WHEN the "Revised Version of the Gospel according to S. John, by Five Clergymen" appeared in 1857, it was received with all the respect due to the private as well as to the public character of the Revisers.

The sober and earnest spirit in which they set about and did their work,—the judgment and the moderation they showed in keeping to the Received text with only very few readings of their own choice, and the modesty with which they put forth the first-fruits of their joint scholarship, commended their labours to all who took interest in them. One felt disposed to think that, if a revision of at least the New Testament in the Authorised Version, so loudly called for in some quarters, was ever to be done, it could neither have a fairer beginning, nor lie in safer hands. Yet men differed, as of course they would, in their estimate of what a revision should be; while the reviews of the Revised Version of S. John were of necessity too short to do full justice to the Revisers who, considering the great importance of the work they took in hand, could not be judged fairly without a special notice of every alteration they thought proper to make in the Authorised Version of this Gospel.

Although, as far as I know, such a notice never appeared, yet situated as I am, far from a good library, and from the help of other men of like studies, I never would have made public a criticism of my own on the work of scholars, some my seniors, and all, I ween, my betters in Greek lore and in Biblical knowledge, had I not been led accidentally by a later publication on one of the Gospels, to look into the Revisers' work more carefully than I had done. There I found, as I expected, repeated proofs of masterly scholarship, and of devout faith; but also many renderings which appeared, to me at least, open to further research. I then thought that, although not able to teach,

1 The alterations in the Revised Version which refer to the Notes at the end of the volume, are enclosed within brackets in the text of the Authorised Version here given.

from not having made Greek the study of my life, I might yet, perhaps, throw in my mite to the general good, by stating most of the objections which occurred to me, as they might occur to any one else, in reading some of the proposed alterations. Still, to notice only the renderings of the Revised Version which appear questionable, would have been to give an unfair estimate of that work: while to remark only on the cases in which the Revisers are clearly in the right, would have been equally unjust to the character of the Authorised Version. Therefore, to say any thing at all fairly, means-to remark on every one of the changes offered by the Revisers; and that is what I have attempted to do.

These changes,1 exclusive of italics embodied in the text, and of different punctuation, amount to upwards of 1340. So large a number of alterations made in the 879 verses of which this Gospel consists, by five earnest men who are loth to alter aught in the Book they rightly call a precious and holy possession," and of which they say after careful study, "that the errors in it are very slight and few in comparison of its many and great excellencies," seems, nevertheless, to show, either that the "2. English Bible is yet very faulty, or that all these alterations are not needed. These very many corrections also seem to justify some inquiry that may help to bring them to their smallest possible measure, notwithstanding that the Revisers tell those who may differ from themwhat indeed no one doubts-" that the arguments on both sides of most questions have been before them."3 This, if it does not stop all further questions which, indeed, the Revisers invite, certainly forbids all reference to commentators that are in everybody's hands; and it drives the inquirer to what, after all, is best,-not merely to copy what others have said before, but to think for him2 Pref. to R. V. p. ii.

3 Ibid. p. xii.

4 Ibid. p. xii.

b

self, so as to make remarks at all events original and conscientious, whatever their other merits or their faults may be. The Notes on the Revised Version of this Gospel, are therefore only hints,-I would not presume to do more,-given with every due deference to the Revisers, from whom I never differ without great diffidence in my own judgment. For assuredly, five men who, besides every means of research for their work, enjoyed the great advantage of each other's help and opinion, ought to know better, and to be less likely to err than a man who, working alone, must needs resort to his own judgment in the last as well as in the first instance, and draw from his own resources only.1 At the same time, the object of this work is so far above all petty motives of personal interest and vanity, that I shall not regret any errors I may have committed either in judgment or in scholarship, if these bring greater light from other and better scholars to shine on my mistakes: so that the true rendering of God's Word, and that alone, be given; no matter by

whom.

