SECTION IV.

CONTINUATION OF BENGEL'S CRITICAL RESEARCHES.

Bengel having, in the year 1729, submitted his work on the Greek Testament, together with his "Apparatus Criticus," to the censorship at Stuttgart, and to the Theological Faculty of Tübingen, received licenses for their publication, which were conveyed in terms very honourable and encouraging to himself. Shortly after this, he found Wetstein's Prolegomena come out together, with the specimen of that critic's intended edition of the Greek Testament. A work of such importance for its copious collations, of course he could not neglect to examine; especially as he was aware that so travelled a scholar as Wetstein must have greatly the advantage of him in extent of materials. He therefore once more paused about his own publication, till he had carefully sifted the whole of this newly presented mass of research. In the subsequent announcement of his work,* he says, “The new edition promised in the ' Prodromus' is, by the Divine help, so far completed, that it may be considered as almost ready to be presented to the public. But as my arrangement required further consideration, and has in consequence been altered, the whole will be found distributed into four distinct works. First, I shall send out a larger edition of the Greek Testament in quarto, which will be succeeded by a smaller one in octavo; the larger will be accompanied by another work entitled 'Apparatus Criticus,' giving a particular account of every reading I have adopted; and then, in a separate volume, I shall publish as soon as possible my exegetical annotations, which though completed in amount, do not appear sufficiently matured for the press."

With regard to the readings adopted by himself in the text, he reassures any anxious inquirers, that, with some exceptions in the Apocalypse, which was a book peculiarly circumstanced, he had not admitted a single expression that had not been embodied with it in printed editions; and he had the more confidently made this a rule with himself, because research had convinced him that any reading not adopted by former printed editions,

♦ This announcement was entitled, “Notitia Novi Testamenti Græci, rectè cautèque adornati, quod perbrevi publicandum justis conditionibus recipiunt Jo. Georgius et Christianus Godofredus Cotta, bibliopolæ.”

even though it might have probability on its side, was always of minor importance. Finally, in composing his " Apparatus," he had carefully considered and weighed each of the forty-three canons of Gerard von Mastricht; and that the promised canon of four words would be found in that "Apparatus." This announcement was accompanied with specimens of the form of the text in quarto, as also of the "Apparatus Criticus." Accordingly both made their appearance, followed by the smaller Greek Testament, in the year 1734.*

The arrangement of each edition is exhibited in its title-page, and both of them were found to agree in every particular with the announcement and specimens; neither were they much inferior as to type, correct printing, and good paper, even to those of Amsterdam.

As the minor Greek Testament was without the "Apparatus Criticus," its preface gave a brief account of Bengel's researches, and of the principles upon which he thought it right to conduct them. In the concluding paragraph of this preface he inserted an adage, which, though brief and in quaint Latin, excellently shows how to search the Scriptures with the greatest benefit:

"Te totum applica ad Textum;

Rem totam applica ad te."

Keep thyself closely to the text,

And apply the whole substance of it to thy own edification."

The "Apparatus Criticus" consists of three parts: the first explains what New Testament criticism is; its difficulties, with the best means of overcoming them; and gives a concise but sufficient history of this branch of knowledge down to his own time. The second part shows, by way of introduction to each portion of the New Testament, the resources of criticism for such several portions, with references to editions, manuscripts, and fathers. Here it was his object to determine more evidently the relative value of the different MSS. by their antiquity, origin, and greater or less degree of correctness, as also what collations, more or less accurate, they had undergone. Next are detailed all the principal

* The quarto edition has the following title, "'H KAINH AIAOнKH, Novum Testamentum Græcè, ita adornatum, ut textus probatarum editionum medullam, margo variarum lectionum in suas classes distributarum, locorumque parellelorum delectum; apparatus subjunctus criseos sacræ, Millianæ præsertim, compendium, limam, supplementum et fructum exhibeat: inserviente Jo. Alberto Bengelio: Tubingæ, 1734.” The octavo was entitled, “'H kaivỳ Aιaðýкn, N. T. Græcum, ita adornatum, ut in textu medulla editionum probatarum retineatur, atque in margine ad discernendas lectiones genuinas, ancipites, sequiores, ansa detur: Stuttgardiæ, 1734."

various readings themselves, in the order of chapter and verse, with evidences for and against them. Then, as to passages of more immediate importance, he examines, with impartial and scrupulous care, each evidence, external and internal, in favour of this or that particular reading. Thus the following Scripture passages are especially attended to: Matt. vi. 13; John i. 1; viii. 1—11; 1 Tim. iii. 16; 1 John v. 7. Lastly was given an introduction to the Revelation of St. John, a book subjected to many more various readings (though it exists in fewer MSS.) than any other book of the New Testament; but oftener found in the MSS. which Bengel's exertions had brought to light, than in others. Here, therefore, he had the more to do in consequence of the very great imperfectness of all the hitherto printed editions of the Apocalypse. The third part of the Apparatus defended criticism in general, and the present criticisms in particular; especially as every care had been taken to keep the latter within the golden medium. Yet he would not dissemble how much still remained to be done for perfecting the general criticism of the New Testament; he therefore, in conclusion, earnestly called upon those who had time, ability, and opportunities, to contribute their help in this laborious but most useful study.

