 61 
 
 against the Distinction of Relative and Divine Worship 62, 63 
 
 against Sacred linages. 64, 65 
 
 against the Use of Sacred Images. 66 — 69 
 
 against Limbus Patrum and Purgatory 70 — 73 
 
 against Justification and the Eeward of Good Works . , . . 74, 75 
 
 against Merits and Meritorious Works 76, 77 
 
 against Free WUl 78, 79 
 
 against Inherent Justice 80, 81 
 
 in defence of the Sufficiency of Faith alone 82, 83 
 
 against Apostolical Traditions 84 — 86 
 
 against the Sacrament of Marriage 87 
 
 Protestant Corruptions by adding to the Text 88—90 
 
 Considerations on the Lambeth Eecords 91—97 
 
 Protestant Translation against the Perpetual Sacrifice 98-101 
 
 " Corruptions of the Scripture 102-107" 
 
 " Absurdities in turning Psalms into Metre 108-111 
 
 A Vindication of the Koman CathoHcs 112, 113 
 
 A Vindication of Ward's Errata, in Beply to Grier, by the Eight Bev. Dr. Mihier. . . . 114-118 
 
PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. 
 
 BY DR. LINGARD. 
 
 Ths. publication of Ward's " Errata to the 
 Prolrisiant Bible" has disclosed a most curious 
 and imporlant fact, that the scriptural church 
 pf Eufriand and Ireland was originally founded 
 on a faise translation of the scriptures. U was 
 the be last of the first reformers, that they had 
 emancipated their disciples from the shackles 
 of Catholic despotism, and had restored to them 
 the freedom of the children of God : it now 
 appears, that this freedom consisted in reading 
 an erroneous version of the inspired writings, 
 and in venerating as the dictates of eternal 
 Wisdom the blunders of ignorant or interested 
 translators. " The scriptures," they exclaimed, 
 " are the sole rule of faith. Here they are, no 
 longer concealed under the obscurity of a 
 learned language, but exhibited to you in your 
 native tongue Here you will easily detect the 
 errors of Popery, and learn the true doctrine of 
 the Gospel." The credulity of multitudes ac- 
 cepted with joy the proffered boon ; the new 
 teachers were hailed as apostles commissioned 
 by heaven ; and every old womart, both male and 
 female, that could read, became an adept, if 
 not in the knowledge of the Bible, at Least in 
 the prejudices and errors of its translators. 
 
 It is not for man to dispute the wisdom of 
 Providence, and arraign at the bar of his private 
 judgment the means which God may choose for 
 the diffusion of religious knowledge. Otherwise, 
 I must confess, there appears to me something 
 very unaccountable in the scriptural blunders of 
 the apostles of the reformation. The object, they 
 said, of their mission was the dissemination of 
 evangelic truth. If the Holy Spirit selected them 
 for this important office, he must also have gifted 
 them with the true knowledge of the scriptures, 
 and, if he gifted them with the true knowledge 
 of the scriptures, it seems to follow that he 
 ought also to have granted them the power to 
 make a true translation of the scriptures. The 
 aposllts of Jesus received the knowledge of 
 tongues, that they might instruct the diftierent 
 nations of the earth : the apostles of the church 
 of England and Ireland ought to have received 
 'he knowledge of, at least, the Hebrew and 
 Greek tongues, that they might form an accurate 
 version of the scriptures. Such a version was 
 as necessary to that church, as the instructions 
 of the first apostles could be to the primitive 
 churches of Christianity. If they were apostol- 
 ical, she was .scriptural. However, withotit 
 Bpeciilating on the cause, the fact is certain, not 
 ouly from the argument? o( U'ard, but e\en 
 
 Ironi tne concessions of his adversaries tiiat ili* 
 fathers of this scriptural church gave it a /ersioi, 
 of the scriptures abounding with errors. And 
 here it may reasonably be asked, whence arosB 
 these errors 1 Were they the offspring of igno- 
 rance, or design ? Dr. Ryan warmly contends 
 for the former, and endeavours to fortify his 
 opinion by the authority of Father Simon : (o) 
 but then, even admitting his assertions, devoid 
 as they are of proof, and liable to objection, 
 what are we to think of the temerity of thesd 
 men, who, incompetent to the task, and con 
 scious of their incompetency, still presumed to 
 violate the purity of the sacred volumes, and to 
 obtrude on their unsuspecting disciples an erro- 
 neous version as the immaculate word of God, 
 and as the sole and infallible guide to religious 
 truth ? Ward, on the contrary, attempts to 
 show that the more important of their errors 
 were committed by design ; and a curious cir- 
 cumstance it is, highly corroborative of his 
 opinion, that most of their blunders are favour- 
 able to their own peculiar doctrines, and unfa- 
 vourable to those of their opponents. But, it 
 this be true, what judgment can any unpreju- 
 diced man fonii of these saints of the reforma- 
 tion 1. For my part, I know of no crime more 
 foul in its own nature, more prejudicial in its 
 consequences, more nearly allied to diabolic 
 malignity, than that of designedly corrupting the 
 holy scriptures, and by such corruption, leading 
 the sincere inquirer into error, and converting 
 the food of life into the poison of death. 
 
 But, from whatever source these false ren- 
 derings proceeded, whether their authors were 
 guided by policy or misled by ignorance, this must 
 be conceded, that if Ward has fairly established 
 the fact, he is entitled to the gratitude of the im- 
 partial reader. The impartial reader, let hira 
 be Protestant or Catholic, will, if his object be 
 truth, thankfully receive the truth from whatever 
 hand may present it to him Hesce it was with no 
 small surprise that I heard the clamour Avhich was 
 raised against the last edition of the " Enata.'' 
 In parliament and out of parliament, in news- 
 papers and pamphlets, it was stigmatized as an 
 attempt to vilify the reformation, and to heap 
 disgrace on the Established Church. " It was 
 the work," observed an eminent senator, emi- 
 nent for the only talent he possesses, that of 
 
 (ffi) Ryan's Analysis, p. 5. Simon, howevei, in the pas- 
 sage referred to, docs not speak of the English translatoi 
 in particiil!ir, but of the Protestant translators in generaL 
 This Dr. Rvan has thought fit to conceal from fair ~eader« 
 
PREFACE TO THE KOBRTH EDITION 
 
 religions calumny, " it was the work of one 
 hundred and twenty Popish priests leagued to 
 put down Proiestantism." Such nonsense 
 hardly deserves notice. I f facts are to be hidden 
 from ihe vyu of the public, becausp they reflect 
 on the cliaractcr of our predecessors, let history 
 at once be condemned to the flames. The 
 evangelists did not conceal the treachery of Ju- 
 das : why should Protestant divines wish to 
 eonceal the blunders or the frauds of the fathers 
 of ihcir church ? 
 
 To me, it appears, that none among the ad- 
 versaries of VVard have had the courage, or the 
 honesty to do justice to that writer. His object 
 in compiling the " Errata," was twofold : firstly, 
 to prove that the versions of the scripture on 
 which the established creed was originally 
 founded, Were extremely corrupt : and secondly, 
 to show that though many errors have been 
 since corrected, there still remain many others 
 to correct. All this however they prudently 
 overlook ; and by an artful confusion of times 
 and persons, by referring to modern Bibles the 
 charges which he makes against those of a for- 
 mer age, and by affecting to consider his accu- 
 sation of the clergy of Queen Elizabeth as 
 directed against the clergy of the present reign, 
 they pretend lo convict him of misrepresentation 
 and calumny. In this, perhaps, they may act 
 wisely ; they certainly act unfairly. Could they 
 have shown that Ward had attributed to the 
 ancient English Bible errors which it did not 
 contain, or that he had attributed to the present 
 Bibles errors which have been corrected in them, 
 they might have substantiated their charges 
 against him. But this they have not attempted. 
 They content themselves with exclaiming that 
 many of the former corruptions have been 
 corrected, and therefore should not have been 
 mentioned. But why should they not ? The 
 very fact of their having been corrected is an 
 unanswerable proof of Ward's assertion. It 
 shows beyond the possibility of a doubt, that the 
 church of England, however scriptural it may 
 pretend to have been in its origin, was in reality 
 founded on a false version of the scriptures ; a 
 version which was a very Babel of confusion, 
 which spoke sometimes the language of God and 
 often the language of men, which had attempted 
 lo improve the lessons of eternal truth by the 
 addition of the whims, the ignorance, the pre- 
 judices, and the falsehoods ofTyndal, Coverdale, 
 Cranmer, &c., &c. 
 
 Among the opponents of Ward, the fiercest 
 and the oidy one who has attempted a full refu- 
 tation of the " Errata," is Dr. Ryan. His at- 
 tempt is a consequence of the grant of Ireland 
 whicli Adrian IV. made to Henry II. Nay, 
 atart not, gentle reader; the most important 
 events in!\y often be traced lo remote and almost 
 " im[>ercoptible causes. The attempt of Dr. 
 llyati is a consequence of the grant of Ireland 
 by Adrian IV. to Henry II. By that grant 
 the Kyans lost an extensive property ;{«) and the 
 present Dr. is the champion reserved by heaven 
 
 (a) Anal., p. 58 
 
 to revenge on Popery the injuries which she 
 inflicted on his ancestors six centuries ago. An 
 awful lesson this to the ambition of princes ! 
 But let us see, how the Dr. proceeds in ihe work 
 of vengeance. He has divided his ireatist! into 
 different sections, corresponding witii ibosn of 
 the "Errata" In reviewing it, K-ihall follow 
 the same order. 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIOXS 
 AOAINST 
 
 THE CHURCH 
 
 Under this head VVard has adduced no loss 
 than seven texts in which the English translators 
 had substituted the word congregation foi 
 church ; to which Dr. Ryan replies, " that the 
 former mistranslations of these seven texts, 
 having been corrected in the present Bible, 
 should have been excluded from the catalogue 
 of the ' Errata.' "(A) This plea has, 1 trust, been 
 sufficiently refuted in the preceding observations. 
 That the correction has taken place, is indeed 
 an improvement in the present Bible ; but it is 
 at the same time a condemnation of its prede- 
 cessors. After the correction. Ward should 
 not have imputed these .errors to the corrected 
 copies ; neither has he done so : he should have 
 imputed them to the more ancient copies, and 
 in doing so, he is justified by the very concession 
 of his adversary. " But," continues the Dr., 
 " he produces an eighth text to show that wo 
 have been guilty of misconstruction to injure 
 his church. In the Romish version it is written : 
 m?j dove is one; (Cant. xi. 8 :) in ours, my dove 
 is hut one ; a curious proof of malice to his 
 church ! Many of his errata are of this kind ; 
 frivolous in themselves ; and affording no proof 
 or but feeble proofs of the propositions ho main- 
 tains."(c) Now, reader what canst thou infer 
 from this passage, but that Ward had censured 
 the Protestant version for having adopted the 
 reading, my dove is hut one ? The reverse, 
 however, is the truth. Ward did not censure, 
 he approved that reading. His censure was 
 levelled against the more ancient reading in the 
 English Bibles, my dove is alone. " But this," 
 he adds, "is also amended." Such was the 
 candour of Ward, that he carefully pointed out 
 to his reader every correction. Of the candour 
 of Dr. Ryan I wish I could speak with equal 
 commendation. But he has begun his analysis 
 with an artifice, which it will be impossible for 
 him to palliate, much less to justify. He has 
 suppressed the real assertion of his adversary, 
 which he could not controvert, and has substi- 
 tuted in its place an assertion so palpably 
 absurd that it could not fail to make an impres- 
 sion on the mind of the uninformed reader highly 
 prejudicial to the character of Ward. Noi 
 has the Dr. left his artifice to work its own 
 effect. He has aided it by his own observations, 
 and has of consequence charged the author of 
 
 (i) Ibid., p. 11. 
 
 <c\ Ibid. 
 
PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. 
 
 Ilio " Erraia " with labouring to create disagree- 
 nicnis where there was perfect harmony ; and 
 wishing to widen instead of contracting the 
 breiich between the two chnrches. (a) Such 
 ia the honest) of our biblical Aristarchus. But 
 if he cannot claim the praise of honesty, he may 
 claim at least that of consistency. The fraud 
 with which he has commenced his controversial 
 career, he has been careful to repeat in every 
 stage of it. He was fully aware that in works 
 of the imagination, according to the masters of 
 the art, perfection cannot be attained, unless 
 character be preserved throughout 
 
 ScTveler ad imum, 
 Qualis ab incaplo processeril, H Hbi constct. 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 AGAINST 
 
 THE BLESSED SACRAMENT, AND 
 'J'HE SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 
 
 Dr. Rvan commences his strictures On this 
 section by observing, that five of the texts pro- 
 duced by Ward having been corrected in the 
 modern Bibles, should have been excluded from 
 the " Errata." 1 shall not fatigue the patience 
 of the reader by repeating what I have already 
 said on the subject of these concessions : but 
 shall content myself with reminding him how 
 extremely corrupt that version must have been, 
 the defence of which is thus abandoned by its 
 warmest advocate. He proceeds: "The other 
 tliree texts have no relation to the sacrament 
 even in his own translation*, as will appear by 
 exhibiting them. Whom heaven truly must receine 
 — Itt us cast wood upon his bread — -for he was 
 the priest of the Most High. These three texts 
 are thus rendered by us : Whom henven must 
 receive — let its destroy the tree with the fruit there- 
 of — and he was the priest of the Most High, {b) 
 'J'hese texts are no more for or against the 
 sacrament than a treatise of astronomy : yet we 
 are accused of misconstruing them from preju- 
 dice against it !" Softly, good Doctor ! There 
 may be more in some of these texts than you 
 seem to be aware of. Let us examine them 
 separately. 
 
 1 St. Whom heaven must receive. In exhibit- 
 ing this text, (to borrow the Doctor's expres- 
 sion,) I fear he has had recourse to his favourite 
 artifice, which I have exposed in the preceding 
 section. He has suppressed the text, which 
 Ward really condemns, and substituted in its 
 place one which he approves. Ward did not 
 condemn the corrected reading of the modern 
 Bibles which Dr. Ryan has exhibited : but he 
 condenmud the corrupted reading of the ancient 
 Bibles, which the Dr. very pnidently has for- 
 gotten. That reading hath, whom heaven must 
 '.ontain ; a rendering which the correction, it 
 has since received, sufficiently proves to have 
 been false. But Dr. Ryan, by suppressing it, 
 and substituting the corrected passage, states 
 
 (a) Anal., p. 11 
 
 (fi) Ibid., p. 12. 
 
 I two advantages : he conceals the ancient cornip- 
 tion from the eye of his reader, and represents 
 Ward as a man of weak intellects, who could 
 thus refer to the sacrament a text which has no 
 relation to it. In the corrected copies 1 acknow- 
 ledge it has not: but in the more ancient it liad. 
 Ward had told us that it was so rendered by 
 Beza, according to thai reformer's own confos 
 sion, in order to exclude the presence of Ghiist 
 from the sacrament ; and Dr. Ryan must have 
 kn-ovvn that Protestant controvertisls in England 
 have often alleged the same text for the same 
 purpose. Ward then was perfectly correct. 
 
 2d, The second passage is very differently reU' 
 dered in the Catholic and Protestant versions : in 
 the former. Let us cast wood upon his bread : 
 in the latter. Lei us destroy the tree vnlh the 
 fruit thereof. It must be acknowledged that 
 the Catholic rendering is not conformable to the 
 present Hebrew : icn?: yy nn-.nxs. But then 
 it is conformable to the more ancient ver- 
 sions, the Greek, the Vulgate, and the Arabic, 
 and the consent of these versions proves that 
 the modern reading of the Hebrew is false, (c) 
 The Protestant translators, on the contrary, 
 have chosen to follow that reading, and accor- 
 dingly have rendered f? nnnnM, lei us destroy 
 the tree ; but then, to make sense, they have 
 been compelled to give to aib a meaning, 
 which, I believe, it has not in any other part of 
 scripture, and under -pzn]: the fruit iheretf. 
 instead of his bread. Ward, therefore, was 
 justified in numbering this in his catalogue of 
 errata. If it be asked why he placed it under 
 the head of false translations against the sacra- 
 ment, he answers because he suspected it to have 
 been adopted in order to elude the force of a 
 passage in the works of St. Jerom, who had re- 
 ferred the original text to the holy Eucharist. ('/) 
 
 3rd. The difference in the third text, Gei. 
 xiv. 18, depends on the meaning which onsr'it 
 to be given to the Hebrew particle 1. Tiie 
 Vulgate and the English Catholic version have 
 rendered \\.for ; and that it is susceptible of this 
 meaning is evident from the Protestant trans- 
 lators themselves, who in similar passages hav) 
 rendered it in the same manner. (Gen. xx. 3 •. 
 Thou art but a dead man for the woman which 
 thou hast taken ; ijs n^?D K1.T] for she is a 
 man's wife. And Isaiah Ixiv. 5 : Behold Uwu 
 art wroth, tf!Z'nr\ for we have sinned.) In the 
 present instance, they have rendered it and. 
 which Ward ascribes to their wish to elude the 
 argument that Catholic theologians had been 
 accustomed to draw from Melchizedeck's typica. 
 sacrifice of bread and wine. 
 
 Dr. Ryan proceeds to instance another text, 
 which, as he vainly flatters himself, will yield 
 him an easy victory. " In the Pro'.estant trans- 
 lation (Heb. X. 10,) it is said, we are sanctified 
 through the offering of the body of Jesus Christ 
 once for all." " Ward says that our translators 
 added the words /«r all, to take away the daily 
 oblation of Christ's body and blood in the mass. 
 
 (c) It was probably nn-BS in the more ancient i«pi<;4 
 
 (d) Errata, No. II. 
 
PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. 
 
 But it must be admitted that the compound 
 Greek word, which Romanists render once should 
 be rendered once for all ; only once and for a 
 short time : that the words /or all are improperly 
 omitted hi the Popish translations, and without 
 serving the cause for which Catholics contend."(a) 
 He is an unskilful or an unfortunate champion, 
 who cannot aim a stroke at his adversary with- 
 out inflicting a wound on his friends. When 
 Dr. Ryan condemns the Catholic, his censure 
 boars still more heavily on the Protesiant trans- 
 ial jrs : and he chooses to praise them at the very 
 moment when they condemn him. The Greek 
 word Eqr>«77«5 occurs frequently in the New Tes- 
 tament : (6) yet in no one instance can I discover 
 that the Protestant translators have rendered it 
 once for all, except in this passjige, Heb. x. 10. 
 If then, as the Doctor asserts, the words for all 
 are improperly omitted in the Popish translations, 
 I trust, he will acknowledge that they are also 
 improperly omitted in the Protestant translations; 
 and thus contribute his mite towards comple- 
 ting Ward's catalogue of errata. The truth, 
 however, is, that the 1 Protestant translators, in- 
 stead of thinking the words for all improperly 
 omitted, were conscious that they formed no part 
 of the sacred texts, and therefore printed them 
 in italics, as an indication that they occurred 
 not in the original, but were useful to form a 
 right notion of the apostle's meaning. Thus is 
 Dr. Ryan condemned by his own clients. But, 
 continues the Doctor, " The term once without 
 the addition of the words /or all, would not jus- 
 tify a daily oblation : for where we are sanctified 
 through the offering of Jesus Christ once, it 
 must be unnecessary to repeat it : it does not 
 follow that, because Christ's body was offered 
 once for sinners, it should be daily offered for 
 them." (c) Is not this a controversial stratagem, 
 a ruse de guere, to draw off the attention of the 
 reader from the real state of the question ? Ward 
 did not say that because Christ's body was of- 
 fered once, it follows that it ought to be offered 
 daily. He was not so weak a logician. But he 
 did say, that the Protestant translators added 
 the words for all, in sup])ort of their favourite 
 doctrine that he was not to be offered daily : and 
 I confess, I think he is not mistaken : for on no 
 other ground can I account for their having 
 added the words for all in this passage, and 
 having omitted them in every other in which the 
 Greek term fqpajTKl occurs. As to the assertion 
 that, " where we are sanctified by the offering of 
 .Tesus Christ once, it must be unnecessary to 
 repeal it," I beg leave to refer Dr. Ryan to the 
 commeiiiary ot St. Chrysostom on this very 
 epistle, a writer who probably understood the 
 Greek language as well as modern translators. 
 Frojn tliat ancient father he will learn, that 
 though Christ was offered once, and his offering 
 sufficeth for ever, yet we offer him daily : but 
 ibat it is one and the same sacrifice, because 
 we offer one and the same victim. ^nuf 
 itQOaijfe;rdi],' xai iig to ait jjjxfae ... it ovv ; ■fiftstg 
 
 lai Anal., p. 12. 
 
 lb) Rom. xi. 10 ; Heb. vii, 28 ; ix. 12. 
 
 (c) Anal p. V3. 
 
 «ad ixaaitjv t^/ieQctv ov nqoatfeqdliBV ; ngotrifsqofiev 
 dXK dva/ivrjotp notovfievoi tov Oavuiov iviov xol 
 fiai iOTc* iuTij xai du nokkat .... TOf yaq Avio* 
 (ie» ■nQoa<fEQOfi6v bv vvv /lev iteQOv, dvQioy devre- 
 gov, aii' list TO avio, diaie ftia ioTiv ^ &vata. In 
 Epist. ad Heb c. ix. hom. xvii. 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 
 THE BLESSED SACRAMENT, AND 
 THE ALTAR. 
 
 Dri. Ryan o])ens his remarks on this section 
 in his usual maner. " Ward charges us with 
 misrendering three texts ; this is a curious 
 charge, when our last translation of two out of 
 the three agrees exactly with the Popish ; and 
 when we have no translation of the third." It 
 will not be a difl^cult task to unravel the web 
 of his sophistry. Ward did not charge the last 
 but the more ancient Protestant translations 
 with misrendering the three texts, and that h.' 
 charge is true, is evident from Dr. Ryan's 
 attempts to shift the question from one version 
 to another. As to the assertion that there is no 
 translation of the third ; it can only mean that 
 by Protestants it is not accounted part of the 
 inspired writings, but occurs in one of the books 
 which they have classed among the Apocrypha, 
 lie proceeds thus : " Nor need our first trans- 
 lators have been afraid of using the word altars ; 
 as there is no evidence that the Popish altars 
 resembled those of the apostolic ago."' Did 
 ever writer trifle more egregiously with the 
 judgment and the patience of his readers 1 
 There is no evidence that the Popish altars re- 
 sembled those of the apostolic age : therefore, the 
 first Protestant translators need not have been 
 afraid of using the word ahum ! But is Dr. 
 Ryan then wilUng to admit that Christians made 
 use of altars as early as the apostolic age ? Foi 
 what purpose did they make use of thera ? It 
 must have been for sacrifice. : otherwise there 
 could have been no more need of altars among 
 Christians in the apostolic age, than among 
 Protestants in the present. But if it were foi 
 sacrifice, that sacrifice would have been no othei 
 in substance than what Catholics call the sacri- 
 fice of the mass. 
 
 " The first Protestant translators need not 
 have been afraid of the word altars .'" Why 
 then did they substitute temple in its place ? Dr. 
 Ryan cannot here have recourse to his former 
 plea of their ignorance of the original languages. 
 The veriest smatterer in the Greek tongue 
 could have informed thera that duamcriQiov meant 
 not a temple but an altar. Their own conduct 
 in falsifying these texts shows, that they wern 
 afraid of the word. For what but fear, and 
 that too of a very urgent nature, could have 
 impelled men, who had assumed the office ol 
 apostles, and whose existence as such depended 
 on their reputation, to pollute that office, and 
 hazard that reputation, by thus wilfully and de- 
 liberately corrupting the sacred volumes ? 
 
PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. 
 
 ' Le truth is, the first teachers of Protestantism 
 hil^\ IV formed religion ; they found it also neces- 
 saiy to reform the inspired writings. They had 
 created a scriptural church without a sacrifice : 
 it v;as prudent to have an edition of the scrip- 
 tures without any honourable mention of altars. 
 Aliars and sacrifice are correlative terms : the 
 one naturally leads to the other. When the 
 Chustian saciifice was abolished, altars were 
 innocessary. They had, of course, treated them 
 with every species of indignity, and were too 
 cautious politicians to permit them to be com- 
 mended in the scriptures. But after the lapse 
 of a century, circumstances were changed : the 
 generation which had witnessed the altars and 
 the sacrifice of the Catholic worship, had passed 
 away. A new race of men, with new habits 
 ind new prejudices, had succeeded, no danger 
 oould arise from the adoption of the term ; and 
 the word altar was silently permitted to resume 
 ita former place in the sacred writings. 
 
 Before 1 close my remarks on this section, I 
 must observe that Ward has noticed another cor- 
 ruption of the text, which Dr. Ryan has thought 
 it prudent to overlook. In 1 Cor. xi. 27, the 
 apostle says. Whosoever shall eat this bread, or 
 drink this cup of the Lord unworthily, rj ntvij shall 
 be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord : from 
 which disjunctive proposition Catholic controver- 
 tists have been accustomed to draw an argument 
 iu favour of communion in one kind. This is a 
 matter of such notoriety that a divine like Dr 
 Ryan could not be ignorant of it. In the first 
 Protestant Bibles this text was faithfully trans- 
 lated : but in the more modern it has been cor- 
 rupted by the substitution of the copulative 
 particle and, for the disjunctive particle or: a 
 substitution of which Ward most justly com- 
 plains. Now, in what manner does Dr. Ryan 
 defend it ? He is silent ; he does not even re- 
 motely hint that such a corruptinn has been 
 noticed by his adversary. Is he then conscious 
 of the fraud, but unwilling that it should come 
 to the knowledge of his Protestant readers 1 I 
 fear this is the only consistent explanation, which 
 his conduct will admit. It certainly is not 
 manly : but it would, perhaps, be too much to 
 expect that every writer should have the honesty 
 to make confessions, which would go to crimi- 
 nate himself. However, he may draw this 
 lesson from it ; that he, who stands in need of so 
 much indulgence himself, should be cautious 
 how he condemns with severity the imaginary 
 blemishes, which he may fancy that he discovers 
 iu others 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 .AGAINST 
 
 PRIESTS, PRIESTHOOD, AND HOLY 
 ORDERS. 
 
 On this subject Dr. Ryan observes : " Accord- 
 ing to Ward we misconstrued six texts, by 
 rendering the Greek word elder instead o{ priest : 
 he says, we did so, lest the term priest should 
 
 a 
 
 reflect honour on the Catholic clergy." (a) 
 Reader, consult Ward, and thou wilt find he saya 
 no such thing. Ward attributes the suppression 
 of the word priest to the suppression of the 
 sacrifice of the mass. Where iliere is no altai 
 or sacrifice, there is no need of a priest. But 
 Dr. Ryan has forged the reason which he hero 
 gives to Ward, as an introduction to the .sarcasm 
 against the Catholic clergy, whicji immediately 
 follows it. " Elder," he also tells us, " is a 
 more literal translation of the Greek word than 
 priest, and presbytery than priesthood : so that 
 the Protestant translators are not chargeable 
 with a mistranslation of these words, {b) He 
 will, however, allow me to ask, what kind of men 
 they were, whom the sacred writers designate 
 by ihetermnQea^vreQoil Were they not ministers 
 of religious worship ordained for that purpose 
 by the apostles 1 As a minister of the Estab- 
 lished Church, he must answer in the afiirmative. 
 But if they were, what is the proper term 
 by which such ministers are described in the 
 English language ? Not only common usage, 
 but the very language of the Church of England 
 decides in favour of the word priest. If then the 
 translators of the Bible meant to speak a 
 language intelligible to their readers, they ought 
 to have translated the Greek word priests and 
 not elders. Were I to request the favour of 
 Dr. Ryan to translate the following Latin sen- 
 tence : " Episcopus Londinensis cum majore 
 civitatis et duobus ecclesiae presbyteris visitavii 
 universitatem Oxonienseni," would he prefer as 
 more literal such a version as this : the o\ erseer 
 of London, with the greater of the city, and two 
 elders of the -church, visited the generality of 
 Oxford 1. 
 
 He proceeds : " Ward asserts that these 
 translators were so conscious, that their bishops 
 had no grace to confer a sacred character, bv 
 the imposition of hands, that they put out the 
 word grace and substituted gift in two passages 
 of St. Paul." When will Dr. Ryan cease to 
 deceive his reader 1 No such reason, as he here 
 relates, occurs in Ward. That writer ascribes 
 the substitution of the term gift, to the doctrine 
 which the reformers preached, that order was 
 no sacrament, (c) Whoever is conversant with 
 the sacred writings will agree with him that 
 /agtofia is not properly rendered, by gift. In 
 scriptural language it always meant grace, or a 
 supernatural gift. 
 
 I cannot follow him through all his mistakes 
 in this section. The last seems to prove that he 
 had hardly looked at the book he pretends to 
 refute. " We are charged," he says, " with 
 mistranslating the Greek word signifying dea- 
 con : though all the Protestant versions of it 
 agree with the Popish without the slightest vari- 
 ation !"(ri) The truth, however is, that Ward 
 does not charge them with mistranslating the 
 passage in question, 1 Tim. iii. 12. He only 
 notices that in this verse it was translated pro- 
 perly : and yet in the fourth verse preceding i' 
 
 (a) Anal., p. 14. 
 (i) Ibid. 
 
 (c) Errata, No. V, 
 d) Anal., p. 16. 
 
PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. 
 
 was rendered in the more ancient versions, 
 minister. He only wishes to know why the 
 isame word, with the meaning attached to it in 
 the Greek, should in the short space of four 
 verses be rendered by a different word in Eng- 
 lish ? In itself this is not a matter of great con- 
 sequence : but I thought proper to notice it to 
 expose the artifices of I^r. Ryan, who can thus 
 condescend to calumniate his adversary, that he 
 may enjoy a short and dangerous triumph. 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 AGAINST 
 
 THE AUTHORT.TY OF PRIESTS AND 
 BISHOPS. 
 
 I HAVE joined these two sections together, 
 because the object of both is in a great measure 
 (he same, to determine the propriety of trans- 
 laling certain scriptural terms, according to 
 their general acceptation, in profane rather than 
 ecclesiastical language. The words bishop, 
 prusl, deacon, (in<;i:l, though originally borrowed 
 from the Greek, have for more than a thousand 
 years been naturalized among us. The three 
 former serve to denote persons raised to certain 
 offices in the church: the last, one employed in the 
 duly of the heavenly spirits. Their meaning is 
 perfectly understood by every man who can speak 
 the English language. But the English transla- 
 tors, as if they had been making a version of 
 some profane writer, rejected these terms, and 
 employed others more consonant in their forma- 
 tion to the meaning of the radicals, of which the 
 Greek words are composed. Thus bishop, is 
 rendered overseer ; the highest functionary in the 
 church is denoted by a term, which in common 
 language signifies a menial servant : priest is 
 translated elder ; and we are vgravely told of 
 choosing and ordaining elders, as if any thing 
 but time could in the strict meaning of the word 
 make an elder : deacons are called ministers, a 
 term which properly includes all the offices of 
 the church : angels, messengers, a word which 
 certainly does not give a very high notion of the 
 dignity of the heavenly spirits. These innova- 
 tions Ward condemns, and, I think, with much 
 justice. He attributes them to the unsettled 
 stale of religion, when the first English versions 
 were made. The reformers had demolished the 
 ancient fabric : they had not agreed what to 
 substitute in its place. It was therefore politic 
 in them to exclude bishops, priests, and deacons 
 tTom the scripture, that the people, who from 
 Labit had been accustomed to reverse these or- 
 ders, might not conceive there was any founda- 
 tion for them in scripture. From the words 
 ayfstle and disciple, no danger was to be appre- 
 hended. 'I'hese therefore were suffered to 
 remain. Though, had tlie translators followed 
 any general rule, they also should have been 
 metamorphosed into messengers and scholars. {a) 
 
 (a) In the late Bibles the words Aiaxovoir and AyycXoa 
 ue gometimea rendered properly. 
 
 In 1 Peter ii. 1 3, we read in. the Calholiu 
 version. Be subject. ...whether it be to the king, 
 as excelling : in the Protestant, whether it be ta 
 the king, as supreme. Dr. Ryan observes, " the 
 Greek word Ctibqux'" signifies supreme as well as 
 excelling ! SO that it is not very material, which 
 way it is rendered."(S) It should, however, be 
 observed that in the more ancient version, to 
 afford some scriptural foundation for the king's 
 claim to the title of head of the church, it wa3 
 rendered, to the king, as the supreme head, a 
 corruption which I trust Dr. Ryan will not have 
 the temerity to defend. The rendering of the 
 more modern Bibles is less objectionable, though 
 it does not in my opinion exactly convey the 
 meaning of the original to the English reader. 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 AGAINST 
 
 THE SINGLE LIVES OF PRIESTS 
 
 " Ward," observes Dr. Ryan, " says we m's- 
 rendered the following text of St. Paul : Have 
 we not the power to eat and to drink — to lead 
 about a woman, a sister, as viell as the other 
 apostles? ( I Cor. ix. 5.) We render, a wife, a 
 sister. The Greek word'signifies wtfe as well as 
 woman : so that our translators are not charge- 
 able with misconstruing it " What idea Dr. Ryan 
 may have formed of the duties of a scriptural 
 translator, I know not : but the canon which 
 he hasTiere laid down, is, I conceive, most sin- 
 gular in its nature, and most pernicious in iti 
 application. There exists hardly a word in any 
 language which is not susceptible of several 
 different meanings : and of these meanings it 
 appears that the translator of the scriptures is at 
 liberty to select that which may please him best. 
 Now I think, and I trust every rational man will 
 think with me, that, when the signification of 
 a word is determined, as it generally is by the 
 context, the translator is" bound to adopt that 
 signification : and that, when it is not, he is not at 
 liberty to select the meaning that may please 
 him best, but ought to render the ambiguity of the 
 text by an expression of similar ambiguity in the 
 version : otherwise he does not offer a faithful 
 copy of the original : he does not translate but 
 interpret : he substitutes fallibility for infallibility- 
 and gives the surmises of his own judgment r 
 prejudice in the place of the real words of the 
 inspired writer. It is true that the Greek word 
 yvi'tj signifies wife as well as woman. It signifies 
 wife in its secondary, woman in its primary and 
 more general acceptation. Now, is there any 
 thing in the context to fix it to its secondary 
 meaning of wife ? Nothing , so that the more 
 ancient writers, whose judgment could not bo 
 biassed by controversial disputes, which did not 
 arise till many centuries after they were laid 
 in their graves, without hesitation translate ii 
 woman, and explain it of an unmarried woman 
 But even allowing it to be as probable thai St 
 
 (J) Anel., p. t* 
 
PREFACE TO THB FODRTH EDITION. 
 
 Paul meant a married, as that he meant an un- 
 married woman, this probability should at least 
 bo preserved in the version, by the adoption of 
 a word as equally susceptible of either meaning 
 as the Greek word in the original. It should be 
 translated a woman, a sister, or a sister woman, 
 and not a wife, a sister, as in the Protestant 
 translation. He who says, a woman, ioea not 
 Jecide whether she were married or not : but he 
 who says, a wife, determines the question at once, 
 and by substituting that determination in place 
 of the words of the apostle, corrupts the sacred 
 volume, and deceives the credulity of his readers. 
 
 The next text is thus rendered in the Catholic 
 version : / intreat thee also, my sincere compan- 
 ion: in the Trotestsmt, my true yoke-fellow. As 
 Dr. Ryan justly observes, " the two versions 
 seems to be the same in substance." But it 
 should be remembered, that the Protestant transla- 
 tion was made for the use of the vulgar, and in the 
 ears of the vulgar yoke-fellow sounds very much 
 like w?fe. Now, why did the Protestant trans- 
 lators act so very differently in rendering this 
 and the preceding text ? In the former for a 
 word of doubtful meaning they gave us another 
 of determinate signification : in this the meaning 
 of the expression is evident, (we have Dt. Ryan's 
 word for it,) and yet they render it by a term, to 
 say the bestof it, of very ambiguous signification. 
 To solve the problem. Ward asserts that their 
 object was to teach the people to look with a 
 more favourable eye on the married clergy : and 
 whoever reflects on the disputes which then di- 
 vided the Christian world on that subject, will 
 not think his opinion devoid of probability. 
 
 The next text is iMatt. xix. 11. Our Saviour, 
 speaking of the virtue of continency, says ; Not 
 all, they take this word ; but they to whom it is 
 given. The Protestant translation has all men 
 CANNOT receive this word, save they to whom it is 
 given. " A curious proof," remarks Dr. Ryan, 
 " that we mistranslated to justify the marriage 
 of the clergy !" The Dr. may make light of the 
 difference between the two versions : but I must 
 be allowed to maintain that the Protestant read- 
 ing is a most palpable corruption. It is confessed 
 that the word cannot does not occur in the 
 original : aud it is evident that it cannot be added 
 without changing the sense. It affords a ready 
 apology to every slave to impure gratification. 
 Though the Dr. asserts that there is little differ- 
 ence between do not receive, and cannot receive, 
 I think few of our readers are so prejudiced as 
 not to admit the distinction between power and 
 act. Every one must know, that men frequently 
 do not perform actions, though they can perform 
 them. In short, let me ask why the translators 
 added the word cannot 1 If it did not add to the 
 moaning of the original, why was the addition 
 made \ If it did. where was their honesty ? 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 
 AOAINST 
 
 THE SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM. 
 
 Of the mistranslations in the Protestant Bible 
 t great number are owing to the peculiar opin- 
 
 ions of their authors : and as these are now 
 forgotten, those are frequently overlooked. It 
 was the favourite tenet of Beza, that the sacra- 
 ments of the new and the sacraments of the old 
 law were of equal efficacy ; and that the baptism 
 of John was similar to the baptism of Jesus. 
 Now there occurs a passage of contrary impoit 
 in Acts xix. 3. In what, said St. Paul to the 
 Ephesians. were you baptized ^ And they said 
 in John's baptism. Eta rt ovf B^amtaOrjie ; hi. ds 
 itnoi'. Eia TO Iwavra ^umio/ta After which, 
 they were baptized in the name of the Lord 
 Jesus. Eta to ovo/ja tb ICvqiu Iijaa. To elude the 
 force of this te.xt, Beza translated : Unto what 
 were ye baptized? Unto John's baptism: and 
 explained John's baptism to be a metaphor ex- 
 pressive of John's doctrine. (o) Beza's opinion 
 was adopted by the English translators, and with 
 it was also adopted his version ; though in the 
 fourth verse they render the same Greek words 
 baptized in and not unto. By this conduct they 
 have undoubtedly disfigured and corrupted the 
 text. Of their readers the greater part are 
 unable to affix to it any meaning at all : and the 
 few that do understand it, are presented with 
 an erroneous version. Ward then was correct 
 in numbering this passage among the Errata. 
 Dr. Ryan in its defence only alleges, that the 
 difference betweerf the Catholic and Protestant 
 versions is too trivial to be noticed : " into, unto, 
 you and ye ! !" But I would have him to reflect 
 that the change of a single syllable will fre- 
 quently cause a very important change in the 
 sense : and to recollect that the Catholic version 
 reads in and not into, as he has thought proper 
 to assert. 
 
 In Titus iii. 5, the Apostle says that we hav« 
 been saved " by the laver of regeneration, and 
 the renovation of the Holy Ghost, whom /(e(God) 
 has poured upon us." In this text, which 
 evidently alludes to baptism, the Apostle clearly 
 says that the Holy Ghost i". poured upon us in 
 that sacrament. But this did not coincide with 
 the views of Calvin, who therefore boldly ren- 
 dered Sta Iovjqov noh^yeveatag, xui itaxatiwcebig 
 nyevfiarog dyto, i i^ey^^" ^9> '//""fi PM lavacrum 
 regeneratibnis spiritus sancti quod effudit in nos. 
 The English translators reversed the authority 
 of Calvin ; and therefore preferring his version 
 to the words of the original, they also rendered 
 it, by the fountain of the regeneration of the 
 Holy Ghost, which he shed on us." If it be said 
 that the relative which is ambiguous, and may 
 be referred either to fountain or Hoty Ghost, I 
 ask, why, where the original is clear, did they 
 prefer ambiguity? why did they select the veib 
 to shed, which alludes rather to the fountain than 
 the Holy Ghost, and why did they so scrupu- 
 lously adhere to- Calvin's versioii, as to suppress 
 the very words which h6 suppressed ? In the 
 modern English Bibles, the words originally 
 suppressed, are indeed restored, and fountain is 
 changed into washing : but the ambiguous relative 
 which, and the verb, to shed, are still retained. 
 Dr. Ryan owns that the Catholic version is 
 preferable. 
 
 (a) Bez. annnt. in Act xix. 
 
PREFACE TO THE >OUUTH tDITION. 
 
 PROTSdIANT TRANSLATIONS 
 AOaINST 
 
 CONFESSION AND THE SACRAMENT 
 OF PENANCE. 
 
 Om this subject the point at issue between 
 Ward and Dr. Ryan is the true meaning of the 
 Greek verb fteiavosiv. According to the Doc- 
 tor it implies sorrow for sin with a firm resolu- 
 tion of amendment, and is therefore properly 
 rendered by the Protestant translators to repent. 
 According to Catholics, it implies not only 
 sorrow and a purpose of amendment, but also 
 an external demonstration of that sorrow by 
 good works performed in a penitential spirit, 
 such as prayer, alms, and fasting, of which nu- 
 merous instances are recorded in holy writ. The 
 Catholic translators have therefore rendered it, 
 lo do penance. Now, that their rendering is 
 accurate I think clear: Istly, from some of the 
 texts themselves, which mention bodily afflic- 
 tion as an adjunct to the sorrow and amend- 
 ment required. Thus we read. Matt. xi. 21, 
 Luke X. 13, They had done penance [repented 
 Prot. ver.) in sackcloth and ashes ; 2ndly, from 
 the ancient Greek ecclesiastical writers, who 
 probably understood the real import of their 
 own language as well as the Protestant transla- 
 tors. Now those always style the performance 
 of penitential works fisruvoiu. Thus St. Basil, 
 speaking of the prayers, the abstinence, the sack- 
 cloth and ashes of the Ninivites, exclaims : 
 Togiturri -fj tuiv Aua^iiai^ ivexoftevbiv fiBtafOia -Ja) 
 3fl, from the austerities to which in the ancient 
 church public sinners were subjected, who were 
 then termed (it if trj ^sravoia dfrsa ; 4th from the 
 translator of the Vnlgate and the Latin fathers, who 
 render it by " penitentiam agere." To these I may 
 aJil Ausonius the poet in the well known passage, 
 
 Sum Dea, quae facti, non factique e.'cigo poenas ; 
 Scilicet ut poeniteat, sic ftsravoia vocor" 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 
 AGAINST 
 
 THE HONOUR OF OUR LADY AND 
 OTHER SAINTS. 
 
 I sHAf.L not dwell long on the texts enumerated 
 under this head, as they are of minor importance. 
 By Ward they were noticed with no other view 
 than to show, how scrupulously anxious the 
 Protestant translators were not to contaminate 
 the orthodoxy of their version by any approach 
 towards the language of Catholics. I shall give 
 Diid instance. In Psalm cxxxix. 17, occurs the 
 following passage -.—Thy friends, O God, arc 
 leciime exceedingly honourable : their princedom 
 is exceedingly strengthened. In the Catholic 
 service this text is applied to the saints ; a sufB- 
 tienl argument for its exclusion from a Protes- 
 tant Bible. That the Hebrew word ■i^J^ ori- 
 gin.-illy meant thy friends, atnl emrvn their 
 
 (a) St. Baa. horn, in fame etsiceitata. 
 
 princedom, cannot be denied. Thoy had been 
 rendered so by the Greek translator, and tha 
 Latin translator, and the Syriac translator, and 
 the Arabic translator, and the Ethiopia trans- 
 latoi. and the Chaldaic paraphrast. But then 
 it was the misfortune of those writers to live 
 before the reformation. Hatred of Popery had 
 not disclosed to them all the mysteries of the 
 Hebrew language. Our Protestant translators 
 applied to the task ; and by the magic touch oi 
 their pen, the friends nf God, and their prince- 
 dom, were translated into the thoughts of God 
 and their sum. " How precious are thy thoughts 
 unto me, O God ! and how great is the sum of 
 them." But this version, if it cannot lay claim 
 to accuracy, has at least one advantage. It 
 offers to the piety of the orthodox churchman a 
 new subject of meditation, the sum of God's 
 thoughts. Truly, if men are determined to 
 corrupt the language of scripture, let them at 
 least make it speak sense. To pervert it from 
 its true meaning is guilt sufficient : to transform 
 it into nonsense is a work of supererogation : it 
 is more than is necessary for the support of o» 
 thodoxy. 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 AGAINST 
 
 THE DISTINCTION OF RELATIVE 
 AND DIVINE WORSHIP. 
 
 In Hebrews xi. 21, it is said of Jacob, irpr- 
 asxvi'Tjasv em to i.xqovjrja ga(?f5e avra : which in 
 the Catholic translation is rendered, according 
 to the Vulgate, adored the top nf his (Joseph's) 
 rod: in the TrotestSint, worshipped, leaning on 
 the top of his staff. Among the ancient writers 
 there were two opinions respecting the meaning 
 of this passage, and that to which it alludes, 
 Genesis xlvii. 31. St. Augustine expounded 
 them to mean that Jacob adored God, leaning 
 on his staff, and St. Jerom countenances this 
 opinion by translating the Hebrew : " adoravit 
 Israel deum, conversus ad lectuli caput." But 
 the general opinion was, that Jacob in this 
 instance directed his respect not immediately to 
 God, but to his son Joseph. Thos ;, however, 
 who held this opinion, were divided in theii 
 manner of explaining it. " He worshipped 
 Joseph," says Theophylactus, " pointing out the 
 worship of the whole people. But how did ho 
 worship ? On the top of his staff: that is, sup. 
 porting himself on his staff on account of his 
 age. But some say he worshipped towards the 
 top of Joseph's rod, signifying by the rod the 
 sceptre of the kingdom which would bo after- 
 wards worshipped." {b) Of these two opinions 
 the former was adopted by Theodoret ; " Israel 
 sat resting on his staff, and worshipped bending 
 
 (p) TlpoueKwrict rcii l(ti(Te(p, ttjv iravros rou ^anv irpocrkvvjjuit 
 oiiXiiii'' Ilwtr Se TTptjaiKwijcTEV J Ein TO ixpov Trie aaat)ov &vrov, 
 TtiVTlcnVf Eirtpuadeitr TT]pa0ifa Sia to ytpaa, Tivta it Ctrl n 
 aKpovTrju paffdov tov Icocrcft, <paatf itpocCKVvriac, rijaaiiuv to Ttji 
 $aci).etaa oxTinTpov Sta Trjfr paffSov irpoaKVvijdtiirtaBai uxaXot 
 
 Theophyl. in cap. xi. ad Haeb. 
 
PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EUITION. 
 
 ais hoad on lis staff:" (o) the lattei by St. Atha- 
 aasius, who in quoting the passage inserts the 
 words iii8 lima " the rod of his son ," (i) and by 
 St. Chrj'sostorn, who says, " though an old man 
 he worshipped Joseph, foretelling the future 
 worship to be rendered by the whole people." {c) 
 In such diver^iity of sentiment no translator car 
 be blamed for adopting either opinion. 1 would 
 translate it, He lowed to the top of Joseph's 
 
 In Ps, xcviii. 5, ii is said, according to the 
 Catholic version, adore the footstool of his feet, 
 because it is holy : in the Protestant, worship at 
 his footstool, for he is holy. The former version 
 is favourable to the exhibition of religious re- 
 spect to creatures ; the latter does not necessarily 
 i^xclude it. I do not, however, think that the 
 Protestant rendering is accurate. The Hebrew 
 phrase is applied in the scriptures to the true 
 God, to imaginary gods, and to creatures : and 
 the noture of the worship, which it denotes, is 
 determined by the nature of its object. But the 
 reformers had rejected that respect, which Ca- 
 tholics allow on religious motives to be sometimes 
 paid to creatures • and it was of course improper 
 to permit any traces of it to be found in the 
 sacred volumes. Thus the same phrase adopted 
 different meanings at the will of the translaior : 
 and the same preposition on one occasion pointed 
 out the object of worship, at another excluded 
 it : onji rpnr.rn n? is rendered, ikou shall 
 not bow down thyself to them : and -Ttri vnnan 
 'xorship AT his foolstnnl. If in the former 
 passage the Hebrew phrase means lo bow down 
 to, how comes it to mean to worship at, in the 
 latter ? I fear, that in this text, as in many 
 others, the prejudices of the translators pre- 
 vailed over their respect for the original. In 
 the Catholic version we read, for it is holy ; in 
 the Protestant, for he is only. The Hebrew 
 text will bear either meaning. 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 
 SACRED IMAGES AND AGAINST THE 
 USE OF THEM. 
 
 Among the different arts by which the apos- 
 tles of the reformation contrived to inflame the 
 animosity of their disciples against the Church 
 of Rome, few were more eflicacious than the 
 ■Jamour which they raised against the worship 
 of images. According to the new gospel, 
 every species of religious respect offered to 
 inanimate objects was idolatrous : and to prove 
 the trtith of this doctrine, almost every page of 
 scripture was improved by new denimciations 
 of vengeance agains! images, and their worship- 
 
 (tz) Eta&tirdTi $aKTtpia St <«;^pi7/i£i'0ff CTriffTTjpt^cTE avrTf. 
 Xl^oatKvi'iTTiv hiTiKkivac Tfi (ia^S(i3 Trjf tfC^a^iyv. Theod. in 
 
 Uen. mterrog. 109, 
 (ft) Homil. in St. PatreB, 11, p. 693. 
 
 (c) Kot yepoiv tijv, fjSri irpooeKWijiTe Tdj lwff«0, ttjv travToa tov 
 Aaiiv npoiTKVvrt(7t* tfqXwv rif/ toofievriy avr(t}, HoUl. XXVi. in 
 
 epis. ad Heb, 
 
 pers. No less than thirteen d.fferenl words in 
 the Hebrew, and nine in the Greek scriptures, 
 were invariably rendered image in the English 
 version : so wonderfully comprehensive is the 
 meaning of that single word in orthodox lan- 
 guage. Of the texts, which had been thus cor. 
 rupted, two proved eminently useful. In 2 Cor. 
 vi. 16, the Apostle was made to say : How 
 agreeth the temple of God with images ? and this 
 corruption furnished every iconoclast preacher 
 with a most powerful text, when he urged the 
 credulity of his hearers to deface the ornaments 
 with which Catholic piety had been accustomed 
 to decorate religious edifices. The other text 
 occurred 1 John. v. 23, babes, keep yourselves 
 from images ; and this, when the house of God 
 had been purged from every trace of Popish 
 idolatry, was constantly painted in large cha- 
 racters within the door. Useful, however, as 
 these texts have been, they no longer appear in 
 the sacred volumes. They were suffered to 
 effect the purpose of their authors, and then 
 were directly consigned to oblivion. The same 
 has been the fate of several others of similar 
 import, as Dr. Ryan acknowledges : " but then," 
 he adds, " having been corrected, Ward should 
 not have inserted them in his list." Why not ? 
 Did they not originally exist in the Protestant 
 version ? Were they not received by the people 
 as part of the original text ? Undoubtedly. 
 Ward then could not have omitted them without 
 betraying the cause he had undertaken to 
 defend. 
 
 But though several of these texts have been 
 corrected by men, whose more moderate ortho- 
 doxy cold blush at the daring effrontery of 
 their predecessors, Ward still complains that 
 several are also left, which equally require cor- 
 rection. In the Protestant version of the 
 decalogue are read, thou shalt not make to thy- 
 self any graven image, instead of graven thing. 
 " But where," says Dr. Ryan, " is the difference ? 
 When a thing is graven, it becomes an image, 
 and a graven thing must be the image of some- 
 thing real or imaginary." (d) If the authors of 
 the Protestant version reasoned in this manner, 
 they deserved no less praise as logicians than as 
 translators. Every graven thing must neces- 
 sarily be an image, why, then I suppose every 
 graven ornament is to be called an image, the 
 pillars that adorn our porticoes will be images ; 
 even our houses of polished and ornamented 
 stone must become images. That the Hebrew 
 word in its original meaning denotes a. graven 
 thing, cannot be denied : and that it may some- 
 times mean an image, I will allow. But in what 
 sense does Dr. Ryan wish itto be taken ? If in the 
 latter, yet from the context it is evident that it 
 denotes an image to which divine worship is to 
 be paid : and such an image in plain English is 
 an idol. Thus it was rendered by the Greek 
 translators, and thus it ought to have been 
 rendered by the Protestant. But if he takes 
 it in the former sense, the present rendering is 
 also false : as it restrains the prohibition to 
 
 (d) Anal., p. SiS- 
 
PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITION. 
 
 images, wliereas in the original it includes under 
 the denomination of graven things, the columns 
 of stones, which were the objects of worship to 
 many of the ancient nations. 
 
 In two other texts, Rom. xi. 4. ; Acts xix. 
 35, it is acknowledged that imnge does not 
 occur in the original. It has been preserved 
 in the Protestant version as a memorial of the 
 devotion which the reformed translators paid to 
 this important word. It was their most useful 
 auxiliary : and they have rewarded its services 
 by still giving it a niche in the inspired writings. 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 AGAINST 
 
 IJMBUS PATRUM AND PURGATORY. 
 
 OiV this subject, after a long preamble in 
 which he shows but little acquaintance with the 
 Catholic doctrine. Dr. Ryan calls on Popish 
 divines to show that the twelve texts mentioned 
 by Ward prove the doctrine or existence of the 
 Limbus patrum or purgatory. But this is 
 unnecessary in the present instance. The point 
 to be determined is, whether the Hebrew word 
 b'-'nx, denotes the grave, as it is rendered in the 
 Protestant version, or the slate nf the spul after 
 death, as it was understood by the Catholic trans- 
 lators. Now, 1st, that it will admit of the lat- 
 ter meaning must be acknowledged by Dr. Ryan 
 himself: since in three instances to allow its 
 insertion, tho word grave has been expunged in 
 the corrected editions of the Protestant Bible. 
 2nd. The proper Hebrew term for the grave is 
 "isp • nor can I find any proof that ^^ji» is 
 evei employed in that sense in the scriptures. («) 
 In every passage in which it occurs, it will 
 easily bear the meaning ascribed to it by the 
 Catholic translators : in some it cannot bear 
 that which is given to it in the Protestant ver- 
 sion. Thus, when Jacob said, " / will go down 
 into JntiB vnto my son mourning ;" he could 
 not mean the grave. He certainly did not con- 
 ceive Joseph's soul to have been buried : and as 
 for his body he could not expect to find it in the 
 grave, as he believed it to have been devoured 
 by "wild beasts. In favour of his opinion Dr. 
 Ryan adduces the Samaritan version in which 
 this text, as he says, is rendered the grave. I 
 fear, however, that, unable to read the Sama- 
 ritan version itself, he has been deceived by the 
 .reacherous authority of its Latin translator. 
 I he Latin translator of the Samaritan version 
 lias indeed rendered Gen. xxxvii. 35, sepulchrum: 
 Inn in the version itself we read, b'n:, which is 
 niiJenlly the same word as the Hebrew, and has 
 the same meaning ; and which the same trans- 
 lator in the parallel passages. Gen. xlii." 38 ; 
 xliv. 29, 31, has rendered by the Latin word 
 Jnferi. 3rd. If modern Lexicographers give 
 
 (a) In the passages usually refered to 1 Kings xi. 6, 10, 
 it Is rendered tidria, inferi, by the ancient translators. 
 They looked on ins^o hia old age, as a figurative ex- 
 prcasion foi him I't his old age. 
 
 both meanings to the Hebrew word, I can op 
 pose to their authority that .of the anci(,rt Greek 
 I and Latin interpreters, who as invariably render 
 Viisx di!)rjo, inferi, ii.fprnus, as they do "-7, 
 Twqpocj, /Jirjfi", sepulchrum. It is from them that 
 the true moaning of this ancient language is to 
 be learned. If, however. Dr. Ryan refuses to 
 submit to them, I trust he will not reject the 
 authority of St. Peter, who in Acts xi. 27 
 translates it di5)?a,.and in obedience to whom the 
 correctors of the Protestant Bible have in thij 
 instance erased the_ word grave, by which it hac 
 been rendered in the more ancient editions. 
 
 Dr. Ryan wishes to persuade his readers tha 
 AVard introduced the text from Heb. v. 7. as a 
 proof of the existence of purgatory. Why 
 should he thus misrepresent his adversary ? In 
 discoursing of the foregoing texts. Ward had 
 occasion to mention that article of the creed, in 
 which Christians profess their belief in the de- 
 scent of our Saviciur into hell : and this had led 
 him to censure the opinion of Calvin and Beza 
 that the descent into hell was only a metaphorical 
 expression, significative of the anguish of de- 
 spair, and the horrors of damnation, which Jesus 
 felt on the cross. To' countenance so blasphe 
 mous an idea, the Protestant translators added 
 their mite ; and in rendering that passage, in 
 which St. Peter alludes to the prayer of Jesus 
 on the cross, tell us that he was heard in that 
 which he feared. The Greek is diuoiija (niHSf hkt 
 which in the Catholic version is translated, 
 he was heard for his reverence. What plea 
 may be offered in defence of the Protestant 
 rendering I know not. Dr. Ryan has offered 
 none. I may therefore assume that it is inil* 
 fensible. 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATION* 
 AGAINST 
 
 JUSTIEICATION AND THE REWARD 
 OF GOOD WORKS. 
 
 Dr. Ryan observes that the texts enumerated 
 by Ward in this section were too obscure to 
 induce the Protestant translators to misrender 
 them. But this is shifting the question. The 
 point in debate is not, whether these texts be 
 obscure or not ; but whether they be fairly ren- 
 dered in the Protestant version. Ward assorts 
 they are not ; and I think he has made out a 
 pretty strong case. The Protestant translators 
 were violent champions in favor of justification 
 by faith only, and whoever consults this version 
 will find that they had two sets of English words 
 to express the Greek word Sixrj and its dcriva- 
 vations. When they were united in the scriptures 
 with the word faith, then they were rendered by 
 just, justice, justification ; but if they were united 
 with words expressive of the reward or practice 
 of good works, just and justification disappeared, 
 and righteous and righteousness were adopted 
 in their place. If nothing unfair were meant, 
 what motive could they have for this verbal 
 legerdemain ? How comes it, that the same 
 
PREPACK TO THE FOURTH EDITION 
 
 Greek words should be cautiously rendered' by 
 (wo different sets of English words, and that 
 these should be alternately adopted as they fa- 
 voured the opinions of the translators, or were 
 adverse to those of their antagonists. 
 
 PROTESTAN'T TRANSLATIONS 
 AQAINST 
 
 MERIT AND MERITORIOUS WORKS. 
 
 In this section Ward produces five texts 
 which, he maintains, have been falsely rendered 
 in the Protostant Bible. In answer, Dr. Ryan 
 compares these texts as they now stand, with the 
 same passages in the Catholic version, and. very 
 gravely asks where is the difference '! Rut know, 
 gentle reader, that he quotes from the amended 
 version, in which the three principal corruptions 
 have been corrected ; while Ward complains of 
 the original translation. Such artifices are but 
 Sony indications of the confidence which Dr. 
 Ryan professes in the goodness of his cause. 
 
 Of the remaining texts, one (Coloss. i. 12), 
 according to the Catholic version, declares that 
 God has made us worthy ; according to the 
 Protestant, has made vs meet to be partakers of 
 the inheritance of the saints. The Greek is 
 txafoaai'Ti : and as the Protestant translators 
 have rendered Ixafoa worthy in Matt, ni. 1', 
 and viii. 8, I see not why they should here have 
 rendered it meet, were it not to avoid the Ca- 
 tholic doctrine of merit. The other passage is 
 in Ps. cxix. 112, in which ^r' is rendered /or 
 reward, by the Catholic ; unto tlie end. by the 
 Protestant version. There is something veiy 
 singular in the fate of this word. If in this 
 passage the Catholic translator has rendered it 
 for reward, in verse 33 of the same psalm he 
 has rendered it always : and in like manner, if 
 in this passage the Protestant translator has ren- 
 dered it unto the end, in Psalm xix. 12, he has 
 rendered it reward. In this confusion of ren- 
 derings I should thipk it the most prudent to 
 adhere to the ancient Greek interpreter, rather 
 than the modern translators. He probably pos- 
 sessed more accurate MSS , and certainly was 
 more intimately acquainted with the original 
 language. 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 
 FREE WILL. 
 
 Of the seven texts enumerated by Ward under 
 this head, three, according to Dr. Ryan, have 
 been corrected ; a sufficient proof that in the 
 original Protestant version they were rendered 
 corruptly. It will be easy to vindicate Ward's 
 reniarks on the remaining four. 
 ■ l.st The Greek text, 1 Cor. xr. 10, is sus- 
 ceptible of two meanings : ihat the grace of 
 God laboured alone, or that the grace of God 
 and the aposlle laboured together. The Pro- 
 
 11 
 
 testant version, by inverting the >vords, " whi'ch 
 was with me,'' appears to restrain the sense to 
 the former meaning, and in that respect is not a 
 faithful representation of the original. 
 
 2nd. Romans v. 6, the apostle says that ot 
 ourselves loe locre dudsfeta, which the Protestant 
 version renders without strength. The true 
 meaning is weak : but weakness does noi imply 
 a total deprivation of strength. 
 
 3rd. The Protestant version renders ytt hwXai 
 &VIU ^uQBitti 8x eiaif, 1 John v. 3, his commiind- 
 meiits are not grievous. Instead of grievous 
 Ward contends wo should read heavy. And 
 that he is accurate will, I trust, appear by 
 comparing this passage with that in St. Matt. 
 xi. 30. 
 
 4th. Matt. xix. 11, is rendered in the Protes. 
 tant version : all men cannot receive this saying. 
 Dr. Ryan acknowledges that cannot is an inter- 
 polation, by proposing a different version of hi-i 
 own, in which that word is omitted. The trans- 
 lators must have trusted much to the credulity of 
 their readers, when they dared thus to add to 
 the meaning of the original. Their disciples 
 however, unconscious of the deception, prided 
 .themselves on their imaginary happiness ; and. 
 while they derived new lights from the blunders 
 and corruptions of the translators, wondered at 
 their former ignorance, and pitied the blindness 
 of the slaves of Popery. 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 AGAINST 
 
 INHERENT JUSTICE. 
 
 Among the new doctrines sported by the apos- 
 tles of the reformation, was that of imputative 
 justice. No man, how virtuously soever he might 
 have lived, could be just or righteous indeed, 
 but only in as much as the justice or righteous- 
 ness of Christ was imputed to him. With the 
 merits or demerits of this opinion I have nu 
 concern : but among the texts by which it was 
 assailed or defended, Ward has selected six, 
 which he maintains to have been corrupted bv 
 the zeal of the Protestant translators. Dr. Ryan 
 contents himself with replying very gravely, thai 
 neither do the Catholic versions prove, nor the 
 Protestant versions disprove the contrary doc- 
 trine of inherent justice. 
 
 Of all the theological champions, with whom 
 it has been my lot to be acquainted. Dr. Ryan 
 conducts controversy in the most singular man- 
 ner. Ward had asserted that in more than one 
 hundred passages the Protestant version of the 
 scriptures was corrupted : he noticed in detail 
 every one of these corruptions, and subjoined 
 to each the reasons on which he founded his 
 charge. Then came Dr. Ryan, and undertook 
 to rebut the accusations. But how does he 
 proceed ? Does he refute each of Ward's ar- 
 guments ? No, he does not so much as mention 
 them. A reader, who had perused none but 
 Dr. Ryan's tract, would not know that Ward 
 had a single reason to offer. Tho Doctor 
 
12 
 
 PREFACE TO THE FOURTH EDITIOJT. 
 
 throughout appears attempting to silence a dumb 
 adversary, to conq\ier a man who makes no 
 resistance. Nowwhence arises this conduct in 
 Dr. Ryan ? Was he unwilling to refute Ward's 
 argumoni ? But who cp.n auspect of unwilling- 
 ness in such a cause the self-created representa- 
 tive of the Ryans, who lost so extensive a terri- 
 tory by the papal giimt uf Ireland to Henry II. ? 
 Was he unable to refute them ? I believe he 
 was. However, let his reasons have been what 
 they may, this is certanj, that instead of answer- 
 ing, he has passed over the arguments of Ward, 
 as if ho had never seen them. But to proceed 
 to the texts in question. 
 
 1st. The first is a passage of considerable ob- 
 scurity, Rom. v. 18. By the Rhemish transla- 
 tors it has been rendered with the most scrupu- 
 lous and laudable fidelity, while the Protestant 
 translators have undertaken to make it more 
 clear by supplying such words, as they thought 
 wanting. If Ward complain of these additions, 
 it is probable that his complaint was not un- 
 founded : since in the corrected editions they 
 have been expunged, and their place has been 
 c-upplied by other additions taken, as it appears, 
 from the sixteenth verse. The alteration I. 
 think judicious : yet after all, it gives us not the 
 words of the sacred texts, but only the conjec- 
 tures of its Protestant translators. 
 
 2nd. We are told in the Protestant version, 
 Rom. iv. 3, that Abraham believed God and 
 that it was accounted unto him for righteousness. 
 What is the meaning of these last words, /or 
 lighleousness ? Do they not imply the same as 
 instead of righteousness ? Such, at least, is the 
 rendering, and the explication of Beza, the 
 master of our translators : pro justitia, i. e. vice 
 et loco justitisB. Now I appeal to any man ac- 
 quainted with the Greek and Hebrew languages, 
 whether such can be the meaning either of St. 
 Paul, ii-dytadi] cirum ha dixuioavfrjr^ or of the 
 writer of Genesis fromwhom the Apostle ouotes, 
 
 3rd. In Ephes. i. 6, the Apostle says that 
 God ^;i'«jti-(«(7«<' -ffUag iy to) i]-janrjiAiva. Ward 
 has made it sufficiently clear from the ancient 
 Greek writers, that i=/uQi7(naev means, has made 
 us agreeable or pleasing in his eyes. The Pro- 
 testant translators have rendered it, has made us 
 accepted. At first sight it may perhaps appear 
 that the two renderings are nearly ahke ; but a 
 closer inspection will discover that the former is 
 adverse, the latter favourable to the doctrine of 
 imputative justice. Ward then was probably 
 accurate in attributing this rendering to the pre- 
 judices of the translators in favor of their own 
 f pinion. 
 
 4th. The false translation of 2 Cor. v. 21, 
 's corrected in the more modern Bibles. Who- 
 ever consults Ward will see what unjustifiable 
 liberties the original translators took with their 
 ■pxt. Bat on this head Dr. Ryan is silent. He 
 would fain persuade his readers, it is of the pre- 
 sent and not of the ancient version that Ward 
 complains. Such artifices are unworthy of a wri- 
 er, who is convinced nf the goodness of his eauM. 
 
 6th. The two remaining texts, Dan. vi 22 ; 
 
 Rom 
 in 
 
 ,om. iv. 6, are noticed by Ward principally as 
 i.isthnces of the huiror which the reformora 
 seems to have entertained for the word justice 
 Thai they might not pollute their pages with 
 sucu a term, they have inserted innncency in the 
 former, and righteousness in the latter passag*' 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIO.VS 
 IN FAVOUR OF THE 
 
 SUFFICIENCY OF FAITH ALONE. 
 
 This section, like most others, offered Dr. 
 Ryan a subject of imaginary triumph. Out ol 
 the six corrupt renderings noticed by Ward, ho 
 boasts that four have been corrected in the later 
 editions of the Bible. He must be a weak adver- 
 sary indeed, who can envy him such a triumph 
 1 shall therefore proceed to the two remaining 
 texts. 
 
 Among the separatists from the Church ol 
 Rome at tlie period of the reformation, no lees' 
 than among the separatists from the Church oi 
 England at the present day, it was a favourite 
 doctrine, that justification by faith consisted in a 
 lull assurance of salvation. Whoever could work 
 in himself this conviction, was secure of future 
 happiness. His assurance wasinfallible; it would 
 preserve him from ever falling, so as to forfeit his 
 claim to the kingdom of heaven. Among the 
 texts adduced in favour of this opinion was that 
 of the epistle in the Hebrews, x. 22, with this 
 diflerence, that former fanatics could only appeal 
 to the assurance of faith of the ancient Protestant 
 version, while modern fanatics may appeal to the 
 full as.surance of faith of the present amended 
 edition. But does the original text, ev nhigoqioiif 
 TCTatebiij, warrant such a rendering 1 1 have no 
 hesitation in asserting, that it does not, and I 
 found my assertion on the authority of those who 
 could not have been ignorant of the true meaning 
 of the Greek language, the ancient doctors o( 
 the Greek Church. By these the TiXijQocfiogiix 
 ■maxBwo is said to be, a full and perfect faith, a 
 faith that believes without doubling whatever 
 God has revealed. Tuvtu. says Theodoret, Siaia 
 lyjiv TtiOTBvoPTBO^ Kill Ttuauv di)rovoi,av Ttja tfivxijO 
 sSuQit^ofTsa. Tmo yaq nXr/QngiOQiav B)(a}.eueP:(a) 
 It is, according to Thoophylact, ntana neni.i]Qiu- 
 ^6V7j «at adt(n(xj(Tog. (b) 
 
 The last text is Luke xviii. 43, Thy faith 
 hath saved thee, instead of hath made thee whole. 
 That this is a false rendering, is acknowledged. 
 I shall therefore only ask, why it was first in- 
 serted in the original version, and why it is still 
 preserved in the corrected edition ? 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 AGAINST 
 
 APOSTOLICAL TRADITIONS. 
 
 On this subject I shall be content to refer tlio 
 reader to the Errata, No. XVI., where he will see 
 
 (a) Theod. in Ep. adHeb., c. x. (6) Thood. in ouad , loo. 
 
PREFACE TO THE FOUIITH EDITION. 
 
 13 
 
 whai reasons Ward had for censuring the Protes- 
 tant translators ; and shall only notice Dr. 
 Ryan's artifice in attempting to persuade us, that 
 two of the five texts condemned by his adversary 
 " agree with the Popish translation." What 
 then I did Ward accuse the Protestants of mis- 
 translating, when they translated in the same 
 eense as the Rhemish divines ? No such thing, 
 Dr. Ryan meant to say, that the ancient ren- 
 dering of the Protestant Bible in these two pas- 
 sages was so evidently false, that it has since 
 been corrected according to the Catholic trans- 
 lation. Had he said this, he wonld have said the 
 truth. 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS CHARGES. 
 
 0^J this head I shall notice the principal 
 passages. It would fatigue the patience of the 
 reader to go through them all 
 
 On marriage. " In the Popish version," 
 says Dr. Ryan, " we read, tliis is a great sacra- 
 ment : in ours, this is a great mystery. (Eph. v. 
 22.) Ward allows that the word signifies mystery 
 in Greek, and in Latin sacrament : surely then 
 we are not chargeable with mistranslation."(a) 
 Never perhaps was there a more intrepid writer 
 than Dr. Ryan ; never one who cared less for 
 detection, or trusted more to the credulity of 
 his readers. Does Ward then condemn the 
 words, this is a great mystery, as a false transla- 
 tion ? On the contrary, he approves of it as a 
 true one. But he condemned the original 
 Protestant rendering, this is a great secret ; a 
 rendering so very, faulty that Dr. Ryan was 
 ashamed to notice it, and therefore endeavoured, 
 by calumniating his adversary, to keep it agreat 
 secret. 
 
 On prayers in an unknown tongue. In 
 1 Cor. xiv. the Protestant translators have 
 added the epithet unknown in five different pas- 
 sages , and in answering this charge, Dr. Ryan 
 very adroitly becomes the assailant, and accuses 
 the Catholic translators of having omitted it in 
 the same passages. What then ? Does it occur 
 in the original ? No ; but it is necessary to 
 complete the sense. So Dr. Ryan may think ; 
 but the apostlfi thought otherwise. He did not 
 insert it ; and if he did not, I cannot conceive 
 whence any translator can derive authority to 
 insert it for him. If you will have the people to 
 study their faith in the scriptures, let them at 
 least have the scriptures as they were originally 
 written. Let the stream flow to them pure from 
 its source, without the admixture of foreign 
 matters. 
 
 With respect to the texts, 1 Cox. xiii. ; I Cor. 
 !. 10 ; and 1 Tim. iii. 6, Ward's charges are 
 directed against the ancient Protestant version ; 
 and Dr Ryan charges him with misrepresenta- 
 tion because these passages are corrected in the 
 modem amended editions ! ! 
 
 James i 13. Let no man say that he is 
 tempted of God : for God is not a tempter of 
 
 evil : and he tempteth no man. Instead of this 
 the Protestant version reads, ^or God cannot be 
 tem.pted with evil. Dr. Ryan has the modesty 
 to assert that these two constructions are nearly 
 the same ! (6) 
 
 CONCLUSION. 
 
 Dr. Ryan has repeatedly challenged the " Po- 
 pish clergy" to reply to his analysis • he cannot 
 be offended that I have accepted the invitation. 
 If in the cause of my reply, I have shown that 
 he has often adopted artifices unworthy a 
 scholar and a divine ; that he was frequently 
 misrepresented, and still more frequently con- 
 cealed the arguments of his adversary, the blame 
 must attach not to me, but to himself. Ho 
 volunteered in the controversy : he must be an- 
 swerable for the manner in which he has con- 
 ducted the contest. 
 
 Besides those parts of the Analysis which 1 
 have noticed. Dr. Ryan has offered some argu- 
 ments respecting the Lambeth Register, and 
 added answers to Ward's queries. With those 
 I have no concern. My only object was to 
 refute his remarks with respect to the Protestant 
 version of the scriptures. As, however, it would 
 be uncivil to take my leave without replying to 
 these queries, which he has placed at the end 
 of his pamphlet, I shall endeavour to do it as 
 concisely and as satisfactorily as I can. 
 
 The three first queries ask, how the Vulgato 
 can be an infallible standard for other transla- 
 tions ? I answer, that the Vulgate is a version 
 deservedly of high authority, but I never yv\ 
 met with a Catholic who considered it as infal- 
 lible. 
 
 Q. IV. Is the translation of the Bible respon- 
 sible for the errors or excesses of Beza, or 
 others, who had no hand in any of our versions t 
 
 A. It is not. Nor does Ward say it is. But 
 many of the first translators were the pupils ol 
 Calvin and Beza, and it was not irrelevant to 
 trace in the work of the masters the errors ol 
 their disciples. 
 
 Q. V. Did the Protestant Churches ever pre- 
 tend to be mfallible m these translations or other- 
 wise 1 
 
 A. I know not whether they did or not. Bin 
 this I know, they ought to have done so. 
 Whence can a Protestant ignorant of the origi- 
 nal languages, derive the knowledge of the 
 Christian faith, tiul from the translation of the 
 Bible ? If then, that translation be fallible, 
 or manifestly erroneous, how can he have any 
 security that his faith be true 1 Built' on an 
 unsafe foundation, it can never acquire stability. 
 The translation of the Bible must be in.'allible, 
 or at least authentic, or the Protestant in 
 question must always live in uncertainty. 
 
 Q. VI. Did not the translators of the Bible 
 of the year 1683 correct forty errors in our old 
 ones 1 
 
 A. The reformers of the old Protestant trans- 
 
 (o) Anal-, p. 40. 
 
 (6) Anal., p. 42. 
 
14 
 
 VRKFACE TO THE FOUHTH EDITIOW. 
 
 Ititious did f.onect forty errors, and should have 
 correcTed forty more. 
 
 Q.^VIl. Having adopted the very words of 
 the Popish English Bible in very many in- 
 stances, is it fair to charge them in every page 
 with miilice, design, and misinterpretation ? 
 
 A. Ward does not often' charge them with 
 malice, design, and misinterpretation. His 
 charges are principally levelled against the ori- 
 ginal translators. He approves in many places 
 of the conduct of the reformers of the Protes- 
 tant version ; in some he condemns them, I fear, 
 justly. 
 
 Q. VIII. It always proves a bad cause to 
 represent an opponent's argument as weaker 
 than it is. Show where 1 exhibit Ward's objec- 
 tions as less strong than they are ? 
 
 A. In every division almost without exception. 
 This I think I have sufficiently proved in the 
 preceding pages. 
 
 Q. IX. According to Ward, the apostles had 
 a Christian doctrine, a rule of faith, before the 
 New Testament was written ; prove that they 
 had it ? 
 
 A. If by a rule of faith Dr. Ryan means the 
 thirty-nine Articles, I do not believe that the 
 apostle had them either before the scripture was 
 written or afterwards. But of this I am sure, 
 that before the scripture was written the apos- 
 tles preached the Christian doctrine, ^nd estab- 
 Ushoid cliurches in which it was taught I 
 
 humbly conceive that they must have had a 
 knowledge of it, and have impated that know^ 
 ledge to their disciples. 
 
