It is not without very good reason, in my opinion, that the Church interdicts the promiscuous, indiscreet, and irreverent use of the holy and divine Psalms, with which the Holy Ghost inspired King David.  We ought not to mix God in our actions, but with the highest reverence and caution; that poesy is too holy to be put to no other use than to exercise the lungs and to delight our ears; it ought to come from the conscience, and not from the tongue.  It is not fit that a prentice in his shop, amongst his vain and frivolous thoughts, should be permitted to pass away his time and divert himself with such sacred things.  Neither is it decent to see the Holy Book of the holy mysteries of our belief tumbled up and down a hall or a kitchen they were formerly mysteries, but are now become sports and recreations.  ’Tis a book too serious and too venerable to be cursorily or slightly turned over:  the reading of the scripture ought to be a temperate and premeditated act, and to which men should always add this devout preface, ‘sursum corda’, preparing even the body to so humble and composed a gesture and countenance as shall evidence a particular veneration and attention.  Neither is it a book for everyone to fist, but the study of select men set apart for that purpose, and whom Almighty God has been pleased to call to that office and sacred function:  the wicked and ignorant grow worse by it.  ’Tis, not a story to tell, but a history to revere, fear, and adore.  Are not they then pleasant men who think they have rendered this fit for the people’s handling by translating it into the vulgar tongue?  Does the understanding of all therein contained only stick at words?  Shall I venture to say further, that by coming so near to understand a little, they are much wider of the whole scope than before.  A pure and simple ignorance and wholly depending upon the exposition of qualified persons, was far more learned and salutary than this vain and verbal knowledge, which has only temerity and presumption.

And I do further believe that the liberty every one has taken to disperse the sacred writ into so many idioms carries with it a great deal more of danger than utility.  The Jews, Mohammedans, and almost all other peoples, have reverentially espoused the language wherein their mysteries were first conceived, and have expressly, and not without colour of reason, forbidden the alteration of them into any other.  Are we assured that in Biscay and in Brittany there are enough competent judges of this affair to establish this translation into their own language?  The universal Church has not a more difficult and solemn judgment to make.  In preaching and speaking the interpretation is vague, free, mutable, and of a piece by itself; so ’tis not the same thing.