1 - Newton - History of Two Corruptions of Scripture
1 - Newton - History of Two Corruptions of Scripture
1 - Newton - History of Two Corruptions of Scripture
COLLECTION
OF
CD
IN
= CM
ICO = 0)
iCD
THEOLOGY.
BY JARED SPARKS.
No. lY.
CD
CO
Vo\
'^
fif 2^
OCTOBER,
1823.
CONTENTS.
SIR ISAAC
NEWTON,
------
191
CHARLES BUTLER,
Historical outline of the controversy respecting 323 THE text ok the Three Heavenly Witnesses,
BOSTON
PUBLISHED BY
O.
EVERETT, NO.
CAMBRIDGE
:
13
CORNHILL.
University Press
Hilliard
& Metcalf.
1823.
SIR ISAAC
NEWTON'S
HISTORY
OF
NEWTON.
a few
human race are recorded the have shone as the ornawho men,
whose wisdom
has muhiplied the triumphs and hastened the progress of intellect, and whose genius has thrown a splendor Of this fortunate number Newton over the world.
stands at the head.
To
give a
life
full
account of
this
and
wonderful
in the
human mind,
to reveal the
deep things of nature, unfold the mechanism of the universe, and enumerate the achievements of science
during the
last
century.
will
No
here be undertaken, nor any thing more than the outlines of a subject, whose compass
turesome task
is
so vast, and
Sir Isaac
Woolsthorpe, near
Grantham, Lincolnshire, on the 25th of December, 1G42. In his early infancy he was extremely feeble, and
httle
hope of
his
life
was entertained.
His
194
father died three
newtojSt.
on the mother.
accordingly the charge of the son devolved wholly She spared no pains with his edu-
cation, and kept him under her own eye till he was twelve years old, when she sent him to the public school at Grantham. He was boarded in the house
began to display the peculiar bent of his genius, and to give a presage of what its future versatihty and power would accomplish.
It
first
was here
that he
It
is
recorded of him, while at this school, that more on practical mechanics, than
on
which the other boys devoted to play, he was busy with hammers, saws, and hatchets, constructrecreation,
Among
was a wooden
telling the
by water, and
the top.
He made
them
was
flying
of
He
fabricated tables
schoolfellows,
and other
and
is
said to
to
The
motions of the heavenly bodies did not escape his notice even at this period ; for he formed a dial
NEWTON.
195
At
first
to neglect his regular studies j occupations caused him but he had too much spirit quietly to look on while
other boys were gaining places above him, and he at but a distinlength maintained not only a reputable,
guished standing in the school. In the mean time his mother's second husband
died, and as she
son,
home
manage
To
this
but with so
mothlike-
were not
flourish
in
hands.
It
he
is
neither to be
for a
applauded
for
admired
The
important
making
his
a bargain,
he
own
time was
passed
in
early
haunts
at
the apothecary's house, reading books, or planning machines, till it was announced that the time of his
return had
arrived.
in the
managed much
produce
at the
itself
was
its
sale of
market.
17*
196
NEWTON.
So unpromising were the prospects of making him a farmer, that his mother resolved to yield to his
propensities,
scholar.
To
and put him in the way of being a this end he was again sent to Grantham
At Grantham he resided nine months, and was then entered at Trinity College, Cambridge, on
school.
the 5th of June, 1660, in the eighteenth year of his In this situation, so favourable for drawing out age.
and improving
his
pecuhar
It
talents,
his success
was
was not among the least equal fortunate circumstances to Newton, that Dr Barrow was at that time fellow of Trinity College. With
to his advantages.
highest order,
and
man would
lege
genius as that
;
not be long in discovering so bright a which then began to dawn in his col-
his greatness,
and, with a modesty and good temper equal to he would not be slow to encourage the
ardour with which the young student was animated, it could advance his at-
his adviser
and
men
of his time,
who were
be desired.
into the
channel of his
of the
vogue, especially
NEWTorf.
197
and Wallis. It is Kepler, Descartes, Saunderson, remarked of him, that he gave no time to the more elementary books usually put into the hands of begimiers.
partially, for
by a glance of the eye at the enunciation and diaof the gram, he saw at once the process and result
demonstration.
The wide
distance,
forced to traverse with slow and painful steps, in their entrance to the profound sciences of numbers and
Propogeometry, he passed over at a single stride. sitions, which required elaborate demonstrations to
bring them out of the mists of doubt, and make them evident to other minds, were to him self-evident truths.
nature, and
with the
we
we can
fact,
sublimest inventions of
human
genius.
first
It
be
said.
took the degree of bachelor of arts in the year 16G4, at which time, and for some months after, he appears to have been engaged in optical researches.
He
in
attempting
;
it
known,
198
NEWTON-
with the design of making experiments to try DescarThe next year after he was tes' theory of colours.
graduated, these inquiries were interrupted, and he was compelled to leave Cambridge on account of the
plague, and take refuge
country.
at
his
own home
in
the
it
mind
like
his,
with the
world of unexplored nature before him, would not be It was during this season of seclusion, that he idle.
caught the dawning hints of his great discovery of gravitation, the origin of which is among the most
striking illustrations of the
in
philosophical musings,
Trifling as
spirit
when an
was
this
incident,
it
of Newton,
mind
Why
should
an
apple
fall
Why
it
By
?
questions, which he asked himself; and, although he could not answer them, he was led into a train of reflections,
to the highest
of
a tendency in
this
bodies to
to its centre,
and that
tendency
is
NEWTON.
199
not perceptibly diminished by ascending to different elevations, as the tops of lofty buildings, and the
summits of high mountains. Why then should not the power, which causes this gravitating tendency,
reach beyond the remotest points of the earth's surface
?
.''
Why
bodies
And
their motions
be
in
some way influenced by this power, as well as the motions of bodies less distant from the centre of the
Not that it is necessary, that the tendency, or should force, everywhere be the same ; for although it is not sensibly diminished on any part of the earth's surearth
?
become weaker.
Pursuing
this train
By comparirg the periods of the planets, with their several distances from the sun, he ascertained, that if they were actually held in their orbits by a power like that of gravitation on
instituted a calculation.
he
and decrease
in proportion as the
only remained to determine, whether a power, acting by such a law, would keep the moon in its
It
orbit,
and produce
its
several motions.
it
He went
was unsuccess-
the results did not correspond with observation ; did not appear that the moon was actuated by such a
;
and he was not encouraged to prosecute his labours. Hereafter it will be seen, however, that he
power
200
was deceived, and
NEWTON.
that
ter
In the year 1667 Newton took his degree of masof arts, and was elected fellow of his college.
to
Cambridge.
engaged
For
in his
less
optical experiments, although only at intervals during his retirement. His was to
primary object
accomplish
the telescope
and
to
this,
elliptical
figure
His attempts proved aborthrough a spherical lens. tive, for, whatever figure he gave to his lens, the image was still defective. Wearied with ill success, he desisted from the labour of and begrinding lenses,
took himself to experiments with his In these prism. experiments he was struck with the oblong form of the spectrum, and the brilliancy of the colours which
it
exhibited.
He
light, in
fracted, in
lar.
It
passing through the prism, were equally rewhich case the spectrum ought to be circu-
was, nevertheless, invariably oblong. He observed, moreover, that the colours were regularly arranged, the red uniformly appearing at one end, and the violet at the other. From these appearances
in passing through the prism are not equally refracted, but those com-
NEWTON.
201
ed.
from those of any other colour, and are thus separatIt hence followed, that light is composed of
rays of as
many
in a certain
uniform angle.
This
this great discovery to be extensive most the of application, since susceptible it is intimately concerned with all the phenomena of
light
and colours.
He
which he had laboured respecting the cause of the imperfection of telescopes ; for he found by computation, that the different refrangibility of light contrib-
uted several hundred times more to produce this effect, than refraction through a spherical lens. Hence, if a
figure could
be so formed as
of
re-
main, and the image would scarcely be more distinct. He despaired of conquering this double difficulty,
and resorted
for the
to the
applied himself to forming and polishing metallic concave mirrors with his own hands, and finally constructed two telescopes of
principle of reflection.
this
He
description, the
first
of which
is
now
in the
pos-
session of the
Royal Society. ment received the name of the Newtonian telescope, and was the foundation of all the great improvements
In a letter to Oldenburg,
This kind of
instru-
by
202
Newton,
in
KEWTON.
which the errors of
refrangibility
might be
corrected by passing the rays of hght through substances possessing different dispersive powers, so that
the refraction of one should be counteracted by the
opposite refraction of another.
But there
is
no
evi-
this
The
was not
lost
it
has been so far improved, that have been made perfectly achro-
One
discovery in
ena of colours.
laid open, in a
He
all
rnalysed
the
rainbow.
He
various colours in
By
a series of
curious experiments and philosophical deductions, to the conclusic::, that there is a thin,
transparent covering on th? curfaces of bodies, in is both refracted and reflected, produc-
One colour process different colours. over because the another, configuration of prevails the particles on which light falls is such, as to absorb
by
this
nearly
all
In almost
all
the fixed colours of opaque bodies, th3 three principal properties of hght, refraction, reflection, and inflection, are
is
concerned.
There
is
no
light,
and
this
an accident,
and not a property inherent in matter. Newton has In the language explained its cause and its nature.
of a poet, he " untwisted
all
NEWTON.
and
in the
203
words of a philosopher, who happily pursued the figure so beautifully started, " he made
the texture of the magic garment, which nature has so kindly spread over the surface of the
visible
known
world."*
was
so completely renovated
may
author.
While thus successfully going forward in the march of discovery, his patron, Dr Barrow, had been appointed professor of mathematics at Cambridge.
in
But
1669, he concluded to resign his professorship, as he wished to devote himself more exclusively to
theology.
cessor.
By
The
his desire
duties of his
much on
some degree
That he might, however, complete what he had so successfully begun, he caused his optical inquiries to be the chief subject of his
lectures during the raised to
the
three
matured
his new discoveries into a system. Newton was elected a member of the Royal
Soci-
time he was chosen, a teles1672, sent him was exhibited for the inspection by cope of the society. So highly was it approved, that a
ety in and, at the
resolution
was passed
Second
to
forward a description of
II.
it
Playfair's
Dissertation, Part
sect. 3.
18
204
to
NEWTON.
optician,
true author.
In a letter read by Oldenburg shortly after to the Society, Newton gave intimations of discoveries to which he had been conducted in optics, and which
he proposed
to
learned body.
These proved
his new theory of light At the earnest solicitation never as yet made public. of the Royal Society, his papers on these subjects
were immediately printed in their Transactions. Newton was now more than thirty years old, and had been
in developing the of nature, but this was the profoundest mysteries first occasion on which he had appeared before the
employed
for
nearly
ten years
public as a writer.
His theory met with a chilling opposition from almost every quarter, and he was so much disturbed at the petulance and peevishness with which he was
by ignorance in the garb of pretended knowledge, he was so much vexed by the narrowassailed
ness and jealousy of some, and the bitterness of others, that he sometimes repented of having jeopardthe world with truths, which
receive, and w^hich
of years to
elicit
had cost him the patient labour and mature. He was first attack-
ed by Hooke, and then by Pardies, Gascoigne, Lucas, and other writers on the continent. Being once
NEWTON.
enlisted,
it
205
his spirit to shrink
from the contest, and he replied promptly to every animadversion from a respectahle source, which was
He
was
at last
triumphant on a basis
So
foreign
his dis-
position and feehngs, that he absolutely refused to publish his Optical Lectures, which were then ready
for the press ; nor did they see the hght till more than thirty years afterwards. In alluding to this " I blamed he own
controversy,
says,
my
imprudence
quiet, to
for parting
as
my
This remark
sufficiently indi-
It
may
justly
com-
applause as the evidence of a pacific and unassuming temper, but we can hardly be required
our
to
mand
descend
to the
level of his
He was
of
motives
;
than
love
and
zeal
for
and notwithstanding
his chagrin
at the out-
he had the
at length
it
gave
new
aspect to the
science of optics.
since the apple in
206
NEWTON.
when he was
resume
that subject.
He
Dr Hooke
a falling body, subjected to the double influence of the diurnal motion of the earth, and the of
power
gravitation.
into
This
letter
inquiries
nature of this description of curves, and orompted him to retrace the steps of his former
the
calculations in regard to the
moon's motion.
The
he had been deceived by the old measurement of the earth, which was essentially false ; making a
truth
is,
degree to consist of sixty EngHsh miles, whereas, by the late and more accurate measurement of Picard, a
half.
degree was ascertained to be sixty-nine miles and a As Newton reckoned the moon's distance in
semidiameters of the earth, and as the length of a semidiameter depended on the length of a degree, this difference gave rise to an enormous error, and
failure
and discouragement.
By
new
He proved sanguine hopes were more than realized. with demonstrative accuracy, that the deflection of
the
to
moon towards
the earth
is
precisely what
it is
it
ought
actuated by a force
operating inversely as the squares of the distances. He then brought the other planets within his calculation, and found the same law to hold in them all.
a discovery
in
nature,
more profound
in its details,
difficult
NEVVTOK.
in its demonstration,
207
and more important in its results, than any which has ever yielded to the force of indusThe law which governs the try, or the light of genius.
heavens and the earth, the uniting principle of the universe, the cement of nature, was detected, and its
rules of action developed
to the
We
Newton was
the
first,
who imagined
attraction
tured long before, but no one had been able to prove the fact. It is not certain that the ancients had any
distinct notions of a
power
like that
of gravity.
Lufor-
and
mation of the world, has some fanciful allusions to a kind of principle, which keeps the earth self-balanced
some manner in the the motions of inexplicable producing stars. But it is doubtful, after all, whether he supin the
poses these effects to be produced by an internal Lupower of attraction, or an external pressure.* cretius is mentioned, because he to allowed be may
have spoken the sense of the large and flourishing sect of the Epicureans, whose he defendphilosophy ed with an ingenuity and of a better eloquence worthy
subject.
Copernicus had some obscure notions of a gravitating principle In the earth, which he supposed to
De Rerum
Natura, Lib. V.
18*
208
exist also in the stars
in their
NEWTON.
and planets, and preserve them
spherical forms.
He
calls
it
a kind
of nat-
ural
appetency*
farther,
and
supposed that an attracting power not only existed in the earth, but that it might reach to the moon and
other planets, and that they might reciprocally attract each other. To such extravagant lengths did his
fancy lead him, that he even assigned to the planets a sort of animating, self-directing principle, by which they were endowed with a sympathy for one another
and enabled
of space.
as gravity
power
to
must act
in
proportion
the
From
this brief
sketch
it
had no conception of a gravitating power ; that Copernicus supposed it to extend not beyond the body of each planet ; that Kepler assigned to it a reciprocal influence
among
knew
nothing of
its
Dr
farther, but in estabUshing the existence of such a power, he went not beyond the
Hooke advanced
confines of probability.
two
essential
particulars
first,
the
fact,
that
an
attracting
the
; secondly, principle pervades law by which this principle acts. Take these away, and no conjectures about attraction could ever
'^
all
matter
tiam
Equidem existimo gravitatem non aliud esse quam appetenquandam naturalem. De, Revol. C(rL Orb. Lib. I. Cap. 9
NEWTON.
be converted
to a single practical use.
tlie
209
But now
immovable
basis of
demonkey of
they
put
in
nature.
Newton undoubtedly
had
as far as he
but,
discoveries, they
literally
the
With
a
this
law
at
new system
of the world.
to
He
difficult
problems pertaining
heavenly bodies, and explained the celestial phenomena in a manner at once simple and satisfactory. In all his inquiries on these subjects, as well as on
every other, he rigidly pursued the
mode
;
of philoso-
or rather phizing recommended by Lord Bacon his own mode, as he made it peculiarly his own by being the first, who reduced it to practice, and
With him
is
it
was
to
be assumed
as a principle, which does not rest on observation or experiment, and that no hypothesis is to be admitted as estabhshing a fact.*
This axiom he never deserted, and hence the profound investigations into which his sublime geomQuicquid enim ex phaenomenis non
canda
est
;
et
mechanics,
in
philosophia experiraenta-
210
etry carried him,
NEWTON.
were clothed with the same
certain-
calculations.
He
walked among the planets, and took their dimensions, and measured their periods, and ascertained
their motions
much
and influence on each other, with as the ocean security as the mariner traverses
;
and he went forward with equal assurance, that he should not be deceived nor misled. He explained the lunar irregularities, which had
all
baffled
former
astronomers, he
suggested
and
and
comets.*
The
these
first
Newton gave of
sent
discoveries,
to the
was
in
1G83, when he
short paper Royal Society containing a dozen This to the planetary motions. propositions relating who visitpaper attracted the attention of Dr Halley,
ed Newton
at
following,
and
became fully acquainted with his novel and astonishing attainn.ants in these high departments of astronomy.
No man was
timate them, and he extorted a promise from Newton, that he would make farther communications to the
*
Lorsque
la
NEWTON.
Royal Society.
ing,
211
subsequent meetappointed to cor-
Accordingly
at a
him of
his
prom-
The consequence
was, that
to arrange his materials form, and on the ISth of April, 1686, he presented to the Society the manuscript of the Philosophic
began
It
was put
to
it
human
with so
much
applause as
destined to receive.
Its originality
to
its
success.
it
make
stand, especially
when such
a faith
is
met by preju-
dice on the one hand, and a spirit of jealousy on the other. Theory and observation harmonized so perfectly
in
this
constrained
to fall
system, that the more impartial were in with the author's conclusions,
his
although they could not go with him to the depths of But the power of old opinions was geometry.
too strong to suffer the scales to drop from the eyes
Many there were in the higher walks of science, who would see and confess nothing it was their pride to be sceptics as to the new phiof the multitude.
;
losophy.
Descartes
they
212
dwelt
in a fairy land,
NEWTON.
and could not descend from the
tion
the humble sphere of demonstraregion of dreams to and fact. So strong did the current set against
Newton's philosophy, that Voltaire spoke truth, in the opinion of Playfair, when he said that the Prin-
had not twenty advocates out of England at the time of the author's death, notwithstanding it had
cipia
been nearly
in
And even
for-
earlier mally introduced into the universities at an It made its way slowly, but surely. period.
The schools astonished stood, but found it vain To combat still with demonstration strong, And, unawakened, dream beneath the blaze
Of truth.
When
the
a foot-
ing abroad,
its
had been
It fortunately passed through tardy in the outset. the hands of a succession of men eminently qualified, both by intellectual ascendency and mathematical
skill, to illustrate
The fluxdeepest principles. field it was a an untrodden ional analysis opened ; magic wand in the grasp of the mathematician. Armits
this potent instrument, he interrogated nature It with an authority and success before unknown. diffidark or was that all let in a flood of light upon
ed with
cuh
La
NEWTON.
Newton's fame, and certainly
to his discoveries.
21S
La
Place, in particular, has gone up with the transcendental calculus to the summit of the Newtonian
system, and all firmer foundation.
his lahours
have tended
to fix
it
on a
After having proved throughout a law Uke that of gravitation, that his great work, all the irregularities of explains with rigid precision
the celestial motions, he concludes, that from this
circumstance, and the extreme simplicity of such a law, we are authorized to believe it the law of
nature.*
Newton's discovery did not end here. It created it was not limit-
The
principle of
the largest.
affinities,
It lets
and
tells
sition
other properties.
is
influence,
it
it
called
and ahhough
does
same laws of
is
action as in
reason to sup-
pose, that this deviation is caused by the figure, position, and other accidentsof the particles brought in contact.
allowed to have
I.
Liv. 2. chap,
1.
214
chemistry depend.*
NEWTON.
thus find him applying his not to discovery explain the machinery of the only universe, but to detect the method of penetrating the
We
to
light
the
of
They
said
was the
and that the whole system was no more than a revival of the old, exploded philosophy.
tion
it
To
this objec-
part, that
he did
not pretend to have discovered the cause of gravity ; and, moreover, that if such a discovery were made, it
would add nothing towards confirming the truth of his theory.f He was concerned with effects ; the
uniformity of these he called
a law
;
The
law is investigated in its operations, and while these are subject to a fixed rule, nothing will be gained And here, it may be or lost by knowing the cause.
observed,
exemplified the pecuhar character of the Newtonian philosophy, in which the causes of physicis
*
t
liis
p. 20.
nondum
potui deducere, et hypotheses non fingo. Princip. Gen. And, after his discussion on contiguous at-
" I traction, he says, scruple not to propose the principles of tion above mentioned, they being of very general extent,
leave the causes to be found out."
Oplics, Queri/ 31.
moand
NEWTON.
al
215
consideration,
till
events do not
come under
the
effects
We
It
now come
to
conception of
this invention
Newton
in
1663, a short
At
than slight
infinities.
us, that
he arrived
even then he published nothing on the subject, but contented himself with using the instrument, which
his
Before
this
invention,
the
mixed mathematics
Problems were
difficulties.
curves and the phenomena of motion, which involved intricacies, that would yield to no powers of
calculation then known. It was frequently impossible so far to simplify the data, as to subject tiiem either to a geometrical or algebraical process, and no
more than an
be obtained.
indefinite
approximation
of fluxions
to truth
is
could
The method
free
from
sources of difficulty, and easily accommodates itself to the conditions of abstruse problems. It embraces all the relations of numbers and
quantity, and
may be
19
216
NEWTON.
It is
to
to
assistance.
