except the Westminster have given an interpolation in the clause "from the place where the dead was layd," A. V. The same holds good in Rom. xv. 29, 1 Pet. iii. 15, 1 John iii. 14, and a number of other places.

Of the freer renderings the following are instances:

Matth. viii. 29, What is between us? (quid nobis et tibi); ix. 8, haue a good heart (confide); xxi. 41, he will bring to naught (male perdet). John xii. 2, them that sat at the table, (discumbentibus); 6, not because he cared for the poor (non quia de egenis pertinebat ad eum). Acts xvii. 5, of the rascal sort (de vulgo).

As examples of felicitous renderings of a genuine Saxon ring these six may suffice:

Mark v. 39, why make you this a doe? Luke xi. 25, swept with a besom and trimmed; xviii. 2, feared not God and of man made no account. Acts xvii. 18, what is it that this word-sower would say? I Cor. viii. I, it is a foul thing for a woman to speak in the church. Rev. ii. 17, a white counter.

The following list of words in the Authorized Version derived from the Rhemish has been prepared by Dr. Eadie:

Matth. xxvi. 26, blessed; 30, hymn. Luke ix. 31, decease. Rom. i. 28, reprobate; ii. 5, impenitent; v. 8, commendeth. James i. 5, upbraideth not; 21, the engraffed word. 1 John ii. 20, unction from the holy one. In addition to "confess" for "knowledge"; "propitiation,” "seduce," "have confidence," " "stumbling," and "understanding," all in the same Epistle.

Of whole clauses transferred from the Rhemish, I have noted, merely by turning over the leaves here and there, the following:

2 Tim. iii. 6, lead captive silly women laden with sinnes; 8, reprobate concerning the faith. I Cor. xv. 34, Evil communications corrupt good Acts xii. 6, the same night Peter was sleeping between. John xvi. 16, because I go to the Father.

manners.

Their want of accurate scholarship, on the principle of literal adherence to the text of the Vulgate, appears, e. g., in I Cor. xiii. 12, where they render speculum, "glasse.'

""

But there is one feature of this version which deserves the highest commendation, namely, the uniformity of their renderings. To amen, rabbi, charity, already noted, may be added, by way of example, multitude, work, and many more will be supplied when we come to consider the Authorized Version, which is frequently marred by unnecessary and inconsistent diversity of renderings of the same word in the original.

While the Latin element, and the general opposition to the current idiom combine to make this version probably the least intelligible of all the English versions to the ordinary reader, it will always possess great value for critical purposes, and on all points connected with the theological differences between the Latin Church and Protestant Communions. It is, however, not so much in the text as in the notes accompanying it, where the odium theologicum is expressed.

Some idea of the animus may be had from the following:

A Table of certaine places of the New Testament, corruptly translated in favour of heresies of these dayes in the English editions: especially of the yeares 1562-77-79 and 80, by order of the bookes, chapters, and verses of the same. Wherein we do not charge our aduersaries for dis. agreeing from the authentical Latin text (whereof much is saide in the Preface), but for corrupting the Greek it selfe, which they pretende to translate.

St. Matth. chap. 19, For "a iust man," they translate "a righteous man, ," because this word "iust" importeth that a man is iust in deede and not only so reputed. And so generally where “iust or "justice" is ioyned with good workes, they say "righteous" and "righteousnes ": yet being joined with faith, they keepe the olde termes "iust" and "iustice." Chap. ii. 6, For "rule" or "gouerne," they translate "feede," to diminishe ecclesiastical authoritie, which the Greeke word signifieth; as also the Hebrewe, Mich. v., whence this is cited. Chap. ii. 2, 8, For "do penance" and "fruite worthie of penance" (which signify painful satisfaction for sinne), they translate "repent" and “repentance," or "amendment of life." Chap. xvi. 18, For "church" they translate "congregation," and that so continually euery where in Tyndals Bible, printed againe anno 1562, that the worde "church" is not once

there to be founde. Which the other editions correcting in other places, yet in this place it remayneth corrupted, reading still, "upon this rocke I wil build my congregation," so loath they are it should appeare how firmly the Church of Christ is founded. S. Mark, chap x. 52, For "thy faith hath made thee safe," speaking of corporal sight geuen to the blind, they translate "thy faith had saved thee," to make it seeme that iustification and saluation is only by faith. S. Luke viii. 48, For "thy faith hath made thee safe" (to wit, from corporal infirmitie), they translate "thy faith hath saued thee." viii. 50, For "beleeue only and she shal be safe," they saye "beleeue only and she shal be saued," in fauour of the forsaid heresie of only faith: neither marking that this safetie pertaineth to the bodie, nor that it is attributed to the faith of an other, and not of the partie restored. Chap. xxii. 20, Beza (whom the English Protestantes herein defend) condemneth the Greeke text (which he confesseth to be the same in al copies) because by it the relatiue, "which," must needes be referred to the Chalice, and so proueth the real presence of Christs bloude in the Chalice. S. John, chap. i. 12, For "he gaue them powre to be made the sonnes of God," Beza and his folowers translate "he gaue them the dignitie" (others say, "the prerogatiue") to be the sonnes "of God": against free-wil. Chap. ix. 22 and 35, For "put out of the synagogue," they translate "excommunicate": as though the Catholike Churches excommunication of heretikes, from the societie and participation of the faithful, were like to that exteriour putting out of the synagogue, of such as confessed Christ.

