of all the translations of the Reformed churches. Moreover, �nts receive the original Hebrew and (}reek Scriptures as/?fml/?b/e, to which they re?ort in all disputed translations. How litdo weight can be, given to the decisions of Cathol?es when they say, as Mr. Hughes says,* "Catholics regard the ? Bible as a spurious version, mistranslated, and containing only a part of the sacred Scriptures." When pressed beyond the power of successful reply, the sophistical Mr. Hughes utters the following, which, though utterly inapplicable to popery, is in perfect keeping with the conduct of the primitive and Protestant churches. "The Catholic Church has ?ways been zealous to disseminate the sacred Scriptures among her children. Witness the fact that so early as the fourth century, as St. Augustine testifies, ' the number of those who had translated the Scriptures from the Hebrew out of the Greek might be computed, but that the number of those who had. translated the Greek into the Latin could not be numbered!' At that period. Latin was the ?ge of the western empire."Y A few years ago, in England, in consequence of the misrepresenta- tions of Catholics and others respecting the English Protestant version, suspicions were awakened respecting its integrity. Charges of nume- rous and wide departures from the first edition of the translators had been freely circulated. Many letters and some pamphlets were imblished to substantiate these charges. In these circmrmtances the authorized printers of the Bible at the University of Oxford published a fac-simile of the first edition of King James' Bible, issued in 1611, in order that it might be compared with modern editions. This fac-simile copy is prepared with great minuteness, not only as it respects the text, but the orthography, punctuation, and even the embellishments. The board of managers of the American Bible Society procured one of these co- pies, and instituted a rigid comparison between it and the standard copy of the society. A supervising committee was appointed by the board, consisting of one member from each denomination connected with the society. A akilfui proof-reader first compared the early and modern ?, word for word, and noted down all the differences. Professor ush, the editor of the society's publications, having in the library great variety of Bibles issued during the last three hundred years, went over all these differences, and ascertained where and when all the changes commenced. The committee then, each with a copy of the muno age in hand, carefully followed the editor, and exami?r?l his inves- tigations. The result was, that the variations existing between the present and early copies of the English Bible consisted in unimportant particulars, such as capital letters, commas, Italic words, &c., not affecting the sense.? After all the clamours that have been made against our English ver- ?on, it still keeps its ground sa a good translation, and far more faith- ful to the original than the Douay Bible. Neverthele? RomanisM lwonounce it a perv?ed version, than which nothing can be more incor- rect. XI. After having given, as we thlnl?, mlfilcient proofs of the genuine- ns?, authenticity, and inspiration of the original Scriptures, aa well as �C?utmve?y with Bre?kem4dp, p. a02. t Ooutrove?y, p. ? t t
�
