See other formats

Full text of "Synonyms of the New Testament"

SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 




SYNONYMS 



OF 



THE NEW TESTAMENT; 



THE SUBSTANCE OF A COURSE OP 

LECTURES ADDRESSED TO' THE THEOLOGICAL STUDENTS, 
KING'S COLLEGE, LONDON. 



BY 

RICHARD CHENEVIX TRENCH, B. D.. 

PROFESSOR OK DIVINITY, KIN(fs r< MJ.i:<;F, 1.<>NDOX J 
.-\rnio;; 01 '. \\<.K!'V CTC. 



FEOVI THK THIRD LONDON BDITIOM, HKVI8KD AND KKLAEfJED. 




REDFIELD, 

??4 BKKKMAN STRF.KT. NEW YORK. 

i s r 5 



PREFACE. 



Tins little volume has grown out of a short 
course of lectures on the synonyms of the New 
Testament, which, in the fuliilment of my duties as 
Professor of Divinity at King's College, I have 
more than once addressed to the theological students 
there. It seemed to me that lectures on such a 
subject might help, in however partial a measure, 
to supply a want, of which many of the students 
themselves arc probably conscious, of which those 
who have to do with their training cannot help 
being aware. The long, patient and exact studies 
in philology of our great schools and universities, 
which form so invaluable a portion of their mental, 
and, I will add, of their moral discipline also, can 
tind no place during the two years or two years and 
a half of the theological course at King's College. 
The time itself is too short to allow this, and it is 



6 PKEFACE. 

in great part claimed by other and more pressing 
studies. Some, indeed, we rejoice to find, come to 
us possessing this knowledge in a very respectable 
degree already ; while of others much more than 
this can be said. Yet where it does not already 
exist, it is quite impossible that it can be more than 
in part supplied. At the same time we feel the loss 
and the deficiency ; we are sometimes conscious of 
it even in those who go forth from us with general 
theological acquirements, which would bear a fa- 
vourable comparison with the acquirements of those 
trained in older institutions. It is a matter of re- 
gret, when in papers admirable in all other respects, 
errors of inexact scholarship are to be found, which 
seem quite out of keeping with the amount of in- 
telligence, and the standard of knowledge, which 
every where else they display. 

Feeling the immense value of these studies, and 
how unwise it would be, because we cannot have 
all which we would desire, to forego what is possi- 
ble and within our reach, I have two or three times 
dedicated a brief course of lectures to the compara- 
tive value of words in the New Testament and 
these, with some subsequent additions and some 
defalcations, have supplied the materials of the 
present volume. I have never doubted that, set- 
ting aside those higher and more solemn lessons, 
which in a great measure are out of our reach to 



PREFACE. 7 

impart, being to be taught rather by God than men, 
there are few things which we should have more at 
heart than to awaken in our scholars an enthusiasm 
for the grammar and the lexicon. We shall have 
done much, very much for those who come t<> as 
for theological training and generally for mental 
guidance, if we can persuade them to have thes-e 
continually in their hands; if we can make them 
believe that with these, and out of these, they may 
be learning more, obtaining more real and lasting 
acquisitions, such as will stay by them, such as will 
form a part of the texture of their own minds for 
ever, that they shall from these be more effectually 
accomplishing themselves for their future work, 
than from many a volume of divinity, studied be- 
fore its time, even if it were worth studying at all, 
crudely digested, and therefore turning to no true 
nourishment of the inner man. 

But having now ventured to challenge for tl: 
lectures a somewhat wider audience than at lirst 
they had, it may be permitted to me to add here ;i 
very few observations on the value of the study of 
synonyms, not any longer considered in reference 
to our peculiar needs, but generally ; and on that 
of the synonyms of the !N"ew Testament in particu- 
lar ; as also on the helps to this study which are at 
present in existence. 

The value of this study as a discipline for 



8 PREFACE. 

training the mind into close and accurate habits of 
thought, the amount of instruction which may be 
drawn from it, the increase of intellectual wealth 
which it may yield, all this has been implicitly 
recognized by well-nigh all great writers for well- 
nigh all from time to time have paused, themselves 
to play the dividers and discerners of words ex- 
plicitly by not a few who have proclaimed the 
value which this study had in their eyes. And in- 
structive as in any language it must be, it must be 
eminently so in the Greek a language spoken by 
a people of the finest and subtlest intellect ; who 
saw distinctions where others saw none ; who di- 
vided out to different words what others often were 
content to huddle under a common term ; who were 
themselves singularly alive to its value, diligently 
cultivating the art of synonymous distinction, 1 and 
sometimes even to an extravagant excess; 2 who 
have bequeathed a multitude of fine and delicate 
observations on the right distinguishing of their 
own words to the after world. 

And while thus, with reference to all Greek, 
the investigation of the likenesses and differences 
of words appears especially invited by the charac- 
teristic excellences of the language, in respect to 



1 The 6i>6fjiaTa Siatpew, Plato, Laches, 197 d. 
a J.I. 1'rotay. 377 a h C, 



PREFACE. 9 

the Greek of the New Testament, plainly there are 
reasons additional inviting us to this study. If by 
it we become aware of delicate variations in an 
author's meaning, which otherwise we might have 
missed, where is it so desirable that we should not 
miss anything, that we should lose no finer inten- 
tion of the writer, than in those words which are 
the vehicles of the very mind of God? If it in- 
creases the intellectual riches of the student, can 
this anywhere be of so great importance as there, 
where the intellectual may, if rightly used, prove 
spiritual riches as well ? If it encourage thoughtful 
meditation on the exact forces of words, both as 
they are in themselves, and in their relation to other 
words, or in any way unveil to us their marvel and 
their mystery, this can nowhere else have a worth 
in the least approaching that which it acquires 
when the words with which we have to do are, to 
those who receive them aright, words of eternal 
life ; while out of the dead carcases of the same, if 
men suffer the spirit of life to depart from them, all 
manner of corruptions and heresies may be, as they 
have been, bred. 

The words of the New Testament are eminently 
the crroL^ela of Christian theology, and he who will 
lot begin with a patient study of these, shall never 
make any considerable, least of all any secure, ad- 
vances in this: for here, as everywhere else, disap- 
1* 



10 PREFACE. 

p ointment awaits him who thinks to possess the 
whole without first possessing the parts, of which 
that whole is composed. Now it is the very nature 
and necessity of the investigation of synonyms to 
compel such patient investigation of the forces of 
words, such accurate weighing of their precise 
value, absolute and relative, and in this its merits 
as a mental discipline, consist. 

Yet neither in respect of Greek synonyms in 
general, nor specially in respect of those of the 
!N"ew Testament, can it be affirmed that we are even 
tolerably furnished with books. Whatever there 
may be to provoke occasional dissent in Ddderlein's 
Lateinische Synonyme und Etymologieen, yet there 
is no book on Greek synonyms which for compass 
and completeness can bear comparison with it ; and 
almost all the more important modern languages 
of Europe have better books devoted to their syno- 
nyms than any which has been devoted to the 
Greek. The works of the early grammarians, as of 
Ammonius and others, supply a certain amount of 
important material, but cannot be said even remote- 
ly to meet the needs of the student at the present 
day. Vdmel's Synonymisches WorterbucJi, Frank- 
furt, 1822, an admirable little volume as far as it 
goes, but at the same time a school-book and no 
more, and Pillon's Synonymes Grecs, of which a 
translation into English was edited by the latu 



PREFACE. 11 

T. K. Arnold, London, 1850, are the only modern 
attempts to supply the deficiency ; at least I am 
not aware of any other. But neither of these wri- 
ters has allowed himself space to enter on his sub- 
ject with any fulness and completeness ; while the 
references to the synonyms of the New Testament 
are exceedingly rare in Yomel ; and though some- 
what more frequent in Pillon's work, are capricious 
and accidental there, and in general of a meagre 
and unsatisfactory description. 

The only book dedicated expressly and exclu 
sively to these is one written in Latin by J. A. 11. 
Tittman, De Synowymis <n ^Vovo Testa im ///<>, Lcip- 
sic, 1829, 1832. It would ill become me, and 1 
have certainly no intention to speak slightingly of 
the work of a most estimable man, and of a : 
scholar above all, when that work is one from 
which I have occasionally derived assistance, such 
as I most willingly acknowledge. Yet the fact 
that we are offering a book on the same subject as 
a preceding author ; and may thus lie under, or seem 
to others to lie under, the temptation of unduly 
claiming for the ground which we would occupy, 
that it is not occupied already ; this must not wholly 
shut our mouths in respect of what appear to us 
deficiencies or shortcomings on his part. And this 
work of Tittmann's seems to me still to leave room 
for another on the subject of the synonyms of the 



12 PREFACE. 

New Testament. It sometimes travels very slowly 
over its ground ; the synonyms which he selects for 
discrimination cannot be esteemed always the most 
interesting, nor, which is one of the most important 
things of all, are they always felicitously grouped 
for investigation ; he often fails to bring out in sharp 
and clear antithesis the differences between them ; 
while now and then the investigations of later 
scholars have quite broken down the distinctions 
which he has sought to establish. Indeed the fact 
that this book of Tittmann's, despite the interest 
of its subject, and its standing alone upon it, not 
to speak of its republication in England and in 
English, 1 has never obtained any considerable cir- 
culation among students of theology here, is itself 
an evidence that it has not been felt to meet our 
wants on the matter. 

The work which is now offered, is, I am perfect- 
ly aware, but a slight contribution to the subject 
small in respect of the number of synonyms con- 
sidered, 2 which might easily have been doubled or 

1 Biblical Cabinet, vols. iii. xxxvii. Edinburgh, 1833, 1837. It 
must at the same time be owned that Tittmann has hardly had a 
fair chance. Nothing can well Le imagined more incorrect and 
more slovenly than this translation. It is often unintelligible, 
where the original is perfectly clear. 

2 I have not thought it worth while to dispose these synonyms 
in alphabetical order. The fact that only one in each pair or group, 



PEKFACT:. 13 

trebled ; many of the most interesting having re- 
mained untouched by me ; and also, as I am pain- 
fully aware, with manifold deficiencies, most proba- 
bly with some mistakes, even in the treatment of 
these. The conclusions at which I have arrived 
may rest sometimes on too narrow an induction : it 
is possible that a larger knowledge would have com- 
pelled me to modify or forego them altogether. I 
can only say that I have not consciously passed 
over any passages which would have made against 
my distinction ; and that on this and any other sub- 
ject in the volume I shall most gladly receive in- 
struction and correction; while yet, in conclusion, 
I will not fear to add that, with all this, the book is 
the result of enough of honest labour, of notices 
not to be found ready to hand in Wetstein, or Gro- 
tius, or Suicer, in German commentaries, or in lexi- 
cons (though I have availed myself of all these), 
but gathered one by one during many yea: 
make me feel confident that any who shall hereafter 
give a better and completer book on the subject, 
will yet acknowledge a certain amount of assistance 
derived from these preparatory labours. 

Let me only add how deeply thankful I shall 

can be arranged according to such law, renders the disposition 
nearly, if not altogether, useless. On the other hand, I have 
sought, by sufficient indexes, to assist the reader's references to the 
book. 



14: PREFACE. 

be to Him who can alone prosper the work of our 
hands, if my book, notwithstanding its deficiencies 
and imperfections, shall be of any service to any in 
leading them into a closer and more accurate inves- 
tigation of His "Word, and of the riches of wisdom 
and knowledge which are therein contained. 

ITCHENSTOKE, May, 1854. 



CONTENTS 



PAGl 



i. 'EKKArjtna, (rvvaycayr], iravrryvpis . . . .17 

ii. 0eiJT7jy, Gt6rT\s "2. 1 

iii. iepov, va6s ........ 28 

iv. l-mn/j-do), (\eyxu (ama, t\fyxs) ... 31 

v. aco07j^ta, avd6e/j.a ....... 35 

Vi. 7I7>o4>7JTUa>, fACLVTeVOfJiai 40 

vii. rifjLupia, K^Xacrts ....... 46 

viii. a\7}0Tjy, a\^6iv6y 48 

'IK. 6epdircai>, 5ov\os, 5ia/coi/o?, wTTTjpeTTjs .... 53 

X. SetAia, <^)J/8os, v\d.0ia ..... 58 

xi. Ka/fia, Trovypia, a/co7j0eta ..... 60 

xii. ayairdo}, (pi\f(a ....... 65 

xiii. flaAcurcra, TreAayoy 72 

xiv. (r/cA7jpos, aw(TT7jpos ...... 74 

XV. eiKdcv, 6/j.oica<Tis, 6/j.oicafj.a . . . . . .77 

xvi. atrcuTia, a(re'A7ja ...... 83 

xvii. fltyyaj/w, aTrro/xai, ^TjAat^aw ..... 89 

xviii. 7raAt77ej/e(ria, dj/a/cofi'wo'is 92 

xix. aurxvi/rj, aiSais ....... 98 

XX. aiSws, <T(a<ppo(rvi>7) 102 

xxi. <rt;pa>, eA/cua> 105 

xxii. 6\6K\ypos, reAetos ...... 108 

xxiii. crreepwoy, SidS-ripa 112 

xxiv. TrAeoj/e^'a, <pi\apyvpia 117 

xxv. j8o<TKa>, TrotfjLaivu) . 120 

xxvi. ^^oy *^yw 124 



16 CONTENTS. 



PAGE 

xxvii. 4 jSi'os ........ 128 

xxviii. Kvpios, SetrTrJrTjs ....... 134 

xxix. aXa&v, inrepyQavos, vfipiffT-f)S ..... 137 

xxx. ai/Tt'xp'^Tos 1 , \J'eu5oxp'0'Tos ..... 145 

xxxi. /ioAiW, p.ia.iv<a ....... 151 

xxxii. TrcuSe/a, vovdeffia ....... 152 

xxxiii. .&(p(Tis, 7rape<ns ....... 157 

xxxiv. /j.wpo\oyia, alff-^poXoyia, eurpcnreAia . . . 162 
xxxv. Aarpeuaj, \eiruvpyeo) . . . . . .171 

xxxvi. Tre'j/Tjy, TTTWXOS ....... l^ 5 

xxxvii. 6v,u6s, opyf], TrapopyLor/aos . . . . . .178 

xxxviii. eAcuoi/, /j.vpov (xP'X a\ei<p<i>) .... 182 

xxxix. 'E/3pcuos, 'Iou5a?os, 'lapa-rj\lr^5 .... 185 

xl. alrew, epcoraa) ....... 194 

xli. avdirav(ns, 'dvfcns . . . . . . .198 

xlii. Ta.irGii'otypoffvi'ri, TrpaJrTjs ..... 201 

xliii. TrpaoTTj?, eirie'iKeia ....... 207 

XHV. - /cAeTTTTJS, A?70"T7JS ..... ,. . 211 

XIV. - 7TA.WO), PtTTTW, AOVW * . . . . . .215 

xlvi. <f>u>s, fyeyyos, fytoariip, Xv^vos, Aa/iiros . . . 219 

xlvii. xP' $ > e^fo? ........ 225 

xlviii. 0eo(T6j87is, eixrejSTjs, sv\a&r)s, dp^ffKos, 5ei(Ti3ai/j.o}V . 227 

xlix. /cATjjua, Aa5o? ....... 237 

1. a. XP 7 7 (TT T7 J S > ayaBwavvr) ..... 238 

/3. eWs, Tricrrts . .... 239 

y. <rxujyta, a'lpecris . . . . . . 239 

S. iJ.aKpodv/u.ia, TrpaJr^s ...... 240 

e. AoiSopea), jSAatr^yiiew ..... 240 

^. i|/ix"cos, (rapKiK6s ...... 240 

r;. jueravoew, jUera^eAo/xot ..... 241 

0. aicov, Kofffj.os . . . . . . .211 

1. Trpau'y, ^<n>X'os ..... 242 

K. 0^X09, VZKp6s ....... 242 

A. Ko\aais, Ti/nupta . . . . . . 2-12 

AlVKNDIX ......... 213 



SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 



. 

*E?cK\r]cria is one of those words whoso history 
it is peculiarly interesting to watch, as they obtain 
a deeper meaning, and receive a new consecration 
in the Christian Church; which, even while it did 
not invent, has yet assumed them into its service, 
and employed them in a far loftier sense than any 
to which the world had ever put them before. 
The very word by which the Church is named i> 
itself an example a more illustrious one could 
scarcely be found of this gradual ennobling of a 
word. For we have KK\rjaia in three distinct 
stages of meaning the heathen, the Jewish, and 
the Christian. In respect of the first, KK\rj<ria, 
as all know, was the lawful assembly in a free 
k city of all those p t^e.-bed of the rights of 



18 SYNONYMS OF THE 

citizenship, for the transaction of public affairs. 
That they were summoned is expressed in the latter 
part of the word ; that they were summoned out 
of the whole population, a select portion of it, in- 
cluding neither the populace, nor yet strangers, nor 
those who had forfeited their civic rights, this is 
expressed in the first. ^ Both the calling, and the 
calling out, are moments to be remembered, when 
the word is assumed into a higher Christian sense, 
for in them the chief part of its peculiar adaptation 
to its auguster uses lies. 1 It is interesting to ob- 
serve how, on one occasion in the !New Testament, 
the word returns to this its earlier significance 
(Acts xix. 32, 39, 40). 

'EKKXTJO-LCL did not, like some other words, pass 
immediately and at a single step from the heathen 
world to the Christian Church ; but here, as so 

1 Both these points are well made by Flacius Illyricus, in his 
Clavis Scripturce, s. v. Ecclesia: Qaia Ecclesia a verbo KoXeTj/ veuif, 
hoc observetur primum ; ideo conversionem hominum vocatiouem 
voeari, non tantura quia Deus eos per se suumque Verbum, quasi 
clamore, vocat; sed etiara quia sicut herus ex turbft. famulorutn 
certos aliquos ad aliqua singularia munia evocat, sic Dens quoquo 
turn totum populum suum vocat ad cultum suum (Hos. xi. 1) turn 
etiam singulos homines ad certas singularesque functioned. (Act. 
xiii. 2.) Quoniam autena non tantuin vocatur Popnhis Dei ad cul- 
tum Dei, sed etiam vocatur ex reliquft turbA aut confusione generis 
humani, ideo dicitur Ecclesia, quasi dicas, Evocata divinitua ex roli- 
qua impionun colluvic, ad cultum colebratiouemquc Dei, ct octer- 
uain folicitutoin. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 19 

often, the Septuagint supplies the link of connexion, 
the point of transition, the word being there pre- 
pared for its highest meaning of all. "When the 
Alexandrian translators undertook the rendering of 
the Hebrew Scriptures, they found in them two 
constantly recurring words, namely rns and nj?. 
For these they employed generally, and as their 
most adequate Greek equivalents, avvaywyij and 
KK\r}(Tia. The rule which they seem to have pre- 
scribed to themselves is 'as follows to render ms> 
for the most part by avvaywyij (Exod. xii. 3 ; Lev. 
iv. 13; Xumb. i. 2, and altogether more than an 
hundred times), and whatever other renderings of 
the word they may adopt, in no single case to ren- 
der it by KK\tjala. It were to be wished that they 
had shown the same consistency in respect of bnp ; 
but they have not ; for while KK\7]aia is their stand- 
ing word for it (Deut. xviii. 1(5 ; Judg. xx. 2 ; 1 Kings 
viii. 14, and in all some seventy times), they too 
often render this also by avvaycayr) (Lev. iv. 13; 
Xunib. x. -1; Deut. v. 22, and in all some live and 
twenty times), thus breaking down for the Greek 
reader the distinction which undoubtedly exists be- 
tween the words. Our English translation has the 
same lack of a consistent rendering. Its two words 
are ' congregation ' and ' assembly ; ' but instead of 
constantly assigning one to one, and one to the 
other, it renders tris now by ' congregation ' (Lev. 



20 SYNONYMS OF THE 

x. 17 ; Numb. i. 16 ; Josh. ix. 27), and now by c as- 
sembly ' (Lev. iv. 13) ; and on the other hand, bnp 
only sometimes by 'assembly' (Judg. xxi. 8; 2 
Chron. xxx. 23), but much oftener by ' congrega- 
tion ' (Judg. xxi. 5 ; Josh. viii. 35). There is an 
interesting discussion by Yitringa (De Synag. Vet. 
pp. 77 89) on the distinction between these two 
Hebrew synonyms ; the result of which is summed 
up in the following statements : Notat proprie bhp 
universam alicujus populi multitudinem, vinculis 
societatis unitam et rempublicam sive civitatcm 
quandam constituentem, cum vocabulum rns ex 
indole et vi significationis suse tantum dicat quern- 
cunque hominum coetum et conventum, sive mino- 
rem sive majorem (p. 80). And again: Svvaywyij, 
ut et ms, semper significat coetum conjunctum et 
congregatum, etiamsi nullo forte vinculo ligatum, 
sed f] eKK\r)Gia [= bnp] designat multitudinem ali- 
quam, quse populum constituit, per leges et vincula 
inter se junctam, etsi ssepe fiat ut noii sit coacta vel 
cogi possit (p. 88). 

Accepting this as a .true distinction, remember- 
ing too the probable etymological connexion be- 
tween bnp and the Greek /eaXe>, and thus its rela- 
tionship, once removed, with eV/cX^o-ta, as indeed 
also with the old Latin i calare,' and our own f call,' 
we shall see that it was not without due reason 
that our Lord (Matt. xvi. 18 ; xviii. 17) and IILs 



NEW TESTAMENT. 21 

Apostles claimed this, as the nobler word, to desig- 
nate the new society of which He was the Founder, 
being, as it was, a society knit together by the 
closest spiritual bonds, and altogether independent 
of space. 

Yet for all this we do not find the title eK/c\r]cria 
altogether withdrawn from the Jewish congrega- 
tion ; that too was "the Church in the wilderness" 
(Acts vii. 38) ; for Christian and Jewish differed 
only in degree, and not in kind. Is or yet do we 
find awaywyr] wholly renounced by the Church ; 
the latest honourable use of it in the New Testa- 
ment, indeed the only Christian use of it there, is 
by that Apo.stle, to whom it was especially given \<> 
maintain unbroken to the latest possible moment 
the outward bonds connecting the Synagogue and 
the Church (Jam. ii. 2). Occasionally also by the 
early Fathers, by Ignatius for instance (Ep. ad 
l*<>lijc. 4), we find o-vvaywyrj still employed as an 
honourable designation of the Church, or of her 
places of assembly. Still there were causes at 
work, which could not but induce the faithful to 
have less and less pleasure in the application of this 
name to themselves; which led them in the end to 
leave it altogether to those, whom in the latest book 
of the canon, the Lord had characterized for their 
fierce opposition to the truth even as " the syna- 
gogue of Satan" (Kev. iii. 9). Thus the greater 



22 SYNONYMS OF THE 



fitness and nobleness of the title etvcX-rjcria has been 
already noted. Add to this that the Church was 
ever rooting itself more predominantly in the soil 
of heathendom, breaking off more entirely from its 
Jewish stock and stem. This of itself would have 
led the faithful to the letting fall of a-vvayayyri) a 
word at once of unfrequent use in classical Greek, 
and permanently associated with Jewish worship, 
and to the ever more exclusive appropriation to 
themselves of e/c/eX^o-ta, so familiar already, and of 
so honourable a significance, in Greek ears. 

It will be perceived from what has been said, 
that Augustine, by a piece of good fortune which 
he had scarcely a right to expect, was only half in 
the wrong, when transferring his Latin etymologies 
to the Greek and Hebrew, and not pausing to ask 
himself whether they would hold good there, as was 
beforehand improbable enough, he finds the reason 
for attributing avvaywyr) to the Jewish, and KK\T]- 
aia to the Christian Church, in the fact that ' con- 
vocatio ' (= 6Kfc\r)crla) is a nobler term than i con- 
gregatio' (= a way coy '??), the first being properly 
the calling together of men, the second the gather- 
ing together (congregatio, from congrego, and that 
from grcx) of cattle. 1 

1 Enarr. in Ps. Ixxxi. 1. In synagoga popiilum Israel accipi- 
mus, quia et ipsorum propric synagoga dici solet, quamv-is et Ec- 
clesia dicta sit. Nostri vero Ecclesiam nunqnara synagogam dixe- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 23 

The Travtjyvpis differs from the eKK\7)aia in this, 
that in the eicic\r)aia, as has been noted already, 
there lay ever the sense of an assembly that had 
come together for the transaction of business. The 
Travijyvpis, on the other hand, was a great assembly 
for purposes of festal rejoicing ; and on this account 
it is found joined continually with eoprr^ as by 
Philo, Vit. Mas. ii. 7 ; Ezek. xlvi. 11 ; cf. Hos. ii. 
11 ; ix. 5 ; the word having given us ' panegyric,' 
which is properly a speech made on such an occa- 
sion. Business might grow out of the fact that 
such multitudes were assembled, HIHV many, and 
for various reasons, would be glad to avail them- 
selves of the circumstance; but only in the same 
way as a 'fair' grew out of a 'feria,' or holy-day. 
Stribo (x. 5) notices the business-like aspect which 
the Travrjyvpeis commonly assumed : ij re Traviyyvpis 
efjLTroptKov TL TTpaj^a'. cf. Pausanias, x. 32. 9; and 
this was to such an extent the prominent character 
of them, that the Romans translated Travtjyvpts by 
the Latin < mercatus,' and this even when the 

runt, sed semper Ecclosiam : sive discernendi cau>~fi, sivo quod 
inter "congregationem, unde sj'nagoga, et convocationem, un<].- K<- 
clesia nomen accepit, distet aliquid; quod scilicet cojiyrrr/f>r! et 
pecora solent, atque ipsa proprie, quorum et greges propric <li*'i 
mus; convocari autem magis est utentium ratione, sicut snnt lioini- 
nes. So also the author of a Commentary on the Book of Proverbs 
formerly ascribed to Jerome (Opp. vol. v. p. 533). 



24 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Olympic games were intended (Cicero, Tusc. v. 3 ; 
Justin, xiii. 5). These with the other games were 
eminently, though not exclusively, the rrravrjyvpeis 
of the Greek nation (Thucyd. i. 25). If we keep 
this festal character of the Travijyvpts in mind, we 
shall find a peculiar fitness in the employment of 
this word at Heb. xii. 23 ; where only in the New 
Testament it occurs. The Apostle is there setting 
forth the communion of the Church militant on 
earth with the Church triumphant in heaven, 
with that Church from which all labour and toil have 
for ever passed away (Rev. xxi. 4) ; and how could 
he better describe this last than as a Travrjjvpis, than 
as the festal assembly of heaven ? 



ii. 0etoT77?, Gearys. 

NEITHER of these words occurs more than once 
in the New Testament : Oeior^ only at Rom. i. 20 ; 
Gearys at Col. ii. 9. We have rendered both by 
' Godhead ; ' yet they must not be regarded as iden- 
tical in meaning, nor even as two different forms 
of the same word, which in process of time have 
separated off from one another, and acquired differ- 
ent shades of significance. On the contrary, there 
is a real distinction between them, and one which 



NEW TESTAMENT. 25 



grounds itself on their different derivations ; 
being from 0eo?, and ^eior???, not from TO Oelov, 
which might be said to be the same thing as 0e6?, 
but from the adjective ^eto?. Comparing the two 
passages where they severally occur, we shall at 
once perceive the fitness of the employment of one 
word in one, of the other in the other. In the first 
(Rom. i. 20), St. Paul is declaring how much of 
God may be known from the revelation of Himself 
which He has made in nature, from those vestiges 
of Himself which men may everywhere trace in 
the world around them. Yet it is not the personal 
God whom any man may learn to know by these 
aids ; He can be known only by the revelation of 
Himself in His Son ; but only His divine attributes, 
His majesty and glory. This Theophylact feels, 
who gives ^eyakeLor^ as equivalent to GewTrjs here; 
and it is not to be doubted that St. Paul uses this 
vaguer, more abstract, and less personal word, just 
because he would affirm that men may know God's 
power and majesty from His works ; but would not 
imply that they may know Himself from these or 
from anything short of the revelation of His Eter- 
nal Word.' But in the second passage (Col. ii. 9), 
St. Paul is declaring that in the Son there dwells 
all the fulness of absolute Godhead ; they were no 

1 Cicero (Tusc. i. 13): Multi de Diis prava sentiuntj omuca 
tamen ease vim et naturam divinam arbitrantttr. 
9. 



26 SYNONYMS OF THE 

mere rays of divine glory which gilded Him, light- 
ing up His person for a season and with a splendour 
not His own ; but He was, and is, absolute and 
perfect God ; and the Apostle uses Oeorys to express 
this essential and personal Godhead of the Son. 
Thus Beza rightly : Non dicit : rr)v deiorrj-ra^ i. e. 
divinitatem, sed rrjv OeoTtira, i. e. deitatem, ut ma- 
gis etiam expresse loquatur ; ... 77 Oeiorys attributa 
videtur potius quam naturain ipsam declarare. And 
Bengel : ISTon modo divinse virtutes, sed ipsa divina 
natura. De Wette has sought to express the dis- 
tinction in his German translation, rendering Oeior^ 
by ' Gottlichkeit,' and 0e6-n?9 by ( Gottheit.' 

There have not been wanting those who have 
denied that any such distinction was intended by 
St. Paul ; and they rest this denial on the assump- 
tion that no such difference between the forces oi 
the two words can be satisfactorily made out. Bu 
even supposing that it did not appear in classic, 
Greek, this of itself would be in no way decisive 
on the matter. The Gospel of Christ might for all 
this put into words, and again draw out from them, 
new forces, latent distinctions which those who hith- 
erto employed the words may not have required, 
but which were necessary for it. And that this 
distinction between f deity ' and l divinity,' if I may 
use these words to represent severally Oeor^ and 
, is one which would be strongly felt, and 



NEW TESTAMENT. 27 

which therefore would seek its utterance in Chris- 
tian theology ; of this we have signal proof in the 
fact that the Latin Christian writers were not con- 
tent with i clivinitas,' which they found ready to 
their hand in the writings of Cicero and of others ; 
but themselves coined ' deitas ' as the only adequate 
Latin representative of the Greek Oeorrj^. We have 
Augustine's express testimony to the fact (De Civ. 
Dei, vii. 1): Hanc dlcinttat< in. vel ut sic dixerim 
deitatem ; nam et hoc verbo uti jam nostros non 
piget, ut de Grseco expressius transferant id quod 
illi 6e&T7)Ta appellant, &c. Cf. x. 1, 2. But not to 
urge this nor yet the several etymologies of the 
words, which so clearly point to this difference in 
their meanings, examples, so far as they extend, go 
to support the same. Both Oeorr)? and tfetoT???, as in 
general the abstract words in every language, are 
of late formation ; and one of them, Oeor^ is ex- 
tremely rare ; indeed only a single example of it 
from classical Greek has yet been brought forward 
(Lucian, Icarom. 9) ; where, however, it expresses, 
in agreement with the view hero affirmed, Godhead 
in the absolute sense, or at least in as absolute a 
sense as the heathen could conceive it. OeiorTjs is 
a very much commoner word ; and all the instances 
of its employment with which I am acquainted also 
bear out the distinction which has been here drawn. 
There is ever a manifestation of the divine, there 



28 SYNONYMS OF THE 

are divine attributes, in that to which OeioTrjs is at- 
tributed, but never absolute personal Deity. Thus 
Lucian, (De Calum. 17), attributes fletor??? to He- 
phsestion, when after his death Alexander would 
have raised him to the rank of a god ; and Plutarch 
speaks of the 0et,6rrj<; -n}? ^%% (De Plac. Phil. v. 
1 ; cf. De Isid. et Osir. 2 ; Bull. 6), with various 
other passages to the like effect. In conclusion, it 
may be observed, that whether this distinction was 
intended, as I am fully persuaded it was, by St. 
Paul or not, it established itself firmly in the later 
theological language of the Church the Greek 
Fathers using never QeioTrjs, but always tfeorT??, as 
alone adequately expressing the essential Godhead 
of each of the Three Persons in the Trinity. 



111. leop, vao<$. 



WE have only in our Yersion the one word 
c temple,' with which we render both of these ; nor 
is it very easy to perceive in what manner we could 
have indicated the distinction between them ; which 
is yet a very real one, and one the marking of which 
would often add much to the clearness and preci- 
sion of the sacred narrative. ' lepov is the whole 
compass of the sacred enclosure, the repevos, in- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



29 



eluding the outer courts, the porches, porticoes, and 
other buildings subordinated to the temple itself. 
IVao?, on the other hand, from valco, 'habito,' the 
proper habitation of God, is the temple itself, that 
properly and by especial right so called, being the 
heart and centre of the whole ; the Holy and the 
Holy of Holies. This distinction, one that existed 
and was recognized in profane Greek and with 
reference to heathen temples," quite as much as in 
sacred Greek and with relation to the temple of the 
true God (see Herodotus, i. 181, 183), is one, I be- 
lieve, always assumed in all passages relating to 
the temple at Jerusalem, alike by Josephus, by 
Philo, by the Septuagint translators, and in the 
New Testament. Often indeed it is explicitly 
recognized, as by Josephus, (Antt. viii. 3. 9), who, 
having described the building of the vaos by Solo 
rnon, goes on to say ; Naov ' e%u>9ev lepov wKoBo/jirj- 
aev ev TeTpaywvw cr^rj/zcm. In another passage 
(Antt. xi. 4. 3), he describes the Samaritans as seek- 
ing permission of the Jews to be allowed to share 
in the rebuilding of God's house (o-vyKaraortcevdcrai, 
TOV vaov). This is refused them (cf. Ezra iv. 2) ; 
but, according to his account, it was permitted to 
them afyucvovpevoLs els TO lepov crefBeiv TOV Qeov 
a privilege denied to mere Gentiles, who might not, 
under penalty of death, pass beyond their own 
Court (Acts xxi. 29, 30). 



30 SYNONYMS OF THE. 

The distinction may be brought to bear with 
advantage on several passages in the New Testa- 
ment. When Zacharias entered into " the temple 
of the Lord " to burn incense, the people who wait- 
ed his return, and who are described as standing 
"without" (Luke i. 10), were in one sense in the 
temple too, that is the /epoz>, while he alone entered 
iifto the mo?, the < temple ' in its more limited and 
auguster sense. We read continually of Christ 
teaching ' in the temple ' (Matt. xxvi. 55 ; Luke xxi. 
37 ; John viii. 20) ; and perhaps are at a loss to 
understand how this could have been so ; or how 
long conversations could there have been maintain- 
ed, without interrupting the service of God. But 
this is ever the /epoi>, the porches and porticoes of 
which were eminently adapted to such purposes, 
as they were intended for them. So too the money 
changers, the buyers and sellers, with the sheep 
and oxen whom the Lord drives out, He repels 
them from the tepov, and not from the mo?. Irreve- 
rent as was their intrusion, they yet had not dared 
to establish themselves in the temple properly so 
called (Matt. xxi. 23 ; John ii. 14). On the other 
hand, when we read of another Zacharias slain 
" between the temple and the altar " (Matt, xxiii. 
35), we have only to .remember that i temple ' is 
z/ao? here, at once to get rid of a difficulty, which 
may perhaps have presented itself to many this, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 31 

namely, Was not the altar in the temple ? how 
then could any locality be described as between 
these two ? In the iepov, doubtless, the brazen altar 
to which allusion is here made was, but not in the 
z/ao?, " in the court of the house of the Lord " (cf. 
Josephus, Antt. viii. 4. 1), where the sacred histo- 
rian (2 Chron. xxiv. 21) lays the scene of this mur- 
der, but not in the house of the Lord, or 1/1*09 itself. 
Again, how vividly does it set forth to us the 
despair and defiance of Judas, that he presses even 
into the i/ao? (Matt, xxvii. 5), into that which was 
set apart for the priests alone, and there casts down 
before them the accursed price of blood ! Those 
expositors who affirm that here vaos stands for lepov^ 
should adduce some other passage in which the one 
is put for the other. 



iv. eTTiTifjidct). eXey^O). (atria, 



< >NK may ' rebuke ' another without bringing 
the rebuked to a conviction of any fault on hi* 
part; and this, either because there was none, and 
the rebuke was therefore unneeded or unjust; or 
else because, though there was such fault, the re- 
buke was ineffectual to bring the offender to own 
it ; and in this possibility of i rebuking ' for sin, 



32 SYNOXYMS OF THE 

without ' convincing 7 of sin, lies the distinction be- 
tween these two words. In eVm^at> lies simply the 
notion of rebuking ; which word can therefore be 
used of one unjustly checking or blaming another ; 
in this sense Peter ' rebuked ' Jesus (ijp^aro eVtr*- 
pav, Matt. xvi. 22 ; cf. xix. 13 ; Luke xviii. 39) : 
or ineffectually and without any profit to the 
person rebuked, who is not therefore made to see 
his sin ; as when the penitent thief ' rebuked ' 
(eVer/^a) his fellow malefactor (Luke xxiii. 40 ; cf. 
Mark ix. 25). But eXej^etv is a much more preg- 
nant word ; it is so to rebuke another, with such 
effectual wielding of the victorious arms of the 
truth, as to bring him, I do not say to a confession, 
but to a conviction, of his sin ; just as in juristic 
Greek, it is not merely to reply to, but to refute, an 
opponent. 

When we keep this distinction well in mind, 
what a light does it throw on a multitude of pas- 
sages in the New Testament ; and how much deep- 
er a meaning does it give them. Thus our Lord 
could demand, "Which of you convinceth (eXey^ei) 
Me of sin ? " (John viii. 46.) Numbers rebuked 
Him ; numbers laid sin to His charge (Matt. ix. 3 ; 
John ix. 16) ; but none brought sin home to His 
conscience. Other passages which will gain from 
realizing the fulness of the meaning of e'Xe'y^e^, are 
John iii. 20 ; viii. 9 ; 1 Cor. xiv. 24, 25 ; but above 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



33 



all, the great passage, John xvi. 8 : " When He 
[the Comforter] is come, He will reprove the world 
of sin, and of righteousness, and of judgment ;" so 
we have rendered the words, following in our ' re- 
prove' the Latin 'arguet;' although few, I think, 
that have in any degree sought to sound the depth 
of our Lord's words, but will admit that ' convince,' 
which unfortunately our translators have relegated 
to the margin, would have been the preferable ren- 
dering, giving a depth and fulness of meaning to 
this work of the Holy Ghost, which ' reprove ' in 
some part foils to express. 1 "He who shall come 
in my room, shall so bring home to the world its 
own 'sin/ my perfect k rightcousm-.-.-.' < I.'d's coming 
'judgment,' shall so 'convince' it of these, that it 
shall be obliged itself to acknowledge them ; and 
in this acknowledgment may find, shall bp in the 
right w r ay to find, its own blessedness and salva- 
tion." 

Between air La and e'Xey^o? a difference of a 
similar character exists. Ah La is an accusation, but 
whether false or true the word does not attempt to 

1 Lampe gives excellently well the force of this \tyfi : Opus 
Doctoris, qui veritatem quse hactenus non est agnita ita ad con- 
scientiam etiam renitentis demonstrat, ut victas dare inanus coga- 
tur. See an admirable discussion on the word, especially as here 
used, in Archdeacon Hare's Mission of the Cotnforter, 1st edit. pp. 
528544. 

2* 



34 SYNONYMS OF THE 

anticipate ; and thus it could be applied, indeed it 
was applied to the accusation made against the Lord 
of Glory Himself (Matt, xxvii. 37) ; but eXey^o? 
implies not merely the charge, but the truth of the 
charge, and the manifestation of the truth ; nay 
more than this, very often also the acknowledgment, 
if not outward, yet inward, of the truth of the 
charge on the side of the party accused ; it being 
the glorious prerogative of the truth in its highest 
operation not merely to assert itself; and to silence 
the adversary, but to silence him by convincing him 
of his error. Demosthenes, Con. Androt. p, 600 : 
TId/ji7ro\v \oi8opia re KOL alrla Ke^wpicrfjievov earlv 

air La fj^ev yap ICTTLV^ orav ri? -x/aXw 
\6ya) fjir] 7rapdo"XTjTaL iriariv^ cav Xeyet* 
Se, OTCLV (bis av eiTrr) Tt9, KOL raX^^e? O/JLOV 
Compare Aristotle, Rliet. ad Alex. 13 : 
ean JJLCV o pr) Svvarov aXXw? c^ew aXX' OVTGOS, w? 
r)/j,el$ Xeyo/^e^. By our serviceable distinction be- 
tween i convict ' and ' convince ' we maintain a dif- 
ference between the judicial and the moral e'Xey^o?. 
Both will meet together in the last day, when every 
condemned sinner will be at once f convicted ' and 
( convinced ; ' all which is implied in that " he was 
speechless " of the guest who was found by the 
king without a marriage garment (Matt. xxii. 12 ; 
cf. Rom. iii. 4). 



NEW TESTAMENT. 35 



v. dvdOrj/JLa, dvdOefia. 

MANY would deny that there is any room foi 
synonymous discrimination in respect of these two 
words, affirming them to be merely different spell- 
ings of the same word, and promiscuously used ; 
which if it were the fact, their fitness for a place in 
a book of synonyms would of course disappear; 
difference as well as likeness being necessary for 
this. This much, indeed, of what they affirm is 
perfectly true namely, that dvaOrj^a and dvdO^pa, 
like evprj/jLa and evpe^a^ eirffltjfia and eV/#e/xa, must 
severally be regarded as having been at first only 
different pronunciations, which issued in different 
spellings, of one and the same word. But it is cer- 
tain that nothing is more common than for slightly 
different orthographies of the same word finally to 
settle and resolve themselves into different words, 
with different provinces of meaning which they 
have severally appropriated to themselves ; and 
which henceforth they maintain in perfect inde- 
pendence one of the other. I have elsewhere given 
a considerable number of examples of the kind ; 
and a very few may here suffice : 0pd<ros and Odpao^ 
'Thrax' and <Threx,' 'rechtlich' and 'redlich,' 
* hanniis ' and ' harnois,' i allay ' and ' alloy.' That 



36 SYNONYMS OF THE 

which may be affirmed of all these, may also, I am 
persuaded, be affirmed in respect of avaQ^a and 
avdOejjLa. "Whether this were so or not was a ques- 
tion debated with no little heat by some of the 
great early Hellenists, and names of weight and 
importance are ranged on either side ; SalmasiuB 
being the greatest name among those who main- 
tained the existence of a distinction, at least in 
Hellenistic Greek ; Beza among those who denied 
it. Perhaps here, as in so many cases, the truth 
did not absolutely lie with the combatants on either 
part, but lay rather between them, though much 
nearer to one part than the other ; the most reason- 
able conclusion, after weighing all the evidence on 
either side, being this that such a distinction did 
exist, and was allowed by many, but was by no 
means recognized or observed by all. 

In classical Greek avdBtj^a is quite the predomi- 
nant form, and that which alone Attic writers allow 
(Lobeck, Phrynichus, pp. 249, 445). It is there the 
technical word by which all such costly offerings as 
were presented to the gods, and then suspended or 
otherwise exposed to view in their temples, all by 
the Romans termed * donaria,' as tripods, crowns, 
silver and golden vases, and the like, were called ; 
which were in this way separated for ever from all 
common and profane uses, and openly dedicated to 
the honour of that deity to whom they were present- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



37 



ed at the first (Xenophon, Anab. v. 3. 5 ; Pausanias, 
x. 9). 

But with the translation of the Hebrew Scrip- 
tures into Greek, a new thought demanded to find 
utterance. Those Scriptures spoke of two ways in 
which things and persons might be holy, set apart 
for God, devoted to Him. The children of Israel 
were devoted to Him ; God was glorified in them : 
the wicked Canaanites were devoted to Him ; God 
was glorified on them. This awful fact, that things 
and persons might be devoted to Him for good, and 
for evil ; that tla-iv was such a thing as being "ac- 
cursed to the Lord" (J<sh. vi. 17; cf. Deut. xiii. 10 ; 
Numb. xxi. 1 3) ; that of the spoil of the same 
city, a part might be consecrated to the Lord in 
His treasury, and a part utterly destroyed, and yet 
this part and that be alike dedicated to Him (Josh, 
vi. 19, 21) ; that in more ways than one a thing 
might be holy to Him (Lev. xvii. 28), claimed its 
expression and utterance now, and found it in the 
two uses of one word ; which, while it remained the 
same, just differenced itself enough to indicate in 
which of the two senses it was employed. And 
here let it be observed, that those who find separa- 
tion from God as the central idea of avdOe^a, are 
quite unable to trace a common bond of meaning 
between it and aya^/za, which last is plainly sepa- 
ration to God ; or to show the point at which they 



38 SYNONYMS OF TIIK 

diverge from one another. Rather is it separation 
to God in both cases. 1 

Already in the Septuagiiit we begin to find 
avd07]fjia and avdOepa disengaging themselves from 
one another, and from a confused and promiscuous 
use. How far, indeed, the distinction is observed 
there, and whether universally, it is hard to deter- 
mine, from the variety of readings in various edi- 
tions ; but in one of the later critical editions (that 
of Tischendorf, 1850), many passages, (such for in- 
stance as Judith xvi. 19 ; Lev. xxvii. 28, 29), which 
appear in some earlier editions negligent of the 
distinction, are observant of it. In the New Testa- 
ment the distinction that avaQ^pa is used to express 
the c sacrum' in a better sense, avdOefia in a worse, 
is invariably maintained. It must be allowed, in- 
deed, that the passages there are not numerous 
enough to convince a gainsayer ; he may attribute 
to hazard the fact that they fall in with this distinc- 

1 Flacius Illyricus (Clavis Scriptures, s. v. Anathema), excellent- 
ly explains the manner in which the two apparently opposed 
meanings unfold themselves from a single root: Anathema igitur 
est res ant persona Deo obligata aut addicta; sive quia Ei ab 
hominibus est pietatis caus oblata: sive quia justitia Dei talcs, ob 
singularia aliqua piaeula veluti in suos carceres poenasque abripuit, 

comprobante et declarante id etiam hominum sententia Duplici 

cnim de causa Deus vult aliquid habere; vel tanquam gratuni 
acceptumque ac sibi oblatum ; vel tanquam sibi exosum, sxueque 
irae ac castigationi subjectum ac debitum. 






NEW TESTAMENT. 39 

tion ; avdOri^a occurring only once : " Some spake 
of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly 
stones and gifts " (dvaOrj^aai, Luke xxi. 5) ; and 
dvd0[ia no more than six times (Acts xxiii. 1-i ; 
Bom. ix. 3 ; 1 Cor. xii. 3 ; xvi. 22 ; Gal. i. 8, 9). 
Still none can deny that so far as these uses reach, 
they confirm this view of the matter ; while if we 
turn to the Greek Fathers, we shall find some of 
them indeed neglecting the distinction ; but others, 
and these of the greatest among them, not merely 
implicitly allowing it, as does Clemens of Alexan- 
dria (Coll. ad Gen. 4), avd&iffia y<y6va/j,v rw 0ec5 
vTrep Xpia-rov : where the context plainly shows the 
meaning to be, we havr become ci costly offering to 
God ; but explicitly recognising and drawing out 
the difference with accuracy and precision. See, 
for instance, Chrysostom, Horn. xvi. in Rom., as 
quoted in Suicer's Thesaurus, s. v. dvaOena. 

And thus, putting all which has been urged to- 
gether, the a priori probability, drawn from simi- 
lar phenomena in all languages, that the two forms 
of a word would gradually have two different mean- 
ings attached to them ; the wondrous way in which 
the two aspects of dedication to God are thus set 
out by slightly different forms of the same word ; 
the fact that every place in the Kew Testament, 
where the words occur, falls in with this scheme ; 
the usage, though not perfectly consistent, of later 



SYNONYMS OF THE 

ecclesiastical books, I cannot but conclude that 
dvdOrj/Lia and dvdQe^a are employed not accidentally 
by the sacred writers of the New Covenant in dif- 
ferent senses ; but that St. Luke uses avddrjfia, be- 
cause he intends to express that which is dedicated 
to God for its own honour as well as for God's 
glory ; St. Paul uses dvddepa, because he intends 
that which is devoted to God, but devoted, as were 
the Canaanites of old, to his honour indeed, but its 
own utter loss ; even as in the end every intelligent 
being, capable of knowing and loving God, must 
be either dvdOrj^a or dvdOe^a to Him. (See "Wit- 
sius, Misc. Sac. vol. ii. p. 54, sqq. ; Deyling, Olss. 
Sac. vol. ii. p. 495, sqq.) 



vi. 7rpo(f)r)TV(i), 



is a word of constant occurrence in 
the New Testament ; navrevopai occurs but once, 
namely at Acts xvi. 16 ; where of the girl possessed 
with the " spirit of divination," or spirit of Apollo, 
it is said that she " brought her masters much gain 
by soothsaying " (^avrevo^vrf]. The abstinence from 
the use of this word on all other occasions, and the 
use of* it on this one, is very observable, furnishing 
as it does a very notable example of that instinctive 



N E W TESTAMEK T. 



41 



wisdom wherewith the inspired writers keep aloof 
from all words, the employment of which would 
have tended to break down the distinction between 
heathenism and revealed religion. Thus et'Sat/xoWor, 
although from a heathen point of view a religious 
word, for it ascribes happiness to the favour of the 
deity, is yet never employed to express Christian 
blessedness ; nor could it fitly have been so, Sat/tow, 
which supplies its base, involving polytheistic error. 
In like manner apery, the standing word in heathen 
ethics for ; virtue,' is of very rarest occurrence in 
the Xew Testament ; it is found but once in all the 
writings of St. Paul (Phil. iv. 8) ; and where else 
(which is only in the Epistles of St. Peter), in quite 
different uses from those in which Aristotle employs 
it. 1 In the same way ^77, which gives us 'ethics,' 
occurs only on a single occasion, and, which indi- 
cates that its absence elsewhere is not accidental, 
this once is in a quotation from a heathen poet 
(1 Cor. xv. 33). The same precision in maintaining 
these lines of demarcation is again strikingly mani- 
fested in the fact of the constant use of dvataar-i'-jpiov 
for the altar of the true God, occurring as it d<ns 
more than twenty times in the books of the New 
Covenant, while on the one occasion when an hea- 



1 Verbum minium humile, as Beza, accounting for its absence, 

say?, si cum donis S. S. coinparetur. 



42 



SYNONYMS OF THE 



then altar has need to be named, the word is 
changed, and instead of dvcriacn-rjpiov ('altare'), 
SW/JLO^ ( ara') is used (Acts xvii. 23); the feeling 
which dictated the exclusion of fiwjuLos long survi- 
ving in the Church, so that, as altogether profane, 
it was quite shut out from Christian terminology 
( Augasti , Handbueh der Chrisilicher Archaologie, 
vol. i. p. 412). 

In conformity with this same law of moral fit- 
ness in the selection of words, we meet with irpo- 
^reveiv as the constant word in the New Testament 
to express the prophesying by the Spirit of God ; 
while directly a sacred writer has need to make 
mention of the lying art of heathen divination, he 
employs this word no longer, but /j,avrveo-0ai in 
preference (c 1 Sam. xxviii. 8 ; Deut. xviii. 10). 
What the essential difference between the two 
things, prophesying and soothsaying, the l weissa- 
gen ' and the ' wahrsagen ' is, and why it was ne- 
cessary to keep them distinct and apart by different 
terms used to designate the one and the other, we 
shall best perceive and understand, when we have 
considered the etymology of one, at least, of the 
words. Mavrevofjbai being from /xaim<?, is through 
it connected, as Plato has taught us, with pavta and 
fiaivofuu. It will follow from this, that the word 
has reference to the tumult of the mind, the fury, 
the temporary madness under which those were, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



43 



who were supposed to be possessed by the god, 
during the time that they delivered their oracles ; 
this mantic fury of theirs displaying itself in the 
eyes rolling, the lips foaming, the hair flying, with 
all other tokens of a more than natural agitation. 1 
It is quite possible that these symptoms were some- 
times produced, as no doubt they were often height- 
ened, in the seers, Pythonesses, Sibyls and the like, 
by the use of drugs, or by other artificial means. 
Yet no one who believes that real spiritual forces 
underlie all forms of idolatry, but will also believe 
that there was often much more in these manifesta- 
tions than mere trickery of this kind ; no one with 
any insight into the awful mystery of the false wor- 
ships of the world, but will believe that these symp- 
toms were the evidence and expression of an actual 
connexion in which these persons stood to a spirit- 
ual world a spiritual world, indeed, which was 
not above them, but beneath. 