The
after
its
first
Newton gave of
in
this
invention,
was
the
origin.
This dilatoriness
making
it
known
Leib-
Germany, had already published several in which the principles of fluxions were clearpapers ly laid down, and the mathematicians of the contiin
The
contest
the partizans of these two illustrious philosophers, till at length the Royal Society appointed a committee to investigate the subject to the bottom.
In their
report
that
it
was decided
in the
Newton was
question
the original inventor, and the only was, whether Leibnitz had seen any of
of Newton's papers, which might unfold to him the This question has never been completely mystery.
answered.
in
London some
of Newton's mathematical papers in manuscript, is certain ; but there is no good evidence of his having
derived any hints from them on this subject, nor any Fontenelle considerpositive proof to the contrary.
ed Newton
the
as unquestionably
the
first
inventor,
and
NEWTON.
same.*
217
Play fair, and other English mathematicians have conceded, that Leibnitz was the second invenNewton. tor, ahhough many years after This concession, whether well founded or not,detracts
no degree from Newton's glory, for nothing is more certain, than that he invented and employed the calcuin
any other person. It is among the fortunate events connected with the progress of science, that the same mind, which detected
it
was known
to
ment by which
its
this
influence traced
this task the old
To
ly
*
the Principia, however, the author never uses directthe fluxional analysis.f
Many
of his theorems
In the preface to the Elements of the Geometry of Infinities, " M. published by the Academy at Paris, 1727, it was stated that, Newton trouva le premier ce marveilleux calcul ; M. Leibneitz
le publia le
premier."
tThe
Second Len^-
ma
of the Second Book, but they do not enter into the strations in the body of the work.
demon-
to his
Newton was charged with having preferred the old geometry own new analysis. The truth seems to be, however, that
in its
he preferred each
proper place.
ssepius se repreiiendebat,
quod
res
rationibus tractavisset, et quod libro suo de algebra Arilhmcticac Universalis titulum posuisset, melius asserens Cartesium suum de
re
eadem volumen
di.\isse
Geometriam, ut
sic
ostenderet hascom-
putationes subsidia tantum esse geometria; ad inveniendum. Dr Winthrop, Professor of Mathematics at Harvard University, wrote
a tract to show that this representation is erroneous, and founded on a misrepresentation of a remark by Dr Pemberton in the
218
NEWTON.
their
truth
but in communicating ; by these truths, he gives a decided preference to the It is not so much his purpose to synthetical mode.
describe the process by which he comes to certain results, as to make these results obvious to others ;
admit a question, whether the profound researches of the French mathematicians might not have done more to enlarge the bounds of
it
and
will
at
least
science,
plify
if
wonder-
working analysis, by the aids of the old geometry. We have now briefly touched on Newton's three
great discoveries, the law of gravitation, the refranThese gibility of light, and the fluxional analysis.
constituted the brightest era in the progress of
human
entire
to
work an
fame of their author. The study of the creation was commenced on new principles, and prosecuted with new success. Truth was called down from heaven it beamed on the to earth inquirer's path, and
;
encouraged him
to
persevere
in
the
enterprize of
hiding places of nature, and many discovery. of the mysterious workings of omnipotence, became
familiar to mortals.
preface lo his
The
View of Newton's
philosophy.
Gent. Magazine,
NEWTON.
219
Our
ed
in
devoted
philosopher lived a retired Ufe at Cambridge, to the duties of his professorship, and absorb-
Scarcely a single incident is known of him, unconnected with his immediate pursuits and discoveries, during the space of
his favourite studies. thirty years.
It is
mentioned as greatly
to his credit
when
to
king James sent a mandamus to the university confer the degree of master of arts on father
Newton was
what
privileges of
who
strenuously resisted
ed
to
was among the delegates appointremonstrate to the high commission court, and
that the king thought
it
He
was executed,
to enforce his
expedient not
demand.
In 1688
sen by the university a member of the convention parliament, in which he held a seat till that body \v?s
dissolved.
Montague, at that time chancellor of the exchequer, and afterwards earl of Halifax, was educated
for at the
Mr
The
to
great
take
by the distin-
guished talents of his friend, as well as to elevate to an office of dignity and emolument. At the the chancellor, the king solicitation of appointed
him
19*
220
him warden of
NEWTON.
the mint
in
afterwards he was raised to the responsible post of master of the mint. This place yielded him an
he retained
services
annual income of nearly fifteen hundred pounds, and His it during the remainder of his life.
and
at all
When Mr Whiston
in this important station, times gave the fullest satisfaction. appointed to his office in the mint, he made
deputy in the professorship of mathIn 1703 ematics, and allowed him the whole salary. he resigned all his duties at Cambridge, and through
his
his influence
the
Whiston was elected his successor. In same year Newton was chosen president of the
Royal Society, and two years afterwards the order of knighthood was conferred on him by Queen
Anne
It
in consideration
was not probable, that a mind hke Newton's would suffer the labours of his new station to drive him entirely from philosophical pursuits ; yet we do not learn, that he did any thing more in this
work on Opics, way, than to prepare for the press his been nearly had which and his Method of Fluxions, The book on Optics in readiness for many years.
was published
1704, and is more diligently elabThe author the Principia itself. than orated perhaps, in discoveries his on value seems to have set a peculiar
in
and imbeing fully aware of their originality exhibits a masterly example His work portance.
optics,
of the
testifies
to the
NEAVTON.
221
splendid success, which may crown the efforts of It was genius when aided by persevering industry.
translated
into
Latin,
author,
by Dr Samuel
Clarke.
optics
The
deep and original thoughts by which they are marked, and for the sagacity of
have been admired
their
author in suggesting
many
probable results in
philosophy, which experiment and observation have Some of them no doubt he had provsince verified.
apprehension, that they might not be acceptable to a public not yet prepared for their reception, induced him to employ this cautious methed, but his
He had been taught of experience, that truth is no welby the discipline come guest when it comes in the garb of innovation,
od of making them known.
and that ignorance
is
easily dazzled
to blindness
by
the time of publishing his Method of Fluxions, Newton gave himself but little to the study of
From
He mathematics, unless for occasional amusement. used to say, that " no old man loved mathematics
except
Dr
Wallis."
It
was
controversy with Leibnitz occurred, but in this he was not personally engaged. It was carried on by Dr Keill, and other English mathematicians. The
facility
by Leibnitz
English nation,
222
his genius, nor his
NEWTON.
mathematical
skill,
ed by neglect.
At four o'clock
in the
was impairafternoon he
received the problem, as he was returning fatigued from his labours in the mint. Before he went to bed
the solution
was completed.
of the success with which the
We
were spent
other treasures of knowledge. As his early years in reading the book of nature with the
so his declining
nobler pursuit of unfolding the science of the moral world, and conThe ardour templating the ways of God to man.
days carried
him onward
in the still
the
heavens, was not more fervent than that with v/hich he inquired for the truths of the spiritual and invisiHe read the scriptures, pondered their meanble.
ing, illustrated
many
down
and holy
import.
In
many
The same
power of intellect was appHed with equal energy in both characters ; and had not his briUiant discoveries
in the
former engrossed
all
the mind of
latter
man
is
him
to
commanding
station
among
lifetime, that
person of eminence in the church, said of him in his " he was the best divine and commen-
NEWTON.
laioY
223
on the Bible he had ever met with." And it is a remark of Dr Chalmers, that " we see in the theology of Newton, the very spirit and principle which
gave
all
its
stability,
and
all
its
He was
made
in
all
means of understanding the Scriptures. His great work on Chronology had for one of its main objects the verification of the writings of the Old
This work cost him the labour of many
Testament.
years, and
It is
was not published entire till after his death. drawn from an immense fund of classical and
acquaintance with the poets, historians, and critics of He begins with a historical sketch former times.
of chronological science from
that the chronology of ancient
its
origin,
and proves
is
kingdoms
All
involved
in the utmost uncertainty. profane history runs back to tradition, and then soon loses itself in
utter darkness.
before the establishment of the Persian empire, and the Greek antiquities are so full of fable, that no
reliance can be placed on
first
them
in fixing dates.
fiction,
It
The
and
has been
their
early history.
was
so
in
224
NEWTON.
Grecian writers have been guides to all future chroThe Romans depended on the Greeks for nologists.
the chronology of the East, while in the history of their
own
worthy of credit, till the age of Alexander. And as for western Europe in general, it had no chronology
till
some
parts
much
Out of
this chaos,
and certainty.
He
Greek mode of reckoning was erroneous, and assigned to the Greek nation too high an antiquity.
On
by astronomical
he builds a system of chronology, widely different from any, which learned moderns have deduced from
ancient writers.
The
general
to about
some
The same cautious important events to much more. and rigid mode of reasoning prevails throughout his
chronological treatise, as in his philosophical researches; the same exactness of logic, fertility of invention,
in detecting and combining the forcible of an points argument. On the Grecian mythology he throws much light,
and sagacity
and with learned ingenuity traces the gods and minor deities of Greece and Rome to the deified heroes of
He finds their origin at a much later period Egypt. than most writers, and discovers that various names
NEWTON.
have been multiplied from the same
original.
225
The
work
the
a cm'ious discussion concerning the earth, the commencement of peopling of towns, of agriculture, the arts and sciences, idolcloses with
first
which have grown out of the social compact. The value which the author set upon this treatise, may be estimated from the fact, that the
and
institutions,
first
than half of the chapter, which constitutes more whole work, he copied out eighteen times with his
own hand.
He
observes, that he
commenced
the
study of chronology and history while at Cambridge, as a relaxation from his severer pursuits. With all his horror of controversy he was again
driven into
it
in the latter
Caroline, renowned
for
her
civilities
to
men
fond of conversing with Newton, and often expressed her satisfaction, that it was her fortune to live in the
She had
caught glimpses of his new views of chronology, and desired him to favour her with an abstract of his
system,
to
At her request,
Coiiti, a
Abbe
its
of
tian
betrayed his
trust
he arrived
in
Paris.
He procured the abstract to be translated into French and published without the author's consent or knowlTo this translation notes were afiixed confutedge.
226
ing
its
NEWTON.
positions.
Newton was
so indignant at this
unworthy conduct of Conti, as well as the perfidy of the translator, who pretended to have asked consent
to publish the abstract, that
he wrote a reply
in
the
now
in his eigh-
which was equally remarkable for the of its argument, and the keenness of its rebuke. power The controversy was continued by Souciet on one
side,
and
Dr Halley on
till
to
a close
about
Whiston wrote against the Chronology, and boasted many years afterwards, that his objections were never
answered.
The remarks on
on the Apocalypse ; but on both they exhibit traces of the same depth of learning and patience of investigation,
starts
which characterize the Chronology. He with an inquiry into the origin of the books of
and advances the theory, so
enlarged on of late, that the historical parts are compiled from various written documents now
lost.
much
The present Genesis, and the books of the Kings. number and arrangement of the Jewish scriptures
were not
settled
till
after the
Roman
captivity,
when
their
the points,
and committed
KEWTON.
ral traditions to writing in the
227
Talmud.
No
vari-
ous readings were preserved, and whatever errors had crept into the text before this period cannot now be
repaired, except from
Newton
ic
the version of the Seventy. Daniel at the head of the places prophetwriters, and considers his prophecies as a key to
the interpretation of the others, and the foundation of the christian religion.
iel
The
periods foretold by
Dan-
accord so exactly with the times of the ministry and death of our Saviour, as to present the clearest
possible evidence, that the prophet spoke the dictates of divine inspiration. The book of Daniel was
written by different persons ; the six first chapters are a collection of papers of a historical character ; the six last only were written and these Daniel, by at various times.
After a series of preliminary observations to this the author traces each of the effect,
prophethe
par-
cies
of
Daniel
to
its
verification
in
succeeding
The vision of the Four Beasts, and Ten Horns of the fourth beast, he explains with
events.
ticularity
the Seventy
to the usual
The prophecy of Weeks he translates anew, and, contrary mode of interpretation, refers one clause
of It to the second coming of Christ. His acquaintance with chronology enabled him to apply the several parts of this remarkable prophecy with great exactness to the events to the Mesprincipal
relating
siah, to the time of his
birth, his death, the duration
20
228
NEWTON.
civil
and
by
astronomical
In regard to the Apocalypse, it has been the prevaiUng opinion of learned men, that this book was written later, than any other part of the Scriptures
;
it
an earlier origin.
He
would seem
Gospel, and at
Hebrews,
as
to
be alluded
to
in those
Epistles.
remarks on the authenticity of the Apocalypse, he proceeds to explain some of its dark prophecies,
which, as he considers them to bear an intimate relation to the prophecies of Daniel, he interprets on
similar principles.
in certain points
predict the
same
many
and progress of the papal hierarchy. courses on the prophecies are confined
dictions
which he believes
to
have
been
he hazards no conjectures beyond the limits of evidence ; hence some parts of the Apocalypse he does
not touch, but leaves them to be unfolded in the order
of providence.
tract
by Newton,
entitled a History
first
of
Two
publish-
NEWTON.
ed
in
229
1754.
which was among the papers formerly belonging to Le Clerc, and deposited after his death in the Remonstrants'
Library
at
Amsterdam.
this tract in
So
early as
1708,
to
Le Clerc mentioned
its
his preface
ignorant of
in
his
came
it
to
own
handwriting.
Some
in
beginning and end, he apphed to the heirs of Newton to be favoured with a perfect transcript from the
motives never explained, this request was not granted, and the piece found its way to the
original.*
From
it
was
left
by
Le
Clerc.
When
Horsley published
this tract
an edition of
was printed from a copy of the original manuscript then in the possession of Dr Ekens.
It
is
in
John
to
be an interpolation, and
gate reading of the disputed passage in Timothy. f Considering the early stage at which he took
up
and the comparatively unexplored region through which he was compelled to pass, he has
this subject,
managed
*
t 1
his
Wetstenii Prolegomena,
John
V.
7;
Tim.
iii,
16.
230
success.
NEWTONT.
Fathers,
the
His knowledge of the Greek and Latin theologians of the middle ages, and
the history of sacred learning, as displayed in this work, impresses the reader with amazement at the
universality of his
Notwith-
standing the length to which the controversy on the text in John has since been carried, and the eminent
has called into action, very few weighty particulars have been added to those first collected
talents
it
by Newton ; and it would have been no disparagement to the champions of the cause he sustained, if they had manifested more willingness, than they have
done, to acknowledge their obligation for the aids they have received from so illustrious a source.
Newton
left
many
which have not been pubhshed. Whiston mentions a tract on the Rule of Faith, and one on the Dominion of the CJergy.
iind noticed
an article on Comiptions of Scripture, and another entitled Paradoxical Questions concernSeveral pieces are designated by ing Athanasius.
title
the general
of Church Matters.
No
reason has
been assigned by the persons into whose hands these papers have fallen, why they should be withheld
from the public. duced them not
It
intro-
has been supposed, and no doubt rightly, that the in theoloopinions they express on certain doctrines
NEWTON.
ogy are not such
dard of Horsley.
cause, every fair
as squared with the
231
orthodox stan-
Whatever may have been the mind must seriously regret, that the
Newton, on the important subjects of rehgious truth and scriptural interpretation, should be withheld from the world.
recorded thoughts of such a
as
man
Some of his pecuhar theological sentiments may be discovered from his writings, and the testimony
of his friends.
Whiston
tells
us of his profound
knowledge of church history during the three first centuries of the christian era, and of his having been convinced by his study of this history, that the doctrine of the trinity
was introduced
scheme many years after the time of the Apostles.* The tenour of Newton's writings is in accordance
with this declaration, nor do they exhibit any evidence, that their author ever believed in a trinity.
The
his papers
charge against Horsley of having suppressed because they were adverse to this doctrine,
also the faith of Ne^^ton, that in early times
was
christian preachers
were
first
and then ordained by bishops, and that no person could be ordained to the pastoral office over any
The
In the satne
Present State of the Republic of Letter?, vol. III. p. 282. work may he seen several other particulars concern-
Newton.
See also
An
Inquiry in-
comparative Moral
Doctrines, p. 367.
20*
232
congregation,
till
NEWTON'.
whom
of
he was
to teach.*
church
government seem
have
approached
He did not nearly to those of the Independents. hold to the baptism of infants, but believed that all
the subjects of this
advanced
in
gious instruction. f
To theology and ecclesiastical history the leisure hours of this great philosopher were devoted during
the last thirty years of his
fice in the
life.
The
enabled him to penetrate deeply into those branches of sacred knowledge, to which he at first applied for
relaxation and amusement.
Till his eightieth year his health
He
was then
afflicted
with a severe
,he never entirely recovered, although he went puncthrough the labours of his office till within a
tually
year of his death. It has been said, that his mind became so
much
impaired in his advanced age, that he could not understand his own works ; but this is a mistake, as is
testified
by Pemberton.
some time previously, Newton was attended by Dr Mead, with whom he held such conversations as
Republic of Letters, vol.
i
Ill, p.
281-
Ibid. p. 280.
NEWTON.
233
proved him to have full possession of his faculties. He died on the 20th of March, 1727, in the eightyfifth year of his age, and his remains were deposited
in
as
wise
is
as
Plato
chain
have
dream,
that there
who
will
deny
?
to
Newton
the
first
rank
in
is
Other philosophers have been renowned for genius, acuteness, and power of intellect ; they have been quick to invent, and sagacious
destined to occupy
to discover the
nature,
and the deeper reasons of things. Other philosophers have shone as stars of the first magnitude in
the firmament of science
;
in
they may have gone before the rest of mankind ; in one endowment of nature they may have stood without an equal.
reflected glory on
Newton's effulgence they are eclipsed and lost. All the rare qualities, which singly measured the greatness of others, were combined in him, and contribut-
ed
him
to the
emi-
nence he held, and sustain him there. To no being whose destiny has been fixed among mortals, can be
more
justly
234
that ever invoked the
NEWTON.
philosophic inuse.
Of New-
ton
it
may
truly
be
said, that he
was one,
Sol*
In private hfe he was mild and affable, peaceful in his temper, gentle in his manners, and a lover of
tranquillity
little
and retirement.
ready
in conversation.
among
his
arrogance or pretension, putting himself on a level with other men, and ascribing whatever progress he
had made
knowledge wholly to his untiring industry and patience. As he was a stranger to pride, so he was free from any affected singularities. He was gen^
in
wherever
it
was found.
His religious
faith
was
settled
',
on the foundation of reason and the Scriptures and strong ; he was a christian piety was steady
behef and
ciples and
in practice.
his
in
of his mind, together with the unison in his philosoformed a perfect and wonphy, morals, and rehgion, the in all derful harmony parts of his character.
Lucret. de Rerura Nat. Lib, IIL
v. 1056.
Alf
HISTORICAL ACCOUNT
OF
TWO CORRUPTIONS OF
IN A
SCRIPTURE.
LETTER TO A FRIEND.
SECTION
I.
On
I.
the
have
raised in
text
of
in
scripture
Three
concerning the testimony of the Heaven, 1 John v. 7, I have here sent you
an account of what the reading has been in all ages, and by what steps it has been changed, so far as I Ajid I have can hitherto determine by records.
done
it
the
more
stand the
many
church have put upon the world, it will scarce be than is comungrateful to be convinced of one more
For ahhough the more learned and quick-sighted men, as Luther, Erasmus, Bullinmonly believed.
236
some
others,
place for
making
against
heresy.
But
whilst
we
exclaim against the pious frauds of the Roman church, and make it a part of our religion to detect and re-
nounce
it
all
we must acknowledge
that ac-
than
the Papists
for
we
so
much blame on
count
they
act according
to their religion,
but
we
contrary to ours.
a long time in the western, the faith subsisted without this text ; and it is rather a danger to rehgion, than
reed.
an advantage, to m.ake it now lean upon a bruised There cannot be better service done to the
purge
it
truth, than to
of things spurious
and, there-
fore,
am
my
mind
plainly
especially since
is
no
article
of
faith, no point of discipline, nothing but a criticism concerning a text of scripture which I am going to
write about.
II.
The
some
is this.
First,
ter,
spirit,
wa-
to
and blood, of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, Then Jerome, for the same end, prove them one.
to allege
it
against
the Vandals, about sixty-four years after his death. Afterwards the Latins noted his variations in the mar-
237
to
in
books
and thence
it
following
centuries,
came
crept out of the Latin into the printed Greek, against the authority of all the Greek MSS.
up,
it
;
went soon
after into
on both
III.
sides.
The arguments
in
the
Three
Heaven,
all
and almost
'
IV. Cyprian's words run thus,* "the Lord saith, and the Father are one.' And again of the
'
And Son, and Holy Ghost it is written, these Three are One.' " The Socinians here deal
Father,
too injuriously with Cyprian, while they would have
this
in
another place
If,"
"
saith
he,
[" one baptized among heretics] be of God, tell me, I pray, of what
^
made God ?
;
the temple
If of the
Dicit
et Filio et Spiritu
Dominus, Ego et Pater unum sumus et iterum de Patre Sancto scriptum est, Et tres unum sunt. Cypr.
Dei factus
est,
de Unit. Eccles.
t
Si teraphiin
Si
Spiritus
Sancti,
cum
tres
unum
sinf,
quomodo
ad Jubaiamtm.
