« PreviousContinue »
him encompassed with a rainbow; servation. See Exodus ii, 3. "an arke a conceit very probably arising from of bulrushes." (na'n Thibet.) In the rainbow's first appearing to Noah, this place it is written with a Jod, and the Chinese being willing to and has all the letters that compose give some account of his origin, the word used to represent the coun: 3dly. Fohi is said * to have carefully try of Thibet, as the Tau in Hebrew bred seven sorts of creatures, which is both T and Th. There is also he used to sacrifice to the supreme another good and indisputable rea. spirit of heaven and earth; and son for making Thibet the resting Moses tells us + that Noah took into place, or where the ark first touched the ark every clean beast by sevens, land; because its mountains are the and of fowls of the air by sevens- highest on the earth, and from This and after the flood Noah built an bet we may say, what we cannot altar, and took of every clean beast, truly assert from Phrygia or Armeand every clean fowl, and offered nia, that the families of the ark burnt-offerings. 4tbly.. The Chinese journeyed from the east, to the plain derive the name of Fohi from his of Shinar.-Biblical Fragments, p. 1 oblation I, and Moses gives Noah 117.. his name upon account of the grant The Ashantees, and also the in.. of the creatures for the use of men, habitants of Bornoo and its neighwhich he obtained by his offering. bourhood, have a tradition that the Shuckford's Connections, vol. i. p. waters of the deluge burst forth 29. 102.
from, and afterwards retired to the The name of Thibet affords a cu- Volcanic lake of Candee; and Bruus rious evidence in favour of the ark asserts, on the agthority of the Dahaving rested there. In Gen. vi. nish residents, that the Pagan na41. it is said, “ make thee an ark” tion of Kassentai, declared that the nan. Thibet is a word only applied world bad been destroyed by rain, to Noah's ark, and to that which and that the wicked would be again Moses' mother prepared for his pre. swept off by a similar calamity.
Essay on Geography of N. W. Af* Le Compte Mem. of China, p. 313.
rica -Pearce's Essay, Sult's Tra. + Gen vij. 8.
vels, p. 34. Couplet's Confucius Proæm, p. 38.76.
THE HEAVENLY WITNESSES,
To the Editor of the Remembrancer. the disputed text, particularly, as it
is borne by the only one of those Sir,
early guardians of the integrity of The question being fairly stated be Scripture, which did not apostatise tween ibe Greek and Latin Churches, from the doctrine of the contested. the controversy on the Heavenly passage. . Witnesses, which it is now surely 1. The internal evidence, which expedient to draw to a close, may seems not to be disputed by any combe brought to a speedy issue. Two petent judge, and is not to be dis.' considerations, when brought to proved by any mode of reasoning, bear upon the question, seem to confirms the testimony of the Latin enforce the necessity of acquiescing Church, as requiring the insertion of in the positive testimony borne to the Heavenly Witnesses. Without
considering the scopeof the Apostle's fectually disposes of the evidence of reasoning, or the connection of his the Greek Church, in annihilating sense, the structure of his language the negative testimony, which it requires them to be inserted, as ne bears on the subject of the disputed cessary to obviate a barbarously so- passage. It is, in fact, not to be licestic construction. On discarding controverted, and remains uodis. them, masculine adjectives (Ipeñs oi puted, that this peculiar discipline paplupõles) are forced into concord existed in the ancient Church, all ance with neuter substantives, (tò of whose members were solemnly
VÕLG rey rò üdwe xj Tò aina :) on re. bound by it to suppress those mysplacing them, this objection va- teries, in silence, of which the connishes, those adjectives finding suit- tested verse enbraces the highest. able substantives in the Heavenly As the elaborate investigations of Witnesses, (o matig vej ở nóyos, se to its impugners end in simply proving mveāna aysov.) Without availing our- the silence of the Eastern Church selves of the allowable licence of respecting that test, they have efaccommodating the context of the fected little more than a confirma. Greek to the Latin, by a strictly tion of the preceding solution of grammatical translation, for which this difficulty in her testimony. It high authority might be pleaded ; is curious to find Mr. Professor we have, I believe, the authority of Porson confirming the argument Matthäi, and of Porson himself, thus deducible from the Discipling (p. 61), most certainly that of Eu. Arcani, by a confession as voluntary genius, for asserting, that the intro- and decisive as that drawn from duction of the Heavenly Witnesses Bishop and Professor Marsh op tbe removes every grammatical objec- internal evidence of the contested tion to the context of the Apostle. passage. While that accurate critic That the suppression of them creates professes to collect everything an insuperable objection to it, may which has been opposed to the disbe referred to the decision of a puted text, he leaves the former judge whose sentence none will argument, (as he likewise does the deny to be impartial, and few dis succeeding) standing without an pute to be competent. “But what," effort to weaken its force. Having observes Bishop Marsh*, in reference acknowledged (p. 285,) that if the to the epistle before us, “ shall we principle is acknowledged, the consay to readings, which when con- clusion follows of course, which is nected with the context make false deduced from it, he thus records his grammar? What shall we say to a incapacity to shake it: “I have verb singular, &c.....to a masculine declined ihe consideration of the adjective referring to a neuter sub- Disciplina Arcari, nor shall I restantive } Now the question to be sume it. It is a dangerous hypoasked is, is it possible, that Velez thesis," &c. (p. 391.) But the found this, and the other readings danger imputed to this argument of the same stamp, in a Greek ma- obviously diminishes vothing of its nuscript ?” “ Even a man," he truth ; and is indeed no more than elsewhere reasons, “ who learnt a bugbear childishly intended to Greek by mere usage and conversa- deter ús from using a weapon the tion, without being taught its first weight of which has been sensibly principles, could not possibly have felt. The polemic who has no better written” as St. John is proved to defence to make against this objechave written, by those who reject tion to the silence of the Eastern the disputed text from his epistle. Church,conspires with the disputant, 2. The Disciplina Arcani, as ef. who confirms that to the solecism in
her testimony, which convicts it of * Lett. to Travis, Append. ii. f. 276. an intentional omission. The one sqq. comp. Pref. p. i. n. 1.
