but had it at the best hand of the Ancient Interpreters Arias Montanus at the expences and by the Authority of Philip the 2d King of Spain republished the Complutensian Polyglot with no small augmentation which in process had the spacious Title of Kings Phillips Bible A Book which beside the Hebrew the Septuagint and St. Jerome's Latin Translation of the Complutensian Edition gives you a fair prospect of the Chaldee Paraphrase upon the remainder of those Books in the old Copy which Cardinal Ximenius gave to the Library at Complutensian together with the Syriac Translation of the New Testament done into Latin Neither would Arias Montanus influenced by Ximenius his example suffer his Book to contract acquaintance with any Translation save that of St. Jerome's and yet that a Latin Translation might not be wanting to render the Hebrew Text verbatim he inserted in the end of his Book San. Pagninus his Latin Translation with his own animadversions whereby the Hebrew might be better understood This grand elaborate and princely undertaking tho it was approved of by the Divines of Spain Lovaenium and other learned and pious Men nay even by the Universal Bishop himself Gregory the 13th yet it groaned under the common fate of all Books was carp'd at and pinched by the men of Leeth These were the detracting sort of People who objected that Arias Montanus had put in Execution a most bold rash and nefarious attempt in daring to publish that corrupt and monstrous Paraphrase which Ximenius had ordered to be laid up in the Colledge Library at Complutensia And there were some Jews who thinking that the Chaldee Paraphrase was a great Pillar to keep up the superstitions of their Religions wished all health and happiness to King Philip the 2d a Defender as they supposed of their Rites and Ceremonies In the mean time one Franciscus Lucus of Bruges a great Divine and a man of vast Learning took up the Cudgels ägainst these impertinent Detractors and made an Apology for the Chaldee Paraphrase Besides Arias Montanus declares that Cardinal Ximenius himself had thoughts of publishing the same Chaldee Paraphrase and that he had thoughts of adding a Latin Translation to it only putting out the Fables Doubtless that princely Work deserves to be had in estimation with all Divines though it be defective in some particulars as carrying along with it all those deformities which we took notice of before in the Conplutensian Bible For the Greek and Latin Copies are the same that were published by Cardinal Ximenius Arias Montanus did not so much reform San. Pagninus his Latin Version as he did corrupt and spoil it for pressing the Hebrew which too closely he frequently commits toto casu and making a great noise about a little Sense does often miss of the proper import of the words Besides Arias caused a better method and more Copious Index to be published as containing more Lexicons and Grammars than that of the Complutensian Bible though many unnecessary things might be left out which make nothing for his purpose The liberal expences of Cardinal Ximenius and Phillip the Second were far exceeded by an Eminent Person of this Age Michael Le Jay of Paris who undertaking to Publish the Polyglot Bible at his own charge spent his whole Patrimony in Printing of it before he had finish'd so great and wonderful a work First then they took care to have all that was already extant in the King's Bible reprinted in a fairer Character and to these he joyn'd the Samaritan Books viz. the Hebrew Samaritan Pentateuch with the Samaritan Translation and the Syriack and Arabick Versions of the Old Testament distinguished by points with their Latin Interpretation a thing scarce credible ever to have been attempted In this business he was assisted by a very Learned man Gabriel of Sion that came from Mount Libanus in the Holy-Land and in some few Volumns by Abraham an Ecchellensian one of the same Nation But that part which contains the observations of several worthy men upon the various Editions of the Bible is wanting in this work and through the negligence of those that were intrusted with it it happen'd that the Copies of the Greek Translation by the Seventy Interpreters and the Latin one by St. Jerom were both composed anew the very same with those in the Kings Bible the Greek Edition after the Vatican Pattern though corrected and amended was omitted and the Copies of the common Edition were laid aside though they had been by Commissions from the Popes strictly examined after the most ancient and best approved Books and that by the Hands of several Excellent Persons and judicious Criticks However I pass by those faults which occasioned by the Transcribers oversight in the Syriack and Arabick Books do yet in great part remain Besides that the Latin Expositors not perfectly understanding the Syriack and Arabick words have often sailed in expressing the sence Lastly to this vast Work are perfixed certain Prefaces which recommend it's usefulness But in this the brave Mr. Le Jay proves his own Enemy for depending totally upon such men as were partly byass'd in their Opinions by prejudice especially John Morin otherwise a man of competent Learning he extolls the Jewish Books and sticks not to prefer them before the ancient Translations of the Church but what seems scarce 0 credible he possitively asserts that it ought to be granted as a certain and undoubted truth that that common Edition which passes about in the vulgar Tongue of the Catholick Church is the true and genuine Original of Holy Scripture But the Fathers themselves at the Council of Trent durst not pass any such decree concerning the Latin Books To no purpose has that Liberal Gentleman drained his Purse in Publishing such voluminous peices of the Polyglot Bible if it appear that the Latin comprehends the proper and Primitive Scripture and that we must have recourse to him as the true Fountain In like manner vindicating the interpretation of the Seventy Elders he draws an Argument solid enough in his Judgment from a Mahometan Author who as to matter of Chronology rejected the Hebrew Books of the Jews and Samaritans and adhered to the Greek Interpreters from whence Mr. Le Jay concludes that the Seventy Interpreters were in the highest esteem not only amongst the Christians but Mahometans too Indeed 't is very probable that Mr. Le Jay to credit the antiquity of the Arabick Versions which he himself first published would not stick to say that by the help thereof St. Jerom had restored the seven or eight hundred Verses of Job which were lacking in the old Translation and this his assertion he confirms by St. Jerom's own Testimony who before his Translation of the Book of Job had premised that in it were missing about seven or eight hundred Verses and that in compiling it he had not followed any of the ancient Translators but had collected sometimes the words sometimes the sence and often both at once out
that should only be retained which was most Antient and long before any Schisms were sprung up in the Church The Holy Council considering that no small benefit will accrue to the Câ—uâ—ch of God if among all the Editions of the Sacred Scriptures which are publick in the World it should be declared which should be accompted most Authentic has decreed and does pronounce That this Ancient and Vulgar Edition which has been approv'd by the Vse which has been made of it for so many Ages in publick Readings Disputations Sermons and Expositions shall be accompted Sacred and that no Person shall dare to reject it upon any pretence whatsoever As to the comparing the Hebrew Context with the Antient Latin Interpreter the Tridentine Fathers never so much as dreamt of it only out of several Latin Versions then abroad in the World they decreed the Antient Version to be preferr'd before the rest In which respect the Decree of the Church appears firm and constant For as she formerly perceived the Translations of Aquila Symmachus and Theodotion to he false and partial so now she has embrac'd one ancient Version rejecting the rest which seemed to be made out of a Design of Innovation Nor have several Divines otherwise expounded the word Authentic which the Fathers of Trent made use of in this particular of whom there were some present in the Council But having no Design to do what others have done before I pass by their Testimonies in silence To these therefore I will only add the words of single Genebrard a most eager Defender of the Vulgar Edition out of an Epistle which he wrote to Arias Montanus Only it compares saith Genebrard speaking of the Council of Trent The Vulgar with the rest by reason of the rashness of the late Hereticks and other Innovators who covet new Versions loath the Old ones and cut off their innate Desire of Novelty reject the Antient to embrace the Newest Those also among the Heterodox who have any thing of Learning and Modesty revere the antient Latin Interpreter and sometimes believe it a matter of Conscience to depart from his Sence From whence Fagius a person learned both in the Hebrew and Chaldee Languages calls them Persons of little knowledg who foolishly and impudently believe the vulgar Edition to be rashly contrived The most learned Drusius also applauds the prudent design of the Councel of Trent and admires its Wisdom I pass by others of the Protestant Belief among whom it would be no difficult thing to give a Catalogue of many that had a good opinion of the Decree of the Council of Trent Wherefore they only think amiss of the Tridentine constitution whereby the old Edition is declared Authentic who too much addicted to the Writings of the Rabbins believe the Jewish Bibles and their own Art to be utterly at a loss unless they detract from that same ancient Interpretation Buxtorf the Prince of the Hebrew adorers whose wrath was kindled by the Critica sacra of Ludovicus Cappellus reprehends him in these words as if he had too severely undertaken the Patronage of the Latin Translator In Anticrit part 2. Let the Reader observe this That there was never a greater Patron of the vulgar Version and who affords a stronger Argument to support its authority then that same Critick not well in his Wits And yet this is that Cappellus to whom the Learned Hugo Grotius and the soundest of the Protestant Criticks always aduere For this the English Protestants are to be commended especially the most famous Wâ—lion who in his Protegonema to the Polyglot Bible forsaking Buxtorfs opinion follows Ludovicus Capellus almost in every thing Nor have they a slight esteem of the Latin Interpreter though they seem not rightly to have understood the force of the word Authentick however they are far from the wild Opinions of some of the Protestants who vent their Spleen without any consideration against the Tridentine Bishops In Mâ—ssellam Thus Fuller through the most haughty Tyranny of the Roman Pontifex it is come to pass that all other Translations excluded and exterminated even the Prototype of the Hebrew Truth the vulgar Latin Version has acquired a kind of Divine Primacy Nor has Isaac Casaubon Adaunâ—l Baron a person otherwise very learned spar'd the Tridentine Prelates who affirms that the Hebrew Truth has lost its Priviledge and Authority since the Greek and Latin Versions were made Authentick at Trent But the Protestants undeservedly complain of the Decree of Trent because they will not put a kind Interpretation upon the word Authentic and deviate from Divines who are of highest Authority in the Church of Rome The Tridentine Fathers when they made that decree consulted the Tranquillity of the Churches and designed only to obviate those who out of an Itch of Innovation beleived their Doctrines would gain no small credit if they detracted from the true Ecclesiastical Version then in the hands of every Person The Imprudent zeal of some Spanish Diviner No less was the errour committed in this particular by sundry Orthodox Divines who maintain the Vulgar Edition to be free from all mistakes which opinion was patroniz'd by most of the Spanish Divines in Mariana's time so that the learned durst not be of a contrary opinion For thus he begins his Treatise in defence of the Vulgar Edition Mariaâ— pro Defens Vulg. We undertake a Troublesom work and very much perplexed a dangerous Contest then which I know not whither any in these Later Ages especially among the Spanish Divines has been maintained with greater Heat and Animosity and more Implacable hatred between the parties so that from Reproaches and Contumelies with which they have defamed one another they have at length cited one another to Tribunals of Justice and that party which was most confident of his own strength has pursued his adversaries being accused of Heresie as Impious Proud c. To which he adds that Men of great repute for learning have been forc'd to plead their causes in Chains to the no small hazard of their Health and Reputation But Mariana shews at large That there are many faults in the Hebrew and Greek Exemplars many falshoods in minute things and that not a small number of those Errours are extant in our Vulgar Edition In like manner Pedro Lopaz a Spanish Divine L. 2. Conc. Ed. Madrid in the Treatise which he wrote concerning the Harmony between the sacred Editions of the Hebrew and Greek asserts the Greek Edition of the Septuagint with the ancient Vulgar to be no less Authentick than the Modern Vulgar wherein he questions not but that there are many blemishes and failings Animad in Aâ—tiq Hetruse The same Dispute Leo Allasius tells us was started concerning the Decree of the Council of Trent which declares the Vulgar Authentick by the Fathers of a Society to whose care a certain Academy was committed and at the same time declares what the sacred General Consistory thought
of the Emperour Charles the Fifth but we can have no certainty of that Edition because the year of the Impression disagrees with somethings contain'd in the Priviledg viz. that the year 1530 was the first year of the Reign of Charles the Fifth who was made Emperour in the year 1529. Besides in the same Priviledge the Inquisitors and some other Divines are mention'd who had the inspexion of that work but at that time and in these places there was no Inquisition To these things may be added another observation drawn from the third Chapter of Genesis where we find these words Ipsa conteret caput tuum which occur in the Latin Edition to be render'd the same way in this Translation as the Protestants render them viz. cette semence brisera ta teste Moreover in the Preface to this Translation we have the same division of the Scriptures which we find in the Protestant Bibles for there these Books are only reckon'd to be Canonical which were writ in the Hebrew Tongue and receiv'd into the Jewish Canon But we may give a probable answer to all these Objections First some error may be couch'd in the Priviledge as we may gather from some other Editions of this Translation Secondly 't is very probable that the true Inquisitors are not mention'd in the Priviledge Thirdly 't is no wonder that he find cette semence c. in the French Translation because the Translation tells us that he follow'd the old Interpretation Lastly the Author of this Translation who also Translated the Edition of St. Jerom as may be seen in the Title Page might have imitated St. Jerom in the division of the Scriptures at that time there being no Decrees of the Council of Trent against it Neither did Cardinal Cajetan who writ a long time after give any other division of them I shall not say any thing at present of the Divines of Lovain whose Translation is generally read among the Catholicks and which hath been several hundred times Printed and Re-printed and also accurately corrected Which work they did not attempt upon any other account but that they might draw the Common-people and the unlearned from the reading of the Geneva Bibles which were then had in great esteem Likewise those Divines who Translated the Bible into the English German Polish Hungarian and some other vulgar Languages profess they did it on purpose to divert the Catholicks from reading Protestant Translations 'T is said that a Manuscript Copy of the Bible was found in Province in the Language of the Country Translat Waldens which I fancy was made by the Waldenses in their Mother Tongue not the pure French John Leger Hist des Vall. John Leger a Calvinist who composed the History of that Sect makes mention of it and tell us that he has likewise a Copy of it German Versions There were Bibles likewise in Germany in the Dutch Tongue read by Catholicks before the innovations of Luther as some Writers affirm who prefer the Norimbergh and Augustan Editions before the Lutheran's after this Joannes Eckius Dictenbergerus and others oppos'd the German Translations to those of the Protestants James Wowiezkus a Jesuit Presbyter Polenian turn'd the Bible into the Poish Tongue at the command of Gregory the 13th and his Version was afterwards approv'd of by Clement the 8th We have read likewise that there were Versions of the Bible in the English Tongue from the time of Bede but at this time the English Catholicks use an English Version made by some English Divines who fled to Rheims in France and there publish'd a Version which they mightily oppos'd to those of the Protestants a late Writer attests in these following words that there were Spanish translations of the Bible from the time of St. Vincentius sirnam'd Ferrarius la Biblia en lengua Valenciana con licencia de los Inquisidores à cuya translacion assisto S. Vincente Ferrer And affirms that 't is publish'd in Folio in Royal Paper in folio de papel Real Socrates and Sozomen praise a much more ancient and Gothic Version done by Vulphile a Gothic King The Version into Arabic done by a Bishop of Sevil when the Spaniards were under the Dominion of the Moors is commended by some I omit Jeroms Version into the Dalmation Tongue because 't is fictitious and foisted in by those who understood not that Learned Fathers words where he says he has given the men of his Tongue a translation of the Scriptures For by Men of his Tongue he means those who understood Latin than which expression there is nothing more frequent in his Writings when he designs the Latin in opposition to the Greeks who read Origen's Hexaple's CHAP XXV Of the Bible done into the Vulgar Tongue by Heterodox Translators IN the days of Pope Innocent the third a French Translation of the Bible done by some Heterodox Divines was publish'd at Metensium whereof that great Prelate did not a little complain being informed by the Bishop of the above-named place that no small number of the Laity Men and Women made it their business to read a certain French translation of the Bible that they frequented secret Conventicles slighted the public worship and defying the Catholic Clergy to the face began to floot at their simplicity Which aforesaid translation might probably be borrowed of the Albigenses people of that time Neither did the Wicklevists in England want their Vulgar translation whereof I hear that something is as yet remaining Now we may observe that these and such like translations were done only out of the Latin by reason their Authors were unskill'd in the Greek and Hebrew tongues Martin Luther a man of a bold and refractory Spirit was the first who took upon him to do an old Copy out of the Hebrew and a new one out of the Greek into the Mother tongue who was a smatterer only in the Hebrew when this his impolish'd and erroneous translation a translation afterward rejected by men after his own heart came to cope with the Vulgar Latin which for many years before and that in the judgment of all Divines was generally received and approved both in Churches and Schools And yet the Gentleman sticks not to be his own Trumpeter and applauding himself for a Linguist boldly asserts that as for all the stratagems of Popery all the tophitical Tyranny of the School-men yea and the whole Kingdom of Antichrist he had invaded subdued and totally overthrown them Nay if we may believe him he telleth us that he and his Languages were a terrour even to Lucifer himself The Devil saith he is not so much afraid of my Faith and internal Courage as of my Tongue Pen and knowledge in the Holy Scriptures But this Patriarch of the German Protestants as not resting very well satisfied I suppose with the first Edition of his Translation wherein he presumes to have repulsed the Armies of the Devil and to have shaken off the Popes tyrannical Voke set
