GENEVA BIBLE.-Edward VI. dying in July 1553, was succeeded by Mary, who immediately restored the Popish service and sacraments, and persecuted the favourers of the reformation with such cruelty, that many of them fled into foreign countries; among whom was Coverdale, who, in Edward's reign, had returned to England, and had been made bishop of Exeter. He with some others fixed their residence at Geneva, where they employed themselves in making a translation of the bible. They began with the new testament, which they published in 12mo. printed with a small but beautiful letter, in 1557. This is the first printed edition of the new testament, in which the verses of the chapters are distinguished by numeral figures and breaks.

Strype, in his annals of the reformation, tells us, that the Geneva brethren, after publishing their new testament, proceeded to revise the old. But not having finished it when Elizabeth came to the throne, some of them staid behind the rest to complete their design. And having finished the old testament, they published the whole bible at Geneva in 4to, in the year 1560, printed by Rowland Hall. This is what is commonly called the Geneva Bible; concerning which F. Simon affirms, that it is only a translation of a French version, made at Geneva some time before. But he said this, perhaps, to disparage the work. In this translation cuts are inserted, representing the garden of Eden, Noah's ark, &c. They likewise added a variety of notes, with two tables; the one containing an interpretation of the names, and the other an account of the principal matters in the scriptures. There is also an epistle to queen Elizabeth, in which they charge the English reformation with retaining the remains of popery, and exhort her to strike off certain ceremonies. But this epistle giving offence, it was omitted in the subsequent editions. The Geneva Bible was so universally used in private families, that there were above thirty editions of it in folio, 4to, and 8vo, printed from the year 1560 to the year 1616. The authors of this edition being all zealous Calvinists, their translation and notes are calculated to support the doctrine and discipline of that party. For which reason, it was better esteemed at its first appearance than it hath been in later times.

THE BISHOPS' BIBLE.-Queen Mary dying in November 1558, was succeeded by Elizabeth, who, treading in the steps of her brother Edward VI. suppressed the Romish superstition in all her dominions, and filled the sees with protestants. After this,

abp. Matthew Parker, having represented to the queen that many churches either were without bibles, or had incorrect copies, she resolved that a revisal and correction of the former translation should be made, in order to publication. The archbishop, therefore, appointed some of the most learned of the bishops and others to revise the bible commonly used, and to compare it with the originals: and to each of them he assigned a particular book of scripture, with directions not to vary from the former translation, except where it was not agreeable to the original; and to add marginal notes for explaining the difficult texts; reserving to himself the oversight of the whole. A revisal of the English bible, on the same plan, had been proposed by Cranmer, (see p. 19.) but the design did not take effect. Parker was more successful in his attempt. The persons employed by him performed their tasks with such cheerfulness, that the whole was ready for the press some time before the year 1568 for in that year the bible of the bishops' revisal was printed in a very elegant manner, with a beautiful English letter, on a royal paper, in a large folio, by Richard Jugge, the queen's printer. In this edition, which contains the apocrypha, the chapters are divided into verses, as in our bibles; and the several editions from the vulgate Latin, which in the great bible were printed in small characters, are omitted, except 1 John, ch. v. 7. which is printed in the same character with the rest of the text. To this edition, Parker added some good notes, different from those of Tyndal and Coverdale, and two prefaces. In the one to the old testament, he exhorted the people to study the scriptures, which, after St. Jerome, he termed the scriptures of the people. In the preface to the new testament, he advised the reader not to be offended with the diversity of translation. After the preface to the old testament, Cranmer's prologue is inserted; and before the Psalms there is a prologue of St. Basil. On the margin, besides the notes, there are references, and the whole is embellished with cuts and maps. This bible, on account of the pains which the bishops took in perfecting it, was called the bishops' bible, and was authorized to be read in the churches. Yet it was found fault with by some, on pretence that it was not as exact as it should be; because in the old testament it does not always follow the Hebrew, but in some places is on purpose accommodated to the LXX. and is disfigured with diverse errors. But Lewis says, the bishops' bible hath fared somewhat the worse through the intemperate zeal of the sticklers for the Geneva trans

lation. In 1572, the bishops' bible was reprinted in folio, in the same splendid manner as in 1568, with a few additions and alterations.

L. THOMSON'S NEW TESTAMENT.-In the year 1583, one Laurence Thomson, an under secretary to Sir F. Walsinghame, published an English version of Beza's Latin translation of the new testament, to which he added notes from Beza, Camerarius, and others. This translation differs so very little from the Geneva bible, that it was sometimes printed with the Geneva translation of the old testament.

