Defense of the Translations of the Scriptures into the English Tongue, Response to preface · Martins comments 44 – Martins comments 45
MATT. 44. We aske them againe, what say you then toforeign that place of the Psalme, where in the Hebrue it is thus, As a lion my handes and my feete: for that which in truth should be thus, They digged or pearced my hands and my feete: being an euident prophecie of Christes nailing to the crosse. There in deede (say they) we followe not the Hebrue, but the Greeke text. Sometime then you follow the Greeke and not the Hebrue onelyonly. And what if the same Greeke text make for the Catholikes, as in these places for example, I hauehave inclined my hart to keepe thy iustifications for reward: and, Redeeme thy sins with almes: might we not obtaine here the like fauour at your handes for the Greeke texte, specially when the Hebrue doth not disagree? No, say they, nor in no other place where the Greeke is neuer so plaine, if the Hebrue worde at the least may be any otherwise interpreted, & drawen to an other significatiō.
FVLK. 44. We say to you first, that you hauehave falsely pointed the Hebrue word in the margēt for all the printed bookes that euer I hauehave seene, as Bomberge both in folio, and quarto, Stephanus, Basil, Plantine, Arias Montanus, Cōplutensis, al place Camets vnderunder Caph, where you make Patach. But perhaps your Hebrue is most out of Mūsters Dictionarie, where it is pointed as you make it. But for answere to your question, we say, that their is a double testimonie of the Mazzorites to proue, that in the most auncient and best corrected copies, the Hebrue was Caru, they hauehave digged or pearced: this is testified not onelyonly by our translators, but also by Ioannes Isaac your owne Rabbin, against Lindanus a prelate of yours. And this the auctors of the Complutense edition, doe acknowledge, for thus they hauehave pointed it Caru, whereforeign is nothing but the redundans of Aleph (whiche is vnderstood in eueryevery Camets) differing from the vsuall reading and declining of the Verbe Carah, that signifiethforeign to pearce or digge. Againe, where it is redde otherwise, if it be rightly pointed, as it is in Arias Montanus Caari, it cannot signifie Sicut leo, as a lion, as both theforeign Mazzorites do teach, and Iohannes Isaac a Grammarian out of thē by the points, & the note ouer iod doth plainly demonstrate. For what should shure…h sound in iod? or if you would contend it should be Daghes, to what purpose should it be in iod, if the worde should signifie as a lion? Therefore howsoeuer this varietie of copies came either by negligence of some writers, or by corruption of the Iewes, wee hauehave sufficient warrant for the auncient and true reading, whiche the Greeke translator did followe, whiche also was in S. Hieromes copie, otherwise hee woulde not hauehave translated out of the Hebrue Fixerunt: they hauehave pearced. Therefore Rabbi Ioseph, which made the Chalde… Paraphrase vponupon the Psalter, laboured to expresse both the copies, as well that which hath plainely (they hauehave pearced,) as that whiche hath it corruptly, as though it spake of a Lion, and yet can not rightly be so translated, because the points are imperfect euen for that reading. Therefore he hath saide Nikethin foreignHeich Cheariah, They hauehave indented and pearced like a lion my handes and my feete▪ as it is in the Venice print of Daniel Bomberg, although Arias Montanus in his Bible, hauehave no more but Nachethin, which he traslateth,foreign biting my handes and my feete. I hauehave played the foole to vtter these matters in the mother tongue to ignorant men, that can make no triall of them, but you hauehave not only giuen me example, but also enforced me with your vnsoluble question (as you thought) by one word somewhat out of frame, to ouerthrow the whole Hebrue text. But you are to be pardoned, for that you follow your M. Lindanus herein, who hath nothing else in effect to quarrel against the Hebrue text, but this: & therfore he repeteth it in many places, to make greater shew of it as you doe. In other, places where the Hebrue worde hath diuerse significations, who shall forbid vsus to chuse that which is most agreeable to the circumstance of the text, and to the analogie or rule of faith?
MART. 45. We replie againe and say vntounto them, why, Is not the credit of those Septuaginta interpreters, who them selues were Iewes, and best learned in their owne tongue, and (as S. Augustine often, and other auncient fathers say) were inspired with the holy Ghost, in translating the Hebrue Bible into Greeke: Is not their credit (I say) in determining and defining the signification of the Hebrue worde, farre greater than yours? No. Is not the authoritie of all the auncient fathers both Greeke and Latine, that followed them, equiualent in this case to your iudgement? No, say they, but because we finde some ambiguitie in the Hebrue, we will take the aduantage, and we will determine and limit it to our purpose.
FVLK. 45. S. Hieronym aboundantly aunswereth this cauill, denying that supposed inspiration, and de…iding the fable of their 70. celles, which yet pleased Augustine greately, yea calling in question, whether anye more were translated by them, than the fiue bookes ofPraefat. in pent. Moses: because Aristaeus, a writer in Ptolomees time, and after him, Iosephus, make mention of no more. The same cause therfore that moued S. Hierome to translate out of the Hebrewe, mooueth vsus: whose translation, if we had it sounde ande perfect, might much further vsus for the same purpose. Althoughe for the signification of the Hebrewe wordes, we require no more credite, than that which al they that be learned in the Hebrewe tongue, must be forced to yeelde vntounto vsus. And seeing your vulgare Latine departeth from the Septuagintaes interpretation, euen in the bookes of Moses, whiche (if anie bee theirs) may most rightly be accounted theirs, because it is certaine they translated them, although it be not certaine whether they translated the rest: with what equity do you require vsus to credite them, which your owne vulgare translation, affirmeth to hauehave translated amisse? as I hauehave shewed before in the example of Canans generation. An other example you hauehave in the 4 of Genesis, Nonne si bene egeris recipies, &c. If thou shalt do wel shalt thou not receiue? but if thou shalt doe euill, straighteway thy sinnes shall be present in the doores. The greke texte, hath foreign, &c. not if thou haste rightly offered: but thou hast not rightly diuided: hast thou sinned? be stil. Where your translation commeth muche nearer to the Hebrue, as might be shewed in verie many examples. As for the auncient fathers credit of the greeke Church, and the Latine that folowed them, if our iudgement alone be not aequiualent vntounto them, yet let these auncient fathers, Origene, and Hierome, that thought them not sufficient to be followed, and therefore gathered or framed other interpretations, let theyr iudgement, I say, ioining with ours, discharge vsus of this fonde and enuious accusation.