a single, well-authenticated case of rents do not inherit their piety ; very deficient cerebral organization, but I distinctly maintain this prowith great and decided moral and position, that out of a given number religious excellence, is quite suffi- of converted men, a majority will cient to overturn the science of be found to be descendants of ChrisPhrenology to its foundation. tian parents. From the two follow

Your correspondent has also com- ing principles, viz. that children pletely misapprehended the nature inherit the development of their of the argument on the subject of parents, and that the majority of hereditary piety. He could scarcely those who are converted have resuppose that I was not equally aware ceived from nature a favourable ore with himself, “ That we often see ganization, something like heredipious parents grieved by the wick- tary piety, seemed to me to follow edness of their degenerate progeny," as a corollary ; but your corresponor that I did not know that Cain, dent must not suppose that this as well as Shem, was the son of idea is a new one. For I find in a Adam. And he is equally mistaken review of Cecil's Life and Works, when he supposes that I “ wisely,” in the Christian Observer, (vol. x. that is to say, intentionally, over. p. 761,) the following passages :looked this fact. But neither this “ Mr Cecil's mother was a dissennor the other facts to which he re- ter, and was a religious woman; fers, have any thing to do with the many preceding generations in her proposition which I was endeavour- family having been also pious chaing to illustrate. The proposition was raclers. We rejoice in every rethis, that “ instances of conversion cord of this hereditary kind of reliare more frequent in the families of gion. We are well aware that grace religious, than of wicked parents.” cannot, like a family estate, be It is nothing to say, that pious pa- vested in a man and his heirs for rents have often degenerate child. ever; but we are of opinion, that a ren. To meet the argument fully doctrine, too much the reverse of and fairly, he ought to have main. this, has gained a dangerous curtained, that instances of conversion rency among us." The reviewer are as frequent in the families of then states his grounds for holding wicked, as of religious parents; a this opinion, and then mentions the proposition which is contradicted following striking fact in confirmaby all observation and experience. tion of it.“ How remarkable is it, Scripture, I observed, seemed to that the northern states of Amerigive countenance to the opinion of ca should retain, to this day, so hereditary piety; and I repeat again, large a portion of their original that after a very careful examina- piety! They were peopled by pertion, both of the Old and New Tes- sons probably not unlike the protament, I have found, with scarce- genitors of the mother of Mr. Cecil; ly an exception, that every eminent and religion continued long to descend servant of God was descended from from father to son, as if entailed with pious parents, so far, at least, as

the American soil; and has not, we have any information on the even to this day, disappeared, in subject; and I imagined that I had spite of civil war, of increasing supported this assertion by an in- wealth, and of many interfering miduction of facts, which, antecedent- grations.” And in the same work ly, I had no idea were so numerous.

for March last, Q. will find in an It does not, in the least, invalidate article entitled, Moral Virtue the argument that a half, or more not Hostile to the Reception of Di. of the family of two religious pa vine Grace," almost precisely the


3 F

same views, which I had stated in most explicit terms, the truth of Pp. 815, and 816.

these two important doctrines; inYour correspondent finally ad- deed the very end and object of Verts to their

passage which is the paper was to reconcile them with found near the end of the foot note Phrenology, and to illustrate and in page 818.” And here again the confirm their truth by shewing that argument is misunderstood. Your they were in perfect accordance with correspondent d. d. had maintained, its doctrines. Now, was it fair to along with Dr. Dwight, the exis- select a single incidental expression tence of a general principle which contained in a passage at the end guides and regulates all the faculties, of a foot-note, where a philosophical to which he gave the name of " dis. and not a religious speculation was position.This opinion, whether the point under consideration, and correct or not, is one of a purely on this to rear an objection contra. philosophical nature, and it was as dicted by the whole tenor and spirit such that I took it up, and endea of the Essay itself? If this were voured to shew that it was incor- a legitimate mode of criticism, it rect. I stated that the existence of would not be difficult to shew from a “disposition" was purely hypo- detached passages of Scripture itthetical, and further, that the hy- self, that neither the doctrine of the pothesis was altogether unnecessary Spirit nor of human depravity is to explain the phenomena. To il- there recognised. For to take the lustrate these views, I stated the parable of the sower, our Saviour case of a man with the most per- never hints any thing of the nefect organs of vision placed at the cessity of divine influence to make bottom of a dungeon, and after the word effectual. The differwards brought to the light of day; ent effects produced by the word of and still, for the purpose of illustra. God, are stated as “ in strict anation, I compared this case with that logy” with the sowing of the seed of an ignorant heathen brought on the different kinds of soil, while from the darkness of paganism to no mention whatever is made of the light and knowledge of the gos. the agency of the Spirit. Nay, pel. From all which I endeavour- more, our Saviour even speaks of ed to prove, that there was no ne- those who had “ an honest and cessity for the intervention of this good heart," an expression which, new power, but that the faculties if viewed apart from the other dethemselves were immediately pre- clarations of Scripture, seems as sented with their appropriate objects, far removed from the idea of the and thus the mind was enlighten- universality of human depravity ed and the will renewed. I acquit and corruption, as can well be imayour correspondent of all intentional gined. But your correspondent misrepresentation, but it would be would be the first to repel the condifficult to select a more complete clusion which might be attempted example of that species of criticism to be drawn from our Saviour's which makes “ a man an offender language against either of the docfor a word,” than the inference trines in question. which is drawn from the passage in In point of fact, however, I did question. The inference is, that most explicitly, even in the very the passage imports a denial of the passage referred to, recognise the necessity of the influences of the necessity of divine influence. Your Spirit, and substantially of the correspondent is pleased to say, doctrine of human depravity. Now, that the words, “ under the inthroughout the whole of the paper fluence of the Spirit,” are placed I had admitted, and asserted in the there without conveying any mean

