the meaning of the sacred writers; and how much has been done in this will
be manifest to any one who makes the attempt to reckon up the long series
of commentaries, English and Continental, on the books of the Holy
Scriptures, published since the Revision of 1611, commencing with the
Annotations of the eminent Nonconformist, Henry Ainsworth, on the
Pentateuch, Psalms, and Song of Solomon, 1627, down to the recent
commentaries on Galatians, Philippians, Colossians, and Philemon, by Dr.
J. B. Lightfoot, the present Bishop of Durham. The attempt to make this
enumeration will deepen the desire that the light which has been shed upon
the Bible by this long succession of its learned and earnest students
should now be employed for the guidance and help of the ordinary readers
of its pages.
To such desire emphatic expression has been given in various ways through
full two generations, with an ever increasing intensity, and by
representative men amongst all Christian communities.
So early in the present century as the year 1809, Dr. John Pye Smith,
President of the Congregational College at Homerton, thus wrote: “That
such blemishes should disfigure that translation of the best and most
important of volumes, which has been and still is more read by thousands
of the pious than any other version, ancient or modern; that they should
be acknowledged by all competent judges to exist; that they should have
been so long and often complained of; and yet that there has been no great
public act, from high and unimpeachable authority, for removing them, we
are constrained to view as a disgrace to our national literature. We do
not wish to see our common version, now become venerable by age and
prescription, superseded by another entirely _new_; every desirable
purpose would be satisfactorily attained by a _faithful_ and
_well-conducted revision_.”[102]
In the following year (1810) Dr. Herbert Marsh, then Margaret Professor of
Divinity at Cambridge, and subsequently Bishop of Peterborough, in the
first edition of his _Lectures_ wrote: “It is probable that our authorised
version is as faithful a representation of the original Scriptures as
_could_ have been formed at _that period_. But when we consider the
immense accession that has _since_ been made, both to our critical and
philological apparatus;” “when we consider that the most important sources
of intelligence for the _interpretation_ of the original Scriptures were
_likewise_ opened after that period, we cannot possibly pretend that our
authorised version does not require _amendment_.”[103]
In 1816 Thomas Wemyss, a learned layman, who had devoted himself to
Biblical studies, called attention, under the title of _Biblical
Gleanings_, to a number of passages which were generally allowed to be
mistranslated; and in 1819 Sir James Bland Burges published _Reasons in
favour of a New Translation of the Scriptures_.
During a few years after this, the subject remained in abeyance, but in
1832 there was published, at Cambridge, a calm and scholarly pamphlet,
entitled _Hints on an Improved Translation of the New Testament_, by the
Rev. James Scholefield, A.M., Regius Professor of Greek in the University
of Cambridge. A second edition was issued in 1836, and a third, with an
appendix, in 1849.
Through these and other publications a widely-spread conviction was
produced that the work ought at length to be attempted, and in the years
1855-57 the question was in a very emphatic form brought under public
notice. In the _Edinburgh Review_ of October, 1855, in a notice of a
certain Paragraph Bible then recently published, there appeared the
following words: “Surely it is high time for a further revision. It is
now almost 250 years since the last was made. During that long period
neither the researches of the clergy nor the intelligence of the laity
have remained stationary. We have become desirous of knowing more, and
they have acquired more to teach us. Vast stores of Biblical information
have been accumulating since the days of James I., by which, not merely
the rendering of the Common Version, but the purity of the Sacred Text
itself, might be improved. And it is essential to the interests of
religion that that information should be fully, freely, and in an
authoritative form, disseminated abroad by a careful correction of our
received version of the Sacred Scriptures.”
In the following year, 1856, the Rev. William Selwyn, Canon of Ely, and
Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity at Cambridge, sent forth his _Notes on
the proposed Amendment of the Authorized Version of the Holy Scriptures_,
in which he states: “I do not hesitate to avow my firm persuasion that
there are at least one thousand passages of the English Bible that might
be amended without any change in the general texture and justly reverenced
language of the version.”
In July of the same year an address to the Crown was moved in the House of
Commons by Mr. Heywood, member for North Lancashire, praying that Her
Majesty would appoint a Royal Commission of learned men to consider of
such amendments of the authorized version of the Bible as had been already
proposed, and to receive suggestions from all persons who might be willing
to offer them, and to report the amendments which they might be prepared
to recommend.
