both with and without Notes The first A. D.MDCLXVI That without Notes I have seen Printed A. D.MDCLXXXVI This was Printed with the attestation and approbation of several Prelates of France with the permission of the Archbishop of Paris Crit. Hist de Vers N. T. and General of his Order Father Simon says that he was the first Catholick Writer that applyed himself with Care to turn the N. Testament into French I will not deny him to be a person of diligence and good fame but yet neither is this a strict Version of the Vulgar The Second is the Version Printed at Mons. This is common among us and hath been often Printed and is of great fame and upon many accounts a very valuable Book But neither is this a strict Version of the Vulgar as I could easily shew by very many instances were it convenient in this place to do it The Third is this Testament Printed at Bordeaux which the following Reflections relate unto It bears the Title of Le Novveau Testament de nôtre Seigneur Jesus Christ Traduit de Latin en François par les Theologiens de Louvain i. e. The New Testament of our Lord Jesus Christ Translated out of Latin into French by the Divines of Louvain It was Printed at Bordeaux A. D.MDCLXXXVI It hath the approbation of two Doctors viz. Lopes and Germain as very profitable to those who shall be permitted and have capacity to read it It hath also the permission of the Archbishop of Bordeaux and 't is in that permission affirmed to be reviewed and exactly corrected I shall make it appear that this is no true Version of the Vulgar Latin that it is not the work of the Louvain Divines as it pretends to be That is agrees neither with the Vulgar nor the celebrated Versions of it which are allowed in the Roman Church That is hath a considerable number of downright forgeries and falsifications a great number of gross errors and mistakes That is adds to the Vulgar and takes from it That 't is inconsistent with it self and by no means corrected as to the Typographical Errata In a word it hath not the authority of ancient Copies or various Readings to support it I dare challenge all mankind to defend it Preface to the Rhem. Testam Those of the Church of Rome have inveighed against the Protestants Versions They have pretended that we have no Bible They have scoffed and derided us on this account They have boasted that they have been the faithful preservers of these Divine Oracles and that what we have of them we may thank them for But lo here a proof of their insincerity here 's that which may convince any honest man even of their own Communion that is willing to know the truth in this most important matter And if any such should read these Papers I must conjure him as he loves his Soul to take care how he trusts that Church with the Salvation of his Soul that dares falsifie at this high rate No man will in other cases trust a cheat or forger of Testaments and Deeds But how great must this wickedness be then when the Holy Oracles of God are corrupted to serve a turn They that can do this can make no boggle at the most horrid and execrable Crimes I did intend in the last Reign to have made and to have published these Reflections But I could by no means procure this Testament either here or beyond the Seas Insomuch that I began to suspect that either there was no such Book or that it had not those faults in it as had been given out But after I had by means of a very learned and excellent Person procured a Copy I found it to be as I have in the following Reflections truly represented it to the Reader IMPRIMATUR Z. Isham R. P. D. Henrico Episc Lond. à Sacris Octob. 18. 1690. REFLECTIONS ON THE French New Testament c. I Will not undertake to represent all the faults of this Translation It shall suffice to take notice of the most notorious and greater number of them I will begin with such as are notorious in an high degree and deserve no better a name than falsifications of the Text merely to serve a turn and support a Doctrine that needs confirmation The Mass and the Sacrifice of it sufficiently need better proofs than have hitherto been produced These Translators in the Contents before Matth. xxvi v. 26. tell the Reader that Jesus Christ did there Institute the Mass And this Institution of the Mass they mention again in the Contents before Mark xiv And they expresly mention the Sacrifice of the Mass in the Contents before Act. xiii And what we tender v. 2. As they ministred to the Lord they render by Or comme ils offroyent an Seigneur le Sacrifice de la Messe i. e. as they offered unto the Lord the Sacrifice of the Mass 'T is certain that our English Version of that place follows the Vulgar Latin and their Rhemist Testament agrees with it herein and Amelote renders it lors qu'ils estoyent occupez au Service de Dieu i. e. when they were empolyed in the Service of God And the old Louvain translation thus Eux donc servans en leur Ministere an Seigneur i. e. as they were serving in their Ministery to the Lord. But these men make no scruple to forsake the Vulgar it self when it will not serve their purpose I have elsewhere shewed that Act. xiii 2. contains no proof of the Romish doctrine of the Sacrifice of the Mass and do not intend to enter upon that dispute