« PreviousContinue »
and the form of the fourth is like the Son of God;" it appears that if the words had been rendered like a Son of God,” the propriety, as well as the sense of the latter construction, would have been materially affected and improved by the change of a minute monosyllable.
But I am unawares running into debate, which I wish to avoid.
Permit me, now I am upon the subject of monosyllables, to offer a remarkable instance of the force of the particle και.
When St. Mathew + enumerates the twelve apostles, after the name of Judas he adds, o xàu waçades. This is rendered by “who also betrayed him; a translation which by no means gives the expressive meaning of the original;-indeed I think the meaning cannot be given without a paraphrasis. “Who even betrayed him," would have been better than also.
To me the word xàs carries with it the following meaning, “ Who was so very wicked as to betray his Master;" and I judge that the position of the word demands and justifies the above sense. Had it been expressed thus, xar o mapuedes , it would have meant only “and he betrayed him;" but by the particle being placed the second word in the sentence, a great and new force is added to the sense.
If it would not be enlarging too much in your Miscellany, I could confirm this thought by a similar proof from a Greek classic of high authority, but I forbear.
P. PAR3ONS, Wye, August 28, 1806.
+ Mat. x. 4.
ON RE-ASSEMBLING THE CONVOCATION.
TO THE EDITOR OF THE, ORTHODOX CHURCHMAN'S
view, is the support of the religion by law established in this united kingdom against all its enemies, of what kind or description soever they may be, and by what
means soever they may endeavour to effect their purpose of subverting and destroying the same. This object so powerfully and so immediately made its way to my heart, that the very instant your design was made public, I hailed it with every demonstration of unfeigned joy; and at the commencement of your labours I offered my services to you, which have, under various anonymous signatures, (as well as occasionally under my real name) been regularly tendered from that time to the present mo ment; and I hope will continue so to be whilst sense and reason remain! You, however, have not the smallest obligation to me for this conduct, as it proceeds solely from a sense of duty on my part, and an ardent and uniform love for the doctrine and discipline of the Church of England; which, though by no means perfect, for what can be perfect under the sun ? (I mean with regard to DISCIPLINE, yet 1 think approaches nearer to that standard than any other institution upon earth.
At present I beg leave to call your attention, and that of your numerous readers, to the question of re-assembling the CONVOCATION, which hath already been more than once mentioned in the pages of your Miscellany. My learned and most worthy friend, The LONDON CURATE, first moved the question so early as vol. i. pp. 241-244, of your Magazine, and there, in a very clear and impartial manner, gave his reasons why it ought to be re-assembled for the dispatch of business, relating immediately to the concerns of the Church, and not be merely called together pro formâ, (although even this is a matter of no slight consideration, as it shews that the assembly is in existence still,) a's has been the case for a long time. 'I beg once more to call the serious attention of all your readers to the sound and excellent reasoning of the Lona DON CURATE on this topic, in the pages of your Magazine which I have cited above.
In vol. iv. p. 98, the LONDON Curate again hints at the question, and strenuously expresses his wish, that "the CONVOCATION were once more in an efficient state, and that it were permitted to the Church of England to deliberate, in its ecclesiastical collective capacity, on such matters as concern Christian doctrine and discipline! In this wish I do most heartily and sincerely join. . We readily allow, that by the “ACT OF SUBMISSION," passed in the reign of the tyrannical and arbitrary HENRY VIII. “ the clergy of this realm acknowledged, that the Aag
CONVOCATION ought to be assembled only by the king's writ; that they will never from thenceforth presume to promulgate or execute any canons, &c. unless by the king's most royal licence and assent, &c.” yet, as Burn observes, “they may act and proceed as provincial councils, when his majesty, in his royal wisdom, shall judge it expedient."
Thanks be to a good and gracious God, in the place of the cruel and arbitrary Henry VIII. the plunderer of monasteries, the rapacious robber of the revenues of the clergy; we have now seated upon the throne of this united kingdom, the mild and amiable George III.; the firm defender of the established religion; the proved respecter of his CORONATION OATH; the watchful guardian of the rights and privileges of the church. Can we then doubt, that if a respectful petition were drawn up by the heads of the church, signed by a competent number of the clergy, (as doubtless it would readily and cheerfully be,) and presented in due form to the king, by a deputation of the clergy; that his MAJESTY, in his paternal affection to his people, and from a sincere love to the established religion, would most readily accede to the prayer of the petition, desiring his authority to allow the ConVOCATION TO ACT AND PROCEED AS A PROVINCIAL Council! For my own part, I do not entertain the shadow of a doubt, that our GRACIOUS SOVEREIGN would with all readiness grant the sanction of his authority for the purpose of executing most fully and effectu. ally what is mentioned above.
