IMAGE EVALUATION TEST TARGET (MT-3) 1.0 I.I 1^ no 1^ 12.2 Mi Hi ^ 1^ 2.0 1.25 1.4 1.6 = ^ 6" ► Hiotographic Sciences Corporation 23 WEST MAIN STREET WEBSTER, N.Y. 14580 (716) 872-4S03 ip f/. fe ^ i '%'■ CIHM/ICMH Microfiche Series. CIHM/ICMH Collection de microfiches. Canadian Institute for Historical Microreproductions / Institut Canadian de microreproductions historiques Technical and Bibliographic Notes/Notes techniques et bibliographiques The Institute has attempted to obtain the best original copy available for filming. Features of this copy which may be bibiiographicaiiy unique, which may alter any of the images in the reproduction, or which may significantly change the usual method of filming, are checked below. D D D D D D n Coloured covers/ Couverture de couleur I I Covers damaged/ Couverture endommag^e Covers restored and/or laminated/ Couverture restaur6e et/ou pelliculde I I Cover title missing/ Le titre de couverture manque Coloured maps/ Cartes g6ographiques en couleur □ Coloured ink (i.e. other than blue or black)/ Encre de couleur (i.e. autre que bleue ou noire) I I Coloured plates and/or illustrations/ Planches et/ou illustrations en couleur Bound with other material/ ReM avec d'autres documents Tight binding may cause shadows or distortion along interior margin/ La re liure serr6e peut causer de I'ombre ou de la distortion le long de la marge intdrieure Blank leaves added during restoration may appear within the text. Whenever possible, these have been omitted from filming/ II se peut que certaines pages blanches ajout^es lors d'une restauration apparaissent dans le texte, mais, lorsque cela 6tait possible, ces pages n'ont pas 6t6 film^es. Additional comments:/ Commentaires suppldmentaires; L'Institut a microfilm^ le meilleur exemplaire qu'il lui a 6X6 possible de se procurer. Les details de cet exemplaire qui sont peut-dtre uniques du point de vue bibliographique, qui peuvent modifier une image reproduite, ou qui peuvent exiger une modification dans la methods normale de filmage sont indiqu6s ci-dessous. I I Coloured pages/ D D y U y D This item is filmed at the reduction ratio checked below/ Ce document est filmd au taux de reduction indiqu6 ci-dessous. Pages de couleur Pages damaged/ Pages endommagdes Pages restored and/or laminated/ Pages restaurdes et/ou pelliculdes Pages discoloured, stained or foxed/ Pages d6color6es, tachet6es ou piqu^es Pages detached/ Pages d^tach^es Showthrough/ Transparence r~y] Quality of print varies/ Quality in^gale de I'impression Includes supplementary material/ Comprend du materiel suppldmentaire Only edition available/ Seule Edition disponible Pages wholly or partially obscured by errata slips, tissues, etc., have been refilmed to ensure the hvtst possible image/ Les pages voidit^ment ou partiellement obscurcies par un feuillet d'errata, une pelure, etc., ont 6t6 filmdes 6 nouveau de fapon 6 obtenir la meilleure image possible. 10X 14X 18X 22X 26X SOX y 12X 16X 20X 24X 28X 32X lire details ues du I modifier ger une > fiimage The copy filmed here has been reproduced thanks to the generosity of: izaalt Walton Killam Memorial Library Dalhousia University The images appearing here are the best quality possible considering the condition and legibility of the original copy and in keeping with the filming contract specifications. L'exemplaire filmi fut reproduit grAce h la gAnirositA de: Izaak Walton Killam Memorial Library Dalhoutie University Les images suivantes ont At6 reproduites avec le plus grand soin, compte tenu de la condition et de la netteti de rexemplaire film6. et en conformity avec les conditions du contrat de fiimage. lies Original copies in printed paper covers are filmed beginning with the front cover and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, or the back cover when appropriate. All other original copies are filmed beginning on the first page with a printed or illustrated impres- sion, and ending on the last page with a printed or illustrated impression. Les exemplaires originaux dont la couverture en papier est imprimAe sont filmAs en commen^ant par le premier plat et en terminant soit par la dernidre page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration, soit par le second plat, selon le cas. Tous les autres exemplaires originaux sont filmis en commenpant par la premiere page qui comporte une empreinte d'impression ou d'illustration et en terminant par la dernidre page qui comporte une telle empreinte. The last recorded frame on each microfiche shall contain the symbol -^»> (meaning "CON- TINUED"), or the symbol V (meaning "END"), whichever applies. Un des symboles suivants apparattra sur la dernidre image de cheque microfiche, selon le cas: le symbols — ► signifie "A SUIVRE", le symbols V signifie "FIN". ire Maps, plates, charts, etc., may be filmed at different reduction ratios. Those too large to be entirely included in one exposure are filmed beginning in the upper left hand corner, left to right and top to bottom, as many frames as required. The following diagrams illustrate the method: Les cartes, planches, tableaux, etc., peuvent dtre film6s A des taux de reduction diff6rents. Lorsque le Jr>ci:.iment est trop grand pour dtre reproduit en un seul clich6, il est filmi A partir de Tangle supArieur gauche, de gauche d droite, et de haut en bas, en prenant le nombre d'images nAcessaire. Les diagrammes suivants illustrent la mAthode. ly errata ad to nt ne pelure, ipon d 1 2 3 32X 1 2 3 4 5 6 -« -,-'^ f^O o THE OIKOULATION f/-^- ■ J OF THB PURE WORD OF GOD; ADDRESSED TO f HON. S. L. SHANNON, PRESIDENT, THE WCE-PRESIDENTS, AND COMMITTEE OP THE NOVA SCOTIA AUXILIARY BIBLE SOCIETY. B"5r HBV- J-OXXXT ^^.TJ^^TiO, IF^XX^C^, ^.d^ ;>* Thy Word fs very pure : therefore Thy servant loveth it. — Psalm cxix. 140. HALIFAX : A. P. KATZMAN. 1871. '■' ITOTE. The circumstances which led to the publication of this pamphlet may be briefly stated: In 1849 I was requested to become President of the Wallace Branch of the Bible Society. Believing that the Parent Society gave countenance to the errors of Pciicry, I declined. Some time after, the request was renewed, and the assurance given that my suspicions were groundless. I then accepted of the oflice, but resigned in 1863 in consequence of reading the Bishop of Chester's defence of the Resolution of Commiitee of the Parent Society 16th of Rlarch of that year, in which they refused to grant a petition signed by 91 of their own members praying the ronimittee to discon- tinue the circulation of Romish Versions. Tliis resignation was followed by the reite- rated denial that the Society made use of any such versions. Pamphlets and other publications came to hand sliowing more fully the defections of the Society. These matters led to the publication of " Reasons of Kxception." In the 44th Report, Feb., 1869, of the Pictou Auxiliary B. S., it is stated: "The Parent Society, to a certain extent, circulate translations from the Latin Vulgate." . . . 'This it does on the plea that no other will be taken,' e*c. This explanation your Committee deems proper to make, lest it be thought that the Society has been guilty of a breach of faith, or of propagating errors. A fuller explanation in answer to objections is being prepared by the Agent, Mr. Russell." In the 45th Report, Feb., 1870, of the same Auxiliary, it is said : '" Since last Annual Meeting Mr. Russell's pamplilct, in vindication of the Society against cirtain charges preferred in this country, has been published, and a largo num- ber of copies have been distributed under directions of your Committee, the funds for payment of which were contributed by friends of the Society in Pictou," etc. From these statements it appears that — (a) "The Societ\- circulates translations from the Latin Vulgate." Tliey are, therefore, engaged in "propagating errors," and consequently "guilty of a breach of faith.' * (l>) The Committee are responsible for the contents of Mr. R.'s pamphlet, because he, as tlicir Agent, prepared it, aiul "it is distributed under their directions." (c) In " Reasons of Except'on" it is shown tiiat the charges against the Society teerepreferred and 2)roi-ed in Britain, as well as " in this country." • Mr. Russell's pamphlet, though ado))ted by the Committee, is a misrepresentation, and therefore requires to be exposed; but he is only the agent. I claim the rigiit of self-defence; aad. an the President and >?>:cretary of the Pictou Auxiliary are leading parties in these transactions, I challenge Mkbc gentlemen to deny or refute, if they can, the statements coatained in this pamphlet. J. M. ,4 !• ciety iiiim- for 'rom bucause Society ■ntation, ri;:;lit of leatling uy can, M. M To the Hon, S, L. Shannon, President, The' Vice' Presidents, and Committee of the Nova Scotia Auxiliary Bible Society. GENTLEMEN,— This pamphlet is addressed to you for the obvious reason tliat your Agent, Mr. Alexander Russell, uuder your imprimatur, has published a Defence of the Popish translations of the British and Foreign Bible Society to which yours is an auxiliary. It is question- al;l() whether you may approve of the manner in which he has performed his task. It must, however, be evident to all — yourselves not ex- cepted, that the animus manifested and the epithets employed prove— were there no other proof — that the cause which he has undertaken to defend is a very bad one. On various occasions the public have been favoured with excellent addresses from many of you upon the evils and dangers of Popery. When the Province was threatened with separate schools for Roman Catholics, you acted promptly and most nobly in opposing the appro- priation of the public funds for the maintenance of such schools. It does, therefore, seem enigmatical that you should, with public funds, extend aid to the Roman Catholic faith. Mr. Russell, as your agent, can advocate Popish error in the Word of God all over the country ; and your collectors, many of them young persons imperfectly acquainted with the subject, must also plead for the same, which tends to represent truth or error to them as a matter of indifFereuce. The action of the Directors of the National Bible Society, restrict- ed though i.. be, is anomalous. They were wont to speak " of the mis- chievous tendencies of translations from the Vulgate circulated by the X y\ \ IV. Introduction. B. & F. B. S.," and characterized the argnments by which the prac- tice was defended as, ''not merely sad sophistry in reasoning, but a sad playing with edged tools, and trifling with high, and holy, and eternal interests." It is a cause of gratitude that, amidst so great defection, the Trini- tarian Bible Society has, for the last forty years, maintained its Pro- tect and pursaed its Work with energy and success. Extracts from docaments, published by both those Societies, are given in this pamphlet. Yours faithfully, JOHN MUNRO. Wallace, 25th May, 1871. ^ he prac- ig, but a ily, and e Trini- its P ro- ots from in this l^hu l/rculaiion of iht jjur^ ||ord of loi IRO. The following extract from the Presbyterian Witness will r "^ce to introduce the contents of these pages, and define most clt ,y the principle involved in the controversy : — Mb. James Babnks, Publisher Prubyteriau Witneu. Wallace, N. S., 5th May, 1869. Dear Sir, — Some days ago a friend sent mo a pamphlet — "Misrepresentation Exposed, — Being a l^efence of the British and Foreign Bible Society from the Attacks of Ror. A. Sntherland and Rev. John Munro, By Alexander Russell, Agent Nova Scotia Auxiliary Bible Society." It was only to-day that I looked over this pamphlet. On pp. 14 and 15 it is said : " There are in the pamphlet" ("Reasons of Exception ) "many other misstatements and exaggerations which want of space and limited time compel me to pass unnoticed. Enough has been fxposed to prove that in matters of fact these writers cannot be depended on. As a mathematician from a given arc may easily describe the whole circle, so may the ■ reader, from the exposures already furnished, judge as to the truthfulness of the pamphlet — how far on matters of fact it is reliable. The very advertisement in the Presbyterian Witness, intimating its sale, misrepresents the truth. The pamph- let was issued in UaUfax last July. I obtained the copy I have about the middle of that month. A few days after, it was for sale in Truro, and doubtless in other places. Few copies were sold. Towards the end of October there appeared in the Witness an advertisement dated 24th Octoueb — ' Jdst Pcblishbd : Reasons, &c.* That is, more than three months after the pamphlet was for sale, this adver- tisement, dated 24l i October, appeared, and has been continued in the paper, week after week, to the present 26th Fe'-." " I put it to those who love the truth, — Is this right ? How will such conduct as I have been exposing appear before Him who has forbidden all misrepresentation — all deception ; who requiretb truth in the inward parts V This is a long quotation, but it is necessary to show the connection — also the animus of the writer. Part of the language is solemn, yet the premises are frivol- ous and fictitious. What are the facts of the case — of this " given arc V Yoa arc aware, sir, that on the first of July last you agreed to •advertize the pamphlet " Reasons of Exception," &c., in the Presbyterian Witness, commencing with your next issni — July 4th — and that we paid the advertisement for four weeks — ana for four weeks only .' You are also aware that the delay in publishing the advertize- mcnt, and the continuing to publish it beyond the specified time, has been a sub- ject of correspondence. The following extract from this correspondence puts the matter correctly : " Mr. Barnes beqs to state that the fault was entirely his. You directed him to advertize tt whenever it was printed, and he forgot till you reminded him of it, and then he advertized in the usual form." As un act of justice I trust you will publish this communication in your earliest issue, and corroborate the facta referred to, that it may be seen what are some of 6 I the cxpcdieuts to which tho Agent of tJio N. S. A. B S. hns hnd recourse. 'I'licro arc more s»r/* " i/i'iru drcs" in tho |)iHn])h!ot thiit " niny easily degcrihc tho whtilo circle"; hut witli these you hiivc hnd nothin-jto do." With esteem, yours fiiithfully, John Munho. [In justice to Mr. Muiiro wo pulilish the foroKoinjrexphumtion. Of course wo endorse no part of it except whnt refers to the advortiseuicnt. Mr. Harucs assumes the ciitirt rcsponsihility witli it'pud to tlic delay, and the expression, "Jusr I'lMii.isiiKD." Everyone who is accustomed to notice tl:e advertisements of I'uh- lisiuMM knows that this is tiic usual mode of advertizing. It misleads nu one, and wo have never hefore seen exception taken to it.] The f course wo riios iissmiics sion, " ,li;sT icnts of Pub- no urn-, luij and easily till) lii>;Iiest His Holy ' (|U()t;ition uluct, as I parupliiot, put lorLli, net appear [lecepiion ; tl cireiilato I'opeatodly 'es, admits ugly prac- I. But it ess in tho perverted taiucd liis i no ])alli- II to God oikiiig of ii. H, 9 ; LOTS AND is said — the uino til fulness ful teacli- t, depriv' enis God 'easouiniT lufaitliful c men to policy of •ieiids of ho vera- decep- ittle lea- a man CO, a se- quonco condemned by Scripture ^.id nil riglit-thinking men. God indeed forbids all misrepreHOntalion and all dee(!ption, as IMr. IJussell most justly remarks, hut ho forgets that God does bO specially in regard to llisown Word. For " Every word of God is pure." *' Add thou not unto His words lest He reprove thee, and thou ho found a liar." Prov. xxx. 5, C. " He that hath my word let him speak my word faithfully." Jer. xxiii. 