Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

The writer next attempts to weaken the force of the external testimony in favour of the smaller epistles of Ignatius, by representing it as a matter of great doubt whether the quotations by Eusebius were taken from the smaller or the larger. "Whoever," says he, 66 comipares the seven larger Greek epistles which bear the name of Ignatius, with the account which Eusebius has given of the epistles of that apostolick father, will find such an argument” (a typographical errour, I presume, for agreement)" as will establish a strong probability that they are the same. Yet this argument is nearly the same in favour of the smaller which are chiefly preferred." I am not sure that I understand the force of the objection; but if the writer means to say that the quotations by Eusebius are from parts of the epistles, in which there is little or no variation between the larger and smaller editions, his assertions are true only in part. Three quotations from the epis. tles of Ignatius occur in Eusebius; two from the epistle to the Romans, and one from the epistle to the Smyrnæans. The first quotation from the epistle to the Romans is very short. It contains only these words, Συτός εἶμι θεοῦ, καὶ δι' οδόντων θηρίων αλήθομαι, ένα καθα ρὸς ἄρτος εὑρεθῶ. "I am the wheat of God, and I shall be ground by the teeth of wild beasts, that I become may pure bread.' In this passage, there is no difference, which ought to be mentioned, between the larger and smaller epistle, excepting that in the former the reading is ἄρτος θεοῦ εὑρεθῶ; and, as the word Θεοῦ is omitted in Eusebius, the probability is so far in favour of the smaller epistle as the source of his quotation. The second quotation from the epistle to the Romans is much the longest extract given by Eusebius; and here the larger and smaller epistle agree with the exception of several various readings such as often occur between manuscript copies of the same author. The following collation will show at once what these varieties are :

Ignat. ad Rom. S. 5. Coterius, Ed. Clerici.

Smaller, or Genuine.

[ocr errors]
[blocks in formation]

κ εὔχομαι έτοιμα μοι ευ- ἂν εὔχομαι σύντομα (MS.

δεδεμένος

γίνονται

ἡτοιμασμένων

ξεθῆναι

ἑκόντα μὴ θελήσῃ

[blocks in formation]

μηδέν με ζηλώσαι.

ανατομαὶ διαιρέσεις

συγκοπαι μελων
αλισμοί

και κόλασις τοῦ διαβόλου
ἐπ' ἐμὲ ἔρχεσθω

& κ εὔχομαι σύντομα μοι
εὐρεθῆναι

ακοντα μὴ θέλῃ
μηδέν μη ζηλώσας
Omitted.

συγκοπαι μελων
αλισμοί

κολάσεις τοῦ διαβόλου

εἰς ἐμὲ ἐρχέσθωσαν.

Most of the various readings may be accounted for, from the negligence or ignorance of transcribers, and the similar pronunciation of different letters, syllables, or words. Four of them are peculiar to the text of Eusebius. With regard to the remainder, his text sometimes

coincides with the one and sometimes with the other. But it is very observable that in all which affect the sense, the reading of the smaller epistle is decidedly preferable, and for the most part corresponds with the quotations in Eusebius. If, therefore, in the solution of the question respecting the two texts, any advantage is to be gained from the quotation by Eusebius, it will be found to preponderate on the side of the smaller.

I am willing, however, to consider the variations as too trifling, and the readings of Eusebius as too uncertain, to have any weight in the inquiry. Consequently these two passages can have no bearing on the question, whether Eusebius quoted from the smaller, which I consider the genuine, or from the interpolated text. Not so with regard to the third. Here the quotation is decidedly from the smaller epis. tle. Of this I shall hope to convince the reader by a collation of the several texts.

Smaller, or Genuine. Ἐγὼ γὰς

Ignat. ad Smyrnaos. S. 3.

Larger, or Interpolated,

Εγω δὲ [οὐκ ἐν τῷ γεννᾶσθαι Ἐγὼ δὲ
* ταυροῦσθαι γινώσκω αὐτὸν ἐν

σώματι γεγονέναι μονον αλλα]

Eusebius.