In the January of the following year a resolution in support of revision
was proposed at the general meeting of the Society for Promoting Christian
Knowledge, by the Rev. G. F. Biber, LL.D., who subsequently published the
substance of his speech in support of this resolution, under the title, _A
Plea for an Edition of the Authorized Version of Holy Scripture with
explanatory and emendatory marginal readings_. Pamphlets also were
published the same year by Dr. Beard and by Dr. Henry Burgess; but, what
it is more important to note, in that year there was published the first
of a series of works which were intended to show by example the kind of
work which the wiser advocates of revision desired to see undertaken. This
was _The Gospel according to John, after the Authorized Version, newly
compared with the original Greek, and revised by five clergymen--John
Barrow, D.D.; George Moberly, D.C.L.; Henry Alford, B.D.; William G.
Humphry, B.D.; Charles J. Ellicott, M.A._ In that same year also Dr.
Trench, then Dean of Westminster (now Archbishop of Dublin), published his
work _On the Authorized Version of the New Testament_; and in 1863 Dr.
Plumptre, in the _Dictionary of the Bible_, reiterated the statement, “The
work ought not to be delayed much longer.”
In the spring of 1870 the desirableness of a fresh revision of the English
Bible was advocated--by Dr. J. B. Lightfoot in a paper read before a
meeting of clergy; by the writer of these lectures in a paper read before
the annual meeting of the Congregational Union of England and Wales; by
the _British Quarterly Review_ in its January number; and, finally, by the
_Quarterly Review_ in its April number.
A weighty sentence from the last-mentioned writer will be a fitting
conclusion to the present lecture. “It is positive unfaithfulness on the
part of those who have ability and opportunity to decline the task. The
Word of God, just because it is God’s Word, ought to be presented to every
reader in a state as pure and perfect as human learning, skill, and taste
can make it. The higher our veneration for it the more anxious ought we to
be to free it from every blemish, however small and unimportant. But
nothing in truth can be unimportant which dims the light of Divine
Revelation.”
LECTURE IX.
_THE REVISION OF 1881._
To the general consensus of opinion described in the last lecture
practical expression was first given by the action of the Convocation of
Canterbury, in the early part of 1870.
On February 10, 1870, a resolution was moved in the Upper House of
Convocation by Dr. Wilberforce, Bishop of Winchester, and seconded by Dr.
Ellicott, Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol, “That a Committee of both
Houses be appointed, with power to confer with any committee that may be
appointed by the Convocation of the Northern Province, to report upon the
desirableness of a revision of the Authorized Version of the New
Testament, whether by marginal notes or otherwise, in all those passages
where plain and clear errors, whether in the Greek Text originally adopted
by the translators, or in the translation made from the same, shall, on
due investigation, be found to exist.” On the motion of Dr. Ollivant,
Bishop of Llandaff, seconded by Dr. Thirlwall, Bishop of St. Davids, it
was agreed to enlarge this resolution so as to include the Old Testament
also, and the resolution as so amended was ultimately adopted.
This resolution was communicated to the Lower House on the following day
(February 11), where it was accepted without a division.
The joint Committee appointed in accordance with this resolution consisted
of seven Bishops and fourteen Members of the Lower House.[104] This
Committee met on March 24th, and agreed to the following report:[105]
I. “That it is desirable that a Revision of the Authorized Version of
the Holy Scriptures be undertaken.”
II. “That the Revision be so conducted as to comprise both Marginal
renderings, and such emendations as it may be found necessary to
insert in the text of the Authorized Version.”
III. “That in the above Resolutions we do not contemplate any new
translation of the Bible, or any alteration of the language except
where, in the judgment of the most competent Scholars, such change is
necessary.”
IV. “That in such necessary changes, the style of the language
employed in the existing Version be closely followed.”
V. “That it is desirable that Convocation should nominate a body of
its own Members to undertake the work of Revision, who shall be at
liberty to invite the co-operation of any eminent for scholarship, to
whatever nation or religious body they may belong.”
This Report was presented to the Upper House on May 3rd, where its
adoption was moved by Bishop Wilberforce, and seconded by Bishop
Thirlwall, and carried unanimously.
Bishop Wilberforce then moved, and Bishop Thirlwall seconded, “That a
Committee be now appointed to consider and Report to Convocation a scheme
of revision on the principles laid down in the Report now adopted, and
that the Bishops of Winchester, St. Davids, Llandaff, Gloucester and
Bristol, Salisbury, Ely, Lincoln, and Bath and Wells, be members of the
Committee. That the Committee be empowered to invite the co-operation of
those whom they may judge fit from their Biblical Scholarship to aid them
in their work.” This also was carried unanimously.