 Q. X. Will not the Greek professor at May 
 nooth admit that the word Icfunul signifies onct 
 for all ? 
 
 A. As I have not the honour to.be acquainted 
 with the Greek professor at Maynooth 1 am 
 unable to answer the question. 
 
 Qs. XI. XII. XIII. XV. regard the meaning 
 of Greek words. For answer I must request 
 the reader to consult the preceding pages. 
 
 Q. XIV. Was it not more decent in an 
 apostle to lead about a wife than a strange 
 woman ? 
 
 . A. I do not see how he could, unless he were 
 married. Our blessed Redeemer was often 
 attended by holy women of his kindred ; why 
 might not an apostle also ? 
 
 Q. XVI. The word na^anTuifii signifies fault 
 as well as sin. The Romanists render it sin : 
 why may we not render it fault without being 
 guilty of misconstruction ? 
 
 A. 1 see no great sin in rendering naganiioftii 
 fault, nor riny great fault in rendering it sin. 
 
 Q. XVn. Did not Adrian IV. grant IrelanO 
 to Henry II., and did not Alexander IV. confirm 
 that grant ? 
 
 A. Did not Dr. Ryan undertake to refute 
 the " Errata," and baa he not failed in almost 
 every point ? 
 
THE AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 Among the many and irreconcileable differ- 
 nnccs between Roman Catholics and the secta- 
 ries of our days, those about the holy scriptures 
 claim not the least place on the stage of 
 controversy : as, firstly, whether the Bible is the 
 8ole and only rule of faith 1 Secondly, whether 
 all things necessary to salvation are contained 
 in the Bible ? Or, whether we are bound to 
 believe some things, as absolutely necessary to 
 salvation, which are either not clear in scripture, 
 or not evidently deduced out of scripture ? 
 Thirdly, whether every individual person, of 
 sound judgment, ought to follow his own private 
 interpretation of the scripture 1 If so, why one 
 party or profession should condemn, persecute, 
 and penal-law another, for being of that per- 
 Buasion 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 
 ■jafely and securely depend, touching the exposi- 
 tion and true sense and meaning of the same ? 
 Fourthly, whence have we the scripture ? That 
 is, who handed it down to us from the Apostles, 
 who wrote it ? And by what atithority we 
 receive it for the Word of God ? And, whether 
 wo ought not to receive the sense and true 
 meaning of the scripture, upon the same author- 
 ity 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 they suspect the purity of 
 that sense, which was kept and delivered to 
 'hem Ijy the same church and authority ? With 
 several other such like queries, frequently 
 proposed by Catholics ; and never yet, nor ever 
 likely to be, solidly answered by any sectaries 
 whatever. 
 
 It is not the design of this following treatise 
 to enter into these disputes ; but only to show 
 thee, Christian reader, that those translations 
 of the Bible, which the English Protestant 
 clergy have made and presented to the people 
 for their only rule of faith, are in many places 
 i,ot only partial, but false, and disfigured with 
 several corruptions, abuses, and falsifications, in 
 derogation to the most material points of Cath- 
 olic doctrine, and in favour and advantage of 
 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 authority of God's holy 
 cliurcb ; so has it also ever been their practice 
 
 to falsify, corrupt, and abuse the same in diners 
 manners. 
 
 1 . One way is, to deny whole books thereof, 
 or parts of books, when they are evidently 
 against them : so did, for example, Ebion 
 all St. Paul's epistles ; Manicheus the Acts ol 
 the Apostles ; Luther likewise denied three 
 of the four Gospels, saying, that St. John's is 
 the only true gospel ; and so do our English 
 Protestants those books which they call the 
 Apocrypha. 
 
 2. Another way is, to call in question at the 
 least, and make some doubt of the authority of 
 certain books of holy scriptures, thereby to 
 diminish their credit : so did Manicheus affirm, 
 that the whole New Testament was not written 
 by the Apostles, and particularly St. Matthew's 
 Gospel : so did Luther discredit the Epistle ol 
 St. James : so did Marcion and the Arians deny 
 the Epistle to the Hebrews to be St. Paul's ; in 
 which they were followed by our first English 
 Protestant translators of the Bible, who pre- 
 sumed to strike St. Paul's name out of the very 
 title of the said Epistle. («) 
 
 3. Another way is, to 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 here- 
 tics, who seem to ground their errors upon the 
 scriptures ; especially those, who will have 
 scripture, as by themselves expounded, for theii 
 only rule of faith. 
 
 4. Another way is, to alter the very origi 
 nal text of the holy scriptures, by adding to, di- 
 minishing, and changing it here or there for their 
 purpose : so did the Arians, Nestorians, &c. and 
 also Marcion, who is therefore called Mus 
 Ponticus, from his gnawing, as it were, certain 
 places with his corruptions ; and for the same 
 reason may Beza not improperly be called, the 
 Mouse of Geneva. 
 
 5. Another way not unlike this, is to make 
 corrupt and false translations of the scriptures 
 for the maintenance of their errors : so did the 
 Arians and Pelagians of old, and so have the 
 pretended reformers of our days done, wltich 
 I intend to make the subject of this following 
 treatise. 
 
 Yet, before I proceed any further, let me 
 first assure my reader, that this work is not 
 undertaken with any design of lessoning the 
 
 («) See Bibles 1679, 1580. 
 
16 
 
 fllF. AI'THOr's VREFACB. 
 
 credit or authority of the Holy Bible, as perhaps 
 some may be ready to suniuse ; for inileed, ii 
 is a common exclamation amoi'.g our adversaries, 
 especially such of them as one would think 
 should have a greater respect for truih, that 
 Catltolics make, light of the written Word of 
 God : that they undervalue and condenm the 
 sacred scriptures, that they endeavour to lessen 
 ihe credit and authority of the Holy Bible. 
 Thus possessing the poor deluded people with 
 an ill opinion of Catholics, as if they rejected, 
 and trod under feet, the written Word : where- 
 as it is evfjdent to all, who know them, that none 
 can have a greater respect and veneration for 
 the holy scripture than Catholics have, receiving, 
 leverencing, and honouring the- same, as the 
 very pure and true Word of God ; neither re- 
 jeciing, nor so much as douhtiug of the least 
 little in the Bible, from the beginning of 
 Genesis, to the end of the Revelations ; several 
 devout C-atholics having that profound venera- 
 tion for it, that they always read it on 
 their knees with the greatest humility and rev- 
 erence imaginable, not enduring to see it pro- 
 faned in any kind ; nor so much as to see the 
 least torn leaf of a Bible put to any mariner of 
 unseemly use. Those who, besides all this, 
 consider with what very indifferent behaviour 
 the scripture is ordinarily handled among Pro- 
 testants, will not, I am confident, say that 
 Catholics have a less regard ibr it, than Pro- 
 testants ; but, on the contrary, a far greater. 
 
 Again, dear reader, if thou findest in any part 
 of this treatise, that the nature of the subject 
 has extorted from me such expressions as may, 
 perhaps, seem either spoken with too much heat, 
 or not altogether so soft as might be wished for ; 
 yet, let me desire thee not to look upon them as 
 the dictates of passion, but rather as the just re- 
 sentments of a zealous mind, moved with the 
 incentive of seeing God's sacred word adul- 
 terated and corrupted by ill-designing men, on 
 purpose to delude and deceive the ignorant and 
 unwary reader. 
 
 The holy scriptures were written by the Pro- 
 phets, Apostles, and Evangelists ; the Old Tes- 
 tament in Hebrew, except only some few parts in 
 Chaldee and Syriac ; the greater part of the 
 New Testament was written in Greek, St. 
 Matthew's Gospel in Hebrew, and St. Mark's 
 in Latin. We have not at this day the original 
 writings of these Prophets and Apostles, nor of 
 theseventy interpreters, who translated the Old 
 Testament into Greek, about 300 years before 
 the coming of Christ ; we have only copies ; for 
 the truth and exactness whereof we must rely 
 upon the testimony and tradition of the church, 
 which in so important a point God would never 
 permit to err : so that we have not the least 
 doubt, but the copy authorised and approved of 
 by the church is sufficiently authentic. For 
 what avails it for a Christian to believe that 
 scripture is the Word of God, if he be uncertain 
 which copy and translation is true? Yet, not- 
 withstanding the necessity of admitting some 
 true authentic copy, Protestants pretend that 
 there is none authentic in the world ; as may 
 
 be seen in the preface to t'je Tigurino edition of 
 the Bible, and in ail their books of controversy ; 
 seeing therein they condemn the council ol 
 Trqnt, for declaring that the old translation is 
 authentic, and yet themselves name no other for 
 such. And, therefore, though the Lutherans 
 fancy Luther's translation ; thfe Calvinists, that 
 of Geneva ; the Zuinglians, that of Zuinglius ; 
 the English, sometimes one, and somelunes 
 another : yet because they do not hold any ono 
 to be authentic, it follows, from their excep 
 tions against the infallibility of the Roman Ca- 
 tholic Church in declaring or decreeing a true 
 and authentic copy of scripture, and their con- 
 fession of the uncertainty of their own transla- 
 tions, that they have no certainty of scripture at 
 all, nor even "of faith, which they ground upon 
 scripture alone. 
 
 That the Vulgate of the Latin is the most true 
 and authentic copy, has been the judgment o4 
 God's Church for above those 1 300 years ; dur- 
 ing which time, the Church has always used it; 
 and therefore it is, by the sacred council (a) ot 
 Trent, declared authentic and canonical in every 
 part and book thereof. 
 
 Most of the Old Testament, as it is in the said 
 Latin Vulgate, was translated (b) out of Hebrew 
 by St. Hierom, or St. Jerom ; and the New-Tes- 
 tament had been before his time translated outoi 
 Greek, but was by him (c) reviewed ; and such 
 faults as had crept in by the negligence of the 
 transcribers, were corrected by him by the ap- 
 pointment of Pope Damasus. " You constrain 
 me," says he, " to make a new work of an old, 
 that I, after so many copies of the scriptures 
 dispersed through the world, should sit as a 
 certain judge, which of them agree with the true 
 Greek. I have restored the New Testament to 
 the truth of the Greek, and have translated the 
 old according to the Hebrew. Truly, I will 
 affirm it confi '• > dy, and will produce many 
 witnesses of tins work, that I have changed 
 nothing from the truth of the Hebrew," &c. (b) 
 
 And for sufficient testimony of the sincerity oi 
 the translator, and commendations of his trans- 
 lation, read these words of the great Doctor St. 
 Augustin : " There was not wanting," says he 
 " in these our days, Hierom, the priest, a man 
 most learned and skilful in all the three tongues 
 who not from the Greek, but from the Hebrew, 
 translated the same scriptures into Latin, whose 
 learned labour the Jews yet conCess to be 
 true." (e) 
 
 Yea, the truth and purity of this translation 
 is such, that even the bitterest of Protestants 
 themselves are forced to confess it to be the 
 best, and lo 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, 
 
 (ffl) Con. Trident., Sess. 4. 
 
 (4) S. Hierom. in lib. de Viris Illustr. extrerao, et ia 
 Preefat. librorum qujs Latinos fecit. 
 (0) Hier. Ep. 89. ad Aug , qiigest. 11, inter Ep. Aug 
 
 (d) See his preface before the New Testament, dedica- 
 ted to Pope Damasus, and his Catalogue in fine. 
 
 (e) S. Aug. de Civit. Dei. lib. 18, c. 43, et Ep. 80, ai 
 Hierom c. 3, et lib 2, Dcict. Christi, c. lb 
 
THE author's rilEFACB 
 
 17 
 
 docs in these words : " St. Hierom, I reverence ; 
 Damasus, 1 commend ; and the work I confess 
 to he godly and profitable to the church." (a) 
 
 Dr. Dove says thus of it : " We grant it fit, 
 ihsit for uniformity in quotations of places, in 
 schools and pulpits, one Latin text should be 
 used : and we can bo contented, for the antiquity 
 thereof, to prefer that (the Vulgate) before all ', 
 other Latin hooks." (i) 
 
 And for the antiquity of it Dr. Covel tells 
 us, " that it was used in the church 1300 years 
 ago :" not doubting to prefer that translation i 
 before others, (c). 
 
 Dr. Huuiphrey 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." (rf) 
 
 In regard of which integrity and learning, 
 MolmcBus signifies his good esteem thereof, 
 saying, (t) " I cannot easily forsake the vulgar 
 and accustomed reading, which also I am accus- 
 tomed earnestly to defend :" " Yea, (/) I prefer 
 the vulgar edition, before Erasmus's, Bucer's, 
 BulJinger's. Brentius's, the Tigurine transla- 
 tion ; yea before John Calvin's, and all others." 
 How honourably he speaks of it!' And yet, 
 
 Conratlus Pellican, a man commended by 
 Bucer, /uinglius, Melancthon, and all the fa- 
 mous Protestants about Basil, Tigure, Berne, 
 &c., gives it a far higher commendation, in 
 these words : (g) " I find the vulgar edition of 
 the Psalter to agree for the sense, with such 
 dexterity, learning, and fidelity of the Hebrew, 
 that I doubt not, but the Greek and Latin inter- 
 preter was a man most learned, most godly, and 
 of a prophetical spirit." Which certainly are 
 the best properties of a good translator. 
 
 In fine, even Beza himself, one of the great- 
 est of our adversaries, affords this honourable 
 testimony of our vulgar translation : " I con- 
 fess," says he, " that the old interpreter seems 
 to have interpreted the holy books with won- 
 derful sincerity and religion. The vulgar 
 edition I do, for the most part, ejnbrace and pre- 
 fer before all others " (h) 
 
 You see, how highly our Vulgate in Latin is 
 commended by these learned Protestants : see 
 likewise, how it has been esteemed by the an- 
 cient (() Fathers ; yet, notwithstanding, all this is 
 not sufficient to move Protestants to accept or 
 acquiesce in it ; and doubtless the very reason 
 's, because they would have as much liberty to 
 reject the true letter, as the true sense of scrip- 
 ture.s, their new doctrines being condemned by 
 both. For bad they allowed any one translation 
 
 (a) Whitaker in his Answer to Reynolds, p. 341. 
 lb) Dove's Persuasion to Recusants, p. 16. 
 
 (c) See Dr. Covel's Answer to Buries, pp. 91, 94. 
 
 (d) Dr Hum. de Ratione r.nerp., lib. 1. pp. 74. 
 
 (e) Molin. in Nov. Test.. Part. .30, 
 (/) Et in Inc. 17. 
 
 [!>) Pellican in Pra-.fat. in Psalter. An 1584. 
 
 (A)Hez;i in Annot.ln Luc.i. l.Et in Prcefat. Nov. Test. 
 
 (i),S. liierom etSt Aug.supr.; St. Greg., lib. 70.; Mor. 
 8. ij3. ; Istdor., lib 6. Ktym. c. 5, 7, et de Divin, Offic. 
 lib. i.car. li ; S. Beda in Martyrol. ("aasiod. 21 Inst. &c. 
 
 to have been authentic, they certainly could 
 never have had the impudence so wickedly to 
 have corrupted it, by adding, omitting, and 
 changing, which they could never have pre- 
 tended the least excuse for, in any copy by 
 themselves held for true and authentic. 
 
 Ohj. But however, their greatest objection 
 acninst the Vulffale Lntin is, that we ought ra- 
 ther to have recourse to the original languages 
 the fountains of the Hebrew and Greek, ir 
 which the scriptures were written by the Pro 
 phets and Apostles, who could not err, than to 
 stand to the Latin translations, made by divers 
 interpreters, who might err. 
 
 Ahx. When it is certain, that the originals oi 
 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, Ps. xxii. 
 ver. 1 6, they translate, " They pierced my hands 
 and my feet :" whereas, according to the He- 
 brew that now is, it must be read : " As a lion, 
 my hands, and my feet;" which no doubt, is not 
 only nonsense, but an intolerable corruption ol 
 the latter Jews against the passion of our Sa- 
 viour, of which the old authentic Hebrew wag 
 a most remarkable prophecy. Again, according 
 to the Hebrew, it is read, (A) Achaz, king of 
 Israel ; which being false, they in some of their 
 first translations read, Achaz, k:ng of Juda, atl- 
 cording to the truth, and as it is in the Greek 
 and Vulgate Latin. Yet, their Bible of 1579, as 
 also their last translation, had rather follow the 
 falsehood of the Hebrew against their own 
 knowledge, than to be thought beholden to the 
 Greek and Latin in so light a matter. Likewise, 
 where the Hebrew says, Zedecias, Joachin's 
 brother, they are forced to translate Zedecias, his 
 father's brother, as indeed the truth, is accordihg 
 to the Greek. (/) So likewise in another place, 
 where the Hebrew is, " He begat Azuba his wife 
 and Jerioth;" which theynot 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 A zuba." But with- 
 out multiplying examples, it is sufficiently known 
 to Protestants, and by them acknowledged, how 
 intolerably the Hebrew fountains and originals 
 are by the Jews corrupted : amongst others. Dr. 
 Humphrey says, " The Jewish superstition, how 
 many places it has corrupted, the reader may ea- 
 sily find out and judge." {m) And in another place, 
 " I look not," says he, " that men should too 
 much follow the Rabbins, as many do ; foi:,tho3e 
 places, which promise and declare Christ tho 
 true Messias, are most filthily depraved by 
 •hem," (n) 
 
 " The old interpreter," says another Pro- 
 testant, " seems to have read one way, whereas 
 the Jews now read another ! which I say, be- 
 cause I would .not have men think this to 
 
 (k) 2 Chron. xxviii. 19. 
 
 (Z) 4 Kings xxiv. 17, 19. 
 
 {m) Humph. 1. 1, de Rat. intorp. p. 178. 
 
 (») Lib. ii. p. 219. 
 
18 
 
 THE AUTHOR 6 PREyJCE. 
 
 have proceeded from the ignorance or sloihful- 
 ness of the old interpreter : rather we have cause 
 to find fault for want of diligence in the antiqua- 
 ries, and faith in the Jews ; who, both before 
 Christ's coming and since, seem to be less careful 
 of the Psalms, than oftheirTalmudical songs." (u) 
 
 I would gladly know of our Protestant trans- 
 lators of the Bible, what reasons they have to 
 think the Hebrew fountain they boast of so pure 
 and uncorrupt, seeing not only letters and sylla- 
 bles have been mistaken, texts depraved, but 
 even whole books of the Prophets utterly lost 
 and perished ? How many books of the ancient 
 Prophets, sometime extant, are not now to be 
 found 1. We read in the old Testament, of a 
 Liber bellorum Domini, " The Book of the Wars 
 of our Lord ; the Book of the Just Men 
 (Protestants call it the Book of Jasher;)the 
 Book of Jehu the son of Hanani ; the Books of 
 Semeias the Prophet, and of Addo the Seer ; 
 and Samuel wrote in a book the law of the 
 kingdom, how kings ought to rule, and laid it 
 up before our Lord : and the works of Solomon 
 were written in the Book of Nathan the Pro- 
 phet, and in the Books of Ahias the Shilonite, 
 and in the Vision of Addo the Seer." (h) With 
 several others, which are all quite perished : yea, 
 and perished in such time, when the Jews were 
 " the peculiar people of God," and when, of all 
 nations, " they were to God a holy nation, a 
 kingly priesthood :" and now, when they are no 
 national people, have no government, no king, 
 no priest, but are vagabonds upon the earth, and 
 scattered among all people : may we reasonably 
 think their di^ ine 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 soimd, no points, tittles, or letters lost, 
 or misplaced, but all sincere, perfect and absolute? 
 
 How easy is it, in Hebrew letters, to mistake 
 sometimes one for another, and so to alter the 
 whole sense 1 As, for example, this very letter 
 vau (or jod, (c) has certainly made disagreement 
 in some places ; as where the Sepluagint read, 
 rrr xjuroa fiu ttigog (rf cpuXix^u), Furtitudinem meam 
 ad te custodiam. " My strength I will keep to 
 thee ;" which reading St. Hierom also followed. 
 It is now in the Hebrew ^Y' fortitndinem ejus, 
 " His strength I will keep to thee." (d) Which 
 corruptions our last Protestant translators fol- 
 low, reading, " Because of his strength will I 
 wait upon theo ;" and to make sense of it they 
 add the words, " because of," and change the 
 words, " keep to" into " wait upon," to the great 
 [■erverting of the sense and sentence. A like 
 error is that in Gen. iii. (if it be an error, as 
 many think it is none,) Ipsa conteret caput tuum, 
 for Ipse or Ip.sum, about which Protestants keep 
 lip such a c'2.mour. (e) 
 
 As- the Hebrew has been by the Jews abused 
 
 (a) Conrad. Pell. Tom. 4, in Psal. Ixxxv. 9. 
 (i) iNiimb. xxi. 14 ; Josh. x. 13 ; Kings i. 18 ; 2 Paral. 
 r t :i4 ; xli. 15 ; 1 Kings x. 25 ; 2 Paral. ix. 29. 
 (c) ■■'■'K''n Nin. 
 
 (i) Psal. Iviil. 10, in Prot. Bible it is Psa'. lix. 9. 
 ie\ Gen. iii. IB 
 
 and falsified against our blessed Saviour Chris* 
 Jesus, especially in such places as. weie manifest 
 prophecies of his death and passion, so likewise 
 has the Greek fountain been corrupted by the 
 eastern heretics, against divers points of Chris- 
 tian doctrine, insomuch that Protestants them- 
 selves, who pretend so great veneration for it, 
 dare not follow it in many places, but are forced 
 to fly to our Vulgate Latin, as is observed in 
 the preface to the Rhemish Testament ; whcrt 
 also you may find sufficient reasons why our 
 Catholic Bible is translated into English rather 
 from the Vulgate Latin than from the Greek. 
 
 To pass by several examples of corruptions 
 in the Greek copy, which might be produced, 1 
 will only, amongst many, take notice of these 
 two following rash and inconsiderate additions ; 
 first, John viii. 59, after these words, Exivit « 
 lernplo, " Went out of the temple ;" are added, 
 Transiens per medium eorum, sic preeteriit , 
 " Going through the midst of them, and so 
 passed by." (/) Touching which addition, Beza 
 writes thus : " 'I'hese words are foimd in 
 very ancient copies ; but 1 think, as does Eras- 
 mus, that the first part, ' going through tho 
 midst of them,' is taken out of Luke iv 30, and 
 crept into the text by fault of the wr/ters, who 
 found that written in the margin ; and that 
 the latter part, ' and so passed by,' was added 
 to make this chapter join well with the next. 
 And I am moved thus to think, not only because 
 neither Chrysostom nor Augustine (he might 
 have said, nor Hierom) make any mention ol 
 this piece, but also, because it seems not to 
 hang together very probably ; for, if he withdrew 
 himself out of their sight, how went he through 
 the midst of them ?" &c. {g) Thus Beza dis- 
 putes against it ; for which cause, 1 suppose, it 
 is omitted by our first English translators, who 
 love to follow what their master Beza de- 
 livers to them in Latin, though forsooth they 
 would have us think they followed the Greek 
 most precisely ; for in their translations of the 
 year 1561, 1562, 1577, 1579, they leave it out, 
 as Beza does; yet in their Testament of 1580, 
 as also in this last translation (Bible 1683), they 
 put it in with as much confidence, as if it had 
 neither been disputed against by Beza, noi 
 omitted by their former brethren. 
 
 To this we may also join that piece which 
 Protestants so gloriously sing or say at the op.d 
 of the Lord's Prayer, " For thine is the king- 
 dom, the power, and the glory, for ever and ever, 
 Arnen," which not only Erasmus dislikes, (A) 
 but Bullinger himself holds it for a mere 
 patch sowed to the rest, " by, he knows not 
 whom ;" (i) and allows well of Erasmus's judg- 
 ment, reproving Laurentius Valla for finding 
 fault with the Latin edition, because it wants it: 
 " There is no reason," says he, " why Laiu'entins 
 Valla should take the matter so hotly, as ihotigh 
 a great part of the Lord's Prayer were cut 
 
 (/ ) Afc^Stitv iia fttav AvTbiV Kai naffriytv Svwf* 
 
 (g) Beza in Joh. viii. 59. 
 
 (A) Erasm. m Annot. 
 
 (i) Bulli.ngcr, Decad. v. Serm. 6. 
 
THE AUTHOR'S t'llEKAUB. 
 
 «way •■ rather their rashness was to be reproved, 
 ;rlio durst presume to piece on their toys unto 
 lie Lord's Prayer." 
 
 Let not my reader think that our Latin Vul- 
 gate differs from the true and most authentic 
 Greek copies, which were extant in St. Hierom's 
 days, but only from such as are now extant, and 
 since his days corrupted. " How unworthily," 
 says B«za, " and without cause, does Erasmus, 
 blame the old interpreter, as dissenting from the 
 Greek ! He dissented, I grant, from those 
 Greek copies which Erasmus had gotten ; but 
 we have found not in one place, that the same 
 interpretation which he blames, is grounded on 
 the authority of other Greek copies, and those 
 most ancient : yea in some number of places we 
 have observed that the reading of the Latin 
 text of the old interpreter, though it agree not 
 sometimes with our Greek copies, yet it is much 
 more convenient, for that it seems to follow some 
 truer and better copy." {a) 
 
 Now, if our Latin Vulgate be framed exactly, 
 though not to the vulgar Greek examples now 
 extant, yet to more ancient and perfect copies ; 
 if the Greek copies have many faults, errors, 
 corruptions, and additions in them, as not only 
 Beza avouches, but as our Protestant translators 
 confess, and as evidently appears by their leav- 
 ing the Greek and following the Latin, with what 
 reason can they thus cry up the fountains and j 
 originals, as incorrupt and pure ? With what 
 honesty can they call us from our ancient vulgar 
 Latin, to the present Greek, from which them- 
 Belves so licentiously depart at pleasure, to fol- 
 low our Latin ? {b) 
 
 Have we not great reason to think, that as 
 the Latin Church has been ever more constant 
 iri keeping the true faith than the Greek, so it 
 has always been more careful in preserving the 
 scriptures from corruption ? 
 
 Let Protestants only consider," whether it be 
 more credible, that St. Hierom, one of the 
 greatest doctors of God's church, and the most 
 skilful in the languages wherein the scripture 
 was written, who lived in the primitive times, 
 when perhaps some of the original writings of 
 the Apostles were extant, or at least the true 
 and authentic copies in Hebrew and Greek 
 better known than they are now ; let us then 
 consider, I say, whether is more credible, than 
 a translation made or received by this holy doc- 
 tor, and then approved of by all the world, and 
 ever since accepted and applauded in God's 
 church, should be defective, false, or deceitful ? 
 or that a translation made since the pretended 
 Reformation, not only by men of scandalous, 
 and notoriously wicked lives, but from copies 
 corrupted by Jews, Arians, and other Greek here- 
 tics, should be so ? (c) 
 
 In vain, therefore, do Protestants tell us, 
 tlifit their translations are taken immediately 
 
 (a) Beza in Prijsfat. Nor. Test., Anno 1556. 
 
 (b) See the Prsef. to the Rhemish Testament; Dr. Mar- 
 tin's Discovery ; Reynold's Refutation of Whitaker, 
 cap. xiii- 
 
 (e) Such were Luther, Calvin, Beza, Bucor, Cranmer, 
 Tyiwla] &c. 
 
 from the fountains of the Greek and Hebrew , 
 so is also our Laim Vulgate ; only with this dif 
 ference, that ours was taken from the fountains 
 when they were clear, and by holy and learned 
 men, who knew which were the crystal waters 
 and true copies ; but theirs is taken from foun 
 tains troubled by broachers of heresies, self- 
 interested and time-serving persons ; and after 
 that the Arians, and other heretics, had, I say, 
 corrupted and poisoned them with their false 
 and abominable doctrines. 
 
 Ohj. 2. Cheminitius and others yet further 
 object, that there are some corruptions found 
 in the Vulgate Latin, viz., that these words, 
 Jpsci conteret caput luum, [d) are corrupted, 
 thereby to prove the intercession of the Blessed 
 Virgin Mary ; and that instead thereof, we 
 should read Ipsum conteret caput tuum, seeing it 
 was spoken of the seed, which was Christ, as 
 all ancient writers teach. 
 
 Ans. Some books of the Vulgate edition have 
 Ipsa, and some others Ipse ; and though many 
 Hebrew copies have Ipse, yet there want not 
 some which have Ipsa : and the points being 
 taken away, the Hebrew word maybe translated 
 Ipsa : yea the holy fathers (e) St. Augustine, 
 St. Ambrose, St. Chrysostom, St. Gregory, 
 St. Bede, &c., read it Ipsa, and I think we 
 have as great reason to follow their interpreta- 
 tion of it as (^heminitius's, or that of the Pro- 
 testants of our days ; and though the word con- 
 teret in the Hebrew is of the masculine gender 
 and so should relate to Semen, which also in 
 the Hebrew is of the masculine gender, yet it is 
 not rare in the scriptures to have pronouns and 
 verbs of the masculine gender, joined with nouns 
 of the feminine, as in Ruth i. 8 ; Esther i.-SO ; 
 Eccles. xii. 5. The rest of Cheminitius's cavils 
 you will find sufficiently answered by the 
 learned Cardinal Bellarmine, lib. ii. de Verb, 
 Dei, cap. 12, 13, 14. 
 
 Again, Mr. Whitaker condemns us for follow- 
 ing our Latin Vulgate so precisely, as thereliy 
 to omit these words, (/) " when this corruptible 
 shall have put on incorruplion," which are in the 
 Greek exemplars, but not in our Vulgate Latin : 
 whence it follows assuredly, says he, " that 
 Hierom dealt not faithfully here, or that Ids 
 version was corrupted afterwards." 
 
 I answer to this, with Dr. Reynolds, {g) that 
 this omission (if it be any) could not proceed 
 from malice or design, seeing there is no loss or 
 hindrance to any part of doctrine, by reading it 
 as we read ; for the selfsame thing is most 
 clearly set down in the very next lines before. 
 Thus stand the words : " For this corruptible, 
 must do on incorruption ; and this mortal, do on 
 immortality: and when this (corruptible, has 
 done on incorruption, and this) mortal has done 
 
 (d) Gen. iii. 
 
 (c) St -August , lib. 2,deGen.cont. Manich .c.xviii.l. 
 11, de Gen. ad Literam, cap. xxxvi. ; St. Ainbr. lib. d« 
 Fuo-a Sieculi, cap vii.; St. Chiysost in Horn. 17, in Gen, 
 St. Greg. lib. i.; Mor. cap. xxxviii.; Beda et alii iu huul 
 locum. 
 
 ( / ) 1 Cor. XV. 54. 
 
 (ff) See Dr. Reynolds* Refutation of Whitahr.r's Ro 
 prehenaioiis, chap. x. 
 
20 
 
 THE AUTHOR a PREFACS. 
 
 on immortality." Where you see the words, 
 which I have put down, inclosed with paren- 
 thesis, are contained most expressly in the fore- 
 going sentence, which is in all our Testaments ; 
 BO that there is no "harm or danger either to 
 faith, doctrine, or manners, if it be omitted. 
 
 That it was of old in some Greek copies, as 
 it stands in our Vulgate Latin, is evident by St. 
 Elierom's translating it thus : and why ought St. 
 Ilierom to be suspected of unfaithful dealing, see- 
 ing he put the self-same words and sense in the 
 next lines immediately preceding ? And that it 
 was not corrupted since, appears by the common 
 reading of most men, in all after ages. St. Am- 
 brose, in his commenlar)' upon the same place 
 reads as we do. So does St. Augustine, De Ci- 
 vitate Dei, cited by Si. Bede, in .his commentary 
 upon the same chapter, (a) So read also the rest 
 of the Catholic interpreters, Haymo, Anselm, &c. 
 
 But if this place be rightly considered, so far 
 is it from appearing as done with any design of 
 corrupting the text, that on the contrary, it appa- 
 rently shows the sincerity of our Latin transla- 
 tion ; for, as we keep our text, according as St. 
 Hierom and the Church then delivered it ; so not- 
 withstanding, because the said words are in the 
 ancient Greek copies, we generally add them in 
 the margin of every Latin Testament which the 
 church uses, as may be seen in divers prints of 
 Paris, Lovain, and other Universities : and if 
 there be any fault in our English translation, it 
 is only that this particle was not put down in the 
 margin, as it was in the Latin which we followed. 
 So that this, I say, proves no corruption, but 
 rather great fidelity in our Latin Testament, that 
 it agrees with St. Hierom, and consequently with 
 the Greek copies, which he interpreted, as with 
 St. Ambrose, St. Bede, Haymo, and St. Anselm. 
 
 Whether these vain and frivolous objections 
 are sufficient grounds for their rejecting our 
 Vulgate Latin, and flying to the original (but 
 now impure) fountains, I refer to the judicious 
 reader. 
 
 But now, how clear, limpid, and pure the 
 streams are, that flow from the Greek and He- 
 brew fountains, through the channel of Pro- 
 testant pens, the reader may easily guess with- 
 out taking the pains of comparing them, from 
 the testimonies they themselves bear of one an- 
 other's translations. 
 
 Zuinglius writes thus to Luther, concerning 
 his corrupt translation : (h) " Thou corruptest 
 the word of God, O Luther : thou art seen to 
 be a manifest and common corrupter and per- 
 verter of the holy scripture ; how much are we 
 ashamed of thee, who have hitherto esteemed 
 thee beyond all measure, and prove thee to be 
 such a man !" 
 
 Luther's Dutch translation of the old Testa- 
 ment, especially of Job and the Prophets, had 
 its blemishes, says Keckerman, and those no 
 small ones, (c) neither are the blemishes in his 
 New Testament to be accounted small ones ; 
 
 (a) St. Beda in 1 Cor. c. xv. 
 (A) Zuins; t. 2, ad Luth., lib de S. 
 
 (c) Keckerman, Syst. 8; Theol., lib. 2 p. 188; 1 S. 
 Joh V 7. 
 
 one of which is, his omitting and wholly lea-vliig 
 out this text in St. John's Epistle : " There be 
 three who give testimony in heaven ; the Father, 
 the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three 
 are one." Again, in Rom. iii. 28, he adds the 
 word " alone" to the text, saying, " We account 
 a man to be justified by faith alone, without tho 
 works of the law.'' Of which intolerable cor- 
 ruption being admonished, he persisted obstinate 
 and wilful, saying, " So I will, so I command ; 
 let ray will be instead of reason," &c. (cl) Lu- 
 ther will have it so ; and at last thus concludes, 
 " The word alone must remain in my New Tes- 
 tament ; although all the Papists run mad, they 
 shall not take it from thence : it grieves me, 
 that I did not add also those two other words, 
 Omnihu'i et omnium, sine omnibus operibus, om- 
 nium legum ; without all works of all laws." 
 
 Again, in requital to Zuinglius, Luther rejects 
 the Zuinglian translation, terming them in 
 matter of divinity, " fools, asses, antichrists, de- 
 ceivers," &c. (e) and indeed, not without cause , 
 for what could be more deceitful and anti- 
 christian, than instead of'our Saviour's words, 
 " this is my body," to translate, " this signifies 
 my body," as Zuinglius did, to maintain his 
 figurative signification of the words, and cry 
 down Christ's real presence of the blessed 
 sacrament ? 
 
 When Froscheverus, the Zuinglian printer 
 of Zurick, sent Luther a Bible translated by the 
 divines there, he would not receive it; but as 
 Hospinian and Lavatherus witness, sent it back 
 and rejected it. (/) 
 
 . The Tigurine translation was, in like luannei 
 so distasteful to other Protestants, " that the 
 Elector of Saxony in great anger rejected it and 
 placed Luther's translation in room there- 
 
 of-" [g) 
 
 Beza reproves the translation set forth by 
 Oecolampadius, and the divines of Basil ; 
 affirming, " that the Basil translation is hi many 
 places wicked,' and altogether differing from ihe 
 mind of the Holy Ghost" 
 
 Castalio's translation is also condemned by 
 (A) Beza, as being sacrilegious, wicked, anil 
 ethnical ; insomuch, that Castalio wrote a special 
 treaiise in defence of it ; in the preface of which 
 he thus complains : " Some reject our Latin 
 and French translations of the Bible, not only 
 as unlearned, but also as wicked, and differing 
 in many places from the mind of the Hoiv 
 Ghost." ' 
 
 The learned Protestant, Molinoeus, affirms 
 of Calvin's translation, " that Calvin in his har- 
 mony, makes the text of the Gospel to leap up 
 and down ; he uses violence to the letter of the 
 Gospel ; and besides this, adds to the text." (j) 
 
 {d) To. V. Germ. fol. 141, 144. 
 
 (e) See Zuing. Tom. 2, ad Luth. lib. de Sacr.,fol. 388 
 
 o89 
 
 (/) Hosp. Hist. Sacram. part. ult. fol. 183; Lavath, 
 Hist Sacram. 1. 32. 
 
 (,?■) Hnspin. in Concord. Discord, fol. 138. 
 
 (h) In Respons. ad Defens. et Respcins. Castal it 
 Test. 1556, in Praefat.et in Annot.in Mat iii. etiv., Ltic 
 ii.; Act. viii. et x. 1 Cor. 1. 
 
 (J) In suaTranslat. Nov. Test. Part. 13, fol. IK) 
 
THE AUTHORS PREFACE. 
 
 And touching Beza's translation, which our 
 English especially follow, the same Molinceus 
 charges him, that '■ he actually changes the 
 text ;" giving likewise several instances of his 
 corruptions. Castalio also, " a learned Cal- 
 vinist, as Osiancler saj s, " and skilful in the 
 tongues," reprehends Beza in a book wholly 
 written against his corruptions ; and says further., 
 " I will not note all his errors, for thai would 
 require too large a volume."(a) 
 
 In short, Bucer and ihe Osianderians rise up 
 against Luther for false translations ; Luther 
 against Munster ; Beza against Castalio, and 
 Castalio against Beza ; Calvin against Servetus ; 
 Illyricus against both Calvin and Beza. (i) 
 Staphylus and Emserus noted in Luther's Dutch 
 uranslations of the New Testament only, about 
 one thousand four hundred heretical corrup- 
 tions, (c) And thus far of the confessed cor- 
 ruptions in foreign Protestant translators. 
 
 If you desire a character of our English Pro- 
 testant versions, pray be pleased to take it from 
 the words of these following Protestants ; 
 some of the most zealous and precise of whom, 
 tn a certain treatise, entitled, " A petition di- 
 lected to his most excellent majesty King 
 James the First," complain, " that our transla- 
 tion of the Psalms, comprised in our Book of Com- 
 mon Prayer, dotb, in addition, subtraction, and 
 alteration, differ from the truth of the Hebrew 
 in, at least, two hundred places." If two hun- 
 dred corruptions were found in the Psalms oiJy, 
 and that by Protestants themselves, how many, 
 think you, might be found from the beginning 
 of Genesis, to the end of the Apocalypse, if ex- . 
 amined by an impartial and strict examination ? 
 And this they made the ground of their scruple, 
 to make use of the Common Prayer ; remain- 
 ing doubtful, " whether a man may, with a 
 safe conscience, subscribe thereto :" yea, they 
 \vrot(i and published a particular treatise, en- 
 tilled, " A ©«fence of the Ministers' Reasons 
 for refusal of Subscribing ;" the whole argument 
 and scope whereof, is only concerning mis- 
 translating ; yea, the reader may see, in the 
 beginning of the said book, the title of every 
 chapter, twenty-six in all, pointing to the 
 mistranslations there handled in particular 
 
 id) («) 
 
 Mr. Carlisle avouches, " that the English 
 translators have depraved the sense, obscured 
 the truth, and deceived the ignorant : that in 
 many places they deiort the scriptures from the 
 right sense, and that they show themselves to love 
 darkness more than light : falsehood more than 
 truth." Which Doctor Reynold's objecting 
 against the Church of England, Mr. Whitaker 
 had no better answer than to say, " What 
 Mr. Carlisle, with som.s others, has written 
 against some places trar4s]ated in our Bibles, 
 makes nothing to the purpose ; I have not 
 
 {a) In Test. Part. 20, 30, 40, 6 J, 65, 66, 74,99, et Part. 8, 
 13, 14,21, 23 
 (4) In Defens. trans., p. 170. 
 
 (c) See Lincl Dub. p. 84, 85, 06, 98. 
 
 (d) Petition directed to his Majesty, p. 75, 76. 
 
 (e) That Christ descended into hell.p. 116,117,118, 
 i21, 154 
 
 4 
 
 21 
 
 said otherwise, but that some things miy be 
 amended." {f) 
 
 The Ministers of Lincoln diocess could not 
 forbear, in their great zeal, to signify to ih6 
 king, that the English translation of the Bible, 
 " is a translation that takes away from the text, 
 that adds to the text, and that sometimes, to the 
 changing or obscuring of the meaning of ihe 
 Holy Ghost ;'■ calling it yet further, " a trans- 
 lation which is absurd and senseless, pervert- 
 ing, in many places, the meaning of the Holy 
 Ghost." (g) 
 
 For which cause, Protestants of tender con 
 sciences made great scruple of subscribing 
 thereto : 'f How shall I," says Mr. Bulges, 
 " approve under my hand, a translation which 
 hath so many omissions, many additions, which 
 sometimes obscures, sometimes perverts the 
 sense ; being sometimes senseless, scinctimea 
 contrary V (/;) 
 
 This great evil of corrupting the scripture 
 being well considered by Mr. Broughton, one 
 of the most zealous sort of Protestants, obliged 
 him to write an epistle to the Lords of the 
 Council, desiring them with all speed to procure 
 a new translation : " because," says he, " that 
 which is now in England is full of errors." (i) 
 And in his advertisements of corruptions, he 
 tells the Bishops, " that their public translations 
 of scriptures into English is such, that it per- 
 verts the text of the old Testament in eight 
 hundred and forty-eight places, and that it causes 
 millions of millions to reject the New Testament, 
 and to run to eternal flames." A most dreadful 
 saying, certainly, for all those who are forced to re- 
 ceive such a translation for their only rule of faith. 
 
 King James the First thought the Geneva 
 translation to be the worst of all ; and further 
 affirmed, " that in the marginal notes annexed 
 to the Geneva translation, some are very partial, 
 untrue, seditious," &c. (k) Agreeable to this are 
 also these words of Mr. Parkes to Doctor 
 Willet : " As for the Geneva Bibles, it is to 
 be wished, that either they were purged from 
 those manifold errors which are both in the text 
 and in the margin, or else utterly prohibited." 
 
 Now these our Protestant English transla- 
 tions being thus confessedly " corrupt, absurd, 
 senseless, contrary, and preverting the meaning 
 of the Holy Ghost ;" had not King James the 
 First just cause to aflirm, " that he could never 
 see a Bible well translated into English ?" (/) 
 And whether such falsely translated Bibles 
 ought to be imposed upon the ignorant geople, 
 and by them received for the very Word of 
 God, and for their only rule of faith, I refer to 
 the judgment of the world ; and do freely assert 
 with Doctor Whitaker, a learned Protest£.nt, 
 
 if) Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, p. 265. 
 
 (g) Seethe Abiidgment, which the Ministers ofLircoln 
 Diocess delivered to his Majesty, p. 11, 12, 13. 
 
 (A) Burges Apol. Sect. 6, and in Covel's Answei to 
 Burges, p. 93. 
 
 (i) See the Triple Cord, p. 147. 
 
 (k) Seethe Conlerence before the King's Majesty, p. 46, 
 47. Apologies concerning Christ's descent into hell at 
 Ddd. 
 
 (/i Conference before his Majesty, p. 46. 
 
t2 
 
 THE author's PREFA2E. 
 
 • that translations are so far only the Word of 
 God, as they faithfully express the meaning of 
 the aulhentical text." (a) 
 
 The English Protestant translations having 
 been thus exclaimed against, and cried down not 
 only by Catholics, but even by the most learned 
 Protestants, (6) as you have seen ; it pleased his 
 majesty. King James the First, to command a 
 review and reformation of those translations 
 ■which had passed for God's Word in King 
 Edward the" Sixth, and Queen Elizabeth's days, 
 (c) Which work was undertaken by the prelatic 
 clergy, not so much, it is to be feared, for the 
 zeal of truth, as apperirs by their having cor- 
 rected so very few places, as out of a design of 
 correcting such faults as favoured the more 
 puritanical part of Protestants (Presbyterians) 
 against the usurped authority, pretended episco- 
 pacy, ceremonies, and traditions of the prelatic 
 party. For example : the word " congregation" 
 in their first Bibles, was the usual and only 
 English word they made use of for the Greek 
 and Latin word ixxXyala ecclesia, because then 
 the name of church was most odious to them ; 
 yea, they could not endure to hear any mention 
 of a church, because of the Catholic Church, 
 which they had fosaken, and which withstood 
 and condemned them. But now, being gi-own 
 up to something (as themselves fancy) like a 
 church, they resolve in good earnest to take upon 
 them the face, figure, and grandeur of a church ; 
 to censure and excommunicate, yea, and perse- 
 cute their disssenting brethern ; rejecting there- 
 fore that humble appellation which their primi- 
 tive ancestors were content with, viz. congrega- 
 tion, they assume the title of church, the Church 
 of England, to countenance which, they bring 
 the word church again into their translations, 
 and banish that their once darling congregation. 
 
 They have also, instead of ordinances, institu- 
 tions, &;c. been pleased in some places to trans- 
 late traditions ; thereby to vindicate several 
 ceremonies of theirs agriinst their Puritanical 
 brethren ; as in behalf of their character, they 
 rectified, " ordaining elders, by election." 
 
 The word Image being so shameful a cor- 
 ruption, they were pleased likewise to correct, 
 and instead thereof to translate Idol according 
 to the true Greek and Latin. Yet it appears 
 that this was not amended out of any good de- 
 sign, or love of truth ; but either merely out of 
 shame, or however to have it said that they had 
 done something. Seeing they have not cor- 
 rected it in all places, especially in the Old 
 Testament, Exod. xx., where they yet read 
 fmage, " Thou shalt not make to thyself any 
 graven image," the word in Hebrew being Pesel, 
 the very same that Sculptile is in Latin, and 
 Kignines in English a graven or carved thing ; 
 and in the Greek it is Eidolon (an Idol) : so 
 that by this false and wicked practice, they en- 
 Jlravour to discredit the Catholic religion ; and, 
 contrary to their own consciences, and correc- 
 
 (.j) M"' taker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, p. 235. 
 
 (I) Dr. iJregory Martin wrote a whole Treatise against 
 ther} 
 
 (c) Bishop Tunstal discovered in Tyndal's New Tosta- 
 metit only, no less than 2000 corruptions. 
 
 tions in the New Testament, endeavour to make 
 the people believe that Image and Idol are the 
 same, and equally forbidden by scripture, and 
 God's commandments ; and consequently, that 
 Popery is idolatry, for admitting the due use of 
 images. 
 
 They have also corrected that most absurd 
 and shameful corruption, grave ; and, as they 
 ought to do, have instead of it translated hell, 
 so that now they read, " Thou wilt not leave my 
 soul in hell ;" whereas Beza has it, " Thou wilt 
 not leave my carcase in the grave." Yet wo 
 see, that this is not out of any sincere intention, 
 or respect to truth neither, because they have 
 but corrected it in some few places, not in all, 
 as you will see hereafter; which they would not 
 do, especially in Genesis, lest they should there- 
 by be forced to admit of Limbus Pairum, where 
 Jacob's soul was to descend, when he said, " I 
 will go down to my son into hell, mourning," 
 &c. And to balance the advantage they think 
 they may have given Catholics where they have 
 corrected it, they have (against purgatory and 
 Limbus Pairum) in other places most grossly 
 corrupted the text : for whereas the words ol 
 our Saviour are, " Quickened in spirit or soul. 
 In the which spirit coming, he preached to them 
 also that were in prison," (d) they translate. 
 " Quickened by the spirit, by which also he went 
 and preached unto the spirits in prison." This 
 was so notorious a corruption, that Dr. Mon- 
 tague, afterwards Bishop of Chichester and 
 Norwich, reprehended Sir Henry Saville for it, 
 to whose care the translating of St. Peter's 
 epistle was committed ; Sir Henry Saville told 
 him plainly, that Dr. Abbot, archbishop of 
 Canterbury, and Dr. Smith, bishop of Glou- 
 cester, corrupted and altered this translation of 
 this place, which himself had sincerely performed. 
 Note here, by the bye, that if Dr. Abbot's con- 
 science could so lightly suffer him to corrupt the 
 scripture, bis, or his servant Mason's forging 
 the Lambeth Records, could not possibly cause 
 the least scruple, especially being a thing so 
 highly for their interest and honour. 
 
 These are the chiefest faults they have cor- 
 rected in this their new translation ; and with 
 what sinister designs they have amended them, 
 appears visible enough ; to wit., either to keep 
 their authority, and gain credit for their new- 
 thought-on episcopal and priestly character and 
 ceremonies against Puritans or Presbyterians ; 
 or else, for very shame, urged thereto by the 
 exclamations of Catholics, daily inveighing 
 against such intolerable falsifications. Bu( 
 because they resolved not to correct either all, 
 or the tenth part of the corruptions of the for- 
 mer translation : therefore, fearing their over, 
 seen falsifications would be observed, both by 
 Puritans and Catholics, in their Epistle Dedi- 
 catory to the king, they desire his majesty's pro. 
 teclion, for that " on the one side, we shall be 
 traduced," say they, " by Popish persons at home 
 or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because 
 we are poor instruments to make God's holy 
 
 id) 1 Peter iii, 18, 19. 
 
THK author's preface. 
 
 !<3 
 
 tnith to be yet more known unto the people 
 whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and 
 darkness : on the other side, we shall be ma- 
 ligned by self-conceited brethern, who run their 
 own ways," &c. 
 
 We see how they endeavour here to persuade 
 the king and the world, that Catholics are desi- 
 rous to conceal the light of the Gospel : whereas 
 on the contrary, nothing is more obvious, than 
 the daily and indefatigable endeavours of Ca- 
 tholic niissioners and priests, not only in preach- 
 ing ami explaining God's holy word in Europe ; 
 but also in forsaking their own countries and 
 inconveniences, and travelling with great diffi- 
 culties and dangers by sea and land, into Asia, 
 Africa America, and the Antipodes, with' no 
 othar design than to publish the doctrine of 
 Christ, and to discover and manifest the light of 
 the Gospel to inndels, who are in darkness and 
 ignorance. Nor do any but Catholics stick to 
 tho old letter and sense of scripture, without 
 altering the text or rejecting any part thereof, 
 or devising new interpretations ; which certainly 
 cannot demonstrate a desire in them to keep 
 people in ignorance and darkness. Indeed, as 
 for their self conceited Presbyterian and fanatic 
 brethern, who run their own ways in translating 
 and interpreting scripture, we do not excuse 
 them, but only say, tjiat 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 slick to 
 cither the Greek, Latin, or Hebrew text ? Do 
 they not leap from one language and copy to 
 another ? accept and reject what they please ? 
 Do they not fancy a sense of their own, every 
 whit as contrary to that of the Catholic and an- 
 cient church, as that of their self-conceited bre- 
 thren the Presbyterians, and others, is acknow- 
 ledged to be ? And yet they are neither more 
 learned nor more skilful in the tongues, nor 
 more godly than those they so much contemn 
 and blame. 
 
 All heretics who have ever waged war against 
 God's holy church, whatever particular wea- 
 pons they had, have generally made use of these 
 two, viz., " Misrepresenting and ridiculing the 
 doctrine of God's church ;" and, " corrupting 
 and misinterpreting his sacred word, the holy 
 scripture ;" we find not any since Simon Magus s 
 days, that have ever been more dexterous and 
 skilful in hatulling these direful arms, than the 
 heretics of our times. 
 
 In the first place, they are so great masters 
 and doctors in misrepresenting, mocking, and 
 deriding religion, that they seem even to have 
 solely devoted tliemselves to no other profession 
 or place, but " Cathedra! irrisorum," the school 
 or " chair of the scorner," as David terms tjieir 
 seat : which the holy apostle St. Peter foresaw, 
 when he foretold, that " there should come in 
 tho latter days, illusores, scoffers, walking 
 after their own lusts." To whom did this pro- 
 phecy ever better agree, than to the heretics of 
 our clays, who derido the sacrod scriptures ? 
 
 " The author of the oook of Ecclesiastes," says 
 one of them, " had (.either boots nor spurs, but 
 rid on a long stick, in begging shoes " Who 
 scoff at the book of Judith : compare the Ma- 
 cabees to Robin Hood, and Bevis of Southamp 
 ton : call Baruch, a peevish ape of Jeremy : 
 count the Epistle to the Hebrews as stubble . 
 and deride St. James's, as an epistle made ol 
 straw : contemn three of the four Gospels. 
 What ridiculing is this of the word of God ! 
 Nor were the first pretended reformers only 
 guilty of this, but the same vein has still con- 
 tinued in the writings, preachings, and teachings 
 of their successors ; a great part of which are 
 nothing but a mere mockery, ridiculing, and 
 misrepresenting of the doctrine of Christ, as is 
 too notorious and visible in many scurrilous and 
 scornful writings and sermons lately published 
 by several men of no small figure in our English 
 Protestant Church. By which scoffing strata- 
 gem, when they cannot laugh the vulgar into a 
 contempt and abhorrence of the Christian reli- 
 gion, they fly to their other weapons, to wit, 
 " imposing upon the people's weak under.stand 
 ing, by a corrupt, imperfect, and falsely trans- 
 lated Bible." (a) 
 
 Tertullian complained thus of the heretics of 
 his time, Ista hiBresis non recipit quasdum scrip- 
 iuras, &c. " These heretics admit nc» some 
 books of scriptures ; and those which they do 
 admit, by adding to, and taking from, they per- 
 vert to serve their purpose ; and if they receive 
 some books, yet they receive them not entirely 
 or if they receive them entirely, after some sort 
 nevertheless they spoil them by devising divers 
 interpretations. In this case, what will you do, 
 who think yourselves skilful in scriptures, when 
 that which you defend, the adversary denies ; and 
 that which you deny, he defends ?" Et lu 
 quidem nihil perdcs nisi vocem de corilenlione , 
 nihil consequeris nisi bilem de blasphematione : 
 " And you indeed shall lose nothing but words 
 in this contention; nor shall you gain any thing 
 but anger from his blasphemy." How fitly may 
 these words be applied to the pretended refor- 
 mers of our days I who, when told of their abu- 
 sing, corrupting, and misinterpreting the holy 
 scriptures, are so far from acknowledging their 
 faults, that on the contrary they bhish not to 
 defend them. When Dr. Martin in his disco, 
 very, told them of their falsifications in the 
 Bible, did they thank him for letting them see 
 their mistakes, as indeed men endued with the 
 spirit of sincerity and honesty would have done \ 
 No, they were so far from that, that Fulk, as 
 much as in him lies, endeavours very obstinaudy 
 to defend them : and Whitaker affirms, thai 
 " their translations are well done." Why then 
 were they afterwards corrected ? and that all the 
 faults Dr. Martin finds in them are but trifles: 
 demanding what is there in their Bibles that can 
 be found fault with, as not translated well and 
 truly ? [b) Such a pernicious, obstinate, and 
 contentious spirit, are heretics possessed witli, 
 
 (a) Dr. St , Dr. S., Dr. T.. Mr. W., &c. 
 
 (i) Whitaker, p. 14 
 
C4 
 
 THE AUTHOR S PREFACB, 
 
 which hideed is llie very thing that renders them 
 Jierelics ; for with such 1 do not ranii those in 
 the list, who, though they havQ even with their 
 first niiik, as I may say, imbibed their errors, 
 ;wd have been educated from their childhood in 
 »froneoiis opinions, yet do neither perlinaciously 
 adhere to the same, nor obstinately resist the 
 .rnlh, when proposed to them ; but on the con- 
 uary, are willing to embrace it. 
 
 How many innocent, and well-meaning people, 
 are there in England, who have scarcely in all 
 their life-time, ever heard any mention of a 
 Catholic, or Catholic religion, unless under 
 these monstrous and frightful terms of idolatry, 
 superstition, antichristianism, &c. ? 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, idolaters, antichrists, the beast in 
 the Revelations, and what not, that may render 
 ihem more odious than hell, and more frightful 
 than the devil himself, and that from the mouths 
 and pens of their teachers, and ministerial 
 guides ? Is it then to be wondered , at, that 
 these so grossly deceived people should enter- 
 tain a strange prejudice against religion, and a 
 detestation of Catholics ? 
 
 Whereas, if these blindfolded people were 
 once undeceived, and brought to understand, 
 that all these monstrous scandals are falsely 
 charged upon Catholics ; that the Catholic 
 doctrine is so far from idolatry, that it teaches 
 quite the contrary, viz., That whosoever gives 
 God's honour to slocks and stones, as Protes- 
 tants phrase it, to images, to saints, to angels, 
 or to any creature ; yea, to any thing but to 
 God himself, is an idolater, and will be damned 
 for the same ; that Catholics are so far from 
 thirsting after the blood of others, that on the 
 contrary, their doctrine teaches thein, not only 
 to love God above all, and their neighbour as 
 themselves, but even to love their enemies. In 
 short, so far different is the Roman Catholic 
 religion from what it is by Protestants repre- 
 sented, that on the contrary. Faith, Hope", and 
 Charity, are the three divine virtues it teaches 
 us ; Prudence, Justice, Fortitude, and Tem- 
 perance, are the four moral virtues it exhorts 
 lis .^ *hi9h christian virtues, when it happens 
 that they are, through human fraility, and the 
 temptations of our three enemies, the world, the 
 flesh, and the devil, either wounded or lost ; 
 then are we taught to apjily ourselves to such j 
 divine reme lies, as our blessed Saviour Christ 
 has left us in his church, viz., his. holy sacra- 
 ments, by which our sjiiritual infirmities are 
 cured and repaired. By the sacrament of bap- 
 
 tism we are taught, that original sin is loigiven 
 and that the party baptized is regenerated 
 and born anew imto the mystical body of Ghrisl 
 of which by baptism he is made a lively mem- 
 ber : so likewise by the sacrament of penance 
 all our actural sins are forgiven ; the same holy 
 Spirit of God working in this to the forgiveness 
 of actual sin, that wrought before in the sacra- ' 
 ment of baptism to the forgiveness of original 
 sin. We are taught likewise, that by partaking 
 of Christ's very body, and his \'ery blood, in tho 
 blessed sacrament of the Eucharist, we by a 
 perfect union dwell in him, and he in us, and 
 that as himself rose again for our justification 
 so we, at the day of judgement, shall in him 
 receive a glorious resurrection, and reign with 
 him for all eternity, as glorious members of tht 
 same body, whereof" himself is the head. It 
 further teaches us, that none hut a priest, truly 
 consecrated by the holy sacrament of order, caii 
 cimsecrate and administer the holy sacrament.s. 
 This is our religion, this is the centre it tends 
 to, and the sole^ end it aims at ; which pviint, 
 we are further taught, can never ue gained but 
 by a true faith, a firm hope, and a perfect 
 charity. 
 
 To conclude : if, I say, thousands of ^ell- 
 meaning Protestants understood this, as also thai 
 Protestancy itself is nothing else but a mere im- 
 posture begun in GermanV and England, indir- 
 tained and upheld by the wicked policy of belf- 
 interested statesmen ; and still continued by mis- 
 representing and ridiculing the Catholic religion, 
 by misinterpreting the holy scriptures ; yea, by 
 falsifying, abusing, and, as will appear is this ibl- 
 lowing treatise, by most abominably comipiing 
 the sacred word of God : now far would it be 
 from them obstinately and pertinaciously to ad- 
 here to the false and erroneous principles, in 
 which they have hitherto been educated ? Hosv 
 willingly would they submit their understandings 
 to the obedience of faith ? How earnestly would 
 they embrace that rule of faith, which oui 
 blessed Saviour and his Apostles left us for our 
 guide to salvation ? With what diligence would 
 they bead all their studies, to learn the most 
 wholesome and saving doctrine of God's holy 
 church 1 in tine, if once enlightened with a true 
 faitli, and encouraged with a firm hope, what 
 zealous endeavours would they not use to acquire 
 such virtues and christian perfections, as might 
 inflame them with a perfect charily, whicli is the 
 very ultimate and highest step to eternal felicity 1 
 To which, may God of his infinite goodness 
 and tender mercy, through the merits and biltei 
 death and passion of our dear Saviour Jesus 
 CJirist, bring us all. Amen. 
 
THE TEUTH 
 
 07 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS OF THE BIBLE. 
 
 EXAMINED. 
 
 UUR pretended Reformers, having squared and 
 modelled to themselves a faith contrary to the 
 certain and direct rule of apostolical tradition, 
 delivered in God's holy church, were forced to 
 have recourse to the scripture, as their only rule 
 of faith ; according to which, the Church of 
 England has, in the sixth of her Thirty-nine 
 Articles, declared, " that the scripture compre- 
 hended in the canonical books (i. e., so many of 
 them as she thinks fit to call so) of the Old and 
 New Testament, is the rule of faith so far, that, 
 whatsoever is not read theiein, or cannot be 
 proved thereby, is not to be accepted as any 
 point of faith, or needful to be followed." But 
 Qnding 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 partial transla- 
 tions : by which they endeavoured, right or 
 wrong, to make those sacred volumes speak in 
 favour of their new-invented faith and doctrine. 
 
 The corruptions of this nature in the first 
 English Protestant translations, were so many, 
 and so notorious, that Dr. Gregory Martin com- 
 posed a whole book of them, in which he dis- 
 covers the fraudulent shifts the translators were 
 fain to make use of, in defence of them. Some- 
 limes 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 copv acknowledged by themselves 
 to be corru[)ted, and of no credit; arid when no 
 copy at all could be found out to cloak their 
 corruptions, then must the bonk or chapter of 
 scripture contradicting them be declared apoc- 
 ryphal ; and when that cannot be made prob- 
 able, they fall downright upon the prophets 
 and apostles who wrote them, saying, " that 
 they might and did err. even after the coming 
 of the Holy Ghost." Thus Luther, accused by 
 /iiinglius for corrupting the word of God, had 
 
 no way left to defend his impiety, but by impu 
 dently preferring himself, and his own spirit 
 before that of those who wrote the holy scrip 
 tures, saying, " Be it, that the church, Augus- 
 tine, and other doctors, also Peter and Paul, 
 yea, an angel from heaven, teach otherwise, yet 
 is my doctrine such as sets forth God's glory, &;c. 
 Peter, the chief of the apostles, lived and taught 
 (irxtra verbum Dei) besides the word of God. "(a) 
 
 And against St. James's mentioning the sa- 
 crament of extreme unction : " But though," 
 says he, " this were the epistle of St. James, I 
 would answer, that it is not lawful for an apoEtIc, 
 by his authority, to institute a sacrament ; this 
 a43perlains to Christ alone. "(A) As though that 
 blessed apostle would publish a sacrament with- 
 out warrant from Christ ! Our Church of 
 England divines, having unadvisedly put St. 
 James's epistle into the canon, are forced, instead 
 of such ail answer, to say, " That the sacrament 
 of extreme unction was yet in the days of Gre- 
 gory the Great, unformed." As though the 
 apostle St. James had spoken he knew not 
 what, when he advised, that the sick should be 
 by the priests of the church, " anointed with oil 
 in the name of our Lord. "(c) 
 
 Nor was this Luther's shift alone ; for all 
 Protestants follow their first pretended reform- 
 er in this point, being necessitated so to do for 
 the maintenance of their reformations, and trans, 
 lations, so directly opposite to the known letter 
 of the scripture. 
 
 The Magdeburgians follow Luther, in accu- 
 sing the apostles of error, particularly St. Paul, 
 by the persuasion of James. (f/) 
 
 Brentius also, whom Jewel terms a grave ai.d 
 learned father, affirms, " that St. Peter, the 
 chief of the apostles, and also Barnabas, aftei 
 
 (a) Vid. Supr. torn. 5, Wittemb., fol. 290, and in Ep. 
 ad Galat., cap. i. 
 
 (A) De (/apt. Babil., cap. de Extrem. Uiict., torn. 2, 
 Wittemb. 
 
 ic) See tfie Second Defence of the Exposition of tho 
 Doctrine of the Church of England, &c. 
 
 (d) Cent. 1, 1. ii., c. 10. col .'ifjO. 
 
26 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 
 the Holy Ghost was received, together with the 
 church of Jerusalem, erred." 
 
 John Calvin affirms, that " Peter added to the 
 schism of the church, to the endangering of 
 Christian liberty, and the overthrow of the grace 
 of Christ." And in page 150, he reprehends 
 Peter and Barnabas, and others. (a) 
 
 Zunchius mentions some Calvinists, in his 
 Epiit. ad Misc., who said, " If Paul should 
 ■ -■> to Geneva, and preach the same hour 
 tf . Calvin, they would leave Paul, and hear 
 Calvin " And Lavatherus affirms, that " some of 
 Luther's followers, not the meanest among their 
 doctors, said, they had rather doubt of St. Paul's 
 doctrine than the doctrine of Luther, or of the 
 Confession of Augsburgh."(A) 
 
 These desperate shifts being so necessary for 
 warranting their corruptions of scripture, and 
 maintaining tlie fallibility of the church in suc- 
 ceeding ages, for the same reasons which con- 
 clude it infallible in the apostles' time, are ap- 
 plicable to ours, and to every former century ; 
 otherwise it must be said, that God's providence 
 and promises were limited to a few years, and 
 Himself so partial, that he regards not the 
 necessities of his church, nor the salvation of 
 any person who lived after the time of his disci- 
 ples ; the Church of England could not reject 
 it without contradicting their brethren abroad, 
 and their own principles at home. Therefore 
 Mr. Jewel, in his defence of the apology for the 
 Church of England, affirms, that St. Mark 
 mistook Abiathai for Abimelech ; and St. 
 Matthew, Hieremias for Zacharias.(c) And Mr. 
 Fulk against the Rhemish Testament, in Galat. 
 ii., fol. 322, charges Peter with error of igno- 
 rance against the Gospel. 
 
 Doctor Goad, in his four Disputations with 
 Father Campion, affirms, that " St. Peter erred 
 in faith, and that, after the sending down of the 
 Holy Ghost upon them."(c() And Whitaker 
 says, " It is evident, that even after Christ's 
 ascension, and the Holy Ghost's descending 
 upon the apostles, the whole church, not only 
 die common sort of Christians, but also even 
 the apostles themselves, erred in the vocation 
 i)f the Gentiles, &c. ; yea, Peter also erred. He 
 'urthermore erred in manners, &c. And these 
 were great errors ; and yet we see these to have 
 been in the apostles, even after the Holy Ghost 
 descended upon thein."(e) 
 
 Thus, these fallible reformers, who, to coun- 
 ienance their corruptions of scripture, grace 
 their own errors, and authorise their church's 
 fallibility, would make the apostles themselves 
 fallible ; but indeed, they need not have gone 
 this bold way to work, for we are satisfied, and 
 can very easily believe their church to be falli- 
 ble, their doctrines erroneous, and themselves 
 i;orru])ters of the scriptures, without being forced 
 *o >"^'d, that the apostles erred.(y) 
 
 fa) Calvin in Galat., c. ii., v. 14, p. 511. 
 rh) Lavatcr in Histor. Sacrament, p. 18. 
 ^:) Page 361. 
 
 (d) The second day's conference. 
 i,e) Whitaker de£ccle9. contr. Bellar. Controvers. 2 
 p. 4, p; 2-23. 
 ' f) Protestants, to authorise their own errors and fal- 
 
 And truly, if, as they say, the apostles were 
 not only fallible, but taught errors in manners 
 and matters of faith, after the Holy Ghost's 
 descending upon them, their writings can be no 
 infallible rule, or, as themselves term it, perfect 
 rule tif faith, to direct men to salvation : which 
 conclusion is so immediately and clearly deduced 
 from this Protestant doctrine, that the supposal 
 and premises once granted, there can be no 
 certainty in the scripture itself. And indeed, 
 this we see all the pretended reformers aimed 
 at, though they durst not say so much ; and 
 we shall in this little, tract make it most evi- 
 dently appear, from their intoleiSible abusing 
 it, how little esteem and what slight regard ihcy 
 have for the sacred scripture ; though they make 
 their ignorant flocks believe, that, as they have 
 translated it, and delivered it to them, it is 
 the pure and infallible word of God, 
 
 Bi!FORE I come to particular examples of theii 
 falsifications and corruptions, let me advertise 
 the reader, that my intention is to make use 
 only of such English translations as are comrnon, 
 and well known iri England even to this day, 
 as being yet in many men's hands : to wit, 
 those Bibles printed in the years 1.562, 1577, 
 and 1579, in the beginning of Queen Elizabeth's 
 reign ; which I will confront with their last 
 translation made in King James the First's 
 reign, from the impression printed in London, 
 in the year 1683. 
 
 In all which said Bibles, [g) I shall take 
 notice sometimes of one translation, sometimes 
 of another, as every one's falsehood shall give 
 occasion : neither is it a good defence for the 
 falsehood of one, that it is truly translated in 
 another, the reader being deceived by any one, 
 because commonly he reads but one ; yea, one 
 of them is a condemnation of the other. And 
 where the English corruptions, here noted, are 
 not to be found in one of the first three Bibles, 
 let the reader look in another of them ; for il 
 he find not the falsification in all, he will cer- 
 tainly find it in two, or at least in one of them ; 
 and in this case, I advertise the reader to bo 
 very circumspect, that he 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 oihe! 
 books and writings, to alter and change, add and 
 put Out, ip their later editions, according as eithei 
 themselves are ashamed of the former, or their 
 scholars who print them again, dissent or disa- 
 gree from their masters. 
 
 Note also, that though I do not so much 
 charge them with falsifying the Vulgate Latin 
 Bible, which has always been of so great autho- 
 rity in the church of God, and with all the (A) 
 ancient Fathers, as I do the Greek, which they 
 pretend to translate : I cannot, however, but 
 
 libillty, would make the apostles themselves erroneous 
 and fallible. 
 
 ig) Bib. 1562, 77, or 79. 
 
 (A) See the Preface to the Rheims New Testament 
 
OF THE SURIl'TURE. 
 
 a-j 
 
 oDseive, ihat as Luther wilfully forsook the 
 Latin text in favour of his heresies and erro- 
 neous doctrines ; so the rest follow his example 
 even to this day, for no other cadse in the world 
 but that ii. makes against their errors. 
 
 For testimony of which, what greater argu- 
 ment can there be than this, that [..uther, who 
 before had always read with the Catholic 
 Church, and with all antiquity, these words of 
 St. Fanl, " Have not we power to lead about a 
 woman, a sister, as also the rest of the apos- 
 tles V (a) And in St. Peter, these words, 
 ■' Labour, that by good works you may make 
 sure your vocation and election." Suddenly 
 after he had, contrary to his profession, taken 
 a wife, as he called her. and preached, that all 
 votaries might do the same : that " faith alone 
 iustified, and that good works were not neces- 
 sary to salvation." Immediately, I say, after 
 ho fell into these heresies, he began to read and 
 translate the former texts of scripture accord- 
 ingly, in this manner : " Have not we power to 
 lead about a sister, a wife, as the rest of the 
 apostles ?" and, " Labour that you may make 
 sure your vocation and election," leaving out 
 ihe other words " by good works." And so do 
 both the Calvinists abroad, and our English 
 Protestants at home, read and translate even 
 to this day, because they hold the self-same er- 
 rors 
 
 I would gladly know of our English Protes- 
 tant translators, whether they reject the Vulgate 
 Latin text, so generally liked and approved 
 by all the primitive Fathers, purely out of de- 
 sign to furnish us with a more sincere and 
 simple version into English from the Greek, 
 ;han they thought they could do from the Vul- 
 gate Latin 1. If so, why not stick close to the 
 Greek copy, which they pretend to translate ? 
 but, besides their corrupting of it, fly from it, 
 ind have recourse again to the Vulgate Latin^ 
 whenever it may seem to make more for their 
 purpose. Whence maybe easily gathered, that 
 their pretending to translate the Greek copy 
 was not with any good and candid design, but 
 rather, because they knew it was not so 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 pretence for 
 iheir turning and winding to and fro from the 
 Greek tothe Latin, and then again to the Greek, 
 according as they should judge most, advan- 
 tageous to themselves. It was also no little 
 part of their design, " to lessen the credit and 
 ;iuthorily of the Vulgate Latin translation," 
 which had so long, and with so general a 
 consent, been received and approved in the 
 church of God, and authorized by the general 
 Council of Trent, for the only, best, and most 
 authentic text. 
 
 - Because, therefore, I find they will scarcely 
 be able to justify their rejecting the Latin 
 translation, unless they had dealt more sin- 
 cerely with the Greek ; I have, in this following 
 
 (a) 1 Cor. ix 5, Mulierem sororem. 2 Pet. i 10, Ut 
 per bona opera certam vestrim vocationem et electio- 
 nem faciatis. 
 
 work, set down the Latin text, as well as the 
 Greek word whereon their corruption depends ; 
 yet, where they truly keep to the Gretk and He- 
 brew, which they profess to follow, and which 
 they will have to be the most authentic text, 1 
 do not charge them with heretical corruptions. 
 
 The left-hand page I have divided into foui 
 columns, besides the margin, in which I havo 
 noted the book, chapter, and verse. In the 
 first I have set down the text of scripture from 
 the Vulgate Latin edition, putting the word thai 
 their English Bibles hav,e corrupted in a dif- 
 ferent character ; to which I have also added 
 the Greek and Hebrew words, so often as they 
 are, or may be necessary, for the better under- 
 standing of the word on which the stress lies in 
 the corrupt translation. 
 
 In the second column, I have given you the 
 true English text from the Roman Catholic 
 translation, made by the divines of Rheims 
 and Doway ; which is done so faithfully and 
 candidly from the authentic Vulgate Latin copy, 
 that the most carping and critical adversary in 
 the world cannot accuse it of partiality or 
 design, contrary to the true meaning and in- 
 terpretation thereof. As for the English of 
 the said Rhemish translation, which is old, and 
 therefore must needs differ much from the more 
 refined English spoken at this day, the reader 
 ought to consider, not only the place where it 
 was written, but also the time since which the 
 translation was made, and then he will find the 
 less fault with it. For my part, because I have 
 referred m}' reader to the said translation made 
 at Rheims, I have not altered one syllable of the 
 English, though indeed I might in some places 
 have made the word more agreeable to the lan- 
 guage of our times. 
 
 In the third column you have the corruption, 
 and false translation, from those Bibles that 
 were set forth in English at the beginning ol 
 that most miserable revolt and apostacy from 
 the Catholic church, viz., from that Bible which 
 was translated in King Edward the Sixth's time, 
 and reprinted in the year 1 562, and from the iwn 
 next impressions, made Anno 1577, and 1579. 
 All which were authorised in the beginning of 
 Queen Elizabeth's reign, when the Chuich ol 
 England began to get footing, and to exercise 
 dominion over her fellow sectaries, as well as 
 to tyrannize over Catholics ; whence it cannot 
 be denied, but those Bibles were wholly agree- 
 able to the principles and doctrines of the said 
 Church of England in those days, however they 
 pretend at this day to correct or alter them. 
 
 In the fourth column, you find one of the last 
 impressions of their Protestant Bible, viz., 
 that printed in London by the assigns of John 
 Bill, deceased, and by Henry Hills andThoma< 
 Newcomb, printers to the King's most excel- 
 lent Majesty, Anno Dom. 1683. In which 
 Bible, wherever I find them to have corrected 
 and amended the place corrupted in their former 
 translations, 1 have put down the word " cor- 
 rected ;" but where the falsification is not yet 
 rectified, I have set dowri likewise the corrup- 
 tion : and that indeed is ii>" most places, yea, and 
 
28 
 
 PROTESTANT TB A^fSI.ATIO*rS 
 
 vn aome two or three places, tbey have made it 
 •ather worse than better : and this indeed gives 
 me great reason to suspect, that in those few 
 places, where the errors of the former false 
 translations have been corrected in the latter, 
 it has not always been the efl'ect of plain dealing 
 and sincerity ; for if such candid intention of 
 amending former faults had every where pre- 
 vailed with them, they would not in any place 
 have made it worse, but would also have cor- 
 rected all the rest, as well as one or two, that are 
 noi. now so much to their purpose, as they were 
 at their first rising. 
 
 In the right-hand page of this treatise, I have 
 set down the motives and inducements, that, as 
 we may reasonably presume, prompted them to 
 corrupt and falsify the sacred text, with some 
 short arguments here and there against their un- 
 warrantable proceeJings. 
 
