Obrázky na stránke
PDF
ePub

on immortality." Where you see the words, which I have put down, inclosed with parenthesis, are contained most expressly in the foregoing sentence, which is in all our Testaments; so that there is no harm or danger either to faith, doctrine, or manners, if it be omitted.

one of which is, his omitting and wholly leaving out this text in St. John's Epistle: "There be three who give testimony in heaven; the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost, and these three are one.' Again, in Rom. iii. 28, he adds the word "alone" to the text, saying, "We account a man to be justified by faith alone, without the works of the law." Of which intolerable corruption being admonished, he persisted obstinate and wilful, saying, "So I will, so I command; let my will be instead of reason," &c. (d) Luther will have it so; and at last thus concludes, "The word alone must remain in my New Tes

shall not take it from thence it grieves me, that I did not add also those two other words, Omnibus et omnium, sine omnibus operibus, omnium legum; without all works of all laws.”

Again, in requital to Zuinglius, Luther rejects the Zuinglian translation, terming them in matter of divinity, "fools, asses, antichrists, deceivers," &c. (e) and indeed, not without cause; for what could be more deceitful and antichristian, 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?

That it was of old in some Greek copies, as it stands in our Vulgate Latin, is evident by St. Hierom's translating it thus: and why ought St. Hierom to be suspected of unfaithful dealing, seeing 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-tament; although all the Papists run mad, they brose, in his commentary upon the same place reads as we do. So does St. Augustine, De Civitate Dei, cited by St. Bede, in his commentary upon the same chapter. (a) So read also the rest of the Catholic interpreters, Haymo, Anselm, &c. But if this place be rightly considered, so far is it from appearing as done with any design of corrupting the text, that on the contrary, it apparently shows the sincerity of our Latin translation; for, as we keep our text, according as St. Hierom and the Church then delivered it; so notwithstanding, because the said words are in the ancient Greek copies, we generally add them in the margin of every Latin Testament which the church uses, as may be seen in divers prints of Paris, Lovain, and other Universities: and if there be any fault in our English translation, it is only that this particle was not put down in the margin, as it was in the Latin which we followed. So that this, I say, proves no corruption, but rather great fidelity in our Latin Testament, that it agrees with St. Hierom, and consequently with the Greek copies, which he interpreted, as with St. Ambrose, St. Bede, Haymo, and St. Anselm. || Whether these vain and frivolous objections are sufficient grounds for their rejecting our te 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 Hebrew fountains, through the channel of Protestant pens, the reader may easily guess without taking the pains of comparing them, from the testimonies they themselves bear of one another's translations.

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

Luther's Dutch translation of the old Testament, especially of Job and the Prophets, 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. (b) Zuing. t. 2, ad Luth., lib. de S.

(c) Keckerman, Syst. 8; Theol., lib. 2, p. 188; 1 S. Joh. v. 7.

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

The Tigurine translation was, in like manner, so distasteful to other Protestants, "that the Elector of Saxony in great anger rejected it and placed Luther's translation in room thereof." (g)

Beza reproves the translation set forth by Oecolampadius, and the divines of Basil; affirming," that the Basil translation is in many places wicked, and altogether differing from the mind of the Holy Ghost."

Castalio's translation is also condemned by (h) Beza, as being sacrilegious, wicked, and ethnical; insomuch, that Castalio wrote a special treatise in defence of it; in the preface of which he thus complains: "Some reject our Latin and French translations of the Bible, not only as unlearned, but also as wicked, and differing in many places from the mind of the Holy Ghost."

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

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

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

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

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

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

(i) In sua Translat. Nov. Test. Part. 12, fol. 110.

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 Calvinist, as Osiander says, "and skilful in the tongues," reprehends Beza in a book wholly written against his corruptions; and says further, "I will not note all his errors, for that would require too large a volume."(a)

În short, Bucer and the 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. (b) Staphylus and Emserus noted in Luther's Dutch translations of the New Testament only, about one thousand four hundred heretical corruptions. (c) And thus far of the confessed corruptions in foreign Protestant translators.

