Imágenes de página
PDF
ePub

by sparing the hoary hairs of the Archbishop from going down to the grave in blood, than by taking his life. They converted him into a saint and a martyr; and occasioned feelings of pity, where only those of indignation and scorn would have been felt. Into the details of his trial we cannot

enter. We are not lawyers enough to pronounce upon the validity of many of the charges brought against him, or on the validity or invalidity of much of his defence. In more moderate times, if such a case could occur in such times, we apprehend such a sentence at least would not have been pronounced, or if pronounced, would not have been inflicted. But long suppressed exasperation could no longer be restrained-It began with Strafford-it fell upon Laud-it rested on Charles.

We give, without any farther remarks, a part of the account of the last scene. It was solemn and touching. May his prayer have been heard, and William Laud found among those whom he had cruelly oppressed and persecuted.

"After these devotions, the Archbishop arose, and gave his papers to Dr. Stern, his chaplain, who accompanied him to the scaffold, saying, Doctor, I give you this, that you may show it to your fellow-chaplains, that they may see how I went out of the world, and God's blessing and mercy be upon you and them.' Then turning to a person named Hinde, whom he perceived busy writing the words of his address, he said, 'Friend, I beseech you, hear me. I cannot say I have spoken every word as it is in my paper, but I have gone very near it, to help my memory as well as I could, but I beseech you, let me have no wrong done me:' intimating that he ought not to publish an imperfect copy. Sir,' replied Hinde, you shall not. If I do so, let it fall upon my own head. pray God have mercy upon your soul.' I thank you,' answered the venerable sufferer; I did not speak with any jealousy as if you would do so, but only,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

I

as a poor man going out of the world, it is not possible for me to keep to the words of my paper, and a phrase might do me wrong.

"The Archbishop now prepared for the block, and observing the scaffold crowded with people, he said, 'I scaffold, that I might have had room to thought there would have been an empty die. I beseech you, let me have an end of this misery, for I have endured he said, I will pull off my doublet, and it long.' When the space was cleared, God's will be done. I am willing to go out of the world; no man can be more willing to send me out, than I am willing to be gone.'

[ocr errors]

he was displaying a magnanimity not "Yet, in this trying moment, when exceeded by the holy martyrs of the primitive ages, he was beset by a furious enthusiast,-one of those revolutionary demagogues who had brought him to this melancholy end. Sir John Clotworthy, a follower of the Earl of Warwick, and an Irishman by birth, irritated because the revilings of the people made no impression on this renowned prelate, propounded to him certain questions, with the hope of exposing him to his associates. What special text of Scripture,' asked he, is now comfortable to a man in his departure?'

[ocr errors][ocr errors]

Cupio dissolvi, et esse cum Christo,' was the Archbishop's meek reply. That is a good desire,' said the enthusiast,

[ocr errors]
[ocr errors]

but there must be a foundation for that divine assurance.'- -No man can express it,' replied the Archbishop, it is to be found within.'-- It is founded upon a word, nevertheless,' said Clotworthy, and that word should be known.' That word,' replied the Archbishop, is the knowledge of Jesus Christ, and that alone.' Perceiving, however, that there would be no end to this indecent interruption, the Primate turned to the executioner, and giving him some money, said, 'Here, honest friend, God forgive thee, and do thine office upon me in mercy.' He was then desired by the executioner to give some sign when he should strike, to which he replied, I will, but first let me fit myself.'

66

[ocr errors]

The Archbishop then knelt down before the block, and thus prayed: Lord, I am coming as fast as I can. I know I must pass through the shadow of death before I can come to thee; yet it is but umbra mortis, a mere shadow of death, a little darkness upon nature, but thou, by thy merits and passion, hast broke through the jaws of death. So, Lord, receive my soul, and have mercy upon me, and bless this kingdom

[blocks in formation]

common with our countrymen, we detest his memory. We pity his biographer.

We cannot recom

mend his book, which must have cost him some pains. It is a partial, prejudiced, illiberal, unjust account both of Laud and his Times. Poor Mr. Lawson!Poor Church of England! if she need such defenders, or can ob

We pity poor Laud, though, in tain no better.

MEMOIRS OF THE CONTROVERSY RESPECTING THE THREE HEAVENLY WITNESSES. 1 JOHN v. 7.

(Continued from page 190.)

