any Text, does occur, that Text, fo varioufly read, will not be a fufficient Proof of that Doctrine it may be alledged for; and the Doctrine might be judged uncertain, if it could not be proved from other Texts, wherein all Copies (except fuch as are apparently faulty) are agreed. But God be praised, all the Doctrines of Chriftianity, as received and taught by the Primitive Catholick Church, and from thence by the Church of England, may be clearly proved from fuch Texts of the Old and New Testament as have no various Readings, at least none fuch as make any Difference in the Senfe; for most of the various Readings caufe no Difference in the Sense.

However, in many Places, I believe, I may fay in moft, if not in all, where the Readings are various, we may pretty well judge and fatisfy ourselves concerning the true Reading, by obferving the following Rules. As first, when any Part of the Old Teftament is quoted in the New, and in the Place from whence that Quotation is taken, there be a various Reading, we may, I think, affure ourselves, that the Words, as quoted there, are the true Reading, whether they be quoted according to the Hebrew or the LXX. And whereas the Old Testament is often quoted in the New according to the Senfe, and not according to the Letter either of the Hebrew or LXX, and there be there a various Reading, that which comes nearest the Senfe of the Quotation in the New Teftament is to be preferred. In the next Place, where a Hebrew Word has one Signification, as pointed by the Maforites, or as interpreted by the Jews, and may well bear a different Signification from that Jewish Interpretation; and the LXX have followed that different Signification of the Word, of which Bishop Pearfon has given feveral Inftances in his excellent Preface to the Cambridge Edition of the LXX, then, I conceive, we may fafely follow the LXX; because we may reasonably fuppofe they understood the Hebrew better than the modern Jews. And the fame may be faid when and

,

and, and other fimilar Letters might be mistaken by Transcribers the one for the other; because the LXX tranflated from correct Copies, taken immediately from the Autographum preferved in the Temple. Again, when we find a Sentence or Period in the Hebrew, which is not in the LXX, or in the LXX, and not in the Hebrew; if we find. it agreeable to what goes before, and follows after in the Context, we may conclude that Sentence or Period was in the Original, but omitted in the Copies we now have, either of the Hebrew or LXX, by the Oversight of Tranfcribers. For the Omiffion of a Sentence may eafily happen through Overfight; but the Addition of a Sentence must be made on Purpose. However, if the Sentence which is found in the Hebrew, and not in the LXX; or in the LXX, and not in the Hebrew, be manifeftly incoherent, and breaks the Senfe of the Context, then there is Reafon to believe it an Addition, occafioned by a Note fome. body had made in the Margin of his Book, which an ignorant Tranfcriber put into the Text. By thefe and feme other critical Rules, we may form a pretty good Judgment which Reading we ought to follow, whether of the Hebrew or the LXX, in moft Places where they differ the one from the other.

Thus,

Thus, Reverend Sir, I have anfwered your Queftion as well as I can; and, perhaps, more largely than you expected or defired. Indeed, if I had only faid, that the Reafon of the Difference between our English Verfion and the LXX, was because they were made from two different Copies of the Hebrew, it had been a full Answer to your Query: But, I hope, my enlarging upon it may be more to your Satisfaction, and that, upon that Account, you will excufe my not anfwering you fooner.

Octob. 17,
1729.

I am,

Reverend Sir,

Your most humble Servant,

T. B.

AN

HISTORICAL ACCOUNT

OF THE SEVERAL

ENGLISH TRANSLATIONS

OF THE

BI B B L E.

O

NE Thing cenfured by the Church of Rome in our Reformation, is, The committing fo much Heavenly Treasure to fuch rotten Veffels, the trufting fo much excellent Wine to fuch mufty Bottles; I mean, the Verfion of the Scriptures into the ufual Languages of the common People, and the promifcuous Liberty indulged them therein. This they charge as an Innovation of a dangerous Confequence. But the conftant current of Antiquity does affirm the contrary, which plainly fhews, that the Church did neither innovate in this Act of hers, nor deviate therein from the Word of God, or from the Ufage of the best and happieft Times of the Church of Chrift.

The Word of God, no doubt, was committed unto Writing, that it might be read by all that were to be directed and guided by it. The Scriptures of the Old Teftament were first written in Hebrew, the Vulgar Language of the Jesus, and read unto them publickly in their Synagogues every Sabbath Day, Acts xiii. 27. and xv. 21. The New Teftament was writ in Greek, the most known and ftudied Language of the Eaftern World, for the fame Reafon; and written for this End and Purpofe, that Men might believe that Jefus is the Chrift, the Son of God, and that believing they might have Life in his Name, John xx. 31. But being that all the Faithful did not understand thefe Languages, and that the Light of Holy Scripture might not be likened to a Candle hid under a Bufhel, it was thought good by many godly Men in the Primitive Times, to tranflate the fame into the Languages of the Countries in which they lived, or of which they had been Natives: Concerning which Theodoret (who lived in the Beginning of the fifth Century) ad Grac. Infid. Serm. 5. thus fpeaks; We Chriftians are

enabled

enabled to fhew the Power of Apoftolick and Prophetick Doctrines, which have filled all Countries under Heaven. For that which was formerly uttered in Hebrew, is not only tranflated into the Language of the Græcians, but alfo of the Romans, the Indians, Perfians, Armenians, Scythians, Sarmatians, Ægyptians, and, in a Word, into all the Languages that are used by any Nation. For the Sacred Writ being the Foundation of the Christian Religion, upon which they built the whole System of their Morality and Doctrine, and which the Chriftians were obliged to read both in Publick and Private; the feveral Churches of the World could not be long without fuch Tranflations as might be understood by every Body.