If you desire a character of our English Protestant versions, pray be pleased to take it from the words of these following Protestants; some of the most zealous and precise of whom, in a certain treatise, entitled, "A petition directed to his most excellent majesty King James the First," complain, "that our translation of the Psalms, comprised in our Book of Common Prayer, doth, in addition, subtraction, and alteration, differ from the truth of the Hebrew in, at least, two hundred places." If two hundred corruptions were found in the Psalms only, and that by Protestants themselves, how many, think you, might be found from the beginning of Genesis, to the end of the Apocalypse, if examined by an impartial and strict examination? And this they made the ground of their scruple, to make use of the Common Prayer; remaining doubtful, "whether a man may, with a safe conscience, subscribe thereto :" yea, they wrote and published a particular treatise, entitled, "A Defence of the Ministers' Reasons for refusal of Subscribing ;" the whole argument and scope whereof, is only concerning mistranslating; 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. (d) (e)

Mr. Carlisle avouches, "that the English translators have depraved the sense, obscured the truth, and deceived the ignorant that in many places they detort the scriptures from the right sense, and that they show themselves to love darkness more than light falsehood more than truth." Which Doctor Reynold's objecting against the Church of England, Mr. Whitaker had no better answer than to say, "What Mr. Carlisle, with some others, has written against some places translated in our Bibles, makes nothing to the purpose; I have not (a) In Test. Part. 20, 30, 40, 64, 65, 66, 74, 99, et Part. 8, 13, 14, 21, 23.

(b) In Defens. trans., p. 170.

(c) See Lind Dub. p. 84, 85, 96, 98.

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

(e) That Christ descended into hell, p. 116, 117, 118, 121, 154.

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

The Ministers of Lincoln diocess could not forbear, in their great zeal, to signify to the king, that the English translation of the Bible, "is a translation that takes away from the text, that adds to the text, and that sometimes, to the changing or obscuring of the meaning of the Holy Ghost;" calling it yet further, "a translation which is absurd and senseless, perverting, in many places, the meaning of the Holy Ghost." (g)

For which cause, Protestants of tender consciences made great scruple of subscribing thereto : "How shall I," says Mr. Burges, "approve under my hand, a translation which hath so many omissions, many additions, which sometimes obscures, sometimes perverts the sense; being sometimes senseless, sometimes contrary ?" (h)

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 perverts the text of the old Testament in eight hundred and forty-eight places, and that it causes millions of millions to reject the New Testament, and to run to eternal flames." A most dreadful saying, certainly, for all those who are forced to receive such a translation for their only rule of faith.

King James the First thought the Geneva translation to be the worst of all; and 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 translations being thus confessedly "corrupt, absurd, senseless, contrary, and preverting the meaning of the Holy Ghost;" had not King James the First just cause to affirm," that he could never see a Bible well translated into English?” (?) And whether such falsely translated Bibles ought to be imposed upon the ignorant people, and by them received for the very Word of God, and for their only rule of faith, I refer to the judgment of the world; and do freely assert with Doctor Whitaker, a learned Protestant,

(f) Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, p. 255. (g) See the Abridgment, which the Ministers of Lincoln Diocess delivered to his Majesty, p. 11, 12, 13.

(h) Burges Apol. Sect. 6, and in Covel's Answer to Burges, p. 93.

(i) See the Triple Cord, p. 147.

(k) See the Conference before the King's Majesty, p. 46, 47. Apologies concerning Christ's descent into hell at Ddd.

(1) Conference before his Majesty, p. 46.

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

The English Protestant translations having been thus exclaimed against, and cried down not only by Catholics, but even by the most learned Protestants, (b) as you have seen; it pleased his majesty, King James the First, to command a review and reformation of those translations which had passed for God's Word in King Edward the Sixth, and Queen Elizabeth's days. (c) Which work was undertaken by the prelatic clergy, not so much, it is to be feared, for the zeal of truth, as appears by their having corrected 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 episcopacy, 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 xxλola ecclesia, because then the name of church was most odious to them; yea, they could not endure to hear any mention of a church, because of the Catholic Church, which they had fosaken, and which withstood and condemned them. But now, being grown up to something (as themselves fancy) like a church, they resolve in good earnest to take upon them the face, figure, and grandeur of a church; to censure and excommunicate, yea, and persecute their disssenting brethern; rejecting therefore that humble appellation which their primitive ancestors were content with, viz. congregation, they assume the title of church, the Church of England, to countenance which, they bring the word church again into their translations, and banish that their once darling congregation. They have also, instead of ordinances, institutions, &c. been pleased in some places to translate traditions; thereby to vindicate several ceremonies of theirs against their Puritanical brethren; as in behalf of their character, they rectified, "ordaining elders, by election."

The word Image being so shameful a corruption, they were pleased likewise to correct, and instead thereof to translate Idol according to the true Greek and Latin. Yet it appears that this was not amended out of any good design, or love of truth; but either merely out of shame, or however to have it said that they had done something. Seeing they have not corrected it in all places, especially in the Old Testament, Exod. xx., where they yet read Image, "Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image," the word in Hebrew being Pesel, the very same that Sculptile is in Latin, and signifies in English a graven or carved thing; and in the Greek it is Eidolon (an Idol): so that by this false and wicked practice, they endeavour to discredit the Catholic religion; and, contrary to their own consciences, and correc(a) Whitaker's Answer to Dr. Reynolds, p. 235. (b) Dr. Gregory Martin wrote a whole Treatise against

them

(c) Bishop Tunstal discovered in Tyndal's New Testament only, no less than 2000 corruptions.

