APPENDIX. How can we tell how far this process of reconciliation was carried? Why is it that we have not the works of the Heretics, of whose names ecclesiastical History is so full? sulted some one. Page 147.-See the Note.-Mr. Byrth seems to think it impossible to have worded the Title of his Lecture so as not to have inWill he allow me to suggest what the Title might have been without offence, though not with exact truth of description" Some of the interpretations of the Improved Version of the New Testament based upon defective Scholarship." To attribute dishonesty" and want of "candour," Mr. Byrth will I am sure feel to be too vulgar to be altogether worthy of his character as a Critic and a Scholar. In the text of his Lecture (p. 122), he indeed states his belief that Unitarian Interpretation, of every kind, wants scholarship, or wants honesty-and it was to the proof of this statement that he ought to have applied himself, or else to have altered " the Title of his Lecture. Page 148.-Luke iii. 23.-" And Jesus himself began to be about thirty years of age, being (as was supposed) the son of Joseph." This passage was not introduced into the first part of Mr. Byrth's Lecture as This I originally delivered. I state this only to excuse myself for having taken no notice of it in the body of my Lecture. is the case also with some other passages. There were also expressions and sentiments of Mr. Byrth spoken, but not printed. would not state this were it not necessary to justify some passages in my own Lecture. I refer especially to an oratorical use that was made of a most objectionable and irreverent sentiment of Coleridge's, fall of the very spirit of dogmatism and presumption. P. 161. With regard to Luke iii. 23. The rendering of the Improved Version is that of Bishop Pearce, who I suppose had no heretical reason for preferring it. I confess it does not seem natural. Dr. Carpenter thinks the words " as he was supposed," put in to guard against some Gnostic or Platonic error, and for the purpose of stating distinctly that he was the son of Joseph, as he was supposed to be. The same writer acutely remarks that it is most improbable, indeed next to impossible, that any writer should trace our Lord's descent from to be his father, thus nullifying his own genealogy. Kuinoel gives a David through Joseph, and then declare that Joseph was only supposed suggestion of Boltenius, to which he evidently inclines that is évoμíceto applies not to the supposed descent of Jesus from Joseph, but to the whole genealogy. I annex his note. "Boltenius ad h. 1. suspicatus est, verba ús évoμíšero, non tantum eo referenda esse, quod Judæi falso putaverint, Josephum esse Christi parentem, sed spectari quoque his verbis genealogiam ipsam h. 1. exhibitam, eaque reddenda esse: hanc putabant esse Jesu genealogiam, erat pater ejus Josephus, hujus pater Eli, etc., ut adeo Lucas professus sit, se inseruisse genealogiam, prouti ea in manus ipsius venisset, seque authentiam illius acrius defendere nolle. Hac ratione admissa, explicari forte etiam posset, quî factum sit, ut Lucas genealogiam ipsi suspectam, in Evangelio infantiæ Jesu propositam, ad calcem illius fortasse adjectam, h. 1. inseruerit, quod nempe aliquamdiu dubius hæsisset, an eam reciperet. Alii opinati sunt, hanc genealogiam, cum diversa sit ab ea, quæ in Matthæi commentariis reperitur, cum laxiori vinculo superioribus annexa sit, non a Luca ipso, sed serius additam esse." : Page 149.-See the Note.-" Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary of whom (Mary) was born (or was begotten) Jesus who is I called the Christ." "Now is it possible to declare, in plainer terms, that, though Jesus was born of Mary, who was married to Joseph, yet that Joseph did not beget him."-Magee. Great is the ingenuity here, wonderfully misapplied. Is it not clear that St. Matthew was tracing the descent of Jesus from David, and that he brings down the chain to the very last link, namely Joseph, that is, the very Joseph necessary to be included, the husband of the mother of Jesus? That Joseph, the very husband of Mary, from whom Christ was born, being thus shown to be a lineal descendant of David, the Evangelist stops. What could he do more? His object being to trace the descent of Jesus from David, what could be more natural than, when he arrived at Joseph, to say-here is the unbroken succession, for this is the very man who was the husband of that Mary from whom Jesus was born. Of course the writer could not alter the form of expression until he arrived at the very man whom he wished to identify as the husband of Mary, the mother of Jesus-and the reason for altering it then is very obvious. If Joseph was not the father of Jesus, the genealogy is vitiated, for it is through Joseph that the descent is traced. Pages 157, 158.