Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub

catholics, as in these places for example, "I have inclined my heart to keep thy justifications for reward," and "Redeem thy sins with alms ;" might we not obtain here the like favour at your hands for the Greek text, specially when the Hebrew doth not disagree? No, say they, nor in no other place where the Greek is never so plain, if the Hebrew word at the least may be any otherwise interpreted, and drawn to another signification.

44.

כארו.

Fulke. We say to you first, that you have falsely pointed FULKE, the Hebrew word in the margin; for all the printed books that ever I have seen, as Bomberg, both in folio and quarto, Stephanus, Basil, Plantine, Arias Montanus, Complutensis, all place camets under caph, where you make patach. But perhaps your Hebrew is most out of Munster's dictionary, where it is pointed as you make it. But for answer to your question, we say, that there is a double testimony of the Mazzorites to prove, that in the most ancient and best corrected copies the Hebrew was caru, "they have digged or pierced": this is testified not only by our translators, but also by Johannes Isaac, your own rabbin, against Lindanus, a prelate of yours. And this the authors of the Complutensian edition do acknowledge; for thus they have pointed it, caru, where is nothing but the redundance of aleph (which is understood in every camets) differing from the usual reading and declining of the verb carah, that signifieth "to pierce or dig." Again, where it is read otherwise, if it be rightly pointed, as it is in Arias Montanus, caari, it cannot signify sicut leo, "as a lion," as both the Mazzorites do teach, and Johannes Isaac, a grammarian, out of them by the points and the note over iod doth plainly demonstrate. For what should shurech sound in iod? or if you would contend it should be daghes, to what purpose should it be in iod, if the word should signify "as as a lion"? Therefore, howsoever this variety of copies came, either by negligence of some writers, or by corruption of the Jews, we have sufficient warrant for the ancient and true reading, which the Greek translator did follow, which also was in St Jerome's copy; otherwise he would not have translated out of the Hebrew fixerunt, "they have pierced." Therefore Rabbi Joseph, which made the Chaldee paraphrase upon the Psalter, laboured to express both the copies, as well that which hath plainly "they have pierced," as that which hath it corruptly,

0.

TT

כארי

ככתין

ד: •

כאריח

[ocr errors]

66

as though it spake of a lion, and yet cannot rightly be so translated, because the points are imperfect even for that Pr reading. Therefore he hath said, nikethin heich cheariah, they have indented and pierced like a lion my hands and my feet," as it is in the Venice print of Daniel Bomberg, although Arias Montanus, in his bible, have no more but nachethin, which he translateth, "biting my hands and my feet." I have played the fool to utter these matters in the mother tongue to ignorant men, that can make no trial of them; but you have not only given me example, but also enforced me with your insoluble question (as you thought), by one word somewhat out of frame, to overthrow the whole Hebrew text. But you are to be pardoned, for that you follow your Mr Lindanus herein, who hath nothing else in effect to quarrel against the Hebrew text, but this; and therefore he repeateth it in many places, to make greater shew of it, as you do. In other places, where the Hebrew word hath divers significations, who shall forbid us to choose that which is most agreeable to the circumstance of the text, and to the analogy or rule of faith?

MARTIN,

45.

FULKE, 45.

Præfat. in pent.

Martin. We reply again and say unto them, Why? Is not the credit of those Septuagint interpreters, who themselves were Jews, and best learned in their own tongue, and (as St Augustine often, and other ancient fathers say) were inspired with the Holy Ghost in translating the Hebrew bible into Greek,-is not their credit, I say, in determining and defining the signification of the Hebrew word, far greater than yours? No. Is not the authority of all the ancient fathers, both Greek and Latin, that followed them, equivalent in this case to your judgment? No, say they; but because we find some ambiguity in the Hebrew, we will take the advantage, and we will determine and limit it to our purpose.

Fulke. St Jerome abundantly answereth this cavil, denying that supposed inspiration, and deriding the fable of their 70 cells', (which yet pleased Augustine greatly,) yea, calling in question, whether any more were translated by them, than the five books of Moses; because Aristæus, a writer in Ptolemy's time, and after him Josephus, make mention of no more. The same cause therefore, that moved St Jerome to translate out of the Hebrew, moveth us: whose translation, if we had it sound and perfect, might

[See before, p. 52.]

much further us for the same purpose: although for the signification of the Hebrew words we require no more credit, than that which all they that be learned in the Hebrew tongue, must be forced to yield unto us. And seeing your vulgar Latin departeth from the Septuagint interpretation, even in the books of Moses, which (if any be theirs) may most rightly be accounted theirs, because it is certain they translated them, although it be not certain whether they translated the rest: with what equity do you require us to credit them, which your own vulgar translation affirmeth to have translated amiss, as I have shewn before in the example of Cainan's generation? Another example you have in the 4th of Genesis, Nonne si bene egeris recipies, &c. "If thou shalt do well, shalt thou not receive? but if thou shalt do evil, straightway thy sins shalt be present in the doors." The Greek text hath, Ovк av opeŵs πроσеvéукуs, &c. “Not if thou hast rightly offered, but thou hast not rightly divided; hast thou sinned? be still." Where your translation cometh much nearer to the Hebrew, as might be shewed in very many examples. As for the ancient fathers' credit of the Greek church, and the Latin that followed them, if our judgment alone be not equivalent unto them, yet let these ancient fathers, Origen and Jerome, that thought them not sufficient to be followed, and therefore gathered or framed other interpretations,-let their judgment, I say, joining with ours, discharge us of this fond and envious accusation.

