Selected quad for the lemma: diversity_n

Word A	Word B	Word C	Word D	Occurrence	Frequency Band	MI	MI Band	Prominent
diversity_n	church_n	true_a	unity_n	401	5	9.8832	5	true

Text snippets containing the quad

ID	Title	Author	Corrected Date of Publication (TCP Date of Publication)	STC	Words	Pages
A17143	An answere to ten friuolous and foolish reasons, set downe by the Rhemish Iesuits and papists in their preface before the new Testament by them lately translated into English, which haue mooued them to forsake the originall fountaine of the Greeke, wherein the Spirit of God did indite the Gospell, and the holie Apostles did write it, to follow the streame of the Latin translation, translated we know not when nor by whom With a discouerie of many great corruptions and faults in the said English translation set out at Rhemes. By E.B.	Bulkley, Edward, d. 1621?	1588 (1588)	STC 4024; ESTC S106854	84,001	112

vs circumspect in all our waies But if they do not vnfainedly repent this their rude railing and reuiling of Gods faithfull seruants let them be assured that they shall fall into the clawes of him that is indéed 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 a railer a slanderer and a false accuser of Gods Saints As touching my iudgement of the old translation of the new Testament I say as S. Hierom somtime said to such superstitious admirers of the old translation that then was as our Romish Papists be now Quòd si vetus eis tantum interpretatio placet quae mihi non displicet nihil extra recipiendum putant c. That is But if the old translation onely please them which displeaseth not me and they thinke nothing els to be receiued c. Euen so say I to them now that stand so much vpon the old translation I do not generally disallow it nor condemne it although some faults haue béen both by the translator committed and afterwards by negligence crept into it which are not malitiously to be railed at but charitably in the feare of God to be reformed But wheras you say Master Beza preferreth it before all the rest in his Preface before the Testament 1556. you do misreport him for he doth not in that Preface prefer it before all the rest whereof he maketh no comparison but onely defendeth it against Erasmus in some places which he thought that he found fault with it without sufficient cause You cannot be ignorant that Master Beza in that Preface affirmeth besides manifold faults crept in by the writers it doth often dissent from the Gréeke interpret many things obscurely adde some things and omit others And wheras you further alledge that in his Annotations vpon Luke he saith the old translator translated very religiously he did as I haue before declared reuerently thinke of him who no doubt was a godly man and tooke godly paines in setting foorth Gods holie word to the benefit of his Church Yet you know that euen in that very place Master Beza sheweth some imperfection in him For these be his words out of which you haue culled your testimonie Vetus autem interpres quamuis alioqui videatur summa religione sacros libros interpretatus tamen quae significatio sit horum vocabulorum non videtur cognouisse ne dum vt vim illorum intellexerit That is But the old interpretor although otherwise he may séeme very religiously to haue translated these holy bookes yet it appéereth that he did not know what is the signification of these words much lesse that he vnderstood the force and power of them And how iustly héere he findeth fault any that is indued with any knowledge in the toongs and not blinded with malice may plainly perceiue Therefore although Master Beza reuerently iudged of him yet he did not thinke him to be without his faults which are charitably to be corrected and reformed as he doth and not malitiously to be carped and reprooued as is our Iesuits