Imágenes de páginas
PDF
EPUB

The translation we have given of this passage is supported by two of the oldest versions in existence-the Chaldee paraphrase and the Septuagint. In the former the same preposition is used as in the Hebrew, and has precisely the same meaning, to or for; and in the latter that preposition is employed which the most exactly corresponds with this meaning. It is well known that in the Greek language the words which correspond with the Hebrew prepositions are (en) and us (eis), the former meaning in, and properly representing (beth), and the latter meaning to, and expressing the meaning of (lamed). Now in the translation of the passage by the Septuagint es (eis) is used, and not & (en), thus exactly agreeing with the translation we have given. It is worthy of notice, too, that when the apostle Peter quoted this psalm in Acts ii. 27, he employed the preposition Es (eis), which properly expresses the sense we have given to the Hebrew word in our interpretation. It does not invalidate our argument to admit that these prepositions, both in Hebrew and Greek, are interchangable, and are sometimes substituted the one for the other. The true and proper meaning is that which we have given in our interpretation; and though the particles may sometimes be used almost indifferently, there are many cases where they cannot be interchanged one for another, and the passage in question presents one of those instances. The proper meaning of the particle (lamed) is to or for, and such is its meaning in the text we are examining; and to give it the meaning of (beth) or in is to obscure the passage, perplex the reader, sanction error, and induce interpreters to have recourse to various conflicting opinions and conjectures. The literal rendering we have given to the passage removes the obscurity, and presents a plain intelligible sense.

While this interpretation agrees with the most ancient versions, it harmonizes with the several subjects named in the passage, and helps to bring out their natural and obvious meaning. The passage evidently speaks of the twofold nature of Christ; his soul is expressly mentioned, and his bodily frame, his material structure is referred to; for corruption is spoken of, and it is only a material substance that can be liable to corruption. Now, in the interpretation we have given, there is no difficulty which compels us to confound these distinct parts of Christ's nature, or to resort to a lame conjecture that perhaps the soul is only another word for the body, or for the corpse of the Saviour. We take the soul to mean literally the spiritual nature of Christ, that vital and immortal substance which survived the death of the body. The passage speaks also of two states, as applying to each part of human nature-corruption, as pertaining to the body, and sheol, or hell, as applying to the soul. These words are clearly distinct the one from the other in their meaning, and our interpretation maintains this distinction. It does not compel us to resort to a vague conjecture that perhaps they mean substantially the same thing. But we take the words in their obvious sense, corruption being spoken of as the state pertaining to the human body, and sheol, or hell, as the place of the soul; but into neither of those Christ should enter; for it is said, "Thou wilt not abandon my soul to hell," to be consigned to that abode of misery; "neither wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption." The soul shall suffer, but thou wilt not abandon it to hell; and the body shall die, but thou wilt not consign it to putrefaction.

This interpretation agrees also with the context and the general scope and design of the prophecy. The Psalm contains one of the most remarkable predictions of the Old Testament in reference to Christ's passion, death, resurrection, and ascension to glory. Here, too, the prophecy is expressed in the first person. Christ himself is the speaker, and he speaks of the things concerning himself. Ages before his incarnation, he contemplates the great purpose of his advent. The work he would have to perform and the sufferings he would have to endure pass before him. The scene is one of mingled terror and glory. He knows that his sufferings from men and

devils, and the requirements of divine justice, will be awful; but he is assured of the divine favour and support, and this assurance inspires joy, even in the prospect of his agony. Hence he exclaims, "I have set the Lord always before me: because he is at my right hand, I shall not be moved." I shall not be moved from my purpose, nor fail in its execution. The Saviour knew, too, that his sufferings would be vicarious; that he would have to suffer as a substitute for sinners; that he must take the place of the guilty criminal; and that, in atoning for him, he must experience an awful degree of agony in his soul, and finally die on the cross as a sacrificial victim. The prospect is dreadful; but he knows that his anguish will be but temporary. Though his soul must agonize under the pressure of human guilt in this world, it shall not be doomed to the sinners' hell in the next; and though his body must die and be laid in the tomb, yet it shall not, like the bodies of sinners, be doomed to putrefaction, but shall rise again on the third day. Animated by these assurances, his joy increases, and he further exclaims, "Therefore my heart is glad, and my glory rejoiceth; my flesh also shall rest in hope. For thou wilt not abandon my soul to hell, nor wilt thou suffer thine Holy One to see corruption. Thou wilt show me the path of life in thy presence is fulness of joy; at thy right hand there are pleasures for ever more."