1 Cicero, who loves to bring out, where he can, superiorities of 
the Latin language over the Greek, claims, and I think with rea- 
son, such a superiority here, in that the Latin has ' divinatio,' a 
word embodying the divine character of prophecy, and the fact 
that it was a gift of the gods, where the Greek had only fiavrtK-n, 
which, seizing not the thing itself at any central point, did no 
more than set forth one of the external signs which accompanied 
its giving. (Dc Divin. i. 1) : Ut alia nos melius multa quani 
Graeci, sic huic praestantissimaj rei nomen nostri a divis ; Grseci, 
ut Plato interpretatur, a furore duxerunt. 



SYNONYMS OF THE 

Revelation, on the other hand, knows nothing 
of this mantic fury, except to condemn it. " The 
spirits of the prophets are subject to the prophets" 
(1 Cor. xiv. 32). The true prophet is, indeed, rapt 
out of himself; he is " in the Spirit" (Rev. i. 10) ; 
he is " in an ecstasy " (Acts xi. 5) ; he is VTTO Ilvev- 
IJiaros 'Aytgv (pepopevos (2 Pet. i. 21), which is 
very much more than i moved, 7 as we have rendered 
it ; rather i getrieben,' as De Wette ; and we must 
not go so far in our opposition to heathen and Mon- 
tanist error as to deny this, which some, especially 
of those engaged in controversy with the Montanists, 
have done. But then he is not beside himself; he 
is lifted above, not thus set ~beside, his every-day self. 
It is not discord and disorder, but a higher harmo- 
ny, a diviner order, that is introduced into his soul; 
so that he is not as one overborne in the region of 
his lower life by forces stronger than his own, by 
an insurrection from beneath ; but his spirit is lift- 
ed out of that region into a clearer atmosphere, a 
diviner day, than any in which at other times it is 
permitted him to breathe. All that he before had 
still remains his, only purged, exalted, quickened, 
by a power higher than his own, but yet not alien 
to his own ; for man is most truly man, when he is 
most filled with the fulness of God. 1 Even within 

1 See John Smith, the Cambridge Platonist, On Prophecy : ch. 4. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 45 

the sphere of heathenism itself, the superior digni- 
ty of the 7rpo(f>rJT7]^ to the pav-ris was recognised ; 
and recognised on these very grounds. Thus there 
is a well known and often cited passage in the Ti- 
mceus of Plato (71 <?, 72 #, 5), where exactly for this 
reason, that the pav-ris is one in whom the powers 
of the understanding are suspended, who, according 
to the derivation of the word, more or less rages, 
the line is drawn broadly and distinctly between 
him and the TrpofajTTjs, the former is subordinated 
to the latter, arid his utterances only allowed to pass 
after they have received the seal and approbation 
of the other. The truth which the best heathen 
philosophy had a glimpse of here, was permanently 
embodied in the Christian Church in the fact that, 
while it assumed the Trpotpr/Teveiv to itself, it ascribed 
the pavrevecrOat, to that heathenism which it was 
about to displace and overthrow. 

The difference of the true prophetical Spirit from an enthusiastical 
Imposture, 



4:6 SYNONYMS OF THE 



vii. Ti/jLcopla, /c6\acrt9. 



OF these words the former occurs but once in 
the New Testament (Heb. x. 29), and the latter only 
twice (Matt. xxv. 46 ; 1 John iv. 18). In ri^wpia, 
according to its classical use, the vindicative charac- 
ter of the punishment is the predominant thought : 
it is the Latin 4 ultio ; ' punishment as satisfying the 
inflicter's sense of outraged justice, as defending his 
own honour, or that of the violated law ; herein its 
meaning agrees with its etymology, being from r^t?;, 
and ovpos, opdco, the guardianship or protectorate of 
honour. In KoXaa-is, on the other hand, is more the 
notion of punishment as it has reference to the cor- 
rection and bettering of him that endures it ; it is 
c castigatio,' and has naturally for the most part a 
milder use than n^wpia. Thus we find Plato 
(Protag. 323 e\ joining Ko\do-e^ and vovOerrja-eis 
together : and the whole passage to the end of the 
chapter is eminently instructive as to the distinction 
between the words : ovSet? /coXafet TOU? a&iKovvras 
QTI rfSi/crjcev, ocrr/5 fjbrj wcrTrep O^piov d\oy terra)? T i- 
/jLcopeirai, . . . d\\a rov fj,e\\ovTO$ %a/Mz>, r iva JJLIJ 
avOis dSiKijo-rj : the same change of the words which 
he employs, occurring again twice or thrice in the 
sentence. Compare an instructive chapter in Cle- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



47 



mens of Alexandria, Strom, iv. 21. And this is 
Aristotle's distinction (llliet. i. 10) : ia<f>epei Be TJ- 
/uLcopla /cal KoXaaw rj fjiev jap KoXaats rov Trda^ovro^ 
ei>fcd eartv rj Se Tipwpia, rov TTOIOVVTOS, i'va diro- 
7r\r)paj0f) : cf. Ethic. Nic. iv. 5 : -n^wpia Travel rip 
opyrjS) r)8ovr)V dvrl rfjs XVTTTJS e/i7rotou era- 
It would be a very serious error, however, to 
attempt to transfer this distinction in its entireness 
to the words as employed in the New Testament. 
The KoXao-i? alcovios of Matt. xxv. 46, as it plainly 
itself declares, is no corrective and therefore tem- 
porary discipline ; it can be no other than the dOd- 
varos -rifjiwpla (Josephus, B. J. ii. 8. 11), the dlSioi 
TLfjLwplai (Plato, Ax. 372 ), with which the Lord 
elsewhere threatens finally impenitent men (Mark 
ix. 43 48) ; for in proof that KoAacrt? had acquired 
in Hellenistic Greek this severer sense, and was 
used simply as punishment or torment, with no ne- 
cessary underbought of the bettering through it 
of him who endured it, we have only to refer to 
such passages as the following: Josephus, Antt. xv. 
2. 2 ; Philo, De Agricul. 9 ; Mart. Polycar. 2.; 2 
Mace. iv. 38 ; Wisd. of Sol. xix. 4. This much, in- 
deed, of Aristotle's distinction still remains, and 
may be recognised in the sacred usage of the words, 
that in /coXaais the relation of the punishment to 
the punished, in TLpcopta to the punisher, is pre- 
dominant. 



4:8 SYNONYMS OF THE 



viii. 

IN the Latin i verax ' and ' verns ' would seve- 
rally represent these two words, and in the main 
reproduce the distinctions existing between them ; 
indeed the Vulgate does commonly by their aid in- 
dicate whether aXyOr)? or ak^Oivo^ stands in the 
original: but the English language has only the 
one word ' true ' by which to render them both ; so 
that of necessity, and by no fault of the translators, 
the difference between them disappears in our ver- 
sion. And yet this difference is a most real one. 
What exactly the nature of it is, a single example 
will at once make evident. God is @eo? a\rj0ij$) 
and He is @eo? a\r)6ivo<> : but very different attri- 
butes and prerogatives are ascribed to Him by the 
one epithet, and by the other. God is d\7j6ij$ (John 
iii. 33 ; Rom. iii. 4 ; = verax), inasmuch as He can- 
not lie, as He is a-^euSrJ? (Tit. i. 2), the truth-speak- 
ing, and the truth -loving God (cf. Euripides, Ion, 
1554). But He is a\vj0iv6<: (1 Thess. i. 9 ; John xvii. 
3 ; = verus), very God, as distinguished from idols, 
and all other false gods, the dreams of the diseased 
fancy of man, having no substantial existence in 
the actual world of realities. "The adjectives in 
express the material out of which anything is 






NEW TESTAMENT. 4:9 

made, or rather they imply a mixed relation, of 
quality and origin, to the object denoted by the sub- 
stantive from which they are derived. Thus %v\-i- 
1/09 means 'of wood,' 'wooden;' \_6ar paK-i-vo^ 'of 
earth,' ' earthen ; ' vd\-t,-vos, i of glass,' ' glassy ; '] 
and aXriO-i-vos signifies ' genuine,' made up of that 
which is true [that which in chemical language has 
truth for its stuff and base]. This last adjective* is 
particularly applied to express that which is all that 
it pretends to be ; for instance pure gold as opposed 
to adulterated metal." (Donaldson, New Cratylux, 
p. 426.) 

It will be seen from this last remark that it does 
not of necessity follow, that whatever may be con- 
trasted with the tt\77#/6?, should thereby be con- 
cluded to have no substantial existence, to be alto- 
gether false and fraudulent. Inferior and subordi- 
nate realizations, partial and imperfect anticipations, 
of the truth, may be set over against the truth in 
its highest form, in its ripest and completes! devel- 
opment ; and then to this last alone the title a\r)6t,- 
vos will be vouchsafed. Thus Xenophon affirms of 
Cyrus (Anab. i. 9. 17), that he commanded a\t]Qivnv 
arpdrevfjia, an army indeed, an army deserving the 
name ; but would not have altogether refused this 
name of ' army ' to inferior hosts ; and Plato (Tim. 
25 a\ calling the sea beyond the Straits of Hercu 
les, 7reXa'yo9 oVrw?, a\y0ivb? TroWo?, would say that 
8 



50 SYNONYMS OF THE 

it alone realized to the full the idea of the great 
ocean deep ; cf. Pol. i. 347 d : 6 TW ov-n a\rj0ivbs 
ap^tov- We should frequently miss the exact force 
of the word, we shoiild, indeed, find ourselves en- 
tangled in many and serious embarrassments, if we 
understood it necessarily as the true opposed to the 
false. Rather it is very often the substantial as 
opposed to the shadowy and outlinear ; as Origen 
(in Joan. torn. ii. 4) has well expressed it : d 
7T/305 avTtSiavrokriv ovaa? KOI TVTTOV KOI 
Thus, at Ileb. viii. 2, mention is made of the 
akrjOivr) into which our great High Priest entered ; 
which, of course, does not imply that the tabernacle 
in the wilderness was not also most truly pitched 
at God's bidding, and according to the pattern 
which he had shown; but only that it, and all 
things in it, were weak earthly copies of things 
which had a real and glorious existence in heaven 
(dvTiTVTra TWV a\f)6ivu>v) ; the passing of the Jewish 
High Priest into the Holy of Holies, with all else 
pertaining to the worldly sanctuary, being but the 
a/cia TWV jjieXXovrwv dyaOwv, while the crw/ua, the 
filling up of these outlines, was of and by Christ 
(Col. ii. IT). 1 



'This F. Spanheim (Dub. Evang. 106) has well put: ' 
in Scripturfc Sacra, interdum sumitur ethice, et opponitur falsitati 
et mendacio ; interdum mystice, et opponitur typis et umbris, ut 
tlnwi> illis respondcns, quao veritas alio niodo etiain <rwfto vocatur a 



NEW TESTAMENT. 51 

When in like manner it is said, " The law was 
given by Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus 
Christ" (John i. IT), it is plain that the antithesis 
cannot lie between the false and the true, but only 
between the imperfect and the perfect, the shadowy 
and the substantial. So too the Eternal Word is 
declared to be TO </)c5? TO a\r]6i,v6v (John i. 9), not 
denying thereby that the Baptist was also " a burn- 
ing and a shining light " (John v. 35), or that the 
faithful are "lights in the world" (Phil. ii. 15; 
Matt. v. 14), but only claiming for a Greater than 
all to be "the Light which lighteth every man that 
cometh into the world." ' Christ declares Himself 
6 a/3To? 6 ak^Oivos (John vi. 32), not that the bread 
which Moses gave was not also " bread of heaven " 
(Ps. cv. 40), but it was such only in a secondary 
inferior degree ; it was not food in the highest sense, 

Spiritu S. opposita rrj <TKia. Cf. Deyling, Obss. Sac. vol. iii. p. 317 ; 
vol. iv. p. 548. 

1 Lampc (in loc.) : Innuitur ergo hie oppositio turn luminarium 
naturalium, qualia fuere lux creationis, lux Israelitarum in yl\irvp- 
to, lux columnar in deserto, lux gemmarum in pectoral!, quse non 
nisi umbras fuere hujus verai lucis ; turn eorum, qui falso se esse 
lumen hominum gloriantur, quales sigillatim fuere Sol et Luna 
Ecclesiae Judaicaj, qui cum ortu hujus Lucis obscurandi, Joel, ii. 
31 ; turn denique verorum quoque luminarium, sed in minore gra- 
du, quseque omue suum lumen ab hoc Lumine mutuantur, qualia 
sunt omnes Sancti, Doctores, Angeli lucis, ipse denique Joannes 
Baptista. 



52 



SYNONYMS OF THE 



inasmuch as it did not nourish up unto eternal life 
those that ate it (John vi. 49). He was rj a//,7reXo9 
77 a\r)6ivr) (John xv. 1), not thereby denying that 
Israel also was God's vine, which we know it was 
(Ps. Ixxx. 8 ; Jer. ii. 21), but only affirming that 
none but He realized this name, and all that it im- 
plied, to the full (Hos. x. 1; Deut. xxxii. 32). l It 
would be easy to follow this up further ; but these 
examples, which the thoughtful student will observe 
are drawn chiefly from St. John, may suffice. The 
fact that in his writings the word aXrjOivos is used 
two and twenty times as against five times in all 
the rest of the New Testament, is one which he will 
scarcely dismiss without a thought. 

To sum up then, as briefly as possible, the dif- 
ferences between the two words, we may affirm of 
the a\?;0/J9, that he fulfils the promise of his lips, 
but the aXyOwos the wider promise of his name. 
Whatever that name imports, taken in its highest, 
deepest, widest sense, that he realizes to the full. 

1 Lampe: Christus est Vitis vera, . . . et qu& talis prapom, quiii 
et opponi, potest omnibus aliis qui etiam sub hoc symbolo in scrip- 
tis propheticis pinguntur. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



ix. OepdTTWv, SoOXo?, 



THE only passage in the New Testament in 
which OepdTrwv occurs is Heb. iii. 5 : "And Moses 
verily was faithful in all his house, as a servant " 
(e!>? depdirwv). The allusion here to Numb. xii. 7 is 
manifest ; at which place the Septuagint has given 
depdiruv as its rendering of *rss ; which yet is not 
its constant rule ; for it has very frequently render- 
ed it not by Qepdfrwv, but by SouXo?. Out of this 
latter rendering, no doubt, we have, at Rev. xv. 3, 
the phrase, Mower?}? 6 SoOXo? rov Oeov. From the 
fact that the Septuagint translates the same Hebrew 
word, now by SoOXo?, now by Qepdirwv, it will not 
follow that there is no difference between the words ; 
nor yet that there may not be occasions when the 
one would be far more appropriately employed than 
the other ; but only that there are other occasions 
which do not require the bringing out into promi- 
nence of that which constitutes the difference be- 
tween them. And such real difference there is. 
The SouXo9 (opposed to e\ev6epo<>, Eev. xiii. 16 ; xix. 
18 ; Plato, Gorg. 502 d) is one in a permanent rela- 
tion of servitude to another, and that, altogether 
apart from any ministration to that other at the 
present moment rendered ; but the depaTrwv is the 



54 SYNONYMS OF THE 

performer of present services without respect to 
the fact whether as a freeman or a slave he renders 
them ; and thus, as will naturally follow, there goes 
constantly with the word the sense of one whose 
services are tenderer, nobler, freer than those of 
the SoOXo?. In the verb OepaTrevew ( ; curare '), as 
distinguished from oovXevew, and connected with 
' faveo,' foveo,' #aX7r&>, the nobler and more careful 
character of the service comes still more strongly 
out. It may be used of the physician's watchful 
tendance of the sick, man's service of God, and is 
beautifully applied by Xenophon (Mem. iv. 3. 9) to 
the care which the gods have of men. Thus Achil- 
les, in Homer, styles Patroclus his Oepdirwv (II. xvi. 
244), one whose service was not constrained, but 
the officious ministration of love. Merioneus is 
6epa7T(>v to Idomeneus (xxiii. 113), and all the 
Greeks are OepaTrovres "Apijos (ii. 110 and often). 
So too in Plato (Symp. 203 c) Eros is styled the 
aKo\ovdos /col Oepdirwv of Aphrodite. With all 
which agrees the definition of liesychius : ol ev 
Sevrepq rd^et, <pl\ot, ; of Ammonius : ol vTroreTay^e- 
VOL (/A,ofc ; and of Eustathius : TWV $>l\u>v ol Spacm- 
tcwrepot,. 

It will be seen then that the author of the 
Epistle to the Hebrews, calling Moses a Oepdirwv in 
the house of God (iii. 5), implies that he occupied a 
more confidential position, that a freer service, a 



NEW TESTAMENT. 55 



higher dignity was his, than that merely 
approaching more closely to that of an ol/covofjuos in 
God's house ; and referring to Numb. xii. 6 8, we 
find, confirming this view, that a special dignity is 
there ascribed to Moses, lifting him above other 
SovXoi, of God. It would have been well if in our 
Version it had been in some way sought to indicate 
the exceptional and more honourable title here 
given to him who " was faithful in all God's house." 
The Vulgate has very well rendered Oepdtrwv by 
f famulus,' (so Cicero, ' famulae Idgeaa matris ') ; Tyn- 
dal and Cranmer by ' minister,' which perhaps is 
as good a word as in English could have been 
found. 

Neither ought the distinction between Bcd/covo? 
and SoCXo? to be lost sight of and let go in the ren- 
dering of the Xcw Testament. There is no diffi- 
culty in preserving it. ALCUCOVOS, not from Sia and 
xW, one who in his speed runs through the dust 
a mere fanciful derivation, and forbidden by the 
quantity of SIOKOVOS is probably from the same 
root as has given us SKOKQ), ; to hasten,' or 'pursue.' 
The difference between Sm/eoi/o? on one side, and 
SouXo? and depdirwv on the other, is that &t,dicovos 
represents the servant in his activity for the work 
(haieoveiv Tfc, Eph. iii. 7; Col. i. 23; 2 Cor. iii. G), 
not in his relation either servile, as that of the Sov- 
A.O?, or more voluntary, as in the case of the Oepd- 



56 SYNONYMS OF THE 



, to a person. The attendants at a feast, and 
these with no respect to their condition as one of 
freedom or servitude, are as such Sidfcovoi (John ii. 
5 ; Matt. xxii. 13). What has just been said of the 
importance of maintaining the distinction between 
SoOXo? and Bid/covos may be illustrated from the 
parable of the Marriage Supper (Matt. xxii. 2 14). 
With us the king's " servants " bring in the invited 
guests (ver. 3, 4, 8, 10), and his " servants " are bid- 
den to cast out him that had not on a wedding gar- 
ment (ver. 13) : but in the Greek, those, the bring- 
ers-in of the guests are SovXot ; these, the fulfillers 
of the king's sentence, are SUIKOVOI this distinction 
being a most real one, and belonging to the essen- 
tials of the parable ; the SoOXot being men, the am- 
bassadors of Christ who invite their brethren into 
His kingdom now, the SICLKOVOI the angels, who in 
all the judgment acts at the end of the world ever- 
more appear as the executors of the Lord's will. 
However the point of the parable may not turn 
on the distinction between them, yet they may no 
more be confounded than the SovXoi and OepLarai 
of Matt. xiii. 27, 30 ; cf. Luke xix. 24. 

'TTrypeTTj?, which only remains to be considered, 
is a word drawn originally from military matters ; 
he is the rower (from cpea-a-a, ' remigo '), as distin- 
guished from the soldier on board a war-galley ; 
then the performer of any strong and hard labour ; 



NEW TESTAMENT. 57 

then the subordinate official that waits to accomplish 
the commands of his superior, as the orderly that 
attends a commander in war (Xenophon, Cyrop. vi. 
2. 13). In this sense, as a minister to perform cer- 
tain defined functions for Paul and Barnabas, Mark 
was their vTrrjpeTrjs (Acts xiii. 5) ; and in this official 
sense of lictor, apparitor, and the like, we find the 
word constantly, indeed predominantly used in the 
New Testament (Matt. v. 25 ; Luke iv. 20 ; John 
vii. 32 ; xviii. 18 ; Acts v. 22). The mention of loth 
SovXoi and vTrrjperai, together (John xviii. 18) would 
be alone sufficient to indicate that a difference is 
there observed between them ; and from this differ 
ence it will follow that he who struck the Lord on 
the face (John xviii. 32) could not be, as some have 
supposed, the same whose ear He had but just 
healed (Luke xxii. 51), seeing that this last was a 
SoOAo?, that profane striker an vTrrjperris of the High 
Priest. The meanings of Sidfcovos and vTrTjpeTrjs are 
much more nearly allied ; they do in fact continu- 
ally run into one another, and there are a multitude 
of occasions on which they might be promiscuously 
used ; the more official character of the iV^perT?? is 
the point in which the distinction '/c/,vv,/i thoin 
resides. 



58 SYNONYMS OF THE 



x. 

OF these three words, the first is used always in 
a bad sense ; the second is a middle term, capable 
of a good interpretation, capable of an evil, and 
lying pretty evenly between the two ; the third is 
quite predominantly used in a good sense, though 
it too has not altogether escaped being employed in 
an evil. 

Aeikia, the Latin ' timor,' having Opao-vrrjs, or 
c temerity,' for its opposite (Plato, Tim. 87 a), is our 
' cowardice.' It occurs only once in the New Tes- 
tament, 2 Tim. i. 7 ; but Se^Xmo), John xiv. 27 ; and 
SetX6?, Matt. viii. 26 ; Mark iv. 40 ; Rev. xxi. 8. In 
this last passage the $ei\oi beyond doubt are those 
who in time of persecution have, out of fear of what 
they should suffer, denied the faith. It is joined to 
(Plato, Phcedr. 254 c; Legg. 859 I) ; to 
(Plutarch, Fab. Max. 17) ; to e/cXvo-t? (2 
Mace. iii. 24) ; is ascribed by Josephus to the spies 
who brought an ill report of the Promised Land 
(Antt. iii. 15. 1) ; being constantly set over against 
dvSpeia, as SetXo? over against dvSpetos : as for exam- 
ple, in the long discussion on valour and cowardice 
in Plato's Protagoras^ 360 d ; and see the lively 
description of the SetXo? in the Characters (29) of 



NEW TESTAMENT, 59 

Theophrastus. Aei\la does not of course itself al- 
low that it is such, but would shelter itself under 
the more honourable title of ev\d/3eia (Philo, De 
Fortit. 739) ; pleads for itself that it is aafyakeia 
(Plutarch, Anim. an Corp. App. Pej. 3 ; Philo, Quod 
Det. Pot. Insid. 11). . 

<o/3o9, answering to the Latin term < metus,' is a 
middle term, and as such it is used in the New Tes- 
tament sometimes in a bad sense, but oftener in a 
good. Thus in a bad sense, Rom. viii. 15 ; 1 John 
iv. 18 ; cf. Wisd. of Sol. xvii. 11 ; but in a good, 
Acts ix. 31 ; Rom. iii. 18 ; Eph. vi. 5 ; 1 Pet. i. IT. 
$6/3o? being thus fievov, Plato, in the passage from 
the Protagoras referred to above, adds atVj^o? to 
it, as often as he would indicate the timidity which 
misbecomes a man. 

Evkdfteia, which only occurs twice in the New 
Testament (Heb. v. 7 ; xii. 28), and on each occa- 
sion signifies piety contemplated on the side in 
which it is a fear of God, is of coinse tn>m ev Xa/z,- 
/BdveaQai,, the image underlying the word being that 
of the careful taking hold, the cautious handling, of 
some precious yet delicate vessel, which with ruder 
or less anxious handling might easily be broken. 
But such a carefulness and cautiousness in the con- 
ducting of affairs, springing as no doubt in part it 
does from a fear of miscarriage, easily lies open to 
the charge of timidity. Thus Demosthenes claims 



60 SYNONYMS OF THE 

for himself that he waa only ev\a/3rjs, where his 
enemies charged him with being SetXo? and aroA//,o?. 
It is not wonderful then that fear should have come 
to be regarded as an essential element of euXa/3em, 
though for the most part no dishonourable fear, but 
such as a wise and good man might not be ashamed 
to entertain. Cicero, Tusc. iv. 6 : Declinatio [a 
malis] si cum ratione fiet, cautio appelletur, eaque 
intelligatur in solo esse sapiente ; quse autem sine 
ratione et cum examination e humili atque fracta, 
nominetur metus. He has probably the definition 
of the Stoics in his eyes. These, while they disal- 
lowed (f>6/3o$ as a 7ra$o?, admitted ev\dfBeia into the 
circle of virtues. Diogenes Laertius, vii. 1. 116 : 
rrjv Se ev\dfBeiav [evavriav (fraalv etvai\ TO) <6/3<w, 
ovaav v\oyov /CK\L(7LV 3>ojB'r)6Y)creo-d(U, fJbV jap TOV 
crotpov ouSa/xc5?, evXaftrjOrjcreadai, Se. It is joined to 

by Plutarch, Marc. 9 ; and set over against 

by Demosthenes, 517. 



xi. /ca/a'a, Trovrjpla, 



are probably at first inclined to regard /catcia 
in the New Testament as expressing the whole 
complex of moral evil, as vice in general ; and in 
this latitude no doubt it is often used. Thus, aperal 






NEW TESTAMENT. 



61 



Kal /catciai, are * virtues and vices ' (Aristotle, Rhet. 
ii. 12; Plutarch, Conj. Prcec. 25, and continually); 
while Cicero (Tusc. iv. 15) refuses to translate Katcla 
by ' malitia,' choosing rather to coin ' vitiositas ' for 
the occasion, giving this as his reason : Nam mali- 
tia certi cujusdam vitii nomen est, vitiositas om- 
nium ; showing plainly that in his eye /carcta was 
the name not of one vice, but of all. Yet a little 
consideration of the passages in which it occurs in 
the New Testament, must make evident that it is 
not there so used ; for then we should not find it as 
one in a long catalogue of sins (Rom. i. 29 ; Col. iii. 
8) ; seeing that in it alone the others would all have 
been contained. We must therefore seek for it a 
more special meaning, and bringing it into compari- 
son with irovrjpia, we shall not err in saying that 
/ca/cia is more the evil habit of mind, irovrjpia rather 
the outcoming of the same. Thus Calvin says of 
KCLKia (Eph. iv. 32) : Significat hoc verbo [Aposto- 
lus] animi pramtatem qure humanitati et aequihiti 
est opposita, et malignitas vulgo nuncupatur. Our 
English translators, rendering xaicla so often by 
' malice ' (Eph. iv. 32 ; 1 Cor. v. 8 ; xiv. 20 ; 1 
Pet. ii. 1), show that they regarded it in the same 
light. 

But the Trovrjpos is, as Hesychius calls him, o 
Spaa-Ti/cbs rov /catcov, the active worker out of evil ; 
the German ' Bosewicht,' or as Beza (Annott. in 



t>Z SYNONYMS OF THE 

Matt. v. 37) has drawn the distinction : Significat 
TTovrjpos aliquid amplius quam /ea/eo?, nempe eum 
qui sit in ornni scelere exercitatus, et ad iiijnriain 
cuivis inferendam totus comparatus. He is, accord- 
ing to the derivation of the word, 6 Trape^wv trovovs, 
or one that, as we say, " puts others to trouble ; " 
and TrovTjpia is the cupiditas nocendi ; or as Jeremy 
Taylor explains it : " aptness to do shrewd turns, 
to delight in mischiefs and tragedies ; a loving to 
trouble our neighbour and to do him ill offices; 
crossness, perverseness, and peevishness of action 
in our intercourse" (Doctrine and Practice of 
Repentance, iv. 1). If the tea/cos is opposed to 
the aytt0o?, and the c^aOXo? to the Ka\o/cdya66?, 
the TTovros would find his exact contrast in the 



While these words, tcaida and Trovypta, occur 
several times in the New Testament, Ka/corfleia 
ocurs there but once, namely, in St. Paul's long 
and fearful enumeration of the wickednesses with 
which the Gentile world was filled (Rom. i. 29), 
and never in the Septuagint. We have translated 
it f malignity.' When, however, we take it in this 
wider meaning, it is very difficult to assign to it any 
district which has not been already preoccupied 
either by ica/cia or Trovrjpta. Even supposing the 
exact limits which separate these two words have 
not been perfectly traced, yet between them they 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



63 



will have left little or no room unappropriated 
for 'malignity' to occupy as peculiarly its own. It 
would therefore seem preferable to understand KCL- 
vo-ijQeia here in the more restricted meaning which 
it sometimes possesses. The Geneva version has 
done so, which has rendered it by a periphrasis, 
" taking all things in the evil part ; " which is ex- 
actly the definition that Aristotle, of whose ethical 
terminology the word forms a part, gives (Ithct. ii. 
13) : ecm <yap KaKoi^Oeia TO evrl TO ^eipov VTro\afjL/3d- 
vew aTrazrra, or, as Jeremy Taylor calls it, " a base- 
ness of nature by which we take things by the 
wrong handle, and expound things always in the 
worst sense;" the 'malignitas interpretantium ' 
(Pliny, JBp. v. 7) ; * being exactly opposed to what 
Seneca (JDe 7"ra, ii. 24) has so beautifully called the 
' benigna rerum sestimatio.' For precisely this use 
of tcafcoijOw see Josephus, Antt. vii. G. 1 ; cf. 2 Sam. 
x. 3. This giving to all words and actions of others 
their most unfavourable interpretation Aristotle 
marks as one of the vices of the old, in that mourn- 
ful, yet for the Christian most instructive, passage, 
which has been referred to just now ; they are 
fca/coijOeis and /ca^vTroTrroi. We shall scarcely err 
then, taking /ca/corjQeta, at Bom. i. 29, in this nar- 

1 How striking, by the way, this use of 'interpreter,' as 'to 
interpret awry,' in Tacitus (himself probably not wholly untouched 
with the vice), Pliny, and the other writers of their age. 



64. SYNONYMS OF THE 

rower meaning ; the position which it occupies in 
St. Paul's list of sins entirely justifies us in regard- 
ing it as that peculiar form of evil which manifests 
itself in a malignant interpretation of the actions 
of others, an attributing of them all to the worst 
motive. 

E"or should we take leave of the word without 
noticing the deep psychological truth attested in 
this its secondary employment this truth, I mean; 
that the evil which we find in ourselves causes us 
to suspect and believe evil in others. The KCIKO- 
?70?7?, according to the original constitution of the 
word, is he that is himself of an evil ^o? or moral 
habit: but such an one projects himself, and the 
motives which actuate him, into others, sees him- 
self in them ; and as Love on the one side, in those 
glorious words of Schiller, 

"delightedly believes 
Divinities, being itself divine," 

so that which is itself -thoroughly evil, finds it al- 
most impossible to believe anything but evil in 
others. The reader of the Republic of Plato will 
remember that remarkable passage (iii. 409 #, 5), 
in which Socrates, showing how it is good for phy- 
sicians to have had chiefly to do with the sick, but 
not for teachers and rulers with bad men, accounts 
for the fact that the yet uncorrupted young men 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



65 



are evrjtfa?, as over against the /carcorjOeis, on this 
ground, namely, lire ov/c e^oi/res eV eaurot? irapa- 
bpoLOTraOr) rot? Trovrjpois. 



x. 

WE have not, I believe, in any case attempted 
to discriminate between these two words in om 
English Version. It would not have been easy, 
perhaps not possible to have done it ; and yet there 
is often a difference between them, one very well 
worthy to have been noted, if this had lain within 
the compass of our language ; and which makes 
the two words to stand very much in the same rela- 
tion to one another as < diligo ' and i amo ' in the 
Latin. It may be worth our while to realize to 
ourselves the exact distinction between these two 
Latin words, as it will help us much to understand 
that which exists between those which are the more 
immediate object of our inquiry. We have here 
abundant help from Cicero, who often sets the 
words in a certain instructive antithesis one to the 
other. Thus, writing to one friend of the affection 
in which he holds another (Ep. Fam. xiii. 47) : Ut 
scires ilium a me non diligi solum, verum etiam 
amari ; and again (Ad Brut. 1): L. Clodius valde 



66 SYNONYMS OF THE 



me diligit) vel, nt e/jL^ariKcorepov dicam, valde me 
amat. From these and various other passages to 
the same effect (there is an ample collection of them 
in Doderlein's Latein. Synonyme^ vol. iv. p. 98 sq.), 
we might conclude that < amare,' which corresponds 
to <tXe>, is stronger than diligere,' which, as we 
shall see, corresponds to ayaTrdv : and this in a cer- 
tain sense is most true ; yet it is not a greater 
strength and intensity in the first word than in the 
second which accounts for these and for a multitude 
of similar employments of them. Ernesti has suc- 
cessfully seized the law of their several uses, when 
he says: Diligere magis ad judicimn, amare vero 
ad intimum animi sensum pertinet. So that, in 
fact, Cicero in the passage first quoted is saying, 
" I do not esteem the man merely, but I love him ; 
there is something of the passionate warmth of af- 
fection in the feeling with which I regard him." 

But from this it will follow, that while friend 
may desire rather ' arnari ' than c diligi ' by his 
friend, yet there are aspects in which the ' diligi ' 
is a higher thing than the i amari,' the a^aira^Oai 
than the fyikelaOai. The first expresses a more rea- 
soning attachment, of choice and selection (diligere 
= deligere), from seeing in the object upon whom 
it is bestowed that which is worthy of regard ; or 
else from a sense that such was fit and due toward 
the person so regarded, as being a benefactor, or 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



67 



the like; while the second, without being necessa- 
rily an unreasoning attachment, does yet oftentimes 
give less account of itself to itself; is more instinct- 
ive, is more of the feelings, implies more passion ; 
thus Dion Cass. 44 : e^tXrJcrare avrov a>? irarepa^ KOI 
rjjaTnjaare a>9 vpyer7jv. From this last fact it fol- 
lows, that when the <$>i\eiv is attributed to a person 
of one sex in regard to one of another, it generally 
implies the passion of love, and is seldom employed, 
but rather dyaTrav, where such is not intended. 
Take as an example of this the use of the two 
words in John xi. The sisters of Bethany send to 
Jesus to announce that His friend Lazarus is sick 
(ver. 3): no misunderstanding is here possible, and 
the words therefore run thus: bv <pi\els daOevel: 
cf. ver. 36. But where the Saviour's affection to 
the sisters themselves is recorded, St. John at once 
changes the word, which, to unchaste cars at least, 
might not have sounded so well, and instead of fa- 
Xetz', expresses himself thus: rjyaTra Be 6 'lyo-ovs 
ri]v MdpOav, K. r. X. (ver. 5). AVe have an instruct- 
ive example of the like variation between the two 
words, and out of the same motives, at "Wisd. viii. 
2, 3. " At the same time the (f>i\e2v is not unusual to 
express the affection between persons of different 
sexes, and this where no passion, no epw?, honour- 
able or dishonourable, is intended, if the case be 
one where nearness of blood at once and of itself 



68 SYNONYMS OF THE 

precludes the supposition of such, as that of a 
brother to a sister. See, for instance, Xenophon, 
j^Tem. ii. 7, 9, 11, a very useful passage in respect 
of the relation in which the two words stand to one 
another, and which shows us how the notions of 
respect and reverence are continually implied in 
the a^airav, which, though of course not excluded 
by, are still not involved in, the $Cktlv. Out of this 
which has been said it may be explained, that 
while men are continually bidden ajarrav TOV Seov 
(Matt. xxii. 37 ; Luke x. 27 ; 1 Cor. viii. 3), and 
good men declared to do so (Rom. viii. 28 ; 1 Pet 
i. 8 ; 1 John iv. 21), the $i\etv TOV Seov is com- 
manded to them never. The Father, indeed, both 
ayajra TOV Tlov (John iii. 35), and also </>t\e TOV 
Tlov (John v. 20) ; with the first of which statements 
such passages as Matt. iii. 17, with the second, as 
John i. 18 ; Prov. viii. 22, 30, may be brought into 
connexion. 

In almost all these passages of the New Testa- 
ment, the Yulgate, by the help of 'diligo' and 
' amo,' has preserved and marked the distinction, 
which in each case we have been compelled to let 
go. It is especially to be regretted that at John 
xxi. 15 17 we have not been able to retain it, for 
the alternations there are singularly instructive, and 
if we would draw the whole meaning of the pas- 
sage forth, must not escape us unnoticed. On occa- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



69 



sion of that threefold "Lovest thou Me?" which 
the risen Lord addresses to Peter, He asks him first, 
aya-Tra? yue ; At this moment, when all the pulses 
in the heart of the now penitent Apostle are beat- 
ing with an earnest affection toward his Lord, this 
word on that Lord's lips sounds too cold ; not suffi- 
ciently expressing the warmth of his personal affec- 
tion toward Him. Besides the question itself, which 
grieves and hurts Peter (ver. 17), there is an addi- 
tional pang in the form which the question takes, 
sounding as though it were intended to put him at 
a comparative distance from his Lord, and to keep 
him there ; or at least as not permitting him to ap- 
proach so near to Him as fain he would. He there- 
fore in his answer substitutes for it the word of a 
more personal love, <t\w ere (ver. 15). When 
Christ repeats the question in the same words as at 
the first, Peter in his reply again substitutes his 
(f)iXo) for the aya-Tra? of his Lord (ver. 16). And 
now at length he has conquered ; for when 
the third time his Master puts the question to 
him, He does it with the word which Peter feels 
will alone express all that is in his heart, and 
instead of the twice repeated aya7ra<t, his w r ord 
is <tXet9 now (ver. 17). The question, grievous 
in itself to Peter, as seeming to imply a doubt 
in his love, is not any longer made more griev- 
ous still, by the peculiar shape which it as- 



70 SYNONYMS OF THE 

sumes. 1 All this subtle and delicate play of feeling 
disappears perforce, where the variation in the 
words used is incapable of being reproduced. 

Let me observe in conclusion that e/>o)9, epav, 
epao-Tijs, never occur in the New Testament, but 
the two latter occasionally in the Old ; epaar^ 
generally in a dishonourable sense (Ezek. xvi. 33 ; 
Hos. ii. 5) ; yet once or twice (as "Wisd. viii. 2 ; 
Prov. iv. 6) in a more honourable meaning, not as 
4 amasius,' but * amator.' A word or two on the 
causes of this their significant absence may here 
find place. In part, no doubt, the explanation of 
this absence is, that these words by the corrupt use 
of the world had become so steeped in earthly sen- 
sual passion, carried such an atmosphere of this 
about them, that the truth of God abstained from 
the defiling contact with them ; yea, found out a 
new word for itself rather than betake itself to one 
of these. For it should never be forgotten that the 
substantive ajaTrrj is purely a Christian word, no 
example of its use occurring in any heathen writer 
whatever; the utmost they attained to here was 
(friXavQpcoTria and </u\aSeA-</a, and the last indeed 
never in any sense but as the love between brethren 
in blood. This is Origen's explanation in an inter- 

1 Bengel generally has the honour rem acu tetigisse : here he 
has singularly missed it, and is wholly astray : ayairav, amare, est 
necessitudinis et alFectus ; <f>iA.e7f, diligere, judicii. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 71 

esting discussion on the subject, Prol. in Cant. vol. 
iii. pp. 28 30. But the reason may lie deeper than 
this. "JE/ow9, like so many other words, might have 
been assumed into nobler uses, might have been 
consecrated anew, despite of the deep degradation 
of its past history ; * and there were beginnings al- 
ready of this, in the Platonist use of the word, as 
the longing and yearning love after that unseen but 
eternal Beauty, the faint vestiges of which may 
here be everywhere traced. 2 But in the very fact 
that epo>9 did express this yearning love (in Plato's 
exquisite mythus, /Symj}. 203 Z>, "Epow is the child 
of Ilevia}, lay the real unfitness of the word to set 
forth that Christian love, which is not merely the 
sense of need, of emptiness, of poverty, with the 



1 On the attempt which some Christian writevs have made to 
distinguish between 'amor' and ' dilectio' or 'caritas,' see Augus- 
tine, De Civ. Dei, xiv. 7 : Xonnulli arbitrantur aliud esse dilectio- 
ncm sive caritatem, aliud amorem. Dicunt enim dilectionem n<vi- 
piendam esse in bono, amorem in malo. He shows, by many ex- 
amples of 'dilectio' and 'diligo' used in an ill sense in the Latin 
Scripture?, of 'amor' and 'amo' in a good, the impossibility of 
maintaining any such distinction. 

3 I cannot regard as a step in this direction the celebrated 
words of Ignatius, Ad Rom. 7 : 6 fabs (pus IffTavpuTat. It is far 
more consistent with the genius of these Ignatian Epistles to take 
fptas subjectively here; "My love of the world is crucified," i. e. 
with Christ, rather than objectively : " Christ, the object of my love, 
is crucified." 



72 SYNONYMS OF THE 

longing after fulness, not the yearning after an in- 
visible Beauty ; but a love to God and to man, 
which is the consequence of a love from God, al- 
ready shed abroad in the hearts of His people. 
The mere longing and yearning, which epcos at the 
best would imply, has given place since the Incar- 
nation to the love which is not in desire only, but 
also in possession. 



xiii. Oakacra-a^ 



like the Latin ' mare,' is the sea as 
contrasted with the land (Gen. i. 10 ; Matt, xxiii. 
15 ; Acts iv. 24). ZTeAayo?, closely allied with 
TrXttf, TrXaru?, ' flat,' is the level uninterrupted ex- 
panse of open water, the ' altum mare,' 1 as distin- 
guished from those portions of it broken by islands, 
shut in by coasts and headlands. Hippias, in 
Plato's Gorgias (338 a\ charges the eloquent soph- 
ist, Prodicus, with a favyeiv e& TO TreXayo? 



1 It need not be observed that, adopted into Latin, it has the 
same meaning: 

Ut pelagus tenuere rates, nee jam amplius ulla 
Occurrit tellus, maria undique et undique coeltim. 

Virgil, JEn. v. 8, 9. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



\6ycov, airoKpir^ravra yrjv. 1 Breadth, and not depth, 
save as quite an accessory notion, and as that which 
will probably find place in this open sea, lies in the 
word. Thus the murmuring Isarelites, in Philo 
( Vit. Mos. 35), liken to a TreXayo? the illimitable 
sand-flats of the desert ; and in Herodotus (ii. 92), 
the Nile overflowing Egypt is said TreXay/feti/ ra 
TreSia, which yet it does not cover beyond the depth 
of a few feet. A passage which illustrates well the 
distinction between the words, occurs in the Tinm us 
of Plato (25 0, 5), where the title of TreXayo? is re- 
fused to the Mediterranean sea; that is but a har- 
bour, with the narrow entrance between the Pillars 
of Hercules for its mouth ; only the great Atlantic 
Ocean beyond can be acknowledged as a\rjdwbs 
TTOI/TO?, TreXayo? 6Wa>?. And compare Aristotle, De 
Mun. 3 ; and again, Meteorol. ii. 1 : peovaa S' r; 
OdXarra ffraiverat, Kara ra? are^oT^Ta? [the Straits 
of Gibraltar], eiirov Bia Trepce^ovcrav <yr)v a? /jLiicpbv 
etc fjieydKov avvdyerai, TreXayo?. 

It might seem, at first sight, as if this distinc- 
tion did not hold good in one of the only two pas- 
sages where the word occurs in the New Testairent, 
namely Matt, xviii. 6 : "It were better for him that 
a millstone were hanged about his neck, and that 
he were drowned in the depth of the sea " (teal Kara- 



1 This last idiom reminds us of the French 'noyerlaterre,' ap- 
plied to a ship sailing out of sight of land. 



SYNONYMS OF THE 



ev Tw 7T\ujL T7J? ^aAacrcr^?). But the 
sense of depth, which undoubtedly the passage re- 
quires, is here to be looked for in the KaraTrovTio-- 
9$ 7r6i/T09, which indeed does not itself occur in 
the ]NTew Testament, being connected with /3a#o9, 
/3ey#o?, perhaps the same word as this last, and in> 
plying the sea in its perpendicular depth, as ireXa- 
709 (cequor maris), the same in its horizontal dimen- 
sions and extent. 



xv. 

IN the parable of the Talents (Matt, xxv.), the 
slothful servant charges his master with being 
a/c\r)p6$, " an hard man " (ver. 24) ; while in the 
corresponding parable of St. Luke it is aucrrTypo?, 
" an austere man " (xix. 21), which he accuses him 
of being. It follows that the words are to a certain 
degree interchangeable ; but not that their mean- 
ings run exactly parallel throughout. They will be 
found, on the contrary, very capable of discrimina- 
tion and distinction, however the distinction may 
not affect the interpretation of these parables. 

2K\v)p6s, derived from 0veeXX&>, o-K\i}va^ i arefa- 
cio,' is properly an epithet expressing that which 
through lack of moisture is hard and dry, and thus 



NEW TESTAMENT 



T5 



rough and disagreeable to the toucn; nay more, 
warped and intractable. It is then transferred to 
the region of ethics, in which is by far its most fre- 
quent use ; and where it expresses the roughness, 
harshness, and intractability in the moral nature of 
a man. Thus it is an epithet applied to ^abal (1 
Sam. xxv. 3), and no other could better express the 
evil condition of the churl. Looking to the com- 
pany which a-K\r}pos keeps, we find it commonly 
associated with such words as the following : avft- 
Mpos (Plato, Symp. 195 d) ; avrirviro^ (Thecet. 155 
a) ; ajp to? (Aristotle, Ethic, iv. 8) ; Plutarch (Cons, 
ad Apoll. 3) ; ar/jeTrro? (Diogenes Laertius, vii. 1. 
64, 117) ; Trovrjpos (I Sam. xxv. 3). It is set over 
against ew^/eo? (Plato, Charm. 175 d) ; /^aAa/co? 
(Protag. 331 d) ; p.a\0a K 6<; (Symp. 195 d). 

AvaTrjpos, which in the "New Testament only ap- 
pears in the single passage already referred to, and 
never in the Old, is in its primary meaning applied 
to such things as draw together and contract the 
tongue, which are, as we say, harsh and *///////, ///. 
to the palate, as new wine, not yet mellowed by 
age, unripe fruit, and the like. Thus, when the 
poet Cowper describes himself, when a boy, as 
gathering from the hedgerows " sloes austere," he 
uses the word with exactest propriety. .But just as 
we have transferred < strict ' (from < stringo '), to the 
region of ethics, so the Greeks transferred 



76 SYNONYMS OF THE 

the image here being borrowed from the taste, as in 
o-/c\7)p6$ it is borrowed from the touch. Neither 
does this word set out anything amiable or attractive 
in him to whom it is applied. We find it in such 
company as the following ; joined with aT/S??? (Plato, 
Pol. 398 a) ; afcparos and avrjSvvros (Plutarch, Conj. 
Prcec. 29) ; av^varo^ (Phoc. 5) ; av6e/caa-Tos l (Da 
Adul. et Am. 14). We find, further, Aristotle 
(Ethic. Eudem. vii. 5), contrasting the avo-rrjpos 
with the eu7/>a7reXo9, which last word he uses in a 
good sense. 

At the same time it will be observed that in 
none of the epithets with which we have thus found 
avarrjpos associated, is there that deep moral per- 
versity which lies in those with which a-K\rjp6<s is 
linked ; and, moreover, it is met not seldom in more 
honourable company ; thus it is joined with a-axppcov 
continually (Plutarch, Cory. Prcec. vii. 29 ; Qucest. 
Gr. 40) ; while the Stoics were wont to affirm all 
good men to be ava-rrjpoi (Diogenes Laertius, vii. 
1. 64, 117) : KOI av<rrripovs Se fyaaiv elvai Trdvras 
crvroL'Satoi;? TW fjLijre avrovs Trpos rjSovrjv 6/uXeo>, 
Trap a\\a>v ra TTpbs rjfiovrjv Trpoo-Be^ecrdai,. In 
Latin c austerus' is predominantly an epithet of 

1 In Plutarch this word is used in an ill sense, as self-willed, 
'eigensinnig;' being one of the many, in all languages, which, be- 
ginning with a good sense (Aristotle, Eihic. Nic. iv. 7), ended with 
a bad. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 11 

honour (Doderlein, Lat. Synon. vol. iii. p. 232). 
The c austerus ' is one of an earnest, severe charac- 
ter, opposed to all levity ; needing, it may very well 
be, to watch against harshness, rigour, or morose- 
ness, into which his character might easily degene- 
rate (non austeritas ejus tristis, non dissoluta sit 
comitas, Quintilian, ii. 2. 5), but as yet not charged 
with these. 

We may distinguish, then, between ovcX^po? and 
ava-rrjpo? thus : cr/cX^o?, applied to any, conveys 
always a reproach and a severe one, indicates a 
character harsh, inhuman, and (in the earlier use 
of the word) uncivil ; ava-Trjpos, on the contrary, 
does not always convey a reproach at all, any more 
than the German 'streng,' which is very diftm-nl; 
from i hart ; ' and even where it does, yet one of com- 
paratively a milder and less opprobrious description. 



xv. eicwv, 



THERE is a double theological interest attending 
the distinction between el/cwv and the two words 
which are here brought into comparison with it ; 
the first belonging to the Arian controversy, and 
turning on the fitness or unfitness of the words 
before us to set forth the relation of the Son to the 



78 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Father ; while the other is an interest that might 
seem at first sight remote from any controversy, 
which yet has contrived to insinuate itself into more 
than one, namely, whether there be a distinction, 
and if so what it is, between the image (eMv) of 
God, in which, and the likeness (6/Waxrt?) of God, 
after which man at the first is declared to have been 
created (Gen. i. 26). 

And first, for the distinction drawn between the 
words during the course of the long Arian debate. 
It is evident that ei/cwv (from GOIKO) and 6/W/m 
might often be used as equivalent, and in many po- 
sitions it would be indifferent whether of the two 
were employed. Thus they are convertibly used 
by Plato (Phcedr. 250 5), o/jLOi^^ara and el/coves 
alike, to set forth the earthly patterns and resem- 
blances of the archetypal things in the heavens. 
When, however, the Church found it necessary to 
raise up bulwarks against Arian error and Arian 
equivocation* it drew a strong distinction between 
these words, one not arbitrary, but having essential 
difference for its ground. Eiicwv (== imago, imita- 
go) always supposes a prototype, that which it not 
merely resembles, but from which it is drawn. It 
is the German ' Abbild,' which invariably presumes 
a 'Yorbild;' Gregory Nazianzene, Oral. 36: aim; 
jap elicovos </>u<7t?, ^i^rj/ma elvai rov ap^ervTrov. (Pe- 
tavius, De Trin. vi. 5, 6.) Thus, the monarch's 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



79 



head on the coin is elrcwv (Matt. xxii. 20) ; the reflec- 
tion of the sun in the water is its el/ccov (Plato, 
Phcedo, 99 d) ; the statue in stone or other material 
is el/ccov (Eev. xiii. 14) ; the child is e/^z/^o? eltcwv 
of his parents. But in the o^oiw^a or o/Wa>crt?, 
while there is resemblance, it by no means follows 
that it has been gotten in this way, that it is de- 
rived : it may be accidental, as one egg is like 
another, as there may exist a resemblance between 
two men who are not in any way akin to one another. 
Thus, as Augustine in an instructive passage brings 
out (Qucest. Ixxxiii. 74), the ' imago' (= eltcwv) in- 
cludes and involves the i similitudo,' but the ; simi- 
litudo ' (= 6//,otWt?) does not involve the ' imago. 7 
The reason will at once be manifest why eltca)v is 
applied to the Son, as the expression of his relation 
to the Father (1 Cor. xi. 7 ; Col. i. 15 ; cf. Wisd. of 
Sol. vii. 26) ; while among all the words of the 
family of o/mo?, not merely none are so employed 
in the Scripture, but they have all been expressly 
forbidden and condemned by the Church ; that is, 
so soon as ever it has had reason to suspect foul 
play, and that they are not used in good faith. 
Thus Hilary, addressing an Arian, says, " I may use 
them, to exclude Sabellian error ; but I will not al- 
low you to do so, whose intention is altogether dif- 
ferent " (Con. Constant. Imp. 17 21). 

