Sivut kuvina
[merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]


Hofe Holy and Learned Men, by whose means the
Church of England was happily Reformed from the
Corruptions of Popery, did not in any thing thew
more Piery and Judgment than this, That they és

spoused no Doctrine, but what might be proved from any Edition, or Translation of the Bible, and even from the Vulgar Latin itself. They did not take the course of Schismaticks; and Hereticks, who commonly endeavour to defend their Ers rors.iby some particular Texts of Scripture, wrested by artificial gloffes to their own mistaken fence; but made good their Cause by a great cloud of Testimonies from chofe Holy Books, and o ther Ancient Monuments of Christianity, or rather from the main scope, and tenor of both : So that if they had had none to please but themselves, and those pious Souls who had a holy thirst after divine Truth, the Translating of Scripture had been a work of no very great difficulty ; for the fun and substance of our Religion was to be found in every Bible, and every Translation of it, and did noc depend on any Conjectures or Subtilties of Linguists.

But then, on another account, they had reason to make use of the greatest Caution and Prudence in this matter; I mean, Because the Eyes of their Enemies, che fierce Papists, were upon them, who, they inight be fure, would make use of all their skill and diligence to difcredit an Englis Bible, how faithfully foever Translated.

And in this respe?? ewas very difficult for our Translators to avoid the giving offence ; for as well they who Tramated the Fible, as they who Inferted the Pfalter one of it into the Liturgy, were no doubr fully perswaded that the Hebrew of the Old To.



[ocr errors]

Atament was the very Original Text, and that therefore all Tran. 1lations ought to be made from that ; but on the contrary, the Romanists look'd on the Vulgar-Latin as the most authentic Text, and would not admit of ariy Variation from it: And further, they were sensible, that this Vulgar-Latin Translation, was done from the LXX, which had had a great respect paid to it by the Church in all Ages, for which reasons it seem'd dangerous, wholly to depart from it ; therefore chey took a middle way by complying with the Vulgar-Latin, and LXX, so far as they could, without contradicting their own Judgment, which was for the Hebrew.

But all the care and temper in the World cannot secure things of this Nature from the Censures of Men, when they are resalved to find fault. 'Tis no wonder that the Papists should condemn, and Burn this Translation, this was expected before hand; but the hard Treatment, which this Psulter has met with from the Tongues and Pens of Protestants, is what could scarce have byen believ'd, it it had been told to the Men of that Age, in which this Translation was made How incredible mult it have feen'd' to pious Mr. Tinddt, and-Bishop Coverdale, if any one had told them, when they were engaged in this excellent Work, thac 'e was to now purpose for them id go on with it; nay, that they had begter let it alone, for that, if the Scriptores were kept Seal'd-up in the Learned: Tongues this could only cause a departựre from cljat, Chunch, that was guilty of such Barbarous usage toward the Peoples buc chat their Traqllation would one day be an occasion of making & Divifon betwixt Protestants them: selves? av biztoa, CT 1011 by Popi

There is reason to believe that ynothing has more difcouraged the Ruling part of Foreign Churches in Gommunion with that of Rome, from Tranflating the Bible into the Vulgar Tongues, than the Experience they liave had of the illt use made of it here in England; and how much more must they be confirmed in their Aversion to this work, when by Reading, the Books of our Diffenters, they may learn that we have many amongst us, whofe Stomachs turn at that Bible, by which our Reformation was first wrought, to fuch a degree, that they think the use of that part of it, which is yee rerain’d, unlawful. And, 'tis natural, for chemi to conclude that their dore fathers sin the time of Henry, VIIT.

were not to blame for burning Tindal's Bible, See Idolat. of: fice Proteftants tremfelves do now charge it Com. Pr. Wors, witłr Mistranslations and. Blasphemy. so, thac ship, and the the fiercest Papists could not more severely CoaAnswer to Mr. dema ie then, thin those who would be chought Oliver's Sere the foundert Protestants have done since : But

this is but one particular of a great many, where

in Papists and Diflenters are United against the Church of England; they seem to wheel off from each other, and to be at the greatest distance, whea in reality they meet pia ac the oppolire part of the Circle.