This interpretation of the prophecy is further sustained and illustrated by the facts which have fulfilled the prediction. We have said that the prophecy speaks of the twofold nature of Christ-his soul and his body; declaring that the one shall not be abandoned to hell, nor the other to corruption. But this language clearly implies a previous state of suffering, in which both should participate. If both were to be delivered and glorified, both were to share in the previous humiliation and pain. Now, if we turn to the history of the Redeemer's passion, death, resurrection and ascension, the facts present us with a most remarkable fulfilment of the prediction.

The Redeemer did suffer both in body and in soul, and both body and soul were delivered and glorified as the Psalm foretold. The Redeemer suffered in his body from the buffeting, the scourging and cruel treatment of the Roman soldiers; from the crown of thorns, the burden of his cross, and the lingering yet racking pains of crucifixión; and, finally, his body died and was laid in the gloomy sepulchre. But unspeakably more awful were the pains and anguish of his soul. The soul of the blessed Redeemer endured a hell of suffering in the work of human salvation. "It pleased the Father to bruise him he put him to grief, and his soul was made an offering for sin." These sufferings were endured by the Redeemer's soul, not when it was separated from the body, for it was then in paradise, but they were endured some hours before his death. In the garden of Gethsemane, the powers of hell were let loose upon him, and the burden of human guilt crushed him to the earth. "His soul was exceeding sorrowful, even unto death;" and "being in an agony, he sweat as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground." Never was sorrow like unto his sorrow. It was beyond the agony of a soul in hell. The sorrows of death compassed him, and the pains of hell gat hold upon upon him: he found trouble and sorrow. All this was necessary in effecting our redemption; but his sufferings were temporary. They were not protracted beyond his death. His soul was not abandoned to hell. Though he suffered for the sinner in this world, he was not consigned to the sinner's hell in the next. This was not necessary, for his sufferings on earth were sufficient to make a full atonement for all mankind. While he hung on the cross, his mental anguish was brought to an end; and, conscious that his spirit would have an imme diate entrance into happiness, he said to the dying thief, "This day shalt thou be with me in paradise;" and when expiring, he exclaimed, “Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit."

As his soul was not abandoned to hell, so neither did his flesh see corruption. The mortality of his body was, indeed, continued longer than the

agony of his soul; but this also was temporary. His flesh rested in hope. On the third day he arose from the dead, and thence his reign of commingled triumph and glory begins. Afterwards he ascended on high, led captivity captive, and took his seat at the right hand of God, where there is fulness of joy and pleasures for evermore. Thus the passage of the Psalmist affords no sanction to the figment of purgatory, or to the notion of a local descent into hell; but receives its accomplishment in the termination which God gave to the Saviour's mental agony on the cross, and the resurrection of his body from the tomb, and the glorification of both soul and body at the right hand of God.

MISCELLANEOUS ARTICLES, ANECDOTES, &c.

AN ACCOUNT OF THE LIFE OF ARIOSTO.

LODOVICO ARIOSTO, the Italian poet, and author of "Orlando Furioso," was born at the castle of Reggio, in Lombardy, in 1474. His father, who was major-domo to Duke Hercules, lived to the extent of his fortune, so left but little at his death. Ariosto, from his childhood, showed great marks of genius, especially in poetry. His father being utterly unlearned, and rather regarding profit than his son's inclination, compelled him to study the civil law; in which having plodded some years to no purpose, he quitted it for more pleasing studies, yet often lamented, as Ovid and Petrarch did before him, and our own Milton since, that his father banished him from the muses. On which occasion one cannot help observing, how cruel and impolitic it is for parents to force their children from those prevailing studies to which their genius leads them, and make them apply to others which, as they hate, can never be a credit or advantage to them.