 All which 1 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 not willing to go to the 
 price of a great volume. And because my de- 
 sire is to be beneficial to all, I have accommo- 
 dated it not only to the purse of the poorest, 
 liut also, as near as possible, to the capacity of 
 the most ignorant ; for which reasons also, I have 
 passed by a great many leamed arguments 
 brought by my author. Dr. Martin, from the 
 significations, etymologies, derivations, uses, 
 &c. of the Greek and Hebrew words, as also 
 from the comparing of places corrupted, with 
 other places rightly translated from the same 
 word, in the same translation ; with several 
 other things, whereby he largely confutes their 
 insincere and disingenuous proceedings : these 
 I say, I have omitted, not only for brevity sake, 
 but also as things that could not be of any great 
 benefit to the simple and unlearned reader. 
 
 As for others more learned, I will refer them 
 to the work itself, that I have made use of 
 through this whole treatise, viz., to that most 
 elaborate and learned work of Dr. Gregory 
 Martin, entitled, a " Discovery of the manifold 
 Corruptions of the Holy Scriptures," &c., 
 printed atRheims, Anno 1 582, which is not hard 
 to be found. 
 
 Have we not great cause to believe, that our 
 Protestant divines do obstinately teach contrary 
 to their own consciences ? For, besides their 
 haying been reproved, without amendment, for 
 their impious handling the holy scriptures, if 
 their learning be so profound and bottomless, as 
 themselves proudly boast in all their works, we 
 cannot but conclude, that they must needs both 
 8t>e their errors, and know the truth. And 
 therefore, though we cannot always cry out to 
 them, and their followers, " the blind lead the 
 blind," yet, which is, alas ! a thousand times 
 ninre miserable, we may justly exclaim, " those 
 who see, lead the blind, till with themselves, they 
 fall into the ditch " 
 
 .As riothiiie has ever been worse resented by 
 such as forsake God's holy church than to hear 
 •heniselvi's braiuled with the general title of 
 bcreiics ; so nothing hiis been ever more com- 
 
 mon among Catholics, than jtistly to stignia(i.ie 
 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, giving 
 them the least disgust by this horrid appeltaliou ; 
 nevertheless, I must needs give them to under- 
 stand, that the nature of the holy sci ipture is 
 such, that whosoever do voluntarily corrupt anJ 
 pervert it, to maintain their own erroneous doc- 
 trines, cannot lightly be characterized by a less 
 infamous title, than that of heretics ; and theii 
 false versions, by the title of heretical transla- 
 tions, under which denomination 1 have placed 
 these following corruptiorrs. 
 
 Notwithstanding, I would have the Protestant 
 reader to take notice, that I neither name nor 
 judge all to beheretics, as ishinted in my preface, 
 who hold errors contradictory to God's churcli, 
 but such as pertinaciously persist in their errors. 
 
 So proper and essential is pertinacity to 
 the nature of heresy, that if a man should hold 
 or believe ever so mduy false opinions agaitist 
 the inith of Christian faith, but yet not with 
 obstinacy and pertinacity, he should err,- but 
 not be an heretic. Saint Augustine asserting, 
 that " if any do defend their opinions, though 
 false and perverse, with no obstinate animosity, 
 hut rather with all solicitude seek the truth, 
 and are ready to be corrected when th-ey find 
 the same, these men are not to be accounted 
 heretics, because they have not any election of 
 their own that contradicts the doctrine of the 
 church." (a) And in another place, against the 
 Donatists, " Let us," says he, " suppose scime 
 man to hold that of Christ at this day, which the 
 heretic Phoiinus did, to wit, that Christ was 
 only man, and not God, and that he should think 
 this to be the Catholic failh ; I will not say that 
 he is an heretic, unless when the doctrine of the 
 ■church is made manifest unto him, he will rather 
 choose to hold that which he held before, than 
 yield thereunto. "(A) 
 
 Again, " Those," says he, " who in the church 
 of Christ hold infectious and perverse doctrine, 
 if when they are corrected for it, they resist 
 stubbornly, and will not amend their pestilent 
 and deadly persuasions, but persist to defead 
 the same, these men are made heretics : (c) by 
 all which places of St. Augustine, we see, that 
 •error without pertinacity, and obstinacy against 
 God's church is no heresy. It would be well, 
 therefore, if Protestants, in reading Catholic 
 books, would endeavour rather to inform tnem- 
 selves of the truth of Catholic doctrine, and 
 humbly embrace the same, than to suflfer tha» 
 prejudice against religion, in which they have 
 unhappily been educated, so strongly lo bias 
 them, as to turn them from men barely educated 
 in error, to obstinate heretics ; such as the more 
 to harden their own hearts, by how mm h the 
 more clearly the doctrine of God's holy t.nurch 
 is demonstrated to thein. When the true f^ith 
 is once made known to men ignorance Ccto ^»o 
 
 (a) S. Aug. Ep. 162. 
 
 (J) Lit>- 4, T-ontr. Doiiat , c. vi.. 
 
 (c) De Civit. Dei, lib. xviii., c. 51. 
 
or THE SCRIPTURK. 
 
 29 
 
 tunger secure ttem from that eldrnal punishment 
 to which heresy undoubtedly hurries them : St. 
 Paul, in his Epistle to Titus, affirming, that " a 
 man that is an heretic, after the first and second 
 admonition, is subverted, and sinneth, being 
 tjoiidennied by his own jndgment." (a) 
 
 Whatever may be said, therefore, to excuse 
 the ignorant, and such as are not obstinate, from 
 that ignominious character : yet, as for others, 
 especially the leaders of these misguided people, 
 they will scarcely be able to free themselves 
 either from it, or escape the punishment due to 
 such, so long as they thus wilfully demonstrate 
 their pertinacity, not only in their obstinately 
 defending their erroneous doctrines in their 
 disputes, sermons, and writings ; but even in 
 corrupting the word of God, to force that sacred 
 book to defend the same, and compel that divine 
 volume to speak against such points of Catholic 
 doctrine as themselves are pleased to deny. 
 
 In what can an heretical intention more evi- 
 dently appear, than in falsely translating and 
 corrupting the holy Bible, against the Catholic 
 church, and such doctrines as it has by an unin- 
 terrupted tradition, brought down to us from the 
 apostles ? As for example : 
 
 1. Against the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar. 
 
 2. Against the Real Presence of Christ's 
 Body and Blood in the Eucharist. 
 
 3. Against Priests, and the Power of Priest- 
 hood. 
 
 4. Against the Authority of Bishops. 
 
 5. Against the sacred Altar on which Christ's 
 Body and Blood is ofl^ered. 
 
 6. Against the Sacrament of Baptism.' 
 
 7. Against the Sacrament of Penance, and 
 Confession of Sins. 
 
 8. Against the Sacrament of Marriage. 
 
 9. Against Intercession of Saints. 
 
 10. Agrainst sacred Images. 
 
 11. Against Purgatory, Limbus Patrum, and 
 Christ's Descent into Hell. 
 
 12. Against Justification, and the possibility 
 of keeping God's Commandments. 
 
 Vi. Against meritorious Works, and the Re- 
 ward due to the same. 
 
 14. Against Free Will. 
 
 15. Against true inherent Justice, and in de- 
 fence of their own Doctrine, that Faith alone is 
 sufficient for Salvation. 
 
 1 6. Against Apostolical Traditions. 
 
 Yea, against several other doctrines of God's 
 holy Church, and in defence of divers strange 
 opinions of their own, which the reader will find 
 taken notice of in this treatise : all which, when 
 the luiprcjudiced and well-meaning Protestant 
 read(!r 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 
 liitherto been ignorant, and more is the pity, of 
 this illhindling of the Bible by their translators : 
 nor have, I am confident, their ministerial guides 
 ever yet dealt so ingenuously by them, as to tell 
 them that such and such a text of scripture is 
 
 (a) Titus iii. 10. 
 
 ! translated thus and thus, contrary to the true 
 Greek, Hebrew, or ancient Latin copies on 
 purpose, and to the only intent, to make it speak 
 against such and such points of Catholic doctrine, 
 and in favour of this or that new opinion of theii 
 own. 
 
 Does it appear to be done by negligence, ig- 
 norance, or mistake, as perhaps they would be 
 vrilling to have the reader believe, or rather 
 designedly and wilfully, when vv'hat they in some 
 places translate truly, in places of controversy, 
 between them and us, they grossly falsify, in 
 favour of their errors 1 
 
 Is it not a certain argument of a wilful cor- 
 ruption, where they deviate from that te.\t, and 
 ancient reading, which has been used by all 
 the fathers ; and instead thereof, to make the 
 exposition or commentarj' of sorae 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 theiu, or not 
 so much for their purpose, it is a manifest -sign 
 of wilful partiality : and this they frequently 
 do. 
 
 What is it else but wilful partiality, when in 
 words of ambiguous and divers significations, 
 they will have it signify here or there, as pleases 
 themselves ? So that in this place it must signify 
 thus, in that place, not thus ; as Beza, and one 
 of their English Bibles, for example, uro;e the 
 Greek word yvinZxa to signify wife, and not to 
 signify wife, both against the virginity anl 
 chastity of priests. 
 
 What is it but a voluntary and designed con- 
 trivance, when in a case that makes for them, 
 they strain the very original signification of tli<! 
 word ; and in the contrary case neglect it alto 
 gether ? " Yet this they do. 
 
 That their corruptions are voluntary and 
 designedly done, is evident in such places where 
 passives are turned into actives, and actives into 
 passives ; where participles are made to disagree 
 in case from their substantives ; where soloacisms 
 are imagined when the construction is mos 
 agreeable ; and errors pretended to creep out 6i 
 the margin into the text : but Beza made use ol 
 all these, and more such like quirks. 
 
 Another note of wilful corruption is, when 
 they do not translate alike such words as are ol 
 like 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 orginal text ; 
 and the words, hymns, grace, rnystery, sacra- 
 ment, church, altar, priest. Catholic, justifica- 
 tion, tradition, &c. avoided and suppressed, 
 where they are in the original, as if no such 
 words were in the text : is it not an apparent 
 token of design, and that it is done purposely 
 to disgrace or suppress ths said things and 
 speeches ? 
 
 Though Beza and Whitaker made it a good 
 rule to translate according to the usual signi" 
 fication, and not the original derivation of 
 5 
 
30 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS 
 
 words ; yet, contrary to this rule, they trans- 
 late Idolum, an image ; Presbyter, an elder ; 
 Diaconus, a minister ; Episcopus, an overseer, 
 &c. Who sees not tj.erefore but this is wilful 
 partiality ? 
 
 If where the Apostle names a Pagan idol- 
 ater, and a Christian idolater, by one and the 
 same Greek word, in one and the same meaning ; 
 and they translate the Pagan (idolater) and the 
 Christian (worshipper of images) by two distinct 
 words, and in two divers meanings, it must needs 
 be wilfully done. 
 
 Nor does it appear to be less designedly done, 
 to translate one and the same Greek word 
 nixouSoais tradition, whensoever it may be taken 
 for evil traditions ; and never so, when it spoken 
 of good and apostolical traditions. 
 
 So likewise, when they foist into their trans- 
 lation the word tradition, taken in ill part, where 
 it is not in the Greek ; and omit it where it is 
 in the Greek, when taken in good part ; it is 
 certainly a most wilful corruption. 
 
 At their first revolt, when none were noted 
 for schismatics and heretics but themselves, 
 they translated division and sect, instead of 
 schism and heresy ; and for heretic, translated 
 an author of sects. This cannot be excused for 
 voluntary corruption. 
 
 But why should I multiply examples, when it- 
 is evident from their own confessi(ms and ac- 
 . knowledgments ? For instance, concerning 
 uexuvoelxe, which the Vulgate Latin and Erasmus 
 translate Agile panitentiam, " do penance :" 
 ' This interpretation," says Beza, " 1 refuse for 
 many causes ; but for this especially, that many 
 ignorant persons have taken hereby an occasion 
 of the false opinions of satisfaction, wherewith 
 the church is troubled at this day." 
 
 Many other ways there -ire, to make most 
 certain proofs of their wilfulness ; as when the 
 translation is framed according to their false 
 and heretical commentary ; and when they will 
 avouch their translations out of profane writers, 
 as Homer, Plutarch, Pliny, Tully, Virgil, and 
 Terence, and reject the ' ecclesiastical use of 
 words in the scriptures and fathers ; which is 
 Beza's usual custom, whom our English trans- 
 lators follow. But to note all their marks 
 were too tedious a work, neither is it in this 
 place necessary : ihe^e are sufficient to satisfy 
 the impartial reader, that all those corruptions 
 and falsifications were not committed either 
 through negligence, ignorance, over-sight, or 
 mistake, as perhaps they will be glad to pretend ; 
 but designedly, wilfully, and with a malicious 
 purpose and intention, to disgrace, dishonour, 
 condemn, and suppress the church's catholic 
 and apostolic doctrines and principles ; and to 
 favour, defend, and bolster up their own new- 
 dovised errors, iind monstrous opinions. And 
 Beza is not far from confessing thus much, when 
 against Castafio he thus complains : " The mat- 
 ter," savs hi', " 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; 
 *hoiii if a man renrehind, he shall be answered 
 
 by and by, that they do the office of ii translator, 
 not who translates word for word, but who 
 expresses the sense : so it comes to pass that 
 whilst every man will rather freely follow his 
 own judgment, than be a religious interpretei 
 of the Holy Ghost, he rather perverts man'.' 
 things, than translates them." This is spokct. 
 well enough, if he had done accordingly. But, 
 doing quite the contrary, is he not a dissembling 
 hypocrite in so saying, and a wilful heretic in so 
 doing? 
 
 Our quarrel with Protestant translators is 
 not for trivial or slight faults, or for such verbal 
 differences, or little escap&s as may happen 
 through the scarcely unavoidable mistakes ol 
 the transcribers or printers : no ! we accuse 
 them of wilfully corrupting and falsifying the 
 sacred text, against poirsts of faith and mo- 
 rals, (a) 
 
 We deny not but several immaterial faults 
 and depravations may enter into a translation, 
 nor do we pretend that the Vulgate itself was 
 free from such, before the correction of Sixtus 
 V. and Clement VIII., which, through the mis- 
 takes of printers, and, before printing, of tran- 
 scribers, happened to several copies : so that a 
 great many verbal differences, and lesser faults, 
 were, by learned men, discovered in different 
 copies : not that any material corruption in 
 points of faith were found in all copies ; for such 
 God Almighty's providence, as Protestants 
 themselves confess, would never suffer to enter : 
 and indeed these lesser depravations are not 
 easily avoided, especially after several transcrij)- 
 tions of copies and impressions from the origi- 
 nal, as we daily see in other books. 
 
 To amend and rectify such, the ;hurch (as 
 you may read in the preface to the Sixtino 
 edition) has used the greatest industry imagi- 
 nable. Pope Pius IV. caused not only the 
 original languages, but other copies to be care. 
 fully examined : Pius V. prosecuted that la- 
 borious work ; and by Sixtus V; it was finished, 
 who commanded it to be put to press, as 
 appears by his bull, which begins, " Elernus 
 Ule Cmhslium" &c.. Anno 1585. Yet, notwith- 
 standing the bull prefixed before his Bible, then 
 printed, the same Pope Sixtus, as is seen in the 
 preface, made Anno 1 592, after diligent exami- 
 nation, found that no few faults slipped into his 
 impression, by the negligence of the printers : 
 and therefore, Censuit atque decrevit, he both 
 judged and decreed to have the whole work 
 examined and reprinted ; but that second cor- 
 rection being prevented by his death, was after 
 the very short reign of three other popes, un 
 dcrtaken, and happily finished by his successor 
 Clement VIII., answerable to the desire and 
 absolute intention of his predecessor, Sixtus : 
 \yhence it is that the Vulgate, now extant, is 
 called the correction of Sixtus,. because this 
 vigilant Pope, notwithstanding the endeavours 
 of his two predecessors, is said to have begun 
 
 (a) See a book entitled, Reason and Keligiou, cap. 
 viii., where the Sixtine and Clementine Bibles are more 
 fully treated of. 
 
OF THE SCRIPTURE. 
 
 SI 
 
 It, which was Recording 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 Clc- 
 mcnCs recognition, is now read in the church, 
 as authentic, true scripture, and is the very best 
 corrected copy of the Latin Vulgate. 
 
 And whereas Pope Sixtus's bull tujoiried 
 tliat his Bible be read in all churches, without 
 ihe least alteration ; yet this injunction supposed 
 the interpreters and printers to have done ex- 
 actly their duty every way, which was found 
 wanting upon a second review of the whole work. 
 Such commands and injunctions therefore, 
 where new difficulties arise, not thought of 
 before, are not, like definitions of faith, unalter- 
 able ; but may and ought to be changed accord- 
 ing to the legislator's prudence. What I say 
 here is indisputable ; for how could Pope 
 Sixtus, after a sight of such faults as caused 
 him to intend another impression, enjoin no 
 alteration, when he desired one, which his suc- 
 cessor did for him ? So that if Pope Sixtus 
 had lived longer, he would as well have changed 
 the Breve, as amended his impression. 
 
 And whereas there were sundry different lec- 
 tions of the Vulgate Latin, before the said cor- 
 rection of Sixtus and Clement, the worthy doc- 
 tors of Louvain, with an immense labour, placed 
 m the margin of their Bible these different lec- 
 tions of scripture ; not determining which read- 
 ing was best, or to be preferred before others ; 
 as knowing well, that the decision of siich causes 
 belongs to the public judicature and authority 
 of the church. Pope Clement therefore, omit- 
 ting no humar. diligence, compared lection with 
 lection ; and after malurely weighing all, pre- 
 ferred that which was most agreeable to the 
 ancient copies, a thing necessary to be done 
 for procuring one uniform lection of scripture 
 in the church, approved of by the see apostolic. 
 4.nd from this arises that villanous calumny 
 and open slander of Doctor Stillingfleet ; who 
 affirms, that " the Pope took where he pleased 
 the marginal annotations in the Louvain Bible, 
 and inserted them into the text ;" whereas, I 
 say, he took net the annotations or commen- 
 taries of the Louvain doctors, but the different 
 readings of scripture found in several- copies. 
 
 Mr. James makes a great deal of noise about 
 Dis impertinent comparisons between ihese two 
 editions, and that of Louvain : yet amotig all his 
 differences, he finds not one contrarie-ty in anj' 
 material point of faith or morals : and as for 
 ottier differences, such as touch not faith and 
 religion, arising from the compressions, being 
 onger or shorter, less clear in the one, and 
 more significant in the other ; or happening 
 ihrpugh the negligence of printers, they give 
 him no manner of ground for his vain cavils ; 
 (^specially seeing, I say, the Louvain Bibhf gave 
 (he different readings, without deterniming 
 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, 
 iiid one uiiilbrnt reading approved of. 
 
 Against Thomas James's comparison, read 
 the learned James Grester. who sufficiently dia. 
 covers his untruths, with a " Mentilo lertio 
 Thomas James decern millia verborwn," &c., after 
 which, judge whether he hits every thing he 
 says ; and whether the Vulgate Latin is to be 
 corrected by the Louvain annotations, or thesu 
 by the A'ulgate, if any thing were amiss in either? 
 Ill fine, whether, if Mr James's pretended dif 
 ferences arise from comparing all with the 
 Hebrew, Greek, and Chaldee, must we needs 
 suppose him to know the last energy and force 
 of every Hebrew, Greek, or Chaldee word, 
 when there is a controversy, better than the 
 authors of the Louvain, and correctors of ,the 
 Vulgate Latin, the Sixline-Clementine edition 1 
 Again, let us demand of him, whether all his 
 differences imply any material alteration in 
 faith or morals, or introduce any notable error, 
 contrary to God's revealed verities 1 Or are they 
 not rather mere verbal differences, grounded on 
 the obscure signification of original words ? In 
 fine, if he or any for him, plead any material 
 alteration, let them name any authentic copy, 
 either original or translation ; by the indispu- 
 table integrity whereof these supposed errors 
 may be cancelled, and God's pure revealed 
 verities put in their place. But to do this, after 
 such immense labour and diligence used in the 
 correction of the Vulgate, will prove a desperate 
 impossibility. (n) 
 
 Indeed, Mr. James might have just cause to 
 exclaim, if he had found in these Bibles such 
 corruptions as the Protestant apostle, Martin 
 Luther, wilfully makes in his translations : as 
 when he adds the word " alone" to the text, to 
 maintain hisheresy of " faith alone justifying ;"(4) 
 and omits that verse, " But if you do not forgive, 
 neither will your Father which is in heaven for- 
 give your sins. "(c) He also omits these words, 
 " That you abstain from fornication :" (d) and 
 because the word Trinity sounded coldly with 
 him, he left out this sentence, which is the only 
 text in the Bible that can be brought to prove 
 that great mystery : " There are three who bear 
 record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and 
 the Holy Ghost, and these three are one." (e) Or 
 if Mr. James had found such gross corruptions 
 as that of Zuinglius, when instead of our blessed 
 Saviour's postive words, " this is my body," he 
 translates, " this is a sign of my body," to avoid 
 the doctrine of the real presence, or such as are 
 hereafter discovered in Protestant English 
 translations : if, I say, he had met with such 
 wilful and abominable corruptions as these, he 
 might have had good cause of complaint ; but 
 seeing the most he can make of all his painful 
 comparisons comes but to this, %'iz., that he notes 
 such faults, as Sixtus himself observed, aftev 
 the impression was finished, and as Clement 
 rectified ; 1 think he might have better employed 
 
 (o) See the Preface to Sixtus V., Edit. Antwerp, 1505; 
 and Bib. Max , Sext,, 19, 20 ; Serarius, c. 19. 
 (b^ Rom. iii. 2P. 
 
 (c) Mark xi. 26. 
 
 (d) 1 Thea. iv. 3 
 
 (e) John v. 7 
 
13 
 
 PROTESTANT TnA.VSLATIONS OF THK SCRXPTURB. 
 
 fiis time in correcting the gross and most into- 
 lerable corniplions of the Protestant translation, 
 than to have busied himself about so unnecessary 
 a work : but there are a certain sort of men, 
 who had rather employ themselves in discovering 
 imaginary notes in their neighbours' eyes, than 
 in clearing their own from real beams. 
 
 To conclude this point, no man can be cer- 
 tait>ly assured of the true scripture, unless he 
 first come to a certainty of a true church, inde- 
 pendently of scripture : find out therefore the 
 true church, and we know, by the authority of 
 our undoubted testimony, the true scripture ; 
 for the infallible testimony of the church is ab- 
 solutely necessary for assuring us of an authen- 
 tic scripture. And this I cannot see how 
 Protestants can deny, especially when they 
 seriously consider, that in matters of religion, 
 it must needs be an unreasonable thing to endea- 
 vour to oblige any man to be tried by the scrip- 
 tures of a false religion ; for who can in pru- 
 dence require of a Christian to stand in debates 
 of ri'ligion to the decisions of the scripture of 
 the Turks, " the Alcoran i* Doubtless, there- 
 fore, when men appeal to such scripture for 
 determining religious difi'erences, their intention 
 is to appeal to such scriptures, and such alone : 
 and to all such as are admitted by the true 
 church : and bow can we know what scriptures 
 are adinitted by the true church, unless we know 
 which is the true chnrch ?" (a) 
 
 So likewise, touching the exposition of scrip- 
 ture, without doubt, when Protestants fly to 
 scriptures for their rule, whereby to square their 
 ieiigion,and to decide debates between them and 
 their adversaries, they appeal to scriptures as 
 rightly understood : for who would be tried by 
 scriptures understood in a wrong sense ? Now 
 when contests arise between them and others of 
 different judgments concerning the right mean- 
 ing of it ; certainly they will not deny, but the 
 judge to decide this debate must appertain to the 
 true religion ; for what Christian will apply him- 
 self to a Turk or Jew to decide matters belong- 
 ing to Christianity?, or. who would go to an 
 Atheist to determine matters of religion 1 
 
 In like manner, when they are forced to have 
 recourse to the private spirit in religious mat- 
 ters, doubtless they design not to appeal to the 
 private spirit of an Atheist, a Jew, or an He- 
 retic, but to the private spirit of such as are of 
 the triie religion : and is it possible for them to 
 know certainly who are members of the true 
 church? or what appertains to the true reli- 
 gion, unless they be certainly informed " which 
 is the true church ?" So that, Tsay, no man can 
 be certainly assured which or what books, or 
 liow much is true scripture ; or of the right 
 sense and true meaning of scripture, unless 
 ho first f.ome to a certainty of the true church. 
 
 (a) We must of necessity know the true church, be- 
 fure we be certain either wliich is true scripture, or which 
 is the trae sense of scripture ; or by what spiiit it is to 
 bee,\po;inded. And whether that chnrch which has con- 
 tinued visib e in the world from Christ's time fill this 
 day, or that which was never known or heard of in the 
 world till 1.500 years after our Saviour, is the true 
 church, let the world judge. 
 
 And of this opinion was the great St. Augus- 
 tine, when he declared, that " he would not be- 
 lieve the Gospel, if it was not that the authority 
 of the Catholic Church moved him to it :" Ege 
 vera Evangnlio non crcderem, nisi mi: Ecdesim 
 CathoUc<B commoveret aut/ioritas. {b) 
 
 OF THE CANONICAL BOOKS OF 
 SCRIPTURE. 
 
 The Catholic Church " setting this always be- 
 fore her eyes, that, errors being removed, the 
 very purity' of the Gospel maybe preserved in 
 the church; which being promised before by the 
 prophets, in the holy scriptures, our Lord Jesus 
 Christ, the Son of God, first published with his 
 own mouth, and afterwards commanded to be 
 preached, to every creature, by the apostles, as 
 the fountain of all, the wholesome truth, and moral 
 discipline contained in the written books, and in 
 the traditions not written, &c., folio»ving the 
 example of the ortliodo-K fathers, and affected 
 with similar piety and reverence ; doth receive 
 and honour all the books both of the Old and 
 New Testament, seeing one God is the author 
 of both," &c. (c) These are the words of the 
 sacred Council of Trent ; w^hich further or- 
 dained, that the table, or catalogue, of the cano- 
 nical books should be joined to this decree, lest 
 doubt might arise to any, which books they are 
 that are received by the council. They are 
 these following, viz. : 
 
 Of the Old Testament. 
 
 Five books of Moses ; that is, Genesis, Exo 
 dus, Leviticus, Numbers, Deuteronomy. 
 
 Joshua, Judges, Ruth. 
 
 Four of the Kings. 
 
 Two of Paralipomenon. 
 
 The first and second of Esdras, which is 
 called Nehemias. 
 
 Tobias, Judith, Hester, Job, David's Psallei 
 of 150 Psalms, Proverbs, Ecclesiastes, Canti- 
 cles, V/isdom, Ecdesiasticus, Isaias, Hiereinias, 
 with Baruch, Ezechiel, Daniel. 
 
 Twelve lesser prophets ; that is. Osea, 
 Joel, Amos, Abdias, Jonas, MichtEas, Na- 
 hum, Abacuc, Sophonias, Aggeus, Zackarias, 
 Malachias. 
 
 The first and second of the Machabccs. 
 
 Of the New Testament, 
 
 Four Gospels, acGording to St. Rlatthew, St. 
 Mark, St. Luke, and St. John. 
 
 The Acts of the Apostles, written by St. Luke 
 the Evangelist. 
 
 Fourteen Epistles of St. Paul, viz., to tha 
 Romans, two to the Corinthians, to the Ga!u- 
 tians, to the Ephesians, to the Philippians,. to 
 the Colossians, to the Thessalonians, two to 
 Timothv, to Titus, to Philemon, to the Hebrews. 
 
 Two of St. Peter the Apostle. 
 
 (A) S. Aug., lib. contr. Epist. Manich., cap. v. 
 (c) Concii. Tritlent., Sess. 4, Decret de CanoDicia 
 Scripturis ; Mark c, ult . 
 
OF BOOKS KEJECTEn BT PROTESTANTS FOR ArOCRYPHAL 
 
 33 
 
 Tliiee 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 acrustomed to be read in the 
 Catholic Church, and as they are in the old Vul- 
 gate Latin edition, &c., be he anathema. " 
 
 The third Council of Carthage, after having 
 decreed, that nothing should be read in the 
 church under the name of divine scripture, but 
 canonical scriptures, says, " that the canonical 
 scriptures are Genesis, E.xodus," &c. ; (r>) so 
 reckoning up all the very same books, and mak- 
 ing pnrticularly the same catalogue of them, 
 with this recited out of the Council of Trent. St. 
 Augustine, who was present at, and subscribed 
 to, this council, also numbers the same books as 
 above. (A) 
 
 Notwithstanding which, several of the said 
 liooks are by the Protestants rejected as Apo- 
 cryphal : their reasons are, because they are not 
 in the Jewish canon, and were not accepted for 
 Tarionical in the primitive church ; reasons by 
 which they might reject a great many more, if 
 it pleased them : but, indeed, the chief cause is, 
 that some things in these books are so mani- 
 festly against their opinions, that they have no 
 other answer but to reject their authority, as 
 appears very plainly from those words of Mr. 
 Whitaker : " We pass not," says he, " for that 
 Raphael mentioned in Tobit, neither acknow- 
 ledge we these seven angels whereof he makes 
 mention ; all that differs much from canonical 
 scripture, which is reported of that Raphael, 
 and savours of, I know not what, superstition. 
 Neither will I believe free will, although the 
 book of Ecclesiasticus confirms it an hundred 
 times." (c) This denying of books to be canoni- 
 cal, because the Jews received them not, was 
 also an old heretical shift, noted and refuted by 
 St. Augustine, touching the book of Wisdom ; 
 {d) which some in his time refused, because it 
 reiuted 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 
 ■11 tnie Christians, than that of the Jews ? For 
 ? "canon is an assured rule, and warrant of 
 direction, whereby (says St. Augustine,) the 
 infirmity of our defect in knowledge is guided, 
 and by which rule other books are known to he 
 God's word :" his reason is, " because we have 
 no other assurance than the books of Moses, 
 ti;e four Gospels, and other books, are the tnie 
 word of God, but by the canon of the church." 
 
 (<j) 3 Concil. Carthag., Can, 47. 
 
 (h) Vid, Doctr, Christian., lib. 2, c. viii. 
 
 tc) Whit confr. Camp., p. 17. 
 
 (ti) S. Aug., lib do Prse'lcst. Sanct. . c. U. 
 
 (c) Whereupon the same great doctor uttered 
 that famous saying : " I would not believe The 
 Gospel, except the authority of the Catholic 
 Church moved me thereto." 
 
 And, that these books which the Protestants 
 reject, are by the church numbered in the sacred 
 canon, may be seen above : however, to speak 
 of them in particular, in their order : 
 
 THE BOOK OF TOBIAS 
 
 Is, by St. Cyprian, " de Oratione Dominica," 
 alleged as divine scripture, to prove that prayer 
 is good with fasting and alms. St. Ambrose 
 calls this book by the common name of scripture, 
 saying, " he will briefly gather the virtues ol 
 Tobias, which the scripture in an historical 
 manner lays forth at large ;"(/) calling also this 
 history prophetical, and Tobias a prophet : and 
 in another place, he alleges this book, as he 
 does other holy scriptures, to provide that the 
 virtues of God's servants far excel those of the 
 moral philosophers. (^) St. Augustine made a 
 special sermon of Tobias, as he did of Job. (A) 
 St. Chrysostom alleges it as scripture, denounc- 
 ing a curse against the contemners of it. (i.) 
 St. Gregory also alleges it as holy scripture, {k) 
 St. Bede expounds this whole book inystically, 
 as he does other holy scriptures. St. Hierom 
 translated it out of the Chaldee l-angunge, 
 ■' judging it more meet to displease the Phari- 
 saical J<jws, who reject it, than not to satisfy the 
 will of holy bishops, urging to have it." Ep. 
 ad Chrnmat. el Heliodorum. To. 3. In fine, 
 St. Augiistine 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 o( 
 God, nor expect help from any other but from 
 him." 
 
 OF THE BOOK OF JUDITH 
 
 This book was, by Origen, Tcrtullian, and 
 other fathers, whom St. Hilary cites, held for 
 canonical, before the first general Council ot 
 Nice ; yet St. Hierom supposed it not so, till 
 such time as he found that the said sacred coun- 
 cil reckoned it in the number of cononical scrip- 
 tures ; after which he so esteemed it. thdt he not 
 only translated it out of the Chaldee tongue, 
 wherein it was first written, but also, as occasion 
 required, cited the same as divine scripture, and 
 
 (e) S. Aug., lib. 11, c. 5, contra Faastum, et lib. 2. c 
 32, contra Ceaconium. 
 (/) S. Amb., lib. de Tobia. c. i. 
 {g) Lib. 3, Offic, c. 14. 
 (A) S. Aug., Scrm., 226. de Tem. 
 (t) S. Chrysost, Horn. 15, ail Heb. 
 {k) S. Greg., part. 3, Pastor, cure! odnion. SL, 
 
M 
 
 OV BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR ArOCRYPHAt. 
 
 sufficient to cor.vince matters of faith in contro- 
 vetsy, numberitig it witli other scriptures, where- 
 of none doubts, saying, " Ruth, Hester, Judith, 
 were of so great renown, that they gave names 
 to the sacred volumes." (a) St. Ambrose, St. 
 Augustine, St. Chrysostom, and many other holy 
 fathers, account it for canonical scripture. 
 
 PART OF THE BOOK OF HESTER. 
 
 By the Council of Laodicea and Carthage, 
 this book was declared canonical ; and by most 
 of the ancient fathers esteemed as divine scrip- 
 ture ; only two or three,, before the said coun- 
 cils, doubted of its authority. And though St. 
 Hierom in his time, found not certain parts 
 thereof in the Hebrew, yet in the Greek he 
 found all the sixteen chapters contained in ten : 
 and it is not improbable that these parcels were 
 sometime in the Hebrew, as divers whole books 
 which are now lost. But whether they ever 
 were so or not, the church of Christ accounts 
 the whole book of infallible authority, reading 
 as well these parts, as the rest in her public of- 
 fice, (i) 
 
 OF THE BOOKS OF WISDOM. 
 
 It is granted, that several of the ancient 
 fathers would not urge these books of Wisdom, 
 ind others, in their writings against the Jews, 
 not that themselves doubted of their authority ; 
 but because they knew that they would be rejec- 
 ted by the Jews as not canonical : and so St. 
 Hierom, with respect to the Jews, said these 
 books were not canonical ; nevertheless, he often 
 alleged testimonies out of them, as from other 
 divine scriptures ; sometimes with this paren- 
 thesis, Si cut tamen plucet librumrecipere, in cap. 
 viii. andxii. Zachariae: but in his latter writings 
 absolutely without any such restriction, as in 
 cap. i. and Ivi, Isaise, and in xviii. Jeremiae ; 
 where he professes to allege none but canoni- 
 cal scripture, (e) As for the other ancient 
 fathers, namely, St. Irenceus, St. Clement of 
 Alexandria, Origen, St. Athanasins, St. Basil, 
 St. Gregory Nazianzen, St. Gregory Nyssen, 
 St. Epiphanius, St. Cyril of Alexandria, St. 
 Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, &c., they make no 
 doubt at all of their being canonical scripture, 
 as appears by their express terms, " divine scrip- 
 ture, divine word, sacred letters, prophetical 
 sayings, the Holy Ghost saith, and the like." 
 And St. Augustine affirms, that, " the sentence of 
 'he books of Wisdom ought not to be rejected 
 .bv certain, inclining to Pelagianism, which has 
 
 {a) See the Argument in tfie Book of Judith in the 
 Poa'ay Rible, Tom. 1. 
 
 (i) "\'ide Doway. Bible, Tom. 1. 
 
 (c) Vide Doway Bible, Tom. 2, and Jodoc, Coce. 
 Tom. 1. Thesaii 6. Art. 9 
 
 SO long been publicly read in the church o' 
 Christ, and received by all Christians, bishops, 
 and others, even to the last of the laity, penitents; 
 and catechumens, cum veneratione Drvinm au 
 j thoritatis, with veneration of divine authority! 
 Which also the excellent writers, next to the 
 apostles' times, alleging for witness, nihil a 
 adhibere nisi divinum testimonium crediderunl 
 thought they alleged nothing but divine teslj 
 niony. {d) 
 
 OF ECCLESIASTICUS. 
 
 What has been said of the foregoing book, 
 may be said also of this. The holy fathers above 
 named, and several others, as St. Cyprian, de 
 Opere et Eleemosyna, St. Gregory the Great 
 in Psal. 1. It is also reckoned for canonical 
 by the third Council of Carthage, and by St. Au.. 
 gustine, in lib. c. 8, Docl. Christian, et lib. 17, c. 
 20. Civit Dei. 
 
 Of BARUCH, with the Epistle of JEREMY 
 
 Many of the ancient Fathers supposed this 
 prophecy to be Jeremiah's, though none of them 
 doubted but Baruch,his scribe, was the writer of 
 it ; not but that the Holy Ghost directed him in 
 it : and therefore by the fathers and councils 
 'it has ever been accepted as divine scripture. 
 The Council of Laodicea, in the last canon, ex- 
 pressly names Baruch, Lamentations, and Je- 
 remiah's Epistle, (e) St. Hierom testifies, that 
 ho found it in the Vulgate Latin edition, and that 
 it contains many things of Christ, and ihelattei 
 limes ; though because he found if not in the 
 Hebrew, nor in the Jewish canim, he urges it not 
 against them. ( / ) It is by the Councils of Flo- 
 rence and Trent expressly defined to be canoni- 
 cal scripture. 
 
 Of the SONG of the THREE CHILDREN, 
 the IDOL, BELL, and the DRAGON, with 
 the STORY OF SUSANNAH. 
 
 It is no just exception against these and other 
 parts of holy scripture of the Old Testament, 
 to say, they are not in the Hebrew edition, 
 being otherwise accepted for canonical by the 
 Catholic Church ; and further, it is very pro- 
 bable, that these parcels were sometimes either 
 in the Hebrew or Chaldee ; in which two lan- 
 guages, part in one, and part in the other, tha 
 
 (d) S. Aug in lib.de Prajdestinat. Sanct., cap. 14. Et 
 lib. de Civit Uei, 17, c. 20. 
 
 (e) Seethe Argument of Baruch's Prophecy in th« 
 Doway Bible, To. 2. 
 
 '/) St Hierom., in Praefat. Jercmue. 
 
OF BOOKS REJECTEH BV PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRYPHA!,. 
 
 35 
 
 rest of the book of Daniel was written ; for 
 from whence could the Septuagfnt, Theodotion, 
 Syijimachiis, and Aqiiila translate them ? in 
 whose editions St. Hieroni found them. But if 
 it be objected, that St. Hierom calls them fables, 
 and so did not account them canonical scripture ; 
 we answer, that he, reporting the Jewish opinion, 
 uses their terms, not explaining his own judg- 
 ment, intending to deliver sincerely what he 
 iound in the Hebrew ; yet would he not omit 
 to insert the rest, advertising withal, that he had 
 it in Theodotion's translation ; which answer is 
 clearly justified by his own testimony, in these 
 words : " Whereas I relate,'' says he, " what the 
 Hebrews say against the Hymn of the Three 
 Children ; he that for this reputes me a fool, 
 proves himself a sycophant ; for I did not write 
 -what myself judged, but what they are accus- 
 tomed to say against me." (a) 
 
 The Prayer of Azarias is alleged as divine 
 scripture, by St. Cyprian, St. Ephrem, St. 
 Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St. Fulgentius, and 
 others. (&) 'I'he Hymn of the Three Children 
 is alleged for divine scripture, by divers holy 
 fathers, as also by St. Hierom himself, in cap. iii. 
 ad Galulos et Epist. 49, de Muiiere Septies icia ; 
 also by St. Ambrose and the Council of Toledo, 
 c. 13. 
 
 So likewise the History of Susannah is cited 
 for holy scripture, by St. Ignatius, Terlullian, 
 St. Cyprian, St. Chrysostom, who in Horn. 7, 
 fine, has a whole sermon on Susaimah, 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 dirine scripture ; St. Cyprian, St. Basil, 
 and St. Athanasius, in Synopsi, briefly explica- 
 ting the argument of the book of Daniel, make 
 express mention of the Hymn of the Three 
 Children, of the History of Susannah, and of 
 Bell and the Dragon. 
 
 OF THE TWO BOOKS OF 
 MACCABEES. 
 
 Ever since the third Council of Carthage, 
 these two books of the Maccabees have been 
 held for sacred and canonical by the Catholic 
 Church, as is proved by a council of seventy 
 bishops, under Pope Gelasius ; and by the 
 sixth general council, in approving the third of 
 Carthago ; as also by the councils of Florence 
 and Trent. 
 
 But because some of. the Church of England 
 divines would seem to make their people believe , 
 that the Maccabees were not received as cano- 
 nical scripture in Gregory the Great's time, . 
 consequently not before, (c) 1 will, besides these 
 councils, refer you to the holy fathers who lived 
 before St. Gregory's days, and alleged these 
 
 (a) S. Hi?r., lib 2, c. 9, aOvers. Ruffin. 
 (h) Vide Dovfay Bible, Tom 2. 
 (c) See the Secimd VindicatioTi of the Exposition of the 
 Doctrine -jftlic Church of England 
 
 two books of the Maccabees as divine sciipture, 
 namely, St. Clement Alexandrinus, lib. i 
 Stromal. ; St. Cyprian, lih. i., Epistolantm 
 Ep. iii. ad Corndmm, lib. iv. ; Ep. i. cl de Ex- 
 hurl, ad Martyrivm, c. xi. St. Isidorus, lib. 
 xvi., c. 1. St. Gregory Nazianzen has also a 
 whole oration coneep-ning the seven Maccabees 
 martyrs, and their mother. St. Ambrose, lib. i., 
 c. 41, OJjic. See in St. Hierom's Commentaries 
 upon Daniel, c. i., 11 and 12, in how great 
 esteem he had these. books, though, because he 
 knew they were not in the Jewish canon, he 
 would not urge them against the Jews. And 
 the great doctor St. Augustine, in lib. ii., c 8, 
 de Doclrina Christiana, el lib. 18, c. 36, dc 
 Civit. Dni, most clearly avouches, that, " Not- 
 withstanding the Jews deny these books, the 
 church holds them canonical." And whereas 
 one Gaudentius, an heretic, alleged, for defence 
 of his heresy, the example of Razias, who slew 
 himself, 2 Mac. xiv., St. Augustine denies not 
 the.authority of the book, but discusses the fact, 
 and admonishes, that it is not unprofitably re- 
 ceived by the church, " if it be read or hoard 
 soberly," which was a necessary admonition to 
 those Donatists, who, not understanding the 
 holy scriptures, depraved them, as St. Petei 
 says of like heretics, to their own perdition. 
 Which te.stimonies, I think, may be suthcienf, to 
 satisfy any one who is not pertinacious and ob- 
 stinate, that these two books of the Maccabees, 
 as well as others in the New Testament, were 
 received, and held for canonical scripture, long 
 before St. Gregory the Great's time. 
 
 Judge now, good reader, whether the author 
 of the second vindication, &c., has not imposed 
 upon the world in this point of the books of the 
 Maccabees. And indeed if this were all the 
 cheat he endeavours to put upon us, it vi ere 
 well, but he goes yet further, and names eleven 
 points of doctrine besides this, which he, with 
 his fellows, quoted in his margin, falsely affirms 
 not to have been taught in England by St. 
 Augustine, the Benedictine monk, when he 
 converted our nation ; telling us, " that the mys- 
 tery of iniquity," as he blasphemously terms the 
 doctrine of Christ's holy church, " was not 
 then come to perfection." For, first, says he. 
 " the scripture was yet received as a perfect 
 rule of faith." Secondly, " the books of the 
 Maccabees, which you now put in your cannon 
 were rejecte(l then as apocryphal." Thirdly 
 " that good works were not yet esteemed meri- 
 torious." Fourthly, " nor auricular confe^sioit 
 a sacrament." Fifthly, " that solitary masses 
 were disallowed by him." And sixthly, " tran. 
 substantiation yet unborn." Seventhly, " that the 
 sacrament of the Eucharist was hitherto admi- 
 nistered in both kinds." What then ? to it waw 
 also in one kind. Eighthly, "purgatory iiself 
 not brought either to certainty or to perfection.' 
 Ninthly, " that by consequence masses for tho 
 dead were not intended to deliver souls from 
 these torments." Tenthly, " nor images allowed 
 for any other purpose than for ornament and 
 instruction." Eleventhly, "that the sacrament 
 of extreme unction was yet unformed." Then 
 
OP BOOKS REJECTED BT PROTESTANTS FOR APOCRTPHAl. 
 
 58 
 
 you must, with your master, Luther, count St. 
 James's Epistle, an epistle of straw. Twclfthly, 
 " inJ even the Pope's supremacy was so far from 
 being then established as it now is, that Pope 
 Gregory thought it to be the forerunner of an- 
 tichrist for one bishop to set himself above all 
 the rest." 
 
 1 will only, in particular, take notice here of 
 this last of his false instances . because he cites 
 and misapplies the words of St. Gregory the 
 Great, to the deluding of his reader : whereas 
 St. Gregory did not think it antichristian of 
 unlawful for the Pope, whom (not himself, but) 
 our Saviour Christ had set and appointed, in 
 the person of St. Peter, above all the "rest, to 
 exercise spiritual supremacy and jurisdiction 
 over all the bishops in the Christian world : but 
 he thought it antichristian for any bishop to set 
 up himself, as John, bishop of Constantinople, 
 had done, by the name or title of universal 
 bishop, so as if he alone were the sole bishop, 
 and no bishop but he, in the universe : and in 
 this sense St. Gregory thought this name or 
 title not only worihil)' forborne by his prede- 
 cessors, and by himself, but terms it profane, 
 sacrilegious, and antichristian ; and in this sense 
 the bishops of Rome have always utterly re- 
 nounced the title of universal bishop ; on the 
 contrary, terming themselves Seroi Servorum 
 Dei. And this is proved from the words of 
 Andraens Friccius, a Protestant, whom Peter 
 Martyr terms an excellent and learned man. 
 "Some there are," says he, " that object to the 
 auihority of Gregory, who says, that such a 
 title pertains to the precursor of antichrist ; but 
 the reason of Gregory is to be known, and may 
 be gathered from his words, which he repeats in 
 many epistles, that the title of universal bishop 
 is contrary to, and dotli gainsay the grace 
 which is commonly poured ujion all bishops ; he 
 therefore, who calls himself the only bishop, 
 takes the episcopal power from the rest ; where- 
 fore this title he would have rejected, &c. But 
 it }s nevertheless evident by other places, that 
 Gregory thought that the charge and principality 
 of the whole church was committed to Peter, 
 &c., and yet for this cause Gregory thought not 
 that Peter was the forerunner of antichrist." 
 (o) Thus ewdently and clearly this Protestant 
 writer explains this difficulty. 
 
 To this may be added the testimonies of other 
 Frptesiants, who, from the writings of St. Gre- 
 gory, clearly prove the bishop qf Rome to have 
 liad and exercised a power and jurisdiction, not 
 only over the Greek, but over the universal 
 church. The Magdeburgian Centurists show 
 us, liiat the Roman see appoints her watch over 
 the whole world ; that the apostolic see is head 
 of all churches ; that even Constantinople is 
 subject to the apostolic see. {b) These Cen- 
 jurists charge moreover the bishop of Rome, 
 in the very example and person of Pope Gre- 
 gory, and by collection out of his writings, by 
 /hem particularly alleged, " that he challenged 
 
 'a) Andracus Friccius. oe Ecclesia. 1 . 3, c. ]0, p. 579. 
 .b) Centiit 6, Col. 425. 42G, 427, 42.'!, 439, 43a 
 
 to himself power to command all archbishops, 
 to ordain and depose bishops at his pleasure." 
 And, " that he claimed a right to ciie archbishops 
 to declare their cause before him, when they 
 were accused." And also, " to excommunicato 
 and depose them, giving commission to their 
 neighbour bishops to proceed against them." 
 That, " in their provinces he placed his legates 
 10 know and end the causes of such as appealed 
 to the see of Rome." (c) 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 
 auihority of God, is preferred before all 
 churches. That all bishops, if any fault bo 
 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 i.s 
 the head of all churches. That the Roman 
 Church, by the words which Christ spake lo 
 Peter, was made the head of all churches. 
 That no scruple or doubt ought to be made ot 
 the faith of the see apostolic. That all those 
 things are false, which are taught contrary to 
 the doctrine of the Roman Church. That to 
 return from schism to the Catholic Church, is to 
 return to the commimioii 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 sec 
 apostolic." [d) 
 
 Considering all these words of Pope Gregory 
 does not this vindicator of the Church of Eng- 
 land's doctrine show himself a grand imposter, 
 to offer to the abused judgment of his unlearned 
 readers, an objection so frivolous and misapplied, 
 by the advantage only of a naked, sounding 
 resemblance of mistaken words ? To conclude, 
 therefore, in the words of Doctor Saunders : 
 " he who reads all these particulars, and more 
 of the same kind that are to be found in the 
 works of St. Gregory, and with a brazen fore- 
 head, fears not to interpret that which he wrote 
 against the name of universal bishop, as if he 
 could not abide that any one bishop should have 
 the chief seat, and supreme government of the 
 whole militant church ; that man, says he, 
 seems to me either to have cast off all under- 
 standing and sense of man, or else to have put 
 on the obstinate perverseness of the devil." (e) 
 
 It is not my business in this place, to digress 
 into particular replies against his other false 
 instances (/) of the difference between the doc- 
 trine of Pope Gregory the Great, and that of 
 the Council of Trent : I will therefore, iti ge- 
 neral, oppose the words of a Protestant bishop 
 against this Protestant ministerial guide, and so 
 submit them lo the consideration of the judicious 
 reader. 
 
 («) Vid. praeced, Notas. 
 
 (d) Dr. Saund. Visit. Monar., lib. 7, a N. 433, 541. 
 
 (e) Dr. Saunders supra. 
 
 (/) You will find some of them hinted at in uthei 
 places as occasion ofiers. 
 
OF BOOKS REJECTED BY PROTESTANTS FOR APpCRyPH^It. 
 
 3*? 
 
 John Balo, a Prptes„tant bishop, affirms, (a) 
 that " the religion preached by St. Augustine to 
 the Saxons was, altars, vestments, images, 
 chalices, crosses, censors, holy vessels, holy 
 waters, the sprinkling thereof, relics, translation 
 of relics, dedicating of churches to the bones 
 and ashes of saints, consecration of altars, cha- 
 lices and corporals, consecration of the font of 
 baptism, chrism and oil, celebration of mass, 
 the archiepiscopal pall at solemn mass time, 
 Romish mass books ; also free will, merit, justi- 
 fication of works, penance, satisfaction, purga- 
 tory, the unmarried life of priests, the public 
 invocation of saints and their worship, the 
 worship of images." (A) In another place, he 
 say^, ihat " Pope Leo the first decreed, that men 
 should worship the images of the dead, and al- 
 lowed the sacrifice of the mass, exorcism, par- 
 dons, vows, monachism, transubstantiation, 
 prayer for the dead, offering the healthful host of 
 Christ's body and blood for the dead, the Roman 
 bishop's claim and exercise of jurisdiction and 
 supremacy over all churches, reliqimm pnnti- 
 ficiiB superstitionis chaos, even the wlioie chaos 
 of Popish superstitions." He tells us, that 
 " Pope Innocent, who lived long before St. 
 Gregory's time, made the anointing of the sick 
 to he a sacrament." (c) 
 
 These are Bishop Bale's words ; which this 
 vindicator would do well to reconcile with his 
 own. The like may be found in other Protes- 
 tants ; namely, in Doctor Humphrey, in Jesui- 
 titrni, part ii., the Centurists, &c. 
 
 But now to return to the place where we oc- 
 casionally entered into this digression : you see 
 by what authority and testimonies both of 
 councils and fathers we have proved these 
 books, which Protestants reject, to be canonical : 
 yet, if a thousand times more were said, it would 
 be all the same with the perverse innovators of 
 our age, who are resolved to be obstinate, and, 
 after their bold and licentious manner, to receive 
 or reject what they please ; still following the 
 steps of their first masters, who tore out of the 
 Bible, some one book, some another, as they 
 found them contrary to their erroneous and he- 
 retical opinions. For example : 
 
 Whereas Moses was the first that ever wrote 
 any part of the scripture, and he who wrote the 
 law of God, the ten commandments ; yet Luther 
 thus rejects both him and his ten command- 
 ments : (rf) " We will neither hear nor see 
 Moses, for he was given only to the Jews ; nei- 
 ther does he belong in any thing to us." " I," 
 says he, " will not receive (f) Moses with his 
 law ; for he is the enemy of Christ." ( /) " Mo- 
 ses isWie master of all hangmen." {,;?) "The ten 
 comman'dments belong not to Christians." " Let 
 the ten commandments be altogether rejetted, 
 
 a) Bale in Act. Rom. Pontif,. Edit. Basil., 1G58, p. 
 J 1, 45, 46, 47, et Cent, I , Col.__3. 
 
 (i) Pageant of Popes, fol. 27. 
 
 (c) Pageant of the Popes, fol. 66. 
 
 (rf) Tom. 3, Geirn., fol.40, 41, and in Colloq. Mensal., 
 Ger., fol, 152, 153. 
 
 (e) In Coloc, Mensal., c de Legs et Evaa. 
 
 (/) Ibid., fol 118. 
 
 ( tt) Scrtn. do Mose. 
 
 and all heresy will presently cease ; for the ten 
 commandments are, as it were, the fountain liom 
 wheTice all heresies spring." (n) 
 
 Islebius, Luther's scholar, taught, (?) that 
 "the decalogue was not to be taught in the 
 church :" and from this came (k) the sect oi 
 Antinomians, who publicly taught, that " the 
 law of God is not worthy to be called the word 
 of God: if thou an an whore, if an whore- 
 monger, if an adulterer, or otherwise a sinner, 
 believe, and thou walkest in the way of salva- 
 tion. When thou art drowned in sin even te 
 the bottom, if thou believcst, thou art in thfl 
 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 Ijook of Job • 
 with him it is, " as it were, the argument of a 
 fable." (w) 
 
 Castalio commanded the canticles of Solomon 
 to be thrust out of the canon, as an impure and 
 obscene song ; reviling with bitter reproaches, 
 such ministers, as resisted him therein, (n) 
 
 Pomeran, a great evangelist among the Luther- 
 ans, writes fnus touchitig St. James's Epistle : 
 " He concludes ridiculously, he cites scripture 
 against scripture, which thing the Holy Ghost 
 cannot abide : wherefore that epistle may not bo 
 numbered among other books, which set forth tho 
 justice of faith." (o) 
 
 Vitus Theodorus, a Protestant preacher, of 
 Nuremberg, writes thus : "The Epistle of Jamea 
 and Apocalypse of John, we have of set purpose 
 left out, because tho Epistle of James is not only 
 in certain places reprovable. where he too much 
 advances works against faith ; but also his doc- 
 tdne throughout is patched together with divers 
 pieces, whereof no one agrees w'ith another.''(p) 
 
 The Magdeburgian Centurists say, thai " the 
 Epistlejof James much swerves from the analogy 
 of the apostolical doctrine, whereas it ascril>es 
 justification hot only to faith, but to works, and 
 calls the law, a law of liberty." (q) 
 
 John Calvin doubted whether t-he apostles 
 creed was made by the apostles. He argued St, 
 Matthew of error. He rejected these words : 
 " many are called, but few are chosen." (r) 
 
 Clemitius, an eminent Protestant, opposes the 
 evangelists one against another : " Matthew and 
 Mark," says, he, " deliver the contrary ; the^e^ 
 fore to MaVthevv and Mark, being two witnesses, 
 more credit is to be given than to one Luke," 
 &c. (*) 
 
 (h) In Convival. Colloq. cited by Auri faber, cap. de 
 Lege. 
 
 (i) See Osiander, Cent. Ifi, p. 311, 310, 320. 
 
 (k) S'eidan, Hist , 1, 12, fol. 162. 
 
 (I) VId, Confessio. Mansfieldensium Ministrorum 
 Tit. de Antinomisj fol, 89, 00. 
 
 (rti.) In Serm. Convival. Tit. de Patriarch, et Prophet. 
 et Tit, de libi:is. Vet, et. Nov. Test, 
 
 (n) Vid, Beza in Vita Calvini. 
 
 (o) Pomeran. ad Rom , c. ft. 
 
 (p) In Aniiot, in Nov. Test , pag ult ■ 
 
 ia) Cent. I,, 1,2, c. 4, Col. 54. 
 
 (r) Inst, I, 2, c. 16. In Matt 27, Harm, in Matt. 20,IG 
 
 (s) Victoria Veritatis et Ruina Panatus, Aie. S. 
 
38 
 
 OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS CALL APOCRYPHA. 
 
 Zuinglius and other Protestants affirm, that 
 " all things in St. Paul's Epistles are not sacred ; 
 and that in sundry things he erred." (o) 
 
 Mr. Rogers, the great labourer to our English 
 convocation men, names several of his Protestant 
 brethren, who rejected for apocryphal the Epis- 
 tle of Paul to the Hebrews, of St. James, the 
 first and second of John, of Jude, and the Apoc- 
 alypse." (A) 
 
 Thus, you see, these pretended reformers 
 have torn out, some one piece or book of sacred 
 scripture, some another ; with such a licentious 
 freedom, rejscting, deriding, discarding, and 
 censuring them, that their impiety can never be 
 paralleled but by professed Atheists. Yet all 
 these sacred books were, as is said, received for 
 canonical in the third Council of Carthage, above 
 thirteen hundred years ago. 
 
 But, with the Church of England, it matters 
 not by whatauthority 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 ihey 
 thought good for canonical, and rejected the 
 rest ; as you may see in the sixth of the Ihirty- 
 nine Articles, (c) 
 
 OF SUCH BOOKS AS PROTESTANTS 
 CALL APOCRYPHA. 
 
 The Church of England has decreed, (il) that 
 ' such are to be understood canonical books of 
 the Old and New Testament, of whose authority 
 there was never any doubt in the church :" and 
 therefore, by this rule she rejects these for apoc- 
 ryphal, viz., 
 
 Tobit. 
 
 Judith. 
 
 The rest of Esther. 
 
 Wisdom. 
 
 Ecclesiasticus. 
 
 Baruch, with the Epistle of Jferemiah. 
 
 7 he Song of the Three Children. 
 
 The Idol, Bell, and the Dragon. 
 
 The Story of Susannah. 
 
 Maccabees I. 
 
 Maccabees IL 
 
 .Mancsseth, Prayer of. 
 
 Esdras IIL 
 
 Esdras IV. (e) 
 
 [a) Tom 2, Elench , f. 10. Magdeburg. Cent 1, 1. 
 , c. 10. Col. .580 
 
 (A) Defence of the 39 Articles, Art. 6. 
 
 (c) The private spirit, not the church, told those Pro- 
 cstants who made the 39 Articles, what hooks of scrip- 
 ture thny were to hold for canonical. 
 
 {d) In the 6th of the 39 Articles. 
 
 v'e) The three last are not numbered in the canun of 
 the scripture 
 
 But if none inust pass for canonical, but such as 
 were never doubted of ii^ the church, I would 
 know why the Church of England admits of 
 such books of the New Testament as have for- 
 merly been doubted of? " Some ancient writers 
 doubted of the last chapter of St. Mark's Gos- 
 pel : (/ ) others of some part of the 22nd of St. 
 Luke ; (o-) some of the beginning of the 8th oi 
 St. John ; (h) others of the Epistle to the He- 
 brews ; {{) and others of the Epistles of St. 
 James, Jude, the second of Peter, the second 
 and third of John, and the Apocalypse." (A) 
 
 And Doctor Bilson, a Protestant, affirms, that 
 " the scriptures were not fully received in all 
 places, no, not in Eusebius's time." He says, 
 " the Epistles of James, Jude, the second of 
 Peter, the second and third of John, are contra- 
 dicted, as not written by the apostles. The 
 epistle to the Hebrews was for a while contra- 
 dicted," &c. The churches of Syria did not re- 
 ceive the second Epistle of Peter, nor the second 
 and third of John, nor the Epistle of Jude, not 
 the Apocalypse. The like might be said for the 
 churches of Arabia : will you hence conclude, 
 says this doctor, that these parts of scripture 
 were not apostolic, or that we need not receive 
 them now, because they were formerly doubted 
 of? Thus Doctor Bilson. (/) 
 
 And Mr.^Rogers confesses, that "although 
 some of the ancient fathers and doctors accepted 
 not all the books contained in the New Testa- 
 ment for canonical ; yet in the end, they were 
 wholly taken and received by the common con- 
 sent of the Church of Christ, in this world, for 
 the very Word of God," &c. (m) 
 
 And, by Mr. Rogers and the Church of Etig. 
 land's leave, so were also those books which they 
 call Apocrypha. For though they were, as we 
 do not deny, doubted of by some of the ancient 
 fathers, and not accepted for canonical : " yet 
 ill the end," to use Mff. Rogers' words, they 
 were wholly taken and received by the common 
 consent of the Church of Christ, in this world, 
 for the very Word of God."(n) "Vide third Coun- 
 cil of Carthage, which decrees, " that nothing 
 should be read in the church, under the name o( 
 divine scriptures, besides canonical scriptures :" 
 and defining which are canonical, reckons those 
 which the Church of England rejects as apocry- 
 phal." To this council St. Augustine subscribed, 
 who, (o) with St. Innocent, {p) Gelasius, and 
 other ancient writers, number the said books m 
 the canon of the scripture. And Protestants 
 themselves confess, they were received in the 
 number of canonical scriptures, (q.) 
 
 (/) See St. Hierom. epist. ad Hed. q. 3 • 
 
 (,?) S. Hilar. 1 10, de Trin., et Hierom, 1 2, oontr. 
 Pelagian. 
 
 (A) Euseb. H., 1. 3, c. 39. 
 
 (i) Id, I. 3, c. 3. 
 
 (i) Et, c. 95, 28. Hierom Divinis Illust,, in P Jac 
 Jud. Pet. et Juan., et Ep. ad Dardan. 
 
 (l) Survey of Christ. Suff, p. ()fi4. Vid. 1st and 4tJ 
 day's Confer, in the Tower, anno 1581. 
 
 (m) Def. of the 39 Articles, p. 31, Art. 6. 
 
 in) Third Council of Carthage, Can. 47. 
 
 (n) De Doct. Christian., 1. 2, c.8. 
 
 (p) Epist. ad Exuper., c. 7. 
 
 (q) Tom. 1, Cone Decret. fiirn 70 Eprscop. 
 
or anCB books as rROTESTANTS OAU. APOOBTrBA. 
 
 89 
 
 ,, Brentius, a Protestant, says, " there are some 
 of the ancient fathers, who receive these apoc- 
 ryphal books into the number of canonical 
 sci'iptnres ; njid also some councils command 
 them to be acknowledged as canonical."(a) 
 
 Uoctor Covel also affirms of ail these books, 
 that, " if Ruifinus be not deceived, they were 
 approved of, as parts of tlie Old Testament, by 
 tiie !ipostles."(6) 
 
 Csi) tiial vviiat Clu'ist's Church receives as 
 canonical, we are not to doubt of : Doctor Fulk 
 avouches, that " the Church of Christ has judg- 
 
 (a) Brentius Apol. Conf. Wit. Bucer's scripta. Ang., 
 p. 713. 
 
 (b) Corel oont. Bnig., pp. 76, 77, 78. 
 
 ment to discern trne writing flrom connterfeit, 
 and the Word of God from the writings of men ; 
 and this judgment she has of the Holy Ghost." 
 (e) And Jewel says, " the Church of God haj 
 the Spirit of wisdom to discern true scripture 
 from false."(<i) 
 
 To conclude, therefore, in the words of the 
 Council of Trent : " If any man shall not receive 
 for sacred and canonical tliese whole books, with 
 all their parts, as they mo read in tlie Catholic 
 Church, and as they are in the Vulgate Latin 
 edition, let him be accursed."(e) 
 
 (c) Fulk An. to a Countr. Cathol., p. 6. 
 
 id) Jewel Def. of the Apol., p. 201. 
 
 (e) Condi. Trid., Sew. 4» Seer, de Can. Srcip^ 
 
40 
 
 I. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AQAINST 
 
 The Book, 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 «nil Verse. 
 
 St. Matlh. 
 chap. xvi. 
 »erso 18. 
 
 St. Matth. 
 chap, xviii. 
 verse 17. 
 
 Ephesians 
 chup. V. 
 verses 23, 
 24, 2a, 27, 
 29. 32. 
 
 Hebrews 
 chap. ii. 
 verse 23. 
 
 Canticles 
 chap. vi. 
 terse 8 
 
 Ephesians 
 chap. i. 
 verses 22, 
 23 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 Et ego dico tibi, 
 quia tu es Pctrus, 
 et super hone Pei- 
 ram tedificabo " ec- 
 clesiam meam," fa 
 li^y HxXriaiat. (1) 
 
 Quod xi nun au- 
 dierit eos, die " Ec- 
 clesim," ixulrjola- si 
 all tern " ecclcsiam,'' 
 ixxXrjotiis, nor. audte- 
 rif, sil tibi sicut eth- 
 nicus et publicanUs. 
 
 Viri, diligite usores 
 veslras, stout el 
 Chrislus dilexit " ec- 
 clesiam." 
 
 Ut exhiberet ipsi 
 sibi gloriosam " ec- 
 ctesiam." 
 
 " Sacramenlum " 
 hoc est magnum ; 
 ego aulem dico in 
 Christo et "ecclesia" 
 iKxiijotaif, 
 
 Et ecclesiam pri- 
 mitivorum, ixxl^ala. 
 
 Una est columba 
 mea. nriK ftta. (2) 
 
 Et ipsum dedit 
 caput supra omnem 
 " ecclesiam," quce est 
 corpus ipsius, et 
 plenitudo ejus, qui 
 omnia in omnibus 
 " adimplelur, " r5 ! 
 
 TtXijIjUflil'S. (3) 
 
 The true English accord- 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 Translation. 
 
 And I say to 
 thee, that thou art 
 Peter, and upon this 
 Rociv will I build 
 my " church." 
 
 And if he will 
 not hear them, tell 
 the " church ;" and 
 if he will not hear 
 the " church," let 
 him be as an hea- 
 then, and as a pub- 
 lican. 
 
 Husbands, love 
 your wives,as Christ 
 loved the " church," 
 verse 25. 
 
 That he might 
 present to himself a 
 glorious " church," 
 verse 27. 
 
 For this is a 
 great " sacrament ;" 
 but 1 speak in Christ, 
 and in the "church," 
 ver. 32, &c. 
 
 And the " church" 
 of the first-born. 
 
 My dove is " one." 
 
 And hath made 
 him head over all 
 the "church," which 
 is his body, the ful- 
 ness of him " which 
 is filled," all in all. 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 testant Ijlhles, printed 
 A. D. 1502, 1577, 1579. 
 
 Instead of church 
 they translate " con- 
 gregation." Upon 
 this Rock will I build 
 my " congregation." 
 
 (1) 
 
 If he will not hear 
 them, tell the '• con- 
 gregation ;" and if 
 he will not hear the 
 "congregatiou," &,c. 
 
 The last Tinnslation oi 
 
 the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
 
 L(in., an. 1683. 
 
 Husbands, love 
 your wives,as Christ 
 loved the " congre- 
 gation." 
 
 That he might 
 present to himself 
 a glorious " congre- 
 gation." 
 
 For this is a great 
 "secret," for I speak 
 in Christ, and in the 
 " congregation." 
 
 And the' "con- 
 gregation" of the 
 
 first-born. 
 
 My dove is "alone." 
 (2) 
 
 And gave him to 
 be the head over all 
 things to the " con- 
 gregation," which is 
 his body, the fulness 
 of him " that filleth" 
 all in all. (3) 
 
 It is corrected in 
 this last translatitm 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 Corrected, 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 My dove i& •• but 
 one." 
 
 And gave him Ic 
 be the head ovei 
 all things to the 
 " church." which i.s 
 his body, the fulnesa 
 of hint " that filleth" 
 all iu all. 
 
THE CHURCH. 
 
 41 
 
 The two English Bibles, (a) usually read in 
 the Protestant congregations at their first rising 
 up, left out the word Catholic in the title of 
 'hose epistles which ha^e been known by the 
 name of Catholicm EpistoltB, ever since the 
 ajjostles' time : (A) and their latter translations, 
 dealing somewhat more honestly, have turned 
 the word Catholic into ■' General," " the General 
 lipistle of James, of Peter," &c. as if we should 
 say in ourcreed,"we believe the general church." 
 So that by this rule, when St. Augustine says, 
 that the manner was in cities, where there "was 
 liberty of religion, to ask, gna ilur ad Catholicum ? 
 we must translate it, which is the way to the 
 general? And when St. Hierom says, if we agree 
 in faith with the bishop of Rome, ergo Catholici 
 sumiis; we must translate, " then we are gene- 
 rals." Is not this good stuff ? 
 
 (1) An'd as they suppress the name Catholic, 
 even so did they, in their first English Bible, 
 the name of church itself :(';) because at their 
 first revolt and apostacy from that church, 
 which was universally known to be the only true 
 Catholic Church, it was a great objection 
 against their schismatical proceedings, and 
 stuck so much in the people's consciences, that 
 they left and forsook the church, and the church 
 condemned them : to obviate which, in the 
 English translation of 1563, they so totally sup- 
 pressed the word church, that it is not once to 
 be found in all that Bible, so long read in their 
 congregations : because, knowing themselves not 
 to be the church, ihey were resolved not to 
 leave God Almighty any church at all, where 
 they could possibly root it out, viz., in the Bible. 
 And it is probable, if it had been as easy for 
 them to have eradicated the church from the 
 earth, as it was to blot the word out of their 
 Bible, they would have prevented its "continuing 
 to the end of the world." ' 
 
 Another cause for their suppressing the name 
 church was, " that it should never sound in the 
 common people's ears out of the scriptures," and 
 that it might seem to the ignorant a good argu- 
 ment against the authority of the church, to say, 
 " we find not this word church in ail the Bible :" 
 as in other articles, where they find not the 
 express words in the scripture. 
 
 Our blessed Saviour says : " Upon this rock I 
 will build my church ;" but they make him say, 
 " Upon this rock I will build my congregation." 
 They make the Apostle Si;. Paul say to Tirjiothy, | 
 1 Ep. c. iii. " The house of God, which is the 
 congregation," not " the church of the living 
 Gcd, the pillar and ground of truth." Thus 
 they thrust out God's glorious, unspotted, and 
 
 (a) Bib. 1562, 1677. 
 
 (A) Euseb., Hist. Ecclej., lib. 2, c. 23, in fine. 
 
 (e) Bible, printed anno 1562 
 
 most beautiful spouse, the church ; and in plac« 
 of it, intrude their own little, wrinkled, and 
 spotted congregation. So they boldly make the 
 apostle say: " He hath made him head of the con- 
 gregation, which is the body :" and in anothei 
 place, " The congregation of the first-born :" 
 where the apostle mentions heavenly Jerusalem, 
 the city of the living God, &c.; so that by tliis 
 translation there is no longer any church mili- 
 tant and triumphant, but only congregation ; in 
 which they contradict St. Augustine, who 
 afliirms, that " though the Jewish congregation 
 was sometimes called a church, yet the apostles 
 never called the church a congregation." But 
 their last translation having restored the word 
 church, I shall say no more of it in this place. 
 
 (2) Again, the true church is known by unity, 
 which mark is given her by Christ himself; in 
 whose person Solomon speaking, says : "Una est 
 cnlumba mea ;" that is, " one is my dove," or 
 " my dove is one." Instead of this, they, bejng 
 themselves full of sects and divisions, will have 
 it, " my dove is alone ;" though neither the He- 
 brew nor Greek word hath that signification ; 
 but, on the contrary, as properly signifies one, as 
 vnus doth in Latin. But this is also amended 
 in their last translation. 
 
 (.3) Nor was it enough for them to corrupt the 
 scripture against the church's unity ; for there 
 was a time when their congregation was invisi- 
 ble ; that is to say, when " they were not at all :" 
 and therefore, because they will have it, that 
 Christ may be without his church, to wit, a head 
 without a body, (<■/) ihey falsify this place in the 
 Epistle to the Eph., xi. 21, 23, translating, 
 " he gave him to be the head over all things to 
 the church," congregation with them, " which 
 (church) is his body, the fulness of him that 
 fiileth all in all." Here they translate actively 
 the Greek word tb TtXrjouuFvu, when, according to 
 St. Chrysostom, and all the Greek and Latin 
 doctors' interpretation, it ought to be translated 
 passively ; so that instead of saying, " and fiileth 
 all in all," they should say, " the fulness of him 
 which is filled all in all ;" all faithful men as 
 members, and the whole church as the body 
 concurring to the fulness of Christ the head. 
 But thus they will not translate, " because," says 
 Beza, " Christ needs no such compliment." And 
 if he need it not, then he may be without a 
 church ; and consequently, it is no absurdity, if 
 the church has been for many years not only 
 invisible, but also, " not at all." Would a man 
 easily imagine that such secret poison could lurk 
 in their translations ? Thus they deal with the 
 church ; let us now see how they use particular 
 points of doctrine. 
 
 (d) Protestants will have Christ to be a head without 
 a body, during all that time that their congregation waf 
 invisible, viz., about 1500 Years. 
 
42 
 
 II. PROTESTANT TRA.NSLATR KS AQAINST 
 
 The Book, 
 
 • 
 
 The true English accord- 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 
 The last Translation ii 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 
 testant Bibles, printed 
 
 the Protestant Bible.Ed 
 
 and Verse 
 
 
 Translation. 
 
 A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 Lon., an. 1683. 
 
 St. Matth. 
 
 ^ccepit Jesus pa- 
 
 Jesus took bread 
 
 Instead of " bless- 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 chap. xxvi. 
 
 rtem et " benedixit," 
 
 and " blessed," and 
 
 ed." they translate, 
 
 
 \iiie 26. 
 
 xai iuloy^aai, acfre- 
 
 brake, and gave to 
 
 " and when he had 
 
 
 
 git, dedilque, <Sfc. (1) 
 
 his disciples. 
 
 given thanks." (1) 
 
 
 St. Mark 
 
 Accepit Jesus pa- 
 
 Jesus took bread. 
 
 Instead of" bless- 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 chap. xiv. 
 
 nem et "benedicens," 
 
 and "blessing," &c. 
 
 ing," they say, "and 
 
 
 verse 22. 
 
 not MoYT^aag,dfC.{2) 
 
 
 when he had given 
 
 
 « 
 
 
 
 thanks." (2) 
 
 
 Acts 01 
 
 Quern oportet qui- 
 
 Whom heaven tru- 
 
 Instead of "receive," 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 ihe Apos. 
 
 dem cmlum " susci- 
 
 ly must " receive," 
 
 they say, whom hea- 
 
 
 chap. iii. 
 
 pcre" usque «n tem- 
 
 until the times of 
 
 ven must " contain." 
 
 
 verse 21. 
 
 pora reslitulionis 
 
 the restitution of all 
 
 And Beza, " who 
 
 
 
 omnium, 6v SsX &q6i. 
 
 things. 
 
 must be contained 
 
 
 
 vov diSaaOai. (3) 
 
 
 in heaven." (3) 
 
 
 leremiah 
 
 Mittamus lignum 
 
 Let us cast wood 
 
 " We will destroy 
 
 Let us destroy ttie 
 
 chap. xi. 
 
 Ml panem ejus. (4) 
 
 upon his bread. 
 
 his meat with wood." 
 
 tree with the fruit 
 
 yerse 19. 
 
 
 
 In anodier Bible, 
 " Let us destroy the 
 tree with the fruit." 
 (4) 
 
 thereof. 
 
 Genesis 
 
 At vera Melchize- 
 
 And Melchizedek, 
 
 Instead of " for 
 
 Instead of "for," 
 
 chap. xiv. 
 
 dck, sex Salem, pro- 
 
 king of Salem, 
 
 he was the priest," 
 
 they translate "and." 
 
 verse 18. 
 
 ferens panem et vi- 
 
 brought forth bread 
 
 they trarslate, " and 
 
 
 
 num, " efat enim 
 
 and wine ; " for he 
 
 ho was the priest," 
 
 _ 
 
 
 sacerdos Dei AUis- 
 
 was the priest of 
 
 &c. (5) 
 
 . ■ 
 
 
 stmt. ' (5) 
 
 God most high." 
 
 , 
 
 
TUB BLESSED SACRAMENT AND SACRIFICE OF THE MASS. 
 
