Capels Remains, Part 3
2. As touching Tranſlations.
IT is granted that tranſlators were not led by ſuch an infallible ſpirit as the Prophets, and Apoſtles were. In the Councel of Trent, after much debating by witty and learned heads, they concluded, That Canus Bel.Tranſlators were not Apoſtles, but very near unto them. The greateſt Papiſts are of the ſame mind, onelyonly Sixtus Senenſis is of opinion, the ſeaventie two Translatours of the old Teſtament into Greeke were infallible. Some are ſo quite another way, that they like not any translations Difference of Churches c. 11at all. Smith, the Se-baptiſt is utterly againſt reading tranſlations in times of worſhip. Amongſt his Reaſons, two are the chiefeſt. One is, that we muſt worſhip God with the beſt we have: Tranſlations are not the beſt, but the Originals. Yet I hope they that know not the Originals, Tranſlations are the beſt they have.
If this were true, then none can worſhip God in and by reading of the Scriptures, but ſuch as underſtand the Originals; nor is that currant in reaſon or Divinity, that we muſt ſerve God with the beſt. There is good, there is better, there is beſt of all: So that if one do that which is good, he ſinnes not, though he do not that which is better, if he do that which is better, he ſinnes not, though he do not do that which is beſt of all. He ſinnes not, who keepes within the circle of that which is good, albeit he do not do that which is better, or that which is beſt of all.
Againe, a thing may be abſolutely better in it ſelf, yet a leſſe good thing in it ſelfe may be better in ſome reſpects and circumſtances. As ſimply in it ſelf, marriage is ſimply better then a ſingle life, yet in ſome reſpects Paul ſhews that a ſingle life is better then marriage; 1 Cor. 7.and this is Pauls Divinity, Though a man do not that which is better, nor that which is beſt, yet as long as he doth do that which is good, he ſins not.
His other reaſon is, That we muſt worſhip God with our owne gifts, not with anothers: As Tranſlations are not our doing, but made by the gifts and paines of others. To this we ſay, that 'tis true, we muſt worſhip God with our owne gifts, but it is not true, that in the worſhip of God with the help, and by the meanes of that which is anothers we do not exerciſe our owne gifts. The maine of the worſhip of God is, That we worſhip him in and with the Spirit, and truth in the inward parts: and ſo we muſt and may doe, and do do, when we make uſe of Tranſlations. When we reade tranſlations, we muſt reade them with Faith, and with the Spirit, which are our inward gifts and graces, elſe our reading is not to profit our ſelves withal: and what hinderance the tranſlation is, to the uſe of Faith and the Spirit, they do not▪ they cannot prove.
So we are ſaid to ſing with the Spirit, and yet we ſing with the Spirit the better for that; and to pray with the Spirit, and yet the book is no hindrance to that neither. Others gifts as long as they rather further then hinder the uſe of our own gifts, can be no blur in the worſhip of God.
The ſame man doth wrangle with the originals too, not denying them, but denying the uſe of the book in the originals themſelves in worſhip, for that the Prophets and Apoſtles wrote books, but did never divide their books into Chapters and Verſes, till Henry Stephens, but the other day firſt made the verſes of the New Teſtament, which being man invention, is not, ſaith he, to be uſed in the worſhip of God.
But whether Stephen Langton Arch-biſhop of Canterbury, did it firſt for chapters, or Robert, or Henry Stephens for the New Teſtament did it into verſes, is not material, ſith we place no Religion in it, and this proviſion is known to be a great helpe to men in the worſhip of God▪ We paſſe by this as a giddineſſe of a weak braine in this Sebaptiſt.
He grants Tranſlations are of good uſe, but not in the worſhip of God: and if of good uſe elſewhere, why not there? Saint Paul exhorts the Colloſſians, That the Word of God might dwell Col. 3. 16.in them richly, in all wiſdome. They being Grecians, I take it for granted, that the moſt of them were not skilled in the Hebrew, the New Teſtament being not written, not any of it, till after Pentecoſt, not all of it nntill John a matter of ſixty years after Chriſts death. This to the Coloſſians could not be meant of the New Teſtament, but of the Old. So againe, the Theſſalonians, being Grecians, did not underſtand the Hebrew, yet they were commanded to prove all things: By what? why by the Scriptures, and this was the Old Teſtament which, they underſtanding not (the Hebrew) then it cannot but be meant of the tranſlation.
