LIBRARY OF THK Theological Seminary PRINCETON, N J. ('(/.St . Divisinn . BX 5100 .B9 1861 Buchanan, James, 1804-1870. The 'Essays and reviews' examined THE 'ESSAYS AND EEVIEWS' EXAMINED; A SERIES OF ARTICLES CONTRIBUTED TO THE ' MORNING post; KEVISED AND CORRECTED BY THE AUTHOR. WITH PEEFACE, INTEODUCTION, AND APPENDIX, COXTAINIXG NOTES AND DOCUMENTS. BY JAMES BUCHANAN, D.D., LL.D., PROFESSOK OF SYSTEMATIC THEOLOGY, XEW COLLEGE, EDIXBUEGH. AUTHOR OF ' FAITH IN GOD, AJTD MODERN ATHEISM COMPARED,' ETC. EDINBUEGH : JOHNSTONE, HUNTER, AND CO. LONDON : JAMES ^^SBET AND CO. MDCCCLXI. CONTENTS. Page Pree-ace, . . . . . . 5 Introduction. — The Two Schools at Oxford ; — Their Points of Connection and of Contrast, as exemplified in the ' Tracts for the Times,' and the ' Essays and Eeviews.' ...... 7 THE ' ESSAYS AND EEVIEWS ' EXAMINED. I. Dr Temple ; ' The Education of the World,' . 45 II. Dr Kowland Williams ; ' Bunsen's Biblical Ee- seai'ches,' . . . . . 61 III. Professor Baden Powell ; ' The Study of the Evidences of Christianity,' . . . 77 IV. H. B. Wilson, B.D. ; ' Stances Historiques de Geneve — The National Church,' . . 96 V. C- W. Goodwin, M.A. ; ' The Mosaic Cosmo- gony,' ...... llo VI. Mark Patteson, B.D. ; ' Tendencies of Eeligious Though in England, 1688-1750,' . . 132 VII. Professor Jowett ; ' The Interpretation of Scrip- ture,' . . . . . .152 VIII. The Scheme of Thought which pervades the Entire Volume, .... 184 IX. The same siibject continued, . . . 213 CONTENTS. APPENDIX. Note A. The Two Factors of Knowledge, . • 24.') „ B. Induction affords no presumption against Miracles, . . . . . 246 „ C Whateiy's doctrine of Testimony, . . 250 „ D. Athanase Coquerel on Creeds, . 251 „ E. Dr Chalmers on Hypothetical Solutions, . 253 „ F. Degerando on Rationalism in Science, . 254 „ G. Wilson on Philosophy as the Interpreter of Scripture., ..... 256 „ H. Dr Strauss' ' Fundamental Assumption,' . 258 „ I. Apostolic Authority, not Successive, but Per- manent, ..... 260 „ J. Eusebius on ' Faith and Eeason,' ^ . 261 DocTTMENTS. — 1. Unanimous opinion of the Bishops of England, .... 262 ,, 2. Opinion of the Archbishops of Ireland, 264 ,, 3. Resolution of the Convocation of the Province of Canterbury, . . 265 „ 4. Resolution of the Convocation of the Province of York, . . . 267 PREFACE. The substance of the following work consists chiefly of a series of articles which the author was kindly invited to supply, and which appeared at stated in- tervals in the columns of the 'Morning Post/ A desire having been expressed in various quarters that they should be collected and reprinted in a separate form, he could feel no hesitation in com- plying with it, except what might arise from his deep sense of their manifold defects and imperfec- tions. From the plan of the series, which contemplated a distinct Examination of each of the ' Essays and Reviews' individually, to be followed up by a general survey of the scheme of thought which is developed in the volume considered as a w^hole, — it was im- possible to avoid altogether some reference to the same topics in different connections, such as may sometimes have the appearance of unnecessary repe- tition. But the judicious reader will make due allowance for any occasional superfluity of this kind, if he finds that it contributes, on the whole, to the 6 PREFACE. clearer exposition and more definite statement of the leading principles which pervade the volume from its commencement to its close. In the Introduction some brief reference is made to a topic which the author conceives to be one of considerable importance, both in a speculative and practical point of view ; the connection, namely, and the contrast between the two Schools which have successively arisen at Oxford ; or the common prin- ciples which may be shown to belong to both, while their respective tendencies point in such opposite directions. He has confined his remarks chiefly to those views respecting the authority and the inter- pretation of Scripture which were developed towards the close of the Tractarian movement, and which appear to him to constitute the link of connection between two schools apparently antagonistic. He has offered no exposition of the distinctive principles of Tract arianism : for his views on that subject he may be permitted to refer to a little treatise formerly published, ' On the Tracts for the Times.'* * liondon : Hamilton Adams, and Co. Edinburgh : Johnstone aud Hunter. 1843. INTRODUCTION. THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD : THKIR POINTS OF CONNECTION AND OF CONTRAST, AS EX- EMPLIFIED IN THE ' TRACTS FOR THE TIMES,' AND THE ' ESSAYS AND REVIEWS.' That two Schools of religious thought, so unlike each other in •many respects, and with such opposite tendencies, as those which are represented, respec- tively, by the ' Tracts for the Times,' and the ' Essays and Reviews,' should have both sprung up at Oxford ; and, after extending to the sister University, as well as to several provincial colleges, should have created a A\dde-spread sensation throughout the whole Church of England, and affected, to a large extent, the sub- stance, as well as the form, of her teaching at home and abroad, can hardly fail to be regarded as a re- markable phenomenon which calls for some investi- gation of its cause and origin, and also as a sigjii- ficant indication of certain under-currents of opinion beneath the smooth surface of educated society which render it one of the most ominous signs of the times. For these two Schools appeared, if not simultaneously, yet in such rapid succession, that 8 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFOED. little more than an interval of twenty years elapsed from the first announcement of the one to the full- blown development of the other ; and scarcely had the Church time to recover her breath after the shock of an attack on her Protestant formularies, when she was again convulsed and agitated by an assault on the very foundations of her Christian faith. . Considering the brief space of time which inter- vened between the two, and giving due weight to the fact that both have arisen among contiemporaries, or among the pupils of such as lived and laboured to- gether during that interval, it seems reasonable to conclude, that each of them must be traced ulti- mately to causes which were in active operation at a period antecedent to the public appearance of either. We cannot account for the first sudden transition from old Orthodoxy into a path which led direct to Romanism, nor for the second transition into a path which tends towards the opposite extreme of Ra- tionalism, by ascribing them merely to the caprices of individual minds, or the accidental and wayward vicissitudes of public opinion. Both may have been occasioned, in part, by passing events, and shaped by the exigencies of the hour ; but their causes must be traced further back, and may be discovered in the state of mind and feeling existing before the first ' Tract' appeared, and which readily responded to the key-note of that trumpet, proclaiming, with no ' uncertain sound,' a want which all had more or POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 9 less intensely felt, but which few had as yet dis- tinctly acknowledged even to themselves. The re- mote antecedents, as well as the proximate occasions, of such sudden and extensive revolutions in the religious opinions of an educated community, must be taken into account ; for it is perfectly true, as one of the ' Essayists' reminds us, that ' both the Church and the world of to-day are what they are as the result of the whole of their antecedents,' and that * we, in this our time, if we would understand our own position in the Church, and that of the Church in the age,' ' cannot neglect those immediate agencies in the production of the present which had their origin towards the beginning of the eighteenth century.' If we consider the actual state of religion during the century which immediately preceded the publi- cation of the ' Tracts for the Times' in 1833, we can be at no loss to discover many circumstances which imperatively called for some change, and which may have determined, to some extent, the character and direction of those^ovements which have recently oc- curred. During the greater part of that century, and especially from the date of Locke's treatise on ' The Reasonableness of Christianity,' both the re- ligious literature and the pulpit of England exhibited, for the most part, but with some honourable excep- tions, a meagre and lifeless form of Christian truth. It may be described as a system which substituted rational arguments for the authoritative lessons of 10 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. Revelation, — which, instead of raising men's thoughts to the magnificent scheme of grace and redemption that is unfolded as a supernatural economy in the Gospel, sought to lower its truths to the level of their comprehension, — which, instead of speaking of ' the things of the Spirit,' spoke rather of those ' things of a man that may be known by the spirit of man which is in him,' — and which failed to arrest their attention or engage their interest, just because it had no power to awaken the conscience when it slum- bered, and still less to satisfy the conscience when it awoke. The careless gave little heed to it, and the earnest inquirer could derive no relief or comfort from it. The more inquisitive and better educated classes felt that they could dispense -with such a Christianity as that ; and generally adopted a speci- ous but ill-defined Deism, which maintained the sufficiency of Natural Religion, abjured aU faith in mysteries, and did homage to the Gospel only as a code of morals, while Christ was regarded, not as the Son of God and the Redeemer of men, but as a sublime Teacher and perfect pattern of virtue. Meanwhile serious rehgion, where it did exist, yearned after more spiritual food, and sought for it in the private study of the Scriptui'es, and the writ- ings of the Reforming or Puritan divines. Thousands flocked to hear a few faithful witnesses for the truth, who spoke home to their hearts and consciences ; and a strong evangelical movement, commencing at first within the pale of the National Church, but POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 11 proceeding afterwards in the direction of a more or less reluctant separation from it, issued eventually in the erection of large societies of Nonconformists, alike popular in their character and permanent in their self-sustained organization. Such was the state of England when the ' Tracts for the Times' were first announced. It seems to have been felt that the National Church Avas in danger, partly from the unbehef and indifference of the higher and more educated classes, and partly from the estrangement and alienation of the middle and lower orders of society. In these circumstances a vigorous effort must be made to retrieve the errors of the past, and to ward off the dangers to which the Church was now in consequence exposed, by reviving principles which had well-nigh become obsolete, by awakening the clergy to a sense of their duties and responsibihties, and by indoctrinating the public mind, through the medium of tracts, short enough for general circulation, with such sentiments as might serve to arrest the further progress of dissent, if not also to reclaim those who had already for- saken the fold. That there was an urgent call for some such movement, few ^vill venture to deny ; and had it been conducted on larger Christian prin- ciples, and directed to the revival of those neglected truths in w^hich all the members of Christ's body have a common and heartfelt interest, it might have gone far, under the guidance of men of acknow- ledged abihty, learning, and influence, to heal our 12 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. unhappy dhdsions, and to secure, if not absolute uniformity of outward profession and worship, yet that spirit of unity and concord, that genuine Ca- tholicity, which can overlook minor distinctions, and recognise all true Christians as brethren, by what- ever other name they may be called. But, unfor- tunately, the authors of the ' Tracts,' in seeking to revive old principles which had become obsolete, instead of reverting to the rich and precious writ- ings of the early English Reformers, sought to re- move the blight, which had been inherited from the eighteenth century, by restoring the peculiar views of the Laudean and Non-juring divines, and thus gave a sectarian aspect to their whole enterprise, while they cut themselves off from the sympathy of multitudes who would otherwise have bid them ' God-speed' in any enhghtened attempt to revive the power of true religion in a lukewarm and indif- ferent age. Had they proclaimed the message of salvation -\vith the same earnestness with which they pressed the Divine right of Episcopacy and the doc- trine of ApostoHcal Succession ; had they urged the necessity of regeneration by the word and Spirit of God as plainly as they taught the efficacy of baptism ; had they spoken less of human priests and more of the great High Priest of our profession — less of mere rites and ceremonies, and more of the 'weightier matters of the law,' many would have blessed God for the movement, who have been compelled to stand aloof from it, and even to deplore it, as one that POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 13 could neither be edifying to the Church, nor useful to the world. But their earnest zeal and untiring efforts have not been without their effect. They have produced more than a temporary excitement; they have been followed by practical results of a most momentous kind, and have left a permanent impress of their influence both on the hterature of the age and on the state of the Church itself. They have widened the breach between the National Establishment and all the other Churches of the Reformation. They have precipitated hundreds of her ministers, and not a few of her influential members, into the Church of Rome. They have contributed, in some measiu-e, to that sudden and ominous reaction, not only against Church principles, but against the fundamental ar- ticles of the Christian faith, which has been long going on at the Universities, and which has at length found articulate utterance in the volume of ' Essays and Reviews.' We are far from ascribing this new development of uhbehef exclusively to the influence of the 'Tracts ' for the Times,' or accounting for it as a mere re- action, in the minds of intelligent and educated men, against the narrow views and bigotted spirit of those who attached imdue importance to sacredotal claims and ritual observances. We believe that it has a deeper root, and that its chief causes must be sought elsewhere. We have already said that both move- ments must be traced ultimately to the state and 14 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. history of tlie Church in a prior age. If the Trac- tarian movement be a revival of the principles of Laud and the Non-jurors, the new movement may justly be described as a continuation of the Deistical reasonings of the eighteenth century. It may be, to some extent, a reaction against Tractarianism ; but it is more than a mere reaction ; it is partly the product of the same causes which generated the tirst movement, and partly also the natural develop- ment of some principles which were incorporated with the Tracts themselves. When we say, in the first place, that it is 'partly the product of the same causes which generated the first movement,' some may receive the statement with, incredulous wonder, as if it were inconceivable that two Schools, exhibiting such marked differences and such opposite tendencies, should be traceable to a common origin. But the fact is certain, account for it as we may, that frequently in the history of the Church, a sudden reaction against an antecedent state of things has given birth, at all the great critical eras of transition, to antagonist forms of error, as well as contributed to revive some portion of truth. The same causes operating on minds differently constituted, or imbued with different prejudices and feelings, have frequently resulted in the production of the most opposite effects. There are, as we have elsewhere said, certain critical eras in the history of religion, when the public mind undergoes a revolutionary change, and when men POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 15 who are not content with the simple truth or un- -vvilling to receive it in its scriptural purity, fall off' and diverge from it, but by two different and even opposite routes — the one tending towards supersti- tion, the other towards scepticism ; rehgion being converted into Ritualism in the former case, and into Rationahsm in the latter. Eusebius, the acute and learned Bishop of Csesarea, tells us that in his own age — the age of keen conflict between declining Polytheism and advancing Christianity — when Di- vine truth was brought into contact with the minds of many heathens who were unwilling to receive it in its simplicity, some who had been pre\TLOusly buried in superstition were awakened out of their dreamy slimibers, and began to perceive the absurd- ity of their hereditary beliefs ; but trusting to their own light, even while they departed from the old beaten road, they diverged into two opposite routes^ — the one leading to avowed Atheism and the contempt of all religion, the other to a rationahstic and refined Paganism, founded on a mystical or allegorical inter- pretation of the old popular fables.* In that sudden and sweeping reaction against the cormptions of the Papacy which gave birth to the Reformation, a similar impulse was given in two opposite directions — the one leading to the extreme of Rationalism in the Socinian movement which was so strongly marked in Italy and Poland, the other to the extreme of * Ensebii 'Praeparatio Evangelica," lib. ii. c iv. -Noitli British Eeview,' No. xxix.. p. 47. 16 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. bigotry in the Jesuit movement which sprung up within the Church itself. This twofold tendency towards a superstitious Ritualism on the one hand, and a sceptical Rationahsm on the other, which seems to be incident to every critical era in the progress of religious thought, might be invested with a sort of dramatic interest by considering the opposite courses pursued by the two brothers Her- bert in the seventeenth century, and by the two brothers Newman in the nineteenth. The same unsettled state of public opinion which led Lord Herbert of Cherbury, to place himself in the van of the great Deistical movement, drove his saintly brother George into the retirement of his rural parsonage, and a strict observance of aU rubrical forms at a time when they were generally neglected and often despised. In the case again of the brothers Newman, — the one, a pohshed Churchman, a profi- cient scholar, and an attractive preacher, found con- genial food for his mind in the traditions of primitive times, and ample employment for his powers in the defence of Episcopacy as an Apostolical succession, and of Baptism as a regenerating rite ; till, having exhausted the Ritualism of the Church of England, he passed over into the Church of Rome, and became a convert to those very doctrines which he had once eloquently assailed ; the other, the younger brother, liimself a student at Oxford at the time when the elder was still resident there — a thoughtful and accomplished, but independent and inquisitive man, — POINTS OF COXXECTIOX AXB CONTRAST. 17 — acquainted superficially in early life with the doc- trines of Evangehcal religion, and imbued to some extent mth a spirit of religious earnestness, but ill- grounded in the evidences and the system of revealed Theology, — pursued a course directly opposite to that of his senior, and descended step by step until he lost all faith in the historic truth of Christianity. The same tendencies are exemplified, only on a larger scale, in the two Schools which have sprung up almost simultaneously at Oxford, whose distinctive pecu- liarities are represented respectively by the ' Tracts for the Times ' and the 'Essays and Reviews.' Considering the state of rehgious opinion and feeling which prevailed in this country during the preceding century, there could be no reason for surprise if it were followed by a sudden reaction, nor even if that reaction should give rise to rival schools with apparently opposite tendencies. For when it began to be felt that the former condition of things could not, and should not, be perpetuated, but that, for the good of society and the safety of the Church, there must be a change of some kind, different minds were already imbued with, certain principles which they had inherited from the past, and would naturally seek to apply these to the reconstruction of the future. Some had been dis- gusted with the rationahstic theology and the lati- tudinarian policy which then reigned in the Church, and had fallen back on the more authoritative teach- ing and the stricter Church principles of a former B 18 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. age, when Laud and the Nonjurors asserted the ex- clusive claims of Episcopacy, and the mysterious effi- cacy of the Sacraments ; while others, shrinking from the revival of such antiquated doctrines, and really, although perhaps unconsciously, influenced by views derived from the great Deistical controversy, which had not passed away without depositing in the public mind some prolific germs of future error, were naturally predisposed to take an opposite, and, what seemed to them, a more enlightened and Hberal course, by adapting their Theology to .the advanced state of human knowledge, and applying to the evi- dences and the interpretation of Scripture itself all the tests which history and science and criticism might be able to supply. Had two such Schools arisen apart from each other, and in circumstances which rendered it impossible to suppose that they had any connection or interdependence, the origin of both, as distinct and independent systems, might have been sufficiently accounted for by ascribing them to causes which were in operation, to some extent, before either movement began. But was there no closer connection between them than what is implied in saying that they were nearly contemporaneous products of pre-existing causes ? Had the one School no influence in determining the direction and stimulating the development of the other ? Or, is it possible to conceive, that the two could spring up in the same University seats, and in such rapid succession, among teachers who were POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 19 contemporaries, and their respective pupils, without exerting some reciprocal influence ? In reply to this question, not a few will probably be ready to admit, that there must have been a real, though, perhaps, latent connection between the two ; and some may even be disposed to account for the rise of the new School, by ascribing it entirely to a natural reaction^ in the minds of educated men, against the antiquated doctrines and the mediaeval rites which the former School had attempted to revive and restore. That some such recoil was felt by enhghtened and liberal minds from the most obvious peculiarities of the Tractarian movement, we see no reason, and have no wish, to deny ; but we much doubt whether the result should be accounted for on the principle of a mere reaction. On a deeper and closer inspection, it will be found that, if there be a striking contrast^ there is also a radical connection between the two movements ; that the development of the first con- tained, at least in its more advanced stage, the germ of the second ; and that, opposite as are the direc- tions in which they tend, — the one towards Komanisni and superstition, the other towards Eationalism and Infidelity, — they may be traced ultimately, in their mature and final form, to a few radical principles which were common to both. The reader "vvill carefully mark the qualifications with which this statement is made. It is only ' in its more advanced stage ' that the Tractarian move- ment is said to have contained the genu of a subse- 20 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. quent development in another direction ; and it is only ' in their mature and final form,' that the two movements are traced to certain radical principles which were common to both. For although we often speak of the Tractarian movement as if it were one continuous, self-consistent, and consecutive development of the same scheme of thought, yet, in point of fact, it consisted of two distinct and well- defined stages, which differed materially from each other ; and this is a point which is often overlooked, but which, in justice to all parties, should be ex- plained and placed before our readers in a clear and convincing light. Any one who will take the trouble to compare the earlier with the later ' Tracts,' will find that, as the series advanced towards its com- pletion, there was a corresponding advance in the development of the system "which it was designed to unfold ; that its initial announcements were far from being its final results ; and that, in its later stages, it raised questions which had not been mooted before, and brought into marked prominence certain views and principles which had hitherto been kept out of sight, if, indeed, they had ever occurred to the minds of the writers themselves. So far from adhering to the same line of argument throughout, the authors of the 'Tracts' departed from it so sig- nally, that we might be justified in describing their later statements as being directly contradictory to their earlier ones. It may be drfficult to draw the line between the two, or to mark the precise point POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 21 of transition from the one to the other ; it may be still more difficult to determine whether the change should be ascribed to reticence on the part of the writers in their earlier expositions, or to a growing insight into the real difficulties of the subjects which they had undertaken to illustrate ; but of the fact that there was a change, no reasonable doubt can be entertained. And Dr Goode refers to it, as well as to the two explanations of which it might be susceptible, when he says, — in his admirable treatise on the * Divine Eule of Faith and Practice,' — ' As time advanced, and the number of their adherents increased, the reserve formerly practised has been gradually thrown aside ; perhaps, indeed, their own views have become more fixed and definite than when they commenced their labours.' This change affected their views chiefly on two points, — the first being the character and claims of the Romish Church, — and the second, the evidence, authority, and sufficiency of the Scriptures as the rule of faith. Their mode of treating these two important subjects in their later '■ Tracts,' paved the way for each of the apparently opposite results which have been recently realised ; the secession of a large number of the ministers and members of the Church of England who have entered into the Romish com- munion, and the formation of another influential party mthin the Church, as well as beyond its pale, who are tending to the opposite extreme of Ration- alism and Infidelity. 22 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFOKD. We have marked a change, first of all, in their views as to the character and claims of the Church of Rome. It is undeniable that, in the earlier ' Tracts/ many of the peculiar doctrines and rites of that Church are unsparingly condemned. It is equally undeniable that, as the series advances, the tone of censure is softened, and even exchanged for accents of reverence, admiration, and affection. Mark how they speak of Rome, while as yet they were contend- ing for the Episcopal Protestant Church. ' You have some misgivings, it seems, lest the doctrine I have been advocating should lead to Popery. I will not, by way of answer, say that the question is not, whether it will lead to Popery, but whether it is in the Bible ; because it would bring the Bible and Popery into one sentence, and seem to imply the possibility of a " communion " between " light and darkness." No ; it is the very enmity I feel against the Papistical corruptions of the Gospel, which leads me to press upon you a doctrine of Scripture which we are sinfuUy surrendering, and the Church of Rome has faithfully retained. How comes it that a system so unscriptural as the Popish makes con- verts ? because it has in it an element of truth and comfort amid its falsehoods. . . And, truly, when one surveys the grandeur of their system, a sigh' arises in the thoughtful mind, to think that we should be separate from them. " Cum talis esses, utinam noster esses ! " But, alas ! an union is im- possible. Their communion is infected with hetero- POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 23 doxy ; we are bound to flee it as a pestilence. They have established a lie in the place of God's truth ; and, by their claim of immutability in doctrine, can- not undo the sin they have committed. They can- not repent Popery must be destroyed ; it cannot be reformed.' (Tract 20, p. 1, 3). Here, at least, ^ the trumpet gives no uncertain sound ; ' and soon after (Tract 38, p. 12), mention is made of ' irre- concileable differences with the system of Rome as it is.' By and by, the opposition to that Church be- comes much more gentle ; and we seem to hear accents of plaintive tenderness. ' Consideriitg the high gifts and the strong claims of the Church of Rome and its dependencies, on our admiration, reverence, love, and gratitude, how could we with- stand it as we do ; how could we refrain from being melted into tenderness, and rushing into communion with it, but for the word of truth itself, which bids us to prefer it to the whole world.' . . ' Do we not hover about our ancient home, — the home of Cyprian and Athanasius, — without the heart to take up our abode in it, yet afraid to quit the sight of it.' ' Is it then a duty to forget that Rome was our mother, through whom we were born to Christ, — that she was the instrument chosen by God's providence to bring the Gospel to the wild heathen tribes, from which most of us are sprung.' Even still, however, the reasons are stated, 'Why we remain separate from Rome ' (No. 71) ; and in republishing Arch- bishop Usher's treatise on ' Prayers for the Dead,' 24 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. ' at a time like the present, when many persons are in doubt whether they are not driven to. an alter- native of either giving up the primitive Fathers or embracing Popery,' their object is said to be, 'to erect safe and substantial bulwarks for the Anglican Church against the Church of Eome ; to draw clear and intelli- gible lines which may allow (the Churchman) securely to expatiate in the rich pastures of Catholicism, with- out the reasonable dread that he, as an individual, may fall into the snare of Popery.' But, at length, ' a change comes o'er the spirit of their dream.' They'lbad assumed a position which they found it difficult to maintain in connection with Protestant principles. Their fundamental error lay in the as- sumption, that the Rule of Faith consists not of Scripture alone, as our only Divine infallible in- formant, but of Scripture combined with tradition, or of Scripture as interpreted by the primitive Church. The words of falUble men, oral or written, were thus invested with an authority co-ordinate with that of the inspired Word of God. The writers seem to have thought, for a time, that they could strike out a via media between the Romish and the Protestant doctrine, and that they might safely adopt the rule of Vincent of Lerins, ' quod semper, quod ubique, et quod ab omnibus.' But, in applying that rule, they soon found themselves involved in inex- tricable difficulties. It was a hard task to prove any one of their peculiar principles by the unanimous consent of the early Fathers, and still more to POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 25 separate these principles from the corruptions with whicli they were blended, even in primitive times, and which contained the germ of many of the sub- sequent errors of Popery. In these circumstances they were compelled to cast about for some plausible reasons, to show that they might consistently adhere to their favourite rule, notwithstanding its acknow- ledged difficulties ; and, in an evil hour, they were induced to have recourse to the perilous expedient of attempting to show that the teaching of tradition, in regard to their Chmxh principles, was not more uncertain than the teaching of Scripture itself, in regard to some of the fundamental articles of the Christian faith ; and that the modern Church is en- tirely dependent on the authority of the first four centuries for its belief in the inspiration and canoni- city of the apostolic writings. This position could not be their final resting-place, — they must either recede or advance ; and some who had been tinc- tured, to a certain extent, with Church doctrines, seem to have been arrested at this point, and to have fallen back on the principle, — that Scripture alone is the rule of faith, while they still retained a deep, and, perhaps, inordinate veneration for the primitive Church, as the earliest expounder of Scrip- ture, and continued to speak of Catholic consent, if not as an infallible interpreter of the truth, yet, at least, as a sure and necessary test of heresy. But from this point we mark, among other adherents of the Church system, a striking example of the ^facilis 26 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. descensus Averni^ in the inevitable development of a false principle, in two opposite directions, whicli led some, when they felt the foundations of Protes- tantism crumbling away beneath them, to throw themselves, as if in desperation, into the arms of an infallible Church ; while it led others, by virtue of the sceptical tendency which was common to both, to recoil alike from tradition and from Scripture, and to abjure all authoritative teaching in matters of faith. The descent in the direction of Romanism was the earliest development of that principle ; and it first aroused public attention to the new danger with which the Church was threatened, by the startling rapidity with which it followed the announcement of principles that were supposed to be at utter vari- ance mth the exclusive claims of Rome, and by the practical commentary on these principles, which was exhibited in the actual secession of multitudes from the Protestant communion. This consummation, however, was not eifected suddenly, nor did it take place until much had been done to undermine the foundations of the Protestant Church of England, and to explain away the meaning of her Articles, or the obligation which was involved in subscrip- tion. They might be explained in what was first called a CathoUc, but what soon appeared to be a Roman Catholic, sense ; and might be subscribed honestly, not in the meaning of those who framed and imposed them, which was unquestionably Pro- POINTS OF CONNECTION ANT) CONTRAST. 27 testant, but in a new meaning recently invented and superinduced upon tliem by the sole authority of those who had subscribed them. Accordingly an elaborate attempt was made to show that they were susceptible of such an interpretation, and might be understood in a sense which was not at variance with the peculiar doctrines and practices of the Church of Eome. In Tract 90, containing 'Re- marks on certain passages in the Thirty-nine Articles,' the Church was startled, and the whole community scandalised, by an exposition of their doctrines such as could only find its parallel in the attempt of Davenport, or Francis a Sancta Clara, in a former age, to reconcile them with those of the Eomish Church as determined by the Council of Trent. In that thoroughly Jesuitical Tract, the writer protests against the supposition that ' persons who profess to be disciples of the early Church will silently concur with those of very opposite sentiments in furthering a relaxation of subscriptions^ which, it is imagined, are gaUing to both parties, though for different rea- sons,' and sets himself to show that in the meantime the Church shotdd make no change in that respect, — ' let the Church sit still, — let her be content to be in bondage, — let her work in chains, — let her submit to her imperfections as a punishment, — let her go on teaching with the stammering Hps of ambiguous formularies, and inconsistent precedents, and princi- ples but partially developed.' But is the solemn practice of subscription to be continued ? Unques- 28 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. tionably, why not? since it may be shown that ' our Articles, the oiBfspring of an imcatholic age, are, through God's good Providence, to say the least, not uncatholic^ and may be subscribed by those who aim at being catholic in heart and doctrine.' And how does the writer interpret the Articles so as to show that they are susceptible of a Catholic or even of a Eoman Catholic sense ? On the vi. and XX. Articles which relate to Holy Scripture and the authority of the Church, we are told that ' two im- portant questions are left unsettled, viz., whether the Church judges, first, at her sole discretion, next, on her sole responsibility, i.e., first, what the media are by which the Church interprets Scripture, whether by a direct Divine gift, or Cathohc tradition, or critical exegesis of the text, or in any other way ; and next, who is to decide whether it interprets Scripture rightly or not, — what is her method, if any, and who is her judge, if any. In other words, not a word is said, on the one hand, in favour of Scripture having no rule or method to fix interpre- tation by, or, as it is commonly expressed, being the sole rule of faith ; nor, on the other, of the private judgment of the individual being the ultimate stan- dard of interpretation.' Both are accordingly set aside ; and it is boldy avowed, that ' in the sense in which it is commonly understood at this day, Scrip- ture, it is plain, is not, on Anglican principles, the Rule of Faith.'' They thus concede the principle which Archbishop Whitgift declared to be * the POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 29 ground of all Papistry,' for the fundamental question between the Protestant and Eomish Churches re- lates to the Rule of Faith ; and the abandonment of that principle opened the flood-gate of error. And so we have the Popish doctine of Justification ; for ' an assent to the doctrine that Faith alone justifies, does not at all preclude the doctrine of Works justifying also,' and * Faith, as being the beginning of perfect or justifying righteousness, is taken for what it tends towards, or ultimately will be ' — ' Faith working by love is the seed of Divine graces, which in due time will be brought forth and flourish — partly in this world, and fully in the next.' And so of the doctrine of the Church, of General Councils, of purgatory, pardons, images, rehcs, invocation of saints ; of the sacraments, transubstantiation, and masses, of the marriage of the clergy, and the su- premacy of the Pope, — such an interpretation is given as is designed to show that there is nothing distinctively Protestant in the Articles of the Church of England, and nothing that should prevent Angli- can Catholics from subscribing them, or constrain those who had already Subscribed them, to feel that they were bound in conscience to relinquish their offices and preferments. The moral indignation which the announcement of such views excited in the general community, rather than any act of discipline on the part of the constituted authorities of the Church, brought mat- ters to a practical issue. Many of the adherents of 30 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. the so-called Catholic principles were made to feel that they could no longer remain, with consistency and honour, in connection with a Church whose articles, however ' ambiguous,' and susceptible of a * non-natural' interpretation, must have been felt to be galling to their conscience ; and one after another, in large numbers, sought refuge in the communion of Rome. Concurrently with this movement, there was going on in the minds which mainly originated and guided it, a still further progress in the direc- tion of a more complete theory of Romanism, — a progress whose commencement had been sufficiently indicated in Mr Newman's ' Sermons on the Theory of Rehgious Behef,' preached before the University of Oxford, andpubhshed in 1843, — but whose more mature results became apparent, when casting aside the old rule of Vincentius Lerinensis — ' quod semper, quod umbique, et quod ab omnibus,' — as no longer sufficient for his purpose, he boldly proclaimed the theory of ' Development' of Christian Doctrine by the sole authority of the Church, — a theory as much opposed to the old doctrine of Rome itself as to the principles of the Reformation, and which bore a suspicious resemblance to those philosophical specu- lations on Human Progress which had generally been found associated with utter scepticism on the subject of Revealed Rehgion. Let it be carefully remarked, that this result was at direct variance with the principles which were professed, not only by those who have since left the POINTS OF COXXECTION AND CONTRAST. 31 Cliurcli of England, but also by many who still adhere to her communion, at the commencement of their common enterprise to revive certain doctrines which had been neglected during the previous cen- tury ; — that they began with denouncing Eomanism as a communion ' infected with heterodoxy,' which had ' established a He in the place of God's truth,' which they were ' bound to flee as a pestilence,' and which ' must be destroyed,' for ' it cannot be re- formed ; ' — and that many of them ended, neverthe- less, in uniting themselves ^vith that very Church which they had so unsparingly denounced. The fact of such a great and rapid change having oc- curred in all their views in regard to the character and claims of the Romish Church, may prepare us to expect that there might be a change also among their disciples in another and very different direction, and that this second movement may possibly owe its origin to some principles which began to be mooted as the ' Tracts' advanced in their course — ^respecting the evidence, authority, and sufficiency of the Scrip- tures as the Rule of Faith. It may surprise some of our readers to be told, that the germ of the sceptical movement which has given birth to the ' Essays and Reviews,' may be found in certain principles which came to be en- grafted on the Anglo-Catholic movement at a later stage in its progress, and which first appeared in the ' Tracts for the Times.' These conmion principles, which we regard as the connecting link between 32 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFOKD. two Schools witli such opposite characteristics and tendencies, are such as relate to the fundamental topics which we have just mentioned — viz., the evi- dence, authority, and sufficiency of the Scriptures as the Rule of Faith. In the second movement, as in the first, there was a marked progress in the development of those views which ultimately determined their direction, and de- veloped their respective results. For, just as in the earher stage, there was a vigorous protest against Romanism, which resulted, nevertheless, in the ulti- mate adoption of all her peculiar doctrines and rites ; so there was a firm adherence to the dogmatic teaching of the Church, which, although it rested partly on the authority of Scripture, and partly on patristic interpretation and primitive tradition, was unquestionably opposed to scepticism, as well as to heresy, which resulted, nevertheless, in the ulti- mate adoption of all the leading principles of modern unbelief. The change, in this respect, was quite as marked, if it was not so rapidly developed, as in the other. For, unquestionably the writers of the 'Tracts' set out as the adherents and advocates of a fixed system of dogmatic teaching, and of definite articles of faith, insomuch that they opposed alike the latitudinarian opinions of Free-thinkers, and the idea of anything like doctrinal development within the Church itself. Witness the strong statements contained in ' Tract ' 60, which is entirely devoted to enforce the necessity of ' definite views of doc- POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 33 trine respecting the person, office, and work of Christ.' They speak of the presumption of ' in- truding men's opinions and fancies into the place of God's truth,' — of Christ ' being to be loved and served, not such as men choose to imagine Him, but such as He really and truly is ; ' and they add :— ' Let it be well considered by such as imagine that sincerity of heart is everything, and doctrine nothing, or very little, what they can make of the awful anathema in Galatians — "Though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed." The verse speaks of the creed as a whole, which the Galatians had received of St Paul. It does not leave them at liberty to choose out which articles they would consider as important, according to their notions and experience of practical good or edifjdng effect, arising out of one more than another. But it supposes them to have received a certain " form of sound words," which no abstract reasoning or theory of their own — nay, no miraculous or other marks of heavenly authority — would warrant their adding to, or diminishing.'' ' There is evidently no security, no rest for the sole of one's foot, except in " the form of sound words" — the one definite system of doctrine, sanctioned by the one Apostolical and Primitive Church.' How is it possible, it may be asked, that a series of ' Tracts,' containing such a clear and expHcit re- cognition of a Divine authoritative standard of doc- c 34 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. trine and of definite articles of faith, can be supposed to have any connection ^vith such a scheme of thought as is developed in the ' Essays and Reviews,' and still more to stand related to it as cause and effect? And imquestionably, were this the only doctrine taught on the subject, the objection would be alike pertinent and conclusive. But have we not already seen that the earher ' Tracts' contained sound protests against Popish error, while the later ones adopted and sanctioned it, — and this not through inadvertence, or in violent contradiction to their kno^vn principles, but thi'ough the gradual and pro- gressive development of a scheme of thought, which rested ultimately on the ground that the Scriptures are not the sole rule of faith, and which led them to place their authority on the same level with that of tradition or the Church, or rather on a lower level still, since the Scriptures themselves were made to depend on the tradition of primitive times ? and would it be wonderful if some, who were imbued with these principles, but un-^illing to follow their leaders in their further progress towards Popery, should break off at this point, and originate a move- ment in the opposite direction, towards what they might call a more liberal and rational view of Chris- tianity? Suppose a student at Oxtbrd to have gro^vn up under the teaching of those who pro- claimed that the Bible is not the rule of Christian faith — ^that it depends for its authority on the sanc- tion of the primitive Church — that we have no POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 35 evidence for its inspiration or canonicity, except such as may be derived from Catholic tradition ; and that so far from being the sole source of religious knowledge, it would be difficult to prove any doc- trine from Scripture alone, — would he not be pre- pared, by such teaching, to give at least their full weight to all the sceptical cavils of modern unbelief, and to join in any new movement which might hold out the prospect at once of an escape from Romanism, and a relief, at the same time, from all authoritative teaching in matters of faith ? There might be a certain measure of reaction in the case, the reaction of independent minds against the revival of mediaeval doctrines and usages ; but there was more than a mere reaction — there is an intelligible link of connection between those views of Scripture which the reader had been taught to entertain, and those ulterior conclusions, in which he was, perhaps, only too willing to acquiesce. For what were the principles with Avhich the Avriters of the 'Tracts' sought, as the series advanced towards its completion, to indoctrinate the minds of their readers ? They were such as these. Vincent of Lerins, is quoted as sajdng, that there are ' two ways ' by which a man may preserve him- self sound in the faith, ' first, by the authority of Scripture, next by the teaching of the Church Catholic. Here, some one perhaps mil demand, why I need make mention of the Church's under- standing of Scripture at all, considering that the 36 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. Canon of the Scriptures is perfect and self-suffi- cient, nay, more than sufficient for all things ? To which I answer, that the very depth of Holy Scrip- ture prevents its being taken by all men in one and the same sense, one man interpreting it in one way, one in another : so that it seems almost pos- sible to draw from it as many opinions as there are readers.' 