Critical Enquiries INTO THE Various Editions OF THE BIBLE PRINTED In Divers PLACES and at several TIMES Together with ANIMADVERSIONS UPON A Small Treatise OF Dr. ISAAC VOSSIVS Concerning the ORACLES of the SIBYLLS And an ANSWER to the OBJECTIONS of the late CRITICA SACRA Written Originally in Latin by Father Simon of the Oratory Translated into English by N. S. LONDON Printed by Tho. Braddyll MDCLXXXIV Robert Denison TO THE Most Worthy and Learned J. H. THis little Gift which being not long since at Paris I received from a most Eminent Divine of that City I bequeath most worthy Sir to You as knowing well how successfully for many Years you have bent your Studies to this sort of Learning The ensuing Treatise was taken out of the Large Critical History of the Old Testament Written Originally in the Latin Tongue which Original the F. Simmon Authour was lately thinking to have published himself For the French Edition which is common in every bodies Hand is only a Compendium of the Latin that has not yet seen the Light and was indeed design'd for Persons accustom'd to that Language who as they are more Nice and Curious so they are soon tir'd with what is long and tedious Nevertheless I could wish that Work had been communicated entire to us who are not so scrupulous and delicate for we do not easily reject those Things that are good but tho it could not be obtained from that most laborious Author of the Critical Animadversions Yet a Parisian Divine both Doctor and Canon who had then some thoughts of setting forth a Bible compleatly furnished bestowed it in pure Friendship upon Us whatever it be which he assured me he received from the Author of the Critics to be inserted among the rest of those Additions designed for the Bible which he was then intending to publish For most worthy Sir the Study of Critical Animadversion is not yet grown so cold among the Parisian Divines but that in our Age there are yet some most Learned Persons among them who contemning the Trifles and Idle Subtleties of the Schools handle that Art with singular Success as being eminently skilled both in the Greek and Hebrew Languages In the number of these is He who willingly Communicated to me these Critical Enquiries into the various fortune that has befallen the Bible through the diversity of Times and Places Perhaps most learned Sir that Parisian Divine may seem to you to have fallen somewhat too severely upon our most Excellent Vossius But if those Monsters of Opinions which he lays to the Charge of our most Learned Vossius be but attentively considered you shall not find him to have exceeded the Laws of Moderation and Equity But I need say no more to recommend to you so Knowing and Judicious in this kind of Learning the Reading of this little Treatise For I remember how highly you valu'd residing in Paris the Wit the Learning and Judgment of the Author of the Critica Sacra tho otherwise little known to you at that time then by his Writings And indeed such is the Genius worthy Sir with which you came into the World that what is good you approve what is right and true you applaud even in Men who differ from us in their Religion and Forms of VVorship Therefore if there be any thing too sharply uttered in that same Author or which may seem not to comply with the General Doctrine of the Protestants you know him to be one of those who professes the Faith of the Romish Church In the mean time accept this little Present whatever it be and believe that I am always ready to serve you in greater things Oxford the middle of April 1683. The TRANSLATOR TO THE READER Candid Reader THE former Critick of Mr. Richard Simon one of the Fathers of the Oratory lately publisht first in French and then in English having suffer'd the fate of all other Books of this nature especially and undergone the Censures of the various Capacities of Readers the Author hath since thought fit to take the work a second time in hand and having revised and abridged it he put it into the Latine Tongue from whence we have made this Version intending as I believe that fewer of the ignorant and injudicious part of his Country-men should hereafter busy their heads about it Adding to it an Appendix by way of answer to certain objections raised against it by the incomparably and famously Learned Dr. Isaac Vossius in his late Tract Intituled De Sybillinis Oraculis As for the few passages that in the former Edition were any way obnoxious to the cavils of some they are here mostly omitted so that there is very little to be found that is like to prove offensive to any sort of men or persuasion in Religion if but moderately Ingenuous This great and excellent Scholar is it must be confest one who lives in the Communion of the Roman Church but it must be withal remembred that so was the great Erasmus also who nevertheless is highly valued by all sorts of sober Protestants and equalled in a manner with the very prime and best of their Authors insomuch that his learned Commentaries upon the Holy Scriptures were rendred into our own Tongue and chain'd up to the Pillars of our Churches in the very heat of the Reformation As to the Book itself I shall not be so importune as to forestal either the judgments or satisfaction of its Readers but only adventure in the general to say thus much that as it savours neither of the Raveries of the Bigot nor of the insolence of the Prophane so in it the learned Man and Scholar will find what will content him and the common man when he sees how many and abstruse things must be first known before a man can arrive to a competent judgment of Scripture difficulties will find great reason for modesty humility not over pragmatically to oppose his own private spirit to the wisdom of his Directors As for those to whom either the Name or Profession of our Author may create an insuperable Prejudice let them but peruse the learned Prolegomena of Bishop Walton premis'd to his Poly-glot Bible and they will find that that Learned and Reverend Prelate was I had almost said exactly but I may safely say upon the main of the same sentiments with our Author For my own part I doubt not but that the Candour of his Spirit the justness of his Judgment and impartiality of his Censures will unquestionably support his Reputation with all the Ingenuous and Wise and as for the rest their very commendation would be a Calumny Adieu M. R. A COLLECTION OF THE CHAPTERS Contained in this TREATISE Chap. 1. OF the Bibles in general as well among the Jews as Christians pag. 1. Chap. 2. Of the Hebrew Manuscripts of the context of the Bible pag. 6. Chap. 3. Several of the Manuscript Copies of the Bibles are examin'd Their various readings are approv'd by the
Testimony of the learned Jews pag. 12. Chap. 4. Of the publisht Exemplars of the Hebrew Context which are Masoretick Of the Art of the Masorites Of its Original and what Opinion we are to have of it pag. 22. Chap. 5. The parts of the Masora in relation to the Manuscript Copies are weighed and illustrated The true Original of the Masora pag. 28. Chap. 6. Other parts of the Manuscripts in reference to the Manuscript Bible are examin'd Their true Original and the Masoretick Lection confirm'd pag. 35 Chap. 7. Some things unprofitably and superstitiously noted by the Masoreticks are illustrated out of the Manuscript Copies of the Bibles pag. 44. Chap. 8. Some Examples of different Writings are produc'd from the Manuscripts which vary from the Masoretick Versions pag. 48. Chap. 9. Whether the Jews corrupted their Bibles of set purpose The Opinion of the Fathers concerning this matter examin'd pag. 56. Chap. 10. The Opinion of Isaac Vossius concerning the Hebrew Manuscripts is examin'd and refuted pag. 71. Chap. 11. Of the Samaritan Bibles their Targumim or Paraphrases pag. 81. Chap. 12. Of the Bibles of the Sadduces and Karraeans pag. 92. Chap. 13. Of the Targumim of the Jews or the Translations of Sacred Scripture and first of the Chaldee Paraphrases pag. 98. Chap. 14. An Appendix of the other Translations of the Bible in use among the Jews pag. 137. Chap. 15. Of the Translations of the Bible of greatest Authority with the Christians and first of the Septuagint pag. 140. Chap. 16. A more particular examination of the Greek Septuagint Translation pag. 150. Chap. 17. The Opinion of Isaac Vossius concerning the seventy Interpreters is examin'd The Vindication of St. Jerom. pag. 157. Chap. 18. Of the rest of the Greek Translations of Sacred Scripture and the Hexaples of Origen The Opinion of Isaac Vossius concerning the disposition of the Hexaples refuted pag. 172. Chap. 19. Of the Antient Versions of the Latin Church pag. 186. Chap. 20. Concerning the Authority of the Antient Versions of the Latin Church and first of the Vulgar In what sense it may be said to be Authentick pag. 193. Chap. 21. Of the Translations of Scripture us'd by the Eastern Church and first of the Arabic Coptic Aethiopic Armenian c. pag. 201. Chap. 22. Of the later Versions of the Bible and first of all of Latin Versions done by Catholick Divines pag. 209. Chap. 23. Of the Latin Translation of the Bible made by Protestants pag. 215. Chap. 24. Of the Translations of the Bible in the Vulgar Tongues and first of all of those made by Catholicks pag. 221. Chap. 25. Of the Bible done into the Vulgar Tongue by Heterodox Translators pag. 226. Chap. 26. Of the Translations of the Bible which were writ in the Vulgar Tongue and their rise from the Geneva Schools pag. 233. Chap. 27. Of the Polyglot Bibles pag. 240. Animadversions upon a small Treatise of Dr. Isaac Vossius concerning the Oracles of the Sybils and his answer to the objections in a late Treatise Intituled Critica Sacra pag. 249 CRITICAL ENQUIRIES Into the Various EDITIONS of the BIBLES at several Places and Times CHAP. I. Of the Bibles in general as well among the Jews as Christians THE whole Context of Sacred Scripture is remarkably known among the Christians by the name of The Books that is to say The Books so call'd for their Excellency above all others and these Books contain both the Old and New Testament The Jews however allow of no more than only the Books of the Old Covenant Of the Old Testament and those only written in the Hebrew Language for as for those which the Church has receiv d from the Hellenist Jews in the Greek Language they deny them to be Canonical and therefore will not admit them into their Synagogues Whereas the Church inspir'd with the Holy Ghost admits them likewise to be of Divine Authority As to which difference they who among Christians assume to themselves the Name of Protestants and Reformed rather chuse to take the Synagogues part than to joyn with either of the Churches that is the Eastern or Western And therefore the Christians have only admitted into the Church those Books of the Old Testament which they receiv'd from the Jews As for the New Testament Christ the first Author of it committed nothing of it to writing but his Disciples after his Passion made publick those Books which we call the Books of the New Testament The New Testament Now who were the real Authors of those Books some there are who very much doubt as if the Gospels of Matthew Mark Luke and John were not assuredly theirs For say they they would not then be entitl'd the Gospels according to Matthew Mark Luke and John but the Gospels of Matthew Mark Luke and John had they been wrote by them and thus we generally say the Books of Moses and not according to Moses But the Titles of the Gospels and other Books are plainly different For that the Gospel which Matthew published was not Matthews but Christs and therefore it is rightly inscrib'd According to St. Matthew that is to say the Gospel of Christ according to the Testimony of St. Matthew upon which the Christians ground their Faith Pauls Epist to the Romans But now to return to the Jews with whom the Oracles of God were first entrusted as the Apostle speaks it the Holy Bible among them is called by several Names For sometimes they call it Mickra The names of the Scripture among the Jews or Reading in which sense those words of Nehemiah are to be taken where he says c. 8. v. 8. And caused them to understand the Reading For though it be true that Nehemiah in that place discourses particularly of the Levites reading the Law of Moses yet afterwards that name was not unfitly attributed by the Jews to all the rest of the Books of Holy Scripture Sometimes they denote the Scripture by these words Gâ—esrim ve Arbang or Twenty four under which name they comprehend the number of the Books of Sacred Writ To which St. Jerom seems to have alluded where he says Which are not of the Twenty four Antient Praelections upon Nehem. and Esdr have not equal Authority with Divine Writ Now what is to be understood by the Twenty four Antient the same St. Jerom more manifestly declares in Prolog Galeat Neither is there any thing to be more frequently found than this name of the Sacred Writings which they generally affix to the beginning of their Manuscript Bibles intimating thereby the whole Context of the Old Testament Although Josephus a notable Witness in this Argument affirms the Sacred Books allowed by his Nation to be no more than Twenty Two Which seems to have been so concluded to the end the number of the Books might be the more readidily and stedfastly retained in the memory by the numbers of the Letters of the Hebrew Alphabet which are also twenty two Nevertheless it
Vulgar Distinction in their Commentaries In which particular the Jews agree very well with the Catholick Divines who do not depend so much upon the Masoretick Distinctions as to make it a point of Conscience not to depart from them when the receiv'd Distinctions will not yield a sense so proper and consentaneous to the Context To which we may add the Infinite Variety of Manuscript Copies which differ many times as to these matters as well from themselves as from the Masoreticks The Antient use of the distinction of Verses There is also another sort of Verses of Verses of which they seem not to have made mention who have handl'd this Subject from whence I am apt to believe that all the Masoretick Drudgery drew its Original These the Greeks call'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Rows the Latines Lineas or Lines These Verses were comprehended under a certain number of words And the setters forth of the Book were wont at the end of their works to add the number of the Verses therein contain'd that thereby they might prevent Additions or Diminutions which might be obtruded upon them Thus Diogenes Laertius tells us the largeness or smalness of the Books which he cites in his History by giving an account of the number of the Verses of which they consist In the same manner were the Volumes of Origen compil'd as St. Jerom seems to intimate where he says that there were seven or eight hundred Verses wanting In the Book of Job according to the Antient Edition of the Latine Interpreter the Verses are frequently reckon'd up at the end of the Samaritan Syriack and Arabick Copies So that 't is probable that the Jews deriv'd this Custom from the Arabians and they from the Greeks which afterwards the subtle Rabbies enlarg'd according as their Fancies prompted them But there was a necessity for them to distinguish other Verses by reason of their Readings and Lessons in the Synagogues to which they put a full stop not according to the number of words or letters but according as the sense guided them For that from the time that the Hebrew Language began to fail the Jews they never read the Law without an Interpreter who repeated it as it was read to the people in the Language they understood And thus the Interpreter follow'd the Reader when he had read one Verse which was such a short Sentence as might easily be deliver'd to the People without oppression to the memory which being read and interpreted then the Reader read another and then another till he came to some new matter so that his Lessons for Morning and Evening were therefore divided into Verses Nor can there be invented any other Original of those Verses which are pointed by the Doctors of Tyberias in the Sacred Context to be seen in the Editions of every Bible Although there were another sort of Verses well known to those of Tyberias because they do sometimes reckon up the Words and Letters of which the Verses consist Another sort of Verses A third sort of Verses the Criticks seem to acknowledge which the Doctors of Tyberias the Authors of the Masora seem not altogether to be ignorant of The word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the Greeks borrowed from Military Discipline does not only signifie a Line but a certain Order or Rank of Lines and consequently of Verses In which sense Hesychius compos'd a Tractate under this Title 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 The distinction of the Twelve Prophets To which the word Sita answers in the Masora and from the same Fountain the word Sedarim or Orders seems to have proceeded where it signifies the same with the Greek word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which distinctions and subdistinctions were invented Cassio de Diâ—in Lâ—â—t that the breath being tired by a long Sentence might recover it self by the means of allow'd Pauses as Cassiodorus rightly observes Of the same nature were those distinctions which the Greeks call 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Latines Capitula or small heads differing from those which we now call Chapters For these 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 divided the whole Context of the Books into lesser Sections and the Heads of these were placed at the front of the Book This is to be seen in the New Greek Testament Printed at Venice Anno 1538. and in the Greek Edition of the same by Robert Stephanus which was copy'd from the Manuscripts preserv'd in the most Christian King's Library Had the Criticks consider'd more seriously these things and some other things which I pass over in silence while they were making their Animadversions upon the Original of the Masoretick Art they would not have wasted so much time and labour in refuting the Jewish Miracles who talk of nothing but of Moses and Esdras To this I will add something concerning the Notes which the Jews call Taamin the Latines Accentus or Accents which serve in the room of Colons and Comma's to distinguish the Hebrew Context in the same manner as the Greeks make use of points and stroaks However in this the Rabbies seem to have exceeded the Greeks and Latines because they not only found out the marks of Accents for the distinction of Sentences and their Members but also invented other Accents for marks of continued speech as if what was not distinguish'd was not continu'd The Original of those Accents they take from Esdras himself But how vainly any man may judge by what has been already said concerning those other sorts of Distinctions For indeed they have no other Authors but the Doctors of Tyberias who in this particular acted the part of Grammarians Neither are the Jews so strict in observing them as to make it an Article of their Belief that they are not to be departed from especially where another Distinction produces a better sense In Lib. Tsachuth Thus Aben Esra makes mention of a certain Learned Rabbi by name Moses Coheu who took little notice of those Masoretick marks in distinguishing the Sentences of the Biblick Context And yet I have the same Opinion of these De Diviâ— Lect. as Cassiodorus had of the Points that were added to the Edition of the Latine Interpreter by the Criticks These Points saith he are as it were certain Paths of the Senses and Lights of Sentences But they must of necessity dote as the Jews do who look upon those Periods of the Hebrew Context to be the Effects of Divinity and thereby shew themselves absolute strangers to Criticism Nor do I wonder that the whole Nation of the Jews embrac'd those marks as well in transcribing their Copies as in the Explanation of the Context seeing all that profess the Faith of the Roman Church so religiously adhere to the Vatican Edition of the Latine Interpretation with points and stroaks and never swerve from it but when they play the Criticks in their Commentaries which that it was also a thing much practis'd by the Jewish Rabbies their Comments upon the Scripture
