Bible Heaven/Bible Heaven.iso/1611_kjv/msg-kjv.09

Text File | 1994-02-11 | 6KB | 94 lines

>>> Continued from previous message

special use and request; but Pope Hadrian calling a Council with
the aid of Charles the Emperor, abolished it, yea, burnt it, and
commanded the Service book of Saint Gregory universally to be
used. [Durand. lib. 5. cap. 2.]  Well, Officium Gregorianum gets
by this means to be in credit, but doth it continue without change
or altering?  No, the very Roman Service was of two fashions, the
New fashion, and the Old, (the one used in one Church, the other
in another) as is to be seen in Pamelius a Romanist, his Preface,
before Micrologus.  the same Pamelius reporteth out Radulphus de
Rivo, that about the year of our Lord, 1277, Pope Nicolas the
Third removed out of the Churches of Rome, the more ancient books
(of Service) and brought into use the Missals of the Friers
Minorites, and commanded them to be observed there; insomuch that
about an hundred years after, when the above name Radulphus
happened to be at Rome, he found all the books to be new, (of
the new stamp).  Neither were there this chopping and changing
in the more ancient times only, but also of late:  Pius Quintus
himself confesseth, that every Bishopric almost had a peculiar
kind of service, most unlike to that which others had:  which
moved him to abolish all other Breviaries, though never so
ancient, and privileged and published by Bishops in their
Dioceses, and to establish and ratify that only which was of
his own setting forth, in the year 1568.  Now when the father
of their Church, who gladly would heal the sore of the daughter
of his people softly and slightly, and make the best of it,
findeth so great fault with them for their odds and jarring;
we hope the children have no great cause to vaunt of their
uniformity.  But the difference that appeareth between our
Translations, and our often correcting of them, is the thing
that we are specially charged with; let us see therefore whether
they themselves be without fault this way, (if it be to be counted
a fault, to correct) and whether they be fit men to throw stones
at us: O tandem maior parcas insane minori: they that are less
sound themselves, out not to object infirmities to others. [Horat.]
If we should tell them that Valla, Stapulensis, Erasmus, and Vives
found fault with their vulgar Translation, and consequently wished
the same to be mended, or a new one to be made, they would answer
peradventure, that we produced their enemies for witnesses against
them; albeit, they were in no other sort enemies, than as S. Paul
was to the Galatians, for telling them the truth [Gal 4:16]: and
it were to be wished, that they had dared to tell it them plainlier
and oftener.  But what will they say to this, that Pope Leo the
Tenth allowed Erasmus' Translation of the New Testament, so much
different from the vulgar, by his Apostolic Letter and Bull; that
the same Leo exhorted Pagnine to translate the whole Bible, and
bare whatsoever charges was necessary for the work? [Sixtus Senens.]
Surely, as the Apostle reasoneth to the Hebrews, that if the former
Law and Testament had been sufficient, there had been no need of the
latter: [Heb 7:11 and 8:7] so we may say, that if the old vulgar had
been at all points allowable, to small purpose had labour and charges
been undergone, about framing of a new.  If they say, it was one
Pope's private opinion, and that he consulted only himself; then we
are able to go further with them, and to aver, that more of their
chief men of all sorts, even their own Trent champions Paiva and
Vega, and their own Inquisitors, Hieronymus ab Oleastro, and their
own Bishop Isidorus Clarius, and their own Cardinal Thomas a Vio
Caietan, do either make new Translations themselves, or follow new
ones of other men's making, or note the vulgar Interpreter for
halting; none of them fear to dissent from him, nor yet to except
against him.  And call they this an uniform tenor of text and
judgment about the text, so many of their Worthies disclaiming
the now received conceit?  Nay, we will yet come nearer the quick:
doth not their Paris edition differ from the Lovaine, and Hentenius
his from them both, and yet all of them allowed by authority?  Nay,
doth not Sixtus Quintus confess, that certain Catholics (he meaneth
certain of his own side) were in such an humor of translating the
Scriptures into Latin, that Satan taking occasion by them, though
they thought of no such matter, did strive what he could, out of
so uncertain and manifold a variety of Translations, so to mingle
all things, that nothing might seem to be left certain and firm
in them, etc.? [Sixtus 5. praefat. fixa Bibliis.]  Nay, further,
did not the same Sixtus ordain by an inviolable decree, and that
with the counsel and consent of his Cardinals, that the Latin
edition of the old and new Testament, which the Council of Trent
would have to be authentic, is the same without controversy which
he then set forth, being diligently corrected and printed in the
Printing-house of Vatican?  Thus Sixtus in his Preface before his
Bible.  And yet Clement the Eighth his immediate successor, pub-
lished another edition of the Bible, containing in it infinite
differences from that of Sixtus, (and many of them weighty and
material) and yet this must be authentic by all means.  What is
to have the faith of our glorious Lord JESUS CHRIST with Yea or
Nay, if this be not?  Again, what is sweet harmony and consent,
if this be?  Therefore, as Demaratus of Corinth advised a great
King, before he talked of the dissensions of the Grecians, to
compose his domestic broils (for at that time his Queen and his
son and heir were at deadly feud with him) so all the while that
our adversaries do make so many and so various editions themselves,
and do jar so much about the worth and authority of them, they can
with no show of equity challenge us for changing and correcting.

>>> Continued to next message