'It is a near thing, if I may so speak, that they, the doctrines of faith, are in Scripture at all : the wonder is, that they are all there : humanly judging, they would not be there but for God's interposition ; and, therefore, since they are there by a sort of accident, it is not strange that they should be but latent there, and only indirectly producible thence.'* These statements plainly im- ply the insufficiency and unsuitableness of Scripture to be the Rule of Faith, and were designed to shut men up to the authoritative interpretation of the Church: but suppose that, in any case, it failed of this effect, might it not still leave an impression of the uncertainty of the teaching of Scriptui'e, such as might prepare many a young ' man to agree with Professor Jowett when he says, ' Nor is it easy to say what is the meaning of " proving a doctrine from Scrip- ture." For when we demand logical equivalents and similarity of circumstances, when we balance adverse statements, St James and St Paul, the New Testament with the Old, it will be hard to demon- * Tracts, ' Recoj cLs of the Church,' No. 24, 2. Tract 85, p. 84. POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 37 strate from Scripture any complex system either of doctrine or practice.'* The Evidences of Christianity are disparaged, and the use of them is described as a species of Rational- ism. * Many difficidties are connected with the evi- dence of the Canon; we might have clearer evidences for it than we have.' ' There are many difficulties connected with the evidence of the Church doc- trines; they might be more clearly contained in Scripture, nay, in the extant ^Titings of the three first centuries, than they are.' ' There is something very arresting and impressive in the fact that there should be these difficulties attending the two great instruments of religious truth which we possess.' ^ How do we know the doctrine is from God ? When we go to inquire into the reasons in argu- ment, we find that the prayer-book rests upon the Bible, and the Bible rests on testimony; that the Church doctrines, which the prayer-book contains, are to be gathered from Scripture', and that the books of Scripture, which make up the Bible, are to be gathered from history ; and, further, that those doctrines might have been more clearly stated in the Bible, and the books of the Bible more clearly witnessed by antiquity.' ' Why has He not spoken more clearly? He has given us doctrines which are but obscurely gathered from Scripture, and a Scripture which is but obscurely gathered from history. We have two informants, and both leave • ' Essays,' p. 366. 38 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. room for doubt' (Tract 85, 108). These state- ments were evidently designed to show that the evidence for Church doctrines was not more defec- tive than that for Scripture itself; — and, in so far as they carried conviction to any mind, must they not have left the impression that the wdiole scheme of Christianity rested on precarious grounds, and pre- pared many a young man to agree ^vith Mr Pattison when he says, that ' neither the external nor the internal evidences are properly theology at all' — that ' both methods alike, as methods of argumenta- tive proof, place the mind in an imfavourable atti- tude for the consideration of religious truth' — that ' where it is busied in establishing the genuineness and authenticity of the books of Scripture,' ' Rational- ism is seen in its dullest and least spiritual form,' and that ' either religious faith has no existence, or it must be to be reached by some other road than that of "the trial of the witnesses'" (Essays, 264, 296). But not only is the evidence defective noAv, it was equally doubtful in the time of our Lord Himself ' The Jews were left in 'the same uncertainty about Christ, in which we are about Ilis doctrine.' ' The whole system of the prophecies left the Jews (even after Christ came) where we are — in doubt.' ' If any one will seriously consider the intercourse with our Lord and the Pharisees, he will see that "they had just reason to complain (as men now speak) that the gospel was not preached to them," — that they were bid to believe on wealz arguments and fanciful POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 39 deductions' (Tract 85, p. 111). These statements may have been designed to show that it is our duty, as it was the duty of the Jews, to beheve on what- ever evidence God might be pleased to vouchsafe ; — but might they not leave the impression that the evidence actually provided, in either case, was ill adapted for the satisfaction of intelligent minds, and prepare many a young man to agree with Professor Jowett, when he says ' the rehgion of Christ was first taught by an application of the words of the Psalms and the Prophets. Our Lord Himself sanc- tioned this application.'' ' The new truth which was introduced into the New Testament, rather than the old truth which was found there, was the salvation and the conversion of the w^orld. There are many quotations from the Psalms and the Prophets in the Epistles, in which the meaning is quickened or spirit- ualised, but hardly any^ probably none^ which is based on the original sense or context' (Essays, p. 406). There are many other striking coincidences, in particular points, bearing on the evidence and authority of Scripture, between the 'Tracts' and ' Essays,' but we must be content with the few speci- mens which have been given above. Every one who is familiar with the Protestant controversy, must be aware that the Hue of argument generally adopted by Popish writers, is directed to prove that there is no alternative between the implicit reception of their doctrines and absolute infidelity, — that for this end they seek to invalidate the authority, and to disprove 40 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. the sufficiency of Scripture as the Eule of Faith ; and that where they have not succeeded in making con- verts to Romanism, they have succeeded, to a lament- able extent, in sowing the seeds of unbehef in every country where their influence prevails. Let any one read Tracts 85 and 90, and say whether this is not precisely the hne of argument which their authors pursued in support of the Church system ; and whether the subsequent development of unbelief might not be its natural and inevitable consequence. It is easy to see this now, when .the latent tendencies of that mode of reasoning have at length come to Ught, and assumed a palpable foi-m in the ' Essays and Reviews : ' but it must surely be regarded as no slight proof of the practical sagacity of Archbishop Whately, that from his knowledge of the theological bearings of certain principles, and from a considera- tion of their incipient tendencies, he was able to predict beforehand a certain and speedy develop- ment of infidelity in connection with the Oxford movement. We quote his memorable words of warning, with some of the reasons on which they were founded, at a time when men's minds were alarmed only at the prospect of an increase of Popery, and not in the least apprehensive of a move- ment in any other direction. ' The dangers which appear to me the most for- midable, are not those which alone are dreaded by some persons. I do not, indeed, doubt that several hundreds, perhaps thousands, comprising the POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTILVST. 41 most honest and consistent of the party, will have become, through its influence, converts to Romanism . . . but all who shall have been thus led openly to renounce our communion for another, -w-ill be found, I fear, much fewer than those whom the same causes will have led to, or confirmed m, total infidelity . . . For — ' 1. The writings (in question) indicate in their general tone that Christianity will not stand the test of close inquiry. They deride as absurd, and cen- sure as profai\e, and deprecate as hazardous, all at- tempts to investigate- evidence ; making faith not the result of evidence, but something opposed to it. And going still further, they distinctly declare all the e\'idences of Christianity that have been put forth by the ablest divines, to be absolutely inferior to that which satisfies an ignorant clown, who believes just what the pastor of the parish tells him.' . . . ' 2. The impression thus produced is strengthened by the circumstance, that these writers patronise the system of " Reserve," " Economy," or " Double-doc- trine" — the allowableness, and the duty, of having one Gospel for the mass of the people, and another for the initiated few. ' . . . ' 3. Moreover the waitings in question discoui^age, indirectly but in effect, and with great assiduity, the study of the Scriptures. In the first place, they laboui' assiduously to place on a level with Scripture history, the voluminous legends of the pretended iVIiddle-age miracles. And they also represent strongly, the uselessness and the danger of studying 42 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. Scripture as a guide to the Christian, without con- stant reference to the interpretations of primitive Tradition.' . ' 4. The earnestness, again, with which these Avriters deprecate " private judgment," has a similar tendency.' .... ' 5. There are similar injurious tendencies in the doctrine of " Apostolical Succession," in that sense in which it has of late been the fashion to maintain it. ' Now, let a man be but once convinced, 1st, That Christianity cannot stand the test of inquiry ; 2d, That he has no ground for certainty as to the real belief of those who teach it ; 3d, That Scripture need not be studied ; 4th, That the exercise of private judgment is forbidden ; and 5th, That Christianity is merely a system of outward ordinances ; let him but adopt all these notions, and what is there to stand between him and infidehty or indifferentism ? ' ' Others there are who feel, indeed, some appre- hensions such as my oAvn, of the spread of infidelity in consequence of the teaching of that School, but apprehend it as something that may ai'ise in a future generation : whereas, to me it appeared from the very first, that the danger was as immediate as it is great ; and inquiry may now con\'ince any one that the tree is already bearing its poisonous fruits, — that they are fast ripening all around us, — and that " the plague is begun." '* * Whately's ' Essays od the Peculiarities of the Christian Be- ligion.' I. Series, p. 18 : see pp. 5, 8, 17, 365. POINTS OF CONNECTION AND CONTRAST. 43 We have adverted to the Connection and the Contrast between the two Schools, which are repre- sented Tespectively by the ' Tracts fol- the Times, ' and the ' Essays and Re\4ews,' for the double pur- pose of shomng that the rise of the one cannot be accounted for by ascribing it to a mere reaction against the peculiarities of the other, but had a more radical and intimate connection with it through certain principles which are common to both ; and further, that these principles, wliich were afterwards developed in opposite directions, — tending, on the one hand, towards Romanism and Superstition, on the other, towards Ratioiiahsm and Scepticism, — were not prominently presented in the earher por- tion of the Tracts, but were gradually unfolded as the series advanced towards its completion. Com- mon justice, as well as Christian charity towards those who were more or less connected with tlie Tractarian movement, demands a distinct recogni- tion of the fact, that many who were led to admire the Anglo-Catholic theory, and to adopt Church princi- ples in conformity with it, at the earlier stage of the movement, were in no respect committed to its later developments, and were not bound, as other- wise they might have been, in consistency and honour, to leave the Church of England, or to foUo^r their more daring leaders, either in their return to Rome, or in any other direction which the movement might subsequently take. We have reason to believe that not a few who were, to some extent, imbued with tlie 44 THE TWO SCHOOLS AT OXFORD. Ecclesiastical principles which the ' Tracts' were de- signed to revive, had no sympathy whatever with the Theological Speculations with which they came to be afterwards associated ; that some actually broke off from their leaders, as much to his honour Mr Palmer did, at the point of transition from the earlier to the later form of the doctrine, and publicly pro- tested against the dangerous tendencies which had begun to appear, — and that many more, who made no public declaration on the subject, refused to be led either in the direction either of Romanism or of Rationalism, and resolved to adhere to what appeared to them to be the via media of the old Church of England. We may regret their extreme views on some points of Ecclesiastical polity ; we cannot ques- tion their consistency, ^ or impute to them any but the purest motives in continuing to adhere to the Protestant EstabHshment. THE 'ESSAYS AND EEVIEWS' EXAMINED. No. L 'THE EDUCATION OF THE WOELD.'* The Master of Rugby must be a high authority on any question of classical scholarship ; but * The Edu- cation of the World,' similar as it may be in some respects to 'The Education of the School,' differs from it very materially in others ; and one who may be competent to pronounce a sound judgment on the second, may be utterly incompetent to frame a com- prehensive theory of the first. Dominie Samson himself might be an excellent pedagogue without being much of a philosopher, — a capital discipHn- arian, but a sorry divine. Dr Temple's theory is founded on the analogy which is supposed to subsist between the advance- ment of an individual from childhood to youth, and * ' The Education of the World.' By Frederick Temple, D.D., Chaplain to the Queen, Head Master of Rugby School, etc. The Fourth Edition. London : Longman, Green, Longman, and Eoberts. D 46 DR TEMPLE. from youth to manhood, and the progress of the race, considered as ' a colossal man,' through a series of corresponding stages. The idea of progressive development in either case, and of a certain resem- blance between the two, such as may render the one in some respects illustrative of the other, is natural enough, and far from being new or original. It re- sembles the parallelism betwixt the successive stages of human life, and the corresponding succession of the seasons, which makes spring a fit emblem of youth, and winter of old age ; and which suggested some fine 'moral analogies' to the profound and meditative mind of Foster. There can be no reason- able objection to any judicious apphcation of it in this way, provided only that due care be taken not to confound what is a mere poetical image, or figure of speech, with an inductive analogy. In this way the Apostle makes use of it on two different occasions. For, speaking of the Jewish nation, he says in one place that ' The heir, as long as he is a child, differeth nothing from a servant though he be lord of all ; but is under tutors and governors until the time appointed of the father.' And again, speaking of his own individual ex- perience as illustrative of the difference between tlie present and the future state of Christian be- lievers themselves, he says — ' hen I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child, but when I became a man, I put away childish things ; for now we see through a glass * THE EDUCATION OF THE WORLD.' 47 darkly, but then face to face.' From these Scrip- tural statements, we learn that there was the same difference between the condition of the Church under the Jewish and Christian dispensations, as there is between the state of an heir who is as yet under tutors and governors, and his higher and freer condition when he comes of age ; and that there is still a similar difference between the condi- tion even of the Christian Church on earth and its more perfect state in heaven. Thus far the analogy between the experience of the Church and that of an individual in passing from childhood to youth, and from youth to mature manhood, is clearly re- cognised in Scripture ; and when appHed within these limits it is eminently suggestive, and well fitted to convey spiritual instruction, not by proving any doctrine, but simply by illustrating one truth by means of another more familiarly known. But in the hands of Dr Temple, the analogy is carried out far beyond these limits, and is employed to illustrate, not any Scriptural truth, but a mere fancy of his own. It is no longer appHed merely to throw light on God's method of procedure in His dispensations towards the Church, so as to ex- plain the difference between the state of the Jewish and that of the Christian disciple, or between the state of the Christian disciple himself on earth and in heaven ; it is extended to the race at large, and applied to explain ' The Education of the World.' The Church is supposed — for what reason we can- 48 DR TEMPLE. not tell — to be, in this respect, the ' representative of mankind,' although the other nations had neither, in his sense of the terms, a season of childhood nor a season of youth, since they never had the Law which was given to the Jews, nor the Example which was vouchsafed to the primitive Christians. Yet, holding the analogy to be applicable to all nations and ages, notwithstanding these important differences, he founds upon it an attempt to ex- plain the law of progress in the ' Education of the World,' and announces the startling discovery, ap- parently in regard to all alike, that there are three stages, which are thus described. 'First come Rules, then Examples, then Principles. First comes the Law, then the Son of Man, then the gift of the Spirit. The world was once a child, under tutors and governors, until the time appointed by the Father. Then, when the fit season had arrived, the Example to which all ages should turn, was sent to teach men what they ought to be. Then the human race was left to itself, to be guided by the teaching of the Spirit within.' When the doctrine is transferred from the Church to the race, we are naturally led to inquire what there was, or could be, in the history of the heathen nations, w^hich can furnish a parallel to the recorded experience of those who were placed under the revealed law of Moses, or privileged with the per- sonal example of Christ ? This question is not di- rectly faced, or answered in explicit terms ; but we * THE EDUCATION OF THE WORLD.' 49 are told that Rome, Greece, and even Asia contri- buted largely to the education of the world. Be it so ; but what was the childhood, what the youth, and what the manhood of heathendom, if, in the case of the Church, childhood was a state of sub- jection to Law, and youth a state of liberation from rules by the substitution of a godlike Example, and manhood a state of more complete emancipation, in which both Law and Example are superseded by 'the gift of the Spirit?' What parallelism exists between cases so dissimilar, which are sup- posed to fall under the same law of development ? Does Divine supernatural revelation in the one case, and the absence of it in the other, make no mate- rial difference between the two ? Or would the race, as a whole, have followed /the same course of advancement had no such revelation been vouch- safed ? The truth is, that the Master of Rugby, in ex- tending the analogy beyond the Kmits within which it is recognised in Scripture, has only added another to the many theories of progress which have been so rife of late on the Continent ; and all such theories, in so far as they either deny or ignore a supernatural revelation, have an infidel tendency. We have the Positive theory of progress, ' the fundamental law of man's historical development,' discovered and, as he thought, demonstrated by Auguste Comte — a law according to which every branch of our knowledge passes successively through 50 DR TEMPLE. three different states : the first being the theological or imaginative, which commences with Fetichism, advances to Polytheism, and culminates in Mono- theism; the second, the metaphysical or abstract, which is a state of transition, criticism and doubt ; the third, the scientific or positive, — the ultimate term of human progress, — ^which supersedes alike the theology of our childhood and the metaphysics of our youth, and brings us in our mature man- hood to a cold, dreary, desolate atheism. We have the Humanitarian theory of progress, elaborated by Pierre Leroux ; a theory founded on the soli- darity of the race, which represents its progress as depending on two opposite poles — permanence and durability, combined with perpetual movement and change — and on three indispensable conditions — the family in which men are born, the country in which they dwell, the property which they inherit or acquire ; and which terminates in the deification of a mere abstraction, — the idea of humanity, — and the denial of any other immortality than that of the race to which they belong. We have the Eclectic theory of progress, developed and illustrated by Victor Cousin, in which, fotmding on a trinary dis- tinction in individual consciousness, he attempts to deduce from it the historical development of the race, and divides it into three great epochs, inevit- able in their occurrence, and invariable in the order of their succession. We have the Saint Simonian, the Hegelian, and many more theories of the same * THE EDUCATION OF THE WORLD.' 51 kind, all attempting the impracticable task of con- structing history a priori^ and bringing it under the dominion of an inexorable necessity, or of some mere natural law. Such speculations, so incessantly renewed, may be justly held to indicate a deep- seated conviction that there is a plan in the dis- pensations of Providence, and a progress also in the development of man ; but the mystery which en- velopes the one, adheres also to the law which de- termines the other, and whether that law be dis- coverable or not by the unaided light of nature, it has not at least been actually ascertained. The progress of the race, as well as of every portion of it individually, depends on. so many causes, and these of such various kinds — climate, soil, constitu- tional temperament, hereditary tendencies, political institutions, civil government, and social influences ; and it is so far from being uniform and constant as to exhibit rather a perpetual alternation of revival and decay, of onward movement and retrogression, — that one can scarcely conceive a more difficult or. comphcated problem than to determine its funda- mental law; and assuredly it will never find its solution in any fanciful analogy between the indi- vidual and the ' colossal man.' However we may lean to the belief that, on the whole, the race is ad- vancing, since every new generation is heir to the accumulated experience and wisdom of all which have preceded it, yet history shows that the main impulse to progress has always been communicated 52 DR TEMPLE. from without, and has been ascribed, in most cases, to those supernatui'al revelations and spiritual in- fluences, of which most theorists make little account, but without which we can neither explain the facts of the past, nor reckon with any certainty on the prospects of the future. But let us test the validity and value of this new theory of progress, by examining somewhat more closely the analogy on which it is made to rest, and viewing it in the Hght of theologj'", history, and a sound doctrine of education. Viewed in the light of revealed theology, what portions of man's history, when we speak of the race, should be represented by the childhood and manhood of the individual ? According to Scrip- ture, the one must evidently correspond to his pristine state of integrity when he was *made in the image of God ; ' and the other, to the perfect maturity which is awaiting him in another and a nobler state of being. In tracing the history of man, the Bible spans the whole hemisphere of time, and connects 'Paradise Lost' with 'Paradise Re- stored.' How does this magnificent conception square with Dr Temple's theory ? Does the pro- gress of which he speaks commence with a state of primitive perfection, or with a state of barbarism ? Does it leave room for a Fall, or for a Restoration, properly so called? He nowhere denies either man's original dignity or his subsequent degradation ; but he ignores both, or passes them by, as if they ' THE EDUCATION OF THE WORLD.' 53 had no important bearing on his theme. And his whole representation of the manhood as compared with the childhood of the race, depends on the sup- position that man in his original state requires re- straints which are no longer necessary for us. And what does he mean to teach respecting our present state ? Can he really mean that now, in this mid- way imperfect condition of our being, we are ex- empt from the obligations of God's revealed law, and independent even of the example of Christ ? or that there is no external authority that ought to determine and regulate our faith and conduct ; that we have no other governor or guide than that ignis fatuuSj ' the light within ? ' Thus understood, his language would imply the wildest extreme of Anti- nomian licence, and might be applied to sanction the most fanatical dekision. True, the Apostle says, that 'we are not under the law, but under grace ; ' but as a divine, Dr Temple must know what all sound expositors have taught, that while we are not under the law as a covenant of works, we are still subject to the law as a rule of life, ' being not without law to God, but under the law to Christ ; ' and that while the law has no office in connection with our justification except that of convincing us of sin, and acting ' as a schoolmaster to bring us to Christ that we may be justified by faith,' it is still the powerful means of our progres- sive sanctification — ' Sanctify them through Thy truth : Thy Word is truth.' True, the Apostle says 54 DR TEMPLE. again that ' the strength of sin is the law ; ' but he adds, ' Is the law sin ? God forbid ; ' ' The law is holy, and the commandment holy, and just, and good.' Yet good as it is in itself, it is ' weak through the flesh,' or the corrupt nature of man, and 'sin, taking occasion by the commandment,' ' worketh death in me by that which is good.' It thus becomes incidentally ' the strength of sin ; ' first, because by its condemning sentence it sepa- rates the soul from the favour and fellowship of God, and bars its return to Him until that sentence has been graciously cancelled; and, secondly, be- cause a spiritual law, apphed to a carnal heart, in- flames and exasperates its corruptions, just as the purest light irritates a diseased eye. What does revealed theology say, again, of authority in matters of faith? Does it recognise an authority such as is external and superior to the mind itself, as well as independent of it ? Looking first to simple Theism, does it say with Dr Temple that 'the natui-al religions' were 'shadows pro- jected by the spiritual light within shining on the dark problems without,' or does it recognise an ex- ternal manifestation as well as an inward percep- tion of truth ? Does it not distinguish between ' the light of nature' considered as the percipient mind, and ' the works of creation and providence,' which manifest the wisdom, power, and goodness of God ? ' The invisible things of God are clearly seen, being understood by the things which are made, even His ' THE EDUCATION OF THE WOELD.' 55 eternal power and Godhead.' Looking again to the Christian scheme, does revealed religion teach mth Dr Temple that in our present condition under the Gospel ' the faculty of faith has turned inwards, and cannot now accept any outer manifestation of the truth of God,' or that there is now no external law, but only an internal one, ' a voice which speaks within the conscience,' ' a law which is not imposed upon us, from without, but by our own enlightened Avill ? ' Does not philosophy itself teach us that all our mere natiu-al knowledge depends on two factors, the one external, the other internal ; and that there could be none whatever were the ' light within' iso- lated from the surroimding universe, which originates, in co-operation mth the mind, those ideas on which the most abstract science and the most ideal creations alike depend ? Is it not natural to suppose that our spiritual knowledge may be dependent on a similar condition, and require an external authority, such as the moral law, or the living Christ, or the ever- lasting Gospel, in addition to ' the light within,' even when that light has been kindled ' by the spirit of wisdom and of revelation in the knowledge of Christ ? ' Dr Temple applies the internal law of which he speaks as a subjective test of every other, and as a supreme arbiter in matters of faith and practice. Eeferring to the law of God, as revealed by Moses, he says, ' that such commands should be sanctioned by Divine authority is utterly irreconcilable with our present feelings.' This of its ceremonial re- 56 DR TEMPLE. quirements ; and again of the moral, Ezekiel is said to ' appeal from the letter of the Second Command- ment to the voice of natural equity ; ' as if Ezekiel had denied what the Second Commandment affirmed, and was not seeking to neutralize a popular perver- sion of it, which had become a proverb amongst unbelievers then as it still is in our own times. Ezekiel assuredly had no intention to place God's law at the bar of man's reason, or to make it subject to his ' enhghtened will ; ' he knew, and spoke as if he knew, the great truth afterwards taught by an Apostle — ' If thou judge the law, thou art not a doer of the law, but a judge ; there is One lawgiver who is able to save and to destroy.' Viewed, again, in the light of authentic history, this theory of human progress will be found to break down utterly ; for will the Master of Rugby, familiar as he must be with the past, since he writes on 'The Education of the World,' point out a single period at which the three influences of law, example, and principles were not, to a greater or less extent, in simultaneous action ? He supposes example to be subsequent to law, and principles to be later than either ; while each of the former is superseded in its turn, and nothing remains but the ' light within.' Whereas their influence has always been more or less felt at every stage ; and so far from law and example being superseded at any time, our most mature principles may be said to grow out of them, and to be perpetually nourished by them ; ' THE EDUCATION OF THE WORLD.' 57 for the renewed soul is ever taking them up, as it were, into its o^vn substance, just as a tree derives sap from the soil and air, and assimilates it for its own nutriment. The three stages of his process of development have been, to a large extent, not suc- cessive, but synchronous, just as Comte's three stages — the theological, metaphysical, and scientific — imdoubtedly were. Dr Temple makes admissions on this point which are fatal to his whole reasoning. He says that 'Though the time for discipHne is childhood, there is no precise line beyond which all discipline ceases ;' — 'the child, again, is not insensible to the influence of example,' — and ' the power of ex- ample probably never ceases during life.' He admits further ' that the outer law is often the best vehicle in which the inner law can be contained for the various purposes of life.' These admissions are illustrated by facts, for ' the iiTuption of barbarians carried the Church back to the childish stage,' and necessitated a ' return to the domain of outer law;' and the Papacy 'was, in fact, nothing more nor less than the old schoolmaster come back to bring some more scholars to Christ.' Now if, in the Ught of history, we find that law, example, and principle have been always to some extent co-exist- ent, and that the progi-ess of the Church itself has been subject to such alternations as rendered it necessary to have recourse again to the ' beggarly elements ' of a former dispensation, why shoidd it be thought that now, when ' that which is perfect ' 58 DR TEMPLE. has not yet come, we must be either exempt from the obhgations of God's revealed law, or independent of the example of Christ as mirrored for our use in His blessed Gospel, or fit to govern ourselves solely by ' spirit and conscience,' — ' the inner law which is not imposed upon us from without,' but accepted ' by our own enlightened ^vill ? ' Viewed, again, in the light of a sound doctrine of education, how does this theory accord with the experience of wise parents and teachers in the moral and spiritual training of the young ? On this point, if on any other, Dr Temple might be expected to be a safe and enlightened guide. He has been placed at the head of one of the most important seminaries in England, and holds an office of deep and solemn responsibility. He must be presumed to have care- fully studied the whole subject of education, since he is himself engaged in the work, and finds leisure, moreover, to speculate on the education of the world. Now, is there a wise Christian parent in England, really concerned for the moral and spiritual training of his children, who would apply to their education the principles which are unfolded in this essay ? Indeed, if there were such a parent, he might well be puzzled, and Dr Temple himself might find it difficult, to say how they could be apphed. The difficulty lies here : these children were born, no doubt, when the race had reached an advanced stage of its education, but they were born as infants not- withstanding. The race to which they belong may * THE EDUCATION OF THE WORLD.' 59 now be, in Dr Temple's sense of the phrase, ' a man ; ' but individually they must still ' speak as a child, and understand as a child, and think as a child ; ' so that, in their case, the analogy woidd seem to admit, and even to require, an inverse application ; for if (xod in His wisdom subjected the race in its infancy to law, and taught it in its youth by example, these same means must still be employed in educating those who are born indeed in the manhood of hu- manity, but in a state of infancy, considered as indi- viduals. To this extent at least the law must still be employed as an outer discipline, and the example as a lesson or model. And is it possible that when one of these children reaches the age of manhood, and is about to enter on 'the battle of life,' the Master of Rugby could address him, as he left the school, in the language of his OAvn theory, and say — ' You have now passed from childhood to youth, and are no longer subject to any external law ; you have passed from youth to manhood, and are now inde- pendent even of the great example : henceforth you must be governed and guided through the quick- sands of life by no external authority, but by the "light within.'" There is an interesting and instructive analogy lietween the case of a little child and that of a Christian disciple. The one, like the other, is ' a new- born babe,' ' born from, above,' — he has spiritual instincts and appetites similar to those of infancy, 'he desires the sincere milk of the Word, that 60 DR TEMPLE. he may grow thereby;' — ^he is born into similar relations, and these relations are connected with similar duties to those of a child ; he is related to his heavenly, as the child is related to his earthly, Father, who is the object of fihal reverence, affection, and trust ; he is related to the whole family of God's children, as the child is related to brothers and sisters. There is an analogy also in respect to their condition and prospects, the one being the child of an earthly parent, advancing under his guidance towards manhood, and preparing for the business of time ; the other a child of God, advancing also towards the manhood of his spiritual being, and preparing for his inheritance in heaven. With reference even to the Church, considered collectively, there is an analogy between its state of minority and pupilage under the preparatory dis- pensations of Divine truth, viewed in connection with its fuller development and freer spirit under the crowning dispensation of the fulness of time, and two corresponding stages in its progress onwards, — the present, as compared "with the prospective, state of the Christian Church itself. These are real analogies, true to nature, recognised in Scripture, and fraught with profoun d instruction ; but the analogy on which the ^INIaster of Rugby founds his theory of human progress is either utterly baseless, or, in so far as it has any foundation in fact, entirely inapplicable to the object for which it is employed. No. II. 'BUNSEN'S BIBLICAL RESEAECHES.'* The Vice-Principal of St David's College has not presented to his readers any systematic statement of his peculiar theory, nor has he condensed his specu- lations into any general summary of results, such as might have enabled them to frame for themselves a comprehensive conception of their scope and ten- dency as a scheme of religious thought. This may have arisen in part from the nature of his contribu- tion to the volume, as a review of a long series of works by the late Baron Bunsen — comprising 'Egypt's Place in Universal History,' ' The Kingdom of God ' in History,' ' The Bible for the People,' and 'Hip- ' polytus and his Age ' — works which are suffi- ciently discursive in their range, as well as mis- cellaneous in their contents, to justify a reviewer in treating them in a somewhat similar style, while they touch the scheme of revealed rehgion at almost every point, and thus aiford pegs to hang remarks upon in regard to every conceivable topic. But if this feature of. Dr Williams' contribution deprives his readers of the benefit of a clear, connected, and * By Kowland Williams, D.D., Vice-Principal and Professor of Hebrew, St David's College, Lampeter ; Vicar of Broad Chalke, Wilts. London : Longman, Green, Longman, and Eoberts- 62 DR ROWLAND WILLIAMS. consecutive discussion of the subject, it supplies him with ample facilities, of which he is not slow to avail himself, for raising difficulties, suggesting doubts, and insinuating objections ; for nibbling at petty- details, while the whole question is not faced nor discussed on its general merits ; and dealing largely in minute, captious criticism, which may shake the faith of some, but can scarcely convince the judg- ment of any. We mean to say nothing of the ' genial baron,' but to leave him in the hands of his less genial critic; we speak only of the reviewer, and of the speculations for which he has made himself person- ally responsible. Dr "Williams can scarcely refuse to occupy the position of Bun sen, or to submit in his turn, and with a good grace, to the ordeal of public criticism. He has placed his materials before us in a fragmentary and disjointed shape, so that apparently they are detached and unconnected, or connected only by the slender thread supplied by the line of Bunsen's inquiries. Accordingly, on a cursory perusal of the review, it might seem, at first sight, as if there were no system whatever in it, but only a series of desultory and miscellaneous remarks ; on closer inspection, however, it will be found that the ' disjecta membra,' when brought together and compared, have a real and even a close relation to one another, and that, like the ' dry bones ' in Ezekiel's vision, they may be made to unite, as when ' the bones came together, bone to his bone,' so as to ' bunsen's biblical researches.' 6B form, not indeed a warm flesh-and-blood shape having 'the breath of life in it,' yet a tolerably complete, and very ghastly, skeleton. There is a sys- tem of thought, whose parts are all mutually related and well adjusted together, underlying that miscel- laneous accumulation in which it is embedded, but it must be exhumed from the covering which serve.- only to conceal its gigantic magnitude and propor- tions, and presented in its true form to the gaze of the world. We undertake to do the learned Vice- Principal this service, by bringing together the scattered parts of his theory, comparing them with one another, marking their mutual connection and interdependence, showing their strict logical coher- ence as constituent elements of one scheme of thought, and proving their common tendency towards the same result — a result which, as regards either the evidences or the doctrines of revealed religion, is neither more nor less than infidehty, scarcely con- cealed imder the drapery of Scriptural terms used in an unscriptural sense. This is a strong statement, and we feel that it can only be justified by evidence equally strong. In adducing that evidence, we propose to olFer, in tlie first instance, in our own language, a clear expres- sion of what we conceive to be the meaning of his leading statements, subjoining his own w^ords as a test of our accuracy ; and then to add some general remarks on his theory, as thus construed, and the manner in which he has attempted to establish it. 64 DR ROWLAND WILLIAMS. To avoid a wearisome multiplication of details, it may be convenient to arrange what we have to say, in merely expounding his theory, under three compre- hensive heads : His views of the nature of re\' elation, — of the record in which it is contained, — and of the contents of that record. The fundamental conception, which underlies his whole scheme of thought, is the idea which he has formed to himself of the nature of Eevelation. He conceives it to be, not the supernatural communica- tion of truth from the mind of God to the mind of man, whether immediately, as in the case of prophets and apostles, or mediately, through the instrument- ality of their preaching or writings, to the minds of their fellow-men ; but the discovery or perception of truth merely by man's natural faculties, aided only by some undefined quickening of his own conscience and reason. It foUows that no truth can be known except what is discoverable by the mere light of nature, and the exercise of his inherent powers. That this is his meaning appears from such state- ments as these : — ' In the Bible as an expression of ' devout reason,' he (Bunsen) ' finds records of the ' spiritual giants whose experience generated the ' rehgious atmosphere we breathe.' 'There is hardly ' any greater question than whether history shows ' Almighty God to have trained mankind by a faith ' which has reason and conscience for its kindred, ' or by one to whose miraculous tests their pride ' must bow; t.e., whether His holy Spirit has acted ' BUNSEN'S BIBLICAL RESEARCHES.' 65 ' through the channels which His providence or- ' dained, or whether it has departed from these so * signally that comparative mistrust of them ever ' afterwards becomes a duty.' ' Conscience would ' not lose by exchanging that repressive idea of * revelation which is put over against it as an adver- ' sary, for one to which the echo of its best instincts * should be the witness.' 