indeed magnanimously cedes the ground from which the other pru. ples, as possessed of a verbal force, dently retreats, but both leave the require the case of their verbs, and field in the possession of the advo. receplugów, by a luckless chance, and cates of the Heavenly Witnesses. the usage of Greek, requires the
These arguments, it must be dative, while picpluçõiles is now pregranted, have little effect if two fixed to the accusative. The ellipvery pretty expedients, contrived by tical construction with xatá belongs a new assailant, who figures in this to adjectives, because, as wanting a Journal, be entitled to any atten. verbal force, they can only govern tion. By this polemic we are by the intervention of a preposition; gravely assured, 1st, that the neuter but in the proposed construction, substantives are not taken in con- - we have the governed case rather cordance with the masculine adjec- curiously connected with a particitives, but dependent upon them, by ple, which takes the dative when an ellipsis of xalà; and that by this the preposition is understood, and happy device, the solecism of the requires the genitive in the sense context is effectually avoided. Again, of bearing witness against, where we are instructed (2) how to dispose xarà is inserted. By such creditof the positive testimony of the able objections (at which he must Latin Church to the disputed verse, be a hardened school-boy who by the intervention of Vigilius Tap would not be overwhelmed with sensis. It is at length fortunately shame) we are, I trust, exonerated discovered that this father disposed from the humiliating task of pursuthat Church to receive the verse as ing these observations from the authentic text, “ by inserting it structure of the text, to its sense as the testimony of St. John, in and connection. These and all such several tracts," which he imposed objections, when they are proposed, upon them “under the names of the author of this exposition is, in Athanasius, Augustinus, and Ida- his own estimation at least, fully cius."
competent to dissipate, by a few . 1. To enable us to appreciate the whisks of his “triple lash” over the former happy contrivance for solv- heads of his hardy opponents. ing the grammatical difficulties in Until he has so far contributed to the Apostle's context, it is much their amusement as to inake the to be regretted its author has attempt, the construction which he not favoured the world with a new proposes, may, without further cesystem of Greck Accidence; as remony, be dismissed, to take its the first principles of the language, proper place among the other sugare unfortunately violated by his gestions of its proposer. That expedient for removing the diffi- it is not to be reconciled with sense culties of the construction. If the or grammar, may be assumed, withreceived system of grammar be not out further proof, on the simple altogether erroneous, as it is now grounds of its having been overlookhardly safe to doubt, adjectives, ed, for so many centuries, by every when taken in the masculine with- reader, translator, and expositor of out substantives, require “ men” to St. John, however competent to deagree with them, to which sense (if cide on the Evangelist's reasoning this word may be here used without and language. an offensive negative particle) we 2. The author's rival expedient are rather awkwardly led by “the for disposing of the external testi. witness of men,” which immediately mony to the disputed text, in tracing follows; "the witness of God” re- it to “ the tracts put forth by Vi. ferring to “ the Spirit which wit. gilius," has been already set forth nesseth” preceding. The same for the reader's edification; and a priucipie being assumed : partici- just estimate given, in a former review, of its claims to the respect of by what legerdemain is the plea to every dabbler in the present con- be withdrawn from this part of the troversy, however informed in its sentence in which the charge is merits. In the defence which he conveyed; the conclusion of which makes to the charge of incompe. takes it to itself, by every rule of tency, by which he has been assailed, interpretation by which it is approhe again submits himself to the or- priated by its commencement ? deal; and the entertainment which The case of the African Church he furnishes, in once more appearing being thus prudently abandoned, a on the stage, derives not a little of stand is made upon “ the tracts put its zest from the new method which forth under the names of Athanahe reveals of "crushing," as shall be sius;" for Augustine and Idacius soon publicly proved, “a smatterer very quietly withdraw from the disin theological science, who," to bor- pute, having been doubtless thrust row an expression from his own into it by “a most wilful misrepre. courtly phrase, “ impudently im. sentation" of the printer. Of this poses on the world.”
