1. Cor. XIV. 6. . except I speake to you, either by reuelation, or by knowledge. This word is found in all pre vious versions. Eph. V. 19. Speaking vnto your selves in psalmes, and hymnes, and spiritual songs. Special credit has been given to the Rheims version for its agency in introducing this word. But it is common to all previous English versions. The Vulgate has hymnis, and the Greek has humnois. I. Tim. II. 6. Who gaue himselfe a ransome for all men. This word is found also in Tyndale, 1525, and 1534; Great Bible, 1539; and the Genevan N. T., 1557. The It will be remembered in this connection that Tomson's revision and the Rheims translation were published within a half dozen years of each other; so that while the above words are found in previous translations, yet because they enter more generally into the common speech of this age, they occur much more frequently in these than in earlier English versions. For the sake of comparison the following excerpts from Tomson's version are here transcribed: Matt. VI. 9. After this maner therefore pray ye. Our father which art in heauen, halowed be thy name. 10. Thy kingdome come. Thy will bee done euen in earth, as it is in heauen. 11. Giue vs this day our dayly bread. 12. And forgiue vs our dettes, as wee also forgiue our detters. 13. And leade vs not into temptation, but deliuer vs from euill; for thine is the kingdome, and the power, I. Cor. XIII. 1. Though I speake with the tongues of men and Angels, and haue not loue, I am as sounding brasse, or a tinkling cymbal. 2. And though I had the gift of prophesie, and knew all secrets and all knowledge, yea, if I had all faith, so that I could remooue mountaines, and had not loue, I were nothing. 3. And though I feede the poore with all my goods, and though I giue my body, that I be burned, and haue not loue, it profiteth me nothing. 1576.] SPECIMENS OF TOMSON'S VERSION. 263 4. Loue suffereth long; it is bountifull; loue enuieth not; loue doth not boast it selfe; it is not puffed vp: 5. It doth no vncomely thing; it seeketh not her owne things; it is not prouoked to anger; it thinketh no euill: 6. It reioyceth not in iniquitie, but reioyceth in the trueth; 7. It suffreth all things; it beleeueth all things; it hopeth all things; it endureth all things. 8. Loue doth neuer fall away, though that prophesyings be abolished, or the tongues cease, or knowledge vanish away. 9. For we know in part, and we prophesie in part. 10. But when that which is perfect, is come, then that which is in part, shalbe abolished. 11. When I was a childe, I spake as a childe, I vnderstood as a childe, I thought as a childe; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. 12. For now we see thorow a glasse darkely; but then shall we see face to face. Now I know in part; but then shall I know euen as I am knowen. 13. And now abideth faith, hope, and loue, euen these three; but the chiefest of these is loue. The annotations to this version in the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles, are for the most part confined to the margins, but in the Epistles, particularly to the Romans and Corinthians, they are quite voluminous, frequently taking up more than half the page, and are in very small type. Mr. Tomson's design was, that every dark sentence and doubtful word "should be made so plain that all might go through with it without wandering or going astray." As seen from the title-page, he lays no claim to originality, but distinctly asserts that the expositions are taken out of the large annotations of Beza and others. These notes are found in all the books excepting that of Revelation, concerning which he says: "I haue not thought good to put forth any such thing vpon the Reuelation as I haue upon the other books." But in the edition of 1595, there is added to the book of Revelation, "A briefe and learned Commentarie, Written by Franc. Junius, &c." This translation of 1576 with its annotations was so acceptable, that it was printed and bound up with the Old Testament of the Genevan Bible, and published in Edinburgh by Andrew Hart, 1610. These Bibles were held in such esteem that it was considered a recommendation years afterwards, that an edition of the Bible should be conformed to that printed by Andrew Hart. The Genevan Bible, whether made up of the New Testament of 1560, 1557, or that of 1576, met with unbounded popularity; and on this very account was opposed by the bishops of the Church of England. The translation was admired by some of them, on account of its scholarship, but denounced by others as coming from Geneva. Objections were made to the preface, that it touched too severely upon ceremonies retained in the English Church service. Serious objections were raised against the marginal notes, some of which were thought to affect the Queen's prerogative, by allowing the subject under certain