Not to mention other Places, this was done here in England, by Adelm or Aldhelm the first Bishop of Sherborn, who tranflated the Pfalter into the Saxon Tongue, about the Year 706. This Adelm, in his Book de Virginitate, praifes the Nuns to whom he writ, that studying the Holy Scriptures, they had manifefted their Industry and Towardlinefs in the daily reading of them. And Bede, 1. 3. c. 5. ab Anno 634. tells us how Aidan (a Scotch Bishop, who promoted Christianity in the Kingdom of Northumberland, in the Reign of King Ofwald, and fixed his See in Holy Island) took Care that all thofe that travelled with him, whether Clergy or Laity, fhould fpend a confiderable Part of their Time in reading the Holy Scriptures: And the Saxon Homilies exhort the People with great Earneftnefs, to the frequent Perufal of the Scriptures; and inforce the Advice from the great Benefit of that Exercise. At this Time of Day the Bible was not accounted a dangerous Book; it was not locked up in an unknown Tongue, or kept under Restraint, or granted with Faculties and Difpenfations. In thofe Days there was a Tranflation of the Scriptures extant in the Vulgar Language, otherwife it had been impoflible for the Women to have studied them, when the Knowledge of the Latin Tongue was fo rare in thofe Days, that few of the Clergy understood it; and this Adelm was the first of our English Nation who wrote in Latin; having been educated at Rome and in France. He wrote a Letter to Egbert (whom they alfo called Ehfrid, Eadfrid, and Eckfrid) Bishop of Lendisfern, extant in Wharton's Auctarium Hift. Dogmat. Ufferij, p. 351; in which he exhorts him, that for the common Benefit and Ufe of all People, the Scriptures might be put into the Vulgar Language, which Butler, in his Book against the Vulgar Tranflation, fays he did. And Archbishop Uber, in his Hif toria Dogmatica, c. 5. tells us, that the Saxon Tranflation of the Evangelifts done by Egbert, without Diftinction of Chapters, was in the Poffeffion of Mr. Rob. Bowyer. Wharton in his Anglia Sacra, pars 1. p. 695. relates how this Egbert writ, for the Ufe of St. Cuthbert, whilst he was with him in his Monaftery, a very fair Copy of the Four Evan gelifts in Latin; which Ethelwold his Succeffor beautified with Gold and Precious Stones, to which Aldred a Prieft added a Saxon Interlineary Translation, to be feen in Cotton's Library. Egbert dyed Anno 1721.

Bede, who flourished about the Beginning of the Eighth Century, frent his whole Time in Study and Devotion, wrote a great many Tracts his laft is faid to be the Tranflation of St. John's Gofpel into

English;

English; and Afferius tells us, the laft Sentence was finifhed, when he was expiring. But Cuthbert in his Letter concerning his Death, recorded in his Life, fays he went no farther than thefe Words, But what are thofe among fo many, John vi. 9. Fox tells us, out of the Preface before the ancient Bibles, that Bede tranflated the whole Bible into the Saxon Tongue: and Caius in his Book de Antiq. Cantab. l. 1. relates the fame. Bale fays he tranflated the Gofpel of St. John, the Pfalter, and other Books of the Holy Scriptures into English.

Ingulphus in his Hiftory, Cent. I. c. 83. makes mention of St. Guthlack's Pfalter: He lived at the fame Time with Adelm, was the firft. Saxon Anchoret; and gave Occafion to the founding the Monastery of Croyland by Ethelbald King of Mercia, in the Place where he had erected his Cell. Lambert in Refpon. ad 26. Art. Epif. fays, he faw his Pfalter in the Saxon Tongue, among the Records belonging to the Abby of Croyland. And there is in the Publick Library in Cambridge, a Tranflation of the Psalms in Latin and Saxon; and another very old Latin Translation, with an Interlineary Saxon Verfion in Sir Rob. Cotton's Library, in the fame Character with the Charter of King Ethelbald, bearing Date Anno 736, as Archbishop Uber tells us, Hift. Dog. p. 104.

King Alfred, in his Letter to Wulffig Bishop of London, prefixed to his Tranflation of Gregory the Great's Paftoral, obferves that the Bible written in Hebrew, was tranflated into Greek and Latin; and that all Christendom had fome Part of the Inspired Writings turned into their own Language. For this Reafon he caufed to be tranflated the Old and New Teftament into the English Tongue. He undertook the Tranflation of the Book of Pfalms himself, but dyed Anno 900. when it was about half finifhed. This was published with the Latin Interlineary Text, by Jahn Spelman, in Quarto, London 1640. There is also another Saxon Interlineary Tranflation of the Pfalter in the Library at Lambeth, which feems to be little later than the Time of King Alfred. And that we may fee how ftrong that King's Inclinations were to provide for the Security of Religion, and to promote the Happiness of his People; he informs Wulffig that he had a Defign that all the English who had any thing of Circumftances, or Sufficiency, fhould be obliged to educate their Children to read English, before they put them to any Trade; and if they intended to have them preferred to any Degree of Notice and Confideration, they fhould get them inftructed in Latin. Several other Tranflations of the Balms were made afterwards, and of the New Teftament. One of the lalt in the Saxon Tongue Archbishop Uber informs us, is in Ben'et College Library; and that another old Saxon Tranflation of the Four Evangelifts was printed at London Anno 1571, wherein the feveral Portions appointed to be read on Sundays and HolyDays, were marked out. Such was the Care of the Church of EngLand then, to instruct the People committed to her Charge in Matters of Religion; that as often as there was any confiderable Change made in the Vulgar Tongue, there were made new Tranflations of the Scriptures, Offices, and Homilies for the Publick, fo far was the from thinking Ignorance to be the Mother of Devotion.

For a Proof of this, Mr. Wharton offers a Saxon English Manuscript