« ForrigeFortsæt »
ever, are comparatively unimportant, although interesting analogies.
The root of the Hebrew verb is found in its least disguised form in the præter Kal. The future is but a modification of this, as is especially evident from the facility with which it resumes the preterit import with "vau conversive." The past is naturally the first and most frequent tense in use, because it is historical. In all these respects the præter answers to the Greek second aorist. The augment of this tense was a secondary or subsequent invention, and accordingly Homer habitually disregards it. The "Attic reduplication" (for example, йyayov) had a still later origin. The second aorist gives the root in its simplest if not purest form. It is further remarkable that none but primitive verbs have this tense, and no Greek verbs are primitive but those which exhibit a monosyllabic root as found in the stem of the second aorist. We invite the attention of scholars especially to these last enunciated principles. They show that this tense was originally the ground-form of the verb.
No tense in Greek exhibits greater modifications of the root than the present. This argues that the tense itself was of comparatively late date. Accordingly the derivative verbs most usually have it, although defective in many other parts; and the variety of forms under which it appears, occasions most of the so-called irregularities set down in tables of Greek verbs. Now the Hebrew has properly no present tense. Present time can only be expressed by means of the participle, with the substantive verb (regularly understood) like our "periphrastic present," ("I am doing," etc.) True to the analogy which we have indicated, the junior members of the Hebraistic family, especially the Chaldee and Syriac, constructed a present tense out of the participle, by annexing the inflective terminations appropriate to the different numbers and persons. This process illustrates the formation of
IV. VERB INFLECTIONS.--In Greek, as in Hebrew, the personal endings are obviously but fragments of the personal pronouns, appended to the verbal root or tense-stem. This is so generally recognized to be the fact with respect to both these languages, that we need dwell upon it only for the purpose of explaining, by its means, some of the peculiarities of the Greek
verbs in . This termination, which reappears in the optative of other verbs, was doubtless the original and proper sign of the first person, rather than the ending in -w. The former is the basis of the oblique cases of the pronoun of the first person, ué, me; as the latter is the last, but non-radical, syllable of the nominative, yú, I. It is in keeping with this that the verbs in -u are some of the oldest in the language, for example, the substantive verb, eiuí. The passive terminal -pai is doubtless but a modification of the same. Now the principle or fact to which we wish to call particular attention in this connection is this: Every primitive "pure" verb in Greek is a verb in -u. By this rule the student may always know them, as there are no others, except the few factitious verbs in -vu, and very rare exceptions like ῥέω, τίω, πίνω, which are attributable to disguises of the true root. Let it now be further noted, in confirmation of what we have stated above concerning the Greek primal tense, that verbs in -u have substantially the same inflection as the second aorist, and they have only those tenses with which these inflections are compatible. Neither of these lastnamed principles, it is true, is carried out with exactness, for the aorists passive of other verbs seem to have usurped these active terminations; but we are persuaded they are in general the real clue to the defectiveness and peculiar inflection of the forms in . We therefore look upon the verbs in question as interesting links in the descent from the older Hebrew type.
V. DECLENSIONAL ENDINGS.-In the absence of any real declensions whatever in the Hebrew, or any proper cases— unless the "construct state" be entitled to be regarded as a genitive there is little ground of comparison with the copious series of modifications of the Greek noun and adjective. Yet Webster has noted the resemblance of the plural and Chaldee to the English oxen, (archaic housen, etc.) epheleustic" has its analogue in the "paragogic" strikingly generalized in the "nunnation" of the Arabic.
