lant discharge of their duty, to a judicious felection of fubjects for fermons, and to introduce in the place of afternoon-fermons explanations of large portions of fcripture formerly called poftillating, in the Scots church lecturing, and among diffenters expounding. He alfo recommends an attention to pfalm-finging; an engine by which he apprehends, (and, probably, with reafon,) the methodists attract many to their focieties.

Art. 76. Preached at Knaresborough, before the Royal Knaref borough Volunteer Company, Oct. 12, 1794. By Samuel Clapham, M. A. Vicar of Bingley. 4to. 18. Johnfon.

This fermon contains a view of the virtuous and benevolent tendency of Christianity; a condemnation of French politics; an exhortation to dutiful conformity to the laws of our country; and a diffuafive from agitating our minds with vifionary projects on equal representationuniverfal fuffrage-annual parliaments, and the reduction of the national debt. Mr. C. does not wish the people to reafon on these and fimilar topics, yet he trufts that Reafon has refumed her empire in the minds of the inhabitants of this favoured ifland :—we knew not that he had loft it.

CORRESPONDENCE.

*To Clericus. Morell's Thefaurus Græca Poefcos, we know, is very scarce. An edition of it appeared at Venice in 1767. A work with the fame title was published at Mentz in 1614, in 8vo. by CAUSSIN; and in 1651 and 1668 was printed at Frankfort PETRI COELEMANNI Opus Profodicum Græcum novum: 8vo. in which, verses are quoted in order to decide the quantity of fyllables, with a Latin tranflation on the oppofite page: but it contains neither Synonyma nor Epitheta:-it refembles the Latin Projodia of Henry Smetius.-With refpect to Greek accents, either Fofter or Primatt will answer our correfpondent's purpofe; the latter is moft diffufe: but for brevity we would recommend an edition of FRANKLIN de Tonis, published by Richardfon. He might alfo confult the account of accents in the Port Royal Greek Grammar; and there are several other works on this fubject, e.g. HENNINII Hellenifmus, Utrecht, 1684. LABBEI Regula Accentuum, Paris, 1693. WULFSBURGII Accentuum Gracorum Exequia, 1702. LAMBERTI Bos Regule Accentuum, 1733; and ESTRUCHE, in his Differtationes Philologica, 1750, treats of Greek Accents.

+++ H. C. fays that he has in vain fearched for the Conditions prefcribed by Teyler's Theological Society, in our Review for January 1779. He will find them, however, on the blue cover of that number, if the cover of it can now be obtained. We cannot give any opinion refpecting the probable state of this Society under the prefent alteration of affairs in Holland.

Itt Mrs. Howorth, who published a tranflation of Haller's Poems, (fee Rev. for December laft,) modeftly informs us that she can lay no claim to the merit of having translated a German writer, as the exe

cuted

cuted her talk from a French verfion. The advertisement, which stated that the work was a tranflation from the German, was published without her knowlege.

§ If M.N. will confult the end of the introductory address in the publication about which he writes, the fuppofed imperfection will be explained. Johníon gives authorities for the ufe of were in the fenfe in which M. N. queftions its propriety.

$ts On reading the temperate letter from the Editor of "the Lounger's Common-place Book," we are equally furprised and concerned to find that, by haftily quoting a paffage, (fee the laft Review, P. 76. 1. 16-19.) without attending to the antecedent, we had imagined his meaning to be totally different from that which the whole period bears. The fentence runs thus in the book:

In every tranfaction of Government, let it clearly appear that the happiness of the people, and not the fordid interefts of a cabal, intent only on places and penfions, is ftill the great purpose, as it was unquestionably the originally foundation, of all governments."

Lounger's Common-place Book, vol. iii. p. 194. The reader is therefore requested to erafe lines 16—22 inclufive、 p. 76. of the Review for January.