'Thus considerations, * religious and moral, no less than scientific and ' critical, have, where discussion was free, widened ' the idea of revelation for the old world, and deep- ' ened it for ourselves.' This is the fundamental conception — the 'rpojrov -vps-j^og — of his whole theory, from which every other part of it may be logically deduced. It follows naturally from this sweeping assumption, that there can be no supernatural inspiration; for, according to his idea, revelation and inspiration are one. We are aware that these two expressions are often used as if they were sjTionymous or convert- ible terms ; but it conduces to clearness of thought to employ the term revelation to denote the objective presentation of supernatural truth to the mind ; and the term inspiration to denote the influence, equally supernatural, which prompted prophets and apostles to impart the truth to others by their preaching or their writings. But as no supernatural truth was to be revealed, so no supernatui'al inspiration, such as is supposed to be pecidiar to ' holy men of old w^ho spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost,' DR ROWLAND WILLIAMS. was needed. We are all alike, althougli not equally, inspired ; St Paul was not more really, although he might be more thoroughly, filled with the Holy Ghost than is the Rev. Vicar of Broad Chalke. ' These truths the same spirit which spake of old ' speaks, through all variety of phrase, in ourselves.' ' If such a spirit did not dwell in the Church, the ' Bible would not be inspired; for the Bible is, ' before all things, the voice of the congregation.' ' We find our Prayer-book constructed on the idea ' of the Church being an inspired society.' It follows that, revelation and inspiration being set aside, there can be no external authority in matters of faith — none, at least, that can impose any obligation either to believe or to obey. ' We trace ' principles of reason and right, to which our heart ' pei^etually responds, and our response to which is ' a truer sign of faith than such deference to a sup- ' posed external authority as would quench these ' principles themselves.' It follows, again, that instead of being subject to an external authority, we have, in our reason and conscience, a subjective test or supreme standard, which may be applied to the claims and the contents of any revelation whatever ; and this conclusion may be deduced by inexorable logic from his fundamental conception, for if there be no revelation other or higher than that of reason and conscience, they may be applied to test what must be their own products. ' Hence we are obliged to assume in ourselves a ^ bunsen's biblical researches.' 67 ' verifying faculty.' A pliilosopher ' taking his ' stand on the genuine words of Holy Scriptm^e, and ' the immutable laws of God to the human mind, * may say, either the doctrine of the Trinity agrees * -svith these tests, or, if you make it disagree, you * make it false.' It further follows naturally and inevitably, that if there be no other and higher revelation than that of reason and conscience, there can be no need and no reason to ascribe a supernatural character either to the scheme of Christianity, or to the credentials to which it has hitherto been supposed to appeal. Hence, speaking of ' our Biblical illustration from 'recent travellers,' he says, 'No single point has ' been discovered to tell in favour of an irrational ' supernaturalism, whereas numerous discoveries ' have confirmed the more liberal (not to say, ra- ' tionalizing) criticism, which traces revelation his- ' torically -svithin the sphere of nature and hu- ' manity.' And Avhat becomes of its supernatural credentials — its miracles and its prophecies ? They must be ad- mitted in words, but may be so explained as to be virtually and in effect explained away. In the case of miracles, the supernatural fact may be doubted, on the ground either of the constancy of physical natiu'e, or the insufficiency of the historical evidence ; but the moral lesson of the legend or myth remains as the perpetual heritage of the Church. ' Ques- ' tions of miraculous interference do not turn merely 68 DR ROWLAND WILLIAMS. ' upon our conceptions of physical law, as unbroken, ' or of the Divine will as all-pervading ; but they ' include inquiries into evidence, and must abide ' by verdicts on the age of records. Nor should ' the distinction between poetry and prose, and the ' possibility of imagination's allying itself with afFec- ' tion, be overlooked.' ' Those cases in which we ' accept the miracle for the sake of the moral lesson ' prove the ethical element to be the more funda- ' mental.' In the case of prophecy, again, — the other great branch of the supernatural evidence, — we are to distinguish between the moral teaching'' of the prophets, and their supposed power to foresee and predict future events. The former may be received, while the latter is rejected. ' In our own country ' each successive defence of the prophecies, in pro- ' portion as its author was able, detracted something ' from the extent of literal prognostication, and ' either laid stress on the moral element, or urged ' a second as the .spiritual sense.' ' When so vast ' an induction on the destructive side has been gone ' through, it avails little that some passages may be ' doubtful, one perhaps in Zechariah and one in ' Isaiah, capable of being made directly Messianic, ' and a chapter possibly in Deuteronomy foreshadow- ' ing the final fall of Jerusalem. Even these few ' cases, the remnant of so much confident rhetoric, ' tend to melt, if they are not already melted, in the ' crucible of searching inquiry.' All the important topics hitherto noticed relate * bunsen's biblical researches.' 69 properly to the nature of revelation, and his con- clusions in regard to them are natural and strictly logical deductions from that conception of it which lies at the foundation of his whole theory. Of course the same conception must affect all his views of the record in which revelation is contained : to others, it is ' the Word of God ; ' to him, it is ' the ' voice of the congregation.' ' On the side of ex- ' ternal criticism we find the evidences of our can- ' onical books, and of the patristic authors nearest ' to them, are sufficient to prove illustration in out- ' ward act of principles perpetually true, but not ' adequate to guarantee narratives inherently in- ' credible, or precepts evidently wrong. Hence we ' we are obliged to assume in ourselves a verifying • faculty. . . . It is not our part to dictate to ' Almighty God that He ought to have spared us ' this strain upon our consciences, nor, in giving us ' through His Son a deeper revelation of His own ' presence, was He bound to accompany His gift by ' a special form of record.' Still, if the Bible con- tained any revelation from. God, in the usual sense of that expression as denoting a commimication of truth from the mind of God to the mind of man through the channel of this record, it must be held to be, to that extent, an external and authoritative rule of faith and practice ; and however difficult it might be, on the supposition of its partial inspira- tion, to separate the Divine from the human element, or to winnow the wheat from the chaff, Ave should 70 DR ROWLAND WILLIAMS. be bound to make the attempt, were we not relieved by the assurance that ' the Bible is, before all things, ' the voice of the congregation.' And yet he would not be held to disparage the Bible ; far from it, for he speaks of those ' to whom the Bible is dear for ' the truth's sake,' — as dear perhaps as any other book, such as those of Luther and Milton, Plato and Shakspere, who were not 'uninspired.' He goes even so far as to reprove Bunsen for asking, ' How ' long shall we bear the fiction of an external revela- ' tion ? ' and ventures to say, with unusual mildness, ' There will be some who think this language too ' vehement for good taste ! ' If it fares thus with the credentials and the re- cord of revelation, it can scarcely surprise us to find that all the highest and most peculiar truths of Christianity — its most precious contents — are either thrown to the winds or dexterously explained away. This is the natural consequence of his fundamental assumption ; for if there be no revelation of truth on the part God, why should there be the submission of faith on the part of man ? Take the doctrine of the fall : ' The fall of Adam represents to him ' (Bunsen) ideally the circumscription of our spirits ' in hmits of flesh and time, and practically the selfish ' nature with which we fall from the hkeness of ' God, which should be fulfilled in man.' Take the doctrine of original sin : ' When it (baptism) be- ' came twisted into a false analogy with circum- ' cision, the rite degenerated into a magical form. ' bunsen's biblical researches.' 71 ' and the Augustinian notion of a curse inherited by ' infants was developed in connection ^\ith it.' ' He * (Bunsen) evidently could not state original sin in ' so exaggerated a form as to make the design of * God altered by the first agents in His creation, ' or to destroy the notion of moral choice and the ' foundation of ethics.' Take the doctrine of the in- carnation : ' The incarnation becomes ^vith our author ' (Bunsen) as purely spiritual as it was with St Paul. * The son of David by birth is the Son of God by ' the Spirit of hoHness. What is flesh is bom of ' flesh ; what is spirit is born of spirit.' ' In Him he ' finds brought to perfection that religious idea ' which is the thought of the Eternal, without con- * formity to which our souls cannot be saved from ' evil.' * This Divine consciousness or wisdom, con- ' substantial with the Eternal Will, becoming per- ' sonal in the Son of Man, is the express image of ' the Father ; and Jesus actually, but also mankind ' ideally, is the Son of God. If aU this has a Sabel- ' lian or almost a Brahminical sound,' etc. Take the doctrine of the Trinity : ' Being, becoming, 'and animating; or substance, thinking, and con- ' scious life, are expressions of a Triad, which may ' be also represented as will, wisdom, and love ; as ' light, radiance, and warmth ; as fountain, stream, * and united flow ; as mind, thought, and conscious- ' ness ; as person, word, and life ; as Father, Son, ' and Spirit ! ' Take his doctrine of sacrifice : ' Sac- ' rifice, with the Psalmist, meant not the goats' or 72 DR ROWLAND WILLIAMS. ' heifers' blood-shedding, but the contrite heart ex- ' pressed by it.' Take his doctrine of propitiation and atonement : ' Propitiation would be the recovery ' of that peace which cannot be Avhile sin divides us ' from the Searcher of hearts.' ' This recognition of ' Christ as the moral Saviour of mankind may seem ' to some Baron Bunsen's most obvious claim to the ' name of Christian.' Take his doctrine of justifi- cation by faith : ' Why may not justification by faith ' have meant the peace of mind, or sense of Divine ' approval, which comes of trust in a righteous ' God, rather than a fiction of merit by transfer ? ' . . . . Faith would be opposed not to the ' good deeds which conscience requires, but to ' works of appeasement by ritual. Justification ' would be neither an arbitary ground of confidence, ' nor a reward upon condition of our disclaiming ' merit, but rather a verdict of forgiveness upon our ' repentance, and of accep'tance upon the offering of ' our hearts.' Such are some of the articles of his creed, — for creed it is, however he may declaim against autho- rized formularies, and one which lays down propo- sitions quite as definite in themselves, and quite as dogmatic in his form of stating them, as are the Articles of the Church of England, although it might be difficult to discover any other resemblance be- tween them. But in deference to his aversion for such formularies, let us call them the results of his critical and philosophic speculations. They are the ^ bunsen's biblical researches.' 73 constituent parts of a theory, all springing naturally from his fundamental conception of the nature of revelation, all bearing a close relation to one another, and reasoned out by a rigorous logic. The mere statement of such a theory should be a sufficient ex- posure of it ; but we may briefly indicate, although within our limits, Ave cannot fully discuss, the ob- jections to which it is liable. In respect to its fundamental assumption, that re- velation cannot consist in a communication of truth ah extra, but must be resolved into the natural, perhaps quickened, action of man's inherent powers of reason and conscience — it is utterly unphiloso- phical, and runs counter to all the analogies supplied by God's method of imparting even our common secu- lar knowledge. God is the revealer of natural truth through the medium of His works, not less than of spiritual truth through the medium of His Word ; and His Word holds the same place with reference to the one, which is held by His works with reference to the other. In both there is an external manifes- tation, as well as an internal faculty of perception, and in both the standard or rule of judgment is in- dependent of our mind, and possesses a certain authority over it. Man is but ' the minister and * interpreter' of nature in the domain of science, and must be content to learn every lesson which she teaches with the docility of ' a little child.' Without psome information conveyed to the mind ab extra, neither reason nor conscience could come into opera- 74 DR ROWLAND WILLIAMS. tion at all. If this be true of our common secular knowledge, it is equally true of our first and simplest notions of natural religion ; for, besides ' the light of nature,' or the internal faculties of reason and con- science, there is an external manifestation of God in His works of creation and providence. If this be God's method of instructing men in secular know- ledge and natural religion, does not analogy teach us to expect some similar provision for imparting the knowledge of spiritual truth, some medium through which God will convey His instruction and make known His supreme will ? And what other medium or provision can be conceived of than His blessed Word ? * Besides being unphilosophical, his theory is un- scriptural. The sacred writers tell us that 'God ' has magnified His Word above aU His name ' — that it is the brightest manifestation, except that in the person of His Incarnate Son, which He has ever made of His character and will; that it contains many truths which could neither be discovered by the unaided light of natm-e, nor even proved, when revealed, otherwise than by the authority of the Revealer ; that it contains ' exceeding great and pre- ' cious promises,' which could convey no comfort un- less they were known to rest on the word, and even on the oath, of Him who cannot lie ; and that for all our knowledge of ' the will of God for our salvation ' we must depend, not on our own reason and con-^ * Appendix, Note A. ' bunsen's biblical reseakches.' 75 science, but on ' the Word of Truth, the Gospel of ' Salvation.' The theory is unchristian — by which we mean that it is opposed to the express teaching of our Lord. In reading these dreary speculations, it has often occurred to us to ask — 'What think ye of ' Christ?' Was He a teacher sent from God, was He the Son of God Himself? What, then, did Christ teach on these points ? Did He ever speak of the narrative of the creation as a myth, or of that of the fall as an allegory ? Did He ever deny the predictive character of ancient prophecy ? On the contrary, did He not say of Moses, 'He wrote of ' Me,' and beginning at Moses and all the prophets, did He not expound to His disciples 'the things concerning Himself? ' Did He Avork real or pre- tended miracles? What says Christ the Lord? should be the question of every one worthy to bear His name, or to hold office in His Church ; and Christ's answer should settle every difficulty. ' I ' know,' says the noble Arnold, ' Christ to have been ' so wise, and so loving to men, that I am sure I ' may trust His word ; and that what was entirely ' agreeable to His sense of justice and goodness ' cannot, unless through my own defect, be other- ' wise than agreeable to mine.' The theory is only an English form of the exploded neology of Germany, in which the naturahsm of J*aulus and De Wette is strangely blended with the mythical theory of Strauss. It is coming into fashion 76 DR ROWLAND WILLIAMS. here, when all the noblest spirits there — Neander and Tholuck, Olshausen, Hengstenberg, Stier, Baum- garten, and many more — have been struggling for years to free their fatherland from its blighting in- fluence. Germany has cast it off as ' a filthy garment,' and is beginning to be clothed with ' a change of raiment.' Like Teufelsdrockh, in ' Sartor Resartus,' the Vice-Principal of St David's has an eye to the ' old clothes : ' is he quite sure that they would be appropriate and becoming under the robes and sur- plice of a dignified clergyman of the Church of England ? No. III. ' THE STUDY OF THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.'* The author of this Essay is no longer in the midst of us. He has been removed by the hand of death. He cannot now be brought in person before the bar of public opinion, nor is he amenable to any earthly tribunal; he can be judged only by Him who is ' Lord of the conscience.' But his ^vritings remain, and must exert some influence, for good or for evil, long after his removal from the busy haunts of men ; and we owe a duty to the living as well as to the dead, — ^to those who are entering on the thorny path of life, not less than to the memory of those who have already finished their course. That duty must be faithfully discharged, on the principle of strict and impartial justice, although it may well be under- taken witb that chastened spirit which his recent re- moval from the midst of us is fitted to produce, and conducted with that forbearance which every gene- rous mind ^vill feel to be due in the case of one who is no longer present to defend himself. Our remarks, therefore, must relate exclusively to his works, with- * By Baden Powell, M.A., F.R.S., Savilian Professor of Geo- metry in the University of Oxford. 78 PROFESSOR BADEN POWELL. out the slightest reference to his previous position or character as a man, or as a minister of the Church of England. Looking, then, to this Essay, and viewing it in the light which is reflected on it by several previous works from the same pen on similar or cognate topics of inquiry, it -will be our object to analyse and arrange its very miscellaneous and somewhat contra- dictory contents, to ascertain and place clearly before our readers the ground principles on which his argu- ment depends, and to enable them to form a just estimate of the amount of weight which belongs to it as a reason for discrediting or rejecting the whole miraculous evidence of Christianity. Adopting Professor Powell's own division of his Essay into two parts — the argument for miracles, and the argument from miracles — our attention will be directed, under the first, to the nature, possi- bility, and credibility of Di\dne supernatural inter- positions ; and, imder the second, to the kind and amount of evidence which they are capable of yield- ing in support of those doctrines in attestation of which they were wrought. In both departments of the inquiry it will be our honest aim to select the strongest points of his case, and to place them clearly before the minds of our readers, while we omit, or pass by with slight comment, many miscellaneous observations which seem to us to have little direct bearing on the settlement of the point at issue. Before entering on the formal discussion of his ^ THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.' 79 two heads, he offers some preliminary remarks designed to prepare the way for it, by showing, on the one hand, the lawfuhiess and expediency of in- stituting an inquiry on the subject, and the spirit and temper, on the other, in which it should be conducted. In illustrating the expediency of such an inquiiy, he says, speaking of ' the evidences of ' Revelation,' that ' unlike the essential doctrines of ' Christianity, " the same yesterday, and to-day, and " for ever," these external accessories constitute a ' subject which of necessity is perpetually taking ' somewhat at least of a new form, with the succes- ' sive phases of opinion and knowledge.' In these words he expressly admits that there are certain doctrines which are essential to Christianity, and that these doctrines are immutable amidst all the vicissitudes of human opinion ; and although he does not specify what they are — and had he done so would probably have omitted some which appear to us to be its peculiar and most precious discoveries — the admission is a large one coming from any member of the school to which he belonged. But when he contrasts these essential doctrines Avith the ' evi- ' dences,' as if the latter were merely ' external ' accessories ' of Revelation, it must be kept in mind that, according to the scheme adopted by Omniscient Wisdom, the evidences have been, to a large extent, incorporated with the truths of religion in thfe same volume, and that they have been so interwoven with its structure as to be regarded by Mr Powell himself 80 PROFESSOR BADEN POWELL. as credenda^ while he rejects them as credentials. They cannot, therefore, be mere external accessories. Yet there is room for a distinction, if not between the ' essential doctrines ' and the evidences con- sidered as 'external accessories,' yet between the substance and the form of the evidences themselves ; and this distinction is well drawn by the President Riambonrg, when treating of the ' direction which ' should now be given to Christian apologetics ; ' he shows that, while the great branches of the evidence remain at all times substantially the same — the Divine attestations to the truth by miracles and prophecy — yet they may, and should, be adapted in point of form to the peculiar exigencies and modes of thought of each succeeding age. This would sufficiently justify ]VIr Powell in proposing Ho review ' the condition in which the discussion stands, and ' to ascertain whether it has kept pace with the ' progressive enhghtenment of the present times,' even although there were no such distinction as he supposes to subsist between the essential doctrines and the evidences of revealed religion. In regard to the spirit in which the inquiry should be prosecuted, we have little to object to Professor Powell's description of it ; and it gives us pleasure to add that the present Essay, although far from being a perfect exemplification of that spirit, comes much nearer to it than most of his recent writings, jis if the searching and, perhaps, severe criticism to which they were subjected had served in some ^ THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.' 81 measure, if not to shake bis convictions, at least to subdue his tone and amehorate his style. VTe can- not concur with him however, when he speaks as if the imbeliever, or the mjin who agitates questions which may shake the faith of others, is innocent of all moral blame, and as if any censui'e pronounced upon him would imply that his instructor was, or thought himself to be, ' omniscient and infallible.' Drawing nearer to the main subject of his Essay, he lays down another distinction, which has great prominence given to it in his previous writings, and which plays an important role in his subsequent reasonings — the radical distinction between reason and faith. He speaks of ' a vn.de distinction between ' the influences of feeling and those of reason ; the ' impressions of conscience and the deductions of * intellect ; the dictations of moral and religious ' sense, and the conclusions from evidence, in refer- ' ence especially to the questions agitated as to tht^ * grounds of belief in Divine revelation ; ' and says : — ' AVhen reference is made to matters of external ' fact (insisted on as such), it is obvious that reason * and intellect can alone be the proj)er judges of tht- ' evidence of such facts. AVhen, on the other hand. ' the question may be as to points of moral or reii- ' gious doctrine, it is equally clear other and higher ' grounds of judgment and conviction must be ap- pealed to.' That Ave may see the use which he mean> to make of tliis distinction, we must look forward tc its application in the progress of his argiunenr ; and 82 PROFESSOR BADEN POWELL. we shall find that it is greatly more important than at first sight it may seem to be. It is applied to prove that faith is independent of the intellect, and can dis- pense, of course, with all miraculous evidence, and every kind of external attestation or authority. ' We ' must recognise both the due claims of science to ' decide on points properly belonging to the world ' of matter, and the independence of such considera- ' tions which characterizes the disclosure of spiritual ' truth, as such.' ' Beyond the domain of physical ' causation, and the possible conceptions of intellect ' and knowledge, there lies open the boundless region ' of spiritual things, which is the sole dominion of ' faith. And while intellect and philosophy are ' compelled to disown the recognition of anything in ' the world of matter at variance with the first prin- ' ciple of the laws of matter — the universal order ' and indissoluble unity of physical causes — they are ' the more ready to admit the higher claim of Divine ' mysteries in the invisible and spiritual world.' He admits — and the admission is one which his clerical associates shordd lay to heart — that ' the idea of a ' positive external Divine revelation has formed the ' very basis of all hitherto received systems of Chris- ' tian belief ; ' but contends that it must now be abandoned, and that religion must be withdrawn entirely from the province of reason, and transferred to the region of faith. Statements like these gener- ally contain some small portion of truth to vrhich they ow^e all their seeming plausibility; but separate ^ THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.' 83 the truth from the error with which it is associated, and the error will be divested at once of its veri- similitude ; winnow the wheat from the chaff, and a mere puff will scatter the chaff to the winds. It is true that there is a difference between leason and faith, and on this account it is right and even neces- sary to distinguish the one from the other ; it is not true that there is no necessary relation or con- nection between the two, or that it is either lawful or safe, even if it were possible, to effect a divorce between them. It is true that reason may exist and operate independently of faith, and apart from it ; it is not true that faith, in the Scriptural sense of that expression, can be severed from knowledge, or exercised apart from our knomng faculties. Saving faith, such as is required in the Gospel, implies more than a mere intellectual assent to the historical truth of Christianity, or to a series of doctrinal propositions ; it consists essentially in a cordial consent to the revealed method of recon- ciliation, and an actual closing with Christ as our own Saviour ; for by faith ■ ' we receive and rest ' upon Christ alone for salvation, as He is freely ' offered to us in the GospeL' But, whatever else may be involved in it, it clearly presupposes behef, and belief again presupposes knowledge of the truth ; and, considered in its relation to the truth, it is distinguished from our other beliefs mainly by this, that it receives a Divine testimony on the authority of the revealer. To identify reason mtli 84 PROFESSOE BADEN TOWELL. faith were to adopt the theory of Rationahsm ; to divorce faith from reason were to adopt either the Popish doctrine of a bhnd and implicit belief, such as accords with the maxim that ' ignorance is the ' mother of devotion,' — or the equally fanatical doc- trine of mysticism, which teaches that men are to be guided only by 'the Hght within,' and substi- tutes what may be the mere delusions of 'private ' spirits' for 'the oracles of God,' as the standard of faith and duty. We have no sympathy with any attempt to relegate rehgion to any other than OUT common cognitive faculties ; it is only neces- sary that the same faculties which are conversant with all other truth should be instructed by the Word, and enlightened by the Spirit, of God, to render them safe guides in the path of rehgious inquiry. While we guard against the abuse, we would equally vindicate the legitimate use, of reason in matters of faith, and protest against that bastard humility which scepticism sometimes assumes when it represents our noblest faculties as incapable of receiving even Divine instruction, and professes that reason, however it may be aided by revelation, can never soar into the region of faith. And we are the less disposed to defer to this mystical doctrine, even when it is propounded by philosophers and divines, both because it has been a fertile source of fanatical' delusion at various eras in the history of the Church, and also because it has been employed by many avowed sceptics to undermine the foimda- ' THE E\aDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.' 85 tions of all religion. It was so employed by Hunie, when, at the close of his ' Essay on Miracles,' he says in words which were intended for irony — ' VTe ' may conclude that the Christian religion not only • was at first attended with miracles, but even at this • day cannot be believed by any reasonable person ' without one. Mere reason is insufficient to con- ' viuce us of its veracity ; and whoever is moved ' by faith to assent to it is conscious of a continued • miracle in his own person, which subverts all the • principles of his imderstanding, and gives him a ' determination to believe what is most contrar}^ to ' custom and experience ; ' and again, also in his ' Essay on ^liracles' — ' I am the better pleased -with • the method of reasoning here delivered, as I think • it may serve to confound those dangerous friends ' or disguised enemies to the Christian religion who ' have undertaken to defend it by the principles of • human reason. Our most holy religion is foimded ■ on faith, not on reason ; and it is a sure method • of exposing it to put it to such a trial as it is by • no means fitted to endure.' So was it employed also by the infidel author of ' Christianity not Founded • on Argument ; ' a title which would be a true ex- pression of an important fact, were it intended merely to annoimce that Christianity must rest on the authority of revelation, since it is neither dis- coverable by the light of nature, nor capable even of being proved by it, when revealed, othen\4se than by the aid of those supernatural attestations to 86 PROFESSOR BADEN POWELL. which it appeals ; but which must be regarded in a very different hght when the argument is directed to prove that Christian faith can have no connection mth the exercise of human reason. These remarks not be found irrelevant to the main argument of Professor Powell, which must now engage our attention. The fundamental conception on which it rests is that of the ' unitj' and ' order' of nature, and it consists in the assumption that every question as to miraculous or supernatural interposi- tion is effectually and for ever foreclosed by the large induction which establishes the uniformity of natural laws. ' The question agitated is not that of ' mere testimony, of its^ value, or of its failures ; it ' refers to those antecedent considerations which must ' govern our entire view of the subject, and which ' being dependent on higher laws of belief, must be ' paramount to all attestation, or rather belong to a ' province distinct from it.' ' In an age of physical ' research like the the present, all highly cultivated ' minds and duly advanced intellects have imbibed, ' more or less, the lessons of the inductive philo- ' sophy, and have, at least in some measure, learned ' to appreciate the grand foundation principle of uni- ' versal law ; to recognise the impossibility even of ' any two material atoms subsisting together without ' a determinate relation,' etc. ' The essential question '• of miracles stands quite apart from any considera- ' tion of testimony ; the question would remain the ' same if we had the evidence of our o^vn senses to * THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.' 87 ' a miracle.' In short, miracles are antecedently and intrinsically incredible, and incapable of proof, whether by ocular evidence or the strongest testi- mony, on account simply of the antecedent pre- sumption against them, arising from the established order of physical causes. This, it must be owned, is a sweeping conclusion, deduced as it is, not from any a priori law of thought, but from the results of induction, which aims only at ascertaining the facts and laws of nature, but never professes to determine what may or may not possibly be. Even in the most advanced of the inductive sciences, it is generally understood that their con- clusions are provisional only, and liable to be modi- fied by any new cases that may come to our know- ledge. We think that those who have most thoroughly mastered the theory and rationale of the inductive process, will agree Avith us in saying that Professor Powell has not duly considered the limits AA-ithin which alone its results can be accepted as absolutely sure. We cannot, within our assigned limits, dis- cuss the general question which is thus raised ; we content ourselves, therefore, with referring our readers to two articles in the North British Bevietv,* while we undertake to show that on one important point he is flatly contradicted by John Stuart INIill, and that on tAvo others he has gone far beyond the scepticism of Hume himself. His argument e\ddently proceeds on the supposi- * No. 62, Art. 4. No. 65, Art. 9, and Note B. 88 PROFESSOR BADEN POWELL. tion that there are no other agencies in the universe that are capable of effecting physical changes except the forces which are at work in the world of matter, — a supposition strange enough when it is remem- bered that there are free, intelligent, and voluntary agents who are capable of changing the state of physical things, and bending them to the accom- plishment of their designs. Men themselves have this power to a limited extent through the inscrut- able connection subsisting between soul and body ; and why may not a higher degree of the same power belong to angels, and a higher still to God, the Lord of all ? But once admit these agencies as capable of effecting physical changes, and his whole argument, in so far as it rests on invariable order maintained by purely physical causes, falls to the ground. For here no violence would be done to the universal law of causation ; there would only be the introduction of new antecedents, followed according to that law with new consequents. He denies this, but it is ad- mitted by a far higher authority on the philosophy of induction. ' In order that any alleged fact,' says Mr MiU, ' should be contradictory to a law of ' causation, the allegation must be, not simply that ' the cause existed without being followed by the ' effect, for that would be no uncommon occurrence, ' but that this happened in the absence of any ade- ' quate counteracting cause. Now, in the case of an ' alleged miracle, the assertion is the exact opposite ' of this. It is that the effect was defeated, not in * THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.' 89 ' the absence, but in consequence, of a counteracting ' cause, viz., a direct interposition of an act of the ' mil of some being who has power over nature ; ' and in particular of a Being whose will, having * originally endowed all the causes with the powers ' by which they produce their effects, may well be ' supposed able to counteract them. A miracle, as ' was justly remarked by (Dr Thomas) Brown, is no ' contradiction to the law of cause and effect ; it is a ' new effect, supposed to be produced by the intro- ' duction of a new cause. Of the adequacy of that ' cause, if it exist, there can be no doubt,' Professor Powell denies that any conceivable kind or amount of testimony could make it reason- able to believe in the occm-rence of a miracle, and herein goes far beyond the utmost scepticism of Hume. The latter lays dovm. liis position as 'a 'general maxim' in these terms: — 'That no tes- ' timony is sufficient to estabhsh a miracle, unless ' the testimony be of such a kind that its falsehood ' would be more miraculous than the fact which it ' endeavours to establish ; ' and even this maxim is still further hmited when he adds, ' that no human ' testimony can have such force as to prove a mi- ' racle, and make it a just foundation foi^ any system ' of religion. I beg the limitations here made may ' be marked when I say, that a miracle can never be ', proved so as to be the foundation of a system of ' rehgion. For I own that, otherwise, there may ' possibly be miracles, or violations of the usual 90 PROFESSOR BADEN POWELL. * course of nature, of such a kind as to admit of ' proof from human testimony.' Professor Powell might have sought to evade this strong statement by admitting that the fact might be proved, but not the fact qua miracle ; but this quibble will meet us as we advance. Professor Powell denies that we should or could believe in miracles were they exhibited before our eyes. And here, again, he far outruns the scepti- cism of Hume and Laplace. The former, in his Essay, supposes a case, and admits that he could not but believe in the occurrence of a miracle ; and the latter says — ' If we ourselves had been specta- ' tors of such an event, we should not believe our ' own eyes till we had scrupulously examined all ' the circumstances, and assured ourselves that there ' was no trick or deception. After such an ex- ' amination we should not hesitate to admit it, not- ' withstanding its great improbability, and no one ' would have recourse to an inversion of the laws of ' vision in order to account for it.' We cannot enlarge on Professor Powell's sketch of the history of Apologetics in England ; we shall only say that it contains many gross misstatements and misrepresentations, without having the merit of being consistent with itself. When he says that the study of ' Paley's Evidences' has been superseded at the universities by that of ' Butler's Analogy,' we can only express our fervent hope that there is no ground for the insinuated charge that the historical ' THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.' 91 evidence has fallen into desuetude at Oxford and Cambridge. If it be so, we can have no reason to be surprised at the infidel tendencies which have recently appeared among not a few who received their education at these ancient seats of learning ; and we are very sure that they are departing in this from the good old paths of the Church of Eng- land, while every Nonconformist college in Britain reckons it indispensable to provide for theological students a thorough course of apologetic, as well as of systematic and exegetic theology. Professor Powell thinks he can deny the truth of miracles without impeaching the honesty of the wit- nesses by whom they are attested. This would be a hard task iii the case of the Jews at Sinai or in the wilderness ; it would be equally hard in the case of the primitive Christians, and especially in the case of the Apostles, who not only saw, but pro- fessed also to work, miracles ; but it would be harder still — \vith reverence be it said — in the case of our Lord Himself. Can we deny the truth of the Gospel miracles without impeaching the character of Him who not only professed to work them, but promised to confer the power of working them on His commissioned servants ? Again we say — for this is, and ever must be, the ultimate issue, — ' What think ye of Christ ? ' The question must be faced, and there must be no equivocation here. Did He work miracles, yea or no ? If He did, then in whose name, and by what authority ? If He did not, and 92 PROFESSOR BADEN POWELL. yet professed to do it, and to confer miraculous powers on His Apostles, then infidels may be right — they are, at least, self-consistent ; but these clergy- men are assuredly wrong. He thinks, however, that the sensible fact, which alone is attested, may be admitted, while its super- natural or miraculous character is doubted or denied; and is at great pains to show that testimony relates only to the sensible ftict, while its supernatural character is nothing more than an inference. This is far from being an original discovery ; it is only a part of the general doctrine which teaches us to regard testimony, in all cases, as merely a pheno- menon to be accounted for, and either to receive or to reject it, according as its truth or its falsehood may be found to accord best with all the known circumstances of the case. Those who are familiar with the teaching of Archbishop Whately on this subject,* will see at once that there is nothing pecu- liar, in this respect, in the case of miracles, — unless it be that the evidence was so strong as to dissipate the incredulity arising in the minds of the eye-wit- nesses from the extraordinary character of the events which they attest, to dispel their inveterate per- judice against such a Messiah as disappointed all their preconceived expectations, and to nerve them for persecution .and martyrdom, in openly proclaim- ing what they had seen and heard. But, leaving the abstract question, let us look to particulg,r facts : * Note C. ' THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY.' 93 In the case of prophecy, no mii-acle is directly at- tested ; one class of "witnesses afford evidence that certain predictions were uttered at a given time ; another class of -witnesses afford e^ddence that certain events occurred several hundred years afterwards : both attest simple facts, and neither of these facts is in itself necessarily miraculous; yet, on comparing the predictions with the events, a mu'acle emerges, which is not directly attested as such, but is seen to possess that character as soon as the facts are ascertained ; and who will say that this inference — for it is an in- ference — can be honestly evaded or denied ? In the case of our Lord, again, was the sensible fact of His resurrection, which is attested by eye-witnesses, of such a natm-e as to leave any room for doubt as to its being a supernatural event, if it really occuiTed ? The only question which most men vnH think of raising relates to the matter of fact : Did Christ rise from the dead, yea or no ? For tliis fact being ascer- tained, there can be no doubt of its miraculous character. The second part of Professor Powell's Essay, the argument from mii'acles, need not detain us long : indeed, it is subordinate to the first, and is not kept very clearly distinct from it. He affirms that the evidential force of miracles is wholly relative to the apprehensions of those to whom they are addressed, a statement which is true in one sense but false in another — true in so far as it imphes merely that their effect ^^ill depend to a large extent on our G 94 PROFESSOR EADEX POWELL. State of mind, but false if it be meant to declare that they can be received as a valid evidence only by the ignorant and unlearned. He speaks of our Lord's reference to His ovm miracles as only a secondary and subsidiary proof of His claims. Every readei' of the New Testament can judge for himself on this point ; ' The works which the Father hath given Me ' to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of ' Me that the Father hath sent Me.' Sometimes he speaks as if miracles might be useful in founding a faith ; but, having fulfilled this function, could be of no further use, in after times, in propagating the truth or in confirming the faith of the Church. But, being incorporated in the sacred narrative, they must be held to be of permanent value, and cannot be called in question or set aside without under- mining the very foundations of our faith. He admits, indeed, that they are still credenda^ while he denies them to be credentials; but they are both, and the distinction between these two aspects of the same facts is a mere subterfuge, serving only to conceal the infidelity which takes refuge under it. For denying them to be credentials, what does he make of them considered as mere credendaf Are they miracles or myths ? Mark his own significant words f ' Miraculous narratives become invested with the ' character of articles of faith, if they be accepted in ' a less positive and certain light, or perhaps as ' involving more or less of the paraboHc or mythic ' character ; or, at any rate, as received in connection ' THE EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY.' 95 ' with, and for the sake of, the doctrine inculcated.' The whole miraculous evidence of Christianity is utterly set aside, and Christianity itself must share the same fate, considered as a supernatural external revelation of the mind and will of God. No. IV. ' SEANCES HISTORIQUES DE GENEVE— THE NATIONAL CHURCH.'* Mr Wilson invites the attention of his readers to what may be caUed the ecclesiastical, as distinguished from the strictly theological aspect of the movement which is now in progress within the pale of the Church of England. His essay (for it cannot be called a review) seems to have been suggested by the report of certain conferences, held in the ancient city of Geneva, for the discussion of questions bear- ing on the history of religion, in the course of which a difference of opinion arose between the Comte de Gasparin and M. Bungener respecting the best con- dition of the Church — the one advocating voluntary churches, such as existed in primitive times, before the age of Constantine ; the latter, national churches incorporated with the State, and estabhshed by law. Mr Wilson gives in his decided adhesion to the views of M. Bungener, and takes occasion to hang on this peg a prolix and somewhat prosy dissertation on national establishments. Assuredly we shall not be tempted, at this time of day, to revive the volun- tary controversy ; and, did his paper contain nothing * By Henry Bristow Wilson, B.D., Vicar of Great Staughton, Hants. ^ SEANCES HISTORIQUES DE GENEVE.' 