Born at Broad Oak, Flintshire, Wales, Oct. 18, 1662: died at Nantwich, England, June 22, 1714. An English biblical commentator, son of Philip Henry. He became a nonconformist minister at Chester in 1687, and in 1712 removed to Hackney. His chief work is the “Exposition of the Old and New Testament” (1708–10). He also wrote “A Method for Prayer” (1710), etc.
General
Mr. Henry’s admirable “Commentary on the Scriptures,” which hath been blessed to the instruction and edification of hundreds of ministers, and thousands of Christians, for more than a century, still maintains its reputation above most, if not all, other commentaries.
M. Henry’s work has long enjoyed a high and deserved reputation. The work is distinguished, not for the depth of its learning or the originality of its views, but for the sound practical piety and large measure of good sense which it discovers. The author was well acquainted with the character and ways of God, and profoundly versant in the science of human nature; so that from his own experience he very often instructs and edifies his readers. He often leaves difficulties unremoved and even unnoticed; and there is a peculiar quaintness in the turn of many of his remarks, which renders his work somewhat repulsive to persons of fastidious taste; but few books of such extent on the Bible contain so much writing to the purpose, or are so well fitted to promote the general good of men.
“I have often read portions of Henry’s ‘Commentary,’ and consulted it; but I have now begun with the first chapter of Genesis, and I mean to read the work through regularly. I have set myself, sir, two chapters every morning, and I anticipate it as a feast. This is the way to read Matthew Henry, sir. I discover new beauties in him every day, that are not obvious when reading detached parts. I would advise you to adopt the same method, sir; you will be quite delighted with it. I have found that the most pious persons of my acquaintance, in the latter period of their lives, have been great readers of Henry. There must be something next to inspiration in him, sir; for as face answers to face, so does the heart of one Christian to another.” I asked his opinion of Scott’s Commentary. “Oh, it is a good work, sir, but it is not to be compared to Henry; there is not that unction of spirit that there is in Henry.”
This work has now been before the Christian community for more than a hundred years, and has, from its first publication, been so well received, and is so generally approved, that all recommendation of the work seems now superfluous…. Many other valuable commentaries, it is true, have been given to the public since this work was first edited, and have deservedly gained for themselves a high estimation and extensive circulation. But it may be safely said that Henry’s “Exposition of the Bible” has not been superseded by any of these publications, and, in those points in which its peculiar excellence consists, remains unrivalled. For some particular purposes, and in some particular respects, other commentaries may be preferable; but, taking it as a whole, and as adapted to every class of readers, this “Commentary” may be said to combine more excellences than any work of the kind which was ever written in any language. It may be more necessary for the unlearned to read such works as this, than for the learned; yet I am persuaded that there is no man living, however learned, but might derive much practical instruction from Henry’s “Exposition of the Bible;” and if ministers of the gospel would spend much time in perusing this work, it would manifest itself by the richness and spirituality of their sermons and lectures.
The “Commentary” of Matthew Henry has for above a century been highly prized by Christians of all denominations; nor has any subsequent one rendered it less valuable, or less desirable in every Christian library. With such views of the virtue and excellence of this work, views which the writer has long entertained, and some sense of the benefit which he trusts that he has personally derived from it for many years, he has great pleasure in making these introductory remarks…. Very practical and edifying, lively, sound and devotional.
Bishop Atterbury’s controversial eloquence is forgotten; while, without eloquence, and with no distinguished power of thought, a devout spirit and doctrinal accuracy have preserved the works of Matthew Henry.
Whose “Commentary” formed the “daily reading,” of Robert Hall and Thomas Chalmers, and is remarkable alike for the copiousness and pious ingenuity of its thoughts, and for the strength and simplicity of its language.
The author [in his “Exposition”] betrays a remarkable fertility of practical suggestion; and, although the work at first sight seems diffuse, it will be found on closer study to contain rich stores of tersely spoken truths, which hold the attention by their quaint freshness and aptness, and feed the spiritual life by their scriptural unction. It has no critical value.
Henry’s “Exposition of the Old and New Testament,” which for practical uses has not been superseded, was begun in November 1704. The first volume was published in 1708, fol.; that and four other volumes, bringing his labours to the end of the gospels, appeared in a uniform edition in 1710, fol. Before his death he completed the Acts for an unpublished sixth volume. After his death the Epistles and Revelation were prepared by thirteen nonconformist divines, whose names are given by John Evans (1767–1827) in the “Protestant Dissenters’ Magazine,” 1797, p. 472, from a memorandum by Isaac Watts. The complete edition of 1811, 4to, 6 vols., edited by George Burder and John Hughes, has additional matter from Henry’s manuscripts. Henry’s “Exposition” has often been abridged.
