Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary

Origin of the books of the New Testament. Canon of the books of the New Testament. Original language of the books of the New Testament. Different versions of the Scriptures in English, with the dates of the same.

ORIGIN OF THE BOOKS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT.

Our Lord Jesus Christ has left us nothing in writing. He gave all his instructions by word of mouth, preaching in public and in private to his apostles and to all the people, inculcating the truths of salvation during the three years of his missionary career: but before he quitted them, he promised to give them an invisible and interior master, who should teach them all things whatever he should say to them, and enable them to answer their opponents and to carry the gospel truths to the utmost limits of the earth. (St. John chap. xiv. 26, and chap. xvi. 13.)

It was in the execution of these promises that the apostles received the Holy Ghost, fifty days after the resurrection of Jesus Christ, and, that animated with his fire, and illumined with his divine light, they have left us the holy gospels, and the other books of the New Testament, which we consider with reason as the work of Jesus Christ himself. Let us then no longer say, happy are they who have seen the Lord, and who have heard from his mouth the words of life. Many of those have persecuted him, and have imbrued their hands in his blood; whilst many of those, who have not seen him, have believed in him. Moreover, we read, we hear, we preserve in the sacred books the instructions he gave to the people. Jesus Christ is in heaven, and he is still preaching on earth: etiam hic est veritas Dominus. (St. Augustine)

The apostles were in no great hurry to write: they began, after the example of their Master, to teach by word of mouth, and to practice the truths they had learned. They were no ways apprehensive of forgetting what they had heard, nor of varying in what they taught; they had impressed too deeply the truths they had received from his lips, both on their mind and heart, and they felt perfectly secure in the promises made to them, that his Holy Spirit should never abandon them. — After some years, the zeal and pious curiosity of the faithful engaged them to commit to writing what they knew, for the consolation and instruction of their disciples. This was the motive of St. Matthew’s writing. St. Mark probably had the same motive in abridging what had been penned by St. Matthew, wishing at the same time to subjoin some additional few facts and circumstances which he had learned elsewhere.

St. Luke informs us that he was determined to write, because accounts were in circulation relative to the life and doctrines of Jesus Christ, differing from what they had received from the apostles; and that he gave his account with all exactitude, from the mouth of those who had been witnesses, and who were charged to deliver them to their disciples, thinking that he should do a service to the Church in writing faithfully, and in order, all that had passed from the beginning. — Lastly, the holy Fathers teach us that the heresy of Cerinthus, and that of the Nicolaites, who denied the divinity of Jesus Christ, gave rise to the Gospel of St. John.

DR. WITHAM’S REMARKS TO THE READER.

A translation of the New Testament into English from the ancient Latin version, was made by some Catholic Divines in the University of Douay, two hundred and thirty years ago, and published by them at Rheims, anno 1582. By the date, that translation was made before the amendments and corrections under Sixtus V. and Clement VIII. to reduce the Latin Vulgate to its former purity. Yet the differences betwixt that Douay translation and the present Latin Vulgate, are so few and inconsiderable, that they must have followed a very correct Latin edition.

The authors of that translation are to be commended for their endeavours to give us a true and literal translation, not a Paraphrase, as most of the French translations seem to be. This liberty of a Paraphrase would indeed have rendered this laborious work much easier, but less exact, and with no small danger of mistaking and misrepresenting the true sense of the word of God. In this I have endeavoured to follow them.

They followed with a nice exactness the Latin text, which they undertook to translate, at the same time always consulting and comparing it with the Greek, as every accurate translator must do, not to mistake the true sense of the Latin text. They perhaps followed too scrupulously the Latin, even as to the placing of the words; but what chiefly makes that edition seem so obscure at present, and scarcely intelligible, is the difference of the English tongue as it was spoken at that time, and as it is now changed and refined: so that many words and expressions both in the translation and annotations, by length of time, are become obsolete, and no longer in use.

It must needs be owned that many places in the Holy Scriptures are obscure, and hard to be understood: dusnoeta, says St. Peter, 2 Peter chap iii. ver. 16. They must be obscure in a literal translation, as they are in the original. These places, as St. Peter there tells us, the unlearned, by their own false interpretations, turn and wrest, as also the other Scriptures, to their own destruction. Nor yet is it lawful even to prevent such fatal mistakes, to make any alterations or additions that are not contained in the literal sense of the text. If the reader, in this edition, find sometimes a word or two in a different character, it is merely because though they are not expressed in the very letter of the text, yet they seem necessary to represent to the reader the true and literal sense and construction of such places, and so cannot be looked upon as any alteration or addition.

I am by no means for changing that simplicity of style, and that plain manner of relating and expressing these divine truths, in which the sacred writers, inspired by the Holy Ghost, have delivered to us these oracles of the word of God. I am of the opinion of M. Godeau, the learned bishop of Vence, who would not in his Paraphrase change thou into you, even when the words were addressed to God himself. He says that to speak to God by thou and thee, is to pay greater honour and veneration to the grandeur and majesty of God. And yet it is certain they sound more awkwardly in the French language than in the English; for hitherto, both Catholics and Protestants have used them in their English Scriptures and Prayer-Books, though the French not so frequently: we have also another reason for retaining them in the Scripture; for the change of thou into you, would very often make the sentence of a doubtful signification, as I could shew by many examples.

I have also retained such phrases, and ways of speaking, which may be called either Hebraisms or Grecisms, as taken from the idioms of those languages, but yet may be well enough understood in English. Nor did I think it necessary to change many words and expressions which, though coming from Hebrew and Greek derivations, are sufficiently understood by a long ecclesiastical use and custom, at least by those who are acquainted with the style of the sacred writers.

But notwithstanding the obscurity in the Holy Scriptures, and the simplicity and plainness of the style and phraseology, these sacred penmen are falsely accused of barbarisms and solecisms in many places in the Greek: and though they have sometimes neglected the ordinary rules of grammar, (which the Latin interpreter has also done) yet in them we may discover not only more sublime thoughts, but even a true, natural, and solid eloquence, far surpassing the studied and artificial rhetoric of the most celebrated profane classics. Of this see the judicious critic, and eloquent Dr. Blackwall, in his book entitled, The Sacred Classics Defended, &c. An. 1728.

I know English Protestants are apt to blame us for translating from the Latin Vulgate rather than from the Greek. Is not the Greek, say they, the fountain? Were not the originals of all, or almost all, the New Testament, written in Greek? They were so. But then we desire first to know where they, or we, may find this Greek fountain pure, clear, and unmixed, as it was in the beginning? where we may be able to meet with those originals, or Greek: autographa, written by those divinely inspired authors? It is certain they are not now extant, nor have been seen or heard of for many ages.

But they will tell us, though the originals are lost, we may meet with many copies, and Greek manuscripts some of them, perhaps written a thousand years ago, as the most learned critics conjecture. We must desire of them, secondly, to know whether any one of these manuscript copies agree in all, or almost all places, one with another, or with the Greek Testaments printed from them, and from which the Protestants have made their translations into vulgar tongues? It is evident to a demonstration, that no such authentic manuscripts can be found.

The immense labours, and almost incredible pains, which many Protestants, as well as divers Catholics, have taken for two hundred and eighty years, to turn over, read, and compare the best and most ancient manuscripts in all the most famous libraries in the world, have made it evident to all mankind in how many thousand places they differ one from another.

The Greek edition of the New Testament, printed at Oxford, E. Theatro Sheldoniano, An. 1675, has given us out of divers manuscripts about twelve or thirteen thousand different readings, as they have been numbered by a Protestant[1] author, G. D. T. who published a neat edition of the New Testament at Amsterdam, Ex Oficina Westeniana, An. 1711. And when, in his Prologom. he gives an account of the indefatigable labours of the learned Dr. Mills, he tells us, that out of about 120 manuscripts he published An. 1707 about thirty thousand different readings; and moreover, that the said Dr. Mills, in his Prologom. owns that he looks upon above two thousand of these to be the true and genuine readings, according to which all printed copies ought to be corrected, and the present readings cast out, which, says he, would occasion no small changes in our books.

This said critic, in the same place, blames Dr. Mills for not attending to the consequences and advantages which, he apprehends, the Papists may pretend to draw from thence, who always cry the fountains are corrupted; 2ndly, the Cocinians; 3rdly, the Atheists, and all they who make a jest of all revealed religion.

I am sorry to find any of our adversaries so ill-natured, and so unjust to us, as to join us in such ill company as that of Socinians, Deists, Atheists, &c. We detest not only their errors, but also the consequences which they bring against the authority of the Holy Scriptures, from the different readings, either in the Greek or Latin manuscripts and copies, of which I may say, with a Protestant critic, that they seem more for pomp[2] and shew than for use and profit; a great number, especially of Dr. Mills’s, being frivolous, and of no moment, like those of Mr. James, in his book, to which he thought fit to give the title of Bellum Papale, setting forth those small differences betwixt the amendments of Sixtus V. and Clement VIII.

