66
The reprint, however, in its execution, does credit to the press which gave it birth: it proves, moreover, the indefatigable zeal of the agents of Popery to promote its revived efforts for its own advancement, and the confidence
know, that there is not one of the great body of such versions which is not preferable, as a fair representation of the original, to the Latin version called the Vulgate — and that, allowing to that venerable version its due honour.
It is a fact worth knowing, that, from the revival of letters, or the era of printing to the present time, all the presses of the principal countries and cities of civilised Europe issued a great abundance of the original, the Greek Testament — the great religious charter of real Christendom; while, from the Eternal City — the City of the great Pontiff — the source and centre of Catholicity, haa issned for the same extended space of nearly three centuries, not one — no, not one! All this is easily explained. The Vulgate ia the grand original, and its prerogative must not be invaded. In a fit of unconscious rectitude or ahame, Bellarmine proposed an edition to Pius V. This we learn from the biographer of Bellarmine, Bartoli, Rom. 1678, p. 388, who ia referred to for this fact in the Literary Policy, p. 77. Did such an edition ever appear? No. Rome could edit from her authorised press a Greek translation of the Old Testament. There was no rival. But of the Greek New Testament, and of the Hebrew Old, the Sacred Latin of the Vulgate kept her in continual dread. Four years ago, Dr. Wiseman announced a facsimile of the celebrated Vatican MS., then in considerable forwardness. Better late than never. Rome may at last turn Protestant or Christian. But our facsimile still hangs fire. The report had some policy in it. The Consultor of the Congregation of the Index held out some hopes of a private critical edition of his own — of course with all the light of Trent, and the uniform consent of the Fathers.
