brew Tongue from a converted Jew. And twenty Years after returning to Jerufalem, he made greater Improvements in that Language under Barrabanus, a Jew, whom he hired at a great Price to come every Night to inftruct him; the Man, like Nicodemus, not daring on fuch Occafion to come to him by Day for Fear of the other Jews. Afterwards he had another Master, a Doctor of the Law, from Tiberias. And then another very eminent Man, whom he hired at a very great Price. And laftly, another to inftruct him in the Chaldee Language. Of all these he fpeaks in one or other of his Epiftles. Having therefore made himself a Mafter both of the Hebrew and Chaldee, he judged himself fufficiently qualified to tranflate the Bible from the original Hebrew into Latin. And befides his Skill in the original Language, he had the Hexapla of Origen to affift him: Whereupon he fet upon the Work; and tranflated all the Books of the Old Teftament; that is, all those which our Church in her fixth Article declares and acknowledges to be canonical. This appears from the Prefaces or Prologues he has prefixed to thefe Books. He alfo tranflated the Books of Tobit and Judith; but not the Books of Wifdom, Ecclefiafticus, Maccabees, Baruch, the Epistle of 'Jeremia, the Additions to Ether and to Daniel, becaufe they were not in the Hebrew, neither received by the Church as Parts of the canonical Scripture. But he confeffes that he had feen Ecclefiafticus, and the firft Book of the Maccabees, and likewife Tobit, in the Hebrew Tongue. As to the New Teftament, St. Jerom did not tranflate it anew, but corrected the old Tranflation.

This Tranflation of St. Jerom, though difliked at first, and blamed by many of his Cotemporaries, yet it gradually prevailed, and the greateft Part of it became the Verfion commonly used in the Latin Church. In the Time of Gregory the Great, which was about 200 Years after St. Jerom made this Tranflation, as appears from feveral Places of that Pope's Epiftles, St. Jerom's Verfion, and the old Italick, were both read in the Latin Churches; that is, as I fuppofe, fome Churches made ufe of one Verfion, and fome of the other: But at laft the Verfion of St. Jerom prevailed over the whole Western Church. Only the Pfalms, and other Hymns, which were read in the daily Offices of the Church, were there continued in the old Italick Verfion, whereby the Copies of that Verfion being neglected, were in Time all loft and destroyed. But when the Roman Edition of the LXX was published, Flaminius Nobilius of Luca, an eminent Divine, and great Critick, well verfed in the Writings of the Fathers, endeavoured to retrieve this ancient Italick Verfion from the Quotations which he collected out of all the Latin Fathers, who lived while that Translation was in Use. And when they failed him, he tranflated immediately from the LXX, making ufe of the fame Words and Phrafes, as far as he could, and the Matter would bear, which he found from his Quotations to have been ufed in that old Verfion. By this Means he has reftored, as well as poffibly could be done by fuch Means, the whole old Italick Verfion. And it is printed by Bifhop Walton, as the proper Translation of the LXX, in his Polyglot Bible.

The Tranflation of St. Jerom was the firft Latin Tranflation made immediately from the Hebrew Original, and continued the only one for