97 else than a discussion of that question, we should not have been induced to notice it all. But it contains much more. It may regarded as the manifesto of the School to which he belongs, in exposition of their views as to their position in relation to the Church whose articles they have signed, and whose authorities they are bound to obey ; and it aifords sufficiently clear indications both of the uneasiness which they feel under the restraints to which they are subject, and of the practical policy which they mean to pursue, vnth. a view to their being liberated from these restraints, while they still retain office in the Established Church. And more than this, it comes also on the domain of theology, and advocates the abohtion of subscription to the Thirty-nine Articles, not on the ground which might be taken, that the articles being sound and good in themselves, the mere subscription of them affords an insufficient guarantee for the soundness of the Church's teachers; but on the express allegation that the articles are no longer tenable, that they are at variance with the convictions of many who have nevertheless sub- scribed them, and that they run counter to the more recent results of critical and theological investiga- tion. For this reason he connects the discussion of a question of mere ecclesiastical polity with the ex- position of his views on some of the most important doctrinal articles of faith ; and as these are at once more important in themselves than any matter of mere external organisation, and more closely con- 98 THE REV. VICAR WILSON, B.D. iiected with the train of our previous reasonings, we propose to give them the precedence in our present notice, with the view of bringing out the strong family Hkeness which subsists, in this respect, be- tween Mr Wilson's paper and the other members of the series to which it belongs. Omitting historical details, and looking to the main substance and scope of his reasonings, jhur distinct topics claim our serious consideration, — his views of a Di'vine revelation, and of the inspiration and authority of the record which contains it ; and his views of the interpretation of Scripture — these ]-)elong to theology : then his views of the constitu- tion of the Church in general, and of subscription to the articles of the Church of England in particular, — these belong to the head of ecclesiastical polity. In regard to his views of a Divine supernatural revelation, and of the inspiration and authority of the sacred record, his statements are too explicit to leave the slightest room for doubt. They are all cast in the mould, and bear the legible impress of the ' negative theology.' ' They (our own Church - ' men) should endeavour to supply to the negative ' theologian some positive elements in Christianity, ' on grounds more sure to him than the assumption ' of an objective faith " once delivered to the saints," ' which he cannot identify wdth the creed of any ' Church as yet known to him.' He speaks of those of the clergy as blame-worthy, ' who consider the ' Church of Christ to be founded, as a society, on ^ SEANCES HISTORIQUES DE GENEVE.' 99 ' the possession of an abstractedly true and super- ' naturally communicated speculation concerning ' God, rather than upon the manifestation of a ' divine life in man.' And he goes so far as to say, ' Jesus Christ has not revealed His religion as a ' theology of the intellect, or as an historical faith.* Poor Blanco "WTiite, in his correspondence with James Martin eau, has said, that 'the moment the ' name Christian is made necessarily to contain in ' its signification belief in certain historical or meta- * physical propositions, that moment the name it- ' self becomes a creed — the length of that creed is ' of little consequence ; ' but who could have ex- pected a similar mode of reasoning on the part of a minister of the Church of Engiand, who has sub- scribed the Thirty-nine Articles ? If an objective revelation is set aside, we cannot expect the inspiration of Holy Scripture to be pre- served ; and accordingly we are told, that — ' In that ' which may be considered the pivot article of the ' Church, this expression (the Word of God) does * not occur, but only " Holy Scripture," " Canonical " Books," " Old and New Testaments." It contains ' no declaration of the Bible being throughout super- ' naturally suggested, nor any intimation as to which ' portions of it were owing to a special Divine illu- ' mination, nor the slightest attempt at defining in- ' spiration, whether mediate or immediate ; — whether ' through, or beside, or overruling the natural facul- ties of the subject of it ; — not the least hint of the 100 THE REV. VICAR WILSON, B.D. ' relation between the Divine and human elements ' in the composition of the biblical books.' We are further told of the Bible, that ' the Word of God ' is ' a phrase which begs many a question when applied ' to the canonical books of the Old and New Testa- ' ments, — a phrase which is never applied to them ' by any of the Scriptural authors, and which, ac- ' cording to Protestant principles, never could be ' applied to them by any sufficient authority from ' without.' But if the inspiration of Scripture be partial and not plenary ; if the Bible cannot be called ' the Word of God,' although it may possibly contain something of the Divine mixed with the human, there must needs be a test of some kind by which the gold may be distinguished from the dross, a method of winnowing the wheat from the chaff ; and what other criterion can be named than the subjective test of our own reason and conscience ? And, accordingly, this test is applied to the doctrine of Scripture respecting the state and prospects of the heathen world, as if there would be a want of equity in God's leaving them without the means of salvation, although no such means were provided for the angels ' who kept not their first estate ; ' and those who are able to do so are exhorted ' to lead ' the less educated to distinguish between the ' different kinds of words which it (Scripture) con- ' tains, — between the dark patches of human passion ' and error which form a partial crust upon it, and ' the bright centre of spiritual truth within.' But ^ SEANCES HISTORIQUES DE GENEVE.' 101 how is tliis to be done ? Why, by the application of the subjective test ; it is quite sufficient to set aside many of what are commonly supposed to be the peculiar doctrines of the Gospel. The ' Jews did ' not perceive that the attribution of wi^ath and ' jealousy to their God could only be by a figure of ' speech ; and, what is worse, it is difficult to per- ' suade many Christians of the same thing, and ' solemn inferences from the figurative expressions ' of the Hebrew Uterature have been crystallised ' into Christian doctrine. AYith respect to the moral ' treatment of His creatiu-es by Almighty God, all * men, in different degrees, are able to be judges of ' the representations made of it by reason of the * moral sense which He has given them.' But, should the subjective test prove inadequate to the occasion, another sure and infallible expedient is provided for our relief ; it consists in a new method of interpretation, and depends on what is called the principle of 'ideology.' Are our readers at a loss to attach a definite idea to the phrase, or are they dreaming of the organ of ideality ? We shall leave the author to explain his own meaning in his own words : — ' The ideal method is applicable in two ' ways ; both in giving account of the origin of parts ' of Scriptm-e, and also in explanation of Scripture.' * The appKcation of ideology to the interpretation of ' Scripture, to the doctrines of Christianity, to the * formularies of the Church, may undoubtedly be * carried to an excess — may be pushed so far as to 102 THE REV. VICAR WILSON. B.D. ' leave in the sacred records no historical residue ' whatever.' ' An example of the critical ideology ' carried to excess, is that of Strauss, which resolves * into an ideal the whole of the historical and doc- ' trinal person of Jesus.' ' But it by no means fol- ' lows, because Strauss has substituted a mere shadow ' for the Jesus of the Evangelists, that there are not ' traits in the Scriptural person of Jesus which are ' better explained by referring them to an ideal than ' an historical origin ; and, Avithout falling into fanci- ' ful exegetics, there are parts of Scripture more ' usefully interpreted ideologically than in any other ' manner, as, for. instance, the history of the temp- ' tation of J esus by Satan, and accounts of demonia- '■ cal possessions.' But, it may be asked, who is to decide as to the use or abuse of such a principle of interpretation — is there no rule by which we may know whether the application of it be legitimate or excessive ; are there no limits within which it must be confined ? None whatever ; for ' liberty must ' be left to all as to the extent in which they apply ' the principle ; for there is no authority, through ' the expressed determination of the Church, nor of ' any other kind, which can define the limits within ' which it may be reasonably exercised.' And to what extent Mr Wilson might be willing to carry its application, becomes only too apparent when he tells us that, besides being legitimate with reference to some traits of the person of Jesus, His temptation by Satan, and the story of demoniacal possession, it 'seances HISTORIQUES DE GENEVE. 103 may be applied to the unity of the race as descended from a single pair, to the account of the deluge, and to the overthrow of Sodom and Qomorrah. Here, then, are two powerful solvents at once foi the historical narratives and the doctrinal truths of Scripture ; the subjective test, and the principle of ideological interpretation. When the one fails, the other is at hand to replace it. Of the two we con- fess that, much as we dislike rationalism and spiri- tualism, we would choose the subjective test as the least of two evils ; for, in the use of this, we appeal at least to reason and conscience, whereas, on the principle of ideology, we have to do only with the wild imaginings of fancy. But with the two com- bined, or brought into alternate .use, we cannot see how a single fragment of revelation can be preserved. Such are some of the theological aspects of this paper ; let us now turn to its ecclesiastical bearings. It attempts to determine the right constitution of the Church, and to discuss the question of subscrip- tion to creeds, and especially to the articles of the Church of England. In respect to both, we think he has fallen into serious and dangerous error. His views of the right constitution of the Church are stated in connection with an account of the difference of opinion on this subject, which had arisen at Geneva between the Comte de Gasparin and M. Bungener. The former, we are told, ' laid it down ' in the strongest manner, that the individuahst ' principle supplies the true basis of the Church, and 104 THE REV. VICAR WILSON, B.D. ' that by inaugurating the union between Church ' and State Constantine introduced into Christianity ' the false and Pa.gan principle of multitudinism.' The latter, again, maintained ' that the multitudinist ' principle was not unlaAvful, nor essentially Pagan : ' that it was recognised and consecrated in the ex- ' ample of the Jewish theocracy ; and that the ' greatest victories of Christianity have been won by ' it.' And what, pray, is the principle of indi- vidualism, and the antagonist principle of multi- tudinism, as applied to Christian churches ? We cannot remember that we ever heard of them under these names before. We have heard of individual congregations of the faithful, and of national churches cpmprehending many distinct congregations ; but indi^adualism and multitudinism — are these concrete existences, or mere abstractions, entia rationis The definition is kindly supplied ; and, as we understand it, a Church founded on the individualist principle is a Christian society which admits none to its mem- bership but such as have been really converted, and which seeks to maintain a pure communion by ex- cluding all who cannot give satisfactory evidence of their having undergone that great change, and even, perhaps, the children of believing parents before they have reached adult age ; whereas, a Church founded on the multitudinist principle comprehends all and sundry, of whatever age, or profession, or character, who belong to the nation in which it is established, so that, according to the fond dream of * SEA^XES HISTORIQUES DE GENEVE.' 105 Dr Arnold, every subject of the State is also ipso fa.cto^ or de jure, a member also of the Christian Church. And so far from its being true that indi- viduahsm was sanctioned by Christ and His Apostles, while multitudinism was afterwards iatroduced by Constantine, to the manifest corruption of the Church, Mr Wilson holds, that the very reverse was the fact — that ' St Paul, and the Lord Jesus, offered the ' Gospel to the Jews, as a nation, on the multi- ' tudinist principle ; but when they put it from ' them, it must make progress by kindhng a fire in ' the earth, even to the dividing families, two against * three, and three against two.' ' Christianity was ' therefore compelled, as it were, against its vnl\, * and in contradiction to its proper design, to make * the first steps in its progress by cutting across old ' societies, filtering into the world by individual con- ' versions, showing, nevertheless, from the very first, its multitudinist tendencies, and before it could comprehend countries or cities, embracing families and households.' ' The Eoman world was pene- trated, in the first instance, by an individual and domestic Christianity, to which was owing the first conversion of our own country ; in the second, or Saxon conversion, the people were Christian- ized en masse.'' ' The conversions operated by the German Apostle Boniface, were of the same multi- tudinous kind as those of Austin, and Paulinus, in Britain.' Mr Wilson prefers the multitudinous to the indi- 106 THE REV. VICAR WILSON, B.D. vidualist method of conversion ; and were he speak- ing of those general awakenings or simultaneous revivals in which the Spirit of God has sometimes brought home the truth ' in demonstration and witli ' power ' to the hearts and consciences of thousands as on the day of Pentecost, we might be found to agree with him ; but in these general awakenings every soul is dealt with individually, and made to feel that it must transact with God for its own sal- vation ; whereas the multitudinous conversions of which Mr Wilson speaks, are nothing more than those chjinges wrought in the outward condition or the mere profession, of a whole people, when they submit to bow before a crucifix, or to be sprinkled with holy water, or to wear the Christian name. But, apart from this, are the two extremes of indi- vidualism and multitudinism, such as he has de- scribed them to be, the only possible forms of the Christian Church ? May there not be an interme- diate system, which, neither professing, on the one hand, to institute a perfectly 'pure communion,' composed of converted men, nor consenting, on the other, to receive all and sundry of whatever char- acter, shall require on the part of its members a ' credible profession' of faith in Christ and obedience to Him, and seek to maintain the sanctity of reh- gious ordinances by the salutary exercise of disci- pline on such as give scandal to their brethren ? Is it not, on this intermediate principle, that most of the Churches of the Reformation have been constituted. * SEANCES HISTORIQUES DE GENEVE.' 107 and have not some of tliem continued to adhere to it even after they became national Churches, and were estabhshed by law ? But the exercise of discipline, without which there can be no effective government of the Church, is peculiarly distasteful to our essayist ; he would fain exempt the private members of his communion from all subjection to' it, just as he is anxious to liberate her ministers from the restraints of articles and creeds. With this view, he is desirous to show that in the primitive Church itself, neither error in doctrhie nor immorahty in Hfe was visited Avith excision from the society, or exclusion from the privileges which Avere common to all. What mean, then, those solemn Avords — 'If he hear not the ' Church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man and ' a publican : ' 'A man that is an heretic after the ' first and second admonition reject, knoAving that ' he that is such is subverted, and sinneth, being ' condemned by himself : ' ' Put aAvay from your- ' selves that Avicked person ? ' But there are other restraints besides the bands of discipline ; there ' is the intolerable bondage of subjection, and especially of subscription, to articles of faith. He says truly enough, that the principle of ' doctrinal hmitation' is at variance with that of a multitudinist church ; and assuming that every national rehgious estabhshment must possess that character, he infers that there should be no ' doctrinal limitation' in the Chui'ch of England. But supposing 108 THE REV. VICAR WILSON, B.D. that this were granted, so far as regards the private members of that Church who have never been re- quired to quahfyfor the Communion by subscribing any set of articles, would it follow that the Church should admit her ministers to public office as teachers and pastors without asking and obtaining some satis- factory assurance of their being sound in faith ? We state the question thus generally, because we have never thought that mere subscription was the only, or the most effective, guarantee of sound teach- ing in the Church ; and we suspect that it is not the act of subscription only, but the requisition of any guarantee, or the acknowledgment of any governing power in the Church, having authority to exercise discipline and to call erroneous teachers to account, which is the real cause of all the oppo- sition which has been made to creeds and articles of faith. Mr Wilson seems to think that the mini- sters of the Church of England should be left free to teach what they please, and that they should not be amenable to discipline, however much their teaching may be at variance with the Thirty-nine Articles. He holds that creeds are opposed to the catholicity of the Church, instead of being, as they really are, a manifestation of the essential unity and agreement of all Protestant Churches, and a bond of union, as Avell as a basis of communion, between all who hold substantially ' the faith which ' was once delivered to the saints.' He speaks as if a Church, with a fixed creed, were an anomaly in * SEANCES HISTORIQUES DE GENEVE.' 109 the midst of a fluid state of opinion in society — as if the truth of God must be as mohile and variable as the opinions of men. The Church, he says, ' should ' give no occasion for a reaction against itself, nor ' provoke the individuahst element into separatism. ' It would do this if it submitted to define itself -' otherwise than by its own nationality.' ' It would ' do this also if, while the civil side of the nation is ' fluid, the ecclesiastical side of it is fixed ; if thought * and speech are free among all other classes, and ' not free among those who hold the office of leaders ' and teachers of the rest in the highest things.' And he concludes, ' If the National Church is to be * true to the multitudinist principle, and to corre- ' 3pond ultimately to the national character, the ' freedom of opinion which belongs to the Enghsh ' citizen should be conceded to the English Church- ' man, and the freedom which is already practically ' enjoyed by the members of the congregation can- * not without injustice be denied to its ministers.' Surely Mr Wilson must see, on a moment's reflec- tion, that, in so far as there is any analogy between the two cases, it teUs against his whole argument. Is there in civil society any class of public office- bearers who are subject to no conditions, and amen- able to no superintendence or control ? The judges of the land are as independent as he would wish the ministers of the Church to be, but are they not sworn to interpret and apply the law impartially, whatever may be their private opinion as to the justice or H 110 THE EEV. VICAR WILSON, B.D. expediency of any particular enactment ? And if they cannot in conscience do so, are they not bound to vacate their seat, and give place to others who can honestly undertake to administer the law as it stands ? The English citizen is free ; but is he sub- ject to no law, or amenable to no authority, in the exercise of his rights as a freeman ? And why should a clergyman be the only avofiog in society, the only one invested with a sacred trust, but ex- empt from all law and control ? The truth is, Mr Wilson occupies a false position in reference to this whole matter, and cannot argue the question effectively on either side. He sustains two dis- tinct characters not very compatible with each other : he is a minister in one of the ' articled Churches,' and also a member of the ' movement party,' which declaims against all articles. Hence he is compelled, if he would vindicate his consistency in remaining a minister of the Church, to show, on the one hand, that, after all, the articles are not so very stringent as to impose any obligation on his conscience to retire ; and yet, if he would get rid of the articles, he must show, on the other, that subscription to them is an intolerable bondage. And it might be amusing, were it not very sad, to mark the miserable shifts and expedients to which he is compelled to have recourse for this twofold object: now quibbling about the precise meaning of a word, to evade the obli- gation which is imposed by subscription ; and again denouncing every attempt to restrain liberty of ' SEANCES HISTORIQUES DE GENEVE.' Ill opinion and speech in the case of men who have vowed to be in subjection to the authorities of the Church ! And what is the remedy which he proposes for existing evils? The abohtion of the Thirty-nine Articles ? By no means. Let them remain as a vener- able monument of wh^t was once the faith of the Church, so that coming generations may regard them as Athanase Coquerel regards the Confessions of the Reformed Church of France, when the forty articles of her old Synods were declared to be no longer a term of ministerial communion, but were still pre- served ' simply as venerable records of the science * and piety of their fathers.' * What change, then, is demanded ? Simply the abolition of subscription to the articles, and whatever follows as a necessary consequence from that. ' An enactment prohibiting * the bishops from requiring the subscriptions under ' the third article of the thirty-sixth canon, together * with the repeal of 13th Eli^iabeth, except as to its * second section, would reheve many scruples, and * make the Church more national, without disturbing ' its ultimate law.' Such is the proposed remedy. We trust that the Church and the Legislature will pause and reflect before they comply with this sug- gestion, proceeding as it does from a party who are scarcely entitled to be heard in such a case. Eecent experience has abundantly proved that mere sub- scription is far from being of itself an effective safe- * Note D. 112 THE REV. VICAR WILSON, B.D. guard against the entrance of unsound teachers into the Church ; but, although it may not be sufficient without some other guarantees, let it not be set aside until a better provision can be substituted in its place. We cannot discuss the wide question of ' articles ' on its general merits ; but those who may wish to study it we refer to the standard treatise on the subject, — ' The Uses of Creeds and Confessions of Faith,' by Professor Dunlop, — which has been recently repubhshed,* and which contains a full and masterly vindication of them in reply to all the ob- jections which have recently been urged against them. * London : Hamilton, Adams and Co. Edinburgh : John- stone, Hunter, and Co. No. V. 'THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY.'* The author of this essay appends to his name the modest title of Master of Arts ; but there is no indi- cation of his being in holy orders, or of his holding office in the Church. If we are correct in supposing that he is the only layman among the contributors to the volume of ' Essays and Eeviews,' it is no more than common justice to him to say, that he is much more moderate in his sentiments, and less offensive in his statements on the subject of Divine truth, than most of his clerical associates. He is far from being free, however, from serious error, when he speaks of the nature of Divine reve- lation, and the authority of the record in which it is contained. He admits, or rather contends, that there may be a mixture of truth and error in the Sacred Scriptures, but only, it should seem, of error in regard to natural things, not in regard to any of the peculiar doctrines of religion. There is nothing in his essay that would justify us in imputing to him the extreme opinions on these subjects which have been openly avowed by some of his fellow-labourers • and we can only express our regret that one who seems honest, and comparatively harmless, should * By C. W. Goodwin, M.A. 114 C. W. GOODWIN, M.A. have allowed himself to be associated in the same enterprise mth such reckless speculators. Still, he has laid himself open to the charge of sanctioning some grave and dangerous errors, both in regard to the real nature and right idea of Divine revelation, and also in regard to the interpretation of the Mosaic narrative. A few remarks on each of these topics will prepare the way for what is in- tended to be the principal object of the present paper — an explanation, "viz., and a defence of the position actually held at the present day by many educated and thoughtfiil men who are not prepared to commit themselves to any particular theory in regard to the conciliation of the Mosaic account with the discoveries of geology, but who still continue to adhere to the historical, and reject the mythical, interpretation of the sacred narrative. The fundamental error of ^Ir Goodmn's essay lies in the conception which he has formed to himself of a Divine revelation, or rather, of the character of the record in which that revelation is contained. He seems to suppose that it may, and that, in point of fact, it does contain a mixture of truth and error. ' It would have been well,' he says, ' if theologians ' had made up their minds to accept frankly the ' principle, that those things, for the discovery of ' which man has faculties specially provided, are not ' fit subjects of a Divine revelation. Had this been ' unhesitatingly done, either the definition and idea ' of Divine revelation must have been modified, and ^ THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY.' 115 ' the possibility of an admixture of error have been ' allowed, or such parts of the Hebrew -svritings as ' were found to be repugnant to fact must have been ' pronounced to form no part of revelation.' Here a general principle is first laid down, and then two alternatives are presented to us. But surely the principle is expressed in terms far too general and sweeping ; for man has ' faculties specially provided ' for the discoveiy of God, of law, of sin, of good and ill desert, of the facts which fall within the range of his present experience and observation, and of the facts which belong to the domain of history ; must we, then, hold that none of these are ' fit subjects for ' Divine revelation,' or that no reference can be made to whatever belongs to human experience or history in the record which contains that revelation? On the contrary, is not the whole structure of reve- lation presented in the form of a historical narrative? And is it not one secret of its marvellous interest and power, that it appeals on so many points to facts which man is able to estimate and to verify ? These facts are referred to in Scripture in three ways; — sonietimes in the way of mere allusion, as when mention is made of the rising and setting of the sun ; sometimes in the way of assertion, as when the fact of human depravity is affirmed ; sometimes in the way of narration, as when the history of Israel is recorded, or the account of creation revealed. What- ever faculties man might possess, and however he might be qualified to exercise them on any of these 116 C. W GOODWIN, M.A. facts, his mere capacity to know something about them in a natural way cannot be held to supersede the necessity of Divine instruction in regard to them, since they are undeniably included in the contents of Scripture ; and, least of all, can it be held to supersede a revelation in regard to the first origin of the world, since confessedly neither reason nor science could rise to the sublime idea of creation. But this view, it may be said, of the relation sub- sisting between Scripture and facts lays revelation open to be tested at every point by man's experi- ence ; and what if they are found not to agree ? Let them be honestly and impartially compared, and we have no fear as to the result. Let the book of re- velation and the book of experience be fairly com- pared, and no such discrepancy mil ever be dis- covered between the two as can impose on us the necessity of adopting either of the alternatives which Mr Goodwin offers to us. We shall not find it ne- cessary either to modify our idea of revelation, on the one hand, so as to make it include a mixture of truth and error, or to reject, on the other, any of the Hebrew writings as forming no part of the sacred canon. There may occasionally be an apparent dis- crepancy ; and for a time it may be difiicult, in the present imperfect state of our knowledge, to find a satisfactory explanation of it. But a real discrepancy there cannot be between nature and Scripture, if God be the author of both ; and we must revise our interpretation of each by patient and persevering * THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY.' 117 Study, till the difficulty is removed by the further progress of science or of criticism. But assuming that there is not only an apparent but a real discrepancy between the Mosaic narrative of creation and the results of geological research, Mr Goodwin proceeds to reason upon it in the fol- lowing terms : — ' An inspired writer may be per- ' mitted to allude to the phenomena of nature ac- * cording to the vulgar view of such things, -without * impeachment of his better knowledge ; but if he * speaks of the same phenomena assertively, we are * bound to suppose that things are as he represents * them, however much our knowledge of nature * may be disposed to recalcitrate. But if we find a * difficulty in admitting that such misrepresentations ' can find a place in revelation, the difficulty lies in ' our having previously assumed what a Divine * revelation ought to be. If God made use of im- ' perfectly informed men to lay the foundations of * that higher knowledge for which the human race ' was destined, is it wonderful that they should have ' committed themselves to assertions not in accord- ' ance with facts, although they may have beheved ' them to be true ? On what grounds has the popu- ' lar notion of Divine revelation been built up ? Is ' it not plain that the plan of Pro\ddence for the ' education of man is a progressive one ; and as im- * perfect men have been used as the agents for teach- ' ing mankind, is it not to be expected that their ' teachings should be partial and, to some extent, 118 C. W. GOODWIN, M.A. ' erroneous ? ' We admit at once that the narrative in Genesis must be received in the same character in which it is offered, as being historically true ; and that no attempt should be made to explain it away on the plea that revelation was not designed to teach men science, or on any other pretext whatever. Thus far we agree with IVIr Goodwin. But his whole reasoning proceeds on the assumption that the sacred narrative contains something which can be proved to be at direct variance with the ascertained results of science, for he had already told us that ' it can ' scarcely be said that this chapter is not intended ' in part to teach and convey at least some physical ' truth ; and taking its words in their plain sense, it ' manifestly gives a view of the universe adverse to ' that of modern science.' It will soon appear that this assumption is utterly groundless, and that what- ever plausibility may seem to belong to it arises, not from the words of the sacred narrative, but from the strange interpretation which ]Mr Goodwin himself has put upon them. We have no difficulty in re- turning an expHcit answer to Islr Goodwin's question, ' On what grounds has the popular notion of Divine ' revelation been built up ? ' It rests ultimately on the ground that God is Himself the author of reve- lation, and that, however imperfect might be the mere human agents w^hom He was pleased to employ, they were so directed and controlled by Him who can neither err nor deceive, that they spake only 'as they ' were moved by the Holy Ghost.' It rests, also, on ^ THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY.' 119 the express recognition of the Old Testament Scrip- tures by the Apostles as ' the lively oracles ' — ' the * oracles of God; ' — and of ' the Law, the Psahns, and ' the Prophets ; ' as ' the Scripture which cannot be 'broken; as 'the Law, one jot or tittle of which ' cannot fail,' on the part of Him 'who spake as ' never man spake.' There is a painful absence of any express acknowledgment, in ^Mr Goodwin's essay, of God as the real author of His own Word ; but if he could realise this one conviction, he would be at no loss to understand on what grounds the popular notion of Divine revelation has been built up, or to account for the strong aversion with which every believer must regard a theory which teaches that the Word of God may contain ' an admixture ' of truth and error.' Ordinary Christians will have far less difficulty in reconciling the narrative of crea- tion with all that they know of the past history of nature, than in accepting a theory which represents the sacred writers as infallible teachers of spiritual truth, but fallible teachers in regard to all the facts belonging to the domain of experience and history; and which would either require, for its safe apphca- tion, a 'verifying faculty,' such as should enable them to separate the ore from the dross, and to winnow the wheat from the chaff : or virtually make science the arbiter to decide what part of their Bibles they were to receive or reject. If we now proceed to examine Mr Good"\vin's in- terpretation of the Mosaic narrative, we shall find 120 C. W. GOODWIN, M.A. that his objections to its historical truth, as being at variance with the results of geological research, rest entirely on what he has added to it in the shape of comments, for which he alone, and not Moses at all, is responsible. At the risk of being deemed hyper- critical, we must seriously object to the title of his essay — ' The Mosaic Cosmogony.' In the ordinary sense of that term, as denoting a theory of the original formation of the material universe, Moses gives no cosmogony : that was left in ancient times to the speculative Greeks, and, in our own days, to the no less speculative minds of astronomers and geologists. Moses contents himself with the simple but sublime announcement — ' In the beginning, God ' created the heavens and the earth.' He does give a historical narrative of a subsequent creation, but it is limited to the reconstruction of the earth already existing, and the introduction of the present orders of being. And what does he say? We agree with Mr Goodwin in thinking that ' it is no part of the ' commentator's or interpreter's business to intro- ' duce obscurity, or find difficulties, where none ' exist ; the difficulties arise, for the first time, when ' we seek to import a meaning into the language, ' which it certainly never could have conveyed to ' those to whom it was originally addressed.' Let us see how closely he has adhered to his own sensible canon of interpretation. Moses thus writes — ' And ' God said, let there be a firmament (rakia, ffrspsu/jua) ' in the midst of the waters, and let it divide the ^ THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY.' 121 • waters from the waters ; and God made the firma- • ment, and divided the waters which were mider ' the firmament from the waters which were above ' the firmament.' What the nature of the firmament was, Moses does not say, thinking, probably, that every child who looked up to the clouds, and knew them to be so many fleecy reservoirs of moisture for irrigating and watering the earth, would easily understand his meaning. But what says Mr Good- ^vin ? ' It represents the sky as a watery vault, ' in which the sun, moon, and stars are set ; ' nay, ' the work of the second day of creation is to ' erect the vault of heaven, which is represented * as supporting an ocean of water above it. The ' waters are said to be divided, so that some are * below, some above, the vault. That the Hebrews ' understood the sky, firmament, or heaven, to be a ' permanent solid vault — as it appears to the ordinary ' observer — is evident enough from various expres- sions made use of concerning it. It is said to have ' "pillars," "foundations," "doors," and "mndows." ' No quibbhng about the derivation of the word ' rakia, which is literally " something beaten out," ' can aifect the explicit description of the Mosaic ' writer, contained in the words — " the waters that " are above the firmament," or avail to show that he ' was aware that the sky is but transparent space.' With a mind clinging so closely to literalism and matter of fact, Mr Goodwin would be an indifferent adept in the art of * ideological interpretation,' and 122 C. W. GOODWIN, M.A. we might almost despair of making any impression on him by speaking of the difference between plain and figurative language, were it not that, in a moment of unusual inspiration, he has himself made use of expressions closely resembling those of Moses. For he speaks on this wise : — ' The earth, apparently so ' still and stedfast, lying in majestic repose beneath ' the ethereal vault, is a globular body.' ' The sun, ' which seems to leap up each morning from the ' east, and traversing the skyey bridge, slides down ' into the west.' ' As for the glittering dust which ' emblazons the nocturnal sky, there is reason to ' believe that each spark is a self-luminous body.' Very good ; but does Mr Goodwin wish to be under- stood, as he understands the words of Moses, that there is a real material bridge which is traversed by the sun, or real material dust scattered over the sky ? — and if not, why should he deny to Moses the same liberal interpretation which he would claim for him- self? It is true that we read of the ' pillars,' ' foun- ■' dations,' ' doors,' and ' windows' of the firmament ; but we read also of ' the wings of the wind,' and of the ' mountains skipping,' Avithout ever dreaming of thinking it necessary to ascribe real wings to the one, or a saltatory motion to the other. Another, and a more offensive, instance of the same kind occurs where, referring to the sublime language of Moses, ' God created man in His own ' image,' he says that, ' the phrase has been ex- ' plained away to mean merely "perfect" or "sinless;" ^ THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY.' 123 ' although the Pentateuch abounds in passages show- ' ing that the HebreAvs contemplated the Di^dne * Being in the visible form of a man and again, ' man's closer relationship to his Maker is indicated ' by the representation that he was formed last of ' all creatures, and in the visible likeness of God.' No reference is made to the apostolic comments on the words of Moses, from which we learn that the image of God in which we were originally created, and after which we must be renewed through Christ, consisted in 'knowledge, righteousness, and true ' holiness ; ' and the anthropomorphic expressions which occur elsewhere in Scripture are pressed into the service, as if he thought, with Archbishop King and his followers, that there is no radical difference between metaphors and analogies, — forgetting that while metaphors may contain and convey a true analogy, they are not founded on the mere relation of resemblance, but involve also a metonymy sug- gested by other relations of a totally different kind. ]VIr Good^vin expresses his doubt whether the word rendered ' created ' (hara) signifies the biing- ing into being that which had no existence before, or merely the forming and. fashioning of pre-existing materials. Professor Baden Powell had also at- tempted to make something of this, but in a much more dogmatic spirit. It is sufficient to say that divines acknowledge both a mediate and an imme- diate work of creation ; but that when reference is made to what was done ' in the beginning,' it must 124 C. W. GOODWIN, M.A. mean the production by the Divine will of what had no existence before ; and as regards the import of the Hebrew verb, the reader may consult the best Jewish authorities, especially Menasseh Ben-Israel in his ' Problemata Triginta de Creatione.' Perhaps the most striking instance of Mr Good- win's tendency to superinduce his own meaning on the words of Moses occurs in his treatment of that portion of the narrative which relates to the ' hea- ' vens,' the ' sim, moon, and stars.' It is almost incredible that an intelligent, well-educated man should have fallen into such an egregious blunder, and still more that he should have ascribed it to Moses. He says — 'The phrase, "the heaven and " the earth " (v. 1), is evidently used to signify the ' universe of things, inasmuch as the heaven in its ' proper signification has no existence until the ' second day.' ' The heaven itself is distinctly said ' to have been formed by the division of the waters ' on the second day. Consequently, during the indefi- ' nite ages which elapsed from the primal creation ' of matter until the first Mosaic day of creation, ' there was no sky, no local habitation for the sim, ' moon, and stars, even supposing those bodies to ' have been included in the original material.' An assumption more utterly groundless it is impossible to conceive. Wliy, he had himself acknowledged that ' in the beginning,' — long anterior to the first Mosaic day of creation, — ' God created the heaven and ' the earth ; ' yet he would now exclude ' the sun. * THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY.' 125 ' moon, and stars ' from that primeval creation, as if Moses, or any man, inspired or uninspired, if he were only gifted with common sense, could be supposed to contradict himself thus flatly within the compass of a few short verses. Mr Goodwin avails himself, with more tact than we like to give him credit for, of the somewhat ambiguous rendering of the 14th verse — ' God said let there be lights in the firmament of the ' heavens to divide the day from the night, and let ' them be for signs and for seasons, and for days and * years ; ' but every scholar knows that Rosenmliller and other critics agree with Dr Buckland in holding that the ' sun, moon, and stars,' are not said to have been called into existence on the fourth day, but only ' prepared and appointed to certain offices ' or uses. This is the clear meaning of the original ; and it is abundantly sufficient to neutralise any objection founded on the erroneous supposition that Moses contradicts himself by affirming, that the heavens were created 'in the beginning,' and yet that the ' sun, moon, and stars ' had no existence till the fourth day of a subsequent work of creation. Omitting, then, the additions which Mr Goodwin has foisted into the Mosaic narrative, let us calmly review it, and see if it can justly be said to contain anything that can be proved to be at variance with the Mosaic narrative. 'In the beginning,' says Moses, with divine simplicity, ' God created the heaven and ' the earth.' ' The first clear view which we obtain,' says Mr Goodwin, 'of the early condition of the earth 126 C. W. GOODWIN, M.A. ' presents to us a ball of matter, fluid with intense ' heat, spinning on its own axis, and revolving ' round the sun,' We have already passed, under Mr Goodwin's guidance, from the region of fact to the region of theory — from the sublime announce- ment of Genesis to the vain speculations of men seeking ' to be wise above what is written.' Does science certify this, ' first clear view of the early ' condition of the earth ?' And if so, what science ? Is it geology, or is it astronomy, or both ? Does not Mr Goodwin himself admit that the nebular theory is a mere 'hypothesis,' and that ' geology carries back the ' history of the earth's crust to a very remote period, ' until it arrives at a region of uncertainty, where ' philosophy is reduced to mere guesses and possibih- ' ties, and pronounces nothing definite;' — nay, that ' to this region belong the speculations which have ' been ventured upon as to the original concretion ' of the earth and planets out of nebular matter, of ' which the sun may have been the nucleus?' And as to its ' spinning round its axis,' does he not know that Mr Ritchie has written an elaborate book (' The Djmamical Theory of the Earth ') to prove ' that the ' earth did not always rotate around its axis ? ' But, whatever may be thought of this, Moses says nothing either of the nebular theory or of any other; he simply sets forth the grand lesson — ' In the begin- ' ning, God created the heaven and the earth,' Assuming, then, that ' the heaven ' as well as ' the ' earth ' was created ' in the beginniug,' what are we ^ THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY.' 127 to understand by that expression ? Evidently ' the * beginning of the ways of God,' the commencement of His creative work. Nothing is said of its date, as nothing indeed could be said of it, for time began with creation, and is applicable only to beings mth whom succession is possible. Nor is it said how long the heaven and the earth continued in the state in which they were thus created ' in the beginning ; ' they may have continued, for aught that Moses says to the contrary, for millions of ages, and they may have passed through a thousand periods of change, by slow decay or sudden catastrophes, such as would leave ample room for all the results of geological research, were they a thousand times more abundant than they are. At length a time arrived when, through some great but unexplained convulsion, ' the earth was without form and void,' or, as Mr Goodwin expresses it, ' the earth was waste and desolate,' and ' darkness was upon the face of the deep.' It is not said that the heaven and the earth were enveloped in darkness from the ' beginning ;' so that, for aught we know, animals having ayes adapt- ed to light, and depending for their food on the vegetable products of the earth, may have existed before ; it is said only that for a season immediately preceding the Hexaemeron of the new terrestrial creation, the earth was ' waste and desolate.' But then ' the spirit of God ' — not the mnd, as Mr Goodwin insinuates, but that Divine agent who alone could bring order out of confusion, and evolve a 128 C. W. GOODWIN, M.A. cosmos from the bosom of chaos — 'moved or brooded ' upon the face of the deep.' And ' God said, let the ' waters under the heaven be gathered together imto one place, and let the dey land appear ;' — ^it existed before, but had been submerged ; it must now appear once more above the waters — ' and God ' called the dry land earth, and the gathering to- ' gether of the waters called He seas.' And so in six successive days or periods the glorious work was progressively accomphshed, till ' God saw every ' thing that He had made, and behold it was very ' good.' Taking this simple view of the meaning of the Mosaic narrative, a view originally suggested by Dr Chalmers, subsequently adopted by Professor Buck- land, and more recently revived by Dr Pratt, we feel no need for any other method of conciliation. It depends entirely on the interval elapsing between the 'beginning' and the state of the earth when it is declared to be ' waste and desolate.' That interval may have been wide enough to admit of all the changes in the strata of the earth, and the successive tribes of its inhabitants, which geology has yet ascer- tained. We are aware, however, that some, seduced, as we think, by the fascinations of speculative theory, have abandoned this explanation, and at- tempted another mode of conciliation ; among the rest the late Mr Hugh Miller, for whose memory we must ever cherish the most affectionate admiration, as well as Dr Kurtze in Germany, and the celebrated * THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY.' 129 Marcel de Serres in France.