This Concluſion I think is clear, ſith the Churches of the Gentiles were commanded to read Moſes and the Prophets, and read them they could not but in a tranſlation; therefore tranſlations are commanded by God, as an Ordinance and conſtitution of Heaven it felf.
The ſame Smith in the ſame book falls foule on the Greek tranſlation of the ſeventy, as that it was a grievous ſin to tranſlate the Old Teſtament into Greek, or any language elſe. His reaſon is, for that this ought not to have bin done til the fulnes of time of the calling of the*Cartw. Hiſt. Chriſti. part. 3 page 85. Was it not lawful for the Jews in captivity to labour the converſion of the Gentiles? Did Daniel ſin, when he urged Nebuchadnezzar to break off his ſins by repentance? Dan, 4. 27. Tho. Cart. in Prov. 16. 6. holds this was onelyonly for this life; But though I am not of Melanctons mind, that Nebuchadnezzar was converted, yet I ſee no reaſon but Daniel might ſeek for converting and the ſaving of his ſoul. Gentiles: other reaſons he hath not worth a fig, nor is this reaſon much better. It's known that *Euſeb. de praep. Evangelii. l. 8. c. 1.Ptolomy King of Egypt had together certaine Learned Jewes, skilful in the Greek Language, in number ſeventy two, and by them he cauſed the Old Teſtament to be done into Greek about two hundred and ninety years before the Birth of Chriſt: And this is obſerved to be a fit time to have it done; for, if it had not been done till after the coming of Chriſt, either the Jewes out of envy would have kept and hid the Hebrew Copies, or corrupted them, or elſe caſt ſome ſuſpition, and evil report of evil doings on the tranſlators; All which (it being done at this time) was prevented.
Now though this were done before the coming of Chriſt, and ſo of the time of the full calling of the Gentiles, yet it was not ſo long before, but that it was a fit preparative againſt the calling of the Gentiles, (whoſe language ſince Alexanders conqueſt generally was Greek) and ſith there then was no printing, no Copies could be ſcattered abroad but by manuſcripts, and writing, which is great labour and coſt, and this being ſuch a ſlow work, there needed that this tranſlation ſhould be done ſome good ſpace before the calling of the Gentiles, that ſo a ſufficient number of Manuſcript-written Copies might be had and ſcattered abroad among the Gentiles, they all underſtanding the Greek, and but few or none the Hebrew: that the books being the foundation of the Prophets, might be ready done againſt the time of the calling of the Gentiles for theirThe Greek tranſlation in the Old Teſtament doth tranſlate …ehovah by foreign, i. e. Lord. Now the New Teſtament in citing places one of the Old Teſtament where Jehovah is in the Hebrew, they follow the Old Greek, and uſe for it foreign, …. e Lord, and vet this tranſlation muſt be called to be (a grievous ſin) w… ch the holy Ghoſt doth ſo punctually follow, and allow in to gra d… matter as the ſignal name Jehovah. If the Apoſtles do, (as hey …o) juſtifie the …ſe of it, do not they with the ſame breath juſtifie the making of it? So Mat. 1. Luke 3. in the Genealogies the names are according to the Greek, not the Hebrew. Junius exported by D. Rainolds in his ſecond edition of his tranſlation of the Syriack Teſtament, altered thoſe names, which in the firſt edition he had ſet down according to the Hebrew, into thoſe names which are according to the Greek in the 70. tranſlation. need and uſe.
*Vid. Ju…. Parall. p. 11.The time of this tranſlation being after the Jewes had been amongſt the Gentiles in captivity, we finde that the Gentiles being to creep into the Church, and now and then ſome to turn Proſelytes; and was it not fit that there ſhould be a tranſlation, ready to bid them welcome into the Church? And what if it were a ſinne to attempt the full calling of the Gentiles, before the full time, yet who can ſay with any reaſon that it was a ſin to provide a tranſlation (which they underſtood) againſt their calling? Nor could this tranſlation be ſufficiently provided for number in written Copies, and ſufficiently ſcattered till the time of their calling▪ So that this was not to go about to call them before the time was they were to be called, but rather an excellent Providence to have Copies ready in a language they underſtood againſt the full time of their full calling.