presume to alter the expositions of your Fore-Fathers who lived with Ptolomy King of Egypt saying that it is not so in the Scripture as they translated it but behold a young Woman shall conceive c. Now there by Scripture is meant nothing but the version of Aquila to which the Jews always adher'd in their disputes with the Christians In like manner Justin accuses the Jews to have eras'd out of their Bibles these words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 à ligno from the wood Psal 95. But if we consider the matter more attentively those words seem rather to have been obtruded upon the place then omitted And therefore they must of necessity be deceived who too unwarily follow Justin Martyrs opinion too peremptorily giving his Judgment upon things which he did not altogether so well understand I should for my part rather hearken to Trypho the Jew whom Justin brings in answering his Dialogue concerning the mutilation of the Scripture done by the Princes of the Jews The thing seems incredible I say it seems to be incredible it is more horrible then casting the Molten Calf or Children offered to Devils or the killing of the Prophets themselves Certainly the Jews had such a Reverence for their Holy Bibles which would not permit them to corrupt them on set purpose Moreover by the answers of Trypho which Justin supplies it is apparent that the Jews at that time so zealously devoted to the letter of the Scriptures and the subtleties of Allegories adhered the more closely to the Hebrew Text that they might the more vigorously inforce them upon the Christians For which reason they made Greek Translations which might more truly correspond with the Hebrew Text then the Septuagint For which reason Justin also many times praises as well the Jewish as Christian Version to the end that disputing with the Jews he might convince them out of their own Books Lastly there is no reason why the Jews should be called in Question for depraving the Copies of their Bibles if they have translated one and the same Hebrew word in that signification which was most proper for their business as when Justin in the same Dialogue objects against Trypho that the Jews read the 49th of Genesis amiss 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 donec veniant quae reposita sunt ei Till those things shall come which are laid up for him Whereas the words in the Greek version of the Septuagint are 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 until he shall come for whom this is laid up For the Hebrew Word Shilo may be rightly rendered in either sense neither is it certain whether the version which Justin so confidently avers to be that of the LXX Interpreters was really theirs or no whereas the Roman Edition owns that for the true one which Justin attributes to the Jews where the Scholiast observes that it is the same in Clemens Alexandrinus Eusebius Chrysostom Cyrill Cyprian and Austin among the Latin Fathers The next in order is Irenaeus who accuses the Jewish Rabbies L. 4. c. 25. for setting up their Law contrary to the Law of Moses wherein they add some things take away others The Opinion of Irenaeus and other places they interpret as they please But the blessed Irenaeus there explains himself and professes himself only to speak of the Constitutions of the Rabbies who as he says make a mixture of Traditions with the Precepts of God and confirms his meaning out of the words of St. Matthew Why transgress ye the Precepts of God through your Traditions In which place Christ never thought in the least of the depravation of the Bible Nor is there any more weight in any other of the Testimonies of the Fathers which are commonly brought to destroy the Jewish Exemplars Morinus tax'd and I wonder that John Morinus a most Learned person who in reckoning up the Fathers that thought the Hebrew Bibles to be corrupted numbers Irenaeus and affirms it from these words of his Which Jews had they thought there would have been Christians Ireâ—l 32.5 and that they would have made use of Testimonies out of their Scriptures would never have scrupl'd to have burnt their Bibles which make it evident that all other Nations participate of Salvation whereas the contrary may be rather asserted from thence For there by the Scriptures Irenaeus means the Translation of the LXX Interpreters which was made use of in the Synagogues which Translation being before the Nativity of Christ and made by the Jews he blames from thence the Version of Aquila as naught and deceitful and infers the propensity of the Jews to destroy the Bible from that Translation which they allow'd in hatred of the Christian Faith forsaking the Version of the Septuagint which was compil'd by their own Country-men So far was Irenaeus from asserting the Jews to have maim'd the Bible that he rather confirms their entireness and denies them to be really depraved only adding a conjecture of his own of what might have been probable Only this depravation of the Holy Scriptures Irenaeus acknowledges with the rest of the Fathers which got footing in the Hebrew Manuscripts when the Jews remain'd in Captivity and which afterwards was reform'd by Esdras Prince of the Great Sanhedrim the Hebrew Exemplars being restor'd to their former Purity by his Industry The third in order is Tertullian but the Arguments which he brings against the Jewish Manuscripts are so frigid Tertul. lib. de habit mul. c. 3. that they scarce deserve a Refutation First these words of his are produc'd We read that the Scripture being proper for Edification was inspir'd from Heaven that afterwards it was therefore rejected by the Jews as all other things that savour of Christianity Neither is it any wonder that they rejected any Scriptures speaking concerning him The Judgment of Tertullian when they would not receive him speaking to them However there is not a word of the Corruptions of the Text in this Testimony of Tertullian Only Tertullian endeavours to vindicate a Book of Enoch's which most men deservedly suspected to be an Imposture and they correspond with the proof which was taken from the Authority of those Jews who did not reckon that Book among the Canonical and therefore he says those Doctors condemned many things as Apocryphal which afterwards the Church receiv'd as inspir'd I know saith he that this Treatise of Enoch which attributes this Order to the Angels is not receiv'd by some because it is not admitted into the Jewish Magazine Nor did Tertullian say as his words are cited by Morinus that the Scripture was resected or mangled but rejected by the Jews For there is no mention there made of the Scripture mutilated but of whole Volumes which the Jews suspicious of their credit rejected And this is confirm'd out of the Editions of Tertullian's Works by Rhenanus Pamelius and others Nor is there any more strength in those other words of Tertullian This Heresie will not admit of certain Scriptures
Tertul. de Praescrip adv her c. 17. or if she receive any she perverts them to her own purposes by Additions and Omissions or if she receive them she does not receive them whole or if she do that nevertheless she perverts them by feign'd Expositions Adulterated Sense being an equal Enemy to Truth with a corrupted and mutilated Text. But here Tertullian plainly taxes the Hereticks not the Jews Now from these words you may give a shrewd ghess whether that Learned person had just reason to break forth into these passionate expressions after he had produc'd the Testimonies of Justin Irenaeus and Tertullian against the Jewish Bibles From hence then says he Morin Exercit Bib. that Principle or Foundation is apparent that the Jews corrupted both their own and our Bibles in hatred of Christ and the Christians and ras'd some Books out of the Canon was taken for granted by our most holy Fathers and upon the confidence of that Foundation they did sometimes unfold several occurring difficulties and answer'd the Objections of the Hereticks and Jews But with the good leave of that most learned Man I must needs say that he never consulted the Fathers in this matter but only made use of what he had read in other Authors and in the works of Leo Castro a mortal Enemy of the Jews and inserted their words verbatim into his Exercitations Nor am I one who believe an obligation of standing to the Opinion of the Fathers in this matter Their Authority is of great moment in matters of Faith but in Critick Learning it is then to be esteem'd when it agrees with Truth and for this we have the Authority of the Prince of the Latine Divines St. Austin who as he was a man of a most acute Wit and piercing Judgment was not afraid to recede from the Opinion of other Fathers upon that Argument which is now the Subject of the Controversie because he thought it less probable So that when he came to consider the difference of the Greek and Hebrew Copies in the years of Methusalem's Age he could not favour their Opinion who preferr'd the Greek before the Hebrew Copies Though St. Austin readily acknowledges with the rest of the Fathers that work to be the work of the Prophets He relates the Opinion of some persons of his Age in these words They admit not that here might be a greater mistake of the Interpreters De Civit. Dei l. 15. c. 11. rather than that it should be false in that Language from whence the Scripture was translated into our Language by the Greek but they say it was not likely that the LXX Interpreters who at one and the same time agreed in sense could err or would impose a falshood where no Interest could sway them But the Jews while they bear us ill will because the Law and the Prophets are become common with us by Interpretation have made some alterations in their Copies to lessen the Authority of ours This Opinion or rather Suspition let every one accept as he thinks good but certain it is that Methuselah liv'd after the Flood Here St. Austin seems to be guided rather by the weight of reason than a cloud of Writers who as he well knew did not make a right computation of Methuselah's Years Wherefore handling the same Argument again he openly affirms that he cannot agree with them who believ'd that the Jews had corrupted their Scripture of set purpose He denies that the Jews being a People scatter'd into all parts of the World could joyn in such an Universal Conspiracy to a Falshood that should be never discover'd At length he adds I could never doubt but that it would be well done that when there is any thing of variance found in both Copies when there cannot be Truth in both let the Truth be judged by that Language out of which the Translation was made by the Interpreter And that St. Austin should be of this Opinion contrary to the Judgments of almost all the Doctors of his Age nothing but the Truth over-rul'd him I wish that other with St. Austin would rather consider the things themselves then the Authority of others For this Diversity in Opinion might easily be reconcil'd I pass by the Testimony of other Fathers of whose names Leo Castro gives us a long scroll to little purpose for it will be sufficient to produce them who understood the Hebrew Language For it would be an idle thing to produce Witnesses that know nothing of the business Among the Greeks only Origen among the Latines only Jerom applied himself to the understanding of the Hebrew Language For to omit all the rest Epiphanius whom Jerom cryes up for his knowledge of five Languages having a smattering of Hebrew understood nothing of the Critical Learning St. Jerome scrupl'd not to call Origen next after the Apostles Master of the Church by reason of his singular Learning especially in the Scriptures but if we seriously consider Origens Hebraick Industry we shall find him but meanly vers'd in that Language But for that he is to be pardoned that grasping at many things he sometimes speaks not so exactly imitating Philo and such kind of Authors But he was furnished with Hebrew Learning sufficient to understand the discrepancies of various Editions Origens Opinion concerning the Jewish Manuscr explained though he were inferiour to St. Jerome in that particular Therefore his Judgment concerning the Purity of the Hebrew Text is not to be despis'd These Writers that promote the Jewish Copies bring many Quotations out of Origen by which they seem to traduce the Jews for being Corrupters of the Sacred Writings Thus in reference to the words of Jeremy The Sin of Juda is written with an iron Pen he argues the Jews to have plainly falsify'd who translate the words their Sin instead of the Sin of Judah Again in the Epistle which he wrote to African concerning the History of Susanna he asserts that the Jews have cut off many passages from their Bibles lest they should be read by the Plebeians We must say that as to those things which contained the Reproach of Elders Magistrates and Judges they took away as much as they could from the knowledge of the people which are kept among their Arcana And as an example of that Corruption he brings what the Author of the Epistle to the Hebrews relates of Isaiah and affirms that the words there written concerning the Prophets they were stoned they were sawed and put to several deaths are not in the publish'd Bibles but that the words concerning Isaiah's being cut in two with a Saw were taken by Tradition and preserved in some secret place Which saith he was craftily of set purpose done perhaps by the Jews some undecent words being inserted into Scripture to abrogate the belief of the whole Other Examples he adds but of the same kind in the same place and all to prove the same thing which Christ in the New Testament objects to
produces are very shallow and full of themselves neither do I believe him to be the Author of them But as he was a man of unexhausted reading he only quoted what he had read in other Authors For how highly he valued the Jews Origen openly testifies when he made use of them as his instructors in the Hebrew Language and by frequent discourse and conversation with them far exceeded all the other Doctors of the Church in the knowledge of the Scriptures The Opinion of Jerom touching the Jewish Bibles In like manner Jerom seems to have a different Opinion of the Jewish Bibles so that the Learned men of his Age scrupl'd not to tax him of inconstancy as well in this as other Arguments And in our times Ribera who was very industrious upon St. Jerom's Works perceiving the difficulty of reaching his sense affirms that Jerom was not to be read by a droanish and illiterate Reader Yet you shall observe many who though they hardly ever saw Jerom will pretend to make him their Patron who of necessity must be often deceiv'd who rashly cite not so much his Opinion or why he thinks so as what he speaks Therefore that we may not appear like to them it will be expedient to explain the Genius of St. Jerom and what his method of Writing is that by this means we may understand what he wrote stedfastly as his own Opinion what upon probability and from the dictates of others Jerom in his Youth was a great declaimer in the Schools and one that us'd to bandy Arguments on both sides well read in the Books of the Grammarians Rhetoricians and Philosophers especially the Peripateticks and Stoicks as being the most skilful in Logick He had made Aristotle his Interpreter Alexander the Aphrodisian his Familiars whose Commentaries he had made free of the Roman Language L. 2. Apoi ad vers Russin Almost from our Cradle saith he we convers'd with Grammarians Rhetoricians and Philosophers Which made him frequently deride his Antagonists as ignorant of Logick and such as had never read 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aristotelis the Predicaments of Aristotle nor his Treatise 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or concerning Interpretation nor his Topicks How much he profited in Aristotles School he abundantly shews and tells us what leaden Adversaries he had in point of Logical Defences We have read most Learned men saith he those Aristotelian Principles as well in the Schools as flowing from the Fountains of Gorgias We have read that there are several sorts of Elocution and that it is one thing to write 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for exercise sake and another 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 for positive Instruction The first is only a Vagous way of Disputation propounding now one thing now another arguing at pleasure speaking one thing and thinking another c. By this means Hierom wip'd off the accusation of childish Inconstancy as if he maintain'd Paradoxes for his own pleasure What he seem'd to affirm 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or singularly those things he makes out to be only said 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or secundum quid that is for Governments sake and accidentally And thus in one place he calls Origen Master of the Church in another Heretick declaring that he only prais'd him for what he was praise worthy I call him our Origen for his great Learning not for the Truth of his Assertions The same things he speaks of Eusebius and upon the same account he calls Aquila sometimes a most diligent and acurate Interpreter sometimes contentious and idle Yet Jerom cannot be said to differ from himself who according to the variety of the Argument has a different Opinion of one and the same Interpreter Having thus display'd St. Jerom's Genius and his method of Writing let us come to our purpose Johannes Morinus who not unfrequently contradicts himself seems to reproach the Inconstancy of St. Jerom in reference to the present Argument in these words in Exercitat Bib. Jerom in his Youth lookt upon the Translation of the LXX Interpreters as approv'd by Christ and his Apostles at length he accus'd the Jews of envious corrupting the Bible in hatred of the Christians But being grown in years and using the company of several Rabbies for the attaining the Hebrew Language he so chang'd his Opinion that he not only asserted the Hebrew Copies to be free from all Mutilation but shew'd himself most violent in defending his Assertion But Jerom himself makes answer to Ruffinus and others who objected the same things against him that he was no such fool to forget in his Old Age what he had learnt in his Youth nor do we so invent Novelties as to destroy old things We are therefore first to consider what has been already observ'd concerning St. Jerom's method of Writing First St. Jerom being bred up in the Church had the Bible in great honour and translated the Holy Writings corrected by most Antient Copies into his own Language which was the Latine Wherefore having embraced the vulgarly receiv'd Opinion of their Authentickness he cry'd out their Authors as others did for so many Prophets that thereby he might persuade men to read them the more diligently and with the greater veneration But whether they were to be in the Catalogue of Prophets or Interpreters that he minded not as not making for his purpose being satisfied with reporting what was in every bodies mouth for the promotion of his labour But being grown older after he had studied the Hebrew Language acting the Critick he no longer spoke from other mens mouths but confidently asserted his own Opinions At length when he had brought upon himself the ill-will of many he again embrac'd the common Opinion concerning the Greek and Hebrew Copies only for orders sake and with respect to his own Interest Therefore I had rather adhere to St. Jerom in his riper years and now grown a skilful Critick than when he was young and only spake the thoughts of other men Nor is it of any moment what Morinus Objects that in these places St. Jerom seems to speak his own Sentiments and not the Opinion of others For it is familiar with St. Jerom to assert what he produces only upon probability and as the Opinion of others as if he were affirming his own Judgment of the matter In which sense are to be understood the words of that Epistle to the Galatians where he testifies 3 Epist that there are some things in the Hebrew Copies perversely obliterated by the Jews For there he speaks the Opinion of those Writers whom he had prais'd in his Preface Thus he answers Ruffinus in another place loading his Doctrine with reproaches I in the Commentaries upon the Ephesians have so followed Origen Dydimus and Apollinarius whose Opinions are certainly contrary one to another that I might not forego the Truth of my Faith What labour has been bestowed upon the Commentaries the progress of what I