28 Mr. It. ignores all thif. Tho Popish rendering of Gen. iii. 15, " »S'//e shall bruise thy head," and found in llomish versions of the B. and F. H. S., is eharacteii/ed by Dean Alford in ifJond Words, June, 18Gt, as " An atrocious misrepre- sentation of Holy Scripture." The Dean is higii Huthority upon th's subject. Ho condemns the misrepvsenlation whicli Mr. K.. notwith- standing his belief that (iod re(pureth truth in the inward parts, defends most energetically. Of the saino text De llossi, a learned Romanist, declares that '• this reading ot the Vulgate is a blundering cor^'iiption."- Jn the "True Catholic," dan , 1870, it is described as "a favourite text of IJomanisiu"; and adds, "Sadly instructive, indeed, it is to see Rome thus perverting Scri|)ture in its earliest utterances: in the very first prophecy, divertingvour look from Jesus to His mother." The doctrine which the Roman Catholics build upon the translation "she" instead of "it," in Gen. iii. IT), may be hwued from Cardinal Culleii's J'astoral Letter, Nov., 18G9, in which ihe following words occur: — "The Festival of the Immaculate Conception of the Blessed Virgin Marg once more draws near . • . How comforting to belujld (rushed /vt'Me^/A Hkk immaculate feet tho venomous serpent, through whom sin entered into the woi-ld." Let us now examine the "misrepresentations" of the British and Foreign Biblo Society, as given by Rev. Messrs. Sutherland and Munro in " Reasons of Exception," &c. I. Mr. Russell says : " r»ut ui 111! tlic uiisirpicscntutions in tlic ptimiilili-'t, none nre more glaring than tlie iulljwin^,', page It): — I'rotcstunt. Koinish. Tostiinient. Bible. Testament. 1 -= 7d. 1 1 = Gd. 1 = 7cl. 1 = 39. 1 15il.k>. Italy 1 == Is. 4(1. France 2 = 3s. Od. lloilaiid ... .1 =^ Is. 0(1. Gcriii;iiiy ...1 = 18. (id. 1 1 2 = 8d. lOd. The ligures one (1) under Romish Bible (Italy) and Romish Testament (Holland) were not in the MSS. — they are typographical errors — no price is given with them. In Report, 18G7, De Saci, Scio, Pereira and Martini are given in the J.ist " On Sale" ; the distinction as to the I'rotestant and Catho- lic Scriptures in Germany is not given. In the Appendix, p. G9, under '• What Printed," we read, " Two Versions, Gosnor & Kiste- raaker, New Testament for Roman Catholics in Germany." No Prutealanl Testftnient is specified. It has been well remarked, "An uninformed reader might ask. Why does the Society publish more versions than one ? No hint is - -rPfi^" " "-•• " "" 8 ff given at p. 46 to aid the inquirer." Wo thoro find " German Scrip- tures iiHued,'* but nothing is snid ns to what is ProtCBtftiit and wimt is Popish I The cheapest Biblu in the Litt is marked ProtcMtant ; and as it could not oven be inferred which was the Romish Hiblo, no price is given. The 2 Romish Testaments are marked lOd., and 8d. the cheapest in the List. In "Reasons of Exception," pp. 9, 10, it is stated: " Popo after Pope has recommended tliem" (Romish versions circulated by the B. and F.) "as the antidote to the Protestant or faithful versions" . . . "and that one (Do Saci) contains enough of the doctrine and practice of Popery to eradicate the ' heretical pruvity' of the bad books, the worst of which is the Protestant Bible." In concluding these remarks it is baid : "In Germany there is no Protestant Testament printed by the Society, while two Romish versions of the Now Testa- ment are printed and circulated." These two contain tlie antidote to eradicate the faithful versions — the evil complained of! A great ado is made about the omission of the cheap edition of Ostervald for France, but that edition was in the MSS. and proof- sheet, though inadvortantly and unintentionally left out of the pamph- let. This omission — which is to be regretted — does not, however, alter the past and present policy of the Society : they sell Romish versions cheaper than the Protestant. i)r. Tregolles said O-it., 1856, " Greater facilities are afforded by foreign Agents themselves of tlie B. and F. B. S. for the use of the Romish than of the honestly-made versions, . . . also it must be remembered, as already noticed, that the sale of the Romish version of De Saci is encouraged in Franc^j by the difference in price . . . De Saci is charged :bree francs, while Ostervald or Martin is five francs. We should soon find a practical difference in this country (England) in iJie sale of two books in appearance the same, and each professing to be the Bible, at half-a- crown (62^c.), the other at four shillings (SI.) Ror the Pric the gucij f 'man Scrip- aiid what is H8t«ut ; and le, no price ind 8(1. the Popo after I I'y tho B. ons" . . . nd practice •ad books, iding these Testament »o\v Testa- mtidote to edition of and proof- lie pamph- hovvefer, II Komisb H., 1856, vos of tJie «t]y-made iced, that in Franc43 eo francs, )on (ind a wo books at half-a- I 9 THE PRICE-LIST OP TUB BlilTISII ;\ND FOREIGN BIBLE SOCIETY, EXTRACTED FIIOM ANNUAL HKPOHT FOB 1870. It is sometimes asserted that translations from tho Vulgate, commonly called Romish Versions, are not circulated by the Uritish and Foreign Bihlc Society. As the simplest refutation of this statement wc give tho following extract from tho Price-list prefixed to the llcport of that Society, for 1870. The tables helow show tho various editions of Jliblcs and Tufllanients published in the Spanish uud Portu- guese languages : — SPANISH SCRIPTURES. Protestant. (VALKUA.) Roman Catholic, (scio.) Description. Varieties 1 of 1 Prices of ea. binding. i 1 Description. Varieties of Binding. Prices of ea. Small PicaSvo.... Two. Minion 8vo i Two. BIBI 4s. 4s. 2s.6d. 2s.8d. NEW TES'I 6d. 7d. lid. Is. as. 2s.ld. .ES. 1 Bourgeoise 8vo. . . . 1 12mo Two. One. Two. Two. Two. 3s.6d. 38.8d -Is. S2mo . , , , Two. Two. Two. 'AMENTS. 32mo 6d. 7d. 24ino" 24mo lid. Is. 8vo 8vo ls.8d. 28.3d. From this it appears that of Bibles and Testaments in Spanish, there arc an equal number of Protestant and Romish Versions, and that there is only ono variety of price and binding less in the latter than in the former, viz., five editions of Protestant in ten varieties, and five editions of Romish in nine varieties. PORTUGUESE SCRIPTURES. Protestant. (D* Almeida.) Roman Catuolic. (Pekeira.) 1 Varieties Description. of Binding. Prices. Description. Varieties of Binding. Prices. 21mo 8vo. None. One. One. BIBLES. l'2nio 8vo NEW TESTAMENTS. 32mo Is.Od. 24mo. Two. Two. Three. Three. la.'Jd. 2s. 43.2d. 5s.9d. 6d. 7d. Is. lid. ls.ls.8d. !!aP.S53R35SS51 10 It Hero wc have results which arc very sail to coiitcniplate, and which must shock the most staunch friends of tlio Britisli and Foreign Bihie Soelcty. No I'rotestatit l?ii)lc for I'ortupil ! Two Roniisii Editions in lour varieties of binding! Two Protestant New Testaments in two varieties ! Two Koinish Editions in six varieties ! A total of tico Protestant Editions in two bindings ; four Romish Editions in ten bindings. This c'uiiipared with last year's Price-list shows a f/ecrcasc of ono variety in the Protestant Editions, and an jHcrcaso of one in the llomisli. Add to this that the three r.hexipest Editiotis of the New Testament are Romish — that is to suy, a Portuguese wisbinir ta purchase a Now Testament, and not having much money, is able to get u Romish Testament for sixpence, scvenpencc, or elevenpence, while he canno: buy a I'rotcstant New Tcstan cnt ni.der one shil- ling. Moreover, he has two Romi.sh books to com])ete with this price; the next cheapest edition is lloinisb; and the dearest is Protestant. How long will this be tolerated l)y a Christian public ! Much has been said and done in the way of protest lately, but wc shall be surprised if the publicatiou of these facts does not do something more. It must not bo forgotten that every subscriber and donor is a sharer in this work of circulating man's corruption as God's trcth ; and must cither accept the responsibility of such a course of action, or repudiate and protest against it. Tliis \& ,iu; course the Trinitarian ]Jiblc Society has adopted ; and to carry on this work of })rotcst, and the active work of Bihie circulation in only the i)urest and most faithful versions, the ("ommitteo apjical for funds to all who value their <^\\\\ inestimable privileges, in the posses- sion of our incoin))arablc English Version. (The extra edition of tlse Protestant New Testament, printed in Spain, has onlv made up foi the Romish New Testament published in England.— /ver7//rf No. 4} [TrinitJirian 13iblc Society Quarterly Record, July, 1869.] SPAIN. Since the ])ublicat;v)n of the last number of our Qi;ai!Teri,y Ricrono, much has been said and wnt'en about the action of the Hritish and Foreign Hiblc Society with regani to Spain. The Rcp(jrt of the Society lies before us, and from it our friends will Icinii exactly how far our assertions accord with theirs, and how far their actions accord with such promises as they have given. On page l.'5'.>, tlic Committee say that ' in "the year 1 855 something effectual was done for i)ronu)tiiig the object of your Society." Many of the supporters of the Society will be surprised to learn that its object, in this instance, was the printing in Mailrid, with the njoiicy of Eugbsii Protestants, an edition of 10,000 copies of Scio'ts JJoi.iisli Hib'c, prepared originally with a view to counteract the faithful (or Protestant) version ol" Valcra. Tliis edition they were not a'lowed to circulat and they '' were kept for years imder strict surveillance. After repeated nego- tiation,'-, with a view to releasing the Society's ])roperty, and renujving it beyond the Spr.nisli frontiers, jiermission was at length given in .)une, 18()7, U)V the books to be withdrawn (torn the country," and being conveyed to a not very remote loca- lity, " iowmX A <.aU'. refui:c at Bayonnc. T; was conjectured that some evcntu.Uities might occur in Spain which would afford an o)))i(jrtunity of sending the exiled Bil)les buck to the country for which they were 'utcndcd ; and so it has cume to pass, and riii; kniiue si.im'i.y is now iii.in(; (JuvDfAi.i.v i;AiiAt:srKi)." 'J"ho Conmiinci! then go on to state how they avadnl themselves of the wide and encou- raging openings fur the circulation of the Scriptures in Spain, and teUs us, among other things, that " steps were taken for jmssing into Spain the cases which were lying . 'It ijaynnnc," and "some limited supplies were successfully pushed across tlie iremtiers in the confusion incident io the tir.-t days of the Revolution." DKii- cultic;, however, arose, but at length ill \.as satisfactorily arranged, and the whole of the 10,(100 Komish Ibhlcs were all iw( il to reenter Sjiain. l''rom this simple stateiient these f(!W facts are clearly eliei'ed : 1. That in Sjiain's darkest day and gu.i'"st need, tLc liritisb and Foreign Bible Society had nothing bett r to do for it but re, rjut the Bil)lc which was made to support the errors of ihat Church to which the 'ouiitry owi'd the chief uf its miser v. to ol yet- ant] 8up| Adv butl alth| the of tl vhich must shock nish Editions in 10 variety in tlie lent are lioniisli tainent, and not lec, sevenpence, ni.tler one sliil- priee; the next !i has been said tlie puI)lic(vtion 'ttcn that every s eorniption as iirse of action, initarian JJihlo active work of thp Conimittco , in the posses- ! in Sj)ain, }ias Ecoui), much Bible Society d from it our , and liow fur efTectual was lortcrs of the i tile |)riniinp [)00 copies of faithful (or to circuiat peatcd netjo- iiii it beyond • or the books remote loca- eniiitu.iiities f; the exiled has ciimo to nii>." The ; and eneou- ' Us', amon^ ^vhi(h were slu'd across >ii." DitH- d the whole tliis simple lid I''orcijjrn 1 "as made cin'ef of its n 2. That this was done with the money of English Protestants. 3. That for the Jirst six months after the Revolution, that Society had nothing to offer Spain but their 10,000 copies of Scio's Romish Bible. 4. That, although they iiavo lately published editions of Valera's Bible, they yet circulate, side by side with them, these copies of Scio. 5. They do this in spite of the desire of the people for the faithful (or Protest- ant) version. 6. They continue this circulation, and evidently intend to so until the entire supjily is exhausted. So much for the past and the present, but what are we to say about the future ? Advertisements are inserted for funds to carry on the printing of Valera's version, but no y(/ttm«^rc is given that they will not circulate or reprint Scio's version, although such a guarantee would increase rather than diminish their funds, satisfy the consciences of many of their warmest supporters, aud grant the earnest desires of the i;cople of Spain. The testimony of Dr. Tregellos, tlie price list of the B. and F-, and extract from Report of the Trinitarian Bible Society, are all, confirmatory of what is given in " Reasons of Exception." ^Ir. R. says, " He has a letter by a Christian minister who is per- sonally acquainted with each member of the Committee." The value of this gentleman's testimony that " No Unitarians have ever been on the Committee or influenced the Committee in the course they have pursued," may be estimated from the following: " Not to speak of Roman Catholics aud Socinians ; for it might be held invidious aud ofl'eiisive to ascribe the Society's conduct in this matter (the omission of oral prayer) to a desire to conciliate them." Statement and Appeal, p- 10 Edinburgh B. S. " The i)i'o'position to banish from the B. and F. B. S. all who did not believe in a Triune God was voted down with great unanimity in 1831, but its advocates withdrew, and formed themselves into a sepa- rate Society, The Trinitariiin Bible Society." Br. Hase, Church Histonj,p. bl2, iVejtf York, 1864. The T. B. Society publishes annually in their " Protest against the Evils of the B. and F. B. S." Extracts from the Articles of the United Church of England and Ireland. Art. I., On Faith in the Holy Trinity ; also Art. TV., V., XV.; and from the Confession of Faith of the Church of Scotland, chap, viii., Of Christ the Mediator. All these condemn the Unitarian and Socinian heresies. II. On p. 7 of Mr. Russell's Pamphlet, we find the following :— " It is asserted here (p. 0) that the Committee of the Bible Society in 1813 entered into a correspondence to secure the circulation of the Douay Bible. 'J'he proof given is " Prof. vol. 1," " Elliotto on Romanism." I have not l)ccn aide to .sec Klliottc, but I have examined McCavin's Protestant. Sure enough, in it the Rev. Peter Gondoljthy's name, and the circumstances pretty much as the writers have given them, are recorded, with this (in their estimation) trifling dift'crenco : it was mit tlie Commiltee nf the Bible Socidij at all! The "Protestant" states that a " number of gentlemen in London, anxious to promote among Roman Catho- lics the circulation of the Doiiav Scrijituros," entered into this corres])oiidcncc." And the K'cv. Messrs. Suthcrhmd and Muiiroat once come to the conclusion, write, print, and send it to the few who will inuThaso, and the many who v.-ill oidy uccc)il their jiamphlet, that the "London Committee" have done this. Is it not shameful ? 