« السابقةمتابعة »
These are some of the staple commodities which the Roman preacher offers to his audience. Nor must I forget to allude to the scenery which he employs. Hell and Purgatory in all their horrors, and Paradise with all its glories, are circumstantially described, as if they were within a day's journey, or as if the orator were merely adding an appendix to the veracious narratives of a Virgil or a Dante : nay, in order to give greater life to his descriptions, I have seen the action of hell-fire represented in the pulpit by the actual application of a torch to the wrist, — the picture being thus made much more graphic than any which a Rubens or a Michel Angelo have ever painted, and giving rise to the suspicion almost that the celebrated painting of Michel Angelo in the Sistine Chapel, or of Rubens at Munich, may have furnished more materials than the Gospels. After such statements as these, I am sure you will consider me justified in describing Italy as one vast nursery for children, and the preachers as nursing fathers, who, like nurses of another sex, are constantly feeding the imagination with more monstrous fables than fairyland has ever suggested, and basing their spiritual dominion on the credulity and ignorance of their spiritual children.” — pp. 224-226.
Of the Church he says in the same letter :
“ Her practice, as far as we have seen in the quotations I have offered to you, is to maintain the obedience of her children by suppressing in every possible manner the exercise of the reasoning faculty, and encouraging superstition, credulity, and every thing else that can enfeeble the mind. She reduces man to in. fancy (designedly, I will not say), and then provides him toys, saints and relics and feste, with all their accompaniments of ribbons and flowers and music and incense; and when he has thus become once again a prattler, she takes advantage of his hopes and fears to fill her coffers and enrich her clergy. In these few words I have nearly anticipated what I had meant to say on the character of the people. Discouraged in the exercise of their thinking powers, they become mentally degraded, and, instead of investigating the sublime truths of Christianity, and entering into the lofty regions of thought which they open to us, they rather babble over improbable traditions and monkish legends, like chil. dren who wander delighted through the wild regions of romance."
- p. 234.
With these extracts we take our leave for the present of the author of these very agreeable Letters, assuring him that we shall be glad to meet him again, and enjoy with him the fruits culled by him on classic or on Christian ground. A. L.
Note to Art. IV.
NOTE TO ART. IV.
(We take the unusual course of giving in the present number a re. ply to an article which will be found in the previous pages. We are led to do this by our desire to preserve that frankness and impartiality which we think should mark periodical, and especially religious, literature. The fact, that an article containing strictures on his Translation of the Psalms was in the hands of our printer, came to Dr. Noyes's knowledge, and led to an interview between him and the author of the article, in company with the Editors of the Examiner; and as it appeared that both parties considered it would be most fair, as well as most agreeable to their feelings, that the article should appear with a rejoinder in the same number, we have so far deviated from usage as to present both papers to our readers at the same time. Eds.)
Messrs. EDITORS, - As you were good enough to allow me to look at the proof-sheets of the review of my translation of the Psalms, I beg leave to say a few words in regard to the use which I made of Professor Torrey's translation of De Wette's Introduction to the Book of Psalms, contained in the third volume of the Biblical Repository. In regard to the use of that transla. tion, the reviewer expressly acquits me of "an intention to mislead, or to make an improper use of other men's labors,” and brings against me no graver charge than that of inadvertence.” In so doing he probably had reference to the undeniable facts, that I made references to the volume and page of the Repository whence I derived Torrey's translation of De Wette's views, ample for scholars, or those who have the means and inclination to examine my references, and that the references are to a very common book, of recent publication, in the hands of a great number of professors and clergymen of all denominations. What the reviewer seems to assert is, that my references are not sufficiently full and explicit for those who have not the means and inclination to examine them, or to consult the Biblical Repository. That there is a degree of inadvertence in this respect I admit, and think the reviewer commendable for noticing it.
I must be excused, however, for expressing the opinion, that the reviewer, having in words acquitted me of “ an intention to mislead, or to make an improper use of other men's labors," and having stated that he brings “no graver charge " against me " than that of inadvertence,” has presented the matter in a way that unduly magnifies its importance, and is adapted to excite suspicion in regard to my literary honesty. Particularly, it strikes me as unnecessary that he should undertake elaborately to prove that I must have made use of Professor Torrey's translation, although in the passage on which he thus comments i professed “in substance to transcribe” De Wette's views, and in a note, which can be conceived to have no other meaning than that of indicating the source from which I derived De Wette's views, I referred, not to the original German, but to the number and page of the Biblical Repository which contains Professor Torrey's translation. I had also three times before referred to the volume and pages of the Biblical Repository containing this translation, in one instance, p. 33, mentioning particularly that a translation of De Wette's Introduction might be found in the number for July, 1833. However, as I have no reason to suspect the reviewer of any ill-will to me, I doubt not that he pursued the course which seemed to him right.
To be more particular in regard to the use which I made of Torrey's translation of De Wette's Introduction. As to the first quotation, beginning, “ The Psalms, says De Wette, are lyric poems,” and extending two pages and a quarter, it seems to me that I have given substantial credit, both to De Wette and the translator, in a manner not unusual, by the reference to De Wette at the beginning of the passage, by my remark, “ in this classification proposed by De Wette," at the close of it, and by the reference in the margin both to the page of De Wette's “ Commentar” in the German, where it is found, and to the vol. ume and page of the Biblical Repository which contains Professor Torrey's translation of it. I now see no reason why inverted commas are not placed at the beginning and end of the quotation. But I regard them as by no means necessary, though it might have been better to place them there. The omission of them was probably accidental.