have said will declare And soon after since that he shall be thought guilty of differing Interpretation and contradictory Sense who in one and the same Work inserts down the Expositions of many Upon the same account in answer to a Letter of St. Austins after he had enumerated those Doctors whose words he had made use of in his own Works he adds Therefore that I may ingeniously confess I have read all these Authors and heaping together the most of their Sentences in my mind I call'd an Amanuensis and dictated either my own or other mens minding neither order nor words nor sometimes the sense In another place writing to St. Austin again If therefore you have thought any thing worthy reproof in our Explanation it became your Learning to examine whether those things which we wrote were in the Greek Authors that if they had not said them you might condemn my Opinion especially having frankly confessed in my Preface that I followed the Commentaries of Origen and dictated either my own or other mens However lest any one should object against him that this manner of Writing was peculiar to him he informs us in another place whom he propos'd to himself to imitate Read says he Demosthenes read Tully and lest those Orators should displease who speak things rather probable than true read Plato Theophrastus Xenophon Aristotle c. Nay he praises Origen Methodius Eusebius Apollinarius Minutius Victorinus Lactantius Hilarius who imitated the same manner of writing and at last after all he adds St. Paul read says he his Epistles chiefly to the Romans the Galathians the Ephesians wherein he seems to be Polemick altogether and there you shall see by his Testimonies taken out of the New Testament how prudently he dissembles his Intention Which passages I have the more prolixly quoted out of St. Jerom because I find many things attributed to St. Jerom which never came into his thoughts First therefore the Oeconomy of St. Jeroms writing is to be observed before Judgment be given of his meaning or that any thing which goes under his name and authority be opposed For frequently he writes not his own sentiments but what he has collected from others Which if they be rightly understood St. Jerome will never be found to differ from himself not so much as in this very subject which we handle at present Therefore in his Commentaries upon Michah he durst not openly accuse the Jews as if they had obliterated the words Ephrata or Bethlehem in hatred of the Christian Religion lest he should be thought to be born of the Tribe of Judah But this he declares to be the Opinion of some of the Doctors of his time affirming nothing only reporting the repugnant Opinions of others Yet Isaac Vossius greedily lays hold upon this Opinion of Jerom a person otherwise learned to shew that St. Jerom durst not deny but that the Jews had purposely obliterated the word Ephrata out of their Copies But it is no difficult thing to apprehend what St. Jerom thought of this Argument while he shews himself so strenuous a Champion of the Hebrew Text which he frequently calls the Hebrew truth CHAP. X. The Opinion of Isaac Vossius concerning the Hebrew Manuscripts is examined and refuted THat the Scriptures of the Jews are the only true and original Scriptures is the Common Opinion of all the Divines whom we call Protestants who in their disputes with the Catholick Doctors always have recourse to the Hebrew Roots if the Latin Interpreter will not serve their turn who as they believe has mistaken in many things Hence it comes to pass that those Divines who call themselves Reformed make no reckoning of the Ancient Translations of the Church some very few excepted who have discerned certain Blemishes in the Hebrew context as well as in the Interpreters of it But Isaac Vossius taking a farther leap has departed at a greater distance from the received customs of the Protestants and openly accuses the Jews of Falsification as if they had expung'd several things out of their Scriptures in hatred of the Christians of set purpose and that after the coming of Christ and the destruction of Jerusalem More than that he sharply rebukes those that plead the Jews cause and as for the Doctors of their sect who defend the modern reading of the Hebrew Scripture he calls them Epist ad Andr. Colvin Asses void of sight and understanding clad with the Professors Gown and carrying for their shield the Masoretick Bible with all its points Now who would not think but that Vossius had most impregnable reason for such a bold assertion and challenge But how grossly he has imposed upon the World shall appear by that which follows What place is there saith he which treats of the Messiah in sacred Scripture which they have not endeavoured either to corrupt or to enervate by sinister Interpretation And a little after When they perceived that the time of the Messiah's coming was past Dissertat de Sept. Praefat. for it was then full six thousand years from the Creation of the World that they might gain 2000 years they expung'd the whole fourteen Ages out of their Scriptures And to obliterate the remaining five or six Ages they curtail'd the Intervals of the Judges omitting Anarchies and contracting the spaces of the Persian Kings By which means they fin'd the measure of time full two thousand years Vossius blam'd But these are the meer Inventions of Vossius who not only accuses the Jews but impeaches the Samaritans for the same fact tho upon another account Nevertheless the Ancient Fathers of the Church Africanus Origen Eusebius Jerom Austin and others who took notice of this difference of the Jewish Codex from the Hebrew Exemplars in Chronology never thought of laying this depravation to the Jews charge Nay St. Austin in this very particular asserts that the Hebrew Exemplar is to be preferred before the Greek and is of that Opinion that credit should be given to that Language out of which the Interpretation is made into another Justin Martyr who disputing against Trypho teazes the Jews in various manners to vindicate the Greek Interpretation of the LXX which was then of sole repute in the Church speaks not a word of any Chronology by them altered to support their cause Besides had the Jews bethought themselves of corrupting the Hebrew Scriptures lest the time of the Messiah's coming might seem to be elaps'd with much more advantage they might have obliterated the Prophesie of Daniel which points out the time exactly then the Books of Moses or Judges But that the Prophesie of Daniel which for the most part refers to the time of the Messiah remains entire is confess'd by all and Vossius cannot deny but that the Jews are hard put to it by this Prophecy But to ward off the blow he affirms that the Ancient Jews did not only separate Daniel from the Chorus of the Prophets but also denyed him to be
greater than of the Synagogue Who can be ignorant that the Authority of the Church has not been able to make good the Purity of its own Exemplars or to justifie them from being clear from all manner of faults when the Version of the Seventy Interpreters of which the Eastern and Western Church made use has not been entire from the very time of Origen However I readily grant that the Hebrew Exemplar is to be chiefly preferr'd for the Christians borrowâ—d the Books of Scripture from the Jews and not the Samaritans Only the Authority of any Assembly whatever does not make a Book to be without Errour or Fault but only declares it to be receiv'd and fit for practice There are also other faults with which the defenders of the Hebrew Text load the Samaritan Copies For first they enendeavour to prove it mutilated by the Example of some few words and then they say that some words are foisted into the place of others They also object the differences of the Hebrew and Samaritan Texts one with another as also the carelesness of the Scribes who confound the Letters Aleph and Ain He and Heth and other Letters resembling in form But they kill themselves with their own weapons when the same things may be objected against the Hebrew Texts themselves In this the Patrons of the Jewish Text are deceived The Samaritan text vindicated because that out of a preconceiv'd Opinion of some of the Jews they think it to be free from all Errour which is to be only affirm'd of the Originals We have already shew'd you that the manner of writing of the Hebrew Context was very inconstant and perhaps more free than among the Samaritans who never hunted after the Trifles of Jewish Allegories Even in this the Samaritan Codex's excel the Jewish for that many things which Superstition foisted into the one are wanting in the other To this we may add that the Hand and Character of the Samaritan Text plainly proves Antiquity On the other side the Jewish Manuscripts being reform'd by several Ages at length obtain'd the name of Masoreticks Lastly the Jewish Text may in many things be illustrated by the Samaritan Thus Gen. 2. we read in the Hebrew that God finish'd his work upon the Seventh Day but in the other upon the Sixth Day which seems to be the more proper Lection Gen. 4. This Sentence which is in the Samaritan Let us go into the field v. 8. seems to be wanting in the Hebrew and many of the Jews mark this gap in the Margin of their Scriptures in these words pausa in medio versus a rest in the middle of the Verse I know that St. Jerom in his Hebraick Questions upon Genesis has observ'd this Pericope for superfluous both in the Greek and Samaritan Exemplars Superfluous saith he is that in the Samaritan and our Volume Let us go into the field But it appears that St. Jerom in these Questions where he professes himself an Assertor of the Jewish Text did not speak so much his own as the Opinion of the Jews Exod. 12. where we read that the sojourning of the Children of Israel who dwelt in Egypt was 430 years the Samaritan Exemplar comprehends Their Fathers with the Children or the sojourning of the Patriarchs in the same Egypt Which Lection agrees with the Truth but is not Jewish But it might have been that they supply'd all these things in their Books and that they might have been glosses for the Explanation of the Hebrew Text which is frequently very obscure On the other side there are several things written with more freedom in the Samaritan Codex which seem to have been added for Illustrations sake out of other parts of the Pentateuch by some of the Samaritan Doctors Which Supplements without doubt argue the Copy to be vitious In like manner the word Garizim Deut. 17. which they have put in the place of Ebal which was the Antient Reading shews that the Samaritans were not over-religiously exact in their Copies whence it is manifestly evinc'd that neither the Samaritan nor Jewish Exemplar are free from all manner of Errour so that they are to be lookt upon as Copies of one and the same Book which may be useful to one another yet so that the Jewish Copy though it have its Imperfections is to be preferr'd before the Samaritan not only because all Religion and the Scripture descended from the Jews to the Christians but because the Exemplars seem to be less obnoxious to Errours However that ought to be no impediment but thaâ— the Jewish Copy may be mended by the Samaritan where a manifest Errour shall appear and the Samaritan Lection preferr'd before the Jewish if it be more correspondent to Truth For indeed the Reading of the Hebrew Text among the Samaritans seems to be nothing near so strict in regard their Copies make no use of pointed Vowels which confine the manner of Reading the Hebrew Context And it is certain that Points were a Modern Invention of the Jews nor are they added to those Volumes which are made use of in the publick Synagogues And there I think the Samaritans rather to be commended than blam'd for retaining their Antient form of Letters The Excellenâ—y of the Samaritan Codex Besides they have a Tradition for the Reading of the Text as the Jews had before the Points were invented by the Doctors of Tyberias Lastly The Samaritans excel the Jews in this that they have retain'd the Antient or Mosaick Characters of the Hebrew Language whereas the Jews upon their return from Babylon devoted themselves wholly to the Babylonian or Chaldaean to which they had been accustom'd which was the reason why the Samaritans first accus'd the Jews especially Esdras as a corrupter of the Sacred Text of Scripture But laying these Quarrels aside let us in a few words examine what may be thought of the first Hebrew Letters For the Samaritan Characters the sounder sort of Criticks and the Antient Coins of the Samaritan Nation fairly plead so that Joseph Scaliger gives them the Title of Asses who will not subscribe to the Opinion of St. Jerom where he says That certain it is Prolog Galeat that Esdras the Scribe Doctor of the Law after the taking of Jerusalem and restoration of the Temple under Zerobabel found out other Letters which we now make use of whereas till that time the Hebrew and the Samaritan Characters were the same This Opinion of St. Jerom concerning the Samaritan Characters was renew'd not long since by Guilielmus Postellus Blancuccius Villalpandus Morinus Capellus Mayerus Perescius and among the Jews by R. Azarias and several others Postellus who had long convers'd with the Jews attributes the cause of that change to the hatred which the Jews had to the Samaritans as being Schismaticks That Party says he who intermix'd with the True Religion the Worship of Idols In Alph 12. Linguar c. de Samar is adjudged by a grave and pious person to
which if not taken Allegorically after the manner of the Cabbala as the Jews themselves write are manifestly false for the same reason if we are not as attentive to the words as to the manner of writing proper to the Jewish Nation the History of the 72. Interpreters not improbably will seem to spring from the same Fountain whether it really was approved of by the immediate Authority of the Sanhedrim or whether through connivance publickly read in their Synagogues it at length by long use became Authentick which truly seems more agreeable than what the false Aristaus says of the Approbation of the Greek Translation in these words Arist of the 70. near the end The Translation being finished Demetrius did first read it to all the Jews who were assembled in the place where it was perfected the Translators were also by who were complemented and caressed by the Body of the Jews as Authors of so great a good and in like manner they gave Demetrius his due Praise and earnestly requested that he would grant a Copy of that Translation to their Rulers As soon as that Volumn of the Law was read the Standers-by the Priests the Interpreters Elders and Governors of the City and the Rulers of the People said thus because that Interpretation was throughout so exact accurate and divine it is reasonable it should remain so and that no alteration be made therein But if the Men of Alexandria were as skilful in the Greek as in the Hebrew that they could judge from a bare Reading of the goodness and exact Agreement of the Greek Translation with the Hebrew Context why did their King so earnestly desire Strangers when he might have made use of their help And then who can believe that the Hellenist Jews but indifferently versed in the Hebrew could be competent Judges of the Translation from a superficial reading when the Learned of our times well skill'd in both Tongues dare not pretend to it Wherefore what is commonly quoted out of Josephus Philo and others in the behalf of the sincerity of the septuagint Translation is of no Moment neither can it make against the Hebrew Originals because there is nothing of the Greek Translation of the 70. in these Writers but what was first taken out of the false Aristeus Judgment of the Greek transl Although I reject the Story of the 70 Interpreters which goes under Aristeuâ—'s Name as an Invention of the Hellenist Jews yet I would not detract from that Translation which for a long time hath had a Reputation in the Synagogue and Church For I know how much the Antients esteemed this Translation since it was praised by the Apostles and the Christian Religion by no other Testimony propagated through the whole World most Churches do to this day retain it perhaps the Sea of Rome would use it to this time if St. Jerome had not made a new Translation from the Original Hebrew these and other reasons easily to be produced manifestly declare this Translation to be of great moment but it doth not hence follow as is the opinion of Isaac Vossius and some others that this Translation is the only true and least Corrupted Peice of Scripture and to be preferred before the Hebrew Copies It hath been a receiv'd opinion among the Ancient Fathers of the Church that they could have nothing sound in Scripture but what they had had Translated from the LXX because the Church owe its Birth and Growth to their Translation Origen dared not Dissent from this opinion although he hath acknowledged a great difference between the Greck and Hebrew Copies and as he hath testified of himself and hath exercised his ingenuity upon all the Editions of the Bibles and their differences