It is true, the Catholics, from such a multitude of differences, even in the most ancient manuscripts now extant, (which, as M. Simon shews, differ as much one from another, and from the printed Greek copies, as those of a later date) may draw these inferences:

I. That the Protestants set too great a value, and lay too great stress upon the Greek text, such as it now is, from which they have made so many different translations into vulgar languages; so that even Luther,[3] Calvin, Beza, and King James I. when he ordered a new translation, made loud and just complaints, that by them was shamefully corrupted the purity of the word of God. For, as St. Jerome[4] said, that which varies cannot be true; especially, when it must remain doubtful which readings ought to be preferred, and when every translator follows, and sets down that reading which, in his private opinion, he judges best, or rather which agrees best with the principles of his sect; by which liberty, says Dr. Walton[5] in his Prolog. they have often followed Lesbiam regulam, that is, by endeavouring to make the word of God conformable to their creed, not their creed to the word of God.

II. From such a multitude of various readings, and differences in all these manuscripts it must needs follow that the Greek fountain has not run clear and unmixed for many ages.

III. For the same reason, the present Greek text cannot be accounted authentic in such a manner as they would have people believe. By an authentic writing, deed, or testament, is often understood the very original itself, written, made, or signed by the author of it. No Greek manuscript nor any part of the New Testament, can now be called authentic in this sense. A writing may be also esteemed authentic in a less degree, when, though it be not the original itself, it can at least be proved to be a copy agreeing exactly, and word for word with that writing that was the original: this again cannot be pretended of the Greek manuscripts now extant, because of such a number of differences, even in the most ancient copies that can be met with. The Protestants, therefore, must needs allow that writings, in a true sense, may be looked upon as authentic, when there are sufficient grounds and authority to believe, and to be convinced, that notwithstanding many small changes which have happened in seventeen or eighteen hundred years, they still contain, in all things of moment, the sense of the originals; so that whether they be copies in the same primitive language, or ere faithfully translated, credit may be given to them as to the originals. Can our adversaries shew any other sense in which the present Greek can be called authentic?

They need not, therefore, quarrel with the Decree of the Council of Trent, (Session 4) which, without deciding any thing concerning the Hebrew or Greek Scriptures, and without denying them to be authentic, declared the Latin Vulgate to be received, and made use of as authentic, ordering a correct edition of it to be published, and to be preferred before all other Latin translations and editions. And that this is the true sense of that Decree, see Pallavicino, who wrote the History of the Council, Salmeron, who was there present, Bellarmin, and divers other learned Catholic writers, cited for this purpose by Dr. Walton in his 10th Prolomenon. The same Catholic writers allow and teach that recourse may be had, even to the present Hebrew and Greek, to find, and prove the true sense of the Scriptures. See Bellarmine, lib. ii. de verbo Dei. chap. 11.

But the Protestants will still pretend that translations of the New Testament ought rather to be made from the Greek, being the language in which it was written, and therefore the Greek must certainly have more of the original than translations into Latin, Syriac, &c.[6] Yet this only shews that the Greek manuscripts and copies, as we have them at present, have indeed more of the original, as to the words, but does not prove that they have more of the original, as to the true sense, than a faithful and exact translation, taken from the originals soon after there were written, if such a translation hath been always kept with equal or with greater care. For it is certain that many times one word, or one letter, added or omitted, quite changeth the sense of a whole sentence; and such changes, when they come to be very numerous, alter the sense of a large writing or book. This may happen to any book, to any deed, to any last will and testament, of which a number of copies have been taken, though in the same language. Put the case, that when St. Jerome undertook a new translation into Latin of the Old Testament, he could meet with no Hebrew text but what was full of faults and changes, and that the Greek version of the Septuagint had been faithfully translated, and more carefully preserved, it is certain that though he might still find in the Hebrew more of the original as to the very words, yet not more of the true sense. Many who opposed St. Jerome’s new translation from the Hebrew, and were for sticking to the former version taken from the Septuagint judged this to be the very case; especially, finding that Christ himself, and his apostles, cited the places of the Scriptures as they were in the Septuagint.

To apply this to the question we are about, and give reasons for translating from the Latin Vulgate: It is not to be doubted but that a Latin translation of all the New Testament was made, either in the apostle’s time or very soon after. No doubt but this translation was not only read by particulars, but in all churches and meetings where the Latin tongue was spoken. It is this translation that St. Jerome and St. Augustine sometimes called vetus, and communis, sometimes vulgata, and Italia, or Italica. And St. Augustine speaking of the Latin versions, of which there had been very many before his time, says, Itala cœteris prœferatur. (lib. ii. de Doct. Christ. chap. 15.)

This common and Vulgate edition of St. Jerome corrected, by order of Pope Damasus, from the Greek manuscripts which doubtless were not so different as those now to be met with in our days: yet he tells us what caution he used in correcting it, only from the best manuscripts and such as seemed true ones. This Latin Vulgate, with St. Jerome’s amendments, was much approved by the learned men; yet it was not generally used in the churches till two hundred years after; they still retained in their public Liturgy, and read in their Church meetings, the common ancient Vulgate, and then by degrees St. Jerome’s corrections were received, at least for the most part, though in some places the New Testament was still retained, according to that ancient and common Italica.

The learned Cassiodorus, in the 6th age, took great pains to have the Scriptures corrected from the faults that had happened by the ignorance or negligence of transcribers, and placed manuscripts as correct as possible, both of the ancient Vulgate and with St. Jerome’s amendments, in his library.

The emperor Charles the Great, who was both learned himself and a great encourager of learning, employed Alcuin, and divers learned men, to correct those frequent faults, which, by such a multitude of written copies, were found in the Latin Scriptures. He tells us he corrected in this manner all the Books[7] of the Old and New Testament.

The Latin writers and interpreters in every age, and also the scholastics from the 12th and 13th century, have much contributed to make us able to discern the true readings from the changes and faults of transcribers, before printing was invented.

The learned men in most universities, and in all parts of the western church, were consulted, who having compared the Latin with the Greek copies, sent their remarks to Rome, where, after examining and advising with men that were judged the most capable in this kind of learning, were published the correct editions of the Latin Vulgate, by Sixtus V. and Clement VIII. Can it be said that greater care, or equal care, has been taken as to any edition of the Greek Testament?

It may be also observed that neither St. Jerome, nor any of the Fathers, thought it convenient to make new translations from the Greek manuscripts They contented themselves with correcting those faults which inevitably happened in the manuscript copies. They had a due veneration for that version which had been made use of from the beginning of the Christian religion in all the Latin churches. Erasmus was the first who undertook a new translation from the printed Greek, published by Cardinal Ximenes, and by Robert Stephen. Beza blames Erasmus for abandoning in many places the Latin Vulgate, which, says he, is more comformable to many Greek manuscripts which Erasmus wanted. The learned Protestant, Mr. Bois,[8] prebend of Ely, at the request of Launcelot, bishop of Winchester, in his book entitled Veteris Interpretis cum Beza aliisque recentiorbus Collatio, commended by Dr. Walton, defends the old Latin translation, where it was changed by Beza, and others. See what he says on the 4th chapter of St. Matthew p. 5. And what heavy complaints the author of the preface makes, not only of new readings, but of all kind of novelties in matters of religion, introduced without necessity.

Dr. Walton,[9] in his Prolog. and other learned Protestants, own that the Latin Vulgate ought to be held in great esteem, and that it ought not to be changed by any private persons, having been authorized and used in the Church for so many ages; especially, saith Walton, since it belongs to the Church to judge of the sense of the Scriptures, and to recommend this sacred Depositum to the faithful. The Church, in a General Council, has declared the ancient Latin Vulgate authentic; but we do not find any Greek copy or edition, such as we come meet with at present, recommended to us by the Church.

As to the annotations in this edition, I have not followed those in the Rheims Testament. They chiefly insisted on the controversies occasioned by the late changes of religion in England. I have made it my endeavour to expound also the literal sense. I am persuaded that aiming at brevity, these notes may seem obscure to those who have not read any other commentary; but I hope they may be useful, both for the preventing of false interpretations, and for a more easy understanding of the word of God, especially in the Epistles of St. Paul. I am not conscious to myself that I have omitted to examine the greatest difficulties, nor those passages that have been perverted by false expositions: nor yet have I used any harsh language, or reflections on those who have fallen into the greatest errors and mistakes. I have always been mindful of that excellent admonition of the apostle to his disciple, St. Timothy, as spoken to every minister of the gospel: Be mild towards all men ... patient, admonishing with modesty them who resist the truth, in hopes that God will at some time give them repentance to know, and acknowledge the truth, 2 Timothy ii. 24. If I have not been acquainted with the Scriptures from my very infancy, as St. Paul witnesseth of the same St. Timothy, my inclinations, at least, led me very early to take the greatest delight in searching the sense of the Holy Scriptures, the commentaries, and interpretations of the ancient Fathers, especially on the New Testament, in their own works, and in the language in which they wrote; in citing of which, I have never trusted any eyes but my own, which I soon found very necessary; not omitting, at the same time, what I could learn from later authors and critics.

But as I am conscious to myself, so I freely own to the public, that I do not look upon myself sufficiently qualified to make a new translation, which therefore I have not pretended to do. I am far from being so perfect in Greek as I could wish, and of Hebrew I know nothing. I have consulted, on the most difficult places, those whom I thought best able to assist me. I have been always cautious not to expound the Scriptures by my own private judgment, nor to follow a blind guide, nor to split upon the same dangerous rock as all heretics have done, rashly wresting the Scriptures to their own destruction, 2 Peter iii. 16. I submit all to the judgment of the Church, and of the head of the Church, the successor of St. Peter, to those pastors and bishops whom Christ left to govern his Church, with whom he promised to remain to the end of the world, Matthew xxviii. 20.