238
Holy Ghost,
the
since these Three are One, how can be reconciled to him who is the Ghost Holy " These enemy of either the Father or the Son f
places of Cyprian being, in my opinion, genuine, seem so apposite to prove the testimony of the Three in Heaven, that I should never have suspected a mislake in
it,
could
I
it
with the
reading in the next ignorance the Latins of both Africa and Europe, age, amongst For had it been in as well as among the Greeks.
meet with of
Cyprian's Bible, the Latins of the next age, when all the world was engaged in disputing about the Trinity, and all arguments that could be thought of
and daily brought upon could never have been ignorant of a text, the stage, which in our age, now the dispute is over, is chiefly In reconciHng this difficulty, I considinsisted upon.
were
by Cyprian
are
in
only words of the text quoted both places are, " And these Three
to the
One
;"
eighth
For Eucherius,*
hibent
itatem
eo quod perfecta ipsa perhibeat testimonium Christo ; ; quia ipse de se dicit, me dereliquerunt
;
sanguine, Christum deroonstrans, utique per manifestans. spiritu vero Sanctum Spiritum
239
us, that
many
spirit,
the
And water, and the blood, to signify the Trinity. St Austin* is one of those many ; as you may see in his third book against Maximinus, where he tells us, that " the is the for God is a
spirit
Father,
for
spirit
Christ gives to
he
;
is
thirst
made
flesh."
Now
if it
was
many
Father, the
plain that the testimony of Three in Heaven, in express words, was not yet crept into their books ;
this testimony,
it
was obvious
for
man
say of
Sane
falli te
nolo in
epis(oI;i
Joannis Apostoli, ubi ait, " (res sanguis, et tres unuin sunt ;" no forte
aquam
et
tamen dictum
fallaris
;
esse, tres
luium sunt.
ne
hanc
enim
sunt, in
Si
sanguinem diversas esse substantias, Propter hoc admonui te, quibus non quid sint, sed quid osteniiis
mus
lus,
inquirere
summus est Deus, Pater et Fiiius et Spiritus Sanctus; de quibus verissime dici potuit, tres sunt testes, et tres ununi sunt ;
nomine
spiritAs significatuin acci|)ianuis
Deum Patrem, (de Deo adorando loquebatur Dominus, ubi ait, " spiritus est Deus); nomine aufemsangniiiis,Filium; quiaverbum caro factum est nomine autem aqu;p, Spiritum Sanctum. Cum enim
ut
ipso quippe
;
rctur Jesus,
quam
ait
autem
D.
dicit
de Spiritu,
quem
Jlugiistin. cont.
Maximinum.
cap. xxii.
21
240
Holy Ghost, 'And these Three are One.' " And that
"
it is
written,
this
was Cyp-
rian's
sixth century,
that Cyprian, in
stood
to be the Father,
and blood, Son, and Holy Ghost; and thence affirming, that John said of the Father, Son, and Holy " Ghost, These Three are One." This at least may be
it
gathered from
this
in
Nor do
*
understand
how any
of those
many who
Facundus, in tlie beginning of liis book to the Emperor Justinian, pro Defensione triuni Capituloruni Concilii Clialcedonensis,
first
dis-
tinctly in these
words
de Patre
et
Filio et
Joannes Apostolus, in epistold sua, " Tres sunt, qui tesSpiritu Saucto sic dicit,
;
Nam
timonium dant
sunt;"
in
in terra, 'jiiritus,
spiritu
significans
litlle after
aqua,et sanguis et hi tres unum &ic. Joan. iv. 21. in aqui And a 37, in sanguine vero Filium.
;
Patrem,
tliis
interpretation
thority, saying,
Aut
si
forsan
ipsi,
quod
dixit,
sanguis, et hi tres
" tres sunt qui testificantur in terra, unum sunt," Trinitatem nolunt
in terra testificari, et qui
.'
dum
tur,
Joanne respondeant.
Numquid
unum
esse dicun-
Quod tamen Jopossunt spiritus et aquae et sanguines dici annis Apostoli testimonium B. Cyprianus Carthaginensis, antistes et martyr, in epistola sive libro quem de Trinitate, immo de Unitatc Ecclesia3 scripsit,
intelligit; ait
enim,
" dicit
de Patre, Filio, et Spiritu Saiicto dictum Dominus, 'ego et Pater unum sumus ;' et
' iterum de Patre, Filio, et Spiritu Sancto scriptum est, et hi " ex Facunil. Lib. i. edit. tres unum sunt.' Sir7nondi, Parisp. 16;
ik, 1629.
241
spirit,
or any
water, and blood, for a type of the man else, who was ignorant of the
in Heaven, as the churches testimony of the Three in the times of the Arian controversy generally were ;
And
even Cypri-
an's own words do plainly make for the interpreta" For he does not say, the Father, the Word, tion.
and the Holy Ghost," as it is now in the seventh verse ; but " the Father, and Son, and Holy Ghost," as it is
in baptism
to derive
;
the
first
the Trinity.
be pretended,
that the
words
reads
by Cyprian are taken out of the seventh than out of the eighth, because he rather verse,
cited
not.
Hi
Trcs in
Unum
sunt, but
Hi
Tres
Unum sunt; I answer, that the Latins generally read, Hi Tres Unum sunt, as well in the eighth verse, as in as you may see in the newly cited places the seventh
;
follow,
and
of Cyprian respects the eighth, or at least is as applicable to that verse as to the seventh, and therefore is of no force for proving the truth of the seventh ; but, on the contrary, for disproving it we have here the
testimony of Facundus, St Austin, Eucherius, and For those many others whom Eucherius mentions.
if
met with
it
in
their
books,
the
the
spirit,
242
V. These passages in Cyprian may receive further light by a hke passage in Tertullian, from whence
Cyprian seems
to
for
it is
well
known
lian's
Cyprian was a great admirer of Tertulwritings, and read them frequently, calling
that
The
passage
is this
;*
"
The
in the
the
Paraclete,
makes three coherent ones from which Three are One, (one thina;, not
it is
said, 'I
;'
denoting the unity of substance, not the singularity of number." Here, you see, Tertullian says not, " the Father, Word, and Holy Ghost," as the text now has it, but " the Father, Son, and Paraclete ;"
nor cites any thing more of the text than these words,
" which Three are One." Though this treatise against St Praxeas be wholly spent in discoursing about the
Trinity, and
all
it,
and
this text
of St John, as
we now read
it,
would have
been one of the most obvious and apposite to have been cited at large, yet Tertullian could find no more obvious
words
in
One."
ty,
" these Three are purpose than These, therefore, he interprets of the Triniit
for
his
"
and enforces the interpretation by that other text, and the Father are One ;" as if the phrase was
Patris in Filio, et Filii in Paracleto, tres efficit co-
"
et
qui Tres
quomodo dictum
tiae
"
est,
Ego
Pater
TeriuUian. luhers.
243
seems
to
have been
for giving
countenance to
he wrote
this
and
it
is
and forced an interpretation had its rise among a sect of men accustomed to make bold with the Scriptures.
it
Cyprianbeing used to itin his master's writings, seems from thence to have dropt into his ; for this
may be
men,
it
gathered from the Hkeness between their And by the disciples of these two great citations.
seems
to
many
in
the Trinity
by the
"
countenance of some such authority, an interpretation so corrupt and strained should come to be received in that
stand.
age so generally,
do not under-
VII.
lian
And what
is
and Cyprian,
said of that in
the feigned disputation of Athanasius with Arius at For there the words cited are only y.xi d Nice.
r^m
7 'K uTiv,
and
these
and they
are taken out of the seventh verse, without naming the persons of the Trinity before them. For the
Greeks interpreted " the spirit, water, and blood," of the Trinity, as well as the Latins ; as is manifest
from the annotations they made on
margin of some of their manuscripts.
this text
in
the
Si-
For Father
21*
244
mon*
MSS
oi
in the library
r^c7i el<riv
/^cc^rv^ovvrei
t^
Kxi
ro
u^mq xxt re
earth,'\
is
ce,in.x
,j'or
there are
and
the blood
there
this
remark,
bxvtou,
rare?-! t
nxrifo, xui
eivToi
that
is,
Holy Ghost, and the Father, and He of HimAnd in the same copy over against these self. words, t* o{ T^ui eli TO ev ii<ri, and these Three are One ; this note is added, mrevTi f4.tx B-sory.i, J; B-iog, One God. This MS is that is. One Deity,
the
about 500 years old. VIII. Also in the margin of one of the
MSS,
in
Monsieur Colbert's
library,
is
mon
tells
us there
a like
these words,
^sorjn,
and
the
sufficiently
of God, the FathThese marginal notes Holy Greeks used to apply this the how show
the testimony
Ghost.
should
tell
you
was not
writ
by Athanasius, but by
be much
insist-
ed upon.
* Critical History of the New Testamrnt, chap. f Suspicor verba h t~^ yri non extare in MS.
18.
245
spirit,
Now
this
water, and blood," to signify the Trinity, seems to me to have given occasion to somebody, either frau-
" the Three in testimony of Heaven" in express words into the text, for proving the Trinity ; or else to note it in the margin of his
dulently to insert the
book, by way of interpretation ; whence it might afterwards creep into the text in transcribing. And the first upon record that inserted it, is Jerome ; if
the preface* to the
*
canonicas.
ordo apud Graecos, qui integre sapiuiit, fidemque rectam sectantur, epistolaruin septem, quae canonicee
ita est
Non
nuncupantur, sicut in Latinis codicibus invenitur; ut quia Petrus est primus in ordine apostolorum, primaj sint etiam ejus epistola;
in
ordine ceterarum.
Sed
sicut evangelistas
dudunn
ad
reddidimus.
Est enim una earum prima Jacobi, si sicut ab eis digests sunt, ita quoin Latinum verterentur eloquiura,
primA Johannis
epistola,
compcrimus,
trium tantummodo vocabula, hoc est, aquae, sanguinis, et spiritOs, in ipsd sua editione ponentibus ; et Patris, Verbique, ac Spiritils testimonium omittentibus in quo maxime et fides catholica robora;
tur, et Patris
ac
Filii et Spiriti^s
una
divinitatis
siibstautia
com-
probatur.
dum a me impensius scripturae veritatem inqniris, mcam quodammodo seuectutem invidorum dentibus corrodendam exponis, qui me falsarium, corruptoremque Sanctarum proEustochium,
nunciant Scripturarum. Sed ego, in tali opere, nee aemulorum mcorum invidiam pertimesco, nee Sanctze Scripturae veritatem
posceniibus dencgabo.
246
under
not a
his
name, be
his.
new
translation of the
New
Testament, but
men
haps
this
think,
at
and among
in
;
his
first
testimony
he complains
in
of the Lat-
and makes answer, that former Latin translators had much erred from the
scripture
;
faith, in putting
in their edition,
Three
in
spirit, water, and blood," and omitting the testimony of " the Heaven," whereby the Cathohc faith is
only
" the
established.
he corrected
original
In this defence he seems to say, that the vulgar Latin translation by the
;
Greek
and
testimony the
in the
text relies
upon.
whilst he confesses
it
X. But
was not
Latin
accuses former translators of falsifying the Scriptures in omitting it, he satifies us that it has
crept into the Latin since his time, and so cuts off all the authority of the present vulgar Latin for justifying
before, and
And whilst he was accused by his contemporaries of falsifying the Scriptures in inserting it, this accusation also confirms that he altered the public reading. For had the reading been dubious before he made it so,
it.
no man would have charged him with falsification for Also whilst, upon this accusafollowing either part.
tion,
its
usefulness
it
renders
the
247
his making it, and the ground of his hoping for success. However, seeing he was thus accused by his
contemporaries,
it
examine
him and
his accusers.
And
so
he being called
to the bar,
we
own testimony for himself (for no man is a witness in his own cause), but laying aside all prejuof dicOj we ought, according to the ordinary rules
upon
his
justice, to
his accusers
XI.
They
in
his writ-
a strange liberty which he takes in asings, observe Many notable instances of this he has serting things.
very fabulous lives of Paul and Hilarion, not to mention what he has writWhence Erasmus said of ten upon other occasions. " in that he was him, frequently affirming things, violent and impudent, and often contrary to himBut I accuse him not. It is possible that he self."*
left
us in composing those
or,
through inadhis
Yet since
contemshould
we
Sicpe
numero
violentas,
parumque pudens,
Jlnnoiiilion. in
sacpe varlus, pa
v. 7.
rumque
sibi
constans.
Erasmi
Johan.
Leum
in
onyrao fusius
dixit.
248
XII.
Now the witnesses between them are partly the ancient translators of the Scriptures into the various languages ; partly the writers of his own age,
and of the ages next before and after him ; and partly the scribes who have copied out the Greek manuscripts of the Scriptures in all ages.
And
all
these
of
all
these,
in
it
will
Three
scripts,
Heaven" was wanting in the Greek manufrom whence Jerome, or whoever was the
author of that preface to the canonical epist?es, pretends to have borrowed it.
ancient interpreters which I cite as witnesses against him, are chiefly the authors of the
Xni. The
ancient vulgar Latin, of the Syriac, and the iEthiopic versions. For as he tells us, that the Latins omitted the testimony of " the
Three
in
Heaven"
in their
much
nations received from the beginning, and generally used, as the Latins did the vulgar Latin) that same testimony is wanting to this day ; and the authors of
as in the
249
Walton's Polyglot ; in the Armenian version,'''' used, ever since Chrysostom's age, by the Armenian
nations
;
and
in
Rascia, Bulgaria, Moldavia, Russia, Muscovy, and other countries, which use the Sclavonic tongue.
In a copy of this version, f printed at Ostrobe (Ostrow) in Volhinia, in the year 1581, I have seen it
and one CamillusJ relates the same thing ; out of ancient manuscripts of this version seen by him.
wanting
it
wanting also
in a certain ver-
1000 years
father
French church, which, saith he, is at old, and which was published by Nor do I a Benedictine monk. Mabillon,
know of any version wherein it is extant, except the modern vulgar Latin, and such modern versions, of
the western nations, as have been influenced by
it.
So
and
then,
by
all
the ancient
faithful interpreters
with,
*
who
doubtless
made
Episcopum
Codex Armeniaciis ante 400 annos cxaratiis, qiiem vidi apiid Ecclesia: Armeniaca;, quae Amstelodami coHi!<i(ur, locum ilium non legit. Sandius.Jlppend. Interpret. Paradox, in It. I.
tThe
sunt.
Unum
rum
^Testimonium Trium in Coelo non est in antiquissimis [llyricoet Ruthenorum codicibus ; quorum unum exemplar, a sex;
centis fere annis manuscriptum, janipridom apud illustri.ssimuni Gabrielem Chineum, terra" Bactrica; Dominum vidi, ct legi alterum manibus nostris teritur, fide et antiquitate sua nobile, CaviilIvs de Jlntichrislo, Lib.
ii.
250
" they could get, the testimony of the Three en" was not anciently in the Greek.
Heavverto
XIV. And
the
first
that
it
was neither
in the ancient
churches,
;
is
hinted above
universal,
namely, that
vehement,
lasting controversy about the Trinity in Jerome's time, and both before and long enough " the Three in Heaven" was after this text of
it,
and
never once thought of. It is now in every body's mouth, and accounted the main text for the business,
had
to
and would assuredly have been so too with them, And yet it is not once it been in their books.
be met with
in all
and other writings of the Greeks and Latins (Alexder of Alexandria, Athanasius, the council of Sardica,
Basil,
nus Afer, Philastrius Brixiensis, Phaebedius Agennensis, Gregorius Baeticus, Faustinus Diaconus, Paschasius, Aruobius Junior, Cereahs,
and others)
in
the
no, not in
Jerome him-
his
version and
preface
to the canonical
be excepted. The writings of those times and there is no arv^ery many, and copious which they do not urge gument, or text of scripture,
epistles
were
That of St John's Gospel, " I and again and again. the Father are One," is every where inculcated,
but this of " the Three
in
Heaven" and
their being
251
One,"
is
no where
to
be met with,
till
at length,
when
ignorant ages came on, it began by degrees to creep into the Latin copies out of Jerome's version. So far are they from citing the testimony of " the
the
Heaven," that, on the contrary, as often as they have occasion to mention the place, they omit and that too, as well after Jerome's age, as in, it,
in
Three
For Hesychius* cites the place thus ; Jludi Johannem dicentem, Tria sunt qui testimoniand before
it.
um
prcebent, et
et
is
Tres
Unum
guis,
which
in
The words
terra
he omits,
in copies
Cassiodorus, or whoever wanting. was the author of the Latin version of the discourse
Heaven"
reads
it
thus
et
Q^uia
et
tres
sunt,
et hi
qui
testijicantur,
spiritus,
aqua,
sanguis,
Tres
Unum
sunt.-\
Beda,
in his
commentary on
qui
it
thus
Et
s])iritus est
testificaiur ,
quoniam Ckristus
Tres
est
Veritas.
Quoniam Tres
^c.
et saiiguis, et
Unum
sunt.
Si testimonium,
far
But here
as I
text,
can gather from his commentary on have been inserted by some later hand.
first
The
author of the
epistle, ascribed to
Pope Eusebius,
reads
terra.
*
t
it,
as
Beda
if
And
the
Hesych.
in Levit. Lib.
22
253
Pope Leo
the place
;
Et
et
spiritus est
dant, spiritus.
sunt.
aqua,
sanguis
et
hi
Tres Untim
first
book
the
De
for
the unity of
Three Persons,
Hi
Tres
Unum sunt,
Johan-
nes dixit, aqua, sanguis, et spiritus ; Unum in mysThis is all he could find of the terio, non in natura.
text, while
therefore
he proves the unity of the persons by the mystical unity of the spirit, water, and blood ;
interpreting
those
of
in
the the
Trinity
with
Cyprian
eleventh chapter of his Yea, he recites the text thus ; Per aquam third book, fully et sanguinem venit Christus Jesus, non solum in aqua,
and others.
sed in aqua
et
sanguine
et
et
quoniam
spiritus
est Veritas.
spiritus, aqua,
sanguis
like
et hi
Tres
Unum
sunt in
Christo Jesu.'^
rius,
The
Jerome;
for Je-
rome did not prevail with the churches of his own time " the Three in Heaven." to receive the testimony of
And
his
for
them
to
know
for the
his version,
testimony, was
as
in effect to
condemn
XV. And
*
testimony
and
in his
in
the xivtli
iis
in
Luc.
xxii. 10,
book De
qui
mvsteriis
cap. 4.
253
De
Thesaurus, cap. 5 ; and again in his first Fide ad Reginas, a Uule after the middle ;
later
Greek,
in
his
com-
mentary on this place of St John's epistle. Also, Didymus Alexandrinus, in his commentary on the " the and blood,"
same passage, reads, spirit, water, " the Three in Heaven without mentioning ;" and so he doth in his book of the Holy Ghost, where he
seems
to omit nothing that
he could
pose ; and so doth Gregory Nazianzen in his xxxviitli and also Niccoration concerning the Holy Ghost
;
tas in his
And here it is farther observable, that, as had contended that " the Father, Son, Eusebians the
oration.
and Holy Ghost," were not to be connunieratcd, because they were things of a difi:erent kind ; Nazianzen and Nicetas answer, that they may be connumerated, because St John connumerates three things not consubstantial, namely, " the spirit, the water, and the blood." By the objection of the Eusebians, it then appears that the testimony of " the Three in
Heaven" was
theirs
for
of the Catholics
;
it is as evident, that it was not in while they answer by instancing " the
spirit, water, and blood," they could not have missed of " the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost,"
had they been connumerated, and called one words immediately before ; and to answer by
cing in these, would have been far
in
the
instan-
more
to their
pur-
254
SIR ISAAC
Newton's history of
pose, because
like
manner
it was the very thing in question. In the Eunomians, in disputing against the
Cathohcs, had objected, that the Holy Ghost is nowhere in scripture conjoined with the Father and
much
the Son, except in the form of baptism ; which is as " as to say, that the testimony of the Three in
in their
books
very diligent in returning an answer to them, and perplexes himself in citing places, which are nothing to the purpose, does not produce this text of " the Three in Heaven," though it be the
most obvious, and the only proper passage, had it been then in the Scriptures ; and therefore he knew
The objection of the Eunomians, and nothing of it. the answer of the Cathohcs, sufficiently show that it
was
in the
books of neither party. Besides all this, Pope Leo, mentioned above, was
famous
epistle
to
Flavian,
patriarch
of
through
east
Constantinople, against Eutyches, which went about all the churches, both eastern and western,
It
in the
in
the
there solemnly approved and subscribed by all the bishops ; and in this epistle the text was thus cited ;
Et
quoniam Christus
est
Veritas
tus, et
aqua,
quia Tres sunt qui testimonium dant, spiriet And sanguis ; et hi Tres Unum sunt.
Eunomium,
sub finetn.
* Lib. V. adversus
255
for Christus,
which
the^ vulgar
:
Latin,
it
was
^a
< to
^rvstJjw*
f'="T"'
'X-VVf^ IcTTiv
ij
Ai)'flf<af
ffiii
yap
et<!'iv
>ci
ciifA*.
x.cti
et
Tpe7i Ts ev siTi.