And whereas it is objected, that theſe Jewes who did put it out of the Hebrew into the Greek, were profane men, is more then I knowe, or then they can prove.
Againe, to make it good, that the act of tranſlating the Scriptures into Greek was no unlawful thing, I need go no further then to the Apoſtles, who becoming all things to all men to ſave ſome, were careful in citing places out of the Old Teſtament) to tie themſelves much to this Greek tranſlation. Inſomuch, that though they did never vary from the Hebrew in ſenſe, yet they did choſe rather to follow the phraſe and words of the Greek, then the Hebrew, to condeſcend as far as might be to the Gentiles who were acquainted with the Greek tranſlation, but not with the Hebrew original.
Wherefore it muſt needs be the froth of a giddy head in this man, to call this act of tranſlation into Greek a grievous ſin; ſith the Apoſtles did ſo much uſe and reverence it, and chiefly Paul who chiefly the Apoſtle of the Gentiles.
We all do or ſhould know, that the Goſpel began at Hieruſalem, from *Gre…a leguntur in omnibus f…re gentibus, Latina ſuis ſinibus exiguis ſine continentur. Cie O…t. pro. Archia peet. The Greek tongue was of that publick uſe in thoſe dayes that Jimes, Peter, and Paul writing to the Hebrews, … in Hebrew but in Greek: and Paul in his E…ſt e to the Hebrews, cites the places h… quotes out of the Old Teſtament accordi g o th… Greek Sep…uagi…t tranſlation, rather then the Original Hebrew c…n….Hieruſalem it went to Judea and Samariah, thence to Syria and Cilicia, from thence to Ciprus, Aſia, Greece, Italy, and from theſe parts to the utmoſt coaſts of the earth according to the commiſſion of Chriſt. Now in all *Iſa. 2. 3 Acts 1. 8. Paul writing to the Romans (wh ſe n…ot…er tongue was I a…ine) w i…e… in G e…k, following the Greek tranſlation in places cited ou… … O…d Teſtament▪ R. m. ….thoſe parts the Greek was moſt in uſe in moſt, onelyonly in uſe in ſome, and of neceſſity they had recourſe to the Greek tranſlation.
Smith ſpeaks fowle of it, as a falſe, and forged tranſlation. I diſpute not what it is now, but what it was then: If it had been ſuch a piece, the Apoſtle Paul would not have looked after it ſo much as he did, nor the church have uſed it ſo long as it did, is well known to thoſe who know the ſtate of the Church, that the church did generally uſe this Greek tranſlation, & a Latine one framed out of this, & ſcarce any other, if any other at all, for ſix hundred yeares after Chriſt.
I know Sixtus Senenſis, andSenen. Bib. l. 8. haer. 13. Bell. dc verbo D. i. l. 2. c. 6. Bellarmine (men of great reading) do write that the ſeventy Interpreters, though they were not Prophets, who wrote Scripture, yet that they had a line, and light of the ſpirit, which did direct them, ſo that in tranſlating they did not er…e at all: which perhaps is too much on the other hand: however it held very pure I am perſwaded along time, till the greek tongue began to grow out of uſe, and then came in a world of tranſlations in Latine, and popular languages.
I am cleare of opinion, that thoſe Anabaptiſts, who are againſt all learning, are againſt all tranſlations whatſoever: For without the knowledge of the Hebrew and Greek tongues, it is not poſſible to turne the Old and New Teſtament into any language whatſoever. Nor without the underſtanding of thoſe two languages can any underſtand the Bible in the Originals neither: And on this ground God may be ſaid to binde us to what is impoſſible, I meane to build on the Scripture, when we can neither have it (by their principles) in any Tranſlation, nor underſtand it in the Originals.
Tryal. p. 112.Mr. Wotton ſaith, that the Anabaptiſts do every one claim a priviledge of not erring for himſelf, (yet not for others) which opinion, he calls a falſe and lewd opinion. And on the matter, if that they do ſo hold, I know no great need or uſe they have of the Scriptures in the Originals or tranſlation.
