Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

HOSEA, v. 7.*

SIR,-In consequence of your correspondent asking for a literal translation from the original of Hosea, v. 7, I turned to it in the Hebrew, without any intention of sending you the result of my inquiry, leaving the answer to some abler hand. In my search, however, I have taken up an idea so in accordance with the Hebrew and the context, and, as it appears to me, so calculated to remove the acknowledged difficulty of the passage, that I send it to you. In the first place, that your correspondent's substituting the word moth for month is untenable appears from the Hebrew word never having such a meaning; and, more than this, at verse 12, in the same chapter, we have the word moth, and the Hebrew word for it is wy. The Septuagint version, which gives us the word epvrin, is also totally at variance with the Hebrew. Now, does signify month, and all the commentators I have examined seem satisfied with this sense, and reason upon it thus:-One says, by month is meant no more than a short time; but if this were the case, why not have used the expression moment, or vapour, or any other, which would at once have shewn you that the literal meaning was not to be taken? Another refers you to the parallel passage, as it is called, at Zach. xi. 8. The word month certainly does there occur, and I expected to find the same Hebrew word; and, more than this, as one month is spoken of, I looked for the solitary word used by Hosea to denote this one month, and thus set the matter at rest; but what did I find? Why, the two Hebrew words, signifying unus; and signifying luna, or mensis; so that we have stronger grounds than ever for saying that if one month was meant by Hosea, it would not have been expressed by a single word, nor by that word, in all probability, which we find him using. Another commentator suggests that the word month, by metonymia, may signify month after month, and so be like tempus edax rerum.' Now all this seemed to me very unsatisfactory, and I therefore resolved to look into the original narrowly, in the hope I might discover the true meaning, and the result has been this:-, in its primary sense, signifies innovavit, renovavit, and is constantly joined to a substantive, with the signification of new; as, for instance, in Psalm xxxiii. 3, when the Psalmist speaks of singing a new song; and in a vast number of other places. Hence it comes to signify novilunium, or the day of the new moon; as, for instance, in the first book of Samuel, xx. v, where it is said, " to-morrow is the new moon," we find this word, and in many other places; and what is especially to be remarked in Hosea, ii. 11, where mention is made of the new moons as those feasts which the Lord would cause to cease, this very word is used to denote these new moons. Thus was I given a strong suspicion that the word rendered month should have been rendered the day of the new moon. I then examined the word, and when,

[ocr errors]

W. G. C.'s letter is received, with many thanks; but, as two answers have appeared, perhaps he will not wish it printed?-ED.

in Buxtorf, I found a second sense given to this word, of divulgare, proclamare, it seemed to agree so well with the blowing the cornet and trumpet, and crying aloud, mentioned in the verse following, that I was much disposed to take this sense rather than the primary one of devour, eat, or consume; but, upon a full examination, I cannot find the word used in this second sense any where but in Daniel, and there, from its being joined with accusations, there is in an accusation so much of biting and devouring, that I am far from sure that the first sense of the word is not retained even by Daniel; and, more than this, the sense of publishing, if it has such a meaning, is allowed to be a Chaldaic idiom, and therefore not likely to be used by Hosea, who wrote before the captivity. In Hosea, also, this same word is used to signify devour, at xi. 6, and xiii. 8; so that the meaning of this word, as rendered in our version, seems correct. I next looked to the words rendered" with their portions," and as the word "with" has nothing to do with the original, and portions might, with equal accuracy, be rendered parts, I seem to prefer "in all parts of their country." The passage, then, if I am correct in my view of it, will run thus:-"The coming day of the new moon" (when their idolatrous worship, be it remembered, was especially practised)" shall usher in their destruction in all parts of their country;" and then how appropriately does it follow, "Blow ye the cornet," &c.; ending with the judgment to be inflicted," Ephraim shall be desolate in the day of rebuke: among the tribes of Israel have I made known that which shall surely be." That Ephraim's sin was idolatry, we learn from Hosea, iv. 17, where it is said, "Ephraim is joined to idols; let him alone." But, as it would seem, he was only to be let alone that his punishment might be more signal at the coming new moon, when, expecting to revel in idolatrous feasts, destruction was about to befal him.