 (1) The turning of blessings into bare thanks- 
 giving, was one of the first steps of our pre- 
 tended reformers, towards denying the real pre- 
 sence. By endeavouringloiakeawaytheoperation 
 andefilcacy ofChrist's blessing, pror.ounced upon 
 the bread and wine, they would make it no more 
 than a thanksgiving to God : and that, not only 
 in translating thanksgiving for blessing, but also 
 in urging the word eucharist, to prove it a niero 
 thanksgiving; though we find the verb tu/ugigeiv 
 used also transitively by the Greek fathers, 
 saying, lof aoiov ivxcgii^riOepia, panem, etchali- 
 cein eucharistisatos ; or, panem, in quo gratiae actas 
 sunt ; that is, " the bread and cup made the 
 eucharist ;" " the bread, over which thanks are 
 given ;" that is, " which, by the word of prayer 
 and thanksgiving is made a consecrated meat, 
 the flesh and blood of Christ." (a) St. Paul 
 also, speaking of this sacrament, calls it, ( 1 Cor. 
 x.)"the chalice of benediction, which we do 
 bless ;" which St. Cyprian thus explicates, " the 
 chalice consecrated by solemn blessing." St. 
 Basil and St. Chrysoslom, in their liturgies, say 
 thus, " Bless, O Lord, the sacred bread ;" and 
 "bless, O Lord, the sacred cup, changing it by 
 ihy Holy Spirit :" where are signified the consiB- 
 cration and transmutation thereof into the body 
 and blood of Christ. 
 
 (2) And, by this corrupt translation, they 
 would have Christ so included in heaven, that 
 he cannot be with us upon the altar. But Beza 
 confesses, " that he translates it thus, on pur- 
 pose to keep Christ's presence from the altar ;" 
 which is so far from the Greek, that not only lUy- 
 ricus, but even Calvin himself, dislikes it. And 
 you may easily judge, how contrary to St. Chry- 
 sostom it is, who tells us, " that Christ ascending 
 into heaven, both left us his flesh, and yet ascend- 
 ing hath the same." And again, " O miracle !" 
 says he, " he that sits above v/ith the Father in the 
 same moment of time is handled with the hands 
 of all." (4) This, you see, is the faith and 
 doctrine of the ancient fathers ; and it is the 
 faith of the Catholic Church at this day. Who 
 sees not, that this faith, thus to believe the pre- 
 sence of Christ is in both places at once, because 
 he is omnipotent, is far greater than the Pro- 
 testant faith, which believes no farther than that 
 he is ascended ; and that therefore he cannot 
 be present upon the altar, nor dispose of his 
 body as he pleases 1 If we should ask them, 
 whether he was also in heaven, when he appeared 
 to Saul going to Damascus .; or whether he can 
 be both in heaven, and with his church on earth, 
 to the end of the world, as he promised ; per- 
 haps, by this doctrine of theirs, they would be 
 put to a stand. (3) 
 
 Consider further, how plain oiir Saviour's 
 words, '■ this is my body," are for the real pre- 
 
 (o) St. Justin in fine, 2 Apolog , St. Irenaeus, lib. 4, 34. 
 (i) Horn. 2, ad popiii Aiitioch., lib. 3, de Sacerdotio. 
 
 sence of his body : and for the real presence o( 
 his blood in the chalice, what can be more 
 plainly spoken, than " this is the chalice, the 
 New Testament in my blood, which chalice is 
 shed for j'ou" (c) According to the Greek, tc 
 ■noxij^ion TO Bx/ijt'Ofie>or,\he word " which" musl 
 needs be referred to the chalice : in which 
 speech chalice cannot otherwise be taken, than 
 for that in the chalice ; which sure, must needs 
 be the blood of Christ, and not wine, because his 
 blood only was shed for us ; according to St. 
 Chrysostom, who says : " That which is in the 
 chalice is the same which gushed out of hia 
 side." (J) And this deduction so troubled Beza 
 that he exclaims against all the Greek copies in 
 the world, as corrupted in this place 
 
 (4) " Let us cast wood upon his bread ;" 
 " that is," saith St. Hierom, (e) " the cross upon 
 the body of our Saviour ; for it is he that said 
 I am the bread that descended from heaven." 
 Where the prophet so long before^ saying bread 
 and meaning his body, alludes prophetically to 
 his body in the blessed sacrament, made of 
 bread, and under the form of bread ; and there- 
 fore also called bread by the apostle, (I Cor. x.) 
 so that both in the prophet and the apostle, his 
 bread and his body is all one. And lest we 
 should think the bread only signifies his body 
 he says, " Let us put the cross upon his bread ;' 
 that is, upon his very natural body that hung on 
 the cross. It is evident, that the Hebrew verb 
 is not now the same with that which the seventy 
 interpreters translated into Greek, and St. 
 Hierom into Latin ; but altered, as may be sup- 
 posed, by the Jews, to obscure this prophecy ol 
 their crucifying Christ upon the cross. And 
 though Protestants will needs take the advan- 
 tage of this corruption, yet so little does the 
 Hebrew word, that now is, agree with the words 
 following, that they cannot so translate it, as to 
 make any commodious sense or understanding 
 of it ; as appears by their different translations 
 and their transposing their words in English 
 otherwise than they are in the Hebrew. (/) 
 
 (5) If Protestants should grant Melchize. 
 dek's typical sacrifice of bread and wine, then 
 would follow also, a sacrifice of the New Tes- 
 tament ; which, to avoid, they purposely translate 
 " and" in this place ; when, in other places, th" 
 same Hebrew particle vau, they translate enjm, 
 for ; not being ignorant, that it is in those, as ip 
 this place, better expressed by " for" or " because, '' 
 than by " and." See the exposition of the fathers 
 upon it. (g) 
 
 (c) Luke itrii. v. 20. 
 
 (d) St. Chrysost. in 1 Cor., cap. x., Horn. 24. 
 
 (ej St. Hierom. in com. in cap. xi. vers 19, Hierom 
 Prophetae. 
 
 (/) Genes, xx. 3 ; Gen. xxs- 27 ; Isaiah Ixiv. 5. 
 
 {^1 St. Cypr., Epist. fi3, Epiphan. HaBr. 55et79. St 
 Hieiotn. in Matth. xxvi., ct in Epist. ad Evaj;riuin- 
 
44 
 
 111, PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 
 
 The Book, 
 
 Chnpler, 
 
 and Verse. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 The true English accord- 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 Translation. 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 testant' Bthtes, printed 
 A. D. 15G2, 1577, 1579. 
 
 The last Translation o» 
 
 thePiotcstant Bible, Ed. 
 
 Lon., »n. I6tl3, 
 
 Proverbs 
 chap. ix. 
 verse 5. 
 
 Proverbs 
 chap. ix. 
 terse 1. 
 
 1 Coiinth. 
 thap. xi. 
 verse 27. 
 
 1 Corinth, 
 chap, ix, 
 verse 13. 
 
 1 Corinth, 
 chap. X. 
 verse 18. 
 
 Daniel 
 :hap. xiv. 
 verse 12. 
 
 Et verse 17 
 
 Etctiam 
 verse 20. 
 
 Venite comeditepa- 
 nem meum, et bihite 
 vinurn quod "miscui" 
 vobis, x.sxi(iaxa, ~oa. 
 
 (I) 
 
 Immolavit victimas 
 suas, misciiit vinurn, 
 BXBQaaey. (2) 
 
 Itnque quicunque 
 maiiducaverit pancm 
 hunc, vel, >/» biberil 
 ciilicem domini in- 
 dignc, (Sfc. (3) 
 
 Et qui aliari de- 
 serviunt cum aliari 
 parlicipanC, Ouaiuqr/- 
 
 Nonne qui edunt 
 hostids participes, 
 sunt altaris? dvai- 
 ui^rjqia. (5) 
 
 Quiafecerant sub- 
 mensa abscondiium 
 iniroitum, Tgans^a. 
 (6) 
 
 Intuitus rex men- 
 sam. 
 
 Et consumelant 
 qum erant super men- 
 sam. 
 
 Come, eat my 
 bread, and drink 
 the wine which I 
 have " mingled" for 
 you. 
 
 She hath immola- 
 ted her hosts, she 
 hath " mingled" her 
 wine. 
 
 Therefore, whoso- 
 ever shall eat this 
 bread, " or" drink 
 the chalice of our 
 Lord unworthily, 
 &c. 
 
 And they that serve 
 the " altar," partici- 
 pate with the"altar." 
 
 Those that eat the 
 hosts, are they not 
 partakers of the 
 " altar ?" 
 
 For they had made 
 a privy entrance un- 
 der the " table." 
 
 The king behold- 
 ing the " table." 
 
 And they did con- 
 sume the things 
 ■which were upon 
 the " table." 
 
 The corruption is, 
 drink the wiiiewhich 
 I have " drawn ;" 
 instead of " rain- 
 gled."(l) 
 
 She hath "drawn' 
 her wine. (2) 
 
 Instead of " al- 
 tar," they translafe 
 " temple." (4) 
 
 Partakers of the 
 " temple. (5) 
 
 For, " under the 
 table," they say, un- 
 der the " altar," (6) 
 
 The king behold- 
 ing the " altar." 
 
 Which was upon 
 the " ahar." 
 
 Come, eat of my 
 bread, and 'drink of 
 the wine which ^ 
 have " mingled." 
 
 She hath killed 
 her beasts, she hath 
 mingled her wine 
 
 Wherefore, who- 
 soever shall eutthia 
 bread, " and" drink 
 this cup of the Lord 
 unworthily, &,c. 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 The two last chap* 
 ters they call Apo. 
 crypha. 
 
THE BLESSED SACRAMENT AND THE ALTAR. 
 
 4S 
 
 ' (1 2) These prophetical words of Solomon 
 are of great importance, as being a manifest 
 prophecy of Christ's mingling water and wine 
 in the chalice at his last supper ; which at this 
 day, the Catholic Church observes : but Pro- 
 testants, counting it an idle ceremony, frame 
 tlieir translation accordingly ; suppressing alto- 
 gether this mixture or mingling, contrary to the 
 true interpretation both of the Greek and He- 
 brew ; as also, contrary to the ancient fathers' 
 exposition of this place. " The Holy Ghost 
 (says St. Cyprian) by Solomon, foreshoweth a 
 type of our Lord's sacrifice, of the immolated 
 host of bread and wine ; saying. Wisdom hath 
 killed her hosts, she hath mingled her wine into 
 ihe cup ; come ye, eiit my bread, and drink the 
 >vine that I have mingled for you." (a) Speak- 
 ing of wine mingled (saith this holy doctor) he 
 foreshoweth prophetically, the cup of our Lord 
 mingled with water and wine, (b) St. Justin, 
 frotn the same Greek word, calls it, xqafia ; that 
 is, (according to Plutarch) wine mingled with 
 water : so likewise does St. Irenaeus. (c) Sec 
 also the sixth general council, {d) treating largely 
 hereof, and deducing it from the apostles and 
 ancient fathers ; and interpreting this Greek 
 word by another equivalent, and more plainly 
 signifying this mixture, viz., fttywai. 
 
 (3) In this place, they very falsely translate 
 " and," instead of " or," contrary both to the 
 Greek and Latin. And this they do on purpose, 
 to infer a necessity of communicating under both 
 kimls, as the conjimctive " and" may seem to do : 
 whereas, by the disjunctive "or" it is evident, that 
 we may communicate in one kind only ; as was, 
 in divers cases, the practice of the primitive 
 church ; as also of the apostles themselves. 
 (Act. ii. 42, and xx. 7.) 
 
 But the practice of our Saviour is the best 
 witness of his doctrine : who, sitting at the table 
 at Emaus (e) with two of his disciples, " took 
 bread, and blessed, and brake it, and did reach 
 to them." By which St. Augustine and (^f) the 
 other fathers, understand the eucharist : where 
 no mention is made of wine, or the chalice : but 
 the reaching of the bread, their knowing him, 
 and his vanishing away, so joined, that not any 
 time is left for the benediction and consecration 
 of the chalice. 
 
 In the primitive times, " it was the custom to 
 administer the blood only to children," as St. 
 Cyprian tells us : and, both he and Tertullian 
 say, " that it was their practice, most commonly, 
 to' reserve the body of Christ;"' which, as Euse- 
 bius witnesses, " they were wont to give alone 
 
 (n) Ep. G3, 2. 
 
 (6) Apol. 2, in fine. 
 
 (c) St Irenaeus, lib. 5, prop. Init. 
 
 («■) Concil. Comtantinop., 6, Can. 32, 
 
 (e) I.uke xxiv. 30; Lib. 3, de Consensu. 
 
 ( f) Hier. Epitaph. Pauia;. Beda. Theophylact. St. Cy- 
 prian' I. de la^sls, n 10 ; Tertui , 1. 2, ad Ux., n. 4 ; 
 Kuseb Ecd. Hist, 1. C c. 36; St. Basil, Ep. an Ceesa- 
 riani Patritiam. 
 
 7 
 
 to sick people, for their viaticum." Also, " the 
 holy hermits in the wilderness, commonly re- 
 ceived and reserved the blessed body alone, and 
 not the blood," as St. Basil tells us. 
 
 For whole Christ is really present, iindei 
 either kind, as Protestants themselves liave 
 confessed : rend their words in Hospinian, (n) 
 a Protestant, who affirms, " that they believed 
 and confessed whole Christ to be really present, 
 exhibited and received under either kind ; and 
 therefore under the only form of bread : neither 
 did they judge those to do evil, who communi- 
 cated under one kind." And Luther, as alleged 
 by Hospinian, (A) says, " that it is not needful to 
 give both kinds ; but as one alone sufBceth, the 
 church has power of ordaining only one, and 
 the people ought to be content therewith, if it 
 be ordained by the church." Whence it is 
 granted, that, " it is lawful for the Church of God, 
 upon just occasions, absolutely to determine or 
 limit the use thereof." 
 
 (4, 5) To translate temple instead of altar, 
 is so gross a corruption, that had it not been 
 done thrice immediately within two chapters, 
 one would have thought it had been done through 
 oversight, and not on purpose. The name of 
 altar both in Hebrew and Greek, and by the 
 custom of all people, both Jews and Pagans, 
 implies and imports a sacrifice. We therefore, 
 with respect to the sacrifice of Christ's body and 
 blood, say altar, rather than table, as all the an- 
 cient fathers were accustomed to speak and 
 write ; though, with respect to eating and 
 drinking Christ's body and blood, it is also 
 called a table. But because Protestants will 
 have only a communion of bread and wine, or a 
 supper, and no sacrifice ; therefore, they call it 
 table only, and abhor the word altar, as papis- 
 tical ; especially in the first translation of 1562, 
 which was made when they were throwing down 
 altars throughout England. 
 
 (6) Where the name altar should be, they 
 suppress it ; and here, where it should not be, 
 they put it in their translations ; ^nd that thrice 
 in one chapter ; and that either on purpose to 
 dishonour Catholic altars, or else to save the 
 credit of their communion table ; as fearing, lest 
 the name of Bell's table might redound to the 
 dishonour of their communion table. Wherein 
 it is to be wondered, how they could imagine 
 it any disgrace either for table or altar, if the 
 idols also had their tables and altars ; whereas 
 St. Paul so plainly names both together : " The 
 table of our Lord, and the table of devils, (t) 
 If the table of devils, why not the table of Bell ? 
 By this we see, how light a thing it was with 
 them to corrupt the scriptures in those days. 
 
 Ce) Hospin. Hist. Saoram , p. 2, fol. 112. 
 (A) lb., fol. 12. 
 (i) I. Cor. X. 21. 
 
(6 
 
 IV. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 
 
 The Book, 
 
 
 The true English accord- 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro 
 
 The las' Translation nf 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 Tho Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 ing to the Khernish 
 
 testanl Uiljle:;, printed 
 
 .lit l''jlesii.nl BtW'5, td. 
 
 and Verse. 
 
 
 TranaUtiun. 
 
 A. D. 15C2, 15.-7, 1579. 
 
 \M.i., ;in. \tS!i 
 
 Acts of 
 
 Slatueriint ut as- 
 
 They appointed that 
 
 Instead of "priests," 
 
 For "prip3t^," they 
 
 the Apos. 
 
 eendcrenl Pauliis el 
 
 Paul and Barnabas 
 
 they translate " el- 
 
 say here also " ci- 
 
 chap. sv. 
 
 Barnabas, et quidam 
 
 should go up, and 
 
 ders." 
 
 ders." 
 
 verse 2. 
 
 alii ex aliis ad Apus- 
 lolos cf'presbytcros" 
 7ig£<jj?ui£ jas, in Jeru- 
 salem, d[C. 
 
 icrtain others of the 
 rest, to the apostles 
 and " priests" unto 
 Jerusalem. 
 
 
 
 Titiis, 
 
 Hujus ret gratia 
 
 For this cause 
 
 Instead of "priests," 
 
 For«pi'iests"thef 
 
 chap. i. 
 
 reliqni ie Cretts, ut 
 
 left I thee in Crete, 
 
 they translate " el- 
 
 say " cliiers." 
 
 verse 5 
 
 ea qum desunt corri- 
 gas, et constiluas per 
 civitates " presbyte- 
 ros," sieut et ego dis- 
 posui (til. 
 
 that thou shouidest 
 reform the things 
 that are wanting, 
 and shouidest ordaiii 
 " priests," by cities, 
 as I also appointed 
 thee. 
 
 ders." 
 
 
 1 Timoth. 
 
 Qui bene prasunt 
 
 The « priests" that 
 
 The "elders" that 
 
 " Elders" also io 
 
 chap. V. 
 
 " pri:sbyteri" duplici 
 
 rule well, let them 
 
 rule, well, &c. 
 
 this Bible 
 
 verse 17. 
 
 honore digni kabean- 
 tur. 
 
 be esteemed worthy 
 of double honour. 
 
 
 
 1 Timoth. 
 
 Adverstts " pres- 
 
 Against a "priest" 
 
 Against an "elder" 
 
 Instead of "priesi' 
 
 chap. V. 
 
 hyterum" aeeuaatio- 
 
 receive not accusa- 
 
 receive not accusa- 
 
 they put " elder." 
 
 verse 19. 
 
 nem noli recipeTe,Jfc. 
 
 tion, &e. 
 
 tion, &c. 
 
 
 St. Jamne, 
 
 Tnfirmatitr quit in 
 
 Is any man sick 
 
 : — Let him 
 
 Elders for "priesta" 
 here also. 
 
 chap. V. 
 
 vobis? inducat '^pres- 
 
 among you ? let him 
 
 bring in the "elders" 
 
 verse 14. 
 
 byteros eeelesiie," et 
 
 bring in the" priests" 
 
 of the " congrega- 
 
 
 
 orent super eum. 
 
 of the church, and 
 let them pray over 
 him. 
 
 tion, &G. 
 
 
»>RIESTS AND PRIESTHOOD. 
 
 47 
 
 St. Augustine affirms, "That in the divine 
 scripturis several sacrifices are mentioned, some 
 before the manifestation of the New Testament, 
 &c., and anothernow, which is agreeable to this 
 manifestation, &c., and which is demonstrated 
 not only from the evangelical, but also from the 
 prophetical writings." {a) A truth most certain ; 
 our sacrifice of the New Testament being most 
 clearly proved from the sacrifice of Melchizedek 
 in tlie Old Testament ; of whoiJi, and whose 
 sacrifice, it is said, " But Melchizedek, king of 
 Salem, brought forth bread and wine ; for he 
 was the priest of God most high, and he blessed 
 him," &c. And to ihake the figure agree to the 
 thing figured, and the truth to answer the figure 
 of Christ, it is said, " Our Lord hath sworn, and 
 it shall not repent him ; thou art a priest for 
 ever, according to the order of Melchizedek." In 
 the New Testament, Jesus is made an " high 
 priest, according to the order df Melchizedek." 
 For according to the similitude of Melchizedek, 
 there arises another priest, who continues for 
 ever,'and has an everlasting priesthood. Whence 
 it is clearly proved, that Melchizedek was a 
 priest, and ofTered bread and wine as a sacrifice ; 
 therein prefiguring Christ oiir Saviour, and his 
 sacrifice daily offered in the church, under the 
 forms of bread and wiae, by aa everlasting 
 priesthood. 
 
 But the English Protestants, on purpose to 
 abolish the holy sacrifice of the mass, did not 
 only take away the v.'ord altar out of tl^ scripT 
 ture ; but they also suppressed the name priest, 
 in all their translations, turning it into elder; (i) 
 well knowinj; that these three, priest, sacri- 
 fice, and altat, are dependents and consequents 
 one of another ; so that they cannot be separ- 
 ated. If there be an external sacrifice, there 
 must be an extenal priesthood to oflTer it, 
 and an altar to oflfer the same upon. So 
 Christ himself being a priest, according to 
 the order of Melchizedek, had a sacrifice, " his 
 body ;" and an altar, " his cross," on which he 
 offered it. And because he instituted this sacri- 
 kice, to continue in his church for ever, in com- 
 memoration and representation of his death, 
 therefore, did he ordain his apostles priests, at 
 his last supper ; where and when he instituted 
 the holy order of priesthood or priests, (saying, 
 hoc facite, " do this,") to offer the self-same 
 sacrifice in a mystical and unbloody manner, 
 until the world's end. 
 
 But our new pretended reformers have made 
 the scriptures quite dumb, as tc< the name of an^y 
 such priest or priesthood as we now speak of ; 
 never so much as once naming priest, unless 
 
 (n) St. August, Ep. 49, q. '.* 
 
 (6) Psal. ex. 4; Heb. vi, 20, and chap rii. 15, 17, 24. 
 
 when mention is made eitjer of the priests of the 
 Jews, or the priests of the Gentiles, especially 
 when such are reprehended or blamed in the 
 holy scripture ; and in such places they are sure 
 to name priests in their translitions, on purpose 
 to make the very name of priests odious among 
 the common ignorant people. Agiiin, they have 
 also the name priests, when they are taken for 
 all manner of men, women, or children, that 
 offer internal and spiritual sacrifices ; whereby 
 they would falsely signify, that there are no other 
 priests in the law of grace. As Whitaker, (c) 
 one of their great champions, freely avouches, 
 directly contrary to St. Augustine, who, in one 
 brief sentence, distinguishes priests, properly so 
 called in the churcli ; and priests, as it is a 
 common name to all Christians. This name 
 then of priest and priesthood, properly so called, 
 as St. Augustine says, they wholly suppress; 
 never translating the word Presbijleros " priests,' 
 but " elders ;" and that with so full and general 
 consent in all their English Bibles, that, as the 
 Puritans plainly confess, and Mr. Whitgift de- 
 nies it not, a man would wonder to see how 
 carefid they are, that the people may not once 
 hear of the name of any such priest in all the 
 holy scriptures : and even in their latter trans- 
 lations, though they are ashamed of the word 
 " eldership," yet they have not the power to put 
 the English word priesthood, as they ought to 
 do, in the text, that th<) vulgar may understand 
 it, but rather the Greek word presbytery : such 
 are the poor shifts they are glad to make usb 
 of. 
 
 So blinded were these innovators with heresy, 
 that they could not see how the holy scriptures 
 the fathers, and ecclesiastical custom, have 
 drawn several words from their profane and 
 common signification, to a more peculiar and 
 ecclesiastical one; as Episcopus, which in Tully 
 is an " overseer," is a bishop in the New Testa- 
 ment ; so the Greek word, ;!rf»9oroi'f(»', signifying 
 " ordain," they translate as profanely, as if they 
 were translating Demosthenes, or the Laws of 
 Athens, rather than the holy scriptures ; when, 
 as St. Hierom tells them, (rf) it signifietli 
 Clericorum ordinationem ; that is, " giving of 
 holy orders," which is done not only by prayer 
 of the voice, but by imposition of the hands," 
 according to St. Paul to Timothy, " Impose 
 hands suddenly on no man ;" that is, " Be not 
 hasty to give holy orders." In like manner 
 they translate minister for deacon, ambassador 
 for apostle, messenger for angel, &c., leaving, 
 I say, the ecclesiastical use of the word for the 
 original signification. 
 
 (c) Whitaker, p 199; St. Aug., lib. 20, de Civil. L»«, 
 cap. 10. See the Puritan's Keply, p 159, and WliiteifVt 
 Defence against the Puritans, p. 722. 
 
 (d) St. Hierom. iu cap. Iviii. Esai. 
 
4H 
 
 -PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AOAINST 
 
 The Rook, 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 and Verse. 
 
 Acts of 
 the Apos. 
 chap. xiv. 
 -«rse 22. 
 
 1 Timoth. 
 chap. i\ . 
 verse 1 i. 
 
 2 Timolh. 
 chap. i. 
 ver-w 6. 
 
 1 Timolh. 
 chap. iii. 
 verse 8. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 Et cum conslilu- 
 issent, j^etgoroci^CTu*'- 
 leg, illis per sin- 
 gulas " ecclesias" 
 "vresbyteros," ngsa- 
 jSi-regs;. (1) 
 
 Noli ncghgere 
 'gratiam,^' X"Q'0/ja- 
 Toa, quts in te est, 
 qu<B data est tibiper 
 prophetiam cum im- 
 positione manuttm 
 " presbyterii." (2) 
 
 £t verse 12. 
 
 Propter quam cau- 
 sam admoneo te, ut 
 resuscites "gratiam" 
 Dei, quas in te est 
 per impositionem 
 minuum mearum. 
 
 The true English accortl- 
 
 ing to tho Rheniish 
 
 Translation. 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro^ 
 tcstant'BihIes, printed 
 A. D. 1562, 1577, 1573. 
 
 " Diaconos" si- 
 militer " pudicus," 
 non bilingues, ^c, 
 Jiaxovus. (3) 
 
 Jiaxoroi, Jtaconi.(4) 
 
 And when they had 
 ordained to them 
 " priests" in every 
 " church." 
 
 Neglect not the 
 " grace" thai is in 
 thee, which is given 
 thee by prophesy, 
 with imposition of 
 the hands of "priest- 
 hood." 
 
 For the which 
 cause I admonish 
 thee,that thou resus- 
 citate the " grace" 
 of God, which is in 
 thee, by tho imposi- 
 tion of my hands. 
 
 "Deacons" in like 
 manner " chaste," 
 not double-tongued, 
 &c. 
 
 Deacons. 
 
 And when they 
 had ordained " el- 
 ders by election," in 
 every " congrega- 
 tion." (1) 
 
 Instead of "grace," 
 they translate "gift;" 
 and " eldership" in- 
 stead ,of '' priest- 
 hood.'' (2) 
 
 Instead of the 
 word " grace" they 
 say " gift." 
 
 " Ministers" 
 " deacons." (3) 
 
 for 
 
 Deacons. (4) 
 
 The last Ttanslation ci 
 
 the Protestant liihie, Rd. 
 
 Lon., an. 168.1. 
 
 "Elders' set in be 
 stead of " priests." 
 
 For the word 
 " grace" they say 
 " gift ;" and " prcs'- 
 bytery," the Gfeeh 
 word, rather than 
 the English word, 
 " priesthood." 
 
 They translate 
 " gift," in the stead 
 of " grace " 
 
 Likewise mi"!t 
 the " deacons" be 
 " grave." 
 
 DeaconB. 
 
PRIESTHOOD AND HOLV ORDERS. 
 
 49 
 
 I V > W E have heard, in old time, o( making 
 pnests ; and, of late days, of making ministers ; 
 but who has ever heard in England of making 
 elders by election ? yet, in their first translations, 
 it continued a phrase of scripture till King 
 James the First's time ; and then they ihought 
 good to blot out the words by " election," begin- 
 ning to consider, that such elders as were made 
 only by election, without consecration, could not 
 prf.tend to much more power of administering 
 the sacraments, than a churchwarden, or con- 
 stable of the parish ; for, if they denied ordina- 
 tion to be a sacrament, (a) ^nd consequently, 
 to give grace, and impress a character, doubtless 
 they could not attribute much to a bare elec- 
 tion : and yet, in those days, when this transla- 
 tion was made, their doctrine was, " that in the 
 New Testament, election, without consecration, 
 was sufficient to make a priest or bishop." Wit- 
 ness Cranmer himself, who being asked, whether 
 in the New Testament there is required any 
 consecration of a bishop, or priest ? answered thus 
 under his hand, viz., " In the New Testament, 
 he that is appointed to be a priest or bishop, 
 needeth no consecration by the scripture ; for 
 election thereunto is sufficient ; (A) and Dr. 
 Slillingfleet informs us, that Cranmer has de- 
 clared, "that a governor could make priests, as 
 well as bishops." And Mr. Whitaker tells us, 
 " that there are no priests now in the Church of 
 Christ ;" page 200, advers. Camp, that is, as he 
 interprets himself, page 210, " this name [iriest 
 is never in the New Testament peculiarly ap- 
 plied to the ministers of the Gospel." And we 
 are not ignorant, how both King Edward the 
 Sixth, and Queen Elizabeth, made bishops by 
 their letters patent only, let our Lambeth re- 
 cords pretend what they will : to authorize which, 
 it is no wonder, if they made the scripture say, 
 " when they had ordained elders by election," 
 instead of " priests by imposition of hands ;" 
 though contrary to the fourth Council of Car- 
 thage, which enjoins, " that when a priest takes 
 his orders, the bishop blessing him, and holding 
 his hand upon his head, all the priests also that 
 are present, hold their hands by the bishop's 
 hand, upon his head, (c) So arc our priests 
 made at this day ; and so would now the clergy 
 of the Church of England pretend to be made, 
 if they had but bishops and priests able to make 
 them. For which purpose, they have not only 
 corrected this error in their last translations, 
 but have also gotten the virords, bishop and priest, 
 thrust intf) their forms of ordination : but the 
 man that wants hands to work with, is not much 
 better for having tools. 
 
 (2) Moreover, some of our pretender? to 
 priesthood, would gladly have holy order to take 
 
 {a) Twenty-fifth of the Thirty-nine Articles. 
 
 (6) See Dr. Burnet's Hist of the Refer.; see Stilling- 
 Seet Ircnicon, p 39-J. 
 
 (c) Council 3 anno 436, where St. Augustino was 
 oreser.t, and subscribed. 
 
 its place again among the sacraments : and 
 therefore both Dr. Bramhall and Mr. Masor 
 reckon it fol- a sacrament, though quite contrary 
 to their scripture translators, (rf) who, lest it 
 should be so accounted, do translate " gift" in- 
 stead of " grace ;' lest it should appear, that 
 grace is given in holy orders. I wonder tli^y 
 have not corrected this in their latter transla- 
 tions : but, perha|)S, they durst not do it, (or 
 fear of making it clash with the 25lh of tht-it 
 39 Articles. It is no less to be admired, thai 
 since they, began to be enamoured of priesthood, 
 they have not displaced that profane intruder, 
 " elder," and placed the true ecclesiastical word 
 " priest," in the text. But to this I hear them 
 object, that our Latin translation hath Seniores 
 el majores tiatu ; and therefore, why may not. 
 they also translate " elders ?" To which I an- 
 swer, " that this is nothing to them, who profess 
 to translate the Greek, and not our Latin ; and 
 the Greek word they know is nqeo^viigHtr presby- 
 teros. Again, I say, that if they meant no worse 
 than the old Latin translator did, they would be 
 as indifferent as he, to have said sometimes 
 priest and priesthood, when he has the words, 
 " presbyteros" and " presb3rterium," as we are 
 indifferent in our translation, saying, seniors and 
 ancient, when we find it so in Latin : being well 
 assured, that by sundry words he meant but one 
 thing, as in Greek it is but one. St. Ilierom 
 reads, Presbyteros ego compresbyter, (e) in 1 ad 
 Gal., proving the dignity of priests : and yet 
 in the 4th of the Galatians, he reads according 
 to the Vulgate Latin text : Seniores in vobis rugo 
 cunsenior el ipse : whereby it is evident, that 
 senior here, and in the Acts, is a priest ; and no* 
 on the contrary, presbyter, an elder 
 
 (3) Lv this place they thrust the word minis- 
 ter into the text, for an ecclesiastical order : so 
 that, though they will not have bishops, priests, 
 and deacons, yet they would gladly have bishops, 
 ministers, and deacons ; yet the word they 
 translate for minister, is Siax6voa,iliaconus ; the 
 very same that, a little after, they translate 
 deacon, (e) And so because bishops went 
 before in the same chapter, they have found 
 out three orders, bishops, ministers, and deacons. 
 How poor a shift is this, that theyjtre forced to 
 make the apostles speak three things for two, on 
 purpose to get a place in the scripture for their 
 mhiisters ! As likewise, in another place, (/) 
 on purpose to make room for their ministers' 
 wives, for there is no living wiihont them, they 
 translate wife instead of woman, making St. 
 Paul say : " Have not we power to lead about a 
 wife ?" &c., for which cause they had rather sa/- 
 grave than chaste. 
 
 (iC) Dr Bramh. p. 9G ; Mason, lib. '. 
 (c) St. Hier., Ep. 83, ad Evagr 
 ) 1 Cor. ix. 5. 
 
 [^ 
 
60 
 
 VI.- 
 
 -PROTESTA.N r IKA.NSJ.AriOXS dUAI>«ST 
 
 •riie Book, 
 
 
 The true -English acpord- 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 
 — : — ■ '. — : — r? — r^ — 
 
 The last Tisnslalipn o( 
 
 -.Chapter, 
 
 The Vulgate i^atin Text. 
 
 ing to the Khemish 
 
 tcstanl Bibles, printed 
 
 the Protestant Bible, Ed 
 
 and Verse. 
 
 
 Translation- 
 
 A. D. 1562, }577, 1579. 
 
 Lon., an. 1683. 
 
 Malachi 
 
 Labia enim sncer- 
 
 The priest's lips 
 
 The priest's lips 
 
 For " .shall" they 
 
 chap ii. 
 
 dotis custudienl sci- 
 
 " shall" keep know- 
 
 "should keep 
 
 translate " should." 
 
 \erse 7. 
 
 cniinm, et legem re- 
 
 ledge, and ihey 
 
 knowledge,and they 
 
 And for " angel" 
 
 
 quirenl ex ore ejus : 
 
 "shall" seek the 
 
 "should" seek the 
 
 "messenge"," in this 
 
 
 quia " aligelus" Do- 
 
 law at his mouth ; 
 
 law at his mouth ; 
 
 also. 
 
 
 mini exercituum est. 
 
 because he is the 
 
 because he is the 
 
 
 
 (1) 
 
 " angel" of the 
 Lord of hosts. 
 
 " messenger" of the 
 
 Lord of hosts. (1) 
 
 • 
 
 
 Apocalyp.' 
 
 " Angela" Ephesi 
 
 To the "angel" 
 
 To the " messen- 
 
 ■ Corrected. 
 
 chap. ii. Hi. 
 
 ecclesia scribe. 
 
 of the church of 
 
 ger" of, &J., instead 
 
 
 rerses 1,8, 
 12. 
 
 
 Ephesqs,write thou. 
 
 of " angel." 
 
 ■ 
 
 Malachi , 
 
 Ecce, ego mitto 
 
 gehold, I send 
 
 '• Instead of " an- 
 
 The same also 
 
 chup. iii. 
 
 '•angelum' meum,iov 
 
 mine " angel," and 
 
 gel," they say "mes- 
 
 they translate here, 
 
 verse 1 . 
 
 uy-jtlnf fia, e( prm- 
 
 he shall prepare the 
 
 senger." And for 
 
 without any correc- 
 
 
 parabit viam ante 
 
 way before my face. 
 
 " Angel" of the tes-, 
 
 tion. 
 
 
 fociem meam. El 
 
 And the Ruler 
 
 tament, they trans- 
 
 
 
 statimveniel ad tern- 
 
 whoni ye seek, shall 
 
 late, " Messenger" 
 
 
 
 plum strum Domina- 
 
 suddenly com.e to 
 
 of the covenant. (2) 
 
 
 
 tor, quern vos quosri- 
 
 his temple, even the 
 
 
 
 
 tis, tt " Angelus" 
 
 " Angel" of the 
 
 
 
 
 testamenti, queni 
 
 testament, whom ye 
 
 
 
 
 vos vuliis. (2) 
 
 wish for. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 St. Matth. 
 
 Hie est enim de 
 
 For this is he of 
 
 For " angel" they 
 
 Instead of "an- 
 
 chap. xi. 
 
 quo scriptum est, 
 
 whom it is \yritten, 
 
 say " messenger." 
 
 gel," they say "mes 
 
 \(iiae 10. 
 
 ecce, ego mitto " an- 
 gelutn" meum ante 
 faciem tuam. 
 
 Behold, I send mine 
 " angel" before thy 
 face. 
 
 
 senger." 
 
 Luke 
 
 ^Hic est de quo 
 
 This is he of 
 
 — Behold, I send 
 
 For " angej, ' 
 
 iihap. \ii. 
 
 scriptum tst, ecce, 
 
 whom it is written. 
 
 my " iiiessenger," 
 
 " messengei," 
 
 /erse 27 
 
 mitto " angelum " 
 
 Behold, I send mine 
 
 iiC 
 
 
 
 meum, 6fC. 
 
 " angel," &c. 
 
 
 
 4 Coriiiih. 
 
 Si quid donavi 
 
 If I pardoned any 
 
 — In the " sight" 
 
 Corfocted. 
 
 chap. ii. 
 
 propter vos in " per- 
 
 thing for you in the 
 
 of Christ. (3^ 
 
 
 /erso !0. 
 
 sona" C/iristi,Fv nqo- 
 
 (701 Till Xul^U. (3) 
 
 " person" of Christ. 
 
 — — ^— ^— __ 
 
 
 
THE AUTHOKirV OK PftlUfiTS. 
 
 (1) Because our pretended reformers teach, 
 '• Thitt order is not a sacrament ;" " that it 
 has neither visible sign," (what is imposition of 
 hands ?) " nor ceremony ordained by God ; nor 
 form ; nor institution from Christ;" (u) con- 
 sequently, that it cannot imprint a character on 
 the soul of the person ordained ; they not only 
 avoid the word " priests," in their transla- 
 tions, but, the more to derogate from the pri- 
 vilege and dignity of priests, they make the 
 scripture, in this place, speak contrary to the 
 words of the prophet ; as they are read both in 
 the Hebrew and Greek, cpvi-Hsjai, ^x^i^rijaaoiv, 
 iiBpai "i-ttBi i where it is as plain as can be spoken, 
 that " the priest's lips shall keep knowledge, and 
 they shall seek the law at his mouth ;" which is 
 a wonderful privilege given to the priests of 
 the old law, for true determination in matters 
 of controversy, and rightly expounding the law, 
 as we may read more fully in Deuteronomy the 
 1 7th chapter, where they are commanded, under 
 pain of death, to stand to the priest's judgment : 
 which, in this place, verse 4, God, by his pro- 
 phet Malachi, calls, " His covenant with Levi," 
 and that he will have it stand, to wit, in the 
 New Testament, where St. Peter has such pri- 
 vilege for him and his successors, that his faith 
 shall not fail ; and where the Holy Ghost is 
 president in the councils of bishops and priests. 
 All which, the reformers of our days would 
 deface and defeat, by translating the words 
 otherwise than the Holy Ghost has spoken them. 
 And when the prophet adds immediately the 
 cause of this singular prerogative of the priest : 
 " because he is the angel of the Lord of hosts," 
 which is also a wonderful dignity to be so called ; 
 they translate : " because he is the messenger of 
 the Lord of^hosts." So do they also, in the 
 Revelations, call the bishops of the seven 
 churches of Asia, messengers. 
 
 (2) And here, in like manner, they call St. 
 John the Baptist, messenger ; where the scrip- 
 ture, no doubt, speaks more honourably of him, 
 as being Christ's precursor, than of a messenger, 
 which is a term for postboys and lacqueys. 1'he 
 scripture, I say, speaks more honourably of 
 him ; and our Saviour, in the Gospel, telling 
 the people the wonderful dignities of St. John, 
 and that he was more than a prophet, cites this 
 place, and gives this reason, " For this is he of 
 whom it is written, Behold,! send my angel be- 
 fore thee :" which St. Hierom calls, tneritorum, 
 aiiS.rioit', the " increase and augmenting of John's 
 merits and privileges." [b) And St. Gregory, 
 " He who came to bring tidings of Christ him- 
 self, was worthily called an angel, that in his 
 verj- name there might be dignity." And all 
 
 la) Twenty-fifth of the Thirty-nme Articles. Roger's 
 Defence o( the same, p. 155! 
 
 (4) St. Hierom, in Comment, inhunc locum. St.Greg.i 
 Horn. 6. in Evang. 
 
 the fathers conceive a great excellency of tins 
 word angel ; but our Protestants, who measure 
 all divine things and persons by the line oftheii 
 human understanding, translate accordingly, 
 making our Saviour say, that " John was more 
 than a prophet," because he was a " messenger." 
 Yea, where our blessed Saviour himself is called 
 Angelus leslamenli, the Angel of thu testament; 
 there they translate, the " messenger of the 
 covenant." 
 
 St. Hierom translated not nuntius, but an- 
 gelus ; the church, and all antiquity, both 
 reading and expounding it as a term of mors 
 dignity and excellency. Why do the innovators 
 of our age thus boldly disgrace the very elo- 
 quence of scripture, which, by such terms of 
 amplification, would speak more significantly 
 and emphatically ? Why, 1 say, do they for 
 angel translate messenger ? for apostle, legato 
 or ambassador, and the like ? Doubtless, this 
 is all done to take away,.as much as possible, the 
 dignity and excellency of the priesthood. Yet, 
 meihinks, they should have corrected this in 
 their latter translations, when they began them- 
 selves to aspire to the title of priests ; whose 
 name, however, they may usurp, yet could not 
 hitherto attain to the authority and power oi 
 the priesthood. They are but priests in name 
 only ; the power they want, and therefore are 
 pleased to be content with the ordinary style ol 
 messengers ; not yet daring to term themselves 
 angels, as St. John did the bishops of the seven 
 churches of Asia. , 
 
 (3) But, great is the authority, dignity, excel- 
 lency, and power of God's priests and bishops : 
 they do bind and loose, and execute all ecclesi- 
 astical functions, as in the person and power ol 
 Christ, whose ministers they are. So St. Paul 
 says : " that when he pardoned or released the 
 penance of the incestuous Corinthian, he did it 
 in the person of Christ ;" (c) they falsely trans- 
 late, " in the sight of Christ ;" " that is, as 
 St. Ambrose expounds it, ."in the name oi 
 Christ;" " in his stead," and as " his vicar and 
 deputy ;" and when he excommunicated the same 
 incestuous person, he said, " he did it in the 
 name, and by virtue of our Lord Jesus 
 Christ." ((f) And the fathers of the Coilncil o) 
 Ephesus avouch, "that no man doubts, yea, it 
 is known to all ages, that holy and most blessed 
 Peter, prince and head of the apostles, the pil- 
 lar of faith, and foundation of the Catholic 
 Church, received from our Lord Jesus Christ 
 the keys of the kingdom ; and that power «( 
 loosing and binding sins was given him ; who, 
 in his successors, lives and exercises judgment 
 to this very time, and always." (e) 
 
 (c) 2 Cor. ii. 10 
 
 (d) 1 Cor. V. 4. 
 
 U) Parta.ActsiiJ. 
 
52 
 
 VII. PROTESTANT TRANaLATIOKS AOAI?)aT 
 
 TheBcxk, 
 
 
 ' : r— 
 
 The tiue JEnglish accord- 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 
 The last Tianslation of 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 Tlie Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 
 testant Bibles, printed 
 
 the Protestant Bible, EJ. 
 
 aiidVer»«. 
 
 
 Translation. 
 
 A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 I.on., an. 1083, 
 
 St. Mat.( 4. 
 
 Ex te enim exiel 
 
 For out of thee 
 
 Instead of " rule," 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 chap. ii. 
 
 dux, qui " regal" 
 
 shall come forth the 
 
 the NewTestament, 
 
 
 verse 6 ; 
 
 populum meum Is- 
 
 Captain, that shall 
 
 printed anno 1580, 
 
 
 Micah 
 
 Tud. ^-Eiarvni, re 
 
 ^' rule" my people 
 
 translates " feed. " 
 
 
 chip. V. 
 
 sliui, its iQx^yJu IB 
 
 Israel. 
 
 (1) 
 
 
 ^ erse 2 
 
 'laqaijX. (1) 
 
 / 
 
 
 
 1 Peter 
 
 ■ 
 Suhjecli igitur 
 
 Be .subject there- 
 
 In the latter end 
 
 Submit yourselves 
 
 chap. ii. 
 
 estate " om7)i hu- 
 
 fore " to every hu- 
 
 of king Henry VIII. 
 
 "to every ordinance 
 
 vetse 13. 
 
 mance ercalurte," 
 
 man creature" for 
 
 and in Edward VI. 
 
 of man," for the 
 
 
 Ttiiarj di-figion/nj 
 
 Gof], whether it be 
 
 times, they transla- 
 
 Lord's sake, whethei 
 
 
 HiloBi,propter Deum, 
 
 to the "king, as 
 
 ted, " submit your- 
 
 it be to the " king, 
 
 
 sive "regi quasi pra- 
 
 exceiluig," &c. 
 
 selves unto all man- 
 
 as supreme. 
 
 
 cellenli" five duci- 
 
 
 ner of ordinance of 
 
 
 
 bus, (SfC, ^agdsl iia 
 
 
 man " whether it be 
 
 
 
 ine^iX"'"''- (2) 
 
 
 unto '.he " king, as 
 to the chief head." 
 IntheBibleof 1577, 
 to the "king, as hav- 
 ing pre-eminence." 
 In the Bible of 1579, 
 to the " king, as the 
 superior." (3) 
 
 ■ 
 
 ■ y 
 ■ 
 
 • 
 
 Acts of 
 
 Atlendite vobis el 
 
 Take heed to 
 
 — Wherein the 
 
 — Wherein tt 
 
 the Apos. 
 
 universo gregi, in 
 
 yourselves, and to 
 
 Holy Ghost hath 
 
 Holy Gho.st h- 
 
 i'h:ip. XX 
 
 quo vos Spirilus 
 
 the whole flock. 
 
 made you " over- 
 
 made you "o.-; 
 
 \(ise 28. 
 
 Sanclus posuiL"epis- 
 
 wherein the Holy 
 
 seers, to feed the 
 
 seers, to feed ■ , 
 
 
 copos regere. eccle- 
 
 Ghost hath placed 
 
 congregation" of 
 
 chuich" of God, 
 
 
 sium" Dei. 'Enia. 
 
 you " bishops to 
 
 God. (3) 
 
 
 
 xd.TSg noi/iiifBtv itjf 
 
 rule the church" of 
 
 
 
 
 ixxlfjaluv ju @£S.(3) 
 
 God. 
 
 i 
 
 
 
EFI8C0P4L AVTHOUITy. 
 
 53 
 
 ( 1 ) It Is certain, that this is a false translation ; 
 because the prophet's words (Mich, v., cited 
 by St. Matthew) both m Hebrew and Greek, 
 signify only a Ruler or Governor, and not a 
 Pastor or Feeder. Therefore, it is either a 
 great oversight, which is a small matter, com- 
 pared to the least corruption ; or else it is done 
 on purpose ; which I rather think, because they 
 do the like in another place, (Acts, xx.) as you 
 may see below. And that to suppress the signi- 
 ficatiort of ecclesiastical power and government, 
 that concurs with feeding, first in Christ, and 
 from him in his apostles and pastors of the 
 church; both which are here signified in this 
 one Greek word, not/tialfbi ; to wit, that Christ 
 our Saviour shall rule and feed, (a) yea, he 
 shall rule with a rod of iron ; and from him, St. 
 Peter, and the rest, by his commission given in 
 the same word, noiuaivs, feed and rule my 
 sheep ; yea, and that with a rod of iron : as when 
 he struck Ananias and Sapphira with corporal 
 death ; as his successors do the like offenders with 
 spiritual destruction, (unless they repent) by the 
 lerriblerod of excommunication. This is import- 
 ed in the double signification of the Greek word, 
 which they, to diminish ecclesiastical authority, 
 rather translate " feed," than " rule or govern." 
 
 (2) For the diminution of this ecclesiastical 
 authority, they translated this text of scripture, 
 in King Henry VHI. and King Edward VI. 
 times, "Unto thd king, as the chief head," 
 (1 Pet. ii.) because then the king had first taken 
 upon him this title of " Supreme head of the 
 Church." And therefore, they flattered both 
 hiin and his young sou, till their heresy was 
 planted ; making the holy scripture say, that 
 the king was the " chief head," which is all the 
 same with supreme head. But, in Queen Eliza- 
 beth's time, being, it seems, better advised in 
 that point, (by Calvin, I suppose, and the Mag- 
 deburgenses, who jointly inveighed against that 
 title ; (4) and Calvin, against that by name, which 
 was given to Henry Vlll.,) and because, perhaps, 
 tliey thought they could be bolder with a queen 
 than a king ; as also, because then they thought 
 their Reformation pretty well established; they be- 
 gan to suppress this title in their translations, and 
 to say, "' To the king, as having pre-eminence," 
 and, " To the king, as the superior ;" endeavour- 
 ing, as may be supposed by this translation, to 
 encroach upon tnat ecclesiastical and spiritual ju- 
 risdiction they had formerly granted to the Crown. 
 
 But however that be, let them either justify 
 their translation, or confess their fault : and for 
 the rest, I will refer them to the words of St. 
 Ignatius, who lived in the apostles' time, and 
 tells us, " That we must first honour God, then 
 the bishop, then the king ; because in all things, 
 nothing is comparable to God ; and in the 
 church, nothing greater than the bishop, who is 
 consecrated to God, for the salvation of the 
 world ; and among magistrates and temporal 
 rulers, none is like the king." (c) 
 
 (a) Psalm ii. ; Apocalyp. ii. 27 ; Job. xxi. , 
 
 (i) Calvin in cap. vii. Amos ; Magdebur. in Prsef. 
 Cent. 7, fol. 9, 10, 11. 
 {c) Ep. 7, ad. Smyrnenses. 
 S 
 
 (3) Again, observe how they here suppresn 
 the word " bishop," and translate it " overseero ,' 
 which is a word, that has as much relation to a 
 temporal magistrate, as to a bishop. And this 
 they do, because in King Edward VI. and Queen 
 Elizabeth's time, they had no episcopal conse- 
 cration, but were made only by their letters 
 patent ; (</) which, I suppose, they will not den}' 
 However, when they read of King Edward VI. 
 making John k Lasco (a Polonian) overseer or 
 superintendent, by his letters patent ; and of 
 their making each other snperirttcndents or pas- 
 tors at F'rankfort, by election ; and such only 
 to continue for a time, or so long as themselves 
 or the congregation pleased, and then to return 
 again to the state of^private persons or laymen ; 
 (vid. Hist, of the Troubles at Frankfort ;) (c) 
 and also of King Edward's giving power and au- 
 thority to Cranmer : and how Cranmer, when 
 he made priests by election only, I suppose, be- 
 cause they were to continue no longer than the 
 king pleased, whereas priests truly consecreatod 
 are marked with an indelible character, — pre- 
 tended to no other authority for such act, but 
 only what he received from the king, by virtue of 
 his letters patent. Fox, tom. 2, an. 1546, 
 1547. 
 
 And we have reason to judge, that Matthew 
 Parker, and the rest of Queen Elizabeth's new 
 bishops, were no otherwise made, than by the 
 queen's letters patent ; seeing that the form 
 devised by King Edward VI. being repealed by 
 Queen Mary, was not again revived till the 8th 
 of Queen Elizabeth. To say nothing of the 
 invalidity of the said form, as having neither 
 the name of bishop nor priest in it, the like doubt 
 of their consecration arises from the many and 
 great objections made by Catholic writers (/) 
 against their pretended Lambeth Records and 
 Register ; as also from the consecrators of M. 
 Parker, viz., Barlow, Scorey, &c., whom we 
 cannot believe to have been consecrated them- 
 selves, unless they can first show us records of 
 Barlow's consecration ; and secondly, tell us, 
 by what form of consecration Coverdale and 
 Scorey were made bishops ; the Rom. Cath. ordi- 
 nal having been abrogated, and the, new one not 
 yet devised, at the time that Mason says they were 
 consecrated, which was Aug. iiO, 1551. And as 
 for the suffragan, there is such a difference about 
 his name, (g) some calling him John, some Rich- 
 ard ; and about the place where he lived, some 
 calling him suffragan of Bedford, (A) some of 
 Dover, (i) that it is doubtful whether shere was 
 such a person present at that Lambeth ceremony. 
 But these things being fitter for another treatise, 
 which, I hope, you will be presented with ere' 
 long, I shall say no more of them in this place.' 
 
 (d) K. Edw. VI. Let. Pat Jo.Utenti. p 71;Regist.Ec- 
 cles. peregr. Londin. Calvin, p. 3'27, Resp. ad Perseciit, 
 Angl. 
 
 (e) Hist. Fra p. 51, 60, 62, 63, 72, 73, TJ. 87, 97, 99, 
 125, 126, &c. 
 
 (/) Fitzherb. Dr. Chaiiip. Nullity of the EnEli-il 
 Clergy Prot. demonst. to. 
 (g) See Dr. Bramhall, p. 98. 
 (A) Mason, Bramhall, &c. 
 (i) Dr. Butler Epist. de Consecrat Minist. 
 
F4 
 
 VIII. PKOTESTA.NT TRA.VSLAriONB AO. iSST 
 
 - The Book, 
 
 Chapter, 
 anil Veise. 
 
 1 Curinlli. 
 chiip. ix. 
 verse 3. 
 
 Philipp. 
 chap. iv. 
 verse 3. 
 
 Hebrews 
 cha]). xiii. 
 verse 4. 
 
 St. Matth. 
 chap. xix. 
 verse 1 1 . 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 St. Matih. 
 ehap. xi.\. 
 V«rso 12 
 
 Numquid non ha- 
 betnus polesldtem 
 " mutiercrn" Soro- 
 rcm,diSei.(ffii' j'lftwxu, 
 circumducendi? <^c. 
 11) 
 
 Etiam fogo et te 
 germane " compar," 
 ou^i/j'S j'i-TJCTje. (2) 
 
 " Honnrabile con- 
 nubium in omnibus" 
 1 l/Jiog 6 y4m°S (>■ fiixai, 
 et thorns immacula- 
 tus. (3) 
 
 Qui dixit illis, 
 " Non onines Capi- 
 vnt" verbum isiud, 
 i n(5nss j^woSai, sed 
 quibus datum esl.(4) 
 
 The trkie English accord- 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 Translatiun. 
 
 Et sti7tt"enunc/ii," 
 qui seipsos castrave- 
 runt, ivvujioi oiiiveg, 
 ill! i/tdav eav totj^, 
 propter regnum cm- 
 Icrvm. (5) 
 
 Have rioit we 
 power tc lead about 
 a " womunj" a sis- 
 ter? &c. 
 
 Yea, and I be- 
 seech thee, my sin- 
 cere " companion." 
 
 " 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. 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 testant Billies, printed 
 A. D. 1502,1577, 1579. 
 
 And there are 
 " eunuchs," who 
 have made them- 
 selves " eunuchs" 
 for the kingdom of 
 heaven. 
 
 Have not we 
 power to lead about 
 a " wife," a sister 1 
 &c. (1) 
 
 For cdmpianion, 
 they say, " yoke- 
 fellow." (2) 
 
 "Wedlock is hon- 
 ourable among all 
 men," &c. (3) 
 
 — " All men can- 
 not receive this say- 
 ing " &c. (4) 
 
 There are some 
 "chaste," which 
 have made them- 
 selves " chaste" for 
 the kingdom of hea- 
 ven. (5) 
 
 The^Tii^t TMnslatioii lH 
 
 the Protestant Bible, Ed 
 
 Lon., an. 1033. 
 
 Instead of *' wrj- 
 man/' they trans- 
 late " wife," here 
 also. 
 
 — « Yokefellow." 
 
 " Marriage is hon- 
 ouVable in all." 
 
 — " All men can- 
 not receive this say- 
 ing/' &c. 
 
 Cotrectet' 
 
"THB SINGLE LIVES OF PRIBST9. 
 
 as 
 
 (1) " If," says St. Hierom, " none of the 
 laity, or of the faithful, can pray, unless he for- 
 bear conjugal duly, .priests, to whom it belongs 
 to offer sacrifices for the people, are always to 
 pray ; if to pray always, therefore perpetually to 
 live single or unmarried.'' (o) But our late pre- 
 tended reformers, the more to profane the sacred 
 order of priesthood to which continency and 
 single life have always been annexed in the New 
 Testament, and to make it merely laical and 
 popular, will have all to be married men : yea, 
 those that have vowed to the contrary : and it is 
 a great credit among them, for apostate priests 
 to take wives. And therefore, by their falsely 
 corrupting this text of St. Paul, they will needs 
 have him to say, that he, and the rest of the apos- 
 tles, " led their wives about with them," (as King 
 Edward the Sixth's German apostles did theirs, 
 when they came first into England, at the call of 
 the Lord-protector Seymour ;) whereas the 
 apostle says nothing else, but a woman, a sis- 
 ter ; meaning such a Christian woman as fol- 
 lowed Christ and the apostles, to find and main- 
 tain them with their substance. So does St. 
 Hierom interpret it, (A) and St. Augustine also, 
 both directly proving, that it cannot be translated 
 " wife." (-2) Neither ought this text to be trans- 
 lated " yoke-fellow," as our innovators do, en 
 purpose to make it sound in English, " man and 
 w^ife ;" indeed, Calvin and Beza translate it in 
 the masculine gender, for a " companion." And 
 St. Theonhylact, a Greek father, saith, that " if 
 St. Paul nad spoken of a woman, it should have 
 been yrjita, in Greek." St. Paul says himself, 
 he had no wife, (1 Cor. vii.) and I think we 
 have a little more reason to believe him, than 
 those who would gladly have him married on 
 purpose to cloak the sensuality of a few fallen 
 priests. In the first chapter of the Acts, ver. 
 14, Beza translates, cum exorihus, " with their 
 wives," because he would have all the apostles 
 there esteemed as married men ; whereas the 
 words our cum mulierihus, " with the women," as 
 our English translations also have it ; because, 
 in this place, they were ashamed to follow their 
 master Beza. 
 
 (3) A0AI.V, for the marriage of priests, and 
 all sorts of men indifTerently, they corrupt this 
 text, making two falsifications in one verse : the 
 one is, " among all men :" the other, that they 
 make it an affirtnatiTe speech, by adding " is ;" 
 whereas the apostle's words are these : " Mar- 
 riage honourable in all, and the bed undefiled ;" 
 which is rather an exhortation ; as if he should 
 say, " let marriage be honourable in all, and the 
 bed undefiled ;" as appears, both by that which 
 goes before, and that which follows immediate- 
 ly ; all which are exhortations. Let, therefore, 
 
 yo) St Hierom., lib. contr. Jovin., cap. 19 ; 1 Cor. 
 Tii. 5, 35. 
 
 (ft) Lib. 1, adveraus Jovin., do Op. Mod., cap. 4 ; Lib. 
 9. eap. 21. 
 
 Protestants give^ u» a reason out of the Groek 
 text, why the)' translate the words following, by 
 way of exhortation, " Let your conversation be 
 without covetousness ;" and not these words alsr 
 in like manner, " Let marriage be honourahle in 
 all." The phraseology and construction of both 
 are similar in the Greek. 
 
 (4) Moreover, it is against the profession of 
 continency in priests and others, that they trans- 
 late our Saviour's words respecting a " single 
 life," and the unmarried state, thus, " all men can- 
 not," &c., as though it were impossible to live 
 continent, where Christ said not, " that all men 
 cannot," but •' ail men do not receive this say. 
 ing." St. Augustine says, " Whosoever have 
 not this gift of chastity given them, it is eilhcl 
 bocause they will not have it, or because they 
 fulfil not that which they will ; and they thai 
 have this word, have it of God, and their own 
 free will." (e) " This gift," says Origcn, " ia 
 given to all that ask for it." (d) 
 
 (5) Nor do they translate this text exactly, 
 nor, perhaps, witln a sincere meaning ; for, if 
 there be chastity in marriage, as well as in the 
 single life, as Paphnutius the confessor most 
 truly said, and as themselves are wont often to 
 allege, then their translation doth by no means 
 express our Saviour's meaning, when they say, 
 " there are some chaste, who have made them- 
 selves chaste," &c., for a man might say all do 
 so, who live chastely in matrimony. But our 
 Saviour speaks of such as have made themselves 
 eunuchs for the kingdom of heaven ; not by 
 cutting ofT those parts which belong to gene." 
 ration, for that would be an horrible and mortal 
 sin ; but by making themselves unable and 
 impotent for generation, by promise, and vow 
 of perpetual chastity, which is a spiritual ca.str?. 
 tioh of themselves. 
 
 St. Basil calls the marriage of the clergy 
 " fornication," and not " matrimony." " 0( 
 canonical persons," says he, " the fornication 
 must not be reputed matrimony, because the 
 conjimction of these is altogether prohibited ; 
 for this is altogether profitable for the security 
 of the church." And in his epistle to a certain 
 prelate, he cites these words from the Council 
 of Nice ; " It is by the great council forbidden, 
 in all cases whatsoever, that it should be lawful 
 for a bishop, priest, or deacon, or for any whom- 
 soever, that are in orders, to have a woman live 
 with them ; except only their mother, sister, or 
 aunt, or such persons as are void of all suspi- 
 cion. "(e) 
 
 (e) Lib. (le Gnfia et Liber. Arbitr., cap 4. 
 (4 Tract 7, in Matth. 
 
 (e) St. Basil, Ep. 1, ad Amphilcch. ; Kp 17, ad Pare- 
 gor. Presbyt. Con. Nice, in Cod. Grae. Can 3. 
 
66 
 
 IX. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 
 
 The Book, 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 and Verw. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin TcxL 
 
 The true English accord- 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 Tranatution. 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 testant Bibles, printed 
 A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 The last Translation of 
 
 the Protestant Bible, E>l 
 
 Lon., an. 16S3, 
 
 Vets of 
 the Apos. 
 chap. xix. 
 verso 3. 
 
 Titus 
 shap. iii 
 verses 5, 6 
 
 " In qna, elg tl, 
 ergo hapttsali eslis? 
 qui dixerunt, " /n" 
 Johannis baplismate. 
 (1) 
 
 Non ex operihus 
 justititB, qua fecimus 
 nos, set! secundum 
 \uam tnisericordtam 
 siilvos UDS fecit ; per 
 lavacrum regenera- 
 tionts ct rcnuvulion- 
 is Spiritiis Sancli, 
 "quern effudit" m nos 
 abunde per Jesum 
 Christum Salvato- 
 rem nostrum. (2) 
 
 " In" what then 
 were you baj)tize(l ? 
 who said, " In" 
 John's baptism. 
 
 Not by the works 
 of justice, which we 
 (lid ; but according 
 to his mercy, he 
 hath saved us ; by 
 the laver of regene- 
 ration, and renova- 
 tion of the Holy 
 Ghost, " whom he 
 hath pourgd" upon 
 us abundantly, by. 
 Jesus Christ our 
 Saviour. 
 
 " Unto " what 
 then were you bap- 
 uzed ? " And they" 
 said, " Unto" John's 
 baptism. (1) 
 
 " Unto' what thcr 
 were ye baptized! 
 And they said, "Un- 
 to" John's baptism 
 
 — By the " foun-' 
 tain" of the regene- 
 ration of the Holy 
 ■Ghost, " which he 
 shed on" us, &c.(2) 
 
 Not by works i.l 
 righteousressjwhich 
 we have done ; but 
 according to his 
 mere)', he saved us ; 
 by the" washing" of 
 regeneration,and re- 
 newing of the Holy 
 Ghost, " which he 
 shed" on us, &c. 
 
THB SACRAMENT OF BAPTISM. 
 
 57 
 
 Is the begimiing of tho reformation, they not 
 only took away fi\e of the seven sacraments, 
 but also deprived the rest of all grace, virtue, 
 and efficacy ; making thetn no more than poor ' 
 and beggarly elements ; at the most, no better 
 thin those of the' Jewish law. And this, be- 
 cause they would not have them by any means 
 helpful, or necessary towards our salvation ; for 
 the obtaining of which, they held and asserted, 
 that " faith alone was sufficient." (o) 
 
 For which reason Beza was not content to 
 say, with the apostle, (Rom. iv. 11,) " That 
 circumcision was a seal of the justice of faith ;" 
 but because he thought that term too low for 
 the dignity of circumcision, he (to use his own 
 words) " gladly avoids it ;" putting the verb 
 instead of the noun, quod obsignarct, for sigil- 
 lum. And in his annotations upon the sEime 
 place, he declares the reason of his so doing to 
 be, the dignity of circumcision equal with any 
 sacrament in the New Testament. His words 
 are, " What could be more magnificently spoken 
 of any sacrament ? Therefore, they that make 
 a real difference between the sacraments of the 
 Old Testament and ours, never seem to have 
 known how far Christ's office extendeth :" which 
 he says, not to magnify the old, but to disgrace 
 the new. 
 
 (1 ) This is also the cause, why the firstEnglish 
 Protestant translators corrupted this place in 
 the Acts, to make no difference between .lohn's 
 bHptism and Christ's, saying : " Unto what then 
 were you baptized ? And they said, Unto John's 
 baptism." Which Beza would have to be spoken 
 of John's doctrine, and not of his baptism in 
 water ; as if it had been said, " What doctrine 
 do ye profess ?" and they said, " Johns ;" 
 whereas, indeed, the question is, " In what 
 then ?" or " wherein were you baptized ?" and 
 they said, " In John's baptism ;" as if they would 
 say, we have received John's baptism, but not the 
 Holy Ghost, as yet : whence immediately follows, 
 ' then they were baptized in the name of 
 lesus :" and after imposition of hands, " the 
 Holy Ghost came upun them :" whence appears, 
 the insufficiency of John's baptism, and the great 
 difference between it and Christ's. And this so 
 much troubles the Bezaites, that Beza himself 
 expresses his grief in these words : " It is not 
 necessary, that wheresoever there is mention of 
 John's baptism, we should think it the very 
 ceremony of baptism ; therefore they, who 
 gather that John's baptism differs from Christ's, 
 because these, a little after, arc said to be bap- 
 .ized in the name of Jesus Christ, have no sure 
 foundation." See his annotations on Acts xix. 
 Thus he endeavours to take away the foundation 
 
 (a) Twenty-fifth of tho Thirty-nine Articles. 
 
 of this Catholic conclusion, that John's baptism 
 differs from, and is far inferior to Christ's. 
 
 Beza confesses, that the Greek «f5 " is oflen 
 used for " wherein"' or '■ wherewith :" as it is in 
 the Vulgate Latin, and Erasmus ; but he, and 
 liis followers, think it signifies not so here ; 
 though but the second verse after, (verse 5,) 
 the very same Greek phrase clg i6 Svo^u is by 
 them translated "In;" where they say, " that 
 they were baptized in," not unto, tho name of 
 Jesus Christ. 
 
 (2) But no wonder, if they disgraced the 
 baptism of Christ, when some (A) of them durst 
 presume to take it away, by interpreting these 
 words of the Gospel : " Unless a man be born 
 again of water, and the Spirit," &c., in this 
 manner, " Unless a man be born again of water, 
 that is, the Spirit," as if by water, in this place, 
 were only meant the Spirit allegorically. and not 
 material water : as though our Saviour had said 
 to Nicodemus : " Unless a man be born again of 
 water, I mean of the Spirit, he cannot enter into 
 the kingdom of heaven." To which purpose, 
 Calvin as falsel)' translates the apostle's words 
 to Titus (c) thus : Per lavacrum regenerationis 
 Spirilus Sancti, quod effudil in nos abunde ; 
 making the apostle say : " That God poured the 
 water of regeneration upon us abundantly ;" that 
 is, " the Holy Ghost :" and lest we should not 
 understand him, he tells us, in his commentary 
 on this place, " that the apostle, speaking of 
 water poured out abundantly, speaks not of ma- 
 terial water, but of the Holy Ghost :" whereus 
 the apostle makes not " water" and the " Holy 
 Ghost" all one ; but most plainly distinguishes 
 them ; not saying, that " water" was poured out 
 upon us, as they would infer, by translating it 
 " which he shed ;" but the " Holy Ghost, whom 
 he hath poured out upon us abundantly." So 
 that here is meant both the material water, or 
 washing of baptism, and the effect thereof, which 
 is, the Holy Ghost poured out upon us. 
 
 But, if I blame our English translators, in 
 this place, for making it indifferent, either 
 " which fountain," or " which Holy Ghost he 
 sheU," &c., they will tell me, that the Greek is 
 also indifferent : but, if we demand of them, 
 whether the Holy Ghost, or rather a fountain ol 
 water, may be said to be shed, they must doubt- 
 less confess, not the Holy Ghost, but water : 
 and consequently, lhei.r translating " which ho 
 shed," instead of " whom he poured out," would 
 have it denote the " fountain of water ;" thereby 
 agreeing with Calvin's translation, and Beza's 
 commentary ; for Beza, in his translation, refers 
 it to the Holy Ghost, as Catholics do. 
 
 (A) Beza in Jo. iv. 10, and inTit.iii. 5. 
 (c) Calvin's Translation in Tit. iji. 5. 
 
68 
 
 -PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AOAIN8T 
 
 The Book, 
 
 
 The true English accord- 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 
 The last Translation <A 
 
 Chapter, 
 and V erse. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 ing to the Rhemlsh 
 
 testant Bibles, printed 
 
 the Protestant Bible, Ed 
 
 
 Translation.' 
 
 A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 Lon., an- 1683. 
 
 St. James 
 
 " Confltemini, " 
 
 " Confess," there- 
 
 " Acknowledge " 
 
 " Confess " your 
 
 chap. V. 
 
 kiofioioyeto&s, ergo. 
 
 fore.your "sins" one 
 
 your " faults " one 
 
 " faults," &c. 
 
 verse 16. 
 
 alter utrum " pec- 
 eala" vestra. {]!) 
 
 to another. 
 
 to another. (1) 
 
 
 St. Matth. 
 
 — Si in Tyro et 
 
 — If in Tyre and 
 
 Beza in all his 
 
 Instead of « they 
 
 chap. xi. 
 
 Sidonefaclts essent 
 
 Sidon had been 
 
 translations has, 
 
 had done penance," 
 
 verse 21 ; 
 
 virlutes, qute fact<B 
 
 wrought the mira- 
 
 " they had amended 
 
 they say, " tlicy 
 
 St. Luke 
 
 sunt in nobis, olim in 
 
 cles that have been 
 
 their lives." kni 
 
 would have repen' 
 
 chap. X. 
 
 cilicioet cinere " p(B- 
 
 done in you, " they 
 
 our other transla- 
 
 ted." 
 
 verse 13. 
 
 nitentiam egissent " 
 
 had done penance"' 
 
 tions say, " they 
 
 
 
 (tetei'dijaup. (2) 
 
 in sackcloth and 
 ashes, long ere now. 
 
 would have repen- 
 ted." (2) 
 
 
 St. Matth. 
 
 •'PcRnitenliam agfte," 
 
 " Do penance," for 
 
 " Repent," for the 
 
 " Riepenti" &c. 
 
 chap, iil 
 
 appropinquabit enim 
 
 the kingdom of hea- 
 
 kingdom of heaven 
 
 
 verse 2. 
 
 regnum ccelorum. 
 
 ven is at hand. 
 
 is at hand. 
 
 
 St. Luke 
 
 Predicans baptis. 
 
 — Preaching the 
 
 Preaching the bap- 
 
 — Preaching the 
 
 chap. iii. 
 
 mum " painitenli(B." 
 
 baptism of " pe- 
 
 tism of " repen- 
 
 baptism of " repen- 
 
 verse 3. 
 
 
 nance." 
 
 tance." 
 
 tance." 
 
 St. Luke 
 
 Facite ergo fructus 
 
 Yield, therefore. 
 
 — Worthy of "re^ 
 
 — Fruit worthy of 
 
 chap. iii. 
 
 dignos "piEnitentice." 
 
 fruits worthy of 
 
 pentance." Beza 
 
 " repentance 
 
 verse 8. 
 
 
 " penance." 
 
 says, "Do fruits 
 meet for them that 
 amend their lives." 
 
 
 rtCtS of 
 
 Petrus vera ad 
 
 But Peter said to 
 
 — " Repent," and 
 
 — " Rfepent » and 
 
 the Apos. 
 
 illos " panilentiam 
 
 theiny "do penance," 
 
 be every one of you 
 
 be baptized, &c. 
 
 chap. ii. 
 
 {inquil) agite," el 
 
 and be every one of 
 
 baptized, &c. 
 
 
 veise 38. 
 
 baplizelur unusquis- 
 que vestrum in no- 
 
 you baptized in the 
 name of JesusChrist. 
 
 
 
 
 mine J esu Ckristi. 
 
 
 
 
CONFESSION AXD THE SACr,AMEN'T OV TESAVCK, 
 
 5!» 
 
 ( 1 ) To avoid this term " confession," especially 
 in this place, whence the reader might easily 
 gather " sacramental confession," they thus fal- 
 sify tlie text. It is said a little before, " if any 
 be sick, let him bring in the priests," &c. . An<l 
 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 ; " ac- 
 knowledge your faults," to make it sound among 
 the ignorant common people, as different as they 
 can from the usual Caiholic phrase, " Confess 
 jour sins." What mean they by this ?" If this 
 acknowledging of faults one to another, before 
 death, be indifferently made to all men, wh}' do 
 they appoint in their common prayer-book, (a) 
 (as it seems, out of this place.) that the sick 
 person shall make a special confession to the 
 minister; and he shall absolve him in the very 
 same form of absolution that Catholic priests 
 use in the sacrament of penance ? 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 diocess of 
 Lincoln, (b) who petitioned to have the words 
 of absolution blotted out of the common prayer- 
 book ; but when they visit the sick, they are of 
 the judgment of Roman Catholics, who, at this 
 day, hold confession and absolution ngcessary to 
 salvation, as did also the primitive Christians. 
 Witness St. Basil : " Sins must necessarily be 
 opened unto those, to whom the dispensations 
 of God's mysteries is committed." St. Am- 
 brose : ". If thou desirest to be justified, confess 
 thy sin : for a sincere confession of sins dissolves 
 the knot of iniquity." (c) 
 
 (2) As for penance, and satisfaction for sins, 
 they utterly deny it, upon the heresy of, " only 
 faith justifying and saving a man." Beza pro- 
 tests, that he avoids these terms, fteiuvoiit, 
 ptznilenlia, and /teitttoetje, pmnilentiant agite, 
 of purpose : and says, that in translating these 
 Greek words, he will always use, resipiscentia 
 and resipiscile, " amendment of life," and " amend 
 your lives." And our English Bibles, to this 
 day, dare not venture on the word penance, 
 but only repentance ; which is not only far 
 different from the Greek word, but even from 
 thn very circumstance of the text; as is evi- 
 dent from those words of St. MatA. xi., and 
 Luke X., were these words, "sackcloth and 
 QshfS," cannot but signify more than the word 
 repentance, or arnelidment of life can denote ; 
 as is plain from these words of St Basil, («/) 
 
 {a) VUitatidn of fne Sick. 
 
 ib) Survey of the Common Prayer-Book. 
 
 {c) St. Basil in Regulis Bievior., Interrogatione 288. 
 St. Amb., lib, de Pcenit., cap. fi. 
 
 (i/) St Basil in Psalm xxix ; SI Aug Horn. 27- Inter- 
 50 H et Ep. 108; Sozom,, Lib 7, cap. 16. See St. 
 Hirrrin in Epitaph Fabiol. 
 
 " Sackcloth makes for penance , Tor the fathers, 
 in old time, silting in sackcloth and ashes, did 
 penance " Do not St. John Baptist, and St. 
 Paul, plainly signify penitential works, when 
 they exhort us to " do fruits worthy of penance •" 
 which penance St. Augustine thus declares ; 
 "There is a more grievous and more mournful 
 penance, whereby properly they are called in 
 the church, that are penitents • removed also 
 from partaking the sacrament of the altar." And 
 Sozomen, in his ecclesiastical history, says, " In 
 the Church of Rome, there is a manifest and 
 known place for the penitents, and in it they 
 stand sorrowful, and as it were mourning, and 
 when the sacrifice is ended, being not made par- 
 takers thereof, with weeping and lamentations 
 they cast themselves far on the ground : then 
 the bishop, weeping also with compassion, lifts 
 them up ; and, after a certain time enjoined, 
 absolves them from their penance. This the 
 priests or bishops of Rome keep, from the very 
 beginning, even until our time." 
 