Before we come unto the maine of the buſineſſe, we cannot skip over a buſineſſe of Mr.Tryall. p. 94 Wotton: his words are theſe. No man ever dreamed that we commonly build our faith upon our Engliſh tranſlation. What he would have by the word (commonly) I know not, except his heart did faile his penne, when he wrote this, and by this word (commonly) he had a conceit that he might finde by it ſome ſhift and ſtarting hole.
A ſtrange ſpeech it is to me, that Engliſh men (of ſuch he ſpeaks) who can underſtand no language but Engliſh, ſhould be ſaid not to build their faith on the Engliſh tranſlation. On what then? The Original they know not, other tranſlations they underſtand not. And if they muſt not build their faith on the Engliſh translation they are left nothing to build their faith on. And what is this, but to leave all unlearned in the Originals without a rule. And if this be not to ſteale Atheiſme into the hearts of the common people, I know not what is, ſith Atheiſme is ſuch a welcome gueſt to the corrupt heart as it is.
Counſellor of State.Which makes me call to mind an Obſervation of Villeroy, a late wiſe Secretary of France, That the maine different Sects of Religion in the East, and the fierce oppoſition they made each againſt each, made the people weary of the Chriſtian Religion, and ſo Mahomet crept in with his religion, and was too welcome to almoſt all, who were almoſt weary of the ſundry Hereſies and Schiſms, which were ſo brief and rife amongſt Chriſtians of the Eaſt: And this (ſaith he) overthrew the Chriſtian Church firſt, and the Chriſtian Empires and ſtates next, over the Eaſt, and let in Mahomets Alchoran, and Mahomets Sword.
I doubt there is ſcarce any ſtrange opinion preſſing hither, but would be welcome to us: The Chriſtian Religion was never in ſuch danger ſince my time as it is now, ſith men runne ſo many and ſo contrary wayes, that few can now tell which is true. And ſince ſo great a Clerk, and ſo great a Reformer as Wotton, hath left the poore Engliſh man no rule to prove his own, or to diſprove the contrary: For if the Engliſh translation be not to an Engliſh man, let Elias come, and tell us what, and which is the rule, and on what an Engliſh man may build his faith on, being that there is nothing left him but his Engliſh translation.
So the old Church after Malachi, what was left to the moſt but the Greek Tranſlation? and after the Apoſtles were dead and gone, the Chriſtian Churches were tied to the Greek tranſlation of the Old Teſtament, or elſe the Old Teſtament was no rule to them, except to a few, who underſtood the Hebrew.
That which all men ſay, (ſaith Ariſtotle) is not to be doubted, but al the learned (I think) agree, that the Church uſed no tranſlation but the Greek, for a matter of ſix hundred yeares after the birth of Chriſt, for two hundred yeares before. So that for my part, I look upon it as a poſition full of danger for men to affirme, That tranſlations are not a rule to ground our faith on, when we underſtand no other. That (ſay I) or none: not none, therefore that.
And now at laſt, after the clearing of what is paſt, we come to the maine point, to find out what it is that a poore ſoule who underſtands not the Originals muſt reſt upon.
Firſt, I ſay, that the Lord is not, nor will not be wanting to his Church in things neceſſary to ſalvation: And to have a rule to build our faith on, is abſolutely neceſſary to ſalvation. And that rule for common people muſt be the Scripture tranſlated, or nothing. And therefore I take it to be a ſpecial Ordinance, that the Scriptures ſhould be tranſlated for the uſe of the Church in ſeveral languages.
Lib. 2. c. 7 p. 37For the Original Copies, I muſt ſubſcribe to that of Ganus a Papiſt, who tells us, That we are not to▪receive into the holy Canon both for the Old and New Teſtament, but ſuch books as the Apoſtles did allow, and deliver over to the Church of Chriſt. And as the Church of the Jewes did preſerve the Hebrew Original of the Old Teſtament ſafe and ſure, ſo I doubt not but the ſame hand of the providence of God, hath and doth preſerve the Greek Original of the New Teſtament.
And for that it is not poſſible that the Originals ſhould ſerve the turne of all, or immediately of any, but of ſuch as have the knowledge of thoſe tongues, (who are but a poor few in reſpect of all the world over) wherefore I take it for granted that the line of Gods providence hath, and doth, and will carry the matter, in having tranſlations of ſeveral languages ſo inti…e, as to be a ſufficient rule to ground their faith: elſe God in his providence muſt needs be wanting in providing neceſſaries for his Church. Nor do I think that there was, or ever ſhall be a Church of Chriſt, or a Church of Chriſtians in the belly of Antichriſt, but have had tranſlations ſufficient to reſt their ſouls on.
