Page images
PDF
EPUB

the Committee, or weakened the favorable impressions which the Bible Society had already produced on the public mind. Both at home and abroad, the great cause gradually and silently extended its influence, so that in April 1810, that is six years after its establishment, thirteen auxiliary societies were formed in various parts of the kingdom, while at Basle, Berlin, and Stockholm, the Scriptures were widely circulated in different languages; beyond the Atlantic, fields of useful exertion presented themselves. Philadelphia took the lead, and an efficient Bible Society soon obtained an establishment in that city. The example thus set was soon followed, and in the course of the first year from the commencement of the Philadelphian Institution, six kindred establishments were formed the Connecticut Bible Society at Harford; the Massachusetts, at Boston; the New Jersey, at Princeton; and three at New York, under the respective designations of The New York Bible Society; and The New York Bible and Common Prayerbook Society.

Now commenced the Wordsworthian controversy, designed by the assailant of the Bible Society, the Rev. Dr. Wordsworth, dean of Borking and chaplain to the archbishop of Canterbury, to withdraw the patronage of the established clergy from the institution. The ground of objection assumed by this dignified person, was singular enough, and, but for various reasons unconnected with the literary controversy, an uninformed reader might very innocently have hailed Dr. Wordsworth as a friend of the Bible Society, supporting its claims, and covering its enemies with ridicule by a severe ironical attack.

This learned adversary of the Bible Society assumed, that the great cause of Christian knowledge, the inestimable interests of piety, and peace, and true religion, would be injured and retarded by the Bible Society; because the support which the clergy and others might be disposed to render to that institution, would withdraw from the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, funds which would otherwise be appropriated to its support. We can only refer our readers to the answers which this weak and puerile work elicited from Lord Teignmouth and the Rev. Mr. Dealtry. Unfortunately for Dr. Wordsworth, he had assumed, what he was not prepared to prove, and which was instantly refuted by the facts of the case. The greatest benefactor the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge ever had, both as it regards the augmentation of its receipts and the increase of its zeal, is unquestionably the Bible Society. Mr. Dealtry, by a comparison of the average receipts of the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, for four years preceding, with those of the five years immediately succeeding the establishment of the British and Foreign Bible Society, draws this general conclusion:

'Not only have the receipts and subscriptions increased, but the rate of increase has been greatly accelerated since the establishment of the Bible Society; and it should be particularly observed that the funds and subscriptions of both Societies received their greatest augmentation in the same

year; viz. in the year ending March 1809.' We are constrained, with great reluctance, to abandon the form of narrative in our account of the further progress of this wonderful moral engine, the British and Foreign Bible Society, and to refer to the dry figures, and statements of its own reports, for what it has received and what it has achieved, in extending its influence and in circulating the Scriptures in the different languages of the world, from the year 1810 to the present period. It is incumbent upon us, however, very briefly to notice the controversies which have marked this portion of its history.

[ocr errors]

In the summer of 1810, the Rev. Dr. Wordsworth made his second appearance as an opponent of the Society, in a letter of 157 pages, addressed to Lord Teignmouth, president of the British and Foreign Bible Society, in vindication of reasons for not becoming a subscriber to that institution. To this elaborate and extended diatribe, written with some warmth of temper, and calculated by the station of its author, the massiveness of its bulk, and the pomp and circumstances of its subscription-implying that it was composed within the walls of Lambeth palace,' and finished on 'St. Peter's day,'-to produce no inconsiderable impression. The Rev. Mr. Dealtry replied, in a volume replete with sound information, solid argument, and acute and eloquent retort. If, says Mr. Dealtry, addressing Dr. Wordsworth, from the 157 pages of your pamphlet, I were to subtract the observations which are merely personal, the discussions which are utterly irrelevant,-the multiplicity of bodings, which it is not difficult to make on all subjects, the mistakes in fact, and the fallacies in reasoning,—the conclusions without proof, and the conjectures without probability, I cannot but remark, that the argument would be shortened, and its effect diminished, in a degree hardly calculable.' This description of Dr. Wordsworth's Letter, a description by no means exaggerated, will account for the length into which Mr. Dealtry felt himself compelled to go in his 'Vindication of the British and Foreign Bible Society.' The discussion having been, for the most part, controversial, both in matter and in tone, it would answer no good purpose to exhibit it, either in detail or analysis. Of Mr. Dealtry's Vindication,' however, it must be said, that it was a seasonable and masterly publication: it took in the whole scope of the question, and sifted to the bottom all the objections relevant and irrelevant which Dr. Wordsworth and others had advanced; and while it raised the character of the writer, it contributed very greatly to establish the growing reputation of the British and Foreign Bible Society.