++ A Conftant Reader' fays, I have been a good deal ftruck by reading, in your last APPENDIx, Profeffor Schultens's interpretation of the paffage, "I know that my redeemer liveth," &c.; and I think his reafonings convincing, that the paffage does not allude to the Chriftian doctrine of the refurrection. I have never feen noticed the incongruity between this paffage, and another in our burialfervice," But fome man will fay, how are the dead raised up, and with what body do they come, &c." Thefe, and the following words, plainly feeming to argue against the refurrection of our prefent bodies, at least in their prefent ftate, while the former paffage has at leaft always been fuppofed to countenance (and appears introduced for that purpose) the oppofite doctrine.'

* M.C. deems the account, in our laft APPENDIX, of Profeffor KONYNENBURG's inquiry into the Nature of the Prophecies fo very interesting, that he ftrongly recommends a tranflation of that work.

$1§ Hypodidafcalus, alfo, from reading our late APPENDIX, much wifhes to fee a tranflation of ENEA's Elements of Arithmetic, which we there commended: fee p. 519, &c.; and of EULER's work on Algebra, incidentally mentioned in p.521.

§* The tract on Grammar, mentioned by G. W. was duly received, and will foon be noticed.

Other letters remain for confideration.

THE

MONTHLY REVIEW,

For MARCH, 1795.

ART. I. An Hiftorical View of the English Biblical Tranflations: the Expediency of revifing by Authority our prefent Tranflation: and the Means of executing fuch a Revifion. By William Newcome, D.D. Bishop of Waterford*, and Member of the Royal Irish Academy. 8vo. pp. 438. 6s. Boards. Johnson.

WE E have frequently had occafion to review the works, and to applaud the genius, learning, and indefatigahle induftry of this very refpectable critic. The work before us is not likely to diminish his high reputation; for that cautious modefty, and that honeft impartiality, which ought to accompany every species of criticifm, but, above all, Biblical criticism, are here eminently confpicuous.

The author's original plan (he fays) extended no further than to folve every objection which has been urged againft adopting fuch a measure, and to ftate the principal arguments ufually alleged in fupport of it. But his thoughts foon led him to take an historical survey of the fubject: and as Lewis's account of our several English translations, though a very useful book to confult, is too minute, and fometimes too indiftinct, to invite a perufal, he conceived that it might neither be unprofitable nor unpleafing to biblical scholars, if he extracted from that work a general hiftory of the chief editions, and fupplied from a few other books, and especially from fome of the prefaces to our early bibles, whatever feemed interefting both with respect to our vernacular translations of the fcriptures, and alfo to the state of clerical literature during the period treated of. But as the fituation which afforded him leifure for profecuting his defign precluded him from access to any library, fome quotations must have been too implicitly followed, and many weighty authorities and curious facts must have been omitted.

In matters of fact it is indifpenfable to quote authorities. He has alfo largely produced them in matters of opinion; because the writers referred to expreffed his fentiments much better than he was able to represent them, because he thus points out fources whence the reader may derive further information, and because the weight of eminent names arrefts attention to what is advanced.

The rules for biblical tranflators, prefixed to the author's expofition of the Minor Prophets, have been much enlarged in the concluding

* Dr. N. has lately been elected Archbishop of Armagh, and Primate of Ireland.

VOL. XVI.

S

chapter:

chapter: and he hopes that they are fomewhat improved, if not from his own reflections, yet from the later publications of fuch able critics as Dr. Geddes, Dr. Campbell, Dr. Symonds, and Mr. Wakefield.'

The work is divided into five chapters.-The first, confifte ing of eight fections, gives an abridged hiftory of English verfions of the Bible, from Wiclif down to James I. The account is chiefly taken from Lewis, but is interfperfed with anecdotes which were unknown to that confufed writer. The Bifhop's narrative is also enlivened with remarks and quotations from modern critics, and with their refpective opinions of the value of the different tranflations. This part conftitutes almost a third of the volume.

