« PoprzedniaDalej »
be heinously offensive to the votaries of Venus, and the sports of the Lupercalia. She had been arraigned on account of her conversion, and might not another time have been favourably treated. I cannot say I clearly comprehend the last words in the passage below from Tacitus, and what “Glory” he means !
Pom ponia Græcina, insignis fæmina, Plautio, qui Ovans se de Britanniis retulit, nupta ; ac superstitionis externæ rea, mariti judicio permissa, isque prisco instituto, propinquis coram, de capite famaque conjugis cognovit, et insontem nunciavit. Longa huic Pomponiæ ætas, et continua tristitia fuit.-Nam Juliam Drusi filiam dolo Messaling interfectam, per 40 annos, non cultu nisi lugubri, non animo nisi mesto, egit. Idque illi, imperitante Claudio, impune; mox ad gloriam vertit.”
“ Pom ponia Græcina, a celebrated lady (married to Plautius, who returned with public honours from the Britannias) being accused of the foreign superstition, was referred to her husband's decision. So he, by an ancient institute, took cognizance, in the presence of (their) neighbours, of bis wife's reputation, and capital hazard; and pronounced her not guilty.-This Pomponia's life was long ; and (her) sadness permanent. For, after Julia, daughter of Drusus (was) murdered by Messalina's contrivance, she went through 40 years, not otherwise than in a sorrowful manner, not otherwise than with a troubled mind. And this during the reign of Claudius,
with impunity; soon afterwards redounded to Glory."
I am persuaded that this great lady (converted to Christianity) convinced not only many of the Bri, tish dames, who graced her husband's Ovation, but Roman ladies also; and Plautius, on his wife's trial, was probably ready to say, as Agrippa to Paul, “ Thou almost persuadest me to be a Christian."
Before Paul left Corinth the last time, we find that many converts were at Rome (well known THEN to Paul) where AQuilla and PRISCILLA can never be suspected of having been idle. Banished as they were, they returned thither very speedily, Rom. xvi. 3. compared with Acts xviii.
And Paul's good friend Phebe, a Deaconess of Cenchrea, was then at Rome, a most active and serviceable person, who, probably, bore Paul's Epistle to Rome; in which he names several zealous Christians there, of his acquaintance there at least THREE YEARS before he attained Rome himself. Paul in his Epistle to Rome, besides extolling Phebe, Aquilla and Priscilla, as active in the good cause, praises a Mary, Andronicus, and Junia, Urban, Apelles, the family of Narcissus, Tryphena, Tryphosa; Persis ; also Rufus elected by the Lord! Cannot this be Rufus Pudens, Claudia Rufina's husband ? Paul also calls the mother of Rufus, his own mother, so much she fostered Christianity! All this was before Paul went last to Asia, and thence last to Jerusalem, where he was kept a prisoner above two years
Owing to the above champions for Christ, so early and active at Rome, I would wonder not, a thou. sand Claudias were converted before Nero's fifth year!
IV.- PROTEST OF THE BRITISH CHURCH AGAINST
THE CORRUPTIONS OF POPERY AT THE BEGINNING OF THE SEVENTH CENTURY. (Letter, p. 349, 350, Note).
The Old Chronicle, mentioned by Bishop Davies in his Letter to Archbishop Parker, is quoted also in his Preface to the Welsh Translation of the New Testament, printed in 1567: The Bishop's Preface was reprinted (Anthony Wood says) “ among other things, and published by Charles Edwards, a Welshman, Oxf. 1671, in oct.” It is quoted, with refer. ence to the old Chronicle, ' by Theophilus Evans, Vicar of Llangamarch, in his Drych y Prif Oesoedd, (1740.)
V.-H. N. T. s.'s OBJECTIONS TO THE PREACHING
OF ST. PAUL IN BRITAIN A more violent perversion of authorities, or (if, in candour, is should be said) misconception of their meanings, is seldom to be met with, than what occurs in the objections made to the principal subject of the preceding Letter, by a correspondent of the Christian Observer, (who signs himself H.N.T. S.) in what he has written on the preaching of St. Paul in Britain, No. 112, 113, for April and May, 1811.
He quotes the words of only two of the Fathers, Clemens- Romanus and Athanasius, and has mistranslated them both.
P. 208. He translates Clement's ewi TO Tequa This Quow, “ to the borders of the West," instead of the extremity, or utmost 'bounds, of the West, or “ad occidentis terminos sive fines," as Pearson translates the
passage, and all other learned men, that I have met with, except Lardner, whom H. N:T. S. follows. But Lardner, though a very valuable collector of antiquities, was not learned in languages. Lardner says: “ I rather think that Clement only meant Italy or Rome, where Clement was, and where Paul suffered. From a note of Le Clerc upon the place, we learn that Bishop Fell so understood Clement." He should have added, from the same note, the contrary authorities of Bishops Pearson and Stillingfleet, who did not so understand Clement, the former interpreting to t&qux ans duo:ws, Spain, and the latter, Britain. Pearson says, Quis unquam dixit Romam fuisse terminos sive fines occidentis ?
P. 274. H. N. T. S. says “ if it can be proved, that St. Paul did not visit Spain, it will be admitted to be even much less probable, that he ever entered England (Britain.]” And how does he prove it? He
says, that St. Athanasius who is brought forward to prove that St. Paul preached in Spain, only says, that the Apostle was ready to go thither, len oxysı.
It is almost incredible that any one should venture to appeal to a passage so contrary to bis assertion, as the original, in this case is. The words of Athanasius are: (vol. i. p. 737, ed. Commelin) MeXpe Tou Ιλλυρικου κηρυττει και μη οκνει μη δε εις την Ρωμεν ασελ.
εις τας Σπανιας αναθηναι, ένα δσον κοια τοσουτον και του κοσου τον μισθον μείζονα απολαβη, he preached as far as Illyricum ; and did not hesitate even to return to Rome, and even to go to Spain, that, in proportion to the labour, he might receive the greater reward. If the whole passage had been quoted, the contradiction would have been too glaring to commit to paper: for if St. Paul was only ready to go to Spain, he was only ready to return to Rome; and if the passage were a proof that he did not go to Spain, it would prove also, that he did not return to Rome. Mn onvei is did not hesitate, did not decline, did not fear to go. Mn oxvel un diam lends is strongly expressive of St. Paul's zeal and labour and courage in undertaking these journies. P. 273. He
says, “ It is very probable that St. Paul was never in Spain. Pope Gelasius especially denies it!!" This may be infallible authority with some of H. N. T. S.'s readers, but I am sure will not be with the majority ; when it is opposed to the direct assertions of Athanasius, Chrysostom, and Theodoret, among the ancients; and of Pearson among the moderns. Chrysostom says, Kai ouds ενταυθα σταται, αλλα και εκειθεν εις Ισπανιαν εδραμς. (Orat. 7, in S. Paulum, toin'. viii. p. 59) Theodoret. εκειθεν δε εις Σπανιας ανελθων, και το θιεον κακείνοις προ