* Mr Miller seems to have been influenced mainly by two considerations : the first was, that he found the fossil remains of some animals of the same type with the present denizens of the earth in the older formations ; and the second — perhaps to his imaginative mind the strongest — was, the persuasion that the three great periods of geological history might be shown to cor- respond in the order of their succession with the progress of the creative work in Genesis, and so to afford, not a means of conciliation merely, but a confirmation of the Mosaic account. It was neces- sary, however, to make the 'days' represent long periods of time. Should there be some who prefer this method to the simpler view of Chalmers and Buckland, we will say nothing to shake their confi- dence in it, although we feel it to be unnecessary for our own satisfaction. We admit that the term 'day' is used with a certain latitude of meaning, since it is applied at one time to denote the duration of light merely, as when ' God called the light day,' — at another to denote the whole period both of light and darkness between one day and another — as when it is said ' The evening and the morning were the first • day ; ' — and at another, perhaps, to denote the whole of the six days, as when it is said, ' In the day that ' God created the heaven and the earth.' But the * ' De la Cosmogonie de Moise, Comparee aux Faits Geolo- giques,' par Marcel de Serres, Professeur de Mineralogie et de Geologie. Paris, 1841. 130 C. W. GOODWIN, M.A. existence of a few organisms in the earlier forma- tions, analogous, or even identical, with existing types, would not of itself induce us to abandon the older explanation, since it is quite conceivable that in replenishing the earth God might reproduce some animals similar to those which had existed before ; and although there may be a superficial resemblance between the periods of geological history and the succession of God's work on the three great days, there is not such an exact correspondence as would be required to furnish any positive evidence in con- firmation of the Mosaic narrative. We cannot close without adverting briefly to the real state of the question, and the general conditions of the argument ; and we do so with a view especi- ally to the satisfaction of those — and they are not a few — who have been perplexed by the pretensions of geology. The question has often been discussed as if our behef in the authority of Moses and the Pentateuch was involved in its solution. It is not so. The authority of Moses rests on the miraculous facts of his own age by which his divine commission was established, and on the unanimous testimony of a whole nation to these facts — a nation who received at his hands a code of laws and a system of theocratic government. It is on the ground of his divine com- mission that we accept his narrative of the creation, and we receive it, as he did, simply as a revelation from God. Moses is the writer, but God Himself is the revealer. Accordingly he gives forth his nar- ' THE MOSAIC COSMOGONY.' 131 rative, not as if he had been an eye-witness of the events which he relates, or as if he had received in- formation respecting them merely from authentic tra- dition : he makes known what he had been divinely taught. At the utmost, therefore, any supposed dis- crepancy between his narrative and the results of geological research can only amount to a difficulty in regard to an authority otherwise established ; but every difficulty will not warrant the rejection of his claims, and one like this should be left to wait for its solution in the further progress of the interpreta- tion both of Nature and Scripture. In every walk of inquiry we are compelled to leave behind us some outstanding difficulties of this kind ; and it is enough, in all such cases, to show that there may be one or more hypothetical solutions of them, although we may be at a loss to determine which of several pos- sible explanations ought to be preferred.* But never let us entertain the thought that there is ' a mixture ' of truth and error' in 'the Word of God.' * Note E. No. VL ' TENDENCIES OF RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ENGLAND, 1688-1750* Every author is free to mark out and define his own subject, and to select even some one particular topic comprehended under it for special or separate con- sideration ; but in writing the history of society, and still more the history of religious thought, it is extremely difficult to find a fixed line of demarca- tion between preceding and subsequent times, such as shall serve to mark off two distinct provinces having no connection with each other. For, as Mr Pattison reminds us, ' the Church and the world of ' to-day are what they are as the result of the whole ' of their antecedents.' The likeliest method of sur- mounting the difficulty might be to select, as our point of departure, some remarkable event which put an end to an old and brought in a new order of things, such as the glorious Revolution in 1688, with reference to civil and political affairs ; or the stiU more glorious Reformation, with reference to the historical progress of true religion. But even in selecting such great eras as affording prominent and well-defined landmarks in tracing the course of human progress, it must never be forgotten that the * By Mark Pattison, B.D. ' RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ENGLAND.' 133 new order of things then introduced, dissimilar and even opposite as it may be to that which preceded it, had still its roots in the past, and was connected at all points by indissoluble ties with the experience and history of living beings hke ourselves, who thought and felt and acted in their own day, and left the impress of their minds on the social institu- tions and religious forms, which more recent times have partly rejected and partly retained. For this reason, we think that, had it been Mr Pattison's object to illustrate the civil and social progress of England, he could not have* chosen a better com- mencement than the Revolution of 1688; but that in writing a paper which aspires to be ' A History of the Theory of Belief in the Church of England,' he should have commenced with the Reformation, and traced the progress of apologetic literature from its first rise in the Martyr Church — the Church of Cranmer, Latimer, Ridley, and Jewell — downwards through its sad and sudden occultation in the age of Laud, and its partial revival through the learning and piety of the Puritans, till he reached his present starting point, and proceeded thence to survey its subsequent development in the times which he passes under review. Had he followed this course, he would have been brought into contact at the outset, with the richest and most evangelical theology which the Church of England has ever enjoyed — the theology of a suffering Church crowned with martjTdom, w^hich lived as it believed, and exhibited 134 REV. MARK PATTISON, B.D. a freshness and fulness of spiritual life such as has embalmed its memory for ever in the hearts of aU devout EngUshmen ; and he would have been the better able to mark, and to place before his readers in strong relief, those striking contrasts which it presents to the Formalism of the Laudean era, as well as to the Rationalism of more recent times. But accepting his essay in the shape in which he has presented it to the public, we propose to examine its contents with a view to ascertain its general drift and object, and how it contributes to the develop- ment of that scheme of thought which his associates have endeavoured to introduce into the Church of England. • Omitting, to a large extent, the mere details of history, and directing our attention chiefly" to the theological bearings of his essay, we will select a few of the more prominent topics which are presented to our notice in the course of it, and will consider chiefly these four: — his definition of Theology; — his description of Rationalism ; — ^his account of the pro- gress and results of the great Controversy between the Christian Apologists and the Deists of the eighteenth century; — and his views of the actual State of matters in the Church of England at the present time. The paper is written in an interesting style ; and as it is to a large extent historical, while it is inter- spersed here and there with pleasing gossip, literary and ecclesiastical, the reader allows himself to be carried along as on the surface of a smooth stream, ' RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ENGLAND.' 135 without putting himself to the trouble of sounding its depths, or seeking to ascertain what these depths enclose. But on looking beneath the surface, and considering more closely the direction of the current, one is startled to find that it is gliding thus smoothly over quicksands, and tending towards a fearful pre- cipice. Let us listen, first of all, to Mr Pattison's definition I'f theology. ' Theology is — -firsts and primarily, the ' contemplative, speculative habit, by means of which ' the mind places itself already in another world ' than this ; a habit begun here, to be raised to per- ' feet vision hereafter. Secondly^ and in an inferior ' degree, it is ethical and regulative of our conduct ' as men in those relations which are temporal and ' transitory.' What have we here ? What but a vague sort of mysticism in the first clause, and a gross form of mere secularism in the second ? The- ology is a mental habit — not an objective truth revealed, but a subjective speculative tendency — a power belonging to the mind, and spontaneously developed, by which it 'places itself already in another world than this ; and all, so far as appears, "without any aid from Divine teaching, but solely from its own internal energy and the vivid force of its own intuitions. Had Mr Pattison been speaking of faith and not of theology, he might have told us, in the Apostle's words, that ' it is the substance of ' things hoped for and the evidence of things not * seen ; ' and that this faith will ultimately 'be raised to 136 REV. MARK PATTISON, B.D. ' perfect vision ; ' but Christian faith involves know- ledge, and knowledge presupposes Divine teaching, when it relates to the things of God ; and as Divine teaching impHes a fixed and infallible standard of truth, to which all human theology must conform, it is more convenient to represent theology, not as a doctrinal system, but as a ' contemplative, speculative ' habit ! ' And what is its use ? Is it to ascertain ' the * will of God for our salvation !' — to supply an answer to the question, ' How shall a man be just ' with God ? ' or ' What must I do to be saved ? ' or, ' What good thing shall I do that I may inherit ' eternal life ? ' ' It is ethical and regulative of our ' conduct as men, in those relations which are tem- ' poral and transitory.' AYhat ! are there no higher relations than such as subsist between man and man, or between the individual and society, during the present life ? Are there not the eternal, indestruc- tible relations between men and God, which are disclosed in some measure by the hght of nature itself? and the still higher and more endearing re- lations which are revealed in the clearer Hght of Scripture, by which He is made known as God the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, the just God and the Saviour, the Redeemer of the guilty, the Renewer of the depraved ? Does theology say nothing of such momentous relations as these ? Does he hold, as he tells us Tindal, the great champion of Deism, held, that * the natural law of right and duty is so ' absolutely perfect that God could not add anything ' RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ENGLAND.' 137 'to it ; ' and that ' it is commensurate with all the * real relations in which man stands ? ' Or does he acknowledge, with Butler, that ' the essence of re- ' vealed religion, as distinguished from natural, ' consists in religious regards to the Son and to the * Holy Ghost ; and the obligation we are under of ' paying these religious regards to each of these Di- ' vine persons respectively, arises from the respective ' relations which they each stand in to us. How ' these relations are made known, whether by reason ' or revelation, makes no alteration in the case ; ' because the duties arise out of the relations them- ' selves, not out of the manner in which we are ' informed of them. The Son and the Spirit have \' each His proper office in that great dispensation of ' Providence, the redemption of the world ; the one * as our Mediator, the other as our Sanctifier. Does ' not, then, the duty of rehgious regards to both * these Divine persons as necessarily arise to the ' view of reason out of the very nature of these offices ' and relations, as the inward good-will and kind in- ' tention which we owe to our fellow-creatures arise ' out of the common relations between us and them.' (Anal., P. H., c. 1.) We hold Mr Pattison's definition of theology to be defective and erroneous; both because he makes it to consist in a mere mental habit, without refer- ence to any system of revealed truth, and because he represents it as a regulative principle, applicable only to earthly relations, which are temporal and 138 KEY. MARK PATTISON, B.D. transitory. And yet he is so possessed -with the idea that theology is a speculative habit, and nothing more, that he thinks the one designation may be harmlessly substituted for the other. Speaking of the eighteenth century, Professor Fraser had character- ' ized the half century which followed the publication ' of Locke's Essay ' as ' the golden age of its purely ' speculative literature.' In quoting the sentence, Mr Pattison says, ' Professor Fraser does not hesi- ' tate to call this " the golden age of English theo- "logy;"' he substitutes theology for speculative thought ; and we can devise no better apology for the apparent misrepresentation than that which is sug- gested by his favourite definition of theology as ' the ' contemplative, speculative habit.' And that he is not %villing to recognise any other relations besides those which subsist between man and man, and which are ' temporal and transitory,' as falling imder ' the ' ethical or regulative' rule of theology, seems to be indicated by his astounding language in regard to the most fundamental of all our natural relations to God. Rationalism 'is obhged to resolve religion ' into the moral government of God by rewards and ' punishments, and especially the latter.' ' It is this ' anthropomorphic conception of God, as the Gover- ' nor of the Universe, which is presented to us in the ' theology of the Hanoverian divines — sl theology ' which excludes on principle not only all that is ' poetical in life, but aU that is sublime in rehgious * speculation.' ' It is this character which makes ' RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ENGLAND.' 139 ' the reading even of the " Analogy " so depressing ' to the soul : as Tholuck says of it, " We weary of " a long journey on foot, especially through deep "sand;" human nature is not only humbled, but * crushed.' What, then, is his account of Rationalism ? Prac- tically it is, in his estimation, any use of reason in regard to matters of religion, and especially in the treatment of its evidences. In this sense the word is used passim throughout his whole essay. But when he attempts, if not to define, at least to de- scribe, it, he tells us that ' the Rationalism which is * the common character of all the writers of this * time (the sceculum rationalisticum from the appear- * ance of Locke's " Reasonableness of Christianity " * till the publication of the "Tracts for the Times "), ' is a method rather than a doctrine, an unconscious * assumption rather than a principle, from which ' they reason.' He had already spoken of the ' su- ' premacy of reason ' — ' The growth and gradual ' diffusion through all religious thinking of the su- ' premacy of reason. That which is rather a prin- ' ciple or a mode of thinking than a doctrine, may be ' properly enough called Rationalism. The term is ' used m this country with so much laxity, that it is * impossible to define the sense in which it is gener- ' ally intended. But it is often taken to mean a ' system opposed to revealed religion, imported into * this country from Germany at the beginning of the * present century. A person, however, who surveys the 140 REV. MARK PATTTSON, B.D. ' course of English theology dming the eighteenth ' century will have no difficulty in recognising ' that throughout all discussions, underneath all con- ' troversies, and common to all parties, hes the as- ' sumption of the supremacy of reason in matters of ' religion.' This is held to be the one common characteristic of all the writers on the evidences, who are subdivided however into two Schools, the one insisting mainly on the internal, the other on the external evidences, while both were subject to the charge of Rationahsm. Mr Pattison must have learned this important lesson from the ' Tracts for ' the Times ; ' it seems to be the vinculum which con- nects the two rival Schools at Oxford, which are proceeding apparently in opposite directions, but which may be found after all to be offshoots from the same root, and to have a more radical connec- tion with each other than may at first sight appear. But, however this may be, the doctrine which teaches the supremacy of reason in matters of reli- gion is Rationahsm; but the doctrine which teaches the legitimate exercise of reason in examining the evidences and interpreting the meaning of Scripture, is not Rationahsm, in the objectionable sense of that expression. The more enhghtened divines even of the Romish Church are careful to distinguish be- tween them, as Afre, the Archbishop of Paris, who fell at the barricades, did, in his introduction to Maret's 'Theodicee Chretienne,' when he said, 'Le * rationalisme et la raison sont deux choses fort < RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ENGLAND.' 141 ' differentes.' To talk of the supremacy of reason in any sense is sheer absurdity. The eternal reason is supreme ; man's reason is, and must be, subordi- nate. In every department it is a mere scholar, an interpreter, and nothing more. It is subject to an authority which is external to itself. It is dependent even on the bodily senses for all its information from without. In the memorable words of Bacon, it is only ' the minister and interpreter of nature.' But- ler, indeed, speaks of the supremacy of conscience ; but in what sense ? Simply as having authority to govern all the inferior faculties of our own nature, not as being independent of Him whose vicegerent it is, or as being free from subjection to Him who is ' Lord of the conscience.' If supremacy can be ascribed to any of our faculties, it can only be in a relative sense, and with reference to other parts of our own nature, while our whole mind, conscience, and heart, must be subject to Him who alone is supreme. Admitting the legitimate use of reason in matters i of reHgion, and especially in examining the evidences I and interpreting the meaning of Scripture, we can li have no difficulty in stating, in explicit terms, I wherein Kationalism, when it is held to be wong, I properly consists. There are various shades of it, I and it may assume many different forms; but it I radically consists in the assumption, that reason is II not subordinate but supreme — not a scholar and in- I terpreter merely, but an arbiter and judge — not sub- m ^ 142 REV. MARK PATTISON, B.D. ject to any external authority, but a law to itself in such sense that no other law can be imposed upon it. Yet it is subject to the natural laws of thought, and these laws are the ordinances of God ; it is sub- ject to the manifold influences of the outer world and of social lif^, and these arrangements are the appointments of God — Avhy may it not be subject also to a revelation of His mind and will, should God condescend to become its instructor in a more extraordinary way ? We say, then, that Rationalism, in the bad sense of the term, may be developed in different forms and manifested in different ways. It may assume the form of Deism, which affirms the sufficiency of reason, and rejects revelation as super- fluous ; or the form of what, by a strange perversion of language, is called rational Christianity, which admits the claims of revelation, but asserts either the right of reason to sit in judgment on its contents, and to reject whatever does not accord with its own preconceived opinions, thereby disowning the autho- rity of a revelation which it acknowledges to be Divine ; or, in direct opposition to its teaching, the sufficiency of reason to understand the mind and Avill of God, as revealed in Scripture, Avithout that subjective illumination of the mind without which the ' natural man cannot receive the things of the ' Spirit of God, for they are foolishness to him ; ' neither can he know them, because they are spiri- ' tually discerned.' Rationalism is defined by Bretschneider, as ' that ' KELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ENGLAND.' 143 ' theological belief which does not admit any super- ' natural, immediate, and miraculous revelation from ' God to man, but asserts that there is only one uni- ' versal revelation, which takes place through the ' contemplation of nature and man's own reason ; ' that the sacred authors did not write under the ' immediate inspiration of the Spirit of God ; that * Christianity was not designed to teach any incom- * prehensible truths and doctrines, but only to con- ' firm the rehgious teaching of reason ; and that ' man neither can nor should accept any doctrine to * be true which cannot be recognised and proved to * him by reason,'* It were easy to show that, in one at least of these ways, ISIr Pattison himself is a rationalist. He may denounce the study of the evidences under that name, but he has no scruple in applying a sub- jective test to the sacred contents of revelation. Speaking of the speculative objections of the English Deists, he tells us that — ' The objections urged * against revelation in the course of the deistical ' controversy, were no chimeras of a sickly brain, ' but solid charges ; the points brought into public ' discussion were the points at which the revealed ' system itself impinges on human reason. No time ' can lessen whatever force there may be in the ob- ' jection agamst a miracle ; it is felt in one century ' as strongly as in another.' Speaking, again, of the more practical objections which weigh most with * Dewar. 'German Protestantism,' p. 17. 144 REV. MARK PATTISON, B.D. the popular mind, he adds that, while the mass of the public cannot judge of speculative questions, ' it ' is otherwise with the greater part of the points ' raised in the deistical controversy. It is not the ' speculative reason of the few, but the natural con- ' science of the many, that questions the extirpation ' of the Canaanites, or the eternity of hell torments. ' These are points of divinity that are at once funda- ' mental and popular.' Now this is what we mean by Rationalism — a presumptuous attempt to foreclose the question of miracles, by bringing it to the tribunal of reason, instead of trying it on the ground of his- torical evidence, and to subject the works and the judgments of God to the criticism and censure of the natural conscience of man. The man who reasons thus is a rationalist ; but no man is a rationalist merely, because, in the right and legitimate exercise of all his faculties, he examines the evidences, or interprets the meaning, of the ' oracles of God.' Mr Pattison seems to imagine that writers" on the evidences are justly chargeable with Rationalism, when they institute a comparison between natural and revealed religion, and found an argument in favour of the latter on its accordance or analogy with the former There might be some ground for this imputation were natural religion a mere product of reason, an ideal creation of the human mind ; but is it so ? Is it not, in so far as it is true, a mere in- terpretation of the lessons of the great volume of nature ? and can there be any ground for a charge 'RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ENGLAND.' 145 of Rationalism when a comparison is instituted, not between the contents of Scripture and the fancies of men, but between the Works and the Word of God? ^lay not reason recognise the authority of either volume, and be dutifully submissive to Divine teaching in both ? The essayist quotes a sentence from the writings of Robert Ferguson, to the effect that some truths of natural religion have been in- corporated with revelation, and have thus both a natural and supernatural attestation. This is tnie ; but it is very far from sustaining his charge of Rationahsm against those who illustrate both the natural evidence of these truths, and the authority of the Scriptures, by which they are ratified and confirmed. As he has referred to the writings of Ferguson, whose unsavoury reputation as a political schemer, although attested both by Burnet and Mac- aulay, should not shut our eyes to his undeniable ability as a divine, which is clearly proved by his treatise entitled, ' Justification only on a Satisfac- ' tion,' and still more by his larger work, ' The In- ' terest of Reason in Rehgion,' we can only express our regret that he did not quote more largely from the latter ; and, to supply his lack of service in this respect, we offer a few extracts which may be com- mended to the serious attention of those who cannot distinguish between the use and abuse of reason in matters of faith : — ' "Whatever can be made appear ' to be in a contradiction to reason, we profess our- ' selves ready to disclaim. But we are apt to believe 146 EEV. MARK PATTISON, B.D. ' that a great deal, which only crosseth some false ' and lubricous principles that dogmatists have bap- ' tized by that name, falls under the imputation of ' disagreement with reason. The repugnancy to ' reason, fastened upon some tenets, is sometimes the ' result of ignorance, prepossession, and lust, rather ' than their contrariety to universal reason, or any ' genuine maxims of it.' ' There can be no act of ' faith without a previous exercise of our intellects ' about the things to be believed. Faith being ' nothing but an unwavering assent to some doctrine ' upon the account of a Divine testimony, our reason ' must be antecedently persuaded that the testimony ' is Divine, before it can assent to the doctrine upon ' the authority and veracity of the revealer.' ' The ' authority of God in the Scripture is the formal ' reason of assent to such and such doctrines, but it ' is by the means and exercise of our intellectual ' faculties that we come to understand such a de- ' claration to proceed from God, and that these ' things are the sense of such and such propositions.' In short, reason is, according to the memorable aphorism of Bacon, ' the minister and interpreter of ' nature ; ' and reason is also, for the same reason and in the same sense, ' the minister and interpreter' of Scripture. Whatever authority belongs to nature as the rule of judgment and the ultimate standard of appeal in the domain of science, the same autho- rity belongs to Scripture in the region of faith. Degerando speaks of a philosophical Eationalism, ^ RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ENGLAND.' 147 which substitutes speculative reason for practical experience in the one, just as we complain of a re- Kgious Rationalism, which supersedes the authority of Scripture, by the presumptuous theories of reason in the other.* In either case, reason is a mere inter- preter, and as such a scholar, not a censor or a judge. We have dwelt the longer on his description of Rationahsm, because it furnishes the key to his whole doctrine, when he proceeds to give an account of the progress and results of the great controversy be- tween the Christian Apologists and the Deists of the eighteenth century. That controversy, which was carried on for more than a century, is divided into two periods; during the first, the advocates of Christianity are supposed to have insisted chiefly on the internal evidence ; and during the second, on the external or historical proofs. This can only be intended to mark the prevaihng character of the discussion in each period ; for Mr Pattison cannot be ignorant of the fact, that both the internal and the external evidences were, to some extent, adduced in both periods, the miraculous and historical proofs having been largely illustrated by Richard Baxter, among others, in his admirable treatises on the Evidences, and the internal proofs having been adduced at a later period by such writers as Jennings, Erskine, and Gurney. But all alike, from Locke to Whately, are summarily char- * Note F. 148 KEV. MAEK PATTISON, B.D. acterized as rationaKsts, for no other reason, appa- rently, than that they were ' ready to give a reason ' for the faith which was in them.' But while we demur to this sweeping application of the term, we are free to confess that the writers who treated of the ' Reasonableness of Christianity,' were too prone to lower the sublime mysteries of Christianity to the level of mere human reason ; and hence, as Dr Pusey informs us, in his work on the ' Theology of ' Germany,' ' the constant appeal to the rationality ' of Christianity, which led Tindal to conceive of it ' as a mere republication of the religion of nature, ' was extensively encouraged in Germany by the ' translation of the works of the earlier English ' Apologists.' We confess also, for we have often painfully felt, that in the second period, that of the external and historical evidences, there was an ab- sence of that evangelical teaching without which the heart and conscience remain unimpressed, even when the intellect is enlightened, and perhaps convinced. In a certain modified sense, therefore, a sense duly defined and strictly guarded, this period may be described as the seculum rationalisticum of the Church of England ; but we are far from agreeing with the essayist in the estimate which he has formed either of the results of the controversy, or of the merits of those who were engaged in it on either side. He seems to have a far higher appreciation of the Deists, and a much stronger sjmfipathy with them, thafl he has evinced towards those able and learned cham- * RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ENGLAND.' 149 pions for the truth who 'contended earnestly for the ' faith once delivered to the saints.' He speaks of the deistical objections as ' not new and unseasoned ' objections, but such as had worn well, and had ' borne the rub of controversy, because they were ' genuine,' and of the deistical writers as being 'many ' of them men of worth and probity,' ' not worse ' men than the average of their class in life.' And the result of the whole controversy is stated as if it were a draivn battle. ' Upon the whole, the writ- ' ings of that period are serviceable to us chiefly as ' showing what can and what cannot be effected by ' common-sense thinking in theology. It is of little ' consequence to inquire whether or not the objec- ' tions of the Deists and Socinians were removed by ' the answers brought to meet them. Perhaps, on the ' whole, we might be borne out in saying that the ' defence is at least as good as the attack ; and so, ' that even on the ground of common reason, the ' Christian evidences may be arranged in such a way ' as to balance the common-sense improbability of ' the supernatural — that is, there are three chances ' to one for revelation, and only two against it.' (' Tracts for the Times.') ' But that result forces ' on the mind the conviction, that either religious ' faith has no existence, or that it must be to be ' reached by some other road than that of the ' trial of the witnesses.' The Christian Apologists are thus described : ' One might say the Apologists ' of that day had left the bench for the bar, and 150 REV. MAEK PATTISON, B.D. ' taken a brief for the Apostles. They are impatient ' at the smallest demur, and deny loudly that there ' is any weight in anything advanced by their op- ' ponents. In the way they override the most seri- ' ous difficulties ; they show anything but the temper ' which is supposed to qualify for the weighing of ' evidence. The astonishing want of candour in their ' reasonings, their blindness to real difficulty, the ill- ' concealed predetermination to find a particular ver- ' diet, the rise of their style in passion in the same ' proportion as their argument fails in strength, con- ' stitute a class of writers more calculated than any * other to damage their own cause with yoimg in- ' genuous minds.' ' Some exceptions, doubtless, there ' are to the inconclusiveness of this debate.' All this is fitted to leave a painful impression of uncertainty and doubt in regard to the author's views. We look in vain for any expHcit acknowledgment of the Divine authority , of revelation, or of any one of its peculiar proofs or doctrines. He does not, indeed, discard, like Professor PoweU, the miraculous evi- dence, nor does he carp, hke Dr Williams, at pre- dictive prophecy ; but on a revicAV of the whole deistical controversy, he affirms the insufficiency of any proof founded on 'the trial of the witnesses.' If you ask, ' on what basis, then, is revelation sup- ' posed to rest — whether on authority, on the in- ' ward light, on reason, or on self-evidencing Scrip- ' ture ?' — the oracle is silent ; he gives no reply. With these views it is not wonderful that he should ^RELIGIOUS THOUGHT IN ENGLAND.' 15l be dissatisfied with the present state of the Church of England, but we were not prepared to expect such an account of it from one who has subscribed her articles, and has recently entered on ' a cure of ' souls.' 'In the present day,' he says, 'when a godless ' orthodoxy threatens, as in the fifteenth century, ' to extinguish rehgious thought altogether, and ' nothing is allowed in the Church of England but ' the formula of past thinkings, which have long ' lost any sense of any kind. ... When it (religion) ' is stiffened into phrases, and these phrases are ' declared to be objects of reverence but not of intelli- ' gence, it is on the way to become a useless encum- * brance, the rubbish of the past, blocking the road. * Theology then retires into the position it occupies * in the Chui'ch of Eome at present, an unmeaning * frostwork of dogma, out of all relation to the actual ' history of man.' Such is the. state of doctrine in the Church of England ; and what is the state of the Christian evidences ? ' The career of the evi- ' dential school, its success and failure, — its success in * vindicating the ethical part of Christianity, and the * regulative aspect of revealed truth, — its failiire in ' estabhshing the supernatui-al and speculative part, ' have enriched the history of doctrine with a com- * plete refutation of that method as an instrument of * theolocrical investigation.' We offer no comment on this sisTnificant statement: but we earnestly recommend those who would form a just estimate of the great argument maintained 152 REV. MARK PATTISON, B.D. by the English Apologists against the Deists of the eighteenth century, to study Dr Leland's ' Review of the Deistical Writers,' a work in which they will find all the recent objections of infidelity anticipated, and answered by calm, judicious, and conclusive argu- ments. No. VII. 'THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.'* The essay of Professor Jowett is greatly superior, both in substance and style, to any other paper in the volume. His masculine ability and ripe scholar- ship are generally acknowledged ; and all who know anything of the state of Oxford must be aware of the powerful influence which he has acquired, and is now exerting, for good or evil, at that ancient seat of learning, and of the enthusiastic personal at- tachment with which he is regarded by many ardent admirers among the rising hopes of the Church. There is much, too, that is both interesting and in- structive in his present disquisition, as might have been expected from one whose attention has been long directed to the principles and methods both of classical and scriptural interpretation. Yet there are some important points on which we feel con- strained, however reluctantly, to differ from him ; and to these we must now briefly advert. Professor Jowett introduces his subject by a state- ment designed, apparently, to assure his readers that, whatever differences of opinion may exist respecting * By Benjamin Jowett, M.A., Eegius Professor of Greek in the University of Oxford. 154 PROFESSOR JOWETT OF OXFORD. the interpretation of Scripture, there is an entire agreement in regard to Scriptiu-e itself. ' All Chris- ' tians receive the Old and New Testaments as sacred * writings, but they are not agreed about the mean- ' ing which they attribute to them. The Book itself ' remains as at the first ; the commentators seem ' rather to reflect the changing atmosphere of the ' world or of the Church.' And again, at a later stage, ' The Scriptures are a bond of union to the ' whole Christian world. No one denies their author- ' ity ; and could all be brought to an intelligence of ' their true meaning, all might come to agree in ' matters of religion.' These statements seem to imply, and may have been designed to convey the impression, that all worthy to be called ' Christians ' do equally, and in the same sense, ' receive the Old * and New Testaments as sacred writings,' and that none ' deny their authority.' But is this a correct statement of the fact ? Are there none among those whom Professor J owett recognises as Christians who are not agreed as to what books, or what parts of books, belong to these ' writings,' and still less as to ' the sense, and the extent, in which they are to be held ' sacred ? ' Does he mean these statements to apply to his own colleagues and associates in the preparation of the ' Essays and Eeviews ? ' and to affirm that they are not Christians, since undeniably one of them rejects the Mosaic narrative of creation, another the prophecies which these writings contain, another the miracles which they record, and another *THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.' 155 all that is supernatural in the scheme which they unfold? It will be a hard task for Mr Jowett to reconcile these statements mth the declared senti- ments of his fellow-labourers, and yet continue to recognise their claim to be regarded as ' Christians.' But it will be a harder task still to reconcile them with his own doctrine in regard to the sacred writings, and the admissions which the force of truth compels him to make respecting the causes of that diversity of interpretation of which he complains. He had surely overlooked these statements, or entirely forgotten them, when, on the same page in which they occur, he wrote as follows : — ' Philosophical differences are ' in the background, into which the differences about ' Scripture also resolve themselves. They seem to ' run up at last into a difference of opinion respect- ' ing revelation itself — whether given beside the ' human faculties or through them, whether an in- ' terruption of the laws of nature, or their perfec- ' tion and fulfilment.' He speaks evidently of ' dif- ' ferences about Scripture,' as well as about the interpretation of it ; and of these he says, most truly, that they ' run up at last into a difference of opinion ' respecting revelation itself,' an admission which it would be a hard task to reconcile with his previous statement, that ' all Christians receive the Old and ' New Testaments as sacred writings or with his subsequent one, that ' no one denies their authority.' And what is this ' difference of opinion respecting re- ' velation itself?' Is it a difference of little moment, 156 PROFESSOR JOWETT OF OXFORD. or one of considerable magnitude ? What are the questions which are raised by it ? We are afraid to oifer an articulate statement of them in our own words, for his language is somewhat obscure, if not ambiguous ; but here they are as stated by himself : whether revelation was ' given beside the human ' faculties, or through them — whether an interrup- ' tion of the laws of nature, or their perfection and ' fulfilment.' For our own part, we are at a loss to discover whether the two clauses refer to distinct (questions, or to one and the same question, con- sidered only in different aspects, and expressed in different terms. We are equally at a loss to under- stand the distinction which seems to be indicated between a revelation given ' beside the human facul- ' ties, or through them ; ' for we never happened to hear of any revelation to which the former expres- sion could apply ; but one thing is clear — the ques- tion raised respecting revelation itself amounts in substance to this, whether it should be regarded as natural or supernatural, or whether it can be held to imply an interruption of natural laws ? If this be the question, we must have the whole deistical controversy over again ; we have to deal with men who deny, or doubt, the whole supernatural element in Christianity — that element which is incorporated with the ' sacred writings,' and interwoven with their very texture. We are not prepared to enter on the task of interpretation, for as yet we know not what we have to interpret, or whether it be the Word of redible that a Christian man, holding office in con- nection with the Church of England, should have penned the following sentences : — ' The religion of ' Christ was first taught by an application of the ' words of the Psalms and the Prophets. Our Lord ' Himself sanctions the application. " Can there be " a better use of Scripture than that which is made " by Scripture ?" Or any more likely method of ' teacliing Christianity " than that by which they " were first taught ?" For it may be argued that the ' critical interpretation of Scripture is a device almost ' of yesterday ; it is the vocation of the scholar or ' philosopher, not of the apostle or prophet. The ' new truth, which was introduced into the Old ' Testament, rather than the old truth which was ' found there, was the salvation and the conversion ' of the world. There are many quotations from ' the Psalms and the prophets in the Epistles, in ' which the meaning is quickened or spiritualized ; ' but hardly any, probably none, which is based on ' the original sense or context. That is not so ' singular a phenomenon as may at first sight be ' imagined. It may appear strange to us that Scrip- M 174 PROFESSOR JOWETT OF OXFORD. ' ture should be interpreted in Scripture in a manner ' not altogether in agreement with modern criticism ; ' but would it not be more strange that it should be ' interpreted otherwise than in agreement with the ' ideas of the age or country in which it was witten ? ' The observation that there is such an agreement, ' leads to two conclusions, which have a bearing on ' our present subject. First, it is a reason for not ' insisting on the applications which the New Testa- ' ment makes of passages in the Old as their real ' meaning. Secondly, it gives authority and pre- ' cedent for the use of similar applications in our ' own day.' If there be meaning in language, these words must be held to imply that our Lord and His apostles, — in quoting from the Psalms and the prophets, — and in applying them, be it remembered, in proof of His claims to be received as the Messiah promised to ' the fathers,' — made use of ' new truth which was in- ' troduced into the Old Testament,' rather than ' of ' the old truth which was foimd there ;' that ' hardly ' any, probably none,' of their many quotations was ' based on the original sense or context ;' that in thus quoting and applying Scripture they accommo- dated it so as to be ' in agreement with the ideas of ' the age or country in which it was written ;' and that this disingenuous, perhaps we should say ' free, ' handhng of the "Word of God" — this attempt, ' not to free it from the repetition of conventional * language and from traditional methods of treat- ^THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.' 