EiKutv* when employed of the Son, like x a P aK ' 



80 SYNONYMS OF THE 



and aTravyaa-fjLa (Heb. i. 3), with which theologi- 
cally it is nearly related, is indeed inadequate, but, 
at the same time, it is true as far as it goes ; and in 
human language, employed for the setting forth of 
truths which transcend human thought, we must 
be content with approximative assertions, seeking 
for the complement of their inadequacy, that which 
shall redress their insufficiency, from some other 
quarter. Each has its weak side, which must be 
supported by strength derived from elsewhere. 
EL/CM is not without its weakness ; for what image 
is of equal worth and dignity with the prototype 
from which it is imaged ? But it has also its strong 
side ; it at any rate expresses derivation while 
o/zotor???, ofjioiaxTis, or any other words of this fami- 
ly, expressing mere similarity, if they did not ac- 
tually imply, might yet suggest, and if they sug- 
gested, would seem to justify, error, and that with 
no compensating advantage. Exactly the same 
considerations were at work here, which, in respect 
of the verbs yevvav and /cr/fety, did in this same con- 
troversy cause the Church to allow the one, and to 
condemn the other. 

The second interest in the discrimination of these 
words lies in the question which has often been dis- 
cussed, whether in that great fiat announcing man's 
original constitution, "Let us make man in our 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



81 



image (elfccov LXX., tbs Heb.), after our likeness " 
(o/zcuWt? LXX., psra^i Heb.), anything different was 
intended by the second than by the first, or whether 
the second is merely to be regarded as consequent 
upon the first, " in our image " and therefore 
" after our likeness." Both are claimed for man in 
the New Testament : the et'/ccoi/, 1 Cor. xi. 7 ; the 
6/Wa><7t9, Jam. iii. 9. 

Many of the early Fathers, as also of the 
Schoolmen, maintained that there was a real dis- 
tinction. Thus, the Alexandrians taught that the 
ei/cow was something in which men were created, 
being common to. all, and continuing to man after 
the fall as before (Gen. ix. G), while the 6/*oiWi? 
was something toward which man was created, that 
he might strive after and attain it; Origen, Pi'ln<-. 
iii. 6 : Imaginis dignitatem in prima, conditione per- 
cepit, similitudinis vero perfectio in consummatione 
servata est ; cf. in Joan. torn. xx. 20. It can hardly 
be doubted that the Platonist studies and predilec- 
tions of the Christian theologians of Alexandria had 
some influence upon them here, and on this distinc- 
tion which they drew. It is well known that Plato 
presented the o^oiovaOat, ra> Sew Kara TO Bvvarov 
(Thecet. 176 a) as the highest scope of man's life ; 
and indeed Clement (Strom, ii. 22) brings the great 
passage of Plato to bear upon this very discussion. 
The Schoolmen, in like manner, drew a distinction, 



82 SYNONYMS OF THE 

although it was not this one, between u tnese two 
divine stamps upon man." Lombard, Sent. ii. dist. 
16; H. de S. Yictore, De Animd, ii. 25; De Sac. 
i. 6. 2 : Imago secimdum cognitionem veritatis, 
similitude) secimdum amorem virtutis ; the first de- 
claring the intellectual, as the second the moral pre- 
eminence, in which man was created. Many, how- 
ever, have refused to acknowledge these, or any 
other distinctions between the two declarations ; as 
Baxter, for instance, who, in his interesting reply to 
Elliott's, the Indian Missionary's, inquiries on the 
subject, rejects them all as groundless conceits, 
though himself in general only too anxious for dis- 
tinction and division (Life, vol. ii. p. 296). 

It is hard to think that they were justified in 
this rejection ; for myself I should rather believe 
that the Alexandrians were very near the truth, if 
they did not grasp it altogether. There are emi- 
nently significant parts of Scripture, where the 
words of Jerome, originally applied to the Apoca- 
lypse, 6 quot verba tot sacramenta,' can hardly be 
said to contain an exaggeration. Such a part is the 
history of man's creation and his fall, in the first 
three chapters of Genesis. We may expect to find 
mysteries there ; prophetic intimations of truths 
which it might require ages and ages" to develop. 
And, without attempting to draw any very strict 
line between el/cvv and ouotWt? or their Hebrew 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



83 



originals, I tliink we may be bold to say that the 
whole history of man, not only in his original crea- 
tion, but also in his after restoration and reconstitu- 
tion in the Son, is significantly wrapped up in this 
double statement; which is double for this very 
cause, that the Divine Mind did not stop at the 
contemplation of his first creation, but looked on to 
him as " renewed in knowledge after the image of 
Him that created him " (Col. iii. 10) ; because it 
knew that only as partaker of this double benefit 
would he attain the true end for which he was made. 



xvi. a<7&m'a, acreA/yeta. 

THE man who is aa-coro?, it is little likely that lie 
will not be ac-eA/yjj? also ; and yet acram'a and ao-eX- 
<yeia are not identical in meaning ; they will express 
different aspects of his sin, or at any rate contem- 
plate it from different points of view. 

And first aa-corta, a word in which heathen ethics 
said much more than they intended or knew. It 
occurs thrice in the New Testament (Eph. v. 18 ; 
Tit. i. 6 ; 1 Pet. iv. 4) ; once only in the Septuagint 
(Prov. xxviii. 7). Besides this we have the adverb 
ao-coTft)?, Luke xiv. 13 ; and ao-wro? once in the Sep- 
tuagint, Prov. vii. 11. At Eph. v. 18 we translate 



84: SYNONYMS OF THE 

it c excess ; ' in the other two places, c not,' as the 
coz> do-cord)?, i in riotous living ; ' the Vulgate al- 
ways by c luxuria ' and ' luxuriose,' words wjiich, it 
is hardly needful to observe, imply in Latin much 
more of loose and profligate living than our < luxu- 
ry ' and ( luxuriously ' do now. The word is some- 
times taken in a passive sense, as though it were 
one who cannot be saved, o-co&adcu jj,r) 
, as Clement of Alexandria (Pcedag. ii. 1) 
expressly explains it, = ' perditus,' ' heillos,' or as 
we used to say, a c losel.' Grotius : Genus hominum 
ita immersorum vitiis, ut eorum ealus deplorata sit; 
the word being, so to speak, prophetic of their 
doom to whom it was applied. ' This, however, was 
quite its rarer use ; more commonly the ao-wro? is 
not one who cannot be saved, but who cannot him- 
self save, or spare ; = c prodigus,' or, again to use 
a good old English word which we have now let go, 
a ' scattering.' Aristotle notes that this, a too 
great prodigality in the use of money, is the ear- 

1 Thus, in the Adelphi of Terence (iv. 7), one having spoken 
of a youth 'luxu perdiium,' proceeds: 

Ipsa si cupiat Salus, 
kervare prorsus non potest hanc familiam. 

No doubt in the Greek original from which Terence translated this 
comedy, there was a play here on the word &ffuros, which the ab- 
sence of the verb 'salvare' from the Latin language has hindered 
Terence from preserving. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



85 



liest meaning of aaom'a, giving this as its definition 
(Ethic. Nic. iv. 1. 3) ; aaarria eanv virep(3o\r) Trepl 
-^prj^ara. The word forms part of his ethical ter- 
minology ; the e\ev0epios, or the truly liberal man, 
is with him one who keeps the golden mean be- 
tween the two a/cpa, namely, dcrcoria on one side, 
and ave\ev6epia or stinginess, on the other. And it 
is in this view of aa-wrla Jliat Plato (Pol. viii. 560 e\ 
when he names the various catachrestic terms, ac- 
cording to which men call their vices by the names 
of the virtues which they caricature, makes them 
style these ao-om'a, {j,ya\o7rpe7reia. 1 It is with the 
word at this stage of its meaning that Plutarch 
joins TToXureXeta (De ApotJieg. Cat. 1). 

But it is easy to see, and Aristotle does not fail 
to note, that one who is ao-wro? in this sense of 
spending too much, of laying out his expenditure 
on a more magnificent scheme than his means will 
warrant, slides too easily under the fatal influence 
of flatterers, and of all those temptations with which 
he has surrounded himself, into a spending on his 
own lusts and appetites of that with which he parts 
so easily, laying it out for the gratification of his 
own sensual desires ; and that thus a new thought 
finds its way into the word, so that it indicates not 
only one of a too expensive, but also and chiefly, 

J Quintilian (Inst. viii 36) : Pro luxurifc liberalitaa dicitur. 



86 SYNONYMS OF THE 

of a dissolute, debauched, profligate manner of liv- 
ing ; the German ' liiderlich.' These are his words 
(Ethic. Nic. iv. 1. 36) : Sib Kal aKoXaarot, avrwv 
[TWV acrtoTcov] elcriv ol TroXXor eir^epco? yap ava\i- 
<TKOVT$ /cal et9 ra? aKo\aaias Sairavrjpoi elcn, KOI Sia 
TO pr) 7T/909 TO Ka\bv &v, Trpo? Ta? r)Sova<? a,7TOK\i- 
vova-iv. Here he' gives the reason of what he has 
stated before : TOU? a/cpareis Kal et? aKo\a<rlav Ba- 



In this sense aacorla is used in the New Testa- 
ment ; as we find aa-wriau and Kpcu,7rd\ai (Herodian, 
ii. 5) joined elsewhere together. It will of course 
at once be felt that the two meanings will often run 
into one another, and that it will be hardly possible 
to keep them strictly asunder. Thus see the various 
examples of the aVwTo?, and of ao-om'a, which 
Athenseus (iv. 59 67) gives ; they are sometimes 
rather of one kind, sometimes of the other. The 
waster of his goods will be very often a waster 
of everything besides, will lay waste himself his 
time, his faculties, his powers ; and, we may add, 
uniting the active and passive meanings of the word, 
will be himself laid waste ; he loses himself, and is 
lost. 

There is a difference in acreA/yeta, a word the 
derivation of which is wrapped in much obscurity ; 
some going so far to look for it as to Selge, a city 
of Pisidia, whose inhabitants were infamous for 






NEW TESTAMENT. 



their vices ; while others derive it from 0e%yew>, 
probably the same word as the German < schwel- 
gen.' Of more frequent use than acrwria in the 
New Testament, it is by us generally rendered ' las- 
civiousness ' (Mark vii. 22 ; 2 Cor. xii. 21 ; Gal. v. 
19 ; Eph. iv. 19 ; 1 Pet. iv. 3 ; Jude 4) ; though 
sometimes 'wantonness' (Rom. xiii. 13; 2 Pet. ii. 
18) ; as in the Vulgate either by c impudicitia ' or 
< luxuria.' If our translators or the Latin intended 
by these renderings to express exclusively impuri- 
ties and lusts of the flesh, they have certainly given 
to the word too narrow a meaning. The daeXyeia, 
which it will be observed is not grouped with 
fleshly lusts, in the catalogue of sins at Mark vii. 
21, 22, is best described as petulance, or wanton in- 
solence ; being somewhat stronger than the Latin 
' protervitas,' though of the same nature, more 
nearly ' petulantia.' The do-eXyfa as Passow ob- 
serves, is very closely allied to the v/BpiariKos and 
a6Xao-T09, being one who acknowledges no re- 
straints, who dares whatsoever his caprice and wan- 
ton insolence suggest, 1 None, of course, would 
deny that dcre\yia may display itself in acts of w r hat 
we call { lasciviousness ; ' for there are no worse dis- 



1 Thus Witsius (Melet. Leid. p. 465) observes: eureA-yeiaj/ dici 
posse omncm tarn ingenii, quam morum proterviam, petulantiam, 
lasciviam, quse ab ^Eschine opponitur ry /xerpt^TTjTt KU\ 



88 SYNONYMS OF THE 

plays of v/3pi$ than in these ; but still it is their 
petulance, their insolence, which causes them to 
deserve this name ; and of the two renderings of 
the word which we have made, 4 wantonness ' seems 
to me the preferable, standing as it does, by the 
double meaning which it has, in a remarkable 
ethical connexion with the word which we now are 
considering. 

In a multitude of passages the notion of lasci- 
viousness is altogether absent from the word. Thus 
Demosthenes, making mention of the blow which 
Meidias had given him, characterises it as in keep- 
ing with the known dcre\yeia of the man (Con. Jbfeid. 
514). Elsewhere he joins Seo-Tnm/ew? and acreA/yw?, 
ao-eA/yw? and TrpoTrerw?. As acreKyeia Plutarch 
characterises a like outrage on the part of Alcibi- 
ades, committed against an honourable citizen of 
Athens (Alcib. 8) ; indeed, the whole picture which 
he draws of Alcibiades is the full-length portrait 
of an ao-eX-y/J?. Josephus ascribes ao-e\yeta and 
fj,avia to Jezebel, daring, as she did, to build a tem- 
ple of Baal in the Holy City itself (Antt. viii. 13. 
1) ; and the same to a Roman soldier, who, being 
on guard at the Temple during the Passover, pro- 
voked by an act of grossest indecency a tumult, in 
which great multitudes of lives were lost (Antt. xx. 
5. 3). And for other passages, helpful to a fixing 
of the true meaning of ao-e\ya, see 3 Mace. ii. 26 ; 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



89 



Polybius, viii. 14. 1 ; Eusebius, II. E. v. 1. 26 ; and 

the quotations given in Wetstein's New Testament, 
vol. i. p. 588. It, then, and aawria are clearly dis- 
tinguishable ; the fundamental notion of aa-corid 
being wastefulness and riotous excess ; 
lawless insolence and wanton caprice. 



xvii. Oiyydvco, aTrro/jicu, 



WE are sometimes enabled, by the help of an 
accurate synonymous distinction, at once to reject 
as untenable some interpretation of a passage of 
Scripture, which might, but for this, have main- 
tained itself as at least a possible explanation of it. 
Thus is it with Heb. xii. 18 : " For ye are not come 
unto the mount that might ~be touched " (^rrj\a$w- 
juevw opei). Many interpreters have seen allusion 
in these words to Ps. civ. 32 : " He touclietli the 
hills and they smoke ; " and to the fact that, at the 
giving of the Law, God did descend upon mount 
Sinai, which " was altogether on a smoke, because 
the Lord descended upon it " (Exod. xix. 18). But, 
not to say that in such case we should expect a 
perfect, as in the following /eeArauyLteixw, still more 
decisively against this is the fact that ^/r??Xa</>aft> is 
never used in the sense of so handling an object as 



90 SYNONYMS OF THE 

to exercise a moulding, modifying influence upon it, 
but only to indicate a feeling of its surface (Luke 
xxiv. 39 ; 1 John i. 1) ; often such a feeling as is 
made with the intention of learning its composition 
(Gen. xxvii. 12, 21, 22) ; while not seldom the word 
signifies no more than a feeling for or after an ob- 
ject, without any actual coming in contact with it 
at all. It is used continually to express a groping 
in the dark (Job v. 14), or of the blind (Isa. lix. 10 ; 
Gen. xxvii. 12 ; Deut. xxviii. 29 ; Judg. xvi. 26) ; 
and tropically, Acts xvii. 27 ; with which we may 
compare Plato, Phced. 99 1) : ^Xa^oj^re? wo-Trep eV 
o-Korei. The ^Xa^a^tez/oi/ 0/009, in this passage, is 
beyond a doubt the i rnons palpdbilis : ' " Ye are 
not come," the Apostle would say, " to any material 
mountain, like Sinai, capable, as such, of being 
touched and handled ; not in this sense, to the 
mountain that may be/^, but to the heavenly Jeru- 
salem," to a VOTJTOV 0/90?, and not to an ala-Qrjrov. 

The so handling of any object as to exert a 
modifying influence upon it, the French c manier,' 
as distinguished from ' toucher,' the German < betas- 
ten,' as distinguished from 'beriihren,' would be 
either aTrreaQai l or Oiyydveiv. Of these the first 
is stronger than the second ; airreadat, (== ' con- 



1 In the passage alluded to already, Ps. civ. 32, tne words of 
the Septuagint are, <5 O.TTT 6/j.fvos T&V opeuv, Kai Ka.irviovTai. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



91 



trectare'), than Oiyydveiv (Ps. civ. 15 ; 1 John v. 18), 
as appears plainly in a passage of Xenophon (Cyrop. 
i. 3. 5), where the child Cyrus, rebuking his grand- 
father's delicacies, says : on ae opw, orav /mev rov 
aprou atyr), et<? ovbev rrjv X e ^P a a f n'O'fya)jj,evoV) orav Be 
TOVTCOV TWOS i y 77 9, euOvs airoicaOalpr) rrjv X W a ^ 
ra xetpo/jiaKTpa, &>? iravu a^Oo^evo^. Our Version, 
then, has just reversed the true order of the words, 
when, at Col. ii. 21, it translates /-IT; aifrr), /zt;8e yevo-r}, 
HrjSe 0iyrj<>, " Touch not, taste not, handle not." 
The first and last prohibitions should, in our Eng- 
lish, just have changed their places, and the pas- 
sage should stand, " Ilv.mV,. not, taste not, touch 
not." How much more strongly will then come 
out the ever ascending scale of superstitious pro- 
hibition among the false teachers at Colosse. 
c Handle not ' is not sufficient ; they forbid to 
' taste ' and, lastly, even to touch those things 
from which, according to their notions, unclean- 
ness might be derived. Beza well : Yerbum Oiyew 
a verbo aTrreaQai sic est distinguendum, ut decres- 
cente semper oratione intelligatur crescere super- 
stitio. 



92 SYNONYMS OF THE 



xviii. TToXiyyevecrLa, dvatcaivcjcris. 



-is, a word frequent enough in the 
Greek Fathers (see Suicer, TJies. s. v.), no where 
occurs in the New Testament ; although the verb 
avayevvdw twice (1 Pet. i. 13, 23). Did we meet 
dva<yevvrjcn<; there, it would furnish a still closer 
synonym to 7ra\iy<yev<rla than the avaKaivwcns, 
which I propose to bring into comparison with it : 
yet that also is sufficiently close to justify the 
attempt at once to compare and distinguish them. 
It will be no small gain to the practical theologian, 
to the minister of God's word, to be clear in his own 
mind in respect of the relation between the two. 

Hakiyyeveaia naturally demands first to be con- 
sidered. This is one of the many words which the 
Gospel found, and, so to speak, glorified ; enlarged 
the borders of its meaning ; lifted it up into a 
higher sphere ; made it the expression of far deeper 
thoughts, of far greater truths, than any of which 
it had been the vehicle before. It was, indeed, al- 
ready in use ; but, as the Christian new-birth was 
not till after Christ's birth ; as men were not new- 
born, till Christ was born (John i. 12) ; as their re- 
generation did not go before, but only followed his 
generation ; so the word could not be used in this 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



93 



/ca ira- 



KOI 



its highest, most mysterious sense, till that great 
mystery of the birth of the Son of God into our 
world had actually found place. And yet it is ex- 
ceedingly interesting to trace these its subordinate, 
and, as they proved, preparatory uses. Thus, by 
the Pythagoreans, as is well known, the word was 
employed to express the transmigration of souls ; 
their reappearance in new bodies being called ira- 
Xiyyeveaia : Plutarch, _Z?<2 Esu Car. i. 7 ; ii. 6 ; D& 
Isid. et Osir. C. 35 : ^Ocripibos al 
\LjjV<n,ai : De Ei ap. Delp. 9 : 
7ra\i,yyev(n,aL Among the Stoics the word set 
forth the periodic renovation of the earth, when, 
budding and blossoming in the spring-time, it woke 
up from its winter sleep, nay, might be said even to 
have revived from its winter death : Marc. Anton. 
ii. 1 : TTJV Trepio&itcrjv 7ra\iyyev(7iav TWV o\wv. Ci- 
cero (Ad Attic, vi. 6) calls his restoration to his 
dignities and honours, after his return from exile, 
' hanc 7ra\iyyevcrlav nostram ;' with which compare 
Philo, Leg. ad Cal. 41. Josephus (Antt. xi. 3. 9) 
characterises the restoration of the Jewish nation 
after the Captivity, as TTJV dvaKT^cnv Kal 7ra\iy<ye- 
veaiav TT}? TrarplSos. And, to cite one passage more, 
Olyrnpiodorus, a later Platonist, styles memory a 
revival or 7ra\iyyeve<rLa of knowledge (Journal des 

1834, p. 488) : ira 
// 



94: SYNONYMS OF THE 

E"o one who lias carefully watched and weighed 
the uses of TroXiyyeveaia just adduced, and similar 
ones which might be added, but will note that 
while it has in them all the meaning of a recovery, 
a change for the better, a revival, yet it never 
reaches, or even approaches, the depth of meaning 
which it has acquired in Christian language, and 
which will now claim a little to be considered. The 
word occurs never in the Old Testament (Trakiv yi- 
vevOai at Job xiv. 14), and only twice in the New 
(Matt xix. 28 ; Tit. iii. 5), but there (which is most 
remarkable) apparently in different meanings. In 
St. Matthew it seems plainly to refer to the new- 
birth of the whole creation, the ano/cardo-rao-is irdv- 
Tuv (Acts iii. 21), which shall be when the Son of 
Man hereafter comes in his glory; while in St. 
Paul's use of the word the allusion is plainly to the 
new-birth of the single soul, which is now evermore 
finding place in the waters of baptism. Shall we 
then acquiesce in the conclusion that it is used in 
diverse meanings ; that there is no common bond 
which binds the two uses of it together? By no 
means ; all laws of language are violated by any 
such supposition. The fact is, rather, that the word 
by our Lord is used in a wider, by his Apostle in a 
narrower meaning. They are two circles of mean- 
ing, one more comprehensive than the other, but 
their centre is the same. The irdKcyyeveala of which 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



95 



Scripture speaks, begins with the fMi/cpo/coo-fjios of 
single souls ; but it does not end there ; it does not 
cease its effectual working till it has embraced the 
whole /Aafcpofcoo-fjLos of the universe. The first seat 
of the 7ra\Lyyev(rta is the soul of man ; but, begin- 
ning there, and establishing its centre there, it ex- 
tends in ever widening circles. And, first, to his 
body ; the day of resurrection will be the day of 
irdkiyyevea-ia for it ; so that those Fathers had a 
certain, though only a partial, right, as many as in- 
terpreted the word at Matt. xix. 28, as though it had 
been equivalent, and only equivalent, to di/a<rra<ri?, 
and who, as a consequence, themselves continually 
used it as a synonym for ' resurrection ' (Eusebius, 
Hist. Ecd. v. 1. 58 ; Suicer, Thcs. s. v.). Doubtless 
the word there includes, or presupposes, the resur- 
rection, but it also embraces much more. Beyond 
the day of resurrection, or it may be contempora- 
neous with it, a day will come, when all nature shall 
put off its soiled work-day garments, and clothe it- 
self in its holy-day attire, the day of the " restitu- 
tion of all things " (Acts iii. 21) ; of the new heaven 
and the new earth (Rev. xxi. 1) ; the day of which 
Paul speaks, as one in expectation of which all 
creation is groaning and travailing until now (Rom. 
viii. 21 23). Man is the present grabject of the 
7ra\iyyeveaia, and of the wondrous transformation 
which it implies ; but in that day it will have in- 



96 SYNONYMS OF THE 

eluded within its limits the whole world, of which 
man is the central figure : and here is the reconci- 
liation of the two passages, in one of which it is 
spoken of as pertaining to the single soul, in the 
other to the whole redeemed creation. They allude 
both to the same fact, but in different epochs and 
stages of its development. 

But now to consider ava/caivwcrc^ the relation in 
which it stands to ira\iyyevea-ia, and the exact limits 
of the meaning of each. This word, which is pecu- 
liar to the Greek of the New Testament, occurs 
there also only twice once in connexion with TTO,- 
\iyyeveo-ta (Tit. iii. 5), and again Rom. xii. 2 ; but 
we have the verb avaKawow, which also is an exclu- 
sively New Testament form, at 2 Cor. iv. 16 ; Col. 
iii. 10 ; and the more classical avaicaivi^a), Ileb. vi. 
6, from which the nouns, frequent in the Greek 
Fathers, avatccuv 'tayzo? and avaKaiviais, are more im- 
mediately drawn ; we have also avaveow (Eph. iv. 
23) ; all in the same uses. It would be impossible 
better to express the relation in which the two 
stand to each other, than has been already done in 
our Collect for Christmas day, in which we pray 
" that we being regenerate," in other words, having 
been already made the subjects of the TraX^ye^eo-ia, 
" may dail/T^e renewed by the Holy Spirit," may 
continually know the avaKaivwais Uvev^aros c Ayiov. 
In this Collect, uttering, as so many others of them 






NEW TESTAMENT. 97 

do, profound theological truth in its most accurate 
forms, the i regeneration ' is spoken of as past, as 
having found place once for all, while the ' renewal ' 
or ' renovation ' is that which ought now to be daily 
proceeding this avaKaivwais being that gradual 
restoration of the Divine image, which is going for- 
ward in him who, through the new birth, has come 
under the transforming 1 powers of the world to 
come. It is called " the renewal of the Holy Ghost" 
inasmuch as He is the ' causa efficiens ' by whom 
alone this renewal, this putting on of the new man, 
is carried forward. 

We see then, of the two, that they are indisso- 
lubly bound together that the second is the follow- 
ing up, the consequence, the completion of the first; 
yet, for all this, that they are not to be confounded. 
The 7ra\i<yyevoria is that great free act of God's 
mercy and power, whereby He causes the sinner to 
pass out of the kingdom of darkness into that of 
light, out of death into life ; it is the avwOev yevvij- 
Qtyai of John iii. 3 ; the yevvTjdrjvat, etc Seov of 1 
John v. 4, sometimes called, therefore, Oeoyeveaia 



rfj avaKaivcacrfi rov vo6s, Rom. xii. 2. The 
striking words of Seneca, Ep. 6, Intelligo me emendari non tan- 
tum, sed transfigurari, are far too big to express any benefits 
which he could have gotten from his books of philosophy ; they 
reach out after blessings to be obtained, not in the schools of men, 
but only in the Church of the living God. 
5 



98 SYNONYMS OF THE 

by Greek theologians ; the yevv7)0f}vcu e/c 
d^Odprov of 1 Pet. i. 23. In it, not in the prepa- 
rations for it, but in the act itself, the subject of 
it is passive, even as the child has nothing to do 
with its own birth. But it is very diiferent as res- 
pects the avaKaivwGis. This is the gradual conform- 
ing of the man more and more to that new spiritual 
world into which he has been introduced, and in 
which he now lives and moves ; the restitution of 
the Divine image ; and in all this, so far from be- 
ing passive, he must be a fellow-worker with God. 
That was i regeneratio,' this is ' renovatio.' They 
must not be separated, but neither may they be con- 
founded. 1 What infinite confusions, conflicts, scan- 
dals, obscurations of God's truth on this side and 
on that, have arisen from the one course as from the 
other. 



xix. aicryyvr], cu'Sco?. 

THERE was a time when the Greek language pos- 
sessed only the word at'Soj? ; which then occupied 
the two regions of meaning afterward divided be- 

1 Gerhard (Loc. TheolL xxi. 7. 113): Renovatio, licet a regene- 
ratione proprie et specialiter accepta distinguatur, individuo ta- 
men et perpetuo nexu cum e& est conjimeta. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



99 



tween it and al<rxywi. AlSoo? had at that time the 
same duplicity of meaning as is latent in the Latin 
' puclor,' in our own ' shame.' Thus in Homer 
aiayyvT] never occurs, while sometimes, as II. v. 
787, ai&w is used on occasions when alayyvr) would, 
in later Greek, have necessarily been employed : 
elsewhere Homer employs alSa)? in that sense which, 
at a later period, it vindicated as exclusively its own. 
And even Thucydides (i. 84), in a difficult and 
doubtful passage where both words occur, is by 
many considered to have employed them as equi- 
pollent and convertible. Generally, however, in 
the Attic period of the language, the words were 
not accounted synonymous. Ammonias formally 
distinguishes them in a philological, as the Stoics 
in an ethical, interest ; and almost every passage 
in which either word occurs is an evidence of the 
real difference existing between them. Yet the 
distinction has not always been quite successfully 
seized. 

Thus it has been sometimes said that at'&w? is 
the shame which hinders one from doing a disho- 
nourable thing ; altr^vvrj is the disgrace, outward or 
inward, which follows on having done it (Luke xiv. 
9). This distinction, while it has its truth, is yet 
not an exhaustive one ; and if we were thereupon 
to assume that alvxyvrj was thus only retrospective, 
the consequence of things unworthily done, it would 



100 SYNONYMS OF THE 

be an erroneous one ; l for it would be abundantly 
easy to show that alor^vvr] is continually used to ex- 
press that feeling which leads to shun what is un- 
worthy out of a prospective anticipation of disho- 
nour. Thus one definition (Plat. Def. 416) makes 
it <6/3o? eVl irpoo-SoKia aof/a? : and Aristotle in- 
cludes the future in his comprehensive definition 
(RJiet. ii. 6) : eo-rco Srj aicr%vvrj, \v7rr] rt? Kal rapa^rj 
nrepl ra a? aSo^lav fycLivo^tva fyepeiv rwv KCLKWV, 7} 
irapovrwv, rj yeyovorayv, rj fjL\\6vrajv. In this sense 
as i fuga dedecoris ' it is used Ecclus. iv. 21 ; by 
Plato, Gory. 492 a j by Xenophon, Ancib. iii. 1. 10. 
In this last passage, which runs thus, fyoftovpevoi Se 
TOV 6$ov ical atcovres oyLtco? ol TroXXol 8t' ala-^yvrjv KOL 
a\\r)\wv Kal Kvpov o-vvr)KO\ov6r)(rav. Xenophon im- 
plies that while he and others, for more reasons 
than one, disapproved the going forward with Cyrus 
to assail his brother's throne, they yet were now 
ashamed to draw back. 

This much of truth the distinction drawn above 
possesses, that ai'So>? ( = ' verecundia,' see Cicero, 
Rep. v. 4) is the nobler word and implies the nobler 
motive : in it is implied an innate moral repugnance 

1 There is the same onesidedness, though exactly on the otner 
side, in Cicero's definition of 'pudor,' which he makes merely pro- 
spective : Pudor metus rerum turpium, et ingenua quaedam timidi- 
tas, dedecus fugiens, laxidemque consectans ; but Ovid writes, 
Irruit, et nostrum vulgat clamore pudorem. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



101 



to the doing of the dishonourable act, which moral 
repugnance scarcely or at all exists in the ala-^vvrj. 
Insure the man restrained only by alayyvr] against 
the outward disgrace which he fears may accom- 
pany or follow his act, and he will refrain from it 
no longer. It is only, as Aristotle teaches, Trepl 
a&o% /a9 fyavraa-ia : its seat, therefore, as he goes on 
to show, is not properly in the moral sense of him 
that entertains it, in his consciousness of a right 
which has been, or would be, violated by his act, 
but only in his apprehension of other persons who 
are, or might be, privy to its violation. Let this 
apprehension be removed, and the ala^vvrj ceases ; 
while at'So)? finds its motive in its own moral being, 
and not in any other; it implies reverence for the 
good as good, and not merely as that to which 
honour and reputation are attached. Thus it is 
often connected with ev\d(Seia (Ileb. xii. 28), the 
reverence before God, before His majesty, His ho- 
liness, which will induce a carefulness not to offend, 
the German ' Scheu ; ' so Plutarch, Cces. 14 ; Conj. 
Prcec. 47; Philo, Leg. ad Cai. 44; often also with 
Seo?, as Plato, Euth. 126 c ; with evKoo-^ia^ Xeno- 
plion, Cyrop. viii. 1. 33 ; with evra^ia and /cocr/xtoT?;?, 
Plutarch, Cces. 4 ; with cre/xi/or?;?, Conj. Prcec. 26. 
To sum up all, we may say that at'&w? would always 
restrain a good man from an unworthy act, while 
would sometimes restrain a bad one. 



102 SYNONYMS OF THE 



THESE words occur together at 1 Tim. ii. 9 ; the 
only other places where o-ca^poa-vvrj occurs being 
Acts xxvi. 25 ; and 1 Tim. ii. 15, where a&? and 
o-cocfrpoo-vvrj are urged by the Apostle as together 
constituting the truest adornment of a Christian 
woman. If the distinction drawn in 19 be cor- 
rect, this one, which Xenophon, (Cyrop. viii. 1. 31) 
ascribes to Cyrus, between the words now under 
consideration, can hardly be allowed to stand : 
Kal (raxfrpocrvv'rjv T^Se, &>? rovs fj,ev 
ra ev T&> (fjavepq), ala^pa <f>evyovTas t 
TOU? Se (rct)<f)pova<; teal ra ev ro5 afyavel. On nei- 
ther side is it successful, for as on the one hand the 
atSo>? does not shun merely open and manifest base- 
nesses, however the aia-xyvrj may do this, so, on the 
other side, the point of the aco^poavvrj is altogether 
different from that here made, which, though true, 
is yet a mere accident of it. The opposite of arco- 
\aa-ia (Thucydides, iii. 37), it is properly the state 
of an entire command over our passions and desires, 
so that they receive no farther allowance than that 
which the law and right reason admit and approve ; 
Plato, Sijni/p. 196 c: elvai jap opoXoyelrai aw^po- 
crvvr] TO Kparelv rjSovwv Kal 7ri6vfjua)v : and in the 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



103 



Charmidcs he lias dedicated a whole dialogue to 
the investigation of the exact force of the word. 
Aristotle, RJiet. i. 9 : dperrj Bt J TJV 777305 ra? ^Soz/a? 
rov ac0fj,aTO<> oura)? e^ouaw, a>? o v6/j.o$ K6\evei, : cf. 
Plutarch, De Curios. 14 ; De Virt. Mbr. 2 ; Grytt. 
6 : r\ fjiev ovv <TG)(f)pocrvvi] ft ' paxyriys ns early 7TL0v~ 
cal rat?, dvaipovaa /J,ev Ta? eTretcra/CTOf? /cat, 
as, Kaipcp Se teal fjieTpioTijTi, KOO'/jLovcra Ta? avay- 
: and Diogenes Laertius, iii. 57. 91. Xo single 
Latin word exactly represents it. Cicero, as he 
avows himself (Tusc. iii. 5 ; cf. v. 14), renders it 
now by i temperantia,' now by ' moderatio,' now by 
6 modestia.' ^co^poo-vmj was a virtue which as- 
sumed more marked prominence in heathen ethics 
than it does in Christian ; not because more value 
was attached to it there than with us ; but partly 
because it was there one of a much smaller com- 
pany of virtues, each of which therefore would sin- 
gly attract more attention ; but also in part because 
lor as many as are "led by the Spirit," this condi- 
tion of self-command is taken up and transformed 
into a condition yet higher still, in which a man 
does not command himself, which is well, but, 
which is far better still, is commanded by God. 

In the passage already referred to (1 Tim. ii. 9), 
where it and ai'&w? occur together, we shall best 
distinguish them thus, and the distinction will be 
capable of further application. If eu'&w? is the 



104 SYNONYMS OF THE 

1 shamefastness,' ' or pudency, which shrinks from 
overpassing the limits of womanly reserve and mod- 
esty, as well as from the dishonour which would 
justly attach thereto, crwfypoavvjj is that habitual 
inner self-government, with its constant rein on all 
the passions and desires, which, would hinder the 
temptation to this from arising, or at all events from 
arising in such strength as should overbear the 
checks and hindrances which alScos opposed to it. 

1 It is a pity that 'shamefast' and 'shamefastness/ by which 
last word our translators rendered ffuxfipocrvvri here, should have 
been corrupted in modern use to 'shame/am/' and Shamefaced- 
ness.' Tlie words are properly of the same formation as 'stead- 
fast,' 'steadfastness,' 'soothfast,' 'soothfastness,' and those good 
old English words, now lost to us, 'rootfast/ and ' rootfastness.' 
As by 'rootfast' our fathers understood that which was firm and 
fast by its root, so by 'shamefast' in like manner, that which was 
established and made fast by (an honourable) shame. To change 
tliis into 'shame/am?' is to allow all the meaning and force of the 
word to run to the surface, to leave us ethically a far inferior word. 
It is very inexcusable that all modern reprints of the Authorized 
Version should have given in to this corruption. So long as 
merely the spelling of a word is concerned, this may very well be 
allowed to fall in with modern use ; we do not want them to print 
'sonne' or 'marveile,' when every body now spells 'son' and 
'marvel.' But when the true form, indeed the life, of a word is 
affected by the alterations which it has undergone, then I cannot 
but consider that subsequent editors were bound to adhere to the 
first edition of 1611, which should have been considered authori- 
tative and exemplary for all that followed. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



105 



xxi. avpa), eXfcvai. 

THESE words differ, and with differences not the- 
ologically unimportant. We best represent these 
their differences in English when we render crvpeiv, 
4 to drag,' eX/cveiv, i to draw.' In crvpew, as in our 
< drag,' there lies always the notion of force, as when 
Plutarch (De Lil. Ed. 8) speaks of the headlong 
course of a river, irdvia avpwv real TTCLVTCL Trapatye- 
pwv : and it will follow, that where persons, and not 
merely things, are in question, it will involve the 
notion of violence (Acts viii. 3 ; xiv. 10 ; xvii. G). 
But in e\Kvei,v this notion of force or violence does 
not of necessity lie. That, indeed, such is often 
implied in it, is plain enough (Acts xvi. 19 ; xxi. 30 ; 
Jam. ii. 6 ; and cf. II. xi. 258 ; xxiv. 52, 417 ; 
Aristophanes, Kjx'tt. 710; Euripides, Troad. 70: 
Ala$ el\K6 KaadvSpav fiia) ; but not always, any 
more than in our < draw,' which we use of a mental 
and moral attraction, or in the Latin i traho,' as 
witness the language of the poet, Trahit sua quem- 
que voluptas. Thus Plato, Pol. vi. 494 e: eav 
e\Kr]raL TT/OO? <j)i\ocro<f)iav. 

Only by keeping in mind this difference which 
there is between e\tcveiv and avpew, can we vindi- 
cate from erroneous interpretation two doctrinally 
5* 



106 SYNONYMS OF THE 

important passages in the Gospel of St. John. The 
first is xii. 32 ; " I, if I be lifted up from the earth, 
will draw all men unto me " (Trdwras eX/cvacd). But 
how does a crucified, and thus an exalted, Saviour 
draw all men unto Him? ~Not by force, for the 
will is incapable of force, but by the divine attrac- 
tions of His love. Again He declares (vi. 44) : 
" ~No man can come to Me, except the Father which 
hath sent Me draw him " (eX/cvcry avrov). Now as 
many as feel bound to deny any < gratia irresisti- 
bilis,' which turns man into a mere machine, and 
by which, nolens volens^ he is dragged to God, must 
at once allow that this e\Kvar) can mean no more 
than the potent allurements of love, the attracting 
of men by the Father to the Son; as at Jeremiah 
xxxi. 3, " With loving-kindness have I drawn thee " 
(eiX/cvord ere), with which compare Cant. i. 3. 4:. Did 
we find avpeiv on either of these occasions (not that 
I believe this would have been possible), the asser- 
tors of a i gratia irresistibilis ' l might then urge the 

1 The excellent words of Augustine on this last passage, him- 
self sometimes adduced as an upholder of this, may be here quoted 
(In Ev. Joh. Tract, xxvi. 4) : Nemo venit ad me, nisi quern Pater 
adtraxerit. Noli te cogitare invitum trahi; trahitur animus et 
amore. Nee timere debemus ne ab hominibus qui verba perpen- 
dunt, et a rebus rnaxime divinis intelligendis longe remoti sunt, in 
hoc Scripturarum sanctarum evangelico verbo forsitan reprehenda- 
mur, et dicatur nobis, Quomodo voluntate, credo, si trahor? Ego 
dico: Parum est voluntate, etiam voluptate traheris. Porro si 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



107 



passages as leaving no room for any other meaning 
but theirs ; but not as they now stand. 

In agreement with this which has been said, in 
e\Kveiv is much more predominantly the sense of 
a drawing to a certain point, in avpetv merely of 
dragging after one ; thus Luciaii (De Merc. Cond. 
3), likening a man to a fish already hooked and 
dragged through the water, describes him as crvpo- 
pevov fcal TT/OO? avdy/cyv ayo^evov. Not seldom 
there will lie in avpeiv the notion of this dragging 
being upon the ground, inasmuch as that will trail 
upon the ground (o-vppa, crvpSrjv) which is forcibly 
dragged along with no will of its own. A com- 
parison of the uses of the two words at John xxi. 
6, 8, 11, will be found entirely to bear out the dis- 
tinction which has been here traced. In the first 
and last of these verses e\Kvetv is used ; for they 
both express a drawing of the net to a certain 
point; by the disciples to themselves in the ship, 
by Peter to himself upon the shore. But at ver. 8 
<rvpi,v is employed ; for nothing is there intended 
but the dr.(t<jnj of the net which had been fastened 
to the ship, after it through the water. Our Yer- 

poetse dicere licuit, Trah.it sua quemque voluptas ; non necessitas, 
scd voluptas; non obligatio, sed delectatio; quanto fortius nos 
dicere debemus, trahi hominem ad Christum, qui delectatur veri 
tale, delectatur beatitudine, delectatur justitift, delectatur sempi- 
terna vita, quod totum Christus est? 



108 SYNONYMS OF THE 

sion, it will be seen, has maintained the distinction ; 
so too the German of De "Wette, by aid of l ziehen ' 
(= e\icvew\ and ' nachschleppen ' (= avpew), but 
neither the Yulgate, nor Beza, which both have 
forms of < traho ' throughout. 



xxii. 6\6fc\rjpo^j Te\eio$. 



THESE words occur together, though their order, 
is reversed, at Jam. i. 4, "perfect and entire;' 7 
oXo/cXypos only once besides (1 Tliess. v. 23), and 
the substantive oXoXi?/>ta, used however not in an 
ethical but a physical sense, also once, Acts iii. 16 ; 
cf. Isa. i. 6. O\6K\7]po? signifies first, as its deriva- 
tion implies, that which retains all which was allot- 
ted to it at the first, which thus is whole and entire 
in all its parts, to which nothing necessary for its 
completeness is wanting. Thus unhewn stones, in- 
asmuch as they have lost nothing in the process of 
shaping and polishing, are oXo/cXrjpoi (Deut. xxvii. 
6 ; 1 Mace. iv. 47) ; so too perfect weeks are effSopd- 
e? 6\oK\7)poL (Deut. xvi. 9) ; and in Lucian, Pliilops. 
8, eV 6\oK\ijpM Septan, c in a whole skin.' At the 
next step in the word's use we find it employed to 
express that integrity of body, with nothing redun- 
dant, nothing deficient (Lev. xxi. IT 23), which 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



109 



was required of the Levitical priests as a condition 
of their ministering at the altar, which was needful 
also in the sacrifices they offered. In both these 
senses Josephus uses it, Antt. iii. 12. 2 ; as continu- 
ally Philo, with whom it is the standing word for 
this integrity of the priests and of the sacrifice, to 
the necessity of which he often recurs, seeing in it, 
and rightly, a mystical significance, and that these 
are oKoK\ripoi, Ovo-tat, 6\o/c\r)p<p @eo> : thus De Viet. 
2 ; De Viet. Off. 1 : 6\6/c\i)pov fcal TrayreXw? /Aoa/jLcav 
a/jLeroxov : De Agricul. 29 ; De Cherub. 28 ; cf. Plato, 
Legg. 759 c. The word in the next step of its his- 
tory resembles very much the ' integer ' and c integ- 
ritas" 1 of the Latins. Like these words, it was 
transferred from bodily to mental and moral entire- 
ness. The only approach to this use of 6\6/c\rjpo^ 
in the Septuagint is Wisd. xv. 3, oXo/cX^po? Siicaio- 
avvr) ; but in an interesting and important passage 
in the Phaxlrus of Plato (250 c), it is twice used to 
express the perfection of man before the fall ; I 
mean, of cours'e, the fall as Plato contemplated it ; 
when men were as yet o\6ic\ripoi KOI avra^et? /ca/eaji/, 
and to whom as such 6\oK\r]pa cfxio-fjiara were 
vouchsafed, as contrasted with those weak partial 
glimpses of the Eternal Beauty, which is all whereof 
the greater part of men ever now catch sight ; cf. 
his Timceus, 44 c. 'OXo/cX^po?, then, is an epithet 
applied to a person or a thing that is c omnibus nu- 



SYNONYMS OF THE 



110. 



meris absolutus ; ' and tlie ev 

which at Jam. i. 4 follows it, must be taken as the 

epexegesis of the word. 

TeXe^o? is a word of various applications, but 
all of them referable to the reXoy, which is its 
ground. They in a natural sense are reXeto^, who 
are adult, having reached the full limit of stature, 
strength, and mental power appointed to them, who 
have in these respects attained their reXo?, as dis- 
tinguished from the veoi or Trat&e?, young men or 
boys ; so Plato, Legg. 929 c. St. Paul, when he 
employs the word in an ethical sense, does it con- 
tinually with this image of full completed growth, as 
contrasted with infancy and childhood, underlying 
his use, the reXetot being by him set over against 
the vrjinoL ev Xpi.ara) (1 Cor. ii. 6 ; xiv. 20 ; Eph. iv. 
13, 14; Phil. iii. 15 ; Ileb. v. 14), being in fact the 
vrarepe? of 1 John ii. 13, 14, as distinct from the vea- 
vio-fcoi and Trai&ia. ISTor is this application of the 
word to mark the religious growth and progress of 
men, confined to the Scripture. The "Stoics opposed 
the reXeto? in philosophy to the TrpoKOTrrwv, with 
which we may compare 1 Chron. xxv. 8, where the 
re\ecoi are set over against the pavOdvovres. With 
the heathen, those also w r ere called re\6tot who had 
been initiated into the mysteries ; the same thought 
being at work here as in the giving of the title TO 
reXeiov to the Lord's Supper. This was so called, 



NEW TESTAMENT. Ill 

because in it was the fulness of Christian privilege, 
because there was nothing beyond it ; and the reXetot 
of heathen initiation had their name in like manner, 
because those mysteries into which they were now 
introduced were the latest and crowning mysteries 
of all. 

It will be seen that there is a certain ambiguity 
in our word ' perfect,' which, indeed, it shares with 
reXeto? itself; this, namely, that they are both em- 
ployed now in a relative, now in an absolute sense ; 
for only out of this ambiguity could our Lord have 
said, " Be ye therefore perfect (reXeiot), as your 
Heavenly Father is pa feet (reXeto?), Matt. v. 48 ; cf. 
xix. 21. The Christian shall be 'perfect,' yet not 
in the sense in which some of the sects preach the 
doctrine of perfection, who, preaching it, either 
nicuii nothing which they could not have expressed 
by a word less liable to misunderstanding ; or mean 
something which no man in this life shall attain, 
and which he who affirms he has attained is deceiv- 
ing himself, or others, or both. lie shall be i per- 
fect,' that is, seeking by the grace of God to be fully 
furnished and firmly established in the knowledge 
and practice of the things of God (Jam. iii. 2) ; not 
a babe in Christ to the end, " not always employed 
in the elements, and infant propositions and prac- 
tices of religion, but doing noble actions, well 
skilled in the deepest mysteries of faith and holi- 



112 SYNONYMS OF THE 

ness." l In this sense Paul claimed to be reXeto?, 
even while almost in the same breath he disclaimed 
the being TereXetwyu-e^o? (Phil. iii. 12, 15). 

The distinction then is plain ; the reXetos has 
reached his moral end, that for which he was intend- 
ed ; namely, to be a man in Christ ; (it is true indeed 
that, having reached this, other and higher ends 
open out before him, to have Christ formed in him 
more and more;) the oXo/cX^o? has preserved, or, 
having lost, has regained, his completeness. In the 
6\6/c\7)po<; no grace which ought to be in a Christian 
man is wanting ; in the re'Xeto? no grace is merely in 
its weak imperfect beginnings, but all have readied 
a certain ripeness and maturity. 'OXoreX???, which 
occurs once in the New Testament (1 Thess. v. 23 ; 
cf. Plutarch, Plac. Phil. v. 21), forms a certain con- 
necting link between the two, holding on to 0X0^X77- 
po? by its first half, to reXeto? by its second. 



xx. 

TIIE fact that our English word < crown ' covers 
the meanings of both these words, must not lead us 

1 On the sense in which 'perfection' is demanded of the Chris- 
tian, there is a discussion at large by J. Taylor, Doctrine and Prac- 
tice of Repentance, i. 3. 40 56, from which these words in inverted 
commas are drawn. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 113 

to confound them. In German the first would often 
be translated ' Kranz,' and only the second ' Krone.' 
I indeed very much doubt whether anywhere in 
classical literature aTecfravos is used of the kingly, or 
imperial crown. It is the crown of victory in the 
games, of civic worth, of military valour, of nuptial 
joy, of festal gladness woven of oak, of ivy, of 
parsley, of myrtle, of olive, or imitating in gold 
these leaves or others of flowers, as of violets or 
roses (see Athensmis, xv. 9 33), but never, any more 
than ' corona' in Latin, the emblem and sign of 
royalty. The S/a&^a was this (Xenophon, Cyrop. 
viii. 3. 13 ; Plutarch, 2)e Frat. Am. 18), being pro- 
perly a linen band or fillet, C ta3iiia' or 4 fascia' 
(Curtius, iii. 3), encircling the brow ; so that no lan- 
guage is more common than irepniQkvai Sidfyjia to 
signify the assumption of royal dignity (Polybius, 
v. 5T. 4 ; Josephus, Antt. xii. 10. 1), even as in Latin 
in like manner the 'diadema' is alone the 'insigne 
rogium' (Tacitus, Annal. xv. 29). 

A passage bringing out very clearly the distinc- 
tion between the two words occurs in Plutarch, C(S. 
r>l. It is the well known occasion on which Anto- 
nins offers Caesar the kingly crown, which is de- 
scribed as Sid$r]/jia <iT6(f)dvw Bd<f>vrj$ irepiTreTT^y/jLevov : 
here the are^a^o? is only the garland or laureate 
wreath, with which the true diadem was enwoven. 
Indeed, according to Cicero (Phil. ii. 34), Caesar 



114 SYNONYMS OF THE 



was already ' coronattis ' = eVre^atw/^o? (this he 
would have been as consul), when the offer was 
made. Plutarch at the same place describes the 
statues of Csesar to have been, by those who would 
have suggested his assumption of royalty, Sia&j/jLa- 
criv dvaSeSepevof, paviXiKols. And it is out of the 
observance of this distinction tljat the passage in 
Suetonius (CcBS. 79), containing another version of 
the same incident, is to be explained. One places 
on his statue coronam laurearn Candida fascia prse- 
ligatam ; ' on which the tribunes of the people com- 
mand to be removed, not the l corona,' but the t fas- 
cia ; ' this being the diadem, and that in which alone 
the traitorous suggestion that he should be pro- 
claimed king, was contained. 

How accurately the words are discriminated in 
the Septuagint may be seen by comparing in the 
First Book of Maccabees, in which only SidSj]/jLa 
occurs with any frequency, the passages in which 
this word is employed (such as i. 9 ; vi. 15 ; viii. 
14 ; xi. 13, 54 ; xii. 39 ; xiii. 32), and those where 
<7T<<zi>o? appears (iv. 57 ; x. 29 ; xi. 35 ; xiii. 39 : 
cf. 2 Mace. xiv. 4). 

In respect of the New Testament, there can be, 
of course, no doubt that whenever St. Paul speaks 
of crowning, and of the crown, it is always the 
crown of the conqueror, and not of the king, which 
he has in his eye. The two passages, 1 Cor. ix. 24 



NEW. TESTAMENT. 115 

2G ; 2 Tim. ii. 5, place this beyond question ; while 
the epithet apapavTivo's applied to the are^aro? T?}? 
00^9 (1 Pet. v. 4), leaves no doubt about St. Peter's 
allusion. If this is not so directly to the Greek 
games, yet still the contrast which he tacitly draws, 
is one between the wreaths of heaven which never 
fade, and the garlands of earth which lose their 
brightness and freshness so soon. At Jam. i. 12 ; 
Rev. ii. 10 ; iii. 11 ; iv. 4, it is more probable that a 
reference is not intended to these Greek games; the 
alienation from which as idolatrous and profane was 
so deep on the part of the Jews (Josephus, Antt. 
xv. S. 1 4), and no doubt also of the Jewish mem- 
bers of the Church, that an image drawn from the 
rewards of these games would have been to them 
rather repulsive than attractive. Yet there also the 
o-re^afo?, or the cnefyavos TT}? ^T}?, is the emblem, 
not of royalty, but of highest joy and gladness, of 
glory and immortality. 

