Further Readings From The Codex Huntingtonianus -- By: Anonymous
BSac 74:293 (Jan 1917) p. 148
Further Readings From The Codex Huntingtonianus
[The Editor has received the following criticism of a New York correspondent, who withholds his name.]
Mr. Buchanan’s line is an absolutely hopeless one. Hort may possibly be too sure of the infallibility of Codex B. That is quite a fair question for debate. But there can be no question at all that Buchanan’s main test of antiquity and authenticity in various Readings — namely the greater or less fulness with which the Doctrine of the Trinity is asserted in them — the value of the Reading varying with the Athanasian Orthodoxy — is the completest possible inversion of a true test. The most convinced Trinitarian in the world if he happens to know anything at all of Apostolic and Sub-Apostolic literature will admit that it took that Doctrine a considerable time to develop, and that if it is present at all in the New Testament, in Clement of Rome, Hennas, Ignatius and the others, it is so in a very implicit form. He will admit that the constant introduction of the Holy Spirit — even in Isaiah for instance 1 — is scarcely a mark of genuineness and antiquity in any version where it occurs, that on the contrary it is proof positive of a comparatively late date and of an egregious naivete in the pious interpolator who cannot imagine that the truth as known to him could not have been at least equally present to the minds of the holy men who wrote the Scriptures to the dictation of the Holy Ghost. Mr. Buchanan quite shares
BSac 74:293 (Jan 1917) p. 149
that point of view, and I fear that until he has got over it, all the diligence and knowledge which he does not seem to lack, will be a serious obstruction to his usefulness even as a textual critic. The “Rich Yield of Readings “in the Codex Hunting-tonianus is likely to prove only a not very indispensable addition to our already large collection of specimens (e.g. the Pseudo-Ignatian letters) of psychological curiosities from the workshop of the pious forger.
[Mr. Buchanan’s Reply.]
Your correspondent is obsessed by Loisy’s theory that the mind of men evolved the Doctrine of the Trinity from some obscure hints let fall by Jesus and His Apostles. We owe the Holy Spirit then to the generative power possessed by the human intellect, the same intellect that we see today piling up arms to destroy men’s lives. Love, the love of the Holy Spirit (which the text of the new MS. says is to save men’s spirits from evil spirits), is then the production of the mind that produced Spanish Inquisitors and invented Hell-fire and the rack. Some of us have not so learned nature and human nature— “red in tooth and claw.” The new MS. has no hell-fire. Perhaps your ...
Click here to subscribe