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

They have also corrected that most absurd and shameful corruption, grave; and, as they ought to do, have instead of it translated hell, so that now they read, "Thou wilt not leave my soul in hell;" whereas Beza has it, "Thou wilt not leave my carcase in the grave." Yet we see, that this is not out of any sincere intention, or respect to truth neither, because they have but corrected it in some few places, not in all, as you will see hereafter; which they would not do, especially in Genesis, lest they should thereby be forced to admit of Limbus Patrum, where Jacob's soul was to descend, when he said, “I will go down to my son into hell, mourning," &c. &c. And to balance the advantage they think they may have given Catholics where they have corrected it, they have (against purgatory and Limbus Patrum) in other places most grossly corrupted the text: for whereas the words of our Saviour are, "Quickened in spirit or soul. In the which spirit coming, he preached to them also that were in prison," (d) they translate, Quickened by the spirit, by which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison." This was so notorious a corruption, that Dr. Montague, 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 Gloucester, corrupted and altered this translation of this place, which himself had sincerely performed. Note here, by the bye, that if Dr. Abbot's conscience could so lightly suffer him to corrupt the scripture, his, or his servant Mason's forging the Lambeth Records, could not possibly cause the least scruple, especially being a thing so highly for their interest and honour.

[ocr errors]

But

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 newthought-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. because they resolved not to correct either all, or the tenth part of the corruptions of the former translation: therefore, fearing their over seen falsifications would be observed, both by Puritans and Catholics, in their Epistle Dedicatory to the king, they desire his majesty's protection, for that "on the one side, we shall be traduced," say they, "by Popish persons at home or abroad, who therefore will malign us, because we are poor instruments to make God's holy

(d) 1 Peter iii. 18, 19.

truth to be yet more known unto the people whom they desire still to keep in ignorance and darkness on the other side, we shall be maligned 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 desirous to conceal the light of the Gospel whereas on the contrary, nothing is more obvious, than the daily and indefatigable endeavours of Catholic missioners and priests, not only in preaching and explaining God's holy word in Europe; but also in forsaking their own countries and inconveniences, and travelling with great difficulties and dangers by sea and land, into Asia, Africa, America, and the Antipodes, with no other design than to publish the doctrine of Christ, and to discover and manifest the light of the Gospel to infidels, who are in darkness and ignorance. Nor do any but Catholics stick to the old letter and sense of scripture, without altering the text or rejecting any part thereof, or devising new interpretations; which certainly cannot demonstrate a desire in them to keep people in ignorance and darkness. Indeed, as for their self conceited Presbyterian and fanatic brethern, who run their own ways in translating and interpreting scripture, we do not excuse them, but only say, that we see no reason why prelatics should reprehend them for a fault, whereof themselves are no less guilty. Do not themselves of the Church of England run their own ways also; as well as those other sectaries in translating the Bible? Do they stick to either the Greek, Latin, or Hebrew text? Do they not leap from one language and copy to another? accept and reject what they please? Do they not fancy a sense of their own, every whit as contrary to that of the Catholic and ancient church, as that of their self-conceited brethren the Presbyterians, and others, is acknowledged to be? And yet they are neither more learned nor more skilful in the tongues, nor more godly than those they so much contemn and blame.

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

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

"The author of the book of Ecclesiastes," says one of them," had neither boots nor spurs, but rid on a long stick, in begging shoes." Who scoff at the book of Judith: compare the Macabees to Robin Hood, and Bevis of Southampton: call Baruch, a peevish ape of Jeremy: count the Epistle to the Hebrews as stubble: and deride St. James's, as an epistle made of straw: contemn three of the four Gospels. What ridiculing is this of the word of God! Nor were the first pretended reformers only guilty of this, but the same vein has still continued in the writings, preachings, and teachings of their successors; a great part of which are nothing but a mere mockery, ridiculing, and misrepresenting of the doctrine of Christ, as is too 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 stratagem, when they cannot laugh the vulgar into a contempt and abhorrence of the Christian religion, they fly to their other weapons, to wit, "imposing upon the people's weak understand. ing, by a corrupt, imperfect, and falsely translated Bible." (a)

