« 前へ次へ »
of Sacred Criticism, and we have no doubt the work will occupy an increasingly distinguished place in the estimation of the public.
4. The Lipsig edition, published by J. Frederick Fischer, in 1767 and 1768, from a MS, in the Library of the Paullinian College, containing the whole text of Leviticus and Numbers, with a part of Exodus and Deuteronomy.
5. The Catena of Nicephorus on the Octateuch. Ist. and ad. Samuel, and ist, and 2d. Kings taken from two Constantinopolitan MSS. one of the 13th. the other of the 14th century, printed at Lipsig, in 772–1774. The catena exbibits the commentaries of 51 Greek fathers upon the text. The reader will observe that the edition of Cardinal Carafa, printed at Rome, by Zanetti in 1587, is not mentioned here, because Dr. Holines takes this edition for the ground work of his own: and with it, all the MSS. Fathers, Versions, and Editions are collated.
The FATHERS and other Greek writers, which are quoted in the various readings, are divided by Dr. H. into three classes.
1. Those who wrote tefore the Tetrapla edition of Origen: 9. Those who wrote before he published the Hexapla: and
3. Those who wrote after the publication of both. The chief of these in their chronological order are Philo Judæus, Barnabas, Clemens Romanus, Hermas, Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr; Irenæus,Theophilus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Hippolytus, Origen, Gregory Thaumaturgus, Eusebius, Athanasius, Cyril of Jerusalem, Epiphanius, Basil the great, Gregory Nyssen, Gregory Nazianzen, Chrysostom, Isidore of Pelusium, Cyril of Alexan. dria, Theodoret, Basil of Seleucia, Cosmas Indicopl., Damascenus, Theophylact, Euthymius, and Zigabenus.-Besides Asterius, Acasius, Diodorus, Gennadius, Hesychius, Macarius, Methodius, Nicetas, Procopius Gazæus, Severianus, Severas, Theodorus, and many others..
The VERSIONS are 1. The antient Latin, Itala or AnteHieronymian, or the Latin version which was in use before Jerom formed that text, which is now called the Vulgate .
2. The Coptic, or that in the language of Upper Egypt.
5. The Arabic, from four MSS. all taken from the Septuagint, so far as they are quoted in this work. The Version of the Pentateuch, by Hareth ben Senan ben Shebat, made A. H. 891. which answers to A. D. 1436. seems to be of most importance. On this version Dr. H.'s reinarks are extend. ed to a considerable length, and are peculiariy interesting.
6. The Slavonic, the various readings of which have been selected from two editions, one, Ostrogens. 1581. folio; and the other, Mosouæ 1759,
7. The Armenian made in the 5th. century, is quoted from the Venice edition of 1733.
8. The Georgian made also in the 5th century, and printed Moscuæ, 1743, folio. For a particular account of these, we must refer to the work itself. The following, which is the concluding paragraph of this preface, we select as worthy of parti. cular observation.
“ Hoc unum "superest monendum, quod collationes istæ ex omni genere, quæ ad hoc opus per hos quindecim annos jam fuerunt elaboratæ, in Bibliotheca Bodleiana reponantur, atque vel a me, si vivam et valeam, vel, si aliter acciderit, ab aliquo quodam Editore sub auspicio Colendissimorum Typographei Clarendoniani Oxoniensis Curatoruin, iu publicum emittentur."
With sincere and deep regret we inform our readers, that this very laborious and eminent critic, died at his house in Oxford, in November 1805, in the fifty-sixth year of his age. But, from the intelligence contained in the preceding paragraph, we learn, that so much is already done towards the perfecting of this important edition, that there is every reason to believe the work will be continued, and the lovers of Biblical Literature soon put in possession of the most valuable edition of this venerable version ever published since the days of Origen. We take this opportunity to recommend the work to the notice of our readers, and hope that many will feel disposed to promote the accomplishment of the undertaking, by their influence and pecuniary aid.
