DEAN TRENCH ON THE AUTHORIZED VERSION OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. *

BEYOND all question words are the province j- of Richard Chevenix Trench. He has written some good poetry; but rather from that " turn " which is experienced by most men of animated mind and genial feelings in the earlier period of life, or on occasions of ex- citement, than from any real afflatus. His sermons are excellent, but to make sermons is the professional duty of a divine. As re- gards words, the Dean has the " innatus amor " of " the little busy bee," not only improving each shining hour, but every hour, storing up words as the bee stores up honey alike from the flower and weed—the classic or the drudge. Who would have thought that a lecture on words could be handled so popularly and in- structively that in a short space of time it should reach an eighth edition ? Yet such is the fact with the Dean's little book. The proposal for a new English Dictionary, if carried out, as seems likely, by the Philological Society, will form one of the most thorough vocabularies of a language ever published. The critical examination of the authorized version of the New Testament before us is the best contribution towards a revision of the Testament (for the critic avoids all suggestion as to the Bible) that has yet appeared. It is not merely that the general ideas of the author are reasonable and moderate. His plans for carrying them into execution are illustrated with a clearness, a fulness, and a mastery over words which could only be attained by a rare genius im- proved by the highest cultivation. For Dean Trench is not limited to words in the mere dictionary. sense. He passes beyond them to the things, the thoughts, the feelings, the state of opinion, the modes of life, which words in their full sense and meaning reflect.

It must not be conceived that this book is a proposal for a new version of the Testament ; it is only a contribution towards what the investigating spirit of the times may force upon us. The au- thor fully understands all the risks and difficulties attendant upon the undertaking ; and but that the danger of leaving things alone seems likely to be become greater than moving, he would be well content to do nothing. A large mass of the religious community receive the authorized version as an inspired book ; it is to them what the Hebrew Bible and the Greek Testament are to the scholar—and rightly, so far as it is accurately translated. If a new version is published as by authority, who can tell what will be shaken ? At present, too, the authorized version may be considered the Protestant Bible for this country and America. But set forth a new one by authority, and its reception most pro- bably would be confined to the Established Church. The Dissent- ers in a body, perhaps all the denominations, would have versions of their own, and something similar might take place in America. To meet these and other evils, Dean Trench suggests a commis- sion, when necessary to move publicly, which commission should be composed indifferently of Churchmen and Dissenters, (except " the so-called Baptists," who " demand not a translation of Scripture, but an interpretation,") scholarship being the ground of qualification. Even then he would not insert the result of their labours in the text, but publish it separately, leaving " the emendations to ripen gradually in the public mind."

Substantially, the present treatise might form a model for such a work, the general discussions being put aside, and the prin- ciples on which the individual author proceeds being turned into an authoritative exposition. Thus, after his introductory remarks, Dean Trench considers the language of the Bible, in • On the Authorized Version of the New Testament : in connexion with some recent proposals for its revision. By Richard Chenevix Trench, D.D., Dean of Westminster. Published by Parker and Son.

t " Words are man's province."—Pope.

its choice of words and their combination into sentences. He then discusses the English renderings in reference to words whose meaning has more or less slanged since they were originally chosen by the translators, or to obsolete words ; on which by the by his method of proceeding may be doubted. It may be right to alter a word whose meaning has changed, because it would mislead. With obsolete words there is not the same danger. Such are as likely to be understood by the people as the " educated " ; if not, a simple gloss explains them; they give a 'venerable air to the work. Connected with what may be called the principles of transla-

'tion' s are the rules to be adopted in sec words forming a class—as proper names, technical terms, weights and measures. In this part of the subject our translators have adopted no uniform course, and have in several ways, according to the Dean, fallen short of precision, and consequently of the perfection which he is envious to attain. His general examples of defective ren- dering are of various kinds, but arranged into four classes :—on better renderings (in former versions) forsaken or placed in the margin ; errors of Greek Grammar ; questionable renderings of words ; on words wholly or partially mistranslated. A defence of certain charges "brought against our version" chiefly by Roman- ists and Calvinists, scarcely comes under the head of revision.Of course no man professing learning would attempt a work of this kind without the usual stock of scholarship. Beyond his critical acumen and philological perception of the true meaning of words—both in reality gifts of nature, Dr. Trench may not whine so remarkably in classical as in English reading. Every page of those parts that relate to English expression rather than translation contain instances of the author's wide acquaintance with our old literature, especially bearing on his actual subject. Here is an example of his reading in a general way, when he is tracing the excellence of our version to its sources.