RHEMISH NEW TESTAMENT.-The English papists, who, after queen Mary's death fled to Rhemes, finding it impracticable to hinder their countrymen from having the scriptures in their mother-tongue, published an English translation of the new testament from the authentical Latin; that is from the vulgate, printed at Rhemes by John Fogny, in the year 1582. At the same time they promised a translation of the old testament in the same language. Their translation of the new testament, the Rhemists rendered unintelligible to common readers, by introducing into it a number of hard words, neither Greek, nor Latin, nor English, but a barbarous mixture of the three languages; such as, Azymes, Tunike, Holocaust, Prepuce, Pasche, Parasceue, Neopyte, Evangelize, Penance, Chalice, Host, &c. These are what the Romish clergy call ecclesiastical and sacred words; and by affirming that they contain certain deep and inexplicable meanings, they have raised in the minds of the vulgar a superstitious veneration of the clerical orders, to the enslaving of their consciences. (See p. 12.) To their translation, the Rhemists added notes, from what they called catholic tradition, from the expositions of the fathers, and from the decrees of popes and councils, for the support of the Romish errors. This is what goes by the name of the Rh mish new testament.—In the year 1589, Dr. Fulke, master of Pembroke-hall, Cambridge, reprinted this translation, together with that of the bishops' bible, in two columns; and in his notes confuted all its arguments, glosses, annotations, manifest impieties, and slanders against the translations used in the church of England; and dedicated the whole to queen Elizabeth.

DOWAY BIBLE. About 27 years after the publication of the Rhemish new testament, an English translation of the old testament, from the authentical Latin, came forth from the English college of Doway, in two vols. 4to; the first in the year 1609, the second in 1610, both printed at Doway, by Laurence Kellam.

But this translation is of the same complexion with the Rhemish new testament, having been made many years before in the college of Rhemes, by the very same persons who translated the new testament: for it was only revised and published by theig brethren of the college of Doway.

KING JAMES'S BIBLE.-Queen Elizabeth dying in March 1602, was succeeded by James VI. king of Scotland, who, soon after his arrival at London, received a petition from the puritan ministers, desiring a reformation of certain ceremonies and abuses in the church. In consequence of this petition, the king appointed several bishops and deans, together with the principal petitioners, to meet him at Hampton-court, January 12, 1603, to confer with him on these abuses. On the second day of the conference, the puritans proposed that a new translation of the bible should be made; and no one opposing the proposition, the king, in the following year 1604, appointed 54, or, according to others, 47 persons learned in the languages, for revising the common translation. These he divided into six companies, and to the several companies he allotted certain books of scripture to be translated or amended by each individual of the company separately. And that they might execute their work in the best manner, he prescribed to them certain rules which they were to observe. The first was; the ordinary bible read in the churches, commonly called the bishops' bible, to be followed, and as little altered as the original would permit.-The third was; the old ecclesiastical words to be kept; as the word church not to be translated congregation, &c.-The fifth; the division of the chapters to be altered, either not at all, or as little as might be.The sixth; no marginal notes to be affixed, but only for explaining the Hebrew and Greek words, which could not be expressed in the text without some circumlocution.-The eighth; every particular man of each company to take the same chapter or chapters; and having amended or translated them severally by himself, where he thought good, all were to meet together to compare what they had done, and to agree on what they thought should stand. The ninth; when any one company had finished any book in the manner prescribed, to send it to the other companies to be considered by them.-The fourteenth; the translations of Tyndal, Coverdale, Matthew, Whitechurch, (the great bible) and Geneva, to be used where they agree better with the original than the bishops' bible.-This, therefore, was not to be a new translation, but a correction only or amendment of the

bishops' bible. The translators entered on their work in spring

1607.

Selden, in his table-talk, says, The king's translators took an excellent way. That part of the bible was given to the person who was most excellent in such a tongue. And then they met together, and one read the translation, the rest holding in their hands some bible, either of the learned tongues, or French, Spanish, Italian, &c. If they found any fault, they spoke; if not, he read on.

After long and earnest expectation, the bible, thus revised, came out in the year 1611, dedicated to the king: and is that which at present is used in all the British dominions.

To this edition of the bible, it hath been objected, 1. That it often differs from the Hebrew, to follow the LXX. if not the German translation; particularly in the proper names.—2. That the translators, following the vulgate Latin, have adopted many of the original words, without translating them; such as hallelujah, hosannah, mammon, anathema, &c. by which they have rendered their version unintelligible to a mere English reader. But they may have done this, in compliance with the king's injunction concerning the old ecclesiastical words, and because, by long use, many of them were as well understood by the people, as if they had been English.-3. That by keeping too close to the Hebrew and Greek idioms, they have rendered their ver``sion obscure.-4. That they were a little too complaisant to the king, in favouring his notions of predestination, election, witchcraft, familiar spirits, &c. But these, it is probable, were their own opinions as well as the king's.-5. That their translation is partial, speaking the language of, and giving authority to one But this, perhaps, was owing to the restraint they were laid under by those who employed them.-6. That where the original words and phrases admitted of different translations, the worse translation, by plurality of voices, was put into the text, and the better was often thrown into the margin.-7. That notwithstanding all the pains taken in correcting this, and the former editions of the English bible, there still remain many passages mis-translated, either through negligence or want of knowledge and that to other passages improper additions are made, which pervert the sense; as Matt. xx. 23. where by adding the words, it shall be given, it is insinuated, that some other person than the Son, will distribute rewards at the day of judg

sect.

ment.