In the Lower House the above given Report of the joint Committee was
presented on May 5th, when its adoption was moved by Canon Selwyn,[106]
and seconded by Archdeacon Allen. In the discussion which followed two
attempts were made to overthrow the principle embodied in the fifth
resolution, and to confine the revision to Scholars in communion with the
Church of England. Both of these were unsuccessful, and the adoption of
the Report was carried, with two dissentients only. On the following day,
May 6th, the House completed its action by agreeing to the suggestion of
the Upper House, that on this occasion it should waive its privilege of
appointing on joint Committees twice as many as were appointed by the
Upper House, and should appoint eight Members only to co-operate with the
eight Bishops mentioned above. The Members selected were Dr. Bickersteth
the Prolocutor, Dean Alford, Dean Stanley, Canon Blakesley, Canon Selwyn,
Archdeacon Rose, Dr. Jebb, and Dr. Kay.
The first meeting of this second joint Committee was held on May 25th. It
was then agreed that the Committee should separate into two Companies--one
for the revision of the Old Testament, and one for that of the New. Of the
Members of Committee belonging to the Upper House five were assigned to
the former Company and three to the latter. The Members belonging to the
Lower House were divided equally between the two Companies. At the same
meeting the Committee selected the Scholars who should be invited to join
the Companies, and also decided upon the general rules that should guide
their procedure. These were:
1. “To introduce as few alterations as possible into the Text of the
Authorized Version consistently with faithfulness.”
2. “To limit as far as possible the expression of such alterations to
the language of the Authorized and earlier English versions.”
3. “Each Company to go twice over the portion to be revised, once
provisionally, the second time finally, and on principles of voting as
hereinafter is provided.”
4. “That the Text to be adopted be that for which the evidence is
decidedly preponderating; and that when the Text so adopted differs
from that from which the Authorized Version was made, the alteration
be indicated in the margin.”
5. “To make or retain no change in the Text on the second and final
revision by each Company, except _two-thirds_ of those present approve
of the same, but on the first revision to decide by simple
majorities.”
6. “In every case of proposed alteration that may have given rise to
discussion, to defer the voting thereupon till the next Meeting,
whensoever the same shall be required by one-third of those present at
the Meeting, such intended vote to be announced in the notice for the
next Meeting.”
7. “To revise the headings of chapters, pages, paragraphs, italics,
and punctuation.”
8. “To refer on the part of each Company, when considered desirable,
to Divines, Scholars, and Literary Men, whether at home or abroad, for
their opinions.”
To these it was added, that the work of each Company be communicated to
the other as it is completed, in order that there may be as little
deviation from uniformity in language as possible.
Of the Scholars invited to join the Companies four[107] declined for
various reasons, and one[108] was prevented by illness from taking part in
the work. The two Companies when formed consisted of the following
Members.
THE OLD TESTAMENT COMPANY.
Dr. W. L. Alexander, Professor of Theology in the Congregational
Theological Hall, Edinburgh.
Dr. E. H. Browne, Bishop of Ely.[109]
Mr. O. T. Chenery, Lord Almoner’s Professor of Arabic, Oxford.
Dr. A. B. Davidson, Professor of Hebrew, Free Church College,
Edinburgh.
Dr. Benjamin Davies, Professor of Hebrew, Baptist College, Regent’s
Park.
Dr. P. Fairbairn, Principal of Free Church College, Glasgow.
Dr. F. Field.
Dr. Ginsburg.
Dr. F. W. Gotch, Principal of the Baptist College, Bristol.
Rev. B. Harrison, Archdeacon of Maidstone.
Dr. A. C. Hervey, Bishop of Bath and Wells.
Dr. J. Jebb, Canon of Hereford.
Dr. W. Kay, late Principal of Bishop’s College, Calcutta.
Dr. Stanley Leathes, Professor of Hebrew, King’s College, London.
Rev. J. McGill, Professor of Oriental Languages, St. Andrews.
Dr. A. Ollivant, Bishop of Llandaff.
Dr. R Payne Smith, Regius Professor of Divinity, Oxford.[110]
Dr. J. J. S. Perowne, Professor of Hebrew, St. Davids College,
Lampeter.[111]
Rev. E. H. Plumptre,[112] Professor of New Testament Exegesis, King’s
College, London.
Dr. H. J. Rose, Archdeacon of Bedford.
Dr. W. Selwyn, Canon of Ely, and Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity,
Cambridge.
Dr. Connop Thirlwall, Bishop of St. Davids.
Dr. Christopher Wordsworth, Bishop of Lincoln.
Mr. W. A. Wright, Librarian[113] of Trinity College, Cambridge.
THE NEW TESTAMENT COMPANY.
Dr. H. Alford, Dean of Canterbury.
Dr. J. Angus, Principal of the Baptist College, Regent’s Park.