"One of the most effectual means by which our Translators have attained their happy felicity in diction, while it must diminish to a certain extent their claims to absolute originality, enhances in a far higher degree their good sense, moderation, and wisdom. I allude to the extent to which they have availed themselves of the work of those who went before them, and in- corporated this work into their own, everywhere building, if possible, on the old foundations, and displacing nothing for the mere sake of change. It has thus come to pass that our Version, besides haring its own felicities, is the inheritor of the felicities in language of all the translations which went be- fore. Tyndale's was singularly rich in these, which is the more remarkable, as his other writings do not surpass in beauty or charm of language the average merit of his contemporaries; and though much of his work has been removed in the successive revisions which our Bible has undergone, very much of it still remains : the alterations are for the most part verbal, while the forms and moulds into which he east the sentences have been to a won- • derful extent retained by all who succeeded him. And even of his XiEts very much survives. To him we owe such phrases as turned to flight the armies of the aliens,' the author and finisher of our faith' ; to him, gene- rally, we owe more than to any single labourer in this field—as, indeed, may .be explained partly, though not wholly, from the fact that he was the first .to thrust in his sickle into this harvest."

This is an instance of another kind, though derived from an equally wide and perhaps a closer examination of old authors.

'Matt. vi. Take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or what ye shall drink.' This take no thought' is certainly an inadequate 'translation in our present English of pi) gepluyii-rt. The words seem to ex- elude and to condemn that just forward-looking care which belongs to man, and differences him from the beasts which live only in the present ; and 'most English critics have lamented the inadvertence of our authorized version, which, in bidding us ' take no thought' for the necessaries of life, prescribes to us what is impracticable in itself, and would be a breach of Christian duty even were it possible.' But there is no inadvertence' here. When our Translation was made, 'take no thought' was a perfectly correct rendering of pit prptpoii-re. 'Thought' was then constantly used as equi- valent to anxiety or solicitous care ; as let witness this passage from Bacon : Harris,. an alderman in London, was put in trouble, and died with thought and anxiety, before his business came to an end' ; or still better, this from one of the Somers Tracts (its date is of the reign of Elizabeth) : 'In five hundred years only two queens have died in childbirth. Queen Catherine Parr died rather of thought.' A better example even than either of these is that occurring in Shakespeare's Julius exult- e take thought and die for -Comas where to take thought' is to take a matter so seriously to heart that death ensues."

In taking an example or two from the proposed verbal im- provements, we shall have recourse to well known texts, rather than to suggestions which indicate the wide and various learning of the author. Here is an instance from an oft quoted and some- times questioned passage.

" Mau. x. 16.-- Be ye therefore wise as serpents and harmless as doves.' Wiclif, following the Vulgate, had 'simple as doves." Simple ' our trans- lators have dismissed to the margin ; they ought to have kept it in the text, as rightly they have done at Rom. xvi. 19. The rendering of iitcipaios by harmless' here and at Phil. ii. 15, grows out of wrong etymology, as though it were from A and 'ripely, one who had no horn with which to push or otherwise hurt. Thus Bengel, who falls in with this error, glosses here : Sine commie, ungull, dente, aculeo.' But this ' without horn' would be dicipteros; while the true derivation of aelpacov, it needs hardly be said, is from d and iceprivougt, unmingled, sincere, and thus single, guileless, simple, without all folds. How much finer the antithesis in this way be- comes. Be ye therefore wise (' prudent' would be better) as serpents, and simple as doves."