Of the absolute necessity of this measure I am myself most fully convinced, and, as an individual, and a free individual, who is solely actuated by a sincere love of the established religion, I claim the privilege of saying, that unless this only efficient means of upholding the Church of England against its numerous and daily increasing enemies, be very speedily resorted to, it will be too late!! and we ourselves shall, ere any long period is passed over our heads, have cause to be wail our astonishing supineness, our wonderful blindness to our danger, when the pure and apostolical religion, established in this united kingdom, is completely overthrown, and when the throne and monurchy are buried in its ruins !!!
Mr. Editor, I wish most sincerely that in the above prediction I may prove a false prophet; but, allow me to say, that I wish much more that my warning voice may be obeyed;" and that our prelates on the bench, and the
true and sincere friends of the Church of England, would unite together, and deeply and thoroughly canvass this most important point, and act according to the suggestions of their united wisdom, and as the exigencies and dangers by which we are surrounded, may point out.
Thus, Mr. Éditor, I have executed what I conceive to be my duty. I have discharged my conscience, and let the result be what it may, I shall, however, have nothing to reproach myself with ; but at least shall have the satis faction of always reflecting, that I have contributed my mite towards putting on their guard those who are appointed to watch over“ our Sion," and who by a timely exertion of their abilities, and the powers vested in them, may avert those dangers, which, by neglect or by contempt of them, must otherwise soon sink us in irretrievable ruin!!!
I am, Mr. Editor,
THOMAS CONSER. Creech St. Michael,
July 26, 1806.
JOB THE ORTHODOX 'CHURCHMAN'S MAGAZINE.
REMARKS ON THE PREFACE TO ST. LUKE'
(Concluded from page 94.) PATIETE.“ That the word Theophilus is not an appel
tion of the title spatisos. But who this person was, (says Michaelis,) it is at present difficult to determine. That he was a man of rank appears from the title which St. Luke has given him: for in the Acts of the Apostles, ch. xxiii. 26, xxiv. 3, xxvi. 26, this title is applied to the Roman governors of Judæa, Felix and Festus. On the other hand, it was not confined to men of this elevated station, but was applied in the East to persons in general
whose rank and office entitled them to respect. The word was adopted in the Palmyrene Syriac; for there are three Palmyrene inscriptions, in each of which a certain Epitropus and Ducenarius is entitled spatisos* This title, therefore, determines no particular rank; and Oecumenius was certainly mistaken in saying, in his commentary on the Acts of the Apostles, that St. Luke's Theophilus was a Roman governor, because Felix and Festus had the same title ; for Theophilus is neither a Latin name, nor does it ever occur in the Roman history as the governor of a province.” Thus professor Michaelis. But as Luke. wrote in Greek, and in a masterly manner, and for the information of a person evidently acquainted with Greek courtesy, and has used this title only four times, and thrice out of that number bas clearly applied it to a Roman governor, why should he not be considered as being no bad expositur of his own meaning in the remaining case? However, why should we think it at all necessary, in a case of so little importance, to give ourselves the trouble of a tedious journey to Palmyra, where honours were ever, cheap, in quest of three inscriptions in honour of persons who died, perhaps, two or three centuries after, and which if legible, we have no great reason to think certainly convey the meaning which professor Michaelis has affixed to them, as we perceive he appears to have expressed himself about very common things in a very questionable manner; and if they do convey that meaning, only serve to shew that St. Luke may have addressed two treatises concerning the Christian faith, either to an Epitropus or Ducenarius; and if to the latter, that the rank of a Centurion, and that of a DuceDarius, have furnished the church with the two most illustrious heathen converts. He has taken upon him, we perceive, to assure us that Oecumenius was certainly mistaken, and why? because, forsooth," this title determines no particular rank,” and because Theophilus is neither a Latin name, nor does it, occur in the Roman history as. the name of a governor of a province. But pray is Archelaus, or Herod, or Philip, or Lysanias, a Latin name? How often do these occur in Roman history ? are not
* If this word was applied to persons of this description at Palmyrag. would it therefore follow that it was so applied in places nearer Rome; Bythynia, for instance, or Greece? or, that Theophilus was therefore not a Roman governor?