and Greg. Martins maner It is not also to be thought but that most of those faults and corruptions which be now in the text were not committed at the first by the translator but haue crept in since either as S. Hierom saith by negligent writers and copiers out of the bookes or by presumptuous and ignorant correctors c. which are not to be imputed vnto him Lastly I say the question is not so much which is the best translation or whether it be better than the rest but whether it is to be preferred before the originall Gréeke which héereafter is to be discussed 9. Reason IN the rest there is such diuersitie and dissention and no end of reprehending one another and translating euerie man according to his fantasie that Luther said if the world should stand long time we must receiue againe which he thought absurd the decrees of Councels for preseruing the vnitie of faith bicause of so diuers interpretations of the Scripture And Beza in the place aboue mentioned noteth the itching ambition of his fellowe translators that had much rather disagree and dissent from the best than seeme themselues to haue said or written nothing And Bezas translation it selfe being so esteemed in our countrie that the Geneua English Testaments be translated according to the same yet sometime goeth so wide from the Greeke and from the meaning of the holie Ghost that themselues which protest to translate it dare not follow it For example Luc. 3. v. 36. they haue put these words The sonne of Cainan which he wittingly and wilfully left out And Act. 1.14 they say With the women agreeably to the vulgar Latin where he saith Cum vxoribus With their wiues Answer HEre in this 9. reason you complaine of the diuersitie and dissention of other translations by reason wherof we should for the preseruing of vnitie of faith if the world should long continue receiue the decrées of Councels as you imagine and make Luther to affirme Why may not vnitie of faith stand with diuersitie of translations There were in the primitiue Church fower seuerall Gréeke translations of the old Testament The first of the seuentie interpretors second of Simmachus third of Aquila fourth of Theodotion and yet there was vnitie of faith in the true Church or whatsoeuer diuersitie of doctrine there was I thinke you cannot prooue that it came of the diuersitie of translations There were in the Latin Church very many diuers translations as S. Augustine in these words sheweth Qui enim Scripturas ex Hebraea lingua in Graecam verterint numerari possunt Latini autem interpretes nullo modo That is For they that haue translated the Scriptures out of the Hebrew toong into the Gréeke may be numbred but the Latin translators cannot Héere you sée that S. Augustine affirmeth the Latin translators of the Scriptures to haue béene so many that they could not be numbred yet he was so far from our Rhemists opinion that they bred diuersitie of doctrine that he thought the same profitable especially for them which wanted the knowledge of the originall toongs forasmuch as that which is obscure in one may be made manifest by another And if there may be diuersitie of expositions of one place of Scripture without breach of vnitie of doctrine why may not some diuersitie of translations stand with vnitie of faith and doctrine Héerof S. Augustine writeth thus Quos necesse est etiamsi rectae atque vnius fidei fuerint varias parere in multorum locorum obscuritate sententias quamuis nequdquam ipsa varietas ab eiusdem fidei vnitate discordet sicut etiam vnus tractator secundum eandem fidem aliter atque aliter eundem locum potest exponere quia hoc eius obscuritas patitur That is Who must néedes although they be of one true faith bring foorth by reason of the obscuritie of many places diuers opinions and iudgements albeit the same diuersitie doth

