gar Latin excedingly: as being marked throughout in a number of places, that such & such words or sentences are superfluous. In al which places our vulgar Latin hath no such thing, but is agreable to the Greek which remaineth after the superfluities be taken away. For example, that before mentioned in the end of the Pater noster, hath a marke of superfluitie in the Greeke text thus ‵’. and Marc. 6, 11. these words, Amen I say to you, it shal be more tolerable for the land of Sodom and Gomorrhe in the day of judgement, then for that citie; and Mat. 29, 22. these words, And be baptized with the Baptisme that I am baptized with? Which is also superfluously repeated againe vers. 23. and such like places exceeding many: which being noted superfluous in the Greek, and being not in the vulgar Latin, prove the Latin in those places to be better, truer and more sincere then the Greek.
Beza præf. No. Testam. 1556. See him also Annotat. in 13. Act. v. 20.The vulgar latin translation agreeth with the best Greek copies, by Beza's owne judgement.Whereupon we conclude of these premisses, that it is no derogation to the vulgar Latin text, which we translate, to disagree from the Greek text, wheras it may notwithstanding be not only as good, but also better. And this the Adversarie himself, their greatest and latest translatour of the Greek, doth avouch against Erasmus in behalfe of the old vulgar Latin translation, in these notorious words: How unworthily and without cause (saith he) doth Erasmus blame the old Interpreter as dissenting from the Greek? He dissented, I grant, from those Greek copies which he had gotten: but we have found, not in one place, that the same interpretation which he blameth, is grounded upon the authoritie of other Greek copies, & those most ancient. Yea in some number of places we have observed, that the reading of the Latin text of the old Interpreter, though it agree not sometime with our Greek copies, yet it is much more convenient, for that it seemeth he followed some better and truer copie. Thus farre Beza. When the Fathers say, that the Latin text must yeald to the Greek and be corrected by it, they meane the true & uncorrupted Greeke text.In which words he unwittingly, but most truely, justifieth and defendeth the old vulgar Translation against him self and al other cavillers, that accuse the same, because it is not alwaies agreable to the Greek text: Wheras it was translated out of other Greek copies (partly extant, partly not extant at this day) either as good and as ancient, or better and more ancient, such as S. Augustin speaketh of, calling them doctiores & diligentiores, the more learned and diligent Greek copies, wherunto the latin translations that faile in any place, must needs yeald. Li. 2. de doctr. Christ. c. 15.
And if it were not too long to exemplifie and prove this, which would require a treatise by it-self, we could shew by many & most cleere examples throughout the new Testament, these sundrie meanes of justifying the old translation.
The vulgar latin translation is many waies justified by most ancient Greek copies, & the Fathers.First, if it agree with the Greek text (as commonly it doth, & in the greatest places concerning the controversies of our time, it doth most certainely) so farre the Adversaries have not to complaine: unles they wil complaine of the Greek also, as they doe Ja. 4. v. 2. and 1 Pet. 3. v. 21. where the vulgar Latin followeth exactly the Greek text, saying, Occiditis; and, Quod vos similis forme, &c. But Beza in both places correcteth the Greek text also as false.
2. If it disagree here and there from the Greek text, it agreeth with another Greek copie set in the margent, wherof see examples in the foresaid Greek Testaments of Robert Stevens and Crispin throughout: namely 2 Pet. 1, 10. Satagite ut per bona opera certam vestram vocationem faciatis. δια των αγαθων εργων; & Marc. 8. v. 7. Et ipsos benedixit, ευλογησας αυτα.
3. If these marginal Greek copies be thought lesse authentical then the Greek text, the Adversaries themselves tel us the contrarie, who in their translations often follow the marginal copies, and forsake the Greek text: as in the examples above mentioned Rom. 11. Apoc. 11. 2 Tim. 2. Jac. 5. &c. it is evident.
4. If al Erasmus Greek copies have not that which is in the vulgar Latin, Beza had copies which have it, and those most ancient (as he saith) & better. And if al Beza’s copies faile in this point and wil not help us, Gagneie the French Kings Preacher, and he that might command in al the Kings Libraries, he found Greek copies that have just according to the vulgar Latin: & that in such place as would seeme otherwise lesse probable as Codex veronensis ολιγον πυρIac. 3. v. 5. Ecce quantus ignis quam magnam silvam incendit! Behold how much fire what a great wood it kindleth: A man would thinke it must be rather as in the Greek text, A litle fire what a great wood it kindleth: But an approved ancient Greek copie alleaged by Gagneie, hath as it is in the vulgar Latin. And if Gagneis copies also faile sometime, there Beza and Crispin supply Greek copies fully agreable to the vulgar Latin. as παντα, οτι ο κυριος ep. Jude vers. 5. Scientes semel omnia, quoniam Jesus &c. and vers 19. εαυτους Segregant semeteipsos: likewise 2 Ephes 2.