[ocr errors]
[ocr errors][merged small]


If the Diffenters would speak out, I am perswaded they must acknowledge, that che only grand and real objection against the Pfalter is, that 'tis a part of our Liturgy; for I cannot but chink, that if our other Translation had been placed there in its stead, when it was first published, in less than an Hundred years, ( which have now almost pafsd foce that time) there would as many, and as great Objections have been made against char, as there have been against this: The exceptions against that Tranflation must indeed have been very frivolous, and so I do in reality think those co be which have been raised against this; but I cannot buc remember the saying of the Reverend and Judicious Hooker, [ That we must consider, nor how small the Spark is that flies up, but how ăpe things about it are to take fire.) The Objections against it are,

I. Such as lie against this Translation in general...

II. Such as are against some particular Passages.
Those of the first fort are as follows, viz.

First, That this Translation is more accommodared to the :LXX, than the Hebrew.

Secondly, 'That it adds some Words and Verfes.

Thirdly, That it omits, or leaves other Words and Verses Untranslated.

1. As to the first general Objection, that it is more accommodated to the LXX, than to the Hebrew, as Mr. Calamy, (Cap. 104 Abridgment of Mr. B's Life) is pleased to express it, I answer.

1. if it were true, yer this would not be any Crime in the Translation, nor in the Church which received it; however, not so great a Crime, as' to justify a Separation. I can never think that 'tis a Christian remper of Mind, which disposés. Men to make Divifions on such accounts as these for it is certain that for many Ages after Chrift, the greatest part of the flation of the LXX, or such as were made from that. 'Twas by this Translation, it being in thar Language, which was theil most Universal, that the main body of the Gentiles were converged wad settled in the Christian Faith; nay, further the Adi poftles, and even Christ Jesus himself, did sometimes quore Texts out of the Old Testament, as they now ftand in this Greek Translation, and not according to the Hebrew; fo that if our Transacion had been done from the Greek, yer our Disfenters in objecting 2-, gainst it, muft ftrike at che Penmen of Holy Scripture, and even ad Cbrift Jesus himself. Had our Saviour been of the same temper with our Diñenters, one of the first Works, on which he had fechis Apostles, or which he had performed himself, had been to make,

New Translation of the old Testament to put into the hands of 'the Gentile, or Heathen Çớnverts; but our Saviour did nog come into the World to teach Men to be Criticks, but was confent with loch Translations of the Bible, as were receiv'd by the

A 2


[ocr errors]

Church: So that if this Tranflation of the Pfalter were wholly from the LXX, yet I believe no competent Judge would have been of Opinion that we ought to divide on this account. But it should seem our Diffencers would, and by parity of reason, if they had lived in the Age of Christ and his Apostles, and had been as wise as they are now, they must have departed from them coo; for chey, upon some occasions, used the Greek Translation, or one that agreed with it, and that is the most that could have been said of the Church, if what Mr. Calamny pretends were true. But 2. This is a very great '

mistake, and any one that would have been at the pains to compare the Ten first Psalms of chis Translation with the Greek, might easily have convinced himself of this Error; for in chese Ten Psalms, there are not less than Twenty material differences between the Greek Translation and ours, whereas they do not agree with the Greek in more than five particulars throughout these Ten Psalms, excepting such places where all Translations agree, as God be thanked, they do in the main : Nay, further I hope to make it appear to all' imparcial Readers, that our Translators never do render any one Verse, so as to make it contrary to, or inconsistent with the Hebres; but they differ from the Greek, and give us a fence quite distinct from them in at least 250 places, and do not so much as fecm to follow the Greek in much above 60 places.