There is no need says he that I speak of Exodus Orig. Epist to African where the Appurtenances of the Tabernacle its Court and Ark where the Vestments of the High Priest and Priests are very much altered insomuch that the Sence doth not seem to be the same let us take heed therefore that we do not imprudently and ignorantly abrogate the Copies which are in many Churches In this passage Origon favours the Septuagint Translation more than the Hebrew Original for this reason least he should be thought to bring Novelties and Corruption into the Church yet at other times among the Learned he did more highly value the Hebrew Verity neither truly the Ancient Church which suspected the Jews sincerity could or ought to have any other opinion of their Copies But the Judgment of St. Jerâ—m and the Learned Fathers of our times ought to be preferred for the Antient Fathers only skilled in the Greek or Latin Tongue could not be positive in things not understood by them but we in this Age can compare the Hebrew Originals with the Greek and pass our Judgments upon them Neither can the Authority of the Apostles who had recourse only to the Greek and not to the Hebrew be any Argument to the contrary What benefit could the Apostles who sowed the first Seeds of the Gospel through the World reap from the Hebrew Copy at that time understood but by a few Jews But as for the Greek Cicero for Arch the Poet. it was become as Cicero doth Testifie the Mother Tongue to most Nations The Apostles there did not use the Greek because they were more perfect than the Hebrew Copies but with Judgment because it was adopted to the genius of those who were to be instructed in the knowledge of the Scriptures the Authority therefore which the Greek Translation of the 70. acquired was extrinsick neither was it the more correct because praised by the Apostles in the new Testament if it were corrupted before their time In like manner the Authority of the Hebrew context it not lesâ—ed because less familiar to the Apostles and the first Fathers of the Church but as the Fathers of the Councel of Trent by their Decree by which the Antient vulgar Translation was made Authentick had left the Hebrew and Greek Copies untoucht In like manner the use of the Greek Translation in the Church time out of mind did not diminish the Credit and Integrity of the Hebrew The Septuagint hath it faults even from the Infancy of the Church many of which Sir Jerom hath marked I do not speak of those which Jerom taking too much Liberty in following his own fancy sometimes doth not so well Correct The Western Church hath patronized Jeroms Censure in leaving the Greek Translation of the 70 so long and so universally used for Jeroms new Translation from the Hebrew Nor were the reasons mean which induced Jerom to this new Translation from the Hebrew Original which afterwards was deservedly used by the Church for as he himself testifieth the many errors in the Greek were not the sole cause of the undertaking of that work which many speak of but that also he had found from his exact knowledg in both Tongues the Greek Interpreters had not
whole troops of the Brethren and for that being then old besides the difficulty of dictating he was not able to look over the Hebrew Volums by reason of the smalness of the Print In like manner he observes Com. in E 42. that he could not rightly translate something while he had not time to consider for hast of dictating Therefore neither St. Jerome nor the Seventy Interpreters being Prophets they must of necessity slip many things because they were but Men. CHAP. XVIII Of the rest of the Greek Translations of Sacred Scripture and the Hexaples of Origen The Opinion of Isaac Vossius concerning the Disposition of the Hexaples refuted THere was no Person before St. Jeromes time who durst adventure to frame a New Translation of the Sacred Scripture from the Hebrew Original in regard the Greek Translation of the Septuagint was looked upon over all the Christian World as Divine and proceeding from men inspir'd with a Prophetic Spirit And therefore it was thought more proper to recount the rest of the Greek Versions rather among the Jewish then among the Christians as being such as were finished by the Jews or half Jews in hatred of the Christian Religion But when Origen inserted them all in his Hexaples together with the Version of the Seventy Elders And that the ancient Fathers of the Church consulted them in Expounding the Scriptures and that nothing more frequently occurs then the names of those Authors in the Writings of St. Jerome we thought it convenient to bring them in next after the Interpretation of the Seventy Elders ◠Aquila's Greek Translation First therefore we will take notice of Aquila whose Greek Version we shall refer to the Reign of Adrian the Emperour He having forsaken the Christian Religion which he professed before revolted to the Jews and at the same time undertook a new Version of the Biblic Context in opposition to the Greek which at that time was universally received in the Church And because he found the 70 Elders to be rather Paraphrasters than Interpreters he began a new Translation which should render the Hebrew words 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or following the signification of every word at the Heels from whence he got the Name of the Contentious Interpreter and his depraved affectation which they called 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 was condemned Although St Jerom according to his custom seems to have a better opinion of him for sometimes he praises him as a Learned and Diligent Interpreter Thus writing to Damasus Aquila saith he Epist 125. who is not Contentious as he is reported to be but interprets diligently word for word Nevertheless in another place he calls him a contentious and silly Interpreter that is to say having relation to things and places he gives a different Judgment of one and the same Interpreter and taxes him as a half Christian calling him withal Jew and Blasphemer In like manner Epiphanius who detracts from Aquila as a person that frequently 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or speaks Barbarisms yet calls to his assistance against the Arrians his Version forsaking that of the 70 Interpreters How highly he was esteemed by the Jews Origen tells us in these words So saith he Epist ad Afric did Aquila subservient to the Hebrew Phrase make his Translation who among the Jews is thought to have rendred the Scripture with greater applause whom they chiefly make use of who are ignorant of the Hebrew Tongue as beleiving him to have attained to the perfection of it However the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or depraved Affectation of that Interpreter can hardly be excused who while he keeps over close to the words of his Text clouds the sence and meaning of it Wherefore he himself not contented with his own Translation undertook another wherein following the same method of Interpretation he was the cause himself that those Versions had no other approvers then the Jews Nor do Justin and some others of the Fathers seem to have recourse to them but only to inforce their Arguments more home upon the Jews The Greek Translation of Symmachus Who was the next that after Aquila translated the Scripture out of Hebrew into the Greek is not certainly known For some attribute that Version to Symmachus others to Theodosion Symachus the first of the Samaritan Sect afterwards turned Nazarite Christian or Ebonite He is vulgarly reported to have compiled his Version in hatred of his own Nation the Samaritans whose Religion he had forsaken and that in the Raign of Severus the Emperor He finding Aquila's Interpretation to be contemn'd by most especially the Christians because he interpreted word for word applied himself as St. Jerom testifies rather to render the sence then the words Symmachus saith he uses to follow not only the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 of words but the order of Sence After that by the report of the same St. Jerome he undertook another Translation as if the former had not been sufficiently accurate to his mind The third place among the Greek Interpreters of Sacred Context is yeilded to Theodotion who nevertheless is thought by most to have lived before Symmachus under the Emperor Commodus He embracing at first the opinion of the Marcionites afterwards turned Ebionites and in compiling his Version altogether laying Aquila's aside comes nearest of all to the 70 Interpreters Wherefore Origen took out of that what seems to be wanting in this And St. Jerom testifies that in his time the Prophesie of Daniel was read in the Church according to Theodotio's Translation nor is it a difficult thing to prove that he regarded much more the sence then the words of the Text. Thus in the 4th Chap. of Genesis v. 4. where we read in the Septuagint 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 and in the Vulgar respexit the Lord had respect which interpretation exactly agrees with the Hebrew Text Theodosio renders it 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 inflammavit the Lord set it on fire wherein he agrees with the Rabbins who beleive that Cain thence perceived that his Sacrifice was not acceptable to God because he found his offering was not consumed by fire Other Translations of the Scripture Concerning the fourth and fifth Versions of the Bible which Origen has added to his Hexaples nothing of certainty can be affirmed the Authors of them being utterly unknown Yet is it not probable they were compiled by any Christian Writers in regard that the Church for a long time after St. Jerom acknowledged no other Translation of the Holy Scripture then that which was read over all the Catholick World under the Title of the Septuagint Initio Caten in Job and for that as Olympiodorus testifies the depraved Interpretations of the fabulous Hebrews were reckoned superfluous after the Version of the Septuagint all other Interpreters being quoted only for perspicuities sake and before these Versions Irenaus speaking of the Interpretation of the 70 L. 3. adv Heret c. 25. adds these words They are
though St Jerom sometimes gives a reason of those Notes somewhat different Origen had added also other marks to this Work in the fashion of a small Label concerning the use of which the Criticks of our Age do not agree and which has been hitherto revealed but by a few we are to understand that Greek Edition of the Septuagint with all those illustrating and killing Notes in the Hexaples of Origen was found together with the Translations of Aquila Symmachus and the other Interpreters as the words of Rufâ—inus seem to prove Oâ—igen's Intention was to shew us what manner of Reading the Scriptures was observed among the Jews and wrote the several Editions of them every one in his proper Columes and whatever was added or taken away in any of them he noted with certain marks at the beginning of the Verses and in that which was another mans and not his own work be affixed his own marks only that we might understand what was wanting or superfluous not in respect of our selves but of the Jews that disputed against us Moreover the same Origen illustrated that vast work of his Hexaples with Scholiasts of several sorts which he placed in the Margent of the Book that he might give some Light to that Edition of the Septuagint which appeared in the midst between all the rest For first you might easily apprehend what was the distinction between the Antient or Vulgar Edition of the 70 and his own new Edition by the benefit of this Mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which stands for 70 in Greek that Mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 denoting the common Lection Then in the same Scholiasts the Interpretations of Aquila Symmachus and Theodosion were every one demonstrated by their proper Letter A' denoted Aquila Σ ' Symmachus and Θ Theodotion The fifth Edition was marked with E ' and the sixth with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 He also set Notes in the Margent of his Book for the verbatim exposition of the words of sacred Scripture which are Printed in his works under the Title of Scholiasts And more then this if we will believe Vossius it is not improbable but that Origen marked in his Hexaples the various reading of the Samaritan Codex If any one will rather choose to believe that Origen did not insert the Samaritan Exemplar into his Hexaples and Tetraples but only marked the various Readings I will not much dispute the Business Thus Vossius fickle in his Judgment sometimes avers sometimes denies and whereas before he had so confidently asserted that the Exemplar of the Samaritan Pentateuch was extant in the Hexaples written in the Samaritan Characters now in a doubt he dares not be positive in a thing wherein he has so little of certainty to make out But as it is no way probable that the Samaritan Exemplar which was the same with the Judaick was extant in the Hexaples so it is very likely that Origen might transfer into his Scholiast the different reading of the Samaritan from the Judaic which he did not take out of the Samaritan Exemplar written in those Original Hebrew Letters but from the Greek Version of the Samaritan Pentateuch corrected by the Samaritans themselves This is the Oeconomie and Disposition of the Hexaples of Origen which Persons the most learned could not comprehend while they do not mind that the Greek Interpretations of Aquila Symmachus and Theodosion were twice set down in one and the same work that is entire in the work it self and part in the Scholiasts in the Margent but Origen who was desirous to be beneficial to all Persons reduced into a Compendium that vast Pile of the Hexaples by the help of Notes and Scholiasts to the end that they who could not buy the Hexaples entire might Transcribe at least the substance of the Text out of the Hexaples themselves and by the same art he published the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or common Edition of the Septuagint together with the new Edition which because he thought more corrected he inserted whole into his Hexaples adding in the Margent of the common and the various Sections under the mark 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 wherefore some are grosly mistaken who not understanding this disposition of the Hexaples undertake to maintain that there is in them a double Edition of the 70 Interpreters as well the vulgar as that corrected and pure one of which Origen and St. Jerom so often make mention placed in two distinct Pages and for that reason that the Hexaples did not derive their name from the distinct Columns but the several Versions but these things are apparently untrue and proceed only from the Ignorance of the order of the Hexaples to the Margent of which the ancient reading of the 70 was transferred and thus both Editions of the Septuagint appeared in the Hexaples now because few could purchase those vast volums that had emptied St. Jerom's Pocket most persons transcribed that interlin'd Edition mark'd by Origen with Asterisks and Daggers and other notes of Distinction from whence arose the greatest confusion in the World in the Greek Exemplars and from that time the ancient Interpretation of the 70 was no longer read in the Churches but the interlin'd one of Origen which or another like to it was afterwards transmitted to the Eastern Church by the Care of St. Jerome CHAP. XIX Of the Antient Versions of the Latin Church THe most contentions in disputes concerning the Bible which have disturbed the Church for these many years have been hammered in the Shops of certain Criticks and Gramarians who being bred in the Schools there is nothing which they do not call to the bar of Controversie presuming to prefer their own wit before the Authority of the Church and as if their Critick Art could by no means brook the Ecclesiastical decrees they presently oppose them with all their might and main but questionless without a cause for that the Church does by no means disallow of such Critical Observations as are every day made upon the Scripture by Persons conspicuous for their Poetry and Learning nor if any one more strictly enquire into the reason of the Biblick Context then another does she reject their Labours so they do not detract from the Ancient Editions And therefore it is lawful for the Protestant Divines in imitation of the Fathers to have recourse to the Hebrew Originals and to make new Translations from them so that they learn from the same Fathers That the Sacred Scripture is the proper possession of the Catholick Church and that they have the same sentiments concerning the Church and her Books which one of their own belief wrote in these words against those who neglect the ancient Versions and long allowed by the practise of the Church Let the Authority of our Mother the Church be preserv'd entire to it self let the Fathers enjoy the honour due to them to whose venerable gray Hairs if any one refuse to rise and contradict their decrees let them not be