[ocr errors]

On the 12th of December, 1811, the important name of Cambridge was added to the list of of Auxiliary Bible Societies; but the accom plishment of this object, so honorable to the parties with whom it originated, as well as to those by whom it was conducted to its issue, was not, however, effected without experiencing a very formidabble and decided opposition.

This opposition proceeded from the Rev. Dr. Marsh, Margaret Professor of Divinity; a person

of considerable learning, dexterous abilities, and profoundly versed in the tactics of controversy. In an Address to the Senate, the professor contrasted the British and Foreign Bible Society with the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, and contended that the latter was entitled to exclusive encouragement and support. The opening of the professor's address, though sufficiently ingenious, and adapted to ensnare the unwary, was certainly constructed too much on the model of a recruiting advertisement, to be worthy of a cause wherein accuracy of statement and dignity of manner were peculiarly required. We have at present,' says the professor, two very extensive Bible Societies, the one founded in 1699, the other in 1804. Both of our archbishops, and all our bishops, with the prince regent at their head, are members of the former: neither of the two archbishops, and only a small proportion of the bishops, are members of the Îatter.'

From the constitution of the two Societies, and their respective objects, the professor contends, that our encouragement of the ancient Bible Society must contribute to the welfare of the established church;' while, our encouragement of the modern Society, not only contributes nothing to it in preference to other churches, but may contribute even to its dissolution.'

[ocr errors]

To this Address, which formed the text-work for much of what was said on the 12th of December, a reply was produced by the right honorable N. Vansittart, then chancellor of His Majesty's exchequer; and 1000 copies of it were printed, and on the recommendation of his royal highness the duke of Gloucester, were distributed among the persons assembled at the formation of the Cambridge Auxiliary Society.

For this reply from a member of the University of Oxford, the cause was indebted to the somewhat indiscreet zeal of the author of the Address; the occasion of it is thus explained by Mr. Vansittart, in the introduction of his Letter.

'Dear Sir,

'I beg to return you my best acknowledgments for the communication of your Address to the Senate of Cambridge; which I the more strongly feel as a mark of your kind attention, as I have not the honor of belonging to that university, and as it is a considerable time since I have been so fortunate as to have had an opportunity of meeting you, you were perhaps not aware that you were sending your Address to a member of the British and Foreign Bible Society; but I accept as a proof of kindness your candid and friendly admonition, which affords me an opportunity of justifying myself to you as a church of England man, for contributing my assistance to that institution. I never, indeed, before thought it necessary to offer any apology for so doing; for though I was aware, before I engaged in the Society, that it had been represented as dangerous to the church, it appeared to me that this charge had been so completely refuted, that it is with no less surprise than regret that I now learn that you still think it well founded.'

Of the reply itself, it may be affirmed, in general, that it contains, within a small compass, a clear and satisfactory refutation of the charges