here 'T is enough to observe that these Translators forsake that Vulgar Latin which their Church commends and approves when in the mean time they pretend to give us a Version of it The Doctrine of Purgatory as 't is taught in the Roman Church must be defended And tho' the Scripture have nothing in it to that purpose yet they 'll rather add to the Text and falsifie that than want a colour for their Doctrine And indeed they have done it where the Apostle tells us of him that shall be saved as by fire 1 Cor. iii. 15. they have it par le feu du Purgatoire i.e. by the fire of Purgatory without any distinction of letters at all as if Purgatory had been in the Text as well as fire And yet the Vulgar Latin of which this is pretended to be a Translation hath only per ignem i.e. by fire as 't is in our English and so 't is in the Testament of Rhemes Nor is there any mention of Purgatory in the old Louvain Version in that of Amelote or Mons. But these men are hardy and to support their Doctrine will add to the Text. The Roman Church will have Marriage to be a Sacrament These Translators will help her out in the defence of this Doctrine and will rather corrupt the Text than renounce that Doctrine And therefore 1
Cor. vii 10. The married is rendred by Ceux qui sont conjoints par le Sacrement de marriage i.e. They that are joined together by the Sacrament of marriage But this is forgery and a gross addition to the Text not only to the Greek but to the Vulgar Latin also and yet these men pretend to give us a Translation of it Again they pursue this unexcusable error Be ye not unequally yoked says the Apostle They render it ne vous joignez point par Sacrement de marriage i.e. join not your selves by the Sacrament of marriage 2 Cor. vi 14. See also this Translation of 1 Tim. iv 3. The Doctrine of Merits is not favoured by the Holy Scriptures But these Translators have pressed them in that cause That ye may be counted worthy says S. Paul 1 Thess i. 5. To the same sense their Vulgar hath it ut digni habeamini that you may be counted worthy So the Rhemes Testament here 's a great agreement But tho' this be the sense of the Greek their Vulgar their Rhemist yet this is too flat for these Translators They will have S. Paul bear witness to their doctrine of Merits And therefore they render it Asin que-vous meritiez c. i.e. To the end ye may merit the Kingdom of God Thus when we are told that God is well-pleased with good works Heb. xiii 16. they will have it on merite envers Dieu that by them a man merits with God The Roman Church boasts her self as the only Catholick Church and pillar of Truth The Holy Scriptures as well as all ancient Creeds are silent in this matter But these Translators have by manifest forgery wrested them to testifie in behalf of this matter In the latter times says S. Paul some shall depart from the faith 1 Tim. iv 1. de la foy Romain i. e. from the Roman faith say the Authors of this Translation And yet the Vulgar the Rhemes Testament that of Mons agree with our English And as this is the sense of the Greek and the Versions so 't is manifest that the addition of Roman is nothing less than forgery and falsification of the Text a crime so great that I want words to express it by They have so ordered the matter that the Apostles words which describe to us the gross defection of the Roman Church and give us warning of their dangerous errors are made to speak a quite contrary sense This appears from the words of S. Paul last mentioned and will farther appear from their translation of the following words of the Apostle What we render the doctrines of Devils agreeably to both their Vulgar Latin and Testament of Rhemes they have rendred by doctrines ensignées par des diables i.e. doctrines taught by the devils by which they have endeavoured to divert the thoughts of the Reader from that worship of Damons which so visibly obtains in the Roman Church And whereas the Apostle goes on to describe the nature of the Apostacy against which he warns his reader v. 3. they have quite perverted his sense and most dishonestly foisted in a sense that is favourable to the errors of their Church Forbidding to marry and commanding to abstain from meats they translate by condamnans le Sacrement de marriage l'abstinence des alimens c. i.e. condemning the Sacrament of marriage the abstinence of meats c. And thus they turn the Apostles words upon the reformed as if they were the Apostates which the Apostle points at because they deny marriage to be a Sacrament and do not think we are now obliged by that difference of meats introduced by the Roman Church In this they deal very insincerely And that they do so will appear to any indifferent person whatsoever What we render forbidding to marry is not only agreeable to the Greek text but also to the Versions received in the Church of Rome viz. that of the Vulgar the old Louvain and that of Rhemes and Mons and that of Amelote Whereas their Version is destitute of all Authority whatsoever For the following words in our Version And commanding to abstain from meats I grant indeed that and commanding is not in the Greek Text and our Interpreters have given warning of it by Printing those words in a different