1 " .said and re|)cated" that " the British and Foreign Bible Society steadily refused to cinMilate t!ie l)oua\ Bible;" and 1 respcctfullv ask the reader who I 111 oiiportuiiity of looking int'i the " Protestant" to examine this niiUtcr. lie will tiiou see whether the two assailants, or the present defender of the Biido Society speaks the truth." \ 12 Mr. R. had not been able to see Elliott, yet he has the assurance to deny what that writer records : " When the British Bible Society proffered to publish the Douay Bible, without note or comment, for the use of the Roman Catholics, the English Roman Catholic clergy would not allow it. When the proposition was first made to them, Mr. Gondolphy, a priest of London, said, " If any of the Bible Soci- eties feel disposed to try our esteem for the Bible by presenting us some copies of a Catholic version, loith or tcithout notes, wo will grate- fully accept, and faithfully distribute them." Yet, when the Bible Society was about to publish the Douay Bible, the Roman Catholic clergy refused it, and Mr. Gondolphy said, "The English Catholic Board did not now intend to disperse gratuitously even their own stereotype edition with notes ; for they could not go about to desire persons to receive Testaments, because the Catholics did not in any wise consider the Scriptures necessary. They learned and taught their religion by means of catechisms and elementary tracts." Glas- goio Prot. Vol. /., p. 253. " Delineation of Roman Catholicism, By Rev. Charles Elliott, D. D., Vol. L, p. 74. Lane «fe Scott, N. York, 1851." (The volumes are labelled on the back, ^^ Elliott on Roman- ism.") Dr. Elliott in this paragraph gives the extracts referrin ; to Priest Gondolphy from the " Protestant." The statement as to the action of the Bible Society is his own. The " Protestant," No. 33, commences by referring to the British and Foreign Bible Society ; and then, that Mr. Scott (a priest in Glasgow) applied for and received English Bibles from that Society. The case of Gondolphy is then mentioned, that plans were taken and a " proposal made by a body of Protestants to supply the poor of the Romish Church with their own versions of the Bible." It is afterwards said " this priest resisted the execution of it." " This led to a long correspondence," published in 1813. What is vaguely stated in tlio " Protestant" Dr. Elliott says, once and again, most distinctly, " The Bible Society prof- fered to publish and was about to publish the Douay Bible." Who now speaks the truth ? Not Mr. Russell ; and upon his own confes- sion neglected to consult the authority by which he might have known the truth. This is another of his " given arcs," III- In " Reasons of Exception" it is stated — 'SVnotijer Important point is that of financial econofny. The last report of the B. and F. 3. S. shows an expenditure of £212,318 sterling in the jjroper work of Bible oircu'iatioii, and with this a oirciilation of 2,.')83,.18() copies, or Is. 9|d. each. The last report of the Scottish National shews an income of £13,833, with a circulation of 943,134 copies, being Is. 2Jd each. Or, in other words, if the funds of tiio B. and F. B. S. were niann>,'ed with the same cconony with those of the Scottisli, their circulation should be 3,731,800, or nearly a million and a (juar- ter more tlian were actually circulated. T^ct the man who can, explain this satis- factorily. We confess our inability to understand it; as both labour chiefly in the same field." Mr. R, cannot answer this ; yet, gives a fivnciful but false illus- tration : — "I have before mo both Societies' reports for 18G7. On page 33 of tho National, I liud that in Italy, during the previous year, on an average 18 colport- eurs hud been employed, who had altogetlicr laboured 933 weeks, and circuliritod ' 4328J spent one C(\ dispol in lt| Sociel 115, Nova burgl Scrii have I B. ail Italy) I cat 13 1 has the assurance tish Bible Society or comment, for m Catholic clergy est made to them, 'f the Bible Soci- by presenting us (es, wo will grate- when the Bible 5 Roman Catholic English Catholic ^ even their own about to desire 's did not in any rned and taught 7 tracts." Glas- Catholicism, By ^ Scott, N. York, lliott on lioman- acts referriii ^^ to ement as to the estant," No. 33, Bible Society ; applied for and of Gondolphy >sal made by a ih Church with iid " this priest )rrespondence," *rotestaiit" Dr. e Society prof- Bible." Who lis own confes- ht have known ho last report of tlio proper work >pies, or Is. ^(^. 'f i:i;i,833, with er words, if the ly with those of lion and a qnar- iplain this satis- lir chieHy in tho •ut false illus- 'ago ;!3 of tlio ■aKO 18 oolport- and cirtMi luted 4328 copies of the Scriptures, at an expense (page 77) of £8f)0 5s. 6d. ; 933 weeks spent in this work gives a circulation of between 4 and 5 copies a week, less than one copy per day, while tho expense to the Society was nearly 4s. for every copy disposed of. On page 119 of the other report I find that, daring the same year, in Italy the number of colporteurs employed by the British and Foreign Biblo Society was 34, and these sold 37,906 copies of Ood's Word, at an expense (page 115, appendix) of £1,.'J22 15s. 3d., or 9|d. each copy. Suppose two persons jn Nova Scotia had last year scut each a dollar, one to London, the other to Edin- burgh, with instructions that the money should be expended in circulating the Scriptures by colportagc in Italy. The dollar to the N. B. S. of Scotland would have paid the expense of the sale of one copy of the Scriptures ; the dollar to the B. and F. B. S. would have paid for the sale of nearly Jive. Both Societies in Italy circulate the same version. Why such disproportion in the expense incurred, I cannot say." The Secretary of the National explains the Agent's difficulty. " In regard to Mr. Russell's pamphlet, on some points it is quite unfair to our Society. He compares the sum we pay for Italian work — Bibles and everything — with the sum paid by his Society for the salaries of colporteurs alone." Of course, he makes out a very high average against us in this way." On the same page from wliich Mr. R. makes his erroneous calcu- lations, the Directors of the National say : " The year will be memor- able for intense political excitement, oppressive taxation, the stagna- tion of commerce, and the ravages of cholera, etc. . . . it is not surprising that the sales of the Scriptures should have been so small" ; and then gives an extract from Rev. Dr. Stewart, Leghorn, confirm- atory of their statement. Mr. R. takes no notice of the cause of the small sales. How absurd to attempt to enlighten the public upon a subject which he did not understand ! Money given to the National only about one-fifth value as when given to the B. and F. ! ! Is not that misrepresentation and deception with a vengeance ? He should immediately apologize to Dr. Goold, and to the numerous parties to whom he and his Pictou friends sent his pamphlet. The difference of expenditure between the B. and F. and the Trinitarian B. S. is also remarkable. The latter, notwithstanding the great and necessary expense incurred in carrying on the work of protest, spend rather more than G3;^ per cent, of the income on the objects of the Society, exclusive of the management and incidental expenses, which is 30 per cent. ; while the B. and F. only spend on the objects of the Society rather more than 55^ per cent, including cost of carriage, freight, package, etc. — no inconsiderable items. The expense of management is 27'57 per cent. If the number of Scrip- tures sent out by the two Societies be compared with the income received by each Society, the circulation of the Trinitarian ought to have been only 20,773 copies, whereas it was 24,625, being 3852 MORE than the proportion. See Quarterly Record T. B. S., Jan., 1871. " A few days ago I had a letter from the same gentleman, who has seen the yery edifying pamphlet I am exposing, in which he says, " I defy anyone to prove a tingle Romisn doctrine, either from the Vulgate, or from any translations from the Vulgate, which we circulate." IV- This challenge is made by the Rev. R. B. Girdlestone, Editorial Superintendent. The testimony of the Rev. C. Chiniquy — 14 l\ a gentleman to whom Mr. R. has frequently appealed — is, " I ana certainly in favour of using a Roman Catholic Bible, and do prefer the Saci translation. When we present the Saci Bible to the Roman Catholic we cannot give it as the most correct translation ; wo must say it is the Bible of Rome. The Saci Bible is far from being per- fect ; it has dark spots. I know it is not correct hero. Gen, iii. ]5, and some other erroneous translations. The Saci Bible, bearing the approbation of high ecclesiastical authority in the Church of Rome, has a real authority, a moral power over the Roman Catholics who read it." Which of these gentlemen would Mr. Russell have ua believe ? Both cannot be correct ; the one contradicts the other. Mr. Girdlestone's assertions have been sufficiently refnted. See " Correspondence" between an Ex-Local Treasurer and the Editorial Secretary, 1870, Morgan S^ Chase, London, in which Mr. Brown, that Treasurer, says : " The great bulk of the Bible Society's sup- porters in this neighbourhood (Barton-on-Humber) were, until recently, (j[uite ignorant that the Society had ever circulated any such version, and they now naturally wish to free themselves from compli- city in the matter." . . . Yon say, " The Society has nei^er circulated any Romish versions whatsoever, either at home or abroad" — " that these translations, made froi ' Jerome's Latin Bil»le, are not RoMisn, though made by Roman Catliolics ; that they contaiii none of the peculiar Romish doctrines, but that, on the contrary, they oppose them ; that the whole spirit and tendency of these translations is thoronyhJy Protestant, and that they are honest and good and sound. But if so, why long for and work for their withdrawal" ? You say tliey do "«r>< exalt Mary, or Peter, or the Pope, or the Church of Rome." In reply I would say, " that if by Romish versions you mean versions which contain nothing whatever of a Romish charac- ter, I am at a loss to understand your statement. For is not mar- riage called a '■'sacrament''^ in the versions of DeSaci, INIartini and Scio ? Is this thoroughly Protestant'? Is not repentance translated penance in the same versions, and are there not several passages in all these versions affecting the doctrine of justification by faitli, and couvitenancing the doctrine of humnn merit and good works ? Is not this Pomish ? And can such versions be called honest, good, and sound? Is not Mary exalted in Gen. iii. 15, as the bruiser of the serpent's head? Would not a Pomanist so understand the passage? And is not the Pope exalted in the translation of 1 Cor. x., 1(5; xi. 24; Eph. iii. 3; and 1 Tim. iii. 16 (tor example) in Scio's and Pereira's versions?" You say, "To put them into tlie hands of the ignorant men and women and children, who would otherwise have no guide but legends, priests and mass-books, is a truly Protestant work. But is not this begging the whole question ? The very fact that p^^re versions are circulated by other Societies, and are received, and wil- lingly received, nay, fre(juently received, in preference to the versions in question, by the very persons you allude to, affords tho ' tesMmony of results' against any such inference." Mr, Alexander Russ' II should now immediately inform his sup- porters which horn of the dilemma he would advise them to take — Cliiuiquy or Girdlestoue. «T1| in one, I r' and iMJ! 15 ipealtHl— is, " I am 'ible, and do prefer ible to tlio Roman tislatioii; wo must Jr from beinfj per- liere, Gen. iii. J 5, l^ible, bearing the Church of Rome, lan Catholics wlio Kussell have us cts the other, itly refuted. See nnd the Editorial licli Mr. IJrown, >lo Society's sup- per) were, until cuhited any such !ves from conipli- ociety has never home or abroad" i» Bible, are not ley contain none ) contrary, they heso translations good and sound, val"? You say r the Cliurch of sh Rt versions you omish charac- 'or is not mar- , Martini and ance translated al passages in by faiih, and vorks ? Js not 'est, good, and bruiser of the '1 the passMije ? ^or. X., 10;*xi. in Scio's and Iiaiifls of ihe nvisc liuve no ■olestant uc)rk. fact that pure :ived, and wil- rcncc to the to, aflbrds the f^orm his sup- em to take— V« Ijet us now glance at a few of Mr. R.'s crlticiGms. He says, "The next passage is P^ph. v. 32: 'This is a great sacrament, I say, in Jesus Christ and in the Church.'" . . . "Well, this is what one, a Christian gentleman and scholar, says on this point : — [This extract is given entire as a specimen of Mr. R.'s criticism, ami of the stutl" with which his pamphlet is filled.] " Then there is the word sacmmentum, or sixcrament, especially in Ephcsiang V. 32, wliicli otlcnds very many, as thou<5li it countenanced the ninny sacraments ot tlie Komish Church ; but, as we think, very needlessly. The C'ouiiiil of Trent defines a sacrament to be " a symbol of a sacred thing," "and a visi!)lc form of invisible grace" ; and our own Churcli more tuUy describes it as "an outward visible sign of an inward spiritual grace, given unto us, ordained liy Cluist IJim- ficlf, as a means whereby wo receive the same, and a pledge to assure us thercuf." But neither of these senses apply to the interpretation of the word as used in the Latin Vulgate or the versions in question. Cranmer and our Reforniers distinctly admit, as we must all admit, that "the Scriptures sheweth not wiiat a sacratnent "is; nevertheless, where, in the Latin text, we have sacmmentum, there in the " Greek text we have im/sterium ; and so, by Scripture, sacramentuiu may be called " mijsliriiim, a thiiuj hklilen or concealed." In further cxplaiuition, we may cite the grent Calvin, who tells us, " that whenever the author of the olil common version "ot the New Testament wanted to render the Greek word 'mjstery' into Latin — "cspecinlly where it related to divine things — he used the word mn-mnnitiiw ; as in " Eplicsians i. 9; iii. '2, 3; CoUossians i. 2G, '27 ; 1 Tim. iii. IG, and cisewlicre. In " all these places, where the word 'mystery' is used, the au'lior of that version " has rendered it sacnunoit. He would not say arcanum, or ' secret,' lost he should " appear to degrade the majesty of the subject. Therefore he lias used the word "'sacrament' for a sacred or divine secret. In this signitication it frcijuently " occurs in the writings of the Fathers ; and it in well known that Haptism and "the Lnrd's Snp|)er, which the Latins denominate sacraments, are called mi/stcn'cs " by the Greeks — a synonymous use of the terms which removes all (bjubt." So, then, the word sacrumenium is used in these versions in the sense of mi/st(r:/, and can be properly understood in that sense alone. When, in the Communion Serv- ice of our Church, and in the Homilies, the word 'mystery' is employed with a sacramental meaning, we do not count matrimony among the sacrameiits, because the Ajiostle applies to it the term 'mystery': and let the plain common ; enso of any serious Roman ('atholie be brought to bear upon this passage ; let him tind that the term sacrament is never applied in the New Testament, even to tlie two grout institutions of the Christian Church — Baptism and the Lord's Sapi)er; and find, too, that the New Testament yields not the smallest countenance to the other feigned sacraments of the Romish Church, as confirmation, penance, extreme unc- tion and ordination, and he will assuredly read this passnge in Ljibcsians as simply as ourselves, and attach to the word mystcrij or sacrament no other interpretation than that of the mystical union of Christ and His Church. In truth, this passage only furnishes another proof of the importance of sej)arating tlie text from the injurious notes with which it is usually accompanied, and of enabling the serioas Roman Catholic to search the Scriptures for himself." Yes, it certainly "furnishes another proof" of the importance of separating the Text from the injurious notes ; but it also furnishes a proof of the greater importance of purifying the Text from such errors, so as to enable "the serious Roman Catholic to search the Scriptures for himself." But it may be asked why is the name of Calvin introduced into this long and