I doubt not but the vulgar, for all its faults hath ſufficient for the ſaving of ſome ſoules Beſides among the Papiſts they have Pagnine allowed by twoAdrian 6. Clement 7 Popes, which runs as pure as any Tranſlation in the world; and Arias Montanus a tranſlation without exception. Senenſis Ann. 1290much commends Jacobus de Voragine a Papiſt, Arch-Biſhop of Genua his tranſlation into the Italian, and Senenſis could well tell, having great skill in the Originals.
To me it is much, that Senenſis (ſo ſharp a Papiſt as he is) ſhould in print, and that ſince the Councel of Trent, ſo highly commend a tranſlation of the Bible into the Italian tongue. And Leo the tenth, Biſhop of Rome, did juſt before Luthers dayes, print a recommendation of Eraſinus tranſlation of the New Teſtament into Latine. So that I look on it as a ſpecial providence of God, that there were tranſlations, and thoſe exact too in the heart of Popery: And if ſo, then he will not ſuffer the viſible Church to be without a ſufficient translation, as a ſufficient rule.
Smith himſelf the great backbiter of translations, ſaith, That if the Tranſlation agree with the Original, it may well be ſaid to be the Word of God: and if it do not agree with the Original, it is not the tranſlation of the Original.
And now we will draw towards the main concluſion, How a ſimple Countrey-man is to believe our Bible to be the Word. Doctor Jackſon, and Maſter John Goodwin have ſet downe many, and many excellent things, but they flie ſo high, that they are for Eagles. One may ſay of their books, as Ariſtotle ſaid of his books of Philoſophy, That they were publiſhed, yet not publiſhed, ſeeing not to be underſtood without his help. Now all the conſiderations theſe great Sophies have, and let there be as much more added to them, yet they will not do the work, till they come to the teſtimony of the ſpirit: They may and do work, and acquire in us an humane faith, which may ſtand free from actual heſitation, and doubting, but not from poſſible dubitation, for lay them all together, yet they may deceive, or be deceived.
Canus diſputes ſtrongly againſt L 2. c. 8. Vid. Velloſ. ad q. 27. quaefit in Ambroſium dub. ult.Scotus, Durand, Gabriel, and others, who reſted themſelves on the authority of the Church by an acquired faith firſt, before they come to an infuſed faith: This (ſaith he) were to ſit down by the Authority of man, not of God, and the formal reaſon of our infuſed faith would be other then the increated truth of God: whereas the difference of faith gotten by helps may erre, but faith infuſed by God cannot erre.
So that when we have all done, and got all the help we can to reſt on the Scriptures, the work is not done▪ till we by the Spirit of God have this ſealed by infuſed faith in our ſouls that theſe books (which we have tranſlated) are the very words of God.
Diff. of Churches c 8. A tranſlation ſo far forth as it doth truly and fully expreſs any thing of th Or ginal may be ſaid to be inſpired of God▪ and no farther.Smith himſelf, that grand backbiter of tranſlations confeſſeth at laſt, that if the tranſlations of the Word of God do agree with the Originals, that then they are the Word of God; nor are they the Tranſlations except they do, and as far as they do concord w th the Originals. If an Ambaſſadour deliver his minde by an Interpreter, and the Interpreter do relate things right (elſe he is not an Interpreter) then his words are the ſpeeches of the Ambaſſadour.
Well then, though all humane reaſons, the conſent of all the world, will not help us to that faith in the Word, which will help us to heaven, yet they are a preparation, and ſuch a preparation to this faith infuſed, that we cannot ordinarily look for faith infuſed, but by the way of this faith which is gotten by the arguments, reaſons, conſiderations, convictions, and helps wrought by the Argumentations, and conſiderations propoſed by men which do work (as moſt often it doth) in us an acquired humane faith free from actual (though not from poſſible) miſtake and doubting.