above a thousand Years. And after it became the only Verfion ufed in the Latin Church, it received alfo the Name of Biblia Vulgata, which was given before to the Italick Verfion. Thofe Books, which we (according with St. Jerom and the primitive Church) account Apocrypha, though the Church of Rome hold them canonical, ftill retain the old Italick Verfion, as do the Pfalms and Hymns ufed in the Liturgy: So likewife in our Liturgy, the Pialins and Hymns are retained according to the old Tranflation of Tindal and Coverdale, which was afterwards fupervised and corrected by the Bishops Tunfal and Heath, though there be a very different Tranflation of the Pfalms and the Hymns taken from the Scripture in our common Bibles, tranflated in the Reign of King James the Firft. And here it may not be improper to obferve, that all we of the Clergy give our Affent and Confent to this old Tranflation; but not to the latter, which is in our Bibles. However, there is no material Difference between them, the Senfe is the fame, though the Words are often different. Indeed there is fometimes a Sentence, or a Verfe, to be found in the Pfalms as they are in the CommonPrayer, which is not in that Place to be found in the Bible-Palms, but then they are to be found in other Pfalms, or other Places of Scripture. And particularly Pfal. xiv. there are eleven Verfes in that Palm in the Common-Prayer, and but feven in the Bible: Yet thofe four additional verfes are not only in the LXX, and Latin Vulgate, but are all cited by St. Paul, Rom. iii. 14, 15, 16, 17. very probably from this Pfalm, though the Verses be not now in our prefent Hebrew Bibles. As therefore this Tranflation is what we Clergymen give our Affent and Confent to, and as it is alfo daily read in our Churches, and our People are beft acquainted with it, I cannot but wonder that the Generality, when they choose a Text out of the Pfalms, take it from the Tranflation in the Bible, and not from that in the Common-Prayer. All the Objections made by the Prefbyterians, and others, against this Tranflation, have been well anfwered, and the whole defended againft their Cavils, by your and my late good Friend, Mr. Johnson of Cranbrook, in his Holy David, and his old English Tranflators cleared. Printed for R. Knaplock 1706. But to return from this Digreffion.

As St. Jerom's Bible was the firft that was tranflated into Latin immediately from the Hebrew, fo it continued the only one fo tranflated until the Time of the Reformation; that is, about 1100 Years. It is true, Nicolas de Lyra, a converted Jew of Normandy, who flourished about the Year 1320, and Paul de Burgos, who flourished about the Year 1415, corrected many Pallages in the Vulgate Verfion, according to the true Senfe of the Hebrew Text; but they never attempted to give an intire Verfion of the Bible.

Sandles Pagninus, a Dominican Monk, was the first who attempted to make a new Tranflation from the Modern Hebrew Text. His Defign was encouraged by Pope Leo X, who promised to defray the Charges of the Impreffion. He was employed in this great Work near thirty Years, which was the firft Time printed at Lyons in the Year 1527, authorized by a Bull of Pope Adrian VI, and another of Pope Clement VII, which are prefixed to it. He declares he has receded as little as poffibly could be from the Vulgate, and only in thofe Places

C 4

where

where it differed from the Senfe of the Hebrew: Yet his Translation is quite another Thing from the Vulgate, having been too fcrupulous in adhering to the Words of the Text, according to the utmost Rigour of Grammatical Rules, which makes his Tranflation obfcure. He has alfo been mifguided in fome Places, having affected too much to follow the Explication of the Jewish Rabbies. He has alfo altered the commonly-received Names of Men and Cities, to fubftitute in their Places others, pronounced according to the Punctuation of the Maforites. It muft, however, be granted to be a very ufeful Work; it is exact and faithful, and very proper to explain the literal Senfe of the Hebrew

Text.

Arius Montanus only revifed the Tranflation of Pagninus; in which he altered fome Words, which he did not think gave the exact literal Senfe of the Original. His chief Aim was to tranflate the Hebrew Words by the fame Number of Latin ones; fo that he has accommodated his whole Tranflation to the ftrictest Rules of Grammar, without confidering whether the Verfion be tolerable Latin, or may pafs for intelligible; and its best Use is to inftruct Beginners, who would learn the Hebrew Tongue; and as it is, I think, always printed interlinearily, with the Latin Word placed exactly over the Hebrew, it faves the Learner the Trouble of having often Recourfe to his Lexicon. The Tianflation of Thomas Maluinda, a Spanish Dominican, as it is more barbarous than that of Arius Montanus, fo it is not much in Request.

Although Cardinal Cajetan had but little Knowledge in the Hebrew, yet he undertook a Tranflation of fome Part of the Bible from the Hebrew, Word for Word, by the Affiftance of two Perfons, one a Jew, and the other a Chriftian, both well fkilled in that Language. But he took care to avoid thofe barbarous Expreffions he muft have ufed, if his Tranflation had been strictly and grammatically literal.