irrelevant (juotation, w/iile there is not in it a single word of his upon E[)h. v. 32 ? It rcijuired some dexterity to do so. Was there no design ? Perhaps, to im[)ross the cursory reader with the idea that the sentiments of that great Divine coincided with the erroneous interpretation of Mr. R.'s " Christian gectloman" as given in the first sentence of the above paragraph. \y- Ml l|i 18 As a scholar, he should have known that Calvin refutes " tliis point." Regarding tlio " sacrament of marriage," Calvin says : " The last of all is Marriage, which while all admit it to be an institution of God, no man ever saw to be a sacrament, until the time of Gregory." , . . "They adduce the words of Paul, by which they say that the name of a sacrament is given to marriage : ' He that loveth his wife ioveth himself,' etc. Eph. v. 28, 32. To treat Scripture thus is to confound heaven and earth." ..." But why do they so strongly urge the term sacrament in this one passage, and in others pass it by with neg- lect? For both in the First Epistle to Timothy (1 Tim. iii. 9, 16) and in the Epistle to the Ephesians, it is used by the Vulgate inter- preter, and in every instance for mystery. Let us, however, pardon them this lapsus, thougli liars ought to have good memories." Inst., Book iv. 34, 36. Mr. R. should advise his Christian gentleman and scholar to study Calvin, and never again so to misrepresent the great Reformer. Rev. T. H. Home expresses himself to the same effect Musterion, mystery, is correctly rendered in the Rhenish Testament in every instance but one, viz., Eph. v. 32, where the Vulgate rendering of sacramentum is translated sacrament, in order to support the Romish tenet that marriage is a sacrament." VI' Mr. R. says : " I c 'stinctly deny that De Saci teaches pen- ance in the Romish sense." In proof of this assertion he gives a quotation of more than three pages in length, in w!'ch occurs a garbled definition of Penitence from the Dictionary of i!:*^ French Academy. In that Dictionary we have " Penitence, Repentance, regret at having offended God ; penitence is also said of the fasts, of the prayers, of the macerations, and in general of all austerities which a man voluntarily imposes upon himself for the expiation of sins. Example : ' one must receive with respect the penance which is com- manded by the priest.' " Mr. R. and his authority conveniently omit the whole of the latter part of this definition. Dlctionaire National, Paris, gives Penitence : one of the seven sacraments of the Catholic Church, that by which the priest remits the sins of those who confess to liim with a sincere regret at having offended God. Penance, or the sacrament of penance, consists of contrition, confession, absolution and satisfaction. . . . Penance is restricte'^. to that part of the sacrament of penance called satisfac- tion, and signifies the austerities which the priest imposes on a sinner for the expiation of his faults. It is said also of the prayers, fastings, macerations, austerities which a mau voluntarily imposes on himself for the temporal expiation of his sins." De Saci himself shows the way he intends penance to be understood ; for in those places where he could not use it in that sense he has translated it differently. For example : in Acts v. 31, " Him hath God exalted to be a Prince and a Saviour for to give repentance unto Israel." He could not say to give penance unto Israel, so he qualifies ii by interpolating the word9 " la grace de" . ... the grace of penance. Again, in 2 Tim. 11, 25 : If God will give them repentance. He cannot say. If God will give then penance, so he interpolates ^iv( antkl pat! VG\A it."' 17 v! 'ch occurs a » repentance. *' r esprit de," " TIio spirt of penance." In both those texts Ostcrvald ^ivc8 " hi repentance." A j^entleinan in tliis conntry second to none as a Biblical scholar, anu tiiough an admirer of De Saci's Bible, yet says, " I have no sym- pathy .vith Do Saci's translation of •' metaiioein,'^ do penance, (to repent) and '■^ mctanoia" penitcihe, (repentance) ; and I do not defend it." Pastor Pozzy says: " In every passage of De Saci's Hible where this word is found, the Roman Catholic is inevitably led to confound repentance and conversion with that which the Church lias agreed to call penance (In penitence.) The diiTerence of which we speak is so real, and implies do fierfectly the acceptation or rejection of Romish errors on this point, that at the beginning of a Catholic version of the Testament, the Rhenish, published in 1.582, .we read: A Table of certain [lassages of the New Testament which have been mistran-lated by Protestants to favour the heresies of the day ; and the Rhenish translators accuse their adversaries of having corrupted the Greek text iiself. They quote in proof of this, Matt. iii. 2, 8 ; Luke iii. 8 ; Acts xvii. 30 ; Rev. ii. 20, 21 ; xi. 9, 11, where, they say, the Protest- ants have translated " to repent" (se repcntir), "repentance" (repent- ance) instead of "do penance" (faire penitence), of "fruits wortliy of penance" (des fruits digues de penitence ) MATTUinv i:i. 2. "Do Penance." Tliis is Mr. Girdlestonc's defence : — "If the verb 'to do' necessarily causes ' faitcs penitence,' etc., to mean ths Popish doctrine of penance, how is it tJ ut Luther said, ' thiit Busse' ? 1. Witii regard to Luther, and thnt iJnsse, we will give an extract from No. 14 of our QiKirtfilij Record, p. 122, in wiiicli we shall find an answer to Mr. Girdlo- •tonc's question : — " When Icrtvinp the city of Cologne lately, in a railway train, no less than five Roman Catliolic priests seated tlicmselves in the same c.arriagt, with ourselves, Wo felt that we could not allow such an opportunity to pass away without saying something for the truth ; and accordingly h nging forth a small German Testa- ment, we took occasion to speak of the true nature of repentance ; we referred to the words of the Lord, Matt. iii. 2, and asked what was the meaning of the word there used by Luther. At this, they all declared that that expression referred to inwitrd sin'ritual rcfmttance ami chinife of mind; and then one of the party, having noticed tlu'.t we understood French, remarked that the German expression had a wholly dillbrent meaning to the penitence of De Saci ; since, s'jid he, that word referred only to the Roman Sacrament, and implied only the performance of an outward act, and did not extend to the spirit. In this remark all the party joined. We thus gained an unbiassed, because un unsolicited testimony. The introduction of 1)'3 Saci's name into the argument was made without any suggestion on our part, and the luimc of the translation had not been mentioned. Conse(iuently we are warranted in the assertion that De Saci's rendering does refer notably to the Lomish Sacrament of penance, and that Luther carefully selected a word which lias not this exclusive meaning." This is, therefore, how it is that " Luther said ' thut Busse.' " 2. The following note from De Saci's Bible (Liege, 1700), on Matt. ."J. 2, cor- roborates ilii», and gives De Saci's own answer to Mr. Girdlestone's question about Luther : — " St. John ficmands not only a change of life and repentance of their sins, as the Luthtnins pretend, but also that they should perform worthy fruits of penance 10 a])pcase tiie wrath of God irritated by sins." This is how De Saci understamU /aire i>^nitence, and he shows pretty clearlj y the Apostles and priests; 1 Tim- ix., 14, 19; Layinjr on of the Apos- tles and priests ; Keccivc not an accusation agninst a prinst. To these pnssaycs we may add Aeis xiv. 22; xv. 2 ; xx. 17, 18; 1 Tim. v. 17; Tims i. .'» ; James v. 14 ; 1 Pet. V. I, .5 ; 2 John i.; .1 tlohn 1, where the word Prrsinilerns is translated pri&st (pretrc) in De haci. This is not its sense in the original. In the New Tes- tament there is a Greek word denoting prient (Ic pretrc) viz. : the word iereus, whii!) is coii!.taiitly employed in Scripture niicn spenking of Jewisli |)riests (des pretrcs Juifs) or of sacriftccrs. Thus Matt. viii. 4. So, too, Mark i. 44 ; liUko i. 5; V. 14; vi. 4; x. .'}1 ; xvii. 14, John i. 19; Acts iv. 1 ; vi. 7 ; Hdi. v. G; etc., when; l)c Saci translates iereus, priest (pretre) to denote the sacrifices under tho Mosaic dispensation. He therefore confounds, under one title, two expressions, will h are carctuliy distinguished in the text, viz., iereus, priest (pietr..), and Pr. sliut'Tus, eider (aiicien.) Thus sanction is given to the Catholic notion of a < 'iristian |irie&thoiid, similar to that which existed under the old covenirit. Who wouiil not su()i»ose, fnxn reading De Saci's New Testament, that there were in tho Ai)08iolic Church |irieKts (des pretres) like those of tho present day J It is a stran;^e fuid remarkable fact that when Presbuleroa is applied to the Jewish H etc. 19 :lie " sacriflcinir [itteiitioti of hin ibyter, Deacon, bble :— •(1 ' priost* is only no vnliil olijcftion f tlio New Tcsta- nft is tlie rout of lajje of iiiiotl)er lore can bo no >t taught," etc. sts of the New ; and aa I'liest rsions, Koman Priest. Jn the Llmighty God ! to assist, io the Christ Jesus." the SNii of spl- at Ma-'S every e holy sacrifice le vSociety aup- is fundauiuntal ist might hold, ivery evangel 1- oord is in the >T the advanco- )f P^ngland — a >f this word, ici : " Mis ren- st thing in his clearly shown De Sad" :— priests (pretrcs) ■< wliicli lii\.Mii, in the 9ih canon of the same ses.slon : ' If any mati sluill say thr.it the sacr mental absolution of the priest is not a judicial act, but a ii:iked ministerial one, in declaring the forgiveness of sins to the person CKntessitig, lot him be accursed.' . . . But the whole mat- ter is ni>t unfolded yet. In order to priestly pardon there must be confession to the priest. . . . 'In this part of the discipline of the Romish Church, her priests usurp the place of God. The priest in tlio confessional presumes to search the heart and try the reins of the children of men.* . . . On confession being made, the priesily f)ai(loii is pronouiiced, the guilt is removed, the past is forgotien, and the t'iit:ure is open to the beginnitig of a fresli Cv,arse of crime, to be ounlcssed in the same style, and forgiven by the same power.' . . . A priest in his canonicals, and in the acts of service, is to a Papist '' piasi Dons" invested with id' the attributes, to his mind, of llie (ireat I AM, and doing the works which none but God can perform," etc. Agtiii Mr. Russel' says: — "l)i'Sa''v's version of Luke 1. 28, "I siilutc thee full of (xmce" (a) is also roKiirdjd as teuihinjr Mariolatry. Say the writers, "Hero the fullness ot Divme jrriie is ascribed to her, necessarily implyinar Divine worship." If so, what aliout our own version ? In the marginal reading of the En^^lish Bible Is,ti»d " tlail 20 thou tliiit nrt Kracionsly orccptcil," (l>) or " Iluil thou that nrt much rjraced." II De Snry's tenilicH Mnriolntry, may not tho writers detect soinethiiii; like it in the mart;iiiul rcuilintrs of the Kii);lish tiilile? Diit, nro •-">! Stephen aikI Han^alms Haid to have " liceii full of faitli and of tlio Holy (Jhot Surely the "Kruee" ns well as the "faith" was j;iven ! The (juaci; could not ' been Mary's inlicruntly. How could n French Roman (^atholic, posMCS^inj,' th. V Word of" God, reading that " There is none rinhtcons, no, not one," " that ad have sinned and comff ghort of the (jlory of God," " that thou .shalt wors'iip the Lord tliv tiod, and Him only shalt thou serve," how, I say, could tho French Komiin (Jatholie rcailinR these, and many similar texts of Ood's Holy Word, ho |)erveried to Mariolatry 7 It Bocms imposbihlo. In |)oi-t of fact no such case has ever been proven" (c.) (a,) Q>i\i\\o\'\c?i do believe that ^l-ATy had and Aa» inl)ei'ent grace, and have dec-lured her itnuiaciihitc. Mr. U., wlieii giving DeSaci, fuiv nishes them with proof to authorize their idolatry. (b.) " Gracioii'ly accepted" (us a sinner); " much graced" (much favoured); "lull of faith and the Holy Ghost" are truths of God. The teaching of Scriptin-e is uniform — one part does not contradict another, as might he inferred from Mr. li.'s reasoning. (c.) Although it seems impossible to Mr. R., yet many who pos- sess the tvhole Word of God are perverted to Mariolatry. VIII. ^^Ir. R. gives a long extract from Dr. G. Campbell, of Aberdeen. He, however, stops short when, in all fairness, ho should have given the Doctor's words — "I am not ignorant that a few passa- ges have been produced wherein tho Vulf/nte and tho original convey difTerent meanings, and wherein tho meaning of the Vulgate appears to favour the abuses established in that Church. Some of these, but neither many nor of great moment, are, no doubt, corruptions in tho text, probably not intentional, but accidental," &c. Probably Mr. R. is indebted tor this and other extracts to S. E. D., an anonymous apologist and defender of the popish proceedings of the B. and F. B. Society. The Rev. Hugh ]McSorley, of Tottenham, remarks on Dr. Campbell's words as given by S. E. D. : — I. Tho B. and F. B. S. docs not, it is true, circulate the Latin vulf^ate itself, the "Authorized Version" of the Churcii of Homo, but it circulates versions of that version ; and it is on that account, but not rfnly on that account, that the Soci- ety is to be blamed; for how does the question stand? We have God's Word presented to us in Hebrew and Greek, the oriijinal languages in which the Word was first spoken or written, and we have a Latin version of those original langua- ges, uud a version of tliiit version is adopted arid circulated by n Protestant society, equally with a version of the original ! The fmlli/ /Aitiii version is preferred to th« faithjul orl<]inal hi/ the Romish ('hitrrh, and a version of that version is ailopted by tliis Protestant Society ! The fountain itself is not approached, but a muddy stream derived from that fountain is aijproacbed. The llonian Church may make the Latin Vulijate her " Antliorizcd Version," if she chooses to do so; but surely it i» not for a Protestant Society to adopt a version of that "Authoiizcd Ver- sion !" Now this is exactly the mistake which the H. and F. B. S. has fallen into — this is the crime, the sin, of which wc accuse that Society. But this is not all; the book which the B. and F. B. S. presents to Uonmnists on the continent .s not, strictly speaking, a translation from the Vulgate; it is an " Ertrart." It is not the Romanist's I>ii)lc at all, it is only a portion of their Bible. And I know noch- ing more calculated to inflict a deep wound on the cause of truth than to call that a Bible which is only an extract. For wo must hear in mind that it is with Romanists the Society is dealing, and to call the book which tho Society scuds to them a " Bible" is untrue in their sense of the word. I 2. lished think t (^ wherein ing of Chun- H Chunl mnkin ns Dr. thercli oven prescn tho rci (' rt iiiuc/t fframl." Jf itiiiiii,' like it ill the 1 mid Har:-iil)iis Hnifl ''« "(;i-uce"i,.s well Mnry'a inlR-icnHy. rd of God, ri-ading ■c sinned und comff tliv (}(>d, n„d u\jn » ('aiholic rcadinjf t>'tl to Mnriolatry ' » proven" (c.) inherent grace, i'lg DeSaci, fuiv graced" (much trijtlia of God. not contradict many wlio pos- ry. Campbell, of 'ness, lio should lat a few passa- original convey 'ulgate appears e of these, but J'uptions in the J*robably Mr. an anonymous e li. and F. B. eniarks on Dr. tin TiiI<,'ato itself, ciilatc,^ versions of 'It, tliat the Soci- ftvc (Jod's Word wliicdi the Word on;,'inal lanj,'ua. ■otCiitaiU society, I preferred to the '» is) adopted hj rew verb with its mnnr.u/ine. endint/, we must SCO that the pronoun, which is of duitblful fjende.r, must ho " He" or " It," and therefore points to Jesus, who alone