 Not only Sozomen, but (e) Socrates also, and 
 all the ancient fathers, when they speak ol 
 penitents, that confessed and lamented their 
 sins, and were enjoined penance, and performed 
 it, did always express it in the said Greek wards ; 
 which, therefore, are proved most ecidently to 
 signify penance, and doing penance. Again, 
 when the ancient Council of Laodicea (_/") says, 
 that the time of penance should be given to 
 offenders, according to the proportion of the 
 fault : and that such shall not communicate till 
 a certain time ; but after they have done pen- 
 ance, and confessed their fault, {g) are then to 
 be received : and when the first Council of Nice 
 speaks of shortening or prolonging the days of 
 penance : when (h) St. Basil speaks after the 
 same manner ; when St. Chrysostoin calls the 
 sackcloth and fasting of the Ninevites, for cer- 
 tain days, " Tol dierum pcEnitenliam, so many 
 days of penance :" in all these places, I wo>ild 
 demand of our translators of the Enghsh Bible, 
 if all these speeches of penance, and doing 
 penance, are not expressed by the said Greek 
 words ? and I would ask them, whether in these 
 places, where there is mentioned a proscribed 
 time of satisfaction for sin, by such and such 
 penal means, they will translate repentance and 
 amendment of life only ? Moreover, the Latin 
 Church, and all the ancient fathers thereof, 
 have always read, as the Vulgate Latin inter- 
 preter translates, and do all expound the same 
 penance, and doing penance : for example, see 
 St. Augustine, among others ; (j) where you 
 will find it plain, that he speaks of " penitential 
 works, for satisfaction of sins'" 
 
 (C) Socrat., lib. 5, cap. ID, 
 
 (/) Council of Laodicea, Can. 2, 9, et 19 
 
 (,e) 1 Council of Nice, Can. 12. 
 
 (A) St, Basil, cap. 1, ad Aniphiloch. 
 
 {i) St. AnKU3t.,Ep. 108. 
 
60 
 
 XI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS A0AIN9T 
 
 The Bciok, 
 
 
 The true English accord- 
 
 Corniptions in the Pro- 
 
 The last Ttanslation rrt 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 ing to th« Rhemish 
 
 testant Billies, printed 
 
 the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
 
 ana Verse. 
 
 
 Trans.'.ition. 
 
 A. D. 1562, 1577, 1578. 
 
 I.on., an. 1G83. 
 
 St. Luke 
 
 Ave, " gratia 
 
 Hail, " full of 
 
 Hail, " thou that 
 
 In Bib. 1637 
 
 ■jhap. i. 
 
 plena,'" Dominus U 
 
 grace," our Lord is 
 
 art freely beloved." 
 
 Hail, " thou that art 
 
 verse 28. 
 
 cum, xexagnat/iivi]. 
 
 with thee. 
 
 In Bib. 1577, "thou 
 
 highly favoured." In 
 
 
 (1) 
 
 
 that art in high fa- 
 vour." (1) 
 
 Bib. 1683, Hail, 
 " thou that art high, 
 ly favoured," our 
 Lord is with thee. 
 
 St. Matth. 
 
 Et " vocavit" no- 
 
 And " called" his 
 
 And "he" called 
 
 And " he" called 
 
 chap. i. 
 
 nomen ejus Jesum, 
 
 name Jesus. 
 
 his name Jesus. (2) 
 
 his name Jesus. 
 
 rerse 25. 
 
 xai CKixlsae to ovojia 
 OUT8 InoBV. (2) 
 
 
 
 
 Genesis 
 
 " Ipsa" conteret 
 
 "She" shall braise 
 
 " It" shall bruise 
 
 "It" shall bruise 
 
 chap. iii. 
 
 caput tuum, et tu 
 
 thy head in pieces, 
 
 thy head, and thou 
 
 thy head, and thou 
 
 verso 15. 
 
 " insidiaberis" eal- 
 
 and " thou shalt lie 
 
 shalt " bruise his 
 
 shalt " bruise hie 
 
 
 eaneo ejus. (3) 
 
 in wait for her heel." 
 
 heel." (3) 
 
 heel." 
 
 2 St. Peter 
 
 Dabo autem operant 
 
 And I will do my 
 
 I will endeavour 
 
 I will endoavonr, 
 
 chap. i. 
 
 et frequenter habere 
 
 endeavour; you to 
 
 that you may be 
 
 that yon may bo 
 
 Terse 15. 
 
 vos post obitum me- 
 
 have often after my 
 
 able, after my de- 
 
 able after my de- 
 
 
 um, nt " horum me- 
 
 decease also, that 
 
 cease, to have these 
 
 cease,to have "these 
 
 
 moriam" factatis.{4) 
 
 you may keep a 
 
 things " always in 
 
 things always in re. 
 
 
 
 "memory of these 
 
 remembrance." (4) 
 
 membrance." 
 
 
 
 things." 
 
 
 
 Psttlm 
 
 Nimis honorificati 
 
 Thy friends, 
 
 How dear are 
 
 How precious aim 
 
 cxxxviii. 
 
 sunt amid tut, "'''■n, 
 
 God, are become 
 
 thy counsels (or 
 
 are thy thoughts un- 
 
 Eng. Uib., 
 
 01 (fiXoi an, Deus ! ni- 
 
 exceedingly honour- 
 
 thoughts) to me ? 
 
 to me, God ! How 
 
 cxxxix. 
 
 mis cnnfortatus est 
 
 able ; their prince- 
 
 ! how great is tho 
 
 great is the sura of 
 
 vrerse 17. 
 
 pnncipatus eorum, 
 axixa*. (5) 
 
 dom is exceedingly 
 strengthened. 
 
 sum of them ? (5) 
 
 them ! 
 
THE HONOUR OF OtTR nr.ESSKD t.ADY AND OTHER SAINTS. 
 
 61 
 
 (1)The most blessed Virgin, and glorious 
 mother of Christ, has by God's holy Church 
 always been honoured with most magnificent, 
 titles and addresses. One of the first four general 
 councils gives her the transcendent title »f the 
 motherol^ God. (a) And by St. Cyril of Alexan- 
 dria, she is saluted in these words, " Hail ! holy 
 mother of God, rich treasure of the world, ever- 
 shining lamp, crown of purity, and sceptre of true 
 doctrine ; by thee the holy Trinity is every where 
 blessed and adored, the heavens exult, angels 
 rejoice, and devils are chased from us : who so 
 surpasse,s in elegance, as ' to be able to say 
 enough to the glory of Mary ?" Yea, the angel 
 Gabriel is commissioned from God to address 
 himself to her with this salutation, " Hail I full 
 of grace."(i) Since which time, what has ever 
 i)een more common, and, at this d;iy, more gen- 
 eral and useful in all Christian countries, than in 
 the Ave Maria to say, gratia plena, " full of 
 grace ?' But, in our miserable land, the holy 
 prayer, which every child used to say, is not only 
 banished, but the very text of scripture wherein 
 onr blessed Lady was saluted by the angel, 
 •' Hail ! full of grace," they have changed into 
 another manner of salutation, viz., " Hail ! thou 
 that art freely beloved," or, " in high favour." 
 (c) I v/ould gladly know from them, why this, 
 or that, or any other thing, rather than " Hail ! 
 full of p;race ?" St. John Baptist was full of the 
 Holy Ghost, even from his birth ; St. Stephen 
 was "full of grace,((i) why may not then our Lady 
 be .(filltd " full of grace," who, as St. Ambrose 
 s&ys, " only obtained the grace which no other 
 wcman deserved, to be replenished with the au- 
 thor of grace ?" 
 
 If they say, the Greek word does not signify 
 so : I must ask them, why they translate ^ixfti- 
 fieiofT, (e) ulcernsus, '• full of sores," and will 
 not translate xex"Q^""f^''1^ gratiosa, " full of 
 graced" Let them tell us what difference there is 
 in the nature and significancy of these two words. 
 If ulcrrosus, ax Beza translates it, .be "full of 
 sores," why is not gratiosa, as Erasmus trans- 
 lates it, " full of grace V seeing that all such 
 adjectives in osus signify fulness, as periculosus, 
 (Brumnosus, &c , as every school-boy knows. 
 What syllable is there in this word, that seems 
 to make it signify " freely beloved ?" St. Chry- 
 sostom, and the Greek doctors, who should best 
 know the nature of this Greek word, say, that 
 it signifies to make gracious and acceptable. 
 St. Athanasius, a Greek doctor, says, that our 
 blessed Lady had this title, xF^fiigiiaiud'rj, be- 
 cause the Holy Ghost descended into her, filling 
 her with all graces and virtues. And St. Hieroni 
 reads gralta phvn, and says plainly, she was so 
 saluted, " full of grace," because she conceived 
 tiim in whom all fulness of the Deity dwelt 
 corporallj'. {/) 
 
 (2) Again, to take fiom the holy mother of 
 God, what honour they can, they translate, 
 
 {a) Cone Eph„ cap. 13 (i) St. Luke i. 18. 
 
 (c) St. Luke i. 15. (,/) Act.=^ vli. 8 (e) Luke xvi, 20. 
 (/) St. Chys. Comment, in Ep. 1 ; St Athan. de S 
 Di-ipar; St Hieron). in Ep 140 in ExpoM. P.sal x\a. 
 
 that " he (viz. Joseph) called his name Jesus." 
 And why not she, as well as he ? For in St 
 Luke, the angel sailh to our Lady al.so, 
 " Thou shall call his name Jesus." Have 
 we not much more reason to think that the 
 blessed Virgin, the natural mother of our 
 Saviour, gave liim the name Jesus, than Joseph, 
 his reputed father; seeing also St. MattJiew 
 in this place, limits it neither to him nor her' 
 And the angel revealed the name first unlo her, 
 saying, that she should so call him. And the 
 Hebrew word, Isa. vii., whereunto the angel 
 alludes, is the feminine gender ; and by the great 
 Rabbins referred unto her, saying expressly, 
 in their commentaries, et vocabit ipsa puetta, 
 &c., " and the maid herself shall call his name 
 Jesus." (g) 
 
 (3) How ready our new controllers of antiquity 
 and the approved ancient Latin translation, are 
 to find fault with this text, Gen. iii., " She shall 
 bruise thy head," &c., because it appertains fo our 
 blessed Lady's honour ; saying, that all ancient 
 fathers read ipsum : (h) when on the contrary, 
 St. Chrysostom, St. Ambrose, St. Augustine, 
 St. Gregory, St. Bede, St. Bernard, and many 
 others, read ipsa, as the Latin text now does. 
 And though some have read otherwise, yet, 
 whether we read " she" shall bruise, or " her 
 seed," that is, her Son, Christ Jesus, we attri- 
 bute no more, or no less to Christ, or to his 
 mother, by this reading or by that ; as you may 
 see, if you please to read the annotations upon 
 this place in the Dovvay Bible. I have spoken 
 of this in the preface. 
 
 (4) Where the scripture, in the original, is 
 ambiguous and indifferent to divers senses, it 
 ought not to be restrained or limited by trans- 
 lation, unless there be a mere necessity, when it 
 can hardly express the ambiguity of the original. 
 As for example, in this wliere St. Peter speaks 
 so ambiguously, either that he will remember 
 them after his death, or that they shall remember 
 him. But the Calvinists restrain the sense of 
 this place, without any necessity; and that 
 against the prayer and intercession of saints for 
 us, contrary to the judgment of some of the 
 Greek fathers ; who concluded from it, " that 
 the saints in heaven remember us on earth, and 
 make intercession for us." 
 
 (5) In fine, this verse of the Psalms, (i) 
 which is by the church and all antiquity read 
 thus, and both sung and said in honour of the 
 holy apostles, agreeably to that in another Psalm, 
 " Thou shall appoint them princes over all the 
 earth," they translate contrary both to the 
 Hebrew and the Greek, which is altogether 
 
 ' according to the said ancient Latin translation, 
 I " How are the heads of them strengthened, or 
 their princedoms ?" And this they do, pur- 
 posely to detract from the honour of the aposf 
 ties and holy saints. 
 
 (g) Rabbi Abraham et Rabbi David. 
 (A) See the Annot. upon this place in the Doway Bible 
 (r) Oecum. in Caten. Gagneius in hunc locum. Psa. 
 Tsliv 
 
Xi:. PROTESTANT TEANSLATroN \GAISST ' 
 
 The Book, 
 
 
 The true £nglish«coor(i- 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 
 The last Translation of 
 
 Cliaptcr, 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 
 teetaitt Bibles, printed 
 
 'he Protestant Bible, Ed 
 
 and \eiHe. 
 
 
 Translation. 
 
 A. V. 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 Lon., an. 1663 
 
 Hebrews 
 
 . Fide, Jacob mo- 
 
 By faith, Jacob 
 
 — -And "leanincr 
 
 By faith Jacob, 
 
 chap. xi. 
 
 riens, singulos filio- 
 
 dying, blessed every 
 
 on the end of his 
 
 when he was a-dv- 
 
 verse 21. 
 
 rum Joseph bene 
 
 one of the sons of 
 
 staff, worshipped 
 
 ing, blessed both tht 
 
 
 dixit, et " adoravit 
 
 Joseph, and "adored 
 
 God." (1) 
 
 sons of JosejA, "and 
 
 
 fasligium virga 
 
 the top of his rod." 
 
 
 worshipped, leaning 
 
 
 ejus," nqoaexivrjOBV 
 
 
 
 upon the top of his 
 
 
 in't 10 SxQoy t^$ qu§Sa 
 
 
 
 staff." 
 
 
 &iTa. (1) 
 
 
 
 
 Genesis 
 
 " Aioramt Israel 
 
 " Israel adored 
 
 " Israel worship- 
 
 And "Israel bowed 
 
 chap, xlvii. 
 
 Deum, conversus ad" 
 
 God, turning to" the 
 
 ped God towards" 
 
 himself upon" the 
 
 verse 31. 
 
 lecluli caput. 
 
 bed's head. 
 
 the bed's head. (2) 
 
 bed's head. 
 
 Ps. xcviii. 
 
 Exaltate Domi- 
 
 Exalt the Lord 
 
 Exalt the Lord 
 
 Exalt tho Loid 
 
 rerse 5. 
 
 num Deum nostrum- 
 
 our God, " and 
 
 our God, and " fall 
 
 our God, and •'•wor- 
 
 Eng. Bib., 
 
 " el adiiriite scabel. 
 
 adore ye the foot- 
 
 down before" his 
 
 slii|> at his footstool," 
 
 xcix. 
 
 lum pedum ejus," 
 
 stool of his feet," 
 
 footstool, "for he" 
 
 " for ho" is hi>ly. 
 
 
 quoniam sanctum est. 
 
 • 
 
 "because it" is holy. 
 
 is holy. 
 
 
 Ps. cxxxi. 
 
 Introihimus in 
 
 Wo will enter in- 
 
 — We will "fall 
 
 We will go info 
 
 rerse 7. 
 
 tabernaculum ejus. 
 
 to his tabernacle, 
 
 dow n be fore his foot- 
 
 hia tabernacles, we 
 
 Eng Bib., 
 
 " adorabimus in loco 
 
 we will " adore in 
 
 stool " 
 
 will "worship at hia 
 
 cxxxii. 
 
 ubt steterunt pedes 
 ejus." 
 
 the place where his 
 feet etood." 
 
 
 footstool." 
 
THR DISTINCTION OF RELATIVE AND i)IVI\B WORSHIP. 
 
 63 
 
 (1 ) The sacred Council of Trent decrees, that 
 •■ tlie images of Christ, of the virgin mother of 
 Rod, and of other saints, are to be had and re- 
 tained, especially in churches; and that due 
 honour and worship is to be imparted unto them : 
 not that any divinity is believed to be in them; 
 or virtue, for which they are to be worshipped ; 
 or tnat any thing is to be begged of them ; or 
 Jiat 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 exhil\i»id lo them, 
 is referred to the archetype, which they resem- 
 bl-? : so that, by the images which we Idss, and 
 beiore which we uncover our heads, and kneel, 
 we adore Christ and his saints, whose likeness 
 they bear." (a) And the second Council of 
 Nice, which confirmed the ancient reverence 
 due to sacred images, tells us, " That these 
 images the faithful salute with a kiss, and give 
 an honorary worship to them, but not the true 
 latria, or divine worship, which is according to 
 faith, and can be given to none but to God him- 
 self." (6) Between which degree of worship, 
 latria and dulia, Protestants are so loath to make 
 any distinction, that, in this place, they restrain 
 the scripture to the sense of one doctor ; inso- 
 much that they make the commentary of St. 
 Augustine, (peculiar to him alone.) the very text 
 of scripture, in their translation ; thereby exclu- 
 ding all other senses and expositions of other 
 faihers ; 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 interpvetalion of this place, in all anti- 
 quity, but in St. Augustine only, as Beza him- 
 self confesses. And here they add two words 
 more than are in the Greek text, " Leaning 
 and God :" forcing di/rou to signify ikvjov, which 
 may be, but is as rare as virg<B ejus, for virgm 
 sum ; and turning the other words clear out of 
 their order, place, and form of construction, 
 which they must needs have correspondent and 
 answerable to the Hebrew te.xt, from whence 
 they were translated ; which Hebrew words 
 themselves translate in this order, " He wor- 
 shipped towards the bed's head ;" and if so, 
 according to the Hebrew, then did he worship 
 " towards the top of his sceptre," according 
 to the Greek ; the difference of both being only 
 in these words, sceptre and bed ; because the 
 Hebrew is ambiguous as to both, and not in the 
 order and construction of the sentence. 
 
 (VJ) Bui 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 
 
 1 a) Concil Trident. , Sess 25. 
 Ci) ConcU. Nicoa. Act 7. 
 
 and totally suppress "worshipped &)()" in 
 another ? Is it not because they are afraid, lest 
 those expressions might warrant and conl/.m 
 the Catholic and Christian manner of adoring 
 our Saviour Christ, towards the holy cross, or 
 before his image, the crucifix, the altar, &c. ? 
 And tho.ugh they make so much of the Greek 
 particle, 67it, as to translate it, " leaning upon," 
 rather than " towards ;" yet the ancient Greek 
 fathers (c) considered it of such little iiBporl 
 that they expounded and read the text, as if it 
 were for the phrase only, and not for any signi- 
 fication at all ; saying, " Jacob adored Joseph's 
 sceptre ; the people of Israel adored the temple, 
 the ark, the holy mount, the place where his feel 
 stood," and the like : whereby St. Damascene 
 proves the adoration of creatures, named dulia ; 
 to wit, of the cross, and of sacred images. If, 1 
 say, these fathers make so little force of the 
 prepositions, as to infer from these texts, not 
 only adoration " towards" the thing, but ado- 
 ration " of" the thing ; how come these, our new 
 translators, thus to strain and rack the little 
 particle, st", to make it signify " leaning upon," 
 and utterly to exclude it from signifying any 
 thing tending towards adoration ? 
 
 I would gladly know of them, whether in 
 these places of the Psalms there be any force in 
 the Hebrew prepositions ? Surely no more than 
 if we should say in English, without preposi- 
 tions, " adore ye his holy will : we will adore the 
 place where his feet stood: adore ye his foot- 
 stool;" for they know the same preposition .s 
 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 signi 
 fication of the preposition : and therefore, in 
 these places, their translation is corrupt aiu) 
 wilful ; when they say, " we will fall down be- 
 fore," or, " at his footstool," &c. Where they 
 shun and avoid, first, the term of adoration, 
 which the Hebrew and Greek duly express, by 
 terms correspondent in both languages througli- 
 out the Bible, and are applied, for the most 
 part, to signify adoring of creatures. Secondly, 
 they avoid the Greek phrase, which is, at least, 
 to adore " towards" these holy things and 
 pi ices: and much more the Hebrew phrase, 
 wiich is, to adore the very things rehearsed 
 " To adore God's footstool," (as the Psalmist 
 saith,) " because it is holy," or, " because he is 
 holy," whose footstool it is, as the Greek read- 
 eth. And St. Augustine so precisely and reli- 
 giously reads, " adore ye his footstool," that he 
 examines the case ; and finds, thereby, that the 
 blessed sacrament must be adored, and that x\u 
 good Christian takes it, before he adores it. 
 
 (c) St. Chrys. Oecum. in Collection. St Dalnaec , Uu 
 1, pro Imaginib , LeoDi. apud Damaa. - 
 
CJ4 
 
 XIII.- 
 
 -PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 
 
 The Kook, 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 and veree. 
 
 Coloss. 
 chap. iii. 
 viirse 5. 
 
 Ephesiana 
 chap. V. 
 verae 5. 
 
 2 Corinth, 
 chap. ri. 
 verse 16. 
 
 1 £p. John 
 chap. V. 
 verse 21. 
 
 1 Corinth. 
 chap. X. 
 vtrse 7. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 Et avaritiam, qua: 
 est " simutacroTum 
 servitus," etdiuioXai. 
 pEia. (1) 
 
 The true English accord 
 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 
 Translation. 
 
 — Aul avarus, quod 
 est " idolorum ser- 
 vitus." 
 
 Quis autem con- 
 sensus templo Dei 
 cum "idolisVeidailwv 
 
 (2) 
 
 Filioli, custodite 
 vos a " timulacris.'" 
 stdiaXotv. 
 
 " Neque idolatry 
 eiSiaXoknj^ai, efficia- 
 mint," sicut quidam 
 ex ipsis. 
 
 — And avarice, 
 which is the " ser- 
 vice of idols." 
 
 — Or covetous per- 
 son, which is " the 
 service of idols." 
 
 And what agree- 
 ment hath the tem- 
 ple of God with 
 "idols?" 
 
 My little children, 
 keep . yourselves 
 from " idols." 
 
 " Neither become 
 ye idolaters," as 
 certain of them. 
 
 Corru:(jtions in the Pro- 
 testant Bibles, printed 
 A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 — And covetotis- 
 ness, which is the 
 " worshipping of 
 images." (1) 
 
 The list Translation of 
 
 the Htotcstant Bible, Ed 
 
 Lon., an. 1683. 
 
 — And covetous 
 ness, which is "idb 
 latry.' 
 
 — Or covetous 
 man, which is " a 
 worshipper of im- 
 ages." 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 How agreeth the 
 temple of God with 
 " images ?" (2) 
 
 Babes, keep your- 
 selves from " im- 
 ages." 
 
 " Be not ■ wor- 
 shippers of images," 
 as some of them. 
 
 Corrected 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 Corrected alsi in 
 this. 
 
HACKED IMAGES. 
 
 65 
 
 {l^ Before I proceed in this, let me ask our 
 English translators, what is the most proper, 
 and best English ofVtSuilov, eiiSoiXoWryi;;, e(Siiilo. 
 iiirifeiii ; iriulum, idolatra, idnlatria? Is it not 
 idol, idolator, idolatry? Are not these plain 
 English words, and well known in our lan- 
 gna^e? Why then need they put three words 
 for one, " worshipper of images," and " wor- 
 Bhipping of images?" Whether is the more 
 natural and convenient speech, either in our 
 English tongue, or for the truth of the thing to 
 say, as the holy scripture does, "covetousness 
 is iilolatry ;" and consequently, '• the covetous 
 man is an idolator;" or to say, as their first ab- 
 surd translations have it, " covetousness is 
 worshipping of images," and the " covetous man 
 is a worshipper of images ?" I suppose they will 
 scarcely deny, but that there are many covetous 
 Protestants, and, perhaps, of their clergy too, 
 that may be put in the list with those of whom 
 the apostle speaks, when he says, there are 
 some " whose belly is their god." And though 
 these make an idol of their money, and their 
 bellies, by covetousness and gluttony, yet they 
 would doubtless take it ill of us, if in their 
 own scripture language, we should call them 
 '• worshippers of images." Who sees not, 
 therefore, what great difference there is be- 
 tween " idol" and " image," " idolatry" and 
 "worshipping of images ?" even so much is 
 there between St. Paul's words, and the Pro- 
 testant translation ; but because in their latter 
 translations they have corrected this shameful 
 absiu-dity, I will say no more of it. 
 
 (2) I.v this other, not only their malice, but 
 their full intent and set purpose of deluding the 
 poor simple people appear ; this translation being 
 made when images were plucking down through- 
 out England, to create in the people a belief, that 
 the apostle spoke against sacred images in 
 churches ? whereas his words are against the 
 idols and idolatry of the Gentiles ; as is plain 
 from what goes before, exhorting them not to 
 join with infidels ; for, says he, " How agreeth 
 the temple of God with idols ?" not " with 
 images," for " images" might be had without 
 sin, as we see the Jews had the images of the 
 cherubim and the figures of oxen in the temple, 
 and the image of the brazen serpent in the 
 wilderness, by God's appointment ; though, as 
 6i>on as they began to make an idol of the 
 serpent, and adore it as their god, it could no 
 longer be kept without sin. By this corrupt 
 custom of translating image, instead of idol, they 
 80 bewitched their deceived followers, as to 
 make them despise, contemn, and abandon even 
 the very sign and image of salvation, the cross 
 pf Christ, and the crucifix , whereby the man- 
 ner of his bitter death and passion is represent- 
 ed ; notwithstanding their signing and marking 
 
 their children with it in their baptism, when 
 they are first made Christians. 
 
 By such wilfid corruptions, in theso and othei 
 texts, as, " Be not worshippers of images, as 
 son\e (if them ;" and, " Babes, keep yourselves 
 from images ;" which, the more to impress on 
 the minds of the vulgar, they wrote upon their 
 church walls ; the people were animated to 
 break down, and cast out of their churches, the 
 images of our blessed Saviour, of his blessed 
 mother, the twelve apostles, &c., with so full 
 and general a resolution of defacing and extir- 
 pating all tokens or marks of our Saviour's pas- 
 sion, that they broke down the very crosses from 
 the tops of church steeples, where they could 
 easily come to them. And though, in their 
 latter translations, they have corrected this cor- 
 ruption ; yet do some of the people so freshly, 
 to this day, retain the malice impressed by il 
 upon their parents, that they have presumed to 
 break the cross lately set on the pinnacle of the 
 porch of Westminster abbey : and the more to 
 show their spite towards that sacred sign of our 
 redemption — the holy cross — they placed it, not 
 long since, upon the foreheads of bulls and 
 mastifl!"dogs, and so drove them through the 
 streets of London, to the eternal shame of such 
 as receive it in their baptism, and pretend to 
 Christianity. AVhat could Jews or Infidels have 
 done more ? Was it not enough to break it 
 down from the tops of churches, and to put up 
 the image of a dragon, (the figure wherein the 
 devil himself is usually represented,) as on Bow 
 Church, («) in the midst of the city, but they 
 must place it so contemptuously on the fore- 
 heads of beasts and dogs ? 
 
 In how great esteem the holy cross was had 
 by primitive Christians, the fathers of those days 
 have sufficiently testified in their writings . 
 " This cross," says St. Chrysostom, " we may 
 see solemnly used in houses, in the market, in 
 the desert, in the ways, on mountains and hills, 
 in valleys," &c., contrary to which', the pretend- 
 ed reformers of our times have not only cast it 
 out of their houses, but out of- their churches 
 also : they have broken it down from all market- 
 places, from hills, mountains, valleys, and high- 
 ways ; so that in all the roads in England there 
 is not one cross left standing entire, that I have 
 ever heard of, except one called llal|)h cros.s, 
 which I have often seen, upon a wild heath or 
 mountain, near Danby forest, in the north ridiuj? 
 of Yorkshire, (i) 
 
 (a) Why might not a cock (the animal by which nut 
 Saviour was pleased to admonish St. Peter of his siti.s, 
 have been placed upon Covent Garden Church, rather 
 than a serpent l or a cross on Bow Church, lather than 
 a dragon 1 
 
 (i) The inhabitants of Danby, Rosdale, Westerdale, 
 and Ferndale, may glory before all parts of England. 
 that they have a cross standing to this day in the iTitdsf 
 of them. 
 
66 
 
 XIV. PROTKSTA.NT THANSI.ATIO.Nb AQAINST 
 
 Th« Book. 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 and Verse. 
 
 1 Corinth, 
 chap. V. 
 vor. 9, 10. 
 
 Romans 
 ubap. xi. 
 verse 4. 
 
 .^cts of 
 the Apos.. 
 chap. xix. 
 verse 35. 
 
 Exodus 
 chap. XX. 
 verse 4. 
 
 .The V.lgale Lalin Text. 
 
 Scripsi vohis in 
 rpislola, ne commis- 
 ccamini fornicariis, 
 non vtique fornica- 
 riis Imjus tiwndi, aul 
 avaris, aul rapL^i- 
 biis, aul " idnlis ser- 
 vienlibus" EiSiaXolAz- 
 gulg, ahoquin debue- 
 ratis de hoc rnundo 
 exiisse : nunc autem 
 scripsi vohis non 
 commisccri ; si is qui 
 fraler nominalur, est 
 fornicator, uut aoa- 
 rus, aut " idolis ser- 
 viens.'&'C, fiSoti-oXdr. 
 ?«'?. (1) 
 
 Reliqui mthi sep- 
 tem millia virorum 
 qui non curvaverunt 
 genua " ante Baal." 
 (2) 
 
 1 
 
 Vin Ephesi, quis 
 enim est hominum, 
 qui nesciat Ephesio- 
 rum civitatem cultri- 
 
 magntE 
 " Jovis 
 
 cem esse 
 Dianis et 
 
 prolix?" TB HiongiBi ? 
 
 Non fades tibi 
 "sculptite," ^OD, stdo). 
 Xoy. 
 
 The trjv .Giiidish accord- 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 Translation. 
 
 I wrote to you in 
 an epistle, not to 
 keep company with 
 fornicators ; 1 mean, 
 not , the fornicators 
 of this world, or the 
 covetous, or: the ex- 
 tortioners, or " ser- 
 vers of idols ;" other- 
 wise you should 
 have gone out of this 
 world. 
 
 But now I have 
 writ to you, not to 
 keep company ; if 
 he that is named a 
 brother be a forni- 
 cator, or covetous 
 person, or a " ser- 
 ver of idob," &c 
 
 Corrtptions in the Pro- 
 testant Hihles, printed 
 ». I) 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 I have left me 
 seven thousand men 
 that have not bowed 
 their knees to Baal. 
 
 Ye men of Ephe- 
 sus, for what man is 
 there that knoweth 
 not the city of the 
 Ephesians to be a 
 worshipper of great 
 Diana, and " Jupi- 
 ter's child ?" 
 
 Thou shalt not 
 make to thyself any 
 graven thing." 
 
 1 wrote to you 
 " that you should" 
 not company with 
 fornicators : " and" 
 I " meant" not " all 
 of" the fornicators 
 of this world,"eilher 
 of" the covetous, or 
 extortioners, "either 
 the idolaters," &c. 
 
 But " that ye" 
 company not " toge- 
 ther ;" if " any" that 
 is " called" a bro- 
 ther be a fornica- 
 tor, or covetous, or 
 a " worshipper of 
 images," &c. (1) 
 
 The last Translation o. 
 
 the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
 
 Lon. an. 1683. 
 
 It is corrected in 
 this Bible. 
 
 I have left me 
 seven thousand men 
 that have not bowed 
 their knees to " the 
 image of" Baal. (2) 
 
 Instead of " Ju- 
 piter's child," they 
 translate "the image 
 which came down 
 from Jupiter." 
 
 Thou shalt not 
 make to thyself any 
 graven image." 
 
 I have left mo 
 seven thousand men 
 that have not bowed 
 their knees to " the 
 image of" Baal 
 
 And here they 
 translate, " the im- 
 age which fell down 
 from Jupiter." 
 
 Thou shalt not 
 make to thoe aty 
 " graven imago." 
 
TIIK USB OF SACKED IMAv. 
 
 67 
 
 (1) How malicious iind heretical was their 
 intention, who, in this one sentence, made St. 
 Paul seem to speak two distinct things, calling 
 the Pagans " idolaters," and such wicked 
 Christians as should commit the same impiety, 
 " worshij)pers of images ;" whereas the apostle 
 uses but one and the self-same Greek word, in 
 speaking both of Pagans and Christians ? It is a 
 wilful and most notorious corruption ; for, in the 
 first place, the translators, speaking of Pagans, 
 r.eiulor the word in the text " idolater ;" but, in 
 the latter palt of the verse, speaking of Chris- 
 tians, they translate the very same Greek word, 
 " worshipper of images," and what reason had 
 they for this, but to make the simple and igno- 
 rant reader think, that St. Paul speaks here not 
 only of Pagan idolaters, but also of Catholic 
 Christians, who reverently kneel in prayer before 
 the holy cross, or images of our Saviour Christ 
 and his saints ; as though the apostle had com- 
 manded such to be avoided ? All the other words, 
 covetous, fornicators, extortioners, they trans- 
 late alike, in both places, with reference both to 
 Pagans and Christians : yet the word " idola- 
 ters" not so, but Pagans they call " idolaters," 
 and Christians, " worshippers of iirages." Was 
 n<it this done on purpose, to make both seem 
 alike, and to intimate that Christians doing 
 reverence before sacred images, (which Protes- 
 tants call worshipping of images,) are more to 
 be avoided than the Pagan idolaters ? whereas 
 the apostle, speaking of Pagans and Christians 
 that committed one and the self-same heinous 
 sin, commands the Christian in that case to be 
 avoided for his amendment, leaving the Pagan 
 to himself, and to God, as not caring to judge 
 him. 
 
 (2) Besides their falsely translating " image" 
 instead of " idol," they have also another way of 
 falsifying and corrupting the scripture, by intro- 
 ducing the word " image" into the text, when, in 
 the Hebrew or Greek, there is no such thing ; 
 as in these notorious examples : " to the image 
 of Baal : the image that came down from Jupi- 
 ter :" where they are not content to understand 
 " image" rather than " idol," but they must in- 
 trude it inio the text, though they know full well 
 it is not in the Greek. 
 
 Not unlike this kind of falsification, is that 
 which has crept as a leprosy through all their 
 Bibles, and which, it seems, they are resolved 
 never to correct, viz., their translating sculplile 
 Mild conflalile, graven image, and molten image ; 
 namely, in the first commandment ; where they 
 cannot be ignorant, that in the Greek it is 
 " idol," and in the Hebrew, such a word as sig- 
 nifies only a " graven thing," not including this 
 word " image." They know that God com- 
 manded to make the images of cherubim, and 
 (if oxen in the temple, and of the brazen serpent 
 in the desert ; and therefore, their wisdoms 
 might htive considered, that he forbad not all 
 graven images, but such as the Gentiles make, 
 and worshipped for gods ; and therefore, Non 
 
 faciti libi sculplih:, coincide with those -words 
 that gn before, " Thou shall have no other gods 
 but me." For so to have an image, as to make it 
 a god, is to make it more than an image ; and 
 therefore when it is an idol, as were the idols ol 
 the Gentiles, then it is forbidden by this com- 
 mandment. Otherwise v/hen the cross stood 
 many years upon the table, in Queen Elizabeth's 
 chapel, pray was it against this conimandment ? 
 or was it idolatry in her majesty, and her coun 
 sellers, that appointed it there ? Or do thcii 
 brethren th« Lutherans beyond seas, at this day, 
 commit idolatry against this commandment, who 
 have in their churches the crucifix, and the holy 
 images of the mother of God, and of St. John 
 the evangelist ? Or if the whole story of the 
 Gospel concerning our Saviour Christ, were 
 drawn in pictures and images in their churches, 
 as it is in many of ours, would they say, it were 
 a breach of this commandment ? Fie for shame ! 
 fie for shame ! that they should with such into- 
 lerable impudence and deceit abuse and bewitch 
 the ignorant people against their own knowled};c 
 and consciences. 
 
 For do they not know, that God many timca 
 farbad the Jews either to marry or converse 
 with the Gentiles, lest they might fall to wor- 
 ship their idols, as Solomon did, and as the 
 psalm reports of them ? This then is the 
 meaning of the commandment, neither to make 
 the idols of the Gentiles, nor any other, either 
 like them, or as Jeroboam did in Dan and Be- 
 thel, (a) By this commandment we are forbid- 
 den, (not to make images, but) to make idols, 
 or to worship images, or any thing else, as God. 
 " I do not," says St. John Damascene, " worship 
 an image as God ; bufby the images and saints 
 I give honour and adoration to God ; for whose 
 sake 1 respect and reverence those that are his 
 friends." (i) "All over the world," says Pope 
 Adrian I., " wheresoever Christianity is pro- 
 fessed, sacred images are honoured by the 
 faithful, &c. By the image of the body which 
 the Son of God took for our redemption, we 
 adore our Redeemer who is in heaven ; far be it 
 from us, that we (as some calumniate) should 
 make gods of images ; we only express the love 
 and zeal we have for God, and his saints : and 
 as we keep the books of the holy scripture, so 
 do we the images, to remind us of our duty, 
 still preserving entire the purity of our faith." 
 [f). Learn from St. Jerom, after what manner 
 they made use of holy images in his time ; he 
 writes in the epitaph of Paula, " that she adored 
 prostrate on the ground, before the cross, as i! 
 she saw our Lord hanging on it." And in 
 Jonas, chap, iv., he proves, that out of the 
 veneration and love they had for the apostles, 
 they generally painted their images on the ves- 
 sels, which are called Saucomartes- And will 
 Protestants say, that this was idolatry • 
 
 (a) 3 Kings xii. 28; Psal. cv. ly. 
 
 (b) St. Jo. Damas., Orat. 3. 
 
 (c) Adrian I, pontif., Ep. ad Conslan. et Ircnn. Itnppt 
 
68 
 
 XVe 
 
 -PROTESTAN'"- TRANSLATIONS AOAINMT 
 
 The Book, 
 
 Chapter, 
 and Veree. 
 
 Isaiuh 
 chap. XXX. 
 v»<rso 22, 
 
 chnp. ii. 
 vffiie 18. 
 
 Uanicl 
 thap. xiv 
 rorso 4. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 Et contaminabis 
 laminas " sculplili- 
 um'\argenti tui, et 
 vestimentum " con- 
 fiatilis" auri tui, <Sfe. 
 (1) 
 
 Quid prodest 
 " sculptile,''^ quia 
 sculpsit illud ficlnr 
 suus " cunjlatite" et 
 "imuginem falsam ?" 
 ykuniof on 
 e}')lvi/iai' avio 
 
 •"lies, 
 
 :1 
 
 Quia non c.olo 
 " idola" manufacta, 
 siduku /s(^07io(i;Ta. 
 
 (3) 
 
 The true jSnglish accord- 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 Translation. 
 
 And thou shah con- 
 taminate the plates 
 of the " sculptiles" 
 of thy silver, and 
 the garment of the 
 " molten " of thy 
 gold. 
 
 What profiteth the 
 " thing engraven," 
 that the forger 
 thereof hath graven 
 it a " molten," and 
 a " false image ?" 
 
 Because 1 wor- 
 ship not " idols " 
 made with bands. 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 testant Bil>les, printed 
 A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 Ye shall defile 
 also the covering of 
 the "graven images" 
 of silver, and thejor- 
 nament of thy "mol- 
 ten images" of gold. 
 
 (1) 
 
 What profiteth 
 the " image," for 
 the maker thereof 
 hath made it an 
 " image, " and a 
 " teacher of lies ?" 
 
 I worship not 
 "things" that be 
 made with hands. 
 (2) 
 
 The last Translation of 
 
 the Protestant Bible, £d 
 
 Lnn., an. 1683. 
 
 In this also they 
 translate " graven " 
 and " molten im- 
 ages, " instead ol 
 "graven" and "mol 
 ten things, ' or 
 " idols," 
 
 What profiteth 
 the "graven image,'' 
 that the maker there- 
 of hath graven it, 
 the "molten imago," 
 and a " teacher oi 
 lies V 
 
 Though they have 
 corrected it, yet iho 
 two last chapters aru 
 omitted in tl.eii 
 small impressions 
 for Apocrypha. 
 
IHH Uab Ot bACUKI) IMAGES. 
 
 69 
 
 (1) The two Hebrew woids, pesilim aaiimas- 
 lechotfi, which in the Latin, signify sculptilia and 
 conflatilia, they in their translation render into 
 English by the word images, neither word being 
 Hebrew for an image ; thus, if one shoidd ask, 
 what is the Latin for an image? and they 
 should tell him sculptile. Whereupon he seeing 
 a fair painted image on a table, might perhaps 
 say, Erct! cgregium sculptile ; which, doubtless, 
 every boy in the granimar-school would laugh 
 at. And this I tell them, because I perceive 
 their endeavour to make sculptile and image of 
 he same import ; which is most evidently false 
 as to tlieir great shame appears from these 
 words of Habbakuk ; Quid prodest sculptile ? 
 &c., which, contrary to the Hebrew and Greek, 
 th<;y translate, " What profiteth the image 1" 
 Sic, as you may see in the former page. 
 
 1 wish every common reader were able to dis- 
 cern their falsehood in this place : first, they 
 make sculpere sculptile no more than " to make 
 an image ;" which being absurd, as I have hinted, 
 (because the painter or embroiderer making an 
 image cannot be said sculpere sculptile,) might 
 teach them that the Hebrew has in it no signifi- 
 cation of image, no more than sculpere can 
 signify " to make an image :" and therefore 
 the Greek Ivmbv, and the Latin sculptile, pre- 
 cisely, for the most part, express neither more 
 nor less than a " thing graven ;" but yet mean 
 H Iways ay these words, a " graven idol," to 
 V hicli signification they are appropriated by use 
 of holy scripture ; as are also simulacrum, 
 ydolum, conflaiile, as sometimes imago : in which 
 sense of signifying idols, if they did repeat 
 images so often, although the translation were 
 not precise ; yet it would be in bome part toler- 
 able, because the sense would be so ; but when 
 they do it to bring all holy images into contempt, 
 even the image of our Saviour Jesus Christ cru- 
 cified, they may justly be controlled for false and 
 heretical translators. Confatile here also they 
 falsely translate image, as they did before in 
 Isaiah, and as they have done sculptile, though 
 two different words ; and, as is said, each signi- 
 fying a thing different from image. But where 
 they should translate image, as, Imaginem 
 faham, " a false image," they translate another 
 thing, without any necessary pretence either of 
 Hebrew or Greek, clearly avoiding here the 
 name of image, because this place tells them, 
 that the holy scripture speaketh against false 
 images ; or, as themselves translate, such im- 
 ages as teach lies, representing false gods, which 
 arc not. Idolum nihil est, as the apostle says, 
 et non sunt dii, qui manibvs funt. Which 
 distinction of false and true images, our Protes- 
 tant translators will not have, because they 
 condemn all images, even holy and sacred also ; 
 10 
 
 and therefore make the holy scrijjtures to speak 
 herein according to their own fancies. What 
 monstrous and intolerable deceit ie this 1 
 
 (2) Wherein they proceed so lo.-, lluit 
 when Daniel said to the king, " I worship not 
 idols made with hands," they make him say, " I 
 worship not things that be made with hands,'' 
 leaving out the word idols altogether, as though 
 he had said, nothing made with hands was to be 
 adored, not the ark, nor the propitiatory, no, 
 nor the holy cross itself, on which our Saviour 
 shed his precious blood. As before they added 
 to the text, so here they diminish and take from 
 it as boldly as if there had never been a curse 
 denounced against such manglors of holv scrip- 
 ture. 
 
 See you not, that it is not enough for them tu 
 corrupt and falsify- the text, and to add and 
 take away words and sentences at their plea- 
 sure, but their unparalleled presumption eoi 
 boldens them to deprive the people of whiJo 
 chapters and books, as the two last chapters ol 
 Daniel, and the rest which they call Apocrypl * 
 which are quite left out in their new Bibliis, 
 When all this is done, the poor simple people 
 must be glad of this castrated Bible, for their 
 " only rule of faith." Va ! v<b .' 
 
 The reason they give for rejecting them is 
 as I told you above, " that they have formerly 
 been doubted of;" but if you demand, why ihcy 
 do not, for the same reason, reject a great many 
 more in the New Testament ? the whole Church 
 of England answers you in Mr. Rogers' words, 
 and by him, " Howbeit we judge them (viz., 
 books formerly doubted of in the New Testa- 
 ment) canonical, not so much because learned 
 and godly men in the church so have, and do 
 receive and allow of them, as for that the Holy 
 Spirit in our hearts doth testify that they are 
 from God." See Rogers' Defence of the Thirty, 
 nine Articles, pages 31, 32. So that Protestants 
 are purely beholden to the private spirit in the 
 hearts of their convocation-men, for almost hall 
 the New Testament ; which had never been ad'? 
 mitted by them in the canon of scripture,if the said 
 " private spirit in their hearts had not testified 
 their being from God ;" no more than the rest 
 called Apocrypha, which they not only thrust 
 out of the canon, but omit to publish in theii 
 smaller impressions of the Bible ; because, 
 forsooth, the holy private spirit in their hearts 
 testifies them to speak ton expressly against thejj 
 heretical doctrines. 
 
70 
 
 XVI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATICXS AGiiWST 
 
 The Book, 
 
 Chapter, 
 and \ er3c. 
 
 The Vulgate-Latin Text. 
 
 The true English ar.cnrd 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 
 Translation. t 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 testant Bibles, printed 
 A. I). 15G2, 1577, 1579. 
 
 The last Translation <V 
 
 the Protestant Bible, Ed, 
 
 Lon. an. 1683. 
 
 Acts of 
 tile Apos. 
 chap. ii. 
 versa 27. 
 
 Genesis 
 ch. -xxxvii. 
 /erse 35 
 
 Genesis 
 chap. xlii. 
 verse 38. 
 
 Genesis 
 chap. xliv. 
 verses 29, 
 ,31 
 
 3 Kings 
 chap. ii. 
 Verses 6, fl. 
 
 Quoniam nnn de- 
 relinques " animam 
 meam in inferno." 
 TED, ) V"/')" fJs. 
 
 &Sou.{i) 
 
 Dcscendam ad f- 
 liiim meum Ivgens in 
 " infernum, " Knb, 
 iiSrig, infernus; for 
 so are the Hebrew, 
 Greek, and Latin 
 words for hell. (2) 
 
 Deducetis canos 
 meos cum dolore ad 
 " inferos." 
 
 Deducetis canos 
 meos cum marore ad 
 " inferos." 
 
 — Ad " inferos." 
 
 Because thou "wilt^' 
 not leave my " soul 
 in hell." ' 
 
 I will go down to 
 my son into " hell " 
 mourning. 
 
 You will bring 
 down my grey hairs 
 with sorrow unto 
 " hell." 
 
 — With sorrow 
 unto " hell." 
 
 •Unto "hell." 
 
 Thou " shalt" not 
 leave my " carcase 
 in the grave." — - 
 Beza. 
 
 Thou wilt not 
 l°ave my " soul in 
 the grave." — (Bible 
 
 1579.) (1) ; 
 
 It is corrected in 
 this translation 
 
 I will go down 
 into " the grave un- 
 to" my son mourn- 
 ing{2) 
 
 I will go down 
 into the " grave." 
 
 Instead of" hell," 
 they say " grave." 
 
 For « hell," they 
 also say, " grave." 
 
 — With sorrow" 
 uulo " the grave." 
 
 — With sorrow 
 unto the ' grave." 
 
 —"To the grave." 
 
 ■ " To the gra? e ''' 
 
LIJHBUS PATRtMI A.VD rURGATORV. 
 
 The doctrine of our pretended reformers is, 
 that " there was never, from the beginning of 
 the world, any other place for souls, after this 
 life, but oniy two, to wit, heaven for the blessed, 
 find hell for the damned." This hereticaj doc- 
 trine includes many erroneous 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 
 Umhus pairum ; but immediately to heaven : 
 that they were in heaven before our blessed Sa- 
 viour had suiTered death for their redemption ; 
 whence it will follow, that our Saviour was not the 
 first man that ascended, and entered into heaven. 
 Moreover, by this doctrine it will follow, that 
 our Saviour Christ descended not into any 
 third place, in our creed called hell, to deliver 
 the fathers of the Old Testament, and to bring 
 them triumphantly with him" into heaven : and 
 so, that article of the Apostle's Creed, con- 
 cerning our Saviour's descent into hell, must 
 either be put out, as indeed it was by Beza in 
 the confession of his faith, printed anno 1 564, 
 or it must have some other meaning ; to wit, 
 either the lying of the body in the grave, or, as 
 Calvin and his followers will have it, the suf- 
 fering of hell torments, and pains upon the 
 cross, (a) 
 
 (1) In defence of these erroneous doctrines, 
 they most wilfully corrupt the holy scriptures ; 
 and especially Beza. who in his New Testament, 
 printed by Robert Stephens, anno 1556, makes 
 our Saviour Christ say thus to his Father, Non 
 deretinqves cadaver meum in sepulchre ; for that 
 which the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, and St. 
 Hierom, according to the Hebrew, say, Non 
 direlinqnes animum meam in inferno. Thus 
 the prophet David speaks it in Hebrew : (A) 
 thus the Septuagint uttered it in Greek : thus 
 the apostle St. Peter alleges it: thus St. Luke 
 in the Acts of the Apostles : and for this,. St. 
 Autrustine calls him an infidel that denies it. 
 Yet all this would not suffice to make Beza 
 translate it so ; because, as he says, hd would 
 avoid ( certain errors, as he calls them ) the 
 Catholic doctrine of limhus pairum and purga- 
 tory. And therefore, because else it would 
 make for the Papists' doctrine, he translates 
 animam, carcase ; infernum, grave, (c) 
 
 And tlunigh 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 1 5'W. they liave it in the text, " Thou wilt 
 not leave my soul in the grave," and in the 
 margin tkey put, " or life, or person ;" thereby 
 
 (a) Calvin's Instit., lib. 2, c. 16, sect. 10, and In his 
 Cstechiam. 
 (A) Psal. XV. 10. 
 lei See Beza's Annofat. in Act il. 
 
 advertising the' reader, thai if it please him, he 
 may read thus, " Thou shalt not leave my life in 
 the grave," or, " Thoii shall not leave my per- 
 son in the grave :" as though either man's souV 
 or life were in the grave, or ainma might be 
 translated person. I said, they were ash-imed 
 of Beza's translation ; but ono would rathel 
 think, they purposely designed to make it worse, 
 if possible. But you see the last translators 
 have indeed been ashamed of it, and have cot* 
 rected it. See you not now, what monstrous 
 and absurd work our first pretended reformeij 
 made of the holy scriptures, on purpose to mako 
 it speak for their own terms? By their putting 
 grave in the text, they design to make it a cer- 
 tain and absolute conclusion, howsoever you 
 interpret soul, that the holy scripture, in this 
 place, speaks not of Christ's being in hell, but 
 only in the grave ; and that according to his 
 soul, life, or person ; or, as Beza says, his car- 
 case. And so his " soul in hell," as the scrip- 
 ture speaks, must be his carcase, soul, or life in 
 the grave, with them. But St. Ghrysostom 
 says, [d) " 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 cf promise ; he 
 descended to them, to fetch them out, and save 
 them." (e) 
 
 (2) How absurd also is this corruption of 
 theirs, " I will go down into the grave unto my 
 son ?" as though Jacob thought that his sou 
 Joseph had been buried in a grave ; whereas, a 
 little before, he said, that some " wild boast 
 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 former, seeing the Hebrew, 
 Greek, and Latin words are the same in both 1 
 It cannot be through ignorance, I find : no, it 
 must have been purely out of a design to mako 
 their ignorant readers believe, that the patri- 
 arch Jacob spoke of his body only to descend 
 into the grave to Joseph's body : for as con- 
 cerning Jacob's soul, that, by their opinion, was 
 to ascend immediately after his death into 
 heaven, and not descend into the grave. But 
 if Jacob were forthwith to ascend in soul, how 
 could he say, as they translate, " I will go down 
 into the grave, unto my son, mourning ?" as if, 
 according to their opinion, he should say : " My 
 son's body is devoured by a beast, and his soid 
 is gone up to heaven :" well, " I will go dowu 
 to him into the grave." 
 
 (d) St. Chrys. in Eph. iv. 
 («) S. Irenaius, lib. 5, fine 
 
 Cornell Catholic 
 Union Library 
 
73 
 
 XVI. ^PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AOAINST 
 
 The Book, 
 
 ChuDter, 
 
 tnd Verse. 
 
 Ps. Ixxxv. 
 verso 13. 
 
 Ps. Ixxxix. 
 
 verse 49. 
 
 Hosea 
 chap. xiii. 
 verse 14- 
 
 I Corinth, 
 chap. XV. 
 verse 55. 
 
 Psalm vi. 
 verse 5. 
 
 Proverbs 
 ch. xxvii. 
 verso 20. 
 
 Hebrews 
 chap. V. 
 vorsu 7. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 The true English accord- 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 Translation. 
 
 El eruisti animam 
 meam ex " infernn 
 inferiori." ( 1 ) 
 
 Eruit a 
 suam manu 
 fori r (2) 
 
 Ero mors tua, 
 mors, morsus tuux 
 ero " inferne," J>in3- 
 
 Thou hast deli- 
 vered my soul from 
 the " lower hell." 
 
 Shall he deliver 
 his soul from the 
 hand of "hell?" 
 
 death, I will be 
 thy death ; I will be 
 thy sting, O " hell." 
 
 Vbt est, mors, sli- 
 mulus tuus ? ubi est 
 '' mfernc,'" victoria 
 tua ? adij. 
 
 In "inferno" autem 
 quis conjitebitur libi 1 
 
 " Infernus" et per- 
 ditio nunquam im- 
 plentur. 
 
 " Quf in diebus 
 earnis sU(B preces 
 siipplicalionesque ad 
 eum, qui possit ilium 
 salourn fncere a 
 morle, cum clamore 
 valido et lachrymis 
 offerens, exauditiis 
 est "pro sua reve- 
 renCia," inb irfi ivla. 
 (S«/«ff. (3) 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 testant Biljes, urinted 
 A. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 Thou hast deli- 
 vered my soul from 
 the " lowest grave." 
 
 (1) 
 
 Shall he deliver 
 his soul from the 
 hand of the "grave?" 
 (2) 
 
 — O "grave," I 
 will be thy destruc- 
 tion. 
 
 The last TrKnslation of 
 
 the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
 
 Lon., an. 1683. 
 
 Where is, O death, 
 thy sting ? where is, 
 0'"hell," thy vic- 
 tory. 
 
 But ira "hell," 
 who shall confess to 
 thee? 
 
 " Hell and de- 
 struction are never 
 full. 
 
 "Who" in the 
 days of his flesh, 
 with a strong cry 
 and tears, offering 
 prayers and suppli- 
 cations to him that 
 could save him from 
 death, was heard 
 " for his reverence." 
 
 O death, where 
 is thy sting? O 
 " grave," where is 
 thy victory ? 
 
 They say, " in the 
 grave." 
 
 « The grave" and 
 destruction are ne- 
 ver full. 
 
 " Which" in days 
 of his flesh, "ofl*ered 
 up" prayers, with 
 strong " crying, un- 
 to" him that " was 
 able to" save him 
 from death, " and" 
 was heard, " in that 
 which he feared." 
 (3) 
 
 Instead of "lower" 
 hell, they say, "low- 
 est" hell 
 
 Shall he deliver 
 his soul from the 
 hand of the "graved* 
 
 O death, I will be 
 thy "plagues;" O 
 "grave," I will be 
 thy destruction. 
 
 For "hell," they 
 say, " grave." 
 
 In the " grave, 
 who shall "give thee 
 thanks ?" 
 
 Corrected 
 
 "Who" in the 
 days, &c., " and 
 was heard in that he 
 feared.'.' 
 
tlMBVS PATROSI AND PDRGATOBT. 
 
 73 
 
 (1) Understand, good reader, that in the Old 
 Testament none ascended into heaven. " This 
 way of the holies," as the aposlle says, " being 
 not yet made open ;" (o) because our Saviour 
 Christ liimself was to " dedicate that new and 
 living way," and begin the entrance in his own 
 person, and by his passion to open heaven ; for 
 none but he was found worthy to open the 
 seals, and to read the book. Therefore, as I 
 said before, the common phrase of the holy 
 scriptures, in the Old Testament, is, even of the 
 best of men, as well as others, that dying, they 
 went down, ad inferos, or ad infernum ; that is, 
 descended not to the grave, which received their 
 bodies only ; but ad inferos, " into hell," a com- 
 mon receptacle for their souls. 
 
 So we say in our creed, that our Saviour 
 Christ himself descended into hell, according 
 to his soul. So St. Hierom, speaking of the 
 state of the Old Testament, (A) says, " If 
 Abraham,, Isaac, and Jacob were in hell, who 
 was in the kingdom of heaven ?" and again, 
 ' Before the coming of Christ, Abraham was in 
 hell ; after his coining, the thief was in paradise." 
 And lest it might be objected, that Lazarus 
 being in Abraham's bosom, saw the rich glutton 
 afar off ia hell : and that therefore both Abra- 
 ham and Lazarus seem to have been in heaven, 
 the same holy doctor resolves it, that Abraham ! 
 and Lazarus also were in hell, but in a place of 
 great rest and refreshing ; and therefore very 
 far off from the miserable wretched glutton, 
 that lay in torments, which is also agreeable to 
 St. Augustine's interpretation of this place, (c) 
 in the Psalm, " Thou hast delivered my soul 
 from the lower hell," who makes this sense of it, 
 that the lower hell is the place wJierein the 
 damned are tormented ; the higher hell is that 
 wherein the souls of the just rested, calling both 
 places by the name of hell. To avoid this dis- 
 tinction of the inferior and higher hell, our first 
 translatoi;s, instead of lower hell, rendered it 
 ' lowest grave ; which they would not for shame 
 have done, had they not been afraid to say in 
 any place of scripture (how plain soever) that 
 any soul was delivered or returned from hell, 
 lest it might then follow, that the patriarchs 
 and our Saviour Christ were in such a hell ; 
 and though the last translation has restored the 
 word hell in this place ; yet so loath were our 
 translators to hear the scripture speak of limbus 
 patrum or purgatory, that they still retained 
 he superlative lowest, lest the comparative 
 bwer (which is the true translation) might seem 
 more clearly to evince this distinction between 
 the superior and inferior hell ; though they 
 uould not at the same time be ignorant of this 
 
 fa) Heb. ixS; x. 20. 
 
 (6) Epitaph Nepot. cap. 3. 
 
 ?c) St. Aug. in Va Ixxxv. \X 
 
 sentence of Tertullian : I know that the Iiosora 
 of Abraham was no heavenly place, but only the 
 higher hell, or the higher part of hell." {d) Nor 
 can I believe, but they must have read these words 
 in St. Chrysostom, upon that place of Rsai : " I 
 will break the brazen ga:es, and bruise the iron 
 bars in pieces, and will open the treasure dark- 
 ened," &c. So he (the prophet) calls hell, says 
 he ; " for although it were hell, yet it held the 
 holy souls, and precious vessels, Abraham, 
 Isaac, and Jacob." (e) 
 
 (2) And thus all along, wherever they find 
 the word hell, that is, where it signifies tlie 
 place in which the holy fathers of the Old 
 Testament rested, called by the church limbus 
 pnlrum, they are sure to translate it grave ; a 
 word as much contrary to the sigriification ol 
 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, T^iss, '^rjc, infernns ? If I ask them, 
 what words they will bring from those languages 
 to signify grave, must they not say, 13P, idgros 
 sepulcfirum ? With what face then can they look 
 upon these wilful corruptions of theirs ' 
 
 (3) Note here another most damnable corrup- 
 tion of theirs ; instead of translating as all atiti- 
 quity, with a general and full consent, has ever 
 done in this place," that Christ was beard of his 
 Father, for his reverence ;" they read, " that 
 he was heard in that which he feared ;" or, as 
 this last Bible has it, " and was heard in that he 
 feared." And who taught them this sense ot 
 the text ? Doubtless Beza ; whom, for the most 
 part, they follow ; and he had it from Calvin, 
 who, he says, was the first that ever found out 
 this interpretation. And why did Calvin invent 
 this, but to defend his blasphemous doctrine, 
 " that our Saviour Jesus Christ, upon the cross, 
 was horribly afraid of damnation : and that ho 
 was in the very sorrows and torments of the 
 damned : and that this was his descending into 
 hell : and that otherwise he descended not.' 
 Note this, good reader, and then judge to what 
 wicked end this translation tends. Who has 
 ever heard of greater blasphemy ; and yet they 
 dare presume to force the scripture, by their 
 false translation, to back them in it ; " he was 
 hoard in that which he feared :" as if they should 
 say, he was delivered from damnation, and the 
 eternal pains of hell, of which h6 was soro 
 afraid. What dare they not do, who tremble not 
 at this ? 
 
 (d) Tertul. 1,4, adversus Marcion. 
 
 ((,) St. Chrysost. Hour, quod Christus sit Dons, to. tt. 
 
'■.4 
 
 TVU. PROTESTANT TRANSLaTIONB AGAINST 
 
 The Book, 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 ai:d Verse. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 The tnie Enelish ar.cnrd- 
 
 ing 10 the Ilhemish 
 
 Transiatiun. 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro 
 tostant Bibles, crinted 
 A. I>. 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 1 he last Tra:islati(m of ' 
 
 the Protestant Bible, Ed. 
 Lon. an. 1 683. 
 
 Romans 
 chap. ii. 
 verse 26. 
 
 St. Luke 
 chap. i. 
 leise 6. 
 
 Apocalyp. 
 chiip. xii. 
 verse ^. 
 
 2 Timoth 
 chap. iv. 
 verse 8. 
 
 8 Thcssal. 
 chap. i. 
 (crscs 5,6. 
 
 Si igilur prcBputium 
 "juslilias," Sixaico- 
 fiuittj.egis custodial, 
 6fc. (1) 
 
 Erant autem "justi" 
 dixawl, ambo ante 
 Deum, incedentes in 
 omnibus mandatis et 
 " justif.cationibus, " 
 xut diXKibifiaai, Domi- 
 ni sine querela. 
 
 ' Byssinum enim 
 "jnstificationes"sur.t 
 sanct3rum,ja dixaiai- 
 fiaru. 
 
 In reliquo, reposita 
 est mihijCorona "jus- 
 iiliis" rr/i dixnioav. 
 yrii,quam reddet mihi 
 Dominus in ilia die 
 "Justus" judex, 6 
 Sixinog xqntjg anSm- 
 oasi, tS^c. (2) 
 
 — Tn exemplum 
 "justi," dtxaiag, ju- 
 dicii Dei, ut digni 
 habeamini in regno 
 Dei, pro quo el 
 paliamini, si tamen 
 jjistum est, SixatPOf 
 egi,apud Deum,relri- 
 buere tribulationem 
 iis qui vus tribulanl. 
 
 Hebrews 
 chap. vi. 
 verse 10, 
 
 Non emm ' injus- 
 tus," aSiKOS, Deus, 
 ut obliviscatur operis 
 vestri, 4fc. 
 
 If then the pre- 
 puce keep the "jus- 
 tices" of the la\v,&c. 
 
 And they were 
 both "just" before 
 God, walking in all 
 the commandments 
 and "justifications" 
 of oar Lord, without 
 blame. 
 
 For the silk are 
 the "justifications" 
 of baints. 
 
 Concerning the 
 rest, there is laid 
 up for me a crown 
 of "justice," which 
 our Lord will ren- 
 der to me in that 
 day, a just Judge. 
 
 For an example 
 of the "just" judg- 
 ment of God, that 
 you may be counted 
 worthy of the king- 
 dom of God, for 
 which you suffer, 
 that yet it be " just" 
 with God to repay 
 tribulations to them 
 that vex you, and 
 to you that are vex- 
 ed, rest with us, &c. 
 
 For God is not 
 " unjust," that he 
 should forget your 
 works, &c. 
 
 If the nncircum- 
 cision keep the "or- 
 dinances"of the law. 
 
 (0 
 
 And they were 
 both "righteous" be- 
 fore God, Walking 
 in all the command- 
 ments and " ordi- 
 nances" of the Lord 
 blameless. 
 
 For the "fine linen" 
 are the " righteous- 
 ness" of saints. 
 
 Henceforth there 
 is laid up for me a 
 crown of righteous- 
 ness," which the 
 Lord the "righle- 
 ous"Judge shall give 
 me, &c. (2) 
 
 Rejoice, &c 
 
 which is a token 
 of the "righteous" 
 judgment of God, 
 that you may be 
 counted worthy of 
 the kingdom of God, 
 for which ye suffer. 
 For it is a " righte- 
 ous"thing with God, 
 to recompence tri- 
 bulation to them 
 that trouble yoii, and 
 to you that are 
 troubled, rest. 
 
 God is not " un- 
 righteous" to forget 
 your good works 
 and labour. 
 
 If therefore the 
 uncircumcision keep 
 the ^'righteousness" 
 of the law. 
 
 And they were 
 both "righteous" be- 
 fore God, walking 
 in all the command- 
 ments and " ordi- 
 nances" of the Lord 
 blameless. 
 
 For the " fino 
 linen" is the " righ- 
 teousness" of saints 
 
 For " justice, 
 they translate "righ- 
 teousness :" and for 
 a "just" judge, they 
 say a " righteous" 
 judge. 
 
 Here also they say 
 " righteous" judg- 
 ment, and " righ- 
 teous thing," instead 
 of "just," &;c 
 
 For God is not 
 " unrighteous," &c. 
 
jnSTiFICATtOV, AND THE REWARD OF GOOD WORR». 
 
 T5 
 
 (1} As the article of justification has many 
 luMnches, and as their errors therein are mani- 
 fold, so are their English translations accord- 
 ingly in many respects false and heretical : first, 
 against justification by good works, and by 
 keeping the commandments, they suppress the 
 very name of justification in all such places 
 wliere the word signifies the eomniaiidments, 
 or the law of (Joii ; and wuere the Greek signi- 
 fies most exactly justices and justifications, 
 according as our Vulgate Latin translates, 
 iuslittas and justificalioncs, there the English 
 translators say, statutes or ordinances ; as you 
 see in these examples, where their last transla- 
 tion, because they would seem to be doing, 
 though to small purpose, changes the first cor- 
 ruption, " ordinances of the law " into righ- 
 teousness ; another word, as far horn" what it 
 should have been, in comparison, as the first : 
 and to what end is all this, but to avoid the 
 term justifications ? they cannot be ignorant how 
 difierent this is from the Greek, which they 
 pretend to translate. In the Old Testament, 
 perhaps they will pretend that they follow the 
 Hebrew word, which is u-pn ; and therefore, they 
 translate statutes and ordinances ; (righteousness 
 too, if they please ;) but even there also, are not 
 . the seventy Greek interpreters sufficient to 
 teach them the signification of the Hebrew 
 word, who always interpret it, dixauMifiaiu ; in 
 English, justifications ? 
 
 But admit that they may control the Septua- 
 giiit In the Hebrew ; yet in the New Testament 
 they do not pretend to translate the Hebrew, 
 but rather the Greek. What reason have they 
 then for rejei;ting the word just and justifica- 
 tions ? Surely, no other reason, but that which 
 their master Beza gives for the same thing ; 
 saying, that " he rejected the v/orA jiisltficationes, 
 on purpose to avoid the cavils that might be 
 made from this word, against justification by 
 faith. "(«) As if he should say, this word, 
 truly translated according to the Greek, might 
 minister great occasion to prove, by so many 
 places of scripture, that man's justification is not 
 by faith only, but also by keeping the law, and 
 observing the commandments of God ; which, 
 therefore, are called according to the Greek 
 and Latin, juflific.nlioni's, because they concur 
 to justification, and making a man just: as by 
 £;t: Luke's words, also, is well signified ; which 
 have this allusion, that they ware both just, be- 
 cause they walked in all the justifications of our 
 Lord ; which they designedly suppress by other 
 words. 
 
 (2) And hereof it also rises, that when Beza 
 
 (a) Buza Annat. in I.Kk. i. 
 
 could not possibly avoid the word in his transla- 
 tion, Apoc. xix. 8, " the silk is the justification of 
 saints;" he helps the matter with this commenta- 
 ry, " That justifications are those good works, 
 which are the testimony of a lively faith. "(i) 
 Bat our English translators have found another 
 way to avoid the word, even in thtir transla. 
 tions : for they, because they could not say 
 ordinances, irarislate, " the right<H>usness o 
 saints;" abhorring the word "justifications of 
 saints ;" because they know full well, that this 
 word includes the good works of saints : which 
 works, if they should in translating, call theii 
 justifications, it would rise up against their " jus- 
 tifications by faith only :" therefore, where thej' 
 cannot translate ordinances and statutes, which 
 are terms farthest off from justification, they 
 say, righteousness, making it also the plural 
 number ; whereas the more proper Greek word 
 for righttousness is Eudvxt]i, (Dan. vi. 22,) which 
 there some of tliem translate, unguiltiness, 
 because they will not translate exactly if you 
 would hire them. 
 
 And by their translating righteous, instead of 
 just, they bring it, that Joseph was a righteous 
 man, rather than a just man ; and Zachary and 
 Elizabeth were both righteous before God, 
 rather than just ; because when a man is 
 called just, it sounds that he is so indeed, and 
 not by imputation only. Note also, that where 
 faith is joined with the word juet, they omit 
 not to translate it just, " the just shall live by 
 faith," to signify, that "justification is by faith 
 alone. "(c) 
 
 (3) These phices, (2 Tim., 2 Thess., and 
 Heb.) do very fairly discover their false and 
 corrupt i4itenlions, in concealing the word ius- 
 tice in all their Bibles ; for, if they should 
 translate truly, as they ought to do, it would 
 infer, ((/) that men are justly crowned in heaven 
 for their good works upon earth, and it is God's 
 justice so to do ; and thai he will do so. because 
 he is a just Judge, and because he will show 
 his just judgment ; and he will not forget so to 
 do, because he is notuijjust; as the ancient fathers 
 do interpret and expoynd. St. Augustine most 
 excellently declares, that it is God's grace, 
 favour, and mercy in making us, by his grace, 
 to live and beliex-e well, and so to bo worthy of 
 heaven ; and his justice and just judgment, 
 to render arid rppay eternal life for those works, 
 which himself wrought in us : which he thus 
 expresses, " How should he render or repay 
 as a just judge, unless he had given it as a inor- 
 ciful Father ?" («) 
 
 {b) Beza Annot. in Apoc. xix. 
 
 (c) Rom. i. 
 
 (d) St. Chrys. Theodoret, Oecumen.upoa these places. 
 
 (e) St. Aug. de Gra ef lib Arbitr., cap. 6. 
 
76 
 
 ynil.-^PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AOAIJTST 
 
 The Bonk, 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 and Verse. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 The true English ar.cord- 
 
 ing 10 the Rhcniish 
 
 Tninslation. 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 testant BiMes. printed 
 A. II. 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 Tlie last Translation of 
 
 the ProteslaiU llilile, Gd. 
 
 Lon. an. IfiSS. 
 
 Romans 
 chap. viii. 
 ver.se 1 8. 
 
 Hebrews 
 chap. X. 
 verse 29 
 
 Colosa. 
 ' chap. i. 
 verse 12. 
 
 Ps. cxviii. 
 rcrse 1 1 2. 
 
 Hebrews 
 chap, ii. 
 verso 9. 
 
 " Existimo,^' Inylt,!!. 
 i««i, enim quad non 
 sunt "coTidtirua pas- 
 siones" hiijus tempo- 
 ris ad Juluram gto- 
 nam, djrc, ax «!«« 
 TjQog Ttjf /tellaaav 
 doSa>'. (1) 
 
 Quanta magis pii- 
 iatis " deleriora me- 
 reri, snpplicia^' noaui 
 
 iifiojiiug, (jvi Filium 
 Dei cuuculcavent, 
 ^c. (2) 
 
 Gratias agentes 
 Deo Palri, qyi " dig- 
 noSj* iJcai'ttiaiKPTi.nos 
 frcil in partem "xur- 
 tin" sanctorum in lu- 
 mine. (3) 
 
 " Inclinavi" cor 
 meum ad faciendas 
 "JHS/iJicationes tuas 
 in eternum, propter 
 retributionem," (4) 
 
 Eum autem qui 
 moJico quam gngeli 
 " minoratus est" vi- 
 dcmiis Jesnm, prop- 
 ter "passionem" mor- 
 tis gloria el hunore 
 coronatum. [6) 
 
 For " I think" 
 that the " passions" 
 of this time are not 
 " condign to" the 
 glory to come, that 
 shall be revealed in 
 
 How much more, 
 think you, doth 
 he '"deserve worse 
 punishinents," who 
 hath trodden the 
 Son of God under- 
 foot? 
 
 Giving thanks to 
 God the Father, 
 who hath made us 
 " worthy" unto the 
 part of the " lot" of 
 the saints in the 
 light. 
 
 I have " inclined" 
 my heart to do thy 
 "justifications for 
 ever for reward." 
 
 But him that was 
 a' little " lessened 
 under" the angels, 
 we see Jesus, be- 
 c.ause of the " pas- 
 sion"of(Jeath,crown- 
 ed with glory and 
 honour. 
 
 For I am " cer- 
 tainly persuaded," 
 that the "a.tflictions" 
 of this time are not 
 " worthy of" the 
 glory which shall be 
 in us. (1) 
 
 How much "sorer 
 shall he be punish- 
 ed," which treadelh 
 under-fool the Sou 
 of God 1. (2) 
 
 Giving thanks to 
 God the Father, 
 " that" hath made 
 us " meet to be par- 
 takers" of the " in- 
 heritance" of the 
 saints in light. (3) 
 
 I have " applied'.' 
 my heart to fulfil 
 thy "statutes always 
 even unto the end." 
 (4) 
 
 . We see Jesus 
 crowned with glory 
 and honour,"which" 
 was a " little infe- 
 rior to" the angels, 
 " through" the " suf- 
 fering" of death. 
 (5) 
 
 For " I reckon" 
 that the siifTeiings 
 of this present time, 
 are not " worthy to 
 be compared with" 
 the glory which shall 
 be revealed in us. 
 
 Of how much 
 "sorer punishment,'' 
 suppose ye, shall he 
 be thought " wor- 
 thy" who hath trod- 
 den under-foot the 
 Son of God. 
 
 Giving thanks im- 
 to the Father that 
 hiith made us"meet,' 
 
 — " Even nmo the 
 
 end.'* 
 
 But we 8eeJe.sua, 
 who was made a 
 "little lower than" 
 the angels, for the 
 " sufTering" of death 
 crowned wiih glory 
 and honour. 
 
MERITS, AN'D MERIT0R10C8 WORKS. 
 
 77 
 
 (1) I SHALL not say much of this gross cor- 
 ruption, because they have been pleased to correct 
 it in their last translation : nor wilt I dwell on 
 their first words, " I am certainly piersuaded," 
 which is a far greater asseveration than the 
 •apostle uses ; I wonder how they could thus 
 translate that Greek word Uyl^onai ; but that 
 they were resolved nor only to translate the 
 apostle's words falsely, against meritorious 
 works, but also to avouch and affirm the same 
 forcibly. And for the words following, they 
 are not in Greek, as they translate in their first 
 English Bibles, " the afflictions are not worthy 
 of the glory," &c., because they will not have 
 our sulTering here, though for Christ's sake, to 
 merit eternal glory ; but thus, " The afflictions 
 of this time, are not equal, correspondent, or 
 comparable to the glory to come," because they 
 are short, but the glory is eternal ; the afflic- 
 tions are small and few, in comparison ; the 
 glory great and abundaiit, above measure. By 
 this the apostle would encourage us to suffer ; 
 as he does also in another place very plainly, 
 when he says, " Our tribulation which presently 
 is for a moment and light, worketh (' prepareth,' 
 says their Bible, 1577, with a Very false mea- 
 ning) above measure exceedirtgly, an eternal 
 weight of glory in us." See you not here, that 
 short tribulation in this life " works," that is 
 causes, purchases, and deserves an ' eternal 
 weight of glory in the next ? And what is that, 
 but to be meritorious, and worthy of the same ? 
 As St. Cyprian says, (a) " O what manner of 
 day shall come, my brethren, when our Lord 
 shall recount the merits of every one, and pay 
 us the reward, or stipend of faith and devotion I" 
 Here you see are merits, and the reward for the 
 same Likewise St. Augustine : (A)" The ex- 
 ceeding goodness of God has provided this, 
 that the labours should soon be ended, but the 
 rewards of the merit shall endure without end ; 
 the apostle testifying, the passions of this time 
 are not comparable," &c.' " For we shall re- 
 ceive greater bliss, than are the afflictions of all 
 passions whatsoever." , 
 
 (2) How deceitfully they deal with the scripture 
 in this place ! One of their Bibles (c) very falsely 
 and corruptly leaving out the words " worthy 
 of," or " deserve," saying, " How much sorer 
 shall he be punished ?" &c. And the last of 
 their translations adding as falsely to the te.xt 
 the word " thought :" " How much sorer pun- 
 i.shment shall he be thought worthy of," &c. ; 
 and this is done to avoid this consequence, which 
 must have followed by translating the Greek 
 word sincerely; to wit, if the Greek here, by 
 :here own translation, signifies •' to be vvorthy 
 of," or " to deserve," being spoken of pains or 
 punishments deserved ; then must they grant 
 us ihe same word to signify the same thing 
 eiscwhere in the New Testament, when it is 
 spoken of deserving Heaven, and the kingdom 
 
 (a) St. Cyprian, Kp 50, v. 3. 
 
 ">) St. August. Serm. 5", de Sanct. 
 
 ycj Bible of 156-2. 
 
 of God, as in Luke, xx., xxi., where if they 
 translate according to the Greek, which they 
 pretend to, they should say, "may be worthy," 
 and " they that are worthy ;" and not according 
 to the Vulgate Latin, which I sec, they are 
 willing to follow, when they think it may make 
 the more for their turn. 
 