Ifidore Clarius, a Monk of Mount-Calin, and afterwards Bishop of Fuligno, only undertook to reform the Vulgate nearer to the prefent Hebrew Text: But though he tells us, that he corrected above eight thoufand Paffages in the Bible; yet he confeffes, that he paffed by fome where there was fmall difference between the Senfe of the Vulgate and the Original, to give as little Offence as might be to Catholicks, which he must have done, had he made too many Alterations in the Vulgate Verfion.

Thefe are all the Tranflations of Note of the whole Old Teftament done by Roman Catholicks from the Hebrew Text, not reckoning the Verfions of particular Books, as of the Pfalms, by the learned Simeon de Muis, who has been very careful in retaining both the Senfe, and the Words of the Vulgate, as far as could be done without Injuftice to the Hebrew Text. His Verfion is good Latin, and intelligible, without Barbarifm, or any Affectation of Elegancy.

If your Curiofity lead you to fee a frietly literal Tranflation of Scripture into English, Mr. Johnson, in his Holy David, before mentioned, has given a Specimen from Mr. Ainsworth, who tranflated the whole Book of Pfalmis from the Hebrew. The Palm Mr. Johnjon has chofen (but he could not choofe amifs) for a Sample of a literal Verfion is

he

the LIX. I will only here tranfcribe the Preface, and the two first Verles. To the Mafter of the Mufick. Corrupt not Michtam of David, when Saul fent, and they kept the Houfe for to kill him. Deliver me from mine Enemies, O my God: From them that rife up against me, fet thou me on high. Deliver me from the Workers of painful Iniquity: And fave me from the Men of Bloods. This Ainsworth was a Prefbyterian, and one that found great Fault with the Tranflation ufed in our Church.

Sebaftian Munfter, a German Monk, who turned Proteflant about the Year 1529, was the firft of that Denomination, who tranflated the Holy Scriptures of the Old Teftament out of Hebrew into Latin. Though he was very careful to keep close to the Hebrew Text, and even to retain fome of its Idiotifms, yet it is neither unintelligible nor barbarous. Huetius (though a zealous Romanist) gives him the Character of a Man well verfed in the Hebrew Language, whofe Style is very exact and conformable to the Hebrew Language. And Du Pin (from whom I take almost all I fay of thefe modern Latin Tranflations) fays, that, "Truly, his Tranflation is the moft literal, but at the fame "Time the moft faithful, of any done by Proteftants." I am forry there should be any Proteftants fo weak, as well as wicked, as wilfully to miftranflate any Paffage in the Bible: Yet as Du Pin, who (though a Papift) is acknowledged by Proteftants to have been of great Candour and Impartiality, does affirm, that there is not a ftrict Fidelity obferved by all Proteftants in their Tranflation of the Scriptures, I fear there is Ground to think that it may be as he fays. But if it be fo, thofe Protestants must indeed be equally weak and wicked, who fhall wilfully miftranflate. For they must be fenfible (if they would rightly confider) that fuch Miftranflations give their Enemies (who will foon difcover fuch unfaithful Tranflations) a great Advantage over them. But as he gives no particular Inftances of fuch unfaithful Doings, I hope he is mistaken. There may, and always will be, fome Miftakes made by the best Tranflators of fo large a Book as the Holy Scriptures; but if they are not wilfully made, and with fome apparent Defign to ferve a Caufe, they ought not to be charged with Want of Faithfulness.

The Tranflation of Leo Juda, a Zuinglian, printed at Zurich, in the Year 1543, and afterwards reprinted by Robert Stephens, in the Year 1545, in two Columns (one containing the Vulgate, with the Notes of Vatablus) is written in a more elegant Style than Munster's: But this Author recedes fometimes too far from the literal Senfe; and in fome Places changes the Expreffions for better Latin, but which are more remote from the true Senfe, and don't exprefs with the fame Force the true Meaning of the Hebrew Text. He also gives himself tometimes too much Liberty to determine the Senfe of the Hebrew Text, according to his own particular Opinion.