May I be permitted, in conclusion, to suggest to your correspondent that, as he appears, like myself, to delight much in getting at the true meaning of the sacred writers, it might be advisable for him to study Hebrew. As an encouragement for him to do so, I must inform him that, at the age of thirty-five I knew not a word of the language, but, being advised by a friend to set about the task, I did so heartily, and have derived great satisfaction from my self-taught knowledge.

I am, Sir, yours most gratefully, D.

REPLY TO THE INQUIRY RESPECTING HOSEA, v.7, IN THE
NUMBER FOR SEPTEMBER.

"WITH Jehovah they have acted unfaithfully, for they have brought forth strange children; therefore a new moon shall consume them, with their inheritance."

In the short space of one month-from one new moon or solemn feast-day to the next-they, and all their possessions, should be utterly destroyed.

The subject may receive illustration by reference to Zech. ii. 8;

Isa. i. 13.

DALETH.

CONFIRMATION.

SIR,-What does the church hold respecting confirmation? I think it can hardly be questioned that she has ever regarded it as an apostolic rite, employed by her first rulers, under immediate inspiration from above, as one special mean and instrument of communicating to the faithful the gift of the Holy Spirit. That we have, consequently, just reason to expect in the use of it a blessing different from that which would attend any becoming ceremony whereby our youth might renew their vows, and dedicate themselves to the service of God. In short, that although miraculous power no longer exhibit to the bodily eye the agency of the Holy Spirit, yet, in all other respects, the blessing communicated by the prayer and imposition of the hands of the successors of the apostles is in no way different from that which was imparted by the hands of Peter and John. Such, unquestionably, was the universal judgment of the church for more than 1500 years, and such is the doctrine embodied in the formularies of the church of England.

All

But if this be so, how has this important truth escaped from before men's eyes, and where is it hid? How comes confirmation to be presented to our flocks rather as a duty than a privilege-a duty, be it remembered, consisting only in the public recognition of obligations, which, even if repudiated, cannot be shaken off-instead of a privilege whereby they may be enrolled to discharge those obligations? How far this is a fair representation of the actual teaching of the existing generation of clergy, each must, of course, judge for himself; but there are circumstances to which I would call your attention, and which, I think, prove that such has until very lately been the case. I have endeavoured, to the best of my power, to find a tract fit to be put into the hands of candidates for confirmation, and explaining to them what I consider as its true nature. But I can find none. those on the list of the Christian Knowledge Society represent confirmation merely as an opportunity of publicly taking on ourselves the vows formerly made in our nane; a view which, though true, is but a miserable fragment of the whole truth. I am well aware, indeed, that it is the spirit of the age in which we live to make little of ordinances, and to teach men to rely on their individual attainments as the medium of communication between themselves and their God. Thus, while we condemn the hermits of former days in separating themselves from their brethren, we are doing the same thing, as far as relates to matters spiritual, and seeking spirituality by striving to become beings solitary and unconnected with all who have gone before, or that now live, or are to follow. But how is the church to take cognizance of the spirit of the age? Not by lending to it any aid, but by a decided, calm, yet energetic, protest. If there is any tract which does this, I have not had the good fortune to see it. The want of some satisfactory tract on the Society's list is the more embarrassing, as I have met with none in any other quarter-none, I mean, fitted in style, length, and form of publication for parochial purposes-for it

is easy to find explanations of the subjects in the older authors containing all that can be denied.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant, W. D.

CHANGE OF LESSONS.

SIR,-In the Book of Homilies, in the edition published at the Clarendon press, 1802, I find, in the Admonition addressed to all ministers ecclesiastical, the following passage:-" And where it may so chance some one or other chapter of the Old Testament to fall in order to be read upon the Sundays or holydays which were better to be changed with some other of the New Testament, of more edification, it shall be well done to spend your time to consider well of such chapters before hand, whereby your prudence and diligence in your office may appear," &c. Will you, or one of your correspondents, have the goodness to inform me whether that Admonition, with respect to changing the lessons, remains in force; if not, when it was abrogated? I am your obedient servant, A PARISH PRIEST.

