The next thing faulted (as you say) in the Reformation, is the committing so much heavenly treasure to such rotten vessels, the trusting so much excellent Wine to such musty bottles: I mean the versions of the Scriptures and the publick Liturgies into the usual Languages of the common people, and the promiscuous liberty indulged them in it. And this they charge not as an Innovation simply, but as an Innovation of a dangerous consequence; the sad effects whereof we now see so clearly. A charge wich doth alike concern all the Protestant and Reformed Churches, so that I should have passed it over at the present time, but that it is made ours more specially in the application; the sad effects which the enemy doth so much insult in being said to be more visible in the Church of England, then in other places. This makes it ours, and therefore here to be considered, as the former were. First then they charge it on the Church as an Innovation, it being affirmed by Bellarmine in his 2. Book De verbo Dei, cap. 15. (whether with lesse truth or modesty, it is hard to say) Vniversam Ecclesiam semper his tantum linguis, &c. that in the Universal Church in all times foregoing the Scriptures were not commonly and publickly read in any other language but in the Hebrew, Greek, and Latine: this is (you see) a two-edged sword, and strikes not only against all Translations of the Scriptures into vulgar languages for common use, but against reading those Translations publickly as a part of the Liturgie, in which are many things as the Cardinal tels us quæ secreta esse debent, which are not fit to be made known to the common people. This is the substance of the charge, and herein we joyn issue in the usual Form with Absque hoc, sans ceo, no such matter really; the constant current of Antiquity doth affirm the contrary: by which it will appear most plainly that the Church did neither innovate in this act of hers, nor deviate therein from the Word of God, or from the usage of the best and happiest times of the Church of CHRIST. Not from the Word of God, there's no doubt of that, which was committed unto writing that it might be read, and read by all that were to be directed and guided by it. The Scriptures of the Old Testament first writ in Hebrew, the Vulgar language of that people, and read unto them publickly on the Sabbath daies, as appears clearly Act. 13. 15. & 15. 21. translated afterwards (by the cost and care of Ptolemy Philadelphus King of Egypt) into the Greek tongue, the most known and studied language of the Eastern world. The New Testament first writ in Greek for the self-same reason, (but that St. Matthew's Gospel is affirmed by some learned men to have been written in the Hebrew) and written to this end and purpose, that men might believe that IESVS is the CHRIST the Son of GOD, and that believing they might have use in his Name, Joh. 20. vers. ult. But being that all the Faithfull did not understand these Languages, and that the light of holy Scripture might not be likened to a Candle hidden under a bushel: it was thought good by many godly men in the Primitive times to translate the same into the languages of the Countreys in which they lived, or of the which they had been Natives. In which respect S Chrysostome then banished into Armenia, translated the New Testament, and the Psalms of David, into the Language of that people; S. Hierom a Pannonian born, translated the whole Bible into the Dalmatick tongue, as Vulphilas Bishop of the Gothes did into the Gothick all which we finde together without further search, in the Bibliotheque of Sixtus Senensis, a learned and ingenuous man but a Pontifician, and so lesse partial in this cause. The like done here in England by the care of Athelstan causing a Translation of the Saxon Tongue; the like done by Methodius, the Apostle General of the Sclaves, translating it into the Sclavonian for the use of those Nations: not to say any thing of the Syriack, Aethiopick, Arabick, the Persian, and Chaldaean Versions, of which the times and Authors are not so well known. And what I pray you, is the vulgar or old Latine Edition, (of late times made Authentick by the Popes of Rome) but a Translation of the Scriptures out of Greek and Hebrew for the instruction of the Roman and Italian Nations, to whom the Latine at that time was the Vulgar Tongue? And when that Tongue by reason of the breaking in of the barbarous Nations was worn out of knowledge, (I mean as to the common people) did not God stir up Iames, Archbishop of Genoa, when the times were darkest (that is to say, anno 1290 or thereabouts) to give some light to them by translating the whole Bible into the Italian, the modern Language of that Countrey? As he did Wiclef not long after, to translate the same into the English of those times, (the Saxon Tongue not being then commonly understood) a copy of whose Version in a fair Velom Manuscript I have now here by me, by the gift of my noble Friend Charles Dymoke, Hereditary Champion to the Kings of England. So then it is no innovation to translate the Scriptures; and lesse to suffer these Translations to be promiscuously read by all sorts of people: the Scripture being as well MILK for Babes, as strong Meat for the man of more able judgement. Why else doth the Apostle note it as a commendable thing in Timothy, that he knew the Scriptures from his childhood? and why else doth S. Hierom speak it to the honour of the Lady Paula, that she made her maids learn somewhat daily of the holy Scriptures? Why else does Chrysostome call so earnestly on all sorts of men to provide themselves of the holy Bibles, the only Physick for the Soul, as he cals it there: inviting to the reading thereof not only men of learning and publick businesse; but even the poor Artificer also, as is acknowledged by Senensis whom before we mentioned. And why else doth S. Augustine inform his Auditors, that it sufficeth not to hear the Scriptures read in the Congregation, unlesse they read also in their private Houses. Assuredly if Boyes and Girles, if Servants and Artificers are called upon so earnestly to consult the Scriptures, to have them in a Tongue intelligible to them in their private Families; and are commended for so doing as we see they are: I know no rank of men that can be excluded.