I say feem to follow them, for 'tis any opinion that they did nor in these 60 places propose to make the Greek their Pattern, except in rendring here and there some particular Words: ( See Gen. Note 9th.) It is certain there are many Supplemental Words in this Translation, which are in the Greek coo; but then the reason why they are here is not that they were in the Greek, but because they were in the Vulgar Latin: The reason I have for faying this, besides what shall be faid under the following Head, is, because there are some Supplements in our Translation, which are not in the Greek, but in the Vulgar Latin only, as (Heavens Pfalm xxii. 32. [in Jerufalem] Ixv. 1, and then they repeat the second Verse of Pfalm cxxxvi, and make it the 27th or Fast Verse of that Pfalm, whereas if they had follow'd the LXX, these two Words, and thaç Verse had not been in our Psalter.

Perliaps some may think I have poorly mended the matter, when in stead of the LXX, I have pitched on To blind a guide as the Vulgar Latin, which seems to be buc a careless and unskilful Version of the LXX, and therefore I must explain myself, and Vindicate our Translators. I lay then, they only followed the Vulgar Latin, in taking some Supplements from them, the most of which they (tlie Volgar Latin) lead from the Greek: That they did not follow the Vulgar Latin in the main, is proved by the fine argumcnt, by which I before shewd that chey did ift follow the Greek namely, That they differ from them in ar fint Tuto handred and Girly places, when it cannot be pre


tended that they Copy'd from them in much above Sixty. And the same Collection of Texts does as effectually prove, that they did not Translate from the Valgar Latin for the most part, as that they did not Translate from the Greek, because, as has been said, the former is but a Transcript of the latter. What reason they had to take these Supplements from the Vulgar Lacin, it will be more seasonable co Thew under the next Head: But they were so far from following the Vulgar chroughout, that Coverdale, in his Epistle Dedicatory to the first Edition, affures us, That he had before him no less than [ Five Interpreters] of which he tells us in his Preface, ( some were Latin, some Dutch) Santes Pagninus had publish'd his Latin Translation fix or seven years at least, before ours. Our Translators were, with out question well acquainted with the great M. Luther, and his High-Dutch Translation : Munster and Leo Judę were Cotemporaries with our Translators; and tho' they did nor Print their Latin Bibles before ours, yer 'tis not improbable,that these Learned Men might have Communicated their Papers to our Tindall and Coverdale. Any one by perufing the following Notes, may convince himself, that they agree with Munster, more than 'cis credible that they could have done, if there Learned Men had not conferred Notes. And in the Edition begun 1539, our English Translation follows Munster in some places, where they did not do so in the Edition of 1535. Afrer Munster's Tran. Qation had had his finishing hand, and had been publish'd ( as is was in the same Year with our firft Edition, viz. 1535) 'tis probable that Dr. Coverdale in the review which he made 1539, thought fit to Copy after him in some places, where before he had not so clear a light: Tho' after all, our Translation does not servilely follow that of Munster, or any other. And what coverdale says of the first Edition, may as well be apply'd to the other, namely, that it follows other Interpreters or Trantlators only ( for the most part, Preface.] In chę fame Preface he reproves those who alledge Scripture so far out of Season, and To wide from the purpose, that a Man may perceive that they never saw the Original;] much less therefore is it to be believ'd, that he, and his Friend Tindall, would undertake to Translate it, [ without seeing the Original ] which makes Mr. Baxter's censure in his [ English Non-conformity ] appear to be rash and groundless, when he charges our Tranjators with want of skill in the Hebrew. Some body was even with Mr. B. by proving that this grave Censor of ocher Mens Abilities, did nor himself understand Latin. (See Preface to Dr. Maurice's Book against Baxter.) And since the chief reason that Mr. Baxter, and some others had for this Suspicion, was, that they supposed, chac fince they took thefe Supplements from the Vulgar and LXX, that therefore they followed them in every thing else, ler me defire the Reader to obferve, that in the firh Edition of the

A 3


« EdellinenJatka »