 (3) Thk Greek word ixafHoai, they translate to 
 make " meet" in this place, but in other places 
 (viz. Mat. iii. 8, 11, and viii. 8,) they translate 
 IxMvof, " worthy." And why could they not 
 follow the old Latin interpreter one step further '> 
 seeing this was the place where they should have 
 showed their sincerity, and have said, that God 
 made us " worthy" of heavenly bliss ; because 
 they cannot but know, that if ix«>'A;, be "worthy," 
 then ixavHaat must needs be " to make worthy." 
 But they follow their old master, Beza, (d) who 
 tells them, that here, and there, and soforth, 
 1 have followed the old Latin interpreter, trans- 
 lating it " worthy," but in such and such a place 
 (meaning this for one) I choose rather to say 
 " meet." What presumption is here ! The 
 Greek fathers interpret it " worthy." St. Chry- 
 sostom, upon this place, says, (e) " God doth 
 not only give us society with the saints, but 
 makes us also worthy to receive so great a dig- 
 nity." And CEcumenius says : that " it is God's 
 glory to make his servants worthy of such good 
 things : and that it is their glory to be made 
 worthy of such things." {/) 
 
 (4) Here is yet another most notorious cor- 
 ruption against " me.rits :" " I have applied my 
 heart to fulfil thy statues, always, even unto the 
 end ;" and for their evasion here, they fly to the 
 ambiguity of the Hebrew word 2i?7' as if the 
 seventy interpreters wore not sufficient to de- 
 termine the same ; but because they find it am- 
 biguous, they are resolved to take their liberty, 
 though contrary to St. Hierom, and the ancient 
 fathers, both Greek and Latin. 
 
 (5) In fine, so obstinately are they set against 
 merits, and meritorious works, that some of 
 them think, {g} that even Christ himself did not 
 merit his own glory and exaltation : for making 
 out of which error, I suppose, they have trans- 
 posed the words of this text, thereby making 
 the apostle say, that Christ was inferior to 
 angels by his sufTering death ; that is, says Beza, 
 " for to suflier death ;" by which they quite ex- 
 clude the true sense, that, " for suffering death, 
 he was crowned with glory ;" which are the 
 true words and meaning of the apostle. But in 
 their last transl.ations they so place the words, 
 that they will have it left so ambiguous, as yon 
 may follow which sense you will. Intolerable 
 is their deceit ! 
 
 (,/) BcTia Annot. in Matth. iii. Nov. Test. 155& 
 
 (ej Oecum. in Caten- 
 
 (/) St. Baz I. in Orat. Litur. 
 
 (^) Ser Calvin in Epist. art Philip. 
 
rs 
 
 XIX. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AGAINST 
 
 The Rook, 
 
 CtiKpier, 
 and Verse. 
 
 St. John 
 chap. i. 
 verse 12. 
 
 1 Corinth, 
 chap. XV. 
 vorso 10. 
 
 Ephesians 
 cliap. iii. 
 verse 12. 
 
 2 Corinth, 
 chap. vi. 
 vorse 1. 
 
 Romans 
 chap. V. 
 verse 6. 
 
 1 Ep. John 
 chap. V. 
 rcisc 3. 
 
 St. Matth. 
 :hap. xijsr 
 vene 11. 
 
 The Vulgate Latm Text. 
 
 Quotqnot auiem 
 recepervnl eum, de- 
 dit CIS ^' poleslatem" 
 i^ualaPj fdios Dei 
 fieri. (I) 
 
 — Scd abundan- 
 tius illis omnibus Id- 
 boravi : non ego an- 
 ten, sed gratia Dei 
 " mecum," ^ X^qk; iS 
 ©«5 ij oil' i/iol. (2) ' 
 
 In quo habemus 
 "fiduciam" ct " ac- 
 cessum" in confiden- 
 tia per fidcm ejus. 
 C3) 
 
 " Adjuvantes" av- 
 vfQi(oiivifs,autem ex- 
 hortamur, ne in va- 
 cuum gratiam Dei 
 recipiatis. (4) 
 
 TTt quid enim 
 Christus, cum adhuc 
 " infirmi essemus" 
 
 secundum tempuspro 
 " impiis " mortuus 
 est. (5) 
 
 ff(Be est enim 
 charilas Dei, ut 
 mandatif ejus cusln- 
 dtamus ■ et mandala 
 rjus "gravia" nun 
 sunt, ai ifiolal ^a. 
 ^ai ax slalf. (6) 
 
 Qui dixit tllis, 
 " non omnes capiunt, 
 i n&yteg -(oijjum ver- 
 bum istud, sed qui- 
 bus datum est. (7) 
 
 The true English aceord- 
 
 ing to the Rheiniiih 
 
 TransUijon. 
 
 But as many as 
 
 eceived liim, he 
 
 gave them " power" 
 
 to be made the 
 
 sons of God. 
 
 — But I have la- 
 boured more abun- 
 dantly than all they; 
 yet not 1, but the 
 grace of God " with 
 me.' 
 
 In whom we have 
 " afliance" and " ac- 
 cess" in confidence, 
 by the faith of him. 
 
 And " we help- 
 ing," do exhort, that 
 you receive not the 
 grace of God in 
 vain. 
 
 For, why did 
 Christ, when we as 
 yet " were weak," 
 according to the 
 time, die for the 
 " impious." 
 
 For this is the 
 charity of God, that 
 we keep his com- 
 mandments : and his 
 commandments are 
 not " heavy." 
 
 — All men 
 not" receive 
 saying. 
 
 "do 
 this 
 
 Corruptions m the Pro- 
 testant Blltte.s. printed 
 A. 1). 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 IJut as many as 
 received him, he 
 gave them " prero- 
 gative" (" Dignity," 
 says Beza)to belhe 
 sojis of God. (1) 
 
 — - Yet not 1, 
 but the grace of 
 God " wliich is" 
 with me. (2) 
 
 " By" whom we 
 have "boldness" and 
 "entrance, with the" 
 confidence " which 
 is" by the faith of 
 him ; or " in him," 
 as Bcza has it. (3) 
 
 And we " God's 
 labofirers," &c. In 
 another Bible, Wo 
 " together are God's 
 labourers." '(4) 
 
 Christ, when we 
 were yet of " no 
 strength," died for 
 the " ungodly." (5) 
 
 — And his com- 
 mandments are not 
 " grievous." (6) 
 
 The lait TTaiiil&Uon ol 
 
 the PictCMtant Kilile, F.i). 
 I. on., an. 168.1, 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 — Yet not I, but 
 the grace of Hod 
 " which was*' with 
 me. 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 Corrected, 
 
 For when we 
 were yet " without 
 strength," in due 
 time Christ died for 
 the " ungodly " 
 
 — Instead of, hia 
 commandments aro 
 not " lieavy," they 
 say, are not " grie- 
 vous." 
 
 — All men " can- 
 not" receive this 
 saying. (7) 
 
 — All men " nau. 
 not" receive tlus 
 sayhig. 
 
FKEE WILL. 
 
 79 
 
 (1) AJAi.N'ST free will, instead of power, 
 .hey, in their transliition, use the Vvord preroga- 
 tive ; and Beza, the word dignity ; protesting 
 (a) that whereas, in other places, he often trans- 
 lated this Greek word, power and authority, 
 here he rejected both indeed against free will ; 
 which, he says, the sophists would prove out of 
 this phice, reprehending Erasmus for following 
 thoiii in his translation. But whereas the Greek 
 word is indiiferenily used to signify dignity or 
 liberty, he tiiut will translate eitherof these, and 
 exclude the other, restrains the sense of the 
 Holy Ghost, and determines it to his own fancy. 
 Now we may as well translate liberty, as Beza 
 does dignity ; but we must not abridge the sense 
 of the Holy Ghost to one particular meaning, 
 and therefore we translate putestas and power, 
 words indid'erently signifying both dignity and 
 liberty. But in their last Bible it is corrected. 
 It Would have been well, if they had corrected 
 this next, though I think of the two, they have 
 made it worse ; translating, " not I, but the 
 grace of God which was with me," (" which is 
 with me,) say their old Bibles." 
 
 ('.I) Bv which falsity, they here also restrain 
 the sense of the Holy Ghost; whereas, if they 
 had translated according to sincerity, " Yet 
 not I, but the grace of God with me," the text 
 might have had not only the sense they confine 
 it to, but also this, " not I, but the grace of 
 God which laboured with me." So that, by this 
 'atter, it may be evidently signified, that the 
 (jrace of God, and tlie apostle, both laboured 
 together ; and not only grace, as if the apostle 
 had done nothing, like unto a block, or forced 
 only ; but that the grace of God did so concur, 
 as the principal agent, with all his labours, that 
 Ills free will wrought with it : and this is the 
 most approved interpretation of this place, 
 which their translation, by putting, " which is," 
 sr, " which was," into the te.vt, excludes. 
 
 But they reprehend the Vulgate Latin inter- 
 preter for neglecting the Greek article, not con- 
 sidering that the same many limes cannot be 
 expressed in Latin : the Greek phrase having this 
 prerogative above the Latin, to represent a thing 
 more brieflv, commodiousiy, and significantly 
 by the article, as Juculius Zrhitdesi, Jucubus 
 Alphtp.i, J 11(1 IIS Jacnhi, Muria Cleop/ia : in all 
 which, though the Greek article is not expressed, 
 yet they are all sincerely translated into Latin. 
 Nor can the article be expressed without adding 
 more than the article, and so not without adding 
 10 the text, as they do very boldly in such 
 speeches, throughout the New Testament. 
 Yea, they do it when there is no article in the 
 Greek, and that purposely : as in this of the 
 Enhesians, (3) where they say, " Confidence is 
 by faith," as though there were no " confidence by 
 works." TheGreek,f«' unnidr/irFi Sm ji/g nigfui;, 
 bears not that translation, unless there were an 
 article after confidence, which is not ; but they 
 add it to the text : as also Beza does the like, in 
 Rom viii. 2, and their English Geneva Tesla- 
 
 (fl) Bezi Nov. Test 1580. 
 
 ments after him, lo maintain the heresy of im- 
 putative justice : as in his annotations he plainly 
 deduces, saying confidently, " I doubt not, but 
 a Greek article must be understood ;" an<l 
 therefore, forsooth, put into the text also. He 
 does the same in St. James ii. 20, still debating 
 the case in his annotations, w'ly he does .so ; and 
 when he has concluded in his fancy, that this or 
 that is the sense, he puts it so in '.he text, and 
 translates accordingly. But if they say, that in 
 this place of the Corinthians there is a Greek 
 article, and therefore they do well to express it : 
 I answer, first, the article may then be expressed 
 in translation, when there can bo but one sense 
 of the same. Secondly, it must be expressed, 
 when we cannot otherwise give the sense of the 
 place, as Mat. i. 6 ex irji; m 'Ov^la, Ex ca qua 
 fait Uricc, where the Vulgate interpreter omits 
 it not ; but in this of St Paul, which we now 
 speak of, where the sense is doubtful, and the 
 Latin expresses the Greek sulficiently otherwise, 
 he leaves it also doubtful and indifferent, not 
 abridging it, as they do, saying, " the grace o' 
 God which is with me." 
 
 (4) AoAix, in this other place of the Corin- 
 thians, where the apostle calls himself and his 
 fellow preachers, " God's co-adjutors, co-la- 
 bourers," or such as labour and work with God, 
 how falsely have their first translators made il, 
 let themselves, who have corrected it in theit 
 last Bible, judge. 
 
 (5) And in this next, the apostle's words do 
 not signif}', that " we had no strength," or 
 " were without strength ;" but that we were 
 " weak, feeble, infirm :" and this they corrupt to 
 defend their false doctrine, " that free will was 
 altosrether lost by Adam's sin." (A) (c) 
 
 (6) Whe.v they have bereaved and spoiled a 
 man of his free-will, and left him without all 
 strength, they go so far in this point, that they 
 say, the regenerate themselves have no free will 
 and ability ; no, not by and with the grace ol 
 God, to keep the commandment. To this pur- 
 pose, they translate, his commandments are not 
 " grievous," rather than " are not heavy ;" for 
 in saying, " they are not heavy," it would follow, 
 they might be kept and observed ; but in saying 
 " ihey are not grievous," that may be true, were 
 they never so heavy or impossible, through pa- 
 tience ; as when a mail cannot do as he would ; 
 yet it grieves him not, being patient and wise, 
 because he is content to do as he can, and ia 
 able. 
 
 (7) Our Saviour says not in this place of St, 
 Matthew, as thcj' falsely translate, " All men 
 cannot," but, " All men tlo not ;" and therefore, 
 St. Augustine says, " Because all will not" (d) 
 But when our Saviour says afterwards, " He 
 that can receive, let him receive :" he adds 
 another Greek word to express that sense, 
 6 Sv^afievog /tuQeiv ^biQfno) whereas by the Pro. 
 testant translation, he might have said, 6 /(u^im 
 XaioeiTu), Vide aboTe. 
 
 (ft) Whitaker, p. 18. 
 
 (c) See Beza's Annot, in Rom. ii. 27. 
 
 (d) St. August, de Gia et lib. Arbitr. c»p. 4> 
 
80 
 
 XI. PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS A3AINST 
 
 The Book. 
 
 Ghajvter, 
 
 and Verse. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 The true English arcord- 
 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 
 Translation. 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro 
 testant Bibles, printed 
 A. i>. 1502, 1577, 1579. 
 
 The last Translation c( 
 
 the Protestant Bible,£d 
 
 Irf>n. an. )683. 
 
 Romans 
 chap. V. 
 vp.rse 18. 
 
 Romans 
 chap. iv. 
 versfl 3. 
 
 2 Corinth, 
 cliiip. V. 
 "er. lilt. 
 
 Gphesians 
 chap. i. 
 verse 6. 
 
 Daniel 
 chap. vi. 
 i-erse 22. 
 
 Romans 
 chap. iv. 
 versu 6. 
 
 " Igilur" sicut per 
 unius delictum in 
 omnes homines in 
 condemnatumsm : sic 
 ttper unius justitiam 
 m omnes homines m 
 justificationem vita. 
 1) 
 
 Therefore, as by 
 the oflTence of one, 
 unto itll men to con- 
 demnation : so also 
 by the "justice" of 
 one, unto all men to 
 justification of life. 
 
 Credidit Abraham 
 Deo, et repiilalum 
 est ilii "adjustitiam" 
 £(f dixnioauvtjp. (2) 
 
 — Ut nos ej^ce- 
 remur "justitia" Dei 
 ipso, dt»awav»Ti 0«« 
 
 In qua " gratif,- 
 caot7,E;taj4T<uCT6i', nos 
 IS dilecto Jilio suo. 
 (4) 
 
 — Quid coram co 
 " justiiia inventa est 
 in me." (5) 
 
 Stent et David 
 dicit, i-tyel, bealitu- 
 dtnem hominis cui 
 Dcus acceplo fert 
 justxtiam sine operi- 
 bus. (6) 
 
 Abraham believed 
 God, and it was re- 
 puted him '■ to jus- 
 tice." 
 
 — That we might 
 be made the. " jus- 
 tice" of God in him. 
 
 Wherein he hath 
 " gratified us" in his 
 beloved Son. 
 
 — Because before 
 him "justice was 
 found in mo." 
 
 As David also 
 "termeth"' the bless- 
 edness of a man, '"to 
 whom"' God " repu- 
 teth justice" with 
 out works. 
 
 " Likewise then," 
 as by the oflTence of 
 one, " the fault 
 came on" all men 
 to condemnation : so 
 by the " justifying" 
 of one " the benefit 
 aboundeth towards" 
 all men, to " the" 
 justification of li^e. 
 
 (1) 
 
 Abraham believed 
 God, and it was re- 
 puted to him " for 
 justice." (2) 
 
 That we " by his 
 means" should be 
 " that righteousness 
 which before" God 
 " is allowed." (3) 
 
 Wherein he hath 
 "made us accepted," 
 (or " freely accep- 
 ted") in his beloved 
 Son. (4) 
 
 Because before 
 him, " my justice 
 Was found out." (5) 
 
 As David " de- 
 scribeth" the bless- 
 edness of "the" man, 
 " unto whom" God 
 " imputeth ' rightC' 
 ousness." (6) 
 
 Therefore, as by 
 the olTences of one, 
 "judgment came u[>- 
 on" all men to con- 
 demnation : even so 
 by the " righteous- 
 ness of of one,"ihe 
 free gift came upon" 
 all men unto ju.sti6- 
 catiop f life 
 
 And it was ac- 
 counted unto him 
 "for righteousness." 
 
 That we miglii be . 
 made the " righte- 
 ousness" of God ill 
 him. 
 
 Wherein he hath 
 made us "accepted" 
 in the Beloved. 
 
 Forasmuch as be 
 fore him"innocency 
 was found in me." 
 
 Instead af "ter- 
 meth" they say,"de. 
 scribeth ;" and foi 
 justice," they hava 
 " righteousness." 
 
ISTHERJiNT JUSTICt. 
 
 (iyBEZ«, in his annotations on Rom. v. 18, 
 protests, that his adding to this text is especially 
 against inherent jnsiic e, which, he says, is to be 
 avoided as nothing more. His false translation 
 you see our English Bibles follow ; and have 
 idik'd no fewer than six words in this one verse ; 
 yea, their last translations have added seven, and 
 artme of those words much different from those 
 of ihcir former brethren ; so that it is impossible 
 to make them agree betwixt themselves. I 
 cannot but admire to see how loath they are to 
 miflcr the holy scripture to speak in behalf of 
 inherent justice. 
 
 (2) So also in this next place, where they add 
 the word " for" to the text, " and it was reputed 
 to him for justice," for " righteousness," says 
 Jheir last righteous work ; for the longer they 
 live, the further they are divided from jusiico ; 
 because they would have it to be nothing else, 
 but instead and place of justice : thereby taking 
 away true inherent justice, even in Abraham 
 himself But admit this translation of theirs, 
 which, notwithstanding in their sense, is false, 
 nust it needs signify not true inherent justice, 
 because the scripture says, it was reputed for 
 justice ? Do such speeches import, that ills not so 
 indeed, but is only reputed so? Then if we shoidd 
 say, this shall be reputed to thee " for" sin, " for" 
 a great benefit, &c., it should signify it is no sin 
 indeed, nor great benefit. But let them remem- 
 ber, that the scripture uses to speak of sin and 
 of justice alike, reputabitur libi in peccalum, 
 "It shall be reputed to thee for sin," as St. 
 Hierom translates it. (a) If then justice only 
 be reputed, sin also is only reputed : if sin be in 
 us indeed, justice is in us indeed. And the 
 Greek fathers make it plain, that " to be re- 
 puted unto justice," is to have true justice indeed ; 
 interpreting St. Paul's words, that " Abraham 
 obtained justice," " Abraham was justified ;" for 
 that is, say they, " It was reputed him to justice." 
 And St. James testifies, that " In that Abraham 
 was justified by faith and works, the scripture 
 was fulfilled," which says, " It was reputed him 
 to • justice," Gen. xv. 6, in which words of 
 Genesis there is not " for justice," or " instead 
 of justice," as. the English Bibles have it, for the 
 Hebrew np-,3> -b nz-Drr should not be so trans- 
 lated, especially when they meant it was so 
 counted or reputed for justice, that it was not 
 justice indeed 
 
 (3) Again, how intolerably have their first 
 translations corrupted St. Paul's words, 2 
 Cor. v., which though their latter Bibles have 
 Lndcrtaken to correct, yet their heresy would 
 not suffer ihera to amend also the word 
 
 la) Deut., xxiii. and xxi^ j OScura. in Caten.Photius, 
 ebap. ii. ver. 33. 
 
 «1 
 
 " righteousness !" It is death to them to htai 
 
 of justice. 
 
 (4) Here again they make St. Paul say, thai 
 God made us " accepted," or " freely accepted in 
 his beloved Son," (their last translation leaves out 
 Son very boldly, changing the word his into the, 
 " accepted in the Beloved,") as if they had a mind 
 to say, that " in, or among ail the beloved in 
 the world, God has only accepted us :" as they 
 ma'ive the angel in St. Luke say to our blessed 
 Lady, " Hail! freely beloved," to take away all 
 grace inherit and resident in the blessed Virgin, 
 or in us : whereas the apostle's word signifies 
 that we are truly made grateful, or gracious and 
 acceptable ; that is to say, that our soul is 
 inwardly endued and beautified with grace, and 
 the virtues proceeding from it ; and conse- 
 quentl)', is holy indeed before the sight of God, 
 and not only so accepted or reputed, as they 
 imagine. Which St. Chrysostom suflicienily 
 testifies in these words : " tie said not, which he 
 freely gave us, but, wherein he made us grate- 
 ful ; that is, not only, delivered us from sins, but 
 also made us beloved and amiable, made our 
 soul beautiful and grateful, such as the angels 
 and archangels desire to see, and such as him- 
 self is in love withal, according to that in the 
 Psalm, the king shall desire or be in love with 
 thy beauty." (6) St. Hierom speaking of bap- 
 tism, says : " Now thou an made clean in the 
 laver : and of thee it is said, who is she that 
 ascends white ? and let her be washed, yet she 
 cannot keep her purity, unless she be strength- 
 ened from our Lord ;" (c) whence it is plain, 
 that by baptism original sin being expelled, in- 
 herent justice takes place in the soul, rendering 
 it clean, white, and pure ; which purity the soul, 
 strengthened by God's grace, may keep and 
 conserve. 
 
 (5) Another falsification they make here in 
 Daniel, translating: "My justice was found out;" 
 and in another Bible, " My unguiltiness was 
 found out," to draw it from inherent justice, 
 which was in Daniel. In their last edition you 
 see they are resolved to correct their brethren's 
 fault; notvi'iihstanding though they mend one, 
 yet they make another ; putting innoccncy in- 
 stead of justice. It is very strange that out 
 English Protestant divines should have such a 
 pique against justice, that they cannot endure 
 to see it stand in the text, where the Chaldee, 
 Greek, and Latin place it. 
 
 (6) It must needs be a spot of (he samu 
 infection, that they translate " describeth" here ; 
 as though imputed righteousness (for so they had 
 rather say, than justice) were the description oi 
 blessedness. 
 
 (b) St. Chrys. in this place of the EphesiAiut. 
 
 (c) St. Hierom., lib. 3, contra Pelagiaaoa. 
 
XZI.— ^PROTKSTANl TRASSUATIONS IK 
 
 The B6ok, 
 
 Chspter, 
 
 and \ erse. 
 
 Ilubrews 
 chap. X. 
 vrtrse 22. 
 
 1 Corinth, 
 chap. xiii. 
 trcrse 2^ 
 
 1 Corinth, 
 chap. xii. 
 i^crse 31. 
 
 The V-ilgate Latin Text. 
 
 St James 
 I'liap. ii. 
 verso 22. 
 
 St. Luke 
 chap, xviii. 
 rcrse 42. 
 
 8t. Mark 
 cLap. X 
 vf!rsc 52, 
 aiul 
 
 chap. riii. 
 verse 48. 
 
 " Accedamus" cum 
 verocordf in"pleni- 
 tudin^' jidet, i» ni-ij- 
 QOifoqia nl^ews. (1) 
 
 Et St habuero 
 "omnem" nixaav,ji. 
 dem, ita ul monies 
 transftram charita- 
 tem aulem non ha- 
 buero, nihil sum. (2) 
 
 Et adhuc " excel- 
 lentiorem viqm" vo- 
 bis demonstro. 
 
 The true English accord- 
 ing to the Rhemish 
 Translulion. 
 
 Vides quqniam 
 fides " co-operaba- 
 tur," oui'ijpj'f », operi- 
 bus illius. (3) 
 
 Et Jesus dixit 
 illi, respice, fides 
 tua te " salvum fe- 
 cit," fi nJ^'S "5 asaa. 
 »i as. (4) 
 
 Vade,fides tua "te 
 salvum Jicit" 
 
 Let us ''approach" 
 with a true heart, in 
 ^' fulness" of faith. 
 
 And if 1 should 
 have " all" faith, so 
 thai I could remove 
 mountains,and have 
 not charity, I am 
 nothing. 
 
 And yet 1 show 
 you a " more excel- 
 lent way." 
 
 Seest thou that faith 
 " did work with" his 
 works. 
 
 Cqr|rupti<fns in the PrO' 
 ttiB'aiit Bibles, |j>rinted 
 A. D. 1562, 1577, 1S79. 
 
 Let US " draw 
 nigh" with a true 
 heart, in " assu- 
 raiice"«tf faith. (1) 
 
 If 1 should have 
 "whole" faith. "To- 
 lam fiJem " saith 
 Beza, for " omnem 
 fidem." (2) 
 
 — Thy faith hath 
 " made thee whole." 
 
 — Thy faith hath 
 ' made thee safe." 
 
 The last Ttmsilation ^ 
 
 the Protcatanl Bililf, Eil. 
 
 Ij(>n., an. 1683; 
 
 Beza, in Testa- 
 ment, 1536, trans- 
 lates it : " Behold, 
 moreover also," I 
 show you a way 
 " most diligently." 
 And in another, viz., 
 of 1565: And "be- 
 sides," I show you a 
 way"to excellency." 
 
 Thou seest that 
 faith " was a helper 
 of" his works. — 
 Beza. (3) 
 
 — Thy faith hath 
 " saved thee." (4) 
 
 Let ns " draw 
 near" with a true 
 heirt, in "full as- 
 surance" of faith. 
 
 "Air faith. 
 
 — Thy faith hath 
 " saved thee." 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 — Thy faith balk 
 "saved thcc." 
 
 Corrected. 
 
DEFENCE OF THE SUFFICIENC* OF FAITH ALON! 
 
 83 
 
 All other means of Siilvatinn being thus taken 
 Bwny, as you have already seen, their only and 
 last refuge is faith alone : and that not the 
 Christian faith contained in the articles of the 
 creed, and such like ; but a special faith and con- 
 fidence, whereby every man must assuredly 
 believe, that himself is the son of God, and one 
 of iho elect predestined to salvation. If he be 
 not, by faith, as sure of this, as of Christ's incar- 
 nation and death, he shall never be saved. 
 
 ( 1 ) For maintaining this heresy, they force 
 .he Greek text to express the very word of 
 assurance and certainty thus : " Let us draw 
 nigh with a true heart, in assurance of faith :" 
 their last translation makes it, " in full assurance 
 of faith ;" adding the word full to what it was 
 oefore ; and that, either because they would be 
 thought to draw that word from the original, or 
 else because they would thereby signify such an 
 assurance or certainty, as should be beyond all 
 manner of doubt or fear ; thereby excluding not 
 only charily, but even hope also, as unneces- 
 sary. 
 
 (2) The word in the Greek is far diflerent 
 from their expression ; for it signifies, properly, 
 the fulness and completion of any thing ; and 
 therefore, the apostle joins it sometimes with 
 faith, sometimes with hope, (as in Heb. vi. 1 1,) 
 sometimes with knowledge or understanding, 
 (Col. ii. 2,) to signify the fulness of all three, as 
 the Vulgate Latin interpreter most sincerely 
 (Rom. iv. 21,) translates it. Thus when the 
 Greek signifies " fulness of faith," rather than 
 " full assurance," (or, as Beza has it, " certain 
 persuasion,") " of faith ;" they err in the precise 
 translation of it ; and much more do they err in 
 the sense when they apply it to the " certain " 
 and " assured faith," that every man ought to 
 nave, as they say, of his own salvation. Whereas 
 the Greek fathers expound it of the " fulness of 
 faith," that every faithful man must have alt such 
 things in heaven, as he sees not ; namely, that 
 Christ is ascended thither, that he shall come 
 with, glory to judge the world, &c., (a) adding 
 further, and proving out of the apostle's words 
 next following, that (the Protestants) " only 
 faith is not sufficient, be it ever so special or 
 assured. "(6) For the said reason do they 
 also translate, " The special gift of faith," (Sap. 
 jii. 14,) instead of '• The chosen gift of faith." 
 Another gross corruption they have in Ecclesi- 
 osticus, V. 5. But because, in their Bibles of 
 the later stamp, they have rejected these books, 
 8a not canonical, though they can show us no 
 more reason or authority fnr their so doing, than 
 for altering and corrupting the text, I shall be 
 content to pass it by. 
 
 (3) Brza, by corrupting this place of the 
 Corinthians, translating lotam fidem for omnem 
 
 a) St. Chry80»t.,Theodoret , Thcopbyl. upon Rom. x. 
 (6) St. Cbryoost., Horn 13, c. 10, wi Heb. 
 
 fidem, thinks to exempt from the apostle's words 
 their special justifying faith ; whereas it may be 
 easily seen, that St. Paul names and mean? 
 " all faith," as he doth " all knowledge,'' and 
 " all mysteries," in the foregoing words. And 
 Luther confesses, that he thrust the wojril 
 " only," (only faith) into the text.(c) 
 
 (4) Also by his falsifying this text of St. 
 James, he would have his reader think, an he 
 also expounds it, " That faith was an efficient 
 cause, and fruitful of good works ;" whereas the 
 apostle's words are plain, that faith wrottght 
 together with his works ; yea, and that his faith 
 was by works made perfect. This is an impu- 
 dent handling of scripture, to make works the 
 fruit only, and effect of fahh ; which is their 
 heresy. 
 
 (5) AoAiN, in all those places of the Gospel, 
 where our blessed Saviour requires the people's 
 faith, when he healed them of corporal diseases 
 only, they gladly translate, " Thy faith hath 
 saved thee," rather than, " Thy faith hath healed 
 thee," or, " Thy faith hath made thee whole." 
 And this they do, that by joining these words 
 together, they may make it sound in the ears of 
 the people, that faith saves and justifies a man : 
 for so Beza notes in the margin, ^ries saluat, 
 " faith saveth ;" whereas the faith that was here 
 required, was of Christ's power and omnipotence 
 only ; which, as Beza confesses, may be pos- 
 sessed by the devils themselves ; and is far from 
 the faith that justifies.(({) 
 
 But they will say, the Greek signifies as they 
 translate it : I grant it does so ; but it signi- 
 fies very commonly to be healed corporally, as, 
 by their own translation, in these places, Mark 
 v. 26 ; Luke viii. 36, 48, 50 ; and in other places, 
 where they translate, " I shall be whole," " they 
 were healed ;" " he was healed ;" " she shall be 
 made whole." And why do they here translate 
 it so ? Because they know, " to be saved," 
 imports rather the salvation of the soul : and 
 therefore, when faith is joined with it, they 
 translate it rather " saved " than " healed," to 
 insinuate their justification by " faith only." 
 
 But how contrary to the doctrine ot the 
 ancient fathers this Protestant error of " faith 
 alone justifying" is, may be seen by those who 
 please to read St. Augustine. De Fide et Opirc, 
 c. 14. 
 
 To conclude, I will refer my I'rotcstant 
 SoLiFiDiAM to the words of St. James the apos- 
 tle ; where he will find, that faith alone, without 
 works, cannot save him 
 
 (c) Luth , torn. 2, fol 40D, edit. Witte., anno 1561 
 {d) Beza Anoot. in 1 Cor. xiii. S. 
 
94 
 
 XXII. PROTESTANT IKANSLATIOSIS AOAI> ST 
 
 The Book, 
 
 Chapter, 
 
 and \ crse. 
 
 2 Thessal 
 chap. ii. 
 verse 15. 
 
 2 Thessal. 
 ehaj). iii. 
 rerse 6. 
 
 1 Corinth. 
 ihiip. xi. 
 verse 2. 
 
 Cplos.s. 
 chap, ii 
 Verse 20. 
 
 1 Peter 
 (.hap. i. 
 \eise 18. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 Ita(jue fratres, 
 state el tenele " tra- 
 ditiones"ni»giidiiaei;, 
 quas didicistis. sine 
 per serinonem, stve 
 per epislolam nos- 
 tram. (1) 
 
 -- Ut subtrahalis 
 vos ab omni ffatre 
 ambulantc inordi- 
 nate, et non secun- 
 dum " traJilionem," 
 quam accepcrunt a 
 nobis. 
 
 Laudo autem vos 
 fratres, quod per 
 omnia mei memores 
 eslis, et sicut " tra- 
 didi" vobis, prcecepta 
 mea tenetis, xuOuig 
 nitgadoxu, lu; na^a- 
 Soaeig xuie/«t£. 
 
 Si ergo mortui estis 
 cum Christo ab " ele- 
 meiilis"/iujus mundi: 
 quid adhuc tanquam 
 viventes in mundo de- 
 cernitis ? it Soyftaii- 
 leaGe. (2) 
 
 Scteutes quod non 
 corruptibilibas auro 
 vtl argento redtmpti 
 estis de vana veslra 
 conversatiunt " pa- 
 terncB traditionis" i* 
 Tijg ftaiatiig ifiitif 
 una^QOiftji nuiqo.ia- 
 pr"JvB. (3) 
 
 The true English accord- 
 ing to the Rheini:sh 
 Translation. 
 
 Therefore, bre- 
 thren, stand and 
 hold the " tradi- 
 tions" which you 
 have learned, wlie- 
 ther it be by word, 
 or by our epistle. 
 
 — That you with- 
 draw yourselves 
 from every brother 
 walking inordinate- 
 ly, and not accord- 
 ing to the "tradi- 
 tions" which they 
 have received of us. 
 
 And I praise you 
 brethren, that in all 
 things you be mind- 
 ful of me, and as I 
 have " delivered" 
 unto you, you keep 
 my " precepts.'' 
 
 If 'hen you be 
 dead with Christ 
 from the "elements" 
 of this world, why 
 do you yet "decree" 
 as living in the 
 world? 
 
 Knowing that not 
 with corruptible 
 things, gold or sil- 
 ver, you are re- 
 deemed from your 
 vain conversation of 
 " your fathers' tradi- 
 tion." 
 
 Conuptions in the Pro- 
 testant Bibles, printed 
 k. D. 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 For " traditions," 
 thoy say " ordinan- 
 ces." (1) 
 
 Instead of " tradi- 
 tions," they trans- 
 late, " instructions." 
 
 —And " keep the 
 ordinances," as I 
 have " preached" 
 unto you. 
 
 If "ye" be dead 
 with Christ from 
 the " rudiments" of 
 " the" world, why, 
 " as though" living 
 in the world, " are 
 ye led with tradi- 
 tions ?" And, " are 
 ye burthened with 
 traditions ?" (2) 
 
 " Vou were" not 
 redeemed with cor- 
 ruptible things, gold 
 or silver, from your 
 vain conversation 
 " received by the" 
 tradition of the" fa- 
 thers. (3) 
 
 The last Translatun tl 
 
 the Protesianl Ffihle, Eil : 
 
 Lnn., an. 1683, 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 Corrected 
 
 — And keep the 
 "ordinances," as 1 
 have delivered them 
 to you. 
 
 — Why, as though 
 living in the world, 
 are you " subject to 
 ordinances V 
 
 -^ From ■ your 
 vain conversation 
 " received by tradi- 
 tion from your fa 
 thers." 
 
AJ-OSTOLICAL TRADITIONa 
 
 A OENERAL mark, wHerewith all heretics that 
 have ever disturbed God's church have been 
 branded, is, " to reject apostolical traditions," 
 and to fly to the scri]rture, as by themselves ex- 
 pounded, for their " only rule of faiih" We 
 read not of any heresy since the apostles' time, 
 on which this character has been more deeply 
 Btam|)ed, than in those of this last age, especially 
 the first heads of them, and those who were the 
 iiiierpreiers'-and translators of the scriptures; 
 whom we find to have been possessed with such 
 prejudice against apostolical tradition, that 
 wheresoever the holy scripture speaks against 
 certain traditions of the Jews, there all the Eng- 
 lish translations follow the Greek exactly, never 
 omitting to translate the Greek word nuf/addaig, 
 ■' tradition." On the contrary, wheresoever the 
 sacred text speaks in commendation of tradi- 
 tions, to wit, such traditions as the apostles de- 
 'ivered to the church, thpre (1) all their first 
 translations agree not to follow the Greek, 
 which is still the self-same word ; but for tradi- 
 tions, use the words ordinances or instructions, 
 preachings, institutions, and any word else, 
 rather than traditions : insomuch, that Beza, 
 the master of our English scripturi^ts, translates 
 the word nagoiSdaeig, traditam dnclrinam, " the 
 doctrine delivered," putting the singular number 
 for the plural, and adding " doctrine" of his own 
 accord, {a) 
 
 Who could imagine their malice and partiality 
 against traditions to be so great, that they should 
 all Sirree. in their first translations 1 mean ; 
 for t'r.<j/ could not but blush at it in their last, 
 with one consent so duly and exactly, in all 
 these places set down in the former page, to 
 conceal and suppress the word tradition, which, 
 in other places, they so gladly make use of? 1 
 appeal to tlieir consciences, whether these things 
 were not done on purpose, and with a very 
 wicked intention, to signify to the reader, that all 
 traditions are to be reproved and rejected, and 
 none allowed. 
 
 (2) l.N some places they do so gladly use this 
 word tradition, that rather than want it, they 
 niake bold to thrust it into the text, when it is 
 not in the Greek at all; as you see in this place 
 of the Epistle to the Colossians, (A) " Why, as 
 though living in the world, are yon led with 
 traditions V And as another English Bible reads 
 mere heretically, " Why are ye burthened with 
 traditions V Doubtless, they knew as well then, 
 as they do now at this day, that this Greek word 
 Siyua, doth not signify tradition ; yea, they were 
 Dot ignorant, when a little before, in the same 
 
 fa) 2 Thos. ii. 3. 
 (4) Bib. 1579 
 
 12 
 
 83 
 
 chapter, and in other places, themsoA-es trans- 
 late ShyftuTu, " ordinances,'' " decrees." (c) 
 Was not this done then to make the very name 
 of tradition odious among the people ? 
 
 And though some of these gross corruption.^ 
 are corrected by their last translators, yet we 
 have no reason to think they were amended cut 
 of any good or pure intention, but rather to de- 
 fend some of their own traditions, viz., wcarhig 
 of the rocket, surplice, four-cornered cap, keep- 
 ing the first day in the week holy, baptizing in- 
 fants, &c., all which things being denied by 
 their more refined brethren, as not being clearly 
 to be proved out of scripture, and they having 
 no other refuge to fly to but tradition, were forced 
 to translate tradition in some places, where it is 
 well spoken of. But, I say, this could noi 
 be from any pure intention of correcting their 
 corrupted scripture ; but rather for the said seli- 
 end ; which appears evidently enough from 
 their not also correcting other notorious Ailsifi-, 
 cations, (as I Pet. i. 18,) (3) " You were not re- 
 deemed with corruptible things, from your vain 
 conversation received by tradition from yo\ii 
 fathers ;" where the Greek ix Tr\i /jujulixg i/jCr 
 iuu^(joq>rig niiTfjOTjixQoddiH, is rather to be thus 
 translated, and it is the Greek they pretend to 
 follow, and not our Vulgate Latin which they 
 condemn : " From your vain conversation de- 
 livered by the fathers ;" but because it sounds 
 with the simple people, to be spoken against the 
 traditions of the Roman Church, ihey'Were as 
 glad to sufler it to pass, as the former translators 
 were, for the same reason, to foist in the word 
 tradition ; and for delivered, to say received. 1 
 say, because it is the phrase of the Catholic 
 Church, that it has received many things by 
 tradition, which they would here control by like- 
 ness of words, in their false translations. Bui 
 concerning the word tradition, they will tell us, 
 perhaps, the sense thereof is included in the 
 Greek word, delivered. We grant it : but 
 ■would they be contt-nt, if we should always ^x- 
 pressly add tradition, where it is so included ? 
 Then should we say in the Corinthians, " 1 praise 
 yeu, that as I have delivered to you, by tradition, 
 you keep my precepts or traditions." And again, 
 " For I received of our Lord, which also I de- 
 livered unto you, by tradition." (d) And in 
 another place, " As they, by tradition, delivered 
 unto us, which from the beginning saw," &r. 
 and such like, by their example, we should 
 translate in this sort. But we use not this licen- 
 tious manner in translating the holy scriptures ; 
 neither is it a translator's part, but an interpre- 
 ter's, and his that makes a commentary : noj 
 does a good cause need any other translati > i 
 than the express text of the scripture. 
 
 (e) Col. ii. 14 ; Eph. ii. lb. 
 (d) J Cf.r xi. 2. 23 ; Luke i. a 
 
66 
 
 PROTESTANT TRANSLATIONS AOAIKST APOSTOLICAL TR APt TIOTfS. 
 
 But if you say, (u) that our Vulgate Latin 
 has, iu this, place, the word tradition ; we grant 
 it has so, and therefore, we also translate accor- 
 dingly : but you, as 1 hinted above, profess to 
 trauijiate the Greek, and not our Vulgate Latin, 
 w"hich you condemn as papistical, and say it is 
 the worst of all, though Beza, your master, 
 pronounces it to be the best. (4) x\nd will yon, 
 notwithstanding, follow the said Vulgate Latin, 
 ratlier than the Greek, when you find it seems 
 to make for your ptirpose ? This is your j)ar- 
 liality and inconstancy. One while you will 
 follow it, though it differ from; the Greek ; and 
 another time you reject it, though it agree with 
 (he Greek most exaptl}' ; as we. have shown you 
 "ibDve, (Col. ii. 20,} where the Vulgate Latin 
 hath nothing of traditions, but, quid decernkis, as 
 it is in the Greek i yet there your sincere breth- 
 ren translate: "Why are ye burthened with 
 '••■idiliQns 1" 
 
 Is not all this to bolster up their errors and 
 Heresies, without sincerely following either the 
 Greek or Latin 1 The Greek, at least, why do 
 they not follow? Doth the Greek nuqitSoafig, 
 induce them to say, ordinances for traditions ? 
 Or lUyiiitiu lead them to say, traditions for de- 
 crees 1 Or (5/x«iio,u«r«, nqto^vTeqog, ^Si]Q, f Woiii'oc, 
 &c., force them to translate ordinances for jus- 
 tifications, elder for priest, grave for hell, image 
 for idol, &c. ? No ! Where they are afraid of 
 being disadvantageous to their heresies, they 
 scruple not to reject and forsake both the Greek 
 and Latin. 
 
 Though Protestants, in their last translation of 
 the Bible, have indeed corrected this error in 
 several places, not iu all, on ptirpose, thereby to 
 defend themselves against their Puritanical bre- 
 thren, when ihey charge them with several Po- 
 pish observances, ceremonies, and traditions, 
 which they cannot maintain by scripture alone, 
 without being forced, as is said, to (ly to unwrit- 
 ten traditions : yet, when they either dispute 
 with, or write against Catholics, they utterly 
 deny traditionsj and stick fast to the scripture 
 alone, for their " only rule of faith :" falsely 
 aiisertingj that the scripture was received by the 
 priniiuvo church as a " perfect rule of faith." 
 
 These arc the words of a late ministerial (c) 
 guide ol the Church of England, " The scrip- 
 ture was yet (viz., when St. Augustine was sent 
 
 i«ii Discover/ ot oic nock, p. 147. 
 
 (^j Beza, Praf. in Nov. Test , 1550. 
 
 (c) See the Pamphlet called a Second Defence of the 
 Expositioii of the Doctrine of the Church of England, 
 kc.,p. 13, n »!. 
 
 into England) received as a perfect rule ot 
 faith :" for which he cites another atithwitj' like 
 his own. But how true this is, let the holy 
 fathers of the first five hundred years satisfy ua. 
 
 St. Chrysosto.m, expounding the words of St. 
 Paul, (3 Thess. %v.) affirms, that "Hereby it 
 appears, that the apostles did not deliver all 
 things, by epistle, but many things without wri- 
 ting ; and these are worthy of faith : wherefore 
 also, let us esteem the tradition of the church 
 to be believed. It is a tradition, s«ek no far- 
 ther." (d) 
 
 And the same exposition is given by St. Basil 
 Theophylact, and St. John Damascene : as also 
 by St. Epiphanius ; who says, " We itiust use 
 tradition, for all things cannot be received from 
 divine scripture ; wherefore the holy apostles 
 have delivered some things by tradition : even 
 as the holy apostle says, as I have delivered to 
 you, and elsewhere ; so I teach, and have de- 
 livered in the churches." (e) 
 
 St. Augustine, proving that those who were 
 baptized by heretics should not be re- baptized, 
 says, " the apostles commanded nothing hereof; 
 but that doctrine which was opposed herein 
 against Cyprian, is to be believed to proceed 
 from their iradition, as many things be, which 
 the church holds ; and are therefore, well be- 
 lieved to be commanded of the apostles/ al- 
 though they are not written." {f) These words 
 of this great doctor are so clear, that .Mr. Cart- 
 wright, [g) a Protestant, speaking thereof says, 
 "To allow St. Augustine's words, is to bring in 
 Popery again." And in another place, (//) " If 
 St. Augustine's judgment be a good judginent, 
 then there be some things commanded of God, 
 which are not in the scriptures, and thereupon 
 no sufficient doctrine contained in the scriptures." 
 How to make all this agree with the doctrine of 
 our present ministerial guides of the Church 
 of England, who teach that m those primitive 
 times, '^ the scripture was received as a peifect 
 and only rule of faith," will be a task that, I am 
 confident, no wise man, who ha:3 either honour, 
 credit, or respect for truth, will vent-jre to un- 
 dertake. 
 
 , (rf) St. Chrys. in 2 Thes. Horn. 4. 
 
 (p) See St. Basil de Spirit. Sanct., c. SO ; Thnophil in 
 2 Thess. ii. ; St Damaac, cap. 17, de Imag. Sanct. ; St 
 Epiph. HaT. Gl. 
 
 (/) St. Aug. de Bapt. contra Don., lib. 5, cap. 23 
 
 (^') In Whitg. Def ,p. 103. 
 
 (A) And his Second Reply against Whitg., part I , on 
 84,85.86. 
 
XXllI. PnOTESTANT TRANSLATION AGAINST THE KACitiMEN'T OF HARRTAOB. 
 
 M 
 
 The Book, 
 
 Chaptsr, 
 
 and \ erse 
 
 The VulgHte Latin Text. 
 
 The true English arcord- 
 
 iiig lo the Rheniish 
 
 Tninsiation 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- The last Tranglation of 
 lestant BiWes, printed I ;he Pnitestani Bilile, Ed. 
 A. IT. 1562, 1577, 1579. I t.im. ;in. 1693. 
 
 Ephosians 
 chup. r. 
 vcree 32. 
 
 " Sacramentum " 
 fivi^^otof, hcs mag- 
 num est. ( 1 ) 
 
 This is a great 
 ' sacrament." 
 
 This is a great 
 "secret." (1) 
 
 This is a great 
 ' mystery." 
 
 ( 1 ) The church of God esteems marriage a holy 
 sacrament, as giving grace to the married per- 
 sons, lo live together in love, concurJ, atid 
 fidelity. But Protestants, who reckon it no 
 more than a civil contract, as it is amongst in- 
 GJuls, translated this text accordingly, calling it, 
 m their first translations, instead of a " great 
 sacrament," oi " mystery," as in the Greek, a 
 " great secri.-t.' 
 
 But we will excuse them for not translating 
 " sacrament," because they pretended not to 
 translate the Latin but the Greek : yet, however, 
 we must ask them, why. they call it not " mys- 
 tery," as it is in the Greek ? Doubtless, they 
 can give us no other reason, bivt that they 
 wished only to avoid both those words, which 
 arc used in the Latin and Greek Church, to sig- 
 nify sacrament ; for the word myslerj- is the 
 same in Greek, that sacrament is in Latin ; and 
 in the Greek church, the sacrament of the bod„y 
 and blood itself, is called by the name of mys- 
 terj-, or ir>j-sleries ; so that, if they should have 
 called matrimony by that name, it would have 
 sounded equally well as a sacrament also : but 
 in saying, " it is a great secret," they are sure it 
 hall not be taken for a sacrament. 
 
 Cut perhaps, they will say, is not every sacra- 
 ment and mystery, in English, " a secret ?" Yes, 
 OS angel is a " messenger ;" priest, an " elder ;" 
 apostle, " one that is sent ;" baptism, " washing ;" 
 evangelist, " a bringer of good news ;" Holy 
 Ghost, " Holy Wind ;" liishop, " overseer or 
 superintendent." But when the holy scripture 
 jses these words to signify more excellent and 
 liviue things than those of the common sort, 
 oray does it become tmnslators to use profane. 
 
 instead of ecclesiastical terms, and thereby to 
 disgrace the writing and meaning of the Holy 
 
 Ghost 1. 
 
 The same Greek word, in all other places, (a) 
 they translated mystery ; who, therefore, can 
 imagine any other reason for the translating of it 
 " secret" in this place, than lesi it might seem lo 
 make against their heretical opinion, " That 
 marriage is no sacrament ?" though the apostle 
 makes it such a mystery, or sacrament, as repre- 
 sents no less than the conjunction of Christ and 
 his church, and whatsoever is most excellent in 
 that conjunction. 
 
 And St. Augustine teaches, that " a certain 
 sacrament of marriage is commended to the 
 faithful that are married ; whereupon the 
 apostle says : ' Husbands, love your wives ; as 
 Christ loved the church.' " (A) And Fulk grants, 
 that " Augustine and some others of the arcient 
 fathers take it, that matrimony is a great mystery 
 of the conjunction of Christ and his church." («) 
 
 But because they have kept to the Greek in 
 their last translation, I shall say no more of it 
 nor should I indeed have thus much noticed il 
 here, but to show the reader how intolerably 
 partial and crafty they were in their first tran» 
 lations. 
 
 (a) Tim. iii.; Col. i. 26; Eph. iil. 9; 1 Cor. xv. l^ 
 (i) St. Aug. de Nupt. et Concnp., lib. i. c. 10. 
 (e) Fulk. in Rhetn. Test, in Epbes. v. 32, sect. S. 
 
 HerefoUeto several herettcal additions, and other notormis falsifications, ^c. 
 
B8 
 
 XXIV. ^PROTESTANT CORRDPTION'S 
 
 The Book, 
 
 CLapter, 
 
 and Veree. 
 
 The Vulgate Latin Text. 
 
 The true English arcord- 
 
 ing lo the llhemish 
 
 Translation. 
 
 Corruptions in the Pro- 
 testant Bib'es. printed 
 A. I). 1562, 1577, 1579. 
 
 The last Tranalation of 
 
 the Protestant Bible Ed. 
 
 Lon. an. IC83. 
 
 2 Paralip. 
 or Chron. 
 ch. xxxri 
 
 verso 8. 
 
 Acts of 
 tho Apos. 
 chap. ix. 
 ver.se 22. 
 
 1 St. Peter 
 chap. i. 
 verse 25. 
 See the 
 like atlJi- 
 tiun in 
 1 Corinth, 
 chap. ix. 
 verse 17. 
 
 St. James 
 chap. iv. 
 verse 6. 
 
 .(Tolossians 
 chap. i. 
 verse 23 
 
 Rcliqva autem 
 verborum Joukim, et 
 abominalionum ejus, 
 qu^'i opcratus est, 
 "et quoB invenia sunt 
 in eo," conlinentitr in 
 Itbro regum Jud<B et 
 Israelii) 
 
 Et eonfundebat 
 Judaos qui hahita- 
 bant Darnasci, aff,r- 
 mans quuniam hic est 
 Christus. (2) 
 
 Verbum autem 
 Domini manet in 
 teternum : hoc est 
 autem verbum quod 
 " evanvelttatum est" 
 in vos. (3) 
 
 Majorem autem 
 dat gratiam. (4) 
 
 Si tamen pcrmane- 
 tis in fide fundali et 
 Stabiles, et immobtles 
 a spe evangetii quod 
 audislis, quod prtedi- 
 calum est in universa 
 ereatura que sub 
 cxlo est. (5) 
 
 But the rest of 
 the words of Joakim, 
 and of his abomi- 
 nations which he 
 wrought, " and the 
 things that were 
 found in him," are 
 contained in the 
 book of the kings of 
 Judah and Israel. 
 
 And confounded 
 the Jews,&c., affirm- 
 ing that this is 
 Christ. 
 
 But the word of 
 our Lord reinainelh 
 for ever: and this 
 is the word that 
 " is evangelized " 
 among you. ' 
 
 And giveth greater 
 graces 
 
 If yet ye continue 
 in the faith ground- 
 ed and stable, and 
 un moveable from 
 the hope of the gos- 
 pel which you have 
 heard, which is 
 preached among all 
 creatures, &c 
 
 The rest of the 
 acts of Jehoakin, 
 and his abomina- 
 tions which he did, 
 " and carved images 
 that were laid to his 
 charge,"behold they 
 are written in the 
 book of the kings Of 
 Judah and Israel. 
 (1) 
 
 Saul confounded 
 the Jews, proving, 
 " by conferring one 
 scripture with ano- 
 ther," that this is 
 very Christ. (2) 
 
 The word of the 
 Lord endureth for 
 ever : and this is the 
 word which " by the 
 gospel" was preach-: 
 ed unto you. (3) 
 
 But "the scrip- 
 ture" oflereth yresL- 
 ter grace. (4) 
 
 If ye continue 
 established in the 
 faith, and be not 
 moved away from 
 the hope of the 
 gospel, which you 
 have heard " how it 
 was'' preached. Or, 
 " whereof" ye have 
 heard " how that it" 
 is preached. Or, 
 " whereof" ye have 
 heard " and which 
 hath been"preached. 
 (5) 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 Corrected. 
 
 — And this la- 
 the word, which 
 " by the gospel" is 
 preached unto you. 
 
 But "he" givet 
 more grace. 
 
 Which ye have 
 heard, "and which 
 was" preached to 
 every creature 
 
Br ADDING TO THE TEXT. 
 
 SS 
 
 (1)1 HAVE not set down these few examples 
 of their additions, as if they were all the only 
 places in the Bible that were corrupted after 
 this manner ; for if you observe well in the fore- 
 going chapters, you will find both additions and 
 diminutions ; and that so frequently done, and 
 with such wonderful boldness, as if these trans- 
 lators had been privileged by especial license to 
 aJJ to, or diminish from, the sacred text at 
 their pleasures : or, as if themselves liad been 
 only excepted from that general curse denounced 
 against all such as either add to, or diminish 
 from it, in the close of the Holy Bible (Apo- 
 calypse xxii. 18, 19,) in these words, " For I 
 testify to every one, hearing the words of the 
 prophecy of this book : If any man shall add to 
 these things, God shall add unto him the plagues 
 written in this book. And if any man shall 
 diminish of the words of the book of this pro- 
 phecy, God shall take away his part out of the 
 book of life, and out of the holy city, and of 
 these things that be written in this book." 
 
 Against holy images they maliciously add to 
 the te.\t these words " carved images, that were 
 laid to his charge." And to what intent is this, 
 but to deceive the ignorant reader, and to fo- 
 ment his hatred against the images of Christ, 
 and his saints ? as they have done also in another 
 place, {Rom. xi. 4,) where they maliciously add 
 the Word " image" to the text, where it is not in 
 the Greek, saying, instead of " I have left me 
 Bex en thousand men, who have not bowed their 
 knees to Baal," thus, " I have left me seven 
 thousand men, who have not bowed their knee to 
 the image of Baal." (a) 
 
 (2) " By conferring one scripture with 
 a.ioiher:" this is added more than is in the 
 Greek, in favour of their presumptuous opinion, 
 that the comparing of the scriptures is enough 
 ibr any man to undertsand them himself, solely 
 by his own diligence and endeavour ; and thereby 
 to reject both the commentaries of the doctors, 
 and the exposition of holy councils, and the Ca- 
 tholic Church, (i) 
 
 (3)' "Br the gospel:" These words are 
 added deceitfully, and of ill intent, to make the 
 simple reader think, that there is no other word 
 of God, bill the written word; for the common 
 reader, hearing this word gospel, conceives 
 nothing else. But indeed all is gospel, what- 
 soever the apostles taught, either by writing, or 
 by tradition, and word of mouth. 
 
 It is written of Luther, (c) that in his first 
 ti:inslation of the Bible into the German tongue, 
 he left out these words of the apcstle clearly : 
 "This is the- word which is evangelized to you ;" 
 because St. Peter does here define what is the 
 word of God, saying : " That which is preached ' 
 lo you, and not that only which is written. 
 
 (a) Bible 1562. 
 h) Bible 1577. 
 (c) Liud. Dubitat., p. 
 
 (4) In this place they add to the text the 
 words " the scripture ," where the apostle may 
 as well, and indifferently say : '" The Spirit," or. 
 " Holy Ghost," gives more graces, as is more 
 probable he meant, and is so expounded by 
 many. And so also this last translation of li»iir.9 
 intimates, by inserting the word He : " Bui He 
 giveth more grace :" though this is more ilian 
 they can stand by. But they will never be pre- 
 vented from inserting their commentary in the 
 text, and restraining the " Holy Ghost'' to one 
 particular sense, where his words seem to bo 
 ambiguous, which the Latin interpreter never 
 presumed to do, but always leaves it as open to 
 either signification in the Latin, as he found it 
 in the Greek. 
 
 (5) l.«j this last place they alter the apostle's 
 plain speech with certain words of their own ; 
 for they will not have him say, " Be unmoveable 
 in the faith and gospel, which you have heard, 
 which has been preached ;" but, " whereof you 
 h'tve heard how it was preached ;" and though 
 he spoke not of the gospel preached to tliem, 
 but of a gospel which they had only heard of, 
 that was preached in the world. 
 
 The apostle exhorts the Colossians to con- 
 tinue grounded in the faith and gospel, which 
 they had heard and received from their apos- 
 ties, {d) But our Protestants, who with Ily- 
 menaeus and Alexander, and other old heretics, 
 have fallen from their first faith, approve not of 
 this exhortation. 
 
 It is certain that these words, " whereof you 
 have heard how it was preached," are not so in 
 the Greek ; but, " which you have heard, which 
 has been preached :" as if it were said, that 
 they should continue constant in the faith and 
 gospel, which themselves had received, and 
 which was then preached and received in the 
 whole world. 
 
 In Cor. xiv. 4, where it is said, " He that 
 speaketh with tongues, edifieth himself;" the 
 Bible printed 1683, translates thus: "He that 
 speaketh in an unknown tongue, edifieth him- 
 self;" so likewise in the 13th, 14th, 19th, and 
 27th \erses, they make the same addition '. so 
 that in this one chapter they add the word " un- 
 known" no less than five times to the text, where 
 it is not in the Greek. And this they do, on pur- 
 pose to iriake it seem to the ignorant people, that 
 mass and other ecclesiastical offices ought not to 
 be said in Latiq : whereas there is nothing hero 
 cither written or meant of any other tongues, 
 but such as men spoke in the primitive cliurch 
 by miracle ; to wit, barbarous and strange 
 tongues, which could not be interpreted com- 
 monly, but by the miraculous gift also of inter- 
 pretation : and though also they might ,by a 
 miracle speak the Latin, Greek, or Hebrew 
 tongues ; yet these could not be counted unknown 
 
 (d) 1 Tim. i. e 
 
90 
 
 PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS BY ADDING TO THE TEXT. 
 
 tongues, as being the common languages of the 
 World, and of iLf learned in every city ; and in 
 which a'so the s.^ iptiires of the Old and New 
 Testament were written; which could not be 
 said to have been written in an unknown tongue, 
 though they were not penned in the vulgar lan- 
 guage, peculiar to all people ; but in a learned 
 and krown speech, capable of being interpreted 
 by thousands in every country, though not by 
 every illiterate person. 
 
 I would gladly know from our translators, 
 what moved them to add the word " unknown" 
 in some places, and not in others, where the 
 Grsek word is the same in all 1 For instance, in 
 the fifth verse of this chapter, where the apos- 
 tle wishes that all should speak with tongues ; 
 they translate exactly according to the Greek, 
 without adding to the text ; when in nil the 
 other plices, where they think there may be 
 some shadow or colour of having it meant of 
 the general tongue, and known language of 
 the church, they partially, and with a very ill 
 tncaning, thrust in the word " nnknovi-n." See 
 the annotations upon this place, in the Khemish 
 'J'cstainent 
 
 Again, Rom. xii. 6, 7, where the apostle's 
 words are, " Having gifts according to the grace 
 that is given us, different, either prOphecy ac- 
 cording to the rule of faith : or ministry, in 
 ministering ; or he that teaches, in doctrine ;" 
 they, by adding several words of their own, not 
 found in the Greek, and altering others, make 
 the text run thus ; " Having then gifts, difl'ering 
 according lo the grace thai is given us, whether 
 prophecy (let us prophecy) according to the 
 pmportion of faith ; or ministry (let us wait on 
 our) ministering ; or he that teaches on teach- 
 ing. 
 
 Besides their additions here, they pervert the 
 text, by changing the word " rule" of faith into 
 
 ' proportion" of faith ; whereby they would have 
 their readers to gather no more froni this place, 
 llian only that their new ministers are to pro- 
 tihecy or preach, and wait on their ministering 
 according to the measure or proportion of faith 
 ■w ability, less or more, that they are endued 
 *ith. Whereas by this text, as also by many 
 oiher places of holy writ, we may gather that 
 the apostles, by inspiration of the Holy Ghost, 
 before they divided themselves into divers na- 
 
 ions, made among themselves a certain'rule and 
 form of faith and doctrine, containing not only the 
 twrlve Articles of the Creed ; but all other prin- 
 ciples, grounds, and the whole platform of the 
 ChriKiim Religion ; which rule was before any 
 of tho books of the New Testament were writ- 
 ten, and before the faith was preached among the 
 Gon^iles; by which rule not only the doctrine 
 of all other inferior teachers was to be tried, but 
 also the preaching, writing, and interpreting, 
 whi' li is here called prophecying, of the apos- 
 lles and evangelists themselves, were by God's 
 Church api)roved and admitted, or reproved and 
 tcjected according to this rule of faith. This 
 
 form or rule' every apostle delivered by word of 
 mouth, not by scripture, to the country by them 
 converted, which was also by the apostolical 
 men, and those who received it entire from the 
 apostles, delivered also entire to the next follow- 
 ing age ; which also receiving it from them, de- 
 livered it as they had received it, to the succeed- 
 ing age, &c., till this our present age. 
 
 And this is the true analogy of faith, set down 
 and commended to us everywhere for apostolical 
 tradition ; and not the fantastical rule or square, 
 which every ministerial guide, accoiding to his 
 great or small proportion of faith, pretends to 
 gather out of the scriptures, as understood by 
 his own private spirit, and wrested to his own 
 heretical purpose ; by which he will presume to 
 judge of, and censure the lathers, councils, 
 church, yea, the scripture itself In the primi- 
 tive church, as also in the church of God, at 
 this dpy, all teaching, preaching, and prophecy, 
 ingare not measured according to the proportion 
 of every man's private and public spirit, but by 
 this rule of faith, first set down and delivered by 
 the apostles: and therefore, whatsoever novelties 
 or prophecyings will not abide this text, they 
 are justly, by the apostles, condemned, as con- 
 trary and against the rule of faith thus delivered. 
 
 I cannot omit taking notice, in this place, of 
 two " notorious and gross corruptions" in their 
 first translation, seeing ihey much concern this 
 Church of England's " priesthood." The first is 
 in Acts i. 26, where, instead of saying : " He, 
 Matthias, was numbered whh the eleven ;" they 
 translate it, " He was, by a common consent, 
 counted wifli the eleven." The other, already 
 mentioned, is, " Acts, xiv. 22, where, foi", '' When 
 they had ordained to them priests in every 
 church," they say : •' When they had ordained 
 elders by election in every congregation." In 
 one of these texts, the words, '' by a common 
 consent," and in the other, " by election," are 
 added on purpose to make the scripture speak in 
 defence of their making superintendents and el- 
 ders by election only, without consecration and 
 ordination, by imposition of hands : by which 
 corrupt additions it evidefltly appears to Ldvo 
 been the doctrine of the Church of EnglanJ, in 
 those days, that election only, without conse- 
 cration, was sufficient to make bishops and 
 priests. 
 
 But in their last translation, made in the bo- 
 ginning of King James the First's reign, they 
 have corrected these places, by expunging the 
 words formerly added. And this was donie by 
 the bishops and clergy, for their great hoiiour, 
 dignity, and authority ; kiiowing that conaeeva- 
 lion, which they thought now high tirhe to pro- 
 tend to, must needs elevate them much above 
 the sphere of a bare election, in which they for- 
 merly moved. And perhaps, another no less 
 prevalent reason was, that they might more se- 
 curely fix themselves in their bishoprics and 
 benefices ; thinking, perhaps, that bishops con- 
 secrated, might pretend to that jure divtnt 
 
CONSIDERATIONS OX THE tAMBBTH RECORDS. 
 
 91 
 
 which men only elected by the congregation or 
 prince, held at the mercy and good liking of the 
 electors: what other motives induced them to 
 this, matters not. However, they th night it 
 now convenient to pretend to something more 
 tlian a bare election ; to wit, to receive an epis- 
 copal and priestly character, by the imposition 
 of hanils : whereas we find not, that their prede- 
 cessors, Parker, Jewel, Horn, &c., ever pre- 
 tended to any other character, but what they 
 received by the Queen's letters patent, election, 
 and an act of parliament ; as is plain from the 
 23rd and 25th of their 39 Articles, as well as 
 from the statute 8 Kliz. I., and therefore ^ere 
 content to have the scripture read, " He was, by 
 a common consent, counted with the eleven ;" 
 and, " When they had ordained elders by elec- 
 tion. ""(a) 
 
 And whereas our present ministerial guides of 
 the Church of England, would gladly have 
 people believe them to have a succession of 
 bishops from the apostolic times to this day ; yet 
 so far was Mr. Parker, Jewel, and the rest of 
 their first bishops, from pretending to any such 
 episcopal succession, " if they had been truly 
 consecrated, they must of necessity have owned 
 and maintained a succession among them," that, 
 on the contrary they published and preached 
 majiv things to discredit the same : and to that 
 
 purpose, falsified and corrupted the scriptiire 
 against succession, for in the defence of the 
 apology of the Church of England, they write 
 thus : " By succession Christ saith, that desola- 
 tion shall sit in the holy place, and anti-christ 
 shall press into the room of Christ ;' for proof 
 of which, they note in the margin. Matt, xxiv 
 And in another place of the same defence, they 
 say of succession : St. Paul says to the faithful at 
 Ephesus : " I know that after my departure 
 hence, ravening wolves shall enter and succeed 
 me ; and out of yourselves there shall, by suc- 
 cession, spring up men speaking perversely ;" 
 whereas St. Paul has never a word about suc- 
 cession or succeeding ; nor is succession named 
 in the 24th of St. Matthew (c) So that you 
 see, the first bishops of the Church of England, 
 not oidy corrupted the sacred text, in translating 
 many places of the Bible against ordination ; 
 but also in their other writings, falsified the scrip- 
 ture with their corrupt additions against succes- 
 sion. (rf) Two sufficient reasons for us to believe, 
 that they neither had nor pretended to either con- 
 secration, or episcopal succession in those da)'s ; 
 consf-quently were not consecrated at Lambeth, 
 by such as had received their consecration and 
 character from Roman Catholic bishops, who 
 claim it no otherwise than by an uninterrupted 
 succession from the apostles, and so from Christ. 
 And this obliges me to digress a little into (d) 
 
 CONSIDERATIONS ON THE LAMBETH RECORDS, 
 
 BT WHICH PR0TEST<4NT BISHOPS ENDEAVOUR TO PROVE THE CONSECRATION OF THEIR FIRST 
 ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY, DR. MATTHEW PARKER. 
 
 (A) In the beginning of King James the 
 First's reign, a new translation of the Bible being 
 undertaken, the said falsifications of scripture 
 corrected, and a full resolution put on of 
 assuming to themselves the character of conse- 
 crated bishops and priests ; they thought it 
 absolutely necessary to derive this character 
 from such bishops as had been, as they thought, 
 consecrated by Roman Catholic bishops ; by 
 whose hands they would now make the world 
 believe, the first of their predecessors, Matthew 
 Parker, was consecrated with great solemnity 
 at Lambeth. To which purpose, they presume 
 to obtrude upon the world certain, before un- 
 heard of, records or registers. But the age in 
 which the sim first shone upon these records, 
 viz., anno 1613, not being so easily imposed upon 
 as was expected, the said Lambeth Register 
 became suspected, and, for divers reasons, 
 detected as a forged instrument. Fitzherbert, 
 a mnri of great sincerity and authority, writ 
 acainst these Lambeth Records, in the very year 
 
 ;,7.) Dr. Tenison and A. B., in the Speculum Considered, 
 p.' 4:), tell U3, " That in the Church of England they have 
 a su'ccessioii of bishops continued down from the apos- 
 tolic times to tills day; but to name or number them," 
 they aly, '• is n^'ither necessary nor useful." They might 
 have added, not possible. 
 
 (b) The Lambeth Kecords Coasidered- 
 
 that Mr. Mason, workman to Dr. Abbot, 
 archbishop of Canterbury, first published them 
 to the world. These are his words : («) " It 
 was my chance to understand, that one Mr. 
 Mason, lately published a book, wherein ho 
 endeavours to prove the consecration of the 
 first Protestant bishops, by a register, testifying, 
 that four bishops consecrated Matthew Parker, 
 the first archbishop of Canterbury. Thou shall 
 therefore understand, good reader, that this our 
 exception, touching the lawful vocation and 
 consecration of the first Protestant bishops in 
 the late queen's day, is not a new qnarrel, now 
 lately raised, but vehemently urged divers limes 
 heretofore, by many other Catholics, many years 
 ago ; yea, in the very beginning of the late 
 queen's reign : as namely, by two learned doc- 
 tors, Harding and Sta.pleton, who mightily 
 pressed them with the defect of due vocation 
 and consecration, urging them to prove the same, 
 and to show how, and by whom they were made 
 priests and bisheps." Thus he. 
 
 («) See the Defence of the Apol., pp. 132, and 127. 
 
 (d) The first Protestant bishops and clergy were so far 
 from pretending to citherconsecratiohorsuccessiou, that 
 tney corrupted the scripture against bv.th. 
 
 (c) See Fitzherbert's Appendix to the Discovery of 
 Dr. Andrews' Absurdities, Falsities, and Lies, printed 
 anno 1613. 
 
D2 
 
 CONSIDERATIONS ON THE 
 
 And to giro you the words of the said doc- 
 tors : thus writes Dr. Harding to Mr. Jewel, 
 pretended bishop of Salisbury: "It remains, 
 Mr. Jewel, you tell us, whether your vocation 
 be ordinary or extraordinary : if it be ordinary, 
 show us the letters of vonr orders ; at least, 
 show us that you have received power to do the 
 ofiice you presume to exercise, by the due order 
 of laying on of hands, and consecration ; but 
 order and consecration you have none ; for 
 which of all these new ministers, howsoever else 
 you call them, could give that to you, which he 
 has not himself" These are his very words to 
 Mr. Jewel ; having but a little before urged 
 him also, in the words of Tertullian, thus : 
 " You know what Tertullian says of such as yon 
 be, Edanl originei eeclesiarum suarum ; we say 
 likewise to you, Mr. Jewel ; and what we say to 
 you, we say to each one of your companions : 
 tell us the original, and first spring of your 
 church ; show us the register of your bishops 
 continually succeeding one another from the 
 beginning ; so as that the first bishop may have 
 soi'ne one of the apostles, or of the apostolical 
 men, for his author, and predecessor, Sic.[a) 
 Therefore, says he, to go from your succession, 
 which you cannot prove, and to come to your 
 vocation : How say you, sir ? you bear yourself, 
 as though you were bishop of Salisbury ; but how 
 can you prove your vocation 1 by what authority 
 usurp you the administration of doctrine and 
 sacraments ? what can you allege for the right 
 and proof of your ministry 1 who has called you • 
 who has laid hands on you ? by what example 
 has he done it ? how. and by whom are you con- 
 .secrated ? who has sent you ? who has committed 
 to you the office you take upon you ?" &c. In 
 this manner was Mr. Jewel urged : to all which 
 he rover replied, by sending Dr. Harding to 
 any register of his, or his metropolitan's conse- 
 cration : or by telling him, that their consecration 
 at Lambeth, was upon record : or that they had 
 authentic testimonies to show who imposed hands 
 upon them. And how easily had such answers 
 been given to these hard qiiestiims, if there had 
 then been extant any authentic register or 
 records of his own, or of Matthew Parker's 
 consecration at Lambeth. 
 
 After the same manner he is set upon by Dr. 
 Stapleion, in his answer to Mr. Jewel's book, 
 entitled, a reply, &c. : " How chanced then, Mr. 
 Jewel," says he, " that j'ou and your fellows, 
 bearing yourselves for bishops, have not so much 
 as this congruity and consent ; I will not say of 
 the Pope, but of any Christian bishops at all, 
 throughout all Christendom ; neither are liked 
 and allowed by any one of them all ; but have 
 taken upon you that office, without any imposi- 
 tion of hands, without al! ecclesiastical authority, 
 rtitliout all order of canons and right 1 I ask not, 
 .who favc you bishoprics, but who made you 
 l,ishops V 'J'hus he to Jewel. (A) 
 
 ',a) We also at this day still urRe our Protestant hiiih- 
 Dps tn prove their succession. But they, instead of doing 
 it, waive us offvvith these words : " To name or nurnlier 
 lur bishop.", is neither useful nor tiecesgary " Viile Supr. 
 
 (A) See Stapleton's Return ot Untruhtg. His Challenge 
 to Jewel and Horn, and his Counterblast against Horn. 
 
 And thus again^ in his Counterblast against 
 Horn, pretended bishop of Winchester: "Is 
 it not notorious," says he to Horn, " that yov. 
 and your colleagues, Parker, &lc., were not or- 
 dained according to the prescript, I will not saj 
 of the church, but even of the very statutes ? 
 How then can you challenge to yourself tho 
 name of the lord bishop of Winchester ?" And 
 in another place he urges Mr. Horn with his 
 " being without any consecration at all of his 
 metropolitan, Parker; himself, poor man," says 
 ho, " being no bishop neither." Who, I say once 
 again, can imagine Jewel and Horn .should have 
 been so careless of their character and honour, 
 as not to have' produced their Lambeth register 
 and records, if any such authentic writings 
 had then been extant, when not only their own 
 credit, but even the credit of their metropolitar, 
 Parker, and all the rest of Queen Elizabeth'.) 
 new bishops ; yea, the whole succession of thi* 
 race, were so miserably shipwrecked ? Yea, id 
 how great stead would such Lambeth writings 
 have stood Mr. Horn, when he durst not join 
 issue with bishop Bonner upon the plea, " That 
 he was no bishop, when he tendered Bonner the 
 oath of supremacy." 
 
 The case was thus :(c) By the first session of 
 that parliament, 5 Eliz I., power was given to 
 any bishop in the realm, to tender the oath of 
 supremacy, enacted 1 Eliz., to any ecclesiastical 
 person within his diocese ; and the refuser was 
 to incur a premunire. By virtue of this statute, 
 Mr. Robert Horn, pretended bishop of Win- 
 chester, tenders the oath to Doctor Bonner 
 bishop of London, but deprived by Queen 
 Elizabeth, and then a prisoner in the Marshal- 
 sea, which was within the diocese of Winches- 
 ter : Bonner refuses t(i take it. Horn certifies 
 his refusal into the King's Bench ; whereupim 
 Bonner was indicted upon the statute. He prays 
 judgment, whether, he might not give in evir 
 dence upon this issue, Qund ip.se mm est inde 
 cvlptihiUs, eo quod diclus episcopiis de Winc/ies- 
 liT mm fiiil. episcnpus timpore dbloliimis tacra- 
 miinli. " That he was not culpable, because 
 the said Horn, called bishop of Winchester, was 
 not bishop when he tendered him the oath." And 
 it was resolved by all the judges at Serjeants'- 
 Inn,' in judse Caltlin, the chief justice's cham- 
 ber, " that if the verity and matter be so, indeed, 
 he should well be received to give in evidenco 
 upon this issue, and the jury should try ii,'' 
 Now, what the trial was, appears by that he was 
 not condemned, nor ever any further trour 
 bled for that case, though he was a man espcr 
 cially aimed at. And at the next sessions oi 
 that parliament, which was the 8th of Elizabeth, 
 they were forced for want', you see, of a better 
 character, to beg they might be declared bish- 
 o]).* by act of parliament. 
 
 Besides, it is no more credible, that sucn 
 knowing and conscientious men, as Dr. Staple- 
 ton, Dr. Harding, Constable, Kellison, &c. t}ien 
 living in England, and probably at ].iondon, 
 would question so public and solemn an action, 
 
 (c) See Abridg of Uyer's Ucporta, tol. 234. 
 
LAMBETH RECOTirS. 
 
 93 
 
 than it is, tban a sober man should now call in 
 doubt kinsj James the Second's coronation at 
 Westminster ; or ask in print, who set the crown 
 ujion liis head, pretending he had never been 
 crowni'.d. 
 
