What means he by " the Bible's own sacred phrase," opposed to '' a profane and common one ? " Would not any man think that he in- tended the originals wherein it was written ? But I dare say, if any one will ask him privately, he will give them another account, and let them know that it is a translation which he adorns with these titles ; so that upon the matter he tells us, that, seeing the Bible can- not be without all the inconveniences mentioned, it is good for us to lay aside the originals, and make use only of a translation, or at least prefer a translation before them ! What shall we do with those men that speak such swords and daggers, and are well neither full nor fasting," — that like the Scripture neither with a translation nor with- out it ? Moreover, I fear he knows not well what he means by its " own sacred phrase," and " a profane, common one." Is it the syllables and words of this or that language that he intends ? How comes one to be sacred, another profane and common ? The lan- guages wherein the Scriptures were originally written have been put
134 ANIMADVERSIONS ON A TREATISE
to as bad uses as any uuder heaven; nor is any language profane or common, so as that the worship of God, performed in it, should not be accepted Avith hira. That there is a frequent loss of propriety and amplitude of meaning in translations, we grant. That the Scriptures by translations, if good, true, and significant, according to the capacity and expressiveness of the languages whereinto they are translated, are divested of their majesty, holiness, and spirit, is most untrue. The majesty, holiness, and spirit of the Scriptures, lie not in words and syllables, but in the truths themselves expressed in them ; and whilst these are incorruptedly declared in any language, the majesty of the word is continued. It is much that men, prefer- ring a translation before the originals, should be otherwise minded ; especially that translation being in some parts but the translation of a translation, and that the most corrupt in those parts which I know extant. And this, with many fine words, pretty allusions, and simili- tudes, is the sum of what is pleaded by our author, to persuade men to forego the greatest privilege which from heaven they are made partakers of, and the most necessary radical duty that in their whole lives is incumbent on them. It is certain that the giving out of the holy Scripture from God is an effect of infinite love and mercy; I suppose it no less certain that the end for which he gave it was, that men by it might be instructed in the knowledge of his will, and tlieu- obedience that they owe unto him, that so at length they may come to the enjoyment of him ; — this itself declares to be its end. I think, also, that to know God, his mind and will, to yield him the obedience that he requires, is the bounden duty of every man ; as well as to enjoy him is their blessedness. And can they take it kindly of those who would shut up this gift of God from them, whether they will or no ? or be well pleased with them that go about to persuade them that it is best for them to have it kept by others for them, without their once looking into it ? If I know them aright, this gentleman will not find his countrymen willing to part with their Bibles on such easy terms.
From the Scripture (concerning which he affirmeth, " That it lawfully may, and in reason ought, and in practice ever hath been, segregated in a language not common to vulgar ears," — all which things are most unduly affirmed, and, because we must speak plainly, falsely) he proceeds to the worship of the church, and pleads that that also ought to be performed in such a language. It were a long and tedious business to follow him in his gilding over this practice of his church ; — we may make short work with him. As he Avill not pretend that this practice hath the least countenance from Scripture, so if he can instance in any church in the world, that for five hundred years at least after it [i.e., Scripture] set out, in the use of a worship the
ENTITLED FIAT LUX. 125
language whereof the people did not understand, I will cease this con- test. What he affirms of the Hebrew church keeping her rites in a language differing from the vulgar, whether he intend before or after the captivity, is so untrue as that I suppose no ingenuous man would affirm it, were he not utterly ignorant of all Judaical antiquity ; which I had cause to suspect before that our author is. From the days of Moses to the captivity of Babylon, there was no language in vulgar use among tlie people but only that wherein the Scripture was written, and their Avhole worship celebrated. After the captivity, though insensibly they admitted corruptions in their language, yet they all generally understood the Hebrew, unless it were the Hel- lenists, for whose sakes they translated the Scripture into Greek ;^ and for the use of the residue of their people, who began to take in a mixture of the Syro-Clialdean language with their own, the Tar- gums^ were found out. Besides, to the very utmost period of that church, the solemn worship performed in the temple, as to all the interest of words in it, was understood by the whole people attending on God therein. And in that language did the Bible lie open in their synagogues ; as is evident from the offer made by them to our Saviour of their books to read in, at his first entrance into one at Capernaum.