So then we have
in the
west, and
solemnly
subscribed in the east by the fourth general council, and therefore it continued the public received reading in both the east and
that council.
west,
till
after the
age of
XVI. So then
Three
in
Heaven," which, in the times of these controversies, would have been in every body's mouth, had it
been
books, was wholly unknown to the churches of those ages. All that they could find in
in
their
their
spirit,
ny
and the blood." Will you now say that the testimoof " the Three in Heaven" was razed out of
their
.'*
books by the prevailing Arians Yes, truly, those Arians were crafty knaves, that could conspire so cunningly and slily all the world over at once (as
at the
word of a Mithridates)
of
the
in
in
the
latter
end of
to
the
all
reign
Emperor
their
Constantius,
get
men's books
hands, and
correct
them
it
without being perceived ; ay, and conjurors too, to do without leaving any blot or chasm in their books,
and
to
it
out of
all
22*
256
men's brains, so that neither Athanasius, nor any body else, could afterwards remember that they had
ever seen
it
in their
books before
own books
too,
so that
as
they generally did in the west, soon after the death of Constantius, they could then remember no more of it than any body else.
faith,
consubstantial
Well, then,
it
was out of
it
their
in
;
books
in
Jerome's age,
the point
when he pretended
are to prove
;
was
which
is
we
was
in
and when any body can show, that it their books before, it may be pertinent to
;
but
out,
till
then
was
it
are
now
extant.
For they
without
upon that pretence correct them at their pleasure without the authority of ancient manuscripts, as some learned men of the fourth and fifth centuries used to
do, are falsaries
ly
by their own confession, and certainneed no other confutation. And therefore if this
reading was once out, we are bound in justice to believe, that it was out from the beginning ; unless
the razing of
it
some
better
argument than that of pretence and clamour. XVII. Will you now say, that Jerome followed
some copy different from any which the Greeks were acquainted with ? This is to overthrow the authority of his version by making him depart from
the received
Greek
and besides,
it
is
contrary to
257
blam-
for in his
copies, but the Latin interpreters only, which were before his time, as if they had varied from the received Greek, he represents
that
Greek
he himself followed
it.
He
justify himself for reading differently from the received Greek, to follow a private copy, but accuses
and
if,
in leaving
Heaven," they had not followed And therefore, since the received Greek, as he did.
the Greeks
knew
thority of his
version sinks
then accused of corrupting the and could not text, persuade either the Greeks or
because
he was
the Latins of those times to receive his reading the Latins received
it
for
not
till
many
this
death
till
present age,
when
and
their
amongst them in printed books ; not receiving it was plainly to approve the
authority of this version being thus
accusation.
XVin. The
far discussed,
it
remains, that
we consider
the author-
ity of the manuscripts, wherein we now read the " the Three in Heaven." And by testimony of the best inquiry that I have been able to make, it is
wanting
Latin.
in the
manuscripts of
all
For, as
we have shown,
Sclavonian versions,
SSS
some
it
Egypt, Syria, Mesopotamia, Armenia, Muscovy, and others, are strangers to this reading, and that
was anciently wanting also in the French ; so I told by those who have been in Turkey, that it is wanting to this day in the Greek manuscripts, which have been brought from those parts into the
am
west
in print
manuscripts are objected against it, pretend that the Arians razed it out. A reading to be found in no manuscripts but the Latin, and not in the Latin before Jerome's
age, as
and that the Greeks, now that they have got from the Venetians, when their
it
little
authority
and
because we have
already
that
it
proved the reading spurious, by showing was heretofore unknown, both to the western
in the
we
shall
now
you an account
of the Latin and Greek manuscripts ; and show, first, how, in the dark ages, it crept into the Latin manuscripts out of Jerome's version
;
it
late-
Greek with-
MSS
those
in
XIX. That
vulgar
Latin,
now
in
use,
is
mixture of the old vulgar Latin, and Jerome's version together, is the received opinion. Few of these
manuscripts are above four or
five
hundred years
259
The
it,
latest
generally have the testimony of in Heaven ;" the oldest of all usually
it
want
Erasmus notes
the other two
to
be wanting
in the at
very ancient
were
another manuscript belonging to the library of the Minorites in Antwerp, the testimony of " the Three
in
in
the margin
in
in
newer
hand.
wanting in five other ones kept at Strasburg, Zurich, and Basil ; one of which MSS. he reckons about 1000 years old, and the other four about 800.
it
noted
it
king of France, Mons. Colbert, and the Benedictines of the abbey of St Germain's. An
ancient and diligent collator of manuscripts, cited by Lucas Brugensis by the name of Epanorthotes, notes in general, that it was wanting in the ancient Latin
Lucas himself, collating many Latin manuscripts. ones, notes it to be wanting in only five, that is, in
the
k\\
all
old
ones
he had,
his
manuscripts being
almost
of them
new
ones.
Codex
Lobiensis written
Lucas
2G0
Codex Tornacensis
used others
num-
ber was easily had ; anuvs, written anno Christi 1432, that
Codex
is,
Buslidi-
but eight
The Lateran
^uoniam
Johannis
epistolct Iegitur,(^uia
um dant in cceIo, Pater, et J^erbum, et Spiritus, Tres Unum sunt ; statimque subjungitur Et
et
hi
Tres
sunt qui testimonium dant in terra, spiritus, aqua, et sanguis, et Tres Unum sunt : sicut in codicibus qui-
busdam
in
invenitur.
papacy of Alexander the Third, that is, in or before the year 1180, and therefore this reading
the
into
some books
for
the words
to the
first
Johannis epistola legitur, as to the next statimque subjungitur ; and more to the first than the next,
because the
first
in
some books,
manuscripts ; appears by but the second part was in almost all ; the words Tres Unum sunt being in all the books which wanted the testimony of " the Three in Heaven," and in most of those which had it ; though afterwards
as
ancient
2G1
out in many,
when branded by
the schoohiien
for Arian.
go to the original of the corruption. Gregory the Great* writes, that Jerome's version was in use in his time, and therefore no wonder if the " the Three in Heaven" testimony of began to be
to
XX. But
cited out of
in
it
before.
Van-
dals,
in the
it
summary of
first
his faith
the
of any man, so
A while
after,
Fulgentius, another
African bishop, disputing against the same Vandals, cited it again, and backed it with the forementioned " the place of Cyprian, applied to the testimony of
Three
so it is probable, that by of that abused authority Cyprian it began first in Afric, in the disputes with the ignorant Vandals, to
in
Heaven."
And
get
It
some
credit
and thence
at length
occurs also frequently in Vigilius Tapsensis, another African bishop, contemporary to Fulgentius. In
ihe
defence, some allege earlier writers ; namely, of Pope Hyginus, the epistle of first epistle the book of II. John Idacius Clarus Pope
its
against
Varimadus;
Trinitatis,
and
the
to
book
De
unitd
Deitate
ascribed
Athanasius.
But
Chiffletius,
sis
who
and Vigilius Tapsensis, sufficiently proves the book against Varimadus to be this VigiUus's, and er*
x. 5.
262
two
To
its
the
same Vigilius
All the
he asserts
also the
book
De
epistles of Hyginus, except the beginning and the end, and the first part of the epistle of Pope John,
in
Heaven"
is
fragments of the
book against Varimadus, described word by word by some forger of decretal epistles, as may appear by So then Eugenius is the first upon comparing them.
record that quotes
it.
set
it
it became of authority in the the revival of before twelfth learning Europe and thirteenth centuries. In those ages St Barnard,
Joachim, and the Lateran council, spread it abroad, and scribes began generally to insert it into the text ; but in such Latin manuscripts
the Schoolmen,
and European
times,
it is
writers, as
XXII.
Now
that
it
was inserted
is
manner how
to
came
be mixed.
For
it is
their
books
By
this
is
nowhere
263
read,
be found sincere.
It is
Jerome
that
we now
and not the old vulgar Latin ; and what wonder, if " the Three in in Jerome we read the testimony of
Heaven
f"
For who
Jerome
for the
Trinity, as
XXIII. But to put the question out of dispute, there are footsteps of the insertion still remaining. For in some old manuscripts, it has been found noted
in the
in
readings are
it
to arise,
by transcribing
I shall
out of the
margin
following varieties.
Of
not the testimony of " the Three in Heaven," some have the words in terra, in the eighth verse, but the
most want
that
it ;
which seems
to
some, before they allowed so great an addition to the text, as the testimony of " the Three in Heaven," noted only in terra in the margin of their books, to be inserted into the testimony of the spirit, water, and blood. Of the manuscripts which have the " the Three in testimony of Heaven," some in the
eighth verse have
jEZi
Tres Unumsunt;
others not.
The
Et
reason of this seems to be, that of those who noted this testimony in the margin, some blotted out
sunt in the eighth verse according to Jerome ; and others did not. And, lastly, the " the Three in Heaven" is in most testimony of
hi Tres
Unum
books
set before
the testimony
33
264
set after
so
;
it is
set after
I
and Hessehus
(if
to
after
which seems
was sometimes so
or after.
knew
it
were
to
come before
Now
these discords in the Latin manuscripts, as they detract from the autliority of the manuscripts, so they
confirm to us, that the old vulgar Latin has in these things been tampered w^hh, and corrected by Jerome's
version.
In the next place, I am to show how, and " the when, testimony of the Three in Heaven" crept
XXIV.
Those who
first
Greek testament,
in
Three
Christi
in
Heaven," except
first
ted in the
in
the
edition of Francis
Haganno
1521
and a
little after,
in that
of Wolfius
Christi
edition,
Colinseus at
*
Vigilius, libr.
editis
At
the
tin
Badianfi editione.
ganoffi,
exemplaribus nonnullis non legi ut in Aldincl et Addo, nee in Grajco Testamento Gerbelii, Hain Colinaji Parisiis edito.
1521; nee
Gomarv.sin
h.
I.
265
was omitted
in
some
the
editions of other
in the
in
Tugurine
1544.
The
first
edition
in in
Heaven," was
that of
at Complutum in Spain, but not 1515; pubhshed before the year 1521. The cardinal, in his edition, used the assistance of
Complu-
tum, there founding an university, anno Christi 1517, or a little before. Two of those divines were Antonius Nebrissensis and
Stunica.
Complutum, and in the preface* to a treatise he wrote against Erasmus, gives this testimoresided at
ny of himself;
Latin
and had
Hebrew and
This
the
Latin
copies."
book, displeasing the cardinal, was not printed till after his death ; and then it came forth at Complu-
The
Cum
prajscitim,
si
nostro quodatn jure, judicium ferre possumus. [Quippe] qui non paucos annos in Sanctis scripturis Veteris elNovi Testamenti, Hebraice, Grajce, ct Latine pcrlegcndis
consumpscrimus
ac HebraiLatin
is
cum
Longa
igitur lectioiie
ac
esperientii jampridem edocfi, quantum tralationi Luic eccl^siasNovi Testament! dcfereiidnm sit, ni fnllor, optime novi. /fee
iilHnica inproan. lihri sni.
266
an Englishman, wrote also against Erasmus ; and both Stunica and Lee, amongst other things, reprehended him for omitting the testimony of " the Three in Heaven." Afterwards Erasmus, finding the
Spaniards, and some others of the
in a heat
Roman Church,
testimony in his
this
third edition,
in
his
anno Christi 1522, representing, "that former editions he had printed the text as he
it
manuscripts ; but now there being found in England one manuscript which had the tesof " the Three in he had inserted
found
in
his
timony
Heaven,"
;
it,
according to that
manuscript
calum-
two following editions. phens, anno Christi 1550, reprinted Erasmus's edition, with some few alterations and various lections,
taken out of the Complutensian edition, and fifteen
after the
numeral
y.
^, i,
he. putting x
y, S,
,
for the
Complutensiin
an edition, and
&ic.
for the
manuscripts
order ; and noting in the margin, that the testimony of " the Three in Heaven" was wanting in the seven manuscripts,
us, that
<?,
f,
C. ^^
'>
"^) 'V*
Whence Beza*
His words
tells
he had read
it
in the rest.
are.
Legit Hieronymus,
et
legit
Erasmus
in Britannico codice
et
in Compliitensi
editione.
Legimus
And
editions.
For
Beza
in
hunc locum.
267
the
West
and of
into
late
presses
Greece
I
in
know
of,
any manuscripts
XXV.
Now to
f)ull
the preface to his annotations, describing what helps he had in composing his first edition, he tells us,
and Erasmus, and the writings of the ancients and moderns collated by himself; and out of Stephens's library, the exemplar which Stephens had collated
with
Avhich
about twenty-five
manuscripts,
almost
all
of
were printed."
for that
He
teen
number he
in his
So then he had
has given us
in
more manuscripts than Stephens And this was all his furniture. print.
The
to
manuscripts he does not here pretend nor could he have them ; for they were not Stephens's manuscripts, but belonged to several
original
;
have
hbraries in France
and
Italy.
The
manuscript S
'Non dcsiint, qui Bezam nimis audaccm fiiisse judlcanl, dum a receptu Icctioiie sspius sine necessitate recedit ; et unius, interdum nuUius, codicis authoritate fietiis, praetoriam exercet potestatc.m, ex cotijecturis
lihifo.
mutando
et
Walton. Prolegom.
23*
268
by
manuscripts v, ^, s, r, C, ?, /, n, were not Stephens's, but belonged to the library of the king of
The
France,
to
whom
6,
let,
The
other
six books,
his
own
library, but
borrowed them
his
edition.
And
yet
Beza
if
in
when he would
he
his
original manuscripts
at
Geneva before
does not
cite various
lections, there
he reckons, that
in the text of
all
Ste-
the manuscripts.
So
period to
'<;,
vi. 11. where Stephens notes a certain be wanting in the manuscript copies and Beza saith, Hcec periodus in omnibus exemplaribus Gracis legiiur, exceptis secundo et octavo. In the
in
Mark
Acts
xiii
lections,
turn
Beza
affirms of the
Greek
In
John
where Stephens
omnibus
licuit.
is silent,
Beza speaks
Sic legitur in
Grcecis
Beza tells us of the word again E<ro in Omnibus nostris vetustis libris inveni.
is
silent,
where Stephens in the margin had noted the testimony of " the Three in Heaven" to be wantso,
And
269
the rest
lis
the text of Stephen's collated book, he reads it in and so tells us, Legimus et nos in nonnul;
This he did
in
the
first
Afterwards, when
he had got two real manuscripts, the Claromontan, and that which at length he presented to the University
tles are
wanting
;)
reckoning up the books he then used, he put only two, and the seventeen of Stephens ; and in his fifth edition he writes summarily, that he used
in
these
nineteen manuscripts, joining with those two real ones the collations of Stephens, as if in those he had sev-
which sufficiently explains his way ; But whilst he had of speaking in his annotations. not the manuscripts themselves to read with his own
enteen others
eyes,
ing
it
way of speak-
to tells us,
Stephani codicibus; and therefore, in his later editions, he corrects himself, and tells us only, that the reading
doth extare in nonnuUis
Stephani veterihus
libns.
Thus Beza argues from Stephens's book of collations; and the same inference has been made by Lucas
Brugensis and others, ever since, from Stephens's " forementioned edition of that book. For," say " they, Stephens had fifteen manuscripts in all, and found the testimony of the Three in Heaven' want'
and therefore
it
was
in the
other
270
eight
;
in
side."
manuscripts, has the authority of manuscripts on its Thus they argue ; and this is the great arhitherto
been
XXVI. But if they please to consider the business a httle better, they will find themselves very
much
the
mistaken.
manuscripts
For though Stephens had fifteen of them did not contain all
y,
s-, <",
iS",
had each of them the four Gospels only. Two, noted contained only the Gospels and the Acts of the S,
71,
Apostles.
only.
One, noted tT, contained the Apocalypse One, noted <, had only the Apocalypse, with
Epistles
to
St Paul's
the
Corinthians,
Gaiatians,
and Colossians.
'* 'V-
The
other
contained
both
St
Paul's Epistles and the canonical ones, besides some other books ; namely, the manuscript C contained the
Gospels ; the manuscripts t, tx, ty, the of the Apostles ; and the manuEpistles and Acts And e, 6, the Epistles, Gospels, and Acts. ^, scripts
this
Epistles and
any one
may
gather,
New Testament.
For
of the
(.
i,
tx, ly^
271
in
Thessalonians, Timothy, Titus, and the Hebrews ; one numeral error, whether of the scribe or typo-
grapher excepted.
and in all these seven manuscripts, ^, e, ^, 6, i, ix, ty he found the testimony of " the Three in Heaven" to be wanting ; as you may see noted in the margin of
;
his edition.
XXVn. And
was wanting
in all
Stephens's manuscripts, is apparent also by its being generally wanting in the manuscripts which are now extant in France. For father Simon* tells us, " that
after a diligent
in
it
though he
consulted seven manuscripts in the king's library, and one in Colbert's." And because Stephens had some
will
add, that a
gentleman, who,
in his travels,
MSS
was
in
me
that
he found
that
it
in
them
all.
One
of the twelve
MS
in the
XXVIII.
books
rests only upon the authority of the editions of Erasmus and Cardinal Ximenes. But seeing that
Erasmus omitted
*
it
in his
two
first
editions,
and
in-
New
272
serted
it
man-
When Lee, upon Erasmus's second putting edition, fell foul upon him " for leaving out the testimony of the Three in Heavcan be none
at
all.
forth
his
en," Erasmus* answered, "that he had consulted more than seven Greek manuscripts, and found it
it
wanting in them all ; and that if he could have found in any one manuscript, he would have followed that
Hence
that
it
notice
was sent
to
was
in a
he printed it in his following editions; notwithstanding that he suspected that manuscript to be a new one, corrected by the Latin. But
saith,
he
since,
England ever heard of any such manuscript, but from Erasmus ; and since he was only told of such a manuscript, in
*
upon
inquiry, I cannot
between him
Dicam
septem
[scilicet
Grasca]
temporibus plura fuisse exemplaria quam nee in ullo iiomm repertum, quod in
;
nostris [scilicet Latinis] legitur. Quod si contigisset unum exemplar, in quo fuisset, quod nos leginius, niminim illinc adjpcissem,
quod
feci
;
in ca^teris aberat.
quod solum
licuit,
mus
+
indicavi quid in Grsecis codicibus minus esset. contra Leum, in hunc locum.
lioc
Hcec Eras-
Ex
dicebatur deesse
ne cui
sit
hunc
suspicor, ad
Latinorum codices,
Postea-
quam enim concordiam inierunt cum ecclesi^ Remand, studuerunt et hfic in parte cum Romanis consentire. Ernsmi Jlnnotation. in
hunc locum
273
it
himself;
cannot forbear
trick put
mony
Heaven" by
to get
it
one Greek co
and thereby
Greek manuscripts of the Scripture are things of value, and do not use to be thrown away ; and such a " the Three in manuscript for the testimony of
rest
Heaven," would have made a greater noise than the have done against it. Let those who have such a manuscript, at length tell us where it is.
XXIX.
edition
So
also
let
them who
tell
insist
upon the
of cardinal Ximenes,
us by what
manu-
this testimony ; or, at least, where script he printed such manuscript of good note is to be seen ; for any take the liberty to believe, that he till then I must
printed nothing else than a translation out of the Latin, and that for these reasons.
First
;
because
in
New
Testament we are
and
1
testament was
these
Joan.
only
borrowedf
Versiculus
v. 7. in
non
reiieillur.
11'alion.
pontificis
tAccivite Vatican^ Roma; Bibliothccii, bona cum Leonis X. maximi veni&. As Gaspar Bellerus, in his epistle prefixtiie
ed to
it.
274
edition
after,
was
finished.
And
Caryophikis some
collating the
time
Vatican manuscripts, found the testimony of " the Three in Heaven" wanting in them all. I do not
say but that the Cardinal had other manuscripts ; but these were the chief, and the only ones he thought
worth while to
tell his
reader
of.
Secondly
startle at
For it is beside the place of the Cardinal's edition. use of this edition, to put notes in the margin of the Greek text. I have not found it done above thrice
in all this edition of the
New
Testament
and there-
fore
there must
that, in
margin of noted in
text.
In
a
Corinth,
xv.
there
in
is
this
margin
In
notable
vi.
variation
the
Greek reading.
in
Matthew
from
13.
where they,
their
edition,
it
recede
the
Greek copies
and correct
note, to justify
by the Latin, they make a marginal their doing so and so here, where
;
Three
in
Heaven"
is
generala third
Greek
to
copies,
they make
marginal
note,
secure
it.
blamed
there
is
for printing
no question but they would make the best and yet they do not tell of the ;
but
275
The run to the authority of Thomas Aquinas.* Greek manuscripts have the text thus, " For there
are
Three
tlie
water, and
In many of the blood ; and these Three are One." the Latin manuscripts, the words, " these Three are
One," are here omitted, and put only at the end of the testimony of " the Three in Heaven," before that of " the spirit, water, and blood ;" in others,
In the Comthey are put after both testimonies. the former follow plutensian edition, they copies, and
justify their doing
so,
Aquinas.
the words
"
Thomas," say
of the
Heaven, teaches, that these Three are One' are subjoined for
unity of the essence of the
insinuating the
Three
Persons.
this unity to
*
interpreted
it
and consent,
being thus
The marginal note is this; Sanctus Thomas, in expositione secundce decretalis de summaTrinitate et Fide Catholica, traclans istum passum contra Abbatem Joachim, viz. " Trcs sunt qui testimonium dant in ctt'lo, I'ater, V'eibum,ct Spiritus Sanclus," dicit
ad literam verba sequentia.
personarum
subditur, et
'
hi
Tres
Unum
sunt
;'
quod quidem
dicitur
propter essential unitatem. Sed hoc Joachim perverse traliere volens ad unitatem cliarilatis et consensus, indncebat consequeiitem auctoritatem. Nam subditur ibidem, t Tres sunt, qui tes
timonium dant
in
in terrA, sanctus
'
spiritus,
aqua, et sanguis
;'
et
quibusdam
libris additur,
et
hi
Tres
Unum
sunt.'