 But in answer to these our objections : Dr. 
 Bramhall falsely affirms, that the said records 
 were spoken of in the eighth year of queen 
 Elizabeth : for proof of which, he would gladly 
 have the world so grossly to mistake the words 
 of ihu statute of the 8th of Eliz. as to think that 
 the mention there made of the records " of her 
 mijesty's father and brother's time, and also for 
 her own time," have relation to their Lambeth 
 Register : whereas by the records there spoken 
 of, is understood only the records of her father's, 
 brother's, and her own letters patent ; and not 
 their then unknown Lambeth Register. 
 
 But Dr. Bramhall, to make good his false as- 
 sertion, and to impose upon the unvi^ary reader, 
 most egregiously falsifies the words of the said 
 statute , saying, " The statute speaks exprsssly 
 of the records of elections, and confirmations, 
 and consecrations :" (a) but you will find in the 
 said statute, expressly these words : " As by her 
 majesty's said letters patent, remaining on re- 
 cord, more plainly will appear." Which, if at- 
 tentively considered, is sufficient to convince the 
 reader, that " the records of her majesty's said 
 father's and brother's time, and also of her own 
 time," relate not to any records or registers of 
 the archbishop of Canterbury ; but only to the 
 records of the king's and queen's letters patent. 
 This device o( Bramhall is more fully answered 
 and refuted by the author of the " Nullity of the 
 Prelatical Clergy of England ;" whither I will 
 refer my reader. 
 
 Again, Protestants tell us further, (i) that 
 there is a register of their bishops, found in a 
 book called " Parker's Antiquitates Britannicae ;'" 
 which I deny not: but to this I answer, that the 
 said register is forged and foisted into Parker's 
 Antiq. Britan. For that edition, printed anno 
 1 605, is the first that ever mentioned any such 
 thing : the old manuscript of that book, having 
 no such register at all in it ; as a learned author 
 (c) who diligently examined the same, affirms 
 in these words : " In the old manuscript of that 
 book. Park. Antiq. Brit., which I have seen, and 
 diligently examined, there is not any mention or 
 memorial at all of any such register or conse- 
 cration of Mat. Parker, or any one of those pre- 
 tended Protestant bishops, as the obtruded re- 
 gister speaks of And any man reading the 
 printed book, will easily see, that it is a mere 
 foisted and inserted thing ; having no connec- 
 tion, correspondence, or affinity, either with 
 that which goes before or follows; and con- 
 atns more things done after Mat. Parker had 
 written that book." Yet this very register 
 
 (a) In this statute is expressly mentioned her majes- 
 tv'B " father's and brotlier's letters patent ;" as also " her 
 own remaining on record." 
 
 (i) Antiq. Brit., edit Hanov., Ifi05. 
 
 (c) The author of a book, called, " The Judgment of 
 the A()ostles and first Aget 'n points of Doctrine," &c-, 
 minted in the year lti33. See pe 200, 211, and 394- 
 
 mentions not any certain place or form of their 
 consecration ; so that it might be performed as 
 well at the Nag's Head'fs at Lambeth. And 
 indeed, we deny them not to have had a certain 
 kind of puritanical consecration, by John Scorey 
 at the Nag's Head in Cheap^ide ; but we deny 
 the said Nag's Head consecration to be either 
 valid or legal, boih for defect in the form, and 
 in the minis(er, John Scorey himself being no 
 bishop, no more than Barlow and Coverdalu, as 
 is hinted above, in page 53. By reason of which 
 defects, the queen, it seems, was forced after- 
 wards to declare, or make them bishops, by act 
 of parliament. But to pass by these things, and 
 to come to a closer examination of their Lam- 
 beth Records : (d) 
 
 Mr. Mason, the very first man that ever told 
 us of this Lambeth Register, urges it in this 
 manner: (f.) "Queen Mary died in the yeai 
 1558, the 17th of November ; the same day died 
 cardinal Pool, archbishop of Canterbur)' ; and 
 the very same day was queen Elizabeth pro- 
 claimed. The 15th of January next following, 
 was the day of queen Elizabeth's coronation, 
 when Dr. Ogleihorp, bishop of Carlisle, was so 
 happy as to set the diadem of that kingdom upon 
 her royal head. Now the see of Canterbury 
 continued void till December following ; about 
 which time the dean and chapter having received 
 the conge (Telire, elected master Parker for their 
 archbishop, yujf/a morem antiquum el laudabilem 
 consuetudinem ecclesitB pradicliB ab anliqua usita- 
 lem et incussa ohservatam, proceeding in that 
 election " according to the ancient manner, and 
 the laudable custom of the aforesaid church ;" 
 citing for these words, his new found register, 
 ex Regist. Mat. Parker. " After which elec- 
 tion, orderly performed, and signified according 
 to the law, it pleased her highness to send her 
 letters patent of commission, for his confirma- 
 tion and consecration, to seven bishops ;" whose 
 names, with as much of the commission as is 
 necessary, he sets down ; after which he tells us, 
 " That to take away all scruple, he will faithfully 
 deliver out of authentical records," as he calls 
 them, putting in the margin ex Regist. M. Par- 
 ker, with as much confidence as if they had then 
 been made known to the world, and published ot 
 produced upon all occasions, for fifty yeais to- 
 gether, before ever he spoke of theni," both the 
 day when he, Mr. Parker, was consecrated, and 
 by whom, viz., 
 
 Anno 1559. Mat. Park. ( J^Jfg™„^^"'°''' 
 Cant. cons. 17 Decemb. . j^Jj,^^ Coverdale, 
 °y ( John Ilodgkins." 
 
 These are Mr. Mason's obtruded records; 
 with which let us compare the words of another 
 recorder. Dr. Bramhall, who, after having told 
 us of Mat. Parker's being, by conge d'elire, 
 elected archbishop of Canterbury, says : ( f) 
 
 {d) Stat. I., 8th Eliz. 
 (c) Mason, lib. 3, p 12& 
 (/) Brain, p. 83. 
 
M 
 
 CONSIDERATIONS ON THB 
 
 " The queen, accepting this election, was gra- 
 ciously pleased to issue out two commissions for 
 the legal confirmalion-of the said election, and 
 consecration of tlie said archbishop ; the former 
 dated the 9lhof September, anno 1559, directed 
 to six bishops ; Culhhert, bishop of Durham ; 
 Gilbert, bishop of Balh; David, bishop of 
 Peterborougli ; Anilion/, bishop of LandaflT; 
 William liarlow, bishop ; and John Scorey, 
 bishop." Which commission he sets down at 
 large, from Ro., par. 2, 1 Eliz. Dated, Apud 
 Redgrave, Nonn die Septembris anno regni 
 EUzabethcB Auglm, ^c, prima. 
 
 Per breve de privato sigtHo, 
 
 ExaminatoT, Ri. Bkoughton. 
 
 Then he goes on : (a) " Now if any man de- 
 sire a reason why this first commission was not 
 executed, the best account I can give him is this, 
 that it was directed to six bishops, without an 
 " Aul minus, or at the least four of you ;" so as 
 if any one of the six were sick, or absent, or 
 refused, the rest could not proceed to confirm or 
 consecrate. And that some of them did refuse, 
 1 am very apt to believe, because three of them, 
 not long after, were deprived." Thus Dr. 
 Bramhal!. 
 
 The three bishops, he means, that were, as 
 l;e would have us believe, '• shortly after de- 
 prived," were Cuthbert Tunstal, bishop of Dur- 
 ham ; Gilbert Bourn, bishop of Balh ; and David 
 Pole, bishop of Peterborough. But according 
 to John Stow, (i) and Holiinshead, these three 
 bishops, with other ten or eleven, all Catholics, 
 were deprived and deposed from their sees, in 
 July before, for refusing the oath of supremacy. 
 "In the month of July," says Stow, "the old 
 bishops of England, then living, were called and 
 examined by certain of the Queen's Majesty's 
 council, where the bishops of York, Ely, and 
 London, vi'iih others, to the number of thirteen 
 or fourteen, for refusing to take the oath, 
 touching the Queen's supremacy, and other 
 article's, were deprived of their bishoprics." 
 Holiinshead had also the same words, and tells 
 us further who succeeded in their rooms and 
 places." 
 
 Ilollinshoad, in the praises of bishop Tunstal, 
 of Durham, has these words : " He was, by the 
 noble Queen Elizabeth, deprived of his bishop- 
 ric, &c., and was committed to Matthew Parker, 
 bishop of Canterbury, who used him very hon- 
 ouralily, 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 1 8th of November, in the year 1 559, 
 depart lliis life at Lambeth, where he first re- 
 ceived his consecration." By this it appears, 
 that Matthew Pa(-ki=r was bish6p of Canterbury, 
 ind lived in the bishop's palace at Lambeth, 
 con^eiiuently installed in the bishopric, which 
 
 (<i)P. 85. 
 
 (i) Bee John SH w and HoUinabed, in an. 1 Eliz. 
 
 he could not be before he was consecrateil, i( 
 consecration was then used ; and all this beforf 
 the lath of November, 1559. 
 
 And well might he, by this time, be in lire 
 full enjoyment and possession of the bisho[)ric 
 of Canterbury ; for by Stow and Hollinsheadj 
 we find him called bishop elect on the 9ih of 
 September, when he and others assisted ai the 
 king of France's obsequies. Yea, by Holiins- 
 head, it evidently appears, that they were elected 
 immediately, or, however, very shortly after the 
 deprivation of the old Catholic bishops : f»r, 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 oidy 
 elect. His Words are these : " On the 12th ol 
 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 o( 
 Doctor Grindall, newly elected bishop of Lon- 
 don." 
 
 The truth of what I have here set down, from 
 Holiinshead and Stow, is unquestionable : but 
 if it agree not with Mr. Mason, and Doctor 
 Bramhall, and their Lambtah Records, shall we 
 not have just cause to reject these as forged ? 
 But, before we compare them together, let us 
 first see what accordance and agreement is 
 found among the records and recorders them- 
 selves. 
 
 Firstly, in the queen's letters patent, or com- 
 mission for consecrating Matthew Parker, (c) 
 the suffragan bishop, there mentioned, is naincj 
 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 inade these 
 records, might be ignorant of the said suffragan's 
 name ; and therefore for inaking sure work, calls 
 him sotnetimes Richard, sometimes John , but if 
 these records had been inade 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 vvhere he was 
 safi'ragan, viz., whether of Bedford or Dover? 
 And whether there was any other suffragan 
 there besides himself, if we suppose that the 
 Lambeth nularius publicus dould be ignorant •( 
 such circumstances. 
 
 Secondly, Mr. Sutcliff affirm.s, that Parker 
 was consecrated by Barlow, Coverdale, Scorey, 
 and two suffragans. But by our pretended 
 register, we find but one suffragan at that 
 solemnity, (d) 
 
 Thirdly, Mr. Mason, tnH. his records, style 
 him suffragan of. Bedford ; but by Doctor Butler 
 he is called suffragan of Dover. («) 
 
 Fourthly, in Mr Mason, we hear tell but ol 
 one commission from the qtteen, for the cni;!-*!- 
 mation and consecration of Matthew I'arker. 
 But Bramhall, by more diligent search ainor.g 
 
 (e) See D. Bram., pp. 87, 89, 90. 
 
 [di Sutclifi' against Dr. Kcllison, p. 0. 
 
 (e) Biitlcr, Ep. de CoDseorat. Miniet. 
 
LAMBETH RECORDS 
 
 •the records, finds two ; the first dated September 
 the 9th. (a) 
 
 Fifthly, by which commission it appears, 
 Pariier was elected before the 9th of Septem- 
 ber : but Mr. Mason says, he was elected about 
 the beginning of December. , 
 
 Thus they concur one with another : and to 
 compare them with Richard Hollinshead, and 
 John Stow's chronicles, theyjuinp as e.\aetly, as 
 if the one had been written at China, and the 
 other at Lambeth : for, 
 
 Si.ulily, Mr. Mason, I say, affirms, that the 
 dean and chapter elected Doctor Matthew 
 Parker about the month of December. But 
 in Slow and Hollinshead, we find him and 
 others called bishops elect, on the 9th of Sep- 
 tember. Yea, seeing Hollinshead calls Grindall 
 newly elect on the r<ith of August, we may 
 easily conclude, that Matthew Parker the metro- 
 politan, was also elected before that time ; which, 
 you see, is about four months before Mason's 
 election by conae (Telire. 
 
 Seventhly, Mr. Mason affirms, that the see of 
 Canterbury continued void till December 1559. 
 On the 17th of which month, according to the 
 new register, Parker was consecrated. [?ut 
 in Hollinshead we find, that Matthew Parker 
 was bishop of Canterbury, and lived in the 
 bishop's place at Lambeth, where he had bishop 
 Tunslal committed, prisoner, to his charge, long 
 before the 17th of December: for on the) 8th 
 of November, 1559, the said bishop Tunstal 
 died. 
 
 Eighthly, Doctor Bramhall, as is said, from 
 our new-made records, brings us a commission, 
 dated on the 9th of September, 1559. And 
 directed, besides others, to three Catholic 
 bishops, Cutlibert Tunstal, Gilbert Bourn, and 
 David Pool, requiring them to confirm and 
 consecrate Matthew Parker. And he has the 
 confidence to affirm, that " the said three 
 bishops were shortly after deprived of their 
 bishoprics, as he is very apt to believe, for 
 refusing to obey the said commission." But in 
 Stow and Hollinshead we find, that the said 
 three Catholic bishops, with ten or eleven 
 others, were deprived of their bishoprics in the 
 month of July before, for refusing the oath of 
 supremacy ; and Mason himself confirms this, by 
 , acknowledging they were deprived not long 
 after the feast of St. John the Baptist ; for 
 which he also cites Saunders, lib de Schismate 
 Angl. But pray consider, sirs, what can be 
 more absurd, than to imagine that Queen 
 Elizabeth would be beholden to such Roman 
 Catholic bishops, as she had formerly deprived 
 of their bishoprics, and made prisoners, for the 
 confirming arid consecrating of her new Protes- 
 tant bishops, who were to be " unlawfully 
 intruded" into their sees ; especially she having, 
 as Bramhall says, Protestant bishops enough of 
 h'T own ; or if such had been wanting, might, 
 Le says, have easily had store of bishops out of 
 Ireland, to have done the work ? 
 
 Piay give me leave to demand of our English 
 
 (a) Bran., p. 83. 
 
 prelates, why this first commission was by tho 
 queen directed to those three zealous Catholic 
 bishops, and not rather to her own Protestant 
 bishops, to whom she directed the last commis- 
 sion, dated December 6 ? Her majesty was not 
 ignorant that their consciences had been toe 
 tender to permit them to swear herself head o( 
 the Church of England : and that rather than 
 gall their so tender consciences, they were con- 
 tent to lose their bishoprics, and sufi'er perpetual 
 imprisonment : could she, upon revolving this in 
 her princely thoughts, easily imagine that they 
 would, without all scruple, impose hands on her 
 newly elected bishops, whom they knew to bf 
 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 Catholic bishops would consecrate Parker, 
 according to king Kdward the Vlth's form of 
 consecration, which they had in queen Mary's 
 days dec' .red to be invalid and null ; and which, 
 at this time, was also illegal ? Or could the 
 queen easily imagine, that Matthew Parker and 
 the rest of her chosen bishops, who had stood 
 so much upon their punctilios at Frankfort, 
 would receive consecration by a form condemned 
 as superstitious and antichristian ; and from 
 which, as Mason says, they had pared away so 
 many superfluities ; yea, so many, as even to 
 pare out the very name, itself, of bishop ? Let 
 the impartial reader consider these things. 
 
 How our present pretended bishops them- 
 selves will make all these things agree, will 
 be hard to imagine ; which, if they caimot do, 
 let them be content to leave us to our own 
 liberties, and freedom of thought ; and to excuse 
 us, if we freely affirm, that " Matthew Parker 
 was never consecrated at Lambeth : that the 
 said records are forged : and, that themselves 
 are but mere laymen, without mission, without 
 succession, and without consecration." 
 
 Ninthly, it is none of the least objections 
 against Parker's solemn consecration at Lam- 
 beth, that we find it not once mentioned by the 
 historians of those times, especially by John 
 Slow, who professed so particular a kindness 
 and respect for Parker ; and who was so exact 
 in setting down all things, of far less moment, 
 done about London. Doubtless, he omitted it 
 not through negligence or forgetfulness, seeing 
 he is not unmindful to set down the consecration 
 of cardinal Pole, Parker's immediate prede- 
 cessor, and the very day on which he said his 
 first mass. Nor does it appear to have been 
 through forgetfulness, that Hollinshead men- 
 tions not this notorious Lambeth solemnity, 
 seeing he tells us, that bishop Tunstal, who died 
 under Parker's custody, " received his consecra- 
 tion at Lambeth :" if either he or John Stow had 
 but given us only such a short hint as this, of 
 Parker's consecration at Lambeth, we should 
 never have questioned it further, nor have 
 doubted of the truth of it, though they had not 
 been so exact to a hair in every punctilio, as to 
 have told us of the chapel's being " adorned 
 
96 
 
 CONSIDERATIONS ON THE 
 
 witli lapestry towards the east ; a red cloth on 
 the floor, in advent ; a sermon, communion, 
 concourse of people ; Miles Coverdalc's side 
 VI ooUen gown ; of the queen's sending to see if 
 all tilings had been rightly performed." What 
 care was here taken ? " Of answer being 
 broiiglit her, that there was not a little amiss, 
 Diily Miles Coverdale was in his side woollen 
 gown, at the very minute of the consecration : 
 of ihe'.r assuring her that that could not cause 
 any defect in the consecration," &c., as our 
 records mention ; which ridiculous circum- 
 Miances render them not a whit the more cre- 
 d/jle. (a) 
 
 If now, from what has been said, these 
 ivambeth records appear evidently to be forged, 
 10 what other refuge will these pretenders to 
 episcopacy have recourse for their episcopal 
 character, but to queen Elizabeth's letters 
 jjatenl, and an act of parliment ? If so, I see 
 no great reason why they should find fault with 
 their ancient name and title of parliamentary 
 bishops. Whoever read of bishops, between 
 St. Peter's time and Parker's, that stood in need 
 of an act of parliament to declare them such 1 
 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 woidd the 
 queiMi, and the wisdom of the nation, have con- 
 sented to the marking of such a superfluous 
 act, if their reverences had desired it. No i no ! 
 there would have been no more need of any such 
 act for them then, than there had been for 
 three score and nine preceding archbishops of 
 Canterbury. 
 
 After all this, another query will yet arise ; 
 to wit, by what form of consecration .Matthew 
 Parker was consecrated ? Our present prelates 
 and clergy will not say, I suppose, that he was 
 made bishop according to the Roman Catholic 
 form, though queen Elizabeth had revived the 
 act of 25 Henry VIII., 20, which authorized 
 the same. Nor can they say that king Ed- 
 ward the Vlth's form was then in being, in the 
 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 5th and 6th Edward VI., 1, 
 consisted of two parts ; one, which authorized 
 the book of common prayer, as it was then 
 newly explained and perfected ; another which 
 e.^labiished the form of consecrated bishops, &c. 
 »iid ad dud to the book of common prayer. 
 This act, as to both these parts, was repealed by 
 :j;ifien Murv ; and this repeal was reversed by 
 
 lO) .Several ridiculous circumstances mentioned in the 
 K><ordB, whi h yel render them ics.s credible 
 
 1 Elizabeth I., as to that part wliich concerned 
 the book of common prayer only ; for so runs 
 the act, " The said statute of repeal, and every 
 thing therein contained, only, concerning tho 
 said book, viz. of common prayer, authorized 
 by EdwarJ VI. shall be void, and o) no effect." 
 And afterwards, 8th Elizabeth I. was revived 
 that other part of it, which concerned the form 
 of ordination, viz., in these words, "' Such order 
 and form for the consecrating of archbishops, 
 bishops, &c., as was set forth in the time ol 
 j Edward VI. and added to the said book of com- 
 mon prayer, and authorized 5th and 6th of 
 Edward VI. shall stand, and be in full force ; 
 and shall from henceforth be used and observed." 
 By which it is as clear as the sun at noon-day, 
 that Edward the Vlth's form was not restored 
 at all by 1 Elizabeth, either expressly or in 
 general terms, under the name and notion ol 
 the book of common prayer, as Protestants 
 would have it thought. Nay rather, it w.is 
 formally excluded by the said act, 1 Elizabeth. 
 For that act of Edward VI. consisting of 
 nothing else but the authorizing of the book 
 of common prayer, and establishing, and adding 
 to it the book of ordination ; and the act ol 
 queen Mary having repealed that whole act, as to 
 both these parts, that act of 1 Eliz. reversing that 
 repeal, as to the book of common prayer onlv, 
 did plainly and directly exclude the repealing of 
 it, as to the book of ordination ; there being 
 nothing else to be excluded, by that word only, 
 but that book. So that it is undeniably evident 
 that king Edward the Vlth's form of consecra- 
 tion was at that day illegal. And must we 
 imagine, that the queen would sufler her new 
 bishops to be consecrated by an illegal form, 
 when she could as easily have authorized it by 
 the law, as she had done the Roman form, by 
 reviving the act 25th Henry VIII. 20th ? Yea, 
 it had been as easy to make that form legal, as 
 it was afterwards to declare them bishops by 
 act of parliament ; and doubtless, more com- 
 mendable. 
 
 liut admit Matthew Parker, and the rest of 
 queen Elizabeth's new bishops, were made such 
 by this, then illegal, form ; yet, if this form 
 prove invalid, they are but still where they were 
 before their election, as to their character. 
 And that it is invalid, is sufficiently and clearly 
 proved by the learned author of Erastus Senioi, 
 to whom I will refer my reader. Yea, the 
 Protestant bishops and clergy themselves have 
 judged the said form to be invalid ; and there 
 fore thought necessary to repair the essential 
 defects of the same, by adding the words bishop 
 and priest. Essential defects, I call the want 
 of these two words bishop and priest, for if 
 they had not been essential, why were thev 
 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 character than if it had 
 continued still invalid and never been altered. 
 The present Protestant bishops, who charged 
 
lAMBETH RECORDS. 
 
 97 
 
 the form of their own consecration, upon their 
 adversaries' objections of the invalidity thereof, 
 (for immediately after E/asius Senior was pub- 
 lished against it, tbey altered it, viz , anno 
 1662,) might as well submit to be ordained by 
 Catholic bishops ; or else, with the Presbj'- 
 terians, utterly deny an episcopal character, as 
 allow, by altering the form after so long a time 
 and dispute, that it was not sufficient to make 
 themscl-es, and their predecessors, priests and 
 bishops. 
 
 What has hitherto been said, concerning the 
 nullity of their character, is yet further con- 
 firmed by their altering the 25th of their 39 
 Articles ; for these first bishops, Parker, Horn, 
 Jewel, Grindall, &c., understanding the condi- 
 tion in which they were, for want of consecra- 
 don by imposition of hands, resolved in their 
 convocation, anno 1562, to publish the 39 
 Articles, made by Cranmer and his associates, 
 but with some alteration and addition ; especially 
 to that Article wherein they speak of the sacra- 
 ments : for, 
 
 Whereas Cranmer's 25th or 26th Article says 
 nothing of holy orders by imposition of hands, 
 or any visible sign or ceremony required 
 therein ; Parker, and his bishops, having taken 
 upon themselves that calling, without any such 
 •ceremony of imposition and episcopal hands, for 
 I believe they set not much by John Scorey's 
 hands and Bible in the Nag's Head, declared, 
 that " God . ordained not any visible sign or 
 ceremony for the five last, commonly called 
 sacraments ;" whereof holy orders is one. This 
 alteration and addition you may see in Doctor 
 Heylin's appendix to Ecclesia Rrslaurata, page 
 1 89. In this convocation they denied also holy 
 orders to be a sacrament ; consequently not 
 likely to impress any indelible character in the 
 soul of the party ordained ; which doctrine con- 
 tinued long among them, as appears by Mr. 
 Rogjrs, in his defence of the 39 Articles, who 
 affirms, that " none but disorderly Papists will 
 say that order is a sacrament ;" and demands; 
 " Where can it be seen in holy scripture, that 
 orders or priesthood is a sacrament ? what form 
 has it 1 (says he) what promise ? what institution 
 from Christ V\a) Sut 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 IJramhall, " though it be not one of 
 these wo which are generally necessary to sal- 
 vatio-' ''(&) 
 
 B'- order of this convocation the Bible of 
 1562 was printed, where the aforesaid text, 
 "When they had ordained to them priests," &:c., 
 was. tr:inslat'ed, " V/hen they had ordained eluers 
 by electior ;" which, as soon as they began to 
 thirst after the glorious character of priests and 
 bishops, they corrected. 
 
 (a) Defence of the Thirty-nine Articles, pp 154, 155. ' 
 {b^ .**<! Mason and Dr. Bram.p. 97.- i 
 
 And though Cranmer cartd as little for any 
 visible signs, imposition of hands, or ceremonies 
 in ordination, as the other first Protestant refor- 
 mers, and according to their practice haj 
 abjured the priestly and episcopal character 
 which he had received among Catholics ; as may 
 be gathered by his words, related by Fox in his 
 degradation, thus: " Then a barber clipped his 
 hair round about, and the bishop scraped the tops 
 of his fingers, where he had been anointed."(c) 
 When they were thns doing ; " All this," quoth 
 the archbishop, " needed not, I had myself dtme 
 with this geer long ago." Ar*d also by his 
 doctrine; that, "In the New Testament, he 
 that is appointed to be a priest or bishop, needs 
 no confirmation by the scripture ; for election 
 thereunto is sufficient." Though, I say, Cran- 
 mer valued not any episcopal consecration, 
 which he had received in the Catholic Church, 
 yet he presumed not to make the denial thereof 
 an article of the Protestant faith ; but queen 
 Elizabeth's pretended bishops, and English 
 Church, in their convocation 1562, seeing, they 
 knew they had no episcopal character by impo- 
 sition of true bishops' hands, thought fit, to 
 make it a part of the Protestant belief, " That 
 no such visible sign or ceremony was necessary, 
 or instituted by Christ ;'' and therefore con- 
 cluded holy orders not to be a sacrament. And 
 though, I say, the Church of England now 
 teaches and practises the contrary, and in king 
 James the First's reign erased from the text the 
 %vord ELECTION as an imposture, or gross cor- 
 ruption, yet this change of the matter docs no 
 more make them now true priests and bishops, 
 than their last change of the form of ordination, 
 in the year 1 662, soon after the happy restoration 
 of king Charles the Second. 
 
 " Ecclesia non est, qua sacerdolem non habel 
 
 There can be no church without priests." — SI- Jerom. 
 
 It is enough, that in this place we have proved 
 these men without consecration or ordination ; 
 yet seeing they glory also in assuming to them- 
 selves the name of pastors, pastor of St. Mar- 
 tin's, &c., it may not be unseasonable to proposa 
 a few queries, touching their pastoral jurisdic 
 lion. 
 
 1 . Whether it is not a power of the keys, ttt 
 institute a pastor over a flock of clergy and 
 people ? 
 
 2. Whether any but a pastor can give pas- 
 toral jurisdiction ? 
 
 3. Whether any bishop, but the bishop of the 
 diocese, or commissioned from him, or hia 
 superior, can validly institute a pastor to any 
 parochial church, within such a diocese ? 
 
 4. Whether any number of bishops can validly 
 confirm, or give pastoral jurisdiction to the 
 bishop of any diocese, if the metropolitan, oi 
 some authorized by him, or his superior, be 
 not one 1 
 
 5. Or to the metropolitan of a province, if tha 
 
 (c) Fox's Acta and Monumenta, fol. 216 
 
98 
 
 PROTESTANT TR ANSr.ATIO.N AGAINST 
 
 primate of the nation, or some authorized by him, 
 or bis superior be not one ? 
 
 ' 6. Whether any but the chief patriarch of that 
 part of the world, or authorized by him, can 
 validly give pastoral jurisdiction to the primate 
 of a nation 1 
 
 7. Whether the bishop of Rome is not chief 
 patriarch of the western church, consequently 
 of this nation ? 
 
 8. Whether Mat. Parker, the first Protestant 
 pretended archbishop of Canterbury, received 
 his pastoral jurisdiction from , the bishop of 
 Rome, or from others by him autitorized ? 
 or, 
 
 9. Whether those who made Mat. Parker 
 primate of England, or archbishop of Cantej- 
 bury, had any jurisdiction to that act, but what 
 they received from queen Elizabeth? 
 
 10. Whether queen Elizabeth had the power 
 of the keys, either of order or jurisdiction ? 
 
 1 1 . Whether it is not an essential part of the 
 Catholic Church to have pastors 1 
 
 12. Whether salvation can be had in a church 
 wanting pastors ? 
 
 13. Whether they do not commit a most 
 heinous sacrilege, who having neither valid 
 ordination, nor pastoral jurisdiction, do notwith- 
 standing take upon them to administer sacra- 
 ments, and exercise all other acts of episcopal 
 and prici-tly functions ? 
 
 14. Whether the ])eople are not also involved 
 with them, in the same sin, so often as they 
 communicate with them in, or co-operate to 
 those sacrilegious presumptions ? 
 
 1 5. Whether those, who as.sume to themselves 
 the names and offices of bishops arid priests,' 
 take upon them to teach, preach, administer 
 sacraments, and perform all other episcopal and 
 priestly functioiis, without vocation, wi'hout 
 ordination, without consecration without suc- 
 cession, without mission, or without pastoral 
 jurisdiction, are not the very men of whom out 
 blessed Saviour charged us to beware ? («) 
 
 16. To conclude, whether it is wisdom in tlie 
 people of England, to hire such men at the 
 charge of perhaps above £\ ,000,000 [query, now 
 3 or £4,000,000 ?] per annum, to lead them the 
 broad way to perdition ? 
 
 ANOTHER CORRUPT ADDITIO.N AGAINST THE PERPETUAL SACRIFICE OF 
 
 CHRIST'S BODY AND BLOOD. 
 
 Protestants teach, in the 31st of the 39 
 Articles, " That the offering of Christ once made, 
 18 that perfect redemption, propitiation and 
 satisfaction for all the sins of the whole world, 
 &c. AVherefore the sacrifice of masses, in 
 which it was commonly said, that the priests did 
 offer Christ for the quick and the dead, to have 
 remission of pain and guilt, were blasphemous 
 fables, and dangerous deceits." By this doctrine 
 the Church of England bereaves Christians of 
 the most inestimable jewel and richest treasure, 
 that ever Christ our Saviour left to his church ; 
 to wit, the most holy and venerable sacrifice of 
 his sacred body and blood in the mass, which is 
 daily offered to God the Father, for a propitia- 
 tion for our sins. And because they would 
 have this false and erroneous doctrine of iheir's 
 backed by sacred scripture, they most egregiously 
 corrupt the text, Heb. x. 10, by adding to the 
 same two words not found in the Greek or 
 Latin copies, viz., " For all ;" the apostle's words 
 being, "In the which will we are sanctified by 
 the oblation of the body of Jesus Christ once ;" 
 which they corruptly read, in their last transla- 
 tion : " By the which will we are sanctified, 
 through the oflering of the body of Jesus Christ 
 once, for all." By which addition they endea- 
 vour to take away the daily oblation of the 
 body and blood of Christ in the holy sacrifice 
 of tiio mass ; contrauicling the doctrine of God's 
 holy church, which believes and teaches, " that 
 our Tjord God, although he was once to ofl'er 
 himself to God the Father upon the altar of the 
 cross by death, that ho might there work eternal 
 redemption ; yet because his priesthood was not 
 J) be extinguished by death, in tlie 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 ol 
 those sins which we daily commit, declaring 
 himself to be ordained a priest for ever, ac- 
 cording to the order of Melchizedek, he offered 
 to God the Father his body and blood, under 
 the forms of bread and wine ; and under the 
 signs of the same things he gave it to the apos- 
 tles, whom then he ordained priests of the New 
 Testament, that they should receive it ; and by 
 the words he commanded them, and their suc- 
 cessors in the priesthood, that they should offer 
 it : " Do ye this in commemoration of me," &;a. 
 And, " Because in this divine sacrifice, which 
 is performed in the mass, the self-same Christ is 
 contained, and unbloodily offered, who oflered 
 himself once bloodily upon the altar of the cross ; 
 the holy synod teaches the sacrifice to be truly 
 propitiatory, &c. Wherefore, according to the 
 tradition of the apostles, it is duly offered, not 
 only for the sins, punishments, satisfactions, anil 
 other necessities of the faithful that are livhig, 
 but also for such as are dead in Christ, as not yet 
 fully, purged. "(A) This is the Catholic doc- 
 trine, delivered in the sacred Council of Trent, 
 which the Ciiurch of England calls blasphemous 
 fables, and dangerous deceits ; and against 
 which they falsity the sacred text of scripture, 
 
 (a) Mat. vii. 15. 
 
 (i) Concil. Trid., seas. 32, cap. 1, c^>. 8, 
 
THK PERPETUAL SACRIFICK. 
 
 99 
 
 by thrusting icto it words of their own, which 
 they find not in any of the Greek or Latin 
 copies. 
 
 tint lest they may object, that this is but a 
 new doctrine, not taught in the primitive church, 
 nor delivered down to us by the apostles or by 
 apostolical tradition ; I will give you ihe-se fol- 
 lowing testimonies from the fathers of the first 
 five hundred years. 
 
 St. Cyprian says, (a) " Christ is priest for 
 ever, according to the order of Melchizedek, 
 which order is this, coming from this sacrifice, 
 and thence descending, that Melchizedek was 
 priest of God most high, that he oflered bread 
 and wine, that he blessed Abraham ; for who is 
 more a priest of God most high, than our I>ord 
 Jesus Christ, who oflered sacrifice to God the 
 Father, and offered the same that Melchizedek 
 had oflered, bread and wine, viz., his body and 
 blood V 
 
 And a little after : " That therefore in Gene- 
 sis the blessing might be rightly celebrated about 
 Abraham by Melchizedek the priest, the image, 
 or figure of Chrst's sacrifice, consisting in 
 bread and wine, went before : which thing our 
 Lord perfecting and performing, offered bread, 
 and the chalice mixed with wine, and he, that is 
 the plenitude, fulfilled the verity of the prefi- 
 gured image." 
 
 The same holy father, in another place, as 
 cited also by the Magdeburgian Centurists, (6) 
 in this manner, "Our Lord Jesus Christ," says 
 Cyprian, lib. 2, ep. 3, " is the high priest of 
 God the Father ; and first offered sacrifice to God 
 tho Father, and commanded the same to be done 
 in rememberance to him ; and that priest truly 
 e.\-ecutes Christ's place, who imitates that which 
 Christ did ; and then he offers in the church a 
 true and full sacrifice to Goil." This saying so 
 displeases the Centurists, that they say, " Cy- 
 orian affirms superstitiously, that the priest 
 executes Christ's place in the supper of our 
 Lord." 
 
 St. Ilierom : (c) " Have recourse," says he, 
 " to the book of Genesis, and you shall find 
 Melchizedek, king of Salem, prince of this city, 
 who even there, in figure of Christ, offered 
 bread and wine, and dedicated the Christian 
 mystery in our Saviour's body and blood." 
 Again, " Melchizedek offered not bloody vic- 
 tims, but dedicated the sacrament of Christ in 
 bread and wine, a simple and pure sacrifice." 
 /nd yet more plainly in another place, " Our 
 ministry," says he, " is signified in the word of 
 order, not by Aaron, in immolating brute vic- 
 tims, but in offering bread and wine, that is, the 
 body and blood of our I^ord Jesus." 
 
 St. Augustine expressly teaches, that " Mel- 
 
 hizedek bringing forth the sacrament, or 
 
 mystery, of our Lord's table, knew how to 
 
 figure his eternal priesthood." («/) " There 
 
 (a) Ep. 53, ad Csci'.ium. 
 
 (A) In the Alphab. Table of the Third Cent., under the 
 letter S., col. 83. 
 
 (c) Ep. ad Marcel, ut migret. Belhleem. ; Ep. ad Evagr. 
 a,uSGt. in Gen., c. 1 1. 
 
 (<i)Ep.95. 
 
 first appeared," says he in another place, " that 
 sacrifice which is now offered to God by Cliris- 
 tians, in the whole world." (e) 
 
 Again, (Cone. 1, in Psal. xxxv.) "There wr.3 
 formerly," says he, "as you have known, the 
 sacrifice of the Jews, according to the ordci of 
 Aaron, in the sacrifice of beasts, and this in 
 mystery; for not as yet was the sacrifice of the 
 body and blood of our Lord, which the faithful 
 know, and such as have read the Gospel ; which 
 sacrifice now is spread over the whole world. 
 Set therefore before your eyes two sacrifices, 
 that according to the order of Aaron ; and this, 
 according to the order of Melchizedek ; for it is 
 written, our Lord has sworn, and it shall not 
 repent him, thou art a priest for ever, according 
 to the order of Melchizedek." And in Cone. 
 2, Psal. xxxiii., he expressly teaches, " that 
 Christ, of his body and blood, instituted a sacri- 
 fice, according to the order of Melchizedek." 
 
 Nothing can be more plain than these words 
 of St. Irena;us, in which he affirms of Christ, 
 (f) " Giving counsel also to his disciples, to 
 ofier the first fruits of his creatures to God ; not 
 as it were needing it, but that they might be 
 neither unfruitful nor ungrateful, he himself 
 took of the creature of bread, and gave thanks, 
 saying, this is my body ; and likewise the chalice, 
 he confessed to be his blood, which is made of 
 that creature which is in use amongst us, and 
 taught a new oblation of the New Testament, 
 which oblation the church receiving from tho 
 apostles, throughout the whole world, ofliers to 
 God, to him who gives us nourishment, the firsi! 
 fruits of his gifts in the New Testament; of 
 whom, amongst the twelve prophets, Malachy 
 has thus foretold : ' I have no will in you, the 
 Jews, says our omnipotent Lord, and I will 
 take no sacrifices at your hands, because, from 
 the rising of the sun to the setting thereof, my 
 name is glorified amongst the Gentiles ; and in 
 every place, incense is offered to my name, and 
 a pi: RE SACRIFICE, bccausc my name is great 
 among the Gentiles, saith our Lord Almighty,' 
 manifestly signifying by these things, because 
 the former people indeed ceased to offer to God ; 
 but in every place a sacrifice is oflered to God, and 
 this PURE, for his name is glorified among the 
 Gentiles." Thus St. Irenaeus, whose words so 
 touch the Protestant Centurists, that they say, 
 " Irenffius, &c., seems to speak very incommo- 
 diously, when he says, he, Christ, taught the 
 new oblation of the New Testament, which the 
 church receiving from the apostles, offered to 
 God over all the world." 
 
 Eusebius Ctesariensis : {g) " We sacrifice, 
 therefore, to our highest I^ord a sacrifice o{ 
 praise ; we sacrifice to God a full, odoriferous, 
 and most holy sacrifice ; we sacrifice after a new 
 manner, according to the New Testament, a 
 
 PURE HOST." 
 
 St. John Chrysostom expounding the words of 
 
 (e) Lib. 1 G, do Civ. Dei, c. 22. See him also lib. 17, c, 17, 
 and lib. 18, c. 35; cum Psalm cix., lib. 1, contr. Advcro, 
 Leg. et Prophet, c. 20: Serm. 4, de Sanctis Innoceniibus 
 
 (/) Lib. 4, Advera. Haer., c. 32. 
 
 {g) Lib. 1, Demonstrat. Evan c 10 
 
100 
 
 PROTESTANT T«ANSLATI07< AGAINST 
 
 he prqpliet Ma! achy, says, (a) " The church, 
 which every where carries about Christ in it, is 
 prohibited from no place ; but in every place there 
 are altars, in Rvery place doctrines ; these things 
 God foretold by his prophet, for both declaring 
 llie church's sincerity, and the ingratitude of the 
 Dihsr people, the Jews, he tells them, I have no 
 pleasure in you, oic. Mark, how clearly and 
 plainly he interprt-'s the mystical table, which is 
 the unbloody host, a.*dlhe pure perfume he calls 
 holy prayers, which are offered after the host. 
 Thou seest how it is gi anted, tnai that angelical 
 sacrifice should every where be known ; thou 
 seest it is circumscribod with no limits, neither 
 the altars, nor the song. In every place incense 
 is offered to my name ; tlleiefore the mystical 
 table, the heavenly and exceedingly venerable 
 sacrifice is indeed the prime pvire host." 
 
 Is it not a thing to be admired, that the 
 Church ot England should not jnly corrupt the 
 sacred scriptures against the great and most 
 dreadful sacrifice ; but should iilso make it an 
 article of her faith, that it is a blasphemous 
 fable, and dangerous deceit? When, without 
 all doubt, she cannot be ignoran.f, that the holy 
 fathers call it : (h) " A visible sacrifice ; (c) 
 "The sacrifice;" {il) "The duly sacrifice;" 
 (ft) " The true' sacrifice according to the order of 
 Melchizcdek ;" (/) " The sacrifi;e of the body 
 and blood of Christ ;" (g) " The r.acrifice of the 
 altar ;" (//) " The sacrifice of the church ; {i) 
 " The sacrifice of the New Tt stament ;" [k] 
 " Which succeeded to all sacrifi ;es of the Old 
 Testament." Arid tliat it was o.Tered for the 
 health of the emperor, Sacrificamuj pro salute im- 
 ^c.raUirix" siiys Tertullian, de Scapul. c. 2. That 
 it was offered for the sick. Pro iujirmis etiam sac- 
 rificamus, says St. Chrysostom, Hum. 27, in Act 
 Apos. " For those upon the sea, and for the fruits 
 of the earth," idem. And for the purging of houses 
 infected with wicked spirits. St. Aug. de Civit. 
 Die, lib. 22, c. 8, says, that " One went and of- 
 fered," in the house infected, " tht; sacrifice of 
 Christ's body, praying that the vexation minht 
 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 in- 
 formed, that in some places arid cities the dea- 
 cons distribute the sacrament to priests ; neither 
 rule nor custom has delivered, that they who 
 have not power to offer sacrifice, should distri- 
 bute the body of Christ to them who offer." 
 Sec also, concil. 3, Bracarense. can. 3. and 
 
 '«; Ad. Psal. xcv. 
 
 •h) St. Agii., (le Civit. Dei, Ijh. 10, c. 19. 
 
 (c) St. Cypr. 1. -2. ep. 3; et St. Agu, Cit. c. 20. 
 
 {(I) Aug. Cit. c. 16, et. Cone. Tolet., Lean. 5; Origen. in 
 Num. Hiini. 23. 
 
 (e) St. Cyprian, 1. 2, ep. 3, et Aug., lib. 10, c. 22, de 
 Civil. Dei 
 
 (/) Et till 29, c, S, et lib 20, contr, Faustum, e. 18 ; ct 
 S. Hieruin ,lib. 3,conlr. Pelag.; Aug. in Psal xj(xiii,eon. 
 2, to. 8; ft St. Crys., lib. 1, Cot. Horn 24. 
 
 (?) S. Aug. in Enchiridion, c. 1 10, et de Cura pro Mor- 
 tals, c. 18. 
 
 (A) Et de Civit. Dei, 1- 10, c. 20. 
 
 (t) Et de Gratia Novi Test., c. 18, et S. Irenaeus, lib. 4, 
 :. 32. 
 
 (i) Aug de Civit. Dei, lib. 17, c. 20.; St. Clement, in 
 Apont Cbnstit., edit. 1564, Antverpiir,llb.e. c. 22 fol. 123 
 
 concil. 12, can. 5. Moreovt 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 iiiideniablc, that 
 Crastoius, a learned Protestant, in his book ol 
 the mass, against Bellarmin, page 167, repre- 
 hends. Origen, St. Athanasius, St. Ambrose, 
 St. Chrysostom, St. Augustine, St Gregory 
 the Great, and venerable Hede, for maintaining 
 " the mass to be a propitiatory sacrifice for tlio 
 sins of the living and of the dead." Consider 
 then, what truth there is in the word;j of that 
 author {I) who affirms, that in Gregory tho 
 Great's time, " Masses for the dead were not 
 intended to deliver souls from those torments of 
 purgatory." Doubtless he considered not tho 
 words of St. Augustine, lib. 9, Confess, c. 12, 
 and De Verb. Apost. Serm. 34, viz. " That tho 
 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 olfer the sacrifice for them." 
 Nor considered this great vindicator, that great 
 miracle related by St Gregory the Great, him- 
 self, concerning purgatory, and the benefits souls 
 there receive, by the offering up of this propitia- 
 tory sacrifice. In his fourth Book of Dialogues, 
 chap. 55, telling us of a monk called Justus, who 
 was obsequious to him, and watched with him in 
 his daily sickness: "This man," says he, "being 
 dead, I appointed the healthful host to be offered 
 for his absolution thirty days together, which 
 done, the. said Justus appeared to his brother by 
 vision, and said, I have been hitherto evil, but 
 now am well, &c " And the brethren in the mon- 
 astery counting the days, found that to be the day, 
 on which the 30th oblation was offered for him., 
 
 Nor would doubtless this vindicator liave told 
 us, " That transubstantiation was yet unborn," 
 to wit, in St. Gregory the Great s time, unless Jio 
 had a mind to impose upon his reader, if he had 
 ever read the doctrine of those fathers, who 
 lived before St. Gregory's time, for example : 
 
 St. Ignatius, martyr, in his epistle to the 
 people of Smyrna, speaking of the heretics of 
 his time, men of the same judgment with this 
 vindicator, writes thus : " 'I'hey allow not ol 
 eucharists and oblations," says he, " because 
 they do not believe the eucharist to be the flesh 
 of our Saviour Jgsus Christ, which suffereil foi. 
 our sins, and which the Father, in his meicy 
 raised again from the dead." 
 
 St. Justin, martyr, in his apology to the em- 
 peror Antonius Pius, made for the Christians; 
 " Now this food," says he, " amongst us, is called 
 the eucharist, which it is lawful for none to par- 
 take of, but those who believe our doctrine to be 
 true, who have been washed in the laver of rcge- 
 neration for the remission of sins; and who rcgij- 
 late tlieir lives according to the prescription o( 
 Christ ; for we do not receive this as common 
 bread, or common drink ; but as by the word ol 
 God, Jesus Christ, our Redeemer, being mado 
 
 {I) The author of the Second Defence of the Ercpoeitioo 
 of the Uoctrinc of tht Church of England, SLc , p. 13. 
 
THE PERPETUAL SACRIFICB 
 
 lOl 
 
 flbsh, had both flesh and blood for the sake of 
 uiir salvation ; just so we are taught, that that 
 fond, over which thanks are given by prayers, in 
 his own words, and whereby oiir blood and flesh, 
 are by a change, nourished, is the flesh and blood 
 of tfie incarnate Jesus ; for the apostles, in the 
 commentaries written by them, called the gos- 
 pel, have recorded that Jesus so commanded 
 thetn." 
 
 St. Irenaeus, taking an argument from the 
 participation of the eucharist, proves the resur- 
 rection of the flesh, against the heretics of his 
 i-iiiie. (a) " As the blessed apostles say : ' Be- 
 cause we are members of his body, of his flesh, 
 and of his bones ;' not speaking this of any 
 spiritual or invisible man, but of that disposition 
 which belongs to a real man, that consists of 
 flesh, nerves, and bones ; and is nourished by 
 the chalice, which is his (Christ's) blood, and 
 receives increase by that bread which is his body. 
 And as the vine, being planted in the earth, 
 brings forth fruit in season : and a grain of 
 wheat falling upon the ground, and rotting, rises 
 up with increase by the virtue of God, who com- 
 prehends all things, which afterwards, by a pru- 
 dent management, becomes serviceable to men ; 
 and receiving the word of God, are made the 
 eucharist, which is the body and blood of Christ ; 
 so also our bodies being nourished by it, and 
 laid in the earth, and there dissolved, will rise 
 at their time ; the word of God working in them 
 this resurrection, to the glory of God the 
 Fa'.her." 
 
 Euseliius Csesariensis : (4) " Making a daily 
 commemoration of him (Christ,) and daiiy cele- 
 brating the memory of his body and blood ; and 
 being now preferred to a more excellent sacri- 
 fice and ofllce than that of the old law, we think 
 It -unreasimable any more to fall back to those 
 first and weak elements which contained certain 
 signs and figures, but not the truth itself" 
 Another place of Eusebius, as quoted by St. 
 John of Damascene : " Many sinners," says he, 
 " being priests, do oflcr sacrifice ; neither does 
 God deny his assistance, but by the Holy Ghost 
 consecrates the proposed gifts. And the bread 
 indeed is made the precious body of our Lord, 
 and the cup his precious blood. "(c) 
 
 St. Hilary : " We must not speak," says he, 
 " of the things of God, like men, or in the sense 
 of the world : let us read what is written, and- 
 understand what we read, and then we shall be- 
 lieve with a perfect faith. For what we say of 
 the natural existence of Christ within us, if we 
 do not learn from him, wo say foolishly and 
 profanely ; for he himself says : ' My flesh is 
 meat indeed, and my blood is drink indeed.' 
 There is no place left for doubting of the reality 
 of his flesh and blood ; for now, by the profes- 
 sion of Christ himself, and by our f-iith, it is 
 truly flesh, and truly blood. Is not this trnlh ? 
 tt may indeed not be true for them, who deny 
 Christ to be true Goi."{d) 
 
 ^a) I.i5>. 5, c. 11. 
 
 (4) Lit). I, de Demonstrat. Evang., c. 10. 
 
 ^c) Lib. 'J, Parallel., c. 45. 
 
 (d) Lib. «, de Triiiitato. 
 
 14 
 
 St. Cyril of Jerusalem :(e) " Since, therefore, 
 Christ himself does thus affirm, and says of the 
 bread, ' This is my body ;' who, from hence, 
 forward, dare be so bold as to doubt of it 1 
 And since the same (Christ) does assure u.s, anrj- 
 say : ' This is my blood ;' who, 1 say, can doiib* 
 of it, and say, it is not his blood? In C^aiia ol 
 Galilee he once, with his sole will, turned water 
 into wine, which much resembles blood ; and 
 does not he deserve to be credited, that he 
 changed wine into his blood ; for if. when in- 
 vited to a corporal marriage, he wrought so stu- 
 pendous a miracle, have we not much more 
 reason to confess, that he gave his body and 
 blood to the children of the bridegroom ? 
 Wherefore, full of certainty, let us receive the 
 body and blood of Christ; for under the form 
 of bread is given to thee the body, and the blood 
 under the form of wine ; that having received 
 the body and blood of Christ, thou mayost be 
 made partaker with him of his body and blood. 
 Thus we shall become Christophers, that is, 
 ' bearers of Christ,' receiving his body and 
 blood into us. Do not, therefore, look on it as 
 mere bread only, or bare wine; for, as God 
 himself has said, it is the body and blood ol 
 Christ. Notwithstanding therefore, the infor- 
 mation of sense, let faith onfirm thee ; and do 
 not judge of the thing by the taste, but rathtr 
 take it for most certain by faith, without the 
 least doubt that his body and blood are given 
 thee- When you come to communion, do not 
 come holding both the palms of your hands open, 
 nor your fingers spread ; but let your left hand 
 be as it were a rest under the right, into which 
 you are to receive so great a King ; and in the 
 hollow of your hand take the body of Christ, 
 saying, amen."(/) 
 
 St. Gregory Nyssen :(o^) "When we have 
 eaten any thing that is prejudicial to our consti- 
 tution, it is necessary that we take something 
 that is capable of repairing what was impaired ; 
 that so, when this healing antidote is within us, 
 it may work out of the body, by a contrary 
 affection, all the force of the poison. And 
 what is this antidote ? It is nothing but that 
 body which overcame death, and was the origin 
 of our life. For, as the apostle tells us, as a 
 little leaven makes the whole lump like itself, so 
 that' body which, by God's appointment, suffered 
 death, being received within out body, changes 
 and reduces the whole to its own likeness. And 
 as when poison is mixed up v^ith any thing that 
 is medicinal, the whole compound is rendered 
 useless ; so likewise that immortal body being 
 within him that receives it, converts the whole 
 into its own nature. But there being no other 
 way of receiving any thing within our body 
 unless it be first conveyed into our stomach by 
 eating or drinking, it is necessary that by thi? 
 ordinary way of nature, the life-giving virtue of 
 the Spirit be communicated to us. But now, 
 since that body alone, which was united to the 
 
 (e) In Catechis. 
 
 (/) It WHS the custom in those clays for the prieatto ■"«- 
 liver the holy sacrament into the hands of the communicant. 
 (g) In Orat, Cat., c. 37 
 
103 
 
 PROTESTANT CORROPTIONB 
 
 Diviriiiy, lias received tfeis grace, and it is mani- 
 fest that our body can no otherwise become im 
 mortal, we are to consider how it is impossible, 
 thai one body, which is always distributed to so 
 many thousand Christians over the whole world, 
 should be the whole, by a part in every one, and 
 otill 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 
 siidderdy changed by the word into his body, 
 by these words : ' This is my body.' And this 
 is effected by virtue of the benediction, by which 
 the nature of those things which appear is 
 transelemented into it." 
 
 Again, in another place :{a) " And the bread 
 in the beginning is only common bread ; but 
 when it is sanctified by the mystery, it is made 
 and called the body of Christ." 
 
 St. Hieroin : " 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 moiiih."(4) 
 
 St. Augustine : " We have heard," says he, 
 "our Master, who always speaks truth, our di- 
 vine Rcdeen>er, ihe Saviour of men, recom- 
 mending to us our ransom, his blood ; for he 
 spake of his body and blood ; which body he 
 called meat and which blood he called drink. 
 The faithful understand the sacrament of the 
 faitli.Cul." •' But there are some," says he, 
 " who do not believe ; they said : ' This is an 
 haid saying, who can hear him ?" It is an hard 
 saying but to those who are obslinate; that is, 
 it is incredible but to the incredulous."(e) 
 
 The same boly father and great doctor, in his 
 commentary upon the Thirty-third Psalm, 
 speaks thus of Christ : " And he was carried in 
 his own hands ? And can this, brethren, bo 
 possible in man ? Was ever any man carried 
 in his own hands ? H(i may be carried by the 
 hands of oih-ers, but in his own no man was 
 ever yet carried. How this can be literally un- 
 derstood of David, we cannot discover ; but in 
 Christ we find it verified ; for Christ was car- 
 ried in his own hands, when giving his own very 
 body, he said : ' This is my body ;' for that body 
 he carried in his own hands." Such is the 
 humility of our Lord Jesus Christ, which is 
 much recommended to men. How plain and 
 positive are the words of these ancient and holy 
 fathers, for the real presence of Christ's body 
 and blood in the Wessed sacrament of the 
 eucharist, which Froiestants so flatly deny ? 1 
 would ask our Church of England divines 
 whether, if the}' had been present among th6 
 apostles when Christ said : " Take and eat, this 
 is my body," they durst have assumed the bold- 
 ness to have contradicted the omnipotent Word, 
 and have replied: " It is not thv body. Lord, it 
 is only bread V I believe the most stifT sacra- 
 mentarian in England would have trembled to 
 have made such a reply ; though now they dare, 
 with blasphemous mouth, call the doctrine of 
 transubstantiation, the " mystery ot iniquity." 
 
 I have insisted somewhat longer upon these 
 two points than, perhaps, the reader may think 
 proper for this treatise ; but when he considers 
 that the priesthood and sacrifice, against which 
 Protestants have corrupted the scripture, and 
 framed their new a,rticles of faith, are 'wo such 
 essential parts of Christian religion, thatif either 
 of them be taken away, , the whole fiibric of 
 God's church falls to the ground, he will not 
 look upon it as an unnecesary digression. 
 
 SEVERAL OTHER CORRUPTIONS AND FALSIFICATIONS 
 
 NOT ME.VTIONED UNDER THE FOREOOIXO HEADS. 
 
 This Treatise increasing beyond what indeed 
 I designed it at first, will oblige me to as much 
 brevity as possible, in these following corrup- 
 tions : 
 
 In Romans viii. 39. instead of the word " cha- 
 ri'y," they, contrary to the Greek, translate 
 " love ;" and so generally in all places, where 
 rpuch is spoken in commendation of charily. 
 The reason is, because they attribute salvation 
 to faith alone, they care not how little charity 
 ma)- sound in the ears of the people. So like- 
 wise in 1 Cor. xiii. for '• charity," they eight 
 times say "love." In Rom. ix. 16, (or this 
 text . " Therefore it is not of the wilier, nor 
 she runner, but of God that showeth mercy," 
 
 f(») In Ornt. in diem Luniinum. 
 (M In Epist. ad Heiibdorum. 
 (c) Lib. dc Verb. Apobt. Serm. 
 
 they translate in their old Bibles : " So lieth it 
 not then in a man's will or running, but in the 
 mercy of God ;" changing of, into in, and 
 wilier and runner, into will and running ; and 
 so make the apostle say, that it is not at all in 
 man's will to consent or co-optrale with God's 
 grace and mercy. 
 
 In 1 Corinthians i. 10, for "schisms," which 
 are spiritual divisions from the unity of thu 
 church, they translate " dissensions." which may 
 be in worldly things, as well as rtligion ; this 
 is done because themselves were afraid to bo 
 accounted schismatics. So likewise 
 
 In Galaiians v. 20, for " heresy " as it , is in 
 the Greek, they translate " sects," in favour Oi 
 themselves, being charged with heresy ; also 
 
 In Titus iii. 10, instead of saying, according 
 to the Greek, " A man that is an heretic. 
 &c., their Bible of 1662 translates, "A man 
 
OF THE SCRIPTPRB 
 
 103 
 
 that is author of sects ;" favouring that name for 
 their own sakes, and dissembling it as though 
 the holy scripture spake not against heresy or 
 heretics, schism or schismatics. 
 
 In I Tim. iii. 6, for a " neophyte," (one lately 
 baptized or phnted in Christ's mystical body,) 
 they translate in their first Bibles, " a young 
 fcholar ;" as though an old scholar could not be 
 a neophyte, by deferring his" baptism, or by long 
 delaying his conversion to God, which he learn- 
 ed to be necessary long before. 
 
 In Titus iii. 8, instead of these words, " to 
 excel in good works," they translate. " to show 
 forth good works ;" and, as their last edition has 
 it, " to maintain good works ;" against the dif 
 ferent degrees of good works. 
 
 In Hebrews x. 20, for "dedicated," they 
 translate, in their first Bibles, "prepared," in 
 favour of their heresy, that Christ was not the 
 first who went into heaven, which the word dedi- 
 cated signifies. 
 
 In the two Epistles of Peter, iii. 16, they 
 force the text to maijitain a frivolous evasion, 
 that " St. Paul's Epistles are not hard," but the 
 " things in the epistles ;" whereas both the 
 Greek and Latin texts are indifferent with regard 
 to both constructions. It is a general custom 
 of theirs, and where they find the Greek text 
 indifferent to two senses, there they restrain 
 it only to that which may be most advantage- 
 ous to their own error, thereby excluding its 
 reference to the other sense. And often- 
 times, where one sense is received, read, and 
 expounded by the greater part of the ancient 
 fathers, and by all the Latin church, there they 
 very partially follow the other sense, not so 
 generally received. 
 
 In St. James i. 13, for " God is not a tempter 
 of evils," they translate, " God is not tempted 
 with evils," and " God cannot be tempted with 
 evils," (a) than which nothing is nore imper- 
 tinent 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 passive ? They 
 may find in their lexicon, that it is both an active 
 and passive ; as also appears by the very cir- 
 cumstance of the foregoing words, " Let no man 
 say, that he is tempted by God." Why so ? 
 " Because," says the Protestant translators, 
 " God is not tempted with evil." Is this a good 
 reason ' nothing less. How then ? " Betsause, 
 God is not tempted to evil ;" therefore let no 
 man say, that " he is tempted by God." 
 
 This reason is so coherent, and so necessary 
 in this place, that if the Greek word were only 
 a passive, as it is not, yet it might have better 
 beseemed Beza to translate it actively, than it 
 did to turn an active into a passive, against the 
 real presence, as himself confesses he did with- 
 out scruple. But though he might and ought to 
 have trnnslatcd this word actively, yet he would 
 not, because he would favour his own heresy ; 
 which, quite contrary to these words of the 
 apostle, says, that " God is a tempter to evil ;" his 
 
 ((}) A,if9toaaas koic^ 
 
 words are, Imlucit Dominvs in tentattonem eca 
 quos sataiKB arhtlrio peftnittef, &c. (/>) " The 
 Lord leads into temptation those whom he per- 
 mits to be at Satan's disposal; or, into whom 
 rather he leads or brings in satan himself, lo fill 
 their hearts, as Peter speaketh." Note, that lie 
 says, God brings satan into a man to fill his 
 heart, as Peter said to Ananias : " VVhy has 
 satan filled thy heart, to lie i.nto the Holy 
 Ghost?" So that by this doctrine of Beza, God 
 brought satan into Anania's heart to make him 
 lie unto the Holy Ghost ; and so leading him 
 into temptation, was author and cause of that 
 henious sin. 
 
 Is not this to say," God is a tempter to evil," 
 quite contrary to St. James's words ? Or could 
 he that is of this opinion, translate the contrary ; 
 to wit, that " God is no tempter to evil ?" Is not 
 this as much as to say, that God also brought 
 satan into Judas to fill his heart, and so was 
 author of Judas's treason, even as he was of 
 Paul's conversion? Is not this a most absurd 
 and blasphemous opinion ? Yet how can they 
 free themselves from it, who allow and maintain 
 the aforesaid exposition of " God's leading into 
 temptation ?" Nay, Beza, for maintaining the 
 same, translates, " God's providence," instead 
 of " God's prescience," .A^cts ii. 23, a version so 
 false, that the English Bezaites, in their transla- 
 tion, are ashamed to follow him. 
 
 And which is worse than all this, if worse can 
 be, they make God not only a leader of men into 
 temptation, but even the author and worker of 
 sin : yea, that God created or appointed men to 
 sin ; as appears too plainly, not only in their 
 translation of this following text of St. Peter's, 
 but also from Beza's commentary on the same. 
 Also Bucer, one of king Edward the Vlth's 
 apostles, held directly, that " God is the author 
 of sin." (c) 
 
 St. Peter says of the Jews, that Christ is to 
 them, Petra scandali qui offendunt verba vec 
 credunt in qun et posili sunt, fis o xat iii&eanv ; 
 that is, " A rock of scandal to them (the Jews) 
 that stumble at the word, neither do believe 
 wherein also they are put," as the Rhemish 
 Testament translates it : or as it is rendered in 
 king Edward the Vlth's English translation, and 
 in the first of queen Elizabeth's, " they believe 
 not that whereon they were set ;" which transla- 
 tion Illyricus approves, (rf) "This is well to be 
 marked, lest a man imagine that God himself did 
 put them, and (as one, meaning Beza, against 
 the nature of the Greek word, translates and in- 
 terprets it) that God created them for this pur- 
 pose, that they should withstand him. Etasmus 
 and Calvin, referring this word to that which goes 
 before, interpret it not amiss, that the Jews wcro 
 made or ordained to believe the word of God, 
 and their Messias ; but yet that they would not 
 believe him ; for to them belonged the promises, 
 the testaments, and the Messias himself; as St. 
 
 (J) Annot. Nov. Test., anno 155(5, Mutt. vi. 13. 
 (e) See Bucer'e Scripta Anglicixna, p. 931 ; et in 
 ad Rom. in p. 1, c. 94. 
 (d) Illyricua's Gloee in 1 Pnt il & 
 
104 
 
 PROTESTANT CORRUPTIONS 
 
 Peter says. Acts, ii. 3, and St. Paul, Rom. ix. 
 And to them were committed the oracles of 
 God, by witness of the same Paul, Rom. iii." 
 Thus Illyricus ; who has here given the true 
 sense of this text, according to the signilication 
 of the Greek word ; and has proved the same 
 by script-lire, by St. Peter and St. Paul, and has 
 confirmed it by Erasmus and Calvin, lea, 
 TiUther follows the same sense in this place : so 
 ines Castalic in his annotations to the New 
 Toitament, 
 
 Mel Beza, against all these, to defend his 
 blasf.hfcmous doctrine, that " God leads men into 
 temptation and brings in satan to fill their hearts," 
 translates it thus : Sunt immorigeri ad quo J ettnm 
 conditi jeurunl, (n) " They are rebellious, 
 whereiinlo also they were created ;" With whom 
 his scholars, our English translators, are resolv- 
 ed to agree ; therefore, in their Bible of the 
 year i677, they read, " Being disobedient unto 
 the which thing they were ordained." And in 
 that of 1572 : " Being disobedient unto the which 
 thing they were even ordained." This is yet 
 worse, and with this, word for word, agrees the 
 Testament of 1580, and the Scottish Bible of 
 1579. This is also the Geneva translation in 
 the Bible of 1561, which the French Geneva 
 Bible follows. And how much our Protestant 
 last translation differs from these, may be seen 
 in the Bible printed at London, anno 1683, 
 where it is read thus : " And a rock of oflTence, 
 even to them which stumble at the word, being 
 disobedient whereunto also they are appointed." 
 
 Is imt this to say positively, that God is au- 
 thor of men's disobedience or rebellion against 
 Christ ? " But, if God," says Castalio against 
 Beza, " hath created_some men to rebellion or 
 disobedience, he is author of their disobedience ; 
 as if he has created sonic to obedience, he is 
 truly author of their obedience." Yes, this is to 
 make God the author of men's sin, for which 
 purpose it was so translated : and thus Beza in 
 his notes upon the text explains it ; that " men 
 are made or fashioned, framed, stirred up, crea- 
 ttd or ordained, not by themselves, for that were 
 iibsurd, but by God, to be scandalized at him, 
 and his Son our Saviour ; Chrislus est eis offen- 
 diculo, prout etiam ad hoc ipsum a Deo ^unt con- 
 diti ;" and further discourses at large, and brings 
 other texts to prove this sense, and this translation. 
 
 And though Luther and Calvin, as is said, dis- 
 sented not from the true sense of this text, yet 
 touching the blasphemous doctrine, (A) that 
 " God is the author of sin," they, with Zuinglius, 
 must, for all this, have the right hand of Beza. 
 " How can man prepare himself to good," says 
 L ither, " seeing it is not in his power to make 
 his ways evil ? For God works the wicked 
 work ill the wicked." 
 
 " When we commit adultery or murder," says 
 Zuinglius " it is the work of God, being the 
 mover, the author, and inciter, &c. God moves 
 
 [a) Vide Gaslalio in Dcfciisione quu Translat., pp. 153, 
 154 155. 
 
 '4) Lut To. 2, Wittetn. an. 1551, Assert. Art. 36, Viil. 
 de Aotvo. Arbit fol. 195, Kilit. 1603. Zuing. Xt. 10, J& 
 proviilentia Dei, fol. 3G9, 3GG, 367 
 
 the thief to kill, &,c. He is forced to sin, &c. 
 God hardened Pharaoh, not speaking hyperbo" 
 lically, but he truly hardens him, yea, althougli 
 he resist." By which, and other of his writings, 
 he so plainly teaches God to be the auihoi ol 
 sin, that he is therefore particularly reprehended 
 by the learned Protestant, Grawerus, in Absur- 
 da Absnrdoruin, c. 5, de Prtsdest., fol. 3, 4. 
 
 " God is author," says Calvin, " of all those 
 things, which these Popish judges would have to 
 happen only by his idle sufferance." (c) He 
 also affirms our sins to be not only by God's 
 permission, but by " his decree and will." Which 
 blasphemy is so evidently taught by him and 
 his followers, that they are expressly condemn- 
 ed for it by their famous brethren : Feining, lib. 
 de Urnvers. Grut.,p. 109 ; Osiander, i'ncn/nd-. 
 Coiitrnv., p. 104; Scaffman, de Peccal., Causis^ 
 pp. 1 55, 27 ; Stizlinus, Dcsput. Theol. de Pro- 
 vitl. Dei. srct. 141 ; Graver, in Absurda Absurd., 
 in Fronllfp. Yea, the Protestant magistrates 
 of Berne made it penal by the laws, for any in 
 their territories to preach Calvin's doctrine 
 thereof, or for the people to read any of his 
 books concerning the same, (d) Are not these 
 blessed reformers ? " O excellent instrument of 
 God !" as Dr. Tenison styles the chief of them.(c) 
 
 Protestants denying free will in man, not oiily 
 to do good, but even to resist evil, open a very 
 wide passage into this impious doctrine, of 
 making God the author of sin. 
 
 In 1 St. Peter i. 22, the apostle exhorts 
 Christains to live as becomes men of so excel- 
 lent a vocation : " Purifying," says he, " youi 
 souls by obedience of charity," (/) &c. ; a little 
 before, verse 17, remembering always, that 
 " God, without exception of persons, judges every 
 man according lo his works." From which place 
 it appears, that we have free will working with 
 the grace of God ; that we purify and cleanse 
 our souls from sin ; that good works are neces- 
 sarily required of Christians : for by many di- 
 vine arguments St. Peter urges this conclusion ; 
 Ul animus nostras caslijicemiis, " That we purify 
 our own souls." So the Protestant translation, 
 made in Edward the Sixth's time, has it, " For- 
 asmuch as you have purified your souls.' (g) 
 So likewise one of queen Elizabeth's Bibles : 
 " Even ye which have purified your souls ;" and 
 so it is in the Greek. Notwithstanding all 
 which, Beza, in his Testaments of 1556 and 
 1565, translates it, Animabus vcstris purijicatis 
 obediendo verilati per Spiritum : which another 
 of queen Elizabeth's Bibles renders thus : " See- 
 ing your souls are purified in obeying the truth', 
 through the Sprit." So translates also the En- 
 glish Bible, printed at Geneva, 1561, and the 
 Scotch, printed at Edinburgh, 1579. 
 
 So that these words make nothing at all either 
 for free will, or co-operation with God's grace, 
 or value of good works, but rather the con. 
 
 Cc)CaIvin,instit. l.l,c. 18, and 1.2, c.4,anJ 1.3, c. 23 
 
 (d) Vid. Litteras Senat. Bern, ad Minislros, &c. im. 
 1555. 
 
 (e) Dr. Ten. Conf. with M. P. 
 
 If) Castific.-intes animas veetras in'ol edientia Chantati^ 
 is) Bib. 1561, 1579. 
 
OK THE SCRIPTITKK. 
 
 JOS 
 
 iraryv proving that in our justification we 
 work not, but are wrought ; we purify not our- 
 selves, but are purified ; we are not active and 
 doers with God's grace, but passive and suffer- 
 ers ; which opinion the Council of Trent con- 
 demns, (a) The Protestant Bible of 1 683, has 
 again corrected this, and translates : " Seeing ye 
 have purified your souls," &c. ; but whether with 
 any good and sincere intention, appears by their 
 liaving left uncorrected another fault of the same 
 stamp in Philippians i. 28. 
 
 Where St. Paul, handling the same argument, 
 exhorts the Christians not to fear the enemies 
 of Christ, though they persecute, ever so ter- 
 ribly, " which to them," says he, " is cause of 
 perdition, but to you of salvation ;" where he 
 makes good works necessary, and so the causes 
 ol salvation, as sins are of damnation. But 
 Bcza will have the old interpreter overseen in 
 so translating : " because," says he, " the a/Hic- 
 tion of the faithful is never called the cause of 
 their salvation, but the testimony." (i) And, 
 (herefore, translates the Greek word eSei^ig, 
 indicium. And his scholars, the English trans- 
 lators, render it a " token ;" though, indeed, one 
 of their Testaments translates it, as we do, 
 a " cause ;" so do also Erasmus, and the Ti- 
 gurine translators ; (c) yea, the apostles com- 
 paring sins with good works, these leading to 
 heaven, as those to hell, convinces its sense to 
 be so ; as 'I'heodoret, a Greek father, also 
 gathers from that word, saying : " That pro- 
 cures to them destruction, but to you salvation." 
 (d) So St. Augustine, St. Hierom, and other 
 Latin fathers. 
 
 And that good works are a cause of salvation, 
 our Saviour himself clearly shows, when he thus 
 speaks of Mary Magdalen : Ri-mitluntiir ti pec- 
 cata mvlla, quoniam ddr.xU mullum : " Many sins 
 are forgiven her, because she loveth much." 
 Against which no man living can cavil from the 
 Greek, Hebrew, or Latin, but that works of 
 charity are a cause why sins are forgiven ; and 
 60 a cause of our justification and salvation, 
 which are evidently the words and meaning of 
 our blessed Saviour. Notwithstanding, Beza 
 and our English translators have a shift for this 
 also ; he translates. Rernissa sunt p'ccata rjus 
 mtilla : nam dilexil multum : which in our Eng- 
 lish Bible is rendered, " Her sins which are 
 many, are forgiven ; for she loved much ;" («) 
 whicli the reader, perhaps, may think to be a 
 difference so small as is not worth taking notice 
 jf ; but,'if well considered, will be found as great 
 as is between our doctrine and Protestants. 
 And first, the text is corrupted, by making a 
 uller point than either the Greek or Latin 
 oears, the English making some a colon, (:) and 
 some a semicolon, (;) where in the Greek there 
 is only a comma {,) ; and Beza ni his Latin, yet 
 more desperately makes a down and full period,(.) 
 
 (fl) Scfis. 6, cap. 4. 
 
 lb) Bcza Annot. in ilium locum 
 
 (c) Bib. 1561. 
 
 (d) Theoil. in Phil , cap 
 
 (e) Bcza Teet. anno 1565. Bih. 1683. 
 
 thereby dividing and distractirg the latter pan 
 from the former, as though it contained not a 
 reason of that which went before, as it does, but 
 were some new matter ; wherein he is cimtrolled 
 by another of his own translators, and hy the 
 Greek prints of Geneva, Zurich, Hnsil, and other 
 German cities, who poin' it as it is in our Ijaliu 
 and English. But their falsehood upjiears much 
 more in turning quomam into nam, " because' 
 into "for." {/) 
 
 Seeing onr Saviour's words are in effect thus : 
 " Because she loved much, therefore, many sina 
 are forgiven her;" which they, by this peritr 
 sion and mispointing it, make a quite difi'ereni 
 and almost contrary sense ; thus : " Because .shr 
 had many sins Ibrgiven her, therefore, she loved 
 much ;" and this love following was a token ol 
 the remission which she, by only faith, had ob- 
 tained before ; so turning the cause into tho 
 effect, and the antecedent into the consequent, 
 hereby utterly overthrowing the doctrine '.vhich 
 Christ by his words and reason gives, and the 
 church by his words and reason gathers. Beza 
 blushes not to confess why he thus altered 
 Christ's words, saying : Nam dihxit, tiyinijoe, 
 "For she loved:" the Vulgate translation and 
 Erasmus render it, " Because she loved." " But 
 I (says he) had rather interpret it as I do, that 
 men may understand in these words to be shown, 
 not the cause of remission of sins, but rather 
 that which ensued after such remission, and that 
 by the consequent is gathered the antecedent. 
 And therefore, ihey who abuse this place, to 
 overthrow free justification by faith alone, are 
 very impudent and childish." (g) Thus Bcza, 
 But the ancient fathers, who were neither impu- 
 dent nor childish, gathered from this text, that 
 charity, as well as faith, is requisite for obtaining 
 remission of sins. St. Chrysostom, Horn. 6, in 
 Mat. says, (//) "As first by water and the 
 Spirit, so afterwards by tears and confession, we 
 arc made clean ;" which he proves by this place 
 So St. Gregory, expounding this same place, 
 says, " Many sins are forgiven her, because she 
 loved much ; as if it had been said expressly, 
 he burns out perfectly the rust of sin, whosoevei 
 burns vehemently with the fire of love. For so 
 much more is the rust of sin scoured away, by 
 how much more the heart of a sinner is inflamed 
 with the great fire of charity." 
 
 And St. Ambrose upon the same words- — 
 " Good are the tears which are able to wash 
 away our sins. Good are the tears, wherein is 
 not only the redemption of sinners, but also the 
 refreshing of the just." 
 
 And the great St. Augustine, debating this 
 story in a long homily, says, («)" This sinful 
 woman, the more she owed, the more she loved ; 
 the forgiver of her debts, our Lord himself, af- 
 firming so : Many sins are forgiven her, because 
 she loved much. And why loved -she much, 
 
 (/) 1556. 
 
 (;») Beza in Luc. vii. 47, 
 \\) Hon). 33, in Evang. 
 (i) Horn. 23, inter. 50. 
 
108 
 
 PROTESTANT CORRnPTIONS. 
 
 but because she owed much ? "Vyhy did she 
 all these offices of weeping, washing, &c., but 
 to obtain remission of her sins ?" Other holy- 
 fathers agree in the seif-same verity, all making 
 her love to be a cause going before, and not an 
 elfect or sequel coming after the remission of sins. 
 