In chap. ii. the author has collected a number of opinions Concerning the prefent received verfion, from Selden, Johnfon, Walton, Poole, Wells, Blackwall, Waterland, Doddridge, Lowth, Pilkington, Secker, Wynne, Purver, Worfley, Durell, White, Kennicott, Priestley, Green, Blayney, Geddes, Symonds, Bagot, Wakefield, Ormerod, the Monthly Review, and from two or three anonymous publications.-This we deem the most entertaining part of the work. We are naturally glad to fee the accumulated opinions of the learned on any fingle fubject, fairly represented and methodically arranged.The Bishop concludes the chapter in the following words:

The authors to whom I have referred are, in fome places, inconfiftent with each other; and in fome places they advance pofitions contrary to my own fentiments: but I have qucted writers of different characters and denominations largely and impartially. They will greatly affiit the reader in fettling his judgment on that interefting fubject, the expediency of an improved biblical verfion. They furnish many folid arguments in fupport of fuch a meafure: and they place the chief objections to it in various and strong points of view. Thefe objections they examine as diligently, as they reprefent them faithfully: and, as far as I can difcern, they dive them of their false glare, and deftroy their force. But I go on to ftate and folve objeç, tions particularly and methodically."

The third chapter is employed in anfwering the ordinary objections to an improved verfion of the Bible. It is introduced by a compliment to Dr. Geddes; which, we think, must be highly flattering to that gentleman, at a time when it appears that a fwarm of zealots, chiefly of his own communion, are attempting to thwart his endeavours, and to impede his progrefs.

The prefent age has feen a literary phenomenon of a curious nature; a Prieft of the Romish church, refident in England, tranflating the fcriptures into our native tongue, and publicly maintaining against two* Proteftants the great utility of a new English translation, in preference to that made a hundred and eighty years ago.'

The Rev. Dr. Vicefimus Knox, whom Dr. Geddes calls an ingenious and amiable writer; and the Author of the Monthly Review for Jan. 1787, whom Dr. Geddes calls a writer of no common abilities.'

The

The R. R. author then answers all the objections, one by one, partly with arguments of his own, and partly from the writers already mentioned.

OBJECTION I." A new translation of the Bible is quite unneceffary." Knox's Effays.

This is rather a round affertion than a solid objection: yet our good Bishop gives it a ferious and full anfwer:

In common language, a measure is faid to be necessary when it is highly expedient. Now let any competent fcholar ftudy the Bible in the original tongues; and then pronounce whether our authorized verfion is not capable of amendment and improvement in numberless places, many of which must be confidered as very important. At the fame time, the fundamental articles of faith, and the leading rules of practice, fo pervade the Bible, that various paffages in which they occur either remain uncorrupt, or can be eafily restored to integrity by rules of criticism in which all acquiefce. Whence we fee how wifely God has given the fcriptures their prefent form: whereas if his revealed will had been delivered in the way of rigorous method and fyftem, like fome treatifes on natural religion, truths of the greatest moment might have occurred in a fingle paffage liable to corruption or perversion.'

OBJECTION II. "A new translation is a dangerous attempt.-It tends to fhake the bafis of the establishment-it might be attended with the most violent concuffions-it would tend to shake the faith of thoufands, &c."-See Knox's Effays, and Monthly Review for January 1787, p. 44.

ANSWER. This mode of objection does not immediately affect the merits of the question, by maintaining that there are not numerous and important errors in our tranflation of the Bible, and that it is incapable of admitting many emendations and much pofitive excellence; but it arraigns the prudence of introducing a corrected verfion, as a measure from which dangerous effects, and not folid advantages, will be apt to arife on the whole. whether the confequences apprehended are not exaggerated; and It must therefore be confidered, whether they may not be prevented in a great degree, if not entirely, by prudent steps preparatory to fuch an undertaking, and by the most prudent manner of carrying it into execution.

It is my full perfuafion that whatever tends to the perfection of our establishment would not shake it, but give it fplendour, ftrength, and fecurity: and that a verfion of the fcriptures, as accurate as the united learning of the prefent age could make it, would reflect the highest honour on our national church; and holds a diftinguished place among those measures which would fix it on a bafis as firm as truth, virtue, and Christianity.'

It is hard to conceive how the faith of thousands can be faken by removing ftumblingblocks instead of retaining them. The arguments of the Deitts are either general fpeculative objections, or abfurdities. imputed to the facred writings. Many difficulties of the latter class are fuperficial ones, arifing from an ignorance of the original languages; and would vanish from the text by judicious renderings. Look into the writings of Voltaire, and fee what wild conclufions he

draws