45.

נפש בשאול

Martin. Again, we condescend to their wilfulness, and say: What MARTIN, if the Hebrew be not ambiguous, but so plain and certain to signify one thing, that it cannot be plainer? As, "Thou shalt not leave my soul Psal. xv. in hell;" which proveth for us, that Christ in soul descended into hell. Is not the one Hebrew word as proper for soul, as anima in Latin? the other, as proper and usual for hell, as infernus in Latin? Here then at the least will you yield? No, say they, not here neither; for Beza telleth us, that the word which commonly and usually signifieth "soul," yet for a purpose, if a man will strain, it may signify not only "body," but also "carcase," and so he translateth it. But Beza (say we), being admonished by his friends, corrected it in his later edition. Yea, say they, he was content to change his translation, but not his opinion concerning the Hebrew word, as himself protesteth.

Fulke. You have chosen a text for example, wherein FULKE, is least colour (except it be with the unlearned) of an hun- 46.

[FULKE.]

6

[ocr errors]

dred. For whereas you ask, whether nephesh be not as proper for soul as anima in Latin, and sheol for hell as infernus in Latin; I utterly deny both the one and the other. For nephesh is properly the life, and sheol the grave or pit, though it may sometimes be taken for hell, which is a consequent of the death of the ungodly, as nephesh is taken for person, or one's self, or (as it is sometimes) for a dead carcase. Yea, there be that hold, that it is never taken for the reasonable immortal soul of a man, as anima is, specially of ecclesiastical writers. That Beza translated the Greek of the New Testament after the signification of the Hebrew words, although it was true in sense, yet in mine opinion it was not proper in words; and therefore he himself hath corrected it in his latter editions, as you confess : he hath not changed his opinion concerning the Hebrew: the reason is, because it is grounded upon manifest texts of scripture, which he citeth, Levit. xix. 27, and xxi. 1, and 11. Num. v. 2, and ix. 10. In the first place your own vulgar Latin translation for lanephesh turneth mortuo you shall not cut your flesh for one that is dead. In the second place your vulgar Latin hath, Ne non contaminetur sacerdos in mortibus; and, Ad omnem mortuum non ingredietur omnino: Let not the priest be defiled with the deaths of his countrymen; and, The high priest shall not enter in to any dead body at all where the Hebrew is lenephesh, and w‐ba byn In the third place your vulgar Latin readeth pollutusque est super mortuo, they shall cast out him that is polluted by touching a dead carcase; where the Hebrew is lanephesh. In the first place your vulgar Latin hath indeed anima, but in the same sense, that it had before mortuo : for the text is of him that is unclean by touching any dead body, which in Hebrew is nephesh. How say you now, is the Hebrew word as proper for soul as anima in Latin?—except you will say, the Latin word anima doth properly signify a dead body. Hath not Beza good reason to retain his opinion concerning the Hebrew word, when he hath the authority of your own vulgar translation? You that note such jumps and shifts in us, whither will you leap to save your honesty? Will you say, the Hebrew text is corrupted since your translation was drawn out of it? The Seventy interpreters then will cry out against you: for they with one mouth,

מת לא יבא

[ocr errors][merged small]

in all these places, for the Hebrew word nephesh render the usual signification xn, adding in the xxi. of Lev. 11, TETEλEUTηKVîa, which either you must translate a dead body, or you shall call it absurdly a dead soul. Would any man think to have found in you either such gross ignorance, or shameful negligence, or intolerable malice against the truth, that, Beza sending you to the places, either you would not or you could not examine them; or if you did examine them, that you would notwithstanding thus maliciously, against your own knowledge and conscience, rail against him? You make us to say, if a man will strain the word, it may signify not only body, but also carcase. What say you? did Moses strain the word to that signification? You said before, that we were at the jumps and turnings of an hare before the hounds; such mighty hunters you are, and we such fearful hares before you. I am not skilful in the terms of hunting, but in plain English I will speak it, that if all the traitorous wolves and foxes that be in the kennel at Rhemes, would do their best to save your credit in this section, nay, in this whole preface, they shall never be able to maintain their own, with any indifferent reader.

47.

Martin. Well then, doth it like you to read thus, according to MARTIN, Beza's translation, "Thou shalt not leave my carcase in the grave?" No; we are content to alter the word carcase, (which is not a seemly word for our Saviour's body,) and yet we are loth to say soul; but if we might, we would say rather "life," "person," as appeareth in the margin of our bibles: but as for the Hebrew word that signifieth hell, though the Greek and Latin bible throughout, the Greek and Latin fathers in all their writings, as occasion serveth, do so read it and understand it, yet will we never so translate it; but for "hell" we will say "grave," in all such places of scripture as might infer limbus patrum, if we should translate "hell." These are their shifts, and turnings, and windings, in the Old Testament.

47.

Fulke. I have shewed you before, that in the New FULKE, Testament we like better to translate according to the proper and usual signification of the Greek word. But the Hebrew word in the Old Testament may be translated, according to the circumstance of the place, life, person, self, yea, or dead body, and in some place perhaps carcase. You follow us very near, to seek advantage of the English word carcase, which commonly is taken in contempt, and therefore

« PoprzedniaDalej »