PREFACE.

FROM causes too unimportant for public enumeration, it happened, that the Author of the following pages possessed neither time nor inclination minutely to discuss the merits or demerits of that Version, which is the object of his present strictures, at its first appearance. Indeed he neglected the examination of it altogether till very lately, when his attention was irresistibly attracted to it by the Remarks of Mr. Nares, ably exposing, particularly upon doctrinal topics, many of its perverse inaccuracies and fallacious deductions. The scope of these Remarks appeared, it is true, sufficiently comprehensive. Still however, he conceived, that certainly misrepresentations of no inconsiderable moment required a more full and distinct, as well as different, refutation; and such a one has he now attempted. It will be seen, that with the theological argument of the New Version he has interfered as little as possible, the specific object in his view being wholly critical. Not indeed that he has combated every erroneous position or incorrect conclusion which might have been fairly opposed; but he has contented himself with selecting a few of those which are most prominent and least venial.

He does not apologize for differing upon points of criticism, either from the Heterodox, or from the Orthodox. A critic is of no party; but, solely attached to philological truth, censures without reserve obliquities of judgment wheresoever he detects them, whether ushered into notice by Trinitarians of rank and character, or turned loose upon the world by an anonymous committee of obscure Unitarians.

LAURENCE

ON THE

Unitarian Version of the N. Testament.

CHAP. I.

Introductory Remarks.

WHEN a work appears under the singular title of "The New Testament in an improved Version, upon the basis of Archbishop Newcome's new Translation, with a corrected Text, and Notes Critical and Explanatory, published by a Society for promoting Christian Knowledge and the practice of Virtue, by the distribution of Books;" it seems natural to enquire into the religious persuasion of the authors. This indeed is not explicitly avowed either in the Title Page or the Introduction; but the translation itself in every part, and the uniform tenor of the notes, sufficiently display it. The improved Version is nothing more than a new version so improved as to be rendered conformable with the tenets of Unitarianism. In proof of this assertion, it is unnecessary to quote more than the following passage, from the comment on 1 John, i. 1. "It is to the unwearied and successful labours of this pious and learned person, (the venerable Theophilus Lind

say,) whose life and doctrine have exhibited the most perfect model in modern times of the purity and simplicity of apostolical Christianity, in conjunction with those of his able coadjutor, Jebb, Priestly, Wakofield, and others, that the Christian world is indebted for that clear and discriminating light, which has of late years been diffused over the obscurities of the sacred Scriptures, and which promises, at no very distant period, to purify the Christian religion from those numerous and enormous corruptions, which have so long disfigured its doctrines, and impeded its progress." Hence the nature of that elucidation, which is diffused over the obscurities of Scripture in this version may be distinctly perei ved.

Nor will the Unitarians, I presume disown the production; and if in their justification they simply allege the propriety of their possessing a translation of the New Testament, more consonant, in their own judgment, with the sense of Scripture than that of the Establishment, they certainly advance a position which few will be disposed to controvert. But is it quite consistent with that open and manly conduct, upon which they peculiarly pride themselves, to sink their characteristical denomination, and simply to describe themselves as "a Society for the promtion of Chrisian knowledge and the practice of virtue by the distribution of books; who, in order to supply the English reader with a more correct text of the New Testament than has yet appeared," had fixed its choice and founded its improvement upon the excellent translation of the late most reverend Dr. William Newcome, Archbishop of Armagh, and primate of all Irelend, a worthy successor of the venerable and learned Archbishop Usher ;"t to enter the combat in disguise, and advance to the attack in an archiepiscopal coat of mail? And is it true to the extent apparently professed both in the Title Page and Introduction,

66

that Archbishop Newcome's version really forms the groundwork of this? The translators indeed say, that they have assumed it as a principle not to deviate from the Archbishop's version "but where it appeared to be necessary to the correction of error or inaccuracy in the text, the language, the construction, or the sense."* But instances of such an exception unfortunately so often occur, that there is scarcely a single page without one or more, and not many without numerous deviations from it. Nor are these deviations simply confined to mere verbal errors or inaccu racies, but extend to the most important doctrines, so as uniformly to divest the Archbishop's translation of every expression hostile to the Unitarian Creed; deviations, which could not have incidentally taken place, but must have been originally projected. For we are expressly told, that the design of the Translators, as well as of the Society, was, to supply the English reader with a more correct text of the New Testament than has yet appeared as also, by divesting the sacred volume of the technical phrases of a systematic theology which has no foundation in the scriptures themselves, to render the New Testament more generally intelligible, or at least to preclude many sources of error: and by the assistance of the notes, to enable the judicious and attentive reader to understand Scripture phraseology, and to form a just idea of true and uncorrupted Christianity." What Unitarians mean, when they allude to a systematic theology, which has no foundation in the Scriptures and also to true and uncorrupted Christianity, no man can for a moment doubt, who has but slightly glanced his eye upon any of their avowed publications. Instead therefore of being that which at first view it may appear to the general reader, a Version undertaken from no party motives, and conducted upon no party principles, the very reverse seems to be the fact.

* Introduction, p. 4.

+ Introduction, p. 5, 6.