I shall only add, that I have not published this translation and notes, that every one, though ever so ignorant, might read and put his own construction on the sense of these sacred writings. The dangerous and pernicious consequences of reading the Scriptures without humility, and an entire submission to the Church, I have elsewhere taken notice of. I beg leave to conclude with this charitable advice, that whosoever takes the Holy Scriptures in hand to read them, first make this, or the like prayer, to the Father of Lights.

A PRAYER BEFORE READING OF ANY PART OF THE HOLY SCRIPTURES.

Come, O holy Spirit, fill the hearts and minds of thy faithful servants, and inflame them with the fire of thy divine love.

LET US PRAY.

O God, who by the inspiration of the Holy Ghost, didst instruct the hearts of thy faithful servants; grant us in the same Spirit, to discern what is right, and enjoy his comfort for ever: Through our Lord Jesus Christ, who liveth and reigneth one God, with thee and the same Spirit, world without end. Amen.

____________________

[1] Ne posset ingens ista farrago prœjudicare atque obesse Testamento . . . Pontificii ubique corruptos esse fontes clamant; Sociniani Christum et Spiritum Sanctum ex novo Testamento erasum et eliminatum vellent; Athei et irrisores totum deletum desiderant; quique cuncti ex tanta multitudine lectionum contra sacratissimum codicem argumenta mutuari possunt, et sœpius mutuati sunt, et adhuc mutuantur. In the preface, p. 26.

[2] In pompam magis quam in usum. Dr. Mills in Prolog. p. 137.

[3] See Simon in his Critiques on the New Testam. chap. ult. citing the words of Grotius, Lutherus dixit per tot versiones incertiores fieri lectores quam antea fuerunt. Beza vero tot esse interpretes, qui non tam convertunt quam pervertunt: ut, nisi audaciœ eorum occurratur futurum sit inter paucos annos, ut ipsarum quoque rerum possessione depellamur. See Simon on the New Testam. chap. 24.

[4] St. Hieron. [St. Jerome] prœfat. In Evang. verum non esse quod variat.

[5] Walton Prolog. 6. p. 37. pro norma fidei Lesbiam regulam haberemus, nec jam verbum Dei ultra esset, sed aliorum qui hoc sibi temer[] promitt[]t.

[6] The question is not, says a learned Prelate, between a version and an original in ordinary circumstances. But here is a version partly made and partly corrected by the first biblical scholar, and one of the greatest and most holy men who ever lived, St. Jerome. He corrected the old Latin version of the New Testament from the Greek, and translated the Old from the Hebrew, in consequence of an order from Pope Damasus, under the eye of the great St. Augustine, and of that constellation of illustrious Doctors, who adorned the Church at the commencement of the fifth century. A version which was made when the best and purest copies of the Hebrew, Chaldaic, Greek, and Latin, together with the Polyglots of Origen, &c. were in existence; a version, which has been constantly in the hands of the Western Church in all its extent during fifteen centuries, and which in the mean while has been transcribed a million times. Hence no material error could creep into the whole, or even into any comparatively great number of copies. On the other hand, the Hebrew and Greek originals having been during many ages chiefly in the hands of wandering Jews, and divided oppressed Asiatics, the Church cannot answer for what changes they may have undergone. Hence the Church recommends to her children the Latin Vulgate, but says nothing of the other texts.

[7] Universos ad amussim correximus. See Simon on the New Testam. chap. ix.

[8] Nova nunc spiramus, suspiramusque omnia, nova lumina, Angliam novam, novum. ... Evangelium, ac si abjuratis Orthodoxorum partibus, in Castra concesseramus Novati, Novatoresque rectius audiremus, quam reformati --- Davidicos numeros, vernaculo sermone nostro, rythmis pessimis, sensu, pejori redditos, &c.

[9] Magni faciendam. Non sollicitandam a privatis.

Go to Part III of General Preface.

On reading the Holy Scriptures. Scripture alone cannot be the whole rule of faith and life. Liberty with regard to school opinions. Four Evangelists. The sum of the New Testament.

ON READING THE HOLY SCRIPTURES.

The Catholic Church earnestly wishes that the truths and maxims of God’s word may be deeply impressed on the minds of all her children, says a learned prelate; and she requires of all her pastors, from the highest to the lowest, as the most important of all their duties, to be unremittingly assiduous in inculcating this word to the young and ignorant. To qualify themselves for fulfilling this obligation, she enjoins all her pastors constantly to read and study the Holy Scriptures, which she has the merit of having preserved inviolate, during the many centuries that have elapsed since their delivery. — With respect to the laity, she never interdicted the Bible to them, as Protestants suppose; but, at a time when cobblers and tailors were insulting heaven with their blasphemies, and convulsing the earth with their seditions, all grounded on the misinterpretations of the Bible, she enjoined that such as took this mysterious book in hand, should have received a tincture of learning, so as to be able to read it in one or other of the learned languages; unless their respective pastors should judge from their good sense and good dispositions, that they would derive no mischief from reading it in the vulgar tongue. (Reg. 4. Ind. Trid.) At present the Catholic prelates do not think it necessary to enforce even this restriction, and accordingly Catholic versions are to be found in folio, quarto, and octavo, with the entire approbation of those prelates.

One restriction is necessary still: not to give to the divine word any other sense than what the universal Church has always given. Hence the saying — Nil nisi quod traditum est. Quod ubique, qoud semper, quod ab omnibus. From the old Church we receive the Bible, and with it the genuine sense, or interpretation of the Bible. For want of an infallible tribunal, which Catholics acknowledge as always existing, and of divine origin, all that dissent from this Church must necessarily harbour doubts as to the real sense of the sacred writings. Hence, a modern writer presumes to offer canons or rules of his own, for the better interpretation of the Scriptures; because, as he says, whilst, “Christians of almost every denomination profess to adopt the same Scriptures as the rule of faith and practice, they yet draw, or seem to draw, from them conclusions widely different. Many causes, doubtless, contribute to this effect; and not, perhaps, more that that corruption of our nature, which blinds the understanding, which in one man exalts itself against the humbling truths of the gospel, and in another refuses obedience to its self-denying precepts. Still we find differences of opinion, which exist between those who appear to believe with sincerity, and to study with candour, the revealed will of God; differences which are, I think, to be traced in a considerable degree to a wrong method of interpreting the sacred writings.”

This reasoning evidently shews the necessity of a visible and fixed authority. Hence the amiable Fenelon, in his argument with Ramsay, says: “The Christian Church, without such a fixed and visible authority, would be like a republic to which wise laws had been given, but without magistrates to look to their execution. What a source of confusion this! “Each individual, with the book of laws in his hand, would dispute about their meaning. The sacred oracles, in that case, would serve only to feed our vain curiosity, to increase our pride and presumption, and to make us more tenacious of our own opinions. There would indeed be but one original text, but as many different manners of explaining it as there are men. Divisions and subdivisions would multiply without end, and without remedy. Can we think that our Sovereign Lawgiver has not provided better for the peace of his republic, and for the preservation of his law?”

If there be no infallible authority, which may say to us all, “this is the true meaning of the holy Scripture: how can we expect that illiterate peasants, or simple mechanics, should engage in a discussion wherein the learned themselves cannot agree? God would have been wanting to the necessities of almost all men, if, when he gave them a written law, he had not at the same time provided them a sure interpreter, to spare them the necessity of research, or which they are utterly incapable. Every man of common understanding has need of nothing more than a sincere sense of his ignorance, to see the absurdities of the sects, who build their separation from the Catholic Church upon the privilege of deciding on matters far above their comprehension. Ought we then to hearken to the new reformers, who require what is impossible; or to the ancient Church, which provides for the weakness of our nature?” If we listen to the former, we should soon be found to resemble those men of latter days, who St. Paul tells us to avoid: ever learning, and never attaining to the knowledge of truth; (2 Timothy chap. iii. ver. 7,) because they trust to their own lights, and not to the visible authority appointed by Jesus Christ. How evident does all this speak for itself, when we behold a Voltaire extracting mental poison from the Song of Solomon; or, another Cromwell reading to a ruthless soldiery God’s ordinances concerning the smiting of the Ammonites and Chanaanites, in order to induce them to kill every Catholic, man, woman, and child; or the fanatic, maintaining from the Revelations, that no king is to be obeyed but King Jesus; or, finally, when we hear those dangerous comments of our modern Moravian and Antinomian Methodists on St. Paul’s Epistles, importing, that they being made free by Jesus Christ, are not subject to any law either of God or man. Surely, in such cases, it would be advisable, if possible, to withdraw the Bible from every such profaner of it; and instead of it, to put into his hands the Catechism, in which he would find the bread of God’s word, broken and prepared for his weak digestion, by those prelates to whom this duty particularly belongs. This the Protestant owns, when he finds the Socinian abusing private interpretation, by repeatedly citing and expounding the sacred text against the divinity of Jesus Christ, and the Presbyterian against the episcopacy.