circumstances to resist rulers. One of these objectionable notes is upon II. Chron. xv. 16. And King Asa deposed Maachah his mother from her regencie, because she had made an idole in a groue; and Asa brake downe her idole, and stamped it, and burnt it at the brooke Kidron. The objectionable comment upon this reads: "And herein he shewed that he lacked zeale; for she ought to haue dyed both by the couenant, as vers 13, and by the Law of God; but he gaue place to foolish pitie, and would also seeme after a sort to satisfie the Lawe." Another exceptionable note was that on Exodus xix. 24. The comment on which passage reads: "Neither dignitie nor multitude haue auctoritie to passe the bounds, that Gods worde prescribeth." Besides the bishops urged that it was a foreign book, in that it was neither translated or printed in England. The Roman Catholics were especially bitter in their opposition. One John Hamilton, a secular priest and a political intriguer, attacked the Genevan Bible soon after its first appearance. He impugned both the translation and the 1611.] THE GENEVAN AND AUTHORIZED VERSIONS. 265 notes, whenever they failed to support Romish traditions concerning purgatory, the holy virgin, prayers for the dead, and Christ's "pretious bodie and bluid." His solemn warning was: "Therefore, I beseek you, dissaivet people, to burn your corrupt Scot's Bibles in the fire, that your sauls be not tormentit with the intolerable pains of the fires of hell." But the shrewdest and most scholarly attack was made by Gregory Martin, who was a thorough linguist, and the first among the translators of the Rheims version. His attack was against English translations in general, and the Genevan version in particular. The main charge, reiterated again and again, was that Protestant translations wilfully and intentionally corrupted the Holy Scriptures; that such "foule dealing,” and such "partiall and false translations were made on purpose to further heretical opinions. These charges were ably confuted by William Fulke, Master of Pembroke Hall, Cambridge. Fulke's defense has not only outlived the charges, but by its vitality has kept them in existence.3 But the quiet move of the bishops, in which Archbishop Parker led the way, to put forth a new version, was designed to be the most effectual blow against the Genevan Bible. But in fact it proved the least hurtful. The publication of the Bishops' Bible, however, constitutes an epoch in the history of English versions, and will be treated of in the next chapter. While, therefore, the Genevan Bible survived all opposition for more than three-quarters of a century, yet at last it was superseded by the Authorized version. And this was by reason of the fact that the Genevan Bible bequeathed its excellencies to the Authorized version. So that, notwithstanding, it still lives in its influence and makes the Authorized version what it is now and what it has been for two and a half centuries, the accepted Bible of all English speaking people. 1 Eadie's History of the English Bible, II., 56. London, 1876. 2 Fulke's Defense of English Translations, pp. 1-24. London, 1617. 3 Ibid. In which the charges are set down as well as the answers. THE CHAPTER VIII. THE BISHOPS' BIBLE. A. D. 1568. HE reign of Queen Elizabeth was a transitional period. In ecclesiastical affairs nothing was settled. The short reign of Edward VI. gave an impetus to Protestant principles which bade fair to decide the question of supremacy between the Old and New learning. A serious check, however, was given to this progress by the short but fierce reign of Queen Mary. But now the friends of the Reformation look upon the accession of Elizabeth with joy and heartfelt relief. Protestantism, just returned from exile, is stronger in its convictions and broader in its designs. Abroad it came in contact with men and ideas, and by such contact gained in self-respect; while at home it had been tried in the fire and thereby purified and made stronger. At the first the reformers were over confident in respect to the friendship of Elizabeth. They attempted radical changes, such as "to set up King Edward's Service, to pull down Images, and to affront the Priests." 1 But in this they met with an effectual check from the queen, who, though slow in developing her policy, soon made it evident that not even the English Church, much less the Genevan Party, had anything to expect from her by way of partial favors. Passing between the extremes of Edward and Mary, she followed the ecclesiastical policy of her royal father, thinking by a middle course to reconcile opposing parties. She insisted, however, that there should be no persecution for opinion's sake, that the consciences of all should be respected. The two great ideals of Queen 1 Burnet's History of the Reformation in England, II., B. III., p. 378. London, 1683. |