VI. VOWEL CHANGES.-To the learner the Hebrew language seems very complicated in this respect; but the whole process of vocalization is wrought out under the following simple law that "without the tone, a long vowel cannot stand in
a closed syllable, nor a short vowel in an open syllable." From this results practically the alternative of a long vowel or an additional consonant (or dagesh forte) in every unaccented syllable. In the Greek the following fundamental principle prevails: that a long vowel (or diphthong) indicates the omission of a consonant, except where it represents two short vowels; and this latter is tantamount to the other, for there is one letter less. Thus the systems of syllabication in both languages essentially coincide in this: that length in the vowel is equivalent to another consonant. We might take room to exemplify these rules, but the modern scholar will readily see their truth. In none of the later cognate languages is this principle regarded with much uniformity, although from the nature of the vocal organs themselves, it follows, even in so arbitrary a tongue (or rather so historical a spelling) as the English, that a vowel is naturally long when it ends the syllable, and short when a consonant closes the sound. But in the Greek and Hebrew the law we have propounded is consistently carried out in a complete system of euphonic changes which lie at the very threshold of either language.
Accordingly, in exactness of phonetic representation these two languages have no rival, not even in the German, Italian, or Spanish. Though the original sounds are now somewhat uncertain, yet it is evident (unless we take the degenerate modern Greek, and the discrepant modern Rabbinical pronunciations as perfect guides) that each letter and vowel in both had its own peculiar power. The two alphabets, we know, were identical in origin; for if we distrust the story of the importation of the Phoenician characters by Cadmus into Greece, we have but to compare the names, order, and forms of the written signs (reversing them, as the two languages were read in opposite directions,) in order to satisfy ourselves that they are essentially the same. Even the unappreciable & has its equivalent in the spiritus lenis, (as the may be visually represented by the spiritus asper,) and the old digamma (Fav) reappears in the consonantal Perhaps the reason why v initial always has the rough breathing, is owing to its affinity to both these last named.
We trust we have said enough to illustrate our proposition, that these two lingual families, and especially their two chiefly
interesting representatives which, widely variant as they are in age, culture, flexibility, and genius, yet by a remarkable Providence have been brought together in the only revelation written for man-have no ordinary or casual points of resemblance. We would be glad to see the subject extended by some competent hand, especially by a comparison of the venerable and rich Sanscrit and Arabic.
ART. VIII.-FOREIGN RELIGIOUS INTELLIGENCE.
understanding. It was added that, if the petitioner should desire to impugu the letters patent, as having been im
CISION BY THE PRIVY COUNCIL.-We have traced in the former numbers of the
Methodist Quarterly Review the history of this important case to the appeal of Bishop Colenso from a decree of South African Bishops-by which he was, on account of heresy, deposed from his See of Natal to the Queen's Privy Council. The decision of this court, which is final, was delivered by the Lord Chancellor on March 29. The hearing of the appeal was commenced on June 27, 1864, when the Judicial Committee de clined to entertain the question of the legality of the Bishop of Capetown's ju risdiction without fuller information. On December 14 the case again came on, when the Bishop of Capetown appeared under protest, denying, "with all due reverence, that her Majesty in Council has any jurisdiction in the subject-matter of the petition, or that any appeal lies from what he (Dr. Gray) has done in the matter, either to Her Majesty in Council,
THE COLENSO CASE-ITS FINAL DE- providently granted by the Crown, the proper course for him to pursue would be by proceedings to repeal the said letters patent. The matter was elaborately argued before the Lord Chancellor, Lord Cranworth, Lord Kingsdown, Sir J. Romilly, and Sir S. Lushington. The court, on the part of the counsel of Bishop Colenso, was prayed to admit the appeal, and on the part of the counsel of the Bishop of Capetown, to "advise Her Majesty to pronounce for protest and against the said pretended complaint and appeal." On these points the court delivered judgment. After minutely recapitulating the circumstances which led the Bishop of Capetown to depose the Bishop of Natal him of his see, the Lord Chancellor from the office of bishop and deprive
or to the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council." The defense concluded by stating that Dr. Colenso not having availed himself of the liberty of appeal to the Archbishop of Canterbury, against the sentence of deposition, as provided, but having appealed to the Judicial Committee of Privy Council, the appeal should not be allowed, because Dr. Gray was entitled to exercise the authority of a metropolitan bishop, and because Dr. Colenso received his bishopric on that
As the question can be decided only by the Sovereign as head of the Established Church and depositary of ultimate humbly report to Her Majesty their judgappellate jurisdiction, their lordships will ment and opinion that the proceedings taken by the Bishop of Capetown, and the judgment or sentence pronounced by him against the Bishop of Natal, are null and void in law.
