In his treatment of this difficult subject, the present writer has tried to set out main principles rather than to go into minute details : he lias also tried to show how a judgment must be formed rather than to express his own opinions. But it is almost impossible to move in textual criticism without having a working hypothesis. Supporters either of the Traditional Text or of WH's views have the advantage of starting from a clearly defined position, and attack or defend definite theories. The present writer has found it neces- sary to intimate, as a working hypothesis, wliat his own views are, and has attempted to show the reasons why he holds tliem. We can reconstruct a text which was current at Antioch by the middle of the 4tli cent., and wliich won its way to practically universal acceptance in countries which used the Greek language ; tliis would not differ in any material respects from the Textus Receptus. We can also reconstruct a text current in Alexandria ])robably as early as the first quarter of the 3rd cent. ; this would be almost the same as Westcott and Hort's text, if we except those passages where they give the preference to Western documents. What are we to do with tlie documents of very divergent types, whicli are loosely classified as Western ? Tliis is really the main problem which textual critics now have to face. We may perhajis roughly distinguish the following groups of docu- ments as attesting different types of readings, but it is necessary to remember tliat there is continual cross-attestation : («) D supported by the old Latin ; (b) groups in whicli K sides witli Western docu- ments against distinctively Alexandrian readings ; {r) tlie ancient text underlying the Antiochian revision, wliicli is often very difficult to distin-
* Hort looked upon what he called the Alexandrian text (as distinsuished from the Neutral) as the result of a revision ; according to the view of the present writer, N and B were not unaffected by the revision.
THADD^US
THADD^US
v2o
guisli ; (d) the Ferrar group of minuscules ; (e) the Old Syriac ; we also know of a certain number of readings which were evidently widely spread in early times, but which have left little or no trace of their existence in extant MSS and versions.
It is im2)ossible within the limits of this article to enter on this very wide question ; nor is it possible at the present stage of criticism to say that any really definite results have been reached. Whatever may be the history of the origin of the Western texts, and however strongly certain isolated readings may commend themselves to the judgment of a few students, it is not likely that any known type of Western text in its entirety will ever command the respect of a considerable body of students of textual criticism and of exegesis ; and it must be borne in mind that the linal decision must rest on exegesis, unless textual evidence at present not even guessed at should be brought to light. Tiie truth appears to be that the Antiochian text adopted much of what was best in the various Western texts ; but at the same time the agree- ment of Western and Alexandrian documents in many readings that are almost undoubtedly right warns us that right readings may lurk in the most divergent texts, though it is improbable that much of value escajjed both the Alexandrian and the Antiochian revisers.
But the existence of these early divergent types of text, in regard to which textual criticism can give no definite verdict, has a very distinct practical lesson to teach, and one which is greatly needed at this critical period in the history of Christianity ; it is impossible to recover at present the ipsissima verba of the NT writers. Of course the limits of doubt are very narrow, and the possible variants are few and for the most part unimportant ; but the fact of doubt remains, and is a standing protest against all mechanical theories of inspiration, for however slight the discrepancies the question must arise, ' Which text or reading is inspired ? ' We must build on the general sense, not on the mere letter of Scripture ; this is the practical lesson which textual criticism teaches us at this moment. And what result can be happier than if the study of the letter, by its inconclusiveness, leads us to a firmer grasp of the general sense, in which is the ' spirit tliat maketh alive ' ?
Literature.— Art. 'Textual Criticism (of NT)' in Hastings' DB, Ext. Vol. p. 208 ff. ; Scrivener, Introd. to Criticism of NT*, 1894; Gregory, Textkritik des NT, 1900, Prolegomena to Tischendorf, 1884-94, Canon and Text of NT, 1907 ; von Soden, Die Schriften des NT, 1902 ff. ; E. Miller, Guide to the Textual Criticism of the NT, 18S6, The Oxford Debate, 1897, The Present State of the Textual Controversy, 1899, The Textual Controversy and the Tiuenticth Century, 1901, The Traditional Text of the Holy Gospels, 1896 [jointly with Burgon], Causes of the Corruption of the Traditional Text, 1896 ; Hort, Introduc- tion to WH's NT in Greeks, i896 ; Nestle, Introd. to Text. Crit. of Gr. NT, 1901 ; Salmon, Some Criticism of the Text of the NT, 1897 ; K. Lake, The Text of the NT, 1900 ; Kenyon, Handbook to the Text. Crit. of NT, 1901 ; Hammond, Outlines of Textual Criticism applied to the NT, 1902. p. M. BARNARD.