can hruLso Satan under our feet. Here, then, thero is an essential difference between the Hebrew and the Vulgate, as cs,scntial a difference AS exists iietwecn the masculine and feminine ponders ; and this is one of the few pas.sapes which wo think important enouph to contend for even npainst the Latin Vulpate, the Council of '1 rent, S. E. D., and tho British and Foreign Bible Society to bootl It seems peculiarly unfair in tho British and Foreign Bible Society to give i Romish version of this text, and then to put a Protestant interpretation on it. But that the reader may sec how erroneous is the Romish version. I wMl ask his nttciifioii to four places in this diapter. I have mentioned that the pronoun is of doulitf'ul ;;ender — it nuiv he cither masculine or feminine, just like the Latin "omnis." In the example " omnis vir," omnis is )Mf/,sr((//;/fi; but in the example " omtds fiemina," omnis is /J;;«//i(';(c So in like manner the /(coHoxn translated "she" by Romanists in Gen. iii. l.'S, and "he" or "it" by Protestante, comes under a similar rule. And the rule will become evident from examining the fonr places which I shall now point out. Ill V. 12, we have " shit gave me of the tree and I did eat" ; and in v. 20, we have " because she. was tho mother of all living." In ea<'h of these two instancei the verh is feminine, and tberefbro makes the pronoun feminine. Auain, in v. Ifi, we have " •. . . and he shall rule over :hec" ; and in v. 15, we have "it," meaning " he" shall bruise thy head," etc. In each of these two instances the. vero is mnscnline, atd therefore makes the iironouii ninsciiliiie. Thus it appears that the Romish vcr^,ioii endorsed by the B. and F. B. Society can he disproved even in the very eha|)ter in which it aj»|)cars ! So carefully has God guartled His own most precious word ! (/') A second instance is in Gen. xiv. 18, 20, where the simple act of Melchi- /.edck is so translated, m/.s-franslated, and 7ion tianslaied, that it is made in the T^m/- 9«^^ and all its Romish oft'spring, to favour the idea that Melchizcdek's act of iiospitality was a sacrilicial or priestly net, and therefore the type of a Roman priest ill offering up the Mass ! forsootli ! of the is more simple Tlie simpb? act of Melcliizedok a type — a type sacrilifti of the JMass. What word in any lantjua than the word "and"? That is the word about which the mistake 22 ti ' arises. Tlirtt word "jiikI" is tiio traiislutioii of asin^Io Ilehrow Iftfer. In those verses tliiit Hebrew letter oeciirs ten times, luid ton limes it is iruiiHlated "and" in the Authorized Version. ... In the Roman Cutliolie version it is transhited seven times " and," oncu " but," once " for," and oucu not translated at all ! Ai d \Tltat is tbo objeet ? This, manifestly : to make tbo act of Melehizedek in '• offer- ing bread and wine" h typo of the Roman Catholic priest in offering up the sacrifice of the Mass. In DeSaci wo have, Mais Melchisedecli, roi do Salem, ofTVant dii pain et dii vin, paire qnil etait, pretre du Dien iK's baut, benit Abram — Hut Melchisedek, kin;» of Salem, offering Ijread and wine, became ho was a Priest of tliu Most High God, blessed Abram. C») A thinl point of difference is seen In Psalm Ixiii. Vnlijnto, orlxiv. Antlio- rizcd ViTsiDii. This I'sulni I would specially comnKMid to tlio iittcntion of tlioso who s(iy thiit there is liardly any dirt'LTence hetwecn the ()ri;;iiml llelirew and tho Vuluftt*'. Ill tlie Viilijnte we have at v. 7, " Man uliall fome to a deep heart, an I God shall ho exalted." And the deep licart here mentioned is tho " saered heart of Jesus," uceordin;; to the interpretation of a Uoman priest. (d) Examine also Psalm xrviii. Vuljratc, or xeix. Authorized Versi')n. In tlie Vuliifttc wo have at v. r>, " ami adore his footstiwl, for it is holy" — the llehrew preposition "at" hcinj,' omitted after "ailore" Tho Vul;,'ate favours idol-wor- 8hi|), and therefore was preferred to the Ori^jinal Ilehiew by tho Fathers at Trent — wise men they in their j,'encration ! C«) A>;nin, in Hel), xi. 21, Viilpafc, we linve, "By faith .Tneoh, dyinp, lilcsscd each of tiie sons of .Io.se])h, and aihred the top of /tin rod." Why this reading was pre'crred hy the Fathers at Trent is ol)vions enough. I maintain, tlicrcfore, in direct opposition to Hr. Cam|)I)eIl, that ho has fallen into a mistake when lie assures us that " it was not because this version was jiceu- liarly ndajitcd to the l{omi> l..,art. an! '"« sacred liourt rizo<| Vorshn. I„ f'v"— tlie Ifol.rew ,'a;'oiirs id„|.w(,r. •'"'""rs at Trent— •o'>./?vinp, IdcHscd ■ "lis reudin.' tv». iidin^' WM tlint fio has fallen ycrsio,, vvas pccu- '<"' of this Svnod t was sn rorci\(.d V*;'- "lis to main-' ""Jn in the teeth thov areprioMf'h ;reek on the one 1 rotestant IJil.io "*t ""(i manifold "••irurnonfs, and •onvev diflerent •' "herein tho '' '" "'oii." Tiio V'ulgalo hat* inter|iohitcd lliu wordn " wliieh woio" in prison. And this is t<8(;d by Komo us an evidenro of l'ur<;atory. :J I'clt.r i. 10: (jod says, " Alalto your calling and election sure." To this the V^il«,'ate add.s, »• by good works." In //urn's /titroditction, Uth ed., vol. ii. p. 239, it is said of tho Vulgate: "Several passages are mistruiislatetl in order to support' the peculiar dogmas of tho Cliin'ch of Uomo," This censure applies to the edition 1.VJ2 of Sexais V. and Clement VIII, from which the modern translations have been made. '• M. I'etavel, minister of tho Swiss Church in London, in liin work, 'J7io Bible in Francs, Paris, 18G4, says: 'The text of tho Vulgate contains a multitudo of faults of all kinds.' . . . ' Theso faults are preci.sely what Homo appreciates tho most in the transla- tion ol the Bible into the native tongue of a people.'" In The Pope and Cuiincil, by Janus, a member of tho llomish Church, 18G1), an account is given ot the forgeries in " Docutnents," " History," "The Hroviary," by that Chuvch, Of tho corruptions in the Vulgate, it is said, " Uno would have suppos^-d there would be no further need for s-o perilous an instrument as falsi fiction of texts . . . iind yet the same method lous still pursued, and that, too, itith texts of Scripture. Innocent III. wished to make Deute'ononjy a code for Christians, that he might get liib'e authority for his doclrino of l*ai)al |)ower over life and death ; but for that the words had to be altered. It is there said that an Israelite may ajtpeal to the high priest and chief judge, and if ho does not abide by tlieir sentencr^, ishall be put to death. (Ueut. xvii. 12.)* Innocent, by a slight inter- polation in the text of the Vulgate, mado this into a statement, that whoever does not sid)mit to the decliiion of tho high priesit (whose place the Pope ocf.Mipies in the New Covenant), is to be sentenced by the jii'lgo to execration. And Leo X. quoted the passage with tho same corru|>tion in a bull of his ... to prove that whoever dis- obeyed the Pope must be put to death" — pp. loG-7. Dr. H. Pavne Smith, Ilejiius Professor of Divinity in (he Univer- sity of Oxford, 8:;ys : " I do not think that the Church of Konie has ever decreed any doctrine without some slight show of Scri[)tural authority. No more interesting work probably could be written thar^ one wliicli would trace how the mistranslations of the Vulyate iiradu- ally led on to the doctiinal errors finally authorized at the Council of * In this aad other texts l)e Saci renders pri«st by I'oittife, pontiff. h 24 l< • 1 Trent." — Church and the World, 2n»l series. Note on p. 87 of Essay III., " Poweri and Duties of the Priesthood." IX. On p. 28 ot " Misrepresentation Exposed" occurs — " Tlic next passage ia Dc Raci is,,' say the writers, "so jrlavinj;, thnt the Romish eilitors of Coioyjiie left it out of tlieir eilition of 17'.)3." That is, l)e Saei was too /loinisli for Koine. I am incline' to think this is equally ereilihie with the inforiinition drawn irom Me(>aviu's I'rotestant. There was a couplet in one of our Scottisii school-books forty years a;^o, whieli I would commend to the study of the writers . — • '■ ficst men nuspoct your talc untrue, Kcpj) prohahilify in view." Tlio words, the writers adosse.sse(l with a spirit of divination" (.Acts xvi. 1(>), because she tes ilied on his behalf and his followers, saying: — " 'riiesc men are tlie servants of the .Most Ib^rh (Jod, which sliow unto us tho way of salvation." Xo dimlit I'aiii mit;lit have trained a little teiiipurury advan- tig^ liy calling to his aid this satellite of the d'^vil, hur he was too fiiilifnTto sa.-ii- lice truth on the aliamf expedjcMcy ; and therefore he refused Iter help. He would have nothing lu do with Ikt certificate to his cliar.icter, or her help either. tliati Whc whicl will I Sain| lite, les 111 dte MDI I wil Fief Vn| the Brifl iSJBsss^z: on p. 87 of Essaj occurs — "y cTclihle with tlie " <';>"|>lot in one of ""'•'J to the stuilv of 'SSoIs Crlition by ({,0 ""il^; it convenient •"•filiated ? There tlie copy of De ^; now on tlio ";'e'l Jan., I8G8. tl'e filsifvincj of u • Lai- J espcre J- 1- Mi^jirK Di: ' jet once more "j I^e Saci : n^v. tlie pravcr.s of all 'C. Sow, s„p,,jj. niarlicd iu lulk-a f^» tlie suhject ■^ fl'iaiilite do ']ii'il iosofFiit: •SKI) (^[,> rpjji^^ ^'onipnsc's is f f^'o. Vulgate ;ilics. Ostor- ^sentation or «t lie r(>p„(i;. "■^ mathetna- <^ twaddle of 'f'tter in (he '. enfitied,— "^'- DeSaci : ■^ ''e,.lt with what ill (he '//'/y/r/f "the '»). iHicauso unt.) us tho "i-Miy a.lvan- '''ii' III .sii.-ii- ler. To present the Protestant Canon of Scripture in a Tlomisli ilress — what is tliat hut sacrificing truth on the altar of expediency ? I imve now, iiowovcr, a cliar^jc still nioro frrave to make afjainst tlie Society. When I wrote the Tract in question, I had tho idea iu iny mind tolcrahly clear, which Fain now ahout to state, l:lit than I," the Editor of the T. B. S. Record states : — "IMr. IMcSorloy only used that as a figure of speech, as a clndlengo which he well knew could not be accepted, has not been, and never will be." " The authorization chiinied for De Saci was given to his coin|)l(!tc work, containing the Apocrypha and notes." " And to use it after it is strippeil of these is iniquitous." X. ^rr. K. (piotes largely from the " Defence" of John Kadly, Esq., a member of the Committee, in which he refers to Scio's ver- sion, and states : — " Turn \vc to Spain. . . . Yet even there, Lieut. Graydun disposed of from twelve to fifteen ihoiisiiiid copies of Scio's version tbrou^xliout tiie cities of the Mcdiicrrancan coast ; and now we are told l)y the Spanish ICv;iiit;cli/ation Coiiiiiiittcc of nearly 4^00 pcisons in one of these who have al)aiidoiied I'apal W'jrshi])," etc. Ah descriptive; of the value of the " mass of evidence" furnished by John Uadlev, Escp, a clergyman of the Church of England, in a pa' iplil(!t p. d.'), l.S()S, remarks ; " We will now examine one or two cases which are brought forwai'd as instances of ^ood that ha\ e been done (by tho B. and F. B. S ) ' Mr. Hadley (p. 40 of his Defence) mentions tho assertion of tin; Spanish Evangelization Society that in one of the Spiiuish cities on tlie .Mi'diterranean coast lOOf) persons had abandoned Papal worship, and traces the cause of this to LiiMit. Graydon, who, twenty years liefore, had sold from twelve to fifteen thousand copies of Scio's version on that coast.' " (a) " This infers th it nothing had been done for Spain during those twenty years, lint what are we to think of the many thousand copies of Valeru's vtn'sion circulated in recent years? Are they not to be taken into accoimt ? Or arc; we to go liack to the remote cause twenty yt'ars before;, and ignore all rc-cnt work ?" (()) " The Society from whom IMr. lladley derives his informa- tion has never employed Scio at all." larl veil foil t PI less ir mutilated or "nion. ss tJian a ,)io„s frnu,!. f|ncc(l a fovuory. Thli XH-.ety coolly omit/ti.e '/;""«" to the rest ; but An,,e:. Testament do le fexto Ilel.reu," / T 'vinel, are f„„n,l ,•„•„,„' -'. approved by IJoniisli ns: the Messed Book ''" •> »f n.is IJook 1,0 '"•'' mi edition. And •li! falsehood. "i/''''"!^'' <'<"isieen, and liever w;is given to his "And to use o' 'Tohn Kadly, '^ to Scio'n ver- ij.vflon disj)osed of :/iour the cities of ''" I''vuri-elization iil'aiuloncd J'apal '" Airtiished hy He or two cases ''('(Ml (h)lie (by ) "lent ions f ho '" Olio of the ay(l(»ii, who, ^Hfiand copies ■'^paiti (Iiinriible Society, w/io do c/ive Scio, have each year to tell us that nothliKj can be done for Spain — that it is effectuully sealed against, the entrance of the truth." JMr. 11. says : — "The Society for Iiisli Cliurcli Missions to the Roman Catholics lias made a larfie distiiliution of this (Douay) version. Its nieinliers saw that our autiiorizcd version ivonUI not hr rccciviid. They circulate the Douay, and God's blessing has followed their efforts." The clergyman just referred to, in his pam])hlet, p. 44, quotes the apologetic arguinent of the B. and F. B. S. in this case. He states : " But this defence 's not true." The following is a eopy of a Minute, No. 320(1, of the Irish Church Mission Society, sent to all missionaries and officers of the Society : " Resolved, '1 hat it be clearly understood as a rule of the Society, that the Committee in no case authorizo the circulation of ihe Douay r,;iu Rhenish versions of the ^ Scriptures as the inspired "Word of God," etc. The JNIinute then goes on to state, that the agents of the Society are generally provi- ded with a copy of the Douay in order that they may "distinctly , expose the errors those versions contain," etc. XI- jMi*. 11. would have his readers believe that the defenders of the B. and F. B. S. are incapable of misrepresentation or deception. That the friends of Bible Societies in this country may have an idea how such defence is at times managed in P^ngland, and what value may be attached to some of his authorities and correspondents, we give the following exposure by the Rev. II. McSorley : — A little tract has been circulated by the British and Foreign Bible Society hoaded as above — " Docs the Hiitish and Forcij^n Hiblo Society circulate Romish versions ? Hy S. K. D."; and in that tract the eauje of the B. and F. B. Society is inifcniously defended ; indeed the only inj^'oniously plausible nrfrurnents which the Society tan advance arc there advanced — but with what cogency I leave my readers now to decide. , The tract hegins with the following preface: — |; " We do not iIpiii/, nay, ivc affirm that the vcrij mmnest translation of the B'thle in Eiii/lisli, set firth l>i/ men of our /irofcssion, containeth the Word of God, and is the Wonl of (!ii(l; its thf kliKfs speirh, beiny translated into French, Dutch, Italian, or [jutin, is still the l,-in(fs speeeh, thou'ih it lie not intrrpietid by every translator with the same r/rare, nor pcraf rent are so fitly for phrase, nor so expressly for sense, every- where." — ( rranslators' Preface to the Authorized Version.) ,vs This is the lie.iding or text, and it means, if it mean anything, that the trans- lation ot tlic Bible into Hnglish, and into French, Dutch, Italian, Spanish, I'ortu- I' guese, (icrniiii and Latin, contains essentially the Word of God, and is tlie Word 'i: of (io(l; ami Iiciht, although Frotestants and Romanists translate the Bible diller- cntly, as we know they do, yet, " the very meanest translation of the Bible." to all intents inid purposes, containeth the Word of God, and is tl.e Word of God, Just as tiic l.^iu'en's speech wiicn ivanslutcd inio any other langtiage is the QiiecTrs speeib. This is manifestly tiie reason why iIk' B. and I''. 