So direful are the effects of the very best things when abused, that Fenelon, in his long and instructive answer to the bishop of Arras, on the promiscuous uses of Scripture, which occurs in his spiritual works, (vol. iv, p. 228, ed. 1767,) says, “that he has not unfrequently found the greatest difficulty imaginable, in rectifying erroneous notions, conceived by an improper and ill-digested perusal of the Holy Scriptures.” — He shews the wisdom of the Jews, in portioning out parts of the sacred writings according to the abilities and discretion of the reader. The beginning of the book of Genesis, certain parts of the prophet Ezechiel, and the Song of Solomon, were not allowed to be read by any persons under 30 years of age. St. Jerome acted in the same manner with regard to young Læta, p. 232. The good archbishop then shews that, if in the early ages this precaution was necessary, it is infinitely more so in ours, (p. 270,) when pastors have lost so much of their authority, and laics can set themselves up for judges; when persons read more through a spirit of curiosity than of edification, more like proud dogmatizing philosophers, than meek and humble disciple. ... “Christians,” concludes this great light and ornament of France, p. 272, “ought to be first taught the spirit of the Scriptures, before they be permitted to read the letter of the Scriptures. These should only be placed in the hands of simple, docile and humble souls, who are willing to feast upon them in silence, and not to argue, cavil and dispute about them, who receive them from the Holy Catholic Church, and only wish to find the true and genuine sense, as expounded by this infallible Church, which Jesus Christ commands us to hear.”

We must, says Fenelon to Ramsay, submit to this Church, or reject the Bible as a fiction. The prelate tells him to consult the sacred writings, to examine the extent of the promises made by Jesus Christ to the Church and her pastors, the depository of his ordinances: Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound also in heaven: that he will be with her till the end of the world; that the gates of hell shall not prevail against her; that she is the pillar and ground of truth: and to her pastors he says, He who heareth you, heareth me; and he who despiseth you, despiseth me. “You cannot,” says the archbishop, “evade the force of these expression by any comments; you have no remedy but in rejecting the authority both of the Lawgiver and of his law.

SCRIPTURE ALONE CANNOT BE THE WHOLE RULE OF FAITH AND LIFE.

The learned Walton (Prolegom. chap. iv. 56,) asserts, what every one versed in antiquity must allow, that “some parts of the New Testament were doubted of for some ages, till at length by consent of the whole Church, all the Books, as they are read at present, were received and approved.” Here then we see that for a chief proof of the inspiration, authenticity, and due rendering of the word of God, we are referred to the general consent of Christians; therefore Scripture, though the rule of faith and life, cannot be the whole rule; since from Scripture alone, an exact canon of the sacred books cannot by human art be learned. — When we have, by common consent, come to an understanding of what is Scripture, and what is not, even then in which Book of Scripture do we read a full and clear account of infant baptism, or of the obligation of keeping holy the Sunday? But in vain shall we seek in particular parts of Scripture what is not to be found in the whole Bible. In the divine law, like the law of the land, there is a lex scripta and a lex non scripta. Blackstone’s Commentaries, vol. i, sect. 3. — Apostolic traditions are one part of the faith and life. The apostles received it in commission from their divine Master, to preach the gospel to every living creature, and to teach whatever he had commanded them; and we must suppose that such of the apostles as never committed their instructions to paper, complied with the full import of their commission. St. Paul exhorts the Thessalonians to hold fast the traditions he had taught them, whether by word or writing, 2 Thessalonians ii. 14. And he gives this rule to Timothy: The things which thou hast heard of me before many witnesses, the same commit to faithful men, who shall be fit to teach others also, 2 Timothy ii. 2. — The Church was Christian before the New Testament was written. See Romans i. 7. & 8.; 1 Corinthians i. 2.; 1 Peter i. 2.; 3. Luke i. 4. And at this day, most persons settle their notions on religious subjects in an early period of life, either before they read the Scriptures, or before they are capable of collecting the system of Christianity from Scripture alone. And thoug a great deal is said of private spirit and gospel liberty of receiving and interpreting the Scripture according to each one’s private opinion, the many canons, articles, and restraining constitutions, are a standing demonstration of the necessity of an authoritative interpreter of this rule of faith and life. The Catholic, then, convinced from St. Peter, that no prophecy of Scripture is made by private interpretation, (2 Peter i. 19, 20,) and that in the Epistles of St. Paul, there are some things hard to be understood, which the unlearned and unstable wrest, as they do also the other Scriptures, to their own destruction; (2 Peter iii. 16,) feels happy in being called upon by God to submit all to the existing infallible tribunal, not because the obvious text is contrary to his tenets, and favourable to his adversaries; (for the obvious sense of the words, this is my body, and the promise, my flesh is meat indeed; and again, hear the Church; if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and publican, &c. &c. &c. is certainly conformable to the Catholic tenets,) but, because in submitting his weak judgment to the infallible authority of the Church, which God has promised to direct into all truth, and to protect against all the powers of earth and hell, his mind enjoys peace and security, which are no where else to be found or enjoyed. Again, if for argument sake, we omit the solemn promises of Jesus Christ has made to his Church of infallibility and indefectibility, will not common sense and common prudence tell us, that it is far safer to explain the Scripture in the sense in which it is at present understood by a vast majority of Christians, and in which, for many hundreds of years, it was universally understood, than to receive the private interpretation of a comparatively small number of dissenters; which, being founded on what is called evangelical liberty, and private spirit, the constant source of disunion, can afford very little peace of mind or conscience. Hence both reason and religion satisfy the Catholic, that, if he is to receive from the Catholic Church the canon and letter of the Scriptures, as handed down from the primitive ages, so is he to receive from the same authority the once universally received interpretation of the text. It is by obedience to this holy Catholic Church, which the apostles in their creed command us to believe; a Church fallible of itself, but infallible by virtue of the promises of Jesus Christ, that we are to be no more tossed to and fro, and carried about by every wind of doctrine. (Ephesians iv. 11. & 16.) This is the highway wherein the way-faring men, though fools, shall not err. (Isaias xxxv. 8.) This is that way of which St. Jerome, in his comments on the v. and vi. chap. of St. Matthew says: “Si a recta via paululum declinaveris, non interest, utrum ad dexteram vadas, an ad sinistram, cum verum iter amiseris:” “if you decline ever so little from the true way, it is of no consequence whether you take to the right or to the left hand, since you lose the true road.” Hence the holy Catholic Church has, in every age, branded those persons with the stigma of heretics, who like Luther and Calvin, have obstinately defended their own private and individual sentiments in opposition to her solemn decisions.

LIBERTY WITH REGARD TO SCHOOL OPINIONS.

In the instructions of Archbishop Fenelon, printed at Cambray only the year before he did, the learned and amiable prelate says: “I call God to witness, that in my whole conduct towards others, I have made it my constant study never to take offence at the discordant opinions of men, but to bring them back by little and little to the truth. I allow full liberty for school opinions, but I can admit of no mincing with regard to faith. Nothing is so dangerous as false peace. I address my opponents in the words of St. Augustine to Pope Boniface, (2 ep. cont. Pelag. lib. iii. chap. 11.) orent ut aliquando intelligant. Non litigent ut nunquam intelligant. I tell them with St. Paul, (1 Timothy vi. 3.) If any man teach otherwise than the Church, and consent not to the sound words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to that doctrine, which is according to godliness, he is proud, knowing nothing, though he appear to know all things, but is sick about questions and strifes of words . ... If any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, nor the Church of God. (1 Corinthians xi. 16.) Also the strong words of Tertullian, in his Book de Præscrip. “that which saves us in faith, and not arguing on Scriptures. Reasoning proceeds from curiosity ... curiosity must yield to faith, and the glory of the knowledge of salvation ... To know nothing contrary to the rule which the Church gives us, is to know all things.” St. Augustine goes so far as to say: I would not believe the gospel, if the authority of the Catholic Church did not determine me. (Epis. cont. Fund. chap. v, n. 6.) “This, says Fenelon, is the most simple, short, and decisive of all controversies.” With regard to those who are full of false prejudices, great moderation and tenderness must be shewn. Particularly, says St. Augustine, when they are devoid of animosity and obstinacy, when they are not heresiarchs, but have imbibed false doctrines from their parents, when they are earnest in seeking the truth, and ready to embrace it when found. (Ep. xlvvii. ad Glor. et Eleus.) Such excellent characters held heretical tenets, but their hearts are not heretical: we cannot be too tender in their regard. But there are few men so liberally instructed, as to work with success in undeceiving them. And they who are qualified for the task, should undertake it by degrees, and with great delicacy and precaution. Above all things mistrust ever bitter zeal. What wounds our pride, scarcely ever corrects our errors. The anger of men worketh no the justice of God. We must spare our brethren the dangerous temptation of shame, and of appearing conquered. “Men, says Augustine, ordinarily seek evasives to cloak their ignorance; for they are more jealous of the glory of the argument, than of the truth. Let this be your only object, to avoid all ambition of victory, that God may be propitious to you in your researches.” “Humble prayer is no less useful, than vain dispute is dangerous. Be collected, mild, and peaceful. Love God, and his truth will appear amiable in you. Edify your brethren, appease their irritated self-love. Give them to understand that the main point is not to dispute on the efficacy of grace, but to yield to grace, in suffering ourselves, like little children, to be instructed by the Church.” But suffer not his charity to be mistaken for indifference. There is but one God, one faith, one baptism. (Ephesians iv. 5.) And from indifference to doubt, from doubt to disbelief, the steps are almost imperceptible. Indifference saps most effectually all religion, and is its greatest enemy.