character from the words of the Text But yet I will maintain that they have given the true sense of S. Paul's words For tho' the words in the Greek are Elliptical yet our English hath supplied the Ellipsis no otherwise than the Authors of the Mons Version have done who have express'd it by qui obligeront de c. and the old Louvain gives us the same sense Besides the Syriac Version justifies our English and which is more than all the following words of the Apostle which God hath created to be received c. which words make it plain enough that they are marked out who command us to abstain from meats which God hath created to be received The Church of Rome hath advanced an opinion concerning sins Mortal and Venial I enter not into the dispute 'T is certain that these Translators have endeavoured to bring in the Scripture as giving express ground for this distinction And tho' they could not find it there they have found a place to foist it into There is a sin not unto death says S. John 1 ep v. 17. which words they translate thus Il y a quelque pechè que n'est point mortel mais veniel i.e. There is a sin that is not mortal but venial I shall proceed to consider some other places in which these Translators so order the matter that they may beget in the Readers minds such an Idea of Christianity as bears conformity to the present Doctrines or usages of the Roman Church Thus when the Evangelist mentions the Chief Priests Matt. ii 4. ch xxvii 1 6 62. ch xxviii 11. they render it by Princes des Prêtres i.e. Princes of the Priests This carries a shew of that eminence and dignity of that Order which is now to be seen in the Roman Church But these men are in this the less blameable because they do follow the letter of the Vulgar which they pretend to translate For which reason the Authors of the Mons Version have the same rendring But then these latter explain these Princes of the Priests by the heads of the twenty four Sacerdotal families They render the word Repent Matt. iii. 2. c. iv 17. Luk. x. 13 c. by faites penitence i.e. do penance Where they give the Reader an occasion of a very imperfect Idea of true Repentance it being possible that men may do penance according to the importance of that phrase in the Roman Church and not repent 'T is said of the Parents of Jesus that they went to Jerusalem Luk. ii 41. These Translators tell that they went en Pelerinage i.e. in Pilgrimage to Jerusalem Thus without just ground they would insinuate that they did what is now the
REFLECTIONS ON A French Testament PRINTED AT BORDEAUX An. Dom. MDCLXXXVI Pretended to be Translated out of the LATIN into FRENCH By the Divines of LOVVAIN By RICHARD KIDDER D. D. and Dean of PETERBOROVGH LONDON Printed for Walter Kettilby at the Bishop's Head in S. Paul's Church-yard 1690. THE PREFACE THAT the People have a right to read the Holy Scriptures cannot be doubted of by him that considers that matter with due Application and without Prejudice And that Man who reads these Holy Books with great Humility and Care and an earnest desire to become better will receive unspeakable Advantages by it The Governours and Pastors of the Church are therefore obliged to promote this holy Disposition and to furnish and assist the People who cannot read these Books in their original Languages with such a true Translation and such needful Explications as may render it more profitable to them The Church of Rome does not absolutely deny the People this liberty but restrains it For they have their Versions of the Bible in the several Popish Countries in the Language of them But for all that certain it is that many of that Church do not only disparage these holy Books but discourage the reading of them And that Church instead of assisting the devout People in their profitable reading the Holy Scriptures and furnishing them with all due means to this purpose hath dealt very insincerely in the whole matter I. By obtruding the Vulgar Latin as that Authentick Copy of the Bible from which in publick disputes and questions there is no appeal to be allowed which the Trent-Council does The Version of the Vulgar Latin I grant is venerable for its Antiquity and is of great use in the Church And is not always to be dâ—spised or declaimed against where at first sight it does not seem perfectly agreeable to the Original Text both because it sometime gives the true sense where it seems in the lâ—tter to differ and also because in the N. T. especially where it differs from the present reading it doâ—s not differ from some ancient Copies But yet after all it cannot always be defended And it were not hard to give proofs of this beyond all exception whatsoever This would be too great a digression in this place And therefore I shall only add as a competent proof of it at present that the most samed and allowed Commentators and Interpreters of the Roman Church do think fit very frequently to forsake the Vulgar which I shall at any time make good against that Church whenever I shall be required to do it II. By commending that for the Version of the Vulgar Latin which in truth is not so After the above named Decree of the Trent-Council the minds of men were in suspence and doubtful because they knew not what Copy