P.S. It appears to me that the rubric is our sole guide, and that we have now no right to change the lessons appointed by the rubric ;* but having understood that it is the custom with some persons to change the lessons upon the authority of the Admonition, I am desirous of being set right on this point.

INTIMACY WITH DISSENTERS.

SIR,-Although destitute of all pretensions to "learning, high character, and long standing in the church," I venture to offer a few remarks on S. P.'s letter respecting intimacy with dissenters.

There can be no doubt but that dissenters do cause divisions, but I am inclined to think that generally they dissent without being aware of the guilt which they incur in doing so. Education makes many dissenters, and the prejudices of early education keep them such. Gross ignorance respecting the nature of the visible church, and a consequent latitudinarianism in their notions of church-matters, drive thousands from us. And I really think that the number of wilful schismatics, who dissent through "envying" or "strife" is comparatively small. I cannot therefore believe that St. Paul would have spoken so sharply respecting modern dissenters as he did of those of his own time. A dissenter in the apostolic times must have shewn a disregard for much that the whole Christian world then esteemed sacred; he must have resisted apostolic authority, and must have been conspicuous in his resistance. Not so in the present day. Dissent is now so general that it is attended with no disgrace, (indeed, amongst a certain class of the community, it is esteemed an honour to be a dis

There can surely be no doubt on this point. The Admonition can have no authority.-ED.

senter.) The general voice of the Christian world is not, as it ought to be, in condemnation of schism; and though the schismatic of the 19th century disregards the same apostolic authority as the schismatic of the 1st century, yet he does but do what others do-he" follows the multitude," not knowing that it is leading him "to do evil." But if this really be the case, if there be many among the dissenters who, though they follow not after us, nevertheless love the name of Jesus, and do many good things in his name, may we not look upon them as our brethren, even as our Master himself has told us that " he who is not against us is on our side"? At any rate, are we doing right in avoiding all intimacy with dissenters till we have done all in our power to reclaim them? Surely, if I have a dissenting friend, whom I believe to be a good man, I am not to keep aloof from him till I have pointed out the unreasonableness of his conduct, or (being unlearned and inexperienced myself) till I have directed him to those masters of our Israel who are qualified to shew him the danger of his situation, and to lead him to see how presumptuous it is for him to expect to be cleansed by bathing in Abana or Pharpar, when God's commandment is, that he should wash himself in Jordan. If, after all my pains, he obstinately continues to prefer mount Gerizim to mount Zion,-if, either from indolence or indifference, he refuses to reflect for himself on the subject, or, after reflection, continues an incurable schismatic, then, I conceive, (but not till then,) I am bound to leave him, that is, to be less intimate with him; but never can I look on that dissenter as a heathen man and a publican who can lay his hand upon his heart and solemnly declare that my God is his, that my Master is his Master, that the book which is to me the compass which guides me over the sea of life is that by which he also shapes his course,that the port to which I am sailing is also "the haven where he would be." Such an one, though an erring brother, is still a brother; and though I condemn his schism, and pray for his return into the bosom of the church, I nevertheless must love him and speak kindly to him, for he is my brother.

Perhaps, if no one else has taken up the subject, you will insert this letter in your next Magazine, as I must think that S. P.'s proposed line of conduct would be more productive of evil than of good, and is not altogether the mode which he would have pursued who became all things to all men, that perchance he might save some. I remain, Sir, with sincere esteem, your obedient servant, JUVENIS.

P.S. I have been asked the following questions, which, when you have an opportunity, I hope you will be kind enough to answer:— "Is there anything irregular or uncanonical in making a separate service of the communion service, or, in other words, in administering the communion and preaching without previous morning prayer?" "Where is the American Prayer-book to be procured?"

DISSENTING DISHONESTY.

SIR,-In your number for August, you did me the honour to insert a letter of mine, headed, "Home Missionary Tactics," and signed

« AnteriorContinuar »