Εικόνες σελίδας
PDF
Ηλεκτρ. έκδοση

BX 9843 AI 058

WILLMER AND SMITH,

32, CHURCH STREET, LIVERPOOL,

PREFACE.

THE length of the following Discourse rendered it necessary to omit large portions of it in the delivery; the remainder has undergone no alteration in preparing the Lecture for the press.

It is one of the duties of the controversialist to drop each subject of debate so soon as every thing materially affecting it has been advanced; and to seize the time for silence, as promptly as the time for speech. This consideration would have led me to abstain from any further remarks respecting the Improved Version, did it not appear that it is considered disrespectful to pass without notice any argument adduced by our opponents. In briefly adverting to Mr. Byrth's strictures on my former Lecture, contained in the Preface to his own, I am more anxious to avert from myself the imputation of discourtesy to him than to disprove his charge of "PITIFUL EVASION;" which even the accuser himself, I imagine, cannot permanently esteem just.

Notwithstanding the criticisms of my respected opponent, I still maintain that a Subscriber to the British and Foreign Unitarian Association is no more responsible for the alleged delinquencies of the Improved Version, than is a Subscriber to the British and Foreign Bible Society for the known departures from the true standard of the text which its funds are employed to circulate. Mr. Byrth appears to enumerate three particulars, in which he thinks that the parallelism between these two cases fails :

First; "The Authorized Version does not profess to be a systematic Interpretation. It is not, in one word, a Creed and an Exposition. It is only a literal translation, without note or comment." So much the worse, must we not say? Whatever deception a false text can produce, is thus wholly concealed and undiscoverable; the counterfeit passes into circulation, undistinguished from the pure gold of the Divine Word, bearing on its front the very same image and superscription. Did this version "profess to be a systematic Interpretation," readers would be on their guard; but while professing to be "without note or comment," it inserts "a note" or gloss (in the case of the Heavenly Witnesses) into the text itself. The doctr

a

bearing of this and other readings, in which Griesbach's differs from the Received Text, makes the Authorized Version, quoad hoc, a creed, while it disclaims this character.

[ocr errors]

Secondly; To constitute the Parallelism, the Bible Society ought to be, "The Trinitarian Society for promoting Christian Knowledge," avowedly publishing an "Improved Version of the Scriptures," &c. So long, then, as Churchmen abstain from proposing an Improved Version," and designate their societies by neutral names, they may be acquitted, "in foro conscientiæ," for retaining any corruptions which may happen to exist in the un-improved Translation. It is easy to conjecture that, on this principle, it will be long before the Church incurs the needless guilt of an " 'Improved Version." Surely the frank avowal, by the words "Trinitarian Society," of a party purpose, would rather abate than augment the culpability of retaining a Trinitarian gloss; since the reader would have fair warning that the work was edited under Theological bias. And one of the most serious charges against "the Improved Version" was precisely this: that its first edition was without party badge (the word Unitarian not appearing in the title); so that it might possibly deceive the unwary.

Thirdly; The parallelism is said to fail in extent; the peculiarities of the Improved Version being much more numerous, and sustained by less evidence, than the false readings of the Authorized Translation. I cannot concur in this remark, so far as it affects the evidence against 1 John v. 7. But I pass by this matter of opinion, to protest against the unjust exaggeration of a matter of fact, contained in Mr. Byrth's supposition of a Trinitarian counterpart to the Improved Version. He speaks of "a text corrected on the principles of" "Theological criticism and conjecture :”—he knows that not one text is so corrected; that Griesbach's second edition is followed without variation; that any proposed deviations from it are only typographically indicated, or suggested and defended in the notes. He speaks of the retention of "questionable passages," without "notice that their authenticity had ever been doubted ;" and the expunging of as many perplexing doctrinal texts as possible :-he knows that not one word of the most approved text is expunged, or of any less perfect text retained; and that notice is given of every deviation on the part of the Editors, in questions either of authenticity or of translation, from their standards, Griesbach and Newcome, and from the Received Text. Mr. Byrth is aware that his opponents in this controversy do not altogether admire the Improved Version; but it is not fit that advantage should be taken of this to publish extravagant descriptions of it, in which the accuracy of the scholar, and en the justice of the Christian, are for the moment lost in the vehemence

partizan.

It is desirable to add, that the Society which originally published the Improved Version, has long since been merged in the British and Foreign Unitarian Association. In this larger body three other societies (of which one, at least, surpassed in scale and influence the unfortunate object of our opponents' hostility) are consolidated; and its subscription list contains the names of those who previously supported any of the constituent elements of the Association. Hence it can, with no propriety, be called "The Society instituted for the circulation" of the Improved Version. It cannot be alleged that a subscriber is bound to anything more than a general and preponderant approbation of the complex objects of the Association; nor does he, by retaining his name on the list of its supporters, forego his right of dissenting from particular modes of action which its Directors may adopt.

May I assure Mr. Byrth, that I did not intend to insinuate, that his strictures were produced "second-hand:" except in the sense that many of them had, in fact, been anticipated. I expressly guarded myself against any construction reflecting on the originality and literary honour of our opponents.

The remaining animadversions of Mr. Byrth, involving no public interest, and having merely personal reference to myself, I willingly pass by; knowing that they can have no power but in their truth; and in that case I should be sorry to weaken them.

ERRATA

In the Second Lecture, "The Bible: what it is, and what it is not."

Page 14, line 7 from the bottom, after 4th place insert with the Book of Acts. 19, line 6 from the top, for Gallilean read Galilean.

25, line 14 from the bottom, for reasons read reason.
32, line 8 from the top, for bold read bald.

43, line 8 from the bottom, for for read at.
45, line 14 from the bottom, for comment read comments.
49, line 13 from the bottom, before separated insert they.
49, line 5 from the bottom, for discussion read agitation.
49, line 4 from the bottom, for conducted read discussed.
51, note, last line, for 737 read 747.

56, line 9 from the top, for this heretic read these heretics.
57, line 4 from the bottom, for later read latter.

« ΠροηγούμενηΣυνέχεια »