It is false. For it is not the received opinion, 1neither is there any probability of it, considering that Jerome in the old and new Testament, both translateth otherwise then th' old interpreter, and often controlleth him. Hereof the testimony of Erasmus, (a man that had as quick a nose in Jeromes doings, as whosoever:) is notable, who flatly affirmeth that this translation is neither Cyprian's, nor Hilary's, nor Ambrose, nor Augustins, nor Jeromes; seeing ⟨p. 105⟩his reading is divers from it, and that it is 2much less, that which he corrected; seeing there be found in this which he condemneth, not only as touching the words, but also as touching the meaning. And in another place he saith, that Jerome manifestly condemneth the former translation, which we yet (for the most part) do use. Jerome (although without cause) scourgeth the old interpreter, for translating [Greek or Hebrew], Sobriety: which (saith he) should have been translated chastity. And this he doeth in two or three places. Now a man would not think, that Jerome was so un-advised, as to have given his adversary this advantage: that he might reply against him, that it was his own translation, or that which he corrected, and therefore that he was driven to a hard shift, which could not defend his cause but by denial of him self. But that this translation is not Jeromes, 3let the reader look the discourse that Munster hath made hereof. Howbeit if this were granted them which they were never able to prove: what have they gained thereby? for it ⟨p. 106⟩followeth not, that if either it were truly translated, or faithfully corrected by Jerome: that therefore it is now true, and void of corruption. The fountain of the Scriptures is so walled by the providence of God, so close sealed and covered; that by no, either negligence or malice of men, there can any such thing fall into it, to trouble the clear & sweet water thereof: but as for the writings of men, they have no such privilege, neither are they laid up in any ark of the durable wood of Cittim, but that they may be, and are corrupted, as the daily experience doth declare. Whereof it is good to hear Jeromes own testimony. I do not think, that the Lords words are to be corrected; but I go about 4to correct the falseness of the Latin books:
It is false. For it is not the receiued opinion, 1neither is there any probabilitie of it, considering that Ierome in the old and nevv Testament, both translateth otherwise then th' olde interpreter, and often controwleth him. Hereof the testimony of Erasmus, (a man that had as quick a nose in Ieromes doings, as whosoeuer:) is notable, who flatly affirmeth that this translation is neither Cyprians, nor Hilaries, nor Ambrose, nor Augustins, nor Ieromes; seing ⟨p. 105⟩his reading is diuers from it, and that it is 2much lesse, that which he corrected; seing there be found in this which he condemneth, not onlye as touching the wordes, but also as touching the meaning. And in another place he saith, that Ierome manifestly condemneth the former translation, vvhich wee yet (for the most part) doe vse. Ierome (although without cause) scurgeth the old interpreter, for translating 〈non-Latin alphabet〉, Sobrietie: which (sayth he) should haue bene translated chastitie. And this hee doeth in tvvo or three places. Now a man would not think, that Ierome was so vn-aduised, as to haue giuen his aduersarie this aduātage: that he might reply against him, that it was his own translation, or that which he corrected, and therfore that he was driuen to a hard shift, which could not defend his cause but by denyal of him self. But that this translation is not Ieromes, 3let the reader looke the discourse that Munster hath made hereof. Howbeit if this were granted them which they were neuer able to proue: what haue they gained thereby? for it ⟨p. 106⟩followeth not, that if either it were truly translated, or faithfully corrected by Ierome: that therefore it is now true, and voyd of corruption. The fountaine of the Scriptures is so walled by the prouidence of God, so close sealed and couered; that by no, either negligence or malice of men, there can any such thing fall into it, to troble the cleare & sweete water thereof: but as for the writinges of men, they haue no such priuiledge, neither are they laid vp in any arke of the durable wood of Cittim, but that they may be, and are corrupted, as the daily experience doth declare. Whereof it is good to heare Ieromes own testimony. I doe not think, that the Lordes wordes are to be corrected; but I goe about 4
- 1Look Jerome upon these places and compare them with th' old translator. Genes. 1. 2 Isaiah. 1 12 30. & 5. 2 Gal. 1. 16 & 2. 5. & 5 8. Eph. 1 14 & 4. 19. &cLooke Ierome vpon these places and compare them with th' old translator. Genes. 1. 2 Esai. 1 12 30. & 5. 2 Gal. 1. 16 & 2. 5. & 5 8. Eph. 1 14 & 4. 19. &c
- 2Look also afterward, for other examples. Eras. epist. N. amico ex ani•o dilecto Erasm•i• Scholijs •• epist. Hieron. ad P•mmach. libro 1. aduersus lovinian.Looke also afterward, for other examples. Eras. epist. N. amico ex ani•o dilecto Erasm•i• Scholijs •• epist. Hieron. ad P•mmach. libro 1. aduersus louinian.
- 3Pr•fat ad co••er. •• ter. •estaē .