The following is from the defensive section ; but it contains a suggested improvement, and is an instance of illustration from manners and customs.

" Leaving these passages which involve doctrine, I may just mention one other which has no such significance. In this fault may be justly found, and has been found, with the words as they stand in our version ; while yet I am convinced, though it is impossible to bring this to absolute proof, that the incorrectness is with the printers, and not with the translators. I al- lude to Matt. xxiii. 24. Which strain at a gnat' has been often objected to there. Long ago Bishop Lowth complained, The impropriety of the preposition has wholly destroyed the meaning of the phrase.' I cannot

doubt, as I have expressed elsewhere, that we have .here a misprint, which having been passed over in the first edition of 1611,bas held its ground firer since ; nor yet that our translators intended ' which strain out a gnat and swallow a camel' ; this being at once intelligible and a correct rendering of the original ; while our version, as at present it stands, is neither ; or onlyy intelligible on the supposition, no doubt the supposition of moat Englia, readers, that strain at' means swallow with difficulty, men hardly and with effort swallowing the little insect, but gulping down meanwhile, un- concerned, the huge animal. It need scarcely be said that this is very far from the meaning of the original words, of 8ItOtfrolerss •-rde idevonra by Meyer rendered well, pereolando removentes muscam' ; and by the iret. gate also not ill, exeolantes eulieent' ; for which use of irioXiteui, as to cleanse by passing through a strainer, see Plutarch, Symp. vi. 7. 1. It was the custom of the more accurate and stricter Jews to strain their wine, vine- gar, and other potables, through linen or gauze, lest unawares they should drink down some little unclean insect therein, and thus transgress Lee. xi. 20, 23, 41, 42—just as the Buddhists do now in Ceylon and Hindoatan : and to this custom of theirs the Lord refers. A recent traveller in North Africa writes in an unpublished communication which he has been good enough to make to me—'In a ride from Tangier to Tetuan I observed that a Moorish soldier who accompanied me, when he drank, always unfolded the end of his turban and placed it over the mouth of his tote, drinking through the mus- lin, to strain out the gnats, whose larvae swarm in the water of that coun- try' The further fact that our present version rests to so great an extent on the three preceding, Tyndale s, Cranmer's, and the Geneva, and that all these have ' strain out,' is additional evidence in confirmation of that about which for myself I feel no doubt, namely, that we have here an uncorrected error of the press."

rrenave intimated one point in which we differ from the au- thor as to obsolete words, and we do not agree with him on one or two other matters. We think certain words have still some of the old force or meaning which he says they have lost—se es_ deavour, cumbreth ; a few of his grammatical objections may be metaphysically sustained, but the text seems sufficient according to the "jus at norma loquendi "—English usage. We think " throne " in English has a much more limited meaning than in Greek ; in fact, the word is never associated even with a bishop's seat, but always with the regal character or capacity. In the following case the translators are probably justified, notwith- standing Dr. Trench's arguments ; -because we doubt whether, in the Greek mind, " throne" and " thrones" might not from practical association have the meaning suggested by our version —the same idea, for example, as the Speaker's chair, and the

Member's seat or place.

"In other places no doctrine is in danger of being obscured, but still the change is uncalled for and injurious. Take, for instance, Rev. iv. 4 : And round about the throne (epoirov) were four-and-twenty seats' (Opomn). It is easy to see the motive of this variation; and yet if the inspired Apostle was visited with no misgivings lest the creature should seem to be encroach- ing on the dignity of the Creator, and it is clear that he was not,—on the

i

contrary, he has, in the most marked manner, brought the throne of God and the thrones of the elders together,—certainly the translators need not have been more careful than he had been, nor made the elders to sit on aeats,' and only God on a throne.'

These, however, are matters of opinion. The work beyond all question is the most practical and safe which has been published on this difficult and delicate question, at the same time that it ranks among the ablest.