175 ' ment,' but to bind it in the shackles of Jewish error for ever — this corrupt admixture of their own false interpretations with the pure letter of Scripture, * was the salvation and the conversion of the world !' Looking at it even from his own point of view, Pro- fessor Jowett might be expected to see, if not the sinfulness of tampering in this way with the real meaning of the Old Testament, yet at least the great improbability that the highest lessons of the most advanced modern criticism should have been anticipated at so early a time. He thinks it strange, indeed, that Scripture should have been then in- terpreted in ' a manner not altogether in agree - * ment with modern criticism ; ' but where is the difference? Is it not the fair application of the ' ideological' principle to the interpretation of the Old Testament, and is it not expressly referred to as giving ' authority and precedent for the use of simi- ' lar applications in our own day ? ' He deduces two conclusions from the supposed treatment by our Lord and His apostles of the Scriptures of the Old Testament ; the first is, that we are not to regard their interpretation as the real meaning ; and the second, that we may warrantably interpret Scripture in the same way — that is, that the interpreter of Scripture is not bound to adhere to its real meaning, but may superinduce his own opinions, especially if they be in agreement with the spirit of the age, on that which he professes to treat, notwithstanding, as the ' Word of God.' And this is part of Pro- 176 PKOFESSOR J()WETT OF OXFOED. fessor Jowett's canon for the interpretation of Scrip- ture ! He adopts the Eationalistic method, and thus reaches a non-natural sense of Scripture. Mr Palmer, speaking of Newman's reasoning in favour of ' the system of interpreting Scripture, not in a literal, but in a mystical and allegorical sense,' says, ' Kationalism has the benefit of the argument to the fullest extent. Its method of interpreting Scripture is wholly mysti- cal and allegorical. All the miracles are " mythical ; " all the facts of the Gospel are " mythical," embodying certain truths or lessons ; the Gospel itself is one great " my thus ;" the existence of Christ is a " my- thus.'" ... 'In fact, this system is fully developed only by such writers as Strauss or Bruno Bauer, to whom the whole of revelation — even the creation (of the Avorld), and the existence of Christ, becomes a " mythus.'"* Had he merely said that some passages in the Old Testament, which cannot be proved to have a de- signed typical reference, are applied in the New to the purposes of religious instruction, — just as the events of common history may be, by their involving a general principle, applicable to more conditions than one ; or even that the prophecies of the Old Testament had a primary reference to persons or occurrences belonging to that dispensation, and can only be extended beyond it on the supposition of a typical relation established between them and the * ' The Doctrine of Development and Conscience,' pp. 122, 266. ^THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.' 177 person and kingdom of the future ^lessiali, he might have escaped censure, while he could have had no claim to originality ; but when he denies that there was any type or prophecy which, in its original meaning, bore reference to the Messiah, and that our Lord put a new meaning into the Scriptures which did not exist there before, we can only ex- press our surprise that he stopped short at his ' two conclusions,' and did not venture on a third, which has already been suggested to him, on the ground of strict logical sequence, by the author of ' Neo- * Christianity' in the Westmimter Review. We have thus examined his chief canons of in- terpretation ; we proceed to offer a few specimens of his own criticisms on the language of Scripture, which may serve also as illustrations of his doctrinal pecuharities. The first that we ^select, both because it occurs repeatedly in the coui'se of his essay and because it relates to a passage which seems to be a special favourite with his fellow-labourers in the same field, is his criticism on the words, ' Henceforth there shall * be no more this proverb in the house of Israel.' ' A change,' we are told, ' passes over the Jewish * religion ' . . . from the ' visitation of the sins of ' the fathers upon the children ' to ' every soul shall ' bear its o^vn iniquity.' Dr Temple had referred to the same passage as an appeal from the Mosaic law to the feeling of 'natural equity;' Professor 178 PROFESSOR JOWETT OF OXFORD. Jowett adduces it as a proof of a ' progressive revela- ' tion,' in which the error of a former age was recti- fied by the better views of a more advanced one ; while both writers seem to regard it as conclusive against the doctrine which teaches that ' God visits ' the iniquities of the fathers on the children.' Every one knows that a thorough discussion of this theo- logical question on its merits, and even a sound critical decision on the meaning of the particular passage referred to, must necessarily take into account such considerations as these : — First, that the phrase, ' Visiting the iniquities of the fathers upon the child- ' ren unto the third and fourth generations,' is incor- porated with the decalogue itself, which was designed to be the standing and permanent law at least of the Jewish Church, and that it formed part of the Second Commandment, which no prophet had authority to abrogate or right to ignore ; secondly, that it occurs in the most solemn revelation of Jehovah's name, which is connected with the glory of His infinite perfections, when ' The Lord descended in the cloud, ' and stood mth Moses, and proclaimed the name ' of the Lord — " The Lord, the Lord God, merciful " and gracious, long-suffering and abundant in good- " ness and truth, keeping mercy for thousands, " forgiving iniquity, and transgression, and sin, and " that will by no means clear the guilty, visiting " the iniquities of the fathers upon the children, " and upon the children's children, unto the third " and fourth generation;'" thirdly, that so far from ^ THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.' 179 denying, the prophet expressly admits, that the Jews were suffering in part on account of their fathers' sins ; for their captivity was caused by the guilt of Manasseh and the men of his times who did evil in Jerusalem which the Lord would not pardon (Ezek. ix. 6; Jer. xv. 4; 2 Kings xxiv. 3); fourthly, that the prophet never once refers to the words of Moses, but only to a popular perversion of his doctrine, which had become so common as to pass for a pro- verb — ' The fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the ' children's teeth are set on edge ' — a proverb which implied that they were suffering only, or at least chiefly, on account of their fathers' sins, not of their own ; whereas the prophet, seeking to awaken their consciences, tells them that although they were sent into captivity by the sins of those who had gone before them, yet what kept them there, and hin- dered their return to their own land, was only their own wilful impenitence and unbelief, and that as soon as they repented and returned to the Lord, they would be graciously restore'd ; and, fifthly, that the effect of his faithful but tender remonstrance was to awaken a sense of godly contrition, imder which the faithfid among them were led to confess at once their own sins and the sins of their fathers, in these touching and impressive words — ' Our fathers ' have sinned and are not, and we have borne their ' iniquities — the crown is fallen from our head; woe ' unto us that we have sinned.' ' Howbeit Thou art ' just in all that is brought upon us ; for Thou hast 180 PKOFESSOR JOWETT OF OXFORD. ' done right but we have done \dckedly.' — (Lam. r. 7, 16; Neh. ix. 32.) Let any one who is compe- tent to judge of moral evidence say whether all these considerations are not relevant to the point at issue, when the question relates to the right inter- pretation of the passage to which Professor Jowett refers ; and yet he takes no notice of them ; he harps upon the proverb which it was the Prophet's object to rebuke and denounce — he embraces it as if it were a portion of God's truth, and a portion of it that was better than the Second Commandment of the decalogue itself. As another specimen of his critical interpreta- tions, we may merely advert to what he says of some passages bearing on the Divinity of Christ. We deeply regret to say that every criticism which he has offered tends in the direction that is opposite to the recognition of that fundamental truth. ' The ' received translation of Philipp. ii. 6 (" Who being "in the form of God, thought it not robbery to be "equal with God"), or of Rom. iii. 25 ("Whom " God hath set forth to be a propitiation through "faith in His blood"), or Rom. xv. 5 ("God, even "the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ"), though ' erroneous, are not given up without a struggle ; ' the 1st Tim. iii. 16, and 1st John v. 7 (the three ' witnesses), though the first (" God manifest in the "flesh") is not found in the best manuscripts, and ' the second in no Greek manuscript worth speaking ' of, have not yet disappeared from the editions of * THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.' 181 * the Greek Testament commonly in use in England, ' and still less from the English translation. An * English commentator, who, with Lachmann and * Tischendorf, supported also by the authority of ' Erasmus, ventures to alter the punctuation of the * doxology in Romans ix. 5 (" Who is over all, God "blessed for ever"), hardly escapes the charge of * heresy.' He refers to Rom. i. 2, and Philipp. ii. 6, as passages which would lose their meaning if dis- tributed between our Lord's divinity and humanity. He argues, indeed, against the old Sociuian inter- pretation ; but has he said one word that is incon- sistent with the Arian scheme, or that goes so far as the admissions of Dr Ellis in his ' Half Century of ' Unitarianism ? ' But he may be the more easily excused for this, since he seems to be of opinion that it is difficult, if not impossible, to prove any doctrine from Scripture. ' Nor is it easy to say what is the meaning of "prov- " ing a doctrine from Scripture." For when we ' demand logical equivalents and similarity of cir- ' cumstances — when we balance adverse statements ' — St James and St Paul, the New Testament with ' the Old — it will be hard to demonstrate from Scrip- ' ture any complex system, either of doctrine or ' practice.' On his views this conclusion need excite no surprise, it is the logical result of his theory ; for he speaks of a 'progressive revelation,' such as is not only less perfect or comparatively incomplete merely in its earlier stages, but necessarily imperfect also as 182 PROFESSOR JOWETT OF OXFORD. containing some errors which must be subsequently corrected or neutraHsed; and as the whole record is placed before us, containing both the earlier errors and the subsequent amendments, of course it would require a strong ' verifying faculty ' to prove any doctrine whatever from Scripture. More than once, in the course of these papers, we have suggested the question — ' What think ye ' of Christ? ' Were that question proposed to Pro- fessor Jowett, he would no doubt say, ' I revere and ' love Him. I own Him as my Master and Lord.' Nothing indeed can be more touching than his allusions to Christ ; he seems to cling to His image as the ideal of all moral excellence, perhaps as the last barrier betwixt his soul and utter unbelief. There is, even at times, a deep pathos, an undertone of sadness, in his words when he speaks on this theme, as if he felt or feared that some of his other views might prove to be at variance with his belief in the personal character of Christ. He has not yet im- peached that character, as Newman and Greig have ventured to do ; but there is no resting-place for the sole of his foot in his present position — he must retrace his steps or advance as consistency demands ; — he has either gone too far, or has not gone far enough; for no man can long believe that Jesus claimed to be the Son of God, the ISIessiah predicted and prefigured in the Old Testament, endowed -with miraculous powers, and commissioned to impart these powers to His followers, and yet maintain his ' THE INTERPRETATION OF SCRIPTURE.' 183 perfect truthfulness and moral honesty, while he denies the reality of miracles, the predictive force of prophecy, the typical meaning of the Old Testa- ment, the supernatural element in revelation, and the authority of the Bible as God's "W ord. No. VIIL THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME * Having examined the several ' Essays and Reviews ' separately and successively, with the view of ascer- taining the sentiments of each of the writers, and the statements for which they are individually respon- sible, we propose now to take a comprehensive survey of the whole series, considered collectively, as the pubhc manifesto of a school or sect which has sprung up within the bosom of the Church of Eng- land, and which can hardly fail to be regarded as one of the most ominous signs of the times. Our aim will be mainly directed, not to the criticism of minute details or the refutation of particular errors, but to the exposition of the general scheme of thought, or system of doctrine, which pervades the entire volume from its commencement to its close. It will be our honest endeavour to extract from its multifarious and miscellaneous contents the grand leading positions which it is designed to establish, and the fundamental conceptions or assumptions on which they ultimately depend ; to explain their con- nection with one another as constituent parts of one consistent and consecutive scheme of thought, all * London : Longman, Green, Longman, and Eoberts. THE GENEKAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT. 185 springing from the same radical principles, and di- rected to the same practical ends ; and to lay bare the concealed links and ligaments ' by which they are indissolubly bound together as articles of the same philosophic creed. In doing so, we leave in abeyance, or rather we leave to the consciences of the compilers of this volume, the question which has been naturally raised in regard to the nature and extent of their individual responsibility in connection with its contents. Con- sidering, however, that they have inserted a prefa- tory notice ' to the reader,' to the effect that * the * authors are responsible for their respective articles ' only,' and that, under the shelter of this disclaimer, some of them may be disposed to plead exemption from the grave and serious charges which certain parts of the work would warrant and justify, we think it right to say that however they may ' have ' -written,' as they tell us, ' in entire independence ' of each other, and without concert or comparison,' they must have concurred, at least, in issuing that notice ' to the reader,' or in authorising some one to prepare it in their name ; and that by that very notice, under which some may be seeking to shield themselves from serious blame, they stand com- mitted to the general object of the volume, which ' is the free handling of subjects peculiarly liable to ' suffer by the repetition of conventional language ' and from traditional methods of treatment.' To this extent they were committed from the first. 186 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT They entered voluntarily into a \drtual copartnery for that specific object, 'the free handling,' — of course ' in a becoming spirit,' — of the most sacred sub- jects which can engage the thoughts of men ; and if, after the appearance of the volume, any of them had begun to feel that their confidence in some of their colleagues was misplaced, and that they had suffered themselves to be unwarily entrapped into a seeming complicity with flagrant infidehty, what honest Enghshman would hesitate to come forward and disclaim publicly all participation in sentiments, which he might be supposed to sanction, but which he utterly abhorred ? But we feel it the less neces- sary to discuss the question as to the joint liability of these writers for the contents of this volume, partly because none of them, so far as we know, have publicly repudiated any part of it ; and still more, because there is enough in each of the Essays, considered by itself, to show that they are aU fellow- workers in the same cause, that they all belong to the same school, and that they all contribute, more or less, in different ways and with various degrees of ability, to the construction of the same general scheme of thought. We have said of the only lay- man among them, that his statements are less offen- sive than those of most of his clerical associates ; but even he insists that the Bible contains a mixture of truth and error, and presses upon us the alternative of either modifying our whole idea of revelation, or rejecting a part of the canonical Scriptures. He WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 187 adopts for himself the former of these alternatives ; and this modified view of revelation, followed out to its legitimate results, would lead to all the conclusions which are rigorously deduced from it by his more daring associates, and especially by Dr WilKams and Professor Jowett. But their relative shares in the work of destruction is a question of comparatively little moment to the Christian public : the great outstanding fact remains, that here is a volume, emanating from ministers and members of the Church of England, which assails the articles of her creed and the authority of the Bible itself; and, we say it ad- visedly, the gain of the whole world would not tempt us to speak of the record of Divine revelation and its precious contents as it has been spoken of in every one of the ' Essays and Reviews.' But, in dealing with this volume, we must not content ourselves -with marking merely some erro- neous views mth regard to the record of revelation, the number and integrity of the books which belong to it, or the nature of its various contents ; the radi- cal error lies much deeper down and further back than any heresy respecting the mere canon of Scrip- ture. It is one which might well serve to supersede any great solicitude about the determination of a canon at all, and which might e^qually serve to eva- cuate its authority were the same canon universally received. The great idtimate question which is raised, relates not so much to the record of revela- tion as to the nature of revelation itself ; and it is 188 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT in their views on this fundamental point that we find the root of every branch of the new system — the spring and foimtain-head of all its other errors, which flow from it as naturally and as necessarily as various streams of water descend by different channels from their parent source. The first and most fundamental error of the whole system — that which may be described as its rrpojrov -^svdog^ and from which all its other errors follow as inevitable corollaries — consists in the assumption that revelation does not imply the supernatural communication of truth from the mind of God to the mind of man, but merely the discovery or per- ception of truth on man's part in the exercise of his own natural faculties. In a certain sense God may be said to be our teacher, for He is the ' Father of ' our spirits' and also the ' Father of lights, from ' whom Cometh down every good and perfect gift ;' every ray of truth, therefore, that beams on our minds may be traced to Him as its sempiternal source, who is ' the very God of truth ; ' but it is a natural revelation only wliich is admitted, while a supernatural revelation is denied. "We cordially admit the former, while we strenuously contend also for the latter. It is a great truth, and one which is too often overlooked or disregarded, that God is reaUy oui' teacher even in natural things ; that we are indebted to Him, who has endowed us with organs of sense and noble faculties, rational and moral, and surrounded us with objects which WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 189 are fitted to call them into active exercise, for all our common secular knowledge, which is so indis- pensable for the purposes of the present life ; and that He should be reverentially acknowledged as the revealer, in this sense,* of all true science, as weU as the source of all religious truth, whether natural or revealed. The Scriptures speak of a natural reve- lation both of secular and religious truth; of the former, when speaking of one of the common arts of life, agriculture and husbandry, the prophet says of the ploughman — ' His God doth instruct him to dis- ' cretion, and doth teach him.' 'This also cometh ' forth from the Lord of Hosts, who is wonderful in ' counsel and excellent in working ' (Is. xxviii. 26, 29) ; and of the former, when speaking of the natural evidence for the existence and perfections of God, the Apostle says, with reference even to the Gen- tiles — 'That Avhich may be known of God is manifest ' to them, for God hath showed it imto them {(pavspov ' Jcr/, 6 yap &sog auroTg s(pa,vs puffs). For the invisible ' things of Him, from the creation of the world, are ' clearly seen, being understood by the things that ' are made, even His eternal power and Godhead.' So far from being jealous, therefore, of the doctrine which affirms a natural revelation of truth, and as- cribes it ultimately to God as its author, we cordially receive it as a lesson which should imbue science itself ^vith a religious spirit, and which may well afford a presumption that since God is our teacher * Note G. N 190 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT in regard to natural things and the interests of the present life, He may also condescend to become our instructor in heavenly things, if we be indeed moral and responsible beings, placed in a state of proba- tion now, and destined to an eternal life hereafter. The error of the authors of the ' Essays and Re- views ' does not consist, then, in the recognition of a natural revelation of truth, or in ascribing that reve- lation to God as its author, but in the denial of any supernatural revelation of His mind and will, and the exclusion of any communication of objective truth on His part, even to the minds of the holy apostles and prophets. But is it possible, it may be asked, that, with the Bible in their hands, any well-educated Englishmen, and, still more, any ordained ministers of the Church, can have committed themselves to such a theory of revelation as this? Let every reader judge for himself ; but let him form his opinion on a careful consideration of all the passages in which everything supernatural is derided or disowned. Dr Wil- liams speaks of ' an irrational supernaturalism,' — of ' that repressive idea of revelation,' — and of ' the ' idea of revelation being widened for the old world, ' and deepened for ourselves.' He adds, 'There is ' hardly any greater question than whether history ' shows Almighty God to have trained mankind by ' a faith which has reason and conscience for its ' kindred, or by one to whose miraculous tests their * pride must bow ; ' and he speaks with evident ap- WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 191 proval of ' the more liberal (not to say rationalising) ' criticism whicli traces revelation historically within ' the sphere of nature and hiunanity.' He quotes, with faint censure, Bunsen's outspoken question, ' How long shall we bear this fiction of an external ' revelation ? ' Dr Temple has gone so far as to say of the personal presence of our Lord Himself, that, ' Had His revelation been delayed till now, ' assuredly it would have been hard for us to re- ' cognise His Divinity, for the faculty of faith has ' turned inward, and cannot now accept any outer ' manile stations of the truth of God.' Professor Powell admits that ' the idea of a positive external ' Divine revelation of some kind has formed the • very basis of all hitherto received systems of Chris- ' tian belief ; ' but he adds, ' Considerations of a very ^ different nature are now introduced from those for- ' merly entertained, and of a kind whicli affect the • entire primary conception of a revelation and its ' authority, and not merely any alleged external • attestations of its truth.' And Professor Jowett, speaking of ' the differences about Scripture,' makes the important admission, that ' They seem to run up ' at last into a difference of opinion respecting revela- • tion itself, — whether given beside the hiuuan facul- ' ties or through them, whether an interruption of ' the laws of natm-e, or theii' perfection and fiil- • filment.' This is really the ultimate question — Was there, or was there not. in the case of prophets and apostles, 192 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT a supernatural revelation of the mind and will of God, an objective presentation of truth, such as was undiscoverable by man's natural faculties, and such as neither reason nor conscience could suggest, how- ever they might receive and respond to it ? Or, to throw the question into another form — Was there anything taught by the prophets and apostles when they spoke in the name of God, and made use of these solemn words, 'Thus saith the Lord,' which was not the product of their own reason and con- science, but a message supernaturally revealed to themselves, which they were commissioned to pro- claim to others, and which was to be received and obeyed on the sole authority of the revealer ? If there was nothing of this kind, then every part of the theory of this volume may be estabhshed with- out difficulty ; for a supernatural communication of truth from the mind of God to His commissioned servants being excluded, the very foundation of Scripture, and its Divine authority, is swept away. But if a real revelation of the mind and will of God be admitted, such as is additional to the natural dictates of man's reason and conscience, then a firm foundation is laid both for a scheme of miraculous attestation, such as might be necessary to establish the Divine commission of His chosen messengers, and also the Divine authority of the record to which that revelation might be consigned. The theory which denies an external supernatural revelation, and traces revelation merely ' -svithin the WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 193 sphere of nature and humanity,' by ascribing it to the natural exercise of man's reason and conscience, is at direct variance with the whole tenor of Scrip- ture, and utterly subversive of the foundation of Christian faith and hope. It is at variance mth the whole tenor of Scripture, in which God is every- where represented as making known to men His sovereign will, and summoning them to believe and obey His word. Without referring to the innumer- able instances in which He is represented as reveal- ing Himself to the patriarchs and prophets, we select two facts — the one Ij^ing at the foundation of the Jewish, the other, of the Christian dispensation. We ask the writers of this volume — Was there, or was there not, an external supernatural revelation when God proclaimed the law amidst the thunder and lightnings of Sinai ? And, again, was there, or was there not, an external supernatural revelation when ' God, manifest in the flesh,' ' spake as never man spake ? ' These questions are direct and simple, and no honest mind Avill seek to evade them. Let them be fairly faced and explicitly answered. It is mere drivelling to say that, supposing them to be real revelations, they could only take effect by quicken- ing the reason and the conscience of those to whom they were addressed ; the question is not as to the manner of their efficacy, but as to their nature and origin, and the authority which rightfully belonged to them ? Were they subjective or objective — the products of man's natural faculties, or a super- 194 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT natural expression of God's mind and will ? But as tlie theory which represents revelation as given, not ' beside the human faculties,' but ' through them ; ' not as ' an interruption of the laws of nature,' but ' as their perfection and fulfilment,' is at direct vari- ance with the whole tenor of Scripture, so it is utterly subversive of the foundation of Christian faith and hope. Wliat is Christian faith, considered simply as behef, but the reception of Divine truth on the ground of Divine testimony, — in other words, on the authority of the Revealer? And what is Christian hope but a firm persuasion of the sure fulfil- ment of God's promises? If there be no supernatural revelation, can there be the slightest foundation for either ? Are there not truths depending on the sovereign will and sole appointment of God, wdiich can neither be discovered by the unaided light of nature, nor even proved, when revealed, otherwise than by the testimony of His word ? And do not these truths — the peculiar lessons of revelation — con- stitute the only ground of our faith and hope as Christians ? The Westminster divines have drawn a strong line of demarcation between natural and revealed religion, when they say — 'Although the ' light of nature, and the works of creation and provi- ' dence, do so far manifest the goodness, wisdom, ' and power of God as to leave men inexcusable, yet ' are they not sufficient to give that knowledge of ' God and of His will which is necessary unto sal- ' vation, therefore it pleased the Lord, at sundry WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 195 * times, and in divers manners, to reveal Himself, ^ and to declare that His -^vill to the Church.' This is the great object of a supernatural communication of Divine truth : to make kno^vn what was undis- coverable by the Hght of nature, and dependent on the sovereign will and appointment of God Himself. Some such revelation was necessary, and was vouch- safed in the state of innocence itself to make known the terms on which man might surely reckon on the continuance of a holy and happy Hfe in the enjoy- ment of God's favour and fellowship, which was made to depend on his beheving the word and obeying the will of God as embodied in a positive precept, the most searching test of a submissive and dutiful spirit ; and how much more is it necessary now, when, as fallen and depraved creatures, we are concerned to know whether God will forgive the guilty and restore the lost, and if so, in what way and on what terms ? and when our own hearts are ever prompting ques- tions which reason can neither answer nor allay — such as the anxious and almost despairing cry, ' How shall ' a man be just with God?' '^T[iat must I do to be * saved ? ' ' What good thing shall I do that I may * inherit eternal life ? ' Xone other than a Di\dne answer can meet and satisfy the longings of a truly awakened soul ; it must be taught what is the Avill of God for its salvation ; it can lean only on His own faithful word of promise ; and what is the worth of a promise but the known character of him by whom it is made ? For this reason the Apostle insists on 196 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT the authority of the Revealer as the sure ground of the believer's confidence and hope : — ' God, willing ' more abundantly to show unto the heirs of promise ' the immutability of His counsel, confirmed it by an ' oath ; that by two immutable things in which it ' was impossible for God to lie, we might have a ' strong consolation who have fled for refuge to lay ' hold upon the hope set before us.' We have enlarged the longer on this point, because it is the real hinge on which the whole discussion turns. It is not a question about the mere record of revelation, it is a question about the nature and origin of revelation itself. According to the writers of this volume, the record of revelation contains a mixture of truth and error — and this of itself is a grave and serious objection to their views ; but this is not all, for they deny that even that portion of truth, be it less or more, which is contained in Scrip- ture, was supernaturally revealed, and contend, that it was developed merely by man's natural faculties, and may ' be traced \vithin the sphere of nature and ' humanity.' Their theory, therefore, in its ultimate analysis, is a scheme of mere naturalism, as opposed to all that is supernatural, in religion. The second error of their system is also funda- mental, as it affects the Divine authority both of the prophets and apostles in proclaiming the truth, and also of the Holy Scriptures, in which the truth was committed to writing — it relates to the nature of in- WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME 197 spiration. The two terms, revelation and inspiration, are often used indiscriminately ; but it may be useful, in some respects, to distinguish between them, and Tf» employ the one to denote the supernatural presen- tation or conveyance of Divine truth to the mincls of the prophets and apostles themselves, while the other is applied to describe the supernatural impulse, guidance, and direction under which they spoke or wrote when they were commissioned to communicate that truth for the benefit of their fellow-men. In speaking of the nature of inspiration, we do not refer to the mode or the measure in which it was im- parted, in regard to which some diversity of opinion has arisen among those who were at one as to the substance of the doctrine itself; we refer only to its nature, as it is represented by the authors of this volume, who employ the term, much in the same way as they speak of revelation, as denoting, not a supernatural influence prompting and enabling the prophets and apostles to speak and to write as infal- lible teachers of Divine truth, but simply as a natural inspiration, the same in kind with that which is felt by every man of elevated genius, or every Christian of devout mind, although it might be different, per- haps, from both, in respect to the measure of its fulness or the degree of its intensity. Here, again, we can conceive that many a thought- ful man will be ready to ask — Is it possible that, with the Bible in their hands, and knowing it also to 198 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT be in the hands of all their people, any ordained ministers of the Church of England can have com- mitted themselves to such a theory of inspiration as this ? Again, we say, let every reader judge for himself. Listen to Dr Williams : — ' If such a Spirit ' (the Eternal Spirit) did not dwell in the Church, ' the Bible would not be inspired ; for the Bible is, ^ before all things, — the voice of the congregation. ' Bold as such a theory of inspiration may sound, it ' was the earliest creed of the Church, and it is the ' only one to which the facts of Scripture answer. ' The sacred writers acknowledge themselves men of ' like passions with ourselves, and we are promised ' illumination from the Spirit which dwelt in them. ' Hence, when we find our Prayer-book constructed ' on the idea of the Church being an inspired society, ' instead of objecting that every one of us is fallible, ' we should define inspiration consistently with the ' facts of Scripture and of human nature. These ' would neither exclude the idea of faUibility among ' IsraeHtes of old, nor teach us to quench the Spirit ' in true hearts for ever. But if any one jjrefers ' thinking the sacred writers passionless machines, ' and calling Luther and Milton uninspired, let him ' co-operate in researches by which his theory, if ' true, will be triumphantly confirmed.' Mark here — ' The Bible is, before all other things, the written ' voice ' of the congregation ; ' ' the Church is an ' inspired society ; ' we are inspired as well as the apostles ; they were fallible as well as we ; Luther WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 199 and Milton were not uninspired. Listen now to Professor Powell : — ' The philosophy of the age does ' not discredit the inspiration of prophets and apostles, ' though it may sometimes believe it in poets, legis- ' lators, philosophers, and others gifted with high ' genius.' Listen again to Professor Jowett : — ' The ' nature of inspiration can only be known from the ' examination of Scripture. There is no other source * to which we can turn for information, and we have ' no right to assume some imaginary doctrine of ' inspiration Hke the infallibility of the Roman Catho- ' lie Church.' This seems to promise well ; but let not the reader rashly assume that he has the witer's full meaning all at once ; let him remember that on the kindred doctrine of revelation Professor Jowett commenced by saying that, 'all Christians receive ' the Old and New Testaments as sacred citings ; ' and yet it turned out after all that they differed about them very materially, and that their differences 'seem ' to run up at last into a difference of opinion re- ' specting revelation itself.' And so in the case of inspiration; the appeal to Scripture, which he recom- mends, will be found very different from what some readers might expect it to be. He lays down ' two ' considerations ' which we should bear in mind : the first is that inspiration, whatever it be, ' is a fact ' which we infer from the study of Scripture — not ' of one portion only, but of the whole' — the last clause being evidently intended to intimate that we are not to form our notion of the nature of inspiration 200 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT from those passages only in which the Scriptures expressly speak of their own inspiration, and from which we might expect to derive our clearest views of it ; but from a general survey of the whole con- tents of Scripture, and our own 'inferences' from the facts which meet us there. The second is, that ' any true doctrine of inspiration must conform to ' all well-ascertained facts of history or of science ; for ' the same fact cannot be true in religion when seen by ' the light of faith, and untrue in science when looked ' at through the medium of evidence or experiment.' These are his two considerations which are to de- cide the whole question as to the nature of that inspiration which the sacred writers claim for them- selves and their writings : and what use does he make of them ? In appljdng the first, he says it must obviously be such an inspiration as ' embraces writ- ' ings of very different kinds — the book of Esther, ' for example, or the Song of Solomon, as well as ' the Gospel of St John. It is reconcilable with the ' mixed good and evil of the characters of the Old ' Testament, which nevertheless does not exclude ' them from the favour of God, — with the attribution ' to the Divine Being of actions at variance with that ' higher revelation which He has given of Himself ' in the Gospel; it is not inconsistent with imperfect ' or opposite aspects of the truth, as in the book of ' Job or Ecclesiastes, — with variations of fact in the ' Gospels or the books of Kings and Chronicles, — with ' inaccuracies of language in the Epistles of St Paul ; WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIKE VOLUME. 201 ' for these are all found in Scripture ; neither is * there any reason why they should not be, except a * general impression that Scripture ought to have ' been written in a way different from what it has.' And, in applying the second, he says, ' Almost all ' intelligent persons are agreed that the earth has ' existed for myriads of ages ; the best informed are ' of opinion that the history of nations extends back ' some thousand years before the Mosaic chronology ; ' recent discoveries in geology may, perhaps, open ' a further vista of existence for the human species, ' while it is possible, and may one day be known, that ' mankind spread not from one but from many centres ' over the globe ; or, as others say, that the supply of ' links which are at present wanting in the chain of ' animal life may lead to new conclusions respecting * the origin of man.' Our notion of inspiration must, in short, be sufficiently elastic to adapt itself to every new discovery of science, and not only so, but to the mere * guesses ' of to-day which may afterwards be- come certainties. In all the other essays incidental expressions occur sufficient to indicate a general agree- ment among the writers on the nature of inspiration. We are warranted in concluding that, according to the doctrine of this volume, the holy apostles and prophets, the writers of our ' sacred books,' had no inspiration that was, at least in kind, peculiar to themselves, but only a higher degree of that which is common to all Christians who enjoy the aid of the Spirit, and even of all men who are endowed with 202 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT reason and conscience ; that the inspiration which they possessed was not a supernatural grace, but a natural gift; that it did not make them infallible teachers of truth, but left them, even in their public ministry and the preparation of the Scriptures, liable to error like other men ; and that whatever claim they may have made to supernatural illumination and Divine direction and guidance, must be tested by the accordance of that claim with the contents of Scrip- ture, the discoveries of science, and the wildest guesses of speculative conjecture. We demur to the condi- tions of the argument as they are laid down by Pro- fessor Jowett. Every sound and honest interpreter of Scripture will give his chief attention, in the first instance, to those express testimonies which bear directly on the question of inspiration, — which affirm its reality and illustrate its nature, — and refer to it as that which imparts to the Bible its awful authority as the ' Word of God,' and its right to demand the belief and obedience of all to whom it is addressed. We insist on a sound interpretation of these testi- monies, in the first instance, and especially on a serious consideration of what our Lord and His apostles said of the Old Testament Scriptures, when they spoke of them as 'the lively oracles,' 'the oracles of God,' ' the Scripture that cannot be broken,' ' the Scripture that must be fulfilled,' the law which was so unchangeable that ' heaven and earth might pass away, but not one jot or tittle of it should fail till all be fulfilled ;' — we insist on this, first of all, before WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 203 we can consent to look at the subordinate considera- tions which he thrusts on the foreground ; and then, with the Hght of a scriptural doctrine of inspiration in our hands, we can calmly survey the whole con- tents of Scripture, and all the ascertained results of sound science, in the confident persuasion that the Word of God -will be found consistent -with itself, and that His works and His Word cannot be at real variance. And if, on comparing Scripture with Scripture, there should appear to be some dis- crepancy between one part and another ; or, on comparing Scripture vnth. science, some difficulty in harmonising the statements of the one "with the discoveries of the other, we shall only regard these as so many stimuli to further inquiry, with a view to the more perfect interpretation both of nature and Scripture ; while we content ourselves in the mean- time with such h3rpothetical solutions as are sufficient to neutrahse objections — solutions which the present state of our knowledge may suggest, while it may not enable us to determine which of several ought to be preferred.* But all these difficulties, real or imaginary, were they a thousand times more formid- able than they are, would not deter us from the public avowal of our adherence to that doctrine of inspiration which we have learned from the teaching of the Lord and His apostles. The third error of the system which is developed * See Note E, already referred to. 204 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT in this volume is a natural sequence from those which have already been examined. It is, that no super- natural attestations are either necessary or admissible as proofs of a Divine revelation. If there be nothing supernatural in the communication of truth to the minds of prophets and apostles, and nothing super- natural in the inspiration by which they imparted that truth to the minds of others by their preaching or their writings, — if, in either case, they were left to the exercise of their natural faculties, prompted, indeed, by higher intuitions and guided by a deeper wisdom than are common to men, but still fallible, as all others are, and subject to the illusions of fancy or the prevailing prejudices of their age and country, — what necessity can possibly exist for their being endowed with miraculous or prophetic powers, or how could it be supposed that such powers would be divinely vouchsafed to give credit and currency to the teaching of men who were, in no other respect, supernaturally qualified for their office and work ? The same considerations which prove that all super- natural attestations were unnecessary, are sufficient also to prove that they were utterly inadmissible in such a case. On the supposition, indeed, of a super- natural communication of religious truth, otherwise undiscoverable, from the mind of God to the mind of man, and of the supernatural inspiration of pro- phets and apostles, who claimed a special Divine commission to preach in His name, and to write 'sacred books' which should be of universal and WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 205 permanent authority, some extraordinary credentials might be required to establish their pecuhar claims, and to impose an obligation on others to acknowledge and submit to their prerogatives as ' ambassadors for ' Christ ;' but when that supposition is set aside, and ' revelation is traced within the sphere of nature and ■ humanity,' there is no need, and no room, for any supernatural manifestation whatever. Every honest reader of his Bible must be aware that its whole tenor, from its commencement to its jiose, implies the .reality of a supernatural communi- cation of truth from God to man, accompanied \vith supernatural evidence, and incorporated along vriih its evidence, not only in the standing ordinances of the Church, but also in a series of sacred writings, designed to perpetuate and transmit the knowledge of both from age to age. But now, in opposition to this undeniable testimony of Scripture, certain writers and ministers of the Church of England have attempted to divest Christianity of everything super- natural, by denying the occurrence, and even the possibility, of miracles, — the existence as well as the fulfilment of predictive prophecy, — and the whole scheme of t3rpical prefiguration, by which the Old Testament was indissolubly connected with the New. We have read many infidel works, but we know of none more thoroughly opposed, at aU points, to the whole doctrine of the supernatural in revealed religion than the volume of ' Essays and Reviews.' How do they speak of miracles ? One ^vriter tells 0 206 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT lis that ' the deluge takes its place among geological ' phenomena, no longer a disturbance of law from ' which science shrinks ; ' that ' the avenger who ' slew the first-born may have been the Bedouin ' host ; ' and that ' the passage of the Red Sea ' may be interpreted Avith the latitude of poetry.' An- other writer, more daring still, founds an argiunent against the credibility of miracles on the order and uniformity of nature, as established by inductive science — an argument which he could not fail to know, and probably would not have scrupled to acknowledge, must be as conclusive against the supernatural creation of the world as against the miraculous attestations of Christianity. ' The entire ' range of the inductive philosophy is at once based ' upon, and in every instance tends to confirm, by ' immense accumulation of evidence, the grand truth ' of the universal order and constancy of natural ' causes, as a primary law of belief, so strongly enter- ' tained and fixed in the mind of every truly induc- ' tive inquirer, that he can hardly even conceive the ' possibility of its failure.' ' The proposition " that " an event may be so incredible intrinsically as to " set aside any degree of testimony "in no way ' applies to, or affects, the honesty or veracity of ' that testimony, or the reality of the impressions on ' the minds of the witnesses, so far as it relates to ' the matter of sensible fact merely. It merely ' means this ; that from the nature of our antecedent ' convictions, the probability of some kind of mistake WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 207 ' somewhere, though we know not where, is greater • than the probability of the event really happening ' in the way, and from the causes assigned.' It is useless to multiply quotations when a principle of this kind is laid down ; a principle which goes far beyond the speculations of Laplace and the scepticism (^f Hume, who both admitted that in certain circum- stances, not likely in their opinion to arise, the evidence of a miraculous occurrence might be irre- sistible, and which can only find its parallel in the fundamental assumption of Strauss, — that whatever is miraculous in any narrative must be regarded and treated as unhistorical, and explained on the principle of mythical interpretation.