advanced by the learned professor against the principle and tendency of the institution. The style is chaste, the sentiments pious and liberal. and the Letter is characterised throughout by such a tone of candor and urbanity, as either to make the reader forget that he is perusing a controversial pamphlet, or to induce him almost to be in love with controversy. But it will be necessary to advert to a few particulars. The professor had described the Society as deficient in patronage. On this topic Mr. Vansittart thus observes:- Among the vice-presidents are already numbered one of the archbishops of Ireland, and five English, and two Irish bishops. I doubt whether the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, which now, as you observe, enjoys the countenance of the whole episcopal bench, was, at so short a period from its formation, honored with the support of so large a body of the prelates; and I should hope the time might not be far distant, when the two Societies may equally flourish under the general patronage of them all. To the objection against the principle of associating with Dissenters, and its probable injuriousness to the interests of the Church, the right honorable author thus judiciously replies:- The co-operation of Churchmen and Dissenters in religious matters, so far as they can conscientiously co-operate, seems to me one of the most efficacious means of lessening both the political and religious evils of dissent. It dispels prejudices, promotes candor and good-will, and must prepare the mind for the reception of that truth which every one perceives to be no less the object of those who differ from him than his own: from such a communication the church of England has nothing to fear, and every thing to hope: as holding (in our judgment at least) that middle line of truth in which all opposite opinions have a tendency to coincide.' And is that truth,' Mr. Vansittart asks, more likely to be acknowledged and embraced, by minds embittered by mutual jealousy and aversion, or by such as have been previously softened by conciliation? With regard to the measure recommended by the professor, that all Churchmen should withdraw from the Society, and leave it wholly in the hands of the Dissenters-Mr. Vansittart shows, that it is fraught with inevitable mischief. anything can make the Society dangerous, this must do it; because there can be no check to any sectarian spirit which might introduce itself, and which must be unavoidably irritated by so harsh, and, I think, so unjust an indication of jealousy.' One of two consequences, Mr. Vansittart contends, must result from such a proceeding; either the reduction of the Society to utter insignificance, an evil sorely to be deprecated, or the future administration of it in nearly the same manner as before, by augmented zeal, activity, and exertion on the part of the Dissenting interest. This latter alternative,' he observes, is to transfer to Dissenters all the honor and influence of whatever has been done, and whatever may be done, by an institution the dawn of which is so glorious, but which is visibly rising into brighter day. Shall it be said,' asks Mr. Vansittart, that the Dissenters alone

[ocr errors]

If

ave carried the word of God to every nation under heaven? Or shall the church of England continue to claim the leading part in this important work? And can the church of England stand so secure upon a narrow and exclusive policy, as by deserving the blessing and uniting the prayers of all people, nations, and languages?

To the general tendency of the professor's advice Mr. Vansittart opposes the following admirable statement and most salutary counsel. 'The existence of dissent will perhaps be inseparable from religious freedom, so long as the mind of man is liable to error; but it is not unreasonable to hope, that hostility may cease where perfect agreement cannot be established. If we cannot reconcile all opinions, let us endeavour to unite all hearts.'

These arguments, Mr. Vansittart observes, had induced him to consider his taking a part in the concerns of the Bible Society, not only consistent with, but a proof of, the sincerity and warmth of his attachment to the church of England; and far from repenting,' he adds, "of what I have done, I feel convinced I shall least of all repent of it as I appproach that state in which the distinction of Churchman and Dissenter shall be no more.'

In the following year, the Margaret Professor, anthor of the Address which we have thus summarily dismissed, produced his threatened Strictures on the Principles of the British and Foreign Bible Society, in an elaborate pamphlet, entitled, An Enquiry into the Consequences of neglecting to give the Prayer Book with the Bible, interspersed with Remarks on some late Speeches at Cainbridge, and other important matters relative to the British and Foreign Bible Society.'

The appearance of this publication was greeted with numerous replies; and its fallacies were exposed, among others, by the caustic pleasantry of Dr. Clarke, the vigorous animadversion of Mr. Dealtry, the conclusive reasoning of Mr. Otter, and the luminous refutation of Mr. Vansittart. To these advocates, was added the Rev. C. Simeon, who, in the preface to Four Sermons on the Liturgy, very ably defended both himself, and the clerical members of the British and Foreign Bible Society, against the accusation conveyed through the assumption upon which the hypothesis of the professor was built.

The amount of what was stated in these several replies sufficiently evinced that the Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge had greatly augmented the number of its subscribing members; that the issue of Prayer-Books, both from that Society and other sources, had largely increased; and that there was every encouragement to conclude, as well from experience as from the reason of the thing, that, by a steady co-operation on the part of the church members of the Society, both the honor and the interest of the church would keep pace with the reputation and prosperity of the institution.

[ocr errors]

In connexion with those writers, who met the Professor's Enquiry' with direct replies, may be mentioned the Rev. Robert Hall, who, in a

speech of extraordinary ability at the Second Anniversary of the Leicester Auxiliary Bible Society, on the 13th of April, 1812, gave to every thing that was deserving of notice in that attack, a most acute and masterly confutation.

The Professor's subsequent attacks required little refutation; and the friends of the Society

left them unanswered to their fate.