 1 have only taken notice here how Beza and 
 our English translators have corrupted this 
 text ; but he who pleases to read Musculus, 
 ill locis Communibiis, c. de Juslificat., 11,5, will 
 find him perverting it after another strange 
 manner, by boldly asserting, without all reason 
 01 probable conjecture, that our blessed Saviour 
 spoke in Hebrew, and used the preterperfect for 
 the present tense ; and that St. Luke wrote in 
 the Doric dialect ; so that Musculus would have 
 it said : " She loved Christ much, and no won- 
 der ; she had good cause so to do, because many 
 sins were forgiven her." 
 
 But Zuingliiis goes yet another way to work 
 with this text, and tells us, that he supposes the 
 word "love" should have been "faith:" his 
 words are, " Because she loved much. I sup- 
 pose, that lovK is here put for faith ; because she 
 has so great affiance in me, so many sins are 
 forgiven her. For he says afterwards. Thy 
 faith hath saved thee ; that is, has absolved and 
 delivered thee from thy sins." (a) Which one 
 distinction of his, will answer all the places that 
 in this controversy can be brought out of scrip- 
 lure to refute their "only faith." But, to 
 conclude, what can be more impious than to 
 affirm, that for obtaining of sins, charily is not 
 required as well as faith, seeing our blessed 
 Saviour, if we credit his evangelist, St. Luke, 
 and I think his authority ought to be preferred 
 before that cf Zuinglius, Beza, Musculus, or 
 our English sectaries, most divinely conjoins 
 charity with faith, saying of charily, " Many sins 
 are forgiven her, because she loved much !" 
 straightway adding of faith, " Thy faith has made 
 thee safe ; go in peace." 
 
 As you see here, they use all their endeavours 
 to su|)press the necessity of good and charitable 
 works ; so, on the other side, they endeavoured 
 to make their first Bibles countenance vice, (h) 
 BO far as to seem to allow of the detestable sin 
 of usury, provided it were not hurtful to ihe 
 . borrower. In Deuteronomy x.xiii. 1 9, they 
 translate thus, " Thou shall not hurt thy brother 
 Sy usury of money, nor by usury of corn, nor by 
 usury of any thing that he may be hurt withal ;" 
 by which they woidd have it meant, that usury 
 is not hero forbidden, unless it hurls the party 
 that borrows. A conceit so rooted in most 
 men's Iii!art3, that they think such usury very 
 lawful, and therefore frequently offend therein. 
 But Almighty God, in this place of holy scrip- 
 :ure, has not one word of hurtins or not hurting, 
 as may bo seen in the Hebrew and reek ; and 
 as also appears from their having corrected the 
 same in their Bible of 1 683, where they read, as 
 it ought 10 be, " Thou shalt not lend upon usury 
 to thy brother, usury of money, usury of vic- 
 tuals, usury of anything that is lent upon usury." 
 
 (a) Zuing. in Luc. vir To 4. 
 (4) Bib. 1562, l.*77. 
 
 If the Hebrew word signify to hurt by tistiTy, 
 why did not they, in the very words next fol 
 lowing, in the self-same Bibles, translate it thus ; 
 " Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury, 
 but not unto thy brother?" why said they not 
 rather, " A stranger thou mayest hurt by usury, 
 but not thy brother V is it not all the same in 
 word and phrase here as before ? 'I'he Jews 
 woidd have given them thanks for so translating 
 it ; who, by forcing the Hebrew word as they 
 do, think it well done, to hurt any stranger, that 
 is, any Christian by usury, be it ever so gre.it. 
 
 Whether the first Protestant translators oi 
 the scriptures were guided by that spirit which 
 should be in Christian Catholic translators, may 
 be easily gathered from what follows, as well as 
 from what you have already seen. 
 
 They were so profane and dissolute, that 
 some of them termed that divine book^ 
 called, Canticum, Canticorum, containing the 
 high mystery of Christ and his church, " The 
 Ballad of Ballads of Solomon," as if it were a 
 ballad of love, between Solomon and his concu- 
 bine, as Castalio wantonly translated it. 
 
 And yet more profanely, in another place, 
 which even their last translation has not yet 
 vouchsafed to correct, " We have conceived, we 
 have born in pain, as though we should have 
 brought forth wind." (c) I am ashamed to set 
 down the literal commentary of ihis their trans- 
 lation. Was there any thing in the Hebrew to 
 hinder them from translating it in this manner : 
 " We have conceived, and as it were travailed tc 
 bring forth, and have brought forth the Spirit ;" 
 Why should they say wind rather than spirit ? 
 They are not ignorant, that the Sepiuagint in 
 Greek, and the ancient fathers, do all exjwuud 
 it, ((^, e,/,) according to both the Hebrew and 
 Greek, of the " Spirit of God," which is first 
 conceived in us, and begins by fear, which the 
 scripture calls : " The beginning of wisdom ;" 
 insomuch, that in the Greek there are these 
 godly words, famous in all antiquity, " Through 
 tiie fear of thee, O Lord, we conceived, and 
 have travailed with pf.in, and hav€ brought forth 
 the Spirit of thy salvation, which thou hast made 
 upon the earth :" which excellently sets before 
 our eyes the degrees of a faithful man's increase, 
 and proceeding in the Spirit of God. But to 
 say, " We have been with child," as their last 
 translation has it, (g) " and have brought forth 
 wind," can admit no spirii/ual interpretation ; but 
 even as a mere Jew should translate, or under- 
 stand it, who has no sense of the Spirit of God. 
 It is the custom of Protestants, in all such cases 
 as this, where the more appropriate sense is o( 
 God's holy Spirit, there to translate wind, as in 
 Psalm cxivii. 18. 
 
 Another impropriety similar to this is, thai 
 they will not translate for the angel's hunouT 
 that carried Habakuc, "He sent him into 
 Babylon, over the lake, by the force of hia 
 
 (c) Tsaiah xvi. 18. 
 
 ((i) St. Ambrose, lib 9, de Interpret., c. 4 
 i.e) Clirysostom, m Peal. vii. prop, fin, 
 {/) See S. Hierom upon this place- 
 Cg) Bible 1683. 
 
OF THE SCRIPTURB. 
 
 107 
 
 spirit;" but thus: "Through a mighty wind." 
 So attributing it to the wind, not to the angel's 
 power, and omitting quite the Greek word, aurS, 
 '' his," which showeth plainly, that it was the 
 angel's spirit, force, and power. (o) 
 
 Again, where the prophet Isaiah speaks most 
 manifestly of Christ, saying : " And {out Lord) 
 shall not cause thy doctor to fly from thee any 
 more, and thine eyes shall see thy master ;" 
 which is all the same in efiect with that which 
 Christ says, " I will be with you unto the end of 
 the world ;" there one of their Bibles translates 
 thus, " Thy rain shall be no more kept back, 
 but thine eyes shall see thy rain." Their last 
 translation has corrected this mad falsiiication.(i) 
 
 Again, whore the holy church reads : " Re- 
 Toice, ye children of Zion, in the Lord your God, 
 becaufe ho has given you the doctrine of jus- 
 tice -"{c} there one of their translations has it, 
 " The rain of righteousness :" and their last 
 Bible, instead of correcting the former, makes 
 it yet worse, if it can be made worse, saying, 
 " Be glad then, yc children of Sion, &c., for he 
 hath given you the former rain moderately." 
 Does the Hebrew word force them to this 1 
 Doubtless they cannot but know, that it signifies 
 a teacher or master : and therefore, even the 
 Jews themselves, partly understand it of Esdras, 
 partly of Christ's divinity : yet these new and 
 partial translators are resolved to be more pro- 
 fane than the very Jews. If they had, as I 
 hinted above, been guided by a Catholic and 
 Christian spirit, they might have been satisfied 
 with the sense of St. Hierom, a Christian doctor, 
 upon these places, who makes no doubt but the 
 Hebrew is doctor, master, teacher ; who also in 
 the psalm translates thus : " With blessings shall 
 the doctor be arrayed,"((?) meaning Christ ; 
 where Protestants, with the Jews of latter days, 
 the enemies of Christ, translate, "The rain covers 
 the pools." What cold stuff is this in respect of 
 that other translation, so clearly pointing to 
 Christ, our doctor, masterjind ]a.wg\ver.(e) 
 
 And again, where St. Jerom, and all the 
 fathers translate and expound, "There shall be 
 faith in thy- times," to express the wonderful 
 faith that shall be among Christians ; there they 
 translate, " There shall be stability of thy times." 
 And their last Bible has it thus, "And wisdom 
 and knowledge shall be the stability of thy 
 times." Whereas the prophet reckons all these 
 virtues singly, viz., judgment, justice, which 
 they term righteousness, faith, wisdom, knowl- 
 edge, and the fear of our Lord ; but they, for a 
 little ambiguity of the Hebrew word, turn faith 
 into stability. 
 
 In Isa. xxxrii. 22, all their first Bibles read, 
 " O virgin daughter of Sion, he hath despised 
 thee, and laughed thee to scorn : O daughter of 
 Jerusalem, he hath shaken his head at thee." In 
 the Hebrew, Greek, St. Hierom's translation 
 and commentary, as also in the last Protestant 
 Bible, printed 1683, it is quite contrary, viz.. 
 
 (a) Isa. XXX. 20. 
 (i) Joel ii. 23. 
 Ic) Lyra in 30. 
 ( iS Psalm Ixxxiv. 7. 
 
 (<) Isaiah xxxiiL 6 
 
 " The virgin daughter of Sion has despi.sed thee 
 O Assur : the daughter of Jerusalem has shaken 
 her head at thee." All are of the feminine 
 gender, and spoken of Sion literally triumphing 
 over Assur; and of the church spiritually tii- 
 umphing over heresies, and all her enemies. In 
 their first Bibles they translated all as of the 
 masculine gender, thereby applying it to Assur ; ' 
 insulting against Sion and Jerusalem. But for 
 what cause or reason they thus falsify it, will bo 
 hard to determine, unless they dreaded, that by 
 translating it otherwise it might be applied 
 spiritually to the church's triumphing over 
 themselves, as her enemies. We cannot judge 
 it an oversight in them, because we find it so 
 translated in the fourth book of Kings, xix. 21, 
 j'ea, and in all their first translations. 
 
 A great many other faults are found in theil 
 first translations, which might be passed by, as 
 not done upon any ill design, but perhaps, rather 
 as mistakes or over-sights, (/) yet however, 
 touching some few of them, it will not be amiss 
 to demand a reason, why they were committed : 
 as for example, why they translated, " Ye abject 
 of the Gentiles," Isa. xlv. 20, rather than, " Ye, 
 who are saved of the Gentiles ;" or, as their 
 translation has it, " Ye that are escaped of the 
 nations V or. 
 
 Why, in their Bible of 1579, did they write 
 at length : " Two thousand to them that keep the 
 fruit thereof," rather than " two hundred ;" as 
 it is in the Hebrew and Greek, and as now theii 
 last Bible has it 1 or. 
 
 Why read t"hey in some of their Bibles, " As 
 the fruits of cedar ;" and not rather according to 
 the Greek and Hebrew, " Tabernacles of 
 cedar ;" or however, as their last translation has 
 it, " Tents of Kedar ?" or. 
 
 Why do they translate : " Ask a sign, either 
 in the depth, or in the height above," rather than, 
 " Ask a sign, either in the depth of hell," &c., as 
 the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin has it l{g) Or, 
 
 Why do they translate : " To make ready an 
 horse," rather than " beasts," as the Greek has 
 it; and as also now their edition of 1683 reads 
 it ?(/*) Or, 
 
 Why translate they : "- If a man on the sab 
 bath-day receive circumcision, without breaking 
 the law. of Moses;" rather than, according to 
 the Greek, which their last translation has . fol- 
 lowed : " If a man on the sabbath-day receive 
 circumcision, to the end the law of Moses should 
 not be broken V'{i) Or, 
 
 Why read they : " The Son of man must 
 suffer many things, and be reproved of the 
 elders," for " be rejected of the elders," as 
 the Greek, and now their Bibles of 1683 have 
 it ; and as in the Psalm, " The stone which the 
 builders rejected ;" we say not reproving of the 
 said stone, which is Christ ?(A) 
 
 Again, why translate they thus : Many wliicii 
 
 (/) Cantica. Canticor , viii. 12. j Camica. Canticor, ; 
 4 ; Isa. vii. 11. 
 (g) Isa. vii. 11. 
 (h) Acts xxiii. 24. 
 (i) Jo. vii. 23. 
 (k) Mark viil 31. 
 
LU8 
 
 PllOTESTANT ABSURDITIES, 
 
 had seen the first house,- when the foundation of 
 thia house was laid before their eyes, wept," &c., 
 when in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, it is 
 read thus : " Many who had seen the first house 
 in the foundation thereof, (i. e., yet standing 
 upon the foundation, undestroyed,) and this 
 temple before their eyes, wept ?" I suppose 
 they imagined, that it should be meant they 
 Fnw Solomon's temple when it was first founded ; 
 
 which, because it was inipossible they trans- 
 lated otherwise than it is in the Hebrew and 
 Greek : they should indeed have considered 
 better of it. 
 
 Though we do not look upon several of these 
 as done, I say, with any ill design, yet wo canr>ot 
 excuse thsra for being done with much more 
 licentious boldness than ought to appear in sin- 
 cere and honest translators. 
 
 ABSURDITIES IN TURNING PSALMS INTO METRE. 
 
 Thbir unrestrained licentiousness is yet fur- 
 ther manifest, in their turning of David's Psalms 
 into rhyme, without reason, and then singing 
 them in their congregations ; telling the people, 
 from Saint James, v. : " If any be merry, let 
 him sing psalms ;" being resolved to do nothing 
 but what they produce a text of scripture for, 
 though of their own making : for, though the 
 apostle exhorts " such as are heavy, to pray," 
 and " such as are merry, to sing ;" yet he does 
 not in particular appoint David's Psalms to be 
 sung by the merry, no more than he appoints our 
 Lord's Prayer to be said by such as he exhorts 
 to pray, though perhaps, he meant it of both : so 
 t from any thing our bold interpreters can 
 gather from the text, JEquo animn est ? Psallat. 
 xXXfiiui, St. James might mean other spiritual 
 songs and hymns, as well as David's Psalms : 
 but be it that he exhorted them to sing David's 
 Psalms, which we have no cause to deny,because 
 the church of Christ has ever used the same ; yet 
 that he meant it of such nonsensical rhymes as 
 T. Sternhold, Joseph Hopkins, Robert Wisdom, 
 and other Protestant poets have made to be sung 
 in their churches, under the name of David's 
 
 Psalms, none can ever grant, who has read 
 them. It has hitherto been the practice of God's 
 churc'h to sing David's Psalms, as triily trans- 
 lated from the Hebrew into Latin ; but never 
 to sing such songs as Hopkins and Sternhold 
 have turned from the English prose into metre : 
 neither do I think that sober and judicious 
 Protestants themselves can look upon them as 
 good forms of praises to be sung in their churches 
 to the glory, honour, and service of so great, so 
 good, and so wise a God, when they shall con- 
 sider how fully they are fraught with nonsense 
 and ridiculous absurdities, besides many gross 
 corruptions, viz., above two hundred ;{n) con- 
 fessed by Protestants themselves ta be foimd in 
 the Psalms in prose, from which these were 
 turned into metre, which we may guess aro 
 scarcely corrected by the rhyme. To collect all 
 the faults committed by the said blessed poets 
 in their psalm-metre, would be a task too tedious 
 for my designed brevity ; I will, therefore, 
 only set down some few of their absurd and 
 ridiculous expressions ; and for the rest,leave tho 
 reader to compare these psalms in metre with tlio 
 others in prose, even as by themselves translated . 
 
 PSALMS IN Prose, Bible 1683 
 
 PsALU ii. verse 3 
 Let us break their bauds asunder, and cast 
 away their cords from us. 
 
 Psalm xvi. verses 9, 10. 
 Theretore, my heart is glad, and my gloiy re- 
 joicelh : my flesh also shall rest in hope. For 
 thou wilt not leave my suul in hell, &c. 
 
 Psalm xviii. verse 36. 
 Thou hast enlarged my steps under me, that 
 .riy feet did not slip. 
 
 ifl) Spe the I'rpfarc. 
 
 \i) The reailer niiil not tie told why this ia added, be- 
 sides iU iiiakiiiJ up I lie rhyme. 
 
 {c) What they trnnKlate " felory " in prose they call 
 
 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 theil law, 
 
 Let us reject the yoiie."(i) 
 
 . Psalm xvi. verses 9, 10 
 Wherefore my heart and " tongue" aIso,(e) 
 
 Do both lejoice together ; 
 My " flesh and bodip' rest in hope. 
 
 When I this thing consider : 
 Thou wilt not leave my soul in " grave," 
 
 For, Lord, thou lovcst me, &c. 
 
 Psalm xviii. verse 36. 
 
 And under me thou makest plain 
 
 The way where I should walk : 
 So that my feet shall never slip, 
 
 "Nor stumble at a balk." 
 
 " tongue," in rhyme. And for want of one foot to mona 
 up aiiother verse, they thrust in a whole bodj, " fleph and 
 body." Again, what in prose is called hell, in rhyme tbey 
 term grave ; as if souls were left in the grave, 
 
IN TURNING PSALMS INTO UETRC. 
 
 PSALMS IN Prose, Bible 1683. 
 
 Psalm xviii. verse 37. 
 1 have pursued mine enemies, and overtaken 
 them : neither did I turn again till thoy were 
 consumed 
 
 Psalm xxii. verse 7. 
 All they that see me, laugh me to scorn. 
 Thoy shoot out the lip, they shako the head. 
 
 Psalm xxii, verse 12. 
 Many bulls have compassed me, strong bulls 
 of Basan have beset me round. 
 
 Psalm xxvi. verse 10. 
 In whose hand is mischief, and their right 
 hand is full of bribes. 
 
 Psalm xlix. verse 20. 
 Mali that is in honour, and understandeth not, 
 is like the beasts that perish. 
 
 Psalm Ixxiv. verses 11, 12. 
 Why withdraweth thou thy hand, even thy 
 riijht 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. 
 Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness 
 to the upright in heart 
 
 Psalm xcix. verse 1. 
 The Lord reigneth, let the people tremble ; he 
 sittcth between the cherubims, let the earth bo 
 moved. 
 
 Psalm cxix. verse 70. 
 Their heart is as fat as grease ■ (As fat as 
 drawn, in another Bible. But in the Latin 
 Vulgate, Coagulatum est sicut lac cor enrum.) 
 
 Psalm cxix. verse 83. 
 For 1 am become like a bottle in smoke. 
 
 (a) This warrior lays about him in a different manner 
 
 from David. , . , t . «. n 
 
 (A) We have heard of crafty heads, but never of crafty 
 
 (e ) in the title page they say," If any be merry, let him 
 •ing psalms' ' But considering w hat psalms they are, they 
 15 
 
 PSALMS IN Metre, Bible 1683 
 
 Psalm xviii. verse 37. 
 So I suppress and wound my foes, 
 
 Ihat they can rise no more: 
 For at my feet they fall down flat, 
 
 I strike them^U so sore, (a) 
 
 Psalm xxii. verse 7. 
 All men despise, as they behold 
 
 Mc walking on the way : 
 " They grin, tney mow, they nod their beads," &c. 
 
 Psalm xxii. verse 12. 
 So many bulls do compass me, 
 
 That be full strong of head : 
 " Yea, bulls so fat, as though they had 
 
 In Basan-field been fed. 
 
 Psalm xxvi. verse 10. 
 Whose hands are heap'd with " craft (i) and guile,' 
 
 Their lives thereof are full. 
 And their right hand with " wrench and wile. 
 
 For bribes doth pluck and pull." 
 
 Psalm xlix. verse 20. 
 Thus man to honour God hath brought. 
 
 Yet doth he not consider ; 
 But like brute beast, so doth ho live, 
 
 " And turn to dust and powder." 
 
 Psalm Ixxiv. verses 11, 12. 
 Why dost thou draw thy hand " a bock. 
 
 And hide it in thy lap 1" 
 O pluck it out, and be not slack, 
 
 " To give thy foes a rap."(c) 
 
 Psalm Ixxvii. verse 16. 
 — Of such abundance that " no floods 
 To them might be compared." 
 
 Psalm Ixxviii. verse 57 
 
 — ^They went astray, 
 Much lik 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 disprai8e."((2) 
 
 Psalm xcvii. verse 13. 
 And light doth spring up to the just, 
 
 With pleasure for nis part, 
 Grea) joy with gladness, mirth and lust, A(c{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 with worldly wealtb. 
 As " grease so aro they fat." 
 
 Psalm cxix. verse 83. 
 As a ■■ skin-bottle" in tho smoke. 
 So am I parch'd and dried. 
 
 advise him to sing, they might have done as well to tave 
 said rather, " If any would be merry, let him sing psalms." 
 
 {d) To say that God raises an ill report of men, has af- 
 finity to Beza's doctrine, which makes God the author of 
 sin. Vid. Supr. 
 
 (e) I thought, till now, that lust had been a ein 
 
110 
 
 PnoTESTANT ABSURDITIES IN TURMNG PSALMS INTO MElRt' 
 
 PSALMS IN Prose, Bible 1683. 
 
 Psalm cxix. verse HO. 
 The wicked have laid a snare for me. 
 
 Psalm cxis. verse 130. 
 The entrance of thy word giveth light : it 
 pvoth understanding unto the simple 
 
 Psalm cxix. verse 150. 
 They draw nigh that follow after mischief: 
 they are far from thy law. 
 
 Psalm cxx. verse 5. 
 Woe is me, that I sojourn iu Mesech,, that I 
 dwell in the tents of Kedar. 
 
 Psalm cxxvii. verse 2. 
 It is in vain for you to rise up early, to sit up 
 late, to eat the bread of sorrow. 
 
 Psalm cxxix. verse 6. 
 Let them be as grass upon the house-tops, 
 which withereth before it groweth up. 
 
 PSAL.MS IN Metre, Bibli: 1683. 
 
 Psalm cxix. verso 110. 
 Altho' the wicked laid their nets 
 " To catch me at a bay." 
 
 PsALM cxix. verso 130. 
 When men first " enter into" thy word, 
 
 They find a light most clear; 
 And very idiots understand, 
 
 " When they it read or hear."(A) 
 
 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 I too long I slack, 
 Within these tents " so black," 
 
 Which Kedars are by " name ;" 
 " By whom the flock elect. 
 And all of Isaac's sect, 
 
 Are put to open shame. "(c) 
 
 Psalm cxxvii. verse 2. 
 
 Though ye rise early in the morn, 
 And so at night go late to bed, 
 " Feeding full hardy wilh brown bread," 
 
 Yet were your labour " lost and worii."(d) 
 
 Psalm cxxix. verse 6. 
 And made as grass upon the house. 
 Which withereth " ere it grow. "(e) 
 
 I could weary the reader with such like ex- 
 amples ; they seldom or never speak of God's 
 covenant with Israel, but they call it God's 
 trade. (<J) As in Psalm Ixxviii. 10, where they sing, 
 
 For why t they did not keep with God, 
 
 The covenant that was made ; 
 Nor yet would walk or lead their lives, 
 According to his " trade." 
 
 Psalm Ixxxvii. verse 10. 
 For why ^ their hearts were nothing bent 
 To him, nor to his " trade." 
 
 Psalm ex. verse 37. 
 For this is unto Israel 
 A statute and a " trade." 
 
 Psalm Ixxxi. Verse i. 
 And set all my commandments light, 
 And will not keep my " trade. 
 
 Psalm Ixxxix. verse 33. 
 To them be made a law and " trade," &c. 
 
 Psalm cxlviii . verse 6. ^ 
 
 Such Stuff as this you will find in other 
 places. The words " more" and " less" have 
 also stood them in as good stead as " trade" to 
 make rhyme with, viz : 
 
 All men on earth, both " least" and " most." 
 Psalm xxiii. verse 8. 
 
 All kings, both " more" and " less." 
 
 Psalm xlviii. verse 1 1 . 
 
 The children of Israel each one both " more" and " less." 
 Psalm xlviii, verse 14. 
 
 Seo also Psalm cix. verse 10; Psalm xi. 
 verso 6 ; Psalm xxvii. verse 8, dec, &c. 
 
 Nor are they a little beholden to an " ever and 
 f )[■ aye ;" " for ever and a day ;" '' for evermore 
 .iways," and the like. 
 
 Besides thoir •nriiing the psalms into metre, 
 
 (rt)I'erhnps, this word "trade" should have been " tradi- 
 .i.in" with thein :.hut for fenr of aPopish terra, which they 
 10 much detest llii\ would rather wKte nonsense than use it, 
 
 they also made rhyme of the Lord s Prayer, the 
 Creed, and the Ten Commandments. In which 
 one thing is remarkable, viz., that in the Creed; 
 upon the article of Christ's descent into hell 
 they make a very plain distinction between the 
 hell of the damned, and that of the fathers of 
 the Old Testament, Limbus Palrvm, thus : 
 
 And so he died in the flesh, but quickened in the sprite, 
 His body then was buried, as is our use and right. 
 His soul did afler this descend into the lower parts, 
 A dread unto the wicked spirits, butjoy to faithful hnarts. 
 
 Whom do they mean by those " faithful hearts," 
 to whom our blessed Saviour's descent into hell 
 Limbus, was a joy, but those of whom the pro- 
 phet Zachary spoke, when prophebying of our 
 Saviour's releasing them, he said : " Thou also 
 in the blood of thy Testament hast let forth thy 
 prisoners out of the lake, wherein there is no 
 water ?" And, whom St. Peter meant, when he 
 said, that Christ in spirit "coming, preached to 
 the spirits also that were in prison ; which had 
 been incredulous sometimes, when they expect 
 ed the patience of God in the days of Noe, 
 when the ark was in building." (/) 
 
 The turning of this article into metre is, I 
 suppose, the very cause why we have not the 
 Creed printed in metre in their latter impres- 
 sions ; and consequently, none of the other pray- 
 
 (i) By singing thus, they would possess the people tha! 
 even the most ignorant of them are capable to understand 
 the scripture when they read it, or have it read to them. 
 
 (c) Why is all this added lonly for the sake of rhyming 
 to the word "name," unless they would make Isaac a 
 sect maker, and his religion a seci like their own. 
 
 (rf) If brown bread is the bread of affliction, a great 
 many feeds on it who are able to buy white. 
 
 (e) How grass can wither before it grows, is a paradox. 
 
 (/) Zach. ix. 11. 
 
PROTESTANT TK A NSr.ATIONS 01' THE SCHIPTURE. 
 
 Ul 
 
 ers and rhymes, which their first Bibles had 
 after the Psalms ; because to put out this and 
 .110 more, would have given too shrewd a cause 
 of fiuSj)icJon. 
 
 Besides the turning of these into metre, they 
 made also certain other prayers of their own in 
 rhyme ; in one of which they rank the Pope, 
 whom their modern divines count a great bishop, 
 and chief patriarch of the western church, and 
 from whom they pretend to receive their episcopal 
 and priestly character, in the same list with the 
 Turk, as if both were infidels alike, and both 
 alike enemies to Christ. Robert Wisdom thus 
 sets out his psalm, which the ignorant people 
 may be apt to take for one of Davids ; assuring 
 themselves that David himself prayed to be de- 
 livered from the Turk and the Pope, and conse- 
 quently, that the Pope is a dangerous creature : 
 
 Preserve us, Lord, by thy dear word, 
 From Turk and Pope det'eml us, Lord, 
 \Vhicl> both woulil thrust out of his throne, 
 Our Lord Jesus Christ, thy dear Son. 
 
 But this, with such other like stuff, is also left 
 out by Protestants in their last impressions, as 
 being indeed ashamed of the impiety, malice, 
 and folly of these gross imposters, especially of 
 this Robert Wisdom, who, notwithstanding his 
 name, was doubtless the most ignorant of all 
 'hose who ever undertook to turn psalm into 
 metre. And so it is likely he was looked upon 
 by Dr. Corbet, sometimes bishop of Norvrich, 
 when he made the following address to his ghost : 
 
 TO THE GKOST OF R. WISDOM. 
 
 That once a body, now but air, 
 Arch-botcher of a psalm or prayer. 
 
 From Carfax (a) come, 
 And patch us up a zealous lay, 
 With on old ever and for aye. 
 
 Or al! and some. 
 
 Or such a spirit lend me, 
 
 As may an hymn down send me. 
 
 To purge rny brain. 
 Then Rol)in look behind thee, 
 Lest Turk or Pope <io find thee. 
 And go to bed again. 
 • 
 Thu mav seem too light for a treatise of this 
 Mture ; but the ridiculous absurdity of these 
 rhyme.5, the singing of which in the churches, 
 has, by several learned Protestants, been com- 
 plained of and lamented, cannot be fidly enough 
 exposed; that so, if possible, fhe common peo- 
 ple's eyes maybe opened, and they may be taken 
 off from the fondness they seem to have for 
 them 
 
 Though the ignorance, rather than ill inten- 
 tion of these busy poets appear in their psalm- 
 metre ; yet what follows canriot be excused 
 from being done with a very treacherous design 
 ( f iho translators ; for what can possibly be a 
 mort! sly piece of craft to deceive the ignorant 
 I eider, than to use Catholic terms in all such 
 ; laces where they may render them odious, and 
 when they must needs sound ill in the people's 
 gars ? For exainple, 2 Maccabees vi. 7, this term 
 
 (Jl The [ilucc of his burial in Oxford. 
 
 "procession" they very maliciously translate, 
 saying : " When the feast of Bacchus was kept, 
 they were constrained to go in procesfion to 
 Bacchus." Let the reader see in the Greek 
 Lexicon if there be any thing in this word, 
 TJotunuSufiv tGj diovvoai, like the Catholic Church's 
 processions, or whether it signify so much as 
 " to go about," as other of their Bibles translate 
 it, with perhaps no less ill meaning than that of 
 1570, though they name not procession. (6) 
 
 St. John, ix. 22, 25, where, for " He should 
 be put out of the synagogue," there first transla 
 tions read : " He should be excommunicated," to 
 make the Jews' doings against them, that con- 
 fessed Christ, sound like the Catholic Church s 
 acting against heretics, in excommunicating 
 them ; as if the church's excommunication ol 
 such, from the society and participation of the; 
 faithful, were like to that exterior putting out 
 of the synagogue. And by this they designed 
 to disgrace the priest's power of excommunica- 
 tion, whereas the Jews had no such spiritual ex- 
 communication ; but, as the word only signifies, 
 did put them out of the synagogue ; and so they 
 should have translated the Greek word, includ- 
 ing the very name synagogue. But this trans- 
 lation was made when the excommunications 
 of the Catholic church were daily denounced 
 against them, which they have corrected in their 
 last Bible, because themselves have begun to 
 assume such a power of excommunicating their 
 non-conforming brethren. 
 
 In Acts xvii. 23, for " seeing your, idols," or 
 " seeing the things which you Atheniana did 
 worship," they translate, " seeing your devo- 
 tions," as though devotion and superstition were 
 all one. 
 
 And verse 24, for " temples of Diana," they 
 translate " shrines of Diana," to make the 
 shrines of saints' bodies, and other holy relics, 
 seem odious ; whereas the Greek word signifies 
 temples. And Beza says: " He cannot see how 
 it tan signify shrines." 
 
 Thus they make use of Catholic words and 
 terms, where they can thereby possibly render 
 them odious ; but in other places, lest the an- 
 cient words and names should still be retained 
 they change them into their own unaccustomeJ 
 and original sound. So in the Old Testament, 
 out of an itch to show their skill in the Hebrew, 
 the first translators thought fit to change most of 
 the proper names from the usual reading, never 
 considering how far differently proper names of 
 all sorts are both written and sounded in differ- 
 ent languages ; but this is in a great part rectified 
 by the last translators, according to the directions 
 of king James the First, that in translating the 
 proper names, they should retain the usual and 
 accustomed manner of speaking. 
 
 Their altering of these proper names ip the 
 Old Tastament, through the pride of being es- 
 teemed such knowing masters in the Hebrew 
 was yet much more tolerable, than the chansjing 
 of many other words in the Ne.v, through an 
 
 (4) Bib. 1562, 1577 
 
A VINDICATION OF 
 
 112 
 
 heretical intention of introducing an utter obli- 
 I'ion of them among the people. 
 
 The words " church, bishop, priest, altiir, 
 cucharisl, sacrifice, grace, sacrament, baptism, 
 penance, angel, apostle, Christ, &c., at their 
 fivit revolt, ihey suppressed, and changed into 
 " congregation, superintendent, elder and minis- 
 ter, table, thanksgiving, gift, mystery, washing, 
 repentance, messenger, ambassador, anointed ;" 
 several other words and phrases they likewise 
 altered, as is evident from what goes before. 
 And for what cause was all this change and al- 
 teration of Catholic terms and phrases, but that 
 the sound of the words should vanish with the 
 substance of the things which ahey have taken 
 away ? With bishops they banished the pastoral 
 care and charge of the Pope and Catholic bish- 
 ops, and set up a child and a woman for the 
 heads of their congregation. With priests wont 
 away the office of priest, in offering the holy 
 sacrifice of Christ's body and blood ; with grace 
 went away the sacrament of holy orders, and 
 four or five of the other sacraments; with altar, 
 eucharist and sacrifice, they excluded the proper 
 service of Almighty God, with Christ's sacred 
 presence in the blessed sacrament ; with the 
 word penance they banished confession, absolu- 
 tion, and satisfaction for sins ; they altered the 
 word church, because they had cut themselves 
 ofT from the Catholic church. And what other 
 design could we suppose them to have had in 
 leaving out apostles, and putting in ambassadors 
 or legates ; in leaving out angels, and introduc- 
 ing messengers ; in putting down the word 
 anointed, where Christ used to be read ; and in 
 translating grave for hell ; but in time to ex- 
 tinguish all faith and memory of apostle, angel, 
 heaven, hell, Christ, and Christianity ;" and to 
 bring thetn to atheism and infidelity, the very 
 centre to which their reformation tends ? {a) 
 
 This fantastical and impious vanity, in chang- 
 ing Catholic and Christian terms and speeches 
 into their profane and heathenish use and signi- 
 fication, was a thing so detested, even by Beza 
 himself, notwithstanding his often being guilty 
 of the same, that he inveighs against it, and 
 those who use 't, in this manner : " The world 
 is now come to that pass," says he, " that not 
 only they who write their own disconrses, re- 
 fuse the familiar and accustomed words of scrip- 
 ture, as obscure, um.avoury, and out of use, but 
 also those that translate the scripture out of 
 Greek into Latin, challenge to themseive:-- the 
 like liberty ; so as while every man will rather 
 freely follow his own judgment than reh^iously 
 behave himself as the Holy GhDSt's interpreter, 
 many things they do not convert, but pervert, 
 for which licentiousness and boldnesb, except 
 remedy be provided in time, either I aui notably 
 deceived, or within a few years, insteaii of Cliris- 
 tians we shall become Ciceronians, i. e. Paganfi 
 and by little and little shall lose the possession 
 of the things themselves." (6) By tl.is you sei3, 
 that though Beza was one of the greatest mas- 
 ters in this wanton, novel, and licentious nrt of 
 changing Christian for Heathen terms nnd 
 phrases, yet he foresaw that in the end, with the 
 words, would be taken away the things signified 
 '' sacraments, baptism, eucharists, priesthood, 
 sacrifice, angels, apostles, and all apostolical 
 doctrine ;" and that so we should be brought 
 again from Christianity to heathenism. 
 
 From WHICH, and from the Stil[.ixgflee71-4N 
 KRROR, (c) that, by asserting, " The pagan god, 
 Jupiter, to be the true God, blessed for ever, 
 more," throws open the door of Jupiter's temple, 
 and points out the very pathway to paganism, 
 
 GOOD LORD, DELIVER tJS 1 
 
 A VINDICATION OF THE ROMAN CATHOLICS : 
 
 AS ALSO THEIR DECLARATION, AFFIRMATION, COMMINATION ; SHOWING THEIR ABHORRENCE 
 OF THE FOLLOWING TENETS. COMMONLY LAID AT THEIR DOOR. ANDTHEV HERE OIILIGE 
 THEMSELVES, THAT IF THE ENSUING CURSES BE ADDED TO THOSE APPOINTED TO BE 
 READ ON THE FIRST D.iY OF LENT, XHEY WILL SERIOUSLY AND HEARTILY ANSWER AMEN 
 TO THE.VI ALL. 
 
 1. CvRSED is he that commits idolatry ; that 
 prays to images or relics, or worships them for 
 God. K. Hmen. 
 
 2. Cursed is every goddess worshipper, that 
 believes the Virgin Mary to be any more than a 
 creature ; thvtt honours her, worships her, or 
 puts his trust in her more than in God ; that be- 
 lieves her abi've her Son, or that she can in any 
 thing coinmaiid him. R. Amen. 
 
 3. Cursed is he that believes the saints in 
 heaven to be his redeemers, and prays to them 
 is such, or that gives God's honour to them, or 
 X) any creature whatsoever. R. Amen. 
 
 4- Cv'rsod is he that worships any breaden 
 
 (a) Change of worJe Imliiccs cha.iigc of fnitl;. 
 
 I god, or makes gods of the empty elements of 
 bread and wine. R Amen. 
 
 5. Cursed is he that believes priests can foi- 
 give sins whether the sinner repent or not : or 
 that there is aiiy power in earth or heaven that 
 can forgive sins, without a hearty repentance 
 and serious purpose of ainendmenl. R. Amen. 
 
 6. Cursed is he that believes there is authority 
 in the Pope or any others, that can give leave to 
 commit shis ; or that can forgive liim his sins 
 for a sum of money. R. Amen 
 
 7. Cursed is he that believes that, indtpundtntiy 
 
 (6) Beza in Act. x. 4G, edit anno 155G, but in the lat- 
 ter pil. of I5G5, sor.ie of these worilg are altered either bj 
 hiniseif or the printi^r. 
 
 (c) I^r. Sliijiiij/fleel's Chargi. of Idolatry ngaiii'it tha 
 'i Church of Rome, p. 7, aim] p. 40 
 
'II:k ROMAN CATHOLICS. 
 
 113 
 
 of the merits and passion of Christ, he can merit 
 salvation by his own good works ; or make con- 
 dign satisfaction for the guilt of his sins, or the 
 pains eternal due to them. R. Amen. 
 
 8. Cursed is he that contemns the word of 
 God, or hides it from the people, on dcsigri to 
 keep them from the knowledge of their duty, 
 and to preserve them in ignorance and error 
 R. Amen. 
 
 9. Cursed is he that undervalues the word of 
 God, or that forsaking scripture chooses rather 
 10 follow human traditions than it. 11. Amen. 
 
 10. Cursed is ht that leaves the command- 
 ments of God, to observe the constitutions of 
 men. R. Amen. 
 
 1 1 . Cursed is he that omits any of the Ten 
 Commandments, or keeps the people from the 
 knowledge of any one of them, to the end that 
 they may not have occasion of discovering the 
 truth. R. Amen. 
 
 12. Cursed is he that preaches to the people 
 in unknown tongues, such as they understand 
 not ; or uses any other'means to keep them in 
 ignorance. R. Amen. 
 
 13. Cursed is he that believes that the Pope 
 can give to any, upon any account whatsoever, 
 dispensation to lie or swear falsely ; or that it is 
 lawful for any, at the last hour, to protest him- 
 self innocent in case he be guilty. R. Amen. 
 
 1 4. Cursed is he that encourages sins, or 
 teaches men to defer the amendment of their 
 lives, on presumption of their death-bed repen- 
 tance. R. Amen. 
 
 15. Cursed is he that teaches men that they 
 may be lawfully drunk on a Friday or any other 
 fasting-day, though they must not taste the least 
 bit of flesh. R. Amen. 
 
 ] 6. Cursed is he who places religion in 
 nothing but a pompous show, consisting only in 
 ceremonies ; and which teaches not the people 
 to serve God in spirit and truth. R. Amen. 
 
 17. Cursed is he who loves or promotes 
 cnielty, that teaches people to be bloody-mind- 
 ed, and to lay aside the meekness of Jesus Christ. 
 R. Amen. 
 
 18. Cursed is he who teaches that it is law- 
 ful to do any wicked thing, though it be for the 
 interest and good of mother church : or thai any 
 evil action may be done that good may come of 
 it. R. Amen. 
 
 19. Cursed are we, if amongst all these 
 wicked principles and damnable doctrines com- 
 monly laid at our doors, any one of them be 
 the faith of our church ; and cursed are we, if 
 we do not as heartily detest all those hellish 
 practices as those who so vehemently urge them 
 against us. R. Amen. 
 
 20. Cursed are we, if in answering, and saying 
 Amen to any of these curses, we use any equivo- 
 cation, mental reservation ; or do not assent to 
 thfcm in the common and obvious sense of the 
 trords. R. Amen. 
 
 And can the Papists then, thus seriously, and 
 
 without check of conscience, say Amen to nil 
 these curses ' 
 
 Yes, they can, and are ready to do it whenso- 
 ever, and as often as it shall be required of them. 
 And what then is to be said of those who either 
 by word or writing, charge these doctrines upon 
 the faith of the Church of Rome I " Is a lynig 
 spirit in the mouth of all the prophets '! are they 
 all gone aside 1 do they backbite with their 
 tongues, do evil to their neighbour, and take up 
 reproach against their neighbour ?" I will say no 
 such thing, bat leave the impartial considerer to 
 judge. C3ne thing I can safely affirm, that the 
 " Papists" are fouUj' misrepresented, and show in 
 public as much unlike what they are, as the 
 Christians were of old by the Gentiles ; that they 
 lie under a great calumny, and severely smart in 
 good name, persons, and estates, for such things 
 which they as much and as heartily detest as those 
 who accuse them. But the comfort is, Christ 
 has said to his followers : " Ye shall be hated of 
 all men." (Math. x. 22,) and St. Paul : "We 
 are made a spectacle unto the world ;" and we 
 do not doubt, that he who bears this with pa- 
 tience, shall for every loss here and contempt 
 receive a hundred -fold in heaven : " For the base 
 things of the world, and things which are de- 
 spised, hath God chosen." 1 Corinth, i. 28. 
 
 As for problematical disputes, or errors of 
 particular divines, in this, or any other matter 
 whatsoever, the Catholic Church is no way re- 
 sponsible for them ; nor are Catholics, as Catho- 
 lics, justly punishable on their accouut. But, 
 
 As for the king-killing doctrine, or murder of 
 princes, excommunicated for heresy ; it is an ar- 
 ticle of faith in the Catholic Church, and ex- 
 pressly declared in the General Council of Con- 
 stance, sess. 15, that such doctrine is damnable 
 and heretical, being contrary to the known laws 
 of God and nature. 
 
 Personal misdemeanors of what nature soever, 
 ought not to be imputed to the Catholic Church, 
 when not justifiable by the tenets of her faith and 
 doctrine. For which reason, though the stories 
 of the Paris massacre ; the Irish cruelties, or 
 powder-plot, had been exactly true, (which yet 
 for the most parts are mis-rolatcd) nevertheless 
 Catholics as Catholics, ought not to suffer for 
 such offences, any more than the eleven apostles 
 ought to have suffered for Judas's treachery. 
 
 It is an article of the Catholic faith to believe, 
 that no power on earth can license men to lie, 
 forswear, and perjure themselves, to massacre 
 their neighbours, or destroy their native country, 
 on pretence of promoting the Catholic cause, or 
 religion. Furthermore, all pardons and dispen- 
 sations granted, or pretended to be granted, in 
 order to any such ends or designs, have no other 
 validity or effect, than to add sacrilege and 
 blasphemy to the above-mentioned crimes. 
 
 Sweet Jesus, bless our sovereign pardon 
 our enemies. Grant us patience ; and establish 
 peace and charity in our nation. 
 
VERSION OF THE ENGLISH BIBLE 
 
 ■» VINDICATION OF WAKD's ERRATA, IN IlEPLY TO GKIER, BY THE RIGHT REV. Dtt, MIINER. 
 
 Dear Sir — You have witnessed the failure of 
 onr vicar in his attempt to vindicate the canon 
 of scripture, witho'jt recourse to the authority 
 of tradition, and this on Protestant, as well as 
 on (Jatholic grounds. As to the other point, 
 which he says he is equally called upon to prove, 
 on the same condition of not recurring to tra- 
 dition, namely : " Which are the books that have 1 
 : been written by Dinine inspiration, and, indeed, 
 that any books at all have been so written,"(a) 
 he entirely gives it up, in the following terms : 
 ■' To pronounce with confidence what books of 
 the canon, or parts of books, are inspired, and 
 what not, may consistently belong to Dr. M., 
 as being a member of a church which lays claim 
 to infallibility : but certainly not to a member 
 of the Church of England. So that when he 
 asks, how we have learned, what books have been 
 written by Dinine inspiration, or that any books 
 at nil have been so written 1 we may answer that, 
 where the holy scriptures declare that they set 
 forth a divine revelation, or that they express 
 ihe word of God, we believe them to do so : 
 S^lh'ds again grovnding a i,bing to be proved npnn 
 Itself!] but as to '.he fact of their inspiration, 
 we must, with awe and humility, decline to say, 
 what we believe no church, ancient or modern, 
 can attest."(6) If this were so, I would ask 
 the vicar, of what great use is the scripture 
 more than any other good book ? and why is it 
 called the word of God 1 Again, with what 
 consistency does the Church of England appeal 
 to it, in her Articles, as her only rule of faith ? 
 But the vicar's ideas are evidently confused on 
 the subject, and therefore, he hastens to another 
 more familiar to him, since he has already pub- 
 lished a quarto volume on the fidelity of the 
 English Bible. However, as the fifty pages he 
 spends upon it in the present work, consist, for 
 the most part, of mere declamation in praise of 
 ?he translation, its authors, and himself, together 
 with proportional abuse of its critics, and Dr. M., 
 a style in which I will not contend with the 
 Rev. Gentleman,) I hope to be able to confine 
 my reflections within much narrower bounds 
 than he confines his. 
 
 The vicar begins his declamation, dear Sir, 
 with unlimited abuse of your correspondent. 
 'fliis he carries on through the greater part of 
 ten pages, reproaching me with, ignorance, svper- 
 ahonsncss, arrogance, siipcrficialness, ^c.{c) In 
 
 (a) Ronly, p. 2. 
 
 {t.) P <). 
 
 fcl P. 61, ct Bcq. 
 
 short, he says, that " Dr. M. cannot stand <l 
 competition, on the score of learning and talents, 
 with even the obscurest," of the fifty-four clergy- 
 men who were named in the reign of James I., 
 to make a new version of the scripture, though 
 he confesses there are five amongst them of 
 whom he knov/s nothing at all, and some others, 
 of whom he has barely learned something from 
 the late Dr. Todd.((i) To this abuse I am content 
 to answer, that as the vicar knows nothing oi 
 me or my attainments, but what he learns from 
 my publications, which, together with his own, 
 are belore the world, so our respective charac- 
 ters for learning and talents will not be decided 
 upon by \yhat we may say of ourselves, but by 
 what others may judge of us. 
 
 The very profession of the vicar, which is to 
 vindicate, at the same time Tyndal's translation 
 of the ^Bible, and king Jaines's correcticni of it, 
 as being both of them faultless, carries with i5 
 its own refutation, and betrays his insincerity 
 and spirit of chicanery. His fellow-labourer, 
 Dr. Ryan, whose Analysis of Wanl's Errala{s] 
 he has commended, " as decisive to the e.xtent 
 it goes,"(/) very fairly gives up se\eral corrup- 
 tions of the sacred text, which disgraced Tyn- 
 dal's and the other early translations and edi- 
 tions of the English Bible, during more than 
 fifty years, as indefensible. Thus, for example, 
 speaking of Ward, he says : " He produces seven 
 texts to show that we mistranslated our Bible 
 for the purpose of injuring his church, and to 
 excuse our apostacy from it ; but the former 
 mistranslations of these seven texts having been 
 corrected in our present Bible, should have been 
 excluded from his catalogue of errata. "(;[,') 
 With the same fairness Dr. Ryan says : " Ho 
 (Ward) produces eight te.\ts, which ho accuses 
 us of misconstruing against the sacrament and 
 mass ; but five of the eight having been correc- 
 ted in our version, agreeably to his own, should 
 have been excluded from the book."(A) The 
 
 (rf) P. Gfi. (e) Dublin, 1808. (f) Reply, p. 94. 
 
 is) Analysis, p. 10. In Tyndal's, transhiiioii. am! the 
 pditions of iijIiS, 1577, 1579, insieail of iHb wnnl ciiuiicil 
 the word on.N'GRRGATiON is used in ihp following manner: 
 Thnu art Paler, and upon Ihls ruck will I build my con- 
 gregation, Mat. xvi. 18. If kevill not hear them, Id tM 
 CONGREGATION ; and if he will not hear the ciiNOiiSGAnoN, 
 let him lie to thee as a lirathen, &c. Mat xviii. 17. 
 
 (A) ibid., p. 13. in two of these passages. Mat. x.xvi. 
 and Mark xiv. i22, instead of saying : Jesus bi.e.sseo lli« 
 bread, the old edilions say : Having givkn thanks. In 
 two other passages, 1 Cof. \x. IPi, and 3 Cor. X. 18, the 
 word TKMHi.E is used, instead of altar, to e:cclude tb< 
 idea of a sacrijice under the new law. 
 
VERSION or THE ENGLISH BIBLE. 
 
 115 
 
 - DoctoT proceeds : " Our opponent (Ward) 
 charges us with misconstruing twelve texts, for 
 the purpose of proving Catholics guilty of idol- 
 atry." But six of the twelve being corrected in 
 our Bible, ought to have been omitted " in his 
 list." (a) In a word, this advocate of the Eng- 
 lish Bible challenges the Popish doctors, as he 
 calls them, to answer him this question : " Did 
 not the translators of our Bible of the y< ir 1683, 
 correct forty errors in our old ones ? (A) Such 
 is the acknowledgment of Dr. Ryan, writing 
 in defence of the English Bible, against the 
 learned cavalier Thomas Ward ; but the Rev. 
 Mr. Gricr undertakes equally to vindicate the 
 old version and the new one, the corrected and 
 the uncorrected text ; and even in those very 
 passages in which the infidelity of the latter is 
 most glaring, and obnoxious to the English 
 Church as well as to the Catholic Church. For 
 example, he defends Tyndal and his followers 
 in tne use of the word congregation, for that of 
 chujch, affirming that, in so doing, " they did 
 not depart from the letter or the meaning of 
 the Holy Ghost." (c) In a word, he pronounces, 
 with Selden's TaWe- Ta/Aer, that " the English 
 translation of the Bible is the best in the world, 
 and which renders the sense of the original the 
 best ; taking in for the English translation the 
 Bishop's Bihle as well as king James's ;" ad- 
 ding : " The bishops made the preceding Eng- 
 lish versions of Tyndal and Coverdale, the 
 models and as it were the basis of their own " 
 (d) Thus then, according to the vicar, the ver- 
 dion of the Lutheran Tyndal fron the Latin 
 Vulgate, of the Calvinist CoverdaJs, from the 
 Vulgate and the Greek, (e) and the corrected 
 version of the English divines from the Hebrew 
 and the Greek, though often differing from each 
 other in meaning, as well as in other respects, 
 are each of them " the best translation in the world, 
 and renders the sense nf the original the best." 
 
 The vicar, as might be expected, speaks in 
 high terms of Tyndal, whom John Fox calls 
 England's apostle, and with equal censure of his 
 i^reat antagonist. Sir Thomas More. Had the 
 vicar read and faithfully exhibited the former's 
 
 (a) Tbid. p. 24. The following are some of the old 
 orruptionB, which have been since corrected, accordiri!; 
 to the original, and the Rheims Testament, Coloss. iii. 5, 
 Covetousncss, which is the worshipping of imafres, Ephes. 
 V. 5 ; 2 Cor. vi. IG, Uoio agreeth the temple nf God with 
 imascs? I John v. 21, Babes, keep yourselves from images. 
 
 (A) P 62. To this the Catholic Doctors answer in the 
 affirmative. But they add first, that the very circumstance 
 of their being corrected by Protestants, is a proof that 
 Hie latter acknt wiedged them to be errors : secondly, that 
 after the forty corrections in question have been made, a 
 still greater number of corrections remain to be made. 
 
 (c) Answer to Ward's Errata, by the Rev. R. Grier, 
 1812, p. 2. To this, his former work, the vicar refers in 
 bis present Reply, with his usual modesty, as follows'; " I 
 trust the readers of my Answer will credit the truth of the 
 ai*sertion, that my publication, comprising, as it does, the 
 ablest arguments of our most learned divines, contair i a 
 full and victorious refutation of pernicious error; and 
 that I have successfully established the superior merit of 
 our standing English text, no less than its fidelity." — 
 Reply, p. 94. (ri) P. T6. 
 
 (e) Coverdale had the chief hand in the Geneva edition, 
 which was so obnoxious to the Church of England, that 
 the prelates of the establishment constantly oppose its 
 publication, as may be seen in Strype. 
 
 books, called, The Wicked Mammon. The True 
 Obedience, and The Answers to iSyr T. More, 
 together with the latter's Confntarion of Tyn- 
 dale's Answere, ^c, 1 ani convinced he must 
 have lowered his tone of panegyric with respect 
 to Tyndal into that of extenuation, at least, as 
 he would have found this pretended apostle's 
 language to be no less seditious than it is hetero- 
 dox, and no less injurious to the present Church 
 of England, than it was to that of former limes. 
 With the most specious pretentions to charity 
 and submission, he terms, at every turn, those 
 who were most dignified and venerated in church 
 and state, " apish, pivish, popish jugglers, tnieves, 
 mnrl.herers, blood-suppers, Pilates, Herods, 
 priapists, sodomites, hangmen, Christ-killers, 
 devils, &c." (/) The learned and dignified 
 author, quoted below, points out, " amonge other 
 tokens of Tyndale's evill intent in hys transla- 
 cion, for enswample, that he chaunged common- 
 lye this woorde chvrche into this woorde congre- 
 gacinn, and this woorde priest into this woorde 
 senionr ; and charilie into love, and grace into 
 favour, confession into knowledge, and penaunct 
 and repentance, with wordes tno, which ho 
 chaunged and useth dayly, as in turning ydoles 
 into ymages, and anonynting into smering, conse- 
 crating into charming, sacramentes into cere 
 monys, and ceremonys into witchecrafle, and yet 
 many moe." (g) Notwithstanding John Fox at- 
 tributes a splendid miracle (in rendering void 
 the enchantment of a certain magician,) to the 
 sanctity of Tyndal, (h) he is far from succeed- 
 ing in vindicating his rehgious or his moral 
 principals. («) It appears that, though Cover-* 
 dale encouraged his disciple Frith to die for his 
 belief, yet, it is plain, from his story, that he 
 himself suffered death, not for that, or his Eng- 
 lish translation of the Bible, but for treasonable 
 practises against the government of the Low 
 Countries, under which he lived. But why does 
 not the vicar honour the name of the above-men- 
 tioned Frith, who had so large a share in his 
 iTiaster Tyndal's Bible, with a single notice ? I 
 can conceive no other motive for this, except 
 that, when he was burnt in Henry's reign, for 
 denying the Catholic doctrine of the sacrament, 
 archbishop Cranmer had the chief hand in bring, 
 ing him to the stake. The vicar, however, makes 
 amends for this omission, by the lofty praises he 
 heaps on the " venerable Coverdale," as he calls 
 him, who was the most conspicuous charactet 
 in giving the 'early editions of the English Bible. 
 This apostate friar was of the same religious 
 order with Luther, and, like him, broke through 
 his solemn vow of continency. by taking to him- 
 self a pretended vrife, during the confusion o\ 
 Edward's reign, at which time also he becatuo 
 bishop of Exeter. Retiring to Geneva, when 
 Mary mounted '.a' throne, he sucked in there 
 
 (/) Sir Thomvip M-jrc's "Works, I..onQOJi. 1517, p. 336 
 
 Ig) Syr T. More's Second Boke, wkicht ccn/vJeth tkt. 
 Defence nf "Vyndall, for his Translacion, p 405. 
 
 (A) See Acts anci Moriani. 
 
 (t) This appears by his attempt to get into Bishoj Tut*- 
 stal's service, after he had declared himself a Protestant, 
 and by his constant maxim of, bearing with the liinei. 
 
116 
 
 VKRSION OF THE ENOLISH BIBLE. 
 
 the doctrine and prejudices of Calvin, so that, 11 
 returning to England when Elizabeth became | 
 queen, he was neither restored to his see, nor | 
 treated as a bishop. It was not without diffi- 
 culty that he obtained the poor living of St. 
 Magnus', near London Bridge, and he was, after 
 some time, turned out of that for non-comformity. 
 The vicar sets up a most curious proof of the 
 fidelity of Coverdale's biblical labours, which is 
 worthy, dear sir, of your notice, as a specimen 
 of the conclusiveness of his reasoning ; it is 
 this, Fulk declares as follows : " I myself did 
 heare that Reverend father, M. Dr. Coverdale, 
 of holie and learned meniorie, in a sermon at 
 St. Paiile's Crosse, upon occasion of some 
 slaunderous reportes, that then were raised 
 against his translation, declare his faithful pur- 
 pose in doing the same, which, after it was 
 finished and presented to K. Henry VIII., and 
 by him committed to diverse bishops of that 
 time 10 peruse, of which, as I remember, Stephen 
 Gardiner was one — they being demanded by 
 the king. Are there any heresies maintained 
 thereby? They answered that there were no 
 heresies that ijiey could find maintained there- 
 by." (o) So far Fulke, to whose account of 
 Coverdale's sermon, the vicar subjoins the fol- 
 lowing inference : " This single admission of 
 Gardiner speaks volumes !" But, dear Sir, 1 
 would ask the reverend gentleman the following 
 questions ; Of what weiuhl is William Fulke's 
 account ^of Miles Coverdale's sermon in defence 
 of the old exploded version ? Secotidly, What 
 signify Stephen Gardiner's words concerning it, 
 ^orany other point during Henry's rfign, when he 
 was as abject a slave to the ndiginns tyrant as 
 Crunmer himself was ? Thirdly, What pro- f of 
 the fidelity of a scriptural translation voulil the 
 decision even of a council he, thai it mninlained 
 no heresies ; when it might be found censiirahte 
 on twenty other Iheologieul charges ? And what 
 then becomes of the reverend vicar's volumes of 
 evidence, for the purity o( Coverdale's version ? 
 But the simple fact of a new translation of the 
 ".hole scripture having been set on foot and ex- 
 • ciited by auihority both of church and state, in 
 ) aines's reign, is a proof that the former version 
 if Tyndal and Coverdale, even after it had 
 teen corrected by the bishops was deemed to 
 iie faulty That it did abound witH. errors is 
 demonstrated bv the learned Gregory Martin, in 
 his Discoverie, &c., whom Fulke in vain at- 
 tempted to answer. The same Is again de- 
 monstrated, together with sufficient proofs that 
 the present version also abounds with errors, by 
 the iiiielligent Thomas Ward, in his Errata, 
 the success of whose undertaking accounts 
 for the vicar's unhonnded abuse of him. (i) 
 But what need is there of a further e.xposure 
 
 (a) Rrply, p. 73. ' J 
 
 (ft) There is no expression nf hatred and i-onti^mpt too / 
 Strong for the vicar, in spe:iking ot"-llirse two ablv.and 
 learned men, which is the liKst proof of hi.s Ixinfr wound- 
 ed by their pens, and his iii:«bility to cope with ih^m. TKi' 
 fellow sludi'nts of Gregory Miirtin, ;il nxf.ird, liore a vtTV . 
 different testimony of his learning and merit from that o'' !| 
 Mr. Gricr, Thinleliraled historianoflhat universityre- i 
 UtoB lli<it, wl.eii llic Duke of Norfolk, to whose eldest boi. 
 
 of the iatter's absurdity, in attempting to vin- 
 dicate both the old and the new version, the un- 
 corrected and the corrected one, and to prove 
 that each of them is the best translation in the 
 world, than the vicar's subsequent comparison 
 between them, and the preference which he 
 gives, in an important instance, to the former ? (c) 
 
 Proceeding to treat of the new version of the 
 scriptures, which was made by order of king 
 James I., more than seventy years after the first 
 appearance of the former, the vicar chiefly con- 
 fines himself to combating the following pas- 
 sage in The End of Controversy, where, speak- 
 ing of the Bibles, " which had been published 
 by authority or generally used by Protestants in 
 this country," the author said : "Those of Tyn- 
 dal, Coverdale, and queen Elizabeth's bishops, 
 were so notoriously corrupt, as to cause a gen- 
 eral outcry against them among learned Protes- 
 tants, as well as among Catholics, in which 
 the king himself, .fames I., joined : and accord- 
 ingly, he ordered a new version of it to be made, 
 being the same that is now in use, w ith some few 
 alterations made in it after the restoration. "(«/) 
 
 The vicar commences his attack on this pas- 
 sage with denying, first, that learned divines of 
 the Church of England, whom alone he ac- 
 knowledges to be Protestants, objected to the 
 old version ; and, secondly, thit the Puruans, 
 to whom he refuses that title, raised an outcry 
 against it. But I would ask him, whether the 
 subscribers to the Mitlinory Petition to Parlia- 
 ment, who therein describe themselves to bo 
 " more than a thousand ministers, that had sub- 
 scribed the service book" of Common-Prayer, 
 and whose representatives, at the cotiference ot 
 Hum] ton-Court, were Dr. Reynolds, and Dr. 
 Spark, both of them professors of O.xford Uni- 
 versity, were not divines of the Church of Eng- 
 land 1 And whether these representatives did 
 not then and there petition as follows ; " May it 
 please your Majesty, that the Bible he newly 
 translated, such as are extant not answering the 
 original, which he (Dr. Reynold's) instanced in 
 
 Martin was then domestic tutor, visited St. John's College, 
 he was greeted with a public oration, in which (he orator, 
 speaking of its great ornament, Gregory Martin said : 
 
 " Habes, illualrisnme Dux, HSreeum nnsti'nm, Grascum 
 
 nostruvi, 
 Poetam nostrum, dccv-s el ^luriavi nostram.^ 
 
 Allu:n. Oxon., P. I, iV. 221. 
 
 With respect to Ward, it may be enough to say that, 
 though a layman, and a military man, he proved hirnsc'i 
 to be an overmatch for his different clerical antagonists, 
 one of whom was HicheU vicar of Hexain; another,, 
 Tennison. A B., of Canterl'Ury. See his Minwmacliia, 
 Hid CUnlns on the Hefotvtntiov, though written in dogrel 
 verse, contain such sterling matter, as to have caused the 
 conversion oi many Protesrants, and among others, ol 
 the late Kev. Roland Davies, C. A. D. The vicar's pre- 
 tended Answer fo tke Errntn, Wits the prototypi^ to hiR 
 Hnph In the End nf Cnnlrnyersii. He wriles much raAout 
 diflVri nt subjects, nni tibonl thevi, and makes many Ih)M 
 assertions and denials, hut never once proves the poiu; 
 which he takes in hand to prove. 
 
 (c) (luoting that foolish book, SMen's Tnble-Tnlk, lia 
 saystiint " Tile Bishop's Bililelthe oM translation,) -opicd 
 chitfly from Tyndal and Coverdale, ranks equally hijjh, 
 as a translation, with king .lames's, and either of them is 
 ifie otsl Irnnsldlioii, in llu, ivirld." — Reply, p. 7fi. 
 
 ((/) End of Controversy, Let ix., p. 71 
 
TUaiON OF THE RN0LI8H BIBIiB. 
 
 iliree particulars." (a) Did not the Lincolnshire 
 ministers present a petition to the king in De- 
 cember, 1604, complaining that " the book of 
 Common Prayer appoints such a translation of 
 scripture to be used in the churches, as in some 
 places is absurd, and in others, takes from, per- 
 verts, obscures, and falsifies the word of God ; 
 examples of which are produced with the autho- 
 rities of the most considerable reformers." (4) 
 Was not Broughton of Cambridge an episcopal 
 Protestant, and "the greatest scholar of his 
 age for Hebrew." as Strype testifies? And yet 
 lie charged the Bible, authorized in his time, 
 jthe Bishops' Bible) with " a great number of 
 errors." which he cnlled " traps and pitfalls ;" 
 adding, in his letter to the Lord Treasurer, 
 that sundry lords and some bishops, and others 
 of inferior rank, had requested him to bestow 
 his labour in clearing the Bible translations, (c) 
 Finally the vicar himself quotes the translators 
 of the new version as " echoing the words of the 
 king," when they state that "upon the impor- 
 tunate petition of the Puritans," the conference 
 of Hampton-Court was held, in which " they 
 had recourse at last to this shift, that they could 
 not with good conscience, subscribe to the Com- 
 munion Book, since it maintained the Bible as it 
 was there translated, which was, as they said, 
 a most corrupt translation." {d) I would now 
 appeal to any candid reader, of whatever reli- 
 gion he may be, no less than to yourself, whether 
 1 was not justified in stating, " there was an 
 outcry against those Bibles, (Tyndal's, Cover- 
 dale's, and the Bishops') among learned Protes- 
 tants, as well as Catholics ?" It remains to be 
 seen whether " king James joined in it or not?" 
 The vicar is forced to acknowledge the truth 
 uf Fuller's and Collier's account of this business ; 
 who state, that on Dr. Reynolds' petition being 
 made, his Majesty answered : " I profess I 
 could never yet see a Bible well translated in 
 English ; but I think that, of all, that of Geneva 
 is the worst." (e) This declaration the vicar 
 says, " can only be supposed to mean that he 
 never yet had seen an English Bible in which 
 there were not passages capable of being belter 
 translated ! (f) His pretext for this perversion of 
 language is, that when the king gave orders for 
 the new translation, which he represents him to 
 have done merely to humour a poor empty shift, 
 a mere shallow pretence {g) of the Church of 
 
 (a) These particulars are the following ; Ist. Gal. iv. 35, 
 r- r"""' Y^'i wrong translated bordereth. Accoriling to this, 
 Mount Sina in Arabia, borders upon Jerusalem ! 3ndly, 
 Ps cv. 28, Tliey were not disobedient (or they rebelled not,) 
 contradictorily translated, They were not obedient. 3rdly, 
 Ps.cvi.20, Phineas exec^Ucd judgment,viTongtra.r>f\aied, 
 Phineas prayerf. See Fuller's Ch. Hist., B. X., p. 14. The 
 vicar asserts that " the passages at first objected to (by the 
 non-conformists, and which he calls an empty shift and a 
 hiilUiw pretence,) have continued in it (the existing version) 
 jfilkoul allaration," p. 81 . Now the fact is, that each of 
 them has been altered according to the suggestion of Dr. 
 Reynolds and his party, as wili be seen in the present Eng- 
 :ish Bible, 
 
 (b) Neat's Hist, of the Puritans, vol. ii. p. 53. 
 
 ie) Strype's Life of A. B. Whitgift, pp. 433,587. 
 id) Reply, p. 80. 
 
 (e) fuller. Eccl. Hist., B. x., p. 14. 
 (/)lbid..p.9l. (^) Reply, p. 81. 
 
 16 
 
 «7 
 
 England's enemies, he gate direction^ that " The 
 
 Bishops' Bible be followed, and as little altered 
 as the truth of the original will permit ; and lha« 
 Tyndal's, &c., be used when thty agree better 
 with the text than the Bishops'." (.'/) And yet 
 what else does this signify, except that the 
 Bishops' Bible is not always conformable to the 
 truth of the original? and that the other editionf 
 sometimes agree belter with the text than does 
 the bishops^ ? Such is the vicar's ingenuity in 
 refuting his own argument ; after which exhi- 
 bition, he concludes, with his customary self- 
 complacency, " I have thus disposed of the 
 royal censure in all its bearings." (i) 
 
 The vicar represents it to be a demonstra- 
 tive proof of the diflerent sects of non con- 
 formists and dissenters subscribing to the purity 
 and excellence of the present version, that 
 they have never attempted to substitute another 
 in its place. But is this the fact? Did not 
 the Grand Committee for Religion, in 1656, 
 when the Presbyterians were in power, appoint 
 a sub-committee, "to confer with Dr. Walton 
 and five others about another translation of the 
 Bible ! and were not many meetings held on 
 this subject at secretary Whitlock's house ?"(*) 
 Again, at the Savoy Conference in 1661, did not 
 the non-conformist divines object to a great num- 
 ber of faulty translations of scriptural passages 
 which occurred in the liturgy, and obtain that 
 they should be amended ; (/) I need say nothing 
 by way of answer to the vicar, in justification of 
 Sir Thomas More's, bishop Tunstall's. and othe 
 Catholics' predictions, as to the consequences to 
 be expected from the general diffusion of Tyn- 
 dal's and the other Protestant Bibles without an 
 expositor, fir so much as a commentary or note 
 upon them, since these were visibly fulfilled in 
 the sacrilegious confusion of Edward's reign, and 
 still more in the fanatic rebellion and regicide 
 fury of that of Charles L, when not a folly or 
 a crime took place without chapter and verse 
 being quoted in its vindication. In short, the 
 Established Church of England, with the vicar 
 himself, has at last taken just alarm at the 
 consequences to be apprehended for herself, 
 as well as for the state, from an unbounded 
 and indiscriminate diffusion of Bibles, without 
 the Prayer Book to direct its meaning. I do 
 not find myself called upon to make any re- 
 mark on the praises which the twenty- two 
 Protestant writers, whom he quotes, bestow 
 on their own Bible. The vicar's citation of 
 these twenty-two witnesses makes no more for 
 his cause, than if I were to cite the two hundred 
 and fifty-two prelates of the Council of Trent 
 who pronounced upon mine. 
 
 Speaking of the last English translation of the 
 Bible, thff one now in use, published by king 
 
 (A) P. 91. 
 
 (t) P. 92. 
 
 (k) Collier's Eccl. Hist., P. ii., p. 869. 
 
 (l) For example, in the Epistle of the First Sunday afte 
 Epiph.,Rom. xii. 1, the text stood thus: Be yechanpcdin 
 your shape. In the Epist. for Sunday before taster, Philip, 
 li. 5, Christ was said to \>e found in his apparel as a man 
 Collier, P. ii!, p. 878. 
 
iis 
 
 ▼SRSION OF THE ENOLIBH SIBtB^ 
 
 fames I., in 1611, th6 author of The End of 
 Controversy said : " Though these new transla- 
 tors ha"e corrected many wilful errors of their 
 predefiessors, most of which are levelled at Ca- 
 lliolic doctrines and discipline, yet they have left 
 u sufficient number of these behind, for which I 
 do not find that their advocates offer any ex- 
 cuse." Two of these he specified as standing 
 in direct opposition to the original text, as it is 
 quoted by those advocates, Dr. Ryan and the 
 Kev. Mr. Grier. (a) On these two points, one of 
 them regarding the celibacy of the clergy, the 
 Other, coinmunion under one kind, the last 
 named gentleman says : " I join issue with Dr. 
 -M." (6) I will state each of them briefly, yet 
 clearly. Our B. Saviour having condemned 
 the Jewish practice of divorce, His disciples say 
 unto him : If the case of a man be so with his 
 wife, it is not good to marry. But he said 
 iinlo them : All men receive not this saying ; 
 in Greek : ov navies J^wjoost lov loyov Tovrop. 
 Mat. xix. 2. In like manner St. Paul says, 1 Cor. 
 vii. 7 : / say therefore to the unmarried and 
 widows: it is good for them if they abide even 
 as I ; but if they do not contain let them 
 marry f in Greek et Se ovx Eyxgatevonat. Now 
 in both these passages, the latter as Well as the 
 earlier Protestant translators change do not 
 into CANNOT, in excuse for the first reformers' 
 breach of their vowed celibacy. {c\ With re- 
 spect lo the former of these falsifications. Dr. 
 Ryan derides it, and says : "The Remish ver- 
 sion agrees nearly with our own !" {d) while 
 the vicar refers to his former work for a satis- 
 factory proof that the word cannot " is most 
 agreeatle to the original," («) vvhiehsays do not. 
 As to the second falsification, the vicar says : 
 '• I have been obliged to convict Dr. M. of gross 
 ignorance of the Greek, no less than a fraudu- 
 lent application of the Latin, and have proved 
 to demonstration that the Rhomish version of 
 this text, f» d.e ovx nYQuiTevortai is erroneous." 
 (/) Now in what does this boasted conviction of 
 my ignorance, and of the erroneoUsness of the 
 Rhemishi version, consist ? . Why the vicar says 
 
 (a} En<l of Controv., Let. ix., p. 73. 
 
 (A) P. 95. 
 ■ (c) A nothcr falsificatitm-of thesartie kind, which seems to 
 (Ifclevelled at the t^*net of free-wiII,occurs both. in the earlier 
 and later version of Galal. v. 17. The apostle says: You 
 
 bo NOT thf^ tkitlSSrt^t Ijmt, would : anv OiXtjte ravra iroirjTCy 
 
 this the translators turn thus : So that vmi cannot do Ike 
 Ihinas thiil^'.iou'woulil, contrary tothc original Greek, the 
 Latin Vglgatp, thw Syriac, Arias fllontanus, Erasmus, 
 Beza, 'Iremelljus, fcc. It is extraordinary that neither 
 the editor of the Rheims Testament nor Ward has pointed 
 out this corruption. 
 
 (rf) Analysis, p, t9. 
 
 (c) Reply, p.O.'i. On oonsultingtlieborik, anil page here 
 referred to, theonly, words rplatingitotihetrnnslation itself, 
 consist in a repetition of Ryan's above-quoted falsehood, 
 •namely, Iw snys : '•.■The Rhemish constructTon does not 
 sulistanlially dilTer from the Protestant one." The restof 
 hi'S lontr dissertation is made up of his own confused expo-' 
 silion of the scriplure and ihe fathers on the subject of 
 celibiicv. See A nswer to Ward, pp. 33, 34, 35. 
 
 (/) Ibid., p. 95, , 
 
 that tf^KtsvopM " is a verb of the middle vdce, 
 
 and that " the Vulgate reading, which agreei 
 with it, is, si vero se tion continent, (g) that ia 
 lo say : if they do not contain themselves ;" 
 therefore, according to the vicar, the passage 
 ought to be translated : if they cannot contain. 
 as in the common Bible ! What is it that chi- 
 canery and confidence will not attempt to prove ! 
 The other instance of still subsisting error in 
 the latter translation of the Bible, as well as in 
 the former, consists in the false translation ol 
 1 Cor. xi. 27, where St. Paul speaking of the 
 B. Sacrament, says : Whosoever shall eat this 
 bread, or drink the chalice of the Lord un- 
 worthily, shall be guilty of the body and of the 
 blood of the Lord : Jiaie o; av eoOitj ton apro* 
 70VT0V I) TiiKij TO noitjQiov Tov xvfitou availing, svo- 
 ;f05, E(7Tat lov miparog xai aifiaia^ tov xvginu. 
 This text, which is so decisive in favour of the 
 Catholic doctrine, respecting the body and blood 
 of Christ being received under either kind in the 
 B. Sacrament, is. On that accountj falsified in 
 both translations of the English Bible, by turning 
 the disjunctive article or, into the conjunctive 
 article and. Dr. Ryan finding this falsification 
 (which Ward does not fail to expose) loo gross 
 to be defended, very prudently passes it by un- 
 answered. The vicar had, in his former work, 
 attempted to prove that i and x<", or and and, 
 are con\'ertible articles ! At present he con- 
 tents himself with relating a story abotit Dr. 
 Kilbie, who, he says, hearing a certain clergy- 
 man maintain in the pulpit that there are ihri" 
 arguments against the translation of a cortaiu 
 word, in the way it has been translated, an- 
 swered him that there are thirteen reasons why 
 it should be translated as it stands ; concluding 
 thus : " To Dr. M. I leave the application ol 
 the foregoing anecdote, for it certainly affords 
 a useful hint to a self-confident critic." Such 
 is the issue of the contest tOi which the vicai 
 challenged me ! And such are his reasons 
 for showing that the term; do not, should 
 be translated cannot, and why the disjunctive 
 OR, should be changed into the conjunctive 
 and. I hope you will not forget Dr. Kilbie: 
 if I do not mistake) the vicar will again intro- 
 duce him to you. In the mean time, I remain, 
 Yours,, &c., 
 
 J. M., D. D. 
 
 P. S- —The vicar's mode of reasoning on thc 
 corrnption in question is of a piece with ihaf 
 of Luther, quoted by me in Letters to a Pre- 
 bendary, Let. v., p. 187, when being called to 
 an account for an undeniable false translation 
 of scripture, he answered : " Sic volo, sic jubco, 
 Luther usita vult, ei ait se doctorem esse supra 
 omnes daetores in, tola Papain" 
 
 ig) Answer, p. 36. 
 
 THE END. 
 K. B.— For A lilt of additional erron in late additions of the Protestant Bible,, tea th« '■ Rock of Ik^ Chweh.''- Ki, 
 
3 
 
 ^w- ,, 
 
 \ : 
 
 ^[ 
 
 
 
 I