A53665:271
Animadversions on a treatise entitled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion,…Animadversions on a treatise intituled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion,…
Animadversions on a treatise entitled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion, between papist and Protestant, Presbyterian and independent by a Protestant.Animadversions on a treatise intituled Fiat lux, or, A guide in differences of religion, between papist and Protestant, Presbyterian and independent by a Protestant.
London: printed by E. Cotes for Henry Cripps, 1662
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
Another Discourse we have annexed to prove, That the Bible cannot be well translated, and that it loseth much of its grace and sweetness, arising from a peculiarity of Spirit in its writers, by any Translation whatever. I do, for my part, acknowledge, that no Translation is able in all things universally to exhibit, that fullness of sense, and secret virtue, to intimate the Truth it expresseth to the mind of a believer, w•• is in many passages of Scripture in its Original Languages; but how this will further the Romanists pretensions who have enthroned a Translation for the use of their whole Church, and that none of the best neither, but in many things corrupt and barbarous, I know not: Those who look on the Tongues wherein the Scripture was Originally written as their Fountains, if at any time they find the streams not so clear, or not to give so sweet a relish as they expected, are at liberty, if able, to repair to the fountains themselves. But those who reject the Fountains, and betake themselves to one only stream, for ought I know must abide by their own ⟨p. 339⟩inconveniences, without complaining. To say, the Bible cannot be well translated, and yet to make use, principally at least, of a Translation, with an undervaluing of the Originals, argues no great consistency of Judgement, or a prevalency of Interest. That which our Author in this matter sets off with a handsome flourish of words, and some very unhandsome similitudes, considering what he treats of, he sums up, p. 283. in these words; I would by all say thus much, The Bible Translated out of its own Sacred phrase into a profane and Common one, loseth both its propriety and amplitude of meaning, and is likewise devested of its peculiar Majesty, Holiness, and Spirit: which is reason enough, if no other, why it should be kept inviolate in its own style and speech. So doth our Author advance his Wisdom and Judgment above the Wisdom and Judgment of all Churches and Nations that ever embraced the Faith of Christ for a 1000 years; all which, notwithstanding what there is of truth in any of his insinuations, judged it their duty, to translate the Scripture into their Mother Tongues, very many of which Translations are extant ⟨p. 340⟩even to this day. Besides, he concludes with us in general ambiguous terms, as all along in other things his practice hath been.