The Revised Version of S. John shows by reason of its great merit, more plainly, perhaps, than any other work of the kind, that it is no light undertaking to mend even one Gospel of the Authorised Version,-much less the whole Book.2 It is indeed easy to condemn in the lecture-room or in the study certain renderings as faulty, for there are such, and to decide that they must be altered; but the difficulty is evidently, to alter them. Not, indeed, because of the language which, in general, is comparatively easy; nor yet from want of a sufficient number of able men to do the work; but because a change in the English Bible implies more than the mere good pleasure of a few scholars and the consent of their friends. It is, not only to undo the work of a guild of the most pious and most learned men of their time,3 but it is also, to demolish bit by bit the worship and the veneration of two centuries and a half-a rash and venturous attempt.

For the English Bible is the Book, not so much of scholars who, may read the originals, as of the people who cannot; and these are satisfied—as well they may bewith the Book as it is, that gives them God's blessing for their inheritance. No version of His Word ever held in a country the rank which the English Bible holds in England. Other versions, indeed, like the Syriac, the

1 The only assistance I received in this work was from Mr. D. Nutt, 270, Strand, whose kindness I wish to acknowledge publicly. Unable to procure for me a copy of the single edition of S. Cyril Al. on this Gospel, he kindly lent me a volume from a complete set of S. Cyril's works in his rich book-store. No one can fully appreciate the value of such a service but he, who like me, has to do without the books he cannot afford to buy.

2 As regards the Old Testament, the fact that Dr. Pusey, probably the first Hebrew scholar in the land, abides by the Authorised Version, in his Commentary on the Minor Prophets, seems a sufficient proof in fa

Armenian, the Coptic, &c., were, and are still, highly valued, but they never were so widely spread in their respective countries as the English Bible is in this. Not only is it found everywhere, but it is one and the same, in the palace and in the cottage; whether clad in the gorgeous apparel of costly binding, or in the russet garb of charity, it teaches and comforts all alike in the same words; as well the illustrious QUEEN who sits on the throne, as the poorest peasant of her realm. By its oneness alone, the English Bible tends, as far as can be, and perhaps more than anything else, to preserve unity in the bond of peace, such as this is, among men and parties which, however much they may differ from one another in form and in faith, draw these nevertheless, from the same Book and from the same teaching. And as to the language it speaks, it is the best of its kind -a language which all can understand, since all learn it there;-a language which, we see through all attempts at a revision, may indeed be altered, but very seldom improved; a language, therefore, which, in spite of a few quaint expressions none the worse for being old-fashioned, shall never become out of date as long as it lives in the heart of the people, and the English tongue is spoken— that is, yet for some time to come.

In sooth, the Authorised Version, owing to the place it holds, and to its influence as a class-book all over the kingdom, is the main stay of the English language which, it has formed. Time-worn as this one book is, it is yet as young and as well understood as when it was first published. And thus, almost alone, it stems the muddy stream of foreign words from off the land; almost alone it keeps up the national and manly features of the former Anglo-Saxon tongue; and thus it saves the language of England from dwindling into the would-be English of other lands; or from becoming, perhaps, little else than the latinized idiom of half-taught men at home. So that, even those who care perhaps less for the lore of the English Bible, than for the beautiful language it speaks, may well be jealous of alterations in that Book which, at first moulded that language, and which has kept it ever since whole and pure.

Such a Book then, fraught with associations which, for ages past have made it one with the nation to which it belongs, may not be lightly tampered with. If, as some think, changes are needed in it, discretion teaches that

vour of the truthful rendering of the English Bible. Nevertheless, as a work akin to this on a portion of the Old Testament might not be without interest to many, I hope, D. V., to be able to finish the one I have already begun on a part of the Pentateuch.

3The King wrote to the Archbishops of Canterbury and York and to the rest of the Bishops as follows that 'whereas he had appointed certain learned men, to the number of four and fifty, for the translation of the Bible,' &c. Hist. of the English Tr. of the Bible, by John Lewis, A.M., 3rd ed. 1818, p. 312.