Dr. E. H. Bickersteth, Prolocutor of the Lower House of
Convocation.[114]
Dr. J. W. Blakesley, Canon of Canterbury.[115]
Dr. J. Eadie, Professor of Biblical Literature and Exegesis to the
United Presbyterian Church, Scotland.
Dr. C. J. Ellicott, Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol.
Rev. F. J. A. Hort.[116]
Rev. W. G. Humphry, Prebendary of St. Paul’s.
Dr. B. H. Kennedy, Canon of Ely, and Regius Professor of Greek,
Cambridge.
Dr. W. Lee, Archdeacon of Dublin.
Dr. J. B. Lightfoot.[117]
Dr. W. Milligan, Professor of Divinity, Aberdeen.
Dr. G. Moberly, Bishop of Salisbury.
Rev. W. F. Moulton, Professor of Classics, Wesleyan College,
Richmond.[118]
Rev. Samuel Newth, Professor of Classics, New College, London.[119]
Dr. A. Roberts.[120]
Dr. R. Scott, Master of Balliol College, Oxford.[121]
Rev. F. H. Scrivener.[122]
Dr. G. Vance Smith.[123]
Dr. A. P. Stanley, Dean of Westminster.
Dr. R. C. Trench, Archbishop of Dublin.
Dr. C. J. Vaughan, Master of the Temple.[124]
Dr. B. F. Westcott, Canon of Peterborough.[125]
Dr. S. Wilberforce, Bishop of Winchester.
To these lists some changes have, from various causes, been made in the
course of the last ten years, both in the way of addition, and in the way
of removal.
* * * * *
To the Old Testament Company thirteen members have been added--
Mr. R. N. Bensley, Hebrew Lecturer, Caius College, Cambridge.
Rev. J. Birrill, Professor of Oriental Languages, St Andrews,
Scotland.
Dr. F. Chance.
Rev. T. K. Cheyne, Hebrew Lecturer, Balliol College, Oxford.
Dr. G. Douglas, Professor of Hebrew, Free Church College, Glasgow.
Mr. S. R Driver, Tutor of New College, Oxford.
Rev. C. J. Elliott.
Rev. J. D. Geden, Professor of Hebrew, Wesleyan College, Didsbury.
Rev. J. R. Lumby, Fellow of St. Catherine’s College, Cambridge.[126]
Rev. A. H. Sayce, Tutor of Queen’s College, Oxford.
Rev. W. Robertson Smith, Professor of Hebrew, Free Church College,
Aberdeen.
Dr. D. H. Weir, Professor of Oriental Languages, Glasgow.
Dr. W. Wright, Professor of Arabic, Cambridge.
During the same period it has lost ten members, seven by death: Professor
Davies, Professor Fairbairn, Professor McGill, Archdeacon Rose, Canon
Selwyn, Bishop Thirlwall, Professor Weir; and three by resignation--Canon
Jebb, Professor Plumptre, and Bishop Wordsworth.
* * * * *
The New Testament Company has undergone less change. Four members have
been added--
Dr. David Brown, Professor of Divinity, Free Church College, Aberdeen.
Dr. C. Merivale, Dean of Ely.
Rev. Edwin Palmer, Professor of Latin, Oxford.[127]
Dr. Charles Wordsworth, Bishop of St. Andrews.
Four also have been removed--Dean Alford, Dr. Eadie, and Bishop
Wilberforce by death, Dean Merivale by resignation.
* * * * *
The first chairman of the Old Testament Company was Bishop Thirlwall. Upon
his resignation of the office in 1871 Dr. Harold Browne, then Bishop of
Ely, now Bishop of Winchester, was appointed to succeed him, and has
continued to hold the office until now. Dr. Ellicott, Bishop of
Gloucester and Bristol, has from the first presided over the New
Testament Company.
The Old Testament Company appointed one of their own number, Mr. Aldis
Wright, to act as their secretary, taking the minutes of their
proceedings, and conducting all needful correspondence. The New Testament
Company deemed it better to assign this office to one who was not himself
burthened with the responsibilities of the revision, and they were happily
able to secure the efficient services of the Rev. John Troutbeck, M.A.,
one of the Minor Canons of Westminster Abbey.
It will be seen that of the sixty-five English scholars who have taken
part in this work forty-one have been members of the Church of England,
and twenty-four members of other churches. Of the latter number two
represent the Episcopal Church of Ireland, one the Episcopal Church of
Scotland, four the Baptists, three the Congregationalists, five the Free
Church of Scotland, five the Established Church of Scotland, one the
United Presbyterians, one the Unitarians, and two the Wesleyan Methodists.