Let us next see whether it be an Innovation in the Church of CHRIST, to have the Liturgies or Common-prayers of the Church in the Tongue generally understood by the common People, which make the greatest number of all Church Assemblies. And first we finde by the Apostle not only that the publick Prayers of the Church of Corinth, were celebrated in a language which they understood; but that it ought to be so also in all other Churches, Except (saith he) ye utter by the voice words easie to be understood, how shall it be known what is spoken? How shall he that occupieth the room of the unlearned say Amen to thy giving of thanks (and consequently to thy Prayers also) if he understand not what thou sayest? 1 Cor. 14. 9. 16. What say the Papists unto this? Do not both Lyra and Aquinas expresly grant in their Commentaries on this place of Scripture, that the common Service of the Church in the Primitive times was in the common vulgar language? Is not the like affirmed by Harding in his Answer to Bishop Iewels challenge, Art. 3. Sect. 28. Adding withall, that it was necessary in the Primitive times that it should be so; and granting that it were still better that the people had their Service in their own vulgar Tongue for their better understanding of it? Sect. 33. Having thus Confitentes reos, we need seek no further, and yet a further search will not be unprofitable. And on that search it will be found that the converted Iewes did celebrate their divine Offices (Tractatus & oblationes, as the Father hath it) most commonly in the Syriack, and sometimes in the Hebrew tongue; the natural languages of that people: as is affirmed by S. Ambrose in 1. ad Cor. cap. 14. and out of him by Durand in his Rationale Divinorum. Eckius a great stickler of the Popes, affirmeth in his Common places, that the Indians have their Service in the Indian tongue; and that S. Hierome having translated the whole Bible into the Dalmatick, procured that the Service should be celebrated in that Language also. The like S. Hierome himself in his Epistle to Heliodorus, hath told us of the Bessi a Sarmation people: the like S. Basil in his Epistle to the Neocaesareans, assures us for the Aegyptians, Libyans, Palestinians, Phenicians, Arabians, Syrians, and such as dwell about the Banks of the River Euphrates. The Aethiopians had their Missal, the Chaldeans theirs; each in the language of their Countryes, which they still retain: So had the Muscovites of old, and all the scattered Churches of the Eastern parts, which they continue to this day.

