For it must be plain to all, that the issue which has been thus at last raised, is of the most serious character. The Authors of this new Revision of the Greek have either entitled themselves to the Church’s profound reverence and abiding gratitude; or else they have laid themselves open to her gravest censure, and must experience at her hands nothing short of stern and well-merited rebuke. No middle course presents itself; since assuredly _to construct a new Greek Text_ formed no part of the Instructions which the Revisionists received at the hands of the Convocation of the Southern Province. Rather were they warned against venturing on such an experiment; the fundamental principle of the entire undertaking having been declared at the outset to be—That “a Revision of the _Authorized Version_” is desirable; and the terms of the original Resolution of Feb. 10th, 1870, being, that the removal of “PLAIN AND CLEAR ERRORS” was alone contemplated,—“whether in the Greek Text originally adopted by the Translators, or in the Translation made from the same.” Such were in fact _the limits formally imposed by Convocation_, (10th Feb. and 3rd, 5th May, 1870,) _on the work of Revision_. Only NECESSARY changes were to be made. The first Rule of the Committee (25th May) was similar in character: viz.—“_To introduce as few alterations as possible into the Text of the Authorized Version_, consistently with faithfulness.” But further, we were reconciled to the prospect of a Revised Greek Text, by noting that a limit was prescribed to the amount of licence which could by possibility result, by the insertion of a proviso, which however is now discovered to have been entirely disregarded by the Revisionists. The condition was enjoined upon them that whenever “_decidedly preponderating evidence_” constrained their adoption of some change in “the Text from which the Authorized Version was made,” _they should indicate such alteration in the margin_. Will it be believed that, this notwithstanding, _not one_ of the many alterations which have been introduced into the original Text is so commemorated? On the contrary: singular to relate, the Margin is disfigured throughout with ominous hints that, had “Some ancient authorities,” “Many ancient authorities,” “Many very ancient authorities,” been attended to, a vast many more changes might, could, would, or should have been introduced into the Greek Text than have been actually adopted. And yet, this is precisely the kind of record which we ought to have been spared:— (1) First,—Because it was plainly external to the province of the Revisionists to introduce any such details into their margin _at all_: their very function being, on the contrary, to investigate Textual questions in conclave, and to present the ordinary Reader with _the result_ of their deliberations. Their business was to correct “_plain and clear errors_;” not, certainly, to invent a fresh crop of unheard-of doubts and difficulties. This first.—Now,