Now there is extant a German Translation done by the Doctors of Tigurino and chiefly of Leo Judas who was most particularly concerned therein which Translation openly opposes that of Luther And yet the same Doctors of Tigurino forged a new one as though the former Version had not been found and good The Authors of this late Translation are are as I hear Hottinger Heideker Mulerus and others who have translated the Hebrew words almost verbatim Piscator a man of great account among the Calvinists is reported to have done a Bible into the German tongue who though he relyed upon Junius and Tremelius their Latin Version yet he did not hang back but kept a full pace with the above named Translators The low German Translation which was taken into consultation at the Synod of Dort in the year of our Redemption 1618 came forth in the year 1637 and by orders of the higher Powers was done into Low-Dutch immediately out of the Hebrew and not from Martin Luthers High Dutch Translation was found errouneous Neither doth the Low-Dutch Translation want its faults arising from a more than ordinary dependance upon the Expositions of the Modern Jews who were rashly supposed by them to understand the Hebrew better then all the World beside And thereupon this Translation met with brisk opposition from some of the the Protestant Faction and Low-Germany the Country wherein it was hatcht was quickly markt out with the brand of novelty and affectation Mr. Leusden Hebrew Professour in Vtrecht a man before commended taking upon him to argue for the Low-Dutch Translation among the rest of his proofs produces as arguments the Corrections of the vulgar Latin by Sixtus Quintus and Clement Octavus Popes of Rome But the true reason why these two Prelates should Correct the vulgar Latin was far different from that of the Low-Country Protestants The former Animadversions without vain affectation desired only to make the vulgar Latin answerable to its ancient Copies whilst the latter sort of men magnifying the Hebrew varities which they pretend always to stand by set out every day and jump't up new Translations of the Bible which as soon as they come a little in vogue the Authors of them presently perkt up show their faces and ridicule the Old Translatour making it their end and aim to build up their Yesterday Opinions upon these new and unheard of Translations being the sole way they make use of to thrust their monstrous Doctrines into the Church and which they do openly acknowledge saying That the Sun of the Eastern Languages arising they betook themselves to the Hebrew Fountains the better to find out and confute the errours of Popery the better to establish their Religion That the English Protestants was cloy'd and overcharged with the numerous Translations of the Bible the bare words of the Bishop of London in his conference at Hampton-Court may be of sufficient evidence If each man begins the Bishop had his peculiar fancy we could never expect an end of Translation wherefore the good will and pleasure of his most Excellent Majesty 't is that some uniform Version be thought upon adding moreover that then he had never met with an English Bible well Translated and was very well satisfied that among the bad ones that of Geneva was the worst where he then thought expedient that the most Learned in both the Vniversities should confer notes together and make up a Translation which being first revised by the most Learned Bishops and Privy Council should at last be established by the Kings Authority The which being done the Church of England will be confin'd to one Translation and no more We may easily from hence conclude with what noyse bustle and dispension the diversities of Bibles came accompanied into England under the different Names of Tâ—ndal and Coverdale Thâ— Matthews Tonstal and Hethe Parker Archbishop of Canturbury and other Bishops the last named persons being the Author of a Bible Entituled the Bishops Translation Now the Geneva Translation which King James will have to be the worst is the same with the French Bible Printed at Geneva the which was made English and Read in Great Britain by some of the Geneva Profession As for the History of these and such like Bibles you may have it in Durel and Fuller's State of England Most wisely therefore did King James the first of the Name of the Kings of England Establish That rejecting and making void all other Translations which were then us'd in the Nation some new impartial and unaffected Translation should be composed Likewise he made a Law for Interpretation and ordered those who had the overseeing of it to go from the Bishops Translation as little as possible willing that some particular words which were in a manner Consecrated to the use of the Church should be retained as the word Church it self which signifies a public meeting and by the Decree he reprimanded the Geneva Reformadoes who had foisted in other Names commanding for these mens sakes that all Marginal Notes and Annotations at the beginning and end of the Bible should be struck out as things of bad consequence and the snares of the common People These and a great many more particulars of the like Nature were order'd by the Kings Royal Authority and accordingly effected so that to this intent there is no Translation made use of in the Church of England than the English one only set forth by his Majesties especial command To which Translation