καὶ μετὰ τὴν ξαναςασιν ἐν καὶ μετὰ τὴν ανάσασιν ἐν σας ή μετα την ανάςασιν ἐν σαρκὶ αὐτὸν οἶδα κ πισεύω κι αὐτὸν οἶδα κ πιςεύω ὄντα, καὶ σαρκὶ αὐτὸν οἶδα κ πισεύω ὄντα· κ ὅτε πρὸς τοὺς ὅτε πρὸς τοὺς περὶ Πέτρον ἦλθεν, οντα. ε ἔτε πρὸς τοὺς περὶ περὶ Πέτρον ήλθεν, ἔφη ἔφη αὐτοῖς· λαβετε ψηλαφήσατε Πέτρον λελυθεν, ἔφη αυτ αὐτοῖς· λάβετε, ψηλαφή με, καὶ ἴδετε ὅτι οὐκ εἰμὶ δαιμό-τοῖς λάβετε, ψηλαφήσατε σατέ με κ ἴδετε ὅτι οὐκ νιον ασώματον. [πνεῦμα γας με κ ἴδετε ὅτι οὐκ εἰμὶ ειμὶ δαιμόνιον ασώμα-σάρκα και οσέκ οὐκ ἔχει, καθὼς δαιμόνιον ασώματον·

τον

ἐμὲ θεωρεῖτε, ἔχοντα. ἢ τῷ
Θωμα λέγει· φέρε τὸν δακτυλόν
σου άδε εἰς τον τύπον τῶν ὅλων,
καὶ φέρε τὴν χεῖρά σου, καὶ βάλε
εἰς τὴν πλευράν μου]

καὶ εὐθὺς αὐτοῦ ἥψαντο, καὶ εὐθὺς
καὶ ἐπίςευσαν.
επίσευσαν

In English thus:
Eusebius and the Smaller or Genuine
text.
For I

εὐθὺς αὐτοῦ ἥψαντος επίςευσαν.

The Larger or Interpolated text.

For I know him to have come in the body not only by his birth and crualso know that after his cifixion, but] also know that after his resurrection he was incarnate, resurrection he was incarnate, and I and I believe in him as being believe in him as being so stiH. And so still. And when he came to when he came to Peter and his comPeter and his companions he panions he said to them, Take and said to them, Take and handle handle me, and see that I am not an me, and see that I am not an incorporeal spirit [for a spirit hath incorporeal spirit.

not flesh and bones as ye see me have. And to Thomas he saith, Reach hither thy finger to the print of the nails, and reach hither thy hand and thrust it inAnd immediately they to my side.] And immediately they touched him and believed.

believed.

The evidence is palpable that Eusebius quoted from the smaller text. What, then, shall we say of this writer, who affirms so confidently that the argument from Eusebius is as much in favour of the one text as of the other? The assertion is ridiculous; because where the larger and the smaller epistles coincide, it is the same text; and where they differ, the testimony of Eusebius is decidedly in favour of the smaller. The collation of the two texts in the extract from the epistle to the Smyrnæans will give the reader a fair specimen of the manner in which the genuine epistles have been interpolated, and will, I trust, go far to convince him that the internal evidence is in favour of the smaller. It will be seen that the genuine text is altered by the insertion of quotations at variance with the age of Ignatius and the circumstances under which he wrote. "I have carefully compared the two editions," says Lardner, "and am well satisfied, upon that comparison, that the larger are an interpolation of the smaller, and not the smaller an epitome or abridgment of the larger. I desire no better evidence in a thing of this nature." "Beside the many other arguments," says the same candid writer, speaking of the interpolated epistles, "against their genuineness, this may be one, that there are more quotations out of the Old and New Testament, than could be well expected. The larger epistles were plainly composed by a man at leisure. Ignatius at his writing was very much straitened for time, being at once a traveller, and a prisoner under a strong guard; and at the places where he rested, much engaged by the kind and respectful visits of the Christians there, and from the neighbouring cities, and in giving them exhortations by word of mouth." Lardner was a dissenter, and had no more love for Episcopacy than for the divinity of his Lord and Saviour; both of which doctrines he denied, and both of which are clearly supported by Ignatius. Yet he has set an example of fairness in discussing the questions relative to these epistles, which it would be well for those to imitate who have not half his learning.

The argument against the epistles of Ignatius, from the supposed uncertainty of the text, amounts on the whole to this: some copies of the epistles which have come down to us have been interpolated; therefore all must be rejected. This is about as unreasonable as it would be to reject the whole of a paper currency because some of the notes had been altered. When the paper issued from a bank has suffered by fraud, it may make us examine every bill we receive with greater caution and scrutiny. But shall we reject every ten dollar note, because the face of some have been altered into hundreds and thousands? And if, on examination we should find two alike in every particular, save that one purported to be ten and the other a thousand, would not the internal evidence be strongest in favour of the ten? Just so is it with regard to the epistles of Ignatius. The smaller are consistent with all the circumstances under which Ignatius is said to have written. They coincide with the quotations made by subsequent writers from his epistles. They accord better with that period of Christianity in which he wrote. And even if all other circumstances had been

equal, the probability would have been in favour of that text which is the simplest, and betrays the least marks of studious amplification. I am aware that some of these positions have been controverted by the writer on whose labours I am commenting; and, as I have objected to his bare assertions, I do not expect your readers implicitly to receive mine. But as I have already exceeded the length proper for your pages, I must solicit your indulgence to allow the continuation of these remarks in a future number.

