« PreviousContinue »
too far. For example, he seriously asks why the great hail out of heaven, in 16th chapter of the Apocalypse, should not be taken literally. Indeed, he seems to have adopted that system which would represent the whole of the book of Revelation, as about to be literally fulfilled in the space of three natural years and a half. Fundamentally erroneous as we conceive this opinion to be, it does not seem to have materially affected his interpretation of Isaiah, although it very materially affects the application of the numerous quotations from the Apocalypse with which he has illustrated his pages. One instance we must give of the fanciful dreams in which he occasionally indulges. He thus translates the first verse of the 28th chapter : • Woe to the crown of mockery, ye hirelings of Ephraim, and to the flower that falleth from its glorious beauty on the top of Gethsemane.' The crown of mockery he refers to the erown of thorns wherewith Jesus was insulted, the hirelings of Ephraim are the chief priests, &c., so called because of their mercenary transactions with Judas, who is himself the fallen flower. The translation and interpretation will not stand for a moment, and it is evident that both Mr Govett and the fathers Eusebius and Jerome, from whom he borrowed this notion, were led astray by the identity of the name Gethsemane with the words rendered in our English versionthe fat valleys.'
In our attempted exposition of the 7th chapter, we hinted the possibility that there might be some corruptions in the Hebrew text. But it must not, therefore, be taken for granted, that we approve of the wholesale emendations made by our author. He has himself judged it necessary to offer some defence of his conduct on this head.
« Some writers and readers are wont to characterize the learned, judicious, and tasteful emendations of Lowth, in his translation of Isaiah, as a 'taking liberties' with the Hebrew text. Now, as of the present version it may be said that in point of alteration, its little tinger is thicker than his loins, it becomes necessary to offer some arguments in vindication of the proposition that the present Hebrew text is not incorrupt or infallible, and that in what is neither perfect nor infallible, authorised alteration may, perhaps, be restoration." P. 364.
The question, however, is, what is authorised alteration ? Mr Govett's canon, if we may judge from his practice, seems to be, that wherever the reading of the Septuagint gives a more consistent sense, or even a more elegant turn to the phrase, or additional emphasis to the sentiment, it is to be preferred. To this we demur; and therefore we consider the great majority of alterations proposed by Mr Govett, aye, and by Lowth too, as unwarrantable liberties taken with the text. Every one knows, that, even in the best executed portions of the Septuagint version, there are number
less instances where the translators have misread the word in the original. In such cases, of course, Mr Govett would not follow them, because the Hebrew gives the more consistent sense; but is it not evident, that if in any instance such a mistake should appear to give a better meaning, that fact of itself would make it all the more likely that the error should be committed by the translator ? How then, especially in the book of Isaiah, the translation of which is confessedly worse executed than other portions of the Scriptures, are we to distinguish between such variations as have arisen from the translators having mistaken the word in the original, and such as have their origin in a reading really different from the received text being found in the manuscript before them ? Even in those places where the Hebrew appears to have been corrupted, patient study of the passage will often reconcile the seeming inconsistency, where the basty critic would at once have taken refuge in an emendation of the text. At the same time we admit not only that passages occur where the Hebrew has become corrupted, but that there is reason for believing that in some instances the text has been wilfully tampered with. Into this subject Mr Govett enters fully in his second dissertation, and shows that, in one instance at least, the Jews have confessed to this accusation, and that the fathers openly charged them with such corruption. We shall add one fact which we do not think he has brought out with sufficient precision. In the New Testament there are 181 quotations made from the Old. These are divided by Horne in his · Introduction,' into eight different classes, the two last of which include those places where there appears to have been a different rendering in the Hebrew, or where that text seems to have been corrupted. They are sixteen in number, and of these there are only two, or at the most three, of which it can be said that no temptation could exist to the Jews to alter the text. Thirteen passages of those quoted in the New Testament which bear marks of corruption are the very passages which we should suppose a priori would be most offensive to the Jews.* This faet alone seems to demonstrate, that wilful corruptions exist in the Hebrew text. Without descending to particulars, therefore, we think a good general rule for amending the Hebrew by the
"That our readers may satisfy themselves on this important subject, we append a. list of tbe texts referred to: - Mic. v. 2.; Mal. iii, 1; Isa. lxi. 1, 2; Isa. liii. 7, 8; Hab. i. 5; Am. ix. 11, 12; Isa. lix. 20, 21; De. xxxii. 42; Isa. Ixiv. 3; Hab. is. 3,4; Isa. xxviii. 16; Ps. xvi. 8-11; Ps. xl. 7-9. To these, we may add a few others. One, the quotation, “ He shall be called a Nazarene,” (Mat. ii. 23,) which it is not improbable once existed in the Old Testament, bnt has since been struck out. Another in Heb. i. 6, “ And let all the angels of God worship him," which, though parallel with Psalm xcvii. 7, seems to have been taken from Deut. xxxii. 48, where it still exists in the Septuagint, verbatim, though not to be found in the He. brew. A third, is Heb. ii. 13, which still stands in Isa. viii. 17, 18, but, as we have
Septuagint, would be, that wherever the Hebrew text cannot be made to give any consistent meaning, or wherever wilful corruption may reasonably be suspected, there, and there alone, the aid of the Greek version ought to be called in. The application of such a rule would, however, strike out a vast number of the emendations proposed in the version now before us, and even in Lowth's.
From what we have said, our readers may easily gather our opinion of the work before us. On the whole, we think it calculated to be useful, especially when the pernicious system of allegorizing still prevails so much in many quarters. If days of darkness are in store for us, and times of unexampled trouble, the hope set before us,' must be all the more dwelt upon. Every one of Christ's ambassadors must proclaim, • The Lord is at hand,' and while directing attention to the signs of the times, must send forth the word of encouragement, 'when ye see these things, lift up your heads, for your redemption draweth nigh.'