truly their Book of Common Prayer may bear some resemblance which Book except the Version of the Psalms hath been so far from the least alteration that it hath been used in their Publick Worship ever since their Reformation in the Reign of Edward the Sixth Though it be a general Opinion that the English had a Translation of the Bible in English done by Wiclift and that before the above named King began his Reign which Translation together with that which was abroad in England in the Reign of King Henry the Eighth was done into English out of the vulgar Latin Also Cochlaus will tell you that Luther's Translation of the New Testament was made English Besides all this there is a common report that a Bible was published at London in Welch that James Vsher the Bishop of Armaugh turn'd a new Copy into Irish and Mr. William Bedd an old one and that both of them are supposed to have been burned CHAP. XXVI Of the Translations of the Bible which were writ in the vulgar Tongue and their Rise from the Geneva Schools WE find not any French Translations of the Holy Scriptures and done out of the Hebrew and Greek which went not to School at Geneva neither do I omit that Translation which may seem to be composed by Renatus Benedictus one of the Parisian Divines since the Geneva Translation and the aforenamed piece are most nearly related as I shall hereafter make evident Robertus Olivetanus born in Picardie and a nigh kinsman of Jo.
condemns his Version and calls it Rabbinical But that most learned Father encountring those Reprovers that know how to find fault but could not mend practised the Critical Art and in his Writings sufficiently satisfy'd those persons that made such a noise against him Nor indeed was it so much to be wondâ—ed at that St. Jerom in some things more seriously considerative and furnish'd with a better stock of Oratory made no scruple to vary from the Ancients For Justice never defends manifest Errors I know indeed that in matters of Faith the Consent of the Doctors and Fathers of the Church carries something of Authority But he is neither generous nor religious who in matters that concern not Faith is afraid to depart from the Opinion of the Fathers and had rather believe other mens Writings then his own Eyes or Experience St. Austin of old thought far otherwise of himself who wishes that other men would judg of his Works I would have no man Aust de don Persev c. 21. saith he so devote himself to all my Writings so as to follow me unless in those things wherein he finds me not to Err. Therefore have we no reason in this particular to agree with Vossius who contrary to the Opinion of St. Jerom would have the 70. Interpreters to be inspir'd with the Holy Ghost and free from all manner of Error Nay as if he had been asham'd to have given those Interpreters the Names of Prophets as if it were correcting himself he affirms the word Prophet among the Antient Writers to signifie no more than Interpreter and those to be Prophets according to the Testimony of the Apostle who rightly interpret the Scriptures But why does Vossius here seek Subterfuges and retire to prophane Learning meerly to shew St. Jeroms Error where he writeth that a Prophet is one thing an Interpreter another as if he had contradicted the Apostle who in several Places uses the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 to signifie Interpretari or to interpret But St. Jerom is in no Error in this particular who best knew the Force of that word when he observes a Greek Poet to have been call'd a Prophet by St. Paul Hierom. Commeat in Ezech. But in his answer to the Objections of the late Critica Sacra Vossius shews himself a faint Combatant ever and anon betaking himself to his lurking holes But what reason he had to produce the Opinions not only of the Apostles and Evangelists but of Philo Festus Plato and others Voss in resp ad Objâ—ct Crit. sacr p. 6. to make it out that not only they who foretold things to come were call'd Prophets but they who unfolded either past or present Predictions we cannot find though indeed there was in that matter no cause of difference between him and the Author of the Critica Sacrae While St. Jerom denys the 70. Interpreters to have been Prophets and asserts them to have been only Interpreters in that same place he thought a Prophet to be no other than a Person inspir'd with the Holy Ghost in which Sence all the Fathers had call'd those Greek Interpreters Prophets nor has Vossius made use of that word Prophet upon any other Accompt who has so confidently asserted their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Divine Inspiration De sept interpret c. 25. I am not ignorant says he that I shall not only incur the reproof but the hatred of many for having such transcending thoughts of this Version so that I can hardly forbear to give it the Title of Divinely inspir'd And indeed I desire to know what reason can be imagin'd why I should not believe that which has been believed by all the Christians from the Aposties time excepting only some few too much favouring the Jews of later Ages Among which no question but he meant St. Jerom. Then he endeavours to prove more at large their 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Divine Inspiration opposing their Arguments who affirm they could not be inspir'd with the Holy Ghost or the Gift of Prophesy the Jews affirming That during all the time of the Second Temple