Directory_and_Chronicle_1850 — Page 640

598

Defense of an Essay, &c.

Nov.

whose knowledge of the language of the country enables them to inquire for themselves of "well-informed Chinese," what is their opinion of the use of Shin, if his statements and opinions cease to have any weight at all.

On Dr. Medhurst's contradictory statements with respect to the meaning and character of some of the most important words about which controversy exists, I have already commented, and shall have still further occasion to comment; so that I shall say nothing more on that subject at present. But I will here mention some of the circum- stances connected with the Letter of the 30th Jan., which tend, in my mind, to deprive the opinions therein expressed in the intemperate language above quoted, of all weight.

On the 17th of January, Dr. Medhurst, Mr. Stronach and Mr. Milne urged Dr. Bridgman and myself to consent to a compromise of our difficulties, in order to procure an immediate edition of parts of the N. T. The compromise proposed by them was that we should consent to their having 5,000 copies with the word sos rendered by 7'i, on which condition they would consent to our having 5,000 copies with eos rendered by Shin. This compromise we rejected: this was on the 17th of January, 1850.

These facts are important, as the sequel will show, to enable the reader to estimate, at their true worth, the opinions of Dr. M. and of Messrs. S. and M. above quoted. On the 17th of January, they surely could not have supposed that the use of Shin to translate Osog would render God's holy word “contemptible,” and “throw obstacles in the way of the reception of the truth on the part of the Chinese,” or, they could not have consented to a compromise with such a term; and if they learned, at so late a stage of our controversy, all these sad things about Shin, only after they became provoked with us for reject- ing their proffered compromise, i.e. between the 17th and 30th of January, the judicious reader will readily understand how much, opinions taken up under such circumstances, and expressed in such language, should weigh with him.

If the opinions concerning Shin above quoted are correct, no mis- sionary, as he reverences God's holy word, should have anything to do with it as the rendering of Osos; and if every “well-ir.formed Chinese” is to be supposed capable of appreciating the “ridicule” its use must cause, all those who have used this term for God are to be esteemed shamefully culpable for not exercising even the commonest care in a matter of such extreme importance. I am far from desiring that the cause of Shin should stand upon the shoulders of any men; if it is not

1