This may be and is, a faire meanes to bring us to look on the Scripture without any actual queſtion made of it as the Word of God. And then by the uſe of the Word to attain to a Divine faith, which is infallible by reaſon of the Divine infallible truth rightly conceived and believed by it. For it is out of queſtion that by the Miniſtry of men, who are not ſimply infallible, both we may, and do attain unto that faith in the divine Revelations of the Word, which are or is infallible.
Its no Paradox to hold, that a thing not infallible, may by way of Miniſtry lead us to that certainty which is infallible: For my part, I hold univerſal tradition as far as it looks onelyonly on the votes and vices of men to be of all reaſons the weakeſt. For the arguments from the authority of God be the ſtrongeſt, yet concluſions from the authority of men is an unartificial argument, & the weakeſt. However, what Arminius ſaith is true, that this humane faith built on ſuch an univerſal tradition, may be a fit preparation to that other faith which is built on the Authority of God: I am far…e from once thinking, that in univerſal tradition men do once dreame to make the laſt reſolution of their faith into the veracity of any ſuch univerſal tradition: For our faith muſt reſt on the ſame that the Apoſtles and Prophets did reſt their faith on But they did reſolve their faith onelyonly on truth uncreated, and divine, and not on the votes of the Church, or any univerſal tradition.
Loc. 1. 2. 8. p. 47.Canus ſpeaks the truth, when he ſaith, that the authority of the divine Scriptures is not to be ſought from the reaſon, or authority of men. For the aſſentAriſt. 1. poſt. to a concluſion cannot be more certain then the aſſent to the premiſſes, and proofs of that concluſion. Now if our infuſed faith did reſt onelyonly or chiefly on the credit of the Church, or univerſal tradition, then our infuſed faith could go no higher then an humane and created truth: I mean onelyonly or chiefly on the voices, or reaſons of men, and not on the voice and authority of God.
But what is this to tranſlations? Much every way. I argue thus: The end of the Church, and people of God is that they ſhould be ſaved: Now if God ſet down the end, he will provide the means of theirQui dat ſinem, dat conſequentia ad finem ſalvation, and that is faith: and faith is not built on the authority of the Church, or of univerſal tradition, (all which are the voices of men) but on the Word of God: Now this Word of God cannot concerne common people, but onelyonly as tranſlated.
Now, what ſhall a poore unlearned Chriſtian do, if that he hath nothing to reſt his poore ſoul on? the originals he underſtands not; if he did, the firſt Copies are not to be had; and he cannot tell whether the Hebrew and Greek Copies, be the right Hebrew, or the right Greek, or that which is ſaid to be the meaning of the Hebrew, or Greek, but as men tell us who are not Prophets, and may miſtake. Beſides, the Tranſcribers were men, and might erre: Theſe conſiderations may let in Atheiſme like a flood: To help all this, we will deliver our mind in ſome Propoſitions.
I. That God (as I ſhewed) did lay up the Hebrew Copies to be kept by the Jewes, who were ordered by God to be faithful notaries to keep theſe Records, and a world of places are cited out of the Old in the New Teſtament according as they are nowe in the Hebrew Copies: and the Old Teſtament hath in it the life and ſoule of the New Teſtament. Moſes and the Prophets wrote of Chriſt. The New Teſtament is but a cleare, and infallible counter-part of the Old. Its cleare that the Hebrew of the Old Teſtament ſtood cleare and uncorrupt, without any breaches made in them by tranſcribers, or otherwiſe, till the time of the publiſhing of the New Teſtament, as appears by the manie places cited in the New out of the Old: chiefly where Hebrew words are kept, and repeated, as Hoſanna, Golgotha, Eli, Eli, Lamaſabachthani, Mat. …7. ſutable unto the places whence they are taken out of the Old, chiefly in Saint Matthews Goſpel, who was moſt punctual in applying and ſuiting the Propheſies of the Old Teſtament of all the holy penmen of the New Teſtament.
And it is eaſie to be proved that Matthew wrote after that was done, which Luke wrote inIn his eight book of the Creed. p. 322. the Acts of the Apoſtles. Doctor Jackſon ſaith a long time after Peter made that Sermon, Act. 1. Saint Matthew addes, and ſaith (ſaith he) it was called the field of blood unto this day Which argueth, that he wrote his Goſpel a long time after St. Peter made his Comment upon the Pſalmist, Acts 1. 15, 16, 17.