ing; that in fact they are “ desti- of superficial, well-intentioned readtute of all meaning, and are placed ers, that I make these remarks," merely to fill up a gap in the sen, &c.

I doubt much if there is tence, or to quiet the reader's sus- one even of that class, who has picions." These are hard words, taken so superficial a view of the Mr. Editor, and almost tempt me argument as Q. appears to have to recal the praise of candour and done. At all events, I can appeal fairness which I was so anxious against him

the authority of one to bestow, for “ to quiet the read- “whose praise is in all the churches," er's suspicions” implies something but whose name I do not consider very like a charge that I knowingly myself at liberty to mention, as the held an obnoxious tenet, but that, sentiments he expresses are con. not to shock too much the preju- tained in a private letter. I have dices of the orthodox reader, I no objection, however, to inform threw in an expression to quiet his Q. privately, if he chooses to give suspicions, and which was other. me an opportunity of doing so. The wise “ destitute of all meaning" following is the passage to which I The real import of my argument allude, and which you will observe may be stated in a single sentence. embraces another of the points on According to my view there were which your correspondent has anithree elements in the conversion of madverted. After stating that he a sinner ; 1st, the moral and in- had read the paper with much intellectual faculuies proper to man; terest, he observes, «


remark 2dly, the means of grace; and, on hypocrisy is to me original, and 3dly, the influence of the Holy I think very important, and your Spirit to make these means effec- concluding note is towards the end tual. d. d. contended that a fourth of it, admirable.” This is a testielement, viz. “ disposition," was mony which I bold in the highest necessary, which I denied. Your estimation, and which outweighs correspondent informs us, that far the laboured criticisms of those it was

“ to prevent the im- who have totally misconceived the pression unfavourable to Phre- arguments which they have atnology, which the perusal of his tempted to controvert. paper would produce on the minds

G. L.


REVIEW OF NEW PUBLICATIONS. Palaeoromaica, or Historical and nomena hitherto inexplicable to

Philological Disquisitions : in- Biblical Critics? quiring, Whether the Hellenistic An Examination of the Hypothesis Style is not Latin-Greek? Whe- contained in Palaeoromaica. By ther the many new words in the

the Rev. WILLIAM Elzevir Greek Testament are not BROUGHTON, M. A. Curate of formed from the Latin? and Hartley Wespall, in HampsWhether the Hypothesis, that the hire. Greek Text of many manuscripts of the New Testament is a Paley observes, that the diverTranslation or Re-translation sity of opinion upon all subjects not from the Latin, seems not to elro- capable of mathematical demoncidale numerous passages : to ac- station is almost incurable; and the count for the Different Rever- appearance of “ Palaeoromaica," in sions: and to explain many Phe- the nineteenth century, seems to

His en

countenance the assertion. It con- other of which is considered by the tains an attempt to revise and re- anonymous author, as rendered highmodel an hypothesis, which was ly probable by the historical and conceived by Hardouin the Jesuit philological reasons that he has adabout the middle of last century, vanced in his Palaeoromaica. Of but which became extinct, through course, we cannot state all the conweakness, upon its exposure to the siderations which may be found in a light, in his folio, entitled “Jo. large and closely printed 8vo.; but the Harduini a societate Jesu Com- Summa fastigia rerum we shall lay mentarius in Novum Testamen- before the reader, and shall endeavour tum, &c. Amstel. 1741."