Sed hoc
in veris
Hffireticis Arianis
tis
exemplaribus non habetur; sed dicitur esse apposilum ab ad perverlendum intellectum sanum auctorita-
Trium Personarum."
Hepc Becr
tus
24
276
some
copies,
this
these
;'
Thomas repHed,
that
Jast clause
added
not extant in the true copies, but was the Arians for perverting the sense." by
Thus
Now
Thomas understood
But
not Greek,
this annotation is
this is
not the
main design. For so the annotation should have been set in the margin of the Latin version. Its
being inserted
that
its
in the
main design
thus, in a
;
to justify the
Greek by
the
Now
to
Thomas
very
apostolic
few words, do
in Spain,
all
the work,
make was
is
artificial
and
where Thomas
of
very judicious authority, might and substantial defence of the printed Greek. But We are to us, Thomas Aquinas is no Apostle.
seeking for the authority of Greek manuscripts. third reason why I conceive the Compluten-
pass for a
sian
Greek
to
have been
is,
in
this
place
translaI
tion
told you,
Erasmus) w^hen,
he
cites
his objections,
he comes
to this
not one
;
Greek manuscript
against
Erasmus
the Latin.
but argues wholly from the authority of On the contrary, he sets down, by way
271
reading of the Greek and that of others, manuscripts, as well as his own,
common
in these
Koti
words,
<>'''
f^^U
Mifix-
f'""'" '
y.x^7vpou'jr((;,
ro Trviuuce,
^'"^' ?
TO v^uip. X.XI
TO
Kdi
c'l
'^''
and
then condemns them altogether without exception ; and justifies the Latin against them by the authority " " of Jerome. Know," saith he, that in this place
the
Greek manuscripts
is,
as they
is
are translated
from the
original
manifest by the prologue of St Jerome upon And this prologue, which he the Epistles, Sic."*
which
goes on to cite at length, and of which we gave you an account above, is all he argues in favour of the " the Three in Heaven." Li other testimony of where he had Greek of manuscripts scripture, places
on
his side,
ii.
So
Thes-
salonians
quidem
legitur, says
he, in Gree-
ds
codicibus, qiios
saith,
IL
v.
he
Tops.uig
hiclegi per
diphtkongum. In
Thessalonians
23.
he
saith.
Cumin Greeds
in
eXiicXij^ov^ et
discrepante,
*
exemplaribus quotquot sunt, Latinis integer hie Jegcitur, neniinc In nescio cur Erasmus dixerit, fyc.
hoc loco codices aperlissime esse corriiptos
iiisani,
;
Sciendum
est,
ut
;i
))rimii
Gontiuere
mani;
feste apparet.
ab
i(;i
quocjue
k,c.
al)
II(ec iilunica in h.
vol. ix\
278
SIR ISAAC
Newton's history of
Pliilipp. iv. 9.
cis
codicibus,
hie
legitur
neque
GrcEci suit
libri,
qui
Trfccm-Ere
qui agite
cum
this
hcec
the manuscripts
used
for
for
him
is
Know,"
he,
place the Greek manuscripts are most In other places, if he hath but evidently corrupted."
" that
one manuscript on
his side,
ly enough ; as the Codex upon 2 Corinthians ii. 3. James i. 22. 2 Peter ii. 2. and other texts. Here he produces all the manuscripts against himself, without excepting so
much
as
one.
gloried
in his
answer
to Stunica,
and Sanctius Caranza, another of the Compkitensian divines, in his defence of Stunica, written presently after, had nothing to reply in this
with his
point.
own
Neitlier could
monks who next undertook the controversy, find one Greek manuscript, which here made against ErasNeither had Marchio Valesius better success, though on that occasion he collated sixteen Greek manuscripts, eight whereof belonged to the king of
mus.
Spain's library, and the other eight to other libraries of Spain ; and he did it on purpose to collect out of
27^
of the
Neither did the reprinting present vulgar of the Complutensian Bible by Arias INIontanus produce the notice of any such manuscript ; though, on
that
occasion,
many
Latin,
fetched
XXX.
So
then,
to
sum up
Complutensian
divines did
practice in
13.
and therefore
in
their
is
printing
the
Heaven"
no evidence
it by a manuscript, but on the contraiy, want of one, they contented themselves with the authority of Thomas Aquinas ; and Stunica confess-
text
ed that they had none. Nor has all the zeal for this been able since to discover one either in Spain,
XXXL
is,
it
that the
down by Erasanoth;
mus
er
;
for the
Ui
KXt TO uyioY
f^xprvpouvT^i
rpe^i < ra
e\i
eTTi
rr^
yjjj,
ro w.Zf/.Xy
tcxi
The pretended
ori
rper^
24-
280
(Icrtv e:
iv
r^ owjav^,
y,u\
TrccTt^p^
Xoyo^, nu)
TrvsZ/LtU.'
KUi ourot
rpui
V tls-iv,
rp'.'i.
The
to spring
from the bare errors of scribes, and arise rather from the various translations of the place, out
of Latin into Greek, by two several persons.
XXXII. But
discord,
real
whilst these two readings, by their confute one another, the readings of the
Greek manuscripts by their agreement confirm For Caryophilus, who, by one another as much.
the
command
of
Pope Urban
the
the principal libraries in Rome, found one common " the reading in them all, without the testimony of
you may see in those his 1G73 collations, printed by Peter Possinus, in the end of his Catena of the Greek Fathers upon
in ;"
Three
Heaven
as
in
Mark.
He met
with
eight manuscripts
in all
1
upon
Joan,
thus;
legunt, "Or/
x.eti
ro fA.ctpTvpo7ivTei,
'X'viuf^ct, y.ut
to leap,
ro
S.ii^.
01
rpui eh 7o
iWi.
Porro
totus
septirnus
versus hnjus
in his
his
manu-
and so doth
Stephens of
lections in
them.
Only
the
281
oZpxv^p,
The very same readis to be put in its right place. ing does Stunica also, in his book against Erasmus, note out of the manuscript he had seen in Spain, as was seen
above.
Nor does
Valesius,
in his collection
of the six-
teen Spanish manuscripts, note any various lections in The same reading exactly have also the this text.
manuscripts
in
England
veyed
lished
at
thither
in
from Egypt through Greece, and puband the four Walton's Polyglott Bible
;
College, and that in both very old, and two in Lincoln Magdalen College, five other ancient ones lately four or and College ; collated at Oxford, in order to a new impression of
Oxford,
viz.
that in
New
the
Greek testament,
as I
am
informed.
The
very
same reading have also tiie three manuscripts of Monsieur Petavius Gachon, a senator of Paris, whose various lections, collected by his son John Gachon,
were printed
tament, anno
in
New
Tes-
Christi
1675.
is
The same
The
hundred years ago, found in the manuscripts of Greece ; as you may see in the text of his commentary on this epistle of St The same reading also Cyril of Alexandria John.
met with
in the
282
in his
citations
both
in his
cap. 5.
and
in his first
book
De
omitted
and
written for
'
Kxprvpouvrei,
And
also
in
the
manuscripts of the
versions.
ages,
may be
to
gathered from
the
all
ancient
XXXIV.
said, that this
It
seen by what has been hitherto testimony is not to be found in the Greek
may be
manuscripts. Epanorthotes,* whom Lucas Brugensis describes to be an ancient, accurate, full, and industrious collator of manuscripts, found
it
wanting
In all
those he
h(SC
met
with.
eadem Greeds
other
libris, et
Nor have
collators
id
made
a further discovery
Habuimus ab Hunnajo,
tOntexfi'm, se-
culo uli oportet antiquos nostrse editionis codices, eosqne cum Hffibi'ffiis, Grsecis, et veterum Patrum commentariis sedulo collalos
;
viii.
7.
latius
.
a nobis descriptus
est.
H(cc Lucas
qui ad
el
Gcnesia
v\\\.
1 dixit hiinc
librumnmUis ancilaio,
nis scriptum,
Dein, loco ex eo
pergit.
non
nes,
sit?
Ad quae dlci quid possit? An quod libro fidendum Non hoc dit^et, qui evolverit quae namque a nostri
;
seculi scriptoribus ex
MSS
in
omnes propemodum
examinatas derreheiidimus.
283
Spain,
against
Lee, Stunica, and the rest in England, Flanders, France, and Italy, who conspired
Erasmus, could
find
nothina;
in
the
manube
him
if
that Phcenix
to somebody someexcepted, which once appeared where in England, but could never since be seen.
Hessehus,* about the year 15G5, professor of divinion this place, ingenty at Louvain, in his commentary
manuuously confesses it w^anting in all the Greek in one the then Spain, known, except two, scripts
other in England ; meaning those by which the Coraplutensian divines and Erasmus printed it. Which two we have shown to be none at all ; unless
the
Since that time one Annius dug up one in England. besides the imagnothing further has been produced,
And yet I will not inary books of dreaming Beza. be found in some say, but that it may hereafter
Greek
copies.
For
in the times
much
to
do
in the East.
long united to the Greek church ; they Antioch ; they reigned patriarchs of Jerusalem and
at
sic se liabent
ail ; Mantiscripti Gracci fere onines Qiioniiim Tres sunt, qui testimonium dant in ternulla factA ra, si)iiitus, aqua, ct sanguis, et hi Tres Uiuim sunt;" mentione triplicis testimonii de ccelo " Patris, Verbi, et Spiritus
inhunc locum
"
Sancti." Dein codices aliter legenles describendo sic pergit ; IVostro tempore duo Gra;ci codices inanuscripli reperti sunt; unus in quoruu) uterque hoc loco testimoniAngiia, et alter in Hispauia
:
um habet
284
SIR ISAAC
Newton's iiisTORr of
years together
and during ; assembled was 1215, kingdom, year the Lateran council, consisting of four hundred and fifteen bishops, Greeks and Latins together ; and therein the testimony of " the Three in Heaven" was quoted out of some of the Latin manuscripts, as
1204, for above
fifty
this their
in the
we
told
you above.
some
in
in the
margins of
books
and hence
insert
transcribing.
For
this
is
Greek manuscripts have been corrected by the Such a book Erasmus* tells us, that he Latin ones.
" once met with, and
er
in
that there
book
mony
kind
less
;
suspected also that out of which he printed the testiEngland, of " the Three in Heaven," to be of the same
He
though
I rather
think
it
was none
at
all
un-
falsary of that age were at the pains to Such transcribe one or tvro of St Paul's Epistles.
some
Whence
Mariana,
Hie obiter illnd incidit admonendum esse GrEecorum quosdara Novi Testanienti codices ad Latiiia exemplaria emendates. Id factum est in fcedere Grsecorum cum Romana ecclesia ; quod
fcRilus testatum Bulla, (juse
dicitur
Anrea
visum
est
enim
in in
et
hoc
ad firmaiidaui concordiain pertinere. Et nos olim codicem incidimus ; et talis adhuc dicitur a Iservari
Pontif.
hujusmodi
Bibliothec^
Verum ex
movere regulam.
menti.
Tesla-
285
lec-
tions
tions
on the
New
And that Valesius but sparingly and cautiously. a corrected with such did meet manuscript, appears
by
the lections themselves.
17.
For
in the
xviii.
t< roxev
in lacum,
the books
now have
it
some
this
in
and written
sius,
fVi
A/,M,wi}v
as
it is
taken out of
this.
Again
in the
11.
translation, in
expounding the
Apollyon, adds, Et Latine hahens nomen exterminans ; Valesius notes the reading in his Greek copy to be pMuxiri %&' o>,ttx |t^^(vv; ;
names Abaddon
which certainly
and some
is
Again, in
the
Latin copies
his
present have
ans^ulos
Valesius, in
So
in the
Apocalypse
;
xix. G.
iurha:.
is
oy_,\H TraXXdZ
the
Latin,
the
later
Valesius, in
In
manuxiii.
script, reads
f^AxTnyyaii !/.iyuXy,i.
;
Hebrews
2.
for 'e>ix8ot,latuernni
and
;
in later
copies, /?/aci/erMn^,
iii.
Valesius reads
rjesTxv
and
in 1
Peter
8. for t* St
Tp
7ri?-it
S).
by an error in fide, Valesius reads These, and such like instances, ))ut
286
the thing out of dispute. Now, though Valesius found not the testimony of "the Three in Heaven"
in this manuscript ; and Erasmus tells us, that he never saw it in any Greek manuscript ; and, by consequence, not in that corrected one which fell into
his
hands
yet
it
may have
into
some other books, not yet taken notice of ; and even in some manuscripts, which, in other places,
by the Latin, it may been inserted by some of the Greek bishops of the Lateran council, where the testimony of " the Three in Heaven" was read. And therepossibly have
fore
he that
first,
shall hereafter
insist
meet with
it
in
any book,
before he
it
Lateran council, and empire of the Latins in Greece ; for, if it be liable to either of these two exceptions, it
to
produce
it.
XXXV.
troversy, I shall
now confirm
itself.
all
from
Who is he that overcometh the world, but he that believeth that jesus is the son OF GOD, that Son spoken of in the Psalms, where
lie saith,
'
"
Thou
art
my Son
this
day have
begot-
287
This
is
he that,
first
after
in a
the
Jews had
long expected him, came, baptism of water, and then in an immortal one by shedding his blood upon the cross, and rising again
mortal body, by
and blood
not by water only, but by water being the Son of God, as well by his
;
dead. Acts
xiii.
Luke THE Spirit also that, together with the water and blood, beareth witness of the truth of his and so a coming because the spirit is truth fit and For there are unexceptionable witness. Three that bear record of his comiug the
supernatural birth of the Virgin,
IS
;
Spirit, which he promised to send, and which was shed forth upon us in the form of cloven tongues, and
in various
gifts
'
the baptism
is
of water, wherein
;
God
testified,
This
my
beloved Son
and the
shedding of his blood, accompanied with his resurrection, whereby he became the most faithful martyr
or witness of this truth.
spirit,
the
agree in
that the
witnessing
One
is
Son of God
is
strong
for the
come, and, therefore, their evidence law requires but two consenting
witnesses,
And
if
we
receive the witness of men, the threefold witness OF GOD, which he bare of his Son, by declaring at his baptism,
raising
'
This
is
my
beloved Son
;'
by
his
288
spirit
on
us, is
greater
is
to
be
more
readily received."
XXXVI. Thus
the argument
full
and strong
but, if
you
insert the
and
spoil
it.
men by
in
testimony be not given to men, how does prove to them the truth of Christ's coming ? If
be,
how
is
the
testimony
?
in
is
from
that
on earth
It
the
difference
between
in earth ? to
witnessing
If, in
in
the
first
it
men,
to
.''
whom
doth
purpose
And how
does
For
my
part, I
can
make none.
mine what
judgments
is
If
it
to deter-
scripture,
and what
not,
by our private
I confess it in ; places not controverted ; but in disputable places, I love to take up with what It is the I can best understand. temper of the hot
and superstitious part of mankind, in matters of reliand for that gion, ever to be fond of mysteries
;
reason,
to
like
best
what
they
understand
least.
2S9
but
Such men may use the apostle John as they please ; I have that honour for him, as to beheve that he
be
wrote good sense ; and therefore take that sense to his, which is the best ; especially since I am dein
it
fended
by so great
authority.
For
have on
Fourth General Council, my so far I of all the as churches in all and, know, the modern Latin, and such others as ages, except have lately been influenced by them ; and that also
side the authority of the
of
all
and nothing against me, but the ; of Jerome, and the credulity and heat of authority
ancient Latin ones
his follov.ers.
For
seen
first
to
tell
letting us
know
libraries
they were to be
; pretend manuscripts, which, since their discovery, could never be heard of ; nor were
to
credit
wc
know
is
plainly
to
to pass
tell
The
Spaniards
any longer for plain dealing. us plainly that they followed the
Thomas
left
out the
One," by the Arians. And yet St Ambrose, St Austin, Eucherius, and other Latins, in the
verse, as inserted
"
And
these
Three
are
in
the eighth
Arian age, gathered the unity of the Deity from and the omission of it is ; now, by printing it, acknowledged to be an erroneous correction.
this clause
The
290
and therefore, if there was any such MS, it was a corrected one,
like the
of Valesius.
mony
saw
it
in
;
Erasmus, who printed the triple testiheaven by that English manuscript, never
tells
us
it
suspected
its
sincerity
and accused
for
pubhcly
in his writings
;
on
several occasions,
and
yet his
accusation
never endeavoured
it
;
to satisfy
him and
know, where the record might be consulted for confuting him but, on the contrary, when they had got the
;
did not so
much
as let us
Trinity into his edition, threw by their manuscript, And if they had one, as an almanac out of date.
satisfy considering
men
Let manuscripts at length be produced, and freely exposed to the sight of the learned world ; but let
such manuscripts be produced as are of authority ; or else let it be confessed, that whilst Jerome pre-
tended to correct the Latin by the Greek, the Latins have corrected both the Latin and the Greek by the sole authority of Jerome.
^91
SECTION
On
the
II.
Text concerning
the
Mystery of Godliness
What
Timothy
16.
For by changing
tion of eo5,
into
of godliness;
as
all
GOD manifested
all
in
the flesh."
four or five
Wherehundred
first
" Great Jerome, as well as the rest, read, mystery of godliness, which was manifested
flesh."
the
in the
For
this
is
the
Ethiopic, Syriac,
Grotius
adds the Arabic, but the Egyptian Arabic version has es and so has the above mentioned Sclavonian
:
version of
Cyrillus
for
made
long
the ancienter
fiv^e
agree
first
centuries, both
all
Greeks
and Latins.
For
they,
in
their
discourses to
Son, never allege this text, as that I can find, they would all have done, and some of them frequently, had they read " God manifested in the flesh ;" and therefore they read . Ter-
25*
292
tullian
adversus
Praxeam, and
Cyprian
adversus
Judceos, industriously cite all the places where Christ is called God, but have Alexander nothing of this.
of Alexandria, Athanasius, the bishops of the council of Sardica, Epiphanius, Basil, Gregory Nazianzen,
Hilary, Lucifer,
Jerome,
Afer,
Faustinus Diaconus, Pope Leo the Great, Arnobius Junior, Cerealis, Vigilius Tapsensis, Fulgentius, wrote all of them in the fourth and fifth
of
God
;
tracts
of the Son, and incarnation and some of them largely, and in several and yet I cannot find that they ever allege
this text to
prove
it,* if
it,
once urges
hot
into
excepting that Gregory Nyssen the passage crept not into him out
In
all
and
never came
are
over,
play though now those " God manifested they that read
it
disputes
for the
business.
For, on
the
contrary,
as often
as
occasion to cite the reading then in use, discover that it was . For though they cite it not to prove
Oi'at.
xi.
contra
Euuom.
293
and
sometimes
in other discourses,
they produce
it.
particularly
Hilary,
lib.
2. de
Trinitale, and
And Am-
brose,
or
whoever of
his
author of the commentary on the Epistles, reads o and so doth St Austin in Genesin ad liternm, hb. 5
and Beda
in his
commentary on
this text,
where he
commentary on the Epistles, ascribed to Jerome. So also do Primasius and Sedulius in their commentaries
on
this
text;
;
lib.
1.
adversus
gilius
Arium
Tapsensis,
Vanmadum,
;
cap.
12
did
and Fulgentius,
c. 2.
de Incarnatione
and so
Pope Leo
ad Flavianum;
all cite
manwas
manifested in the flesh ;" as the Latin manuscripts of St Paul's Epistles generally have it to this day ;
and therefore
it
this
hath
been the constant public reading of the Latin churches from the beginning. So also one of the Arians
in
and interprets it of the Son of God, who was born of the Father ante secula ; and of the Virgin, in
And Fulgentius, in his answer novissimo tempore. to this homily, found no fault with the citation ; but on
the contrary, in his
first
294
6.
seems
after
the
III. Now, for the Greeks, I find indeed that they have changed the ancient reading of the text, not
only
in
hut
still
remain-
ing
sufficient
at
instances
first.
reading was
tary
on
;
this epistle,
among them of what the So in Chrysostom's commenthey have now gotten fes into
the text
itself, I
am
and yet by considering the commentary satisfied that he read o. For he nehher
else, infers
in this
the
they do who read -^05 read 0, understands by it Christ incarnate ; or, as he expresses it, "Man made God, and God made
Man
;"
and so leaves
or
it
at liberty
to
be taken
in
for
either
God
man.
And
accordingly
one place
of his commentary he saith, ^E-puupaS)] Iv irxpx.f ^n/^mpIn anotlier place ; "AvdpaTroi atp^ri uvu-f^d^rfiroi, yoi
kvfipuTToi avct>J,<p6>}. ix.}jpux,^v
ev x-or/uct, f^s6^ i f^av ei^ov
avTov
loas
oiuyysAci.
received
sin ;
the
Man
world ; was
((pxv'ipah
Instead of
saith,
Man appeared
without sin; making Man the nominative case to these and all the verbs which follow ; which certainly he
their nominative
He
man
295
uveifAxpTijToi
Gffls lSiY.xia6}t.
sinless in and through the said of Chrysostom will be have spirit more evident, when I shall have shown you how
say, that
?