...

Gregory Martin who went so far as to say that the English Bible was "not indeed God's book, worde, or scripture, but the devil's worde," delivers himself thus:

39 66

Now then to come to our purpose, such are the absurd translations of the English bibles, and altogether like unto these: namely, when they translate "congregation " for "church,' ," "elder" for "priest," "image for "idol," "dissension " for "schism, general" for " catholic,' cret," for "sacrament," "overseer " for " "bishop," messenger" for angel," ""ambassador " for "apostle,' ""minister" for "deacon," and such like, to what other end be these deceitful translations, but to conccal and obscure the name of the church and dignities thereof, mentioned in the holy scriptures: to dissemble the word "schism" (as they do also "heresy" and "heretic ") for fear of disgracing their schisms and heresies; to say of “matrimony," neither "sacrament," which is the Latin, nor

66

"mystery," which is the Greek, but to go as far as they can possibly from the common, usual, and ecclesiastical words, saying, "This is a great secret," in favour of their heresy that matrimony is no sacrament? *

On the other hand, Fulke, in the Dedication prefixed to his Defence, etc., expresses his opinion of the Rhemish translation thus:

In which, that I speak nothing of their insincere purpose, in leaving the pure fountain of the original verity, to follow the crooked stream of their barbarous vulgar Latin translation, which (beside all other manifest corruptions) is found defective in more than an hundred places, as your majesty, according to the excellent knowledge in both the tongues wherewith God hath blessed you, is very well able to judge; and to omit even the same book of their translation, pestered with so many annotations, both false and undutiful, by which, under colour of the authority of holy scriptures, they seek to infect the minds of the credulous readers with heretical and superstitious opinions, and to alienate their hearts from yielding due obedience to your majesty, and your most Christian laws concerning true religion established; and that I may pass over the very text of their translation, obscured without any necessary or just cause with such a multitude of so strange and unusual terms, as to the ignorant are no less difficult to understand, than the Latin or Greek itself: yet it is not meet to be concealed, that they which neither truly nor precisely have translated their own vulgar Latin and only authentical text, have nevertheless been so bold to set forth a several treatise, etc. . . . ....t

Of the subsequent editions of this version particulars will be given below.

The Old Testament was not published until 1609-10, although the translation had been prepared many years previously, even before the appearance of the New Testament, the delay being occasioned "for lack of good meanes" and our poor estate in banishment." It appeared in quarto, the first volume in 1609, the second in 1610 with the title:

66

The Holie Bible, Faithfully Translated into English out of the Avthentical Latin. Diligently conferred with the Hebrew, Greeke, and other Editions in diuers languages. With Arguments of the Bookes and

*Fulke, pp. 218, 219.

+ Fulke, p. 5.

Chapters: Annotations: Tables: and other helps, for better understanding of the text; for discouerie of Corruptions in some latter translations: and for clearing controuersies in Religion. By the English College of Doway. Spiritu Sancto inspirati, locuti sunt sancti Dei homines. 2 Pet. 1: The holie men of God spake, inspired with the Holy Ghost. Printed at Doway by Lawrence Kellam, at the signe of the holie Lambe. M.D.C.X.

A brief address on the last page states:

We haue already found some faults escaped, but fearing there be more, and the whole volume being ere long to be examined again, we pray the courteous reader to pardon all and amend them as they occur.

From the Preface addressed: To the right wel beloued English reader grace and glory in Iesus Christ Euerlasting, a few paragraphs are here given.

But here another question may be proposed: why we translate the Latin text, rather than the Hebrew, or Greeke, which Protestants preferre as the fountaine tongs, wherin holie Scriptures were first written? To this we answer that if indeed those first pure Editions were now extant, or if such as be extant were more pure then the Latin, we would also preferre such fountaines before the riuers, in whatsoeuer they should be found to disagree. But the ancient best learned Fathers and Doctours of the Church, doe much complaine, and testify to vs, that both the Hebrew and Greeke Editions are fouly corrupted by lewes and Heretikes, since the Latin was truly translated ont of them, whiles they were more pure; and that the same Latin hath been farre better conserued from corruptions. So that the old Vulgate Latin Edition hath been preferred and vsed for most authentical aboue a thousand and three hundred yeares. . .

...

How wel this is done the learned may judge, when by mature conference they shal haue made trial thereof. And if any thing be mistaken, we will (as stil we promise) gladly correct it. Those that translated it about thirty yeares since, were wel knowen to the world, to haue been excellent in the tongs, sincere men, and great Diuines. Only one thing we haue done tovching the text, whereof we are especially to giue notice: That whereas heretofore in the best Latin editions there remained many places differing in words, some also in sense, as in long process of time the writers erred in their copies, now lately by the same care and diligence of the Church, those diuers readings were maturely and iudiciously examined and conferred with sundry the best written and printed books,