[ocr errors]

Now started up Dr. Edward Maltby, a clergyman of the protestant church of England, whose objection to the Bible Society was of a very different character to that of his predecessors; these had contended, that in giving the Bible, the Society gave too little; the object of this assailant was to prove, that in so doing the Society gave too much. The whole Bible ought not, in his opinion, to be given to the bulk of the people.' According to this Protestantpapist, out of sixty-six books, which form the contents of the Old and New Testament, not above seven in the Old, nor above eleven in the New, appear to be calculated for the study or comprehension of the unlearned.'

6

Against this attack, which threatened to reduce the Bible, in the hands of the common people, to less than one-third of its former dimensions, the British and Foreign Bible Society, or rather Christianity itself, was very ably defended by the Rev. J. W. Cunningham, Vicar of Harrow.

To the Observations of Mr. Cunningham, the author who had provoked them made no reply. He was not, perhaps, aware of the mischievous consequence of his theory, till he saw them so acutely exposed; and he very judiciously abandoned his pamphlet to the fate it deserved, and which, in the hands of Mr. Cunningham, it could not be expected to escape. If Dr. Maltby had not shown his respect for Christianity by a work of no ordinary merit, in its illustration and defence, he would have laid himself open to the suspicion of no very friendly designs towards our holy religion, and the institutions by which it is promoted. But, in fact, the cause of the Society is that on the side of which the Scriptures, and every church which professes to be founded upon them, are decidedly ranged; and they who will oppose it, can find no other weapons to employ against it than such as have been undeniably forged in the camp of the Philistines.'

We do the next opponent too much honor, by introducing him into our pages, and notice him not on his own account, but simply for the purpose of inserting the comments of the Bishop of St. David's, now of Salisbury, on a very contemptible performance, which bears upon its title-page the name of the Rev. Henry Norris, curate of St. John's, Hackney; purporting to be a Practical Exposition of the Tendency and Proceedings of the British and Foreign Bible Society;-of this wretched Exposition the learned prelate remarks, that he holds it to be a most unjustifiable attack on the Bible Society;' adding, that it is so destitute of the demonstration which it professes to give, so defective in its premises, so inconclusive in its inferences, and so reprehensible in its calumnies respecting the church members of the Society, that it might be left to its own refutation.' A few skirmishes

118

SOCIE

BIBLE SOCIETIES.

Now, we are of opinion, that a society thus constituted, has as much right to circulate Protestant prayer books, popish legends, and Hindoo shasters, as Jewish legends and apocryphal fables. That is, they have no right to do either; for when they circulate with the Scrip

irt the public journals, and a warfare of a somewhat graver character, employed the champions of the Bible Society, at distant intervals, till the death of the Rev. John Owen, which sad event took place at Ramsgate, September 26th, 1822, in the fifty-seventh year of his age. It was obvious to the friends of the institution, as it was un-tures, which all consider of equal authority, doubtedly felt with deep chagrin by its enemies, that it gained ground with every past assault upon its character, while the opposition to it, increasingly divested of its pretensions to reason, truth and piety, became more and more enfeebled; strong only in prejudice and malignity. Mr. Owen lived to effect one of the greatest works ever achieved by man; and he was permitted to see that work triumph over the most formidable hostility. He died in the hour of victory; nothing can better illustrate his character, than the just tribute of respect which was paid to his memory by the Rev. Joseph Hughes, one of his surviving colleagues. See Attachment to Life,' a Sermon on the Death of the late Rev. J. Owen, M.A.

Hitherto amidst unrivalled prosperity, the British and Foreign Bible Society, through evil report, and through good report, had maintained its undeviating majestic course. If a storm occasionally raged without, peace and harmony prevailed within. The numerous and diversified energies which it attracted, it also combined; and when a world rose up in arms against it, it was irresistible in its might. Having survived opposition, and humbled and silenced its most powerful adversaries, it was everywhere greeted with applause. It had nothing to do but to concentrate all its wonderful resources upon its direct and legitimate objects. The field was won, and now all that was required was its occupation. Under circumstances thus auspicious, how deeply is it to be regretted, that conflicting interests and opinions should have arisen to distract its operations, and almost to threaten its extinction. We trust that the day of extreme peril is past, and that the cause which has brought so many differing parties to coalesce, will at length allay the ferment which has been excited; and once more unite hearts, if it cannot reconcile opinions. We refer, and we do it with sincere pain, to the controversy in the Bible Society, respecting the Apocrypha: we think that there ought never to have been a question as to the simple and legitimate principle on which the Society was constituted. If the Bible was to be the band of union, and if, jealously to guard against the possibility of breaking it, the condition was subjoined that it should, in every case, be without note or comment; it surely never could have been in the contemplation of its original founders to circulate any thing but what was in spired, or, at least, accredited by all the parties united, as the word of God. The simple principle of diffusing the Scriptures alonc was adopted, among other reasons, chiefly because it would for ever close the door of controversy, by leaving nothing to be discussed; because the Scriptures offered common ground which Christians of all denominations could occupy, without compromising their peculiar and respective tenets.