In 1807, Dr. Adam Clarke where it is added by a more published his useful work, "The recent hand in the margin: for it Succession of Sacred Literature;" is wanting also in the text. It to which he prefixes two fac is also variously written in those similes of the disputed passage; manuscripts which retain it. This one taken from the Compluten- will appear more plainly by comsian Edition of the New Testa- paring the following extracts taken ment; and the other from the from four manuscripts of the VulCodex Montfortii in Trinity Col- gate in my own possession: lege, Dublin. In treating on the first Epistle of John, he makes some judicious observations

on

the text of the three witnesses, in order to illustrate his plates. After stating his opinion of the age of the Codex Montfortianus, which

has been already given, he pro

ceeds as follows:

"Though a conscientious ad

vocate for the sacred doctrine con

own

tained in the disputed text, and which I think expressly enough revealed in several other parts of the sacred writings, yet I must the passage in question stands ou a most dubious foundation. All the Greek manuscripts (the Codex Montfortii alone excepted) omit the passage: so do all the ancient versions, the Vulgate excepted: but in many of the ancient MSS. even of this version it is wanting. There is one in the British Museum, of the tenth or eleventh century,

N. S. No. 53.

"1.

Quoniam tres sunt qui testimonium dant in cœlo, Pater, Verbum et Spiritus Sanctus et hii tres unum sunt. Et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, Spiritus, Sanguis et Aqua.

2.

Quoniam tres sun,

qui testimonium dant in terrat Spiritus, Aqua et Sanguis, et tres, unum sunt. Et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in cœlo Pater Verbum et Spiritus Sanctus, et hii tres unum sunt.

[blocks in formation]

et Filius et Spiritus Sanctus, et hii tres unum sunt.

5.

Quoniam tres sunt qui Testimonium dant in terra Spiritus, Aqua et Sanguis, et tres sunt qui testimonium perhibent in Cœlo Pater, Verbum, et Spiritus

Sanctus et hi tres unum sunt. "This last I took from an ancient manuscript in Marsh's library, St. Patrick's, Dublin.

"In the Bible printed by Fradin and Pinard, Paris, 1497, fol. the text is the same with No. 2, only instead of testimonium dant, it read's dant testimonium.

"The reader will observe, that in No. 2, 4, and 5, the eighth verse is put before the seventh, and that 3 and 4 have filius instead of verbum. But both these readings are united in an ancient English manuscript of my own, which contains the Bible from the beginning of Proverbs to the end of the New Testament, written on thick strong vellum, and evidently prior to the time of Wicliff.

"For three ben that geven witnessing in heven the Fadir, the Word or Sone and the Hooly Goost, and these three ben oon. And three ben that geven witnessing in erthe, the Spirit, Mater, and Blood, and these three ben oon.

"As many suppose the Complutentian editors must have had a manuscript or manuscripts which contained this disputed passage, I judge it necessary to add the note, which they subjoin at the bottom of the page, by which (though nothing is clearly expressed) it appears they either had

such

a manuscript, or wished to have it thought they had such. However the note is curious, and shows us how this disputed passage was read in the most approved manuscripts of the Vulgate extant in the thirteenth century,

when St. Thomas Aquinas wrote, from whom this note is taken.

"The following is the whole note literatim :

"Sanctus Thomas in expositione secunde Decretalis de suma Trinitate et fide Catholica tractans istum passum contra Abbatem Joachim ut tres sunt qui testimonium dant in celo Pater Verbum et Spiritus Sanctus: dicit ad Et ad litteram verba sequentia. insinuandam unitatem trium personarum subditur, Et hii tres unum sunt. Quodquidem dicitur propter essentie Unitatem. Sed hoc Joachim perverse trahere volens ad unitatem charitatis et consensus inducebat consequentem auctoritatem. Nam subditur ibidem: Et tres sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, s. Spiritus: Aqua: et Sanguis. Et in quibusdam libris additur: Hii tres unum sunt. Sed hoc in veris exemplaribus non habetur: sed dicitur esse appositum ab hereticis arrianis ad pervertendum intellectum sanum auctoritatis premisse de unitate essentie trium personarum. Hec beatus Thomas ubi supra.'

"If the Complutensian Editors translated the passage into Greek from the Vulgate, it is strange they made no mention of it in this place, where they had so fair an opportunity, while speaking so very pointedly on the doctrine in question; and forming a note for the occasion, which is indeed the only theological note in the whole volume. It is again worthy of note, that when these editors found an important various reading in any of their Greek manuscripts, they noted it in the margin: an example occurs 1 Cor. xvi. 51.— Why was it then that they took no notice of so important an omission as the text of the three witnesses, if they really had no manuscript in which it was contained? Did they intend to deceive the

reader, and could they possibly imagine that the knavery should never be detected? If they designed to deceive, they took the most effectual way to conceal the fraud, as it is probable they destroyed the manuscripts from which they printed their text; for the story of their being sold in 1749 to a rocket-maker, (see Michaelis, vol. ii. p. 440,) is every way so exceptionable and unlike the truth, that I really wonder there should be found any person who would seriously give it credit. It is more likely the manuscripts were destroyed at first, or that they are still kept secret, to prevent the forgery (if it be one) of the text of the three witnesses from being detected; or the librarian already mentioned may have converted them to his own use. If they were not destroyed by the Complutensian editors, I should not be surprized if the same manuscripts should come to light in some other part of the world, if not in the Alcala library itself."*

It is worthy of notice in this part of this important controversy, that Dr. Clarke's suspicion of the story of the rocket-maker, who is alleged to have purchased the MSS., from which the Complutensian Edition was formed, and who was of course supposed to have exploded them long ago, turns out to be well founded; and his anticipation that they might one day be discovered, has at length been realized. I copy the following passage from a pamphlet recently published by Dr.