SECTION V.

OPINIONS PRONOUNCED UPON BENGEL'S CRITICISMS.

The reception of his work among the studious fully answered his expectations; nevertheless, while many of the better disposed were thankful for the advantages it afforded, insomuch that the minor edition of the New Testament was soon out of print, there were others of a very different mind. "Certain ministers of God's word" scrupled not to insert in one of the periodicals entitled "Early Gathered Fruits," (No. 4, of the year 1738,) a stricture containing the following remarks.

" If every book-maker is to take into his head to treat the New Testament in this manner, we shall soon get a Greek text totally different from the received one. The audacity is really too great for us not to notice it; especially as such vast importance, it seems, is attached to this edition. Scarcely a chapter of it has not something either omitted, or inserted, or altered, or transposed. The audacity is unprecedented."

The writer of this stricture was probably John George Hager, M.A.; he, at least, it was who afterwards used very much the same language in a disputation which he held at Leipsic.

Quite another sort of objections was raised in an article of the Bibliothèque Raisonnée, published by the Wetsteins of Amsterdam; (see vol. for 1734, p. 203 ;) which article was known to have been written by J.J. Wetstein himself. Here it was stated as a principal defect of Bengel's work, that he had not adopted lections enough; not even all which he considered the true ones; that he had gone only upon a half measure; and that half measures, particularly in criticism, had been always of little or no use. That it was one and the same thing here, whether we gently intimate or whether we speak out; whether we note our preference for one lection standing in the text, or for another standing in the margin; all still depended upon the general question, Are we or are we not freely to use our critical resources? The right of using these had never been disputed by the Protestant churches or by Rome herself; for as it rests on the surest foundation, so all editors of the Greek Testament had ever acted upon it. Cautious and prudent, however, as they had been in so doing, this had not secured them from censure and persecution: for even Erasmus had been rewarded with the reputation of being an Arian; and Robert Stephens was obliged to fly to Geneva to escape a burning at the stake, &c. Therefore Bengel's excessive prudence and caution would be any thing but serviceable to him; especially as he too, in editing the Apocalypse, had found it necessary to abandon these his favourite virtues; so that it would have been better had he relinquished such caution altogether, and adopted into the text, whether from print or manuscript, whatever readings he considered to be the best. That the four worded canon proposed by Bengel "Proclivi scriptioni præstat ardua," ("the more difficult reading is preferable to the easier one,") was quite ambiguous and unsupportable, as any reading countenanced by a majority of MSS. is surely the one to be preferred; hence Bengel's work, as presenting a collation of only twelve, could be of no very great value. Wetstein lastly threw out a sarcastic slight upon Bengel's promised exegetical annotations, (the Gnomon ;) but he concluded with acknowledging, that Bengel's edition of the New Testament was the best that had ever yet been printed.

That Bengel should publish some reply to opinions thus more or less unreasonably passed upon his work, seemed necessary from the circumstances of the case, especially as that age was charac

teristically fond of learned controversy. He had also another reason for so doing; for "critical labours being (as he had observed) so toilsome and dry, doubly entitled the labourer to a temperate and equitable judgment upon his productions; consequently it was but right that he should defend himself against unreasonable detraction." This he undertook to do in several pieces as follows.

In reply to Wetstein's strictures he wrote, "A Defence of the Greek Testament, edited at Tübingen in 1734." This defence he inserted in the preface to his " Harmony of the four Gospels," published in 1736. Count Zinzendorf having read the “Defence," had recommended it to his friends in Holland; for he met with it in his tour through that country, and was very much pleased with it. From Holland, therefore, Bengel received a request, which there is reason to suppose came originally from Bâsle, that he would by all means republish it in Latin, for easier access to foreign countries. Bengel then revised and translated it, and sent it to Amsterdam for admission into the " Miscellanea Critica,” a journal published there; its admission, however, having been, for some special reason, refused, two of his friends, Professor D'Orville and Jerome von Alphen, undertook the printing of it.* Bengel in this defence dismisses several minor objections, and proceeds as follows:-1. "That Wetstein was incorrect in asserting, that the edition in question had been prepared with the help of no more than twelve MSS.; it contained his own collations of seven Strasburg MSS., one Byzantine MS., one at Warsaw, one at Moscow, two at Uffenbach; with collations made by others of three at Bâsle, and collations of seven more, besides the collations of L. Valla and of J. Faber Stapulensis. He had also collected upon the ancient Latin version of the Old and New Testament (the Vulgate,) sufficient to render it a very easy task to make a complete recension of that version. Above all, by impartially collating every lection of printed editions, he had reduced the whole controversy to a much narrower compass, upon very many passages.

2. "Why the canon Proclivi Scriptioni præstat ardua,' should be deemed ambiguous, he was the less able to understand, as the terms of which it consists had long been used, and by the oldest critics; especially too as he had given his own meaning in thus

"Io. Alberti Bengelii Defensio N. T. Græci Tubinga, anno 1734, editi. Lugduni Batavorum apud Conradum Wishoff, 1737." It was also reprinted in the Appendix to the 2d edition of the "Apparatus Criticus."