the Gift of Prophesy and Inspiration ceas'd Which says he is altogether Rabinical and Fictitious But no less idle is that which he produces against St. Jerom in these words Seing there the words Prophets and Prophesie were used in so large a Sence even among the Hebrews Ibid. c. 26. they are not to be admitted who deny the 70. Interpreters to have been Prophets as being the Chief Priests of the Jewish People and not only Interpreters of things past but of things likewise to come As if it had been the business in question whether the Title of Prophets might be applicable to the Interpreters while the word Prophet signifies no more than an Interpreter when he had endeavoured to prove in so many words that they were Prophets who were inspir'd with a Holy and Prophetick Spirit In resp ad Critic sacr Nay he esteems them injurious to St. Jerom who abuse his Testimonies to overthrow the Authority of the Seventy Interpreters When he himself being now of riper Years was of opinion that their Errors are not to be imputed to the Interpreters themselves who Translated the Holy Scripture by the Inspiration of the Holy Ghost but to the Scribes and Amanuenses But we have already made appear what was the Sentiment of St. Jerom concerning this present matter which Vossius understood not for now he was arrived at Years of more Maturity when he explained his Books by Commentaries And how often he there corrects not only the Scribes but the Interpreters themselves there is no man can be ignorant Tho I deem the History carry'd about under the Title of Aristaean to be an Illegitimate Birth yet I willingly acknowledg that the Interpretation which is attributed to the 70. Interpreters was made by the Jews of Alexandria in the Reign of Ptolemy Philodelphos and copyed out of the Hebrew Manuscript in Chaldee or Babylonic Characters in regard the Jews made no use of any other Letters for transcribing the Scripture but only those after their Return out of Captivity But as for the other Greek Version which Vossius believes to have been made by a Person learned neither in the Greek or Latin Tongue badly and negligently copyed from the same Hebrew Exemplar in Samaritan Letters it is a meer Fiction taken out of the Pseudo-Aristobulus who nevertheless speaks not one Tittle of the Letter wherein Vossius maintains the same Copy to have been written neither did any body besides Vossius ever dream of 'em so far is it remote from all probability of Truth They mistake indeed as Vossius well observes who believe that Version was deriv'd from any Chaldaic or Syriac Paraphrase there being no such thing extant at that time and it being as certain that Philo takes the Hebrew and the Chaldee Language promiscuously for the same However we may have some reason to conjecture be had some
Version of St. Jerom betwixt them i. e. the Hebrew and the Translation of the 70 as it were betwixt the Synagogue and the Eastern Church like two there 's one on each hand but in the middle is Jesus i. e. the Roman Church For this alone being built upon a strong and lasting Rock stood always firm in the Truth when all others deviated from the right understanding of the Scriptures a comparison highly unworthy a Cardinal of the Roman Church which yet Nicholas Ramus a Spanish Divine too and Bishop of Cuba has transfer'd into his Tract of the Vulgar Translation San. Pignin a Dominican first publish'd a Version of the holy Scriptures according to the Hebrew Original in the year MDLXXVII with two Epistles of the two Popes Adrian the Sixth The Version of Pagnine and Clement the Seventh in the front of the Book who both strengthen his Edition of the Bible with their Authority and before this time Leo the Tenth had approv'd Pignine's design of making a New Translation of the Bible according to the Hebrew Original 't is evident as well from the Epistle which Franciscus Picus wrote to Pagnin as from Pagnin himself that he spent at least thirty years in that Work insomuch that it had the approbation of all the Jews of that Age for an accurate piece Yet some great men amongst the Catholicks have judg'd otherwise of it For Genebrard describes it thus 't is not dâ—ligently done 't is too ambitious too curious too Grammatical too much affecting abbinical niceties and such as often mars the Truth and Substance of things with the subtilty of Novel Precepts Whereupon sometimes it corresponds not enough with the Doctrine of the ancient Hebrews And Joannes Mariana confirms this with instances of his lapses who endeavours to make it out that Pagnin has sometimes overthrown the mysteries of our Religion by receding too much from the Version of St. Jerome as in the ninth Chapter of Job where Jerom renders it rursum circundabor pelle meâ I shall be again clothed with my Skin and thence proves the resurrection of the Body Pagnin Translates it postquà m pellem meam contriverunt after they have consumed and worn my Skin and in the first Edition of his Version had interpreted it more obscurely post pellem meam contritam vermes contriverunt banc carneâ— and after my consumed Skin the Worms have consumed my Flesh adding words which are not extant in the Hebrew and yet Monsieur Huel gives quite another Character of Pagnines Version than Genebrard Mariana and other very learned men whom I forbear to mention He has given us says he an example of almost a perfect and compleat interpretation of the holy Scriptures But it 's