This was the plan of Fenelon chalked out by others, the plan himself had practiced with such astonishing success, and which he had learned of the amiable and admirable apostle of the Chablais, St. Francis de Sales, who was accustomed to say, be always meek; “with a single spoonful of honey, you may attract more bees, than a hundred barrels of vinegar.” ... “If you lean to any extreme, let it be to that of meekness. There is no soil, however barren, that will prove unproductive, if softened with the dew of meekness.”

There are such inimitable instructions in the five letters of Fenelon, to a lady who wished to be admitted a member of the Catholic Church, that a brief analysis of the same cannot but be very acceptable to the biblical scholar: — In the first, the prelate shews that there can be but one true religion, and one only Church, the spouse of Jesus Christ. Our Lord would have only one; men are not entitled to make more. Religion is not the work of human reasoning; but it is our duty to receive it, such as it has been given us from above. One man may reason with another man, but with God we have only to pray, to humble ourselves, listen, be silent, and blindly follow. This sacrifice of reason is the only proper use we can make of it, weak and contracted as it is. Every consideration must yield, when the supreme reason decides. — He recommends prayer, as the true end of all controversies; it humbles the soul, makes it docile and obedient, and enables it to listen with fruit to the Holy Spirit. — In the second, he shews the necessity of a visible authority. Religion, he says, is all humility. The mysteries are given us to subdue the pride of reason, by making us believe what we cannot comprehend. Without this authority, the Scripture can only serve to nourish our curiosity, presumption, jealousy of opinions, and passion for scandalous disputes: there would be but one text, but as may interpretations as religions, and as many religions as heads. What opinion could be formed of the wisdom of a legislator, who should leave an excellent code of laws, but no authority to execute the laws; what revolutions and dissensions would follow! And can we suppose that Jesus Christ would leave his spiritual kingdom unprovided, and abandoned to this disorder? — In the third, he teaches how to hear the Church, and to obey it without any apprehension of error. The infallible promises of God are our surety. He tells the lady, if she wish for any reform, not to seek it, like Dissenters, out of the Church, but by frequently reverting back to her thoughts upon herself, and by reforming every thing amiss there; by subduing all that savours of self; by silencing the imagination, listening in silence to God, and imploring his grace for the perfect accomplishment of his will. O happy, O solid reform! the more we practise this reform, the less we shall wish to reform the doctrines of the Church. — In the fourth, he gives her comfort and instructions how to act under her trials. The kingdom of God suffers violence. We cannot die to ourselves without feeling it; but the hand that afflicts us, will be our support. Truth will free you from anxieties. You will then become truly free, and enjoy the consolation of sacrificing to God your former prejudices. You will then find the truth of God’s word: learn of me, for I am, &c. and you will find peace to your soul. — In the fifth, he give excellent instructions, on the promises of Jesus Christ to his one true Church. He remarks the Jesus Christ does not say, if you will not hear the church of this country or that; he does not suppose a plurality of churches, but one universal Church, subsisting through all ages and nations, and which is to speak and to be obeyed from one extremity of the globe to the other. Not an invisible church composed of the elect only, but a Church that can be pointed out with a finger. A city elevated on the summit of a mountain, which all can see from a distance. Every one knows where to see, to find, and to consult her. She answers, she decides; we listen, and believe: and woe to those who refuse to believe and obey her: if he will not hear the Church, &c. — A father could not bear to see his son, under the pretext of reform, making parties in his family; and can our heavenly Father, who loves union, and who gives this distinctive mark to his children, suffer without indignation any unnatural children to split his family, which he has endeavoured to cement with his own blood in the bond of unity. Schism, then, which constitutes many churches, whilst God will acknowledge only one, is the greatest of crimes; it is that of Core, Dathan, and Abiron, who wished to divine and split the sacred ministry. — In vain do our adversaries object, that the Church has fallen into error. Had it been possible for the visible Church to have been one single day idolatrous and false, God would never have ordered all, without any the least limitation, to hear and obey the Church. Going therefore, says Jesus Christ to his then infant Church, teach ye all nations, baptizing them, &c. teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you, and behold I am with you all days, even to the end of the world. (Matthew xxviii. 19.)

Can a sincere Christian then hesitate whether in expounding doctrinal points of Holy Scripture, he ought to yield to that authority which was given by Jesus Christ to the body of pastors, and which they have uniformly exercised for eighteen centuries? With St. Augustine he would exclaim: to question the authority of the Church, is the height of either impiety or arrogance. Ecclesiæ nolle primas dare, vel summæ profecto impietatis est, vel precipitis arrogantiæ. (lib. de util. credendi. chap. 17.)

Let us then take up these sacred pages with respect and gratitude; let us read them with a docile and religious frame of mind, and feast our souls thereon, firmly believing that the Bible is the production not of man, but of God. What a consolation this for our faith, to have such a foundation as cannot possibly be moved! What joy for our hope, to be no less certain of the truth and security of the gospel promises, than if we were to hear them at present from the mouth of Truth incarnate! What aid to our charity, to be certain of finding in this adorable book, the Mediator, without whom we could never have been reconciled with God; the Way, without which we could never go to him; the Guide, who alone can conduct us to him; the Light, out of which all is darkness; the Victim, in whose blood we are to be washed; the Priest, always living, always present, always acting for us before the face of God; the Master, whom we are to hear; the Model, upon which we are to frame our lives; the Example of every virtue, which is to make us resemble our head; in a word, the adorable Head, the principle of life, of faith, and of grace in all his members; the Sovereign Judge, both of the living and the dead.

____________________

THE BOOKS OF THE OLD TESTAMENT Preface. GENESIS Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50. EXODUS Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40. LEVITICUS Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27. NUMBERS Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36. DEUTERONOMY Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34. JOSUE [now known as JOSHUA] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24. JUDGES Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21. RUTH Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4. 1 KINGS [now known as 1 SAMUEL] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31. 2 KINGS [now known as 2 SAMUEL] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24. 3 KINGS [now known as 1 KINGS] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22. 4 KINGS [now known as 2 KINGS] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25. 1 PARALIPOMENON [now known as 1 CHRONICLES] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29. 2 PARALIPOMENON [now known as 2 CHRONICLES] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36. 1 ESDRAS [now known as EZRA] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10. 2 ESDRAS, alias NEHEMIAS [now known as NEHEMIAH] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13. TOBIAS [now known as TOBIT] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. JUDITH Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. ESTHER Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. JOB Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42. PSALMS - Douay-Rheims Numbering [Modern Numbering] Introduction. Psalms: 1 [1], 2 [2], 3 [3], 4 [4], 5 [5], 6 [6], 7 [7], 8 [8], 9 [9 & 10], 10 [11], 11 [12], 12 [13], 13 [14], 14 [15], 15 [16], 16 [17], 17 [18], 18 [19], 19 [20], 20 [21], 21 [22], 22 [23], 23 [24], 24 [25], 25 [26], 26 [27], 27 [28], 28 [29], 29 [30], 30 [31], 31 [32], 32 [33], 33 [34], 34 [35], 35 [36], 36 [37], 37 [38], 38 [39], 39 [40], 40 [41], 41 [42], 42 [43], 43 [44], 44 [45], 45 [46], 46 [47], 47 [48], 48 [49], 49 [50], 50 [51], 51 [52], 52 [53], 53 [54], 54 [55], 55 [56], 56 [57], 57 [58], 58 [59], 59 [60], 60 [61], 61 [62], 62 [63], 63 [64], 64 [65], 65 [66], 66 [67], 67 [68], 68 [69], 69 [70], 70 [71], 71 [72], 72 [73], 73 [74], 74 [75], 75 [76], 76 [77], 77 [78], 78 [79], 79 [80], 80 [81], 81 [82], 82 [83], 83 [84], 84 [85], 85 [86], 86 [87], 87 [88], 88 [89], 89 [90], 90 [91], 91 [92], 92 [93], 93 [94], 94 [95], 95 [96], 96 [97], 97 [98], 98 [99], 99 [100], 100 [101], 101 [102], 102 [103], 103 [104], 104 [105], 105 [106], 106 [107], 107 [108], 108 [109], 109 [110], 110 [111], 111 [112], 112 [113], 113 [114 & 115], 114 [116a], 115 [116b], 116 [117], 117 [118], 118 [119], 119 [120], 120 [121], 121 [122], 122 [123], 123 [124], 124 [125], 125 [126], 126 [127], 127 [128], 128 [129], 129 [130], 130 [131], 131 [132], 132 [133], 133 [134], 134 [135], 135 [136], 136 [137], 137 [138], 138 [139], 139 [140], 140 [141], 141 [142], 142 [143], 143 [144], 144 [145], 145 [146], 146 [147a], 147 [147b], 148 [148], 149 [149], 150 [150]. PROVERBS Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31. ECCLESIASTES Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12. CANTICLE of CANTICLES [now known as SONG OF SONGS] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8. WISDOM Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19. ECCLESIASTICUS [now known as SIRACH] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51. ISAIAS [now known as ISAIAH] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 58, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66. JEREMIAS [now known as JEREMIAH] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48, 49, 50, 51, 52. LAMENTATIONS Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. BARUCH Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. EZECHIEL [now known as EZEKIEL] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 43, 44, 45, 46, 47, 48. DANIEL Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. OSEE [now known as HOSEA] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. JOEL Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3. AMOS Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9. ABDIAS [now known as OBADIAH] Introduction. Chapter: 1. JONAS Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4. MICHEAS [now known as MICAH] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7. NAHUM Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3. HABACUC [now known as HABAKKUK] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3. SOPHONIAS [now known as ZEPHANIAH] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3. AGGEUS [now known as HAGGAI] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2. ZACHARIAS [now known as ZECHARIAH] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14. MALACHIAS [now known as MALACHI] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4. 1 MACHABEES [now known as 1 MACCABEES] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16. 2 MACHABEES [now known as 2 MACCABEES] Introduction. Chapters: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15.