nothing at all differ from the vnitie of one faith as also one expounder agréeably to one faith may diuersly expound one place bicause that the hardnes thereof requireth the same So saith Chrysostom Talis enim Scripturae mos est vt in paucis verbis plurima saepè multitudo sensuum inueniatur That is Such is the maner of the Scripture that in few words a very great multitude of senses or expositions may be found And therefore as there may be diuers expositions of places of the Scriptures which may all agrée with the analogie and proportion of faith euen so may there be in translations diuersitie in words and phrases without dissention in doctrine or breach of faith I write not this that I allow the itching ambition of some of whom Master Beza doth iustly complaine who without sufficient knowledge in the toongs and sound iudgement take ouer rashly vpon them to translate that blessed booke of the holy Scriptures which ought not to be handled with vnwashen hands but with all reuerence and fidelitie in the feare of God ought to be dealt in Neither do I thinke but that it were very expedient and profitable for the Church of Christ that in euery toong there were one as exact and absolute translation as might be agréed vpon which should either onely or principally be followed The which if it cannot be procured I say that vnitie of faith may as well agrée with diuersitie of translations as there might and would be diuersitie of doctrine through the malice of Satan and weaknes of mans iudgement though there were but one onely translation And therfore I thinke you rather sucke that out of your owne fingers than find it in Luthers works in such sense and sort as you expresse it And thereupon haue noted no place in his writings where it is to be found but onely refer vs to a place of Coclaeus who being a professed and malitious enimie to Master Luther of what weight and force his report is to be accounted let the indifferent Reader iudge But whereas you charge Master Bezas translation so much estéemed of vs to go so wide from the Gréeke and meaning of the holy Ghost that we dare not as you say follow it I answer that as we reuerence the man for his great gifts of learning and woorthily estéeme his godly and learned labors in translating faithfully the Testament of Iesus Christ so neither he doth require nor we iudge our selues to be bound in all things absolutely without exception to follow him He is a man and may erre and as we thankfully to Gods glorie acknowledge that he hath euen hit the marke in many so we doubt not but he might misse it in some and peraduenture so hath done not in substance of doctrine but in some proprietie of words and phrases Howbeit whereas you so maliciously and falsely accuse him to haue gone so far from the Gréeke and meaning of the holy Ghost let vs sée your proofes You alledge héere but two places the one Luc. 3. v. 36. the leauing out of the name Cainan which we haue put in This is a great matter whereat you make such a tragicall exclamation in your marginall note vpon that place which is but the leauing out of one name whereas both in the old Latin and your owne new English there are left out not onely words but also sentences in at least an hundred places Thus you can straine a gnat and swallow a camell sée a mote in your brothers eie and not behold a great beame in your owne Touching the matter it selfe which concerneth neither faith nor doctrine Master Beza hath not without great and good cause omitted the said name of Cainan partly bicause it is not in the Hebrew Genes 11. nor in the booke of Chronicles where the same Genealogie is set out and partly for that it is not expressed but omitted in one most ancient Gréeke and Latin copie that of late yéeres came to his hands which he hath sent to the Vniuersitie of Cambridge there to be kept and is there reserued Whereupon Master Beza vpon good warrant hath omitted that name And if we had had intelligence of that ancient Gréeke and Latin copie we would not haue doubted to haue followed him But whether it be expressed or omitted it is a matter of no great moment and concerneth no point of doctrine Beda hauing shewed that in the veritie of the Hebrew the name of Cainan is in both those places of the old Testament left out and that S. Luke alledged it as he thought out of the Septuaginta interpretors standeth in a mammering at the matter and writeth thus Sed quid horum sit verius aut si vtrumque verum esse possit Deus nouerit That is But whether of these readings be the truer or whether both be true God knoweth The second place wherein you charge Master Beza with disagréeing from the Gréeke and vs with dissenting from him is Act. 1. v. 14. He translating Cum vxoribus With the wiues and we according to the old Latin With the women Wherein you do but cauill according to your accustomed maner and find a knot in a rush Doth not the Gréeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifie indifferently both a woman in respect of hir sex a wife in respect of hir calling S. Hierom can teach you this in these words Numquid non habemus potestatem mulieres vel vxores circumducendi quia 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 apud Graecos vtrumque significat sicut caeteri Apostoli Cephas c. That is Haue we not power to lead about women or wiues for the Gréeke word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 doth signifie both as the other Apostles and Cephas c. Héere S. Hierom doth not only flatly affirme that the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which S. Luke in this place which you alledge Act. 1.14 doth vse signifieth both a woman and wife but also sheweth that that place of S. Paul 1. Cor. 9.5 may be translated either women or wiues And in his booke against Heluidius he doth translate it wiues The which also S. Augustine doth affirme that som translated in that place Wiues Therefore I beséech you why may not this place in the Acts in like maner be translated either women or wiues without going so wide from the Gréeke and meaning of the holy Ghost as you complaine on Doth your old translator translating Act. 21.5 the very same two Gréeke words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which be héer in this place vsed Cum vxoribus and you with their wiues go so wide from the Gréeke Or doth Master Beza go wide from the Gréeke translating the same Gréeke words with the very same Latin words as the old interpretor doth and he néere vnto the same But you will say the sense of this place requireth to be translated Women and not wiues and the sense of the other Act. 21.5 Wiues and not women Then