ground the respondent makes choice, From the main point in dispute, « for the purpose of making manithe testimony delivered by the Afri- fest on whose side the ignorance can Church in its confession of lies;” and somewhat pleasantly, lays faith, he now deems it prudent to the foundation of his proof, in an retire without further opposition.' avowal, “that the Athanasii Opera He indeed affects to cover his re- which he has is a Latin version treat by discharging a flying shaft only, printed at Paris in 1603." The at his opponent, who is charged advantages, derived by the author with “a most wilful misrepresenta- of this confession, in transferring tion of his meaning.” In truth, the charge of " jgnorance" to the what honest mind nust not feel its side of his opponent, cannot be indignation rise, that so foul a con- more appositely expressed than in struction should be put upon his the words of an umpire, to whom words, while it is obvious, that “in he appeals in the present dispute. stating Vigilius drew up that con: “ You ought to be told, Sir," defession in the name of the African clares Mr. Porson, on a like occa. bishops, he intended nothing more sion of appealing from an exploded than that he composed it by the di- edition, to one by the Benedictines, rection and with the concurrence of " that wben correct editions are those prelates.” To beat down this published, on the faith of MSS., no unabashed confidence to the ground, critic is allowed to argue from the and exbibit in its natural colours, old and corrupt readings," (p. 293.) the respect for equity and truth much less from the old and spurious which advances this defence of his additions. error, in a charge of wilful misre. After this peroration to bis depresentation against his opponent, fence, the author enters into his it is only necessary to propound one proof of the charge against Vigilius, or two questions to be solved at his wbich consists in returning on our ease. Are we to include in this in- hands, as his composition, the genuous apology the latter part of Books ad Theophilum, which I forthe charge urged against Vigilius; merly mentioned, as ascribed by the and to conclude, that “thie several Benedictines to Idacius, and clearly tracts which he put forth under the proved by them not to have been names of Athanasius, Augustinus, composed by Vigilius. It is far and Idacius,” were also “ composed from my intention to enter on the by the direction and with the con- nugatory task, of seriously refuting sent of those prelates ?" Or if this the thoughts and suppositions which absurdity be too gross to get dowu, the resvondent opposes to the facts
and reasons of the editors of Atha- dence of assertion once more under nasius. But it may not be deemed foot, it is only necessary to produce uvedifying, to trace him through the following extract from the the windings and doublings which writer, who has supplied the subhe is driven to take, in making out stance as well of his theory as of its the semblance of a case against that present defence. “Jam de Vigi. African Prelate. At one turn, we lio," says Dr. Griesbach,“ obser. are given to understand, that the vandum est, .... quod libellos suos, books, addressed to Theophilus, are sub nominibus fictis Athanasii, Au. aseribed by his Latin editor to Atha. gustini, et Idacii, maluit in lucem nasius ; but by a quick retrograde emittere, quam suum nomen promovement are soon ioformed, that fiteri." This extract, I, on the conou the judgment of Bengel, Gries- trary assert, will be amply sufficibach and Porson, they should be ent to shew “ on what grounds" ascribed to Vigilius. While, by the original charge was advauced every rule of fair reasoning, either against Vigilius. My proof of the of these contradictory propositions charge, which is thus retorted on must destroy its opposite; they are the respondent, is founded not ingeniously clubbed into one autho- merely on the fact, that all the inrity, and from one half of it the formation with which it is accompaproof left to be extracted, that nied is adopted without the cerethese books were put forth under mony of an acknowledgment, from the name of Athanasius, and froin the same writer: nor yet on the the other that they were put forth circumstance that an exact coinci. by Vigilius. After so much labour dence, even to the spelling of Idato blink the point in dispute, can cius's name exists, between this ex. it be now deemed within the bounds tract from Griesbach and the charge of credibility, that Mr. Porson, to against Vigilius; but mainly on the whose judgment a reference is thus consideration, that Augustine and confidently made, after recapitulat. Idacius's names, however associated ing the arguments of the Benedic. in the extract, equally disappear tines respecting the author of these from the defence, and that no strainbooks, joins issue in their sentence, ing or distorting will ever include that they cannot be ascribed to them in any defence which is built . Vigilius? “ In short,” he observes, on the respondent's Gothic Atha. “ Vigilius's claims to either of these pasius. . publications," the books ad Theo. Under a sense of the result philum, or contra Varimadum, “ are to which the discussion was thus only supported by some weak and only calculated to lead, a man gratuitous conjectures of Chifflet," of ordinary nerves would have P. 339.
sougbt a way to escape from a disWhere my opponent now lies, pute, which he had unluckily rewith his “triple lash,' and “ tracts vived, without forecasting the conput fortb by Vigilius,” it is neede sequences. But the respondent, less to point out. But while jus- seeng no' appearance could be tice remains to be done to his vera- saved, after another brandish of his city, he must not be suffered to rise “triple lash,” coolly wipes his front, and retire with the reputation which and discharging a second yolley of he has earned for information. courtly phrases against "smatterers “ This,” he observes, in closing his who impudently impose upon the defence, “ will be sufficient to prove world,” faces his opponent with a on what grounds I have charged charge, to which his conscience Vigilius with having composed cer- must have given a proper direction. tain tracts under the name of Atha- “ But as to the Disputatio Atha. nasius." To beat down this confi. nasii cum Ario," he observes, in