men, that there is nothing in them so formidable, as the vague and general representations of their number and weight would lead men to conclude. Now, if such a man as Dr. Whitby, a man of distinguished learning and abilities, was alarmed at Mill's publication, as dangerous to the cause, not only of Protestantism, but of Christianity itself; we need not be surprised, that men of inferior talents, and less acquainted with the science of criticism, should look on the edition of the Old Testament by Kennicot, or of the New by Mill, or by Wetstein, as, at least, a very hazardous experiment. Yet, now that the experiment has been made, is there any appearance of those evils which have been dreaded from it? I am not sensible that there is. It is true, that Kennicot's publication of the Old Testament is so recent, that we have scarcely yet had time to discover its consequences; but if we may judge from the reception given to the New, we have no ground to fear them. Mill's work has been now in the hands of the Public for more than half a century, and Wetstein's for not much less. Yet it is not in my power to discover that, in the judgment of any reasonable man, or even in the judgment of the people, the cause of Christianity has suffered by these publications. I know that the most enlightened readers have judged them to be, in many respects, of service to the cause: and the opinion of the most enlightened, where there is no interference of secular motives, or of violent measures, will always prove at last the opinion of the generality.

Soon after Mill's edition appeared, which was about the beginning of the present century, the various readings of the New Testament became a topic for declamation to sceptics and freethinkers. There needed but a little time, in which men might canvass those variations, to convince every person who reflected, that there was nothing terrible in the case. Accordingly, he would now be deemed but a sorry advocate for the infidel hypothesis, who should have recourse to an argument which, if allowed to have any validity, would subvert our belief in all history whatever, as well as in that of the Gospel; for the writings of the Old and New Testament have not been exposed to more hazards from transcribers, than other ancient writings. Now, if any one should say, We can believe nothing in ancient history, on account of the variations to be found in the different editions and manuscripts of the different authors, no man of common sense would think him fit to be argued with. Yet there is one reason (without recurring to a miraculous interposition) to think, that we have more security of a faithful transmission of the Scriptures, than of any composition merely human. The supposed sacredness of the former, serves as a guard to them, and makes at least the greater part of transcribers afraid to take those freedoms with them which they would, without scruple, take with other writings. The excessive, nay, even superstitious, scrupulosity, which has given rise to so many absurdly literal versions of Scripture, is a strong presumption of the truth of what I say.

Those who consider religion as no other than a political engine, have reason, I own, to be alarmed. But those, on the contrary, who are persuaded that the religion of Jesus is founded in truth, and consequently divine, are inexcusable in their fears of canvassing it as much as possible. It is falsehood, not truth; it is guilt, not innocence, which studiously excludes the light, and flies examination. This our

reason teaches; this our religion also teaches. For whosoever doth evil, saith our Lord", hateth the light, and shunneth it, lest his deeds should be detected. But he who obeyeth the truth, cometh to the light, that it may be manifest that his actions are agreeable to God. Fears of this kind, in these latter ages (for from the beginning they were not), originated with the Romanists. The Protestants thought they saw clearly the reason of their apprehensions on this subject, and were not surprised at them. The measures employ. ed by the party were all of a piece, and not badly suited to the end they had in view. Such were their index expurgatorius, their inquisitions, their licensers of books, their prohibitions, and other methods, for discouraging translations of the Scriptures, and for preventing the people's becoming acquainted with them, of such measures the secret springs, as well as the manifest tendency, furnished ample matter of declamation to the adversaries of the Romish establishment.

It is not with pleasure that I add, but impartiality obliges me, for it is too true, that when matters in

14 Jo. iii. 20, 21.

any place took such a turn, as to throw the secular power into the hands of any party of such adversaries; those of that party too often betrayed a propensity to recur to some of the measures they had before so universally and so loudly reprobated. We may, however, now, with some confidence, affirm, that it is rather too late a period in the age of the world to think of such odious expedients. By the invention of printing, and by the many discoveries and improvements which have extended the intercourse of nations, the acquisition of knowledge is, at present, so much facilitated and accelerated, in all civilized countries, that it will not be checked in its progress, nor will truth be overborne, by those expedients which were found fully sufficient for the purpose formerly. Nay, so evident is this become, that even that formidable power, which so long made ignorance a principal engine of government, seems compelled, at length, to shift her ground, and to appear among the foremost in patronizing what must conduce to the furtherance of knowledge.

It is little more than two centuries since the authenticity of the Vulgate version was formally affirmed, by a decree of the council of Trent. Immediately after that sentence, it appears to have been the prevalent opinion of zealous Romanists, that that translation ought to be considered as inspired, and consequently as absolutely faultless. On this account, the champions of the party did not hesitate to exalt it far above the original, which, though they acknowledged to have been inspired, they affirmed to have

been, since that time, miserably corrupted, in passing through the hands of collators and copists. In about a century after, how much more moderate the opinions, even of Romanists, were become, appears sufficiently from what we are informed of, on this subject, in Simon's Critical History. The high style, so common with theologians, and former controvertists, was heard no more. All moderate and judicious Romanists were ashamed of it. The prevalent opinion of such was then, what no reasonable Protestant will dissent from at this day, that, in every thing essential to the faith and practice of a Christian, it was a good version, and might be safely used. Opinionum "commenta delet dies." Let not the hand of power interfere; let there be neither bribes nor terrors, to bias the mind on either side; and men of the most opposite factions will soon become reasonable, and learn to understand one another. Free and fair discussion will ever be found the firmest friend to truth. At the time I speak of, the most moderate of the Roman Catholic party were, however, convinced that, in deference to the council's declaration, every true son of the church, who, for the use of the people, purposed to translate the Scriptures into the vulgar tongue, ought to translate from the Vulgate version only. What, then, would those people have thought of a new translation into Latin, by one of their own priests, from the original Hebrew and Greek? They had some specious grounds, I acknowledge, for considering it as presumptuous, at least in the appearance which it has, of setting up the opinion of an indivi