But at the fame Time he has not taken near fo much Liberty as Sebaftian Chatillon, commonly known by the Name of Caftalio, who having taken a Fancy to give the World an elegant Latin Verfion of the Bible, has mixt Expreffions borrowed from profane Authors with the Text of Holy Writ. His whole Style is affected, effeminate, overcharged with falfe Rhetorick, and has nothing of that noble Sim licity

and

and natural Grandeur, obferved in the Originals, and in other Verfions, He is too bold in his Expreffions, and, after all, does not always write good Latin.

The Verfion of Tremellius and Junius, has much more of the true natural Simplicity: The chief Hebraifms are preserved, and the whole exactly conformable to the Hebrew Text, without Obfcurity or Barbarity. But then they are not always fo confcientious (this is Du Pin's Charge against them) but that fometimes they put in more than is in the Text, and add fome Words to extort the Senfe they would give it. They likewife frequently recede without the leaft Neceffity from the Words of the Vulgate, inftead of which they often put others which are neither fo good nor fo noble.

Andrew and Luke Ofiander, have acted with more Refervednefs in their Edition of the Bible; for they have contented themselves to add to the Vulgate fuch Corrections as they believed ought to be made according to the Hebrew Text, without the leaft Diminution of the Text of the ancient Verfion; but have inferted their Amendinents, printed in a different Character from the Text of the Vulgate, which may breed fome Confufion. For which Reafon, it would have been more proper to have printed the Differences of the Hebrew Text in the Margin.

The Latin Bible most common in England (I mean of thefe modern Tranflations) is that of Tremellius and Junius, with the Greek Testament tranflated by Beza. But I think the Vulgate is the only Latin Tranflation made Ufe of in our University Schools.

Thefe many new Latin Tranflations gave Occafion to the Council of Trent to establish the Authority of the Vulgate in a particular Manner. Therefore in the fourth Seffion of that General Council (as they were pleafed to call themfelves) in the Year 1546, they made the folJowing Decree. Infuper eadem facro-janeta Synodus confiderans non parum Utilitatis accedere poffe Ecclefiæ Dei, fi ex multis Latinis Editionibus, quæ circumferuntur facrorum librorum, quænam pro authentica habenda fit innotefcat: Statuit et declarat, ut hæc ipfa Vetus et Vulgata Editio, quæ longo tot feculorum ufu in Ecclefia ipfa probata eft, in publicis Lectionibus, Difpu tationibus, Prædicationibus, aut Expofitionibus, pro authentica habeatur. Et quod eam nemo rejicere, quovis prætextu audeat vel præfumat.

The Proteftants ftrenuoufly objected against this Decree, and said, as we learn from Chemnitius in his Examen of this Council and its Decrees; Hoc non eft tolerandum in Ecclefia, ut pro iis quæ Spiritus Sanctus in fontibus Habraicis et Græcis fcripfit, ea que vitiosè ab interprete reddita, vel à librariis mutata, mutilata vel addita funt, tanquam authentica nobis obtrudantur, et quidem ita ut non licet, infpectis fontibus, ea rejicere.

The Romanifts on the other hand, in Defence of this Decree, deny that it equals, much lefs prefers, this Verfion to the Original. They fay, as we learn from Du Pin's Compleat Hiftory of the Canon of Scripture, where he treats of the Latin Tranflations: "That the Intention "of the Council was, that, amongst all the Latin Verfions, this alone "should be made ufe of in publick Sermons, Difputes, and Confer

ences. This authentick Qualification however does not imply an "exact Conformity in all Refpects to the Original Writings, fuch "as have been dictated by the Holy Ghoft, or an Exemption from all "Errors