5. Another principle for which the Bible Society is responsible, is the MAINTENANCE, AS NEARLY AS

"Rom. Cath.-After all you have said, how do you know the Canonical Books of Scripture, but by the Authority of the Church? "Ch. Eng.-Not at all by her Authority, but by her Evidence. There is a great difference: I pray you to consider it. There were false Gospels and false Epistles inscribed to several of the Apostles, set up by the Heretics in the first age; and they were detected in that same age, while the Originals of what the Apostles wrote were still in being. But the Heretics could not produce the Originals of theirs; nor did their copies agree with one another, as Eusebius tells us: (Hist. lib. v. cap. 28.) And this was not deciding the matter by authority, but by plain evidence of a fact, as of any other forgery or supposititious writing.

"But you state the matter so, as if there were a Heap of Papers, of many hundred years past-some genuine, some spurious, all confusedly thrown together; and that it were left to the Church to distinguish these by her Authority; and that we were obliged so to receive them, without knowing any more of the matter, and had nothing but her Authority to trust to. But this, Sir, is far from being the case. The Canon of the Scripture was settled at the time, when it could be done by full evidence, and the notoriety of the thing was known to all: and we have received it down from that time, in copies so universally spread through the Christian World, that it is impossible to add or detract from it, without a general detection of the forgery by all Churches. And this has preserved the Canon of the New Testament so entire, that there is no difference about it between you and us, or any other Christian Church.

"It is true, indeed, we differ with you as to the Canon of the Old Testament. But we have the Jews on our side for this, who never received those Books, we call Apocryphal, into their Canon. They were not wrote in their language, at least most of them. And I might bring in the Jew again to reason the case with you, how you came to understand their Canon better than themselves, who were in possession of it many hundred years before Christianity, and were so careful as to number the very letters.

"But I will not prolong this, nor enter into the particular disputes between your Church and ours; my business being now only to consider the foundation principle of the Authority of the Church, upon which all the rest depend. I will only say this further as to these Apocryphal Books, that St. Jerome, in his Prologus Galeatus, printed before all your Vulgar Latin Bibles that I have seen, excludes all these by name out of the Canon, and says the Church did so too. And we may suppose that so learned a Father, who had himself translated the Scriptures, knew what the Church received in his time. And it seems strange to me, that such a flagrant testimony against you should stand in the front of your own Bibles. But if you

would

POSSIBLE, OF A PURE AND ORIGINAL TEXT.

The

effort to give the Word of God to all mankind brings this subject forward as one of great importance.

Three languages, the Hebrew, Greek, and Latin, have acquired, in the eyes of various nations, an almost sacred character, from being the earliest vehicles, now extant, of the Holy Scriptures-the Latin entirely, and the Greek partly, in translations; the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek New Testament, as originals. To these may be added the Syriac.

It is well known by Biblical Philologists, that there are considerable discrepancies between the Hebrew Old Testament and the Greek Version of it by the LXX.; as also between the Original Texts of the Old and New Testaments and the Latin Version of them entitled the Vulgate*.

In the midst of these Varia Lectiones, it has been hitherto judged the wisest practical measure to print for every country the Version most esteemed by it, whether it were according to the Original, the Septuagint, or the Vulgate. The discrepancies, however NUMEROUS, are not IN KIND so dangerous as to shake

would have further satisfaction as to this point, I refer you to Bishop Cosin's elaborate History of the Canon of the Scriptures,' which has not been answered by any of your Church, that I hear of; for it seems to carry demonstration along with it, proceeding wholly upon fact, and giving vouchers in abundance."

(Leslie on Private Judgment, &c. Section XII.) *On the question, whether the Text of the Scriptures has suffered any material corruption, the reader may derive the greatest satisfaction from the perusal of an article by Professor Lee, in his Appendix to the "Persian Controversies;" where the argument is exhibited in the most full and luminous manner. Vide Chapter IĮ. pp. 474-533.

any vital point of Revealed Religion. Viewing, therefore, the importance, on the one side, of giving speedily and universally the knowledge of the Scriptures, partly according to the Originals, and partly according to accepted and competent Versions; and, on the other side, the extremely small hazard of compromising the integrity of Scripture; it might fairly be asked, Would it have been right to pause, and defer the promulgation of the Bible, till mankind should have agreed on a Uniform Text—a thing, practically speaking, neither attainable nor essential? The more rational course has been taken: the Original Scriptures, the Septuagint, and the Vulgate, have all been used by the Bible Society. And, from this very policy, the following great benefit will arise as the multitude of persons interested and skilled in Biblical Criticism will thus certainly increase in Britain, in France, in Germany, in Russia, in Greece, in the Indies, and in the New World, a stronger stimulus will be communicated to their researches after a pure and standard Text; the incorrect points of each received Text will be discerned and acknowledged; and the Bible will thus · attain, in every part of the world, a character, which no other book merits or could possibly acquirethat of having been tried, again and again, in the severest furnace of criticism, and having ever been found to be, in its essential character, pure as the purest gold.

6. With regard, however, to New Versions of the Scriptures, the Bible Society stands in a different situation. In adopting Ancient Translations, which were made or copied under disadvantages beyond

the reach of present controul, we may well bear with those inaccuracies,

quas aut incuria fudit,

Aut humana parùm cavit natura.

But, in an age blest with so much liberty of biblical investigation, and supplied with such ample materials of every description of literature, it may justly be required that NEW VERSIONS SHOULD BE EXECUTED

WITH THE UTMOST ADVANTAGES THAT CAN BE HAD.

These, therefore, the Bible Society endeavours to attain, by putting into activity all persons who can in any way contribute to the great end. The claims preferred by the Bible Society may justly challenge the attention of the most learned, devoted, opulent, and influential Churches, Universities, Institutions, and Individuals: with them it rests to do the greatest possible act of justice and of benevolence, by accurately translating the Word of God, in all languages, for the use of the whole human

race.

Nor has the plea been made in vain. The most distinguished patronage has been already given to this object, in every country of the earth, excepting those over which the long night of ignorance, superstition, and intolerance still hovers, reluctant to disperse. Myriads of free hearts, accomplished minds, and holy spirits are, at once, the willing agents and the intrepid guardians of the principles of the Bible Society.

Of the immense toil which attends the work of translating the Scriptures, however, none can possibly form an adequate idea who have not been actually engaged in it. The two parts of this work

are obvious: it requires the understanding of the sense of the Original; and an acquaintance with the idiom of the vernacular tongue into which the translation is made. These two branches present difficulties, which cannot be met, generally, by fewer than two persons. It were well that every Version should have, if possible, the aid of many more.

It is to learned individuals and to learned works, that recourse must be had for an opinion on questions of Biblical Criticism: it is to natives, that we must look for the true idiom of a foreign language.

How vastly superior will a converted and pious Native Translator be, in comparison with one who is not pious! Not merely will his heart be in the work, but he will possess a more spiritual apprehension of the true sense of Scripture. Especially, it may be remarked, the Epistolary Writings of the New Testament will, perhaps, never be well translated, except under the superintendence and with the aid of pious and well-instructed persons.

It is not every objection, nor indeed is it many and powerful literary objections, that should be admitted as condemnatory of a new Version, provided no fundamental doctrine is shaken: before, however, a Version is generally allowed and highly sanctioned, it ought to have the best recommendations which the nature of the case admits.

Objections have been made, in different ages, to Versions of the Bible by persons who were enemies either to the Bible itself or to its general circulation. The fairest reply to this class of objectors is, to put them on the duty of pointing out and amending what they think to be faulty. Refusing to do this, they betray their hostile principles; for