In our succeeding Number we shall take a general view of the collations which were carried on for fifteen years, both at home and abroad; the literary treasures which were opened, and the contributions which were made, to enable the Doctor to carry his grand project into execution. After which, we propose to examine some of the inost important various readings, that we may be able to appreciate the benefit, which the republic of letters, and the cause of Divine Revelation, are likely to derive from the completion of this arduous and expensive undertaking..
(To be continued.)
Art. X. Roscoe's Life and Pontificate of Leo. X. continued from p. 132.
which introduces us to the eventful period, when Martin Luther first made a distinguished figure in Christendom. Whether the extravagance of Leo, in his domestic expenditure, his munificence to men of letters, and his profusion in public spectacles, had greatly reduced his finances, or whether his project for completing St. Peter'at Romę vastly exceeded his revenues, certain it is, that he found himself greatly embarrased, and under the necessity of obtaining supplies by extraordinary means. He bad recourse to the sale of indulgences, which had, indeed, in former times been resorted to in cases of great emergence, but which at the present time, was the most imprudent measure that 'could have been devised. In the dark ages, there was nothing .so gross, which might pot be imposed upon the vulgar, but the
tiine of Leo was distinguished, in an extraordinary degree, by a .spirit of inquiry and the diffusion, of knowledge, and nothing was so directly calculated to destroy all reverence for the church of Roine, as this monstrous traffic in indulgences. It required but little sagacity to foresee, that it would be followed by unbounded licentiousness among the vulgar, contempt among the learned, and indignation among those who still retained the least regard for common decency. Leo was equally unfortunate, moreover, in his choice of persons for carrying on this mer'chandize. Among the most shameless of these infamous iner'chants, was one John Fetzal, a Dominican inquisitor. “ This frontless monk, says Mosheim, executed this iniquirious commission, not only with matchless insolence, indecency, and fraud, but even carried his impiety so far, as to derogate from the all-sufficient power and influence of the merits of Christ." He boasted that he had saved more souls from hell, by his indulgences, than St. Peter had converted to Christianity by all his preaching: and among his other blasphemous expressions, he used to say: '“The moment the money tinkles in the chest, the soul. mounts up out of purgatory." "A soul inay go to heaven, in the very moment, in which the money is cast into the chest. The man who buys off his own sins by indulgences, merits more than he who gives alms to the poor, unless it be in extreme meccssity. The unblushing impudence of this farmer of indulgences, together with the profligacyand profaneness to which they gave birth, at length arvused the indignation of Martin Luther, who was, at this time, an Augustine monk, and a professor in the University of Wittemberg. This singular, and almost divine, man seems to have been raised up by the peculiar providence of God, for the work of refořination, and the pious reader of his history will not fail to remark the extraordinary manner in which he was first induced to give bimself up, to the service of the Church, the suitableness of his education for the work in which he was to be employed, the rare union of temper and talents which qualified him to meet every emergence, and the extraordinary coincidence of circumstances which opened the way to events the most distant from his thoughts, when he first commenced his 'career. ' He possessed a spirit, bold, ardent, and invincible; a genius quick, and penetrating; and a mind stored with a vast fund of knowledge, considering the times in which he lived. His
memory is said to have been exceedingly retentive, his speech com. manding and eloquent, liis eye piercing, and his person impressive of respect and reverence. He was indefatigable in labour, undis. inayed in difficulties, and so ardent a friend to truth, that he followed her, wherever she led, without ihe least regard to consequences. However, not exempt from the lot of humanity, he had faults, which sometimes threw a shade over his brightest actions. He was naturally irritable, and had too strong a proa pensity to sarcasm and jesting. The former failing caused him to take up some things ioo hastily, and sometimes hurried hiin to undue lengths; and the latter occasionally prompted him to treat his adversaries with a degree of contempt, which can by po means be justified.. .
