Quote:
|
And also showing that the Dean was not laying out any plan, in fact he was indicating that such plans were not even possible in his day
|
While we cannot read a particular formal plan, we certainly find throughout his works the pieces of his plan of how a revision of the Bible should be executed. He rejected the Westcott/Hort work, all the while labouring for his own. He did not write the Revision Revised just because he disagreed with WH or because he loved the KJB. He wrote it because, while he was on the side of conserving the KJB, he honestly thought that there was a way to revise it. And if the Church of England was not going to accept his own revision method, he would do his best to promote the kind he wanted for the future.
“It is idle — worse than idle — to dream of revising, with a view to retaining, this Revision. Another generation of students must be suffered to arise. Time must be given for Passion and Prejudice to cool effectually down ... Partisanship must be completely outlived, — before the Church can venture, with the remotest prospect of a successful issue, to organise another attempt at revising the Authorized Version of the New Testament Scriptures.”
This leads to an important question: who or what follows Burgon?
1. No one. (Edward Miller accomplished nothing.)
2. It was manifested in another way, namely, through:
a. Hills and the KJBO movement as the defenders,
b. The English purification which took place in the PCE, as has consequently recognised
3. Burgon's disciples, or real the revisers, are yet to come.