Tertullian complained thus of the heretics of his time, Ista hæresis non recipit quasdum scripturas, &c. "These heretics admit not some books of scriptures; and those which they do admit, by adding to, and taking from, they pervert to serve their purpose; and if they receive some books, yet they receive them not entirely; or if they receive them entirely, after some sort nevertheless they spoil them by devising divers interpretations. In this case, what will you do, who think yourselves skilful in scriptures, when that which you defend, the adversary denies; and that which you deny, he defends ?" Et tu quidem nihil perdes nisi vocem de contentione, 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 reformers of our days! who, when told of their abusing, corrupting, and misinterpreting the holy scriptures, are so far from acknowledging their faults, that on the contrary they blush not to defend them. When Dr. Martin in his discovery, told them of their falsifications in the Bible, did they thank him for letting them see their mistakes, as indeed men endued with the spirit of sincerity and honesty would have done? No, they were so far from that, that Fulk, as much as in him lies, endeavours very obstinately to defend them: and Whitaker affirms, that their translations are well done." Why then were they afterwards corrected? 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 with,

66

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

which indeed is the very thing that renders them heretics; for with such I do not rank those in the list, who, though they have even with their first milk, as I may say, imbibed their errors, and have been educated from their childhood in erroneous opinions, yet do neither pertinaciously adhere to the same, nor obstinately resist the truth, when proposed to them; but on the contrary, 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, idolators, antichrists, the beast in the Revelations, and what not, that may render them more odious than hell, and more frightful than the devil himself, and that from the mouths and pens of their teachers, and ministerial guides? Is it then to be wondered at, that these so grossly deceived people should entertain a strange prejudice against religion, and a detestation of Catholics?

Whereas, if these blindfolded people were once undeceived, and brought to understand, that all these monstrous scandals are falsely charged upon Catholics; that the Catholic doctrine is so far from idolatry, that it teaches quite the contrary, viz., That whosoever gives God's honour to stocks and stones, as Protestants phrase it, to images, to saints, to angels,|| or to any creature; yea, to any thing but to God himself, is an idolater, and will be damned for the same; that Catholics are so far from thirsting after the blood of others, that on the contrary, their doctrine teaches them, not only to love God above all, and their neighbour as themselves, but even to love their enemies. In short, so far different is the Roman Catholic religion from what it is by Protestants represented, that on the contrary, Faith, Hope, and Charity, are the three divine virtues it teaches us; Prudence, Justice, Fortitude, and Temperance, are the four moral virtues it exhorts us to which christian virtues, when it happens that they are, through human fraility, and the temptations of our three enemies, the world, the flesh, and the devil, either wounded or lost; then are we taught to apply ourselves to such divine remedies, as our blessed Saviour Christ has left us in his church, viz., his holy sacraments, by which our spiritual infirmities are cured and repaired. By the sacrament of bap

tism we are taught, that original sin is forgiven, and that the party baptized is regenerated, and born anew unto the mystical body of Christ, of which by baptism he is made a lively member: 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 sacrament of baptism to the forgiveness of original sin. We are taught likewise, that by partaking of Christ's very body, and his very blood, in the blessed sacrament of the Eucharist, we by a perfect union dwell in him, and he in us, and that as himself rose again for our justification, so we, at the day of judgement, shall in him receive a glorious resurrection, and reign with him for all eternity, as glorious members of the same body, whereof himself is the head. It further teaches us, that none but a priest, truly consecrated by the holy sacrament of order, can consecrate and administer the holy sacraments. This is our religion, this is the centre it tends to, and the sole end it aims at; which point, we are further taught, can never be gained but by a true faith, a firm hope, and a perfect charity.

To conclude: if, I say, thousands of wellmeaning Protestants understood this, as also that Protestancy itself is nothing else but a mere imposture begun in Germany and England, maintained and upheld by the wicked policy of selfinterested statesmen; and still continued by misrepresenting and ridiculing the Catholic religion, by misinterpreting the holy scriptures; yea, by falsifying, abusing, and, as will appear is this following treatise, by most abominably corrupting the sacred word of God: how far would it be from them obstinately and pertinaciously to adhere to the false and erroneous principles, in which they have hitherto been educated? How willingly would they submit their understandings. to the obedience of faith? How earnestly would they embrace that rule of faith, which our blessed Saviour and his Apostles left us for our guide to salvation? With what diligence would they bend all their studies, to learn the most wholesome and saving doctrine of God's holy church? In fine, if once enlightened with a true faith, and encouraged with a firm hope, what zealous endeavours would they not use to acquire such virtues and christian perfections, as might inflame them with a perfect charity, which is the very ultimate and highest step to eternal felicity? To which, may God of his infinite goodness and tender mercy, through the merits and bitter death and passion of our dear Saviour Jesus Christ, bring us all. Amen.

« PredošláPokračovať »