means unto them, but they by natural discourse attaining the knowledge thereof, seem the makers of those laws which indeed are His, and they but only the finders of them out.......The rule of ghostly or immaterial natures, as spirits and angels, is their intuitive intellectual judgment concerning the amiable beauty and high goodness of that object, which with unspeakable joy and delight doth set them on work. The rule of voluntary agents on earth is the sentence that reason giveth concerning the goodness of those things which they are to do......Notwithstanding, whatsoever such principle there is, it was at the first found out by discourse, and drawn out of the very bowels of heaven and earth...... Good doth follow unto all things by following the course of their nature; and on the contrary side, evil by not observing it....... But amongst creatures, only man's observation of the law of his nature is righteousness; only man's transgression sin......Take away the will, and all acts are equal...... ...... "Capable we are of God, both by understanding and will; by understanding, as He is that sovereign Truth which comprehendeth the rich treasures of all wisdom; by will, as He is that sea of Goodness, whereof whoso tasteth shall thirst no more....... .We now love, in respect of benefit; we shall then love the thing that is good, for the goodness of beauty in itself. The soul being in this sort, as it is active, perfected by love of that infinite Good, shall also, as it is receptive, be perfected with those supernatural passions of joy, peace, and delight...... Man doth not rest satisfied with fruition of that wherewith his life is preserved...but doth manifestly pursue with great earnestness that which cannot stand him in any stead for vital use; that which exceedeth the reach of sense; yea, somewhat above capacity of reason, somewhat divine and heavenly, which with hidden exultation it rather surmiseth than conceiveth; somewhat it seeketh, and what that is, it knoweth not; yet desire thereof doth so incite it, that all other desires give place....... When supernatural duties are exacted, natural are not rejected.................As St Paul's words concerning ancient Scripture presuppose the Gospel of Christ embraced; so our own words, when we extol the entire body of Scripture, must be understood with this caution, that the benefit of nature's light be not thought excluded as unnecessary, because the necessity of a diviner light is magnified.................. ......"That which is of God, and may be evidently proved to be so, we deny not but it hath in his kind, although unwritten, yet the selfsame force and authority with the written laws of God....... “Our belief in the Trinity, the coeternity of the Son of God with his Father, the proceeding of the Spirit from the Father and the Son, the duty of baptising infants-are in Scripture nowhere to be found by express literal mention; only deduced they are out of Scripture by collection....... ...... "The bounds of wisdom are large................. Wisdom endued the fathers who lived before the law with the knowledge of holy things. ......Now, if wisdom did teach men by Scripture (only) every way of doing well, there is no art, but Scripture should teach it...... Whatsoever either men or angels know, is as a drop of that unemptiable fountain of wisdom, which wisdom hath diversely imparted her treasures unto the world. Some things she openeth by the sacred books of Scripture; some things by the glorious works of Nature; with some things she inspireth them from above by spiritual influence; in some things she leadeth and traineth them only by worldly experience and practice. We may not so in any one special kind admire her, that we disgrace her in any other; but let all her ways be according unto their place and degree adored...... That authority of men should prevail with men against or above reason, is no part of our belief. Companies of learned men, be they never so great and reverend, are to yield unto reason; the weight whereof is no whit prejudiced by the simplicity of the person that doth allege it, but being found to be sound and good, the bare authority of men to the contrary must of necessity give place....... "Admit this-what would follow? God, in delivering Scripture to his Church, should have abrogated the law of nature, which is an infallible knowledge imprinted in the minds of all the children of men-Admit this, and what shall the Scripture be but a snare and a torment to weak consciences, filling them with infinite perplexities, scrupulosities, doubts insoluble, and extreme despairs? Not that the Scripture itself doth cause any such thing....... Whatsoever is spoken of God, or things appertaining to God, otherwise than as the truth is, though it seem an honour, it is an injury. And as incredible praises given unto men do often abate and impair the credit of their deserved commendation, so we must likewise take great heed, lest, in attributing to Scripture more than it can have, the incredibility of that do cause even those things which indeed it hath most abundantly to be less reverently esteemed. I therefore leave it to themselves to consider whether they have in this point, or not, overshot themselves."