But what
the reading
os, without any dispute raised about and how the Greeks have since coro
and
Chrysostom's. IV. And, first, that the Nestorians read is evident by some fragments of the orations or homihes
have done
in
Arnobius Junior,
with Serapion.
of Nestorius, sent by him to the Pope, and cited by in the second book of his conflict
For there, in order to show what was the opinion of Nestorius, and how he defended
it,
he
cites
two of
words
Kon
na-
nam quod
tum
est
de came, caro
;
Creatorem
quod
ita-
ex
ipsa,
natum
est,
de
Sjyiritu
Sancto
est.
Deo
Et paulo
est
Deus
Luciphorum) Deus
est.
mam
Deo honoramus.
ereavit.
Spiritum divina separat natura, qui humaniiatem ejus Quicquid ex Maria natum est, de Spiritik
296
Sancto
SIR ISAAC
Newton's history of
est,
creatum
est ;
qui ef secundum justitiam replevit, quod hoc quod manifestatum est in carne^jusin Spiritu.
tificatum est
Which
last
words
in
the
those homilies,
that Nestorius reads o expressly; but not only so, absolutely excludes God from being understood by it ; arguing, that the Virgin was not
5oroj5
the flesh,
because that thing which was manifested in was justified in the spirit; or, as he ex-
pounds it, replenished by the spirit in righteousness, and calling that thing which was manifested in the
flesh, a creature
;
tiam replevit \hoc^ quod creatum est; \jiempe^ hoc manifestatum est in came, justijicatum est in
quod
Spiritu.
VI.
And now,
thus against the deity of Christ, that if this had not been the re-
ceived public reading in the Greek churches, his adversaries would have fallen foul upon him, and
for
falsifying
it
was a created
manifested
which
God
in the flesh."
in history.
and yet I meet with nothing of this kind His adversaries do not so much as tell
They were
so far
297
from raising any controversy about the reading, that they do not in the least correct him for it ; but
on the contrary they themselves, in their answers to as he did ; and only laboured his writings, read
'd,
by various disputations
text, as I find
to put another sense upon the by Cassian and Cyril, the two princi-
pal
who
VII.
at that
Chrysostom's scholar, and his deacon and legate to the Pope and after the banishment of Chrysostom, retired from Con;
monkish
in
life for
some
France.
At
when
Nestorius,
who was
opinion,
Nestorius sent a legacy to Rome with copies of his orations, to let the Pope understand the controversy ; and thereupon Leo the Great, who
opposed him
He
wrote
it
For he wrote
it
before
Ephis
by the book
in
itself.
This book
now
extant only
Latin
stir
that
the
making great
at
298
that
what
he
wrote
;
he
had received
satisfied
from
his
it
master Chrvsostom
originally in
am
that
he wrote
in
Greek.
both
languages.
For
it
saw them
in
eloquent
Greek
and
is
more
had
their
author's eloquent language from their author, and the Latin from one of the Latins where he lived ; than
that the contrary should
tise,*
be true.
Now
in this trea-
when he comes
Nes-
which we gave you an account above out of Arnobius, he returns this answer
it
;
to
hoc quod
ais, JVestori,
;
justitid repleverif,
vis
creaturn est
et
tcstimonio comprobare,
;
quod
Spiritu
dicat,
;
came
justificatus
in
utrumque /also
et hoc,
Quia
quod
a Spiritu
vis
eum repletum
adimpletionem.
Et
hoc,
re
rationemque furaris.
JVon enim
ita
ah apostolo posi-
ium
est,
tit
tu
id
Quid enim
est pietatis
apostolus ait ?
Et manifeste magnum
sacramentum, quod manifestatum est in Vides ergo, quod carne, justificatum est in Spiritu.
mysterium pnetatis, vel sacra^nentum justificatum apos*
18,
209
Thas far Cassian is not only readP or but confuting INestorius by that reading. whereas Nestorius said it was a creature which was
ing
0,
justified,
Cassian
tells
him, that
if
wliole text, he
mystery of godhness."
Vides ergo,
saith
quod
mysterium pietatis justificatum apostolus prfsdicavit. He does not say, Deum justificatum apostolus prcedicavit (as
been
in
his
he certainly would have done, had that Bible,) but mysterium ; and so makes
mysterium, or, which is all one, its relative quod, the nominative case to the verbs which follow. In
lib. 5.
Et
manifes-
magnum
pietatis sacramentum,
^-c.
quod manifesest
iatum
est in
came,
Quod
ergo
illud sacramentum,
Deus
ita
scilicet
manifestatus in came,
So you see assumptus in gloria. Nestorius and Cassian agree in reading i', but dif-
palam
est
fer in
interpreting
it
the
its
one restraining
being justified
;
it
to
creature, by reason of
restraining
it
the other
God, by reason of its being a great mystery, and assumed in glory. VII3, In like manner Cyril, the grand adversaof in his three books De Fide ad Imry Nestorius,
to
peratorem
Reginas, written against him in the beginning of that controversy, did not reprehend
et
26
300
him, as
SIR ISAAC
if
Newton's history of
falsely,
but only
complained of his misinterpreting it ; telling him, that he did not understand the great mystery of and that it was not a created godliness, thing, as he
thought, but the
for
Word
his
this
ro
if
or
Son of God
and arguing
this interpretation
text.
And,
first, in
book
De
;
Fide ad Imperatou\xvZa-6e,
;.
rem, sect. 7.
T5 ypatpdi'
he has
passage
uSirei
fitire f^iv
(A.iyo(, rjj?
fj XpirOV, 0? i(pUVSp6l6i]
&C,
Ye
nor the
Christ
the
i'?,
who was
spirit.
By
plain that
he read
using one of
for
f^vriipiev,
these
turned
ing
into
<i ;
and, by
way
in
of interpretation, insert-
rarert Xptrov,
j
which
those
MSS
was
to
be
understood
in
oi,
For had eas been in this very hard. said have H-^s-ipiev, ihtUi X^/s-v, 'i^ text, he would not TTeVi Xptroi l(pttn^u6y, putbut f^v^-vipiov, Gsoi, i<pct.vipaih
which
;
tino- x^.f^ss,
not for
f^vripiov^
For
Xptrh, and
605 are
more plainly equipollent than Xpirci and t^vrnpiov. And making Xpuci and t^v^^ptoy equipollent, he makes
/M,^5-/)'v
>/'*^'
and therefore
Had he read them joined in this text by the article . left out that authenhave never would he read ^es,
tic
tation
and demonstrative word, and by way of interpreFor this for iv5-w/><e 5, written Xpiihv 05.
301
the
argument which lay before him. Neither would he have gone on, as he does, within a few lines, to recite the same text, putting Aoy by way of interpretation for
his bare
f^vT^i^iov
;
and
the
after
to
opinion, that
to
Word
or
the
was here
be understood by
this
mystery, and to
opinion, as needing proof out of other texts of scripture, as he does after this man-
my
nothing
else
;
us from
God
the
Father
the
JVord,
xoho
was
servant, he
For in taking the form of a manifested in the flesh. was horn of the holy God-bearing Firgin, And then after many other things he at length fyc
in sect.
mys-
tery
is
who
is God, and, according to the ScripLord of all things, appeared to us, was
This he makes
;
and
be
to
IX. Again,
in
the
first
De
Fide ad Reginas, near the end, he cites the text, and argues thus against the interpretation of Nesto* "E/ yaf
yi/iiv
eJj^j
iTigav
eJfiix,)
i's
Ik Qstu
vecr^os Xoyoi,
xcci
l^avEja^jj
fii^ipriv
ifa^xi.
rrif
ayias TaoSUou
^toTOKOV,
Jsi/Xst; Xa/SeJv.
ad Imperalorem,
Sect. 8,
302
rius.
"
Who
is
is
manifested
it
in the flesh ?
Is
is
no
so
Word
of
God
the
Father
For
be a great mystery of godliness (which was* manifested in the flesh) ; he was seen of anthat
gels,
the Gentiles
by
;
on
as
in the
world
man
but
God
born
in the flesh,
and
after
our manner."
X. So
nas,f he
also in his
cites the
second book,
place
again
;
upon it against the opinion of Nestorius after this manner " If the word, being God, is said to become a man, and yet continue what he was before, without
;
is
without
but
if
Christ be a
mere
man, joined with God only in the parity of dignity and power, (for this is mantained by some unlearned
men,) how
plain,
is
he manifested
in the flesh ?
Is
it
not
that every man is in the flesh, and cannot otherwise be seen by any body ; how then was he said
to
For do they
What was
if
there therefore
new
or
extraordinary in Christ,
a
man
as
we
are,
Thus
which
why
that
was manifested
*
t
in the flesh,
loco jam legit
0C
pro
sensu perturbato*
303
eternal
but
the
Word,
or
Son
of
God
all
been very superfluous and impertinent, then been expressly in the text.
God had
XL
to prove, that
and Cyril,
in confuting
him, did
it
in the text,
nor
any debate about the reading, but only put another interpretation upon the text than Nestorius had done ; arguing with Cassian, that in the text it
was not
great
mere man,
and by consequence Christ, or God the Son, which was manifested in the flesh ; and labouring by divers other arguments
mystery
of godliness
to prove this interpretation,
cavil, that Cyril
it
is
evident beyond
all
was a stranger
i'^or ,
to '.
now
got
into
the text
and read
XII
who,
his
in
And
his
all this is
further confirmed
by Photius,
commentary
Scholiums, read
is
ItpuvepuiYi,
and consonant
text
to this reading
in
Cyril's
his
explanation
of the
twelve
Apparuit in came ? And explains it by saying. Hoc est. Dei patris verhum caro factum est, and concludes, that it is hency that we call him God and Man. Whereas had &eli been in the
est igitur
quod
dicit,
26*
304
text, it would have needed no interpretation ; nor would he have put ^/yej for ??, in order to prove that God was manifested in the flesh. And yet in his
books ad Reginas, and in other writings, wherever he quotes this text, the Greeks have since corrected itby
their corrected manuscripts of St Paul's Epistles,
and
written 5 instead of
c ;
whence,
if
you would
truly
o
understand the Nestorian history, you must read or o<- for eoc, in all Cyril's citations of this text.
XIII.
whilst Cyril read o or ?, and in the of the twelve chapters, or articles, quotexplanation ed this text in the second article ; and this explana-
Now,
tion
was recited by him in the council of Ephesus, and approved by the council,* with an anathema at the end of every article ; it is manifest that this
and by consecouncil allowed the reading 05 or ; authentic and that or was the 05 public unconquence
troverted reading
till
council.
For
Nestorius and Cyril, the pitriarchs of Constantinople and Alexandria, and the heads of the two
if
0?
or
and their
writings went about amongst the eastern churches, and were canvassed by the bishops and clergy without any the reading ; and if Cyril read dispute raised about
5
itself; I think
its
that
conclusion
we make
if
of
being
then
the
general
uncontroverted
reading, must
needs
be granted us.
And
the authority
iii,
of one of the
sub
initio.
305
make any thing for the we have that into the bargain.
the
XIV.
Yet
whilst
Nestorian
controversy
or
a?
was a creature
it
was
the
Word
made
was
the prevalence of the latter party orthodox opinion, that o or U the it for pass God ; and so gave occasion to the Greeks of
;
God
change the language of Christ into that of God; and say, in their expositions of the text, that God was manifested in the flesh, as I find
henceforward
to
Thodoret
dotl),
and
at
text itself;
inviting
the easy
to
God
Co
in
the
into
Gc,
them
do
it ;
and,
if this
to
set right
Chrysostom, Cyiil, Theodoret, and wherever else they found it, in their opinion, corrupted by heretics.
XV. And
the
man
that
first
began thus
to
alter
Constantinople,
in
For the Emperor Anastasius banished him for corAt that time, the Greek church had been rupting it.
Many long divided about the council of Chalcedon. who allowed the condemnation of Eutyches, rejected the council
;
by reason of
its
decreeing, by the
letter against
Rome's
Eu-
306
naturis
;
to the
Greeks,
and by a great part of that church taken for Nestorianism. For they understood, that as the body and
soul
made
the
nature of Christ
assigning the
person of Christ, as well as to all other things, and not considering that in all compounds the several
parts
Hence each
party endeavoured
heresy ; as if they that were for the council secretly favoured the Nestorians, and they that were against ' For one party, in maintaining it, the Eutychians.
two
were thought
;
the nature
to
other party, in opposing two distinct natures in him, were thought to deny the truth of one of the natures
Both parties, therefore, to clear with Eutyches. themselves of those imputations, anathematised both
those heresies
;
differ-
ed
in their
sense, as
modes of speaking, they agreed in their But the bishops Evagrius well observes.
of
Rome
by these
to
length the Emperor Zeno, and empire, perhaps to secure it quiet of the bishop of Rome, from the encroachment
at
who, by this verbal contest,* aspired to the name and authority of universal bishop, sent about an
* Vide Baroniuin,
anno 451
307
henoticum, or pacificatory decree ; wherein he anthemaiised both Nestorius and Eutyches with their
followers on the one hand, and abrogated the Pope's
letter
and
his succesto
have
donius
those
decree signed by all the bishops. at first subscribed it ; but afterwards heading
And Mace-
who
ing the Scriptures in favour of his opinion, and such other tilings as were laid to his charge, deposed and
But
his
own
party,
which
length prevailed, defended him, as if oppressed calumnies and so received that reading for gen; by which he For how had uine, put about among them.
what they reckon on their side, Jerome well knew, when he recommended the testimony of " the Three in Heaven" by its
ready are
all
parties to receive
usefulness
and we have a notable instance of it in when the churches, both eastern and western, received this testimony in a moment into their Greek testaments, and still continue with great zeal
;
and passion
to
defend
it
for
the
ancient
reading,
all
the
Greek manuscripts.
Theodorus Lector,
lib.
ii.
and
in
grius notes
year before.
308
corruption, I must
who
lived
in that
very age.
in his in these
For
in
his Breviary,
after,
which he wrote
collected,
in the
and
as he saith
it
preface, out of
Greek
tempore ah Macedonius Constantinopolitanus episcopus imperatore Anasiasio dicitur expulsus, tanquam evangelia
falsaret
paruit
;
records, he delivers
words
Hoc
et
maxhne
hahet
Quia ap-
in carne, justificatum
Htmc enim
mono syll ahum
id
mutasse,
uhi
qui
in
hoc
est
Grcecum,
est,
literd
mutatd
vertisse
et fecisse
Tanquam
JVestorianus
severum ergo cidpatus expeUitur per omitted here letters Greek The Monachum.jof in those and of in the edition second Sunius, are,
the councils, thus inserted
;
Uhi hahet
mutatd
e's,
hoc
est qui,
monasyUahum Grcecum,
et fecisse
literd
in u, vertisse
id
this
est,
nem.
Cut
in the sacred text before conjecture ; for if was the corruption, then or o was not in, and so could
but
if eos
was not
in, it
could
The
interpola-
seems
out
to
make
Nestorianism here
309
and then
words ut
essei to the
sacred text
ut.
the
interpolator writing
^i
for
Whereas they
and
up the lacuna by the authority of an ancient author, Hincmarus ; who above eight hundred years
fill
ago*
manner
^uidam
im-
quoniam falsavit evangelia ; ilium apostoli locum, quod apparuit in carne, jus;
literarum
et
mutatd o in , mutavit, et fecit 0c, id est, ut esset, Deus apparuit per carnem; quapropter tanquam JVesfor
torianus fuit expulsus. He was banished therefore changing the ancient reading (which in some
MSS
o)
into
was oc, as these authors have it, and in others c. But whereas he is here represented
manner
referred to the sacred text
;
are in like
and somebody, to
out the sense, lias in their stead added ut npparerct to the words of Liberatus, and written id npparerct, ut esset Deus, he
make
id nppareret
comma after
Hincmari opuscul.
310
the meaning
is,
that
he
was banished
which
his
enemies
it
was not
really so.
;
human
nature in Christ
in
and
the
God,
in
the
Word, dwelt
this
nature,
as
a holy
man
the
human
nature.
this,
made
This distinguishing Christ into two natures was, by the enemies of Macedonius, accounted Nestorianism in another lanmanifested in the flesh.
God
respect the historian saith, that as a Nestorian for corrupting the text, though he was not really of that opinion.
guage
and
in this
they banished
him
XVII. But
Nestorian for
whilst
this,
he
is
said
to
be banished as a
without explaining what is here meant by a Nestorian, it looks like a trickish way of speaking, used by his friends to ridicule the proceedings against
him
as inconsistent
;
the crime
of falsation
as
if
c into o. For they that read histowith ry judgment, will too often meet with such and even in the very story of trickish reports ;
rather change
Macedonius,
same kind.
that
his
keeping
by
emperor under
whom
it
was
called, and
311
deliver
up
to
this
book
this
to
the
emperor
Anastasius
some,
;
make
if,
emperor perjured,
coming to the crown, he had promised under his hand and oath, that he would not act against the council of Chalcedon ; and represented his subscribed promise to be the
as
at his
him.
his bishopric by being and had subscribed the council of Chalcedon, against
was
anathematised
and
this
make
a contrary
to the emperor that in of behalf he had done as much as the crown, council. Another report was,f " That the people
;
story of the
as
if,
when he came
of Alexandria and
and
free, priests
all Egypt, great and small, bond and monks, excepting only strangers,
became about
this
evil spirits,
and being deprived of human speech, barked day and night like dogs ; so that tliey were afterwards
jound with
iron chains,
and drawn
to
the church,
For they
then
all
And
an
angel
people, saying, that this to them because happened they anathematised the
appeared
council
some of
the
of
that
they
should do so no more."
k.c. lib.
iii.
27
312
tory,*
" That the adversaries of Macedonius produced certain boys in judgment to accuse both him
themselves of sodomy
and
but
that
and that in a solemn council the great ; of the East was thus accused and thus patriarch
another
that there
; you must acknowledge, were many bishops among the Greeks who would not stick at as ill and shameless things,
man
as corrupting the
Scriptures.
But
if
all
this
be a
a sham
need of
in
con-
first at
Constantinople, being that council which Theodorus " a calls company of mercenary wretches ;" and
Nicephorus,
against Macedonius."
Upon their adding to thef " " thrice holy" these words, who art crucified for us" the people fell into a tumult ; and afterwards, when
Macedonius came
be accused, they fell into a " The time of persecugreater tumult, crying out, tion is at hand ; let no man desert the father ;" meanto
ing Macedonius.
*
t
was
said
Evagrius,
lib.
lib.
iii.
ii.
Theodor.
Nicephor.
lib, xvi.
cap. 26
Evagr.
lib. iii;
cap. 44.
313
up by the clergy of Constantinople, of the city were burnt, and the nobles many parts and emperor brought into the greatest danger ; instirred
be
somuch
that the emperor was forced to proffer the resignation of his empire, before he could quiet the multitude. Then seeing that, if Macedonius were
judged, the people would defend him, he caused him to be carried by force in the night to Chalcedon ;
and thence
into banishment, as
Theodorus
writes.
also to
Whence
I gather, that
the council
removed
Chalcedon
and
finish their
pro-
ceedings there.
in
For the
tumult
the
judgment by boys, Nicephorus places after this and all agree that he was condemned ; and ;
an epistle recorded by Evagrius, say that Xenaias and Dioscorus, joined with many bishops, banished him. When his conPalestine,
in
monks of
demnation was sent him, signed by the emperor, he asked, whether they that had condemned him, received the council of Chalcedon
that brouglit
" If
and when they ; him the sentence denied h, he replied, Arians and Macedonians had sent me a book of
I
receive
it .^"
So
that
it
seems
illegality
of the council.
The
next day one Timothy was made bishop of Constantinople, and he sent about the condemnation of
Macedonius
ed.*
*
to
all
Whence
think
will easily
be granted, that he
Theophanes,
p. 135.
314
SIR ISAAC
Newton's history gp
was condemned
by the greatest part of and ; by consequence, that thegenuine reading was till then, by the churches of that For had not the public reading empire, accounted .
as a falsary
then been
pretending that he
changed
it
into
c.
XIX. About
and
and Justinian, set up the authorof the council of Chalcedon again, together with
that of the
Pope over
;
versal bishop
Macedonius
tion
prevailing,
which condemned him, and for and promoting establishing the doctrine of two natures in Christ, they received and spread abroad the
to the heretics,
reading 0c.
that fell
slept
till
But
Pope,
again with
Rome
it.
in
Phocas revived
told
XX.
friends of Macedonius, to
There
is
one which
notably confirms what has hitherto been said, and makes it plain that his friends received his corruptions as
genuine scripture.
Testament, his friends retorted the crime upon the council, as if they had
taken upon them, under colour of purging the Scriptures from the corruptions of Macedonius, to correct
in
was banished
New
as un-
315
For
this
men and
idiots,
I gather
about in
from an ironical report of this kind put the West, and thus recorded by Victor
Tununensis.
Messcdd
J^.
C. consuUbus, Constanti-
nopoli,jiibente Anastasio Imperatore, sancta Evangelia, tanquam ab idiotis composita, reprehend untur et " In the of emandantur that
;
is,
consulship
jNIessala,
wrhten by Evangehsts that were idiots." Here Victor errs in the year. For Messala was
;
as
if
is,
But Victor
;
is
very
dates
of
the years
for
he
places
Avienus
502
and
the
in
abovementioned
tumult
whereas
pened
in
the
same year.