accounted in the number of their Sons nor of Brethren to us Autor prefat in lib. J. Boys pâ—o defens vulg That Protestant Writer is afraid lest his Brethren Innovators should suffer for the Title which they bear of Reformed who taking the worst method of reforming in the World destroy instead of building up I could wish therefore that the Protestants would reconcile themselves to us seeing that if the present Matter concerning the Ancient Interpreters were more diligently considered they would rather differ in name then in reality from the Divines of the Church of Rome and now most of them carry themselves more mildly then at the beginning of the Schism since the Critica sacra of the learned Cappellus has recall'd them to a right judgement of the uncertainty of the Hebrew Context which is now commonly in the hands of every pretender to Scholarship for they found themselves to be deceived by the Inconsiderate Assertion of certain Grammarians who judged of those Ancient Interpreters by the modern Rules of the Hebrew Grammer The ancient Translation of the Eastern Church Over all the Latin Church almost from the times of the Apostles even to the Age wherein St. Jerom liv'd that Interpretation of Scripture was highest in repute which by some was call'd the Italian perhaps because it was first compil'd in Italy and thence dispersed to other Nations to which the Latin Tongue was familiar by others call'd the Old Translation by reason of it's Antiquity Among the most part it was call'd by the name of Vulgar and Common to distinguish it from those other Versions which could hardly be number'd Who was the Author of that ancient Translation is unknown However certain it is that it was taken from the Greek Translation of the Seventy Elders in regard that no person till St. Jeroms time would undertake to make a new Version from the Hebrew This Edition Flaminius Nobilius having corrected it with a Diligence beyond his Ability caus'd to be Printed at Rome 1588. 1628. which was afterwards reprinted at Paris by John Marinus together with the Vatican Greek Exemlpar but that this was the pure Version of the Latin Church made use of over all the East before St. Jeroms time no skilful Critick will presume to affirm For it could not be that Nobilius could transcribe it entire and absolutely perfect from the writers of the Fathers who did not follow it exactly themselves and if any one of them were learned in the Greek Language they did not think it lawful to make a new Interpretation from the Greek Septuagint To which we may add that St. Jerom repaired that ancient Version which he sound in some places not altogether so accurate but very much varying from it self according to the diversity of Countries and Exemplars in the reforming of which he made use of the Greek Exemplar which Origen had inserted into his Hexaples and which deviates least from the Hebrew Copies But by the venerable Fragments which are still remaining at this day we may easily perceive that St. Jerom left some faults as not being able in so laborious an undertaking to be intent upon every thing St. Jerom imitated the industry of Origen The same St. Jerom to the end he might shew himself no less profitable to those of his own Language then Origen had been to the Greeks in imitation of him publish'd that ancient Version corrected together with additions from the Hebrew Text under the mark of an Asterisk with a Dagger to shew what was superfluous Of which undertaking St. Jerom himself thus speaks writing to St. Austin That Interpretation was the Interpretation of the Seventy Elders and wherever there are any marks like Daggers they denote that the Seventy have said more then there is in the Hebrew Where there are any Asterisks or little Stars they signifie an Addition by Origen out of Theodotion and there we have Translated the Greek here we express'd from the Hebrew what we understood observing rather the Truth of Sence then the Order of the words This new Translation of St. Jerom from the Greek Exemplars was joyfully receiv'd by most Churches as being of singular use in the Explanation of Scripture and shew'd the difference between the Exemplars of the Church and the Synagogue For which how Ruffinus has fum'd and storm'd against that most learned person and so well deserving of the Church can hardly be express'd Who saith Ruffinus would have dar'd to unhallow the Instruments left by the Apostles but a judaic Spirit For Ruffinus does not speak of the Version which St. Jerom afterwards made from the Hebrew but of that which he drew from the Greek Translation of the Septuagint with some additions under the mark of the Asterisk and the little Dagger to shew what was superfluous The same Ruffinus adds many other things for which he condemns St. Jerom of which more hereafter And while St. Jerome by the example of Origen whom he pretends to have imitated in his undertaking defends himself Ruffinus replies upon him that never any Catholick hitherto had presum'd to Translate out of the Hebrew into Latin any thing of Sacred Scripture Withal he shews that Origens undertaking is far different of that of St. Jerom in regard that Origen has introduc'd no Alterations into the Ancient and generally receiv'd Version by the Church But St. Jerom answers most incomparably both to Ruffinus and all other his Detractors But as to that other Version which that most learned Father Translated in his Elder years according to the Hebrew Truth far greater difficulties arise upon it For by reason of that even among his Friends he is tax'd as an Innovator In so much that St. Austin himself could not brook that the Greek Translation which it is manifest the Apostles had us'd should be defam'd as if the Authors of it had mistak'n It will be very hard saith St. Austin writing to St. Jerom if when thy Interpretation shall begin to be frequently read in many Churches that the Greek and Latin Churches should seem to disagree Soon after he confirms the thing by example in these words A certain Brother of ours a Bishop when he had determin'd that they Translation should be read in the Church where he presides another person started an Objection that the Text was by these otherwise Translated in the Prophet Jonah then had been inculcated into the Sence and Memory of all people for so many Ages upon which there arose such a Tumult among the people the Greeks cheifly blaming and clamouring against the Calumny of the suppos'd falshood that the Bishop was forc'd to have recourse to the Testimony of the Jews For this Version St. Jerom brought upon himself the Curses of all people of which he frequently complains even to Irksomness nor is it a Treatise so much as an Apology which he every where writes What shall I do with my Calumniators who if I had diminish'd any thing from the Translation of the
70 would have clamour'd against me as one Sacrilegious and not fearing God especially they who when they differ in the Truth of Faith and follow the Errors of the Manichaeans incense the minds of the ignorant as if they could shew any thing changed from the ancient custom rather desired to err then to learn truth from one whom they Emulate And after something more of this Nature he again adds against Ruffinus and others his followers who reviling his Translation reproach him for a Heretick and an Apostate Our Latin yea envious Christians and that I may speak more plainly Hairs of the Grummian Faction bark against me why we discourse according to the Hebrew If they do not believe us let 'em read those other Editions of Aquila Symmachus and Theodotion let 'em examin the Hebrews not in one place but in several Provinces and when they find them all agree with me in my Error or Ignorance then let 'em understand themselves to be overwise and rather desirous to sleep then learn and let 'em inhabit in the 70 Cells of Alexandrian Pharos Lastly he does not spare the very Eyebrows of the Bishops to use his own words who endeavours to oppress whomsoever they see powerful in the Church and to Profess the word of God But I spend time in vain his Apologies against Ruffinus being every where to be had In which he strenuously defends the reason of his Version and shews how much he profited in his Study of the Scriptures under his Jewish Masters and how much by the same Instructors Clemens Alexandrinus Eusebius and several others advantag'd themselves who while they dispute about the Scripture and endeavour to prove what they say produce the Jews for Witnesses and Patrons of their Opinions And because Ruffinus had objected to St. Jerom that while he made his Translation he was not inspired with a Prophetic but a Judaic Spirit He answers Would it not seem tedious or rather would it not savour too much of vain Glory I could shew thee what an advantage it is to wear out the Thresholds of good Masters and to learn Art from Artificers For St. Jerom wrote an Epistle to Pammachius entitled concerning the best manner of Translating wherein he refuses the Calumnies of one Palladius who at the Insligation of Ruffinus had bespattered his Translation He there shews by many Examples that it is not the duty of a good Translator to translate his Authors verbatim when neither the 70 Interpreters nor the Evangelists follow'd that Method of Translation Aquila saith he a Prosel te and contentious Interpreter who endeavoured to Translate not only the words but the Etymologies of words is deservedly rejected by us Concerning the 70 Interpreters in the same Epistle he has this expression It is new too long to enumerate how much the 70 have added of their own how much they have omitted which in the Exemplars belonging to the Church are distinguish'd by Lines and Asterisks These and many other things of the same Nature he throws together into the same Epistle to vindicate his own method or Translation somewhat more free and loose then some of the rest from the Calumnies of his Adversaries and to the end his Detractors might understand That the sence and not the words were to be considered in Scripture Let 'em not think saith he that the State of the Church is endangered by me if through hast of dictating I have omitted some words Readily therefore St. Jerom acknowledges that in framing a new Translation of the Sacred Text he chiefly consulted the Jews as his Leaders and Instructors neither does he question but that many things might slip him as a man so far was he from the Opinion of those who asserted him in that undertaking to be inspir'd with the Holy Ghost whom Mariana egregiously refutes What avails it saith that learned Jesuite after so many Ages to strain for new Fictions to set up new Prophets Shall we call him a Prophet who in the framing his Translation follows sometimes the Greek Interpreters sometimes the Jews of his Age upon whom he more frequently depends Can he be said to be a Prophet who frequently but chiefly in his Commentaries upon the Prophets doubts of the Genuine Signification of the Hebrew Words 'T is true I knew Pagninus and other Writers especially of the Protestant Belief who deny'd that Version to be St. Jeroms which for many Ages has been read in the Eastern Churches but if you except some few Books of that translation which it is certain were not rendred by St. Jerom as they are extant in the Edition no person truly candid will deny but that this Interpretation which goes about under the Title of the Vulgar was really made by St. Jerom though there be something in it of the ancient Latin Version which before St. Jeroms time was only esteemed in the Church So that in some places which however are very few there does appear the reading of the Ancient Version or else a mixture of both And clear it is that that same Translation was made by some native Latinist from the Hebrew Original Now who in the whole Latin Church beside St. Jerom at that time understood both Languages that is the Hebrew and the Latin But they that desire to know more of these things let them consult Austin Eugubin and John Mariana in their Writings upon this Subject Now that we may more perfectly understand the Nature of that Vulgar Edition we must take notice that St. Jerom tho he confesses himself not to have expressed the Words of his Text verbatim and like a Grammarian nevertheless sometimes he sticks more close to his Words then the 70 or the other Interpreters so that he is not always like himself in his Translation Again we are to observe that the modern Lection of the Hebrew Text is not so often to be corrected from the Translation of St. Jerom as it disagrees from it for thohe make profession to have followed the Hebrew Truth yet sometimes he forsakes it to follow the Greek Interpreters Neither do I think that the Hebrew Exemplar of his Masters which he frequently opposes against the 70 Interpreters is to be preferred in all things seeing that St. Jerom himself had no Original Exemplar of the Hebrew Text neither do I think we are to give Judgment upon the Version of St. Jerom by the later Translations which frequently vary from the other but we must have recourse of necessity to other Grammer Rules then those which have been set down by our late Instructors as hath been at large demonstrated and which it is no difficult thing to confirm by many Examples I shall therefore produce only enough to puzzle the less skilful We find according to the vulgar Edition in the oth of Zachary ver 11. these words Thou also in the Blood of thy Testament hast sent forth thy Prisoners out of the Pit but according to the Hebrew Exemplars it ought to be rendred I have sent
forth thy Prisoners and the Pronouns Thou thy thine are in the Feminine Gender and so make the Sence far different from that of St. Jerom which agrees with that of the Seventy Interpreters Many to defend the vulgar Edition in this place reject the J wish Exemplars as corrupted by them on set purpose But it is much more proper to say that the same Pronoun in the Feminine Gender is taken sometimes for the same in the Masculine which the Masorites of Tyberias allow who added the pointed Vowels to the modern Context And thus they demonstrate the same thing to have happened in three places of Scripture which they cite Wherefore if the same occur in any other places which the Masorites have omitted the antient Translators are not therefore presently to be accus'd because they do not agree with the later In the same manner St. Jerom may be vindicated for translating the word Thou hast sent when according to the Hebrew he ought to have translated it I have sent For this difference of Translation arose from the Letter Jod which is noted by the Mazorites to be often superfluous The Mazorites themselves reckon up 43 Places mark'd jather jod that is throw away Jod as redundant Thus Jer. 32 v. 33. where we read Thou hast taught in the second Person The Hebrew word is written with Jod at the end as if it should have been rendred in the first Person And indeed in the lesser Mazorah it is marked to be read without a Jod and in the second Person as Jerom renders it But I pass by these things and many others by which it might be made out that the Latin Interpreter is often undeservedly reprehended by those that do not understand him and measure all things by the Rules of their own Skill CHAP. XX. Concerning the Authority of the Antient Versions of the Latin Church and first of the Vulgar In what Sence it may be said to be Authentic The authority of the Ancient Version of the Church AS it is a thing that seems to be rooted in men by nature to be opiniated in their own Disputations and to be so presumptuous as to take sometimes those things which are false and unjust for Truths so it chiefly happens in this present Argument where the Writers seem to fight for their Lives and Liberties Thus the Jewish Rabbys seem to be incited by no other reason to avouch their Manuscripts to be free even from the slightest Faults and Errors but only as they are Jews and read no other Scripture in their Synagogues than the Hebrew Text. In like manner the Greek and Latin Fathers in the primitive Times of the Church embracing the Greek Version of the 70. Interpreters as Divine preferr'd it before the Hebrew Copies for that the one were skilled in the Greek Learning others preferr'd the Latin or Vulgar Edition of the Bible altogether used by the Latin Church and Translated from the Septuagint not understanding the Greek Therefore is the wisdom of the Fathers of the Council of Trent highly to be applauded for this that they by their Suffrages declared Authentick that Version which being publickly received and made use of in the Church was in every bodyes hands that is which was solely esteemed Authentick among the Latins Nor does that antient Lati Edition which was read for many Ages in the Eastern Church before Jerom's Translation less deserve the Name of Authentic than the modern Vulgar only there is this difference between the one and the other that the other was not declared Authentic by the publick Decree of the General Council Prologue 10 de vulg There Walton is in an Error who denyes this antient Vulgar Edition to have been Authentick as well saith he for that it was translated from the Greek which we have demonstrated not to have been Authentick nor can the Rivulet have more Authority than was in the Fountain nor can any Version be said to be Authentick unless the Interpreter wrote it with the same Spirit as the first Author which never any man affirmed as to this Version nor had the Church of Rome rejected it and entertain'd a new one had she judged it to have been Authentick But Walton understood not what was meant in the Decree of the Council of Trent by the word Authentick while he confounds Authentick with Divine and Prophetical all the while he treats upon the Argument now in hand Therefore it is necessary to consider what the Fathers of the Council of Trent intended should be understood by the word in Controversie Vulgarly among the Lawyers the word Authentick signifies the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 which the French interpret Originale or Original And in this Sence the Exemplification of a Will is distinguished from the Authentick or Original and Authentick Tables are said to be those which are first drawn from whence as from the Original Copies are made In this Sence the Hebrew Context cannot be said to be Authentick because the Originals of the Hebrew Codex are lost and there remain no other than Copies Therefore the word Authentick is taken by the same Lawyers in another Sense and so Version in their Books carrys the Name of Authentick Thus the Latin Translation of Justins Novels is call'd Authentick because it was rendered out of the Greek verbatim and so it is distinguished from another Version the Author of which is said to be Julian Patricius which is only a Latin Epitome of those Constitutions The first Exemplar was called Authentick as much as to say True and no way maim'd as Antonius Contius has observed Now in this Acceptation of the word Authentick there is nothing which can offend the Protestants But if we must not derive the signification of this word from the Lawyers where it had its rise the same word is several times repeated in the Acts of the Fifth General Synod Where when the Exemplars which Macarius the Patriarch of Antiochia and other Monothelite Bishops offered to the Fathers of the Council were read over again presently the Legates of the Apostolick See replyed That the Testimonies of the Fathers were maimed by Macarius and his Companions Thereupon they require the Authentic Copies to be sent for from the venerable Patriarchal Treasury of the Royal City of Constantinople and to be compared with the Exemplars produced by Macarius and the other Monothelite Bishops There Authentic is no more than that which is not adulterated or of suspected Credit Nor did the Tridentine Bishops pronounce the Latin Version which was only read in all the Eastern Churches Authentic in any other Sense Nor can the Words of their Constitution be wrested to any other Exposition if they be but a little more attentively considered For they were in Consultation about selecting one out of many Versions of the Scripture which were then publick in the world and because the Authors of most were Persons of suspected credit it was in prudence thought fit by those Bishops that