writings which one of the parties associated on the
common principle deny to be sacred; they break
faith with the public, and violate the solemn
pledge which was laid down as the only founda-
tion of their union. In this view the proceed-
ings of the Committee of the British and Foreign
Bible Society, in conniving at the circulation
of the apocryphal books, or aiding that circula-
tion with their funds, appears to us decidedly in-
consistent. Still we think that men may be in-
consistent, without being so far criminal as to
justify the withdrawment from them of public
confidence. The circumstances of the case would
perhaps have betrayed their most violent censors
into the same inconsistency; and from the im-
placable spirit which some of them have dis
covered, we fear they would not have retraced their
steps with the same humility. We believe that
the Committee have abandoned the Apocrypha
altogether; and are well satisfied with the fol-
lowing resolution, dated November 21, 1825:
That the funds of the Society be applied to the
printing and circulation of the canonical books of
Scripture, to the exclusion of those books, and
parts of books, which are usually termed Apo-
cryphal; and that all copies printed, either en-
tirely or in part, at the expense of this Society,
and whether such copies consist of the whole, or
of one or more of such books, be invariably is-
sued bound, no other book whatever being
bound with them; and further, that all money
grants to societies or individuals, be made only
in conformity with the principle of this regula-
tion.' We only wish they had never adopted any
other. But we acquit them of all sinister inten-
tions; we have still confidence in their prin-
ciples and management; and we are happy to
believe that the connexion of the Society with the
circulation of the apocrypha, has chiefly been
incidental, indirect, or owing to circumstances
which the Committee believed they could not
prevent or control,
While therefore we ap-

[ocr errors]

plaud the vigilance which detected the evil, and still more the magnanimous zeal which first remonstrated with the offenders, and afterwards brought the whole under the review of the public; we must deeply regret the extreme intemperance of language and spirit, and the illiberal acrimony, amounting to uncivilised rudeness and anti-christian intolerance with which some of the best men upon earth have been treated by their brethren on the other side of the Tweed. We willingly turn from this unhallowed conflict, which we would gladly terminate by bringing the parties under the influence of that divine benevolence which first brought them to love each other. While it was one and undivided this institution was truly great; but must dwindle into useless insignificance the moment it ceases to be girt with that charity which is the bond of perfectness.

BIBLIA, or BIBLIA PETRARIA, in a military ense, a machine used by the ancients for throwing stones or darts.

BIBLIANDER (Theodore), professor of divinity at Zurich, in the sixteenth century. He attempted a new edition of the Koran; the text of which he corrected, by collating the Arabic and Latin copies. To this edition he subjoined the life of Mahomet and his successors; and prefixed an apology, by way of preface, which has been much exclaimed against.

BIBLICI. See BIBLISTE. BIBLIOGRAPHY, from ßßλog, a book, and ypapw, to write, a name which has been recently employed both in Great Britain and on the continent, to comprehend every thing that relates to books; and as every branch of knowledge is contained in them, by a strange kind of reasoning, Bibliography is made to denote a science which comprehends all the other sciences. One modern writer on the subject prefers the more general term Bibliology, which he divides into seven different heads, viz. 1. Glossology or the knowledge of languages. 2. Diplomacy, or the knowledge of writings. 3. Bibliopeia, or the composition of books. 4. Typography, or the knowledge of printing. 5. Bibliopoly, or the knowledge of bookselling. 6. Bibliography, or the knowledge of books. 7. Universal Literary History. These various heads are branched out into innumerable subdivisions, embracing every subject to which the human mind has ever been directed.