15. S. circulate liomish transliUioiis of tiie Bil>le on the continent — they imply that although the liomish be " the very meanest," yet they contain, and arc the Word of God, substantially, to all intents ami purjioses. With regard to this heading or le.xt, with which S. E. D. has prefaced his defence, I venture to make the following observations : — 1. S. K. D. does not give the extract accurately; he must have taken it Bccond-Iiaiul. As he presents it, it is one complete sentence, with no less than !!!| t^'onfjfive words B 28 „., -i- r/io extract u-lw.„ . '^■'J'><^i>s/j/jur sense, I'ieii i.ie ser forth l)v m. n f ^^ '"iintnin that "tho vJl,. *"-'^"''"iAr themselves taineth the Word o ^ "d ,? ""•"* T'''"*'*'""." '• ^ et S r^'u"'"*' "-"nWatio,, of fo oouhl' have heen H.^m''''','""'' ^'"'=* ''^'li^ parent'ios:. v t, of the extract Ti ^' '^•' "'"' flmt oi.inio;,' ; • ' ''""' '''« whole of th,. rl ' f-t the^z:iv. nt;""t"!^^" - i" "" s^£;s i'.:'" "''^" '---nn^s r ''>"rn this speeimen nf "' '^''^ "^■'"«"y ) 29 ';«;;<' of seven IJncsf, ""at Jio lias omitted '•"^i we answer : tlmt "'"'"('"» of the liSl 7« "theirs of S ;,";;;,/■''"•"'•''«''? "/"/% ercru Irani "•f "''nn nrg„n,ent. '>^^"''"';: t/,em.scIvo, ;i"'"'ttninsl«„o,,of 't.«a^- timt "tiio ;'""*'«. foiiraincth ■^ •"".v Jiothi,,^, of '". (-'i«o Jiis argu. ,yprossecl: they '^'- we i,ave seen exoMse /or .loing '""' f"-q.are.| at J?|ir/H)so n-Hs to «"slators of the on. •■^''■nct IS only orixe.I Versio ^'mt tlu.,, think •;» ''-'ve a new ^""' 'i-oni tlio '■^' ^''« inins/a- "us ineans it ,".'*^ -n.Kin '"^^"'fc' riil,|,ed •'^^I't'oablo to own.) «■ ""y trans- ^^ II fli or/zed ''"•' -Viit/ien. ••. ■'*''"iilu 1,0 'tteo of tho "' I''- n. S. and tlicii 'Hzed Ver- T IH'lUuiljr ■ I'lvparcd '" «.'( tliat i XII. lu f.oncludiiig his critical defence, Mr. Russell sajs : — "Every version slioulil be judged as n whole. So will tlic (circulated) versions judged hy every candid mind. Not what tliis or that passage, isolated from tho rest, may he supposed to tench ; l)Ut what the version is as a whole." Tliis is another of Mr. Russell's "given arcs," which may easily describe tho '' absurdity of the object" and " whole circle" of his pamphlet. Apply the principle to any document, would man pcrtnit tho f'alsitication of this and that passage and then judge the whole correct? ISo; such alteruiions, among i)onour- able men, are criminal. Yet our author takes upon himself to defend the falsification of this and that passage of the Holy Scrip- tures, notwithstanding that all such tampering with the text is forbid- den by the Holy Spirit. Has he forgotten his own axiom, "Him (God) who has forbidden all misre[)resentation — all deception ?" Need we remind him of the care with which Providence has watched over the Old Testament? The Jews numbered every word and letter lest there should be any alteration. The critical stuff prepared in London which appears so profusely in his pamphlet, seems to have so elated him, thai iie must have forgot his logic before he could write such pro- found nonsense. He informs his readers that the circulation of Mar- tini is now discontinued. Did the "candid mind" of the Committee of the Hible Society judge and condemn that version as a whole? No, they did not, and could not, for Martini's Bible, from Genesis to Rev- elation, is not a tissue of Romish errors ; but because particular texts in it are perverted so that it contains proof for nearly all the essential dogmas of Popery, and on account of which that version received the authority of Pins VI . Romish versions of the Scriptures are con- demned because of the perverted passagps in them. Mr. Russell's conclusioii is therefore, like his criticism, deceptive. Enough of such tergiversation; — or to use his own words, "I put il to those who love the truth. Is this right? How will such conduct as I have been ex})osing appear before Him," etc. A gentleman who had heard Mr. R. lectur?, and had read " Mis- repres(;iitation Exposed," remarked, ironicallt/, " Mr. Alexander Russell has washed all the Popery out of the B. and F. B. S." Thin sarcasm is very expressive of the system pursued by the apologists of that Society. As has been correctly said, "The British and Foreign Bible Society at once denies, admits and defends'^ (those errors.) Mr. R. denii'S that the li. and F. circulate such versions. (See his letter in " IMnrning Chronicle," t5rd Aug.. 1809, a?trf elsewhere.) la the pamphlet he admits that the Society circulates " De Saci's, Scio's, Perei.a's, and a Polish New Testament" — " versions from the Vulg- ate." Tliose he defends, or attempts to wash all the Popery out of them. No pcinince, no priest-craft, no mariolatry, no sacrament of marriage, no mass, no idolatry, no merit of prayers, or works, no indidgence, no worship of angels, no celibacy, no purgatory — all immaeniate as ihe Virgin, aid all infallible as the Pope ! There is one ftassage, however, which he could not so easily misrepresent, and therefore [irudently j)as?,ed it over. In " Reasons of Exception," p. 16, it is stated : ''''Eleventh — Subjection of the whole Church to the I ^4 u 30 Priest/iood." l pgfpr r » subject to the nriesJ" li''^'.''^ 3'e others u-ho nro vn, 13 J'evoJtiiifr M,. /; ^ • -^"e use mac e of this h. ', *^'^ V'® '"'e- I'JC lootof liomiiiiism"! ^^""^eJi exclumis, " Pries t- , XIII. The EaH of SI.., ft i ~c:;'^''-'"'""E "■ —".1 ««r. SHVs; "TherJof^ Aiiothy,. writer ;,, " "^ '^^'^''sation "lieie a„d P„„„ i V' '"'" "'^ '■•""■"t one,, ■, „...,',■ '"« '""«'■ ' f Hie ■•"« "> wi . Mnr'rdl r";;-"'-^ " i-- ■■- 4t;-, ;;r° '^•'^'' ^;^7^/'>o seen that "the conress/onal p, ""J. then, Clearly <^^^«„^^ ' h' Snvi " ;'':^' ^<^^t I'lank J ntioubted excel- >; as what v,u ara te rojectcl. 'Ji," W'orle of the Church of England who zealous- ly ()se the errors of Popery, as may be seen from the following Jicports. which will also corroborate very much of what has been advanced in these pages : — (JiiANTiiAM, — \Vi'. luivc iiiiuli plenstire in rccordinjj; tlie opcninp: of a new Auxiliary in this town. Tiic; first ini-etinj; was lield on Tnosdny cvL-niiij;, Nov. 2, nml was intended liy the \U'v. nuy;h MeSorlcv and the Scire ary as a deputation. Tlie (iM'iloininant feelin;; seemed to he j^rief at finding that the money they liad l/ei 11 ;:i villi: fur years for t lie uhlic will tiut decide that tlie Hriti-sh and Forei>;n Society has allowed judgment to go by default. XIV. Mr. Russell goes on to any, — " The reader can now judge, not only on the " Ucasons of exception" to the BiMc Society hy the Ucveren.) Much of the same policy may be seen in the Romish versions ! XV. Mr. R. " requests the Directors of the Scottish Society to front It'Wn, in the most decid P'H. Auxiliary the 1870. "•"'••f- illblM. ,1 J" 30 16 f '" the (own of I •''f>. inclii,!,-,,,, the |iM-l.)cl., Curril,oo, ,^"^ Annan, and /t-'^tainentssoM. |es and .0 J 'r .^jj^, "«" or 80, ;vlioro very imv of tho .>orno years arjo. P'-^»^ '^-^^y^ in the '^ter and anient >^^ disposed of. people aro now ^"land for more. ^i'vered by tho (otiier kinds i„ ""^S- h is this s tlio Directors "loi'glit ! and " error in that act of wicked- error in such ■pr^ss sanction J.'"s differenco, fence of error 'th tho public .^- Jt was t in full, jn y two Bible the one had ted at, yet it 'ii th(! wmk of the IJililo Society. Some of ;hi' amiieiieo were Mr. MuiiroN people. Mefore Mepuriitit);;, a intif eoiitroverKial I'OtiverNiitiuii nlioiit the (liHpiiietl version nroso. I mentioned that the priests not unfreciucntiy hurncd them. Ati old j{entlenmn re|)Iied in words wliicfi I cnnnot retail, hnt tiieir pur- port WHS, " 'Phftt it wu.J no had thin^; after all the priests ilid. I said, ' Surely yor. should not say that. Mr. Mnnro would not hurn them — at least ho doe*) not flay HO in his pamphlet.' ' /ini I ironlil,' very emphatically rejoined the old |/«n- ficman. I'roliaMy hi! had ' hecarne wiser than his teacher' ; thoui;h it is no won- der thai one putting; implicit taith in Mr. Mnnro's nss<>rtions should agree with the Romish priest in hurninjj; De Siiei's version of the Holy Scriptures." Of (;ours(! he eoinlucted thi.H inoetiiig with devotional exercises, and it appears, interspc'rded it with ridicule and slander, which, no doiilit, lie finds of use to ^ivo zest to his performances when advoca- ting the ex|)e(lieney of cireuiating Popish vtTsions as the Word of (lod. Ridicule ami slander are eld atul usual tactirs of the Papacy, with which he has copiously interlarded his pamphlet. God'.s truth need.s no such weapons ; tliey are brought into use to carry out a daiig(!roiiH concession to Home, jinwe all you aje tlirouffh >,'race, and all you hope to bo to liie mercy ci (iod in Christ, and through His word onlj, anv. 13th, y^ t'le same '-espect to b^t^.s of the U It a|)j)ears "it'a/is foU '^''mijiation ion of that ^'■^ ^*'i' the y^'^i\ the *^ Trinita, <>civtanes, •Taken the versions '"^s of the /'"ended 'ch have ""nittee, eet Hith ''grity of y which mts can n»e and 1st that ith the fJesire lately ons of » con- :)here, uiure ry to IseJjr- iS of l.nid; Tehe 39 mistranslations in the Appendix to the latest Report of the Edin- burjifh and Glasgow Bible Societies, can hesitate to say that there is there solid proof exhibited of most blaraeable laxity, which tio com- mon-place reference to the imperfection of all translations cmii be sustained as a plea to vindicate or palliate. Our reason for alhifling to the snbject is simply to issure oar constituents that the support of the Scottish Bible Societies is still imperatively necessary." The Greenock, Aberdeen, and other Auxiliaries of the Edinbiirrrh all testify as to the importance of disseminating the pure Word of God, and that alone. In the same Report (1840) of the Edinburgh Bible Society it is stated in r<-ference to Germany: "The opposition against pure Bible circulation has not at all diminished in this city (Hamburg) ; on the contrary, it is on the increase." "• Dr. Brose, at Gottingen, has been very active; and I trust that in the course of time he will distril)ute a large number of pure Scriptures." In the Appendix it is said : " One of the versions which has hitherto been circulated in Beljrium is that of DeSaci. . . . The communications made to the Committee fully proved that those errors are not immatkrial. Faithful minis- ters of Christ Hnd, by almost daily ex[)erience, that they serve to throw serious hindrances in their way. The rendering of 2 Tim. iii. 16, 'All Scripture [which is] inspired of God is profitable,' is eager- ly laid hold of by the priests of the Church of Rome to justify the setting aside of texts which make against them, and the assumption ot a right to pronounce on what is inspired and profitable, and what is not. And whatever may be said to prove that the phrase ' Do penance ("■ Faites penitence''^ tnuf/ bear a sound sense, it is univer- sally taken by the people in an unsound and Popish sense, which turns away the mind from the idea of Scriptural repentance, and directs it to the superstitions of Popery." The Reformation has nowhere stood its ground except in those lands where a sound version of the Bible has not merely been provi- ded, but brought into use, sent forth throughout the length and breadth of the land, and freely circulated among the community at large." . . . *' How needful . . . for the improvement of that precious but perhaps fleeting opportunity which is^ 2iow offered us ; and at once to send forth the Scriptures, in their native purity and power, into every Popish land." In Re()ort, 1816, it is stated : "During the course of the pait summer, u brief controversy arose, to which allusion must be made. An impression bad been produced, in what way your Committee can- not ■I'.idertake' to affirm, that the P'dinburgh Bible Society was now prepared to al)andon its position of dissent from, and protest agiiiiist, the procedure of the British and Foreign Bible Society. Some advertisements were inserted in the public prints, disclaiming any such intention on the part of the Society. To these advertisements successive rejoinders ."er»> put forth by tlie Auxiliary of the British and Foreign Bib'.d Society in this town (Edinburgh.) Your Com- mittee did not think it seendy to prolong this war of advertisements, but, committing the matter to a Sub-Committee, issued ' A Stutemeut 40 and Appeal on the Subject of Pure Bible Circulation,' the perusal of which they earnestly solicit from the Christian public. Its calm and well-weighed reasoning should surely go far to satisfy dispassionate readers that the po-ition assumeil bj your Society has not been sug- gested by a mere ebullition of caprice, or the fluctuating expediency of the moment, but is the result of aa lionest conviction that the highest interests of truth are at stake in the difference between us and the liritish and Foreign Bible Society." From this Statement and Apf)eal, prepared by Rev, Dr. Candlish, at the request of the Committee, the subjoined may be given: — "Some months ago, the Committee of the Edinburgh Bible Society felt it their duty to warn the Christian community, by ])ublic advertisement, against the efforts made by an agent of the British and Foreign Bible Society, to recom- mend that Society as once more worthy of the restored (^ontidence of Scotland ; and it was then intimated that a fuller exposition of the views of the Edi:;burgh Bible Society might be looked for, in the form of a calm statement and ap[)eal, such as the present docu- ment is designed to be. Certainly this step has not become less necessary since the time when it was first contemplated." . . " Having succeeded, as we may fairly say without a boast — at least so far as our country was concerned — in securing, by God's blessing, the victory of His truth, and having made the cause of pure Bible circulation triumphant, we were content to let the din of stiife be hushed," etc. " It is not therefore, on the whole, to 1)0 regretted that this occasion should have been afforded, and this necessity laid upon us. The principles involved it» the former contendings and pre- sent testimony of our Society are of no passing interest, Itut of para- mount importance ; the events of the day are showing their import- ance more and more." . . . Wo wonhl have our comparative provincial institution known and commended, not merely as the organ of a protest against error, but as tiie instrument, also, of a larger and purer Bible circulation than has ever been fairly brought to bear on the ripening corruption of the age. The testimony for a pure lUble circulation is to be regarded as a testimony fur the prophetic oilico of the Redeemer, or Ilis exclusive right in tin; character of a Prophet, to speak to men in Ilis own word, as interpreted and applied by Ilia own Spirit." . . • "These Bible Society contendings involve, a? we cannot doubt, His honour as a Propliet — the sole and all-sniricit-n •, Prophet of His people," ... He nuist be blind indeed who does not see that the keeping of the Bible [Hire, as God's Word, from all risk of confounding it witli man's inventions, is all in all for Protest- ant Christianity." "The third oI)jection to the proc(>edings of the British and Foreign Bible Socic y is founded upon tlicir use of objectionable versions of thf IJiluM in foreign tongues. Here, again, the plain (juesti"!! of right and wrong lias lnu'ii ohsf>urc(l by nuK'Ii ingenious special pleading, and the whoI(> subject of translations of the Scrip- tures has been so hainlled as to unsettle men's conlidence even in the best. andgiv( i vague impression that since none are faultless, all or any, even the worst, may be useful; so that it really matters little 41 'G perusal of 'ts calm and lispa.ssionate >t l)(;en sii". oxpediftijcy ion that the l)et\veen us Statement nest of the lis airo, the "y to warn the clForts ' to recom- iilitleiice of fioM of the ^or, III the sent (locu- et'ome less • • . -■'U, least so )I(;s.sing, >ure Kible f strife be '■<^i,M'etted L'ssity laid •s and pre- t of para- 'I' iinport- ^panitive the organ •'■gt'i- and > hear on "'•e Hible oiVu'Ai of !