rather mix'd then Pure Those variations which arise from the different marking of the Numbers I pass by as for example Judges 16. Where the Hebrew and the Vulgar read 1100. the Syriac Version numbers 1300. 1 Sam. c. 6. for 50070. in the Hebrew Greek and Latin the Syriac reckons 5070. But no man can be ignorant that there are frequent variations of numbers in all Books of the same nature There are other Examples of different Readings of more moment in the Syriac Translation which altogether alter the Sence such are some in the Book of Joshua especially in the division of their Allotments to the several Tribes Another Alteration there is in the Syriac Exemplar where all the Inscriptions of the Psalms are left out on purpose to put others in their places The reason of which seems to be for that anciently the 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 or Argument of the Psalm was prefix'd at the beginning of every Psalm Whence it came to pass that the Hebrew Inscriptions of the Psalms which did not explain the Psalms to the liking of the Syrians were omitted and others added by the Syriac Rabbies As to the Syriac Language and it's various Dialects I shall say nothing at present in regard that many have already learnedly handl'd that Subject We are only to discourse of those things which concern the Syriac Version Therefore what before we have observ'd touching the Jewish Exemplars to which the Rabbies of Tiberias added the Points that supply the place of Vowels that is now to be noted as to the Syriac Exemplars to which the Syrian Doctors have added the Pointed Vowels which now appear in their Coppies Therefore Walton is in an Error who believes that Gabriel Sionita the Maronite of Mount Lebanon was the first that inserted pointed Vowels into the Syriac Exemplar He was the first saith he speaking of this Gabriel who pointed it and added the Latin Interpretation of the same For before all the Manuscripts were either destitute of points or if any word or vowel happen'd to be pointed in another it was omitted one Syllable pointed and another naked as we see at this day in the Manuscript Copies That this is partly true I will not deny for that the Syriac written Copies some have more some have less points at the pleasure of the Transcribers who nevertheless seldom omit the Principal Yet I have met with Manuscripts that have been exactly pointed Abraham Echâ—llensis In Ebed Jesu a Maronite of Mount Lebanon testifies also that he had by him some Books written in the Syriac Language above 300 or 400 years before compleatly furnish'd with all the Points Then again in most Copies they never omit any Points but only such as are of no use in reading which may be easily supply'd by the Reader As we find in the Syriac Edition of the New Testament which was first publish'd by Vuidmanstadius wherein some Points are omitted which are of little use And therefore the Industry of Gabriel Sionite a most learned person is not so much to be applauded for his adding points to the Copies but he is rather to be commended for this for that with great labour and toyl he corrected the most of the Errors which are extant in those Manuscripts though that Edition does not seem to be so absolute and perfect neither Of the Arabic Translations The Arabick Translations seem to be of much less Authority which are read at this day by the Easiern Christians Nor do they seem to be so ancient as the Syriac For the most of them were made publick among the Syrians as well Jacobites and Maronites as Nestorians when the Syriac Language ceas'd to be familiar when they were subdu'd by the Saracens who introduc'd the Arabic among them The Coptic also or the Christian's that inhabit Egypt had their Bibles written in the ancient Coptic Language which they still retain but because that Coptic Language was known to very few there was a necessity to make new Arabick Versions which might be understood by all So that the most of their Books which are made use of in their Churches are written both in Coptic and Arabic Therefore it is very probable that the Syrians Translated the holy Scripture out of the Syriac into â—â—abic such as were those Arabick Exemplars at the end whereof we find the Arabic Version to have been Translated from the Hebrew that is from that Syrian Translation which the Syrian's call unmixt By the same reason we might affirm that the Exemplars of the Arabick Versions which follow the Greek Copies of the 70 were not so much Translated from the Greek of the 70 Interpreters as according to the Syriac which was Translated from the Greek though it be probable that the Sect of the Melchites took their Version from the Greek Copies as they did most of those other Books of which they make use But whether there were any Version of the Scriptures before that time I shall not now enquire it being certain that most of those Versions now us'd by the people that inhabit the Eastern Regions are not now the same which in former times were made use of in the same Country And indeed should that Arabick Version publish'd in the Parisian and English Polyglots be throughly examin'd it would be found very imperfect full of faults and Errors Thus the Arabic Book of Joshuah though toward the end it may be said to be Translated out of the Hebrew yet it appears to be a mixture of Greek and Hebrew or rather Syriac Besides the Author of that Translation many times shews himself a Paraphraser not an Interpreter and he makes no scruple of altering the Sence of his Text. In the Book of Chronicles we find the names of Greece Turkie Chorasan Sclavonia France Cyprus and the like Yet all the Errors of that Version are not to be imputed to the Arabian Translator the most without doubt being committed by the Scribes Thus Jos 11. We read in the Arabic Version Nabin King of Caesarea whereas in the Hebrew Text and ancient Translations it is Jabin King of Hasor In the same Arabic Version Joshua is said to have assail'd the City of Caesarea which was the Metropolis of several other Cities and Judges 3. instead of the Hebrew word Pesilim which signifies Idols the Arabic reads Palestine Lastly some Errors have crept into the Arabic Exemplars through the incertainty of the pointed Vowels For the points are no less defective in the Arabic then in the Hebrew and Syriac The Coptic Versions The Coptic Versions of the Bible which were anciently made by those Christians that inhabited Egypt seem to be of more Credit then the Arabic For they carry a semblance of more Antiquity And if we may believe Kircher who had by him some Exemplars of those Versions we may look upon 'em to be as ancient as the Council of Nice But not to content about their Antiquity certain it is that they were read in the Churches
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
Hebrew Tongue and one that had exercised himself very much in this kind of Study as it appears from the Latin Translation of the Old Testament which he adds to his Comment and likewise from his Hebrew Lexicon which he adapted to the ancient Translations which notwithstanding he departed from in his Translation relying too much upon his own parts and catching rather at words and shadows than the substances of things CHAP. XXIV Of the Translations of the Bible into the Vulgar Tongues and first of all of thâ—se made by Catholicks AFter the rise of new Hereticks in the Western Church who casting aside Traditions would acknowledge no other rule and standard of Religion besides the Scriptures there were several warm disputes betwixt Divines of all perswasions about this very thing The more prudent and moderate Catholicks did not absolutely condemn the Translations of the Scriptures into the mother Tongue of every Nation because it was allowed of by the Fathers But they judged it requisite to stop the increase and progress of Heresie which sprung from some misinterpreted and perverted Texts of Scripture to forbid the promiscuous reading of them in the vulgar languages by reason of several inconveniences which attend it without a due regard to the Persons Times and some other circumstances Faith according to St. Paul comes by hearing and 't is certain far more have been converted to Christianity by hearing of the Gospel than by reading it At the first promulgation of the Christian Religion there were no Books of the Gospel from which Men might have learned the Principles of their Religion 't is very probable that if the Apostles had never write any thing about the Christian Faith yet our Religion by the help of Tradition had been transmitted unto us entire and perfect This is the general opinion of the Catholick Doctors who do not positively forbid these Translations if so be all persons in all times and places be not promiscuously permitted to read them for 't is their Maxim Non prosit potius quic quid abesse potest Now 't is easily prov'd that almost all Christians before the rise of the Protestant Innovators had the liberty to peruse the Scriptures in their native Tongues For what other reason should the Grecians prefer the Septuagint to the Original Hebrew but that the Greek was their Mother Tongue Likewise the People of Italy had the Bible Translated into Latin because they naturally spoke it and for the same reason the Eastern People had their Syriack Coptick Arabick and Armenian Translations which for brevity I shall omit 'T is true that some Translations are now read among these People which they do not understand as the Latin is at this day among the Italians but this is no convincing argument that these Translations were never in the Languages familiarly known and understood by the common People Now I pass to the Translations of the Bible into the modern Tongues Jacobus de Varagine is highly esteemed among the Italians for his Translation of the Scriptures into their Tongue But now there are some other Italian Translations much in vogue which carry the names of Nicholas Malermius Abbot of the Monastry of St. Michael de Lern and Anton. Bucciolus and in some Editions there is a Preface in which the Author discourses at large of the Translations of the Scriptures into the vulgar Languages but there is this difference betwixt Brucciolius and some other Interpreters He turn'd the Bible immediately out of the Original whereas they only translated it from the Latin Interpretation which was usually read in the Western Churches There are several Editions of this immediate Translation from the Hebrew the first of which the Author dedicates to Francis the First King of France in the Year 1530. afterwards there came forth three other Editions in the Years 1539 40 and 41 but the Edition in the Year 1540 is accounted the best because there are several very useful Marginal Notes in it together with an Epistle of Antonius Brucciolius to Renata the Wife of Francis Duke of Ferrara in the defence and commendation of the Translations of the Bible into the Vulgar Tongues yet this Italian Interpreter seems to be too weak for the management of so noble and weighty a design seeing he sticks not closely enough to the Hebrew Text but follows other Translations especially that of Pagnin whose very errors he has copied out adding some more of his own in some places which he did not understand For in the 8 Chap. of Nehemiah where Pagnin perverts the Original by rending it In lege Dei expositi he translates it Nulla lege d'Iddio dichiarata differing as much from Pagnin as the Hebrew Text For because he searched not into the Hebrew Copies he did not take notice that the word which fignifies Lex is of the Feminine Gender and that the Participle passive which he render'd by Dichiarata was of the Masculine Gender and so while he pretends without consulting the words of the Context to correct Pagnin whom he did not well understand he falls into a downright error I shall forbear to say any thing of the Translation of Jacobus de Voraign because I never saw it Passevinus who had a Copy of it gives no very great Character of it but others highly commend it But I think I may confidently affirm that very few of those Translations which are taken out of Latin Editions can be accurate and correct seeing it happens very often that the Latin Interpreter cannot be understood without some knowledge of the Hebrew Tongue hence it is that Jacobus de Voraigne Mattermus and others who turn the holy Scriptures out of Latin into another Tongue are often guilty of gross mistakes There were several Translations of the Bible into French long before Calvin was heard of Gall. Vers For before the Catholick Religion was reform'd or rather deform'd by him a French Translation of the Scriptures was read in Geneva and the neighbouring Mountains which was compos'd in the year MCCXCIV by one Guiars des Moulins a Canon of Aria in Artois formerly under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Terovenne a Copy of that Translation is still kept in the publick Library at Geneva and another at Paris in the study of the Famous Henry Justelle and I am of opinion that this is the Translation which is mention'd by Robert Olivetanus Rob. Olivet Praes in Bibl. who sent the first Bible in French to Genevah Likewise there is another French Translation in some Libraries in France which is believ'd to have been done by Orosmes Canon of Rouen in the time of Charles the fifth and Car. Molinaus gives out that he had some loose Manuscript Peices of it Moreover 't is evident that the Divines of Lovaine were not the first as is commonly believ'd who Printed the French Translation of the holy Scriptures We have a Translation publish'd at Antwerp in the year 1530 by Martin L' Empereur with the Priviledge
will appear that he has given positive sentence in matters which he little understood I will therefore begin from the Epistle which he has affix'd to that little discourse At the first dash in this Epistle Vossius takes several occasions to traduce the person himself as learned as he was in the Hebrew Language for a Fool a half Rabbie and an Egregious Knave as one that produc'd the words of St. Jerom most wickedly dress'd and trim'd for his own turn Gen. 19.33 The place in dispute is extant in these words in St. Jeroms Hebrew Questions upon Genesis The Hebrews as to what follows And he perceiv'd not when she lay down nor when she rose up marke the words at the top as a thing incredible and as a thing not to be comprehended in nature how a Man should lye with a Woman and not understand any thing of it Vossius attests that he has consulted many Manuscript Copies and that he finds it written in all Apponunt not Appungunt they set over or upon instead of they mark with points at the top He would have said truer that he never found Apponunt in any Manuscripts that were of credit or reputation for what sence could be made of these words had Apponunt been set in the place of Appungunt Nor does he tell us where he found these Manuscripts But that we may come to the business there was no reason for Vossius to pervert the words of the Hebrew Text fearing perhaps least from that word Appungunt the Antiquity of points might be made out from St. Jeroms time For the sounder sort of Criticks confess that those points were much later then the age wherein St. Jerom liv'd who nevertheless acknowledge that that sort of points of which St. Jerom here makes mention and which are put upon some words of the Hebrew Context were done upon the same ground that the Samaritans and the Syrians fix certain cross stroaks over some words which were invented by the Grammarians or Criticks And the Jews both Ancient and Modern agree with St. Jerom in this particular Mention is also made of these points in the Talmud in Medraschim or the Allegoricall Comments of the Jews upon Scripture And they are likewise to be seen in the Modern Exemplars of the Bibles and in most upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Becumah when she arose Which is the word at present in dispute there is added this note upon the Margent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Nakod gnal Vau a Point upon Vau. An. 1615. In the small Venetian Bibles set forth by Râ—ter Bragadinus in the 37th Chap. of Genesis where the same point is put upon the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 there is this note in the Margent 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 one of the fifteen Points which are in the Law Now as for the reasons which are given for these Points by the Jews who are troubl'd with an Itch of vanity I pass them by in silence as being very frivolous It is enough to have observ'd that the Jews retain those Points in their Exemplars by Tradition from their Ancestors When Vossius in his Epistle deplores the miserable Estate of the Accademies in Germany at this day where Rabbinisme domineers without controul and no Theology but Rabbinical is admir'd The Learned Gentleman does not believe that human Learning can be taught or studyed where Rabbinism raigns and the Rabbinical Screitch-Owls bear an ominous sway Nor do I dissent from Vossius in this particular And I would be glad those pedling Priests might be expung'd out of the number of Divines who contemning the Latin and Greek Learning will admit of nothing but the Fictions of the Rabbins But that Persons eminently Learned who after the Example of Origen Jerom Chrysostom Theodoret and others of the Fathers frequent the Thresholds of the Jews should be listed in their Number I can hardly endure For though generally the greatest part of the Books of the Jews are full of frivilous Trifles yet there are not a few of the Rabbies who have wonderfully illustrated Sacred Scripture And this the Commentaries of St. Jerom alone upon the Peophets aparently make out who was not ashamed to consult the most Learned Jews of his Age. But to the nice and squeamish Mr. Vossius St. Jerom seems contemptible and Prince of the Semi-Rabbinical Divines And that Semi-Rabbie as he calls him though he have his failings has far surpass'd all the rest of the Fathers of the Church in expounding the Books of Sacred Scripture And I could wish also that Vossius had first convers'd with those half Rabbins before he began to meddle with their concerns For those half Rabbies can hardly forbear Laughter when they read in his Epistle before his Treatise of the Oracles of the Sybils that it is not above six Centuries since those Vowel points came to be us'd with which the Modern Exemplars of the Jews are loaded That three or four Ages most fiercely contended together while these were of Opinion that the Vowels were thus others another way to be introduc'd And that the Controversie would never have been at an end unless Daniel Bomberg had ended the quarrel having had some Centuries of the Jews and so those Vowels crept into the World out of Bombergs Shop in Venice That person 't is true had a Library well furnish'd with Rabbinical Books from whence he gathered most of his Fictions more Rabbinical But they who have convers'd with Books of the Jews well know that before Bombergs Edition of the Hebrew Bibles and in other parts of Italy especially at Pesaro the Hebrew Bibles were then Printed with pointed Vowels We also meet with Copies of the Bibles in Manuscript written above four hundred years since which have the same Points and Bibles are quoted by the more antient Rabbies wherein the same Points are made use of And it is plain that these Points were in use not only for six but for nine hundred years ago For the Rabbie Saadas Gaon wrote a Grammer about the Year DCCC wherein he disputes at large about the pointed Vowels which were in use among the Jews long before his time Besides those things are all feigned that Vossius affirms concerning the soare contention among the Jews how the Vowels are to be placed upon the Hebrew Context And of the same stamp is that which the Learned Gentleman urges concerning the Editions of Bomberg which according to the Opinions of the Jews are full of Faults And indeed the Jews contemn the first Edition of Bomborgh which was overlook'd by Felix Patrensis in regard the Masoretis Notes are very unskilfully added to the Margent of that Exemplar but they applaud and reverence the second and third of Bombergh's Editions In the adding the Mazoretic notes to Bomberghs Editions great difficulties arose for that there are few among the Jewish Rabbies that truly understand the Masoretic Art which however R. Jacob Ben Hajim with incessant toyl and labour