* There is nothing for- midable, nothing even that is new or original, in this fresh attack on the evidence of miracles. Any one who has carefully studied Leslie's 'Rules,' as given in his ' Short and Easy Method ^vith the ' Deists,' will see that the question has been far more profoimdly argued, and with a much deeper insight into its real merits, by pre^vious writers, and ^vill be proof against all the dogmatical assertions of the late Savilian Professor at Oxford. We cannot discuss the question on its general merits ; we can only indi- cate a few lines of thought which may be profitably follow^ed out.' Let the reader consider the nature, extent, and limits of sound inductive science. It does not deal with what is possible or impossible, but wdth what actually is : it takes cognisance only * Note H. See also Note B. 208 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT of facts, and seeks simply to co-ordinate these facts under general laws ; and, even in its Tvddest and highest generalisations, it is bound not only to take into account all the facts bearing on its conclusions which have been already ascertained, but to leave room also for any new facts which may subsequently emerge, and which may serve to modify the state- ment of such laws as had been provisionally adopted while our knowledge was less complete. It cannot determine, therefore, on the ground of any presum- tion a 'priori^ either what is impossible to occur under the Divine government, or even what would be un- worthy of the Divine perfections in the administration of the world's affairs, — unless where the supposed event involves a manifest contradiction, or can be clearly shown to be at variance, not with our views, but with the moral perfections of the Divine Being. It is competent to entertain the quid est ? it is utterly incompetent to the task of determining quid possihile est ? or quid oportet ? Yet Professor Powell under- takes to demonstrate the intrinsic incredibility of miracles on the ground of the results of inductive science ; and in doing so, has only shown his utter ignorance of the real nature and legitimate use of inductive science itself. It is this tendency to push induction beyond its proper limits, and to found upon it abstract conclusions on points of mere speculation, or dogmatic assertions as to the genesis of worlds, the origination of life by spontaneous generation, and the transmutation of species, which WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 209 has awakened that jealousy of science, of which philosophical writers complain, in the minds of many religious men, who have no repugnance what- ever to the study of the facts and laws of nature, when these are presented apart from the speculations with which they have been combined. The sup- posed impossibility of any interruption of the physi- cal order of nature is one of those unauthorised assumptions for which inductive science is in no respect responsible. When correctly understood and applied, induction would take account of all the kno^vn facts of the case, both such as fall under our own experience and observation, and such as are brought to our knowledge by authentic testimony ; — for a large proportion of the facts on which the generalisations of science itself are based, rest on no other evidence than the reports of observers in other lands or in former ages. When mention is made, therefore, of ' the universal order and constancy of * natural causes,' and when this is applied to pre- clude the supposition of miraculous events, the argument is chargeable mth a flagrant petitio prin- cipii similar to that which is involved in Hume's argument ; since it excludes some facts which, whether real or the reverse, have at least been attested by numerous witnesses, and their testimony must be dealt with, in the first instance, on the ordinary principles of historical evidence, before any one is entitled to assume the uninterrupted constancy of nature. When these facts are taken into account. 210 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT they may serve to modify our conclusion, to the ex- tent of substituting general for umver^sal in the formula by which it is expressed ; for the general constancy of nature is admitted on all hands, and is implied in the very idea of a miracle itself. But the general constancy of nature does not exclude the possibility of exceptional cases or extraordinary events arising from the interposition of a Supreme power, which is superior to all physical causes, and capable of controlling them for the accomphshment of His high designs Avith reference to the moral and spiritual benefit of men ; events which do not imply the universal suspension or permanent re- versal of any natural laws, but merely the interrup- tion of their operation in a few particular instances and for certain specific ends. Paley's argument, ' if ' there be a God, miracles are not impossible,' is self- evidently conclusive ; and it is poorly met by Professor Powell's reply, that nature being a finite product, natural theology can know nothing of Omnipotence ; since every one must see that nature may be a real manifestation, without being an ade- quate measure, of His ' eternal power and Godhead.' Miracles being thus disposed of, prophecy, in so far as it is predictive — and tj^ical rites, persons, and events, in so far as they are prefigurative — must share the same fate. Prophecy was merely a means of moral instruction, and was not designed as a ' prognostication ' of the future. There are no Mes- sianic predictions in the Old Testament ; or if there WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 211 be a few which still seem to be such, they are fast melting away in the crucible of modern criticism. The 53(1 chapter of Isaiah had no reference to ' the ' Man of Sorrows ' who ' was wounded for our trans- ' gressions and bruised for our iniquities,' but found its fulfilment in the personal history of Jeremiah, or in the national history of the Jews. The Book of Daniel was not written by him, and at all events, it was a narrative, and not a predictive, work. Let the English reader take up his Bible, and follow the line of the Divine dispensations as they are succes- sively unfolded, and then, without entering into any controversy about particular texts, let him say, on a survey of the whole scheme, whether, from the first announcement of a future Saviour immediately after the fall, there was not a continuous stream of pro- phecy, always pointing forward to things not seen as yet, but destined to come into existence hereafter, which imparted a provisional and preparatory char- acter to each of the successive eras of the patriarchs, the law and the prophets ; and, whether the whole of the Old Testament would not be evacuated of its highest meaning, w^ere it supposed to have no ful- filment in the new and better dispensation of the fulness of times ? And, in regard to the great scheme of tjrpical prefiguration, which may be called a visible, as prophecy was a verbal, method of prediction, and which was applied as such by our Lord and His apostles in proof of His Messianic character, who can read, without horror and indignation, the state- 212 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT. ment of Professor J owett, that, in the use which they made of the types, ' New truth was introduced into ' the Old Testament, rather than the old truth which ' was found there ;' and that of the quotations from the Psalms and the prophets, ' Hardly any, perhaps ' none, is based on the original text or context ? ' All supernatural attestations are thus discarded, miracles, prophecies, and types ; and no wonder, since a supernatural revelation of Divine truth, and a supernatural inspiration of prophets and apostles had been already rejected. It remains to inquire how far these views must necessarily affect the character and authority of the record of revelation. No. IX. THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT A\TnCH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. On a first perusal of this volume, the fragmentary and miscellaneous character of its contents is apt to leave the impression that it is nothing more than a series of detached pieces, strung together without any regard to order or method, having Kttle mutual connection with each other, and no common bearing on one specific and definite result. But on looking beneath the surface, and examining more closely its constituent parts, w^e find, on comparing them with one another, that there is a certain method under- l}ing this apparent disorder ; we begin to see the outlines of a systematic plan, and discover the leading principles of a connected and well-digested scheme of thought, such as could only be developed by a series of ^viiters belonging to the same school, im- bued with the same spirit, and aiming at the same practical ends. It is far from being a mere collec- tion of loose papers, such as might appear together in one of our quarterly reviews ; it is a real, though not a methodical, exposition of a system of opinion on some of the most important subjects of human thought, in which each part has a close relation to 214 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT every other, while all the parts, when put together, constitute a complete theory of speculative unbeHef The fundamental conception on which the whole superstructure depends, is that of the nature of re- velation, as consisting, not in the supernatural com- munication of truth from the mind of God to the mind of man, but in the perception or discovery of it merely by man's natural faculties, quickened, it may be, by a certain Di™e influence, but not in- foraied by any positive external teaching, and never transcending ' the sphere of nature and humanity.' Such being the nature of revelation, it follows that there could be no necessity for any supernatural inspiration, either to enlighten the minds of the pro- phets and apostles, or to enable them to impart the truth to others by their preaching or their writings ; it was enough if they were endowed with the Spirit in the same way in which all Christians are inspired with it, or even all men of extraordinary abihty and genius. And since there is thus nothing that is properly supernatural, either in the revelation of the truth, or in the inspiration which qualified them to teach it, it follows, again, that all supernatural attestations may be dispensed Avith as evidently super- fluous in such a case ; and hence the whole magni- ficent scheme of miraculous interposition, propheti- cal prediction, and t}^ical prefiguration, suitable as it might be, and even necessary, to authenticate a Divirre supernatural revelation, and to estabhsh the Divine commission and authority of God's inspired WHICH PERVADES THfi ENTIRE VOLUME. 215 messengers, is ruthlessly cast aside as having neither place nor use in the new ' negative theology." But the system, to be complete, must be carried out to all its legitimate results ; it cannot stop short at this point ; it is rolling do'^ii an inclined plane with ever-increasing velocity, and no human power can arrest its progress till it sinks into the abyss. It has elfectually disposed of a supernatural revela- tion in former times ; it must now deal with the record of revelation which is still in our hands, and determine its claims to be regarded as a standing and authoritative rule of faith and practice in the present day. The question is forced on the ^Titers of this volume, and they must face it — ' Is the Bible to be received as the Word of God or as the word of man?' A solemn question, as every one must feel who has a living conscience in his bosom and a sold that needs to be saved. To do them justice, the writers of this volume do not refuse to entertain the question, and they have given us sufficiently clear indications of the answer which they are disposed to return to it. We mark, therefore, as the fourth cardinal error of their theory, the doctrine that the Bible is not the Word of God, although it contains Divine truth, but Divine truth mixed with human error ; and that it is not an authoritative external rule either of faith or practice, except in so far as its contents commend themselves to the reason and conscience of men, or what is called ' the light within.' This comprehensive state- 216 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT ment includes several distinct particulars, and each of these must be separately considered. The theory admits that the Bible contains a certain portion of ' Divine truth ; ' but in what sense ? Is it Divine truth supernaturally revealed — a Divine message making known to man the mind and will of God for his salvation — a positive in- struction, additional to the light of nature, and superior to it ? Or is it Divine truth, not super- naturally revealed, but perceived or discovered by our natural faculties, and called divine for no other reason and in no other sense, than as all other truth may be said to be so on account of its being ultimately derived from Him who is ' the God of Truth ? ' We fear that the latter is the sense in which the ex- pression must be understood ; for, in any other, it would open the door for that ' irrational super- naturahsm' of which Dr Williams speaks, and revela- tion could no longer ' be traced within the sphere of ' nature and humanity.' But if it be understood in this sense, it follows that the truth which is con- tained in Scripture, although it may be Divine, is not a whit more supernatural than the error with which it is there associated — that both alike are the mere products of man's natural faculties, quickened only into action by some purely subjective influence ; and that, in point of authority, they stand precisely on the same level, so far as that depends at all on the sacred ^vritings in Avhich they are equally con- tained ; in other words, they have no authority what- WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 217 ever, except that which, in every other case, belongs to truth as compared with error. The Bible, there- fore, as such, cannot be called in any peculiar sense, 'the Word of God.' It contains, indeed. Divine truth, but so does every other took — the * Principia' of Newton, the dramas of Shakspere, the volume of * Essays and Eeviews' — in so far as they inculcate what can be shown to be true ; but it does not contain any Divine truth supernaturally revealed, or any message from God making known to men what He requires them to believe and obey as an authoritative expression of His mind and will — it is Divine only as all other truth is Divine, and here, as everywhere else. Divine truth is mixed with human error. That this is no exaggerated or overcharged de- scription of the scheme of thought which is de- veloped in this volume, is only too painfully evident from the following passages. We are taught, first of all, to distinguish between two things which are justly said to be widely different — between the Bible being the Word of God, and containing the Word of God. ' It has been matter of great boast,' says Mr Wilson, 'within the Church of England, in ' common with other Protestant Churches, that it is ' founded on the "Word of God," a phrase which ' begs many a question when applied to the canoni- ' cal books of the Old and New Testaments. . . In ' that which may be considered the pivot article of the ' Church, this expression ("the Word of God") does 218 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT ' not occur, but only "Holy Scripture," "Canonical "Books," " Old and New Testaments." It contains no ' declaration of the Bible being throughout super- ' naturally suggested, nor any intimation as to which ' portions of it were owing to a special Divine illumi- ' nation, nor the slightest attempt at defining in- ' spiration, whether mediate or immediate, whether ' through, or beside, or overruling the natural faculties ' of the subject of it ; not the least hint of the relation ' between the Divine and human elements in the com- ' position of the biblical books. . . The Word of God is ' contained in Scripture, whence it does not follow that ' it is co-extensive with it. The Church to which we ' belong does not put that stumbling-block before ' the feet of her members. It is their own fault if ' they put it there for themselves, authors of their ' own offence.' Still, it may be said, this writer acknowledges the 'Word of God' as contained at least in the Bible, although not co-extensive with it; and some, satisfied with the mere sound of the words, may never think of inquiring in what sense the orthodox phrase is used ; they may overlook the fact that he carefully leaves open the whole question as to the natural or supernatural origin of this word — whether 'inspiration was mediate or immediate, ' through, or beside, or overruling the natural facul- ' ties of the subject of it.' True, he speaks of a ' Divine ' as well as a ' human ' element in ' the ' composition of the biblical books ; ' but is not all truth Divine ? and may not ' the Divine element ' WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 219 be that portion of truth which they happen to con- tain, just as the ' human element ' is that portion of error with which it is combined in Scripture, while the former, no more than the latter, is held to have been supernaturally revealed? The one is Divine, simply because it is true ; the other is human, simply because it is false ; but in neither instance is there anything higher or better than the mere product of man's ' natural faculties.' In a certain sense, widely different from his, we recognise the presence both of a Divine and a human element in the Word of God: — a Divine element in its truth supernaturally revealed as a message from God to man, and also in its in- spiration, which extends, not only to its peculiar doctrines, but to its whole contents in whatever way they may have become known, and stamps them all with the impress of infallible authority ; — and yet a human element, not implying faUibihty or error, seeing that it was superintended and controlled by unerring wisdom, but human in these respects — that the natural faculties of the sacred writers were called into exercise as the recipients of Divine communica- tion and the instruments of the Divine will — that human language was employed as the vehicle of Divine truth — that human experience and human faith find expression there, so as that the sacred writers are witnesses to us of what they saw and heard as n;en, and also examples to believers in all ages, in so far as they gave utterance to their per- sonal feelings of penitence or trust, of peace, and 220 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT hope, and joy, — and thereby imparted, under the guidance of the Spirit of God, that deep human interest to their writings which could belong only to those of ' men of like passions with ourselves,' and which will find a responsive chord in the heart of every true believer tiU the end of time. In this sense we grateftdly acknowledge the presence of a human, as well as of a Divine, element in Scripture, but not in the sense of there being a mixture of truth and error there. But, if we are to believe the writers of this voliune, a correct description of the Bible would exclude from its sacred contents aU Divine truth supernaturaUy revealed, and admit a copious admixture of human error. ' If geology proves,' says Dr Temple, ' that ' we must not interpret the first chapters of Genesis ' Kterally ; if historical investigations shall show us ' that inspiration, however it may protect the doc- ' trine, yet was not empowered to protect the narra- ' tive of the inspired writers from occasional inac- ' curacy .... the results should stiQ be welcome.' Dr WiUiams speaks of 'the half ideal, hah" traditional * notices of the beginnings of oiu' race, compiled ia * Genesis ; " and of the fii-mness with which Bimsen ' relegates the long hne of the fii'st patriarchs to the ' domain of legend or of sjTnbolical cycle.' Mr TVilson exhorts those 'who are able to do so,' to ' lead the less educated to distinguish between the ' different kinds of words which it (the Bible) con- ' tains — between the dark patches of human passion wincH pp:rvades the entire volume. 221 • and error which form a partial crust upon it, and ■ the bright centre of spiritual truth within.' ^Mr Goodwin insists 'that the definition and idea ol' • Divine revelation' must be modified, and 'the possi- bihty of an admixture of error' allowed; and tells us that ' theologians persist in clinging to theories of ' God's procedure towards man which have long been ' seen to be untenable.' The BiblC; being thus a mixture of truth and error, cannot of course be regarded as having any claim to be of itself an authoritative external rule either of faith or practice ; it can only be of use, as any other book may be, in so far as it commends itself as true to the reason and ' conscience of men, or to the 'hght within.' To what tests — ^rational, moral, scientific, and historical — its sacred contents must be subjected, to ehcit the truth and eliminate the error that is combined with it, will afterwards appear ; in the meantime we sohcit the attention of our readers to the jealousy "svith which these writers regard any external authority in matters of rehgion, or any authority at least higher than the Bible — con- sidered, not as ' the Word of God,' — but as ' an ex- ' pression of devout reason,' — or as ' the voice of the ' congregation.' A ' misgiving as to the authority ■ of the Scriptures ' is described as a characteristic of those who patronise a ' negative theology ; ' and we are told, most truly, that ' when the Protestants ' threw off this authority (of the Chiu'ch) they did ' not assign to reason what they took from the 222 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT ' Church, but to Scripture ; ' that ' as long as this ' could be kept to, the Protestant theory of behef ' was whole and sound,' but that 'time, learned con- ' troversy, and abatement of zeal drove the Protes- ' tants generally' from this ground; and that 'every ' foot of ground that Scripture lost was gained by ' one or other of the three substitutes, Church ' authority, the spirit, or reason.' And as these writers are not prepared to acknowledge the autho- rity either of Scripture or of the Church, every external rule or standard must be excluded, and they take refuge in reason, and spirit or conscience, which may be said to constitute together ' the light ' within.' After, a time, says Dr Temple, ' the hu- ' man race was left to itself to be guided by the ' teaching of the spirit within;' 'The faculty of faith ' has turned inwards, and cannot now accept any ' outer manifestations of the truth of God;' 'The ' law in fact which God makes the standard of our ' conduct may have one of two forms ; it may be an ' external law — a law which governs from the out- ' side, compelling our will to bow even though our ' understanding be unconvinced and unenlightened ' — saying you must, and making no effort to make ' you feel that you ought ; appealing not to your ' conscience, but to force or fear, and caring little ' whether you willingly agree or reluctantly submit. ' Or, again, the law may be an internal law, a voice ' which speaks within the conscience, and carries the ' imderstanding along with it — a law which is not WniCII PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 223 ' imposed on us by another power, but by our ' own enlightened wilL' ' The spirit or conscience * comes to full strength, and assumes the throne ^ intended for him in the soul ... He is the third ^ great teacher and the last.' ' We use the Bible, * not to over-ride, but to evoke the voice of con- * science : ... it wins from us all the reverence of * a supreme authority, and yet imposes on us no ' yoke of subjection. This it does by virtue of the ' principle of private judgment, which puts con- * science between us and the Bible, making con- ^ science the supreme interpreter, whom it may be * a duty to enlighten, but whom it can never be a * duty to disobey.' According to the principle of the Reformed Churches, * the doctrines of men and private spirits,' not less than 'the decrees of councils and opinions ' of ancient writers,' are to be judged by the Holy ' Spirit speaking in the Scriptures ; ' and on no other principle can there be any elFectual safeguard against the wildest fanaticism in the Church. It is singular that grave and learned divines of the Church of England should seek to revive the doctrine of the ' light within,' which Avas so popular among the sectaries in the age of Cromwell, and which found its ablest advocate in Eobert Barclay, the author of a celebrated ' Apology for the Doctrines of the People called Quakers.' His argument is at least as logical and his statement as scriptural, as those of Dr Temple, when he puts the case thus: 224 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT — ' From these revelations of the Spirit of God to ' the saints have proceeded the Scriptures of truth, ' which contain (1) a faithful historical account' of certain facts ; (2) ' a prophetical accomit of se¥eral ' things ; (3) a full and ample account of the doc- • trine of Christ. Nevertheless, because they are ' only a declaration of the foimtain and not the • fountain itself, therefore they are not to be es- • teemed the principal ground of aU tntth and know- • ledge, nor yet the adequate primary rule of faith ' and manners. Nevertheless, as that which giveth • a true and faithful testimony of the first foimdation, ' they are and may be esteemed a secondary rule, ' subordinate to the Spirit from which they have all ' their excellency and certainty.' Our only doubt is whether our new advocates of the ' inward light ' might agree with Barclay in speaking so highly ot the Scriptures. But how far they have departed from the principles of the Reformers must be evi- dent to every one who considers how those noble champions of the truth contended for the sole autho- rity of the Scriptures in opposition alike to the alleged infallibility of the Church and the presimiptiious pre- tensions of 'private spirits;' how they represented • the Spirit of God speaking in the Scriptures' as the supreme arbiter and judge in aU controversies in mat- ters of faith; and how they spoke, as Claude did in his ' Defence of the Reformation,'* of the prophets and apostles as heiu^ still present to the Church in their * Note I. WHICH PERVADES THE EXIIRE VOLUME. 2'2d unchangeable wi'itings, and ever living -w-itnesses for ^ the faith once delivered to the saints,' amidst all the caprices of individual error, and all the fluctua- tions of pubhc opinion. It was to no 'light within' that they made their appeal in fighting the battles of the faith ; but to that sun of truth which God has placed in the firmament of the Church, and by which reason and conscience itself should be enlightened and ruled. If the Bible contains a mixture of truth and error, it follows that the reading of the Scriptures must be useless, or even dangerous, imless we are in posses- sion of some criterion or test by which we may discriminate between what is true and false, and separate the pure ore from the dross with which it is combined. And tliis leads us to consider the ^fth cardinal error of the system which is developed in the ' Essays and Eeviews ; ' an error which consists in thinking that we may warrantably sit in judgment on the contents of Scripture, and determine what should be received and what should be rejected b}- the application of various tests — rational, moral, cri- tical, scientific, and historical — which have all been employed in their tui-n to discredit one portion after another of ' the oracles of God,' imtil it would be difficult to say how much or how little is left that would be worth contending for. These various tests, although specifically different, may be reduced to two general heads — the subjective test, including 226 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT reason and conscience, and the external test, includ- ing criticism, science, and history. The subjective test, which includes reason find conscience, is the fundamental principle of two kin- dred systems — the older form of Rationalism and the more recent form of Spiritualism. The doctrine which is common to both is, that man possesses in the faculties of his own mind, and may freely apply, an internal test which enables him to separate what is true from what is false in Scripture, and entitles him to receive the one while he rejects the other. The external test, again, which includes criticism, science, and history, is applited by those who seek to try the accuracy of Scripture either by collating different manuscripts, or by investigating the history of the text, or by comparing its statements with some other parts of our ascertained knowledge, such as have been acquired, for instance, by the modern discoveries of astronomy and geology, or by the improved methods of historical research introduced and exemplified by Niebuhr. By a more compre- hensive generalisation all these topics may be re- duced to one category, and the question, in its ultimate analysis, relates to the proper office and province of that faculty, whatever it be, by which Ave compare the different sources and departments of our knowledge with one another, and mark the agreement or disagreement between them. In dis- cussing this general question, much confusion of thought, and not a few dangerous errors, have arisen, WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 227 on both sides, from not distinguishing aright between the use and the abuse, the legitimate exercise and the palpable excesses, of that faculty — call it reason, or reflection, or the faculty of comparison or relations, or what you will — which is so employed. There is a right use and legitimate exercise of man's intel- lectual faculties with reference both to natural and revealed religion. It is perfectly competent, and not only lawful but incumbent on him as an intelli- gent being from whom God requires a reasonable service, to examine the evidences which He has provided for the express purpose of laying a solid foundation of faith and hope ; to make use of all available means for the right interpretation of His Word, which He has Himself put into our hands Avith the injunction to 'search the Scriptures;' to collate one part of it with another, whether as it is rendered in our English version or as it exists in the best and purest copies of the original text ; and to compare both its historical and doctrinal contents "vvith all the facts of our ascertained knowledge, — with the genuine dictates of right reason, with the laws of our moral natiu-e, and with the results of scientific or historical research. It is competent to do so, al- though in the case of multitudes it is neither possible nor necessary ; and we have no sympathy with those who would interdict the free exercise of our faculties in these various departments of inquiry, and de- nounce, as ]Mr Pattison, in hiunble imitation of the ^ Tracts for the Times,' has done, all study of the 228 THE gp:neral scheme of thought evidences, as if it amounted to Rationalism in the bad sense of the term. But if there be a legitimate use, there is also a flagrant abuse of reason in matters of faith ; it may be diflficult to discriminate between the two, or to draw a broad line of demarcation such as shall serve to mark the limits within which reason may be warrantably and safely exercised, and beyond which it ought to be checked or restrained ; but practically the distinction is universally felt and acknowledged. If we may be guided in forming a clear conception of it by the practice of our soundest divines in discussing such questions as avowed ration- alists have raised with reference to the contents of Scripture, we should be disposed to say that, speak- ing generally, they have never denied the competency of men to judge of anything in regard to which they had, or were capable of having, sufficient information, or the validity of their conclusions, excepting when it could be clearly shown that they rested on partial and insufficient evidence, or were erroneously de- duced from the premises on which they depended. The two main objections which have been urged against the whole scheme of Rationahsm are these : first, that it has pronounced judgment on some sub- jects which human reason is incompetent, on account either of its. necessary limitation as being finite, or of the want of sufficient information, to determine ; and secondly, that when it has pronounced judgment on some other subjects which belong to its proper province, it has judged erroneously, and adopted WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 229 conclusions which are not warranted by the facts of the case. Let any one examine the Hne of argument Avhich is pursued by such profound thinkers as Butler, M'Laurin, and Inglis, in deahng with the presumptive objections of infidelity, and he will find that in every instance they have recourse, not to a sweeping denial of the competency of reason to judge when it is folly informed, or of the validity of its conclusions when they have been correctly deduced, but to one or other of these two replies. And there is, and ever will be, ample room for maintaining a warfare with Kationalism on these grounds. For, unless on the supposition that man is omniscient, there must always be some truth which is above reason, although it is not against it ; and, unless on the supposition that man is infallible, there must always be a danger of his drawing erroneous conclusions even from the facts of his ascertained knowledge. And it is by showing that he is incompetent to judge of some things, and has judged erroneously of others, that our best divines have most successfully repelled the assaults of infidehty. "Wlien it has been objected, for instance, to the doctrine of the Trinity, that it is against reason as involving a flagrant self- contradiction, the objection has been repelled, not by alleging that a self-contradictory proposition ma}^ be true, but by showing that there is no contradiction in the case, since the persons of the Godhead are not*said to be one and three in the same sense, or eodem respectv. When it has been objected, again, to the doctrine 230 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT of original sin, that it is opposed to the dictates of conscience, which teach us to regard sin as a per- sonal offence that cannot be imputed to others, or visited in their case -with penal suffering — the ob- jection has been repelled partly by showing that, for aught we know, there may be aiiother besides a purely personal law — a generic constitution extend- ing to the race at large, and imposed' on one ap- pointed to act as its representative ; and partly by pointing to the undeniable fact of hereditary evil, arising from the solidarity of the race, which is so evident as to extort even from Dr Beecher the ac- knowledgment that the moral phenomena of the actual world are such as cannot be accounted for otherwise than on the supposition 'of a forfeiture ' prior to birth.' And so when the irregular dis- tribution of good and evil in the present state has been urged as an objection against the reality of a moral government, it has been met by Butler with this conclusive reply, that what might be unsuitable to a state of final retribution may be perfectly con- sistent Avith a preparatory state of probation and trial, and that we are incompetent judges in such a case, since the great scheme is as yet only incom- pletely developed, and still more imperfectly under- stood. Still, it may be said, reason is acknowledged as the* supreme arbiter and judge in all such cases ; and its sovereignty is practically acknowledged when its competency is admitted at all. And this is the WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE V0LU3IE. 231 fundamental fallacy of the whole scheme. It is assumed to be supreme, because its exercise is in- dispensable to the acquisition of knowledge. As well may the eye be said to be the lord of light, because both are essential to vision. Eeason is a reflective faculty, but it reflects only on what it first receives — it is dependent on the senses for its earliest information from without, and, from first to last, has to deal with facts which are independent of its caprices, and which utterly (jlisown its authority. And as this is the real state of the case with respect to our natural knowledge, we are not otherwise situated with respect to that which is spiritual. The volume of nature in the one case, the volume of revelation in the other, is the supreme rule, and the standard of ultimate appeal. Every theory in science must be brought to the test of nature, and every speculation in religion to the test of Scripture ; and the mere exercise of reason, in either case, has no effect in changing the relation between reason and the rule of its judgment. Wlien the work entitled ' Philosophia Scriptures Interpres,' which is usually printed among those of Semler, first appeared, it was answered, among others, by John Wilson, of Cathe- rine Hall, Cambridge, at a time when theology was really studied and understood at the universities, by distinguishing between the 'rule of interpretation' and ' the means which are many and various ; ' and by showing that however reason, with the aid of learning, science, and criticism, may be a means, it 232 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT cannot be the rule of interpretation, since, accord- ing to the received doctrine of all the Reformed Churches, 'Scripture is its -own interpreter,' just as nature, and nature only, is the rule of science ; and reason, ^Aith all the resources of telescopes, and crucibles, and other means, is merely the scholar who reads the lesson that is set before him — the minister who is compelled, at every step, to bend his own operation into compliance with inexorable laws, which he is able to decipher, but utterly powerless to modify or set aside. Suppose one were to say, You concede the com- petency of reason to examine the evidence of revela- tion, and to compare one part of Scripture vdth another, as well as ^^^Lth the facts of history and science ; you admit the right — you insist even on the duty, of private j udgment in matters of faith — are you entitled, then, to blame me on account of unbelief, if, in prosecuting, as I believe in a con- scientious and candid spirit, the inquiries which you allow to be competent, I have arrived at a con- clusion widely different from yours ? "We should answer, not by denying his right to inquire and decide for himself, for ' let every man be fully per- ' suaded in his ovra mind,' but by reminding him that, in the exercise of that right, he may have judged amiss, and cannot possibly have exhausted the whole evidence that has been placed before him, so as to be released from the duty of further in- quiry — that his conclusion stands opposed to the WHICH PERYJLDES THE EM'IKE TOLOtE. 233 whole array of proofe by which the authority of re- relation was first established in the worfd, and by which it still sustains itself amidst all oppo^tion : and that while his "^judgment" rests with wiio alone is * Lord of the conscience,* we know enough from the experience of onr own hearts to warrant ns in saying that prejndice and pas^on often bias the mind in the treatm^t of evidence, and still more in the treatment of the truths of religion ; and that He, * who searches the heart," and ' knows what is in ^ man,* has taught His disciples that ' light has come * into the world, but men haTe loTed darkness rather *■ than light.* Surely, if no man woidd rest his sal- Tation on the spotless perfection of His character, it must be a fearfid Tenture to peril all on the siq>- posed sinle^xie^ of unbelief; and, while he claims the ri^t of free inquiry, he should remember that, in the exercise of private judgment, he is still sub- ject to God as a moral and responsible agent, and that he will be judged according to the measure of Hght which has been vouchsafed to guide him to the knowledge and belief of the truth. Bationalism will be a precarious support and a miserable refuge should revelation really be supernatural and divine ; for then, even in the way of mere natural conse- quence, and apart from any positive penal infliction, he must forfeit all those privileges and hopes which are indissolubly connected with a true, heartfelt faith. '^t' — ^ have succeeded in exposing the fundamental 234 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT errors of this system of doctrine, especially those which relate to the nature of revelation, and the record to which it has been consigned, we may dis- miss ^vith a more summary notice some other con- clusions which can only be regarded as natural and inevitable consequences from its leading principles. Among these we mark, first of aU, a tendency to underrate the importance, and to disparage the study, of the evidences of Divine truth. Coleridge is quoted as having exclaimed, 'The evidences of Christianity ! I am weary of the phrase ; ' and so many a one turns away even from the natural evi- dence for the being and perfections of God, as if we were not bound to study every manifestation by which God has made Himself known, whether through the medium of His works or His Word. In this respect the new school at Oxford, bears a striking resemblance to that which preceded it, and the 'Essays and Reviews' have been largely in- debted to the ' Tracts for the Times.' And it is not unnatural that they should have adopted the same disparaging tone in speaking of the Christian evi- dences ; for if the older school -wished to supersede the sole authority of Scripture as the rule of faith in favour of the distinctive principles of Romanism, the new school is equally concerned to set it aside in favour of the peculiar claims of Rationalism. Accordingly we are told that the evidences are not, ' like the ^ essential doctrines of Christianity,' ' the ' same yesterday, and to-day, and for ever,' but WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 235 mere ' external accessories ' of revelation ; that ' faith ' and internal conviction, not historical facts, are the ' basis of religious beHef that negative theology ' distrusts the old proofs of a miraculous revelation that ' either faith has no existence, or must be ' reached in some other way than by "the trial of " the witnesses ' and that, so far as the * super- ' natural' element is concerned, ' the evidential ' school has been an entire failure.' We are even informed that ' an age proving its creed shows it has ' lost faith in it :' perhaps ministers of the Church of England disproving its creed may be, according to the rule of contraries, not a symptom of unbelief, but rather the reverse of that ! We need not won- der at this extreme jealousy of the Christian evi- dences, for "without them we cannot establish the Divine commission of the apostles or the Divine authority of Scripture ; and ^Yithout an authoritative Bible there is no external rule or standard that can claim the submission of reason, or even the obedience of the life. If the evidences be discarded, or at least dispa- raged, and if faith is still to be retained and cherished, it must either be utterly baseless, or it must be made to rest on some other ground — on some intuition of reason, or some feeling of the heart, or some instinct of the moral sense ; and accordingly every effort is made to effect a divorce between reason and faith. Not content with saying that the study of the exter- nal evidences alone is inadequate to the production of 236 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT true spiritual and saving faith, belief is described as if it were independent alike of knowledge and of proof, and, as if it might be more certainly and more easily attained in some other way. Instead of considering the magnificent scheme of miracle, and prophecy, and type which God has expressly provided to estab- hsh and sustain the faith of His Church, the sciul must soar aloft on the wings of ' contemplative and ' speculative ' thought ; and if this should seem to imply some exercise of reason, since we can scarcely be said to think or speculate without it, yet no one must imagine that anything like reasoning on evi- dence is involved in it; it is a transcendental reason, a direct intuition, higher than all experience, and independent of all proofs ; for ' beyond the possible ' conceptions of intellect or knowledge there lies ' open the boundless region of spiritual things, ' which is the sole dominion of " faith ;"' and, there- fore, 'what is not a subject for a problem may hold ' its place in a creed.' 