« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »
factory, in that it provides for indefinite expansion without altering the designation of any of the best-known MSS. In a select apparatus criticus (such as that in Dr. Sanday's appendices to the Oxford Greek Testament) probably no change would have to be made, except in the case of such minuscules as are quoted for the Acts, Epistles, or Apocalypse; and the intelligibility of existing treatises on textual criticism remains unimpaired.
It will be observed that the concordat that has been arrived at involves the final disuse of Scrivener's peculiar numbers. That has been accepted by the English scholars consulted, not without some sense of regret (since they hold that the blame for the original divergence did not rest with Sc ener) but for the sake of uniformity and in recognition of the superiority of Gregory's later lists over the last edition of Scrivener. It is to be hoped that the concordat will now find universal favour, and that references will in future always be given in accordance with Gregory's revised list. It has already been employed, not only by Gregory himself in the German edition of his Canon and Text of the New Testament, but by Nestle in the third edition of his Einführung in das griechische neue Testament. Nestle had originally proposed an alternative system, an elaborate method of permutations and combinations of the Latin, Greek and German alphabets, but abandoned it for the sake of concord, He adds that he was especially influenced by the example of the Oxford scholars, Sanday, Turner, and Souter, the last-named of whom has in hand a text of the Greek Testament, with select critical apparatus, for the University Press. It should be added that half of Gregory's book is taken up by exhaustive lists of the numbers and symbols applied to the New Testament MSS. in other editions, from Stephanus to von Soden, and by a catalogue of libraries in which the MSS. are now preserved. In short, it is a complete guide to the identification of MSS., and as such will be invaluable to the textual student.
In one respect only does an advantage remain with von Soden, but it is (or may be) a considerable advantage, which it has been held may be decisive in his favour, in spite of the many obvious drawbacks of his system. It lies in the fact that his system will be attached to the most exhaustive critical text of the New Testament in existence, which scholars are likely to have to use for a long time to come. If von Soden's critical apparatus is so arranged as to be generally useable, quite apart from an acceptance of his textual theories-if, that is, it gives the various readings with a simple list of the MSS. containing them—it will no doubt be difficult to avoid using his nomenclature. If however, he quotes, not the MSS. themselves but the families into which he has classified them, the force of this argument will be greatly diminished, and there will still remain an opening for an edition which will simply record the facts, without being committed to the support of a particular textual theory.
In conclusion, it may be of interest to give the totals at which these two latest catalogues of Greek New Testament manuscripts arrive. Von Soden's list includes 167 8-MSS., 1277 E-MSS., 378 a-MSS., 281 texts with Gospel commentaries, and 235 with commentaries upon the other books. Gregory's list gives 161 uncials, 14 papyri, 2292 minuscules, and 1540 lectionaries-a total of 4007 manuscripts. If von Soden's edition really enables us to deal confidently with this huge mass, it will indeed have done good service to the cause of New Testament criticism, however unacceptable its nomenclature may be. Of his textual theories we hope to be able to speak later, when the results of them are laid before us in his actual text.
F. G. KENYON.
ART. VI.-THE ETHICS OF DIVISION.'
1. Conference of Bishops of the Anglican Communion.
Holden at Lambeth Palace, July 27 to August 5, 1908. Report of the Committee appointed to consider and report upon the Subject of Reunion and Intercommunion.
(London : S.P.C.K. 1908.) 2. The Doctrine of Holy Communion and its Expression in
Ritual. Report of a Conference held at Fulham
D.D. (London : Longmans, Green, and Co. 1900.) 3. Unity in Diversity. Five Addresses delivered in the
Cathedral Church of Christ, Oxford, in 1899. By
don : Longmans, Green, and Co. 1899.) 4. The Vision of Unily. By J. ARMITAGE ROBINSON, D.D.,
Dean of Westminster. (London : Longmans, Green,
and Co. 1908.) With a strange yearning men are to-day ringing the changes on the note of unity. In looking back to the discussions of the Pan-Anglican Congress, people are saying on all sides that this note was struck throughout, that a marked readiness to accentuate points of agreement and depress topics or aspects of topics which provoke divergence was one of the Congress' distinguishing features. This, too, is to be noticed in the recent deliberations of the Lambeth Conference, as evidenced in the tone of its Encyclical, and especially in its treatment of the subject of Home Reunion. This, again, was the staple of the memorable sermon of the Dean of Westminster preached in Westminster Abbey at the opening of the Conference: a sermon which made so deep an impression upon those who heard it. And while the subject has been engaging the minds and enlisting
· The article on The Ethics of Division' is one of the late Bishop of Burnley's last contributions to the cause of Reunion. Owing to his lamented death the proofs have not received his correction, but his MS. had been most carefully reconsidered, and there is no reason to suppose that any further alteration would have been introduced.