Well then, as God committed the Hebrew Text of the Old Teſtament to the Jewes, and did and do…h move their hearts to keep it untainted to this day: So I dare lay it on the ſame God, that he in his providence is ſo with the Church of the Gentiles, that they have and do preſerve the Greek Text uncorrupt, and clear: As for ſome ſcapes by Tranſcribers, that comes to no more, then to cenſure a book to be corrupt, becauſe of ſome ſcapes in the printing, and 'tis certaine, that what miſtake is in one print, is correctin another.
A ſecond Propoſition is, That God never did ſuffer his Church to be without a ſufficient Rule, and there can be no rule but tranſlations to the Vulgar: Therefore I make no queſtion, but the ſweet providence of God hath held the hearts, and hands, and pens of tranſlators, ſo in all true Churches in all times, that the virnacular, and popular tranſlation into mother tongues, have beene made pure, without any conſiderable tincture of errour to endanger the ſoules of his Church.
For what if Interpreters and Tranſlators were not Prophets, yet God hath and doth uſe ſo to guide them, that they have been, are, and ſhall be preſerved from ſo erring in tranſlating the Scriptures, that the ſouls of his people may have that which will feed them to eternal life, that they ſhall have ſufficient for their inſtruction, and conſolation here, and ſalvation hereafter? This is the opinion of Bellarmine himſelfe, albeit he appropriates it to their vulgar Tranſlation, yet I think the eye of providence provides for all vulgar, and vernacular tranſlations in their mother tongue for all true Churches in the world.
3. Propoſ.Tranſlations are ſufficient with all their miſtakes to ſave the Church. I will deliver this in the Spiritual arm…y. 263, 264words of Maſter Baine. Faith cometh by hearing of the word from a particular Miniſter, who by confeſſion of all is ſubject to errour; As God hath not immediately and infallibly aſſiſted Miniſters, that they cannot erre at all, ſo we know that he is in ſome meaſure with them, that they cannot altogether erre. A Tranſlation that erreth cannot beget faith, ſo farre forth as it erreth, The word Tranſlated, though ſubject to errour, is Gods Word, and begetteth, and increaſeth faith, not ſo farre forth, as man through frailty erreth, but as he is aſſiſted through ſpeaking, and tranſlating to write the truth. So he, This gives full ſatisfaction to me, and I hope it will to others.
4. Propoſ.The maine Concluſion, for a ground of all, is the evidence and ſeale of the Spirit of God, which perſwadeth us of the ſaving truth in the Tranſlation, and by way of Miniſtry to come to ſaving faith by the preaching of the Word by our ſeveral Miniſters Papiſts cry up the inerrable and infallible authority of the Church, and yet they themſelves deny not but their particular preachers (whom they heare) are as ſubject to erre as any of ours are: I know no In the Church it is rather foreign then it. foreign.authority the Church hath, whatever the Church doth is but Miniſterial. The Papiſts and we agree in this, That Tranſlations, Originals, Reading, Preaching, is of no ſaving effect without the Revelation and Teſtimony of the Spirit: Canus (I ratherRain. conf. p. 424 chooſe to mention him the oftener, becauſe Dr. John Rainolds ſaith, that he was of better minde, and ſounder judgement then Popiſh Doctors areLoc. 1. 2. …. 24, p. 109 the moſt of them:) It is a great errour (ſaith he) in them who think they can either underſtand, or interpret the Scripture without the peculiar gift of the holy Ghoſt: And againe,c. 8. The laſt reſolution of our faith muſt be in the inner efficiency of God moving to beleeve. We believe not for that John or any man elſe ſaith it, but becauſe God hath revealed it. Now that God hath revealed his minde, we do immediately believe it by ſpecial inſtinct. And again, The formal reaſon of our aſſent is the light of God, which God doth infuſe into us; and for this he cites Aquinas, Lect. 2. ad Rom. 10.
And as the underſtanding in us diſcernes of natural things, and the taſte in matters of ſenſe, ſo when the minde of a man is inlightened by the Spirit; we are inabled to diſcerne doctrines neceſſary to falvation from errours which are not of God. This his reſolution is often up and down in his book.