to assist him in forming an estimate deavour, in this work, to establish of the truth, importance, and tenthe authority of the Latin Vulgate dency of our author's conjectures. as the primitive apostolical text, Hitherto it has been admitted by was equally convincing, in the es- critics of every name, that the pretimation of the learned, as had valent use of it throughout the Robeen his previous attempt to per- man Empire, points to the Greek, suade them that the Æneid was as the language which, in all procomposed by a Benedictine Monk bability, was made use of by the in the thirteenth century. The sacred penmen ; but, our author paradox in his commentary was thinks, ihat the notion concerning supported, we are told, by ingenui- the general knowledge and universal ty and erudition, but he failed in prevalence of Greek, in the age of the establishment of his point, the apostles, is at once contrary which was in opposition to the to probability, and contradictory to uniform testimony of Christian facts. I « The object of his first disantiquity ; and after the exposure quisition is to inquire, whether the which Michaelis made of its incon- Jews, Romans, and other nations sistency with all external and inter- were, in the age of the apostles, as nal evidence, * it was seldom allud- generally acquainted with the Greek ed to by Biblical critics, and never language, as is usually supposed ;" thought of, but as the dream of a and, we observe, that throughout this

person who, as Voltaire says of dissertation there is a palpable missomebody, if not absolutely a fool, representation of the common opihad a very particular kind of rea- nion. Says he, “ Nothing, in fact, son." t

can be more absurd than the com. Our attention is recalled to his mon notice of the universality of extraordinary and forgotten hypo- Greek among all classes of men, in thesis, by the appearance of what the time of the apostles.” We re. we may style an edition of it alter- ply that, in point of fact, no such ed and improved; by substituting notion has been entertained by Bifor the vulgate as the apostolical ori- blical critics. No one has ever ginal, either, a Latin original of asserted that the “common people which the present Greek vulgate is – labourers and manufacturersche a version, but of the existence of vilis plebecula, as Jerome calls the which, there is no trace of any thing class of the first Christians," attainlike external evidence,—or a losted to the facility of reading the most Greek original, from a Latin version, difficult of all languages. Every one of which the present Greek vulgate unites with the author, in thinking, is a barbarous translation. Such that “ the only readers of those are the critical conjectures, one or days were people of rank and learn

Michaelis by Marsh, vol. i. p. 390, &c.

+ Palaeor.



# Pref. p. 9.

ing, by whom Greek was usually similar way, as the usual medium learned, as French among our- of communication among the better selves."

."* We are told in the quaint, informed, more especially when exbut definite language of learned di- tensive circulation was the object of vines, in the olden time, that, in a writer. We are evidently conthe age of the apostles, “ the Greek strained to infer, a priori, that, for was lingua communis to the Jews, the sake of this advantage, it was although not vulgaris.”+-" In the also selected by the inspired pentime of the apostles," says Dr. Lard- men ; unless, indeed, the infener, " it very much prevailed in the rence were in opposition to evidence Roman Empire.” Says Dr. Camp- of a more direct and conclusive bell, “ The Greek had been for ages kind. But the fact is, that in ada sort of universal language in the dition to our consideration, a priori, civilized world, at least among peo- we are in possession of the New ple of rank, and men of letters.”S Testament in Greek ; it has been Upon this point we must admit the handed down to us from a very retestimony of Cæsar, as one perfect- mote antiquity; there is no external ly competent to form an accurate evidence of an original in any other opinion; and he tells us that, language ; whereas we have the ex“in castris Helvetiorum tabulæ re- plicit testimony of Jerome and Aupertæ sunt literis Græcis confectæ, gustin, that the New Testament et ad Cæsarem perlatæ ; quibus in was originally written in Greek; tabulis nominatim ratio confecta “ De novo nunc loquor Testamento erat, qui numerus domo exisset eo- quod Græcum esse non dubium est, rum, qui arma ferre possent; et item excepto Apostolo Matthæo, qui priseparatim pueri, senes, mulieresque. mus in Judæa Evangelium Christi Quarum omnium summa.”ll Most Hebraicis literis edidit."** Still farexplicit is this evidence, relative to ther back, at a date so early as the the prevalence of the Greek lan- second century, we find Tertullian guage in Gaul ;—and still more ge- appealing to the .“ Authenticum neral and decisive in its applica- Græcum" of St. Paul ; and whether, tion, is the well-known testimony by this, we are to understand autoof Cicero, when he says, “ Græca graph, or only well-attested copies, leguntur in omnibus fere gentibus : ihe evidence which the passage afLatina suis finibus exiguis sane con

fords is the same, under either suptinentur." Widely as the know. position, in establishing the received ledge of the Latin was in after opinion concerning the Greek oriages diffused throughout Europe, ginal of the Christian Scriptures. there never was a period, in its mo- No one of these circumstances singdern history, in which it was lingua ly might be sufficient to establish the vulgaris ; but it was lingua com- commonly received opinion ; but munis, i. e. was understood every when we combine our a priori con. where by the better informed por- sideration concerning the language tion of society, and in this respect in general use, for the purpose of was for a long time the established spreading knowledge, with our posmedium of instruction. It is as session of an esteemed original, in true, that, in the same respect, the the absence of which we should Greek was common in the aposto- have no standard of faith ; together lical age,

and was made use of in a with several ancient and most ex.

• Pref.


23. § Dis. I. p. 58. ** Palæor. p. 352.

+ Leigh's Crit. Pref. p. 1. folio.
Il Cæs. de Bell. Gall. L. I. c. xxix.

* Works, vi. p. 87.

Cic. Pro Arc. Poeta.

« VorigeDoorgaan »