Bibliography, in fact, to have any intelligible sense, should be confined to the bare description and arrangement of books, or the duty of an intelligent librarian. In such an arrangement it is certainly necessary to follow some general division of knowledge; but, for divers reasons, it cannot be proper to adopt that classification which results from a perfect acquaintance with the sciences. To consult the books of such a library it would then be requisite first to have read them. In the article LIBRARY we shall suggest some of the best practical considerations on this subject.

BIBLIOMANCY, divination performed by means of the Bible; otherwise called sortes biblicæ, or sortes sanctorum. It consisted in taking passages at hazard, and drawing indications thence concerning things future. It was much used at the consecration of bishops. It was a practice adopted from the heathens, who drew the same kind of prognostication from the works of Homer and Virgil. In 465 the council of Vannes condemned whoever practiced this ait to be cast out of the communion of the church; as did the councils of Agde and Auxerre. But in the twelfth century we find it employed as a mode of detecting heretics.

[ocr errors]

Greek church we read of the prevalence of this custom so early as the consecration of Athanasius, on whose behalf the presiding prelate, Caracalla, archbishop of Nicomedia, opened the gospels upon the words, For the devil and his angels.' Matt. xxv. 41. The bishop of Nice first saw them, and adroitly turned over the leaf to another verse, with was instantly read aloud: The birds of the air came and lodged in the branches thereof.' Matt. xiii. 32. But this passage appearing irrelevant to the ceremony, the first became gradually known; and the historian who has recorded the fact, remarks, that the church of Constantinople was violently agitated by the most fatal divisions during the patriarchate! Mr. Southey tells us, that both the celebrated founders of Methodism, Mr. Wesley and Mr. Whitfield, occasionally practised this method of deciding upon some of their earlier religious plans. For another kind of Bibliomancy, not very dissimilar, the ana, Bath-Kol, or daughter of the voice, in use among the Jews, See BATH-KOL.

F. J. Davidius, a Jesuit, has published a Bibliomancy under the borrowed name of Veridicus Christianus.

BIBLIOMANIA, an extravagant passion for books, and particularly those called curious or rare, from whatever cause; or a desire for accumulating them beyond all reason and necessity; a passion at once well satirised and stimulated in the productions of the author of a modern

work under this title.

BIBLIOTHECA, from ßißλoç, a book, and Onen, repository, properly signifies a library, repository of books.

BIBLIOTHECA, in literature, denotes a collection of the treatises of various writers on a certain subject: thus, we have historical bibliothecæ, as that of Diodorus Siculus; mythological bibliothecæ, as that of Apollodorus; theological and sacred bibliothecæ, as those of Ravenellus; the Bibliotheca Veterum Patrum, or collection of the works of the early Fathers of the Christian church, published by Duport and others at Lyons, in 1677, in thirty folio volumes, &c. It is also used for a catalogue of the books in a library: such are the Bibliotheca Thuanæa, Bibliotheca Du-Boisiana, &c.

BIBLIOTHECA, in sacred literature, is applied to the books of the Old and New Testament, in respect to their excellency, and sufficiency for the uses of the Christian life.

BIBLIOTHECARIAN, or BIBLIOTHECARY, a librarian, or keeper of a library. The word is also used for the author of a bibliotheca, or a catalogue of books. In this sense P. L'Abbe, Gesner, Lipenius, Struvius, Fabricius &c. are celebrated bibliothecarians.

BIBLIOTHECARY, Bißiov, a book, and BIBLIOTHETICAL, Onkn, a depository; a Bibliothe ́ke, place where books are BIBLIO LATRY. deposited. The library bibliothecary is a librarian; bibliolatry is book idolatry.

In the Gallican church it was long practised in the election of bishops; children being employed, on behalf of each candidate, to draw slips of paper with texts on them, and that which was thought most favorable decided the choice. A similar mode was pursued at the installation of abbots, and the reception of canons: and this custom is said to have continued in the cathedrals of Ypres, St. Omer and Boulogne, so late as the year 1744. In the nonical.

What I said in my epistle to my reverend friend and master, Doctor James, the incomparably industrious and learned bibliothecary of Oxford, I profess still; but I hold those canons of the apostles unca

Hall.

« PreviousContinue »