•() phet, I ' f'y' His I'olve, 83 iiiiricit-n ; vlio does ''■oru all I'l'otest- i>-h and ionahle I' plain !r<'ni()ii8 Scrip- in the all or '« little which you give, you cannot trust the best — you cannot condemn the worst. This indeed, generally, has all along been one of the saddest consequences of this sad controversy, that it has laid our friends of the British and Foreign Bible Society under the necessity of defend- ing their doubtful position by raising doubtful questions that strike far deeper than they intend, and shake the bulwarks of the whole citadel of Christianity." . . . "In this instance, anxious to vin- dicate their practice of adopting translations acknowledged to be b?d, they begin to fmd fault with the good; and plunging into intricate critical enquiries respect'ag the Septuagint and the Vulgate, they make ordinary readers begin to dot)l)t if there be any trust- worthy translation at all, or if, in the general uncertainty as to the wliole of them, one may not be just as valual)le as another. This is surely not merely sad sophistry in reasoning, but a sad playing with edged tools, and trifling with high and holy and eternal interests." .... "One Bible is only a little more uiicertain and faulty than another; but all may do good." " We solemtdy protest against this rash tam- pering with men's confidence in God's Word, merely to serve the purpose of a dangerous concession to Rome." ..." 'I'here is a mighty distinction, whatever gloss may be put upon it, between an authorized or authentic Protestant, and an authorized Popish, version. The one, making allowance for human infirmity, is an honest and fair transcript of the blessed originals ; the other is a cautious copy of a Latin book, which Jerome, writing when the Church was far gone towards Pope.-y, unconsciously, it may be, modified and corrupted, and which the Church of Rome has adopted in preference to the true Bible, as more favourable to her inventions, and less likely to teach her people the truth." " A few instances will be subjoined (given in notes) of the mis- chievous tendencies of the translations circulated by the Ihitish and Foreign Bible Society. We are not aware that, in any case of this kind, they have even the decent apology of necessity. If there were no other translation to be had, into a particular language, something miifbt be said in favour of using an incorrect one in tlie meantime. But in the European, as well as in the Eastern languages, good translations exist, and tlie only reason the British and Foreign Bible! Society ran give is. that the authorized Popish translations are moni readily received by the people. Tliis, however, as we have already shown, is no justification." The case of a mission- ary, or private Christian, is put, and then it is said: "An individual may exercise his discretion in determining how to act, when in parti- cular cases such an alternative is presented to him. But a Bible Society must proceed upon a general ride; and it must take the res- ponsiliility of boing held to certify that what it circulates is m good faith, the nnadulteratiMl and uncorrupted V/o'-d cf God. In this view it is by 1,0 means unlikely that thougli the writers of the New Testa- ment Velt MO scruple in freely using the current Greek translation of the Old for all the ]mr[)oses of their ordinary preaching and corres- pondence, they might have considered themselvea called to decide a very different question had they been asked to sanction it, as a wliole, 42 and to give it forth without caveat or qualifioation as the Word of God. They, in their business of teachitig the people, were free to make the best they could of ilie Scri[)tural means within their nsach, as modern teachers are. But it is tiio business of a Bible Society to furnish these means ; and it makes itself directly answerable for the means it furnishes. This is its peculiar charge and j)eculiar respon- sibility, to see that it be an honest and sulhcient Bible that it puts into circulation : to speculate on the measure of good that may be extracted out of a Bible which they cannot vouch for, is altogether beyond their province." *' We venture, in conclusion o( this appeal, to give our country- men the assurance that the pure Bible Societies of Scotland, whether united or separate, are determined, by God's help, ' to lengthen their cords and strengthen their stakes.' . . . Pvverything, under God, will depend on the Christian people of Scotland. Let them respond with alacrity to the call made upon them ; and within a very few years we may have it in our power to say, that Scotland has been instrumental in scalterinj: far and wide over the agitated earth that unadulterated Word of God, which alone, when ' yet once more God shakes, not the earth only, but also the heavens,' is to be the strength and cement of ' that kin^jdom which cannot be moved.' " The following extract of a letter in the Appendix, Report, 18 i6, is interesting, as indicative of the state of feeling in England on the subject: — " Wavertree, 8th August, 184.5. Sir, — Hiving beea strongly urged by some supporters of the Biitish and Foreign Bible Society, to, and of which, I was many years ago a contributor and au officer, to become connected with its Association established some time since in this district, I refused on the ground of the Socinian question ; but when I sub'/jijuently learnt frotn Mr. Kadley's pamph- let that the Society had become the agent of Poi)ery (for such I con- sider it, Locause it does the work of Popery by circulating Popish and perverted copies of the Scriptures), I immediately brought the matter before my |)eople from the pulpit; and [ am happy to say that all those of my hearers who were connected with the British and Foreign Bible Society withdrew from it. Seeing that the above Society had departed from the Protestant principles with which it commenced, and wa>. now infected, through the medium uf the abomi- nable doctrine of expediency, with the leaven of Popery, and consid- ering to what an awful extent Po|)ery has prevailed among the minis- ters of the Church of Ei;gland — considering these and other subjects of deep interest, I established the Bible Society, of which the follow- ing documents will furnish an account," etc. Your faithful servant, Saaiukl Fknton. In the Fiftieth Annual Report E. B. S., 18o9, Jufnlee Year (held January, 18()()), it is said : " At the close of fifty years, employed in the work of disseminating, fur and wiile, the pure Word of (iod, it may be interesting and not unprofitable to cast a glance over the oast annals of the Society, and of the great cause which it is its objei. to promote." . . . "The friendly relation subsisting between the two Societies (B. and F. B. S. and E. B. S.) continued uninterrupted till t com[ auih( Briti ance phal wish vers^ tiont: euce and 43 Word of rt3 freu to •iir r.!Mch, ■jociety to le for the ir i"(3.s])oa- i:it it puts It tnny be Itogether couiitrj- wlietlier leii tlieir ler iioi], respond very few lias been !n-th that lore God strength 1846, is d on the Mg beea ij^n Hible tr and an led some Socinian pamph- "h I con- ; Popish iglit the say that tish and above vhich it i abomi- consid- 3 niinis- siiltjects toJlow- lervaut, r (held 'yod in- iod, it lio oast JCL, to 3n the rupted till the year 182o, when the Edinburgh Committee found themselves compelled to suspend tlieir intercourse, and afterwards, with the authority of their constituents, to withdraw their support from the British and Foreign IJible Society, in consequence of the counten- ance afforded Ity their Committee to the intermixture ot the Apocry- phal writings with the inspired Scriptures. The Committee have no wish to reler, except as a matter of h.istory, to the painful contro- versy ; but in any sketch, however slight, of the progress and opera- tions of tlio Edinburgh liible Society, it is impossible to omit refer- ence to the arduous struggle she was called to maintain for the purity and integrity of the Holy Scriptures." In IfSGl a Union vvas formed between the Edinburgh, Glasgow, and otiier Bible Societies, under the name of National. In the Report for that jear — " Another recommendation of the Union pro- posed is, that, under the new constitution, not a single principle of the old Society is either compromised or abandoned. The great principles on which, as a Society, we have hitherto acted, are expressed more distinctly in the new Constitution than in our old Regulations, which were all the Constitution we poss-.-ssed -, and these principles, it may be remembered, were : the religious character of the institution, as indicated and sanctified by prayer ; the admission to office in the Society of such only as profess belief in the doctrine of the Trinity, and the circulation of the Bible, pure and simple, without note or comment." At the public meeting in Edinburgh, when the Union was accom- plished, the following resolution vvas adopted: — "That, in the pros- pect of union with another Society, under the belief that the great object they have both in view — the diflf'usion of the pure Word of God — may be more effectually promoted, and the resources of Scot- land more tliorouglily elicited and cordially enlisted in the cause, it is becoming that the Edinburgh Bible Society record, in special form, it& gratitude to God for the extent to which, under His help and blesning, it has been enabled to supply our own countrymen wiih the Scriptures, to spread them in foreign countries, to maintain and vin- dicate their purity, to aid in the preparation of foreign versions ; and more particularly in recent months, for the gratifying success which has attoiitletl the labours of the Society in Italy." I'lio Rev. Dr. Candlish said in his speech at that meeting: "There is another reason stated in my motion for tliis union, and that is, — seeing that every precaution has been taken to secure the principles professed in common, both by the Edinburgh and National Bible Societies, as well as their financial interests." " The National Bil)le Society sj»rung into existence in 1800, in a time of perfect peace." . . . " The Edinburgh Society has had to steer its way through the sea of troubles in regard to the principles on which Bible circu- lation ought to proceed ; and therefore we have that satisfaction, after having inanagod its affairs, that we agree in this union with no sur- render of those principles on which this society had been conducted, and on which it was originally founded. I am not going, in a time of peace, to take up those controversies on former differences, or m •} ' 44 re-open those wounds which time has closed and healed ; hut I am here to testify, so far as I can understand the principle of union, that the Edinburgh Society enters into it with all her colours Hying." . . . " It is well to unite in one phalanx, one body, for the distri- bution of the Scriptures, and to do all that in us lies to unite all par- ties in Scotland who love the Word of (xod in its purity and integrity, and who love Him of whom that Word testifies." Similar expressions are to be found in other Annual Reports. In 186G the sentiments are the same as those expressed by the Commit- tee in 184G, twenty years before. They say: "For what object has all this labour been expended ? It is for the circulation of one book — the Hook of books. . . . It is the Word of Christ — indispen- sable, in the doctrines it reveals, for the special recovery of the lost. And as the Word of Christ, to circulate it, and combine for the circu- lation of it, is to make a practical acknowledgment of our faith in the prophetic office of the Saviour. His mediatorial offices are not titles of barren courtesy. . . . Ilis Word, therefore, is the supreme standard of faith, paramount to all other authority, and the one mes- sage of eternal life to the perishing." . . . ''We have it (His Word) under the Seal of Heaven in the Holy Scriptures. We can no more be indifferent to them than we can despise the office in which Christ gave them to us — His office as the Prophet, to whom all prophets bare witness." . . . An Association for the spread of the Scriptures, if it is thus a testimony to the prophetic honours of our Lord, is the best form of a protest against the two leading errors of our lime." . . . One error would sink the Word in the Church," etc. The other error, sink the Word before the claims of human reason and science," etc. . . . " No instrument will suf- fice but the Word. It is the Word of salvation." " Where the word of a king is," we are told, '• there is power." Such, then, are the principles of the National, as of the Edinburgh Bible Society, subscribed to and faithfully acted upon, so far as the public knew till a recent period, by Divines (not to refer to the mighty dead) such as Revs. Dr. Candlish, C. J. Hrown, Guthrie, iiegg, Fairbairn, Rev. Sir H. W. Moncrief, Drs. Barclay, McLeod, Cairns, Goold, and the majority of the clergy of Scotland.* Vhe following correspondence will shew that the Directors ot the Natioi ;d have violated these principles, which will, no doubt, perplex and gii 'vo manj as well as the writer of these pages. The Rev. Dr. Gocld, Secretary of the National B. S., wrote: — "5 St. And- rew-squa. s Edinburgh, Oct. 8, 18G7. "My dear sir, — "We are annoyed here that you have not received the Bibles. I was from home on the continent at the time your letter arrived, but Mr. Dawson attended to your request, and by the earliest i>essel after the receipt of your note, the box with the Bibles was despatched. The mystery is th'it the invoice was despatched at the same time. Has it never reachtu ? The dute in our books when the box and invoice left is August 12. The former might be a day or two before the * Drs. Brown, Guthrie and Begg are not now oflicially connected with the N. B. S. 45 I) lit I am \n'Km, that i"s flying." \tho distri- jffi all par- integrity, orts. In ^ Couimit- !>ljject has one hook in(li.s|)en- f the lost, the circu- ith in the not titles supreme one mes- 'p it (His ^Vo can office in whom all sjiread of onours of ')g errors 't. And- Wg are us from >ut Mr. 