overcame the first restorer of the Masora But whether he wasted his Patrimony in maintaining those Centuries that Bombergh hir'd as Vossius eagerly contends I shall neither sollicitously inquire neither is it to the purpose Much more might be added to what I have already produc'd and perhaps proper enough to the business but I am afraid least the learned Gentleman should bring me to the Bar for a Semi Rabby and a Favourer of the Jews Therefore let us come to the Examination of his little Treatise concerning the Oracles of the Sybills where he disputes more learnedly of the Jews and their Books At the beginning of his discourse this Person of an unexhausted Erudition produces some things in reference to the Oracles of the Sybills which the Jews more especially in Spain made use of against the Christians And as for those things which seem to be more remote from Truth then Fiction he refers them to p. 19 or 26. where he handles that Argument but seeing that it has already been demonstrared that the Chronology fetch'd from the Books of the Jews less favours the Jews than that which is taken out from the Greek Translators there is no reason we should spend any more time in rifling the Inventions of the most learned Vossius The quâ—cksighted Gentleman had already observ'd that the Jews in the time of Aquila had for the nonce corrupted the Hebrew Manuscripts and had expung'd above 2000 Years that they might make it out that the Messiah's time was not yet come But in this place more perspicatious then before he believes that the space of that Depravation may be Comprehended within the limits of two and twenty Years at most and this he gathers from the words of Ignatius in his Epistle to the Philadelphians That most Holy Martyr according to the report of Vossius relates that he heard some say that if those things which are contained in the Gospels were not to be found in the Ancient Monuments he would not believe them Now saith Vossius since he answered and they denied it is manifest that the Jews had deprav'd the Exemplars or swerved from the Sense of the 70 Interpreters But how this Learned Gentleman can wrest the answer of Ignatius who afferts that Christ shall be to him instead of the Ancient Monuments to his opinion of the Jewish Manuscripts being corrupted about that time I confess I do not understand Neither also are those words to be found in the Genuine Exemplars of Ignatius which Vossius himself set forth Christo velut summo sacerdoti credendum potius quam aliis sacerdotibus Which however the learned Person produces as if they belong'd to the answer of Ignatius 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 I have heard some say that unless I find the Gospel in the Ancient Monuments I will not believe To these I answer that Jesus Christ is to me instead of the Ancient Monuments But there the discourse is not of the Old Testament compared with the New as Vossius believ'd but of the Hereticks which springing up in the Infancy of the Church denied the Faith which the Exemplar of the Gospel set forth Whence it came to pass that the Ancient Fathers of the Church Tertullian Ireneus and others of the same rank did not undertake to refute the Hereticks out of the sacred Scripture but from certain Tradition or from the Doctrine of Christ propagated by the Apostles and their Successors Apostolick Persons in the Churches of several Nations In which sense Ignatius asserts that Christ or his Doctrine was to him in the place of the Ancient Monuments This unless I am very much deceived is the meaning of Ignatius's words who commends Unity of Doctrine in Christ whose Spirit ought to be preferred before any Ancient Monuments whatever Many other things also Vossius produces in this place concerning the Etymology of the word Aera and concurs with them who believe Era and the Heriga of the Arabians to be the same word nor is it improbable but that which he presently adds of the Arabick word Hegyra as if it were to be deduc'd from the Hebrew 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Hagger a Proselyte or Stranger seems not so very likely The Learned Gentleman believes that several Jews of the Sect of the Herodians forsaking Herod their Messiah who was also by them stil'd 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 the Stranger revolted to Mahomet by them also call'd Haggar When the Jews saith Vossius believed that their Messiah should be a Stranger But these things are little remote from the Fictions of the Rabbies In the next place I would fain know from what Oracle of the Sybills the Learned Gentleman gather'd that the Messiah of the Jews should be a Proselyte and a Stranger according to the true opinion of the Jews for that this Assertion is contrary to the Prophesies of the Prophets and all Evangelical History as all Men well know Certainly the Jews expect one Messiah above all the rest of whom Vossius discourses at present but he according to the common consent of all the Jews is expected to be of the Nation and one of the Tribes of the Jews But they expect other Messias's besides and for that reason they give that Title to some Kings who were well affected towards them And therefore Cyrus is call'd the Messia of the Jews so also Herod and Mahomet might have the Title of Messiah from the Jews And in our age they are ready to salute that Prince or King whoever he be with the Title of Messiah that will but take into his protection their Affairs and the Ceremonies of their Country But these things belong nothing at all to the word Heriga which most certainly is an Arabic and not an Hebrew word Much nearer does that come to the Truth which after some things thrown between the Learned Gentleman adds concerning the Genuine signification of the word 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 that 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 signifies the same with 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 so that the Apocryphal Books signifie the same with Mysterious Books and inaccessible to the understanding But who can then gather with Vossius that the Books of the Apocrypha that according to his Sentiments were formerly added by the Ancient Jews to the Books of the Old Testament were worthy to be reckon'd as Canonical with the rest of the Prophetick Books that the Modern Canonical Scripture both of the Synagogue and Church is maim'd and lame while the Books of Enoch Elias and some others are left out Prophets are become very Cheap with Vossius who not only numbers the 70 Interpreters among the Prophets but also the most famous Impostors who taking upon them the names of the Patriarchs and Prophets and other Persons of high same and repute among the Gentiles have Printed the Books of Adam Enoch Abraham Moses Esaiah Jeremiah Hystaspes Mercurius Trimegistus Zoroaster the Sybils Orpheus Phocilldes and several others In a short time if it so please the Heavens we shall have
upon which he does not wholly depend while he does not put a small value upon the Tradition or reading of the Hebrew Context which the Greek Interpreters follow'd Nay sometimes he does not scruple to prefer it before the Masoretic because he did not set himself to write with a mind pre-engag'd by the Greek Interpreters as Vossius nor by the Latin as most of the Divines of the Romish Church nor by the Jews as the Croud of Protestants But says the most learned Vossius the Jews are Enemies to the Christians and therefore the reading of the Sacred Scripture ought not to be fetch'd from them as if any Art could be better learnt from any other then they who profess it But then Vossius urges again and Confesses that the reading of the Scripture ought to be fetch'd from the Jews indeed but from those ancient Jews who preceded the time of Christ not from the latter Rabbins who understood it not at all And in this also Simon agrees with Vossius that the Tradition of the Hebrew reading is to be taken from those ancient Jews only in this he differs from him in saving not only from those but from Aquila Symmachus Theodotion Jerome and all other Interpreters of the Sacred Scripture for that no Art can be brought to perfection by one or another but by many together Simon professes himself under the Laws of no Master he denyes that a perfect knowledg of the Hebrew Tongue can be attain'd by the vulgar Rules of the Grammarians as being confin'd within too narrow limits Furthermore he believes it necessary to have recourse to the ancient Interpreters in imitation of St. Jerome who not only Consulted the Rabbys of his own Age but sometimes the Seventy Interpreters sometimes Aquila sometimes Theodotion or any other whose Interpretation seem'd most to the Purpose And we have no reason in our Age of making another Translation of the Bible which may excel all the rest For it is not true as Vossius often inculcates that only one St. Jerome durst presume to vary from the Septuagint For you shall find the rest of the Fathers have frequent recourse to the Versions of Aquila Symmachus or Theodotion because their sense sometimes appears to be better To say Truth they differ more from Vossius who believes that the Seventy Interpreters being taken away all the remaining knowledge of the Hebrew Language is utterly lost and that without them no one word can rightly be expounded That Aquila and other Interpreters fail'd wherever they departed from the Ancient Version that he was an Idle Interpreter who being learned in the Hebrew did not give the Hebrew words new significations from the Greek Translation of the Septuagint but only retain'd those significations us'd by the Greek Interpreters though in a different Order and accommodating other Notions to other places And yet Origen frequently commends that same Aquila whose Version Vossius affirms to be so full of trivial words speaking of Aquila as of a person who searching out the Proprieties of words and dilligently adhering to their significations studyed to give them the most proper Interpretation 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Aquila labouring to Interpret by words that carryed most Authority But if Aquila apply'd the same Notions of the Hebrew Language variously in several and different places those places are to be weigh'd and Judgment is to be given whether he have swery'd truly or falsly from the Interpreters Certain it is that St. Jerome sometimes preferr'd Aquila before the Seventy Interpreters because they seem'd to favour the Jews In like manner Origen thought that Aquila had in several places more properly express'd the words of the Hebrew Context then the 70. There it is a fiction of Vossius's that there was no man among all the ancient Christians upon whom a clearer light of Hebrew truth shone then upon all the Christian Rabbies and Semi-Rabbies of our Age. For as it was most excellently observ'd by Ludovicus Capellus there is nothing that was ever begun and perfected both at one time The Translation of the 70 Interpreters was corrected by Aquila Symmachus Theodotion and Jerom and as St. Jerow's so is that mended every day by persons learned in the Greek and Hebrew Languages In this alone the Septuagint excells all the other Versions of Sacred Scripture for that it was the first of all the Translations from which all the succeeding Interpreters drew many things proper for their purpose Nor do I question but that in the time of Philo there were extant Lexicons of Hebrew words taken out of the Version of the 70 both at Alexandria and other places Nor will I deny but that Aquila might make use of them as great helps in compiling his Translation But for me to believe that he who in the Opinions of Origen Jerom and other Fathers did not consult the Jews of his time is a thing almost impossible and why Vossius should think so there seems to be no other inducement then a pre-engag'd Opinion that the 70 Interpreters are the only persons with whom the knowledge of the Hebrew Language was buried And indeed whatever Vossius throws upon Aquila may be said of St. Jerom though it be most certain that he consulted the Jewish Doctors of his time when he was compiling his Translation and very often rather chose to depend upon them then upon the Greek Interpretation For he often declares in his works that he was instructed by the most learned Doctors of his Age. The same is Aquila's case whom he calls sometimes contentious Interpreter because he sticks sometimes too close to the signification of the words more eager upon the force of the word then the Sence of the Sentence For which reason Jerom accuses him of deprav'd affectation but never of Ignorance which affectation Origen ascribes to his too much dilligence Now Vossius passes to other matters He denies that the Sence of Scripture can be plough'd forth of a Mute Codex which heither any man knows how to read or understand as being half maim'd and furnish'd with no other Vowels then what the Enemies of the Christian Faith have fix'd to it And thus he thought it not enough to traduce the Interpreters of Holy Writ unless he accuse the Books themselves Every Foot and even to loathing he objects in his little Treatise that the Hebrew Codex is mute as if it had been less mute in the Age of the 70 Interpreters then in our time This is the manner of Writing among the Orientals to follow Compendium's Nor is the Hebrew Language more subject to this vice than the Arabic Chaldee and Syriac whose manner of writing is Compendious likewise The Condition of the Exemplars which the 70 Interpreters made use of was no better But there was a certain manner of writing confirm'd by Use and Custom amongst the Hebrews and the rest of the Orientals especially the Rabbies as now it appears For after the Invention of points most of the Oriental Bocks were set
Anno 1618. But this Edition was much inferiour to the rest there being many things reform'd and amended or rather spoil'd by the Inquisitors especially in the Commentaries of the Rabbins Another Bible was also set forth at Venice by Daniel Bomberg but less exact Nevertheless those are not to be contemn'd which the Jews caus'd to be put forth for their own use at Pisaurum Sabionesa Mantua Frankfort and other places Buxtorf also publish'd a new Edition of Bomberg's Bible which was overlook'd by R. Jacob Ben Hajim which he believes to be corrected in many things by himself especially in reference to the Tittl'd Vowel of the Chaldee Text. But as for the Edition Printed at Basil 1608. it seems much inferiour to that of Bomberg out of which it was taken and is contemn'd by the Jews Imperfect also are the Bibles Printed by Robert Stephens in Quarto and Decimo Sexto and by Plantin in Quarto and in other Volumes compar'd with that which R. Menasseh Ben Israel and other Jews caus'd to be Printed at Amsterdam in Quarto 1635. and in Octavo 1661. Moreover the Jews especially they who inhabit the Eastern parts highly commend an Edition set forth at Venice in Quarto in a large Paper by Lombrosus which contains the Literal Notes The Rabbi also himself explains the most difficult places of the Text in the Spanish Tongue To these might be added other Editions of the Bible and those a great many publish'd by the Jews not only in Italy and Germany but at Constantinople Thessalonica and Hadrianople but it suffices to have given an account of the most remarkable We have also said that the Christian Bibles are not so accurate as those set forth by the Jews but the Christian Characters are far superiour to those of the Jews The Five Books of Moses also are set forth apart by themselves with a threefold Targum and the Commentaries of Solomon Isaac Thus was the Pentateuch printed at Hanovia 1611. with verses distinguished by Number according to the Latin Editions CHAP. IX Whether the Jews corrupled their Bibles of set purpose The Opinion of the Fathers concerning this matter examined ALthough there be a very great difference between the Exemplars of the Hebrew Context which are now extant and those which the Seventy Interpreters and St. Jerom made use of and that in our days they very much vary one from another yet we ought not thence to conclude that the Jewish Bibles were by themselves corrupted in hatred of the Christians as some Divines bearing no good will to the Jews Leo Castro have been pleas'd to report Leo Castro a Spanish Divine urges highly for this the common opinion of the Fathers and produces a great train of their Testimonies After the same manner Johannes Morinus shews himself somewhat too severe against the Jews for though he adjudge this Opinion not altogether so probable yet he musters up a long Catalogue of the maintainers of it to impose upon the more ignorant And what seems to exceed all belief Isaac Vossius among the Heterodox has uttered many bitter reproaches against the Jews as adulterators of sacred Writ But if the weight of their reasons be considered rather than the number of their reasons we shall find their accusations to have quite another face True it is that they condemn under the name of the Jews the versions of Aquilas Theodotion and Symmachus in regard that the Jews continually set them up in opposition to the Septuagint Therefore as often as the Fathers question the Jews for corrupting the sacred Scripture they only speak of those versions or of something like them as hereafter we shall make it appear Upon which accompt St. Jerom labouring to excuse himself for having translated the Scripture out of Hebrew into Latin gives this reason Epist 89. I have not so much endeavoured to abolish the Ancient as to produce those Testimonies which by the Jews are either omitted or corrupted that ours might understand what the Hebrew truth contains In which words he sharply taxes Aquilas Symmachus and other Interpreters whom he frequently calls by the title of Semi-Christians For when the Fathers in their disputes with the Jews concerning the truth of the Christian Religion made use against them of no other Scripture but the Septuagint on the other side the Jews still had recourse to the Hebrew Books that is to Aquila and other Interpreters who had made new translations out of the Hebrew for this reason chiefly was St. Jerom induc'd to make a new translation from the same fountains And for the same reason Origen before him had compos'd his Hexapla with wonderful Art Justin Martyrs Opinion explained The first that comes into the field is Justin Martyr who disputing against Tryphon accuses the Jews of false and crafty exposition of the Scripture As when he objects to them their ignorant and malicous applying the words of the Psalm Psal 110. The Lord said to my Lord to Ezechiah which are only to be understood of Christ As also their misapplication of the words of Isaiah Before a child knows to call his Father and his Mother c. To the same Ezechiah which as he demonstrates ought to be interpreted concerning Christ Then he affirms many things to have been taken out of Scripture by the perverseness of the Jews because they favoured the Christian Religion and then that some words were changed into others However in all this there is nothing argu'd against but the perverse exposition of the context or misinterpretation not against the text it self in regard Justin could give no Judgment concerning the Integrity or falshood of that as being one that was utterly Ignorant of the Hebrew Language which is palpable from the Etymology which he gives of the word Israel This name Israel saith he signifies a man overcoming Power For Isra is a man and El Power But this above all the rest is most worthy observation that Justin by the word Scripture understands nothing but the Translation of the seventy Interpreters So that when he accuses the Jews for depraving the Scripture he also taxes the version of Aquila which in many things differs from the Septuagint Which led several learned men into mistake not heeding what Justin meant by the name of sacred Scripture And thus he condemns the Jewish Rabbies for rashly asserting that there was never any such thing wrote by Isaiah as Behold a Virgin shall conceive but Behold a young Woman shall conceive The whole controversie lies about the Translation of the word Gnalmah which the Seventy Interpreters Translate 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 virgo a virgin But Aquila 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 puella and after Aquila the Jews of that Age. Which Interpretation nothing alters the Hebrew Text. But Justin allowing no Scripture but that which was publickly received for the use of the Church that is the Septuagint opposes the Authority of that Translation against the Jews But you saith he in these things