William Ames: Marrow of Theology

Yeah, we definitely need an Ames collection. This has been on our radar and we are working on building collections to fill out what we lack in Puritan authors. It is a huge project for us, but you should start to see a fairly steady stream of Puritan collections going up on CP, hopefully sooner rather than later.

Over 2 years later and there doesn't seem to have been much progress on this.

Is Faithlife still planning on bringing 'a fairly steady stream of Puritan collections' to CP?

Ames' Marrow of Theology in particular is a big omission. 

"The Marrow of Theology clearly and systematically sets forth the essence of Puritan thought about God, the church, and the world. It is essential for understanding the Puritan view of covenant, sanctification, and activism, and is highly recommended for laypeople and theologians alike. It ought to be a part of every pastor’s library and every church library." - Beeke, Meet the Puritans

I found a recently transcribed version of the older English translation of Ames' Latin. This is NOT a fresh translation, though it seems care was taken to modernise and appropriately amend the English text during transcription.

https://www.monergism.com/marrow-sacred-divinity-1639-william-ames-ebook

"Transcriber Notes

Hand-typed, modernized, corrected, and annotated by
William H. Gross www.onthewing.org
© Jan 2014. Last updated: Jul 15, 2014

The 1639 Tables of Doctrine were painstakingly reconstructed
by my wife, Lynn. They do not fit the Kindle and ePub formats.

The Table of Definitions has been moved to the front.   Original  page numbers are  [bracketed]  intra-text.   Editor’s marginal notes are omitted.  Dr. Ames’ own quotes of Scripture have been modernized, but not replaced with current translations.  Paragraphs are numbered, but Dr. Ames calls each one a ‘thesis.’

Scripture in the footnotes is taken from the NKJV (Thomas Nelson Publishers © 1982)
except where otherwise noted.

Nature and scope of changes: The terms, “thee, thine, hast,” etc. have been modernized;
archaic and cumbersome syntax has been simplified; obsolete words and phrases have either
been revised, or annotated. The original text was inconsistent in spelling, capitalization,
numbering, format, and usage, with many typographical errors. These have been standardized
and corrected. Parallelism has been employed to help the reader follow the arguments (words
that were assumed in the original, have been filled in, and pronouns were given a reference).
Many Scripture citations were incorrect; or they were taken from an alternate translation where
the verse numbers differed from the KJV. Those are corrected and standardized according to the
NKJV. If the wording was unusual, but used in the text (typically from the Geneva Bible), it has
been annotated. Many additional citations have been footnoted for your convenience; and where
helpful, the full text of the verse has been footnoted as well.
Some of the wording was so esoteric or technical, or the allusion so vague, that rather than
modernize it, I kept the original. For example, the underlined portion here page [43]:

THIRDLY, in that besides ordination properly, whereby each thing seeks its own perfection, they
keep as it were a common society; all desire the conservation of the whole more than of
themselves, as seen in heavy things which are carried upward to avoid an emptiness.

This may mean that the subject of our prayers concerning our personal sacrifice is so heavy, so
burdensome, that we must carry it upwards to God to avoid emptiness and despair. But I have
left such interpretations to the reader, rather than impose my own. I avoided paraphrasing to
allow his voice (or the translator’s) to be heard in its most original form.
You may recognize some wording which John Owen and Jonathan Edwards later employed in
their own writings. Religious leaders in the American colonies referred to Dr. Ames more than
perhaps any other writer. We are all indebted to him for his influential and innovative labors in
the cause of our Lord Jesus Christ. I pray that you find this version edifying. It is not a light
read, but it is a profound and rewarding read.
ONE LAST OBSERVATION: based on grammar, spelling, and style, the English translation from the
Latin seems to have been done by two different individuals. The style of the one is clear and
forthright, and the other is more obscure. Modernizing the English reduced that obscurity only
in part. In 1968 John Dykstra Eusden did a fresh translation from the 1629 Latin edition, which
may be more helpful to you than this modernization of the original English.
W.H.Gross
February 21, 2014"