AVe may feel the more confident that in these 
last j t'rnin the Apocalypse St. John did not 

intend kinyly crowns, from the circumstance that on 
three occasions, where beyond a doubt he does mean 
such, Sidfy/jia is the word which ho employs (Rev. 
xii. 3 ; xiii. 1 [cf. xvii. 9, 10, at eirra tce^aXal . . . 
/3aa-i\ei<> k-nra elcriv] ; xix. 12). In this last verse it 
is h'tly said of Him who is King of kings and Lord 
of lords, that " on His head were many crowns " 



116 SYNONYMS OF THE 



7ro\\a) ; an expression which, with all 
its grandeur, we find it hard to realize, so long as 
we picture to our mind's eye such crowns as at the 
present monarchs wear, but intelligible at once 
when we contemplate them as diadems, that is, nar- 
row fillets bound about the brow, such as StaS^ara 
will imply. These " many diadems " will then be 
the tokens of the many royalties of earth, of hea- 
ven, and of hell (Phil. ii. 10) w r hich are his ; roy- 
alties once usurped or assailed by the Great Red 
Dragon, the usurper of Christ's dignity and honour, 
described therefore with Ms seven diadems as well 
(xiii. 1), but now openly and for ever assumed by 
Him to" whom they rightfully belong ; just as, to 
compare earthly things with heavenly, we are told 
that when Ptolemy, king of Egypt, entered Antioch 
in triumph, he set two crowns (SiaBij^aTa) on his 
head, the crown of Asia, and the crown of Egypt 
(1 Mace. xi. 13). 

The only place where crrefavos might seem to 
be used of a kingly crown is Matt, xxvii. 29, with 
its parallels in the other Gospels, where the weaving 
of the crown of thorns (crre^az/o? axavQivoi}, and 
placing it on the Saviour's head, is evidently a 
part of that blasphemous caricature of royalty 
which the Roman soldiers enact. But woven of 
such materials as it was, probably of the juncus 
marines, or of the lyciuin spinosum^ it is evident 



NEW TESTAMENT. 11 Y 

that BidSrjfjLa could not be applied to it ; and the 
word, therefore, which was fittest in respect of the 
material whereof it was composed, takes place of 
that which would have been the fittest in respect 
of the purpose for which it was intended. 



xxiv. TrXeGyef/a, 

BETWEEN these two words the same distinction 
exists as between our c covetousness ' and l avarice,' 
or as between the German ' Habsucht ' and ' Geiz. J 
n\eove%la is the more active sin, (fnXapyvpla the 
more passive : the first seeks rather to grasp what 
it has not, and in this way to have more; the second, 
to retain, and, by accumulating, to multiply that 
which it already has. The first, in its methods of 
acquiring, will be often bold and aggressive ; even 
as it may, and often will be as free in scattering and 
squandering, as it was eager and unscrupulous in 
getting ; ' rapti largitor,' as is well imagined in the 
Sir Giles Overreach of Massinger. Consistently 
with this we find TrXeoye/cT??? joined with apira^ (1 
Cor. v. 10) ; Tr\eove%ia with /3apvr^ (Plutarch, Arist. 
3) ; and in the plural, with Kkoiral (Mark vii. 22) ; 
with dSLKtcu (Strabo, vii. 4. 6) ; with <f)i\ovi,Klai, 
(Plato, Legg. iii. 677 1} ; and the sin defined by 



118 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Theodoret : rj rov TrXetoz^o? e^ecrt?, teal rj TWV ov 7rpocr~ 
IJKOVTWV apTrayrj. But, while it is thus with TrAeo- 
ref/a, (j)i\apyvpia on the other hand will be often 
cautious and timid, and will not necessarily have 
cast off the outward appearances of righteousness. 
Thus, the Pharisees were fyiKdpyvpot, (Luke xvi. 14) ;' 
this was not irreconcilable with the maintenance 
of the outward shows of holiness, which the TrXeo- 
vel; ia would evidently have been. 

Cowley, in the delightful prose which he has 
mixed up with his verse, draws this distinction 
strongly and well (Essay Y, Of Avarice), though 
Chaucer had done the same before him in his Per- 
sones Tale: "There are," says Cowley, "two sorts 
of avarice ; the one is but of a bastard kind, and 
that is the rapacious appetite for gain ; not for its own 
sake, but for the pleasure of refunding it immedi- 
ately through all the channels of pride and luxury ; 
the other is the true kind, and properly so called, 
which is a restless and unsatiable desire of riches, 
not for any farther end or use, but only to hoard and 
preserve, and perpetually increase them. The cov- 
etous man of the first kind is like a greedy ostrich, 
which devours any metal, but it is with an intent, 
to feed upon it, and, in effect, it makes a shift to 
digest and excern it. The second is like the foolish 
chough, which loves to steal money only to hide it." 

There is another and more important point of 



NEW TESTAMENT. 119 

view, from which TrXeove^ia may be regarded as the 
wider, larger term, the genus, of which faXapyvpta 
is the species ; this last heing the love of money, 
while 7r\eove%la is the drawing and snatching to 
himself, on the sinner's part, of the creature in every 
form and kind, as it lies out of and beyond himself; 
the ' indigentia ' of Cicero: (Indigentia est libido 
inexplebilis : Tusc. iv. 9. 21). For this distinction 
between the words compare Augustine, 7:'// ////. in 
Ps. cxviii. 35, 36 ; and Bengel's profound explana- 
tion of the fact, that, in the enumeration of sins, St. 
Paul so often unites TrXeovegla with sins of the ilesh ; 
as at 1 Cor. v. 11 ; Eph. v. 3, 5 ; Col. iii. 5 : Solet 
autem jungere cum impnritate 7r\eovej;iav, nam 
homo extra Deum qua'rit pabulum in creatuni ma- 
teriali, vel per voloptatem, vel per avaritiam ; bo- 
nuin alienum ad se redigit. But, expressing much, 
Bengel has not expressed all. The connexion be- 
tween these two provinces of sin is deeper, is more 
intimate still ; and this is witnessed in the fact, that 
not merely is 7rXeoyef<a, as covetousness, joined to 
sins of impurity, but the word is sometimes in 
Scripture, continually by the Greek Fathers (see 
Suicer, Tlies. s. v.), employed to designate these sins 
themselves ; even as the root out of which they 
alike grow, namely, the fierce and ever fiercer long- 
ing of the creature which has turned from God, to 
till itself with the inferior objects of sense, is one 



120 SYNONYMS OF THE 

and the same. Regarded thus, Tr\eov6J;ia has a 
much wider and deeper sense than <f)i\apyvp{a. 
Take the sublime commentary on the word which 
Plato (Gorg. 493) supplies, where he likens the de- 
sire of man to the sieve or pierced vessel of the 
Danaids, which they were ever filling, but might 
never fill ; l and it is not too much to say, tha.t the 
whole longing of the creature, as it has itself aban- 
doned God, and by a just retribution is abandoned 
by Him, to stay its hunger with the swines' husks, 
instead of the children's bread which it has left, is 
contained in this word. 



XXV. /3ocr/<:a>, 

WHILE both these words are often employed in 
a figurative and spiritual sense in the Old Testa- 
ment, as at 1 Chron. xii. 16; Ezek. xxxiv. 3; Ps. 
Ixxvii. 72 ; Jer. xxiii. 2 ; and Troijjiaiveiv often in the 
New ; the only occasions in the latter, where 



1 It is evident that the same comparison had occurred to Shak- 
Bpeare : 

" The cloyed will, 
That satiate yet unsatisfied desire, 
That tub both fill'd and running." 

Cymbeline, Act i. Sc. 7. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 121 

is so used, are John xxi. 15, 17. There our Lord, 
giving to St. Peter his thrice repeated commission 
to feed his " lambs " (ver. 15), his " sheep " (ver. 16), 
and again his " sheep " (ver. 17), uses, on the first 
occasion, /3oWe, on the second, Troi^aive, and returns 
again to /36o-A:e on the third. This return, on the 
third and last repetition of the charge, to the word 
employed on the first, has been a strong argument 
with some for the indifference of the words. They 
have urged, and with a certain show of reason, that 
Christ could not have had progressive aspects of the 
pastoral work in His intention, nor have purposed 
to indicate them here, else He would not have come 
back in the end to /^oovce, the same word with which 
He began. Yet I cannot believe the variation of 
the words to have been without a motive, any more 
tli an the changes, in the same verses, from ayaTrav 
to (f>i\tv, from apvia to irpo^ara. It is true that 
our Version, rendering /56o-/ce and Trot/zatW alike by 
" Feed," has not attempted to reproduce the varia- 
tim, any more than the Vulgate, which, on each 
occasion, has < Pasce ; ' nor do I perceive any re- 
sources of language by which either the Latin 
Version or our own could have helped themselves 
here. It might be more possible in German, by 
aid of ' weiden ' (= (36atceiv), and < hiiten ' (= TTOL- 
/jLaiveiv) ; De Wette, however, has i weiden ' through- 
out. 



122 SYNONYMS OF THE 

The distinction, although thus not capable of 
being easily reproduced in all languages, is very far 
from fanciful, is indeed a most real one. /3oovw, 
the same word as the Latin i pasco,' is simply ' to 
feed : ' but Troi^aivaj involves much more ; the whole 
office of the shepherd, the entire leading, guiding, 
guarding, folding of the flock, as well as the finding 
of nourishment for it ; thus Lampe : Hoc symbolum 
totum regimen ecclesiasticum comprehendit ; and 
Bengel : fioo-fceiv est pars rov iroi^alv.iv. Out of a 
sense continually felt, of a shadowing forth in the 
shepherd's work of the highest ministries of men 
for the weal of their fellows, and of the peculiar fit- 
ness which this image has to set forth the same, i, 
has been often transferred to their office, who are, 
or should be, the faithful guides and guardians of 
the people committed to their charge. Kings, ir/ 
Homer, are 7roi/j,eves \awv : cf. 2 Sam. v. 2 ; vii. 7. 
ISTay more, in Scripture God Himself is a Shepherd 
(Isa. xl. 11) ; and David can use no words which 
shall so w^ell express his sense of the Divine protec- 
tion as these : Kvpios Troi/jLalvei ^e (Ps. xxiii. 1) ; 
nor does the Lord take anywhere a higher title than 
6 7roijj,r)v 6 /ca\6s (John x. 11 ; cf. 1 Pet. v. 4, 6 ap- 
^iTroifjiriv : Heb. xiii. 20, 6 /xe'ya? iroi^v TWV TrpofBd- 
TO>Z>; nor give a higher than that implied in this 
word to his ministers. Compare the sublime pas- 
sage in Philo, De Agricul. 12, beginning : ovray 



NEW TESTAMENT. 123 

rb TTOi/Jiaiveiv earlv dyaObv, ware ov /3a- 
crikevcrL /JLOVOV KOI cro</>o? avSpdaij KOI i/ru^a?? re- 
\eia KCKaOapfjievaiS) d\\a Kal Qeca rw Travrjje/jiovi, 
&/z/w<? dvarlOerat, : and also the three sections pre- 
ceding. 

Still, it may be asked, if Trotpaivew be thus the 
higher word, and if iroi^aive was therefore superadd- 
ed upon /Soovee, because it was so, and implied so 
many further ministries of care and tendance, why 
does it not appear in the last, which must be also 
the most solemn, commission given by the Lord to 
Peter I how are we to account, if this be true, for 
his returning to /Boatce again ? I cannot doubt that 
in Stanley's Sermons and Essays on the Apostolical 
Age, p. 138, the right answer is given. The lesson, 
in fact, which we learn from this His coming back 
to the /36ovce with which He had begun, is a most 
important one, and one which the Church, and all 
that bear rule in the Church, have need diligently 
to lay to heart ; this namely, that whatever else of 
discipline and rule may be superadded thereto, still, 
the feeding of the flock, the finding for them of 
spiritual nourishment, is the first and last ; nothing 
else will supply the room of this, nor may be allow- 
ed to put this out of its foremost and most important 
place. How often, in a false ecclesiastical system, 
the preaching of the word loses its pre-eminence ; 
the ftoGiceiv falls into the background, is swallowed 



124 SYNONYMS OF THE 



up in the iroiiiaivtiv, which presently becomes no 
true TToi/jialveW) because it is not a fida/cew as well, 
but such a ' shepherding ' rather as God's Word, by 
the prophet Ezekiel, has denounced (xxxiv. 2, 3, 8, 
10; cf. Zecli. xiii. 15 IT; Matt, xxiii.). 



xxvi. 77X09, < 

THESE words are often joined together ; they are 
so by St. Paul, Gal. v. 20, 21 ; by Clemens Koma- 
nus, 1 Ep. ad COT. 3, 4, 5 ; and by classical writers 
as well; as, for instance, by Plato, Phil. 47 0/ Legg. 
679 c ; Menex. 242 a. Still, there are differences 
between them ; and this first, that 77X09 is a /*60w, 
being used sometimes in a good (as John ii. 17 ; 
Horn. x. 2 ; 2 Cor. ix. 2), sometimes, and in Scripture 
oftener, in an evil sense (as Acts v. 17 ; Rom. xiii. 
13 ; Gal. v. 20 ; Jam. iii. 14) ; while </>06Vo9 is not 
capable of a good, but is used always and only in 
an evil signification. "When V}Xo9 is taken in good 
part, it signifies the honourable emulation, with the 
consequent imitation, of that which presents itself 
to the mind as excellent ; 77X09 TOW aplo-rcov, Lucian, 
Adv. Indoct. 17 ; 77X09 teal /u/M?<m, Herodian, ii. 4 ; 
77X0)777? KOI /u/Lt77T7J9, vi. 8. It is the Latin * oemula- 
tio,' in which nothing of envy is of necessity in- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 

eluded, however it is possible that such may find 
place; the German 'Nacheiferuug,' as distinguished 
from ' Eifersucht.' The verb ' semulor,' as is well 
known, finely expresses the distinction of worthy 
and unworthy emulation, governing an accusative 
in cases where the first, a dative where the second, 
is intended. 

By Aristotle (Rhet. ii. 11) 77X05 is employed ex- 
clusively in this nobler sense, to signify the active 
emulation which grieves, not that another has the 
good, but that itself has it not; and which, not 
stopping here, seeks to make the wanting its own, 
and in this respect is contrasted by him with envy : 
ecrrt fr/Xo? \v7T7) rt? cjrl fauvofievT) Trapov&la dyaOwv 
evTi^cov, .... ov% on aXXw, aXX' on ov%l tcai avry 
ecrri' Sib KOL eTrieiKes ear iv 6 f/)Xo5, KOI eTTieifcwv 
TO Be <>Qove2i>) c^aOXoz/, /cal <pav\a)v. Cf. Jerome, 
F,.i-p. in Gal. v. 20 : V}Xo? et in bonam partem accipi 
potest, quum quis nititur ea qure bona sunt aemulari. 
Invidia vero aliena felicitate torquetur; and again, 
In Gal. iv. 17: ^Emulantur bene, qui cum videant 
in aliquibus esse gratias, dona, virtutes, ipsi tales 
esse desiderant. (Ecumenius : ecrn, 



67r TLj fjier TIVOS 

TOV 7T/D05 77 O-TTOvStj 6CTTI. 

But it is only too easy for this zeal and honour- 
able rivalry to degenerate into a meaner passion, a 
fact which is strikingly attested in the Latin word 



126 SYNONYMS OF THE 

simultas,' connected, as Doderlein (Lat. Synon. 
vol. iii. p. T2) shows, not with ' simulare,' but with 
' simul ; ' those who together aim at the same object 
being in danger not merely of being competitors, 
but enemies; just as a/ziXXa, which however has 
kept its more honourable use (Plutarch, Anim. an 
corp. app. pej. 3), is connected with a^a. These 
degeneracies wiiich wait so near upon emulation, 
may assume two shapes ; either that of a desire to 
make war upon the good which it beholds in 
another, and thus to trouble that good, and make it 
less ; therefore we find ?5Xo9 and epi? continually 
joined together (Rom. xiii. 13 ; 2 Cor. xii. 20 ; Gal. 
v. 20 ; Clem. Rom. 1 Ep. 3, 6) ; or, where there is 
not vigour and energy enough to attempt the making 
of it less, there may be at least the wishing of it 
less. And here is the point of contact which ?}Xo? 
has with $>9ovos : thus Plato, Menex. 242 a : irp&rov 
JAW p}Xo?, CLTTO VjXou 8e $66vo<$ \ the latter being 
essentially passive, as the former is active and ener- 
gic. We do not find </>#6z/o? in the comprehensive 
catalogue of sins at Mark vii. 21, 22 ; its place be- 
ing there supplied by a circumlocution, o(/>#aX/io? 
Troi^po?, but one putting itself in connexion with 
the Latin ' invidia,' which is derived, as Cicero ob- 
serves, ' a nimis intuendo fortunam alterius ; ' cf. 
Matt. xx. 15 ; and 1 Sam. xviii. 9 : " Saul eyed" 
i. e. envied " David." Q66vo<> is the meaner sin, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 127 

being merely displeasure at another's goods l (\v7nj 
eV aXX-orpiois ayaOols, as tlie Stoics defined it, 
Diogenes Laertius, vii. 63. Ill), with the desire 
that these may be less ; and this, quite apart from 
any hope that thereby its own will be more (Aris- 
totle, Rliet. ii. 10). He that feels it, does not feel 
with it any impulse or longing to raise himself to 
the level of him whom he envies, but only to de- 
press the other to his own. 2 "When the victories of 
Miltiades would not suffer the youthful Themistocles 
to sleep (Plutarch, Them. 3), here was ff/Xo?, that 
is, in its nobler form, for it was such as prompted 
him to worthy actions, and would not let him rest 
till he had set a Salamis of his own against the Ma- 
rathon of his great predecessor. But it was $>Q6vos 
which made that Athenian citizen to be weary of 
hearing Aristides evermore styled " The Just " (Plu- 
tarch, Arist. 7) ; and this his <p06vos contained no 
impulses moving him to strive for himself after the 
justice which he envied in another. See on this 



1 Augustine's definition of $Q6vos (Exp. in Gal. v. 21) is not 
quite satisfactory : Invidia vero dolor animi est, cum indignus vi- 
detur aliquis asseqni etiam quod non appetebas. This would 
rather be j/e'^ecm and ve^earav in the ethical terminology of Aris- 
totle (Ethic. Nic. ii. 7. 15; Rhet. 2. 9). 

2 On the likenesses and differences between /juaos and <0oVoy, 
see Plutarch's graceful little esfay, full of subtle analysis of the 
human heart, De Invidid et Odio. 



128 SYNONYMS OF THE 

subject further the beautiful remarks of Plutarch, 
De Prof. Virt. 14. 



xxvii. 0)77, /3/09. 

THE Latin language and the English are alike 
poorer than the Greek, in having but one word, the 
Latin ' vita,' the English c life,' to express these two 
Greek. There would, indeed, be no comparative 
poverty here, if &rj and /9/o? were merely dupli- 
cates ; but, covering as they do very different spaces 
of meaning, it is certain that we, having but one 
word for them both, must use this one in very di- 
verse senses ; it is possible that by this equivocation 
we may, without being aware of it, conceal very 
real and important differences from ourselves ; for, 
indeed, there is nothing so potent to do this as the 
equivocal use of a word. 

The true antithesis of %ajrj is OdvaTos (Horn. viii. 
38 ; 2 Cor. v. 4 ; cf. Jer. viii. 3 ; Sirac. xxx. IT ; 
Plato, Legg. xii. 944 c\ as of the verb tfiv, diroOvij- 
a/ceiv (Matt, xx. 38 ; 1 Tim. v. 6 ; Eev. i. 18 ; cf. II. 
xxiii. 70; Herodotus, i. 31 ; Plato, Phcedo, 71 d: 
OUK Ivavriov (fjrjs TO) tyjv TO reOvdvai elvai) ; & 07 ?) i n 
fact, being very nearly cdtmected with ao>, a7?/u, to 
breathe the breath of life, which is the necessary 



NEW TESTAMENT. 129 

condition of living, and, as such, is involved in like 
manner in Trvev/xa and ^ffv^rj. 

But, while %wrj is thus life intensive (' vita qua 
vivimus'), /9t'o? is life extensive (' vita quam vivi- 
mus'), the period or duration of life ; and then, 
in a secondary sense, the means by which that life 
is sustained; and thirdly, the manner in which that 
life is spent. Examples of the use of /S/os in all 
these senses the R"ew Testament supplies. Thus it 
is used as 

a, the period or duration of life ; 1 Pet. iv. 3, 
Xpovo? rov @iov: cf. Job. x. 20, /3t'o? rov xpdvov: Plu- 
tarch, De Lib. Ed. 17 : cmy/jLi] %povov rrds o yS/o? ean. 

/3, the means of life, or ' living,' E. V. ; Mark 
xii. 44 ; Luke viii. 43 ; xv. 12 ; 1 John iii. 17, rov 
fiiov rov fcoa/Aov : cf. Plato, Gorg. 486 d ; Legg. 936 
c ; Aristotle, Hist. Anim. ix. 23. 2 ; and often, but 
not always, these means of life, with an under sense 
of largeness and abundance. 

y, the manner of life ; 1 Tim. ii. 2 ; so Plato, 
Pol. 344 e : filov Siaywyij : and Plutarch very nobly 
(De Is. et Os. 1) : rov Se <yivwa-Keiv ra 6Wa, Kal (f)po- 
velv a^)atpe^^ro?, ov fttov aXXa ^ovov [olftai] slvai 
T-TJV aOavaalav : and De Lib. Ed. 7 : reray/ieVo? /9/o? : 
Josephus, Antt. v. 10. 1 ; with which compare Au- 
gustine (De Trin. xii. 11) : Cujus vitae sit quisque ; 
id est, guomodo agat kcec temporalia, quam vitam 
Grseci non faijv sed (3iov vocant. 



130 SYNONYMS OF THE 

From this last use of yS/o?, as the manner of life, 
there is often an ethical sense inhering in it, which, 
in classical Greek at least, fcorj does not possess. 
Thus Aristotle, according to Ammonius, could draw 
the following distinction between the words ; /3<o? 
earl \OJLKT] &ij : Ammonius himself affirming /3io<? 
to be never, except incorrectly, applied to the exist- 
ence of plants or animals, but only to the lives of 
men. l I know not Low he can reconcile this state- 
ment with such passages as these from Aristotle, 
Hist. Anim. i. 1. 15 ; ix. 8. 1 ; unless, indeed, he 
would include him in his censure. Still, the dis- 
tinction which he is here somewhat too absolutely 
asserting, must be acknowledged as a real one ; it 
displays itself with great clearness in our words 
' zoology ' and c biography.' "We speak, on the one 
hand, of 'zoology,' for animals have the vital prin- 
ciple ; they live, as well as men ; and they arc 
capable of being classed und described in relation 
to the different workings of this natural life of 
theirs ; but, on the other hand, we speak of ' l>io- 
graphy ; ' for men not merely live, but they lead 
lives, lives in which there is that moral distinction 
between one and another which may make them 
well worthy to be recorded. Out of this it will fol- 

J See on this point, and generally on these two synonyms, Vo- 
mel, Synon. Worterbuch, p. 168 sq. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 131 

low, that, while Odvaros and 0)77 constitute, as was 
observed above, the true antithesis, yet they do so 
only so long as both are physically contemplated. 
So soon as a moral idea is introduced, the antithesis 
is not between Bdva-ro^ and fco?;, but Qdvaros and 
/3/o? : thus Xenophon (Resp. Laced. 9. 1) : TOV tca- 
\ov OdvdTov dvTi TOV ala^pov (3iov. The two great 
chapters with which the Gorgias of Plato concludes 
(82, 83), are alone sufficient to bring plainly before 
the consciousness the full distinction between the 
words themselves, as also between those derived 
from them. 

But this being the case, /3/o?, and not fw?;, being 
thus shown to be the ethical word in classical anti- 
quity, a thoughtful reader of Scripture might very 
well inquire with something of perplexity, how it 
is to be explained that there all is reversed far) 
being certainly in it the nobler word, belonging to 
the innermost circle of those terms whereby are 
expressed the highest gifts of God to his creatures ; 
so that, while /3/o? has there no such noble use, but 
rather the contrary for we find it in such associa- 
tions as these, ySoval TOV ftiov (Luke viii. 14), rrpaj- 
jjiaTeiai, TOV /Siov (2 Tim. ii. 4:), aXatyveia TOV {3iov 
(1 John ii. 16) 00/7, on the other hand, is continu- 
ally used in the very noblest connexion ; crre^ai/o? 
(Rev. ii. 10), /3t/3\o$ TT}<? o>% (iii. 5), o>7? 
eia (2 Pet, 1. 3), far; /cal d^Oapaia (2 Tim. 



132 SYNONYMS OF THE 

i. 10), <arj TOV &eov (Eph. iv. 18), o>?7 auomos (Matt, 
xix. 16) ; ' or it may be simply a>ij (Matt. vii. 14, 
and often), to express the highest blessedness of the 
creature. 

A little reflection will supply the answer. Re- 
vealed religion, and it alone, puts death and sin in 
closest connexion, declares them the necessary cor- 
relatives one of the other (Gen. i. iii. ; Rom. v. 12), 
and, as an involved consequence, in like manner, 
life and holiness. It alone proclaims that, wherever 
there is death, it is there because sin was there first; 
wherever there is no death, that is, life, it is there 
because sin has never been there, or, having been 
once, is now cast out and expelled. In. revealed 
religion, which thus makes death to have come into 
the world through sin, and only through sin, life is 
the correlative of holiness. Whatever truly lives, 
does so because sin has never found place in it, or, 
having found, has been expelled from it. So soon 
as ever this is felt and understood, &ij at once as- 
sumes the profoundest moral significance ; it be- 
comes the fittest expression for the very highest 
blessedness. Of that whereof you predicate abso- 
lute o>?7 ? you predicate of the same absolute holi- 
ness. Christ affirming of Himself, eyo> dpi 

1 ZO.T? O.IWVLOS occurs once in the Septuagint (Dan. xii. 2 ; cf. 
, 2 Mace. vii. 36), and in Plutarch, De laid, et Os. 1. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 133 

implicitly affirmed of Himself that He was absolute 
holiness ; and in the creature, in like manner, that 
only lives, or triumphs over death, death at once 
physical and spiritual, which has first triumphed 
over sin. No wonder, then, that Scripture should 
know of no higher word than G>TJ to set forth either 
the blessedness of God, or the blessedness of the 
creature in communion with God. 

From what has been said it will at once be per- 
ceived how erroneous is that exposition of Eph. iv. 
18, which understands aTr^XXorptto/iez/ot TT?? a>?}? 
roO @eoi), as " alienated from a divine life," or, from 
a life lived according to the will and commandments 
of God (remoti a vita, ilia qua) secundum Deum est: 
(imtius), o>7J having never, certainly never with 
St. Paul, this signification. The fact of such aliena- 
tion was only too true ; but it is not what the Apos- 
tle is affirming. Rather lie is there describing the 
miserable condition of the heathen, as of men es- 
tranged from God, the one fountain of life (irapa 
2ol TTtjyr) fan??, Ps. xxxv. 10) ; as not having life, 
because separated from Him who alone absolutely 
lives (John v. 26), and in connexion with whom 
alone any creature has life. Gal. v. 22 is another 
passage, which we shall never rightly understand, 
which will always seem to contain a tautology, 
until we give to &rj (and to the verb tfjv as well), 
the force which has been claimed for it here. 



134: SYNONYMS OF THE 



xxviii. fcvpios, 

THE distinction which the later Greek gram- 
marians sought to trace between these words was 
this; a man would be Seo-TroT???, as respects his 
slaves (Plato, Legg. 756 e), and therefore ot'/coSeo-Tro- 
T???, but Kvpios in respect of his wife and children, 
who, in speaking either to him or of him, would 
use this title of honour ; " as Sara obeyed Abraham, 
calling him lord " (xvpiov avrbv /ca\ovcra^ 1 Pet. 
iii. 6 ; cf. 1 Sam. i. 8 ; and Plutarch, De Virt. Mul. 
s. vv. Muetca teal Meywrne). There is a certain truth 
in this distinction. Undoubtedly there does lie in 
fcvpios the sense of an authority owning limitations, 
moral limitations it may be and the word im- 
plies that the user will not exclude, in its use, their 
good over whom it is exercised ; while in Seo-TroT??? 
is implied a more unrestricted power and absolute 
domination, confessing no such limitations or re- 
straints. He who addresses another as Seo-Trora, puts 
a far greater emphasis of submission into his speech 
than if he had addressed him as xvpie. It was out 
of a feeling of this that the free Greeks refused this 
title of Seo-TroTT?? to any but the gods (Euripides, 
Hippol. 88 : a'mf, Oeovs jap Seo-Trora? Ka\elv Xpeav) ; 
and the sense of this distinction of theirs we have 



NFW TESTAMENT. 135 

retained in our use of ' despot,' ' despotic,' ( despot- 
ism,' as set over against our use of 'lord,' ' lordship,' 
and the like ; the ' despot ' is one who exercises not 
only dominion, but domination. 

Still, there were influences at work, whose ten- 
dency was to break down any such distinction as 
this. Slavery, however legalized, is so abhorrent to 
men's inborn sense of right, that they seek to miti- 
gate, in word at least, if not in fact, the atrocity of 
it ; and thus, as no southern Planter at the present 
day willingly speaks of his " slaves," biit prefers 
some other term, so in antiquity, as far as any gen- 
tler or more humane view of slavery obtained, and 
it was not merely contemplated in the aspect of one 
man's unlimited power over another, the antithesis 
of Seo-TroTT;? and Soi)\o? would continually give place 
to that of /cvpios and SoO/Xo?. The harsher antago- 
nism would still survive, but the milder would pre- 
vail side by side with it. So practically we find it ; 
one language is used as freely as the other ; and 
often in the same sentence both terms are employed 
(Philo, Quod Omn. 1 *,<,!>. Lll. 6). We need not 
look further than to the writings of St. Paul, to see 
how little, in popular speech, the distinction of the 
Greek synonymists w r as observed. Masters are now 
Kvpioi (Eph. vi. 9 ; Col. iv. 1), and now SeaTrorai 
(1 Tim. vi. 1, 2; Tit. ii. 9; cf. 1 Pet. ii. 18), with 
him. 



136 SYNONYMS OF THE 

But, while all experience shows how little sinful 
man can be trusted with absolute unrestricted power 
over his fellow, how certain he is to abuse it a 
moral fact attested in our use of c despot ' as equiv- 
alent with * tyrant,' as well as in the history of the 
word 'tyrant' itself it can only be a blessedness 
for man to think of God as the absolute Lord, Ruler, 
and Disposer of his life ; since with Him power is 
never disconnected from wisdom and from love : 
and, as we saw that the Greeks, not without a cer- 
tain sense of this, were well pleased to style the 
gods SecrTTorat, however they might refuse this title 
to any other; so, within the limits of Revelation, 
w r e find Seo-TroT???, no less than A:U/HO?, applied to the 
true God. In the Old Testament, i Adonai' is occa- 
sionally rendered by the two words joined together; 
as at Gen. xv. 2, 8 ; Jer. i. 6 ; iv. 10. ISTo doubt 
Seo-Tj-or??? realized to their minds who used it, even 
more than /cvpios, the sense of God's absolute dis- 
posal of His creatures, His autocratic power ; and 
that when He worked, none could let Him. That 
it did so present itself to Greek ears is plain from 
a passage in Philo (Quis Her. Div. Hoar. 6), where 
he finds an evidence of Abraham's eXa/3eta, of his 
tempering, on one great occasion, boldness with 
reverence and godly fear, in the fact that in his ap- 
proaches to God he leaves the more usual tcupie, and 
instead of it adopts the Seo-Trora, in which there was 



NEW TESTAMENT. 137 

implied a more entire prostration of self, an ampler 
recognition of the omnipotence of God. The pas- 
sages in the New Testament where God is styled 
Sea7rdT7)$ are these which follow : Lnke ii. 29 ; Acts 
iv. 2 ; Rev. vi. 10 ; 2 Pet. ii. 1 ; Jude 5. In the 
two last it is to Christ, but to Christ as God, that 
the title is ascribed. Erasmus, indeed, with that 
latent Arianism, of which, perhaps, he was scarcely 
conscious to himself, denies that in the words of 
Jude 5e<T7roT77i> is to be referred to Christ ; giving 
only Kvpiov to Him, and Sea-TroTtjv to the Father. 
The fact that in the Greek text, as he read it, eov 
followed and was joined to SeaTroTrjv, no doubt really 
lay at the root of his reluctance to ascribe the title 
of Sec-TroT?;? to Christ. It was with him not a philo- 
logical, but a theological difficulty, however he 
may have sought to persuade himself otherwise. 



xxix. a 



words, which occur all three of them to- 
gether at Rom. i. 30, and the first two at 2 Tim. iii. 
2, offer an interesting subject for synonymous dis- 
crimination. We shall find them, I think, not to 
speak of other differences, constituting a regular 
sequence in this respect, that the aAao>y is boastful 



138 SYNONYMS OF THE 



in words, the virepij^avos proud in thoughts, the 
vftpurrrfs insolent and injurious in acts. 

And first, as respects aXatyv. This word occurs 
in the New Testament only at the two places al- 
ready referred to; aXaCpvda also twice, Jam. iv. 16 ; 
1 John ii. 16. Derived from aX??, ' a wandering 
about,' it was applied first to vagabond mounte- 
banks, conjurers, and exorcists (Acts xix. 13 ; 1 Tim. 
v. 13), who were full of empty and boastful profes- 
sions of feats which they could accomplish ; being 
from them transferred to any braggart or boaster, 
vaunting himself to be in possession of skill, or 
knowledge, or courage, or virtue, or riches, or what- 
ever else it might be, which had no existence in 
fact. Thus Plato defines a\a,oveia to be e|fc Trpoa- 
TroirjTifcr) ayaOwv /u?) virap^ovrwv : and Xenophon 
(Cyrop. ii. 2. 12) describes the aXa&v thus : 6 pev 
jap a\.aa)V e/jioije So/cei ovojjia KelaOai eVt rot? irpocr- 
KOI TrKovcritoTepois eivai r\ elai^ KOI 
, KOI 7roMJcreiV, a /JLTJ Ifcavoi elffi, VTTLCT- 
^* ical ravTa, (f>avpols yiyvo/jLevois, on rou 
\a/3eiv TL 6vKa /cal tcepSavai TTOLOVCTLV '. and Aris- 
totle (Ethic. Nic. iv. 7. 2) : BOKCL Srj 6 pev a 
TrpocrTroiTjTiKos TCOV v$d%o)V eivai, /cat fJi 
teal fjuei^ovwv r) V7rdp%l. 

It is not an accident, but of the essence of the 
d\aa)v, that in his boastings he overpasses the limits 
of the truth (Wisd. ii. 16,) as appears plainly from 



NEW TESTAMENT. 139 

that whole passage in Aristotle, who nowhere de- 
scribes him as merely making unseemly display of 
things which he actually possesses, but as vaunting 
of those which he does not possess ; cf. Rliet. ii. 6 : 
TO ra d\\6rpia avrov (f>d<rK6iv, aXabz/e/a? arj^elov : 
and Xenophon, Afemor. i. 7. Thus, too, Plato (Pol. 
560 c) joins ^euSefc teal dXafoye? \OJOL ; and we have 
a lively description of the a\a&ov in the Characters 
(23) of Theophrastus ; and still better, of the shifts 
and evasions to which he has recourse, in the work, 
Ad Hcrenn. iv. 50, 51. While, therefore, ' braggart ' 
or ' boaster ' fairly represents dXafcoz/, ' ostentation ' 
does not well give back dXagbreia, seeing that a man 
can only be ostentatious in that which he really has 
to show; we have, in fact, no word which ivmlers 
it at all so adequately as the German ' Prahlerei.' 
Thus, Falstaif and Parolles are both excellent, 
though infinitely diverse, examples of the d\a&v : 
'while, on the contrary, Marlowe's Tamburhiine, 
despite of all the big vaunting words which he ut- 
ters, is no such, inasmuch as there are 1 earful reali- 
f power with which these his ^teyaXr;? 'yXa>crcr>;? 
ATOyUTrot are sustained and borne out. This dealing 
in braggadocia is a vice sometimes ascribed to 
whole nations ; thus, an e^vTos d\a^oveia was 
charged on the JEtolians of old, and, in modern 
times, on the (ia.scons, who out of this have given 
us the word 'gasconade.' The Vulgate, which 



140 SYNONYMS OF THE 

translates a\aoye?, elati,' and "which the Rhemi&h 
follows, ' haughty,' has not seized the middle point 
of the word as successfully as Beza, who has ren- 
dered it ' gloriosi.' l 

A distinction has been sometimes drawn be- 
tween the a\a%c0v and the TrepTrepos [77 aydirTj ov irep- 
Trepeverai,) 1 Cor. xiii. 4], that the first vaunts of 
things which he does not possess, the second, of 
things which, however little this his boasting and 
bravery about them may become him, he actually 
has. The distinction, however, is not one that can 
be maintained (Polybius, xxxii. 6. 5 ; xl. 6. 2) ; both 
are liars alike. 

But this habitual boasting of one's own, will 
hardly fail to be accompanied with a contempt for 
that of others. If it did not find, it would rapidly 
generate, such a feeling; and thus aka^oveia is 
nearly allied to vTrepotyla : we find them not seldom 
used as almost convertible terms ; thus see Philo, 
J9<3 Carit. 22 24. But from vTrepo^ria to vTreprjtyavla 
the step is very near ; and thus we need not wonder 

1 We formerly used 'glorious' in this sense. Thus, in North's 
Plutarch, p. 183: "Some took this for a glorious brag; others 
thought he [Alcibiades] was like enough to have done it." And 
Milton (The Reason of Church G-overnmcnt, i. 5): "He [Anselm] 
little dreamt then that the weeding hook of Reformation would, 
after two ages, pluck up his glorious poppy [prelacy] from insult- 
ing over the good corn [presbytery]." 



NEW TESTAMENT. 141 

to meet vTrepr)<f>avo<; joined with d\acov. This word 
occurs three times, besides the two occasions noted 
already ; at Luke i. 51 ; Jam. iv. 6 ; 1 Pet. v. 5 ; 
virepr]<j)avia once, Mark vii. 22. A picturesque 
image serves for its basis, being, of course, derived 
from vTrep, and ^atVo/xat, one who shows himself 
above his fellows, exactly as the Latin f superbus ' is 
from 'super;' as our 'stilts' is connected with 
'Stolz,' and with 'stout' in its earlier sense of 
i proud,' or ' lifted up.' Deyling, Obss. Sac. vol. v. 
p. 219 : Quse vox proprie notat hominem capite su- 
per alios eminentem, ita ut quemadmodum Saul, 
prse ceteris, sit conspicuus, 1 Sam. ix. 2. Figurate 
est is qui ubique eminere, et aliis prjcferri cupit. 

A man can be actually dXa&v only when he is 
in company with his fellow men ; but the seat of 
the v-n-ep^avia is the mind. He that is sick of this 
sin, compares himself secretly with others, and lifts 
himself above others, in honour preferring himself. 
[I is sin, as Theophrastus (Charact. 34) describes it, 
is the /carcKfrpovrjo-k ns irXrjv avrov rwv a\\wv. His 
conduct to others is not of the essence of his sin, it 
is only the consequence. His ' arrogance,' as we say, 
his claiming to himself of honour and observance, 
his indignation, and, it may be, his cruelty and re- 
venge, if these are withheld, are only the result of 
this false estimate of himself. In this way vTreprj- 
davoi Kal fiapel? (Plutarch, Qu. Rom. 63) are joined 



142 SYNONYMS OF THE 

together. In the vireprj^avo? we have tne perversion 
of a much nobler character than in the d\ao>z/, the 
melancholic, as the a\acov is the sanguine, the 
vftpia-Tijs the choleric, temperament ; but because 
nobler, therefore one which, if it falls, falls more 
deeply, sins more fearfully. He is one, in the 
striking language of Scripture, " whose heart is lift- 
ed up," vtyrjKoKapSios (Prov. xvi. 5) ; he is one of 
those ra v^\a cfrpovovvres (Rom. xii. 16), as opposed 
to the ranrewol T$ /capSia ; and this lifting up of his 
heart may be not merely against man, but against 
God ; he may assail the very prerogatives of Deity 
itself (1 Mace. i. 21, 24 ; Wisd. xiv. 6 : virep^avoi, 
yiydvres). Therefore are we thrice told, in the very 
same words, that " God resisteth the proud " (vjreprj- 
(frdvois dvTiTda-aerai : Jam. iv. 6 ; 1 Pet. v. 5 ; Prov. 
iii. 34) ; sets Himself in battle array against them, 
as they against Him. 

We have now to speak of vppio-rrjs, which, by 
its derivation from vftpis, (which is, again, from virep, 
as we should say, 'uppishness,') stands in a certain 
etymological relation with vTreprifyavos (see Donald- 
son, New Gratylus, pp. 517 519). The word occurs 
only twice ; Rom. i. 30, where we have translated 
it, < despiteful ; ' and 1 Tim. i. 13, where we have 
rendered it, < injurious.' In the Septuagint often ; 
and at Job xl. 6, 7 ; Isa. ii. 12, in connexion with 
i>7repr)<j>avos : as the two, in like manner, are con- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 

nected by Aristotle (Rhet. ii. 16), Other words with 
which it is associated, are aypios (Homer, Od. vi. 
120); arao-0aXo9 (II. xxiv. 282); dSitcos (Plato, Z^</. 
i. 630 5) ; uTrepoTTT??? (Aristotle, Ethic. JVt'c. vi. 3. 
21). The vfipio-rris is contumelious ; his insolence 
and contempt of others break forth in acts of wan- 
tonness and outrage. Thus, when Hanun, king of 
Ammon, cut short the garments of king David's 
ambassadors, and shaved off half their beards, and 
so sent them back (2 Sam. x.), this was #/3pt?. St. 
Paul declares that, in the time when he persecuted 
the Church, he was vfipia-Trjs (1 Tim. i. 13 ; cf. Acts 
viii. 3), but that he was himself vftpia-Qels (1 Tlu-ss. 
ii. 2) at Philippi (Acts xvi. 22, 23). Our blessed 
Lord, when He is prophesying the order of His 
Passion, declares that the Son of Man vftpiaOijo-erai 
(Luke xviii. 32), as we have later the account of 
the //3/H? which lie actually underwent at the 
hands of the Roman soldiery (Matt, xxvii. 27 30). 
The whole blasphemous masquerade of royalty, in 
which it was sought that He should sustain the 
chief part, was such. Tacitus, describing the deaths 
of the Christians in Kero's persecution, adds (An- 
nal. xv. 44) : Pereuntibus addita ludibria ; they 
died, he would say, /ueO' v(3pew. the same applies 
to York, when, in Shakspeare's Henry VI., the pa- 
per crown is set upon his head, before Margaret 
and Clifford stab him. 



SYNONYMS OF THE 

Cruelty and lust are the two great spheres in 
which v[Bpt,s will display itself; or rather not two ; 
for they are one and the same sin, and when 
Milton wrote, " lust hard by hate," saying much, he 
yet did not say all ; but the two forms in which it 
will mainly display itself; and, out of a sense that 
the latter belongs to it quite as much as the former, 
Josephus (Antt. i. 11. 1) characterizes the men of 
Sodom as being vftpurrdl to men, no less than acre- 
/3ei? to God. He applies exactly the same phrase 
on a later occasion (Antt. v. 10. 1) to the sons of 
Eli ; indicating on each occasion presently after, 
that by this vjSpis which he charged on those and 
these, he intended an assault on the chastity of 
others ; cf. Plutarch, Demet. 24 ; Lucian, Dial. Deor. 
vi. 1 ; and the article "TfBpew Sl/crj in Pauly's En- 
cyclopddie. The true antithesis to v/Spia-Trjs is cro>- 
<j>pa>v (Xenophon, Apol. Soc. 19 ; Ages. x. 2). 

The three words, then, are very broadly distin- 
guishable from one another, have very different 
provinces of meaning severally belonging to each, 
and present to us an ascending scale of guilt, such 
as I sought to seize at the first, when I observed, 
that the three severally expressed a sin in word, in 
thought, and in deed. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 







THE word avri'Xjpicro^ is peculiar to the Epistles 
of St. John, occurring five times in them ; 1 Ep. ii. 
18, bis ; ii. 22 ; iv. 3 ; 2 Ep. 7 ; and no where be- 
sides. But, although St. John only has the word, 
St. Paul has, in common with him, a designation 
of the person of this great adversary, and of the 
marks by which he shall be recognized ; for there 
can be no doubt that the avdpwTros T}<? afjuiprla?, 
the vf'o? rr?9 avrwXe/a?, the avopos of 2 Thess. ii. 3, 
8, are all of them other designations of the same 
person (see Augustine, Zte Civ. Dei, xx. 19. 2) ; and, 
indeed, to St. Paul and to that passage in his wri- 
tings we are indebted for our fullest instruction 
concerning this great enemy of Christ and of God. 
Passing by, as not relevant to our purpose, many 
of the discussions to which the mysterious annnumv- 
ntcnt of such a coming foe has naturally given rise, 
as, for instance, whether we are to understand by 
the Antichrist a single person or a line of persons, 
a person or a system, there is only one of these 
questions which has a right to occupy us here ; 
namely, w r hat the force is of ami in this composi- 
tion ; does avrlxpiaTos imply one who sets himself 
up against Christ, or one who sets himself up in the 
7 



146 SYNONYMS OF THE 

stead of Christ ? Is he an open foe, who seeks vio- 
lently to usurp his seat ; or a false friend, that pro- 
fesses to hold it in his name ? 

There is no settling this matter off-hand, as some 
are in so great a hurry to do ; seeing that av-ri, in 
composition, has both these forces. It is used often 
in the sense of substitution / thus, dvTi/3aai\evs, he 
who is instead of the king, ' prorex,' ' viceroy ; ' 
avOvTraros, he who is instead of the consul, c procon- 
sul ; ' avriSeiTTvo?, he who fills the place at a feast 
of an absent guest ; avrl\vrpov^ the ransom paid in- 
stead of a person. Then, secondly, there is in avri 
often the sense of opposition, as in avriBeaw, av-ri- 
\oyla, avTifcetfAevos ; and still more to the point, 
more exact parallels to avrl^picn-o^^ as expressing 
not, merely the fact of opposition, but, in the latter 
half of the word, the very object against which the 
opposition is directed, avnvo^la (see Suicer, Tlies. 
s. v.), opposition to law ; avri^ip^ the thumb, as set 
over against the hand ; ttimjXio?, lying over against, 
and so exposed to, the sun ; ^AvriKdTwv, the title 
which Caesar gave to a book which he wrote against 
Cato ; avTiOeos, not indeed in Homer, where it is 
applied to Polyphemus (Od. i. 70), and to the suit- 
ors (xiv. 18), and must mean c godlike,' that is, in 
strength and power; but yet, in later use, as in 
Philo ; with whom dvrideos vovs (D& Conf. Ling. 
19) can be no other than the ' adversa Deo inens ; ' 



NEW TESTAMENT. 147 

and so in the Christian Fathers. And the jests 
about an 'Antipater' who sought to murder his 
father, to the effect that he was <epoW/*o?, would 
be utterly pointless, if avrL in composition did not 
bear this meaning. I will not cite 'Avrepw, where 
the force of avrL is more questionable ; and exam- 
ples in sufficient number have been quoted already 
to prove that in words compounded with ai/r/, some 
imply substitution, some opposition ; which being 
so, they have equally erred, who, holding one view 
of Antichrist or the other, have affirmed that the 
word itself decided the matter in their favour. It 
does not so ; but leaves the question to be settled 
by other considerations. (See on this word avri- 
Xpio-To? a masterly discussion by Liicke, Comm. ill. 
die Brief e, des Johannes, pp. 190 194.) 

For myself, St. John's words seem to me deci- 
sive on the matter, that resistance to, and defiance 
of, Christ, not the false assumption of his character 
and offices, is the essential mark of Antichrist ; that. 
which, therefore, we should expect to find embodied 
in his name ; thus see 1 John ii. 22 ; 2 John 7 ; and 
in the parallel passage, 2 Thess. ii. 4, he is 6 avTiK&i- 
pevos, where none will deny that the force of ami 
is that of opposition : and in this sense, if not all, 
yet many of the Fathers have understood the word. 
Thus Tertullian (De Prase. Hcer. 4): Qui Anti- 
christi, nisi Christ! rebelles? He is, in Theophy- 



148 SYNONYMS OF THE 

lact's language, evavrios ro5 Xpio-rw^ c TF^rchrist,' 
as the Gemans have rightly rendered it ; one who 
shall not pay so much homage to God's word as to 
assert its fulfilment in himself, for he shall deny 
that word altogether ; hating even erroneous wor- 
ship, because it is worship at all, hating much more 
the Church's worship in spirit and in truth ; who, 
on the destruction of every religion, every acknow- 
ledgment that man is submitted to higher powers 
than himself, shall seek to establish his own throne ; 
and, for God's great truth, ' God is man,' to substi- 
tute his own lie, c Man is God.' 

The term -^ei^So^^o-To?, with which we proceed 
to compare it, occurs only twice in the ISTew Testa- 
ment ; or, if we count, not how often it has been 
written, but how often it was spoken, only once; for 
the two passages (Matt. xxiv. 24 ; Mark xiii. 22) are 
records of the same discourse. In form the word 
resembles so many others which appear to have 
been combined of -^eOSo? and almost any other sub- 
stantive at will. Thus, / xJrei>Sa7r6<7ToXo9, ^ei;SaSeX<o9, 
i^L'SoSt8acr:aXo?, ^euSoTrpoc/^r?;?, ^ev^ofjudprvp^ all 
in the New Testament ; the last also in Plato. So, 
too, in ecclesiastical Greek, ^evSoTroL/juj 
rpla, and in classical, tyevSdyyeXos (Homer), 

(Herodotus), and a hundred more. The tyev- 
is not one who 'denies the being of a 
Christ ; on the contrary, he builds on the world's 



NEW TESTAMENT. 149 

expectations of such a person ; only he appropriates 
these to himself, blasphemously affirms that he is 
the Foretold One, in whom God's promises and 
men's expectations are fulfilled. Thus Barchochab, 
or " the son of the Star," as claiming the prophecy 
at Numb. xxiv. 17 he called himself, who, in 
Adrian's reign, stirred up again the smouldering 
embers of Jewish insurrection into a flame so fierce 
that it consumed himself with more than a million 
of his fellow-countrymen, he was a tyevSoxpiaTos : 
and such have been that long series of blasphemous 
pretenders and impostors, the false Messiahs, who, 
since the rejection of the true, have, in almost every 
age, flattered and betrayed the expectation of the 
Jews. 