of the V. Latin to follow And the Pope did not for above twenty years after declare what certain Copy should be taken for the Authentick V. Latin Afterwards indeed Pope Sixtus V. gave notice to the Christian World what his mind was in this matter A. D. MDLXXXIX He puts out a Latin Bible in the Preface whereunto he acquaints the Reader as follows That agreeably to the aforesaid Decree of the Council of Trent He having called upon God and relying upon S. Peter's Authority for the publick good of the Church had not thought much to set forth that Bible He sets forth his labour in chusing the best readings his design that according to the Decree of the Trent Council the Vulgar Bible might be printed most Correct and his performance viz. That he had accurately purged this Edition from various Errors and with utmost diligence restored it in pristinam veritatem i.e. to its ancient verity After this declares his will viz. He decrees that that Edition should be taken for that Vulgar Latin which the Trent Council declared Authentick And this He tells us he does ex certâ nostrâ scientiâ deque Apostolicae potestatis plenitudine i.e. from his own certain knowledge and plenitude of Apostolick Authority And that it ought to be received as such sine ulla dubitatione aut controversiâ i.e. without any doubt or controversie After this Clement the VIII puts out his Edition of the Vulgar and requires expresly that that be received also And this he does A. D. MDXCII The differences between that of Sixtus V. and Clement VIII are too many to be here related Where'tis in Clement's Edition eduxistis 't is in that of Sixtus V. induxistis Exod. xvi 3. Where the one hath opposuit 't is apposuit in the other Deut. xxiv 6. Clement hath extrinsecùs where Sixtus reads it intrinsecùs 1 Kings vii 8. Where Clement hath it à portá Sixtus hath it ad portam 2 Ezr. c. iii. v. 28. One reads latitudinem when the other reads altitudinem Judith i. 1 2. What in Sixtus is insipientia is sapientia in Clement Ecclus. xxi 15. Non respicis in Sixtus is respicis in Clement Hab. 1.13 Where Sixtus hath Credentes Clement hath non Credentes Joh. vi 65. Where Sixtus hath interpretabilis Clement hath in interpretabilis Heb. v. 11. And where one hath doctas the other hath indoctas 2 Pet. i. 16. Yet are both these to be received by the authority of Pope and Council tho' they contradict each other And we shall still be at the pleasure of a Pope to give us another Authentick Copy III. The Church of Rome hath done very insincerely in allowing Versions which pretend to be true Versions of the Vulgar when they are not I shall more especially consider those which were done into French there was a French Bible printed at Antwerp by the permission of Charles the V. A. D. MDXXX and reprinted A. D. MDXXXIV which differs from the present Vulgar But this being done before the Bull of Sixtus V. I insist not upon it After this there was another Version of the V. Latin into French by the care of certain Louvain Divines deputed to this purpose An Edition of which Printed at Lyons I frequently refer to in the following Reflections This was a Version of great fame and authority in the Church of Rome and the Testament of Bordeaux pretends to be done by these Divines So it was that tho' this Louvain French Bible were designed to keep the people from reading the Protestant Editions yet it was complained of by several of the Church of Rome as Father Simon relates as coming too near the Sentiments of the Protestants It will appear by the following Reflections that this Version does not exactly agree with the present Vulgar Since that have been many Popish Versions in the French Tongue which pretend to be Versions of the Latin into French of the N. Testament in which I am particularly concerned at present I shall mention none but such as I have perused The first is that of Amelote who was chosen by the French Clergy to this employment A. D.MDCLV He hath Printed his Version
departing from the Vulgar where there was no cause for it but adhere to it when there is Eph. v. 9. Fruit of the spirit Le Fruit de la lumiere So does this French Version render it viz. the fruit of the light I will not here charge these Divines because the Vulgar reads it so and we find it so in a Greek Copy and the Syriac Version follows this reading But then the Version of Mons puts spirit for light in the Margin 2 Thess ii 7. The mystery This Version of ours agrees with the Greek the Syriac the Kulgar and with the Popish Versions of the Vulgar also viz. that of Rhemes of Mons and of Amelote and yet for all that our French Version hath it le decret So that the Authors of it can depart from the Vulgar whenever they think sit Hebr. ix 6. The Service of God This by our French is rendred by les Services des Sacrifices that is the Services of Sacrifices Nothing can desend these Translators but the Vulgar only which renders it by sacrificiorum officia yet is there nothing in the Greek to this purpose and the Syriac is as far from it And we know very well that the Priests business in the first Tabernacle was the ordering the Candles placing the Shew-bread and burning Incense The Sacrifices were offered in the Court upon the Altar of Brass there