evident that Pagnine err'd in many particulars For first he declar'd that he would keep close to the Latin Interpretation except in such places where 't was absolutely necessary to do otherwise Notwithstanding which he often deserted it without any colour or shadow of reason only that he might follow Kimchi and other latter Ribbins of the Jews For how came it about that for these words in the beginning of Genesis which in the Vulgar Translation are Spiritus Dei ferebatur super aquas the Spirit of God mov'd upon the Waters he should render Spiritus Dei superflabat in superficie aquarum the Spirit of God breath'd upon the Face of the Waters unless because the Chaldee Paraphrase and some Doctors of the Jews had so explain'd it Again who could brook the Version of the same Pagnine in the sixth Chapter of Genesis who for these words which in the Latin Edition are nòn permanebit spiritus meus my Spirit shall not always abide he put nòn erit ut in vaginâ speritus meus my Spirit shall not be as if 't were in a Scabbard He was not content to explain the Sense of the Hebrew word only but likewise the Etymology of it just as Kimchi had done it Wherefore he shew'd himself a foolish and quarrelsome Interpreter As Aquila of old had done in speaking so barbarously Thus where the Latin Interpretation has it in the 1 of Gen. and the 20 vers producant aquae reptile let the Waters bring forth every creeping thing He Translates repere faciant aquae reptile let the Waters make every creeping thing to creep and in another Edition reptificent let them creep c. Neither does he always follow the Sense of the Hebrew Text thus in the 8 Chap of Nehemiah the Latin Interpreter excellently well renders these words from the Hebrew legerunt in libro in lege Dei distinctè they read in the Book in the Law of God distinctly But Pagnine contrary to all Sense and Reason Translates it so legerunt in libro in lege Dei expositi They read in the Book of the Law of God Expounded in which place he contradicts himself for in his Dictionary those very words are otherwise explain'd Other remarks which might be made upon Pagnine's Version I shall for brevities sake omit Arias Montanus was not the Author of the new Version of the Bible he was content to correct Pagnines Translation in some places But having a more then ordinary regard to the bare Grammar Rules never minding the Sence he outwent Pagnine in his barbarousness He spent his whole time in expressing the Hebrew exactly without any respect to the Sense thus in the 9 of Exodus where Pagnine has pretty well render'd novi quià nondùm timeatis I know because ye will not yet fear the Corrector Arias Montanus turn'd novi quià antequà m timeatis I know because ye fear before that The Hebrew word Terem has doubtless a different signification in one place it signifies priusquà m before that in another nondùm not yet which Arias never minding turn'd it to that Sense which comes next to hand An infinite number almost of such absurdities may be found in this Translation which I advisedly forbear to mention Who for Gods sake can understand Arias's Interpretation of that Verse of the 110 Psalm where for these words which we read in the Vulgar Edition tu es Sacerdos in aeternum secundùm ordinem Melchisedec thou art a Priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec In Pagnines Version secundùm morem Melchisedec thou art a Priest after the manner of Melchisedec Arias turns this way tu es Sacerdos in seculum super verbum meum Melchisedec thou art a Priest for ever upon the word of Melchisedec Monsieur Hewet did indeed attempt defending him in this and openly styl'd him a most faithful Translator who keeping close to the Hebrew Text despis'd the censures and calumnies of the unskilful yet certainly he does not seem to deserve the name of an Interpreter who does not in some measure express the Sense of the Author which he Translates But notwithstanding all this Arias Montanus is very famous among all Learned men for that vast and truly Royal Work of the Polyglot Printed at Antwerp which
Calvins was the first that attempted that great work and at last finished it in the year of our Redemption 1535 which was the first year of the Reign of that monstruous Religion set up at Geneva by Jo Calvin since that before that time as the above named testifies some old Copies only of an old French Manuscript were read in these and such like places and those without an Author Now what method Olivetanus followed in his Translation we may know by his Preface which method truly was not ridiculous had he been fit for the undertaking such a task Though in the interim several circumstances sufficiently demonstrate unto us the Translator's ignorance in the Hebrew and Greek Tongues As for the French I dare not say he understood it being that Jo. Calvin who looked over this Translation leaves this for an Animadversion That the Author writ false French Neither truly in his famous Preface doth he shew any competent knowledge he had in the Hebrew when he tells us a Tale of a Tub and stories only fit for three-days-standing Hebrecians where he learnedly observes R. Aben Ezra himself This Olivetanus therefore did not take the trouble upon him to do the Hebrew Copy into French but with much more ease followed some forerunning Interpreters Since he telleth us of two Italian and three German Translations of the Bible at that time extant And yet in the very