XIX. Moses and the Prophets, Christ and his Apostles, were in their times all preachers of God’s truth; some by word, some by writing, some by both1. This they did partly as faithful Witnesses, making mere relation what God himself had revealed unto them; and partly as careful Expounders, teachers, persuaders thereof. The Church in like case preacheth still, first publishing by way of Testimony or relation the truth which from them she hath received, even in such sort as it was received, written in the sacred volumes of Scripture; secondly by way of Explication, discovering the mysteries which lie hid therein. The Church as a witness preacheth his mere revealed truth by reading publicly the sacred Scripture. So that a second kind of preaching2 is the reading of Holy Writ.
For thus we may the boldlier speak, being strengthened3 with the example of so reverend a prelate as saith, that Moses from the time of ancient generations and ages long since past had amongst the cities of the very Gentiles them that preached him, in that he was read every sabboth4 day. For so of necessity it must be meant, in as much as we know that the Jews have always had their weekly readings of the Law of Moses; but that they always had in like manner their weekly sermons upon some part of the Law of Moses we nowhere find.
Howbeit still we must here remember, that the Church by her public reading of the book of God preacheth only as a witness. Now the principal thing required in a witness is fidelity. Wherefore as we cannot excuse that church, which either through corrupt translations of Scripture delivereth instead of divine speeches any thing repugnant unto that which God speaketh; or, through falsified additions, proposeth that to the people of God as Scripture which is in truth no scripture: so the blame, which in both these respects hath been laid upon the church of England, is surely altogether without cause.
Touching translations of holy Scripture, albeit we may not disallow of their painful travails herein, who strictly have tied themselves to the very original letter; yet the judgment of the Church, as we see by the practice of all nations, Greeks, Latins, Persians, Syrians, Æthiopians, Arabians, hath been ever that the fittest for public audience are such as following a middle course between the rigour of literal translators and the liberty of paraphrasts, do with greatest shortness and plainness deliver the meaning of the Holy Ghost. Which being a labour of so great difficulty, the exact performance thereof we may rather wish than look for. So that, except between the words of translation and the mind of the Scripture itself there be contradiction, every little difference should not seem an intolerable blemish necessarily to be spunged out.
Whereas therefore the prophet David5 in a certain Psalm doth say concerning Moses and Aaron, that they were obedient to the word of God, and in the selfsame place our allowed translation saith they were not obedient; we are for this cause challenged as manifest gainsayers of scripture, even in that which we read for scripture unto the people. But for as much as words are resemblances of that which the mind of the speaker conceiveth, and conceits are images representing that which is spoken of, it followeth that they who will judge of words, should have recourse to the things themselves from whence they rise.
In setting down that miracle, at the sight whereof Peter fell down astonied before the feet of Jesus, and cried, “Depart, Lord, I am a sinner,” the Evangelist St. Luke saith 6the store of the fish which they took was such that the net they took it in “brake,” and the ships which they loaded therewith sunk; 7St. John recording the like miracle saith, that albeit the fishes in number were so many, yet the net with so great a weight was “not broken.” Suppose they had written both of one miracle. Although there be in their words a manifest shew of jar; yet none, if we look upon the difference of matter, with regard whereunto they might both have spoken even of one miracle the very same which they spake of divers, the one intending thereby to signify that the greatness of the burden exceeded the natural ability of the instruments which they had to bear it, the other that the weakness thereof was supported by a supernatural and miraculous addition of strength. The nets as touching themselves brake, but through the power of God they held.