The distinction, then, is plain. The dt/ri^pto-To? 
denies that there is a Christ ; the -^evBo^pLaro^ af- 
firms himself to be the Christ. Both alike make 
war against the Christ of God, and would set them- 
selves, though under different pretences, on the 
throne of his glory. And yet, while the words have 
this broad distinction between them, while they 
represent two different manifestations of the king- 
dom of wickedness, we ought not to forget that 
there is a sense in which the final Antichrist will be 
a Pseudochrist as well ; even as it will be the very 
character of that last revelation of hell to absorb 
into itself, and to reconcile for one last assault 



150 SYNONYMS OF THE 

against the truth, all anterior and subordinate forms 
of evil. He will not, it is true, call himself Christ, 
for he will be filled with deadliest hate both against 
the name and offices, as against the whole spirit and 
temper, of Jesus of Nazareth, now the exalted King 
of Glory. But, inasmuch as no one can resist the 
truth by a mere negation, he must oifer and oppose 
something positive in the room of that faith which 
he will assail and endeavour utterly to abolish. 
And thus we may certainly conclude, that the final 
Antichrist will present himself to the world as, in 
a sense, its Messiah ; not, indeed, as the Messiah of 
prophecy, the Messiah of God, but still as the 
world's saviour ; as one, who, if men will follow 
him, will make their blessedness, giving to them the 
full enjoyment of a present material earth, instead 
of a distant and shadowy heaven ; abolishing those 
troublesome distinctions^ now the fruitful sources of 
so much disquietude and pain ; those, namely, be- 
tween the Church and the world, between the spirit 
and the flesh, between holiness and sin, between 
good and evil. It will follow, therefore, that how- 
ever he will not assume the name of Christ, and so 
will not, in the letter, be a ^euSo^pto-ro?, yet, 
usurping to himself Christ's offices, presenting him- 
self to the world as the true centre of its hopes, as 
the satisfier of its needs and healer of its hurts, he 
will in fact take up into himself all names and 



NEW TESTAMENT. 151 



forms of blasphemy, will be the ^euSo^/ato-To? and 
the avriio-Tos at once. 



xxxi. /JLO\VVQ}, 



have translated both these words, as often 
as they occur (the first, at 1 Cor. viii. 7 ; Rev. iii. 
4 ; xiv. 4: ; the second, at John xviii. 28 ; Tit. i. 15 ; 
Heb. xii. 15 ; Jude 8), invariably by the one English 
word, 'defile,' a word which doubtless covers them 
both. At the same time there exists a certain dif- 
ference between them, or at least between the 
images on which they repose this namely, that 
fjLo\vveiv is properly ' to besmear ' or ' besmirch,' as 
with mud or filth, ' to defoul ; ' which, indeed, is 
only another form of the word ' defile;' thus Aris- 
totle (Hist. An. vi. 17. 1) speaks of swine, TO> TT^XW 
ILdKvvovres eauroik : cf. Plato, Pol. vii. 535 e ; Cant. 
v. 3 ; while /jiiaiveiv, in its primary sense and usage, 
is not 'to smear,' as with matter, but 'to stain,' as 
with colour. The first corresponds with the Latin 
' inquinare ' (Horace, Sat. i. 8. 37), ' spurcare,' (itself 
probably from ' porcus ' ), and is thus exactly equiv- 
alent to the German ' besudeln ; ' the second with 
the Latin ' maculare,' and the German ' beflecken.' 
It will follow from what has been said, that while, 



152 SYNONYMS OF THE 

in a secondary and ethical sense, both words have 
an equally dishonorable signification, the 

(2 Cor. vii. 1) being no other than the 
rov /coo-pov (2 Pet. ii. 20), this will only hold 
good so long as the words are figuratively and ethi- 
cally taken ; so taken, [uaiveLv is the standing word 
in classical Greek to express the profaning or un- 
hallowing of aught (Plato, LeggAjL. 868 a ; Tim. 69 
d ; Sophocles, Antig. 1031). In a literal sense, on 
the contrary, piaiveiv may be used in good part, just 
as, in English, we speak of the staining of glass, 
the staining of ivory (see an example of this, II. iv. 
141), and as, in Latin, the c macula y need not of 
necessity be also a * labes ; ' fio\vveiy, on the other 
hand, admitting of such better use as little in a 
literal as in a figurative sense. 



xxxii. TTcubeia, vovOecria. 

THE chief inducement to attempt a discrimina- 
tion of these synonyms lies in the fact of their oc- 
curring together at Eph. vi. 4, and being often there 
not distinguished at all, or erroneously distin- 
guished. 

IlatSela is one of those many words, into which 
the more earnest spirit of revealed religion has put 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



153 



a deeper meaning than it knew of, till that took 
possession of it ; the new wine by a wondrous pro- 
cess making new .even the old vessel into which it 
was poured. For the Greeks, iraiSeia w r as simply 
'education;' nor, in all the many definitions of 
TrcuSeia, which are to be found in Plato, is there so 
much as the slightest prophetic anticipation of the 
new force wliich the word should obtain. But the 
deeper apprehension of those who had learned that 
" foolishness is bound in the heart " alike u of a 
child" and of a man, while yet "the rod of correc- 
tion may drive it far from him " (Prov. xxii. 15), led 
them, in assuming the word, to bring into it a fur- 
ther thought; they felt and understood that all ef- 
fectual instruction I'm- the sinful children of men, 
includes and implies chastening, or, as we are ac- 
customed to say, out of a sense of the same truth, 
4 correction.' ! 

Two definitions of TratSeia, the one by a great 
heathen philosopher, the other by a great Christian 
theologian, may be fruitfully compared. This is 
Plato's definition (Legg. C59 d) : Tra&eia pev eV0' 77 
TraiSwv o\/crj re teal aycoyr) 77/305 rov VTTO rov vo^ov 
\6yov opdov clprj/jievov : and this is that of Basil the 
Great (In Prov. 1) : ecrriv 77 TrcuSela dywytj ri$ ox/>e- 

1 The Greek, indeed, acknowledged, to a certain extent, the 
same, in his secondary use of d/cjAcKrroy, which, in its primary, 
meant simply 'the unchastised.' 



154: SYNONYMS OF THE 



rfj "fywxf], eTriTrovcDS 7ro/vAa/a<? TMV CLTTO rca/ctas 
v avrr]v KKa0alpovcra. For those who felt and 
acknowledged that which is asserted in the second 
clause of this last definition, the word came to sig- 
nify, not simply < eruditio,' but, as Augustine ex- 
presses it, who has noticed the change (Enarr. in 
Ps. cxviii. 66), ' per molestias eruditio.' And this is 
quite the predominant use of TraiSela and Tra&eveiv 
both in the Septuagint and in the New Testament 
(Lev. xxvi. 18 ; Ps. vi. 1 ; Isa. liii. 5 ; Sirac. xxii. 6 ; 
fjido-nyes KOI TrcuSela : Luke xxiii. 16 ; Heb. xii. 5, 
7, 8 ; Rev. iii. 19, and often). The only occasion in 
the New Testament upon which Tra&evew occurs in 
the old Greek sense, is Acts vii. 22. Instead of 
" nurture " at Eph. vi. 4, which is hardly strong 
enough a word, ' discipline,' I am persuaded, would 
have been preferable the laws and ordinances of 
the Christian household, the transgression of which 
will induce correction, being indicated by ira&eia. 

NovOeaid) for which the more Attic Greek would 
have had vovOeria or vovOeTrja-is (Lobeck, Phryni- 
chus, pp. 513, 520), is more successfully rendered, 
4 admonition ; ' which, however, as we must not for- 
get, has been defined by Cicero thus : Adnionitio 
est quasi lenior objurgatio. Exactly so much is in- 
tended by vovOevia here ; the training by word 
by the word of encouragement, when no more than 
this is wanted, but also by the word of remonstrance, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 155 

of reproof, of blame, where these may be required ; 
as set over against the training by act and by dis- 
cipline, which is TraiSeia. It seems to me, therefore, 
that Bengel, who so seldom misses, has yet missed 
here the distinction, who, on the words, ev TraiSeia 
/cal vovOeaia, has this note : Ilarmn altera occurrit 
ruditati ; altera oblivion! et levitati. Utraque et 
sermonem et reliquam disciplinam includit. In 
support of that which has been urged above, and 
in evidence that vovdeala is the training by word of 
mouth, such combinations as the following, Trapai- 
vecreis KOI vovdec-iai (Plutarch, De Coh. Ira, 2) ; vov- 
0Titcol \oyoi (Xenophon, M< in. i. 2. 21) ; StSa^r; KOI 
vov6eT7j(Ti$ (Plato, Pol. 399 Z>) ; vovOerelv KCLI 8iBd(r- 
KGLV (Prot. 323 d\ may be adduced. 

Relatively, then, and as by comparison with 
TrcuSela, vovOevla is the milder term ; while yet its 
mention, associated with that other, teaches us that 
this too is a most needful element of Christian edu- 
cation ; that the ira&eia without it would be very 
incomplete; even as, when years advance, and there 
is no longer a child to deal with, it must give place 
to, or rather be swallowed up in, the vovOeala alto- 
gether. And yet the vovOeala itsdf, where need is, 
may be earnest and severe enough. The word in- 
dicates much more than a mere Eli-remonstrance : 
" Nay, my sons, for it is no good report that I hear " 
(1 Sam. ii. 24) ; indeed, of Eli it is expressly re- 



156 SYNONYMS OF THE 

corded, in respect of those sons: OVK e 
avrovs (iii. 12). In Plutarch alone we find the word 
united with /^i/a? (Conj. Prcec. 13) ; with i/royo? 
(De Adul. et Am. 17) ; and vovOerelv to have con- 
tinually, if not always, the sense of admonishing 
with Uame (II. 37 ; De Prof, in Virt. 11 ; Conj. 
JPrcec. 22). Jerome, then, is only partially in the 
right, when he desires to get rid, at Eph. vi. 4, of 
4 correptione,' which he found in the Yulgate, and 
which still keeps its place there. This he did, on 
the ground that in vovOeola no rebuke nor austerity 
is implied, as in i correptio ' there certainly is : 
Quam corre$twn&m nos legimus, melius in Grseco 
dicitur vovOeaia, quse admonitionem niagis et erud^ 
tionem quam austeritatem sonat. Undoubtedly, in 
vovOeaia such is not of necessity implied, and there- 
fore 4 correptio ' is not its happiest rendering ; but 
the word does not exclude, nay implies this, when- 
ever it may be required ; the derivation, from vovs 
and riOrjiu, involves as much ; whatever is needed 
to cause the monition to be taken home, is implied 
in the word. 

In claiming for vovOea-ia, as compared with and 
discriminated from TratSe/a, that it is predominantly 
the admonition l)y word, which is also plainly the 
view that our translators have taken of it, I would 
not at all deny that both it and the verb vovderelv 
are used to express correction In/ deed, but only af- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 157 

firm of the other the appeal to the reasonable 
faculties that it is the prevailing use of both ; so 
that in such phrases as these of Plato : pd/38ov vov- 
OeTTjcns (Legg. 700 c) ; TrXyyals vovderelv (Legg. 879 
d\ the word is used in a secondary and improper, 
and therefore more emphatic, sense. Such passages 
are exactly parallel to that in Judges, where it is 
said of Gideon, that " he took thorns of the wilder- 
ness and briers, and with them lie taught the men 
of Succoth " (Judg. viii. 16) ; on the strength of 
which language, or of any number of similar uses, 
no one would seek to deprive the verb ' to teach ' 
of having, as its primary meaning, to communicate 
orally knowledge from one to another. 



xxxiii. afaais, 



s is the usual word by which forgiveness, 
or remission of sins, is expressed in the New Testa- 
ment. Derived from d^irj^ the image which un- 
derlies it is, of course, that of a releasing or letting 
go ; probably the year of jubilee, called constantly 
ero9, or eVtauro?, TTJ<? a^ecreco?, or simply a^ecrt? (Lev. 
xxv. 31, 40 ; xxvii. 24), and in which all debts were 
to be forgiven, suggested the higher application of 
the word. It occurs with considerable frequency, 



158 SYNONYMS OF THE 

though oftener in St. Luke than in all the other 
books of the New Covenant put together. On a 
single occasion, however, the term Trdpea-is TWV 
d/jLaprrjfjbdrwv occurs (Rom. iii. 25). Our translators 
have not noticed, or at least have not marked in 
their Version, the variation in the Apostle's phrase, 
but render Trdpecri? here as they have rendered a<e- 
crt9 elsewhere ; and many have since justified them 
in this, having, after consideration of the subject, 
denied that any difference was intended by him. 
Others again, and as I believe more rightly, are 
persuaded that St. Paul changed his word not 
without a reason, but of intention, and because he 
wished to say something which irdpeais does ex- 
press adequately and accurately, and which afaaw 
would not. 

It is known to many, that Cocceius with those 
of his school made much of the variation of words 
here, finding herein a great support for a favourite 
assertion of theirs, that there was no remission of 
sins, in the fullest sense of the words, under the 
Old Covenant, no reXeiWt? (Heb. x. 1 4), no entire 
abolition of sin even for the faithful themselves, but 
only a present pretermission (irdpeo-i$\ or dissimula- 
tion, upon God's part, in consideration of the sacrifice 
which was one day to be. On this matter a violent 
controversy raged among the theologians of Hol- 
land, at the end of the sixteenth and beginning of 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



159 



the following centiuy, which was carried on with 
an unaccountable acrimony ; and for -a brief history 
of which the reader may turn to Deyling, Obss. Sac. 
vol. v. p. 209 ; Vitringa, Obss. Sac. vol. iv. p. 3 ; 
Yenema, Diss. Sac. p. 72 ; while the fullest state- 
ment of what Gocceius did mean, and in his own 
words, may be found in his treatise, Tftilitas Dis- 
tinct ionis duorum Vocdbulorum Scriptures, irape- 
creoj? ct a(/>e<reo>9, Opp. vol. ix. p. 121. Those who 
at that time opposed the Cocceian scheme, denied 
that there was any distinction between a</>eo-t? in id 
Trdpeo-is. But in this they erred : the Cocceians 
were undoubtedly wrong, in saying that for the 
faithful there was only a Tra^ecr*?, and no a</>ecr<r, 
afjiapTTj/jLciTtov, in applying to them what was assert- 
ed in respect of the world under the Old Covenant ; 
but they were right in maintaining that 
was not purely and entirely equivalent with a< 
Beza, indeed, had already drawn attention to the 
distinction. Having in his La!in Version, as first 
published, taken no notice of it, he acknowledges 
at a later period his error, saying, Hoec duo pluri- 
mum inter se differunt ; and now rendering irdpecns 
by ' dissimulatio.' 

In the first place, the derivation would d priori 
suggest a difference of meaning ; if a^eo-t? is re- 
mission, 7ra/3eo-fc9, from Trapirj/ju, will be naturally 
' the irdea-^ djLarrjLaTcoV the 



160 SYNONYMS OF THE 

prcetermission or passing ~by of sins for the present, 
leaving it open in the future either entirely to remit, 
or else to punish them, as may seem good. And the 
classical usage both of Trapikvai and of irdpeai? 
bears out this distinction. Thus Xenophon (Hipp. 
vii. 10) : d/jLapTij/jLciTa ou ^pr) irapievai aKoKacrra. Of 
Herod Josephus tells us, that being desirous to 
punish a certain offence, yet for other considerations 
he passed it by (Antt. xv. 3. 2) : Trapij/ce TTJV a^ap- 
rlav. When the Son of Sirach (Ecclus. xxiii. 2) 
prays to God that He would not "pass ~by " his sins, 
lie assuredly does not use ou ^ Trapy as = ou ^ 
a$fj, but only asks that he may not be without a 
wholesome chastisement following close on his 
transgressions. So, too, on the contrary, when in 
proof that Trdpecris is equivalent to a^eo-i?, the fol- 
lowing passage, from Dionysius of Halicarnassus 
(Antt. Rorti. vii. 37) is adduced : rrjv pev oXoa^prj 
irdpe&iv ov% evpovro, rrjv 8e e/9 ^pbvov ocrov rfelow 
^v e\a/3ov, it is not Trdpea-is, but oXocr^pT;? 
which is equal to afacns, and no doubt the 
historian added the epithet out of a feeling that 
Trdpeais would have insufficiently expressed his 
meaning without it. 

Having seen, then, that there is a great primd 
facie probability, that St. Paul intends something 
different by the Trdpea^ dfjuapT'rjfJLdTcov, in the only 
place where he thinks good to use this phrase, from 



NEW TESTAMENT. 161 

that which he intends in the many where he em- 
ploys a(/>e<rt9, that passage itself, namely Rom. iii. 
25, may now be considered more closely. It appears 
in our Yersion : " Whom God hath set forth to be a 
propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare 
his righteousness for tJte remission of sins that are 
past, through the forbearance of God." I would 
venture to render it thus : " Whom God hath sefc 
forth to be a propitiation through faith in his blood, 
for a manifestation of his righteousness, because of 
tJie prcetermission [&ia TTJV irdpeaiv^ not Bid 7-779 Tra- 
peo-eo)?], in the forbearance of God, of the sins that 
went before ; " and the exact meaning which I 
should attach to the words is this " There needed," 
St. Paul would say, " a signal manifestation of the 
righteousness of God, on account of the long pre- 
termission or passing over of sins 3 in his infinite 
forbearance, without any adequate expression of his 
wrath against them, during all those long years 
which preceded the coming of Christ ; which mani- 
festation of God's righteousness found place, when 
lie set forth no other and no less than his own Son 
to be the propitiatory sacrifice for sin." There had 
been a long period during which God's extreme in- 
dignation against sin and sinners was not pro- 
nounced ; the time, that is, previous to the Incarna- 
tion. Of course, this connivance of God, this his 
holding his peace, was only partial ; for St. Paul has 



162 SYNONYMS OF THE 

himself just before declared, that the wrath of God 
was revealed from heaven against all unrighteous- 
ness of men (Rom. i. 18) ; and has traced in a few 
fearful lines some of the ways in which this revela- 
tion of his wrath displayed itself (i. 24 32). Yet 
still, it was the time during which He suffered the 
nations to walk in their own ways (Acts xiv. 16) ; 
they were the times of ignorance which God winked 
at (Acts xvii. 30), in other words, of the avoyj] rov 
Oeov. But this position in regard of sin could, in 
the very nature of things, be only transient and 
provisional. With a man, the prsetermission, or 
1 prseterition,' as Hammond would render it, of sins 
will very often be identical with the remission, the 
Trdpeais will be one with the a^ecrt?. He forgets ; 
he has not power to bring the long past into judg- 
ment, even if he w r ould ; or he has not righteous 
energy enough to will it. But with an absolutely 
righteous God, the irdpevis can only be temporary, 
and must always find place with a looking on to a 
final decision ; every sin must at last either be ab- 
solutely forgiven, or adequately avenged. In the 
meanwhile, the very Trdpecri<s might seem to call in 
question the absolute righteousness of Him, who 
was thus content to pass by and to connive. God 
held his peace, and it was only too near to the evil 
thought of man to think wickedly that He was such 
an one as himself, morally indifferent to good and 



NEW TESTAMENT. 1G3 



to evil ; but now (<lv TO> vvv Kaipw) God, by tlie 
sacrifice of his Son, lias rendered such a perverse 
misunderstanding of his meaning in the past dis- 
simulation 'of sin for ever impossible. Bengel ex- 
presses well this same view, which I cannot doubt 
is the correct one, of the passage : Objectum prseter- 
missionis [Tra/oeo-ew?], peccata ; tolerantiae [^o%)?]j 
peccatores, contra quos non est persecutes Dens jus 
suum. Et hsec et ilia quam diu fuit, non ita appa- 
ruit justitia Dei : non enim tarn vehementer visus 
est irasci peccato, sed peccatorem sibi relinqnere, 
afj.e\6iv, negligere, Ileb. viii. 9. At in sanguine 
Christi et morte propitiatori ostensa est Dei jus- 
titia, cum vindicta ad versus peccatum ipsum, ut 
esset ipse Justus, et cum zelo pro peccatoris libera- 
tione, ut esset ipse justificans. Compare Hammond 
(in loc.\ who has seized excellently well the true 
distinction between the two words. 

He, then, that is partaker of the a<ecr*?, has his 
sins forgiven, so that, unless he bring them back 
upon himself by new and further disobedience 
(Matt, xviii. 32, 3 ; 2 Pet. i. 9; ii. 20), they shall 
not be imputed to him, or mentioned against him 
any more ; while the Trdpecris is indeed a benefit, but 
a very subordinate one ; it is the present passing 1 >y 
of sin, the suspension of its punishment, the not 
shutting up of all ways of mercy against the sinner, 
the giving to him of space and helps for repentance, 



164 SYNONYMS OF THE 

as it is said at Wisd. xi. 24 : Trapopa? 
dvOptoTTwv e/5 /Aerdvoiav. If this repentance follow, 
then the Trdpecris will be swallowed up in the a^ecrt?, 
but if not, then the punishment, suspended but not 
averted, in its due time will arrive (Luke xiii. 9). 



xxxiv. fjLO)po\o<yia, ala-XpoXoyla, evTp(nre\ia. 



ia, a word employed by Aristotle, but 
not of frequent use till the later Greek, is rendered 
well in the Vulgate, on the one occasion of its oc- 
currence in Scripture, Eph, v. 4, by ' stultiloquium,' 
a compound word, it may be first coined by Plautus 
(Mil. Glor. ii. 3. 25) ; although one which did not 
find more favour and currency in the after language 
of Rome, than the ' stultiloquy ' with which Jeremy 
Taylor sought to reproduce it, with us. It will in- 
clude not merely the TTOLV pfjpa dpyov of our Lord, 
(Matt. xii. 36), but in good part also the Tra? \6yo? 
o-aTTpo? of his Apostle (Eph. iv. 29) ; discourse, as 
everything else about the Christian, needing to be 
seasoned with the salt of grace, and being in danger 
of growing first insipid, and then corrupt, without 
it. 

It seems to me, that those who stop short with 
the dpya prj^ara, as if those alone were included in 



NEW TESTAMENT. 165 

the word, fail to exhaust the fulness of its meaning. 
Thus Calvin too weakly : Sermones inepti ac inanes, 
nulliusque frtigis ; and even Jeremy Taylor, in his 
sermons On the Good and Evil Tongue (Serm. xxxii. 
pt. 2), hardly comes up to the full force of the word. 
The remarkable passage in which he unfolds the 
meaning of the pa>po\oyla begins thus : " That 
which is here meant by stultiloquy or foolish speak- 
ing is the ' lubricum verbi,' as St. Ambrose calls it, 
the ' slipping with the tongue ' which prating peo- 
ple often suffer, whose discourses betray the vanity 
of their spirit, and discover ' the hidden man of the 
heart.' " In heathen writings, pcopoXoyla may very 
well be used as little more than equivalent to a8o- 
Xeo-^i'a, ' random talk,' and /-6&>poAo<ye/ as equivalent 
to \rjpeiv (Plutarch, De Garr. 4) ; but words obtain 
a new earnestness when they are assumed into the 
ethical terminology of Christ's school. Nor in seek- 
ing to enter fully into this word's meaning, ought 
we to leave out of sight the greater emphasis which 
the words 'fool,' 'foolish,' 'folly,' obtain in the lan- 
guage of Scripture, than elsewhere they have, or 
can have. There is the positive of folly as well as 
the negative to be taken account of, when we are 
weighing the force of fjLwpo\oyia : it is that ' talk of 
fools,' which is folly and sin together. 

AivxpoXoyia also occurs only once in the New 
Testament (Col. iii. 8), and is not to be confounded 



166 SYNONYMS OF THE 



with aurxporr)?, Eph. v. 4. By it the Greek Fathers 
(see Suicer, Thes. s. v.), and most expositors after 
them, have understood obscene discourse, ' turpilo- 
quium,' such communication as ministers to wan- 
tonness, oxyjua TTopvelas, as Chrysostom calls it. 
Thus Clemens of Alexandria has a chapter in his 
Pazdagogus (ii. 6), Hepl alorxpoXoyias, in which he 
recognises no other meaning but this. Nor k it 
otherwise w r ith our own Yersion, which has rendered 
the word by ' filthy communication.' ISTow, beyond 
a doubt, ala"xpo\oyia has sometimes this sense pre- 
dominantly, or even exclusively ; thus Xenophon, 
De Lac. Rep. v. 6 ; Aristotle, De Rep. vii. 15 ; Epic- 
tetus, Man. xxxiii. 16 ; and see Becker's ChariJdes, 
1st ed. vol. ii. p. 264. But very often, indeed more 
generally, by ala^poKoyia is indicated all foul- 
mouthed abusiveness of every kind, not excluding 
this, one of the most obvious kinds, most ready to 
hand, and most offensive, but still not intending by 
the aiaxpd of the w r ord, to point at such alone. 
Thus Polybius, viii. 13. 8 ; xxxi. 10. 4 : alo-'XpoX.oyla 
teal \oiSopla Kara rov /3acn\a)s : and compare the 
phrase alo-^poXoyia e<' lepols. Plutarch also (De 
Lib. Educ. 14), denouncing all ai&xpoXoyla as un- 
becoming to youth ingenuously brought up, includes 
in it every license of the ungoverned tongue, em- 
ploying itself in the abuse of others; and I am 
persuaded that St. Paul, using the word, is forbid- 



STEW TESTA3IKST. 167 

ding the same. The context or company in which 
the word is found goes far to prove this ; for all the 
other things which he is here prohibiting, are the 
outbreaks of a loveless spirit toward our neighbour ; 
and so, I cannot but believe, is this. 

But by far the most interesting word in this 
group remains still to be considered. EvrpaTreXta, 
a finely selected word of the world's use, which 
however St. Paul uses not in the world's sense, like 
its synonyms just considered, is only met with once 
in the New Testament (Epli. v. 1). Derived from 
ev and Tpe7reo-6at, that which easily turns, and in 
this way adapts itself to the shifting circumstances 
of the moment, to the moods and conditions of 
those with whom at the moment it may deal ; ' it 
has not of necessity, nor indeed had it more than 
slightly and occasionally in classical use, that evil 
signification which, in the use of St. Paul, and of 
the ethical writers of the Church, it exclusively ac- 
quired. On the contrary, Thucydides, in that pane- 
gyric of the Athenians which he puts into the 
mouth of Pericles, employs evrpaTreXcos (ii. 41) as 
=== evKivrjTcos, to characterize the versatility, the 
c versatile ingenium,' of his countrymen. Aristotle 
also, as is well known, gives praise to the evrpdire- 

1 That St. Paul himself could be eurpciireXos in this, the better 
sense of the word, he has given the most illustrious proofs, Acta 
xxvi. 29. 



168 SYNONYMS OF THE 



Xo<? or eVtSe^to? (Ethic. Nic. iv. 8), as one who keeps 
the due mean between the /Sto/^oXo^o? and aypoifcos 
in whatever pleasanty or banter lie may allow him- 
self. He is no mere yeXcoroTroto? or buffoon ; never 
exceeds the limits of becoming mirth, nor ceases to 
be the gentleman ; and we find in Plato (Pol. viii. 
563 $), 6vrpa7T6\ia joined with ^aptezmoyzo? : as it 
is in Plutarch (De Adul. et Am. 7), in Josephus 
(Antt. xii. 4. 3), and in Philo (Leg. ad Cai. 45), 
with %ap*9. 

At the same time, there were not wanting even 
in classical usage, anticipations of that more unfa- 
vourable signification which St. Paul should stamp 
upon the word, though they appear most plainly in 
the adjective evrpaTreXos : thus, see Isocrates, vii. 
49 ; and Pindar, Pytli. i. 93, where Dissen traces 
well the downward progress of the word : Primum 
est de facilitate in inotu, turn ad mores transfertur, 
ct indicat hominem temporibus inservientem, dici- 
turque turn de sermone urbano, lepido, faceto, im- 
primis cum levitatis et assentationis, simulations 
notatione. In respect of only gradually acquiring 
an unfavourable significance, evrpaTreXia has a his- 
tory closely resembling that of the Latin ' urbani- 
tas,' which would be the happiest equivalent by 
which to render it, as indeed Erasmus has done ; 
' scurrilitas,' which the Yulgate has, is altogether 
at fault. There needtf only to quote in proof the 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



169 



words of Cicero, Pro Ccel. 3 : Contumelia, si petu- 
lantius jactatur, convicium; si facetius, urbanitas 
nomimitur ; which agrees with the striking phrase 
of Aristotle, that the eurpaireXta is TreTratSet^eV?/ 
vfipis : cf. Plutarch, Cic. 50. Already in Cicero's 
time (see RJict. ii. 12) ' urbanitas ' had begun to ob- 
tain that questionable significance, which, in the 
usage of Tacitus (Hist. ii. 88) and Seneca (De Ira, 
i. 1^), it far more distinctly acquired. 

But the fineness of the form in which evil might 
array itself could not make a Paul tolerant of the 
evil itself; he did not consider that sin, by losing 
all its coarseness, lost half, or any part of, its mis- 
chief; on the contrary, that it might so become far 
more dangerous than it was before. In the finer 
talk of the world, its * persiflage,' its * badinage,' 
there is that which would attract many, whom scur- 
rile buffoonery would only revolt and repel ; who 
would in like manner bo in no danger of h-ndini:; 
their tongue or ear to foul-mouthed abuse. A far 
subtler sin is noted here than in either of the other 
words, and not a few would be now touched, whom 
the preceding monition had failed to find out. Thus, 
Bengel (in loc.) has well observed : Hsec subtilior 
quam turpitude aut stultiloquium ; nam tii<j<it'> 
nititur ; and Jerome: De prudenti mente descendit, 
et consulto appetit qusedam vel urbana verba, vel 
rustica, vel turpia, \ el faeeta. I should only object 



170 SYNONYMS OF THE 

to the c rustica vel turpia,' which belong rather to 
the other forms in which men offend with the tongue 
than to this. It always belongs to the eurpa-TreXo?, 
as Chrysostom notes, da-rela \eyeiv. He keeps ever 
in mind the observation of Cicero (De Or at. ii. 58) : 
Hsec ridentur vel maxime, quse notant et designant 
turpitudinem aliquam non turpiter. There would 
need polish, refinement, knowledge of the world, 
wit, to be an evrpaTrekos even in this worser sense 
of the word ; although these, of course, enlisted 
in the service of sin, and not in that of the truth. 
The very profligate old man in the Miles Gloriosus 
of Plautus, iii. 1. 42 52, who at the same time 
prides himself, and with reason, on his wit, his ele- 
gance and refinement (cavillator lepidus, facetus) is 
exactly the evrjoavreXo? : and remarkably enough, 
w r hen we remember that ev-r paTreXla being only ex- 
pressly forbidden once in Scripture, is forbidden to 
Ephesians, we find him bringing out that all this 
was to be expected from him, being that he was an 
Ephesian : Post Ephesi sum natus ; non enim in 
Apulis, non Animulas. 

While then by all these words are indicated sins 
of the tongue, it is yet with a difference. In fjicopo- 
\oyia the foolishness, in alo-%po\oyia the foulness, 
in evrpairekia the false refinement, of discourse 
which is not seasoned with the salt of grace, are es- 
pecially noted. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 171 



xxxv. Xar/oevo), Xeirovpyeco. 

IN both these words lies the notion of service, 
but of service under certain special limitations in 
the second, as compared with the first. Aarpevew, 
as indicated by the words with which it is allied, 
\drpi$, < an hired servant,' \drpov, 'hire,' is properly, 
* to serve for hire.' Already, however, in classical 
Greek both it and \arpeia are occasionally trans- 
ferred from the service of men to the service of the 
higher powers ; as by Plato, Apol. 23 c: rj TQV Seov 
\arpeia: cf. Phcedr. 24-e; and the meaning, which 
in Scripture is the only one which the words know, 
is anticipated in part. In the Septuagint \arpeveiv 
is never used to express any other service but either 
that of the true God, or of the false gods of hea- 
thenism. The single seeming exception, Deut. 
xxviii. 48, is not such in fact; so that Augustine 
has perfect right when he says (De Civ. Da, x. 1, 
2) : Aarpeia secundum consuetudinem qufi locuti 
sunt qui nobis divina eloquia condiderunt, aut sem- 
per, aut tarn frequenter ut psene semper, ea dicitur 
servitus quse pertinet ad colendum Deum. 

AeiTovpyelv is a word boasting of a somewhat 
nobler beginning ; it signified, at first, to serve the 
state in a public office or function ; from 



172 SYNONYMS OF THE 

( = 877/^60-409), and epyov. It resembled \arpeveiv 
in tliis, that it was occasionally transferred to the 
highest ministry of all, the ministry of the gods 
(Diodorus Siculus, i. 21). When the Christian 
Church was forming its terminology, which it did 
partly by shaping new words, but partly also by 
elevating old ones to higher than their previous 
uses, it more readily, as regarded the latter, adopted 
those which had before been employed in the civil 
and political life of the Greeks, than such as had 
played their part in religious matters ; and this, 
even when it was seeking for the expression of reli- 
gious truth. The reasons which induced this were 
the same which caused it more willingly to turn 
basilicas, buildings, that is, which had been used 
in civil life, than temples, into churches ; namely, 
because they were less haunted with the clinging 
associations of heathenism. Of the fact itself we 
have a notable example in the words \eirovpyos, 
\eiTovpyla, \eiTovpyeiv. It is probably well known 
to all how prominent a place in ecclesiastical lan- 
guage these words assumed. At the same time, in 
this case also the transition had been made more 
easy, the way for it had been prepared, by the Sep- 
tuagint ; and by Philo (De Prof. 464). Neither by 
these, however, nor yet by the Christian writers 
who followed, were the words of this group so en- 
tirely alienated from their primary uses as XarpeLa 



NEW TESTAMENT. 173 

and \arp6veiv had been ; being still occasionally 
used for the ministry unto men (2 Sam. xiii. 18 ; 1 
Kings x. 5 ; 2 Kings iv. 43 ; Rom. xv. 27 ; Phil. ii. 
25, 30). 

From the distinction already existing between 
\arpeviv and \eirovpyeiv , before the Church had 
anything to do with them, namely that \arpevetv 
was ' to serve,' \etrovpyeiv, ' to serve in an office and 
ministry,' are to be explained the different uses to 
which they are severally turned in the New Testa- 
ment, as, indeed, previously also in the Septuagint. 
To serve God is the duty of all men ; the \arpeveiv, 
therefore, and the \arpeia are demanded of the 
whole people (Exod. iv. 23 ; Deut. x. 12 ; Josh. xxiv. 
31 ; Matt. iv. 10 ; Acts vii. 7 ; Rom. ix. 4) ; but to 
serve Him in special offices and ministries is the 
duty and privilege only of a few, who are set apart 
to the same ; and thus in the Old Testament the 
Xetrovpyelv and the \iTovp<yia are ascribed only to 
the priests and Levites who were separated to min- 
ister in holy things ; they only are \eirovpyoi 
(Numb. iv. 24 ; 1 Sam. ii. 11 ; Nehem. x. 39 ; 
Ezek. xliv. 27) ; which language, mutatis mutandis, 
reappears in the New ; where not merely is that 
old priesthood and ministry designated by this lan- 
guage (Luke i. 23 ; Heb. ix. 21 ; x. 11), but that of 
apostles, prophets, and teachers in the Church (Acts 
xiii. 2 ; Rom. xv. 1C ; Phil. ii. 17), as well as that 



174 SYNONYMS OF THE 

of the Great High Priest of our profession, who is 
T&V ayiwv \iTovpyo$ (Heb. viii. 2). 1 

It may be urged against the distinction here 
drawn that \arpeveiv and \arpeia are sometimes ap- 
plied to official ministries, as at Heb. ix. 1, 6. This 
is, of course, true ; just as where two circles have 
the same centre, the greater will necessarily include 
the less. The notion of service is such a centre 
here ; in Xeirovpyeiv this service finds a certain 
limitation, in that it is service in an office : it fol- 
lows that every \irovp>yla will of necessity be a 
\arpela, but not, vice versa, every Xarpela a \eirovp- 
yi'a. I know no passage which better brings out 
the distinction between these two words which I 
have sought to trace, than Ecclus. iv. 14, where 
both occur: ol \arpevovres avrfj [i. 0. rfj ^o0/a] 
\eiTovpjrja-ova-Lv 'Ayiw. "They that serve her, 
shall minister to the Holy One." 

1 In later ecclesiastical use there has been sometimes the at- 
tempt to push the special application of \firovpyia still further, 
and to limit its use to those prayers and offices which stand in 
more immediate relation to the Holy Eucharist. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 175 



XXXVI. 

IN both these words the sense of poverty, and 
of poverty in this world's goods, is involved ; yet 
have they severally meanings which are exclusively 
their own. It is true that TreV??? and TTTW^O? contin- 
ually occur together in the Septuagint, in the Psalms 
especially, with no rigid demarcation of their mean- 
ings (as at Ps. xxxix. 18 ; Ixxiii. 22 ; Ixxxi. 4 ; cf. 
Ezek. xviii. 12 ; xxii. 29) ; very much as our " poor 
and needy ; " and whatever distinction may exist in 
the Hebrew between ynsx and ^as, the Alexandrian 
translators have either considered it not reproduci- 
ble by the help of these words, or have not cared to 
reproduce it ; for they have no fixed rule in regard 
of them, translating the one and the other by TTTW- 
^o? and irevrjs alike. Still there are passages which 
show that they were perfectly aware of the distinc- 
tion, and would, where it seemed to them needful, 
maintain it; occasions upon which they employ 
Trevrjs (as Deut. xxiv. 16, 17 ; 2 Sam. xii. 1, 3, 4), 
and where, as will presently be evident, TTTW^O? 
would have been manifestly unfit. 

HeV?79 occurs only once in the New Testament (1 
Cor. ix. 9), while Trror^o? some thirty or forty times. 
Derived from Trez/o^at and connected with 



176 SYNONYMS OF THE 



and the Latin ' penuria,' it properly signi- 
fies one so poor that he earns his daily bread by his 
labour; Hesychius calls him well avroSid/covos, as 
one who by his own hands ministers to his own ne- 
cessities. The word does not indicate extreme want, 
or anything approaching to it, any more than the 
' pauper ' and * paupertas ' of the Latin ; but only 
the ' res angusta ' of one to whom TfXovaios would 
be an inappropriate epithet. What was the popular 
definition of a jrevij? we learn from Xenophon (Mem. 
iv. 2. 37 : TOVS pev cl/jLai /arj i/cava 6%ovTa<? els a Se 

TrevTjTCLS row? Be TrXe/o) T&V itcavwv 7r\ovcriov$. 

was an epithet commonly applied to Socrates 
(Xenophon, CEcon. ii. 3) ; and irevia he claims more 
than once for himself (Plato, Apol. 23, c ; 31 c). 
What his Trevia was, he explains in the passage from 
Xenophon referred to ; namely, that all which ho 
had, if sold, would not bring five Attic minsB. So, 
too, the HeveaTcu, in Thessaly, (if, indeed, the deri- 
vation of the name from TrheaOai is to stand,) were 
a subject population, but not reduced to abject 
want y on the contrary, retaining partial rights as 
boors or cultivators of the soil. 

But while the TreWj? is ' pauper,' the TTT&^O? is 
' mendicus ; ' he is the c beggar,' and lives not by 
his own labour or industry, but on other men's 
alms (Luke xvi. 20, 21) ; one therefore whom Plato 
would not endure in his ideal State (Legg. xi. 936 c). 



JS'EW TESTAMENT. 177 

If indeed we fall back on etymologies, TT poo-am?? (a 
word which ought to be replaced in the text at 
John ix. 8), or eVan-?;?, would be the more exactly 
equivalent to our < beggar.' Tertullian long ago 
noted the distinction between TTTO^O? and Trez^? 
(Adv. Marc. iv. 14), for having to do with our 
Lord's words, fia/cdpioi, ol TTTW^OI (Luke vi. 20), he 
changes the 'BeatijKtt^re*,' which still retains its 
place in the Vulgate, into 'Bead mendicij and jus- 
tifies the change, observing, Sic enim exigit inter- 
protatio vocabuli quod in Grseco est. 

The words then are markedly distinct; the TreV^? 
is so poor that he earns his bread by daily labour, 
the TTTor^o? is so poor that he only obtains his living 
by begging. The TTTO^O? has nothing, the TreVr?? has 
nothing superfluous. (See Doderlein, Lot. Synon. 
vol. iii. p. 117.) The two, irevia (== paupertas) and 
TTTcoxeta (== egestas), may be sisters, as one in Aris- 
tophanes will have them (Pint. 549) ; but if such, 
yet the latter very far more destitute of the world V 
goods than the former, and indeed Hevia in that 
passage seems inclined to disallow wholly any such 
near relationship as this. The words of Aristopha- 
nes, in which he plays the synonymist betweeii 
them, have been often quoted: 



fJ.(v yap fiios, ov arv Ae'yeis, ^r\v IGTIV /J.T)fifV ^ovra.' rov 8e 
O.} TO?S tpyois 



8* 



178 SYNONYMS OF THE 



xxxvii. 0v/ji6$. opytf, 



and opyrj are found several times together 
in the New Testament, as at Horn. ii. 8 ; Eph. iv. 3 ; 
Col. iii. 8 ; Rev. xix. 15 ; often also in the Septua- 
gint, 2 Chron. xxix. 10 ; Mic. v. 15 ; and often also 
in other Greek (Isocrates, xii. 81 ; Poly bins, vi. 56. 
11; Josephus, Antt. xx. 5. 3; Plutarch, Zte CoJi. 
Ira, 2) ; nor are they found only in the connexion 
of juxtaposition, but one of them made dependent 
on the other ; thus Bvfios T?}? 0/37?}? (Rev. xvi. 9 ; cf. 
Job iii. 17 ; Josh. vii. 26) ; while opyrj Ovpov, not 
occurring in the New Testament, is of constant re- 
currence in the Old (Ps. Ixxvii. 49 ; Lam. i. 12 ; 
Isa. xxx. 27 ; Hos. xi. 9). 

When these words, after a considerable anterior 
history, came to settle down on the passion of anger, 
as the strongest of all passions, impulses and desires, 
and to be used predominantly as expressions of it 
(see Donaldson, New Oratylus, pp. 675 679), the 
distinguishing of them one from another, a good 
deal occupied grammarians and philologers. They 
felt, and rightly, that the existence of a multitude 
of passages in which the words were perfectly in- 
differently used (as Plato, Legg. 867), made nothing 
against the fact of such a distinction ; all which, in 



NEW TESTAMENT. 1Y9 

seeking to desynonymize the two, they assumed 
was, that the words could not be indifferently used 
in all cases. The general result of their disquisi- 
tions is, that in OV/JLOS 1 (connected with 6vw, and 
derived, according to Plato, airo TTJ? Ovaews, Crat. 
419 g), is more of the turbulent commotion, the 
boiling agitation of the feelings, either presently to 
subside and disappear, like the Latin ' excandes- 
centia,' which Cicero defines (Tusc. iv. 9), Ira nas- 
cens et modo desistens, or else to settle down into 
opytf, wherein is more of an abiding and settled 
habit of the mind ('ira inveterate'), with the pur- 
pose of revenge ; the German ' Zorn.' 

This the more passionate, and at the same time 
more temporary, character of OV/JLOS (OvfjLoi accord- 
ing to Jeremy Taylor, are "great but transient 
angers"), may explain a distinction of Xenophon, 
namely that QU/JLOS in a horse is what opy?; is in a 
man (De Re Equest. ix. 2 ; cf. Plutarch, Gryll. 4, 
in fine). Thus the Stoics, who dealt much in defi- 
nitions and distinctions, defined 0i//z65 as 0/3777 
apxo^^l (Diogenes Laertius, vii. 1. 63. 114) ; and 
Ammonius : OV/AO? p.iv ea-ri Trpoa/caipos' opjrj Se 

Aristotle too, in his won- 



1 It is commonly translated ' furor' in the Vulgate. Augustine 
(Enarr. in Ps. Ixxxvii. 8) is dissatisfied with the application of this 
word to God, 'furor' being commonly attributed to those out of a 
eound mind, and proposes 'indignatio' in its room. 



180 SYNONYMS OF THE 

derful comparison of old age and youth, character- 
izes the angers of old men (Ehet. ii. 11): KOI ol 
Ov/jLol, ofet? fjuev elcnv^ d<70veis Be like fire in straw, 
quickly blazing up, and as quickly extinguished. 
Origen (in Ps. ii. 5, Opp. vol. ii. p. 541) has a discus- 
sion on the words, and arrives at the same results : 
Bia<f>epei, Be OvfjLos 0/97779, rto Ovpov fj,ev elvai opyrjv 
fcal en, eK/caiojAevrjv opyfyv Be ope^tv 
. This agrees with the Stoic defini- 
tion of 0/3777, that it is e7ri0v/j,ia TifJLwpias. 

The Trdpopyio-pos of Eph. iv. 26, a word which 
does not occur in classical Greek, but several times 
in the Septuagint, as at 1 Kin. xv. 30 ; 2 Kin. xix. 3, 
is not = 0/3777, however we may translate it ' wrath.' 
This it cannot be ; for the Trapopyio-fjios there is ab- 
solutely forbidden ; the sun shall not go down upon 
it; whereas under certain conditions 0/3777 is a right- 
eous passion to entertain. The Scripture has nothing 
in common with the Stoics' absolute condemnation 
of anger ; it takes no such loveless view of other 
men's sins as his who said, creavrov /j,rj rdpaa-cre* 
afjLaprdvei Tt? ; eatrrcG d/jLaprdvet, (Marc. Ant. iv. 46). 
It inculcates no aTrdOeia, but only a ^eTpiOTrdOeia : 
and even as Aristotle (Ethic. Nic. vii. 7), in agree- 
ment with all deeper ethical writers, had affirmed 
before, that when guided by reason anger is a right 
affection, so the Scripture permits, and not only per- 
mits, but when the right occasion for it has arrived, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 181 

demands it. This all the profounder teachers of the 
Church have allowed ; thus Gregory of Nyssa : 
dyaObv Krfjvos eartv 6 OvfJLOS, orav rov XoyKT/Aov VTTO- 
tyyiov yevijrcu : Augustine (De Civ. Dei, ix. 5) : In 
disciplina nostra non tarn quseritur utrum pius ani- 
mus irascatur, sed quare irascatur. There is a 
" wrath of God," a wrath also of the merciful Son 
of Man (Mark iii. 5), and a wrath which righteous 
men not merely may, but as they are righteous, must 
feel ; nor can there be a surer and sadder token of an 
utterly prostrate moral condition than the not be- 
ing able to be angry with sin and sinners ; see the 
words of Plato (Legg. 731 1) : OvpoeiSr) fjiev XPV Trdvra 
ai'Spa elvat,. K. r. X. 1 St. Paul is not therefore, as so 
many understand him, condescending here to hu- 
man infirmity, and saying, " Your anger shall not 
be imputed to you as a sin, if you put it away be- 
fore nightfall" (see Suicer, Thes. s. v. 0/37*}); but 
rather, " Be ye angry, yet in this anger of yours 
suffer no sinful element to mingle ;" there is that 
which may cleave even to a righteous anger, the 
Trapopyiapos, the irritation, the exasperation (<cxa- 
cerbatio'), which must be dismissed at once; that 
so, being defecated of this impurer element which 

1 "Anger," says Fuller (Holy State, iii. 8), "is one of the sinews 
of the soul; he that wants it hath a maimed mind, and with Jacob 
sinew-shrunk in the hollow of his thigh, must needs halt. Nor is 
it good to converse with such as cannot be angry." 



182 SYNONYMS OF THE 

mingled with it, that only which ought to remain, 
may remain. 



xxxviii. e\a,Lov, pvpov (%p/&> 5 a 

IT has been sometimes denied that in the Old 
Testament there is any distinction between these 
words ; and that on the very insufficient grounds 
that the Septuagint renders ^otfl sometimes by pvpov 
(Prov. xxvii. 9 ; Cant. i. 3 ; Isa. xxxix. 2 ; Am. vi. 6) ; 
though much more frequently, indeed times out of 
number, by eXcuov. But how often in a single w T ord 
of one language are latent two words of another ; 
especially, when that other abounds, as does the 
Greek compared with the Hebrew, in finer distinc- 
tions, in a more subtle notation of meanings ; for 
example, Trapezia and Trapapoki] in the Hebrew 
b^a, and this duplicity of meaning it is the part of 
a well-skilled translator to evoke. JSTay the thing 
itself, the pvpov (= ' unguentum ') so naturally grew 
out of the eXcuov (= ' oleum ' ), having oil for its 
base, with only the superaddition of spice or scent 
or other aromatic ingredients, Clement of Alexan- 
dria (Pcedag. ii. 8) calls it "adulterated oil" (SeSo- 
\a)fj,evov e\aiov ' ), that it would be long in any 

1 Compare what Plutarch says of Lycurgus (Apoth. Lac. 18): 
rb HfV fj.vpov f\a.(TfV, &s TOV c\aiou <p0opay K 



NEW TESTAMENT. 183 

language before the necessity of differencing words 
would be felt. Thus in the Greek itself nvpov is 
not found earlier than Archilochus, who was the 
first to employ it (Athenseus, xv. 37). Doubtless 
there were ointments in Homer's time ; he is satis- 
fied however with 'sweet-smelling oil,' 'roseate oil' 
(euwSe? eXcuov, Od. ii. 339 ; poSoev e\cuov, II. xxiii. 
186), wherewith to express them. 

But that in later times there was a clear distinc- 
tion between the two, and a distinction which ut- 
tered itself in language, is abundantly evident. I 
would only refer in proof to a passage in Xenophon 
(Conv. ii. 3, 4), which turns altogether on the greater 
suitableness of e\aiov for men ; and pvpov for wo- 
men ; these last consequently being better pleased 
that the men should savour of the manly oil than 
of the effeminate ointment (eXalov Se rov ev yv/nva- 
criois OCT/JLIJ /cat irapovaa TjSiwv fj pvpov r yvvaL%\, KOI 
aTrovcra TroOeuvoTepd). And in like manner our 
Lord's rebuke to the discourteous Pharisee, u My 
head with oil thou didst not anoint, but this woman 
hath anointed my feet with ointment " (Luke vii. 
46), would lose all or nearly all its point on any 
other supposition: "Thou withheldest from me," 
He would say, " cheap and ordinary civilities ; while 
she bestowed upon me costly and rare homages ; " 
where Grotius remarks well : Est enim perpetua 
avTi<not,-%ia. Mulier ilia lacrimas impendit pedibus 



184 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Cliristi proluendis : Simon ne aquam quidem. Ilia 
assidua est in pedibus Cliristi osculandis : Simon 
ne uno quidem oris osculo Christum accepit. Ilia 
pretioso unguento non caput tantum sed et pedes 
perfimdit : ille ne caput quidem mero oleo : quod 
perfiinctorise amicitioe fuerat. 



Some have drawn a distinction between the 
verbs uXetyeiv and xpieiv, which, as they make it 
dependent on this between pvpov and e\aiov, may 
deserve to be mentioned here. The dXeifaw, they 
say, is commonly the luxurious, or at any rate, the 
superfluous, anointing with ointment, XP l/LV the 
sanitary anointing with oil. Thus Casaubon (ad 
Athenaeum, xv. 18) : a\,ei$ecr6ai dicebantur potissi- 
mum homines voluptatilus dediti, qui pretiosis 
unguentis caput et maims illinebant ; ^pieadai de 
hominibus ponebatur oleo corpus, sanitatis caused, 
inunguentibus. ~No traces of the observation of 
any such distinction appear in the New Testament ; 
thus compare Mark vi. 13 ; Jam. v. 4, with Mark 
xvi. 1 ; John xi. 2. 

A distinction between the words is maintained 
there, but it is wholly different from this ; namely, 
that aXelfaiv is the common and mundane, XP^ LV 
the sacred and heavenly, word : aheifaiv is used in- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 185 

discriminately of all actual anointings, whether with 
oil or ointment ; while ^pieiv^ no doubt in its con- 
nexion with xpta-Tos, is absolutely restricted to the 
anointing of the Son, by the Father, with the Holy 
Ghost, for the accomplishment of His great office, 
being wholly separated from all secular and com- 
mon uses. Thus, see Luke iv. IS ; Acts iv. 27 ; x. 
38 ; 2 Cor. i. 21 ; Ileb. i. 9 ; the only occasions on 
which xpieiv occurs. The same holds good in the 
Septuagint, where %p/<?, ^pio-^a (cf. 1 John ii. 20, 
27), and %/o/e^, are the constant and ever recurring 
words in respect of all religious and symbolical 
anointings ; aKeifaiv hardly occurring in this sense, 
not oftener, I believe, than at Exod. xl. 13, and 
Numb. iii. 3. 



xxxix. 'Efipaios, 'lou&uo?, 'Io-patj\LTrj<;. 

ALL these titles are used to designate members 
of the elect family, the chosen race ; yet they are 
very capable, as they are very well worthy, of be- 
ing discriminated. 

And first, 'Eftpalo? a name which dates back 
from a period before one, and very long before the 
other, of those brought into comparison with it, 
were, or could have been, in existence (Josephus, 



186 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Antt. i. 6. 4). It is best derived from w, the same 
word as vtrep, 'super;' 'in this title allusion being 
contained to Abraham's immigration into the land 
from the other side of Euphrates ; who was, there- 
fore, in the language of the Phoenician tribes among 
whom he came, " Abram the Hebrew" or 6 irepdr^, 
as it is well given in the Septuagint, Gen. xiv. 13, 
being from beyond (Trepav) the river. Thus Origen, 
In Matt. torn. xi. 5 : f E{3pawt,, omz/69 epp,rjvevovrat, 
Trepan/cot. The name is not one by which the chosen 
people know themselves, but by which others know 
them ; not one which they have taken, but which 
others have imposed on them ; and we find the 
word's use through all the Old Testament entirely 
consistent with this explanation of its rise. In 
every case 'Efipalos is either a title by which for- 
eigners designate the people of God (Gen. xxxix. 
U, 17 ; xli. 12 ; Exod. i. 16, 19 ; 1 Sam. iv. 6 ; xiii. 
19 ; xxix. 3 ; Judith xii. 11) ; or by which they 
designate themselves to foreigners (Gen. xl. 15 ; 
Exod. ii. 7 ; iii. 18 ; v. 3 ; ix. 1 ; Jon. i. 19) ; or by 
which they speak of themselves in tacit opposi- 
tion to other nations (Gen. xliii. 32 ; Deut. xv. 12 ; 
1 Sam. xiii. 3 ; Jer. xxxiv. 9, 14) ; never, that is, be- 
ing used without such an antagonism, either latent 
or expressed. 