PHILO-IGNATIUS.

FROM THE CHURCHMAN'S MAGAZINE.

LOOKING into a late number of that highly respectable work, the Gospel Advocate, I was a little surprised to find a writer, who signs himself Senescens, disapproving of loud responses in the performance of Divine worship. His words are these:-"What I have always considered decidedly the best manner of reciting the hymns and psalms, and other versicles directed to be repeated by the people, next to that of chanting them, is for the clerk to pronounce them audibly and distinctly, and for every person in the congregation, old young, male and female, learned and unlearned, to accompany him, in a voice just above the breath, forming what I would call (if I might be allowed so mean an expression upon so grave a topick) a`universal hum, or susurrum.”

Now, I have the misfortune to differ, toto cœlo, from the writer, as to the best manner of performing the service. Instead of leaving it to "the worthy parish clerk" to bear the chief burden of the responses, I could wish every man, woman, and child in the congregation, to respond also, in a clear, distinct, and audible voice. In my view, this is the only way in which full effect can be given to our beautiful service; and, so far from thinking it an innovation, I should be much more disposed to give that name to the gentle, sleep-inducing susurrum, recommended by the writer alluded to.

Nothing, I conceive, would be more improper than to perform some parts of the liturgy in this manner. Many of the psalms of David, rehearsed every Sunday, are songs of triumphant rejoicing; and whether "said or sung." demand a corresponding elevation of tone and spirit during the recital. Take, for instance, the animated bymn, We praise Thee, O God, or the Jubilate Deo, in the order for daily morning prayer, or the Cantate Domino, in that for the evening. How much at variance would be the tone and sentiment, if uttered in a voice "just above the breath!" How languid would our devotions appear!

I cannot but think this mode erroneous, too, on another account: it deprives the publick worship of God of all animation and spirit. You perceive nothing of that warm and thrilling glow of feeling, which is communicated by loud and concurrent voices, lifted up in the language of adoration. You lose the advantage of sympathy.

No one,

I presume, ever worshipped for the first time in a church, where the responses arose clear and distinct from every part of the house, without being struck with the propriety of the custom, and perceiving it to have a sensible effect on his own devotions. That such was the early mode of performing the service, is clear, from the testimony of the Fathers; by one of whom we are told, that the AMEN was pronounced with such emphasis, that it rolled through the house like thunder.

Had the writer alluded to been a clergyman, he would have recollected how much his own zeal and animation in performing the service have been inspired, by hearing the responses made in an elevated voice. When the contrary is the case, he is apt to suspect that his people are not in earnest; and the thought deprives him of half of his ardour. Indeed, he often finds it irksome to conduct the worship of the sanctuary in an edifying manner, when he is so badly supported by the voices of the congregation.

To conclude, I cannot help thinking it a part of every clergyman's duty to instruct his people to make the responses audibly and distinctly; and not to remit bis exertions till he has thoroughly succeeded. A parish clerk may be of great use to him in this part of his labours; but, the object once accomplished, he will stand in less need of his assistance, when all have learned to " worship, and fall down, and kneel before the Lord their Maker."

CLERICUS.

ΤΟ THE EDITOR OF THE GOSPEL ADVOCATE.

THE following incident, mentioned by Mr. Nelson, in his life of Bishop Bull, was thought worthy of a relation by the pious and learned biographer, because, in his own words, "it showeth how valuable the liturgy is in itself, and what unreasonable prejudices are sometimes taken up against it."

He was sent for, while minister of St. George's, to baptize the child of a dissenter in his parish; upon which occasion he made use of the office of baptism, as prescribed by the Church of England, which he had got entirely by heart; and he went through it with so much readiness and freedom, and yet with so much gravity and del votion, and gave that life and spirit to all that he delivered, that the whole audience was extremely affected with his performance; and notwithstanding that he used the sign of the cross, yet, they were so ignorant of the offices of the Church, that they did not thereby discover that it was the common prayer. But after that he had concluded that holy action, the father of the child returned him a great many thanks, intimating, at the same time, with how much greater edification they prayed who entirely depended upon the Spirit of God for his assistance in their extemporaneous effusions, than those did who tied themselves up to premeditated forms; and that if he had not made the sign of the cross, that badge of popery, as he called it, no

« AnteriorContinuar »