A LIST OF THE PRINCIPAL COMMENTATORS, &c.,

( Note: Those who have a Cross, † , prefixed to their Names, have been perhaps Men of Learning, but they have erred from the Faith which was once delivered to the Saints, and can therefore be consulted only as Critics, or to be refuted.)

St. Ambrose (397)

St. Anselm (1109)

St. Athanasius (373)

St. Augustine (430)

C. Wm. Allen (1594)

† Aquila Gr. Int. (130)

† Amana (1629)

St. Basil (379)

Ven. Bede (735)

St. Bernard (1153)

St. Bonaventure (1274)

C. Cæs. Baronius (1607)

C. Rob. Bellarmine (1621)

W.F. Berthier (1782)

Jas. Bonfrere (1642)

Ric. Bristow (1581)

Alb. Butler (1773)

J.B. Bossuet (1704)

Bartholocci (1687)

† Beza (1605)

† Bayle (1706)

† Bochart (1667)

St. John Chrysostom (407)

Clement of Alexandria (217)

St. Cyprian (258)

St. Cyril of Jerusalem (386)

St. Cyril of Alexandria (444)

Ric. Challoner (1781)

Denis the Carthusian (1471)

Aug. Calmet (1757)

C. Thos. Cajetan (1534)

C. Amb. Catharin (1553)

Pet. Collet (1770)

Carrieres (1717)

De La Chetardie (1714)

De Calasio.---Conc. (1621)

† Calvin (1564)

† Le Clerc (1736)

† Cappel (1658)

† Colier.---Dict. (1721)

† Chateillon (1563)

St. John Damascene (780)

Du Pin (1720)

Duquesne (1790)

† De Dieu (1642)

† Drusius (1616)

St. Ephrem (380)

St. Epiphanius (403)

Eusebius (339)

D. Erasmus (1536)

Wm. Estius (1613)

Cl. Fleury (1723)

Fs. Foreiro (1581)

M.A. Flaminius (1550)

† Fagius (1550)

† J.A. Fabricius (1736)

† Frishmuth (1687)

St. Gregory I. (604)

St. Gregory of Nazianzus (390)

St. Gregory of Nyssa (400)

Jo. Gerson (1429)

Guarin (1729)

J. Gordon (1641)

Gil. Genebrard (1597)

† Grotius (1645)

† Grabe (1712)

St. Hilary, Pict. (368)

Hesychius (609)

J.B. Du Hamel (1706)

George Leo Haydock (1849)

Jo. Henten (1566)

Houbigant (1783)

P. Dan. Huet (1721)

† Hammond (1660)

St. Ignatius, M. (107)

St. Isidore, Sev. (636)

St. Irenæus (202)

Innocent III. (1216)

St. Jerome (420)

J. Justin Martyr (167)

Jansenius (1576)

C. Jans. of Ypres (1638)

† Juda Hakkad (2 Cent.)

† Josephus (1 Cent.)

† Blind Joseph (1 Cent.)

† Jarchi Rabbi (1180)

† King James I.---Bible by 47 Translators, in 6 divisions. (1607)

† Junius (1602)

† Kennicott (1783)

† Kimchi, R. (1240)

St. Leo I. (461)

Louvain Bible (1583)

Luc. of Bruges (1619)

Cornelius a Lapide (1637)

Phil. Labbe (1667)

Lenglet (1755)

Liranus (1340)

J. Le Long (1721)

† Leo of Modena (1609)

† Leigh (1671)

† Lightfoot (1675)

† Luther (1546)

Maldonat (1583)

T. Malvenda (1628)

And. Massius (1573)

Mic. Mauduit (1709)

Jo. Mariana (1624)

Menochius - Ed. 4 vol. by Tournemine. (1655)

Mar. Mersenne (1648)

Ber. Montfaucon (1741)

Jo. Morinus (1659)

Sim. de Muis (1644)

† Maimonides (1209)

† Marsham (1685)

† Mill (1707)

† Munster (1552)

† Michaelis (1700)

Noel, Alexander (1724)

Nob. Flaminius (1590)

Origen (253)

Œcumenius (10 Cent.)

Jer. Oleaster (1583)

† Onkelos Chaldean (1 Cent.)

St. Paulin (431)

St. Prosper (463)

Sant. Pagnin (1536), tr. and revised by

B. Ar. Montanus (1598)

Ja. Pamelius (1587)

Pelletier (1711)

Den Petau (1652)

Paul Pezron (1706)

Jo. Pineda (1637)

Bas. Ponce (1629)

Ben Porerius (1610)

Jo. Price (1676)

† Pliny the elder (79)

† Philo the Jew (1 Cent.)

† Polus, or Poole (1669)

† Pococke (1691)

Mic. Le Quien (1733)

† Pas. Quesnel (1719)

Rab. Maurus (856)

Mart. Raimond (1286)

Rupert (1155)

Ribera (1591)

J.B. Riccioli (1671)

Wm. Reynolds (1592)

Rondet (1785)

† Rivet (1651)

† Reland (1718)

† J.J. Rousseau (1778)

Septuagint (B.C. 284, &c.)

(Edited by Sixtus V, 1587, and Du Bos, from the Vatican; by Grabe, from the Alexandria Copy.) Samaritan-----Greek Version older.

Sulp. Serverus (420)

Em. Sa (1596)

Jas. Salicu (1640)

Alf. Salmeron (1585)

Gas. Sanchez (1628)

Nic. Serarius (1609)

Ch. Sigonius (1594)

Sext. of Sienna (1560)

Hen. Sponda (1643)

Ric. Simon (1712)

Aug. Steuchus Eug. (1550)

† Le Mait de Saci (1684)

† Symmachus (200)

† 2 Scaligers (1558 & 1609)

† Saumaise (1653)

† Schmid (1697)

† Selden (1654)

† Spencer (1693)

† Strabo (16)

St. Thomas Aquinas (1274)

Theodoret (458)

Theophylactus (1071)

Theophilus An (182)

Jas. Tirinus (1636)

Le Nain Tillemont (1698)

N. Toinarel (1706)

Alf. Tostat (1454)

Fr. Turrian (1584)

R. Jos. Tournemine (1739)

† Theodotion (185)

† Tertullian (245)

† Tremellius (1580)

† Jas. Usher (1655)

Laur. Valla (1565)

Vatable (1547)

Correct Edit. of Salamanca (1584)

Fr. Vavasseur (1681)

Gab. Vasquez (1604)

J.B. Vallalpand (1608)

Marq. Velesius, or Pet. Faxard (1600)

L. Vives (1540)

† Mic. Villanovan, or Servetus (1553)

† Js. Vossius (1689)

† Voltaire (1778)

Th. Worthington (1626)

C. Walmesley (1797)

Rob. Witham (1738)

Th. Ward (1708)

† Walton (1661)

† Wetstein (1754)

† Whitby (1726)

† Wesley (1791)

† Whitfield (1769)

† Whiston (1755)

† Wolf (1744)

Ximenes the 1st Polyglot (1502-22)

Zunica, or Stunica (1530)