In regard to the next quotation from De Wette's Introduction, of two pages, which is expressly ascribed to him, and inclosed with the usual quotation marks, the reviewer observes that I have not referred in the margin to the place whence I drew it. The reason why this was not done undoubtedly was, that the extract was from the same Introduction of De Wette from which the previous extract was made, and that a few pages before I had referred both to the original, and to the volume and page of the Biblical Repository which contains Professor Torrey's translation of it; and I took it for granted that the reader would suppose, without a new reference, that I drew my translation from that source. It did not occur to me that it was supposable that I should undertake to translate anew what was so well done by Professor Torrey.
In regard to the third quotation, comprehending about eighteen or nineteen pages, from De Wette, introduced by my remarks, “A more complete view of its varieties [i. e. of the Hebrew parallelism) has been given by De Wette in his Introduction to the Psalms, which I shall in substance transcribe," – I thought
Dr. Noyes's Explanation.
that I sufficiently indicated my obligations to De Wette and to Professor Torrey's translation without the use of quotation marks. First, because De Wette's view of the Hebrew parallelism, which I professed to give, extended, as I supposed, over all those pages, - thus indicating the extent of my quotation as really, though perhaps not as evidently, as quotation marks would have done. I now perceive, however, that three or four of the last pages are only on a subject akin to that of parallelism, viz. other modes of Hebrew rhythm. There was thus some degree of inadvertence. Secondly, my language is, -" I shall in substance transcribe." I employ the term “ transcribe,” not use,” or “adopt,” which seems to me to indicate that I meant to give his very language, and not my own. As to the qualifying term “ in substance,” it was meant to indicate, first, that I omitted in different places five or six pages of De Wette's view ; secondly, that I introduced in two different places (pp. 47 and 51) about half a page of matter of my own, from the old edition ; thirdly, that all the illustrations were given in my own version, and not in that of De Wette; and fourthly, that I wished to introduce from the Introduction of the first edition of my book some other illustrations, and some remarks from Dr. Lowth and the poet Campbell. Perhaps my language, " I shall in substance transcribe,” was not sufficiently precise and explicit. I now perceive that it can be understood to mean what I did not intend. But in view of the preceding facts, a candid judgment will admit that I could have used it only in the sense now explained; that is, for the purpose of indicating that I transcribed De Wette's view, with the modifications above pointed out.
In regard to the use of Professor Torrey's version, I supposed that I made sufficient acknowledgment by referring in the margin to the volume and page of the Biblical Repository which con. tained it, and not to the original German. If I had had any wish to conceal my obligation to the English version, it would have been as easy for me to refer to the original German as to that. The ludicrous consequences * pointed out by the Reviewer, which seem to follow from the supposition that I adopted De Wette's language, or Torrey's version of it, as my own, will, I hope, afford some indication to those who are acquainted with my writings that I could have had no such intention. Such an intention would imply great folly, as well as dishonesty.
Although I am not expressly charged by the reviewer with any thing more than inadvertence, yet, lest any reader
may construe this admission into a mere form of politeness, I beg leave
The principal one, however, was a mere error of the printers, viz. the insertion of the paragraph," Sometimes there are triplet parallelisms," etc., with the two following illustrations from the old edition, in the wrong place. Its proper place is on p. 43, six lines from the bottom, before IV.
to advert to the consideration that I could have no motive for wishing to be considered as the translator of the passages borrowed from Professor Torrey's translation. The only conceiva. ble motive for passing off another translation for my own is a desire of being thought able to translate a few pages from the German, or to translate them well. But on pages 19 and 20 I have translated a passage of some length from Eichhorn, and on page 16 a passage from Tholuck, which have never been translated into English by any other writer, so far as I know. In the Introduction to the Book of Job, I examined at some length De Wette's objections to the speech of Elihu, long before his Introduction to the Old Testament had been translated into English. Throughout my Introductions and Notes to the books which I have translated, there are various references to the opinions of German theologians which have never been translated, and occasional translations from their writings, which show that I could have no motive for taking any improper means to produce an impression that I am capable of translating plain German prose. Twelve years ago, too, I wrote an elaborate review of Hengstenberg's Christology in the Examiner, some time before any English translation of it had been published. Any Latin scholar knows whether he would be ambitious of being thought capable of translating a passage from Kuinoel's or Rosenmüller's Commentary on the New Testament, especially if he had repeatedly published translations from the Latin before.
I might also mention some other considerations, such as that there was no concealment in the case ; and that the printers and proof-readers will testify that I sent as copy to the press the volume of the Biblical Repository from which my quotations from De Wette were extracted. The principal proof-reader was an excellent scholar, who, as I then supposed, collated the proofs with the copy; though I have since learned that he only read them after they had been collated with copy by another person.
Being about to publish a second edition of the Translation of the Psalms, it occurred to me that I might make it more useful to theological students by inserting in the Introduction more critical matter than in my first edition, which was designed chiefly for the common reader. Not having leisure to elaborate anew my whole Introduction, and having been in the habit of recommending to successive classes of theological students Torrey's Translation of De Wette's Introduction to the Psalms, as the best with which I was acquainted, I thought it expedient to incorporate the more important parts of it with my Introduction. If I had followed the practice of some writers of Introductions in this country, and in Germany too, whom I could mention, I might have elaborated and rearranged what I have borrowed from De