the eloquence of the Church's leaders, an object-lesson in the possibilities of Christian fellowship was offered in the fair vales of Derbyshire, where, under the auspices of the Student Volunteer Movement, 630 men and women met to confer on practical Christian work. There was no clashing of creeds; no rivalries of Church organization. Full recognition of varied methods and diverse confessions was found to be compatible with friendly discussion; and all was hallowed by a spirit of prayer.
The following article is a small contribution to what may be called the literature of toleration ; and the writer will confine his attention to the divisions within the Church of England, and what appears to him to be the attitude which members of that Church are called upon to adopt towards them.
Toleration is a plant of tediously slow growth. Even as late as the middle of the seventeenth century it was scarcely known. The most enlightened Churchmen had but dim glimmerings of its sacred obligations. The spirit of persecution was as lively as in the lurid days of Smithfield. If thumbscrews and boots still wrenched and crunched only in dark corners, it was thought legitimate enough to apply the moral screw. Galling disabilities were the penalty for freedom of thought. Nonconformity lay under bans degrading to the free agency of intelligence. It would have been a strange anticipation of the later stages of ethical progress, had the leaders or the revisers of the Reformation Settlement manifested a largeness of heart, for the fruits of which the world of their day was not ripe.
It is not forgotten that nonconformity in earlier days was intimately associated with political disaffection; that it was consequently a far more perilous thing than it subsequently became ; that 'recusancy' connoted a not infrequent approach to something akin to treason against the Throne as well as dissent from the Church. This consideration no doubt should be taken materially to qualify our judgement of the moral character involved in intolerance. Still, apart from such extenuation, it remains an undoubted fact that toleration in the true acceptance
of the term was unknown. Prior to the French Revolution Europe knew it not. And no sect or denomination can lay claim to a degree of enlightenment above its fellows. If no Lutheran held the citizenship of Geneva, no Calvinist possessed that of Hamburg. It is a singular episode in the history of Independency that, while no consistent adherent tolerates the idea of a State-Church, it was only the death of Oliver Cromwell that arrested the formal endeavour of the Independents to establish their persuasion as the StateReligion. Had this been done, the measure the Church meted to Dissent would have been measured to the Church in return; Church disabilities would have borne witness to the uniformity of human frailty.
It should further be noticed that while the Church's forms when finally crystallized were accepted by the large majority of Churchmen, they satisfied the extremists of no party. The agitation during the process of crystallization had been lively. The parties of the disputants had survived their leaders. But, when once the Prayer Book received the imprimatur of Royal authority, the common refuge lay in the direction of interpretation ; and for the historical research which assisted interpretation the reliable data were as yet but scanty.
The purpose of the present article is to put forth a plea for the adjustment of perspective in our view of Church questions. Is it possible to view these questions, as the pressure of modern needs forces them successively upon our notice, apart altogether from their bearing upon the accepted tenets of a particular school ? For one thing, the distinction between the differing kinds of evidence should be marked. Historical, psychological, ethical, theologic facts cannot be treated as if they were demonstrable. Mathematical truths, being capable of demonstration, split men into no parties. That the sum of two and three is five, being axiomatic, men do not divide over the statement. It is not a matter of opinion. Apart from opinions, the mind accepts it. The moment we conceive of religious truth as susceptible of mathematical demonstration, that moment we divest it of its religious character. For