'ter the . The Has it invoice >re the • B.S. vessel sailed. The box was sent to Halifax. I am glad to see your activity in our cause. So far as your controversy is concerned, we have no wish to get emhroiled in it ; it would serve little purpose here, and we have been on friendly relations with the British and Foreign Uible Society, though we have followed a different course. We would not print Popish versions : on the other hand, there is the question, would you withhold from a poor Roman Catholic such ver- sions as DeSaci and Martini ? All our Evangelical friends abroad speak of souls saved and converted to Protestantism through tliese versions. It is a questioii, you will perceive, attended with consider- able diificulty. We have a committee sitting upon it at present. Wo do as little as we can in the way of circulating these versions," etc. I am yours, faithfully. (Signed) W. H. Goold." — Rev. John MuNRO, Wallace, Nova-Scotia. The Doctor wrote on Nov. 21, 1867 : "My dear Sir, — I got your letter dated Nov. 5th, and have bestowed the best attention upon its contents. The invoice and bill of lading were both iiicluded in the letter which I sent you, and wbich you say reached you. It was the duplicate of the bill, and was put into the letter in the presence of Mr. Dawson, and never seen here after the letter was despatched. We are making enquiries at Liverpool if another copy of the Bill can be got. It is quite unaccountable how such mishaps should occur in correspondence between us. We have nothing like it with any other place, and my correspondence extends to various regions of the earth. In regard to Popish versions you judge us harshly and rashly. It is not correct to say that we circulate Popish versions. . . . Our Board at its very last meeting appointed a large com- mittee to correspond with the French churches with the view of securing a better version than any in use. In the meantime we must either take the course we have always done, circulate Ostervald and leave our colporteurs to give DeSaci if asked for, or withhold the Bible altogether. . . . We printed a Protestant version for Portugal lately, when the British and Foreign B. S. printed a Popish one." ..." We declined connection with your own Canadian Society, unless the colporteurs to be employed were to circulate Pro- testant versions." These letters being contradictory and unsatisfactory, the case was submitted to several of the Directors ; also to the Scottish Reform- ation Society, when the following reply was received from the Secrecary : " Edinburgh, 17th Dec, 1867. Rev. John Munro, Wallace, Nova-Scotia, — My dear Sir, — Referring to my last con- fidential note, I saw Dr. Goold to-day. He says they are in no way circulating Popish versions of the Scriptures, and are at present considering what arrangements could be made with continental com- mittees in o/der to secure a pure version for the continent. I shall bo glad to hear from you again on this subject. Meanwhile 1 am pleased to think that the Committee of the Bible Society are eschew- ing the evil complained of. With kind regards, very truly, (signed^ G. R. Badenoch." By the same mail, 2nd Jan., 1868, the following letter was 46 I received from the )\istern Secretary : " National B. S., Glasgow, 18ih Dec, 18G7. Rev. dear Sir, — At a recent meeting of this Com- mittee your letters to Dr. Goold, Mr. Sommerville, and Mr. Kaiusey, were submitted to the consideration of the Directors. It was felt tl; It tile sibject re(|uired more consideration than could be given to it in so large 21 meeting, and the whole question, with your remarks oti it, was again remitted to a large Sub-C'ommittee, eml)racing our dear friend, Mr. Sonwni^rville, and others in whom, I am sure, you would have every conlidence. As both sections of the Hoard jire repre- sented in this Sub-Committee, it may be some little time before a decision is come to; but as soon as possible (in course of two or three wee'-'-i) meetings of both sections, east and west, will bu held, and tliereuftei ihf- o'.'cision of the whole Board taken on this Report. I auj. Rev. dear Sir, yours faithfully, (signed) William J. Slowan, Sec.'y. Kev John Mlnuo." On this part of the correspondence, it has to be remarked, Mr. Bailtuioch's letter was quite satisfactory. Jt will be olj.served that Dr. (iooid's letter of 8tli Oct, 1867, was opened and a documeat abstracted; consequently the contents must have been known to some l)arty before it reached nie. Let this be particularly iiotic(ul. Two letters mailed to Dr. Goold in 180(5 never reached him, wiiich caused a great li.shed Reports of the Society that we have seen. In these circumatances duty was plain — to continue connection with the Niuioual Bible Soeieiy and wait results. Nothing further was heard, by corruspondenoe or otherwise, of the countenancing of Uoniish ver- git)ns l)y that Society ti'l the notice appeared in the Preshyterian Witness, Nov., 1861*. Now, if this was known in Oct, 1867, why was it never again mentioned till information was gut from France? The result of correspondence relative to this matter will be found in the of t en(i of into con I hav sane Pel Va to obj mei fou log Ian 47 Glasgow, lii.s Coai- liaiusey, was felt veij to it larks orj our dear u would 3 repre- K-'foic a or three 'J ; in Portu- gal, by Pereira, in 1781-3; in Spain, by Scio, in 1793." "Not only did the Church of Rome thus seek to counteract the Reformation by iranslatio7is of versions, but also by their circulation." Conse(iuently soon after the IJ. and F. B. S. was established in 1804, Roman Cath- olic Bible Societies sprang up to counteract its work, and one was formed in France early in the present century at Ratisbon in 1806; in England, in 1813; Hanover, iu 1814; in Russia, iu 1814; and in Poland, in 1816. Here, then was a distinct departure from the true principle of translating from the inspired Originals, and your Com- mittee are grieved that the British and Foreign Bible Society should ever have been so tempted, in the face of this great principle, to adopt the very means that the Church of Rome had designed to coun- teract the influence of pure versions. That Society took up the Romish versions, and adopted them in Germany in 1812 ; Poland, in 1813; France, in 1816; Italy, 1818; Portugal, 1818; Spain, in 1820; — thus doing the work of the Church of Rome, and either igno- rautly or wilfully circulating versions which the Romanists declare to be " opposed" to the other versions circulated by the B. and F. B. S. Your committee venture to affirm that this practice of that Society cannot be consistently reconciled with the first principle which should be the foundation of every Bible Society ; and therefore they urge on all the members of the Society, and upon all P^nglish Protestants, the solemn duty of protesting against such a practice During the past year defences of its practice have been put forth, thi tlia Sti'C still tod Wl fail the liou — it n(te II but if lil 60 SI coin Scii "cp tlion 51 in utlcvly ignoring the first duty of u liihlo Society, making (juilo a trivial msitter of circulating a "few luiHtakes" as Divino trutli, and |irt)rlainung tl>at "///« work nf V f. Jiible Society is to circulate the best translation that people will take,' Your Committee feci that they need not attenipt here any reply to huch an assertion au this, heliov- ing that its simple statement will he its own refutation among all who have any sense of their responsihility to give to others what (Jod has given to them" — Tii;ainsl tuiili. Hut thin comes the prcvailiiif; I'r^uiiient against us — Look at tho Coinmitico of the U. nnd F. 11. S., awl say where ymi ' of qualification nor abate- ment ; we must leave the issue to thf God of Truth: . . . There is but one method of opposing ernr successfully, and that is by arm- ing truth against it. Let us at all events, come what may, d<-fund the truth as it has been revealed to us in God's inspired Book, without compromise and without fear." The CiiAiUMAN, Count Wengierski, said : — lie stood before .'hem as regarded the Trinitarian Bible Society, identical with its princi- ples, protest and work; and as regarded Poland, representing the Polish Comnuttee assembled at Warsaw for the revision of the Polish New Testament. He thoiight no degree of caution should be considered too great or superfluous to furnish blinded men with the word of God in its greatest purity. If the heart of mai», after ail, hardened itself against the edge ot the truth, it would be a comfort to them to think that they had not blunted it. From this point of 1 CO J de go anj to Je| atnl cht rer of 55 brist lever that tliey Ilud 1 the ach a been , good etl by ety of to say it feel There Biblo y, and fut the at mat- picions hinder ch like lowever as been act this njr with I of the ve I ain tly com- tliut in and Ilia or under j:ui ; the all uiat- each the r abate- There by arm- fend the without ore 'hem ts princi- ntinj; the of the should be with the after all, a comfort 3 j)oiut oi view they could not condemn too strongly the practice of the British and Foreign Bible Society against distributing Roman Catholic versions of the Scriptures in Poland and elsewhere. Though it should be proved, which it was not, that Roman Catholics would not read our version, no Protestant Society could be justified in putting into the hands of men a defective version, and calling it the Word of God. Still less could they approve the practice of circulating Roman Catholic versions by placing on the litle-page " Protestant," or Martin Luther's great name, as was the case in the Vienna edition, circulated in Poland by the British and Foreign Bible Society. As some had truly testified, thinking to make believe that the Protestant Bible and the Roman Catholic version were one and the same thing. . . . Poland alone, of all the nations of Europe, had not at that moment the true Protestant version of the Uilde ; and why, he asked, should they be deprived of the knowledge of salvation through God's Holy Word? But God overrules all for his glory, and what had been refused by the elder Society had been undertaken by the Trini- tarian Bible Society. Poland had reason to bless the Lord for the existence of this Society. But for its generous support the Polish nation of twenty millions would be deprived of the knowledge of Gospel salvation, " by grace through faith alone," and not by the priest or by doing penance. . . . Poland was a country of extremes. With the progress of the Reformation she rose to welfare and glory, and declined in the same ratio as the Scriptural doctrines gave way to Roman Catholic reaction." These are the sentiments of a Polish nobleman, delivered in London 8th May, 1870. In the Report of the B. and F. B. S. 4th May, 1870, we turn to page 82, " Poland," but nothing can be under- stood of the kind of Bibles circulated by that Society there, which the Count so severely condemns. The same nobleman published in 1868 a Tract, "A Voice of Warning from Poland to Protestant England," in which it is said, — "Polai d at that time (1545) was as Protestant, nay, more Protestant than England is at this moment. Poland had the Scriptures transla- ted into tiie language of the country. But the Jesuits flocked in'o the country, and first commenced doing there as they have been long doing heie — breeding dissensions, getting influence over public opinion, interfering in the literature of the country, and establishing themselves in schools and colleges. And here stands one of the finest countries in Europe — one of the bravest populations of the v/orld, denationalized, s|)lit up, and divided between the three most arbitrary governments of Europe, as a warning to England, and those Protest- ant countries, which have the blessing of God's truth, not to allow it to be tampered with. ... At the end of the same century, Jesuits obtained the chief direction of the education of the youth, and considered it as their peculiar duty to combat the opinions and cheek the progress of the Protestants. . . . Ao I have already remarked, the press, the literature and Scripture being in the hands of Jesuits, Poland has no other version of the Bible, than that made m by Romanists, and supporting Romish errors. Even those nominally Protestant versions, printed in Protestant countries like Berlin, Breslau, Leipsic, which are now sent to Poland by Protestant Eng- land, are in reality Popish Bibles and New Testaments, by J. Wuyka, Societa tis Jesu. When I asked the British and Foreign Bible Society to print, for twenty *^- (lions of Poles inhabiting Russian, Prussian, and Austrian Poland, a pure and faithful version, they refused, on the plea that " a Roman Catholic version would do better for Popish Poland." Incredible as this may seem, yet this is a bare fact. I refer the reader to the Quarterly Record of the Trinitarian Bible Society for Jan., 1868, where it is fully proved. " Protestant England ! I ask yon to give to Poland what you have not refused to any heathen country — an honest and jaithful version of the Bible. By God's mercy, through the permission of the Russian Government, Poland is now open for missionary labour- ers. I ask you, for the honour of Protestant England, being myself a fellow-citizen with yon, in the name of Poland not to send any longer into that country the Popish Bible, where the word pokuta, " ppuance," is substitiiiud for "repentance," and means atonement, mortification for sin — to do ncnance as an atonement for sin — thus giving strength to the Jesuits ot that country to keep Poland under subjection to the Romish priests." In the Record of T. B. S., Jan., 1871, it is said in reference to the Circular of the B. and F". B. S., Oct., 1870 — The second statement is that the Society " has never circulated the Douay, or any other ver- sion from the Vulgate, either in the English language, or any other of the languages spoken in Great Britain or Ireland." This is a repetition, in other words, of the first law, already quoted above. But for what purpose ? It cannot be that wo have made any state- ment to the contrary, because we have not done so. Is it mentioned as a redeeming quality? If so, it condemns a large part of their continental work. If it be cited as a virtue never to liave circulated the Romish version in P^nglish, is it not a condemnation of tlieir circu- lation of Romish versions in French, Spanish, Portuguese and Polish — and if so, how can the non-circulation of one Romish version be stated as a defeiice for the circulation of four others? But why have they "never circulated the Douay"? Because, as we have seen, it is for- bidden by the first law. That law distinguishes the Authorized Version from all other versions ia the English language whatsoever, and it is a distinction evidently based on purity. The third statement explains that in " India, China," etc., the Society bus always used versions made by Protestants, and tliat ver- sions founded on the Vulgate have only boon circulated where, from prejudice or other causes, the Scriptures would not be recciived in any other form." Tl':it is, if a Romanist objected to this tnxt, "God commandeth men everywhere to repent," they will give it in another form, God commandeth all men evv^ry where to do pet,anc€. If this " other form" be indeed the inspired Word of God, all Protestants i I 57 must stand condemned. If it be not, then the Committee are circula- ting man's lie as the truth of God," etc. The subjoined List of perverted passages in Romish versions of the scriptures, circulated by the B. and F. B. S., is taken from a pamphlet, by a clergymen of the Church of England — Second Edition, London 1868, 24 Paternoster Row. It was expected that a few pages would have been sufficient to expose the misrepresentations referred to in the first part of this pamphlet; but in order to do justice to the statements made, and the principles therein involved, it has assumed the enlarged form in which it is now submitted to the public. It was not necessary that many remarks should be made by the writer. The subject has been so fully discussed by able and competent judges, of whose judicious and faithful criticism, he has amply availed himself ; and now most gratefully acknowledges tho assistanco thus obtained. The issue is left in the hand of Him " ^o cannot lie — whose word is Truth, and whose Words are puite words. XI^ 68 A.— Corrupt passages affecting the Doctrine of the Atonement, by Oen. xiv. 18, 19.. Matt. xxv!. 28.. , Mark xiv. 24. .. Lukexxii. 20.... Acts xiii. 2 1 Cor. X. 16. . I Cor. xi. 24. . . Eph. iii. 3 1 Tim. iii. 16. . . THE VULGATE. (Of Clement VIII.) But Melohisedech, the Kir;' of Sa- lem, bringing forth bread &du wine, for he ■was the Priett of the Most Higli Ood, Messed bim. . . . which shall be shed. The cup of bleasinf; which we bless, is it not th« communion of the blood of Christ? and the bread which we break, is it not the participation of the body of the Lord? . . which. . shall be given. . . . according to revelation was made known to me the sacrament. . .great is the sacrament of piety. . FRENCH. (D« Saei.) But Melchlsedeoh, K\ng of Salem, offering bread an