Smith.

"Mr. T. quotes the Bishop of Peterborough's third edition of his translation of Michaelis, to show that the learned Bishop has changed his opinion, and now believes the manuscripts from which

* Pp. 92–97.

the Complutensian text was taken, to have been more ancient and valuable than, agreeably to the general opinion, he had before supposed. This is, however, a matter which does not at all affect our argument. Undoubtedly, for reasons of critical curiosity and satisfaction, we should be gratified by knowing the character and history of the Alcala manuscripts; yet there is the highest moral certainty that this knowledge would do nothing more than confirm what is already well enough known. In fact, the matter is established: for there is good reason to believe that the learned Germans, Moldenhauer, and Tychsen, were the subjects of an imposition practised. upon them by some people in the Spanish University, who were not disposed to permit their manuscript treasures to be scrutinized by Protestants. A gentleman with whom I have the honour of acquaintance, well known as a friend of rational freedom and a sufferer in its cause, and whose extraordinary talents as a linguist and a poet have eminently enriched our literature, John Bowring, Esq., has spent much time in Spain, and was the intimate friend of the most enlightened, learned, and patriotic men in that country, during its enjoyment of the blessing, (of which it has been so basely and cruelly robbed!) of a constitutional government. He had the opportunity of carefully examining the manuscripts at Alcala; he has published reasons amounting to a demonstration that no sale or destruction of manuscripts ever took place; by his personal examination he found THE SAME Scripture manuscripts which had been described as being in the library, by Alvaro Gomez, who died in 1580; and he adds, That the manuscripts referred to are modern and valueless, there can be no longer any ques

[ocr errors]

tion.' To Mr. Bowring I am also series of papers on the disputed indebted for the information (which, passage, by an acute and wellhad it been known to Michaelis, informed writer, appeared in the or to his learned translator, would Christian Observer.. These pahave been to them most welcome pers, had they been printed sepaintelligence, and would have saved rately, which they deserved to be, them a world of trouble,) that would have made a considerable Gomez, in his Life of Cardinal pamphlet, give a very lucid Ximenes, states that Leo X. lent view of the principle points of to Ximenes those [Greek manu- evidence for and against the auscripts which] he required from the thenticity of the passage; with Vatican; which were returned as the author's own observations on soon as the Polyglott was com- some of the writers on both sides. pleted.'"* He discusses very ably the state of the first editions of the Greek Testament, the testimony of the Greek MSS., that of the ancient Fathers, and the Greek and Latin Fathers, all of which he shows to be unfavourable to the authority of the passage. His mode of accounting for the mistake, or supposed mistake, of Stephens, in placing the crotchet, to which we have already referred, seems very satisfactory.

According to this statement, unless some MSS. in the Vatican, yet unexamined, shall be found to contain the testimony of the heavenly witnesses, which is in the highest degree improbable, it must be admitted, that the Complutensian Editors translated the passage into Greek from the Latin Vulgate; and thus one of the main arguments on which its authenticity has been erected will be entirely overthrown.

verse.

The various readings of the Latin MSS. given by Dr. Clarke, and which are only a specimen of the diversity that obtains in this passage in the MSS. of the Vulgate, create a strong suspicion that there is something radically unsound in the authority of the The unique theological note also which Dr. Clarke gives from the Complutensian, in the very ambiguity which pervades it, savours strongly of management. It was felt desirable to support the authority of the Vulgate, and yet it was deemed imprudent to assert, that the passage was found in the Greek MSS. Had the evidence been satisfactory, it would have been more dis. tinctly indicated.

In the same year in which Dr. Clarke's work was published, a

Smith's Rejoinder to Taylor, 1829. pp. 48, 49.

"The arguments that have been urged in this and the foregoing chapter concerning Stephens's MSS. may be thus briefly stated.

"First. Neither the MSS. of the Complutensian editors, nor those of Erasmus, nor any of the 150 which now exist, except two, both of modern date, contain 1 John v. 7. Hence it seems highly improbable that it should be found in all Stephens's MSS., collected as they were from various quarters.

"Secondly. He returned to the Royal Library the MSS. which he had borrowed from it. Yet Simon, after a diligent search in that li brary, did not discover that verse in a single MS.

[ocr errors][merged small]
« AnteriorContinuar »