-" He was in the world, and the world was made by APPENDIX. "He was in the world, and him, and the world knew him not." the world was enlightened by him, and yet the world knew him not." -I. V. This interpretation cannot, I think, be defended. I am sorry it was ever given. Yet Mr. Byrth's sarcasm is quite powerless eyes which it against it, what kind of light is that which blinds the was intended to illuminate?" in the face of the text-" the light shineth in darkness, and the darkness comprehendeth it not;" unless he adopts the interpretation of some of the Fathers,-" And the darkness did not insinuate itself into the light, interpenetrate and quench it." Page 161.-The liberality of ROBERT HALL. We desire to speak with respect of this great and good man. But perhaps it would be impossible to name a man more illiberal as a controversialist, and who allowed himself such an unmeasured use of uncharitable language. It was only the other day I learned an anecdote of him from the person to whom the words were spoken, descriptive at once of his vigour and his rancour speaking of the Unitarians he said—" they are inspired from beneath,”—with a look, said my informant, never to be forgotten. Many passages might be brought from his writings, especially his Reviews, demonstrative of this temper,—but the passage given by Mr. Byrth himself, in which he is satisfied to rest conclusions so momentous and fearful upon reasonings so arbitrary and vague, is quite enough. When any man acquainted with the state of Theological opinion in the world, and with the impossibility of uniformity, can upon his own opinions as essential, and run a doctrinal line between Heaven and Hell, we require no further tests of his "liberality," unless indeed he is, what Mr. Hall was not, only a traditional fix believer. I have already remarked that some of my observations apply more to the spoken than to the printed lecture. Were it possible to efface the impressions made by the speaker, and which required to be counteracted, gladly would I efface every word of personal reference from my pages. Even now, with the recollection fresh upon my mind, of the unsparing contempt, both literary and moral, expressed by words and tones, not conveyed by the printed page, when the speaker, feeling that the sympathies of his audience were with him to the full, and that their knowledge of the subject required from him the broadest statements, to render it intelligible, gave himself to the excitement of the moment,-I have more than doubted whether it would not have been better to have avoided every personal allusion. I believe that I have in no case overstated or misrepresented what was said. I deeply grieve to fix upon my pages the suggestions, perhaps, of momentary excitement, which Mr. Byrth's better feeling has, in some instances, refused to record-and that the obligation I was under to remove an impression actually made, does not permit me to give full effect to this working of a kinder spirit, the manifestations of which, in other ways, I have respectfully to acknowledge. LIVERPOOL. Syllabus of a Course of Lectures now in course of delivery successively. UNITARIAN LECTURE, ON TUESDAY EVENINGS IN PARADISE-ST. CHAPEL. 1839.-February 12. 1. The practical importance of the February 19. - Rev.R.P.Buddicom. 9. The Deity, Personality, and Operations of the Holy Ghost - Rev. J. E. Bates. 2. The Bible; what it is, and what Rev. J. H. Thom. Rev. J. Martineau. Rev. J. H. Thom. Rev. H. Giles. 5. The propositionThat Christ is tures March 19. 6. The scheme of Vicarious Redemp- March 26. Rev. J. Martineau. Rev. J.Martineau. 7. The unscriptural Origin and Ec- Rev. J. H. Thom. The Course of Unitarian Lectures will be published weekly, and may be had of JOHN GREEN, Newgate Street, London, WILLMER AND SMITH, Liverpool, and all other Booksellers. |