Art. III.— The Works of the Rev. J. Berridge, A.M., Vicar of
Everton; with a Memoir of his Life, numerous Letters, Anecdotes, Outlines of Sermons, &c. By the Rev. R. WHITTINGHAM, Vicar of Potton. London : Simpkin, Marshall, & Co., 1838.
It is the cowardice of Christians that spoils their fortunes.' Such is one of Dr M‘Crie's pregnant apophthegms, struck out in sketching the bold character of queen Esther. The history of the church, especially since the days of the reformation, furnishes many a comment upon it which it would be well for us to ponder. Confidence in the truth and right of our cause, when conjoined with fearless daring and determination, indifferent alike to censure or applause, and unmoved either by opposition or persuasion, has seldom lost the field, or fallen short of victory. On a great scale, Luther and Knox are illustrations of this truth. In leading on the mighty ecclesiastical movements of their age, it was Luther's impetuous boldness that won the day when Melancthon's timidity had well nigh lost it; it was Knox's stern indomitable courage that wrought out Scotland's glorious deliverance, just as it was the cowardice of England's bishops that made them faulter in midway,
already bad occasion to notice, has there no apparent reference to Christ, owing to the context having been cor ted. Perbaps we might add as a fourth, Matt. ii. 15. This passage is generally supposed to be taken from Hosea, but as in the connection in which it there stands, it seems to have no reference to the subject for the illustration of which the Evangelist quoted it, may we not suppose that at one time it was to be found in some other propbetic writing.
and left that church with but half a reformation. On a smaller scale, and with more directly spiritual ends in view, it was Whitefield's boldness that secured for him such triumphs in the conversion of souls. And as another illustration of this in the same field, we know not a brighter than the subject of this memoir—the author of these works—John Berridge of Everton. He is a truly splendid specimen of what is bold, decided, resolute, manly, enterprising in a Christian minister; and as a consequence, his labours were crowned with most signal success. His whole character and history deserve our study.
It is just half a century since Berridge died. After a life of arduous and almost unexampled labour, and a career of marvellous success in the ministry of the gospel, he rested from his toil. And truly his worn-out frame needed repose ; for heavy and scorching was the burden and heat of the day ;' while the energy of his character, which condemned the inactivity even of an hour, as self-indulgence, rendered it beyond measure exhausting and oppressive. But the sleep of the labouring man is sweet;' and by this time be has found that it is so; nor does he grudge his labours now, bowever hard to flesh and blood they once appeared. Having finished his reaping, he is “ receiving his wages, and gathering fruit into life eternal. For weariness he now has rest; for tribulation triumph ; for persecution the palm of victory; for the stormy scenes of earth, the sea of glass like unto crystal ;' no tumult, no tossing, no shipwreck there ! Like Whitefield, he was reconciled to life, because he felt that he could do for Christ on earth what he could not do in heaven;' and like him, he longed to depart and be with Christ, because though not weary of the work, he was Feary in it.'*
• His epitaph, written by bimself, except of course the last date, is too descriptive and too admirable to be here omitted. It contains the summary of bis life.
“ HERE LIE
Late Vicar of Everton,
Who loved his Master, and his work,
I was born in sin, February 1716.
Admitted to EVERTON Vicarage, 1755.
The waste places of the land, both in his own vineyard and around it, called for his labours, and he freely gave them. There were few to labour; and hence his share of the burden was so oppressive. Many were his hindrances and difficulties; and hence the perseverance and courage which his position demanded were of no ordinary kind.
Yet he hesitated not, grudged not, shrunk not, wearied not. He continued stedfast and immoveable ; and he found long ere he was summoned from contending below to rest above, that his labour was not in vain in the Lord.' His Master acknowledged with an ample blessing, the faithfulness, the patience, the boldness of his devoted servant. Worldly men pointed at him the lip of bitter scorn. His
high church brethren breathed nothing but enmity and hatred. Timo, rous men, with whom caution is the chief virtue, and boldness the chief crime, looked doubtfully upon all his movements. Luke warm professors, enjoying the luxury of ease in Zion,' frowned on him as a disturber of their repose. Formal churchmen, whose love of ecclesiastical order swallows up their love of souls, could not tolerate his irregularities. Decent, quiet parochial ministers, who summed up their duties in baptizing, marrying, administering the sacrament, and visiting the sick, eyed suspiciously and jealously his never-tiring zeal. Shepherds, whose concern for the sheep of Christ's fold was bounded by the stream, or hill, or fence that marked the limits of their parish, could not understand his uncon. trollable propensity to hunt for souls,' wherever souls were to be found, or to encroach with unscrupulous rapacity upon the territories of every neighbour. He was no general favourite. No ordi nary measure of reproach and scorn fell to his lot.
Yet opposed and reviled, he maintained his position, and pur. sued his labours fearlessly, till the day of his dismissal came, and he was summoned from the battle below to the triumph above. • None of these things moved him, neither counted he his life dear unto him, that he might finish his course with joy, and fulfil the ministry which he had received at the hands of the Master whom he served. His death was no common calamity to the land, though many might rejoice in it. It was as if a standard-bearer had fallen. It might well have been a matter of public lamentation to the church in which he ministered, and in which it may truly be said that he did not leave his equal behind him. Nor was it merely for his fervent piety and devoted zeal that he was thus distinguished. His natural genius was of no common order, and perhaps it may be said that in this respect he took the first place among the evangelical ministers of his day. His classical attainments were of a superior kind; and for his general accomplishments as a man, he was confessedly entitled to no second-rate place even in the world's