But nothing is more memorable in this kinde then that which Aenaeas Silvius tels of the Sclavonians, who being converted to the Faith made suite unto the Pope to have the publick Service in their natural Tongue: but some delay being made therein by the Pope and Cardinals, a voice was heard, seeming to have come from Heaven, praying, Omnis Spiritus laudet Dominum, & omnis lingua confiteatur ei: whereupon their desires were granted without more dispute. Touching which Grant there is extant an Epistle from Pope Iohn the 8. to Sfentopulcher King of the Moravian Selaves, anno 888. at what time both the Latine Service and the Popes authority were generally received in those parts of Europe. Which Letter of Pope Iohn the 8. together with the Story above mentioned, might probably be a chief inducement to Innocent the 3. to set out a Decree in the Lateran Councel, importing that in all such Cities in which there was a concourse of divers Nations, and consequently of different Languages, (as in most Towns of Trade there doth use to be) the Service should be said, and Sacraments administred, Secundum diversitates nationum & linguarum, according to the difference of their Tongues and Nations And though Pope Gregory the 7. a turbulent and violent man, about 200 years after the Concession made by Iohn the S. in his Letter to Vratislaus King of Bohemia, laboured the cancelling of that priviledge, and possibly might prevail therein as the times then were: yet the Liburnians, and Dalmatians, two Sclavonian Nations, and bordering on Italy (the Popes proper seat) do still enjoy the benefit of that indulgence, and celebrate their Liturgie in their own Language to this very day. So that the wonder is the greater that those of Rome should stand so stifly in defence of the Latine Service, which the common people understand not, and therefore cannot knowingly, and with faith say Amen unto it. For though the Latine Tongue was Vulgar in a manner to those Western Nations, amongst whom the Latine Service was first received, and for that cause received because Vulgar to them: yet when upon the inundation of the barbarous nation, the Latine tongue degenerated into other Languages, as in France, Italy, and Spain; or else was quite worn out of knowledge as in Britain, Belgium, and some parts of the modern Germany, in which before it had been commonly understood; it was both consonant to piety and Christian Prudence that the Language of the common Liturgies should be altered also. The people otherwise either in singing David's Psalmes, or repeating any parts of the daily Office, must needs be like those Romans or Italians which S. Ambrose speaks of; who loved to sing Greek songs by rote (as we use to say) out of a meer delight which they had to the sound of the words; nescientes tamen quid dicant, not understanding one word which they said or sung.

The blame and guilt of Innovation being taken off, we must next examine the effects and dangerous consequents; more visibly discerned at this time in the Church of England, then was or could have been believed when they were first intimated. Amongst these they reckon in the first place the increase of Heresies, occasioned by the mistaking of the true sense and meaning of the Holy Scripture; and to that end it is said by Bellarmine, that the people would not only receive no good by having the Scripture read publickly unto them in their national Languages, Sed etiam caperet detrimentum, but on the contrary are like to receive much hurt. However, acciperet facillime occasionem errandi: because thereby they would most easily be led into errors: which gave occasion unto some (as he tels as there) to call the Scripture Librum Haereticorum, the Hereticks Book. So he in his 2. Book and 15. chapter, De verbo Dei. The like saith Harding in his Answer to Bishop Iewel's Challenge, Art 3. sect. 31. The Nations (saith he) that have ever had thei Service in the vulgar Tongue (where note that some Nations never had it otherwise) have continued still in Errors, Schisms, and certain Judaical Ceremonies, &c. In the next place they reckon this, that by permitting Scripture and the publick Liturgies to be extant in the Vulgar Tongues, all men would think themselves Divines, and the authority of the Prelates would be disesteemed; So Harding in his Answer to Iewels Apologie. l 5. fol. 460. that the people not content with hearing or reading the holy Scripture, would first take upon them to be Expositors, and at last to be Preachers also, which in effect is that which is charged by Bellarmine. And for this last, the present Distempers and consusions in the Church of England (out of which they suck no small advantage) gives them great rejoycing, as seeing their predictions so exactly verified. In answer to the first we need say no more, then that there have been Sects and Heresies in all times and Ages: never so many as in the first ages of the Church (witnesse the Catalogue of S. Augustine, Philastrius, and Epiphanius) in which the Scripture was translated into fewer Languages then it is at the present. 2. That this is no necessary effect of such Translations (for we see few new Heresies started up of late in France or Germany, where such Translations are allowed of) but a meer possible Contingency, which either may be or may not be, as it pleaseth God to give or to withdraw his grace from a State or Nation. And 3. That as according to the Divine Rule of the Apostle, we must not do a thing positively evil, in hope that any good, how great soever, may come of it: so by Analogie thereunto, we must not debar the people of God from any thing positively good, for fear that any contingent mischief may ensue upon it. But of this I shall not say more now, as being loth to travel on a common place. The point hath been so canvassed by our Controversors, that you may there finde Answers unto all Objections.

