Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

save that the Syriac version has a transposition. But it also must be observed, that the passage as (in our opinion) written by Mark, has exercised some influence in corrupting the text of Matthew. (See my ed. at Matt. ix. 17.) But to proceed: The testimony of D and of four out of the five codices of the Itala is conclusive in favour of the omission of the words άλλà olvov νέον εἰς ἀσκοὺς καινοὺς βλητέον, which have all been taken, word for word, out of Luke as a marginal note; while B and 102, by the mere omission of Banrov, seem to corroborate their testimony. For it thus plainly appears, that the addition in question was first written on the margin of Mark as a note, from which Banov was allowed to drop,—if indeed the note was not incomplete from the first. The interpolation of words taken from both the parallel places is finally proved by the testimony of two minuscular codices and six old Latin codices, which have gone so far as even to add to the text of Mark the additional words καὶ ἀμφότεροι συντηροῦνται. And a weighty consideration in favour of the form of the passage which has been adopted, is to be found in the circumstance that the present assumed abridgment of the parallel texts corresponds with the whole character of Mark's mode of writing, as is known from many places whose purity is beyond all critical suspicion.

In this example we have also proceeded upon another principle of textual criticism, viz., that in parallel places generally, that form of the text is to be preferred which presents a difference rather than a complete agreement,-it being always assumed that it has the necessary weight of testimony in its favour. In this case it is not at all indispensable that the interpolated readings should by their verbal agreement indicate their sources; as is shown by Matt. xxvii. 35, compared with John xix. 24, and by Matt. xxvii. 49, compared with John xix. 34. To this rule there are but few exceptions, such as, e. g., are furnished by Mark viii. 2, and Matt. xv. 32, in both of which places the proper reading is ἡμέραι τρεῖς: for the readings ἡμέρας τρεῖς and ἡμέραις τρισίν are introduced in the respective places evidently with a view to grammatical correction. But Matt. i. 25 is no exception to this rule. There the weighty testimonies of the codices B L 1. 33, of the Sahidic and Memphitic versions, of several of the oldest codices of the Itala, and of several Latin fathers, concur in making the reading so erexev vióv, instead of that which in most authorities has been interpolated (from Luke ii. 7), eŵç oð étexev tài vidv autñe Tòv πpwróroxov. If, in opposition to this, it be said that the last words were omitted out of anxious reverence for the Virgin Mary, the objector must have forgotten that the same words have not been removed out of Luke by a single

authority, although the omission in him would have been of greater service to the honour of the Virgin, even if there had been no alteration in Matthew at all,-for there the preceding words οὐκ ἐγίνωσκεν αὐτὴν εὥς preserve their full force, though the words in question be retained.

The principle upon which citations from the Old Testament are dealt with is similar to that of the treatment of parallel places,-e. g., in Matt. xv. 8, the shorter reading must, upon the authority of five manuscripts and of several very important fathers and versions, be preferred to the fuller reading, which agrees with Isaiah.

It is a rule of first-rate importance, to hold by that reading which is of such a nature that all, or at least the greater part of the existing variations can be explained by it. Under this rule come certain tendencies, of subordinate importance no doubt, but which may in part give rise to ambiguity or error. Matt. xxiv. 28 appears to me to be a striking illustration. Here we find in Codex L (that which usually accompanies B), in three of the oldest codices of the Itala, and (twice) in Origen, the words, ὡς γὰρ ἦσαν ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις τοῦ κατακλυσμοῦ τρώγοντες καὶ πίνοντες. Now, the eating and drinking referred to, to take the expression in its strict sense, took place, not in the days of the deluge itself, but in the days that preceded it, as is also indicated by the addition 20 ó κατακλυσμός. Hence arose the following various readings: —ἐν ταῖς ἡμέραις ταῖς πρὸ τοῦ· ἐν τ. ἡμ. ἐκείναις πρὸ τοῦ· ἐν τ. ἡμ. ἐκείναις ταῖς πρὸ τοῦ· and ἐν τ. ἡμ. πρὸ τοῦ. Here the rule is also applicable, that generally the shorter reading is to be preferred to the longer. A similar example is found in Mark viii. 26, where μηδε εἰς τὴν κώμην εἰσέλθῃς is the proper reading; and another in Mark i. 16, where αμφιβάλλοντας ἐν τῇ θαλάσση seems to have been the original. Compare my edition at both these places, and the prolegg., p. xviii. In these places it ought to be considered how unlikely it is that Codex B and its related codices should by mere accident have adopted those readings, by whose apparent impropriety the origin of the others is explained.