For
chronicle, that
the Scriptures
corrected about this time by a council at Constantinople, by the order of Anastasius ; and I meet with
no other council
to which this character can agree, besides that which deposed Macedonius. Now that should censure and correct the they Gospels, as if
written
history
by idiots, is too plainly ironical to be true and therefore it must be an abusive report, ;
to
Maco
27*
316
donius as the genuine apostolic reading of the ScrijJtures, which the council had rashly corrected.
XXI.
So then
the falsation
fifth
was
set
on foot
in
century, and is now of about twelve hundred years standing and therefore since it lay but in a letter, and so was more easily
the beginning of the
;
spread abroad in the Greek manuscripts than the " the Three in Heaven" in the Latin testimony of
ones
we need
not
wonder
if
the old
reading be
Greek manuscripts
us,
I
now
extant
and yet
it is
in
some.
tells
;
XXII.
that
tell
all
the
yet
must
0.
Beza's
For he had
no other manuscripts of the Epistles besides the Claromontan ; and in this manuscript, as Morinus
by ocular inspection has since informed us, the ancient reading was c ;* but yet in another hand,
and with other
out of the line
;
ink, the
letter
and the
letter o,
thickenedf to make
Sed praepostera
aliqua
0,
et
ambesa paululum O,
facile
i.
ut appareret signia.
emendatio
conspicitur.
ii.
Hac Morinus
in ExercUationibiis
iiividit,
Biblicis, Lib.
Exercitat.
cap. 4.
At Beza nobis
ut ex ejus epistolA ad Academiatn Cantabrigiensem a Waltono edita liquet ubi variantes aliquas lectiones celandas esse admonet.
;
Such is the reading in the defective edition of 1754, as well as in the late edition of the entire essay from which the present is reprinted; but the sense of the passage imt{|<'
Thickened."
" ambesa paululum" in the preceding expressed by 0. En.] note, a partial crasement of the letter
plies,
what
is
317
by Va-
sufficiently
whom
lesius also read in one of the Spanish manuscripts; and so did the author of the Oxford edition of the
New
Testament, anno Christi 1675, in the manuscript of Lincoln College Library, which is the
oldest of the
Oxford manuscripts.
Photio
The Alexandrian
Epist.) read
orum,
(teste
MS
com.
in
oc.
So then there are some ancient Greek manuscripts which read c, and others o ; but 1 do not hear of
any Latin ones, either ancient or modern, which
read Gti^.
XXIIL And
said,
it
properly be
the
spirit .^"
But
ducta cernitur tam lineola per nipdium I. Putat auO, qiiani virgiila siiperiia ut jam legatiir lem Millius, lirieolas illas olim teniies t'uisse et piope evanidas, et
Alio atramentojam
literal
novo
deiii
atramento incrassatas
fuisse
diictas,
set
ductus quosdam ac vestigia satis certa depreliendere visus e3pra^sertim ad partem sinistrani, qua; periiilieriam iiterre per;
tingit
hodierna lineolte
superinductA.
Veriim
si
lineola aiitiquitus
linea;
tam conspicua
alio
esset, ut uscpie
crassioris,
lineA
illi superinductS incrassaretur. ut cerni vix posset; mirum est, quod ejus ductus et vestigia satis
certa, per
medium
literse illius
aliis in
OC
hie
mutatum
0C.
318
to read
o,
and interpret
it
to his divinity,
makes
long expected Messias, the hope of Israel, is to us *' And this mystery the great mystery of godliness." was at length manifested to the Jews from the time
whom
have now given you an account of the corruption of the text, the sum of which is this ; the difference between the Greek and the ancient ver-
XXIV.
sions puts
it
past dispute,
that either
the
Greeks
have
corrupted their
MSS,
and Ethiopians,
their versions
and
it is
more reasonIt
than for three to conspire. It was easier to change a letter or two in the Greek, In the Greek, the than six words in the Latin.
it
one nation to do
sense
is
obscure
in the
versions, clear.
to
It
was
the
agreeable to the interest of the Greeks, change, but against the interest of other
to
make
nations
do
it ;
The Greek
reading was unknown in the times of the Arian controversy ; but that of the versions then in
Some Greek use amongst both Greeks and Latins. MSS render the Greek reading dubious; but those
of the versions hitherto collated
agree.
There are
no signs of corruption
in
319
particularly
the text
was corrupted.
I
XXV.
to tell
know
there
an
epistle
De
reads 05.
For
heresy, and so was written by a much later author than Athanasius, and may also possibly have been
since corrected, like the works of
Cyril,
I
Chrysostom and by the corrected texts of St John's Epistles. have had so short a time to run my eye over auupon further search,
this falsation
may
not hereafter
if
to
it
the argument.
will
But
there
the
should, I presume
is
not be
difficult,
now
know what
to
I
construc-
how
apply them.
XXVI. You
have used
in this
debating the greatest mysteries of religion, knew nothing of these two texts, I understand not, why we should be
so fond of
whilst
it
discourse, and 1 hope you will interpret it candidly. For if the ancient churches, in and deciding
And
to
is
man
be
pleased, and of a man of interest to be troubled at the detection of frauds, and of both to run most into
those passions
when
the detection
is
made
plainest
320
I
hope
one of your
as
it
integrity,
prove
so
much
the
more acceptable,
makes
a further
BUTLER'S
HISTORICAL OUTLINE.
HISTORICAL OUTLLVE
OF THE CONTROVERSY RESPECTING THE TEXT
OF THE
As corning the Appendix to Butler's Hora BiblictB. from a Roman Catholic and a Trinitarian, this article to be free from any bias on the must be
supposed
writer against the genuineness of the seems, indeed, to have reviewed the suband to have given as ject with great iinpartiality, accurate an outline of the controversy through the several stages of its progress, as the hmits he pres-
[The following comparative view of the arguments, \vhich have been advanced on both sides in discuss1 John, v. 7. is taken from ing the genuineness of
part of the
text.
He
If in
some
instances
he
too brief for perspicuity, he has on the whole contrived to embrace the most important points of
is
any
other writer.]
genuineness of the verse of the Three Heavenly Witnesses, or 1 John v. 7. has engaged much of
The
28
324
the
of the
last
centuries
so that, as
is hardly a library in all Europe, from the Vatican to the Bodleian, from Madrid to Moscow, in
" there
proceeded from the pen of St John ;" and, Travis observes, " there are few subjects, in the walks of philology or criticism, in which, one
it
really
as
Mr
simple
question, as
itself,
it
on a nearer approach, into so many pands comphcated branches, and covers so large a field of historical and theological criticism."
of the state of the question ; II. Of the history of the general admission of The Verse into the printed text ; III. And of the principal disI.
2:
sheets
mav be
found to contain,
putes to which
it
IV.
An
inquiry
whether the general sense of the text is affected by the omission of The Verse ; V. Some account of
the argument in favour of
scription
;
its
VI.
Some
its
against
scripts
;
it
from
VII.
Of
from
Valla
its
;
supposed existence
VIII.
the
manuscripts of
in
From
its
supposed existence
the
editors ; IX.. And manuscripts of the Complutensian in the existence its from manuscripts used supposed
by Robert Stephens
X. Some observations on
the
325
Greek Apostolos or Collection of Epistles read in the Church ; XI. On its not being inserted in the oriental
versions
XII.
most ancient
lence of
all
On
the
it
XIV.
On
ers
will then respecting it ; XV. Some account be given of what has been written respecting its
first
scripts.
other important topics for and several against the authenticity of The Verse ; and of those which have been mentioned, lead to facts
There
are
many
and subjects which are not noticed in these sheets but, what is noticed, \v\\\, perhaps, be found sufficient
;
to
versy.
The
is
as follows
In the
Tcxtus Rcceptus, or received Greek text of the 1st Epistle of St John, the 7th and 8th verses of the fifth chapter are expressed in these words :
Seventh Verse.
"Oti
rpd
(~/v
c'l
f^uprvpoZyrti
tv T&i
eupx\u,
Trcniip,
Afiy5, Kit]
TO a.yt6V TTViu/^x'
Kcti oiiToi Of
rpeli iv <V/,
Eighth Verse.
y.ui
uSuj),
TO Xiuof xeti
oi
Tpi7i ili
'To
tv fV<y,
326
Ouoniam
sunt.
tres sunt,
et
Pater, Vei-bum,
ccelo ;
unum
Et
tus, et
tres sunt,
spiri-
aqua,
et
sanguis
is,
et hi tres
in
unum
sunt.
The
verse,
question
or, to
V
the words,
Ki ouret
01
r^ouaxvi^
'
TTXiiip,
Xoyoi,
x-xi
to uyiov
7rvsv(4.s6'
rpsTi
o't
xi rpui ciTit
fixprvpoZvrei
genuine or spurious.
genuine, the
text
If the passage
question be
is
stands properly, as
it
pressed
BiTii
y.x)
n'l
if
it
be spurious,
v /V;v,
should stand
ei
T^ui iU TO
in
tho
Greek
and
in
the
;
Latin,
"
(^uoniam
tres
unum sunt." IT. With respect to the histohy of the general ADMISSION OF THE VERSE INTO THE PRINTED TEXT 1. The first event, which deserves attention, is the
spiritus, et
aqua, et sanguis
et
lii
tres in
the Latin Vulgate : what should be understood by the Vulgate, in this place, will be mentioned afterwards.
insertion of
it
in
2.
The second
is
Erasmus''s
insertion
of The
ment.
327
Erasmus had the honour of behig the person who published the first printed edition of the Greek New
Testament.
He
pubHshed
five
editions,
in
1516,
The Complutensian
Polyglott was printed in 1517, and published in 1522. In his edition of 1522, and in his two subsequent editions,
Erasmus
his
is
supposed
to
have conformed
his
makes
he published.
insert
he did not
nesses.
1516 and 1519, The Verse of the Heavenly WitIn his editions of
rise to
This gave
Lee, an Englishman, and to a dispute between him and the Spanish divines employed on the Complutensian Polyglott.
if it
Codex Montfortianus
and,
consequence of this discovery, Erasmus inserted The Verse in his edition of 1522, and retained it in
his
two subsequent
editions.
3.
The
third of these
events,
is
the insertion of
The Verse
in the Complutensian That Polyglott. noble work was begun in 1502, completed in 1517,.
and published
4.
in
1522.
is
The
the insertion of
Stephens,
in
in his
celebrated edi;
New
Testament,
1550
the text of
it,
28*
328
edition of
Erasmus.
The fifth of these events, is the insertion of The Verse mBeza's editions of the Greek Testament. The first of his editions was pubhshed in 1565 he
5.
;
principally follows in
it,
He printed other editions in 1576, 1582, 1589, and 1598 ; they do not contain every where the same text, but in all of them. The Verse is inserted.
Stephens.
6. The The Verse
sixth of these
in the
events,
is
the insertion of
New
Testament.
of their presses.
printer of distinction
last
of
them, died
in
1680.
first
edition
Leyden, in 1624 ; it was printed from the of Robert Stephens where it varies
:
from that
edition,
it
Beza
The
Verse.
By
which had
fluctuat-
was followed,
it
in all
deservedly acquired the appellation of Editio Recepta : the editors of it are unknown.
that account,
7. The seventh of these events, is the insertion of The Verse in the modern edition of Luther''s transla-
329
Hon of the
New
Testament.
From
the translations
The published by himself, he uniformly rejected it. he the while was in was which last edition, press,
living,
but was not quite finished till after his death, was that of 1546. In that, as in all his former ediit
tions,
is
wholly absent.
Luther concludes
his
dying request, that, The should be ahered, in the slightest instance. Verse, however, was inserted in the Frankfort edition of
1574
in
rejected
the
and, for a time, inserted in some, and ; other editions: but, since the beginning of
17th century, with the exception of the Wittenin the ediberg edition of 1607, the insertion of it,
tions of Luther's translation, has
8. It should
been general.
be added, that the principal printed editions of the Greek New Testament since the Elzevir,
bach.
it is
The Verse
is
found
in the text
first,
of them
all
;
by
to
be genuine
To
the credit of
all
the
their
particular
candour and
the
arguments
for
Verse.
With respect to the principal disputes to WHICH IT HAS GIVEN RISE 1. The first, is the dispute between Erasmus and
:
Comphitensian Polyglott.
330
It
has been mentioned that Erasmus published He five editions of the Greek New Testament.
did not insert
The Verse
in the
this, he was reprehended, in the severest terms, by Lee or Ley, an Enghsh divine
and 1519.
For
of some note, afterwards advanced, by Henry the Eighth, to the archbishopric of York ; and by Stunica, a Spanish
divine,
sian Polyglott.
readiness to insert
The
Verse,
if
a single manuscript
it.
it,
of one or more manuscripts, Stunica was bound, in honour, to produce such a manuscript ; but he pro-
duced none.
(For the controversy between Erassee Biirigni, Vie d^Erasme, 2 vol. 8vo.
372-381
between Erasmus and Stunica, see the same work, vol. 163-175 ; and for Stunica's attack and Eras-
Codex
Tom.
The
2.
in his editions of
The second
of
The
331
till
in
Mr
voked
a fresh dispute.
By
Sandius,
it
JVu-
Paradox^
in
Johannem.
Its
authenticity
is
defended hy
Mr
Selden.
In his
de Sxjnedriis Ehrceorum, L. 2. C. 4. S. 4. he sums up the arguments on each side of the question, and pronounces in favour of The Verse.
treatise
A
er
it
Simon, in his Histoire critique du Texte du JVouveau Testament, Rot. 1680. 4to. Part I. ch. 18;
Part
ings.
It
II.
in
In support of
Deux
verset 7
Dissertations
du
ch. v.
"
//
y a trois au
authenticite de ce texte.
V on fait
voir que
passage
n^ est
Examen
du
ch. v. de la 1
Epistre de St Jean.
3S2
verite du Texte de la premiere Epistre cle St Jean, v. 7. demontree par des preuves qui sont au dessus de toute exception, prises du temoignage de VEglise Latine, et de VEglise Grecque, et en particulier
La
dhm
Irlande.
manuscript du JVouveau Testament, trouve en Par David Martin, Pasteur de VEglise a Utrecht. Utrecht, 1721.
found an able adversary in Mr Thomas Emfyn, an eminent presbyterian divine, whose suf-
The Verse
all
true christians
it
he attacked
in the
text, 1
i-eprinted in
An
1
ansiver to
v. 7.
Mr
critical dissertation
on
John,
Reply to Mr .Martin'' s examination of the answer, London, 1720. Martin also met with an able adversary in Casar
de Missy, a native of Berlin, French preacher in the Savoy, and French chaplain at St James's, the author
Letters against the genuineness of the verse, inserted in the 8th and 9th volumes of the Journal
of
Four
Britannique. The Bible de Vence, published middle of the last century, Tom.
at Paris,
xiii.
about the
p. 5. contains
a candid, learned, and sensible dissertation in favour of The Verse. The author cites in it, ICetneri Dis-
333
;
Dissertatio
singularis
Roger^
1713.
A
Dr
regular attack
Benson, a presbyterian divine, in his Parajphrase of the, Gospels, 2 vol. 4to. 1756. Sir Isaac JVewton is the author of a treatise against
the genuineness of
ance, under the
JVeivton
to
The
of
Verse.
It
made
its
appear-
title
Two
Letters
Mr
Le
manuscript
in the
volume of Dr Horsley's
force,
late edi-
Newton's works.
candour, and
They
Newton.
perspicuity,
The English opposition to The Verse, in this stage of the controversy, is respectably closed by Mr Boivyer, the learned printer's Conjectures on the JVew
Testament, London, 4to. 1781.
In the
of
much
the
The Verse had been the subject Some mention of controversy in Germany. works which there have made their apprincipal
mean
time,
pearance on this subject, may be found in the note on St John's first Epistle, in Schviidius^s Historia
Antiqua
Vindicatio canonis sacri veteris novique Testamenti, Lipsia, Svo. 1774. an excellent publicaet
Lutheran school
Tubing(C, 1773
;
in
mon, 2
vol. 4 to.
and
334
Herbert Marsh,
first,
Introduction to the JVew Testament, translated by vol. 4. cA. 21. Michaelis had, at
Mr
in
The
Verse,
his Vindicice
piurium
lectionu/n codicis
et
Greed JVovi
ah eo latas leges
criticas, Halce, 1751 ; but, afterwards, became one of its most powerful opposers, in his Historical and Critical Collections, relative to what are called the
proof passages,
3.
in dogmatic theology.
to the third stage of the controversy. In the 119th Note to the 37th Chapter of his History of the Decline and Fall of the Roinan Empire, (3
This leads
" The 545, 4to.) INIr Gibbon asserts, that Three Witnesses have been established, in our Greek
vol. p.
the honest
bigotry of the Complutensian editors, the typographical fraud, or error, of Robert Stephens, in the placing
a crotchet
con of Chester, in three letters, in the Gentleman's He printed them, with two Magazine of 1782.
others, in a separate
five,
ditions, in octavo, in
1786.
To
these,
Mr Professor
in the
Porson replied
in
In the
Mag-
1790, another
letter,
on the sub-
appeared from
Mr
Travis.
Mr
Porson replied
335
it, in the jMagazine of the following month, and soon afterwards, all Mr Person's Letters, with addi-
tions,
which increased
their
volume, an
erudition,
number
to twelve,
were
eternal
monu-
critical
sagacity,
In 1794,
Mr Travis
;
Mr
professes to answer, one after another, the arguments of other distinguished opponents of The Verse. In
1795,
ters to
J\Ir
let-
Mr
iii
Mr
Archdeacon
Translator's
Travis,
of one of
the
and
in confirmation
of the opinion, that a Greek Manuscript now preserved in the public library of the University of Cambridge, is one of the seven, which are quoted by Robert Stephens, at 1
John
v. 7. with
an Appendix, con-
taining a review of Mr Travis's Collation of the Greek which he examined at Paris ; an extract
MSS
from Mr Pappelbaum's Treatise on the Berlin MS ; and an Essay on the Origin and Object of the Vchsian readings.
By
the
Translator of Michaelis
letters
was, as
one expresses it, of his notes to his translation of Michaelis's Introduction, that the
title
to
in
the
of his book,
29
336
ed by Robert Stephens, at 1 John, v. 7 but his letabound with most learned, ingenious, and profound remarks on almost every point, which comes
ters
ness of
The
Verse.
Mr
an interesting pamphlet on the subject of The Verse, with this title, Observations on the Text of the Three
Divine Witnesses, accompanied with a Plate, containing two very exact Fac-Similes of 1 John, Chap. v. verse 7, 8, and 9, as they stand in the first Edition of
the JVeiv Testament, printed at Compliitum, 1514,
and
in the
Codex Montfortii, a JManuscript marked C. 97, in the Library of Trinity College, Dublin. By A. Clarice, Manchester, 1805. It is to be hoped he
will put
it
The
following
may be
found to contain a
view of the principal arguments used by the combatants in support of their opinions.
iV. The first object of the inquiry is to ascertain WHETHER THE GENERAL SENSE OR IMPORT OF THE
TEXT, IS ASSISTED OR INJURED, BY THE INSERTION OR OMISSION OF The Verse. The ascertainment
of this
fact, will
of the text. This against the internal evidence the verse is of some an inquiry obscure, nicety ;
susceptible
to partisans of each opinion, have attempted sense on it, which best suits their cause.
337
is
that
The Verse
"
to
the
as
Who
he that overcometh the world, but he, who believThis is he, who is the son of God ?
blood, even Jesus the Christ
;
blood.
And
is
it is
the Spirit
who witnessed
because
the spirit
truth.
Spirit,
Thus
in
who bear
;
witness, the
right
in itself.
is
whom testimony
borne
the spirit,
Thus without further aid, the testimony to him. and construction meaning of the sentence are complete.
The Verse
1.
therefore
is
V.
the
its
Erasmus
madq
from
first
attack on
The
Verse.
At
that time,
general insertion in the manuscript and printed of tiio copies of the Latin text, the universal opinion
in its favour.
The
text of these
and tempocopies had been adopted by the spiritual ral courts, appealed to in disputes, taught in the
schools,
and praised
and commented
on by the
learned
men
Prcscrijjtion
in these
prescription be pleadable
favour.
cases,
was
in
338
2. If
we
The
Verse, the
to
introduction of
The
Verse, was
first
owing
the
fath-
by the African
in the
till
Verse gained
ground
It is universally received for genuine in the 12th. remarkable, that not the slightest vestige of opposition to it is discoverable in the works of those
times,
nothing, which
inti-
The
Verse.
Here
the
Rome
Trent,
The
council
to all,
of
Session 4, declared
Anathema
"
who
should
not receive for holy and canonical, all and every part of the books of the Old and New Testament,
as they
had been accustomably read in the Catholic Church, and as they stood in the old vulgate ediand
in
tion ;"
the
sixth
session,
declared
" the
Vulgate to be authentic, and that no one should, on any pretence, dare or presume to reject it."
Now, when the council of Trent made this decree. The Verse had long been accustomably read in the catholic church, and long made a part in the
old vulgate edition
;
those, therefore, in
communion
Verse,
fall
To
reply
;
The Verse
339
are
That
in
we
now
us, in
speaking,
that no
on
its
does not
from
Italic
its
;
the Ancient
does not denote the edition published by St Jerome ; it merely denotes that edition, which,
it
at the
time of the council of Trent, was generally in use ; and afterwards served as the groundwork
of the editions published, first by Sixtus Quintus, afterwards by Clement the Eighth, and which last
edition
is
this edition
ancient versions
in a
is,
3dly.