That which doth most concern me to consider of, is the second consequent, because it doth relate more specially then the other did to the present condition and estate of the Church of England. Although the Charge be general and equally concerning all the Protestant and Reformed Churches: yet the Application makes it ours, as before I said, and as ours, properly within the compasse of my present design. And though I will not take upon me to Advocate for the present distempers and confusions of this wretched Church (which no man can lament with a greater tendernesse, or look on with more indignation then I do, and I think you know it): yet I must tell you that it is neither Novum crimen C. Caesar, nor ante haec tempora inauditum, for those of the inferiour sort to take upon them the inquiry into sacred matters, to turn Expositors and Preachers, as the spirit of delusion moves them. The people have had an itch this way, in all times and Ages. The Satyrist thus complained of it amongst the Heathens;

--------Ecce inter pocula quaerunt
Romulides satui, quid dia Poemata narrant.

That is to say,

The wel-fed Romans in their Cups, do sit
And judge of things contain'd in holy Writ.

And the Apostle doth complain of it among the Christians, where he informes us of some ignorant and unstable men, which wrested some hard places of S. Pauls Epistles, as they also did the other Scriptures, to their own destruction, 2 Pet. 3. 26 and wrest them so they could not (I am sure of that) did they not take the liberty of expounding also. Look lower to S. Basils time, when learning did most flourish in the Church of CHRIST, and we shall finde the Emperors Cook (or the Clerk of his Kitchen at the best) as busily dishing out the Scriptures, as if it were no more then serving up his Masters diet from the Kitchin-hatch: paid home by that good father for his overgreat sawcinesse, with this handsome scoffe, Tuum est de pulmento cogitare, non Divind decoquere, that it belonged unto his office to provide good pottage for the Court, not to Cook the Scriptures. But this was not the folly only of this Master Cook, who perhaps (though better fed then taught) might now and then have carried up the Chaplains Messe, and having heard their learned conferences and discourses, was apt enough to think himself no small fool at a joynt of Divinity. That whole age was extremely tainted with the self-same peccancy; of which S. Hierome in his Epistle to Paulinus makes this sad complaint. Whereas (saith he) all other Sciences and Trades have their several and distinct professors, Sola Scripturarum ars est quam omnes passim sibi vendicant; only the Art of opening or rather of undoing a Text of Scripture, (as the phrase is now) was usurped by all: Hanc garrula anus, hanc delirus senex, &c. The pratling Gossip and the doting Sire, the windy Sophister, and in a word, all sorts of people do presume upon, dismembring the body of the Scriptures, and teaching others before they have learnt any thing that is worth the teaching. Some with a supercilious look, speaking big words discourse of holy Scripture amongst silly women: others (the more the shame) learn that of women which afterwards they may teach to men, and some with no small volubility of tongue, and confidence, teach that to others which they never understood themselves: Not to say any thing of those who having a smack of humane learning, and coming so prepared to handle the Holy Scriptures, do with enticing words feed the ears of the people, bearing their Auditors in hand quicquid dixerint legem Dei esse, that whatsoever they deliver is the Word of God, nor will vouchsafe to learn what the Prophets and Apostles do conceive of the matter, but very incongruously produce some Testimonies out of holy Writ to make good their corrupt imaginations; as if it were an excellent, not a pernicious way of teaching, to wrest the sense of holy Scripture, and thereby to accommodate it to their present purposes! Hath not the Father given us in this place and passage a most excellent Mirrour, wherein to see the ill complexion of the present times? doth not he set them forth in such likely colours, as if he rather did delineate the confusions of the present Age, then lament the miseries of his own? May not both Factions see by this, what a condition the poor Church of England is involved in by them? The sight whereof although it justifie them not in their several courses, as being not without example in their present practises): yet it may serve to let you know that as the distractions and confusions under which we suffer, are not the consequents of our translating of the Scriptures and publick Liturgies into the common vulgar Tongues, so it is neither new nor strange that such confusions and distractions should befall the Church.

Project Canterbury