When, however, the name Mof&uo? arose, as it 
did in the later periods of Jewish history (the pre- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 187 



cisc time will be presently considered), ' 
was no longer used exactly as hitherto it had been. 
Nothing is more frequent with words than to retire 
into narrower limits, occupying a part only of that 
meaning whereof once they occupied the whole ; 
when, through the coming up of some new term, 
they are no longer needed in all their former ex- 
tent ; and at the same time, through the unfolding 
of some new relation, it is no longer desirable that 
they should retain it. It was exactly thus with 
'E/Spaios. According to the usage of the word in 
the New Testament, the point of view external to 
the nation, which it once always implied, exists no 
longer ; neither is every Jew an 'E/Bpaio? now ; but 
only those who, whether dwelling in Palestine or 
otherwise, have retained the sacred Hebrew tongue 
as their native language; the true complement and 
antithesis to 'Efipalos being 'EXXrjviaTijs, a word 
first occurring in the New Testament, and used to 
designate the Jew who has unlearned his own lan- 
guage, and now speaks Greek, and reads the Scrip- 
tures in the Septuagint version. 

This distinction first appears at Acts vi. 1 ; and is 
probably intended in the two other passages, though 
these are not without their difficulties, where ( E(Bpal- 
o? occurs (2 Cor. xi. 22 ; Phil. iii. 15) ; as well as in 
the superscription, on whosesoever authority it rests, 
of the Epistle to the Hebrews. It is important to 



1S8 SYNONYMS OF THE 

keep in mind that in language, not in place of habi- 
tation, lay the point of difference between the ' He- 
brew ' and the ' Hellenist.' He was a ' Hebrew,' 
wherever domiciled, who retained the nse of the 
language of his fathers. Thus Paul, though settled 
in Tarsus, a Greek city in Asia Minor, can affirm 
of himself that he was a i Hebrew,' and of ' He- 
brew' parents (Phil. iii. 15), though it is certainly 
possible that he may mean by these assertions no 
more than in a general way to set an emphasis on 
his Judaism. Doubtless the greater number of the 
' Hebrews ' in this sense were resident in Palestine ; 
yet still it was not this fact, but their language 
which constituted them such. 

At the same time it will be good to keep in mind, 
that this distinction and opposition of ( E/3paios to 
c E\\ijvia-Tij<>, as a distinction within the nation, and 
not of that nation with other nations, which is clear 
at Acts vi. l r and probably is intended at Phil. iii. 
15 ; 2 Cor. xi. 22, is hardly, if at all, recognized by 
later Christian writers, not at all by Jewish and 
heathen. With them ( E/3paio<; is simply equivalent 
to T0L>8a?o9 : thus see Plutarch, Sym/p. iv. 6 ; Pau- 
sanias, v. 7. 3 ; x. 12. 5 ; while Eusebius, speaking 
of Philo, an Alexandrian Jew, who had been but 
once in his life at Jerusalem, and who wrote exclu- 
sively in Greek, expresses himself in this language 
(Hist. Eccl. ii. 4) : TO pev ovv yeVo? aveicaOev r E/3palos 



NEW TESTAMENT. 189 

rjv : and Clement of Alexandria, as quoted by Euse- 
bius (vi. 14), makes continually the antithesis to 
'Efipaiot, not *E\\rjvL(7Tal, but "-EAX^e? and eOvrj. 
Theodoret (Opp. vol. ii. p. 1246) styles the Greek- 
writing historian, Josephus, o-wyypafavs 'Efipaios : 
cf. Origen, Ep. ad Afric. 5. As little in Josephus 
himself, or in Philo, do any traces exist of the New 
Testament distinction between ' EXXrjvio-TTJ? and 
Only this much of it is recognised, that 
, though otherwise a much rarer word than 
, is always employed when it is intended to 
designate the people on the side of their language ; 
a rule which Jewish, heathen, and Christian writers 
alike consent to observe, and which still survives in 
the fact, that we speak to the present day of the 
Jewish nation, but of the Hebrew tongue. 

This name 'lou&uo? is of much later origin. It 
does not carry us back to the very cradle of the na- 
tiuii, and to the day when the father of the faithful 
passed over the river, and entered on the promised 
land ; but keeps rather a lasting record of the pcri< ><1 
of national disruption and decline. It arose, and 
could only have arisen, with the separation of the 
tribes. Then, inasmuch as the ten tribes, though 
with the worst right, assumed Israel as a title to 
themselves, the two drew their designation from the 
chiefest of them, and of Judah came the name 
o 01 * 'lovSalot,. Josephus, as far as I have ob- 



190 SYNONYMS OF THE 

served, never employs it in telling the earlier his- 
tory of his people. The first occasion of its use by 
him is, I believe, at Antt. x. 10. 1, and in reference 
to Daniel and his young companions. Here, how- 
ever, if his own account of the upcoming of the 
name were correct, he must have used it by antici- 
pation his statement being that it first arose after 
the return from Babylon, and out of the fact that 
the earliest colony of those who returned were of 
that tribe (A.ntt. xi. 5. 7) : eKXijOqa-av Se TO Svofia 
ef 975 rjpepas dve/3r]o-av etc JBa/3i>Xwi/o9, CLTTO TT}? 'lovBa 



avroi re /ca 7] %&>pa r?? Trpoo-rjyopas avTrjs 
fiov. But in this he is clearly in error. We meet 
'lovSaloi, in books anterior to the Captivity, used in 
them as a designation of those who pertained to the 
smaller section of the tribes, the kingdom of Judah 
(2 Kin. xvi. 6 ; Jer. xxxii. 12 ; xxxiv. 9 ; xxxviii. 
19) ; and not first in Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther ; 
however in these, and especially in the last, it may 
be of far more frequent occurrence. 

It is not hard to perceive how the name extend- 
ed to the whole nation. When the ten tribes were 
carried into Assyria, and disappeared from the 
world's stage, that smaller section which remained 
henceforth represented the whole nation ; and thus 
it was only natural that 'IouSao? should express, as 
it now came to do, not one of the kingdom of Judah 



NEW TESTAMENT. 191 

as distinguished from that of Israel, but any member 
of the nation, a Jew in this wider sense, as opposed 
to a Gentile. In fact, the word TouSato? underwent 
a process exactly the reverse of that which 'Effpalo? 
had undergone. For 'E/fyaZo?, belonging first to 
the whole nation, came afterwards to belong only 
to a part ; while 'lou&uo?, designating at first only 
the member of a part, ended by designating the 
whole. It now, in its later, like 'E/3/acuo? in its ear- 
lier, stage of meaning, was a title with which the 
descendant of Abraham designated himself, when 
lie would bring out the national distinction between 
himself and other people (Rom. ii. 9, 10) ; thus 
"Jew and Gentile;' never 'Israelite and Gentile :' 
or which others used about him, when they had in 
view this same fact ; for example, the Eastern Wise 
Men inquire, " Where is lie that is born King of 
the Jews?" (Matt. ii. 2), testifying by the form of 
this question, that they were themselves Gentiles, 
for they would certainly have asked for the King 
of Israel, could they have claimed any nearer part 
or share in Him ; as, again, the Roman soldiers and 
the Roman governor give to Jesus the mocking title, 
" King of the Jeios " (Matt, xxvii. 29, 37), but his 
own countrymen, the high priests, challenge Him 
to prove by coming down from the cross that He is 
"King of Israel" (Matt, xxvii. 42). 

For indeed the absolute name, that which ex- 



192 SYNONYMS OF THE 

pressed the whole dignity and glory of a member 
of the theocratic nation, of the people in peculiar 
covenant with God, was 'lerpa^X/r???. It is a title 
of unfreqnent occurrence in the Septuagint, but 
often used by Josephus in his earlier history, as 
convertible with *E{3paios (Antt. i. 9. 1, 2) ; in the 
middle period of it to designate a member of the 
ten tribes (viii. 8. 3 ; ix. 14. 1) ; and toward the end 
as equivalent to Tou&uo? (xi. v. 4r). It is only in its 
relation of likeness and difference to this last that 
we have to consider it here. It was the Jews' badge 
and title of honour. To be descendants of Abra- 
ham, this honour they must share with Ishmaelite, 
and Edomite ; but none except themselves were the 
seed of Jacob, such as in this name of Israelite they 
were declared to be : nor this only, but more hon- 
ourably still, their descent was herein traced up to 
him, not as he was Jacob, but as he w r as Israel, 
who as a Prince had had power with God and with 
men, and had prevailed (Gen. xxxii. 28). That this 
title w r as accounted the noblest, we have ample 
proof. Thus, when the ten tribes threw off their 
allegiance to the house of David, they claimed in 
their pride and pretension the name of " the king- 
dom of Israel " for the new kingdom which they 
set up the kingdom, as the name was intended to 
imply, in which the line of the promises, the true 
succession of the early patriarchs, ran. So, too, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 193 

there is no nobler title with which our Lord can 
adorn Uathanael than that of " an Israelite indeed " 
(John i. 47), one in whom all which that name in- 
volved, might be indeed found. And when Peter, 
and again when Paul, would obtain a hearing from 
the men of their nation, when therefore they address 
them with the name most welcome to their ears, it 
is still avSpes ^IcrparfKlrai, (Acts ii. 22 ; iii. 12 ; xiii. 
16 ; cf. Rom. ix. 4 ; Phil. iii. 5 ; 2 Cor. xii. 29) ; 
with which they seek to acquire their good-will. 

When, then, we limit ourselves to the employ- 
ment in the New Testament of these three words, 
we may say that 'Eppaios is a Hebrew-speaking, 
as contrasted with Greek-speaking, or Hellenizing, 
Jew ; what in our Version we have well called a 
i Grecian,' as distinguished from "EXXyv, a veritable 
* Greek ' or other Gentile ; 'lou&uo? is a Jew in his 
national distinction from a Gentile ; while 'laparjXi- 
T???, the augustest title of all, is a Jew as he is a 
member of the theocracy, and thus an heir of the 
promises. In the first is predominantly noted his 
language, in the second his nationality ('louSai'cr/zo?, 
Josephus, De Mace. 4; Gal. i. 13 ; 'lofScufe^, Gal. 
ii. 14), in the third his religious privileges, and 
glorious vocation. 



194: SYNONYMS OF THE 



xl. alreco, epcordco. 

THESE words are often rendered by the authors 
of our Yersion, as though there was no difference 
between them ; nor can any fault be found with 
their rendering, in numerous instances, alrelv and 
epwrav alike by our English < to ask.' Still it must 
be admitted that there are occasions on which they 
have a little marred the perspicuity of the original 
by not varying their word, where the original has 
varied its own. Thus it is, for example, at John 
xvi. 23, where the obliteration of the distinction 
between alrelv and epwrav suggests very often a 
wrong interpretation of the verse, as though its 
two clauses were in nearer connexion, and more 
direct antithesis, than in fact they are, being in- 
deed in none. The words as they stand in our 
Yersion are as follows: "In that day ye shall asJv 
me nothing [e'yu-e OVK epajnjo-ere ovSev]. Yerily, 
verily, I say unto you, Whatsoever ye shall ask 
[oaa av a IT rj eyre] the Father in my name, He 
will give it you." Now any attentive student of 
the original will acknowledge, that " ye shall ask " 
of the first half of the verse has nothing to do with 
" ye shall ask " of the second ; that in the first 
Christ is referring back to the Jj0c\ov avrbv epcorav 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



195 



of ver. 19 ; to the questions which they would fain 
have asked Him, but did not venture : " In that 
day," He would say, " the day of my seeing you 
again, I will by the Spirit so teach you all things, 
that ye shall be no longer perplexed, no longer 
wishing to ask Me questions, which yet you dare 
not put." Thus Lampe well : ISTova est promissio 
de plenissima cognitionis luce, qua convenienter 
ceconomia3 I^ovi Testament! collustrandi essent. 
Nam sicut quasstio supponit inscitiam, ita qui nihil 
amplius qugerit abunde se edoctum existimat, et in 
doctrina plene exposita ac intellecta acquiescit. 
There is not in the verse a contrast drawn between 
asking the Son, which shall cease, and asking the 
Father, which shall begin ; but the first half of the 
verse closes the declaration of one. blessing, that 
they shall be so taught by the Spirit as to have 
nothing further to inquire ; the second half of the 
verse begins the declaration of altogether a new 
blessing, that whatever they ask from the Father 
in the Son's name, He will give it them. Yet wh> 
will affirm that this is the impression which the 
English text conveys to his mind ? 

The distinction between the words is this : 
atreo), the Latin 'peto,' is more submissive and 
suppliant, indeed the constant word by which is 
expressed the seeking of the inferior from the supe- 
rior (Acts xii. 20); of the beggar from him that 



196 SYNONYMS OF THE 

should give alms (Acts iii. 2) ; of the child from 
the parent (Matt. vii. 9 ; Luke xi. 11 ; Lam. iv. 4) ; 
of the subject from the ruler (Ezra viii. 22) ; of man 
from God (1 Kin. iii. 11 ; Matt. vii. 7 ; Jam. i. 5 ; 
1 John iii. 22 ; cf. Plato, Eutliypli. 14 : ev^eadaL 
[eanv] alrelv rov$ 6eov<s). 'Epcordco^ on the other 
hand, is the Latin < rogo ; ' or sometimes (as John 
xvi. 23 ; cf. Gen. xliv. 19) l interrogo,' which in- 
deed is the only meaning that in classical Greek it 
has ; never there meaning ' to ask,' but only < to in 
terrogate,' or ' to inquire.' Like the Latin ' rogo,' l 
it implies on the part of the asker a certain equal- 
ity, as of king with king (Luke xiv. 32), or, if not 
equality, familiarity with him from whom the gift 
or favour is sought, which lends authority to the 
request. 

Thus it is very noticeable, and witnesses for the 
remarkable accuracy in the employment of words, 
and in the record of that employment, which pre- 
vails throughout the New Testament, that our Lord 
never uses alrelv or alreia-Qai, of Himself, in respect 
of that which He seeks from God ; his is not the 
petition of the creature to the Creator, but the re- 
quest of the Son to the Father. The consciousness 
of his equal dignity speaks out in this, that often as 

i Thus Cicero (Plane, x. 25) : Neque enim ego sic rogabam, ut 
pctere viderer, quia fumiliaris esset rneus. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 197 

Ho asks, or declares that He will ask, anything of 
the Father, it is always e/owrw, e/wn?0-a>, an asking, 
that is, as upon equal terms (John xiv. 16 ; xvi. 26 ; 
xvii. 9, 15, 20), never alrco or alr^aa). Martha, on 
the contrary, plainly reveals her poor unworthy 
notions of his person, and in fact declares that she 
sees in Him no more than a prophet, ascribing the 
alrelaOat, to Him, which He never ascribes to Him- 
self: o<ra av airway rov Seov, So><m CTOL o @eo<? 
(John xi. 22): on which verse Bengel has these 
observations : Jesus, de se rogante loquens ISeijOyv 
dicit (Luc. xxii. 32), et e/wn/ow, et nunquam alrov- 
fiai. K"on Greece locuta est Martha, sed tamen 
Johannes exprimit improprium ejus sermouem, 
quern Dominus benigne tulit : nam alrcla-Oai vide- 
tur verbum esse minus dignum ; cf. his note on 
1 John v. 16. 

It will follow from what has been said that the 
po)rav, being thus proper for Christ, inasmuch as 
it has authority in it, is not proper for us ; and in 
no single instance is it used in the Xew Testament 
to express the prayer of man to God, of the creature 
to the Creator. The only passage where it might 
seem to be so used, which therefore might be ad- 
duced as contradicting this assertion, is 1 John v. 
16 ; which yet constitutes no true exception to the 
rule, but rather in its change from alrtjo-eL of the 
earlier clause of the verse, a strong confirmation of 



198 SYNONYMS OF THE 

it. " If any man see his brother sin a sin which is 
not unto death, he shall ask [cuT^o-ei], and He 
shall give him life for them that sin not unto death. 
There is a sin unto death. I do not say that he 
shall pray \Vva eptorrjcry] for it;" the Christian 
intercessor for his brethren, St. John declares, shall 
not assume the authority which would be implied 
in making request for a sinner who had sinned the 
sin unto death (cf. Mark iii. 29 ; 1 Sam. xv. 35 ; 
xvi. 1), whatever this may be, that it might be for- 
given to him. 



xli. avaTravats, 

OUR Version renders both these words by 'rest; ' 
avcLTravcns at Matt. xi. 28 ; xii. 45 ; and avevis at 
2 Cor. ii. 13 ; vii. 5 ; 2 Thess. i. 7. ~No one can 
object to this; while yet on examination we at 
once perceive that the words repose on different 
images, and contemplate this ' rest ' from, different 
points of view. J Ava7ravo-is (from avairavw] implies 
the pause or cessation from labour ; it is the con- 
stant word in the Septuagint for the rest of the Sab- 
bath ; thus Exod. xvi. 23 ; xxxi. 15 ; xxxv. 2, and 
often : avecns (from avir^i) implies the relaxing or 
letting down of chords or strings which have before 



NEW TESTAMENT. 199 

been strained or drawn tight, the exact and literal 
antithesis to it being eiriraa-^ (from eVtretVa)) : thus 
Plato (Pol. i. 349 <?) : ev rfj emrdaei Kal dvevei ruv 
XopSwv : and Plutarch (De Lib. Ed. 13) : ra roa 
Kal ras \vpas dviefjiev, f iva emrelvai SwyOoofjiev : and 
again (Lye. 29) : OVK aveais TJV, aXX' erriracns rr)? 
TroXtreta?. Other quotations illustrative of the 
word are the following ; this from Josephus (Antt. 
iii. 12. 3), where he says of Moses that in the jubi- 
lee year he gave civea-iv rfj yfj diro re dporpov Kal 
</>uTta? : but the most instructive of all is in Plu- 
tarch's treatise^ DC, Lib. Ed. 13 : Soreov ovv 
rraicrlv avairvoi^v rwv avve^v TTOVCO 
OT6 Tra? o /Si'o? r)/ji(i)v 6t9 aveaw Kal cnrovSrjv 
rai" Kal Sia rovro ou JJLOVOV eyprjyopais, d\\a Kal 
VTTVOS evpedrf ovSe TroXe/^o?, a\\a Kal eiprjvr) ovSe 
Xijj,u)V, a\\a Kal euSla' ovSe evepyol rrpa^eis^ d\\a 
Kal eopral. .... KadoXov &e aw^erai, awfta /JLCV, 
IvSeia Kal 7T\rjpct)o-i ^v^rj Se, aveaet, Kal rrovw. 
The opposition between aVeo-t? and ajrovBrj whicli 
occurs in this quotation, is found also in Plato 
(Legg. iv. 721 a) ; while elsewhere in Plutarch 
(^L /lll p' v - ^)) avea-i's is set over against arevo^wpia^ 
as a dwelling at large, instead of in a narrow and 
strait room. 

When thus we present to ourselves the precise 
significance of aveais, we cannot fail to note how 
excellently chosen the word is at Acts xxiv. 23 ; 



200 SYNONYMS OF THE 

where e%e/ re aveaiv, we translate, "and let him 
have liberty" It would be difficult to find a better 
word, yet ' liberty' does not exactly express St. 
Luke's intention : Felix, taking now a more favour- 
able view of Paul's case, commands the centurion 
who had him in charge, as the context abundantly 
shows, to relax for the future the strictness of his 
imprisonment, and it is this exactly which 
implies. 

The distinction, then, between.it and ava 
is obvious. When our Lord promises avaTravcn,? to 
as many as labour and are heavy laden, if only 
they will come to Him (Matt. xi. 28, 29), the prom- 
ise is, that they shall cease from their toils ; that 
they shall no longer weary themselves for very 
vanity ; when his Apostle expresses his confidence 
that the Thessalonians, troubled now, should yet 
find ai/eo-t? in the day of Christ (2 Thess. i. 7), that 
which he anticipates for them is not so much rest 
from labour, as a relaxing of the strings of endur- 
ance, now so tightly drawn, and, as it were, strained 
to the uttermost. It is true that this promise and 
that are not at their centre two, but one ; yet for 
all this they present the blessedness which Christ 
will impart to his own under different aspects, and 
by help of different images ; and each word has 
its own peculiar fitness in the place where it is 
employed. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



201 



xlii. TaTrewocfrpoa-vvrj. Trpaorr)?. 

THE very work for which Christ's Gospel came 
into the world was no other than to cast down the 
mighty from their seat, and to exalt the humble and 
meek ; it was then only in accordance with this its 
task and mission that it should dethrone the hea- 
then virtue /jLeya\o^wxia, and set up the despised 
Ta7Tivo<f)pocnji>r) in its room, stripping that of the 
honour which hitherto it had unjustly assumed, de- 
livering this from the dishonour which as unjustly 
had hitherto been its portion. Indeed the very 
word raTreLvo^poavvrj is, I believe, itself a birth of 
the Gospel ; I am not aware of any Greek writer 
who employed it before the Christian sera, or, apart 
from the influence of Christian writings, after. Plu- 
tarch has got as far as Ta-jreivofypow (Dd Alex, T "///. 
ii. 4), which however he employs in an ill sense ; 
and the use which heathen writers make of TaTretvos, 
jaTreivorr)?, and other words of this family, shows 
plainly in what sense they would have employed 
Ta7reivo(j)poavvrj, had they thought it good to allow 
the word. For indeed the instances in which ra- 
Treivos is used in any other than an evil sense, and 
to signify aught else than that which is low, slavish, 
and mean-spirited, are few and altogether excep- 
9* 



202 SYNONYMS OF THE 

tional. Thus it is joined with ave\ev9epos (Plato, 
Legg. iv. 744 c) ; with ayevvrjs (Lucian, J)e Calurti. 
24) ; with SovX^o?, and with other words of this 
stamp. 

Still these exceptional cases are more numerous 
than some will allow. Such may be found in Plato, 
Legg. iv. 716 a, where raTreivos is linked with /ce/coa-- 
fjLr}fjLevo<i, as in Demosthenes we have Xoyot (jberpioi 
Kal Tcnreivoi \ and see for its worthier use a very 
grand passage in Plutarch, De Prof, in Virt. 10. 
Combined with these prophetic intimations of the 
honour which should one day be rendered even to 
the very words which have to do with humility, it 
is very interesting to note that Aristotle himself has 
a vindication, and it only needs to receive its due 
extension to be a complete one, of the Christian 
TaTreivcxfrpoa-vvT) (Ethic. JSFic. iv. 3). Having con- 
fessed how hard it is for a man rfi akrjOeia 
^frv^ov elvai for he will allow no f^eja 
which does not rest on corresponding realities of 
goodness, and his f^ejaXo-^rv^os is one i^ejaXwv avrov 
a%iwV) agios &v he goes on to observe, though 
merely by the way and little conscious how far his 
words reached, that to think humbly of oneself, 
where that humble estimate is the true one, cannot 
be imputed to any as a culpable littleness of spirit ; 
it is rather the true o-axfrpocrvvr) (6 jap /Ai/cpwv agios, 
Kal TOVTCOV dgiwv eavTov, a-co^pcDv). But if this be so 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



203 



(and who will deny it ? ) then, seeing that for every 
man the humble estimate of himself is the true one, 
he has herein unconsciously vindicated the Taireivo- 
typoauvT] as a grace which should be every man's ; 
for that which Aristotle, even by the light of ethi- 
cal philosophy, confessed to be a ^aXe-Tro^, namely 
rfj a\r]6eia /-teyaXo^ir^oz' elvai,, the Christian, con- 
vinced by the Spirit of God, knows to be an abvva- 
TOV. Such is the Christian TaTreivofypoavvri, no self- 
made grace, and Chrysostom is in fact bringing in 
pride again under the disguise of humility, when 
he characterises it as a making of ourselves small, 
?/7/' n- we are great (TaTreivocppocrvvrj TOVTO eanv, orav 
rt<? yLteya? & v, eavrov Tcnreivoi : and lie repeats this 
often ; see Suicer, Thes. s. v.) ; it is rather the es- 
teeming of ourselves small, inasmuch as we are so ; 
the thinking truly, and because truly, therefore 
lowlily, of oursel 1 . 

But it may be objected, if this be the Christian 
Taireivofypoavvr], if it springs out of and rests on the 
sense and the confession of sin, how does this agree 
with the fact that our Lord could lay claim to this 
grace and say, " I am meek and lowly in heart " 
(rcLTreivos 777 /capSia, Matt. xi. 29) ? The answer is, 
that for the shiner raTreivo^poavi^ involves the 
confession of sin, for it involves the confession of 
his true condition ; while yet for the unfallen crea- 
ture the grace itself as truly exists, involving for 



204: SYNONYMS OF THE 

such the acknowledgment not of sinfulness, which 
would be untrue, but of creatureliness, of absolute 
dependence, of having nothing, but receiving all 
things of God. Thus this grace belongs to the high- 
est angel before the throne, being as he is a crea- 
ture, yea even to the Lord of Glory Himself. In 
his human nature lie must be the pattern of all 
humility, of all creaturely dependence; nor is it 
otherwise than as a man that Christ thus claims to 
be rcnreivos ; for it will be observed that He does 
not affirm Himself Taireivos TW Trvev/Aari (contrite 
sinners are such, Ps. xxiii. 19), any more than He 
could speak of Himself as TTTOJ^O? r&> Tr^eu/^art, his 
Trvevfjia being divine ; but He is Tcnreivos rfj /cap- 
8ia: his earthly life was a constant living on the 
fulness of His Father's love ; He continually took 
the place which beseems the creature in the pres- 
ence of its Creator. 

Let us seek now to put this word in its relation 
with TrpaoTT)?. The Gospel of Christ did not to so 
great an extent rehabilitate vrpaor^? as it had done 
TaTrewocfrpoavvri, and this, because the word did not 
need rehabilitation in the same degree. ITpaor?/? 
did not require to be turned from a bad sense to a 
good, but only to be lifted up from a lower good to 
a higher.. This indeed it did need; for no one 
can read Aristotle's account of the Trpdos and of 
(Ethic. Nic. iv. 5), mentally comparing this 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



205 



with the meaning which we attach to the words, 
and not feel that revelation has given to them a 
depth, a richness, a fulness of significance which 
they were very far from possessing before. The 
great moralist of Greece set the Trpaorw as the mid- 
dle virtue between the opyiXorijs and the dopyrja-la, 
with however so much leaning to this last that it 
might very easily run into this defect ; and he finds 
the Trpaor?/? worthy of praise, more because by it a 
man retains his own equanimity and composure 
(the word is associated by Plutarch, De Frat. Am. 
18, with fj,6Tpio7rd0La), than from any nobler reason. 
Neither does Plutarch's own pretty little essay, Tlepl 
dopyrjcTLas, rise anywhere to a higher pitch than this, 
though we might perhaps have expected something 
higher from him. The word is opposed by Plato 
to dypioTTjs (Symp. 197 d) ; by Aristotle to %aXe7ro- 
T??? (Ilist. Anim. ix. 1); by Plutarch to airorofjiia 
(De Lib. Ed. 18) ; all indications of a somewhat su- 
perficial view of its meaning. 

Those Christian expositors who will not allow 
for the new forces at work in sacred Greek, who 
would fain limit, for instance, the vrpao? of the New 
Testament to such a sense as the word, when em- 
ployed by the best classical writers, would have 
borne, will deprive themselves and those who accept 
their interpretation of very much of the deeper 
meaning in Scripture ; on which subject, and with 



206 SYNONYMS OF THE 

reference to this very word, see some excellent ob- 
servations by F. Spanheim, Dubia Evangelica, vol. 
iii. p. 398. The Scriptural Trpaor^ is not in a man's 
outward behaviour only ; nor yet in his relations to 
his fellow-men ; as little in his mere natural dispo- 
sition. Rather is it an inwrought grace of the soul ; 
and the exercises of it are first and chiefly towards 
God (Matt. xi. 29 ; Jam. i. 21). It expresses that 
temper of spirit in which we accept his dealings 
with us without disputing and resisting ; and it is 
closely linked with the raTreivofypocrvvri, and follows 
close upon it (Eph. iv. 2 ; Col. iii. 12), because it is 
only the humble heart which is also the meek ; and 
which, as such, does not fight against God, and 
more or less struggle and contend with Him. 

This meekness however, which is first a meek- 
ness in respect of God, is also such in the face of 
men, even of evil men, out of the thought that these, 
with the insults and injuries which they may inflict, 
are permitted and used by Him for the chastening 
and purifying of his people. This was the root of 
David's vrpaoTT??, when on occasion of his flight 
from Absalom Shhnei cursed and flung stones at 
him the thought, namely, that the Lord had bid- 
den him (2 Sam. xvi. 11), that it was just for him to 
suffer these tilings, however unjust it might be for 
the other to inflict them ; and out of like convic- 
tions all true Christian TrpaoTtjs must spring. He 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



207 



that is meek indeed will know himself a sinner 
among sinners ; or, if in one case He could not know 
Himself such, yet bearing a sinner's doom ; and 
this will teacli him to endure meekly the provoca- 
tions with which they may provoke him, not to 
withdraw himself from the burdens which their sin 
may impose upon him (Gal. vi. 1 ; 2 Tim. ii. 25 ; 
Tit. iii. 2). 

The Trpaortj^ then, if it is to be more than mere 
gentleness of manner, if it is to be the Christian 
grace of meekness of spirit, must rest on deeper 
foundations than its own, on those namely which 
the TaTreivofypocrvvr] has laid for it, and it can only 
continue, while it continues to rest on these. It is 
a grace in advance of raTrewo^poavvii, not as being 
more precious than it, but as presupposing, and as 
unable to exist without it. 



xliii. 



ewe/ceia. 



Ta7TLvo(f)po(7vi>rj and eTrieifceia are in their mean- 
ings too far apart to be fit objects of synonymous 
discrimination ; but Trpao-n;?, which stands between 
them, holds on to them both. Its points of contact 
with the former have just been considered ; and for 
this purpose its own exact force was sought to be 



208 SYNONYMS OF THE 

seized. Without going over this ground anew, we 
may now consider its relation to the latter. Of 
ernei/ceia, it is not too much to say that the mere 
existence of such a word is itself a signal evidence of 
the high development of ethics among the Greeks. ' 
Derived from elW, eoiica, * cedo,' it means properly 
that yieldingness which recognises the impossibility 
which formal law will be in, of anticipating and 
providing for all those cases that w r ill emerge and 
present themselves to it for their decision ; which, 
with this, recognises the danger that ever waits 
upon legal rights, lest they should be pushed into 
moral wrongs, lest the ' summum jus ' should prac- 
tically prove the 'summa injuria;' which therefore 
urges not its own rights to the uttermost, but going 
back in part or in the whole from these, rectifies 
and redresses the injustices of justice. 2 It is in this 
way more truly just than strict justice would have 
been ; SUaiov KOI (Beknov rti/o? Si/calov, as Aristotle 

1 No Latin word exactly and adequately renders it; 'dementia ' 
sets forth one side of it, 'cequitas' another, and perhaps 'modestia' 
(by which the Vulgate translates it, 2 Cor. x. 1) a third; but the 
word is wanting which should set forth all these excellences re- 
conciled in a single and a higher one. 

5 This aspect of eirieineia must never be lost sight of. Seneca 
(De Clem. ii. 7) well brings it out: Nihil ex his facit, tanquam 
justo minus fecerit, sed tanquam id quod constituit, justissimum 
sit; and Aquinas: Dhninutiva est poenarum, secundum 
rectam ; quando scilicet oportet, et in quibus oportet. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



209 



expresses it (Ethic. Nic. v. 10. 6) ; being indeed, 
again to use liis words, iTravopOwpa vo^ov^ y e\\e[- 
Tret Sid TO fcaQoXov : l and he sets the a/cpt/SoSiWio?, 
the man who stands up for the utmost tittle of his 
rights, over against the eVta/o}?. Plato defines it 
(JDff. 412 5), Si/caicov KOI av/JifapovTcov eXdrrwcris. 

The archetype and pattern of this grace is to 
be found in God. All his goings back from the 
strictness of his rights as against men ; all his 
allowing of their imperfect righteousness, and giv- 
ing of a value to that which, rigidly estimated, 
would have none ; all his refusing to exact extreme 
penalties (Wisd. xii. IS ; 2 Mace. x. 4 ; Ps. Ixxxv. 
5 : OTL cru, Kvpie, ^p^o-ro? /cal eTrietfcrjs KOI iro\vi- 
Xeo? : cf. Plutarch, Coriol. 24 ; Pericles, 39 ; Ccesar, 
57) ; all his remembering whereof we are made, 
and measuring his dealing with us thereby; we 
may contemplate as eTrtei/cei.a upon his part ; as it 
demands the same, one toward another, upon ours. 
The greatly forgiven servant in the parable (Matt, 
xviii. 23) had known the ernei/ceia of his lord and 

1 Daniel, a considerable poet, but a far greater thinker, has in 
a poem addressed to Lord Chancellor Egerton a very noble passage, 
which ma}- be regarded as an expansion of these words; indeed it 
would not be too much to say that the whole poem is written iu 
honour of eVtej/ceia or ' equity,' as being 

"the soul of law, 
The life of justice, and the spirit of right." 



210 SYNONYMS OF THE 

king ; the same therefore was justly expected from 
him. The word is often joined with (friX-avOpcoTria 
(Polybius, v. 10. 1 ; Philo, De Vit. Mos. i. 36 ; 
2 Mace. ix. 27) ; with ^a^oQv^la (Clemens Rom. 
1 Ep. 13) ; and, besides the passage in the E"ew 
Testament (2 Cor. x. 1), often with Trpaor^ : as by 
Plutarch, Pericles, 39 ; GcBsar, 57 ; cf. Pyrrh. 23 ; 
De Prof. Virt. 9. 

The distinction existing between these two, 
eVte/Keta and Trpaor^, Estius, on 2 Cor. x. 1, seizes 
in part, although he does not exhaust it, saying : 
Mansuetudo [Trpaor^] magis ad animum, enW/eaa 
vero magis ad exteriorem conversationem pertinet ; 
cf. Bengel : Trpaorrj^ virtus magis absoluta, eirteuceta 
magis refertur ad alios. Aquinas too has a fine 
and subtle discussion on the relations of likeness 
and difference between the graces which these 
words severally denote (Summ. Tlieol, 2" 2", gu. 
157): Utrum dementia et Mansuetudo sint peni- 
tus idem. Among other marks of difference he 
especially urges these two ; the first that in eVtet/ceta 
there is always the condescension of a superior to 
an inferior, while in Trpaor^ nothing of the kind is 
necessarily implied : dementia est lenitas supe- 
rioris adversus inferiorem ; mansuetudo non solum 
est superioris ad inferiorem, sed cujuslibet ad quem- 
libet ; and the second, that which has been already 
brought forward, that the one grace is more pas- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 211 

sive, the other more active, or at least that the 
seat of the irpaor^ is in the inner spirit, while the 
7TLLK6La must needs embody itself in outward acts : 
Differunt ab invicem in quantum dementia est 
moderativa exterioris punitionis, mansuetudo pro- 
prie diminuit passionem me. 



Xliv. - tfXe7TT?79, 



and X^CTTJJ? occur together John x. 1, 
8 ; l cf. Obad. 5 ; Plato, Pol. i. 351 c ; and their 
meanings coincide so for that the one and the other 
alike appropriate what is not theirs, but the /eXe-Trr^? 
by fraud and in secret (Matt. xxiv. 43; John xii. G; 
cf. Exod. xxii. 2 ; Jer. ii. 26) ; the X^o-rr;? by vio- 
lence and openly ('2 Cor. xi. 26; cf. Ezek. xxii. 9; 
Jer. vii. 11; Plutarch, De Super. 3 : ov fyofSclrai 
\r)o-ra$ 6 ol/covpwv) ; the one is the ' thief and steal >, 
the other the 'robber' and plunders, as his name, 
from \rjfc or \eta (as our own ' robber,' from ' raub,' 
booty), sufficiently declares. They are severally 
the ' fur ' and ' latro ' of the Latin. Our translators 

1 They do not constitute there a tautology or rhetorical ampli- 
fication ; but as Grotras well gives their several meanings: Fur 
[KACTTTTJS] quia venit ut rapiat alienum; latro [A77<rnfc] quia ut 
occidat, ver. 10. 



212 SYNONYMS OF THE 



have always rendered KXeTrrrj? by 'thief;' it would 
have been well, if they had with the same consist- 
ency rendered Xyo-rijs by ' robber ; ' but, while they 
have done so in some places, in more they have 
not, rendering it also by ' thief/ and thus effacing 
the distinction between the words. 

We cannot indeed charge them with any over- 
sight here, as we might those who at the present 
day should render \yo-rrjs by ' thief.' Passages out 
of number in our Elizabethian literature make it 
abundantly clear that there was in their day no 
such strong distinction between 'thief 'and ' rob- 
ber ' as now exists. Thus Falstaff and his company, 
who with open violence rob the king's treasure on 
the king's highway, are ' thieves ' throughout Shak- 
speare's Henry IV. Still there are several places 
in our Version, where one cannot but regret that 
we do not read 'robbers' rather than 'thieves.' 
Thus Matt. xxi. 13: "My house shall be called 
the house of prayer, but ye have made it a den of 
thieves ; " so we read it ; but it is ' robbers ' and not 
' thieves ' that have dens or caves. Again, Matt. 
xxvi. 55 : " Are ye come out as against a thief 
with swords and staves for to take me ? " but it 
would be against some bold and violent robber 
that a party armed with swords and clubs would 
issue forth, not against a lurking thief. The poor 
traveller in the parable (Luke x. 30) fell not among 



NEW TESTAMENT. 213 

4 thieves,' but among ' robbers;'' bloody and vio- 
lent men, as by their treatment of him they plainly 
declared. 

No passage however has suffered so seriously 
from this confounding of l thief and l robber ' as 
the history of him, whom we are used to call < the 
penitent thief;' the anterior moral condition of 
whom is probably very much obscured for us, and 
set to a great extent in a wrong light, by the asso- 
ciations which naturally accompany this name. It 
is true that in St. Luke's account of the two that 
are crucified with Jesus, the one obdurate, the other 
penitent, the word X^O-T??? does not occur any more 
than K\67TTr)$ : they are styled generally tcafcovpyoi,, 
6 malefactors ; ' and only from the earlier Evangel- 
ists their more special designation as \ya-Tat has 
been drawn. In all probability they both belonged 
to the band of Barabbas, who for murder and in- 
surrection had been cast with his fellow insurgents 
into prison (Mark xv. 7). lie too was a \ycmjs 
(John xviii. -iO), and yet no common malefactor, on. 
the contrary c a notable prisoner' (Seoyuo? eV/cr^o?, 
Matt, xxvii. 16). Now when we consider the en- 
thusiasm of the Jewish populace on his behalf, and 
combine this with the fact that he had been cast 
into prison for an unsuccessful insurrection, keep- 
ing in mind too the condition of the Jews at this 
period, with false Christs, false deliverers, every 



214: SYNONYMS OF THE 

day starting up, we can hardly doubt that Barab- 
bas was one of those stormy zealots, who were ever- 
more raising anew the standard of resistance against 
the Roman domination ; flattering and feeding the 
insane hopes of their countrymen, that they should 
yet break the Roman yoke from off their necks. 
These men, when hard pressed, would betake them- 
selves to the mountains, and there live by plunder, 
if possible, by that of their enemies, if not, by 
that of any within their reach. The history of 
Dolcino's ' Apostolicals,' of the Camisards in the 
Cevennes, makes sufficiently clear the downward 
progress by which they would not merely obtain, 
but deserve to obtain, the name of i robbers.' By 
the Romans they would naturally be called and 
dealt with as such ; nay, in that great perversion 
of all moral sentiment which would find place at 
such a period as this was, the name, like l klept ' 
among the modern Greeks, would probably cease 
to be dishonorable, would scarcely be refused by 
themselves. 

Yet of how different a stamp and character 
would many of these men, these last protesters 
against a foreign domination, be likely to be from 
the mean and cowardly purloiner, whom we call 
the thief. The bands of these X^crra/, while they 
would number in their ranks some of the worst, 
would probably include also some that were ori- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 215 

ginally of the noblest spirits, of the nation even 
though they had miserably mistaken the moral 
necessities of their time, and had sought to work 
out by the wrath of man the righteousness of God. 
Such a one we may well imagine this penitent 
\rjo-rrjs to have been. Should there be any truth 
in such a view of his former condition, and cer- 
tainly it would go far to explain his sudden conver- 
sion, it is altogether kept out of sight by the name 
'thief which we have given him; and whether 
there be any truth in it or not, there can be no 
doubt that he would be more accurately called, 
' the penitent robber? 



xlv. TrXu^o), VLTTTW, \ova). 

WE have but the one English word, 4 to wash,' 
with which to render these three Greek. We mu^t 
needs confess here to a certain poverty, seeing that 
the three have severally a propriety of their own, 
one which the writers of the New Testament 
always observe, and could not be promiscuously 
and interchangeably used. Thus 7r\vveiv is always 
to wash inanimate things, as distinguished from 
living objects or persons ; garments most frequently 
Homer, II. xxii. 155 ; ipdnov, Plato, 



216 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Charm. 161 e ; and in the Septuagint continually ; 
so o-roXa?, Rev. vii. 4) ; but not exclusively these, 
which some have erroneously asserted, as witness 
the only other occasion where the word occurs in 
the ]STew Testament, being there employed to sig- 
nify the washing or cleansing of nets (Si/crua, Luke 
v. 2). When the Psalmist exclaims, TT\VVOV pe 
CLTTO T% avofjuia^ (Ps. 1. [li.] 3;' cf. ver. 9), these 
words must not be cited in disproof of this asser- 
tion that only of things, and not of persons, TrKvveiv 
is used ; for the allusion to the hyssop which fol- 
lows presently after, shows plainly that David had 
the ceremonial aspersions of the Levitical law pri- 
marily in his eye, which aspersions would find 
place upon the garments of the unclean person 
(Lev. xiv. 19 ; Numb. xix. 6), however he may have 
looked through these to another and better sprink- 
ling beyond. 

NiTTTeiv and Xouet^, on the other hand, express 
the washing of living persons ; although with this 
difference, that vLirreiv (which displaced in the later 
period of the lajiguage the Attic v%eiv) and vtya- 
vdai almost always express the washing of a part 
of the body, the hands (Mark vii. 3), the feet 
(John xiii. 5 ; Plutarch, The*. 10), the face (Matt. vi. 
17), the eyes (John ix. 7), the back and shoulders 
(Homer, Od. vi. 224) ; while Xoue^, which is not so 
much 'to wash' as 'to bathe,' and \oOo-0ot, or in 



NEW TESTAMENT. 217 

common Greek XoiW&u, ' to bathe oneself,' imply 
always, not the bathing of a part of the body, but 
of the whole: \e\ovfievpi TO crti/Aa, Heb. x. 23; cf. 
Acts ix. 37 ; 2 Pet. ii. 22 ; Kev. i. 5 ; Plato, Phced. 
115 a. This limitation of viTrreiv to persons as 
contradistinguished from things, which is always 
observed in the Kew Testament, is not without 
exceptions, although they are very unfrcquent, 
elsewhere ; thus, in Homer II. xvi. 229, Sevra? : 
Od. i. 112, rpaTrefa? : Lev. xv. 12, tr/ceCo?. A sin- 
gle verse in the Septuagint (Lev. xv. 11) gives us 
all the three words, and all used in their exact pro- 
priety of meaning: KCLI ocrwv eav a-^rijTai 6 yovop- 
pvrjs teal ra? ^eipa^ ov vkviTCTai {/Sart, Tc\vvl 
ra /yU-arta, KOI \oua~erai TO (rwpa vBaTL. 

The passage wlicre it is most important to mark 
the distinction between the last considered words, 
the one signifying the washing of a part, and the 
other the washing of the whole, of the body, and 
where certainly our English version loses some- 
thing in clearness from not possessing words which 
should note the change that finds place in the origi- 
nal, is John xiii. 10 : " lie that is washed [o \e\ov- 
pevos] needeth not save to wash [yl^racrOai] his 

feet, but is clean every whit." * The foot-washing 



1 The Latin labours under the same defect ; thus in the Vulgato 
it stands: Qui lotus est, non indiget nisi ut pedes lavet. De Wette 
10 



218 SYNONYMS OF THE 

was a symbolic act. St. Peter had not perceived 
tliis at the first, and, not perceiving it, had ex- 
claimed, " Thou shalt never wash my feet." But 
so soon as ever the true meaning of what his Lord 
was doing flashed upon him, he who had before 
refused to suffer Him to wash even his feet, now 
asked to be washed altogether : " Lord, not my feet 
only, but also my hands and my head." Christ re- 
plies, that it needed not this ; Peter had been al- 
ready made partaker of the great washing, of that 
forgiveness which reached to the whole man ; he 
was \e\ov fjuevos, and this great absolving act did not 
need to be repeated, as, indeed, it was not capable 
of repetition : "Now ye are clean through the word 
which I have spoken unto you" (John xv. 3). But 
while it was thus with him, he did need at the same 
time to wash his feet (vityaaQai rovs TroSa?), ever- 
more to cleanse himself, which could only be 
through Buffering his Lord to cleanse him from the 
defilements which even he, a justified, and in part 
also a sanctified man, should gather as he moved 
through a sinful world. The whole mystery of our 
justification, which is once for all, reaching to every 
need, embracing our whole being, and our sanctifi- 
cation, which must daily go forward, is wrapped 



has sought to preserve the variation of word: "Wer gebadet ist, der 
braucht sich nicht als an den Fiissen zu ivaschen. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



219 



up in the antithesis between the two words. This 
Augustine has expressed clearly and well (In Ev. 
Joh. xiii. 10) : Homo in sancto quidem baptismo 
totus abluittir, non prseter pedes, sed totus omnino: 
veruntamen cum in rebus humanis postea vivitur, 
utique terra calcatur. Ipsi igitur humani affectus, 
sine quibus in hue mortalitate non vivitur, quasi 

pedes sunt, ubi ex humanis rebus afficimur 

Quotidie ergo pedes lavat nobis, qui interpellat pro 
nobis : et quotidie nos opus habere ut pedes lave- 
mus in ipsa, Oratione Dominica, confitemur, cum 
dicimus, Dimitte nobis debita nostra. 



xlvi. 



ALL these words are rendered either occasion- 
ally or always, in our version, by Might;' thus 
(/>dj?, Matt. iv. 16 ; Rom. xiii. 12 ; and often ; <ey- 
709, Matt. xxiv. 29 ; Mark xiii. 24 ; Luke xi. 33, 
being the only three occasions upon which the word 
occurs ; (frwo-rijp, Phil. ii. 15 ; Rev. xxi. 11, the only 
two occasions of its occurrence ; Xu^z/o?, Matt. vi. 
22 ; John v. 33 ; 2 Pet. i. 19, and elsewhere ; though 
also often by ' candle,' as at Matt. v. 15 ; Rev. xxii. 
5 ; and Xa^?ra9, Acts xx. 8, but elsewhere by ' lamp,' 



220 SYNONYMS OF THE 

as at Matt. xxv. 1 ; Rev. viii. 10; and by ' torch,' 
as at John xviii. 3. 

Hesychius and the old grammarians distinguish 
between <w? and </>e<yyo? (which were originally 
one and the same word), that <>? is the light of the 
sun or of the day, tf>eyyo? the light or lustre of the 
moon. Any such distinction is very far from being 
constantly maintained even by the Attic writers 
themselves, to whom it is said more peculiarly to 
belong ; thus in Sophocles alone <e<yyo9 is three or 
four times applied to the sun (Antig. 800 ; Ajax, 
654, 840 ; Trachin. 597) ; while in Plato we meet 
(w? 0-6X^77? (Pol. vii. 516 5; cf. Isa. xiii. 10 ; Ezek. 
xxxii. 7). Still there is truth in that which, the 
grammarians have observed, that ^eyyo? is predomi- 
nantly applied to the light of the moon or other 
luminaries of the night (Plato, Pol. vi. 508 c), (/>? 
to that of the sun or of the day. Nor is it unwor- 
thy of note that this, like so many other finer dis- 
tinctions of the Greek language, is thus far observed 
in the New Testament, that on the only occasions 
when the light of the moon is mentioned, ^eyyo? is 
the word employed (Matt. xxiv. 29 ; Mark xiii. 24 ; 
cf. Joel ii. 10 ; iii. 15), as <w? where that of the sun 
(Rev. xxii. 5). From what has been said it will 
follow that </>w? and not </>ey<yo?, is the true antithe- 
sis to OVCO'TO? (Plato, Pol. vii. 518 a ; Matt. vi. 23 ; 
1 Pet. ii. 9) ; and generally that the former will be 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



221 



the more absolute word ; thus Hab. iii. 4, Kal 

yo9 avrov [rou &eov] o>? <o)9 ecrrat. (See Doder- 

lein, Lat. Synon. vol. ii. p. 69). 

<l>a)crTr)p, it has been already observed, is ren- 
dered ' light ' in our version, on the two occasions 
upon which it occurs. The first of these is Phil, 
ii. 15: "Among whom ye shine as lights in the 
world" (o>9 <ft>crT>7pe5 ev KOfffial). It would be 
difficult to improve on this rendering, while yet it 
fails to mark with all the precision which one would 
desire the exact similitude which the Apostle in- 
tends. The <f>a)o-Tfjp<> here are undoubtedly the 
heavenly bodies, (' luminaria,' as the Vulgate has 
it well, ' Ilimmelslichter,' as De "Wette), and mainly 
the sun and moon, the 'lights,' or * great lights' 
(= ' luces,' Cicero, poet.), of which Moses speaks, 
Gen. i. 14, 1C ; at which place the Septuagint has 
(j)(i)a-Trip$ for the Hebrew rvpSra. Cf. Ecclus. xliii. 
7, where the moon is called (fxDcrrtjp : and Wisd. 
xiii. 2, where ^axrnypcs ovpavov is exactly equiva- 
lent to (frcatJTripes ev Kocrfjiw at Pliil. ii. 15; which 
last is to be taken as one phrase, the ACOCT/ZO? being 
the material world, the o-Tpeo/j,a or firmament, not 
the ethical world, which has been already expressed 
by the yevea cr/co'X.ia teal Sieo-rpa/^/xeV??. 

So also, on the second occasion of the word's 
appearing, Rev. xxi. 11, where we have translated, 
" Her light [o <pa)arr)p aim}?] was like unto a stone 



222 SYNONYMS OF THE 

most precious," it would not be easy to propose 
anything better; and the authors of our version 
certainly did well in going back to this, "Wiclif ' s 
translation, and in displacing "her shining" which 
lias found place in the intermediate versions, and 
which must have conveyed a wrong impression to 
the English reader. Still, u her light " is not quite 
satisfactory, being not wholly unambiguous. It, 
too, may present itself to the English reader as, the 
light which the Heavenly City diffused ; when, in- 
deed, (pwo-rtjp means, that which diffused light to 
the Heavenly City, its luminary, or light-giver. 
What this light-giver was, we learn from ver. 23 : 
"the Lamb is the light thereof;" 6 Xir^o? avrrjs 
there being = 6 ^coo-rrjp avrrjs here. 

In respect of \v%yos and Xa/x?ra?, it may very 
well be a question whether the actual disposition 
made by our translators of the words which they 
had at their command was the best which could have 
been adopted. If instead of translating Xa/^Tra? 
torch ' on a single occasion (John xviii. 3), they 
had always done so, this would have left 'lamp,' 
now appropriated *by Xa//,7ra?, disengaged. Alto- 
gether dismissing candle,' they might have ren- 
dered \vxyo? by 'lamp,' in all, or certainly very 
nearly all, the passages where it occurs. At present 
there are so many occasions where ' candle ' would 
manifestly be inappropriate, and where, therefore, 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



223 



they are obliged to full back on 'light,' that the 
distinction between 6w? and Xw;i/os nearly, if not 
quite, disappears in our version. 