-HOOKER, Eccl. Polity, Books I. & II. (extracted in fragments at intervals, and some redundancies, not affecting the sense, omitted). "The outcry with which ST JEROME had once been assailed was now renewed against ERASMUS. The annotations also by which he justified what were regarded as his innovations, were fresh causes of displeasure to many among the monkish theologians of the day. It was in vain for him to say that it was not his place, as an editor, to add to the Greek text which was before him; he was treated, as other critics have since been, as though it had been his duty to have invented evidence when he did not find it. He was attacked by Edward Lee, and also by Stunica. The ignorance and presumption of the former are such as might seem almost incredible. If Erasmus's MSS. did not contain what Lee said ought to have been there, he should have condemned and rejected them as worthless! It was in vain for Erasmus to answer that the omission' of 1st St John, v. 7, was a case not of omission, but simply of non-addition....... The revision of the Latin version of Erasmus raised up against him yet more enemies. In his edition, 1519, he followed the phraseology of the early Latin Fathers, substituting 'sermo' for 'verbum.' This was deemed almost, if not quite, a heresy; and he had to defend himself, in consequence, against many attacks.......A bishop, whose name Erasmus suppresses, was preaching at 'Paul's Cross,' when he went out of his way to attack the new translation. It was a shameful thing for those who had been so long doctors of divinity, to have to go to school again—for such to receive instruction from any mere Greekling. At length his zeal' waxed so warm (he said), that he called on the Lord Mayor of London, who was present, and on the citizens, for aid, that they would shew themselves men, and not suffer such new translations, which subvert the authority of Holy Scripture, to obtain further currency....... ...... "This critic (Bengel), like his predecessors, had to pass through misrepresentation on account of his work......The Greek Testament, with the text revised in some measure, and with further corrections in the margin, was considered dangerous.' One of his opposers, Kohlreif, publicly challenged him to a most uncritical measure; namely, to hush the enemies of criticism, by admitting that even the various lections were given by inspiration, in order to meet the necessities of various readers!...... ...... 66 Bengel felt that the attacks to which he was exposed were not made so much against himself personally, as against the genuine text of the New Testament; he thus bore the violent language with which he was assailed, with much equanimity, while he replied firmly and temperately to those who attacked him....... ...... "Lachmann's object was to give the Greek Testament in that form in which the most ancient documents have transmitted it....... His plan was in fact this—such evidence ought to lead to such results. Reviewers mis-stated his plan and purpose, and described his edition in such a manner as to shew that they did not comprehend what he had intended, or what he had performed....... "The great diligence which Mill displayed...exposed him to the attacks of many writers.......'Not only the clergy, but even ...... 2 1 If instead of zeal, or by the side of it, we have the desire of thriving in a fraudulent livelihood upon clamour, there is no limit to the cloud of misrepresentation which may be raised. But neither such things, nor thrusting into the very chamber of Death falsehoods brutal enough to wound, and artful enough to escape legal responsibility, can take away the duty, or the satisfaction, of buying the Truth, and selling it not. Such things, however, do show what chance their authors conceive themselves to have in the field of argument, as well as "what spirit they are of." 2 Thus many speak as if Gesenius and Rosenmüller altered the Hebrew text more than Lowth and Kennicott; whereas just the reverse is the fact. professors in the universities, who had no knowledge of criticism, considered his vast collection of various readings as a work of evil tendency, and inimical to the Christian religion.'......The principal opponent was Whitby.......It is scarcely possible to conceive that he could have attempted to defend the common text, had he really been conscious how it originated. And yet some will always be found to listen and applaud, when writers like Whitby charge honest and reverential criticism with rendering the word of God uncertain,' and with being hostile to Christianity....... Whitby's accusation is a manifest proof how little he was capable of apprehending the subject on which he was writing....... "The generation of Edward Lee and Daniel Whitby is yet flourishing among us. Many still sympathize with those feelings which aroused against Erasmus, on account of his meddling with sacred criticism, the indignation of a certain bishop, who wished the secular arm to hinder the boldness of biblical scholars. It was then deemed to be unbearable that theologians should have to learn from grammarians what the Word of God actually contains; now, however, both theologians and grammarians of certain classes are united in contemning and condemning those critical studies which they have never taken the pains rightly to understand for themselves. And thus it is that those who labour in the collation of MSS., or in seeking to render the results of such collation available for others, are misrepresented, not on the ground of what they have done, but because of what some choose to say that they have done or attempted. And such sweeping condemnations find their admirers amongst those who wish to 'take' what may be called a popular theological 'stand.' These things are not very encouraging to those who, with solemn and heartfelt reverence for God's Holy Word, desire to serve Him, and to serve his people, by using intelligent criticism in connexion with the text of the New Testament. Assailants often say much of the 'temerity' of critics, and they speak of 'sweeping' alterations on slight or insufficient grounds. This involves the question not simply of principles, but also of facts. It may sound not quite courteous to say of such opposers, Don't believe them too readily; but still those |