To
council
of Trent
declaring
clare
it
the Vulgate
to
dogmata of
faith or
29*
340
decision, every
Roman
he receives the scripture from the church, under her authority, and vi^ith her interpretation ; but further
this, the council leaves the Vulgate in mere matters of criticism, to the private judgment of every
than
individual.
To
this
effect,
father
Salmeron,
who
who
cited
by the
in
tlie
Abbe de Vence,
to
In this stage of the argument, Bossuet takes very high ground, in one of his letters to Leibnitz, publish-
ed by
Mr
Dutens, in his edition of Leibnitz's works ; Bossuet seems to place the general
acquiescence of the Roman Cathohc church, in the authenticity of The Verse, among the traditions
which the church receives, and the faithful are thereAs every thing which has fore bound to adopt. fallen from the pen of that great man, is important,
in question is little
known,
it is
here
transcribed at length.
" J'avoue au reste, Monsieur, ce que vous dites des anciens exemplaires Grecs sur le passage, Tres Sunt,
S/-C.
mais vous s^avez aussi bien que raoi, que Partine doit pas etre pour d'ailleurs etabli, non etant cela revoque en doute,
seulement par la Tradition des Eglises, mais encore Vous s^avez aussi par I'Ecriture tres eviderament.
341
sans doute, que ce passage se trouve re^u dans tout ce qui paroit manifeste, sans meme I'Occident;
Fulgence
lente
meme
Confession de
presentee unanimement au
au Roi Huneric par toute I'Eglise d'Afrique. Ce temoignage produit par un aussi grand Theologien,
par cette scavante Eglise, n'ayant point ete reproche par les heretiques, et au contraire etant conet
de miracles, dont cette Confession de foi fut suivie, est une demonstration de la Tradition, du
moins de toute I'Eglise d'Afrique, I'une des plus illusOn trouve meme dans S. Cyprien tres du monde.
une
allusion manifeste a ce passage, qui a passe natu;
et
confirme
la
Tradi-
Je suis, &tc. tion de tout rOccident. " J. Benigne, Eveque de Meaux." Such is the state of the argument, so far as the
authenticity of
the
general
certainly imposes on
the
The
The
its
following are
authenticity, and arguments against the principal anwers to them. VI. They say, that there is hardly a library in Europe, in which the Manuscripts of the Greek Tes-
342
butler's historical
really
OUTLIISTE:
proceeded from the and that the result of this long and
is,
laborious examination
that of
all
the
Greek manu-
of which scripts of the Cathohc Epistles, now extant, more than a hundred have been quoted by name,
independently of those which have been quoted the aggregate, (as where Dr Griesbach, Professor
Birch, or Professor Alter speak, at large, of all the manuscripts they have seen), the passage has been
the Codex Montdiscovered in one manuscript only, fortianus, which is neither of sufficient antiquity nor
mit
but
The Verse
generally ad-
which contained The Verse, for which they cite those, which were in the possession of Valla, the
Complutensian
editors,
VII. With respect to the manuscripts of Valla ; the advocates of The Verse assert, that Valla had
seven Greek manuscripts of the 1st Epistle of St John, and that all his manuscripts exhibited The
Verse.
They
observe, that
it
was
his plan to
gate receded
notice,
in in
that
he takes no
his
annotations, of the
omission of
The
Verse, any of his manuscripts ; from which they it was contained in them all. that infer,
343
The
adversaries of
The Verse
reply,
that
we
are
ignorant of the number of manuscripts which Valla used, and of his plan of annotation ; that, though it
be probable he had seven Greek manuscripts, which exhibited St John's Gospel, ch. vii. v. 29. where he expressly mentions that number of manuscripts, it does not appear, and it is highly improbable, he
should have the hke
of the
1st
Epistle of
The Verse
might have been wanting in the Latin text, with which he made his collation ; that he might studiously have
which he
;
lived,
it is
in the
to persecution
that
some or other of
his manuscripts
titles
;
have been
that
no manuscript
is
that,
of course, there
the
probability of none of his manuscripts having contained it, as there is that we are now in possess-
same
ion of
some
or other
of his manuscripts.
adversaries of
FroiA
The Verse
its
favour
observable that
Lee, with the contents of Valla's manuscripts, he attempted to bear him down by other arguments,
but did not deny that
to
be found
in
344
the
archdeacon
But
asserts, were in Erasmus's possession. the archdeacon appears to have been mistaken
;
in this supposition
la's
',
Erasmus was
it
no where appears that he commentary was in possession of Valla's manuscripts, and he himbut
self asserts
the contrary.
Such
men
of letters should
eagerly rise in
is
his defence,
unjustly accused.
VIII. With respect to the manuscripts used BY the CoiiPLUTENsiAN EDITORS ; The Polyglott
Alcala or Complutum, under the Bible, printed patronage, and at the expense of Cardinal Ximenes,
at
was begun
in
1502
it
was
cer-
1522.
in
It is
spared no expense
procuring
whether he had any that were The Verse truly valuable, has been much doubted. %as its place in this edition ; from which its advomanuscripts
;
but,
it
was exhibited by
all,
or at least
by the
Complutensian
editors.
This inference
Verse.
is
denied by
the adversaries of
The
They
contend, that,
from the deference, which the Complutensian editors had for the Vulgate, they were honestly persuaded, that The Verse was genuine, and therefore inserted,
and thought themselves warranted in inserting in their text, a translation of it from the Latin. This^
345
they say, appears clearly from the dispute between the former in the bitterest Stunica and Erasmus ;
latter
The
Verse,
in his
printed
edition
Erasmus, with
Stunica to produce a equal vehemence, challenged in Greek manuscript support of The Verse ;
single
single
This,
of the case, to per; explain sons unacquainted with Stephens's celebrated edition
this part
To
to
Greek Testament, which gives rise to the and which was the edition publishpresent question, ed by him in 1550, it is necessary to observe that
of the
the text of
it is
In the
Greek manuscripts, from the King's libraborrowed were which of eight six were procured from various quarters, and
ry,
in Italy.
The Complutensian
denoted,
text
and the
fifteen
copies he
when he
cited
various readings from them, by the Greek numerals The copy ', he quotes far as fifteen. 'j ^'. y\ as
like throughout the whole New Testament, because, other printed editions, the Complutensian edition,
which
it
Of his
fifteen
346
BUTLER
HISTORICAL OUTLINE.
in manuscripts, he quotes some in one part, some another ; but none throughout the whole New Testament. In the Cathohc Epistles, Stephens has quoted
only seven manuscripts, which he denotes by the numerals S\ i. ^'. 6\ l. tA, ty', of which the four marked
^',
',
C'
6'
'>
three
<,
were from the King's hbrary, and the other iy\ were among the six which he had
the disputtext, h rZ oupxf^,
v, 7.
ci
Xcyoi-, vmi
to aytov
wvry.ctoe,
iv
x< outoi
rpiti (*
KXi rpui
etTiv ci
/n^xorvpeuvref
Ttj yfj
Stephens has quoted the seven with an obelus prefixed. mentioned, manuscripts just
In the margin,
according to his plan of annotation, when any word or number of words is omitted in the quoted
Now,
manuscript, he expresses it by placing in his text, an obelus before the first word, and a little crotchet in
the shape of a semicircle, and of the size of a comma, after the last word. At the place in question,
is set before , which precedes -f ovpavS, and the semicircle immediately after oupxfc;^ 5 so that " by this notation the words r^ odpav^', and not the
the obelus
in
printing,
this
Robert Stephens had not been pubhshed many years, when Lucas Brugensis suspected, that Stephens's compositor had here made a mistake, and
347
set
is,
the
word of the
controverted passage, and not after the third ; for, even in the sixteenth century it was well known, that
the
Greek manuscripts, in general, omitted the whole passage ; but no one, either before or since the time of Robert Stephens, has ever seen a Greek
manuscript which omitted the three first words only. This, however, was not admitted by the advocates
of
The
Verse,
who
is
still
hundred years after the time of Lucas Brugensis, Simon examined all the Greek manuscripts in the library of the king of France, and found that not
only
"
all
yv were absent from them all ; and, as of the four out seven, which Stephens has quoted at 1 John V. 7. had been borrowed from this hbrary,
far as
though Simon did not attempt to determine what particular four, he concluded, that Stephens's representation
at that passage was inaccurate. To argument, the patrons of Stephens's semicircle had recourse to the hypothesis, that the eight
evade
this
belonged to the king's library, were no longer there, and even that they were no longer in existence; a
position, which,
30
348
is
who
maintain,
set right,
which
still
exist,
other
From
this
untenable
Le
they were driven, a few years afterwards, by Long, who, in 1720, undertook to determine the
eight
particular
which had been used by Robert Stephens, and consequently four out of the seven, which are quoted at
1
John
V. 7.
in
described
The eight manuscripts he imperfectly the Journal des Sfavans for June 1720;
but he gave a more complete and accurate account of them in the edition of his Bihliotheca Sacra, which
was published
author.
in
From
circle
appeared
to
to
The
Verse, ap-
be wholly abandoned. But, in 1791, Mr peared Archdeacon Travis took a journey to Paris, in order
compare Stephens's quotations from the eight manuscripts, which he had borrowed from the royal
to
on which
Le Long
had
fixed, as the
eight,
phens.
his
own
Stephens differed, so frequently, from the readings in Le Long's manuscripts, as to warrant the inference, that these were not the eight, which Stephens
349
The grounds
length, in the
bon; they
Mr GibMarsh. Mr by of Mr Travis's last the to publication Previously edition of his letters to Mr Gibbon, Mr Marsh in one
sixth edition of his letters to
of his notes to Michaelis, (Vol. II. p. 789), had informed the world, that he had found a Greek manuscript,
marked
. 6.
4.
in
by
ered to be the manuscript which Stephens had quoted the mark, "/', and consequently, one of the seven
in Stephens's edition manuscripts which are quoted of 1550, at 1 John V. 7 ; and at the same time,
induced him to believe, assigned the reasons, which that the manuscript in question had been at Paris,
and that
Stephens
not only including
it
called
"
Now,
but
all
this
manuscript omits
following
fi
odpciv^,
;
t^ y^
and,
the
words,
all
since
Stephens quotes
same omission,
it
follows, that, as
Of ted the whole passage, the others did the same. aware well the truth of this inference, Mr Travis was ;
and, in his last edition of his letters to
Mr
Gibbon,
attacked
Mr
Marsh's arguments
in
support of the
x. G. 4.
and Stephens's
To this Mr
ters to
Mr
350
In this publication,
Mr Marsh
states
the
several
steps which led to the discovery of the identity of the two manuscripts. He estabhshes it by various proofs ; and, by an application of an algebraical theorem to the documents produced by him, he shows, that the
probabihty
is
favour of the identity of the manuscripts to the probability of the contrary, as two nonillions
in
to a unity.
This
is
which have appeared, of the application of mathematical calculation to a critical inquiry. One of the points, principally discussed by Mr Marsh, is, how
far
the inference, deduced from a general and resimilarity, in favour of the identity of
markable
scripts,
is
manu-
cordances
in
all
collations
but
Mr
Marsh's
treatise
abounds with other curious and important remarks, and is a mine of recondite and useful biblical erudition.
nature of this inquiry does not admit of more than this general outline of that part of the controver-
The
from the subject of Robert StePersons to whom the subject phens's manuscripts. is new, would be surprised, in their investigation of
sy,
which
arises
it,
to find that
it
embraces so wide a
field
of inquiry.
Perhaps, nothing has contributed so much to the accurate knowledge, which seems now to be obtain-
New
which
The
351
X. Tlie adversaries of The Verse continue the observe that there are many Greek attack
;
they
or the collection manuscripts of the Apostolos, of lessons, read in the Greek churches, from the
and which they call the Apostolos, to diswhich contains tinguish it from the Lectionarium, Now, they observe, the lessons from the Gospels.
Epistles,
that
to discover
The Verse
it is
in
to
be found
in the first
which appeared at Venice in 1602 ; but the adversaries of The Verse contend, that this does not afford
the
slightest
argument
in
of
The
Verse,
printed from the modern Greek had long found its way.
text, into
which
it
XI.
The
that it is wholly unknown to any of the Oriental Versions which were made from the
TEXT, while
it
was
It is totally
unknown
sion
;
to the
it is
version,
the
beginning of the
sixth century,
at
beginning of the seventh ; it is wanting also in the Aiabic manuscripts, as well of the
Alexandria,
version printed in the Polyglott, as in that published
30*
352
by Erpenlus
it
is
wanting
in
the
Ethiopic,
the
Cophtic, the Sahidic, and the Ai-menian versions. To this, the advocates of The Verse reply, that
all
faulty
beyond
first
That we know
little
is
of the Armenian
version
but that
The Verse
contained in the
at
pubhshed
1666
infer, that
which that edition was printed. We certainly know little of the Armenian version ; but no one has actuVerse in any Arpretended to have seen The
ally
in the manuscript ; and Professor Alter, second volume of his edition of the Iliad, page 85, " Pater Zohmentions his having been informed by
menian
rab
Armenus,
Bibliothecarius Meghitarensium
that
in
insula S.
Lazari Venetiis,"
having examined
many Armenian manuscripts, in the library of his convent, he had not found The Verse in any one of
them.
XII.
IT IS
The
adversaries of
that
WANTING IN FORTY OF THE MOST ANCIENT This, they MANUSCRIPTS OF THE Latin VERSION.
if say, equipoises,
do not overbalance the authority of those Latin manuscripts in which it is contained. " BibIn 1743, Sabatier published, at Rheims,his
it
qusecunque
in codicibus
Manuscrip-
353
reperiri
potuerunt, quae
cum
vulgata Latina et
The object of the textu Greco comparantur." work is to restore the text of the ancient Itahc, by cum
putting together the quotations of the Bible, in the works of the ancient Fathers ; where none can be
chasm from
the Vulgate.
parts of
He
was so fortunate
as to find, in
different
number of quofirst
chapters,
and likewise the beginning of the fifth. But, when he comes to the seventh verse, this very voluminous
Father,
epistle
who wrote
in
question, suddenly
immediately after
to
fills
his
assistance.
up, by
who
that
wrote
at the
end of the
fifth
century.
The adversaries of The Verse urge, the Greek Fathers have never quoted
XIII.
their
it, in
warmest disputes about the Trinity, which they certainly would have done, if the passage had been
known
to them ; and this, they observe, is the more remarkable, as they often quote and dwell upon the sixth and eighth verses in succession, without once
mentioning or even slightly alluding to the seventh This is one of the strongest parts of the verse.
The
it,
Verse.
Its
it
advo-
to reply to
except that
The Verse
354
Fathers used ; that many works copies, which those written by those Fathers, and many other works
written at the
and that
all
same time, have not come down to us ; The Verse might have been mentioned in
or one of these.
or
some
The Verse urge the same argument from the silence of the Latin Fathers till the fourth century. Here, they are met by the advocates of The Verse, who contend
XIV. The
adversaries of
that,
not quoted, it is expressly referred to by several of the earhest Latin Fathers ; TertuUian and St Cyprian. The adver-
though
The Verse
is
particularly
saries of the
refer to the
verse,
by mystically
and the water, mentioned in that verse, of the FathGhost. They dwell much er, the Son, and the Holy
on a passage of St Augustin,
" the says, that
Spirit,
be understood, without any absurdity, of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost," an expression, which, most assuredly, St Augustin would never have used,
if
he had been aware of the seventh verse. It is certain that The Verse is mentioned
to the
in
St
Jerome's Preface
Canonical Epistles
first
but the
suspected
Erasmus,
dictine
Dom
all
Martianay, the
writers.
by Bene-
modern
355
adversaries of The Verse thus account THE INTERPOLATION OF IT INTO THE TEXT OF THE MANUSCRIPTS. The mystical mterpretation of
for
XV. The
some of the
the
fathers
adopted,
in their
com-
margin of their
copies
text
it
;
;
by degrees
it
it
it
insensibly
came
at first,
sometimes
in
appeared sometimes in one form, and another, and was inserted sometimes
before, and sometimes after the eighth verse ; at length the dignity of the subject gave it a precedence over the eighth verse ; and thus it came to be con-
Proba-
had gained a place in no manuscript, as part of the text, till some time after the death of St Au;
gustin
may be
considered
Latin text.
into the
as the era of
settlement in the
it
From
Greek.
was transplanted
At the general council of Lateran, held in The 1215, The Verse was quoted from the Greek.
Vulsent
were translated
into
the
Greek
and
the
Greek churches.
About
a century after
the
first
Greeks began to quote The Verse ; Greek writers who have quoted it, are
Manuel
and
it
CaUecas,
who
lived
in
the
fourteenth^
j
and Bryennius,
is
observable, that,
when
the passage
first
356
appeared
BUTLER
in
HISTORICAL OUTLINE.
it
Greek,
presented
itself
first
under as
its
many
different
shapes, as
when
it
made
ap-
pearance
line
in Latin.
out-
of the history of the controversy respecting this celebrated Verse. It has the merit of having rendered invaluable services to the biblical criticism of sacred text.
It
the
rary history, particularly the rules for judging of the age of manuscripts, the nature of manuscript collations, the different merits of the principal editions of
the
Old and
New
them, and the characters of the different persons, A full and edited or pubhshed.
complete history of the controversy, which should enter, at large, into all its particulars, would be an
invaluable acquisition to literature.
Considering Mr Archdeacon Travis was a mere novice in biblical criticism, when he first engaged in
the controversy, he performed wonders
his misfortune to
;
but
it
was
combat with
giants.
which appears argument be satisfactorily answered, is its having a place in the confession of faiih presented by the Mr Porson has treated African bishops to Huneric.
principal
in its favour,
The
not to
this
but
it
seems
to deserve a
more
serious treatment.
It is
not neces-
sary to suppose, as
Mr
BUTI.ER
HISTORICAL OUTLINE.
357
If
hundred bishops had a Bible his pocket, and the useful place doubled down. there were such a number of copies exhibiting
Verse, as induced the bishops to adopt
it
The
into
ground
to contend, that
it
was inserted
in the copies
This circumstance, therefore, may be thought to deserve further investigation ; and a more complete examination of the manuscripts in the royal library
at Paris, is much to be desired ; in other respects the topics of argument respecting the authenticity of
this celebrated
CAMBRIDGE
1823.
COLLECTION
OF
THEOLOGY.
VOL.
II.
CONTENTS
OF
DANIEL WHITBY.
Biographical notice.
-
Preface
......
LAST THOUGHTS.
21
SECT.
I.
Proofs from Scripture.^ that the JVature and Powers of Christ were derived from the Father -
33
SECT.
The Scriptures teach
the Father,
II.
that Christ is
a distinct Being
to
from
and subordinate
him
39
SECT.
In what Sense Christ
III.
may
be called
God
53
SECT.
IV.
-
On
the
63
VI
CONTENTS.
SECT.
V.
Strange Consequences of the Doctrine that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are one and the same Being
85
SECT.
Explanation of certain
have been supposed Father and Son
to
VI.
prove
-
the Identity
-
of
the
-
94
SECT.
Texts in the Epistles considered
VII.
-
112
FRANCIS HARE.
Biographical notice
-
123
on the difficulties and discouragements which attend the study of the scripTURES
143
SIR ISAAC
Biographical notice
NEWTON.
-
>
193
On
the
Text of
the
235
CONTENTS.
Vll
SECT.
II.
On
the
291
CHALRES BUTLER.
HISTORICAL OUTLINE OF THE CONTROVERSY RESPECTING THE TEXT OF THE THREE
HEAVENLY WITNESSES
323
AGENTS
FOR llECEIVING SUBSCUIPTIONS FOR
THIS COLLECTION
OF
MAINE.
Portland,
Samuel Johnson
PENNSYLVANIA.
Philadelphia, A. Small
NEW HAMPSHIRE
Portsmouth, Concord, Keene,
J.
MARYLAND.
E.
J.
W. Foster
B. Moore
Baltimore,
JV.
J.
J. Prentiss
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.
Washington, Georgetown,
Norfolk, Richmond,
P. Thompson
MASSACHUSETTS.
-T
i
James Thomas
Christopher Hall
J.
Charles Whipple
Newburyport,Jj^^^^^,^,^^^
Salem,
^
VIRGINIA.
H.
JVash'
Gushing k. Jlppleton
Henry Whipple
William Hilliard C. Harris Charles Williams
S. Butler
NORTH CAROLINA.
Newbern,
Raleigh, Fayetteville,
Salmon Hall
Joseph Gales
I.
M'Rea
A. G. Tannatt
SOUTH CAROLINA.
Charleston, Columbia,
./.
RHODE
Providence,
George
ISLAND. Dana
GEORGIA.
CONNECTICUT.
New Haven,
Hoive
&.
Spalding,
NEW
York, Albany, Canandaigua,
Utica,
YORK.
J.
J.
KENTUCKY.
Lexington,
Lol'isville,
New
William G. Hunt
J. Collins, jr.
*
ALABAMA.
Mobile,
Littlefield,
Davenport,Sf Co.
NEW
Trenton,
JERSEY.
CANADA.
Montreal,
H. H. Cunningham
D. Fenton