At the age of twenty-four Ariosto lost his father, and found himself perplexed with family affairs. However, in about six years he was, for his good parts, taken into the service of Don Hippolito, Cardinal of Este. At this time he had written nothing but a few sonnets; but now he resolved to write a poem, and chose Bayardo's "Orlando Inamorato," for a groundwork. However, he was prevented writing for a great many years, and was chosen as a fit person to go on an embassy to Pope Julio II., where he gave such satisfaction that he was sent again, underwent many dangers

and difficulties, and at his return
was highly favoured. Then, at his
leisure, he again applied himself to his
poem; but soon after he incurred the
Cardinal's displeasure for refusing to
accompany him into Hungary, by
which he was so discouraged that he
deferred writing for fourteen years,
even till the Cardinal's death. After
that he finished by degrees, in great
perfection, that which he begun with
great expectation. Duke Astolfo of-
fered him great promotions if he
would serve him; but preferring
liberty to grandeur, he refused this
and other great offers from princes
and cardinals, particularly from
Leo X., from all whom he received,
notwithstanding, great presents. The
Duke of Ferrara delighted so much
in his writings that he built him a
house in Ferrara, with a pleasant
garden, where he used to compose
his poems.
These were highly es-
teemed by all the princes in Italy,
who sent him many presents and
great offers, but he said "he would
not sell his liberty for the best car-
dinal's hat in Rome." In his diet he
was temperate, and so careless of
dainties that he was fit to have lived
in the world when they fed upon

acorns.

Ariosto began one of his pieces in his father's lifetime, when the following incident shows the remarkable talent he had for poetry. His father one day rebuked him sharply, charging him with some great fault, but all the while he returned him no answer. Soon after, his brother began on the same subject; but he easily refuted him, and with strong

66

arguments justified his own behaviour. "Why, then," said his brother, "did you not satisfy my father?" "In truth," said Lodovico, "I was thinking of a part in my drama, and methought my father's specch to me was suitable to the part of an old man chiding his son, that I forgot I was concerned in it myself, and considered it only to make it part of my work."

Ariosto was tall, of a melancholy complexion, and so absorbed in study and meditation that he often forgot himself. His portrait was painted by Titian in a masterly manner. He was honoured with the laurel by the hands of the Emperor Charles V. He was naturally affable, always assuming less than was his due; yet never putting up with a known injury even from his superiors. He was so fearful on the water, that whenever he went out of a ship, he would see others go before him; and, on land, he would alight from his horse on the least apprehension of danger. How inconsistent this with that fiery imagination which could so well describe

the courage, strength, and marvellous intrepidity of an Orlando Furioso, as well as of many other renowned and valiant knights, and valiant ladies too! For, certainly, he was much fitter to handle the pen than the sword, and to write advantageously the achievements of others, than afford matter of panegyric, at least, in the manner of these heroes whose praises he delighted to sing.

He lived to the age of fifty-nine, and towards his latter end grew infirm, and by taking much physic injured his stomach. He affirmed

that he was willing to die: and the rather because he believed, and the greatest divines were of opinion, that after this life we should meet and know our friends; saying to those that stood by, "that many of his friends were departed whom he had a great desire to see; and that every hour seemed to him as a year till he might visit them." He died in Ferrara, in the year 1533; and there was scarce a man that could write but honoured him with an epitaph.-Selected by J. Horner.

SKETCH OF A SHORT VISIT TO EYAM.

(To the Editor.)

DEAR BROTHER,-An esteemed friend of mine, a distinguished member of the Society of Friends, in the course of last summer visited Eyam, in Derbyshire, and has since drawn up the following account of the occurrence. At my solicitation he has placed a copy at my disposal. On perusing it, I thought it might prove acceptable and interesting to many of your readers. If you should concur in opinion with me and insert it in your pages, you will oblige

Yours, very sincerely, &c.,
Manchester, 5th Dec.
W. S.