“Among the many and great blessings which God has bestowed upon his Church, by means of the sacred Council of Trent, we may justly reckon this as one of the greatest, that out of so many Latin editions of the divine Scriptures, he has declared, in the most solemn manner, the ancient Vulgate alone to be authentic, which had been approved in the Church, and used during so many hundred years. For, no to mention that many of the late editions seemed to have been falsely translated, on purpose to maintain the heresies of the present times; so great a variety of contradictory versions was undoubtedly calculated to introduce great confusion in the Church of God. for, at the present period the same inconvenience is observable, which was noticed by St. Jerome (præf. in Jos.) in his time; I mean that there were as many different works as there were copies, tot fuise exemplaria quot codices; as each person allowed himself the liberty of inserting or leaving out what he thought proper. The authority, however, of this old Vulgate edition, was always so much superior to that of any other, that no equitable judge can entertain a doubt, but that it deserves to be preferred before them all. For the books which are contained in it, as it has been handed down to us by our ancestors, have bee received partly from the version or correction of St. Jerome, partly retained from the very ancient Latin edition, which St. Jerome styled the common and the Vulgate (in chap. 49, Isaias.) St. Augustine the Italic (Christian Doctrine ii. 15.) and St. Gregory the old translation (Ep. ad Leand. C. 5.) Concerning this old or Italic edition’s superior accuracy, there is still extant the glorious testimony of St. Augustine, in the second book of Christian Doctrine; where he says, that in his opinion the Italic deserved to be preferred before all the numerous Latin editions which were then in the hands of the public, because it adhered closer to the words of the original, and delivered the sense in a clearer manner. The ancient Fathers have moreover frequently spoken in the highest terms of St. Jerome, whom St. Augustine (above, and City of God 18. 43.) styles a most learned man, and one perfectly acquainted with the three languages; and he shews that his translation is accurate, from the testimony of the Jews themselves. St. Gregory extols the same person in such a manner, that he says, his translation, which he calls the new one, is more accurately taken from the Hebrew in all respects than any other; and hence upon it, we may entirely depend. (Mor. 20, 24.) St. Isidore likewise in many places gives the preference to St. Jerome’s version, before any other, and testifies that it was generally received and approved of by the Christian Churches, because the words were more expressive of the genuine meaning of the text. (Etymol. 65.) The learned Sophronius, perceiving the approbation which was given it, not only by the Latins, but also by the Greeks, was so much taken with it, that he gave an elegant Greek version of St. Jerome’s translation of the Psalms, and also of the Prophets. The men most eminent for learning in the following ages, Remigius, Bede, Rabanus, Haymo, Anselm, Peter Damian, Richard, Hugh, Bernard, Rupert, Peter Lombard, Alexander, Albert, Thomas [Aquinas], Bonaventure, and all the rest who have flourished in the Church for these nine hundred years, made use of St. Jerome’s version in such a manner, that all the others, though they could hardly be numbered, being almost entirely by Divines, have become obsolete. Hence, it is not without reason that the Catholic Church speaks in such exalted terms of St. Jerome, ‘the greatest doctor, divinely raised up to interpret the sacred Scriptures;’ and it will be no rash or difficult matter to censure the judgment of all those who either do not acquiesce in the learned labours of so renowned a doctor, or even have the boldness to think that they can offer something better, or at least equal, to the public. However, lest this very accurate translation, which has been found of so very great service to all parts of the Church, should in degree be adulterated, either by the injuries of time or by the negligence of printers, or by the rashness of those who undertake to correct without sufficient grounds, the same most sacred Council of Trent added very wisely to her decree, that this same ancient and Vulgate edition should be printed with all possible accuracy; and that none should be allowed to print it without the permission and approbation of superiors. By which decree, she at the same time set bounds to the licentious temerity of printers, and excited the vigilance and industry of the pastors of the Church to preserve with all vigilance so great a treasure. And although the Divines of some celebrated academies had acquired much applause by their attempts to restore the Vulgate edition to its ancient beauty, yet, as in a matter of so great importance, too great diligence cannot be exerted; and many manuscripts. of the greatest antiquity had been procured and brought to the city by the order of the Pope; in a word, as the execution of decrees of the General Councils, and the integrity and purity of the Scriptures, belong in a particular manner to the care of the apostolic see; hence the sovereign pontiff, Pius IV, watching with the greatest diligence over every part of the Church, commissioned some chosen Cardinals of the Holy Roman Church, and others who were the best acquainted with sacred learning and the various languages, to correct the Vulgate Latin edition in the most accurate manner, after having examined the most ancient manuscripts, the Hebrew and Greek original texts of the Bible, and the commentaries of the ancient Fathers. This plan was pursued by Pius V. But when, on account of the many urgent occupations of the apostolic see, this learned body had not met for a long time, Sixtus V being called by divine Providence to the high priesthood, assembled them again with all diligence, and ordered the work, which was at last brought to a conclusion, to be put to press. When it was printed, and the same Pope was about to send it forth into the world, perceiving that not a few mistakes had crept into the Bible by the fault of the press, which seemed to require a more diligent revision, he judged it expedient, and determined to begin the work afresh. But as he could not execute this his design, being prevented by death, Gregory XIV, who, after the 12 days pontificate of Urban VII had succeeded Sixtus V, in compliance with his intention, undertook to perfect what he had begun, and again deputed some eminent Cardinals, and other learned men, for that purpose. But he also, and his successor, Innocent IX, being taken out of this world, in a very short space of time, at last, towards the commencement of the pontificate of Clement VIII, who now governs the Universal Church, the work which Sixtus V had intended, by the assistance of God, has been brought to a conclusion.

“Receive then, Christian reader, by the consent of the same pontiff, Clement, from the Vatican press, the ancient and Vulgate edition of the sacred Scripture, corrected with all possible diligence, which though indeed it be difficult, considering human weakness, to assert that it is absolutely perfect, yet that it is more correct and pure than any which till this day have been published, cannot admit of any doubt. And truly, though in this revision of the Bibles, no small pains have been taken in examining the manuscripts, the Hebrew and Greek originals, and even in comparing the commentaries of the ancient Fathers, yet in this Vulgate reading, as some alterations have been designedly made, so also some passages which seemed to claim the same privilege, have been purposely left unchanged. The reasons for so doing, are because St. Jerome frequently admonishes us (Ep ad Sun. & Fret. præf. in Evang.) that this is a necessary precaution to avoid offending the people: besides, we may easily believe that our forefathers, who gave Latin translations out of Hebrew or Greek, were in possession of better and more correct copies than those which are come down to us, which being often copied out, in such a length of time, have perhaps lost something of their purity and correctness: and finally, because it was not the intention of the sacred congregation of most eminent Cardinals, and of other very learned men, who were set over this work by the holy see, to undertake any new edition, or by any means to correct or rectify the old translator, but merely, by removing the mistakes of former transcribers, and the corrections improperly inserted, to restore the same old and Vulgate Latin edition, as far as possible, to its pristine integrity and purity; and to do their utmost endeavours, after it should be thus restored, to have it printed with all accuracy, in compliance with the decree of the General Council. Moreover, in this edition it has been judged expedient to insert nothing but the Canonical books, every other work of human industry, as foreign to our purpose, being removed at a distance; and this is the reason why the 3d and 4th books of Esdras, which the Council of Trent did not number among the Canonical books, and even the prayer of King Manasses, which is extant neither in Hebrew nor in Greek, nor in the more ancient manuscripts, nor forms a part of any Canonical book, have been place out of the order of the Canonical Scripture. Besides, there are not here to be seen any concordances in the margin, (which in future editions are not forbidden to be inserted) no notes, no various readings, no prefaces, no arguments at the beginning of books. But, as the apostolic see does not condemn the industry of those who in other editions have inserted concordances, concordantias locorum, (or what may help to remove apparent contradictions in the text) and also various readings, prefaces of St. Jerome, and other things of the like nature, so she does not forbid these helps for the advantage of the studious being inserted, in a different type, in future impressions of this Vatican edition, provided the various readings be not marked on the margin of the text itself.-----.”

This is the Preface originally prefixed to the Vatican edition of the Vulgate. As it contains an abridgment of the Bull of Sixtus V and gives some account of the pains which have been taken, and of the means adopted, to give a correct edition of this so much admired Vulgate, we thought it could not prove unacceptable to the English reader. The brief of Clement VIII, dated 9th Nov. 1592, in the 1st year of his pontificate, shews the solicitude of his Holiness that this work should descend unadulterated to posterity; and hence he prescribes due limits to the enterprise of printers, and calls upon the vigilance of pastors to prevent any corruption or change being inserted by private authority. This is unquestionably the meaning of those general prohibitions inserted in the Brief, as well as in the Bull of Sixtus V, where this limitation is expressly inserted. “We forbid, in the most decided manner, any person to undertake the impression of the text of a new Vulgate edition of the Bibles, without the express leave of the Apostolic see. Neither let any one dare, or presume, to frame a different edition to suit his own private or peculiar judgment...” They never intended to control future Popes, over whom they could claim no such authority; as they would enjoy the like sovereign power as themselves. Hence if, at any future period, any material improvements should be discovered, by the unremitting labours of the learned, they will be at liberty to authorize them to be adopted; neither can they entertain the smallest apprehension of their infallibility being endangered on this account, nor fear the cavils of Protestants, who, in imitation of Thomas James, (d. 1629) may perhaps amuse their deluded admirers by a sequel to his Papal war. Had the doctor rightly understood the Bull of Sixtus V. and the decree of the Council of Trent, when it defined the Vulgate to be the only authentic Latin version, it is probable he would have spared himself the trouble of shewing that there were many variations in the two editions of Sixtus V and Clement VIII. However, leaving the doctor and his admirers to their own discretion, we cannot but applaud the labours of these great pontiffs for the good of the Church; and we are glad to find, that some of the most learned even of the Protestants, join with us in extolling the accuracy of the Vulgate. I will only mention the learned Mills at present, as his authority must have considerable weight, particularly in his country, to which his labours and judgment have done so much honour. “We look,” says he, (Proleg. in N. Test. p. 142) “upon the old Italic version with sovereign respect.... We are also far from saying any thing against the Vulgate edition of St. Jerome.... We are so far from thinking that it ought to be corrected by any printed Greek copy, that we are persuaded no more essential service can be rendered to it, than by correcting it according to the ancient manuscripts. that by this method it may become, as much as possible, similar to that which St. Jerome published.”

To acknowledge, as Drusius has done, (ad loca dif. Pentat.) that the Vulgate is a good translation, and superior in point of authority, to those Latin versions which had made their appearance before the decree of the Council of Trent was promulgated, is all that the Church requires; and this, no equitable judge, who has compared them together, will surely ever deny. One thing ought particularly to make it dear to all Christians, that it was composed so many years before the late dissensions about religion took place; and that by men who cannot be said to have been biased on either side, and who are revered as men of sound doctrine, both by Catholics and Protestants. That the Vulgate was composed by the inspiration of God, as the originals certainly were, no person asserts; neither do Catholics maintain that it is actually free from every imperfection, much less that it was so at the time of the Council of Trent, 1546, April 8th, when the famous decree was made, 46 years before the Clementine edition was given to the public. Since the last correction, many alterations have been proposed by Lucas Brugensis, whose work is published in the 4to edition of Du Hamel. Bellarmine, who was one of those celebrated Cardinals employed by Clement VIII to revise his edition of the Vulgate, Baronius, and N. Alexander, in their annals, &c., point out several amendments which might still be made. None of them, indeed, affect the faith or morals of Christians; but still they deserve attention, as nothing can be esteemed little with regard the word of God. Hence, in the notes which will accompany this edition, the most important amendments at least will be noticed: not that we mean to reject the Vulgate, or to take upon ourselves the right of deciding that they ought to be admitted, but only in imitation, and by the authority of so many great and good Catholics, to promote the cause of God, by separating what may be called in question, from his most sacred and undoubted revelation. See Philip’s C. Pole, ii. 17. Bellarmine, Diss. &c.