beginning of his work he protests that he scorned the equipage of a Learned mans Footman that he was free from prejudice and leaving other Translations betook himself to the Hebrew That he had marked the more obscure places of Scripture with an Asterisk and put down other mens Comments in the Margent The same Olivetanus sets a great value upon the different Readings of the Bible more especially upon those which he had observed out of the Greek Interpeters and St. Jerom through the great light which they give to the Scriptures Wherefore he openly declares that he values not the help of the Modern Jews or the assistance of their Books neither is he affraid to maintain that the Hebrew Vowels were first foisted in upon the Bible by the Doctors of Tiberius and therefore for his part prized the Septuagint and St. Jerom much above the common Hebrew Bible Neither in writing Hebrew will he imitate the Modern Jewish Doctors but prefers himself before them looking upon the new Jewish Pronunciations as Monstrous though in the last place he acknowledgeth that St. Jerom knew the Hebrew Tongue better than himself The gifts of Heterodox Men must certainly shine forth in a miraculous manner before they win the applause of the Catholick though Robertus Oliveranus I am fully perswaded knew and â—ppâ—ovâ—d fâ—etter things when he followed the worse who in one baâ—e year punctilio of time in comparison compleated a work which requiâ—ed fiâ—ty years study The Gentleman I must needs confess very seldom takes any notice of the different readings and scarce at all looks back upon the Ancient Translatours Sometimes truly he sticks to a less obvious sense as in 1 Chap. of Gen. where for these words which are in the vulgar and in a manner all Traâ—slations The spirit of God c. he will give you these the Wind of God c. And to the end he would not be called in question concerning any affected novelty he produces in open Court as Witnesses of his true Translation certain of the Greek Fathers who were of the same opinion though at the end of his Book he inserts a dâ—fferent Interpretation Thus Olivetanus slid into a great many gross mistakes not only through his Ignorance in the Hebrew and Greek but likewise in the Latin Hence it is that having a greater respect for the Latin Translator then the Hebrew Copy an Ocean of Errors overwhelm him an Example whereof we have in the 1 Chap. of Gen. where for cete grandia in the Latin Translation he gives us in the French Grandes Baleines But how he can make cote agree to Balana I see no reason being the word generally taken denotes Creatures of an oblong vast and prodigious Bulk And which is much more unsufferable Olivetanus in the 25 Chap. of Gen. where the Latin Translator readeth Lampas he commits a grand mistake by adhering too much to a similitude and setteth down Lampe Jo. Calvins Bible Jo. Calvin though he was no greater Critick in the Hebrew than Robertus Olivetanus yet he openly declares the Translation not only to be Mungril French but that it stood Guilty of a whole Catalogue of Errours And yet he had applauded this very same Translation before and fostered it under his Authority wishing that all learned Men would make it their business to study that immense and laborious work and then to publish a Translation of their own which he would have presented to the more wise knowing and sober Divines Hen Stephens published these Animadversions of Jo. Calvin in the year of our Redemption 1535 who being an Acute Ingenious and very Judicious Man and no Novice in the Holy Scriptures dexterously corrects a great many things in Olivetanus his Edition and through his great ability in the French tongue clear'd it from all the obsolete words And yet he minded the matter more than the words and for perspicuities sake write a Paraphrase in Place of a Translation Now and then no great occasion caling him away he recedes from Olivetanus his Translation tho he keeps to the Gentlemans method and puts down several Notes and Expositions in the Margent tho not so often as Olivetanus himself He is much out in presenting us with a sense less proper in the Context and a more plausible one at the end of the Book which mistake arose from his small acquaintance with the Hebrew Propriety Olivetanus had wisely inserted in his Copies some Marginal Notes borrowed from the Ancient Translatours which Jo Calvin impudently takes away as in the 6th Chap. of Gen. where you may read both in the Septuagint and the Vulgar Latin non permanebit spiritus meus he following Olivetanus translates it ne debatra spes meus non desceptabit my Spirit shall not strive c. having no regard to the Old Translatours which Olivetanus had ranked in his Margent There were several Editions put forth of those Animadversions of Jo. Calvins which were diligently perused even by Orthodox Divines more especially that Edition in Folio published 1357 which came out in pretty handsom Character and had only a few particulars in it altered and the method of it reduced to that of the Vulgar Latin Neither is he here unprovided of St. Jerom's Preambles excellent Mediums to Cajole the vulgar People The Geneva Doctors Bible Cornelius Bertramus Hebrew Professor at Geneva Beza Fayus Rotanus Jaquemotus Goulartius and some others took this abovesaid Tranâ—â—ation in hand and in the Year of our Incarnation 1588 writ Animadversions upon it These Men especially Bartramus having a Competent