De grat. l. 6. c. 2.Bellarmine is for the ſame concluſion. A man cannot (ſaith he) without the ſpecial illuſtration ofDe bapt. l. 1 c. …1. & tertio. God believe the myſteries of faith. And again, Faith cannot ariſe in the heart, but by divine revelation, which is either immediately from God alone, or by the inſtrument of the Word reade or preached.
I think it hath truth in it, Loc. l. 2: c. 8 p. 48.which Canus obſerves, That Peter had heard the Teſtimony of John Baptiſt, when with open voice he proclaimed Chriſt to be the Son of God, John 1. 84. and had moreover with his own eyes ſeene many miracles of Chriſt, yet after all theſe, Christ doth aſcribe Peters Mat. 16. 17confeſſion of his ſaith to none of of theſe, but onelyonly to divine revelation.
So then Proteſtants and Papiſts, we and they concurre in this, That at last we muſt ſit down by the evidence and ſealing teſtimony of the Spirit; but with this difference: They ſay, The Spirit gives light and evidence to the authority of the Church; we ſay, To the Sovereignty of the Scriptures. 1 Cor. 2.Nothing can be ſeene without ſome light or other: Things of Reaſon cannot be conceived without the light of reaſon, nor things of the Spirit without the light of Faith, and of the Spirit.
Though Wotton hath caſt an unhappy ſtone or two at tranſlations, yet when he comes to anſwer Fiſher, who ſaid, That the Spirit of God teacheth, and perſwadeth men to believe the Church, Are you (ſaith Wotton) Tryal. p. 72they who mock at private ſpirits, and yet are glad to flie that help? Is it not as likely the Spirit ſhould teach men which is the Scripture, as which is the Church, and aſſure them of a tranſlation, as of this or that mans Ordination and Prieſthood? So he, thus at laſt, he is for the divine authority of tranſlations.
But is not this to fall upon private revelations? No ſuch matter: for we call not in for the Teſtimony of revealing of the Spirit to teach us any thing but what is revealed in the word; that wer to bring in privat revelations: But becauſe none doth, or can know the ſecrets of God, but the Spirit of God, therefore1 Cor. 2. 10 we ſay, that we are made to ſee the evidence of truth firſt revealed in the Word, and then by that light, which the Spirit kindleth in our hearts, both the Scripture to be the Word of God, and the minde of the Sripture is not onelyonly revealed, but confirmed to us by the Teſtimony of the Spirit in us and to us.
So here is no uſe of the Spirit to reveal new lights, but to ſhew us the evidence of theſe truthes which are in the Word. A private ſpirit is to lead us from, this is to lead us to the Word. And all this is done by illightning our underſtandings, and ſanctifying our wills to diſcern and to approve the evidence of truth, which is in the Scripture and no other.
They ſay, their Church cannot erre in matters of Faith. And why forſooth? Becauſe it is infallibly guided by the ſtrait line of the ſpirit. We ſay, The true Church cannot ſo erre in matters of faith or life, as to fall away from Chriſt, and ſo to fall into damnation. And why? Becauſe (beſides other helps) the true Church is guided by the certain and infallible direction of the ſpirit, the vicar generalJoh. 16. 23. to our Lord Jeſus. Why then may not we twit them, rather then they do us with the private ſpirit?
Aquinas, the firſt through-PapiſtPart. 1 9. 1 a. 8. ad 2. that ever was, (It is Dr. John Rainolds cenſure of him) ſhall ſpeak laſt for this point▪ All holy learning is proved out of the Scriptures onelyonly, neceſſarily; out of all other authors only, probably: For our faith doth reſt on the revelation made to the Apoſtles and Prophets who wrote the Canonical Books, and not on any other revelation, if any be made to other Doctors. So he, and he was preferred by Innocent the Pope before all Writers next to the Scriptures, & well might the Pope ſo do (ſaith the ſame Dr. Rainolds) for that he deſerved better of the Papacy then all the Fathers.
Theſe things are ſo plaine, that to argue more were to weakenPerſpicuitas argumentatione elevatur. Cic. them. As I have read it to be the obſervation of Tully, That things perſpicuous and clear are much obſcured by much arguing: I hope the Papiſts for ſhame will give over fooling againſt us, that we run after private Spirits and revelations, ſince Aquinas the flower of the Papiſts ſpeaks out as much as we do, as touching the ſealing of the Spirit.