It is on many grounds a matter for thankfulness that they who took the
initiative in the formation of the two Companies were able to secure so
wide a representation of the various religious communities of our country,
and men belonging to different schools of religious thought. For while no
one can reasonably suppose that in the present day any body of Scholars
would consciously allow themselves in the translation of the Scriptures to
be swayed by any theological bias, there is, as all know, such a thing as
unconscious bias; and it was greatly to be desired that no such suspicion
should be raised against this Revision as for a long time obtained in
reference to the Revision of 1611. It was also to be desired that no
ground should exist that would give an excuse for any to say that through
the bias of theological prepossessions the interpretations given by some
to important passages of Scripture were unconsciously ignored, and that,
had such interpretations been brought under the consideration of the
Revisers, they must, as honest scholars, have accepted them. Such a ground
of objection has happily been excluded by the constitution of the two
Companies. The varieties of theological opinion found amongst the Revisers
have been an efficient protection against any lapse of the kind referred
to, and it may safely be affirmed that no interpretation of any important
doctrinal passage for which any respectable amount of authority could be
claimed has failed to come under notice, or to receive a careful
examination.
The advantage resulting from this varied representation in the membership
of the two Companies has been still further extended by the arrangements
which have secured the co-operation of a considerable number of American
Scholars. Shortly after the formation of the two Companies steps were
taken for enlisting such co-operation; and after some correspondence with
representative men in America, the Rev. Dr. Philip Schaff, of New York,
was requested to act on behalf of the English Companies in selecting and
inviting American Scholars. In October, 1871, it was reported to the New
Testament Company that Dr. Schaff had verbally informed the secretary that
the American Revisers were prepared to enter upon their work. Various
causes of delay, however, intervened, and it was not until July 17th,
1872, that the communication was made that the American Companies were
duly constituted. These Companies held their first meeting on the 4th of
October in that year. The following is the list of their Members.
THE OLD TESTAMENT COMPANY.
Professor T. J. Conant, Baptist, Brooklyn, New York.
Professor G. E. Day, Congregationalist, New Haven, Conn.
Professor J. De Witt, Reformed Church, New Brunswick, N.J.
Professor W. H. Green, Presbyterian, Princeton, N.J.
Professor G. E. Hare, Episcopalian, Philadelphia, Pa.
Professor C. P. Krauth, Lutheran, Philadelphia, Pa.
Professor Joseph Packard, Episcopalian, Fairfax, Va.
Professor C. E. Stowe, Congregationalist, Cambridge, Mass.
Professor J. Strong, Methodist, Madison, N.J.
Professor C. V. Van Dyke,[128] Beirût, Syria.
Professor T. Lewis, Reformed Church, Schenectady, N.J.
In all eleven members.
THE NEW TESTAMENT COMPANY.
Professor Ezra Abbot, Unitarian, Cambridge, Mass.
Dr. G. R. Crooks, Methodist, New York.
Professor H. B. Hackett, Baptist, Rochester, N.Y.
Professor J. Hadley, Congregationalist, New Haven, Conn.
Professor C. Hodge, Presbyterian, Princeton, N.J.
Professor A. C. Kendrick, Baptist, Rochester, N.Y.
Dr. Alfred Lee, Bishop of Delaware.
Professor M. B. Riddle, Reformed Church, Hartford, Conn.
Professor Philip Schaff, Presbyterian, New York.
Professor C. Short, Episcopalian, New York.
Professor H. B. Smith, Presbyterian, New York.
Professor J. H. Thayer, Congregationalist, Andover, Mass.
Professor W. F. Warren, Methodist, Boston, Mass.
Dr. E. A. Washburn, Episcopalian, New York.
Dr. T. D. Woolsey, Congregationalist, New Haven, Conn.
In all fifteen members.
Four Members have since been added to the Old Testament Company; namely:
Professor C. A. Aiken, Presbyterian, Princeton, N.J.
Dr. T. W. Chambers, Reformed Church, New York.
Professor C. M. Mead, Congregationalist, Andover, Mass.
Professor H. Osgood, Baptist, Rochester, N.Y.
One Member, Professor T. Lewis, has been removed by death.
Four Members have been added to the New Testament Company:
Dr. J. K. Burr, Methodist, Trenton, N.Y.
Dr. T. Chase, Baptist, President of Haverford College, Pa.
Dr. H. Crosby, Baptist, Chancellor of New York University.
Professor Timothy Dwight, Congregationalist, New Haven, Conn.
Four also have been removed by death, Dr. Hackett, Dr. Hadley, Dr. C.
Hodge, Dr. H. B. Smith; and two by resignation, Dr. Crooks and Dr. Warren.
* * * * *