66

66

in the Original Greek, but are supplied by the translator; the latter of them might, indeed, be omitted altogether without any detriment to the sense; "thy will be done, as in Heaven, so also on earth," which is a more literal translation, is perfectly intelligible. A passage in the second Commandment again, he directs to be read, according indeed to the usual mode, both of reading and pointing it," visit the sins of the fathers' upon the children' unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me;" which mode of reading destroys the sense, by making a pause at children," and none at generation;" for this implies that the third and fourth generations, who suffer these judgments, are themselves such as hate the Lord, instead of being merely, as is meant to be expressed, the children of such; "of them that hate me," is a genitive governed not by "generation," but by "children" it should be read (according to Sheridan's marks) "visit the sins of the fathers' upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me:" i. e. visit the sins of the fathers who hate me, upon the third and fourth generations of their descendants. The same sanction is given to an equally common fault in reading the fifth Commandment; "that thy days may be long in the land' which the Lord thy God giveth thee:" the pause should evidently be at " long," not at " land." No one would say in ordinary conversation, "I hope you will find enjoyment in the garden which you have planted." He has also strangely omitted an emphasis on the word "covet," in the tenth Commandment. He has, however, in the negative or prohibitory commands avoided the common fault of accenting the word "not." And here it may be worth while to remark, that in some cases the Copula ought to be made the emphatic word; (i. e. the " is," if the proposi

tion be affirmative, the "not," if negative ;) viz. where the proposition may be considered as in opposition to its contradictory.* If, e. g. it had been a question whether we e.g. ought to steal or not, the commandment, in answer to that, would have been rightly pronounced, "thou shalt not steal" but the question being, what things we are forbidden to do, the answer is, that "to steal" is one of them, "thou shalt not steal." In such a case as this, the proposition is considered as opposed, not to its contradictory, but to one with a different Predicate: the question being, not, which Copula (negative or affirmative) shall be employed, but what shall be affirmed or denied of the subject: e. g. "it is lawful to beg; but not to steal;" e.g. in such a case, the Predicate, not the Copula, will be the emphatic word.

One fault worth noticing on account of its commonness is the placing of the emphasis on "neighbour" in the ninth and tenth commandments; as if there might be some persons precluded from the benefit of the prohibitions. One would think the man to whom our Lord addressed the parable of the good Samaritan, had been used to this mode of delivery, by his asking "and who is my neighbour?"

The usual pronunciation of one part of the " Apostles' Creed" is probably founded on some misapprehension of the sense of it: "The holy Catholic Church, the Com

Nor is this properly an exception to the above rule; for, in such cases, that which is expressed as the Copula, is, in sense the Predicate; the question being in fact whether "true" or "false" shall be predicated of a certain

assertion.

See Sir Peter (afterwards Lord) King's History of the Apostles' Creed; a work much more valuable (in proportion to its size) than most that are studied by theologians.

munion of Saints," is commonly read as if these were two distinct articles; instead of the latter clause being merely an explanation of the former: "The holy Catholic Church, [viz.] the Communion of Saints."

INDEX

TO SOME OF THE PRINCIPAL WORDS.