the bloud of the Sacrisice was sprinkled and generally the body of it was there consumed And the oblations offered there were Sacrifices in the most common sense of the Law of Moses 'T is true indeed the Vulgar does in great measure excuse these Louvain Divines and would more effectually do it had they given us a strict Version of it But they forsake it when 't is not for their turn let it be never so justifiable but keep close to it as in this place when 't is faulty For that it is so is notorious And this is insinuated by several Popish Versions of the Vulgar which in this place vary from it E. G. The Authors of the Mons Version very honestly decline the Vulgar as absurd in this place What we render accomplishing the Service of God thus do they express it viz. qui exerpoient le Saint ministere i.e. The Priests who exercised the holy ministery And Amelote thus poury accomplir le Culte de Dieu i. e. For the accomplishing the worship or Service of God Heb xi 8. Receive this in our Fr. translation is expressed by Concevoir without any authority or shadow of it Ver. 19. In a figure Fr. T. pour exemple d'obeissance i. e. for an example of obedience This is a most gross misrepresentation of the Text Nor will the Vulgar help out this Version 'T is true that Version hath it in parabolam But this will not justifie our Louvain Divines The Rhemists indeed translate it for a parable but they put an Explication in the Margin viz. i.e. in figure and mystery of Christ dead and alive again This is indeed to the purpose but our Louvain Divines seem to have no shame left in their Version of the place For they add to the Text at pleasure the word obedience which the Vulgar hath not Amelote renders it comme une figure mysterieuse i.e. as a mysterious figure And the Version of Mons comme d'entre les morts en figure de la resurrection So that in truth they render the place in a figure just as our English For the rest of their words are but Explication and printed in another letter And the old Fr. Edition of the Louvain Divines modestly render it by figure also Heb. xi 21 Worshipped leaning upon the top of his staff Fr. translation adora le bout du baston d'iceluy i. e. he adored the top of his staff V. L. adoravit fastigium virgae ejus The Louvain Divines have here followed the Vulgar Latin which they frequently forsake and are not therefore to be charged with mis rendring that Version But the Greek and Syriac favour not this rendring And the Authors of the Mons translation receive it not into their Text but put it into the Margin and they so turn it as it speaks only a profound inclination towards the Ensign of Joseph's grandeur and therein a veneration of the kingdom of Jesus Christ whose type he was as they have explained this matter in the Margin But our Louvain Divines have not taken that care to preserve the simple people from Idolatry either in the Version or any Explication of it Jam. iii. 7. For every kind of beasts c. Here the Louvain Divines depart from the Vulgar without any shadow of reason For as they leave out the word Serpents so after those words hath been tamed they put in par reptibles i. e. by creeping things 1 Pet. iv 15. A busie body in other mens matters French translation convoiteux des biens d'autruy i.e. covetous of other mens goods 'T is true the Vulgar renders it appetitor alienorum but yet there is not sufficient cause from that Version for this rendring For the murderer and thief named before are alienorum appetitores in the sense contended for The Authors of the Mons translation were so sensible of this that they translate it thus Se mêlant temerairement de ce qui ne le regarde pas i. e. one that rashly meddles with that which does not belong to him This Version agrees with our English and with the Greek And what we render evil-doer in the same verse they also render to the same sense agreeably to the Original Greek tho' in the Vulgar it be now maledicus and by the Louvain Divines is rendred medisans it is very probable that it was in the Vulgar maleficus at first In which conjecture I am the more confirmed from what I find in the note of Amelote upon the place who does ingenuously consess that it is highly probable that the present Greek is to be followed and affirms that there is no MS. or Interpreter that hath it otherwise and that S. Cyprian and Tertullian read maleficus 1 Joh. iv 3. That confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh Fr. translation qui separe Jesus-Christ i.e. that separates Jesus Christ The Rhemist hath it that dissolveth Jesus And all this from the Vulgar who hath it qui solvit Jesum I will not charge the Louvain Divines here with mis-translating the Vulgar I only observe that they adhere to it stiffly when it departs from the Greek as it does here by the confession of the Authors of the Mons Testament Nor does it only depart from the Greek but without sufficient ground For whereas 't is pretended that the Vulgar reading is grounded upon ancient Copies and that the Nestorians and such as divide the Divinity of Christ from his Humanity have corrupted the Text a late learned Writer of the Church of Rome hath sufficiently shewed that there is not sufficient ground for this charge He does