Another principle, which has already been proceeded upon in Mark ii. 22, is sometimes difficult of application,-viz. that, so far as the limited extent of their writings admits of its being done, we ought to study closely, and to apply to the determination of critical passages, the characteristic peculiarities of each of the sacred writers. Such readings as correspond with these peculiarities are not likely to have been inserted by a foreign hand. The difficulty in applying the rule arises from the fact, that the peculiar style of the author is often a doubtful matter. It concerns the whole mode of proceeding

and of representation, as well as particular expressions. To the latter class, e. g., belong John's practice of writing 'Indous without the article, which is very frequently added by the authorities; Paul's way of writing our Saviour's names, Χριστὸς Ἰησοῦς, for which the more common ̓Ιησοῦς Χριστός is often substituted; and Matthew's partiality to the use of ixtñvos, on which account that word not only ought, in spite of opposing authorities, to be retained in xviii. 7, 27, 28, but apparently also ought to be adopted in xviii. 26. A still more comprehensive law, but one also still more obnoxious to difficulties in its application, is, that all the dialectical peculiarities of the New Testament authors ought to be carefully sought for and retained. Comp. for this, my ed. of 1849, Prolegg. xviii.xxviii.

In like manner, we ought to study the idiosyncrasies of each manuscript, especially of the most important, and to regard as peculiarly suspicious a reading which appears to be one of these. Thus, it appears that Codex B usually has the perfect instead of the aorist, e. g., in Luke xxiv. 18, 2 Cor. xi. 21, Eph. i. 20; and the Cambridge Codex resolves the participle into the tempus finitum, e. g., in Matt. xx. 30, xxv. 25; John xii. 3, xii. 35. Several related codices also may fall into the same peculiarities, although we are more certain of its really being such in the case of one than in that of several. Under this law, also, come the traces of an actually exercised recension, or preparation of the text with a definite plan and purpose, which, from the nature of the case, will manifest itself in several authorities. And the law is, further, applied to the versions; it being, however, kept in view in their case, that that must not be taken for a peculiar reading which originates in the very nature and spirit of the translation.

Finally, it is a law of a more especially palæographical kind, to avoid all readings that have arisen from the carelessness or ignorance of the scribe. No certain judgment can be formed in such cases without a previous study of the old uncial codices, which are written without separation of the words, partly without accents, and with many abbreviations. And notwithstanding all that this study can do, many cases remain doubtful. To these latter belong especially those in which the question is in regard to a ὁμοιοτέλευτον, which often occasions mistakes. Those errors are sometimes difficult to decide upon that arise out of itacismus, or from the interchanges of ε, 1, 1, 0, v, all of which came by degrees to be pronounced as; as also are those that arise from the interchange of a and : e. g., dǹ and dɛî, 2 Cor. xii. 1; σì and σù, Philem. 11, 12. See also above, p. 826.

ART. VI.—The Autobiography of the Rev. William Jay; with Reminiscences of some distinguished Contemporaries, Selections from his Correspondence, &c. Edited by GEORGE Redford, D.D., LL.D., and JOHN ANGELL JAMES. London: Hamilton, Adams, and Co. 1854.