So much we thought proper to premise, in order to obviate the mistakes or clamours of those who may be less informed. In the dissertations which may be printed after the sacred books are finished, a more particular account will be given of the Vulgate, as also the original texts, and of the most authentic versions; for we must here again observe, with Bellarmine, (Dissert. on the Vulgate.) that the oriental churches possess authentic versions, though not declared in such express terms as the Vulgate has been, for those of the western parts; authentic, we mean, in the sense of the Council of Trent, conformably to the decision of civilians; “That writing is authentic (says Julian J. C. de fide Instrumentorum) which in itself deserves credit in courts of judicature, and is of sovereign authority, so that it ought not to be rejected or called in question by any one.” Scriptum aliquod ex se fidem facit in judicio, & supremæ est auctoritatis ut a nullo rejici vel in questionem vocari debeat. Thus the Vulgate must not be rejected, though there may be a disputed concerning some particular passage; it is of such authority, that in disputes it may be safely alleged. So may also the Septuagint; and still more the originals, which are intrinsically authentic; whereas the versions can possess only an extrinsic authenticity. Yet al must be examined with care. If the originals were certainly in the same state as when the came from the hands of the sacred penmen, no syllable could be rejected; but as they have been subject to the same inconvenience as other writings, from the carelessness, or from the malice of transcribers, as has been abundantly proved both by Catholics and Protestants, (See Kennicott’s two Dissertations, Capellus, Critica sacra, &c.) Despise not on this account the prophecies; but prove ever thing, maintain what is right, 1 Thessalonians v. 21. We shall shew in another place, that these mistakes do not injure our faith, though they sometimes prove a stumbling-block to infidels, and are truly a scandal to heretics, who build their faith entirely upon the Scriptures, heedless of the command of Christ, when he said to his apostles, He that heareth you heareth me...and He that will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as the heathen and the publican. With some appearance of reason, therefore, did Protestants, for many years, maintain the absolute perfection of the originals; and those who denied it, were declared accursed by the churches of Switzerland, not many years ago, as we learn from Kennicott. This learned man calls upon the English church, (to which he gives the titles of the ground and pillar of truth, which were given by St. Paul to the Catholic Church alone) he earnestly solicits the heads of this church, to sanction the many important improvements which he had collected from the Hebrew manuscripts, that when a new English version should be given, as it is loudly called for by him, Dr. Blaney, and others, on account of the inaccuracies of the present Protestant version, it may be more conformable to what was dictated by the Almighty. Such a work, if well executed, might indeed be of great service to those who study the sacred Scriptures, though we could hardly hope but that the false doctrine of those who are engaged in error, would give a leaven of insincerity to their translations, as it did to those of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus, and more recently to that of Beza, of whom Pearson, a Protestant writer of eminence, complains on this very account. (Præf. in Sept. Cantab.)

Hence, though we have occasionally consulted some of the heterodox versions and commentators, in points of criticism; yet it has been with fear of deception, and we have dwelt upon the works of Catholic authors, both with greater pleasure and advantage. To obviate the misinterpretations of the may heretical works which disgrace the Scripture, and deluge this unhappy country, has been one main design of the present undertaking. In our endeavours to explain the Vulgate, the notes will be selected from commentators of the highest respectability, whose names we shall mention, at least in matters of any importance, or where any of them has suggested an explanation, striking and peculiar to himself. To adhere to the first inventor every observation, we do not suppose will be requisite; neither would the trouble attending such researches, or expense of printing so many names, be compensated by the utility. We shall subjoin at the end of this preface the names of those who have been chiefly consulted. Little Greek or Hebrew will be inserted; the latter will only be given in English characters, expressing each Hebrew letter by such as are adopted either in the Rabinical, or in a new method of reading Hebrew without points. The English letters which here correspond with the Hebrew alphabet, are, a, b, g, d, e, u or v, z, e, t, i or j, c, l, m, n, s, a, p, ts, k, r, ss, th. Of these, six are vowels, a, e, u, i, long e and a: But u and i are also consonants before vowels; the other 16 letters are consonants, and are pronounced, when many come together, by inserting o; thus m l c, must be moloc, a king; also the name of an ancient idol, e d k, edok, a thorn; ari, a lion; Jeve, the Self-existent Being, pronounced Jehovah by moderns, though without reason. See Amama, p. 319. This method frees....the student from the perplexing difficulties of the Massorets, and allows him time to improve himself in things which may be of far greater service. The invention of Hebrew points, is allowed by all good critics to have been a work of too late a date to be of any great authority; and when we reflect that by these points the Jews have frequently rendered passages obscure, which were favourable to the Christian religion; we ought to be upon our guard how we find fault with the versions of St. Jerome, and of the Septuagint, who were acquainted with them. This observation will also serve to point out the causes of the many different versions of the same passage in the ancients, and of the wonderful conformity which is observed among the modern interpreters. The accents and spirits in Greek are not of greater authority; they are entirely omitted in the famous Alexandrian Manuscript of the Septuagint, (not to mention others) and are also neglected in the Complutensian Polyglot; because they were not found in the manuscripts. which were consulted, nor indeed are they in any of those which are most esteemed for their antiquity. We do not deny but that they may be of some service, as well as the Hebrew points; but they cannot stand their ground in a dispute, or make the victory declare for either party, as their origin is certainly human. Punctuation, though nearly of the same nature, must not however be altered to favour heresy or to pervert morals, which has sometimes been the case. Thus the Socinians read, John i. 1. “and God was. This word was,” &c. instead of the word was God; and libertines read, 1 Corinthians vii. 36. let him do what he will he does not sin; if he marry.

In all these things let us cling invariably to the doctrine of the Church, and receive the bread which she breaks for her little ones with gratitude and submission; she invites us to take into our hands the sacred volumes, and to meditate on the, day and night: she cautions us indeed against the false translations and comments of heretics, whose doctrine creepeth as a cancer. But she assures us, that there is nothing to fear from this ancient and Vulgate version, provided we receive it in that sense, in which it was first delivered, and as it has been constantly expounded by the Catholic Church, to whom alone this province belongs. To her judgment we entirely submit all our labours, and retract whatever may be found worthy of censure by her sovereign judgment. “I may fall into a mistake,” says the humble St. Augustine, “but I will not be a heretic.” It was from the Church we received these venerable books: as the same Saint observes, “I would not believe the Gospels, unless the authority of the Catholic Church influenced me to do so.” contra Epist. Fundam. And why should we refuse to receive the interpretation of all difficult passages from the same unerring source, the ground and pillar of truth? 1 Timothy iii. What has Marcion, Luther, or Wesley to do in her field? she possessed it first; she received it from those Apostles to whom it certainly belonged. No; the gates of hell itself shall not prevail against her. Christ is with her all days; his Holy Spirit is sent purposely to guide her into all truth which is necessary for man to know. Search then the Scriptures under her guidance, (John v. 39.) in which, as St. Peter admonishes us, (2 Peter iii. 16, 17.) are some things hard to understand, which the unlearned and unstable wrest...to their own destruction. You therefore, brethren, knowing these things before, take heed, lest being lead aside by the error of the unwise, you fall from your own steadfastness. If you read in this spirit, the Scriptures will prove a book of life, the covenant of the Most High, as it is justly styled in Ecclesiasticus xxiv. 32. This is the book of the commandments of God, says Baruch, and the law that is for ever; all that keep it, shall come to life; but they that have forsaken it, to death. Return, O Jacob, and take hold of it, walk in its brightness... We are happy, because the things which are pleasing to God, are made known to us. In a word, whenever we take this sacred book into our hands, let us bless God, who has given such gifts to man, and raising our hearts and minds to the Father of lights, and the God of all consolation, let us beg, with all earnestness, that we may read for our improvement in all virtue, and neither be deceived by misunderstanding what we read, nor lead others astray. Non decipiar in his, non decipiam ex his. St. Augustine. Come, Holy Spirit, &c. Let us never forget those memorable words of the Prince of the Apostles: We have also the more firm prophetical word, whereunto you do well to attend, as to a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day-star arise in your heart. Understanding this first, that no prophecy of Scripture is made by private interpretation; for prophecy come not by the will of man at any time, but the holy men of God spoke, inspired by the Holy Ghost, 2 Peter. i. 19, 20. — This Book of God, as the Arabic version styles the Book of Genesis, as the head of all the Scripture, this Book of Wisdom, shall praise her own self, shall glory in the midst of her people, and shall open her mouth in the Churches of the Most High... I came out of the mouth of the Most High...as a cloud I covered all the earth...come over to me all ye that desire me, and be filled with my fruits, &c. Ecclesiasticus xxiv. 1. &c.

Haydock.

----------

A List of the Principal Commentators, &c.