The advantages of such a re-arrangement of the 
words appear to me not inconsiderable. In the first 
place, the English words would more nearly repre- 
sent the Greek originals : Xir^o? is not a candle 
(' candela,' from ' candeo,' the white wax light, and 
then any kind of taper), but a hand-lamp fed with 
oil ; while Xayu/rra? is not a lamp at all, but a torch, 
and this not merely in the purer times of the lan- 
guage, but also in the later Hellenistic Greek as 
well (Polybius, iii. 93. 4; Herodian, iv. 2; Judg. 
vii. 16, 20) ; and 'so, I believe, always in the New 
Testament. In proof that at Rev. viii. 10, Xa/^vra? 
should be translated < torch,' (< Fackel,' De "Wette,) 
see Aristotle, De JftnuL 4. And even in the para- 
ble of the Ten Yirgins it would be better so. It 
may be urged, indeed, that there the Xa/r/raSe? are 
nourished with oil, and must needs therefore be 
lamps. A quotation, however, from Elphinstone 
(ILfxtory of India, vol. i. p. 333), will show that in 
the East the torch, as well as the lamp, is fed in 
this manner. He says : " The true Hindu way of 
lighting up is by torches held by men, who feed 
the flame with oil from a sort of bottle " [the ay- 
of Matt. xxv. 4] " constructed for the pur- 



pose. 



224 SYNONYMS OF THE 

It would not be difficult to indicate more pas- 
sages than one, which would be gamers in perspicu- 
ity by such a rearrangement as has been proposed, 
especially by marking more clearly, wherever this 
were possible, the difference between <o>? and \v- 
%fo?. Thus 2 Pet. i. 19 is one of these ; but still 
more so John v. 35. "We there make our Lord to 
say of the Baptist, " He was a burning and a shin- 
ing light" the words of the original being, e/ce^o? 
T t v o \vyyos 6 Kauofievo^ Kal (paivcov. The Vulgate 
has rendered them better : Ille erat lucerna ardens 
et lucens ; not obliterating, as we have done, the 
whole antithesis between Christ, the <&5? a\r)6iv6v 
(John i. 8), the </>&)9 e/c </>O>TO?, the Eternal Light, 
which, as it was never kindled, so should never be 
quenched, and the Baptist, a lamp kindled by the 
hands of Another, in whose light men might for a 
season rejoice, and which was then extinguished 
again. It is not too much to say, that in the use 
of Xi^yo? here and at 1 Pet i. 19, being here tacitly 
contrasted with <&)?, and there openly with </>o)o-(/>6- 
po?, the same opposition is intended, only now 
transferred to the highest sphere of the spiritual 
world, which the poet had in his mind when he 
wrote, 

" Niglit'e candles are burnt out, and jocund Day 
Stands tiptoe on the misty mountain tops." 



NEW TESTAMENT. 225 



xlvii. 

OF %a/3t? we have the following definition (Aris- 
totle, Rliet. ii. 7) ; eo-ro) Brj %/)<? KaO J TJV 6 
dpiv vjrovpyelv TW Seo/zei>&>, pr) avrl 

' iva TL avrw rw vTrovpyovvri, a\V tva eKeivw TL. 
The word is often found associated with e'Xeo<? 
(1 Tim. i. 2 ; 2 Tim. i. 2 ; Tit. i. 4 ; 2 John 3) ; it is 
in this association only, and as signifying the Divine 
compassion, that I wish to speak of it here. But 
tiiuiio-h standing in closest inner as well as outer 
f:nim<j.\i"ii, there is this difference between them, 
that x ( ' l P L ^ nas reference to the sins of men, e'Xeo? to 
their ////V/ 1 //. God's %/^?, his free grace and gift, 
is extended to men, as they are guilty, his e'Xeo? is 
extended to them as they are miserable. 1 The 
lower creation may be, and is, the object of God's 
e'Aeo?, inasmuch as the burden of man's curse has 
redounded also upon it (Job xxxviii. 41 ; Ps. clxvii. 
9 ; Jonah iv. 11), but of his %a/>t? man alone ; he 
only needs, he only is capable of receiving it. In 

1 It will be seen that the Stoic definition of eAeos, to wit, \virr) 
us e'irl avatcas KaKoiraOovvri (Diogenes Laertius, vii. 1. 63; cf. Aris- 
totle, 'Rhet. ii. 8), breaks down at two points when transferred tc 
the Divine compassion, which has not grief in it, and is very far 
from being limited to those who suffer unworthily. 
10* 



226 SYNONYMS OF THE 

the Divine mind, and in the order of our salvation 
as conceived therein, the e\eo? precedes the %dpi$. 
God- so loved the world with a pitying love (herein 
was the e'Xeo?) that He gave his only-begotten Son 
(herein the %/^9) that the world through Him 
might be saved : cf. Eph. ii. 4 ; Luke i. 78, 79. But 
in the order of the manifestation of God's purposes 
of salvation the grace must go before the mercy, the 
%a/o? must make way for the e'Xeo?. It is true that 
the same persons are the subjects of both, being at 
once the guilty and the miserable ; yet the right- 
eousness of God, which it is just as necessary should 
be maintained as his love, demands that the guilt 
should be done away before the misery can be as- 
suaged ; only the forgiven can, or indeed may, be 
made happy ; whom He has pardoned, He heals ; 
men are justified before they are sanctif&d. Thus 
in each of the apostolic salutations it is first %/H?, 
and then e\eo?, which the Apostle desires for the 
faithful (Rom. i. 7 ; 1 Cor. i. 3 ; 2 Cor. i. 2 ; Gal. i. 
3 ; Eph. i. 2 ; Phil. i. 2, &c.) ; nor could the order 
of the words be reversed. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



227 



xlviii. 



0eoo-e/3r;?, an epitliet three times applied to Job 
(i. 1, 8 ; ii. 3), occurs only once in the New Testa- 
ment (John ix. 31) ; and Qeoaepeia no oftener (1 Tim. 
ii. 10). Eva-e/3tjs, with the words related to it, is of 
more frequent occurrence (1 Tim. ii. 2 ; Acts x. 2 ; 
2 Pet. ii. 9, and often). Before we proceed to con- 
sider the relation of these to the other words of this 
group, a subordinate distinction between them- 
selves, may fitly be noted ; this, namely, that in 
6eoo-e{3>js is necessarily implied by its very deriva- 
tion, piety toward God, or tnn:ird the gods ; while 
eva-e/Br)?, often as it means this, yet also may mean 
piety in the fulfilment of human relations, as toward 
parents or others (Euripides, Elect. 253, 254), the 
word according to its etymology only implying 
i worship ' (in our older use of the word) and rever- 
ence well and rightly directed. It has in fact the 
same double meaning as the Latin ' pietas,' which 
is not merely 'justitia ad/versum Deos' (Cicero, De 
Nat. Deor. i. 41) ; a double meaning, which, deeply 
instructive as it is, yet proves occasionally embar- 
rassing in respect of both one word and the other ; 
so that on several occasions Augustine, when he has 



228 SYNONYMS OF THE 

need of an a'ccurate nomenclature, and is using 
c pietas,' pauses to observe that lie means by it what 
evaefieia indeed may mean, but Oeoo-epeia alone must 
mean, namely, piety toward God (De Civ. Dei, x. 1 ; 
Enchir. 1). At the same time eucre/Seta, which the 
Stoics defined CTTLO-TIJ/JLTJ Oewv OepaTreias (Diogenes 
Laertius, vii. 1. 64, 119), and which was not every 
reverencing of the gods, but a reverencing of them 
aright (e), is the standing word to express this 
piety, both in itself (Xenophon, Ages. iii. 5 ; xi. 1), 
and as it is the true mean between dOeorTj? and Sei- 
aiBaifjiovia (Plutarch, De Super st. 14). 

What might otherwise have required to be said 
on ev\aj3r)<: has been already anticipated in part in 
considering the word evXdfteia (see p. 58) ; yet 
something further may be added here. It was 
there observed how the word passed over from sig- 
nifying caution and carefulness in respect of human 
things to the same in respect of divine ; the Ger- 
man i Andacht ' had very much the same history 
(see Grimm, WorterJjuch, s. v.). The only three 
places in the New Testament in which 6v\a/3tj$ oc- 
curs are these, Luke ii. 25 ; Acts ii. 5 ; viii. 2. We 
have uniformly translated it fc devout;' nor could 
any better equivalent be offered for it. It will be 
observed that on all these occasions it is used to ex- 
press Jewish, and, as one might say, Old Testament 
piety. On the first it is applied to Simeon 



NEW TESTAMENT. 



229 



/cat ev\a[Bi]$) ; on the second, to those Jews who 
came from distant parts to keep the commanded 
feasts at Jerusalem ; and on the third there can 
scarcely be a doubt that the ai/Spe? ei)\a/3et? who 
cany Stephen to his burial, are not, as might at 
lirst sight appear, Christian brethren ; but cTevout 
Jews, who showed by this courageous act of theirs, 
as by their great lamentation over the slaughtered 
saint, that they abhorred this deed of blood, that 
they separated themselves in spirit from it, and 
thus, if it might be, from all the judgments which 
it would bring down on the city of those murderers. 
Whether it was also further given them to believe 
on the Crucified, who had such witnesses as Ste- 
phen, we are not told ; we may well presume that 
it was. 

If we keep in mind that in that mingled fear 
and love which together constitute the piety of man 
toward ({<xl, the Old Testament placed its empha- 
sis < .11 the fear, the New places it on the love, though 
there was love in the fear of God's saints then, and 
there must be fear in their love now, it will at once 
be evident how fitly evXaftrjs was chosen to set forth 
their piety under the Old Covenant, who like Zacli- 
arias and Elisabeth "were righteous before God, 
walking in all the commandments and ordinances 
of the Lord blameless," (Luke i. 6), and leaving 
nothing willingly undone which pertained to the 



230 SYNONYMS OF THE 

circle of their prescribed duties. For this sense of 
accurately and scrupulously performing that which 
is prescribed, with the consciousness of the danger 
of slipping into a careless negligent performance 
of God's service, and of the need therefore of anx- 
iously watching against the adding to or diminish- 
ing from, or in any other way altering, that which 
is commanded, lies ever in the words evKafifa ev\d- 
fteia, when used in their religious significance. 1 

Plutarch, in more than one very instructive 
passage, exalts the evXdfieia of the old Romans in 
divine matters as contrasted with the comparative 
carelessness of the Greeks. Thus in his Corlolanus 
(c. 25), after other instances in proof, he goes on to 
say : " Of late times also they did renew and begin 
a sacrifice thirty times one after another ; because 
they thought still there fell out one fault or other 
in the same ; so holy and devout were they to the 
gods " (rotavrr} JJLCV evXdfieia Trpbs TO Oelov f Pco- 
fj,aiwv). z Elsewhere, he pourtrays JEmilius Paulus 
(c. 3) as eminent for his ev\d/3ia. The passage is 

1 Cicero's well-known words deducing 'religio' from 'relegere' 
may be here fitly quoted (De Nat. Deor. ii. 28): Qui omnia qua? 
ad cultum deorum pertinerent, diligenter retractarent, et tanquam 
relcgerent, sunt dicti religiosi. 

3 North's Plutarch, p. 195. Cf. Aulus Gellius, ii. 28 : Veteres 
Roman! .... in constituendis religionibus atque in diis iminortali- 
bus animadvertendis castissimi cautissimique. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 231 

long, and I will only quote a portion of it, availing 
myself again of old Sir Thomas North's translation, 
which, though somewhat loose, is in essentials cor- 
rect : " When he did anything belonging to his 
office of priesthood, he did it with great experience, 
judgment and diligence ; leaving all other thoughts, 
and without omitting any ancient ceremony, or 
adding to any new ; contending oftentimes with his 
companions in things which seemed light and of 
small moment ; declaring to them that though we 
do presume the gods are easy to be pacified, and 
that they readily pardon all faults and scapes com- 
mitted by negligence, yet if it were no more but 
for respect of the commonwealth's sake they should 
not slightly or carelessly dissemble or pass over 
faults committed in those matters " (p. 206). 

But if in v\a@ij$ we have the anxious and the 
scrupulous worshipper, who makes a conscience of 
changing anything, of omitting anything, being 
above all things fearful to offend, we have in Oprja-- 
KOS, which still more nearly corresponds to the Latin 
' religiosus,' the zealous and diligent performer of 
the divine offices, of the outward service of God. 
prja-Kcla (= ' cultus,' or perhaps more strictly, 
' cultus exterior ' ), is predominantly the ceremonial 
service of religion, the external forms or body, of 
which ev<re/3eia is the informing soul. The sugges- 
tion that the word is derived from Orpheus the 



232 SYNONYMS OF THE 

Thracian, who brought in the celebration of re- 
ligious mysteries, etymologically worthless, yet 
points, and no doubt truly, to the celebration of 
divine offices as the fundamental notion of the 
word. 

How finely chosen then are these words by St. 
James (i. 26, 27), and how rich a meaning do they 
contain. " If any man," he would say, " seem to 
himself to be Opfjo-tcos, a diligent observer of the 
offices of religion, if any man would render a pure 
and undefiled dp^aKeia to God, let him know that 
this consists not in outward lustrations or ceremonial 
observances ; nay, that there is a better dprja/ceta 
than thousands of rams and rivers of oil, namely to 
do justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly 
with his God" (Mic. vi. 7, 8); or, in the Apostle's 
own language, " to visit the widows and orphans in 
their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from 
the world " (cf. Matt, xxiii. 23). He is not herein 
affirming, as we sometimes hear, these offices to be 
the sum total, nor yet the great essentials, of true 
religion, but declares them to be the body, the 
Bpya-Keia, of which godliness, or the love of God, is 
the informing soul. His intention is somewhat ob- 
scured to the English reader from the fact that ' re- 
ligious ' and ' religion,' by which we have rendered 
OpfjcrKos and Oprjcrtcela, possessed a meaning once 
which they now possess no longer, and in that 






NEW TESTAMENT. 233 

meaning are here employed. St. James would, in 
fact, claim for the Christian faith a superiority over 
the old dispensation, in that its very Oprja/ceia con- 
sists in acts of mercy, of love, of holiness, in that 
it has light for its garment, its very robe being 
righteousness ; herein how much nobler than that 
old, whose Opijo-Keta was merely ceremonial and 
formal, whatever inner truth it might embody. 
These observations are made by Coleridge (Aids to 
Reflection, 1825, p. 15), who at the same time com- 
plains of our rendering of Opr/axo? and OprjaKeia as 
erroneous. But it is not so much erroneous as ob- 
solete ; an alternative indeed which he has himself 
suggested as its possible justification, though he 
was not aware of any such use of l religion ' in the 
time that our version was made as would bear out 
the translators. Milton however will at once sup- 
ply an example of a passage in which 'religion ' is 
used to express an outward ceremonial service, and 
not the inner devotedness of heart and life to God. 
Some of the heathen idolatries he characterizes as 
being 

"adorned 
With gay religions full of pomp and gold." 

Paradise Lost, b. i. 

And our Homilies will supply many more : thus in 
that Against Peril of Idolatry : " linages used for 
no religion, or superstition rather, we mean of none 



234 SYNONYMS OF THE 

worshipped, nor in danger to be worshipped of any, 
may be suffered." A very instructive passage on 
the merely external character of dpTjaxela, which 
also I am confident our translators intended to ex- 
press by their c religion,' occurs in Philo (Quod Det. 
Pot. Insid. 7) ; having repelled those who would 
fain be counted among the ei)o-e/3et? on the score of 
divers washings, or costly offerings to the temple, 
he proceeds : ire r JT\dv7]TaL yap /cal o5ro? TT 
evarefteiau 6SoO, 9 pf]cr K6 lav dvrl ocr IOTTJTOS rj 
fjievos. The readiness with which Opr^aiceia declined 
into the meaning of superstition, service of false 
gods (Wisd. xiv. 18, 27; xi. 16; Col. ii. 18), itself 
indicates that it had more to do with the form, than 
with the essence, of piety. Thus Gregory Nazian- 
zene (lainb. xv.) : 



v olSa Kal rb 5ai[j.6vwv tre)3ay, 
'H 5' eycre/3eio irpo&Kvvficris Tpiddos. 

To come now to the concluding word of this 
group. Azicr&aifjLwv, and SeicriSaifjiovia as well, had 
at first an honourable use ; as perhaps also ' super- 
stitio ' and ' superstitiosus ' had ; at least there seems 
indication of such in the use of i superstitiosus ' by 
Plautus (Curcul. iii. 27; Amphit. i. 1. 169). The 
philosophers first gave an unfavourable significance 
to Seio-iSaifAovia. So soon as they began to account 
fear a disturbing element in piety, which was to be 



NEW TESTAMENT. 235 

eliminated from the true idea of it (see Plutarch, 
De And. Poet. 12 ; and "WYttenbach, Animadd. in 
Pint. i. 097), it was natural, indeed almost inevita- 
ble, that they should lay hold of the word which 
by its very etymology implied and involved fear 
(SeicriSat/jLovia, from 8et'8a>), and should employ it to 
denote that which they disallowed and condemned, 
namely, the ' timor inanis Deortim ' (Cicero, De Nat. 
Dcor. i. 41) ; in which phrase the emphasis must 
not be laid on ' inanis ' but on c timor ; ' cf. Augus- 
tine, De Civ. Dei) vi. 9 : "Varro religiosum a super- 
stitioso ea distinctione discernit, ut a superstitioso 
dicat timei'i Deos ; a religioso autem vereri ut pa- 
rentes ; non ut hostes timeri. 

But even after they had thus turned SeLaiScufMo- 
via to ignobler uses, to the being, as Theophrastus 
defines it, SetXi'a irepl TO SCLI/JLOVIOV, it did not at once 
and altogether forfeit its higher significance. In- 
deed it remained to the last a fjieaov. Thus we not 
only find SeiaiSaijuwv (Xenophon, Ages. xi. 8; Cijrop. 
iii. 3. 58), and ceicriSai/jiovia (Polybius, vi. 56. 7 ; 
Joseph us, Antt. x. 3. 2), in a good sense ; but I am 
uided also employed in no ill meaning by St. 
Paul himself in his great discourse upon Mars' Hill 
at Athens. He there addresses the Athenians, " I 
perceive that in all things ye are o>? SeKriSaipovea-- 
Te/}ou<?" (Acts xvii. 22), which is scarcely, "too su- 
perstitious," as we have rendered it, or " allzu aber- 



230 SYNONYMS OF THE 

glaiibisch,' as Luther ; but rather i religiosiores,' as 
Beza, 'sehr gottesfurchtig,' as De Wette, have 
given it. 1 For indeed it was not St. Paul's manner 
to affront his auditors, least of all at the outset of a 
discourse ; not to say that a much deeper reason 
than a mere calculating prudence would have hin 
dered him, I believe, from expressing himself thus, 
namely, that he would not, any more than his great 
Master, quench the smoking flax, or deny the reli- 
gious element which was in heathenism. Many in- 
terpreters, ancient as well as modern, agree in this 
view of the intention of St. Paul ; for example, 
Chrysostom, who makes &icri,$ai,juov6aTepovs = ev\a- 
jBeaTepovs, and takes the word altogether as praise. 
Yet neither must we run into an extreme on this 
side. St. Paul selects with finest tact and skill, 
and at the same time with most perfect truth, a 
word which shaded off from praise to blame ; in 
which he gave to his Athenian hearers the honour 
which was confessedly their due as zealous worship- 
pers of the superior powers, so far as their know- 
ledge reached, being evo-efle&rdrovs Travrwv TWV 
'EXkijvcov, as Josephus calls them ; but at the same 
time he does not squander on them the words of 
very highest honour of all, reserving them for the 



1 Bengel (in loc.}\ SeiffiSainuv, verbum per se pea-ov, ideoque 
ambiguitatem habet clementem, et exordio huic aptissiniarn. 



NEW TESTAMENT. 237 

true worshippers of the true and living God. And 
as it is thus in the one passage where SeicriSai/jLwv 
occurs, so also in the one where SeiaiSaiiJLovia is to 
be found (Acts xxv. 19). Festus may speak there 
with a certain latent slight of the Sei<ri$aifju)vla, or 
overstrained way of worshipping God ( ' Gottesve- 
rchrung' De Wette translates it), which he con- 
ceived to be common to St. Paul and his Jewish 
accusers, but he would scarcely have called it a 
4 superstition ' in Agrippa's face, for it was the same 
which Agrippa himself also held (Acts xxvi. 3. 27), 
whom certainly he was very far from intending to 
insult. 



xlix. K\f)fj,a, 

THESE words are related to one another by de- 
scent from a common stock, derived as they both 
are from Xaoj, ' frango ; ' the fragile character of 
the branch, the ease with which it may be broken 
off, to be planted or grafted anew, constituting the 
basis and leading conception in both words. At 
the same time there is a distinction between them, 
this namely, that /c\fjfj,a (= 'palmes') is especially 
the branch of the vine (dfiTreXov /eX^ua, Plato, Pol. 
i. 353 a) ; while K\dSos (= 'ramus ') is the branch, 
not the larger arm, of any tree ; and this distinction 



238 SYNONYMS OF THE 

is always observed in the New Testament, where 
K\rj/uia only occurs in the allegory of the True Yinc 
(John xv. 2, 4, 5, 6 ; cf. Num. xiii. 24 ; Ps. Ixxix. 
12 ; Ezek. xvii. 6) ; while we have mention of the 
K\d$oi of the mustard-tree (Matt. xiii. 32), of the fig- 
tree (Matt. xxiv. 32), of the olive-tree (Bom. xi. 16), 
and generally of any trees (Matt. xxi. 8 ; cf. Ezek. 
xxxi. 7; Jer. xi. 16 ; Dan. iv. 9). 



1. 



[I have put together, and in a concluding article subjoined, as 
there are readers to "whom they may be welcome, a few passages 
from different authors, intended to have illustrated some other 
synonyms of the 'New Testament, besides those which, after all, I 
have found room to introduce into this volume.] 



a. ^/^O-TOTT??, ayaOaiavvij. Jerome (Oomm. in 
Ep. ad Gal. v. 22) : Benignitas sive suavitas, quia 
apud Grsecos ^PT/OTOTT/? utrumque sonat, virtus est 
lenis, blanda, tranquilla, et omnium bonorum apta 
consortio ; invitans ad familiaritatem sui, dulcis al- 
loquio, moribus temperata. Non multum bonitas 
[ayaOwa-vvrj] a benignitate diversa est ; quia et ipsa 
ad benefaciendum videtur exposita. Sed in eo dif- 






NEW TESTAMENT. 239 

i'ert; quia potest bonitas esse tristior, et fronte seve- 
ris moribus irrugata bene quidem facere et prsestare 
quod poscitur ; non tamen suavis esse consortio, et 
sua cunctos invitare dulcedine. 

ft. e\7rt9, TTIOTW. Augustine (Enchirid. 8) : Est 
itaque fides et malarum rerum et bonarum : quia 
et bona creduntur et mala ; et hoc fide bona, non 
mala. Est etiam fides est prseteritarum rerum, et 
praesentium, et futurarum. Credimus enim Chris- 
tum mortuum ; quod jam prsdteriit ; credimus sedere 
ad dexteram Patris ; quod nunc est : credimus ven- 
turuin ad judicandum ; quod futurum est. Item 
fides et suarmn rerum est et alienarum. Nam et se 
quisque credit aliquando esse coepisse, nee fuisse 
utique sempiternum ; et alios, atque alia ; nee so- 
lum de aliis liominibus inulta, qua) ad religionem 
pertinent, verum etiam de angelis credimus. Spes 
autem non nisi bonarum rerum est, nee nisi futura- 
rum, et ad eum pertinentium qui earum spem ge- 
rere perhibetur. Quse cum ita sint, propter ha 
caussas distinguenda erit fides ab spe, sicut vocabu- 
lo, ita et rationabili differentia. Nam quod adtinet 
ad non videre sive quce creduntur, sive quse spe- 
rantur, fidei speique commune est. 



7. cr^tVyLta, a^eo-t?. Augustine (Con. Crescon. 
Don. ii. 7) : Schisma est recens congregationis ex 



2-10 SYNONYMS OF THE 

aliqua sententiarum diversitate dissensio ; hoeresis 
autem schisma inveteratum. 



S. i*aKpo0vfjLLa, irpaor^. Theophylact (In Gal. 
v. 22) : /j,a/cpo0vfjLia irpaoTrjTos ev TOVTW So/eel Trapa 
TYJ ypa<f>f) 8ia<f)epeLV, ro5 rov /JLEV ftafcpddvfjLov iroKvv 
ovra ev (frpovijcret) ////) o^ew? a\\a o"%o\f) ziriTiQevai 
TTJV irpocnJKovorav $l/cr]v TCO Trraiovri. TOV Be irpaov 



e. \oiSopeo),, fB\av$>r)(jLew. Calvin (Comm. in N. 
T. ; 1 Cor. iv. 12) : Notandnm est discrimen inter 
hsec duo participia, XotSo pov^evoi KOI l&\a<r<f)fAovfte~ 
voi. Quoniam \oiopia est asperior dicacitas, quse 
non tantum perstringit liominem, sed acriter etiam 
mordct, famamque aperta contumelia sugillat, non 
dubinm est quin \oiopdv sit maledicto tanquam 
aculeo vulnerare hominem ; proinde reddidi male- 
dictis lacessiti. B\av<fyr)pla est apertius probmm, 
qiium quispiam graviter et atrociter proscinditur. 



, crapKiKo?. Grotms (Annott. in N. 
T. / 1 Cor. ii. 14) : Non idem est tyv%iKbs av0pa)~ 
7T09 et 0-apKiKos. WVXIKOS est qui humanse tantum 
rationis luce ducitur, crap/tocos qui corporis affecti- 
bus gubernatur; sed plernnque ^rv^iKoi aliqua in 
parte sunt trapta/col, ut Graecortini philosophi scorta- 
tores, puerorum corruptores, glorise aucupes, male- 



NEW TESTAMENT. 24:1 

dici, invidi. Verum liic (1 Cor. ii. 14) niliil aliud 
designatur quam homo Immaiia, tantiim rationo ni- 
tons, quales erant Judseorum plerique et pliilosopln 
GrsecoruHL 

77. /jLeravoea), /xera/ieXo/itat. Bengel (Gnomon N. 
T. 2 Cor. vii. 10) : Yi etymi ^-ravoia proprie est 
mentis, /uera//,eXeia voluntatis ; quod ilia sententiam, 
haec solicitudinetn vel potius studium mutatum di- 
cat. . . . Utrumque ergo dicitur de eo, qnem facti 
consiliive pccnitet, sive pcenitentia bona sit sive 
mala, sive malse rei sive bonoe, sive cum mutatione 
actionum in posterum, sive citra cam. Yerunta- 
men si usnm spectes, yuera/zeXe^a plerunque est fjieaov 
vocabulum, et refertur potissimum ad actiones sin- 
gulares : ^erdvoia vero, in N. T. prsesertim, in bo- 
nani partem sumitur, quo notatur pcenitentia totius 
vitse ipsorumque nostri quodammodo : sive tota ilia 
beata mentis post errorem et peccata reminiscentia, 
cum omnibus atfectibus earn ingredientibus, quain 
fructus digni scquuntur. Ilinc tit ut peravoelv sa3pe 
in imperativo ponatur, ^erayueXeto-^ai nunquam : 
ceteris autem locis, ubicunque /j,erdvoi,a legitur, 
v possis substituere : sed non contra. 



9. alwv, Ko&fjios. Bengel (II). Epli. ii. 2): alcov 
et K0(7//,o? differunt, 1 Cor. ii. 6, 12 ; iii. 18. Ille 
hunc regit, et quasi informat: /cocr/^09 est quiddam 
11 



24:2 SYNONYMS OF THE 

exterins ; alcov subtilius. And again (Eph. vi. 12) : 
Koa-jjios rnunduB, in sua extensione : alwv seculum, 
prsesens mundus in sua indole, cursu et censu. 



L. irpavs, rjcrvxios. Bengel (Ib. 1 Pet. iii. 4) : 
Mansuetus [Trpavs], qui non turbat : tranquillus 
[770-^^09], qui turbas aliorum, superiorum, inferi- 
orum, sequalium, fert placide . . . Adde, mansuetus 
in affectibus : tranquillus in verbis, vultu, actu. 



K. OvrjTos, ve/cpos. Olsliausen (Opusc. Theoll. p. 
195): Ne'/cpos vocatur subjectum, in quo sejunctio 
corporis et animse facta est : OVIJTOS, in quo fieri 
potest. 

X. eXeog, oiKTip/x-os. Fritzsche (Ad Rom. vol. ii. p. 315) : 
Plus significari vocabulis 6 oiKTip/xog et oucrtipcw quam ver- 
bis 6 IXeos et eXeeti/ recte veteres doctores vulgo statuunt. 
Illis enim cum tXoos, tXao/xat et IXacrKo/xat, his cum ot et 
oT/cros cognatio est. 'O eAeos gegritudinem benevole ex 
miseria alterius haustam denotat, et commune vocabulum 
est ibi collocandum, ubi rnisericordias notio in genere enun- 
tianda est ; 6 oiKTip/xos segritudinem ex alterius miseria 
susceptam, quse fletum tibi et ejulatum excitat, h. e. mag- 
nam ex alterius miseria aegritudinem, miserationem decla- 
rat. 






APPENDIX. 

ADDENDA ET CORRIGENDA. 

Since the publication of the first edition of his admira- 
ble work on the " Synonyms of the New Testament," Mr. 
Trench has issued a second and a third edition. Several 
additions and corrections are made by the author in these 
last issues, partly based upon the criticisms of reviewers 
and others, but mainly the result of frequent and careful 
revisions of the volume. As these additions and correc- 
tions are of some importance, though not affecting the sub- 
stance of the work, it has been thought best to make a 
careful collation of the third with the fii*st edition, and to 
incorporate, in the form of an Appendix, such changes and 
improvements as the author may have adopted. It is be- 
lieved that nothing of moment has escaped attention in 
this collation, and that the work is now as complete and 
thorough as the accomplished author could make it within 
the limits which he had prescribed to himself. 

j. A. s. 



244 APPENDIX. 

Page 13, line 2 : after the words " untouched by me," 
add the following note : 

It is possible that some reader of this book might like to have 
suggested to him a few of these, on which to exercise his own skill in 
synonymous distinction. The following, then, were some which I had 
once proposed to myself to consider, but which I have now reserved for 
a second part, which I hope, but scarcely expect, hereafter to publish : 
aTToAvrpcocns, /carccAAayi], iAaayic's airtcTTOs, aireiQ'fjs 
aa"iroi/$os o/ypaUjUaros, iStcoTTjs AaAeco, Aeyco TrapoiytJa, 
$a\p.6s, vpvos, ipS'fi 5oj/ica>, Treipdfa ajj-tyiftXriaTpov, crayfivr], di- 
KTVOV Sevens, ew^, irpoffevx^lt eyrev^ts jSouA'/?, 8f\ri/J.a Qvffia, irpoo"- 
(popd repots, Suvafjus, tr^ueToy 0A?i|/is, (rrsvo^wpia. cr6<f>os, 
cvver6s pwr^TOKOS, p.ovoyzvt}s 7ra0os, briQvpla vlbs Qeov, 
Qzov xa.Lv6s, veos a/5ioy, cuwvios C^ OJ/ > 6-rjpiov Stwai 
SiKouocruvri aAAoy, erepos ayia^co, tcaffapifa, ayvifa (ry/.tTra0eco, 



, ayvos, 



, oTrratn'a, Trpo<pr]Teia Ac/yos, /'^ua /Sa^r-ncr/ia, 
a.uapr/a, auapTTjua, irapaKO-tj, Trapdirruf^a. eTr/rpOTros, olxoj/6/jiOs 
lJ.aKpo6vfji.ia, virojAOvl], O.VO'XT] KOTTOS, [J.6x6os TTT6rj(ns, 6dtj.ftos, 



ci), criuwdca e|oy(ria, 5vva[j.is, Kpdros, <V%us axpr,(TTOs, a- 
co, cnraTaA(co, Tpv(pd& <aSAos, tcaitds crvveffis, 8id- 

VOIO. - KTJfffOS, $6pOS. 



Page 29, line 4 : after the words " of God," add : (Acts 
vii. 48 ; xvii. 24 ; 1 Cor. vi. 19) ; the oT/cos rov Oeov (Matt. 
xii. 4 ; cf. Exod. xxiii. 19). 

Page 29, line 7 : after the word " Holies," add : called 
often aytaa-^a (1 Mace. i. 37 ; iii. 45). 

Page 47, line 6 : after e/*.7roio9cra, add : It is to those 
and similar definitions that Aulus G-ellius refers when he 
says (Noot. Att. vi. 14) : 'Puniendis peccatis tres esse d> 



APPENDIX. 245 

here causas existimatuni est. Una est quge vcvBto-La, vel 
KoAaa-i5, vel TrapcuWo-is dicitur ; cum poena adhibetur casti- 
gandi atque emendandi gratia ; ut is qui fortuito deliquit, 
atteiitior fiat, correctiorque. Altera est quam ii, qui voca- 
bula ista curiosius diviscrunt, TiptDpiav appellant. Ea 
causa animadvertendi est, cum dignitas auctoritasque ejus, 
in quem est peccatum, tuenda est, ne proetermissa animad- 
versio contemtum ejus pariat, et honorem levet : idcircoquc 
id ei vocabulum a conservatione honoris factum putant.' 

Page 60, line 17 : after " 8e," add : Yet after all, in 
these distinctions whereby they sought to escape the embar- 
rassments of their ethical position, they did indeed effect 
nothing 5 being only o^o/xaro/j.a^oi, as a Peripatetic adver- 
sary lays to their charge. See on this matter the full dis- 
cussion in Clement of Alexandria, Strom, ii. 7 9. 

Page 63, line 14 : after "worst sense," add note from 
Grotius 

Grotius : ' Cum quce possumus in bonam partem interpretari, in 
pejorem rapimus, contra quam exigit officium dilectionis.' 

Page 64, line 16 : after i; in them," add : for, according 
to our profound English proverb, " 111 doers are ill deern- 
ers." 

Page 67, line 6 : the passage from the words " from 
this last fact, etc ...... to a sister" (p. 68, line 2), is omit- 

ted in the third edition. 

Page 71, line 14 : after " love," add note from Gregory 
Nazianzene : 



8' upeis v) 
v Epws 8e 6epfj.bs SuffKaBeKrAs re 

''Cam. ii. 34. 150, 151.) 



246 APPENDIX. 

Page 72, line 16 : after " headlands," put reference 
(Plutarch, Timol 8), and add : 

Hippias, in Plato's Gorgias (338a), charges the eloquent sophist, 
Prodicus, with a (ptvyeiv fls rb Tre-yaAos TU>V A^-ycov, airoKptyaj/Ta yj]*', 
which last idiom reappears in the French ' noyer la terre,' applied to 
a ship sailing out of sight of land ; as indeed in Virgil's ' Phceacum 
abscondimus urbem.' 

Page 77, end of xiv. : add : rather the degeneracy of 
a virtue than an absolute vice. 

Page 90, line 19 : after " heavenly Jerusalem," add : 
It was, he would teach them, a vorfrov opos, and not an at- 
o-cfyroV, to which they were brought near. Thus Knapp 
(Script, var. Argum. p. 264) : ' Videlicet TO i//^Xa<^w/xei/ov 
idem est, quod cuo-^roV, vel quidquid sensu percipitur aut 
investigatur quovis modo ; plane ut Tacitus (Ann. iii. 12) 
oculis contrectare dixit, nee dissimili ratione Cicero (Tusc. 
iii. 15) mente contrectare. Et Sina quidem mons ideo al- 
or^rob appellatur, quia Sioni opponitur, quo in monte, quse 
sub sensus cadunt, non spectantur 5 sed ea tantum, qua) 
mente atque animo percipi possunt, vo-^ra, 7rvD/iart/<a, rjOiKa. 
Apposite ad h. 1. Chrysostomus (Horn. 32 in Ep. ad Hebr.) : 
lidvra ro'iwv Tore at<r^ra, KOL ot//etg, KOC faavai' Travra 
1/077x0. Kal aopara vvvS 

Page 93, line 25 ; for " memory," read " recollection 
or reminiscence," and add the following note : 

Not 'memory,' as I very erroneously had it in the first edition 
of this book. The very point of the passage in Olympiodorus is to 
bring out the old Aristotelian and Platonic distinction between ' me- 
mory' (jtij/^T?) and 'recollection' or 'reminiscence' (ai/a,uj//7<ns), the 



APPENDIX. 247 

first being instinctive and common to beasts with men, the second 
being the reviving of faded impressions by a distinct act of the will, 
the reflux, at the bidding of the mind, of knowledge which has once 
ebbed (Plato, Legg. v. 7326 : avdf.ivr](ris ' eVrtv eirip^o^ {ppoviiffews 
aTroAjTrojycrrjs), and as such proper only to man. It will at once be 
seen that of this only it can be said, as of this only Olympiodorus does 
say, that it is TraAiyyej'ecria r?]s 



Page 101, line 7 : after " </>aj/racrta," add : or as South ; 
" The grief a man conceives from his own imperfections 
considered with relation to the world taking notice of them ; 
and in one word may be defined, grief upon the sense of 
disesteem" 

Page 102, line 19 : after " mere accident of it," add : 
The old etymologies of o-u<j>poo-vvr), that it is so called as 
rr;v <>p6vr]viv (Aristotle, Ethic. Nic. vi. 5), or o-u- 
s ^povTJo-etos (Plato, Crat. 411 e; cf. Philo, De 
Fort. 3), have about the same value which the greater 
number of the ancient etymologies possess. But Chrysos- 
toin rightly: crox^poo-vvr/ Xtyerat cbro rov era) as ras <pe'- 
vas 6x&.v. Set over against aKoXaaia (Thucydides, iii. 37), 
and aKpao-ia (Xenophon, Mem. iv. 5), it is properly, etc. 

Page 103, line 9 : after " Diogenes Lal'rtius, iii. 57. 91," 
add : In Jeremy Taylor's words (The House of Feasting) : 
" It is reason's girdle, and passion's bridle ... it is /JOJ/AT; 
*/X*7 ? ' as Pythagoras calls it ; KP^TTI? ape-r^?, so Socrates ; 
Kocr/xos ayaOuv TraiTwr, SO Plato 5 acr<aA.eia TCOV 
^wv, so lamblichus." We find it often joined to 
rqs (Aristophanes, Plut. 563, 564) ; to evra&a (2 Mace. iv. 
37) ; to K-aprepi'd (Philo, De Agric. 22). 



248 



APPENDIX. 



Page 108, line 16 : after " is wanting," add : Thus Da- 
rius would have been well pleased not to have taken Baby- 
lon, so that Zopyrus were oXoK^pos still (Plutarch, Eey. el 
Imper. Apotlieg.). Again, unhewn stones, etc. 

Page 118, line 14: after "Tale," add: and more at 
length in his description severally of Covetise and Avarice 
in the Eomaunt of the JRose, 183-246. 

Page 137, line 2 : from the words " the passages," etc. 
to the end of the section, is omitted in the second and third 
editions. 

Page 144, line 17: after " Encydopddie" omit the 
nest sentence, and read the last paragraph, as altered, thus : 
The three words, then, are clearly distinguishable from 
one another, have very different provinces of meaning seve- 
rally belonging to each : they present to us an ascending 
scale of guilt ; so that, seeking to sum up the whole in 
fewest words, one might say, as has been observed already, 
that the three severally express the boaster in words, the 
proud in thoughts, and the injurious in acts. 

Page 160, line 3 : after " seem good," add : to Him 
who has the power and right to do the one or the other ; 
with this note : 

Fritzsche (Ad Rom. vol. i. p. 199) : ' Conveniunt in hoc [a^ecm et 
irdpeffts] quod sive ilia, eive hrcc tibi obtigerit, nulla peocatorum tuo- 
rurn ratio habetur ; discrepant eo, quod, hac data,, facinorum tuorum 
poenas nunquam pendes ; ilia concessu, non diutius nullas peccatornin 
tuorum poenas lues, quam ei in iis connivere placuerit, cui in deHcta 
tua animadvertendi jus sit.' 

Page 160, line 24 : after " without it," add the follow- 
ing note : 






APPENDIX. 249 

Still more unfortunate is a passage to which Ldsner (Obss. e PJd- 
lone, p. 249) refers from Philo (Quod Let. Pot. Ins. 47) in proof tluvt 
irdpeo-ts = atyeffis. A glance at the actual words is sufficient to show 
that Losner, through some inadvertence, has misunderstood its iner.u- 
ing altogether. 

Page 162, line 10 : after " coi-," add : this av(>x>i be- 
ing the correlative of irdpco-is, as x"-P L * ' 1S ^ u<eo-i9 ; so that 
the finding of di/o^i} here is a strong confirmation of that 
view of the word which has been just maintained. 

Page 162, line 13 : after " render it," add : (deducing 
the word, but wrongly, from mipct/j-t, ' praetereo '). 

Page 163, line 1 : after " to evil," add : that such with 
too many was the consequence of the 4vo^ TO? ecu, the 
Psalmist himself declares (Ps. 1. 21). 

Page 167, line 15 : in place of note here, insert the 
following note : 

Chrysostom, who, like most great teachers, often turns etymo- 
logy into the materials of exhortation, does not fail to do so here. To 
other reasons why the Christian should renounce euTpairf\la he adds 
this (Horn. 17 in /.}Vje.*.) : "Opa Kal avrb rovvop.a. euTpcwreAos Aeyerat 
6 TTOI/C/AOS, 6 ircwToSaTrbs, 6 UffTaTOS, 6 eijKO\os, 6 iravra yivS/Mefos 
TOVTO 8e Trtjppca Tusv TTJ TlfTpa ^ov\u6vT<av. Taxws TpeTrerot 6 rotoc- 
ros Kal /jLeBiffTarai. 

and put the words " that St. Paul," etc. after " exclu- 
sively acquired," line 20. 

Page 174, line 2 : put the note here referred to in the 
text, and add the following note : 

A reviewer in The Ecclesiastic, July, 1854, of tho first edition of this 
1) ).->k, to whom I would willingly be thankful for much praise, and foi 
painting out to me some errors, which I have since removed, has 
thought good to charge me with saying here what I knew, while I 



250 APPENDIX. 

said it, to be untrue. His words are : " It is not ' an attempt some- 
times' to limit the \eirovpyia to the Eucharistic celebration that has 
been made. It is the universal language, as Mr. Trench must know u-cll, 
or' all Calholic Ecclesiastical writers," p. 297. It might have sufficed 
to charge me with ignorance, and not with wilful falsehood in my 
statement ; and for repelling this charge of ignorance, I will content 
myself with quoting a single passage from Bingham's Antiquities (xiii. 
1. 8) : " [The Greek writers] usually style all holy offices, and all parts 
of Dir'me Service, by the general name of Aetroypym. But it is never 
used, as the Romanists would appropriate it, for the business of sacri- 
ficing only ;" and of this he gives ample proof in his notes. Cf. Sui- 
cer, Thes. s. v. ; Deyling, Obss. Sac. vol. i. p. 285 ; and August!, Chrisil. 
Archceol. vol. ii. pp. 537, 538. 

Page 180, line 10 : after " n/wopias," add : So Gregory 
Nazianzene (Carm. ii. 34. 43, 44) 

6v/m.os jUeV ICTTLV a&poos effis fypevos, 
opy}] Se BVJJ.OS ifififawy. 

Page 181, line 7: after "wrath of God," add: who 
would not love good, unless He hated evil, the two being 
inseparable, so that either He must do both or neither ; 
and also the following note : 

See on this anger of God, as the necessary complement of his love, 
the excellent observations of Lactantius (De Ira Dei, c. 4] : ' Nam si 
T)eus non irascitur impiis et injustis, nee pios utique justosque diligit. 
In rebus enim diversis aut in utramque partem moveri necesse est, aut 
in nullam.' 

Page 199, line 25 : after " straight room," add : It is 
sometimes used in a figurative sense, and then expresses 
what we, employing exactly the same image, are accus- 
tomed to call the relaxation of morals (Philo, De Cherub 
27). 

Page 205, last line : to " in Scripture," add as note : 



APPENDIX. 251 

They will do this, even though they stop short of lengths to which 
Fritzscha, a very learned but unconsecrated modern expositor of the 
Romans, has reached; who on Rom. i. 7, writes : ' Delude consideran- 
dum cst formula %a^tj vijuv rcai flp^yrf in N. T. nihil aliud dici nisi 
quocl Graci illo suo xcu'^e/j/ s. ev Trpdrretv enuntiare consuevcrint, h. c. 
ut aliqnis fortunatus sit, sive, ut cum Horatio loquar, Ep. i. 8. 1, ut 
gaudeat et bene rein gerat ! ' 

Page 209, line 5 : for tlie sentence beginning " Plato," 
etc. read : In the Definitions which go under Plato's name 
(4125) it is defined &/<a/W, etc. 

Page 218, line 22 : after " sinful world," add : One 
might almost suppose, as it has been suggested, that there 
was allusion here to the Levitical ordinance, according to 
which Aaron and his sons in the priesthood were to be 
washed once for all from head to foot at their consecration 
to their office (Exod. xxvii. 4 ; xl. 12) ; but were to wash 
their hands and their feet in the brasen laver as often as 
they afterwards ministered before the Lord (Exod. xxx. 
19, 21 ; xl. 31). Yet this would commend itself more, if 
we did not find hands and feet in the same category there, 
while here they are not merely disjoined, but set over 
against one another (John xiii. 9, 10). Of this however I 
cannot doubt, that the whole mystery, etc. 

Page 225, xlvii : this section has been enlarged and 
rewritten, as follows : 



xlvii. 

is a word in manifold aspects full of interest ; it 
would be difficult to find another in the uses of which the 
Greek mind utters itself more clearly. I do not propose 



252 APPENDIX. 

however now to consider it in more aspects than one, that 
is, in its relations to e/\eos, and as signifying the divine fa- 
vour and grace. I shall only consider how far, and in what 
respects the x^P ts eo ^ (Rom. vi. 14, 15 ; xi. G ; Gal. ii. 
21 ; Heb. xiii. 9) differs from the IXecs (Luke i. 50 ; Eph. 
ii. 4 ; 1 Pet. i. 3), his grace from his mercy. 

The freeness of the outcornings of God's love is the 
central point of the x^pis. Thus take the remarkable defi- 
nition of the word which Aristotle supplies, and in which, 
though he is but speaking of the x^P 1 ? f men, he lays the 



whole weight on the fact that it is a benefit conferred with- 
out hope or expectation of return, finding its only motive 
in the liberality and free-heartedness of the giver (Rhet. 
ii. 7) : OTTO) SA; x^r"^' KCt ^' V ^X 0>v ^- e 'y erat .X^P iv vrovpyew 
TUV SeOyUevxo, pwj O.VTL TWOS, yu,?y8' tVa TI airnp ru> virovpyovvn, 
d/XA.' Lva eicetVa) TI. Agreeing with this we have x^P 15 KC " 
Swpea, Polybius, i. 31. 6 ; cf. Rom. iii. 24 (3a>pcai/ r^ avrou 
Xapt-t) ; v. 15, 17; xii. 3, G; xv. 15; so x^P 15 Ka - Vt ewota, 
Plato, 7ye<7</. xi. 931 a ; x^P 1 ? opposed to /xwrflos, Plutarch, 
JDyc. 15 ; cf. Bom.'xi. 6, where St. Paul sets x^P^ ail( l ^/ > 
ya over against one another in sharpest antithesis, showing 
that they mutually exclude one another, it being of the 
essence of that which is owed to x^pis that it is unearned 
and unmerited, as Augustine urges so often, ' Gratia, nisi 
gratis sit, non cst gratia;' or indeed demerited, as the 
faithful man would most freely acknowledge. 

But while x^ots has thus reference to the sins of men, 
and is that blessed attribute of God which these sins call 



APPENDIX. 253 

out and display, his free gift in their forgiveness, e/\eos has 
special and immediate regard to the misery which is the 
consequence of these sins, being the tender sense 1 of this 
misery displaying itself in the effort, which only the con- 
tinued perverseness of man can hinder or defeat, to assuage 
and entirely remove it. But here as in other cases it may 
be worth our while to consider the anterior uses of this 
word, before it was assumed into this its highest use as the 
mercy of Him, whose mercy is over all his works. Of 
eXeo? we have this definition in Aristotle (Rliet. ii. 8) : 

6<TTU> Sry A.e09, X.V7TYJ TIS 5Tt <aiVOjU,eVu> KttKO) <$apTl/5 KCU Xv- 

Trrjpo), rov ava^Lov rvy^avea', o KU.V O.VTOS TrpocrSoK^creiei/ av 
r-aOf.lv, r; rail/ avrov TLVO.. It will bo at once perceived that 
much will have here to be modified, and something remo- 
ved, when we come to speak of the divine 2Aeo?. Grief 
docs not and cannot touch Him, in whose presence is ful- 
of joy ; He does not demand unworthy suffering 



nition of eA.05, Diogenes Laertius, vii. 1. 63) l to move 
Him, seeing that absolutely unworthy suffering there is 
none in a world of sinners ; neither can He who is lifted 
up above all chance and change, contemplate, in beholding 
misery, the possibility of being Himself entangled in the 
same. It is not to be wondered at, that the Manichseans 
and others who wished for a God as unlike man as possible, 

1 So Cicero (Tusc. iv. 8. 18): ' Misericordia est {Egritudo ex mise- 
ri.1 ulterius injuria laborantis. Nemo enim parricide aut proditoria 
supplicio misericordia, coramovetur.' 



254 APPENDIX. 

cried out against the attribution of oVeos to Him ; and 
found here a weapon of their warfare against that Old 
Testament, whose God was not ashamed to proclaim Him- 
self a God of pity and compassion (Ps. Ixxviii. 88 ; Ixxxvi. 
15; and often). They were favoured here in the Latin 
by the word ' misericordia,' and did not fail to appeal to 
its etymology, and to demand whether the ' miseruni cor ' 
could find place in Him. Augustine is engaged in contin- 
ual controversy with them. To their objection he answered 
truly that this and all other words used to express human 
affections did require certain modifications, a clearing away 
from them of the infirmities of human passions, before they 
could be ascribed to the Most High ; but that these for all 
this were but the accidents of them, the essentials remain- 
ing unchanged. Thus De Div. Qucest. ii. 2 : l Item de 
misericordia, si auferas compassionem cum eo, quern mise- 
raris, participate miseries, ut remaneat tranquitta bonitas 
subveniendi et a miseril liberandi^ insimiatur divinse mise- 
ricordiae qualiscunque cognitio :' cf. De Civ. Dei, ix. 5. 
We may say then that the X"-P L * f Grod, his free grace and 
gift, is extended to men, as they are guilty, his eAeos, as 
they are miserable. The lower creation may be, and is, 
the object of God's eXeo?, inasmuch as the burden of man's 
curse has redounded also upon it (Job xxxviii. 41 ; Ps. 
cxlvii. 9 ; Jon. iv. 11; Rom. viii. 20-23), but of his x<*P t<J 
man alone ; he only needs it, he only is capable of receiv- 
ing it. 

In the Divine mind, and in the order of our salvatioi) 






APPENDIX. 255 

as conceived therein, the t/\eos precedes the ^apis. God so 
loved the world with a pitying love (herein was the e/\eo<j) 
that he gave his only-begotten Son (herein the x^P ts )> that 
the world through Him might be saved (cf. Eph. ii. 4 ; 
Luke i. 78, 79). But in the order of the manifestation of 
God's purposes of salvation the grace must go before the 
mercy, the x^s must make way for the IXeos. It is true 
that the same persons are the subjects of both, being at 
once the guilty and the miserable ; yet the righteousness 
of God, which it is quite as necessary should be maintained 
as his love, demands that the guilt should be done away, 
before the misery can be assuaged ; only the forgiven may 
be blessed. He must pardon, before He can heal ; men 
must be justified before they can be sanctified. And as 
the righteousness of God absolutely and in itself requires 
this, so not less does the same, as it has expressed itself in 
the moral constitution of man, having there linked misery 
with guilt, and made the first the inseparable companion 
of the second. From this it follows that in each of the 
apostolic salutations where these words occur, X"P^ pre- 
cedes e/Xeos (1 Tim. i. 2 ; 2 Tim. i. 2 ; Tit. i. 4 ; 2 John 
>) ; nor could the order of the words have been reversed. 