FEW volumes have lately appeared which will be more eagerly sought after by the religious public, and more greedily devoured by the reader, than that now before us. It is one of those fascinating works which lay hold on you with both hands at fonce, and carry you along, in spite of yourself, but with unwearied delight, through the mazes of a busy and joyous life, in all its moods, "from grave to gay, from solemn to severe," never allowing you a moment's rest from beginning to end. Mr Jay of Bath is destined to be as popular after death in these memorials, as he was during life in the pulpit. Of no work can it be said more graphically, that "he being dead yet speaketh." It is Mr Jay, and nobody else, that is speaking in these pages: we see "the old man eloquent" seated in his easy chair, and hear him speaking in his Autobiography, in his Reminiscences, and in his Correspondence. His editors (for they do not aspire to the character of biographers) merely put in a word occasionally, to help his memory or eke out his story. And, after all, we have no regular biography. Mr Jay condescends upon no dates, no details about his parentage, no diary of experiences, no distinct chronicle even of the leading events of his life. treats himself as he treated his texts, not systematically but æsthetically, aiming not so much to give information as to produce effect, and he has succeeded in the one case as much as he did in the other. But this peculiarity of style, which contributes so much to the delectation of the reader, sadly increases the trouble of the reviewer, especially as the editors have done little, as perhaps they could not do much, to supply the want of a more regular narrative. In attempting, therefore, to lay before our readers a succinct account of "the man and his communication," we require almost to construct a narrative of our own, by picking out the disjecta membra, and piecing them together as best we can.

This we propose to do under the following heads:

I. MR JAY'S LIFE. II. HIS REMINISCENCES OF ILLUSTRIOUS CHARACTERS. III. HIS RELIGIOUS SENTIMENTS. IV. HIS CHARACTER AS A PREACHER AND AUTHOR.

I. About seventy years ago, the village of Tisbury, in Wiltshire, which lies in the neighbourhood of the far-famed Font

VOL. III-NO. XI.

31

hill Abbey, then in course of erection by its wealthy proprietor, Mr Beckford, contained a small Methodist chapel, presided over by the pious and excellent Cornelius Winter. One Saturday evening, a boy of fourteen years of age, attracted by the singing, entered the humble meeting-house, dressed in a flannel jacket and white leather apron, just as he had come from his work at Fonthill House, where he wrought as an apprentice mason. He was a comely boy, and his black eyes sparkled with animation and intelligence as he listened to the simple discourse of the good man, while he spoke of "the faithful saying and worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners." A good lady, struck with his appearance, and finding him first at the chapel next morning by seven o'clock, took him by the hand, benignly asking, "Are you hungering for the bread of life?" and afterwards, much to the boy's surprise, she introduced him to the minister. That boy was William Jay; and such was his introduction into public life and an honourable ministry of upwards of half a century.

His father was a stone-mason, occupying a cottage which was his own property; and William, his fourth and only male child, must, if we may gather from his age at the time of his death, have been born in 1769. How little could the proprietor of Fonthill Abbey have thought, had his stone-mason's son crossed his path with his flannel jacket and his white leather apron, that this same stripling would, in course of time, produce a book of which Mr Beckford himself was induced to say, "This man's mind is no petty reservoir supplied him by laborious pumpings; it is a clear transparent spring, flowing so freely as to impress the idea of its being inexhaustible. In many of these pages, the stream of eloquence is so full, so rapid, that we are fairly borne down and laid prostrate at the feet of the preacher."

To this period we may probably ascribe his first religious impressions; but Jay was never fond of fixing dates in the matter of regeneration, and has left the day of his spiritual as well as of his natural birth unrecorded. "Some people," he says, "love to talk of their being born again, and of their being made new creatures, with a kind of physical certainty and exactness; and refer to their conversion, not as the commencement of a work which is to continue increasing through life, but as something which may be viewed as a distinct and unique experience, immediately produced, originated and finished at once; and perfectly determinable as to its time and place and mode of accomplishment; but I hope this is not necessary, for I have no such narrative or register to afford." —(Pp. 21, 22.)

« AnteriorContinuar »