This decision has a far-reaching importance not only with regard to the individual case on which it has been delivered, but with regard to all the colonial sees of the Church of England. It was allowed by the court that the letters patent of Bishop Gray, of Cape
town, granted him the rights of a metropolitan. In these letters it is said:
We do will and ordain that in case any proceeding shall be instituted against any of the said Bishops of Grahamstown and Natal, when placed under the said metropolitical see of Capetown, such proceedings shall originate and be carried on before the said Bishop of Capetown, whom we hereby authorize and direct to take cognizance of the same. And if any party shall conceive himself aggrieved by any judgment, decree, or sentence pronounced by the said Bishop of Capetown or his successors, ... it shall be lawful for the said party to appeal to the said Archbishop of Canterbury or his successors, who shall finally decide or determine the said appeal.
| bishop to such, without an act of parliament, so it is ruled that in a crown colony an act of parliament is necessary; and in colonies which have their own legislatures, the sanction of those legislatures must be obtained to give validity to the establishment of a diocese. The queen has a right of her own prerogative to command the consecration of a bishop, but no power to assign him any diocese not constitutionally created.
Therefore the colonial bishoprics already founded, with the exception of Calcutta, Bombay, and Madras, sanctioned by acts of imperial parliament, and Jamaica, sanctioned by the local legislature, have no position in the eye of the law. The judgment is most sweeping in its conse
The letters patent creating the See of quences, since it renders all jurisdiction in such unsanctioned bishoprics, not Natal contain the following: only of metropolitans over bishops, but of bishops over the inferior clergy, invalid; so that in fact there is no jurisdiction at all, and the Bishop of Natal's clergy may, if he return, refuse to acknowledge his authority, just as he refuses to acknowledge that of the Bishop of Capetown. This places the Church of England in the colonies, with the single exception of Jamaica, in an entirely new position, making the authority of all bishops even to claim legally the title assigned, dependent upon acts of the legislature sanctioned by the
We do further will and ordain that the said John William Colenso and every Bishop of Natal shall, within six months after the date of their respective letters patent, take an oath of due obedience to the Bishop of Capetown for the time being as his metropolitan.
Colenso took the oath accordingly as follows:
I, John William Colenso, Doctor in Divinity, appointed Bishop of the Sec and Diocese of Natal, do profess and promise all due reverence and obedience to the Metropolitan Bishop of Capetown and to his successors.
Dr. Pusey has written an interesting letter on the decision of the privy council. He hails it as an indication that the Church of South Africa will soon be as free and as prosperous as the Scotch Episcopal Church and the Church of the United States. The Church, he thinks, is now freed from all complicity with Dr. Colenso, over whom, neither directnor indirectly, it has any jurisdic
Objection was raised in his appeal by Bishop Colenso, on the ground of there not being in reality, at the time the oath was taken, any metropolitan see of Capetown, or any bishop thereof in existence, this see having been created some months later. Apart from this specific objection, which, whether valid or invalid, could not have affected the generally principle, the letters seemed to be very plain. The metropolitan had power to cite the bishop and clergy to his bar, and a final appeal was open from his decision to the Archbishop of Canterbury. But the opinion of the privy council at once cuts away the entire foundation, by stating that the queen's letters patent have themselves no authority whatever, not having been made by any statute of the Imperial Parliament, nor confirmed by any act of the legislature of the Cape of Good Hope, or of the legislative Council of Natal. As in England and Ireland the queen has no power to create a new diocese, or to appoint a
The trustees of the Colonial Bishopric's Fund, from which the salaries of the colonial bishops are for the most part paid, have announced that they are not prepared to pay the arrears of the salary of Bishop Colenso, and it is therefore expected that another legal contest may possibly take place.
MONASTICISM IN THE CHURCH OF monastic institution ENGLAND.-The called the Benedictine Brotherhood, or the "Order of English Benedictines," and founded by Brother Ignatius,' seems to root itself in the Anglican