INDEX. 



aipevis 



airta 



O.TCTOfJ.O.1 



PAGE 


PACK 


'>vri . . .238 


jSios . . . . ,128 


65 


ySAao-^ueaj . . . 240 


98, 102 


jSJo-Kw . . . .120 


239 




oyta . . .164 


SeiAia .... 58 


98 


Seio-iSaiViwv . . . 227 


. 194 


SeCTTTOTTJS . . . 131 


31 


SiaS^a . . . .112 


. 241 




137 


SoCAos .... 53 


. 182 




48 


'EjSpaTos . . . 185 


. . . .48 


el K v 77 


85 


fKK\-rj(ria . . . 17 


. 35 


e \aiov . . . .182 


affts ... 92 


e\eyxos ... 31 


t . . . . 198 


i\4y%it . . . .31 


198 


tAeoy .... 225 


rroy . . .145 


e\KVca .... 105 


89 


cATri'y .... 239 


a . . . .83 


fvieticeia .... 207 


83 


fTUTl/J-aOO . . 31 


? . . . .74 


fpcurdw . . . .194 


157,243 


fi>\d$cia , . 53 



INDEX. 



257 



6iAa/8?'js 
fyff $?'?? 


PAGE 

. 227 

227 
. 104 


/j.a.KpoQv l u.ia 

/ULfTCtVOfOi) 


PACK 

. 240 
40 
. 241 
241 




. 128 


fJ.O\VV(l) . 


151 






jJLVpOV 


. 182 


Wxwf . 


242 


/iwpoXoyfa . 


164 


6d\a<T(ra 


72 


vaos . 


. 28 


Ofiorijs . 


24 


venpos . 


242 


0(0ffe&-r)s . 


. 227 


J/iTTTW 


. 215 


fleoTrjs . 


24 


vovdeffia. 


152 


depdnuv 


. 53 






diyydva) . 


89 


6\oK\-npos . 


. 108 


OCTJTOJ 


. 242 


ouoiea/na, . 


77 


Bpria-Kos . 


227 


6fu>iwtns . 


. 77 


6 ^ ' ' 


. 178 


oprn 


178 


M, . 


. 28 


TratSe/a . 


152 


Iou5a7oj . 


185 


tra\iyyf veffia 


. 92 


'IirpaTjA/TTjs 


. 185 


Travliyvpis 


17 






irdpeais 


. 157, 243 


KciKia 


60 


Tra.popyurfj.6s . 


178 


KzKo-n6fia . 


. 60 


TT e \ayos 


. 72 


;rAa5oj . 


2:!7 


IT finis . 


175 


/cAfTTTTJ? 


. 211 


ITIITTIS 


. 239 


*A^a . 


2)17 


7rAove|ia 


117 


KoAaffiv 


46, 242 


TTAWCO 


. 215 


K6fffJ.OS . 


241 


votnaivut 


120 


KVplOS 


. 134 


TTovripia 


. 60 






jrpaSrri': 


201, 207, 240 


AauTra? . 


219 


irpaiis 


. 242 


\arpevu . 


. 171 


irpotyrjTevca 


40 


\troi>pyeca . 


171 


7TTWX''S 


. 175 


Apirr^s 


. 211 






AotSopcw 


2-10 


ffCtpKlKOS 


240 


Ayuw . 


. 215 


<TK\Tlp6? . 


. 74 


At'vyos . 


219 


ffrtAavos 


112 



253 



INDEX. 



PAGE 

i H n f 

105 (pi\apyvpio 
239 <t>i\f<y 
102 



Qtyyos 



. 201 

108 

46, 242 

137 

. 137 

53 

. 219 



PACK 

124 

117 
65 

58 
219 
219 

225 
238 
182 

145 

89 

240 



IL 



INDEX OF OTHEK WORDS. 



Abbild . 
Admonitio 
/Kmulor . 
aycnrr) . 

CLKO\affTOS 

Altare . 



Aino 
Andacht 
An ti pater 

Am 



Austerus 

Avarice 

Beflecken 
Benignitas 

Beruhren . 
Besudeln 
Betasten . 
Biography . 
Booita 

icht 



PAGE 

7S Call . 

15 1 Calo 

l-i:> Candela . 

70 Caritas 

153 Castigatio 

42 Cautio . 

}!'', Clomcntisi. 

C5 Congregatio . 

92 Convict 

228 Convince 

146 Convocatio 

147 Corona . 

] If, Correptio . 

42 Covetousneas 

41 Cultua 
7f. 

117 Defile . 

Dofoul 

151 Deltas . 

238 Despot 
74 Diaderaa 
90 Dilectio 

151 Diligo . 

90 Divinatio . 

130 Divinitaa 

239 Donarium 

42 Drag . 
Gl Draw 



PAGB 

20 

20 

223 

71 

46 

60 

208 

22 

34 

33 

22 

113 

150 

117 

231 

161 

151 

27 

186 

118 

71 
Co 

.;:; 
27 

:;G 

105 
lOfi 



260 



INDEX. 





PAGE 




PAGR 


Egestas . 


. 177 


Losel 


. 84 


Eifersucht 


125 


Liiderlich 


86 


Equity 


. 209 


Luxuria, luxuriosus . 


. 84 


"Epcas . 


71 






Eruditio . ; 


. 154, 156 


Macula . 


152 


cvScunovict 


41 


Malitia 


. 61 


Exacerbatio 


. 181 


Manier . 


90 


Exeandescentia 


179 


Mansuetus 


. 242 






JUCtl'TIKTJ . 


43 


Fair . 


23 


uajrts 


42 


Fascia . 


113 


Mendicus 


176 




23 


Mercatus . . *. 


23 


Fur 


211 


Metus . 


59 


Furor 


. 179 


Moderatio . 


. 103 






Modestia 


103, 208 


Gasconade 


139 






Geiz . 


. 117 


Nacheiferung 


125 


Gloriosus 


140 


Xachschleppen . 


. 108 


Glorious . 


. 140 


j/e^ueo-aco, vegans . 


127 


Grecian 


193 










Ostentation 


. 139 


ITabsucht . 


. 117 






'EAATJZ/iO-TTJS . 


187 


Palmes . 


237 


'OAoTeATjs . 


. 112 


Panegyric . 


. 23 


Iliiten . 


121 


Pasco . 


122 






Pauper, paupertas 


. 176 


Lmago 


. 78 


Pelagus 


72 


Indigentia . 


119 


neveVrcu 


. 176 


Indignatio 


. 179 


Penuria 


170 


Joquino 


151 


Perditus . 


. 84 


Integer, integritas 


. 109 


irfpirepos 


140 


Interpreter . 


63 


Peto .... 


. 195 






Petulantia 


87 


i:a\eca 


. 20 


Pietas 


. 228 


Klept . 


214 


irdvros . 


74 






Pretermission . 


. 159 


Liibes 


. 152 


Pralilerei 


139 


I, afro . 


211 


Prodigus . 


. 84 


Life . 


, 128 


7TOO(raiT7J5 


177 



11* 



INDEX. 



261 





PAGE 




PAGI5 


Protervitas 


87 


Thief 


. l) 1 2 


Piulor .... 


99 




41 






Timor 


. 58 


Regent ratio 


98 


Toucher 


90 


Rfligio .... 


230 


Traho 


. 105 


Religion, religious 


2)12 


Tranquillus . 


242 


Religiosus 


231 


Turpiloquium . 


. 166 


Ren->vatio 


98 






Reprove 


33 


Ultio . 


46 


Robber . 


211 


Upiishness 


. 142 


Rogo .... 


196 


Urbanitas 


168 


Scatterling 


84 


Yerax 


. 48 


Scurrilitas . 




Yereeundia . 


100 


r hiiiiiefast, shaniefastness . 


104 


Yerus 


. 48 


Similitude 


79 


Vita . 


128 


Simultas .... 


126 


Vitiositas . 


. 61 


Spurco .... 


161 


Yorbild 


78 


Stain .... 


152 






Stilta .... 


141 


"Wahrsagen 


. 42 


Stolz . 


141 


AVantonncss . 


88 


Stout .... 


141 


AV-ideii . 


. 121 


Stultiloquy 


1 .if, 


AVeipsagen 


42 


Snperbia 


141 


AVi.l.-rchrist 


.148 


Superatitio, superstitiosus 




Worship 


227 


Ta'iiia .... 


113 


Ziehen 


. 108 


Temperantiu 


108 


Zuulogy 


lo'l 


Ofoyfveaia .... 


97 


Zorn . 


. 179 



ni. 



INDEX OF TEXTS REFERRED TO. 



MATTHEW. 


Ch. xix. ver. 1 6, page 
21, 


132 
111 


MARK. 


Chap. ii. ver. 2, page 191 


28, 


94 Chap. iii. 


ver. 5, page 181 


iii. 


17, 


68 


23, 


95 




29, 


193 


iv. 


10, 


173 


xx. 15, 


126 


iv. 


40, 


53 




16, 


219 


38, 


128 


vi. 


13, 


184 


V. 


14, 


51 


xxi. 8, 


233 


vii. 


3, 


216 




15, 


219 


13, 


212 




21, 22, 


126 




25, 


57 


23, 


30 




21, 22, 


87 




37, 


62 


xxil 2, 14, 


56 




21, 22, 


117 




48, 


111 


12, 


34 




21, 22, 


141 


vi. 


IT, 


216 


13 


56 


ix. 


25, 


32 




22, 


219 


20, 


79 




43,48, 


47 




23, 


220 


37, 


68 


xii. 


44, 


129 


vii. 


9,7, 


196 


xxiii. 15, 


72 


xiii. 


22, 


148 




14, 


132 


23, 


232 




24, 


219 


viii. 


26, 


58 


35, 


30 


XV. 


7, 


213 


ix. 


3, 


32 


xxiv. 24, 


148 


xvi. 


1, 


184 


xi. 


28, 


198 


29, 


219 










28, 29, 


200 


29, 


220 










29, 


203 


32, 


238 




LUKE. 






28, 29, 


206 


43, 


211 






. 


xii. 


36, 


164 


xxv. 4, 


223 


i. 


6, 


229 




45, 


198 


24, 


74 




10, 


30 


xiii. 


24, 


220 


46, 


46 




23, 


173 




27, 30, 


56 


46, 


47 




51, 


141 




32, 


238 


xxvi. 55, 


30 




78, 79, 


226 


XV. 


1, 


220 


55, 


212 


ii. 


25, 


228 


xvl 


18, 


20 


xxvii. 5, 


81 




29, 


137 




22, 


82 


16, 


213 


iv. 


18, 


1S5 


xviii. 


6, 


73 


29, 


116 




20, 


57 




17, 


20 


27-30, 


148 


v. 


2, 


216 




23, 


209 


29, 87, 42, 


191 


vi. 


20, 


177 




32,84, 


163 


37, 


34 


vii. 


46, 


188 


rix. 


13, 


32 






viii. 


14, 


181 



INDEX. 263 

Ch. viii. vcr.43, page 129 Ch. viii. ver. 9, page 32 Chap. iv. ver.24, page 137 



ix. 33, 


219 


20, 


30 




27, 


1>5 


X. 


2T, 


63 


46, 


32 


V. 


17, 


124 




SO, 


212 


ix. 2, 


184 




'22 


57 




30, 


213 


3, 36, 5, 


67 


vi. 


1, 


187 


xi. 


11, 


196 


7, 


216 


Tit 


7, 


173 


xiii. 


9, 


164 


8, 


177 




'22, 


1M 


xiv. 


9, 


99 


16, 


32 




33, 


jl 




13, 


83 


31, 


227 


viii. 


ij 


2*3 




32, 


190 


x. 11, 


1-22 




3, 


105 


XV. 


12, 


129 


xi. 22, 


197 




3, 


143 


ivi. 


H 


118 


3,36, 


67 


ix. 


5, 


44 




20, 21, 


176 


xii. 6, 


211 




31, 


59 


xviii. 


32, 


143 


32, 


106 




37, 


'217 




39, 


32 


xiii. 5, 


216 


X. 


'2, 


227 


xix. 


21, 


74 


10, 


217 




33, 


135 




24, 


56 


xiv. 16, 


197 


xi. 


5, 


44 


xxi. 


5, 


39 


27, 


5S 


xii. 


20, 


195 




15, IT, 


63 


XV. 1, 


52 


xiii. 


2, 


170 




37, 


80 


3, 


213 




5, 


57 


xxii. 


51, 


67 


2, 4, 5, 6, 


233 




16, 


1<>3 


xxiii. 


1C, 


154 


xvi. 8, 


83 


xiv 


16, 


162 




40, 


32 


19, 


195 




19, 


105 


xxiv. 


39, 


90 


23, 


194 


xvi. 


16, 


40 








23, 


196 




19, 


105 








26, 


107 




22, 23, 


143 




JOHN. 




xvii. 3, 


43 


xvii. 


6, 


105 








9, 15, 20, 


197 




22, 


235 


i. 


8, 


224 


xviii. 3, 


220 




23, 


42 




9, 


51 


3, 


839 




27, 


90 




12, 


92 


18, 


57 




30, 


162 




17, 


51 




151 


xix. 


13, 


138 




18, 


68 




57 




32, 39, 40, 


13 




47, 


193 


40, 


tit 


xxi. 


29, 30, 


29 


fi. 


6, 


56 


xxi. 6, S, 11, 


107 




30, 


105 




14, 


80 


15, 17, 


121 


xxiii. 


14, 


39 




IT, 


124 


15, 17, 


63 


xxiv. 


23, 


199 


ill 


3, 


97 


15, 16, 17, 


69 


XXV. 


19, 


237 




20, 


32 






xxvi. 


3,27, 


2:37 




33, 


43 








25, 


102 




35, 


63 


THE ACTS. 






29, 


167 


V. 


20, 


63 














26, 


133 


ii. 5, 


223 










33, 


219 


22, 


193 


ROMANS. 




85, 


51 


lit. 2, 


196 










S5, 


224 


12, 


193, 


i. 


7, 


226 


vt 


82, 


51 


16, 


108 




18, 


162 




44, 


106 


21, 


94 




20, 


24 




49, 


52 


21, 


95 




20, 


25 


\ii 


82, 


67 


Iv. 24, 


72 




24,82, 


162 



264 INDEX. 

Chap. i. ven 29, page 61 Chap. xi. ver. 7, page 81 Chap. ii. ver. 4, page 226 





29, 


62 


xii. 


3, 


89 


iii. 7, 


55 




29, 


63 


xiii. 


4, 


140 


iv. 2, 


206 




30, 


137 


xiv. 


20, 


61 


3, 


178 




30, 


142 




20, 


110 


5, 


164 


ii. 


8, 


178 




24, 25, 


32 


13, 


110 




9,10, 


191 




32, 


44 


14, 


110 


iii. 


4, 


34 


XV. 


33, 


41 


18, 


132 




4, 


48 


xvi. 


22, 


89 


19, 


87 




18, 


59 








23, 


96 




25, 


158 








26, 


ISO 




25, 


161 


2o CORINTHIANS. 29, 


164 


V. 


12, 


132 








32, 


61 


viii. 


15, 


59 


i. 


2, 


226 


v. 3, 5, 


119 




21, 23, 


95 




21, 


185 


4, 


166 




23, 


68 


iii. 


6, 


55 


4, 


167 




38, 


128 


iv. 


16, 


96 


IS, 


83 


ix. 


3, 


89 


V. 


4, 


128 


vi. 4, 


152 




4, 


173 


vii. 


1, 


152 


4, 


154 




4, 


193 




5, 


198 


4, 


156 




16, 


238 




10, 


241 


5, 


59 


X. 


2, 


124 


ix. 


2, 


124 


9, 


135 


si. 


16, 


238 




22, 


187 


12, 


242 


xii. 


2, 


96 




26, 


211 








2, 


97 


X. 


1, 


210 








16, 


142 


xi. 


22, 


187 


PHILIPPIANS. 




xiii. 


12, 


219 


xii. 


20, 


126 








13, 


187 




21, 


87 


i. 2, 


126 




13, 


124 




29, 


193 


ii. 10, 


116 




13, 


126 








15, 


51 


XV. 


16, 


173 








15, 


219 




27, 


173 


GALATIANS. 


15, 


221 














17, 


173 








i. 


3, 


226 


25, GO, 


173 


1ST CORINTHIANS. 


8,9, 


39 


iii. 5, 


193 










13, 


193 


12, 15, 


112 


i. 


3, 


226 


ii. 


14, 


193 


15, 


110 


ii. 


6, 


110 


V. 


19, 


87 


15, 


187 




6, 12, 


241 




20, 


126 


15, 


188 




14, 


240 




20. 21, 


124 


iv. 8, 


41 


Hi. 


18, 


241 




22, 


133 






iv. 


12, 


240 




22, 


238 






V. 


8, 


61 




22, 


240 


COLOSSIANS. 






10, 


117 


vi. 


3, 


2..T 








llf 


119 








i. 15, 


T9 


viii. 


3, 


68 








23, 


5 




7, 


151 


El'HEBIANB. 


ii. '., 


24 


ix. 


9, 


175 








9, 


25 




24, 26, 


114 


i. 


2, 


226 


17, 


50 


xi. 


T, 


79 


ii. 


2, 


241 


is, 


234 



INDEX. 



265 



O!is.p. Ti. vet. 21, page 


91 Chap. ii. ver. 25, pn?o 207 Cliap. i. ver. 26, 27, p. 232 


iii. 5, 


119 


iii. 2, 


187 


ii. 2, 


i'l 


8, 


61 






6, 


105 


8, 


1C5 






iii. 2, 


111 


8, 


17S 


TITUS. 




9. 


B4 


10, 


S3 






14, 


12< 


10, 


96 


t 2, 


48 


6, 


141 


12, 


206 


4, 


225 


c, 


142 


ir. 1, 


135 


6, 


S3 


16, 


133 






15, 


151 


v 4, 


1S4 






ii. 9, 


135 






*ST THESSALONIAX3. 


iii. '2, 


207 










5, 


94 


IST PETER. 




i. , 


4S 


5, 


96 






ii. 2, 


143 






L 8, 


OS 


v. 23, 


103 






18, 23, 


92 




112 


HEBREWS. 




1", 


59 










19, 


224 






L 8, 


80 


23, 


93 


2o TIIESSALONIAXS. 


9, 


188 


ii. 1, 


61 






iii. 5, 


N 


9, 


226 


i. 7, 


200 


5, 


54 


9, 


227 


7, 


193 


v. 7, 


59 


IS, 


135 


ii. 8, 8, 


145 


14, 


110 


iiL 4, 


242 


4, 


147 


vl. 6, 


96 


6, 


134 






viii. 2, 


50 


8, 


87 






2, 


174 


3, 


129 


IST TIMOTHY. 




9, 


1G3 


4, 


S3 






ix. 1, 


124 


v. 4, 


115 


i. 2, 


225 


21, 


173 


4, 


122 


13, 


142 


x. 1, 4, 


158 


5, 


141 


l-' ! , 


143 


11, 


173 


5> 


143 


Ii. 2, 


129 


23, 


217 






2, 


287 




46 






9, 




xii. 5, 7, 8, 


154 


2o PETER. 




9, 


103 


15, 


151 






10, 


227 


18, 


89 


i. 3, 


131 


15, 


102 


23, 


24 


9, 


163 


v. 6, 


128 


28, 


59 


19, 


219 


13, 


1SS 


28, 


101 


If, 


224 


vi. 1, 2, 


135 


rfii. *0, 


122 


21, 


44 










ii. 1, 


137 










<) 5 


227 


2n TIMOTHY. 




JAMES. 




IS, 


87 










M, 


152 


i. 2, 


225 


i. 4, 


108 


20, 


163 


7, 


58 


4, 


110 


22, 


21? 


10, 


131 


5, 


1% 






ii. 4, 


131 


12, 


115 






5, 


115 


23, 


206 


t 





266 



INDEX. 



JUDE. 

Chap. i. ver. 4, page ST 
5, 137 
8, 151 



Ch. vii. ver. 4, page 21 6 



IST JOHN. 



1, 90 
13, 14, 110 
16, 131 



16, 
18, 



22, 
22, 
IT, 
22, 

3, 

18, 
IS, 
21, 
4, 
16, 



133 
145 



20, 27, 185 



145 
147 
129 
19G 
145 
46 

F O 

69 

97 
197 



20, 


68 


viii. 


10, 


220 








10, 


223 






xii. 


3, 


115 


>HN. 




xiii. 


1, 


115 








1, 


116 


3, 


225 




H 


79 


7, 


145 




16, 


53 


7, 


147 


xiv. 


4, 


151 






XV. 


3, 


53 






xvi. 


9, 


ITS 


iTIOS 


rs. 


xvii. 


9,12, 


115 






xix. 


12, 


115 


5, 


217 




15, 


173 


10, 


44 




18, 


53 


18, 


128 


xxi. 


1, 


95 


10, 


115 




4, 


24 


10, 


131 




8, 


58 


4, 


151 




11, 


221 


5, 


131 




13, 


219 


9, 


21 




13, 


222 


11, ' 


115 


xxii, 


5, 


219 


19, 


154 




5, 


220 


4, 


115 








10, 


137 









REDFIFLDS NE\\ T AXD POPULAR PUBLICATIONS. 



TRENCH'S PHILOLOGICAL WORKS. 

THE STUDY OF WORDS. 

By Rev. RICHARD CHENEVIX TRENCH, B. D. One vol., 12mo. 
price 75 cents. 

" He discourses in a truly lenrned and lively manner upon the original unity of Ian 
fringe, nnd the origin, derivation, and history of words, with their morality and separate 
bpheres of meaning." Evening Post. 

" This is a noble tribute to the divine faculty of speech. Popularly written, for use 
i\s lectures, exact in its learning, and poetic in its vision, it is a book at once for the 
scholar and the general reader." N. Y. Evangelist. 

" It is one of the most striking and original publications of the day, with nothing of 
hardness, dullness, or dryness about it, but altogether fresh, lively, and entertaining." 
Boston Evening Traveller. 



**, 



ENGLISH, PAST AND PRESENT. 
By Rev. RICHARD CHENEVIX TRENCH, B. D. 12mo, price 75 cts. 

" An able work by an able author. The subject is treated under the several heads 
of, the English a composite language ; its gains ; its diminutions ; the changes in its 
meaning; and the changed spelling.'' Hartford Courant. 

" The entire work is eo clearly and simply written, and the information imparted is 
of so interesting a nature, and is so pleasantly given, that it may be read with zest by 
the most careless and amusement-se -king." Boston Post 

" In its most vivid and chnrming sketches of the component parts of the English lan- 
guage, it will give as much pleasure as instruction." Philadelphia Episcopal Recorder. 



THE SYNONYMS OF THE NEW TESTAMENT. 
By Rev. RICHARD CHENEVIX TRENCH, B. D. 12mo, price 75 cts. 

"The nice distinctions between words of nearly the same significations, and the shades 
of different meaning often applied to the same word, render a book of this (kind not 
only convenient, but in fact necessary. All may be enlightened by its perusal." Chris- 
tian. Herald and Messenger. 

" It shows great exactness of thought, and a wide range of philological training ; and 
we can hardly imagine how the subject could have bei-n treated at once more concisely 
nnd more luminously. Every biblical student, especially every clergyman, ought to be 
in possession of the volume." Puritan Recorder. 

" This book is well worth the perusal of every thorough theological student. Like 
nil the works of Mr. Trench it evinces marks of great scholarship. As an exegetical 
iid in the solution of the meaning of the New Testament, the work under notice is in- 
faluable." Saturday Evening Gazette. 



ON THE LESSONS IN PROVERBS. 
By Rev. RICHARD CHENEVIX TRENCH, B. D. 12mo, price 50 cts. 

" It is a book at once profoundly instructive, and at the same time, deprived of all 
approach to dryness, by the charming manner in which the subject is treated." Ar- 
thur's Home Gazette. 

" It is a wide field, and one which the author has well cultivated, adding not only to 
his own reputation, but u valuable work to our literature." Albany Even. Transcript. 

" The work shows an acute perception, a genial appreciation of wit, and great re- 
Boarch. It is a very rare nnd agreeable production, which may be read with profit and 
delight." Ncu York Evangelist. 



HEDFIELDS NEW AND POPULAR PUBLICATIONS, 

LAS CASES' NAPOLEON. 

Memoirs of the Life, Exile, and Conversations of the Emperor Na- 
poleon. By the COUNT LAS CASES. 4 vols. 12 mo. Cloth, with 
eight Portraits on Steel, two Maps, and ten Illustrations, $4 ; halt' 
ealf or morocco, extra, $8. 

"The earlier American editions of these fascinating memoirs have long beon out of 
print. Of all the works relating to Napoleon by his personal friends and associates, 
this is the best and most important." N. Y. Herald. 

"In no other work can be 'found so full and truthful a statement of the private quali- 
ties or natural disposition of the soul of the greatest general which the world has ever 
produced, as in Las Cases' Journal." Christian Secretary, Hartford. 

" A work which for minuteness of detail, keenness of description, and interesting in- 
formation in regard to one of the greatest soldiers that ever lived, is not surpassed, if 
equalled. The author, favored as he was with constant companionship of the Emperor, 
for year?, possessed peculiar advantages for collecting material for such a volume." 
Buffalo Express. 



HISTORY OF LOUISIANA. 

The History of Louisiana Spanish Domination. By CHARLES 

GAYARRE. 8vo., cloth. $2 50. 

The History of Louisiana French Domination. By CHARLES 

GAYARRE. 2 vols., 8vo, cloth. $3 50. 

" Its author is an accomplished scholar, a fine writer, and has devoted himself to his 
subject with commendable fidelity and zeal. His work is an important and valuable ad- 
dition to the local and early history of an interesting portion of our country, and de- 
serves a place in every library in which works of American history form any part." 
Boston Post. 

" There is little need of looking beyond Gayarre, who rests his narrative on authentic 
documents." Bancroft's History of the United States, Vol. VI. 

" It includes, nmong a variety of interesting passages, the war of 1776 \ the politics and 
intrigues of the West, for the navigation of the Mississippi ; the intrigues of WILKINSON, 
M'GiLLiVRAY, and others; the YHZOO scheme ; the curious episode of WILLIAM AU- 
GUSTUS BOWLES ; and a variety of interests, adventures, experiments, and politics, all 1 
of which are luminously stated, logically arranged, and argued to just conclusions of 
history." W. Gilmore Simms. 



FRANCE E RE'S NARRATIVE. 

Narrative of a Voyage to the Northwest Coast of America, in the 
years 1811, '12, '13, and '14; or the First Settlement on the 
Pacific. By GABRIEL FRANCHERE. Translated and Edited by 
J. V. Huntington. 12mo, cloth. Plates. $1 00. 

"Of all the narratives of travel and adventure in our Northwestern wilderness, there 
is none that gives a more vivid and picturesque description of the events, or in which 
the personal adventures of the narrator are told with more boldness, yet, 1'reer from all 
egotism, than in this unpretending work of Mr. Franchere. It is truly a fragment of 
our colonial history, saved from oblivion." Philadelphia National Argus. 

" The great value of this work, as an authentic and decisive narrative of critical events" 
was strongly attested by Colonel Benton, in the great debate of 1846, on the Oregon 
boundary question. It is a pleasant narrative, simply told. Irving made much use of 
it in his Astoria." Boston Atlas. 

"The De Foe-like simplicity of the style, its picturesque descriptions of personal ad- 
venture, and o.f the features of the countries traversed by the author, confer an interest 
on this narrative, apart iroua that which springs from its historical value." Ftu York 
Evenin* Pott. 



REDFIKLD S NEW AND POi'LLAR FUEL. CATIONS 

SKETCHES OF THE IRISH BAR. 

By the Right Hon. RICHARD LALOR SHEIL, M. P. Edited 
a Memoir and Notes, by Dr. SHELTON MACKENZIE. Fourth 
Edition. In 2 vols. Price $2 00. 

"They attracted universal attention by their brilliant find pointed style, and their lib 

eralify of settiment. The Notes embody a great amount of biographical information, 

tantry irossip, legal and political anecdote, and amusing reminiscences, and, in fact, 

omit nothing that Is essential to thejjerfect elucidation of the text." New York TribiULS. 

' They are the best edited books we have met for many a year. They form, with 
Mackenzie's notes, a complete biographical dictionary, containing succinct and clever 
sketches of all the famous people of England, and particularly of Ireland, to whom tho 
slightest allusions are made in the text." The Citizen (John Mitchel). 

'' Dr. Mackenzie deserves the thanks of men of letters, particularly of Irishmen, for 
urch and care. Altogether, the work is one we can recommend in the highest 
terms." Philadelphia City Item. 

"Such a repertory of wit, humor, anecdote, and out-gushing fun, mingled with tho 
deepest pathos, when we reflect upon the sad fate of Ireland, as this book affords, it were 
hard to find written in any other pair of covers." Buffalo Daily Courier. 

"As a whole, a more sparkling lively series of portraits was hardly ever set in a single 
gallery It is Irish all over; the wit, tho folly, the extravagance, and the fire are al 
nlike characteristic of writer and subjects." New York Evangelist. 

" These volumes afford a rich treat to the lovers of literature." Hartford Christian Set 




CLASSIC AND HISTORIC PORTRAITS. 
By JAMES BRUCE. 12mo, cloth, $1 00. 

" A series of personal sketches of distinguished individuals of all ages, embracing pen 
and ink portraits of ii'-ar sixty persons from Sappho down to Madame de Stael. They 
fhow miH'li research, and possess that interest which attaches to the private life of thoso 
wlmse names are known to fame." New Haven Journal and Courier. 

"They are comprehensive, well-written, and judicious, both in the selection of sub- 
i the manner of treating them." Boston Atlas. 

"The author has painted in minute touches the characteristics of each with various 
i details, oil interesting, and all calculated to furnish to the mind's eye a complete 
portraiture of the individual described." Albany Knickerbocker. 

" The sketches are full and graphic, many authorities having evidently been consulted 
by the author in their preparation." Boston Journal. 



**, 



THE WORKINGMAWS WAY IN THE WORLD. 

Being the Autobiography of a Journeyman Printer. By CHARLES 
MANBY SMITH, author of "Curiosities of London Life." 12mo, 
cloth, $1 00. 

"Written by a man of genius and of most extraordinary powers of description."- 
H'.-ton Traveller. 

" It. will be read with no small degree of interest by the professional brethren cf the 
author, wall as by all who find attractions in a well-told tale of a workingman." 
Boston Atlas. 

"An amusing as well as instructive book, telling how humble obscurity cuts its way 
through the world with energy, perseverance, and integrity.'' Albany Knickerbocker. 

"The book is the most entertaining we have met with for months." Philadelphia 
Evening Bulletin. 

' He has evidently moved through the world with his eyes oru-n and having a vein 
of humor in his nature, h3 written one of the most readable oooKa ot the season.' 1 
Zion's Herald. 



REDFIELD'S NEW AND POPULAR PUBLICATIONS. 



SATIRE AND SATIRISTS. 

By JAMES HANNAY, Author of " Singleton Fontenoy." 12mo. 
"Cloth. 75 cents. 

"As respects nice analysis of cliaractrr, sharp penetration, general culture and knowl 
od<re of the times of which he speaks, Mr. Hannay deserves to be classed among the best 
modern essayists." Christian Enquirer. 

" A more entertaining, useful, and reliable volume upon the important and compre- 
hensive subject of which it treats, we have never had the pleasure of reading." Charles- 
ton Weekly 'News. 

' These lectures are very much after the fashion of Thackeray's brilliant series, and we 
pay Mr. Ilannay the highest possible compliment when we sny his sketches do not suffer 
by comparison with those of the author of Pendennis." Savannah Journal and Courier. 
""The anecdotes of the satirists, with which the work abounds, furnish a wholesome 
seasoning to the dish and add increased interest to this well -digested little volume." 
Christian Secretary, Hartford. 



FINGER RINGS. 

The History and Poetry of Finger Rings. By CHARLES EDWARDS, 
Esq. With numerous illustrations. 12mo* Cloth. $1 00. 

" A publication even more unique in its text than peculiar in its title. It is issued in 
beautiful style, displays a remarkable industry in exploring so novel a field of research, 
and contains much that is both curious and interesting." Boston Atlas. 

" It is remarkable how much authentic history, antiquarian lore, pleasant anecdote, 
and true poetry may be drawn through a ring. The author writes con amorc, and has 
given us one of the pleasnntest and most useful books of the season." Arthur's Home 
Gazette. 

" The book is richly interspersed with anecdotes and is certainly one of the most no- 
ticeable publications of the day for novelty and interest." Boston Journal. 




FULL PROOF OF THE MINISTRY. 

By REV. J. N. NORTON, A. M., Rector of Ascension Church, Frank- 
fort, Ky., author of " The Boy Trained to be a Clergyman." 
12mo. Cloth. 75 cents. 

" Those who have read ' The Boy who was trained up to be a Clergyman,' from the 
pen of the same gentleman, need only be told that this is a sequel to that tale. For oth- 
ers we will add that this volume is crowded with incident, is racily written, and of course 
full of interest." Loieell American Citizen. 

"The author mnst be a preacher of short sermons, for his book makes a short story 
of what might have been, with the usual spinning out and amplifying, an ambitious work 
of two volumes." Worcester Palladium. 

" All Christians may obtain from it some valuable hints to direct them in their religious 
duties." Hartford Religious Herald. 

" The style is chaste and concise, and the teachings of the book of the highest moral 
worth." Detroit Democrat. 

1 It is unnecessary for us to recommend it to parents and teachers. Its influence will 
b jxcellent upon any mind, particularly if young." Buffalo Democracy. 



ttlDFIELDS Ni;\V AND POPULAR PUBLICATIONS. 

MOORK'S LIFE OF SHERIDAN. 

Memoirs of the Life of the Pvf. Hon. Richard Brinsley Sheriaan v 
by THOMAS MOORE, with Portrait after Sir Joshua Reynolds 
Two vols., 12mo, cloth, $2.00. 

" One of the most brilliant biographies in English literature. It is the life of a wfo 
written by a wit, and few of Tom Moore's most sparkling poems are more brilliant atd 
r fccinaling than this biography." Boston Transcript. 

" This is at once a most valuable biography of the most celebrated wit of the times, 
nJ one of the most entertaining works ol its gifted author." Springfield Republican. 

" The Life of Shpridan, the wit, contains as much food for serious thought as the 
beet sermon that was ever penned." Arthur's Home Gazette. 

"The sketch of such a character and career as Sheridan's by sue tend as Moore'i, 
can never cease to be attractive." N. Y. Courier and Enquirer. 

"The work is instructive and full of interest." Christian Intelligencer. 

" It is a gem of biography ; full of incident, elegantly written, warmly appreciative, 
md on the whole candid and just. Sheridan was a rare and wonderful geniue, and baa 
la this work justice done to his surpassing merits." N. Y. Evangelist. 



BARRINGTON'S SKETCHES. 

Personal Sketches of his own Time, by SIR JONAH BARRING-TOW, 
Judge cf the High Court of Admiralty in Ireland, with Illustra- 
tions by Barley. Third Edition, 12mo, cloth, $1 25. 

" A more entertaining book than this '- not often thrown in our way. His sketches 
of character are inimitable ; and many of the prominent men of his time are hit off hi 
the most striking and graceful outline." Albany Argus. 

" He was a very ehrewd observer and eccentric writer, and his narrative of hia owo 
life, and sketches of society in Ireland during his times, are exceedingly humorous and 
interesting." N. Y. Commercial Advertiser. 

" It is one of those works which are conceived and written in so hearty a view, and 
brings before the reader so many palpable and amusing characters, that the entertain- 
ment and information are equally balanced. " Boston Transcript. 

" This is one of the most entertaining books of the season." N. Y. Recorder. 

" It portrays in life-like colors the characters and daily habits of nearly all the Eng. 
lish and Irish celebrities of that period." ./V. Y. Courier and Enquirer. 



JOMINPS CAMPAIGN OF WATERLOO. 

The Political and Military History of the Campaign of Waterloo 
from the French of Gen. Baron Jomini, by Lieut. S V. BKNET 
U. S. Ordnance, with a Map, 12mo, cloth, 75 cents. 

"Of great value, Doth for its historical merit and its acknowledged impartiality."- - 
Ckristian Freeman, Boston. 

" It has long been regarded in Europe as a work of more than ordinary merit, while 
to military men his review of the tactics and manoeuvres of the French Emperor dur 
ing the few days which preceded his final and most disastrous defeat, is considered of 
instructive, as it is interesting." Arthur's Home Gazette.. 

" It is a standard authority and illustrates a subject of permanent interest. WirV 
military students, and historical inquirers, it will be a favorite reference, and for 't^s 
general reader it possesses great value and interest." Boston Transcript. 

" It throws much light on often mooted points respecting Napoleon's military nd 
political genius. The translation is one of much vigor." Boston CommontoeaUh. 

"It supplies an important chapter in the most interesting and eventiul period c 
poleon's military career. ' Savannah Daily News. 

4 It ifl ably w/ tten and skilfully translated." Y*nk(e Blade. 



REDPIELD'S NEW AND POPULAR PUBLICATIONS. 

NAPOLEON IN EXILE ; 

Or, a Voice from St. Helena. Being the opinions and inflections ot 
Napoleon, on the most important events in his Life and Govern- 
ment, in his own words. By BARRY E. O'MKARA, his late Sur- 
geon, with a Portrait of Napoleon, after the celebrated picture of 
Delaroche, and a view of St. Helena, both beautifully engraved 
on steel. 2 vols. 12mo, cloth, $2. 

" Nothing can exceed the graphic truthfulness with which these volumes record th 
words and habits of Napoleon at St. Helena, and its pages are endowed with a charm 
far transcending that of romance." Albany State Register. 

" Every one who desirrs to obtain a thorough knowledge of the character of Napoleon, 
should possess himseif of this book of O'Meara's." Arthur's Home Gazette. 

" It is something indeed to know Napoleon's opinion of the men and events of tha 
thirty years preceding his fall, and his comments throw more light upon history than 
anything we have read." Albany Express. 

" The two volumes before us are worthy supplements to any history of Franc*." 
/ tton Evening Gazette. 



ME AG HERS SPEECHES 

Speeches on the Legislative Independence of Ireland, witti Intro- 
ductory Notes. By FRANCIS THOMAS MKAGIIER. 1 vol. 12mo, 
Cloth. Portrait. $1. 

" The volume before us embodies some of the noblest specimens of Irish eloquem o ; 
not florid, bombastic, nor acrimonious, but direct, manly, and convincing." Ncio Ynrk 
Tribune. 

" There is a glowing, a burning eloquence, in these speeches, which prove the authur 
man of extraordinary intellect." Boston Olive Branch. 

" As a brilliant and effective orator, Meagher stands unrivalled." Portland Eclectic. 

" All desiring to obtain a good idea of the political history of Ireland and the move- 
ments of her people, will be greatly assisted by reading these speeches." Syracust 
Daily Star. 

" It is copiously illustrated by explanatory notes, so that the reader will have no difS- 
culty in understanding the exact state of affairs when each speech was delivered." 
Bof.on Traveller. 




THE PRETTY PLATE, 

A new and beautiful juvenile. By JOHN VINCENT. Illustrated by 
BARLEY. 1 vol. 16mo, Cloth, gilt, 63 cts. Extra gilt edges, 88 cts. 

"We venture to say that no reader, great or small, who takes up this book, wil lay il 
d >wn unfinished." Courier and Enquirer. 

" This is an elegant little volume for a juvenile gift-book.- The story is one of peruliai 
Jnctruction nnd interest to the young, and is illustrated with beautiful engn.vin:."'." - 
Boston Christian Freeman. 

" One of the very best told nnd sweetest juvenile stories that hns bern issued from th 
gress this season. It hue a moat excellent mortil." Detroit Daily Advcrtixr. 

" A nice little book for a holyday present. Our little girl has read it through, and pro- 
bounces it first rate." Hartford Christian Secretary. 

" It ifl a pleasant child's book, well told, handsomely published, and ilhutrn't"! Ii 
D*rle.y's best style ' Albany Etprts 



REDFIELD'S NEW AND POPULAR PUBLICATIONS, 

COS AS DE ESP ANA. 

(Strange Things of Spain.) Going to Madrid, via Barcelona. 
12mo. $1 00. 

" Wo commend this volume as a most charming one, written with elegance and ease, 
full of vivacity and wit, and describing the odd customs of quaint old Spain in the most 
spicy and delightful manner. 1 ' Boston Evening Telegraph. 

" Tlfc history of the Spanish pig would not be unworthily placed with the famed essay 
of Klin. The volume is instructive, humorous, a model of style, in short, a most remark- 
able book that will benr many readings. Anybody who knows what a good book is, we 
advise to buy this." Newark Daily Advertiser. 

"The author is a gay fellow, never out of spirits, no matter what may be the annoy- 
ances around him. and he compels his reader to enter with zest into all the scenes he 
describes. The volume is altogether a most agreeable one." Philadelphia Eve. Bulletin. 

" This racy volume contains a series of pictures of Spanish life, painted by an artist 
whose pencil is both skilled and practised." Zion's Herald, Boston. 

"The author is of the rollicking school of travellers, and is a pleasant companion. 
He has a charm in his method of handling his subjects which can not fail to fascinate his 
readers." Louisville Journal. 




SOUTHWARD HO! 

A Spell of Sunshine, by WILLIAM GILMORE SIMMS, author of " The 
Partisan," &c. 12mo. Cloth. $1 25. 

" This is one of Simms's works that renders will bo most pleased with. It is sprightly 
find lull of variety, serving up southern life, character, and scenery, with the fidelity and 
Inn-.- of a master." Worcester Palladium. 

"There is a groat deal of literary excellence in this work. It embraces a series of 
continuous tales ot tin; most interesting ami lively nature, written in an admirable man- 
ner, and calculated to jilea-i' all tastes." Daily Times. 

"This is one of the ab!<sf, most rntm-laining, and popular productions of the above- 
named author. It abounds in striking delineations of character, and is pervaded through- 
out with a truly American and patriotic spirit." Christian Intelligencer. 

"'Southward Ho!' has modern life for its tbeme, and with the gleaming wit, and 
graphic descriptive powers of the writer, abounds with entertainment." Baltimore Sun, 



f 



HOSMER'S POETICAL WORKS. 

The Poetical Works of W. H. C. HOSMER. Now first collected. 
With a Portrait on steel. 2 vols., 12mo. $2 00. 

" Imagination, poetic spirit, and diction, are patent in these polished compositions. 
The first volume is chiefly devoted to the legendary lore of Indian tradition, and abounds 
in picturesque descriptions of Nature's wildest scenery. Occasional poetic effusions, 
evoked by some incident of the hour, or suggested by the teeming travail of a glowing 
imagination, make up the second volume. The work constitutes a body of lyrics, and 
of rich specimens of almost every metre in English poesy." National Intelligencer. 

" The poems designed to perpetuate the traditions of the Indian race particularly, are 
of a high order, the subject being evidently suited to the author's peculiar genius. Some 
of the "Bird Notes" also are exquisitely beautiful, and so too are many of the Miscella- 
neous pieces. The volumes are highly creditable to the author and to the country." 
Puritan Recorder. 

' He has certainly written a great deal of agreeable and flowing verse, abounding in 
smooth descriptions of nature, and illustrated by apt and pleasing imagery. New York 
Triton* 



RrDFlEI.DS NEW AND POPULAIl PUBLICATIONS. 



POETICAL WORKS OF FITZ-GREENE HALLECK. 

New and only Complete Edition, containing several New Poems, 
together with many now first collected. One vol., 12mo., price 
one dollar. 

"Halleck is one of the brightest stars in our American literature, and his name ia 
l.'ke a household word wherever the English language is spoken." Albany Express. 

" There are lew poems to be found, in any language, that surpass, in beauty of 
r.iou!>ht and structure, some of these." Boston Commonwealth. 

" To the numerous admirers of Mr. Halleck, this will be a welcome book ; for it is a 
characteristic desire in human nature to have the productions of our favorite authois 
iu an elegant and substantial form." Christian Freeman. 

" Mr. Halleck never appeared in a better dress, and few poets ever deserved a better 
due." Christian Intelligencer. 



FIRM IL IAN; 

The Student of Badajoz. A Spasmodic Tragedy. By T. PERCY 
JONES, [W. E. Aytoun.] Price 50 cents. 

" ' Firmilian' is no coarse, *F-hand effort, wherein pages of nonsense are endured for 
the sake of a lew happy hits. Its sole merit is not in its idea. It is a carefully conceived 
and thoroughly elaborated production, and in point of execution, it is really admirable. 
The great object of the piece, doubtless, is to ridicule Alexander Smith, who is set forth 
as T. Percy Jones himself. Many passages are exquisite bits at the Smith style, and there 
are occasional dabs at Tennyson, Carlyle, Giltillan, and others. The whole affair is 
beautifully done, and as before hinted, it has lines and passages of great vigor." B. Post. 

" Bon Gaultier never 'did' a better thing, not even excepting those celebrated bal- 
lads." Albany Express. 



BRONCHITIS, AND KINDRED DISEASES. 

In language adapted to common readers. By W. W. HALL, M. D 
One vol., 12 mo, price $1.00. 

"It is written in a plain, direct, common-sense stylo, and is free from the quackery 
which marks many of the popular medical books of the day. It will prove useful to 
those who need it." Central Ck. Herald. 

" Those who are clergymen, or who are preparing for the sacred calling, and public 
speakers generally, should not fail of securing this work." Ch. Ambassador. 

" It is full of hints on the nature of the vital organs, and does away with much super- 
stitious dread in regard to consumption." Greene County Whig. 

' This work gives some valuable instruction in regard to food and hygienic influ- 
ences." Nashua Oasis. 



KNIGHTS OF ENGLAND, FRANCE, AND SCOTLAND 
l3y HENRY WILLIAM HERBERT. One vol., 12mo., price $1.25. 

"They are partly the romance of history and partly fiction, forming, when blended, 
portraitures, valuable from the correct drawing of the times they illustrate, and interest 
Ing from their romance." Albany Knickerbocker. 

" They are spirit-stirring productions, which will be read and admired by all who 
th historical tales written in a vigorous, bold, and dashing style." Bostt 



with historical tales written in a vigorous, bold, and dashing style." Bosttm 
Juur-tml. 

" Thefo legendrf of love and chivalry contain some of the finest tales whitrh tho 
graphic, and powerful f " ui Herbert hua yet given to the lighter literature of the day ' 
-Detroit Free Frcsi 



REDFIELD S N T E\V AN'D POPULAR PUBLICATIONS. 

MACAULAYS SPEECHES. 

Speeches by the Ri^ht Hon. T. B. MACAULAT, M. P., Author of 
" The History of England," " Lays of Ancient Rome," &c., &c. 
Two vols., 12mo, price $2.00. 

" It is hard to say whether hie poetry, his speeches in parliament, or his brilliant 
esaays, are the most charming ; each has raised him to very great eminence, and woula 
be sufficient to constitute the reputation of any ordinary man." Sir Archibald Alison 

' It may be said that Great Britain has produced no statesman since Burke, who has 
united in so eminent a degree as Macaulay the lofty and cultivated genius, the eloquent 
orati r, and the sagacious and far-reaching politician." Albany Argus. 

" We do not know of any living English orator, whose eloquence comes so near the 
ancient ideal cloi^e, rapid, powerful, practical reasoning, animated by an intense earn- 
e.-tness of feeling:.'' Courier ff Enquirer. 

" Mr. Macnulay has lately acquired as great a reputation as an orator, as he had for- 
merly won as an essayist and historian. He takes in his speeches the same wide and 
comprehensive grasp of his subject that he does in his essays, and treats it in the samo 
elegant style." Philadelphia Evening Bulletin. 

" The same elaborate finish, sparkling antithesis, full sweep and copious flow of 
thought, and transparency of style, which made his essays so attractive, are found in 
Liu speeches. They are so perspicuous, so brilliantly studded with ornament and illus- 
tration. and so resistless in their current, that they appear at the time to be the wisrst 
and greaU-'Ht of human compositions " NcwYork Evangelist, 



CALAVAR; 

The Knisht of the Conquest. A romance of Mexico. By the late 
DR. ROBERT MONTGOMERY BIRD, author of -Nick of the 
Woods ;" with Illustrations by Darley. I2mo. Cloth. 

The romantic incidents of that renowned conquest, when Spanish rule gained a 
Ert footin uon the northern half of this continent, --urmshed "ematemls 



steadfast toonng upon me nurmuiu ... , I4 ..o ^.... , -- - ,.,,,,- 

;;;iS^^ 

It is historical, well-written, pure in sentiment, and instructive, as well a., n 



this account alone." Missouri Republican, 



* 



THE LION SKIN 
\nA the Lover Hunt; by CHARLES DE BERNARD. 12mo, $1.00. 

" It is not often the novel-reader can find on his bookseller's shelf a publication so hill 
r.f incidents and good humor, and at the same time so provocative of honest thought.' 
- National (Worcester. Mass.) Mg is. 

" It is full of incidents ; and the reader becomes so interested in the principal person- 
ages in the work, that he is unwilling to lay the book down until he has learned then 
Whole history." Boston Olive Branch. 

" It in re fresh in" to meet occasionally with a well-published story which is written for 
B storv. iuid for nothing else which is i-ot tipped with the snapper of a moral, m 
londd" in th<> lumdlr with a po-.md of phiUmthropy, or ;ai equal quantity of leaden pU 
tosopliy." Springfield Republican. 



REDFIELD'S NKW AND POPULAR PUBLICATIONS. 

MAURICE'S THEOLOGICAL ESSAYS. 

Theological Essays. By FREDERICK DKNISOX MAURICE, M.A., 
Chaplain of Lincoln's Inn. From the second London Edition, 
with a new Preface and other additions. One vol., 12mo, cloth; 
price $1.00. 

"These essays are well worthy ttm attention of every thoughtful reader, and espe- 
cially of every Christian minister, lie speaks with the earnestness of a vital experi- 
ence, and with the kindly love of a human sensibility. It is refreshing to read one who 
thus draws from a living experience rather than from the dry wells of an abstract and 
formal theology." Chicago Congregational Herald. 

"They manifest a remarkable degree of logical ability, a thorough acquaintance with 
the Bible, and a full reliance upon the revelations of that book for every human emer- 
gency. It is well worth a devoted study." Louisville Journal. 

" Mr. Maurice is unquestionably a man of learning and ability, wielding a powerful 
pen, and able to invest dry, and to many minds distasteful themes, with unusual interest." 
Worcester National JEgis. 

" These are the famous series of discourses, in consequence of publishing which, tho 
Rev. Mr. Maurice was expelled from a professorship in King's College, London." Com- 
mercial Advertiser. 

" Kvidently the production of a mind of considerable vigor." N. Y. Evening- Post. 

" The Essays give decided indication of reflection, power, and earnestness of spirit." 
Hartford Cliristian Secretary. 

"A noble-spirited and really honest man, full of tenderness and truth fulness." 
The (JYew York) Churchman. 



THE CATACOMBS OF ROME, 

As Illustrating the Church of the First Three Centuries. By the 
Right Rev. W. INGRAHAM KIP, D.D., Missionary Bishop of 
California. Author of "Christmas Holidays in Rome," "Early 
Conflicts of Christianity," &c., &c. With over One Hundred 
Illustrations. 12mo, cloth ; price 75 cents. 

"The evidence furnished by the Catacombs of the departure of the Romish Church 
"rom Primitive Christianity is complete and overwhelming. The work is exceedingly 
f aluable.' ' Christian Intelligencer. 

" It is a valuable aid in the contest between primitive truth and modern innovations and 
is such the author commends it to his brethren in the Church." Roe/tester American. 

" We commend this book as one of the most fascinating and useful of volumes ; full 
of information, imparted in a style which beguiles the reader, and makes his perusal 
of the book seem like a pleasant dream." Zion's Herald. 

" Few books, lately published, will better repay the reader than this, which unites so 
happily the deepest interest with the soundest instruction." Banner of the Cross. 



BALLOU'S RE FIE W OF BEE CHER. 

The Divine Character Vindicated. A Review of the " Conflict 
of Ages." By Rev. MOSES BALLOU. In one vol., 12mo, cloth ; 
price $1.00. 

"His demolition of Beecher's 'Conflict of Ages' especially the fantastic and absurd 
conceit which forms the ground plan of that work is most triumphant and complete. 
(Charleston) Evening News. 

"The best feature of the work that we discover is its regard to decency, and ita 
general freedom from a vituperative spirit." Puritan Recorder. 

" Mr. Ballon writes clearly and in good temper, and presses his opponent with many 
very perplexing considerations. N. Y. Evangelist. 

"It is the fullest, clearest, most thorough review of Dr. Boecher'a work which haf 
Tet appeared." The Trumpet. 



CO 

o 
EH 



V & 

<D <D 
A A 
O -P 



g 



gl 



i 

H 

w &* 



University of Toronto 
Library 



DO NOT 

REMOVE 

THE 

CARD 

FROM 

THIS 

POCKET 





Acme Library Card Pocket 
LOWE-MARTIN CO. LIMITED