· Such was the man whom it pleased God to use as his instrument, in effecting the greatest reformation that the church had experienced, since error and profligacy had found their way into it. His opposition to the scandalous sale of indul. gences led him to a discovery of other enormities, and he proceeded from exposing one error and abuse to the detection of another, till the whole inass of papal corruption opened before hrim, and he saw the absolute necessity of totally renouncing all * connection with this “ Mystery of iniquity," lest he should be “partaker in her plagues." But it is of importance to remark that this was among the very last of his discoveries. He had been nursed in a superstitivus veneration, for the successors of St. Peter; and had imbibed, from his earliest infancy, the notion that there is no salvation out of the pale of the church. The following account, which Luther himself gives, of the progress he made in his great work, and which we have extracted from the excellent work of Mr. Milner, entitled “ Church History,” will be found of great importance towards appreciating the value of that part of Mr. R's work, which relates to the reformation accomplished by Luther.
“Before all things, says he, I intreat you, pious reader, for our Lord Jesus Christ's sake to read my writings with cool consideration, and even with much pity. I wish you to know that when I began the affair of indulgences, at the very first, I. "was a monk, and a most mad papist. So intoxicated was I and drenched in papal dogmas, that I would have been most ready at all times to murder, or assist others in murdering, any person, who should utter a syllable against the duty of obedience to the pope. I was a complete SAUL; and there are many such yet. There were, however, and are now, others, who appear to me to adhere to the pope on the principle of Epicurus; that is, for the sake of indulging their appetites; when secretly, they even deride him, and are as cold as ice, if called upon to defend the papacy. I was never one of these; I was always a sincere be
liever; I was always earnest in defending the doctrines I pro-, fessed: I went seriously to work, as one who had a horrible dread of the day of judgement, and who, from his inmost soul, was anxious for salvation.
" You will find, therefore, in my earlier writings, with how much humility, on many occasions, I gave up very considerable points to the pope, which I now detest as blasphemous, and abominable in the highest degree. This ERROR, iny slanderers, call INCONSISTENCY;--but you, pious reader, will have the kindness to make some allowance, on account of the times and my inexperience. I stood absolutely alone at first; and certainly I was very unlearned, and very unfit to undertake matters of such vast importance. It was by accident, not willingly or by design, that I fell into these violent disputes; God is my witness.' Vol. 4. pp. 332, 333.
This general view of Luther's character and conduct seemed necessary to clear the way to some remarks, that we shall take the liberty of making on Mr. R's account of this great reformer. Luther, evidently, is not a favourite with Mr. R. and we have sometimes been disposed to doubt, whether the reformation itself stands any higher, in his estimation, than the author of it; at least, he has, certainly, betrayed no undue partiality to either. What strikes us, on a general survey of Mr. R's account of this great work, is an oversight of any interference of Providence in it;--every thing is astribed to the natural connexion between cause and effect, without any regard to a supremne cause; God makes no appearance in this transaction. Mr. R., moreover, attributes to Luther and his adherents, a systematic plan of opposition to the church of Rome, an eagerness to seize on every circumstance which could add celebrity and respectability to their cause, at the expense of the credit of the papal see: whereas, it is abundantly evident that the reforiner had conceived no idea of separating from the church of Rome, till absolutely coinpelled to do so, and that he was, at all times, peculiarly anxious to be considered, as one of her must dutiful soir, Lastly, Mr. R. has overlooked a variety of circumstances in this controversy between Luther and the church, which would have placed the character of the reformer in a favourable light, while he has frequently dwelt with apparent pleasure and minuteness, on what seems likely to bring discredit, on his principles, and conduct. He begins with the following remarks."
“ The peace of the church, thus restored by the labours of the council (of Lateran) was not however destined to remain long ùndisturbed. Scarcely had the assembly separated, before the new opinions and refractory conduct of Martin Luther, a monk of the Augustin order, at Wittenberg, attracted the notice of the Roman court, and led the way