« Prev Letter To Bishop Ellicott, In Reply To His… Next »
367

Letter To Bishop Ellicott, In Reply To His Pamphlet.

368

Nothing is more satisfactory at the present time than the evident feelings of veneration for our Authorized Version, and the very generally-felt desire for as little change as possible.Bishop Ellicott.839839On Revision,—p. 99.

We may be satisfied with the attempt to correct plain and clear errors, but there it is our duty to stop.Bishop Ellicott.840840Speech in Convocation, Feb. 1870, (p. 83.)

We have now, at all events, no fear of an over-corrected Version.Bishop Ellicott.841841On Revision,—p. 205.

I fear we must say in candour that in the Revised Version we meet in every page with small changes, which are vexatious, teasing, and irritating, even the more so because they are small; which seem almost to be made for the sake of change.Bishop Wordsworth.842842Address to Lincoln Diocesan Conference,—p. 25.

[The question arises,]—Whether the Church of England,—which in her Synod, so far as this Province is concerned, sanctioned a Revision of her Authorized Version under the express condition, which she most wisely imposed, that no Changes should be made in it except what were absolutely necessary,—could consistently accept a Version in which 36,000 changes have been made; not a fiftieth of which can be shown to be needed, or even desirable.Bishop Wordsworth.843843Ibid.,—p. 27.

369

Letter To
The Right Rev. Charles John Ellicott, D.D.,
Bishop Of Gloucester And Bristol,
In Reply To His Pamphlet In Defence Of
The Revisers And Their Greek Text Of
The New Testament.

What course would Revisers have us to follow?... Would it be well for them to agree on a Critical Greek Text? To this question we venture to answer very unhesitatingly in the negative.

Though we have much critical material, and a very fair amount of critical knowledge, we have certainly not yet acquired sufficient Critical Judgment for any body of Revisers hopefully to undertake such a work as this.

Bishop Ellicott.844844   Considerations on Revision,—p. 44. The Preface is dated 23rd May, 1870. The Revisers met on the 22nd of June.
    We learn from Dr. Newth's Lectures on Bible Revision (1881), that,—As the general Rules under which the Revision was to be carried out had been carefully prepared, no need existed for any lengthened discussion of preliminary arrangements, and the Company upon its first meeting was able to enter at once upon its work (p. 118) ... The portion prescribed for the first session was Matt. i. to iv. (p. 119) ... The question of the spelling of proper names ... being settled, the Company proceeded to the actual details of the Revision, and in a surprisingly short time settled down to an established method of procedure.All proposals made at the first Revision were decided by simple majorities (p. 122) ... The questions which concerned the Greek Text were decided for the most part at the First Revision. (Bp. Ellicott's Pamphlet, p. 34.)

My Lord Bishop,

Last May, you published a pamphlet of seventy-nine pages845845The Revisers and the Greek Text of the New Testament, by two Members of the New Testament Company,—1882. Macmillan, pp. 79, price two shillings and sixpence. in vindication of the Greek Text recently put forth by 370 the New Testament Company of Revisers. It was (you said) your Answer to the first and second of my Articles in the Quarterly Review:846846To these two articles—so far, at least, as they are concerned with the Greek Text adopted by the Revisers—our Essay is intended for an answer.—p. 79.—all three of which, corrected and enlarged, are now submitted to the public for the second time. See above, from page 1 to page 367.


« Prev Letter To Bishop Ellicott, In Reply To His… Next »





Advertisements



| Define | Popups: Login | Register | Prev Next | Help |