[blocks in formation]

years 1665 and 1666, destroyed in less than twelve months nearly fourfifths of its inhabitants, was still more remarkable on account of the individual who, from a clear conviction of religious duty, continued to dwell there, in active usefulness, during the awful visitation and desolation of the place. He remained in the very midst of it, even while the plague was raging with unabated fury, to give counsel, example, outward help and spiritual comfort to the poor sufferers who were being cut off at all ages, and at one time in almost every hour of the day! This noble-minded philanthropist was William Mompesson, rector of the parish, and probably one of the greatest patriots and patterns of Christian disinterestedness, and devotion to the good of others, that ever adorned the English name. This truly benevolent pastor, finding that any individual leaving the district might be a me

dium for conducting the direful disease even to the depopulation of one-half of the kingdom, earnestly exhorted the inhabitants to remain in faith; and through divine assistance to prepare themselves to meet the destroying angel without dread, and the Judge of all the earth with joy and not with grief. He stood, like Moses on the hill of Rephidim, animating and encouraging his people to put their trust in the arm of divine power, and in that only-himself being a practical example of the doctrines and precepts which he taught; and marvellously he succeeded in his efforts, far beyond any precedent of the kind hitherto recorded in the annals of Great Britain. It is stated by the celebrated Anna Seward, the friend of Dr. Johnson and a native of Eyam, that "not an individual was known to pass the boundary" prescribed-not one left the dale which hemmed in the plague! but all regarded, in the vigour of true love and confidence, the sound advice of their minister and friend; they observed his rules as with the heart of one man. Noble patriots one and all!

Another minister, an Episcopalian Nonconformist,* named Thomas Stanley, likewise proved himself truly valiant in this cause of mercy and goodwill to his fellow-mortals, whilst the angel of death was hovering over the place. His name, however, in history, is but little known. Yet his good works are recorded on high.

Before attempting a description of the surrounding scenery, I may mention that William Mompesson had a beloved wife, who stayed in this valley of death to share her husband's anxieties, dangers and duties, in soothing the sorrows and sufferings of the people; when, alas! at the age of twenty-seven, she also fell a victim to the levelling scourge, leaving him, then a year older than herself, to struggle on a mourner and a pilgrim in the earth till the seventy-first year of his age. He died, and was interred at Eakring, in Nottinghamshire, in

In those days there were clergymen who, while advocates for Episcopacy, could not conform to other Church regulations enjoined by the Court of Parliament.-W. S.

1708.

The writer of this sketch. with feelings he cannot describe, read the epitaph of this dear and excellent woman, whose body was consigned to the silent tomb in the public graveyard at Eyam, and a translated inscription, written in Latin by her husband, will be seen further on. They had two little children, George and Elizabeth; but these babes were removed to a distance ere the plague had assumed its virulence. They never saw their mother again. On the morning of the 22nd of the eighth month, 1666, William Mompesson and his wife were walking arm in arm in the fields adjoining the rectoryshe dwelling on her usual theme, their two absent children-when suddenly she exclaimed, "O Mompesson! the air! how sweet it smells!" The meaning he too well understood; the words entered his soul, and his heart sank within him. She had taken the distemper; the symptoms grew more manifest. She became delirious; and before night no hope of her recovery was entertained. How severely the good man felt on the loss of his partner, and how little hopes he had of escaping the death-plague, may be seen from the following extract of a letter he addressed to his patron and friend, Sir George Saville, dated Eyam, Sepr. 1, 1666 :”

66

66

'HONOURED AND DEAR SIR,-This is the saddest news that ever my pen could write; the destroying angel having taken up his quarters within my habitation. My dearest wife has gone to her eternal rest, and is invested with a crown of righteousness, having made a happy end. Indeed, had she loved herself as well as me, she had fled from the pit of destruction, with the sweet babes, and might have prolonged her days; but she was resolved to die a martyr to my interest. My drooping spirits are much refreshed with her joys, which I think are unutterable. Sir, this paper is to bid you a hearty farewell for ever, and to bring you my humble thanks for all your favours; and I hope you will believe a dying man, I have as much love as honour for you, and I will bend my feeble knee to the God of heaven, that you, my dear lady, and your children, and their

« AnteriorContinuar »