LXXIV LIFE OF DE OWEN.
exhaustive, and yet not marked by that discursiveness which is the fault of some of his writings, and bringing into play some of his greatest excellencies as a writer, — his remarkable exegetical talent, his intimate knowledge of Scripture, and mastery of the stores of ecclesiastical history. Dr Hammond replied to him from among the Episcopalians, and Cawdrey from among the Presbyterians, — a stormy petrel, with whose spirit, Owen remarks, the Presbyterians in general had no sympathy; but Owen remained unquestionable master of the field.^
It was not thus with the controversy which we have next to de- scribe. Owen had prepared a valuable little essay, — " Of the Divine Original, Authority, Self-evidencing Light and Power of the Scrip- tures; with an answer to that inquiry. How we know the Scriptures to be the word of God?" the principal design of which, as its title so far indicates, was to prove that, independently altogether of its exter- nal evidence, the Bible contams, in the nature of its truths and in their efficacy on the mind, satisfactory evidence of the di^dne source from which it has emanated; — an argument which waS' afterwards nobly handled by Halyburton, and which has recently been illustrated and illuminated by Dr Chalmers with his characteristic eloquence, in one of the chapters of his "Theological Institutes."^ In this essay he had laid down the position, that " as the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament were immediately and entirely given out by God himself, — his mind being in them represented to us without the least interveniency of such mediums and ways as were capable of giving change or alteration to the least iota or syllable, — so, by his good and merciful providential dispensation, in his love to his Word and church, his Word as first given out by him is preserved unto us entire in the original languages."^ It happened that while this essay was in the press, the Prolegomena and Appendix of Walton's invaluable and immortal work, the " London Polyglott," came into Owen's hands. But when he glanced at the fonnidable array of various readings, which was presented by Walton and his coadjutors as the result of their collation of manuscripts and versions, he became alarmed for his principles, imagined the authority of the Scriptures to be placed in imminent jeopardy, and, in an essay which he entitled, " A Vindication of the Purity and Integrity of the Hebrew and
nary to the Dissenting party, though he comes much short of that person." — Athen. Oxon., iv. 106.
' The other writings drawn from Owen in this controversy were provoked by Cawdrey. — 1. A Review of the true Nature of Schism, with a Vindication of the Congregational Churches in England from the imputation thereof, unjustly charged on them by Mr Daniel Cawdrey, 1657. 2. An Answer to a late Treatise of Mr Cawdrey about the Nature of Schism, 1658, prefixed to a Defence of Mr John Cotton, &c., against Cawdrey, written by himself, and edited by Owen.
■ Theological Institutes, x. b. iii. ch. 6. ^ P. 153, duod. ed.
HIS EETIREMENT AND LAST DAYS. LXXV
Greek Texts of the Old and New Testaments, in some considerations on the Prolegomena and Appendix to the late Biblia Polyglotta,"^ rashly endeavoured to prove that Walton had greatly exaggerated the number of various readings, and insinuated his apprehension, that if Walton's principles were admitted, they would lead, by a very direct course, to Popery or Infidelity. It is needless to say how undeniable is the fact of various readings ; how utterly groundless were the fears which Dr Owen expressed because of them ; and how much the labours of learned biblicists, in the region which was so nobly cultivated by Walton and his associates, have confirmed, instead of disturbing our confidence in the inspired canon.^ And yet it is not difiicult to understand how the same individual, who was unsurpassed, perhaps unequalled, in his own age in his knowledge of the subject-matter of revelation, should have been comparatively uninformed on questions which related to the integrity of the sacred text itself. The error of Owen consisted in making broad assertions on a subject on which he acknowledged himself to be, after all, but imperfectly informed ; and, from a mere a priori ground, challenging facts that were sustained by very abundant evidence, and charging those facts with the most revolting consequences. Let those theologians be warned by it, who, on the ground of preconceived notions and incorrect interpretations of Scripture, have called in question some of the plainest discoveries of science ; and be assured that truth, come from what quarter it may, can never place the Word of God in jeopardy.
Walton saw that he had the advantage of Owen, and in " The Considerator Considered, and the Biblia Polyglotta Vindicated," suc- cessfully defended his position, and did what he could to hold Owen up to the ridicule of the learned world. Though he was Owen's victor in this controversy, yet the arrogance of his bearing excites the suspicion that something more than learned zeal bore him into the contest, and that the exasperated feelings of the ecclesiastic made him not unwilling to humble this leader and champion of the Puri- tans in the dust. The respective merits of the two combatants in this contest, which excited so much commotion in the age in which it occurred, are admirably remarked on by Dr Chalmers: "The most interesting collision upon this question that I know of, between unlike men of unhke minds, was that between the most learned of our Churchmen on the one hand, Brian Walton, author, or rather editor, of the ' London Polyglott,' and the most talented and zealous of our sectarians on the other, Dr John Owen. The latter adventured him-