'Matters of clear and positive ' fact, investigated on critical grounds, and supported ' by exact evidence, are properly matters of know- ' ledge, not of faith. It is rather in points of less " definite character that any exercise of faith can ' take place ; it is rather with matters of rehgious ' behef belonging to a higher and less conceivable ' class of truths, with the mysterious things of the ' unseen world, that faith holds a connection, and ' more readily associates itself with spiritual ideas, ' than with external evidence.' This faith without WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 237 evidence reminds us of what Kant said of speculation apart from experience : ' The Hght dove, whilst in ' its free flight it divides the air, whose resistance it ' feels, might entertain the supposition that it would ' succeed much better in airless space ; so Plato ' abandoned the sensible world, because it set such ' narrow limits to the understanding, and hazarded ' himself beyond it upon the mngs of ideas into the ' void space of the pure imder standing. He did not ' mark that he made no way by his efforts — since he ' had no counter-pressure, as it were, for support, ' whereon he could rest, and whereby he could em- ' ploy his power in order to make the understanding ' move onward.' It is well worthy of re^nark that some of the earliest opponents of Christianity made it a matter of charge against her ministers, that they left the truth to depend on faith and not on reason, and that this charge was indignantly repelled by the first Christian apologists. Among others, Eusebius distipctly refers to it in his ' Pra3paratio Evangelica ' (Book L, c. 1); or in Seguier de Saint Brisson's French version (pp. 3, 6, 14),* and replies in sub- stance that Christians are not required to believe A\dthout evidence, but have solid grounds for their faith in those supernatural attestations by which the Gospel Avas established at the first, and espe- cially in the manifest fulfilment of prophecy, facts passing before their eyes, by Avhich it was still con- firmed. * Note J. 23S THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT Akin to the distinction between reason and faith, but yet different from it, is that between • letter and ' spirit and this, when combined with the principle of •ideological interpretation,* is more than sufficient to reheve us from the restraints of any external rule of faith, and to set aside all the supernatural facts, and all the peculiar doctrines, of revelation. If neither the subjective nor the external tests formerly mentioned could complete the work of destructive criticism, their deficiency is amply supplied by a canon of interpretation which enables us to seize the spirit while we discard the letter, just as we can best reach the kernel by breaking the husk iu which it is contained; and which entitles us to treat miracles as myths, while we may make the doctrinal statements of Scripture mere sjrmbols of any idea which philo- sophy may invent, or a teeming fancy suggest. Pro- fessor Jo wet t declaims agaiost mythical and typical interpretations, but ' ideology* ' will be more prolific of fanciful and far-fetched meanings than any prin- ciple which has ever yet obtained the sanction of educated men, or admission into the pulpits or pro- fessorial chairs of any Church in Christendom. But what is to be said of the Church herself, her articles and creeds ? Surely here, at least, we have a visible external authority — ^a society regularly con- stituted, placed under official governors, and subject to a code of laws for the express purpose of guarding the sacred deposit of Divine truth, and maintaining a ' godly discipline.' But what is the Church more WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLUME. 239 than any other voluntary association, if there be no supernatural revelation ? and what is her authority, if that of the Bible be set aside ? Will her creeds or articles impose any obligation on the consciences of her members, or even of her office-bearers, if the words of inspired prophets and apostles have no such power? True, her office-bearers have subscribed these articles ; but what then ? May they not be understood in a non-natural sense, or subjected to the principle of ' ideological interpretation ' as well as the Scriptures ? These are confessedly the Avords of men ; why should it be more difficult to deal Avith them than with the ' Word of God ? ' The volume which we have thus reviewed sug- gests some reflections which may be briefly stated as a suitable sequel to the remarks which have been already oflered. It contains nothing remarkable in point of ability, or learning, or even of novelt}^ Com- pared with the writings of Lord Herbert, Anthony Collins, and other freethinkers of a former age, the ' Essays and Reviews ' are immeasurably less likely to leave a permanent impression on the public mind; they are not superior, if they can be said to be equal, to some of the pieces which appeared in Chapman's ' Catholic Series.' What, then, is the secret of the Avide-spread and almost unprecedented sensation Avhich they have unquestionably excited in the Eng- lish mind ? We believe it to be due almost entirely to the position and profession of the writers as 240 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT members, and, for the most part, ministers and pro- fessors, in connection ^\ith. the Church of England. The appearance of such a work from such a quarter has been generally, and, we think, justly regarded, as a significant indication that the movement, Avhich commenced at Oxford nearly thirty years ago, has not yet spent its force, and as an ominous sign of the times, portending still further change. Otherwise there is nothing formidable in this fresh assault on the bulwarks of our faith. The creed of Christendom, which has survived the attacks of Celsus and Porphyry in early times, and the more recent outbreaks of French, and German, and Eng- lish infidelity, is not likely to fall before Dr Temple's fiuiciful theory of the 'Education of the World;' or Dr Williams's denunciation of Predictive Prophecy ; or Professor Powell's Inductive Presumption against Miracles ; or Mr Wilson's Principle of Ideological Interpretation ; or Professor Jowett's Method of fixing the Meaning of Inspiration. The whole volume is a mere eclectic compilation of the most hetero- geneous and incongruous elements, derived from diiferent sources — ^^from the Deistical writers of the last century, from the older Rationahsts and the more recent SpirituaUsts, from the Neologians of Germany, both the effete school of Paulus and the antagonist school of Strauss, all jumbled together, as if from such conflicting elements a self-consistent scheme could be formed. Little danger need be apprehended from the weight of their learning or WHICH PERVADES THE ENTIRE VOLI^IE. 241 the force of their reasonings ; but much may arise from the sceptical spirit which pervades the volume, and the almost imperceptible influence which it may exert in sapping the faith of young and inexperientjed minds. One of its worst effects will probably be to generate a feeling of distrust in regard to the super- natural element of revelation, and a latent but influ- ential prejudice against the more peculiar doctrines of the Gospel, such as may, if left uncounteracted, prevent many from considering the claims of Scrip- ture at all. For this reason we would strongly r6commend the profound and able treatises of Mr M'Laurin and Dr Inglis on ' Prejudices against the ' Gospel,' which have been recently reprinted in one little tract, and which are admirably fitted to pro- duce an impression on the minds of young men who are not unwilling to think as well as to read.* Much as we deplore the appearance of the ' Essays and ' Reviews,' we see no reason for apprehension or alarm, unless the same method of teaching is to be still perpetuated in the Church and Universities. The evil that is done through the press can be coun- teracted also through the press ; but when error is instiUed into the minds of men in the pulpit or the lecture-room, the remedy must be sought for A\dthin the Church itself. We cannot doubt that, like every other controversy in the past history of the Church, the present agitation will be overruled * London : Hamilton. Adams, and Co. Edinburgh : Johnstone, Hunter, and Co. 242 THE GENERAL SCHEME OF THOUGHT. for good ; and that He who can bring ' Hght out ' of darkness, and order out of confusion,' will, in His own good time and way, make it redound to His OAvn glory, and to the establishment of that blessed Word which ' He has magnified above all His name.' APPENDIX. Note A. An able writer in the North British Revieiv has beauti- fully expanded the instructive analogy to which ^ve have briefly referred in the text. * Apart altogether from the existence in Scripture of mysteries of supernatural doc- trine and fact, which no revelations of the religious con- sciousness from within could have reached, there are other considerations which point decisively to the same conclusion. Putting out of view that large portion of Scripture which embodies truths undiscoverable or undis- covered by man, it may be questioned whether there can be a discovery of truth at all in which the teaching from without does not combine with the apprehension from within ; and influences, ah extra, are as intimately con - nected with, and necessary to, the knowledge received, as the power of knowing in the mind itself. The capa- city of apprehending truth, of whatever kind, is very different from the apprehension of the truth itself ; and while philosophy and experience alike combine in assur- ing us that the capacity is native to the mind, they also tell that, in order to the truth being apprehended, this capacity must be aw^akened and called forth by external influences. All ideas received, realized, and appropriated, are thus founded on a true and necessary antithesis be- 244 APPENDIX. tween the power to perceive and know within, and the objective truth presented to it from without ; and the seclusion of the mind from the influences of this external teaching, would leave its powers shut up in the germ, and its consciousness no better than a blank. Such seems undoubtedly to be the law of man's development, both as to his perception of the visible world and his knowledge of the intellectual. The power of perception Avould remain for ever dormant ; and the eye, as its organ, would be without vision, unless an outward world, by the presentation to it of its sensible objects, awakened the capacity to life and exercise ; and, in like manner, the mind itself would remain a tabula rasa, with all its noble faculties wrapped in slumber, and its opulence of thought unknown, unless the external conditions of knowledge necessary to develop it were present, and be- came its teacher from without. And the same conditions that are necessary to the acquisition of ideas, whether in the sensible or in the intellectual world, are no less ne- cessary to the apprehension of truth of a moral and spiritual kind. An outward teaching of spiritual truth would never, indeed, lodge the apprehension of it in the understanding and heart, unless there were previously existing there the innate capacities for apprehending it ; but it is no less certain, that the powers of thinking and feeling within, would of themselves never conduct to truth, unless there were the outward teaching, which is an indispensable condition for their exercise and develop- ment. ' The analogies, then, of all God's methods of educat- ing the human mind in natural truth, clearly point to the employment of an outward teaching in combination with APPENDIX. 245 an inward capacity of learning, in the education of man in spiritual things. These methods are uniformly based on the fundamental antithesis between the subjective susceptibilities of knowledge within, and the objective realities of knowledge external to the mind ; and the one is no less necessary to the result than the other. It would, therefore, have been to traverse all the analogies of the past in regard to the education of both the indivi- dual and the race in natural knowledge, if supernatural knowledge had been communicated in any other shape than as an outward presentation of truth to the capa- cities for truth waiting to receive it within. The two theologies of Nature and Revelation are both taught in this way. The outward creation, with the impress upon it of God's wisdom, power, and goodness, addresses itself to the reUgious faculty even of those who have no other teaching, but who, under this appeal from without, have that faculty awakened to know something, however im- perfectly, of His eternal power and Godhead. And the volume of a supernatural revelation, with its mysteries of Divine thought and reality far beyond what creation embodies, is an appeal also from without which awakens to the apprehension of its Divine truth the capacities of spiritual knowledge and faith which, without such ap- peal, had remained useless and undeveloped. So far is it, then, from being true, that our subjection to the influences of an external revelation is not adapted to man's condition and wants, — that it is perhaps the only method of teaching by which the capacities of faith and spiritual discernment within could have been really de- veloped or perfectly taught. At all events, it is certain, that a revelation of Divine wisdom, embodied in human 246 APPENDIX. speech, is not only admirably adapted for the purpose of the religious instruction and spiritual training of man in Divine truth, but it is the only method in strict analogy with those processes by which other truth is communi- cated.' — North British Review. Xo. Ixv., p. 238. XOTE B. We have elsewhere observed, that ' the legitimate ap- plication of induction is widely different from this sort of abstract metaphysical generalisation. On the ground of experience and inductive analogy, we may warrantably affirm the general constancy of nature, and the regular operation, in ordinary circumstances, of natural laws. — a doctrine which, so far from being inconsistent with the tmth of miracles, is necessarily impUed in the re- cognition of them, as exceptional or extraordinary oc- currences. TTe may even, on the same ground, admit, in regard to many natural events whose causes are as yet unknown, that they may all be ultimately reduced to regular laws, and connected with the order of the general system of nature ; and, still further, that in speculating on the changes which have occurred on the earth in past times, we should seek for their explanation, in the first instance, in those causes which are still known to be in operation, and refrain from having recourse to other agencies, until these causes have been exhausted and found inadequate to account for the phenomena. But neither experience nor inductive analogy can afford any warrant for maintaining the invariable or immutable constancy of nature, so as to exclude the possibihty. APPENDIX. 247 either of extensive changes iu the constitution of the world and its inhabitants at successive epochs in its his- tory, or of the occasional occurrence of extraordinary and exceptional events at variance with the usual course of nature, even when no extensive or permanent changes occurred in its established constitution : far less can they warrant us in ascribing the permanent changes in the one case, or the exceptional occurrences in the other, to the operation of mere physical causes. "Were no other causes than such as are physical, known to us. we should be utterly unable to account for this class of events at all, since neither experience nor analogy could afford any key for their explanation. Yet, that great changes have occurred in the state of the world in past ages, involving the extinction of old and the introduc- tion of new species, both of plants and animals, and that special events of a miraculous kind have been historically recorded and actually believed, are facts which can neither be doubted nor denied. The only question is. How are they to be accounted for ? The existence of God being admitted, most men will beheve with Paley that miracles are not impossible ; and that the great primary miracle of Creation is sufficient to make any other miracle credible which He may be pleased to per- form, — for creation and miracles are strictly analogous. But to affirm that " the order of nature" is " constant, invariable, and immutable," — that there never have been, and never can be, either any permanent changes in its arrangements, or any special events at variance with its usual course, and that all such periodic changes or exceptional occurrences, must be ascribed only to physi- cal causes, is to make Xature independent of the wiU of 248 APPENDIX. God, and to exempt it from His providential government and control. And to represent these arbitrary and groundless conclusions as the results of inductive science, when they are at direct variance with facts attested, in the one case, by the strongest physical, in the other, by the strongest historical, evidence, and when there is no natural analogy which can be appealed to in support of them, is to betray a lamentable ignorance of the real nature, and a reckless disregard of the necessary Umits, of scientific induction.' — North British Review^ No. Ixii.. p. 360. Dr Thomas Brown expresses his views on this subject in the following terms : — ' What the holiest views of God and the universe require us to beheve is . . . that He whose will was the source of all the qualities which created things display, may, if it seem good to Him, suspend, or variously modify, the qualities which Him- self had given, or be, in any other way, the dii-ect ope- rator of extraordinary changes. We know God, as a Creator, in the things which are really existing, that mark, in the harmony of their mutual agencies, however varied they may seem to be, a general purpose, and there- fore a contriver ; and we believe in God, as the provi- dential Governor of the world, — that is to say, we be- lieve that the world, which He has so richly endowed, and the hving beings, for whose use He seems so richly to have endowed it, cannot be indifferent to Him who made that magnificent provision, but must, on the con- trary, be a continued object of His benevolent contem- plation. And, therefore, since all things are subject to His will, and no greater power seems necessary to sus- pend any tendency of Nature than what originally pro- APPENDIX. 249 duced it, — if there should be circumstances in which it would be of greater advantage, upon the whole, that the ordinary tendency should not continue, we see no reason, a priori^ for disbeUeving that a difference of event may be directly produced by Him, in those rare cases in which the temporary dcA^ation would be for the same gracious end as that which fixed the general regularity.' — ' The possibihty of the occasional direct operation of the power which formed the world, in varying the usual course of its events, it would be in the highest degree un- philosophical to deny ; nor can we presume to estimate the degree of its probability, since, in many cases, of the wide bearing of which, on human happiness, we must be ignorant, it might be the result of the same benevolent motives which we must suppose to have influenced the Divine mind in the original act of Creation itself. . . . The will of the Deity, whether displayed in those obvious vai*iations of events which are termed miracles, or in- ferred from those supposed secret and invisible changes which are ascribed to His providence, is itself, in all such cases, to be regarded by the affirmer of it as a new physi- cal antecedent, from which, if it really form a part of the series of events, a difference of result may naturally be expected. . . . The laws of Nature (causasion ?). surely are not violated, when a new antecedent is fol- lowed by a new consequent ; they are violated only when the antecedent being exactly the same, a different con- sequent is the result.' — Essay on Cause and Effect, pp. 82, 394, 396. 250 APPENDIX. Note C. It is not with reference to miracles only, but to all facts of whatever kind, that Archbishop Whately's doc- trine respecting testimony, is worthy of careful study. ' Of signs, there are some which, from a certain effect or phenomenon, infer the ' cause' of it ; and others Avhich, in like manner, infer some ' condition ' which is not the ' cause.' Of these last, one species is the argument from testimony : the premiss being the existence of the testi- mony, the conclusion the truth of what is attested ; — which is considered as a condition ' of the testimony having been given : since it is evident that, so far only as this is allowed (i.e., so far only as it is allowed that the testimony would not have been given had it not been true), can this argument have any force. Testi- mony is of various kinds ; and may possess various de- grees of force, not only in reference to its own intrinsic character, but in reference also to the kind of conclusion that it is brought to support.' Locke says — ' In the testimony of others is to be considered — 1, The number ; 2, The integrity ; 3, The skill of the witnesses ; 4, The design of the author, where it is a testimony out of a book cited ; 5, The consistency of the parts and circum- stances of the relation ; 6, Contrary testimonies.' The mere fact that all these circumstances must be taken into account in estimating the value of testimony, is sufficient to show that it is regarded simply as a phenomenon whose existence is to be accounted for, and that its truth is only inferred when it can be shown that such testi- mony ' would not have been given, had it not been true.' — Whately's Rhetoric, B. i., P. i., c. 2, §§ 4. APPENDIX. 251 Principal Campbell contended, as is well known, for ' an instinctive belief in testimony but he admits that, if it be not founded on experience, it is at least regu- lated by it. And this seems to involve the principle, that testimony is viewed simply as a phenomenon to be ac- counted for. ' From experience, we learn to confine our behef in human testimony Tvithin the proper bounds. Hence we are taught to consider many attendant cir- cumstances, which serve either to corroborate or to in- vaUdate its evidence. The reputation of the attester — his manner of address — the nature of the fact attested — the occasion of giving the testimony — the possible or probable design in giving it — the disposition of the hearers to whom it was given — and several other circum- stances, have all considerable influence in fixing the de- gree of credibihty.' — Dr CamphelVs Rhetoric, B. i., c. 5. Note D. Athanase Coquerel, in presenting to the public ' the first complete system of Protestant dogmatics published in France by a pastor of the French Estabhshed Church, since the revocation of the Edict of Xantz,' proposed to offer ' a complete exposition of the Christian faith, ex- pounded according to the spirit of the age ' — but still ' resting on the Bible as a positive and direct revelation of the Spirit of God to the spirit of man.' In doing so, he takes occasion to explain and vindicate the abolition of subscription to articles of faith in the Protestant Church of France. ' In our days, the tenets of the Re- formed Church of France can only be found, and are 252 APPENDIX. written only, in the minds of its ministers— of its elders — of its members." * My object is to explain how a regu- lar minister of the Reformed Church of France has a full right to compose and publish a treatise of Christian faith at variance with the Forty articles of our old Synods, witJiout being hound in honour to send in his demission.^ After stating his opposition to " any other standard of faith but the Word of God,' he adds, that ' the only cause of his not entering the service of the Church of England,' was his unwillingness to sign the Thirty-nine articles. — similar as they were to those of his own Synods. He explains, that when Christian worship was restored in France, the law of Germinal, which * conferred civil liberty on the Protestant communities, and regulated their organisation,' was " silent as to the obligation of signing the articles in order to enter the ministry." and did not restore • the national Synod, the only body which had a right to draw up articles of faith,' so that the creed be- came obsolete, and not a single minister since the year 1802 has been, or could be, called upon to sign" them. M. Coquerel rejoices in this change ; and speaks with evident satisfaction of ' the preservation of the ancient creeds, simply as venerable records of the science and piety of their fathers, and of the enjoyment of a fuU freedom of examination and of faith. ' Of the effect of this change we are scarcely qualified to judge ; nor how far his state- ment is borne out by facts, when speaking of the 50<) ministers of his Church, he says, — what certainly we could not now say of the Chui-ch of England. — * I am confident that not one of us can be justly caUed a Rationalist in its genuine German sense, — there is not one of us who do not consider the Scriptures as a positive revelation." But • APPENDIX. 253 we have our misgivings iu regard to the teudencies of religious thought under the new system, when we read liis own anticipations as to the future, and especially of ' the gradual emancipation of Christianity,' — its emanci- pation from discipline, — its emancipation from a clerical hierarchy, — its emancipation from authority, — its eman- cipation from forms, — its emancipation from the letter of Scripture, and its emancipation from Dogmas. — Chris- tianity, translated by Davidson, 1847. Note E. Dr Chalmers, speaking of a far more important ques- tion, offers some excellent remarks on ' unresolved dif- ficulties,' and the use of ' hypothetical solutions,' in theo- logy. ' There is many a conceivable topic of human thought regarding which there is an utter want of evidence either on the one side or on the other — in which case, if it do not help, neither should it hinder our conviction upon other topics that are shone upon by evidence, and which lie accessible to human inquiry. A thing may be far removed from us in ulterior darkness, like a body in the heavens, beyond the range of our telescopes. In \-irtue of its situation, we can attain to no positive know- ledge of it. But it ought to be well remembered too. that in virtue of this very situation, it stands disarmed of all jx>wer to disturb our conclusions respecting the things which are near to us, and within the confines of observation.' ' The argumentum. ab ignorantia, when rightly applied, is a preservative from an infinity of R 254 APPENDIX. errors in all the branches of human speculation. There is a little clause, very often employed by Butler in his reasonings — ^and, when opportunely brought in, it is of inestimable value both in theology and in science — for aught we know.' ' An hypothesis may subserve a great logical purpose in theology, ... it may be of force to nullify aU the objections, and so to leave in their undiminished strength all those aflSrmative proofs on which the system of theo- logy is based.' ' The defenders of the cause may not be able to offer a positive solution of the difficulty ; yet of the multitude (of possible solutions), if there be but one likely, or even one that cannot be disproved, this is enough to relieve the cause of that discredit which an- tagonists would lay upon it.' 'In this state, we cannot say of the thing conjectured, that we know it to be true, — but we can say, that ' for aught we know,' it may be true. This is not enough for the establishment of a dogma. But it is enough for the displacing of an ob- jection. — Works, vol. ii., p. 279, 306 ; see also Institutes, i. 120. Note F. There is a Rationalism in science as well as in theology, and the one may serve to throw much light on the other. For this reason we solicit attention to the account which Degerando has given of the various systems of Ration- alism in philosophy. In these systems, Reason is opposed to the authority of nature and experience, just as in some religious systems Reason is opposed to the authority of revelation. In enumerating the erroneous methods, or APPENDIX. 255 rather the partial and defective forras of philosophy, De- gerando mentions these six, — Dogmatism, Rationalism, Materiahsm, Idealism, Scepticism, and Empiricism — and contrasts them respectively with what he calls the Philo- sophy of Experience, which receives that element of truth which belongs to each of these systems, while it elimi- nates the error with which it was blended. Rationalism in science is thus characterized as the rival of experience, unwilling to bow before the authority of Fact, and striving to assert its independent rights — ' Deux puis- santes rivales se disputent ou paraissent se disputer I'empire des connoissances humaines ; I'Experience et la Raison. Plusieurs les croient opposees dans leurs preten- tions, et se prononcent pour I'une des deux en proscrivant I'autre. . . . On a donne le nom iVEmpirisme a ce systeme qui, se concentrant exclusivement dans les im- pressions sensibles, refuse aux donnees de I'experience le secours des verite's speculatives. On pourrait donner le nom de Rationalisme au systeme qui, se fixant an contraire, d'une maniere exclusive dans les deductions abstraites, rejette loin de lui tons les elemens empruntes des sens. L'Empirisme et le Rationalisme partent tons deux d'une supposition commune, — I'incompatibHte de deux principes de nos cinnoissances, fondes Tun sur les sens et I'autre sur la raison.' He then shows that Reason must receive all its data from without, — that the source and the rule of truth lie elsewhere than in the mind it- self, — and that absolute Rationalism, if consistent, must issue in utter scepticism. — Histoire Comparee des Sys- temes^ ii. 360, etc. Bartholmess marks the same contrast between Em- piricism and Rationalism ; and applying the distinction 256 APPENDIX. fco theology, shows that religion may be reasonable, with- out being rationalistic. — Histoire Critique des Doctrines Religieuses de la Philosophie Moderne^ ii. 110, 297. The fact that Rationalism asserted its claims in science as well as in Theology, and that, in the former, it was ef- fectually refuted by Bacon, when he established his funda- mental Aphorism, that man is merely ' the interpreter of nature,' needs only to be clearly apprehended to teach us the great lesson, that man is -also the mere interpreter of Scripture, and that God's revelation, not man's reason, is the rule of faith. Note G. The statement in the text is made with a certain quah- fication, which is necessary to guard against an erroneous inference from it. For human science must never be placed on the same level, in point of authority, with the inspired Word of God. Had there been only a Revelation of Divine truth to the minds of Prophets and Apostles, without any effectual provision for insuring its being conveyed by them in its integrity and purity to the minds of others, and transmitted in their witings to future times, there might have been less difference between the two cases — as Scripture would then have been a human and fallible account of God's revealed truth, just as science is a human and falHble exposition of the volume of nature. But inspiration secures the infallibility of the record, and thus preserves the authority of the truth v-evealed. And, for this reason, our divines have been <;areful to mark the difference, in point of authority, APPENDIX. 257 between human science and Divine revelation. The author of ' Philosophia Scripturse Interpres ' had said, ' Every one is the best interpreter of his own words, and God, heing the autJior of Philosophy^ to Him is to be ascribed whatever interpretation is made of the Scripture by the maxims of Philosophy, and, consequently, that is to be owned as the rule of interpretation.' An able writer who published a reply to that work says, ' that God is the author of all true and sound philosophy, I grant,' . . . but, ' I must add, by way of limitation to this concession, that God is not so the author of Philosophy, as He is of the Scripture. He is so far the author of the Scripture, as that He hath infalhbly directed His servants in penning its several parts, and preserved them from error in that work : but He is not so the author of Philosophy, as infalhbly to direct any man in the world, so as not to err in his philosophy. Here, therefore, is a very great difference ; and seeing that this philosophy (which we acknowledge, so far as it is sound and true, to be God's gift,) is nowhere to be found but in the minds or writings of fallible men, by what certain rule shall we judge of the maxims of philosophy in matters of religion, whether they be undoubtedly true or no ? Or, which way shall we be assured that the aforesaid maxims (supposing them to be unques- tionably true) are duly applied to the matter in con- troversy? Whither shall we go, in this case, to find out such solid satisfaction as may give sufficient ground for that Divine faith, that we certainly owe to the doctrine of Scripture ? ' The same writer retorts the argument of his opponent in two ways : Firsts ' If because God is the author of 258 APPENDIX. Philosophy, therefore Philosophy must unfold all the difficulties in Scripture, Avill it not as well follow that, seeing God is the unquestionable author of the Scrip- tures, therefore the Scriptures are to resolve all the diffi- culties in Philosophy ? ' and Secondly^ ' If Grod be the best Interpreter of His own mind, then, doubtless, the best interpretation of His mind is to be fetched from that which is the only certain and undoubted record of His mind, and that is the Scripture.'— John Wilson, B.D., of Catherine Hall, Cambridge, The Scripture's Genuine Interpreter Asserted^ p. 100, 102 (London, 1678). Note H. Professor Powell's presumptive argument against miracles is neither more nor less than Dr Strauss' fun- damental assumption, which underlies his whole criticism of the 'Life of Jesus,' — that 'whatever is supernatural must needs be unhistorical.' Hence his mythical inter- pretation of the sacred narrative. His theory is equally opposed to the older Rationalism, which admitted the his- torical truth of the narrative, but ascribed every supposed miracle to natural causes ; and the doctrine of Super- naturalism, which ascribes such events to extraordinary Divine interposition. It is expressly designed 'to substi- tute a new mode of considering the hfe of Jesus, in the place of the antiquated systems of Supematuralism and Naturalism.' Let the reader compare the following passages witli Professor Powell's ' Essay,' and say whether the one be APPENDIX. 259 not the mere echo of the other. ' Our modern world, after many centuries of tedious research, has attained a conviction, that all things are hnked together by a chain of causes and effects, wliich suffers no interruption .... This conviction is so much a habit of thought Avith the modern world that, in actual Ufe, the belief in a super- natural manifestation, is at once attributed to ignorance or imposture.' ' That an account is not historical — that the matter related could not have taken place in the manner described, is evident, when the narration is irre- concilable with the known and universal laws which govern the course of events. Now, according to these laws, agreeing with all Just philosophical conceptions and all credible experience, the absolute cause never disturhs the chain of secondary causes by single arbitrary acts of interposition, but rather manifests itseK in the production of the aggregate of finite causalities, and of their reciprocal action. WTien, therefore, we meet with an account of certain phenomena, or events of which it is either expressly stated or implied that they were produced immediately by God HimseK — (Divine apparitions, voice from heaven, and the Hke) — or by human beings possessed of supernatural powers — (miracles, prophecies) — such an account is in so far to be considered as not historical. And, inasmuch as, in general, the intermingling of the spiritual world with the human is found only in unau- thentic records, and is irreconcilable with all just con- ceptions ; so narratives of angels and devils, of their appearing in human shape, and interfering with human concerns, cannot possibly be received as historical." — Strauss' Life of Jesus, i., 71, 87. 260 APPENDIX. XOTE I. Many writers have recently attempted to establish the claims of Christian truth on the ground of the apc^tolical succession of the bishops and clergy of the Church — a, fact which Archbishop ^Vhately assures us cannot be estab- lished with reference to the ministers of any Church in Christendom. ' The fallacy consists in confounding to- gether the unbroken apostolical succession of a Christian ministry generally, and the same succession, in an un- broken line, of this or that individual minister. The existence of such an order of men as Christian ministers, continuously from the time of the Apostles to this day, Ls perhaps as complete a moral certainty as any historical fact can be ' but if each man's hope is made to rest on his receiving the Christian ordinances at the hands of a minister to whom the sacramental virtue that gives efficacy to those ordinances has been transmitted in imbroken succession from hand to hand, every thing must depend on that particular minister, and his claim is by no means established from otir merely establishing the uninterrupted existence of such a class of men as Christian ministers. There is not a minister in all Christendom who is able to trace up, with any approach to certainty, his own spiritual pedigree.' . . . . ' The Church of England rests the claims of ministers, not on some supposed sacramental virtue, transmitted from hand to hand in unbroken succession from the Apostles, in a chain, of which if any one link be even doubtful, a dis- tressing anxiety is thrown over all the ordinances, sacra- ments, and Church privileges for ever ; but, on the fact of these ministers being the regularly appointed officers of APPENDIX. 261 a regular Christian comnutnity.' — Whately ou the King- dom of Christ, p. 117, 180. Instead of representing the apostolical commission as attaching to a successive ministry^ it should rather be connected with the permanent icritiiigs of the Apostles, by means of which they are still, as it were, present with the Church, and speak with Divine authority both to ministers and people. Their olB&ce, as inspired messengers, did not terminate with their hves, but was perpetuated, in its world-wide and indefectible authority, as long as their words should continue to be read or heard. ' They being dead, yet speak,' and 'their Une is gone out through all the earth, and their words to the end of the world.' This was the ground on which the Eeformers took their stand in vindicating their doctrine, discipline, and government, in opposition to the claims of what was called the Apostolical See ; and our readers will find it admirably discussed in CLAn)i's Historical Defence of the Reformation. Note J. It was one of the earhest calumnies against Chiistianity, that it rested on Faith, not ou Reason, " Quelques detractem*s ont dit que le Chi'istianisme n'etait suscep- tible d'aucun raisonnement, ils ont suppose que ceux qui s'appellent du nom de Chretiens fondent leur croyance sur une foi sans raison et sur un acquiescement sans examen, soutenant que nous ne pourrons donner aucune preuve claire de la verite contenue dans nos prom esses. 262 APPENDIX. voulant que nos adeptes s'en tiennent a la foi seule, ce qui les fait surnomer fideles, pour marquer une foi sans discernement et sans discussion.' , . . . ' Invoquons le Dieu de I'univers par I'intercession de notre Sauveur, son Verbe et notre souveraine Pontife, et justifions-nous de la premiere imputation qui nous est faite, en prouvant combien sont calomniateurs ceux qui ont avance que nous ne pouvons donner aucune demonstration de notre croyance, et qu'elle repousse toute espece de raisonne- ment.' ' Mais a quoi bon prolonger ces ebauclies de demonstration que nous ne noussoummetton, pas a une foi aveugle, mais au contraire, a des convictions raison- nees et utiles qui embrassent toutes les donnees d'une piete sincere, puisque Touvrage que nous avons entrepris est specialement consacre a traiter cette question dans son ensemble ? Nous engugeons done, nous conjurons meme les personnes capables de suivre une serie de raisonnements, d'apporter quelque attention a ceux qu'il renferme, a fin de conserver dans leur esprit les preuves de nos dogmes, et de se preparer a les defendre contre tous ceux qui pourraient les questionner sur les motifs de notre esperance.' — Eusebii Preparatio Evangelica^ by Segiiier de Saint Brisson, i. p. 3, 6, 14. DOCUMENTS. No. (1.) THE ' ESSAYS AND REVIEWS.' The following letter from the Archbishop of Canter- bury has been received by the Rev. "W. R. Fremantle, of APPENDIX. 263 Haydon Rectory, in reply to an Address bearing upon the ' Essays and Reviews — Lambeth, Feb. 12. Rev. Sir, — I have taken the opportunity of meeting many of my Episcopal brethren in London, to lay your Address before them. They unanimously agree with me in expressing the pain it has given them that any clergymen of our Church should have published such opinions as those concerning which you have addressed us. We cannot understand how their opinions can be held consistently with an honest subscription to the for- mularies of our Church, with many of the fundamental doctrines of which they appear to us essentially at vari- ance. Whether the language in which these views are ex- pressed is such as to make their pubhcation an act which could be visited in the ecclesiastical courts, or to justify the synodical condemnation of the book which contains them, is still under our gravest consideration. But our main hope is our rehance on the blessing of God in the continued and increasing earnestness with which we trust that we and the clergy of our several dioceses may be enabled to teach and preach that good deposit of soimd doctrine which our Church has received in its fulness, and which we pray that she may, through God's grace, ever set forth as the uncorrupted Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. — I remain. Rev. Sir, your faithful servant, J. B. Cantuar. Rev. W. Fremantle. 264 APPENDIX. I am authorized to append the following names : — C. J. Ebor. R. D. Hereford. A. C. London. J. Chester. H. M. DUNELM. A. Llandaff. C. R. WiNTON. R. J. Bath and Wells. H. Exeter. J. Lincoln. C. Peterborough. C. Gloucester and Bristol. C. St David's. W. Sarum. A. T. Chichester. R. RiPON. J. Lichfield. J. T. Norwich. S. OXON. J. C. Bangor. ^ T. Ely. J. Rochester. T. V. St Asaph. S. Carlisle. J. P. Manchester. No. (2.) the IRISH archbishops ON THE ' ESSAYS AND REVIEWS.' The Archbishops of Armagh and Dublin have addressed the following letter to the bishops of their provinces, with a view to its circulation amongst the clergy generally : — Right Rev. Brethren, — Our attention has been called to a protest which has been issued by the prelates in England in reference to a pubUcation entitled ' Essays and Reviews,' the production of professed members, most of them clergymen, of our Church, and yet setting forth views manifestly at variance with its principles. We cannot doubt your strong disapprobation of the disingenu- ousness of such conduct. Even supposing the doctrines of our Church to be as unsound as we firmly believe them to be the reverse, still it is directly opposed to the most APPENDIX. 265 obvious principles of morality for persons to continue professed members of the Church, and perhaps enjoying its emoluments, while assailing those doctrines. With respect to the pubHcation in question, we have not hitherto deemed it necessary to take any public step, considering that the writers were in English dioceses, and that the respective diocesans would be likely to take such measures, either by ecclesiastical censure or other- A\nse, as the case might appear to them to call for ; and we beheve that it is but very recently that the matter has obtained any considerable notoriety in this portion of the Church. But now that this pubhcation is obtain- ing much circulation, we feel it necessary to call your attention to it, with a view to your putting your clergy specially on their guard against the possible inroads of erroneous and strange doctrines in this new form. As to the best mode of your doing this, your own judgment and knowledge of the circumstances in each locality will be a sufficient guide. T7ith earnest prayers for the Divine guidance to ourselves and to you in all matters, and more especially in this difficult conjuncture, we re- main. Right Reverend Brethren, yours, etc., ' J. G. Armagh. ' R. Dublin.' No. (3.) CON\'OCATION OF THE PROVINCE OF CANTERBURY. Yesterday morning both Houses of Convocation re- sumed business at Westminster — the Upper House, in Queen Anne's Bounty-office ; and the Lower House, in the Jerusalem Chamber, adjoining the Abbey. 266 APPENDIX. Upper House, The Archbishop of Canterbury presided ; and there were present the Bishops of London, Winchester, Oxford, St David's, Lincohi, Norwich, Salisbury, Gloucester and Bristol, Llandaff, and St Asaph. THE ' ESSAYS AND REVIEWS.' The Venerable Archdeacon Bickersteth, the acting prolocutor of the Lower House, who was accompanied by the Hon. and Rev. Dr Pellew, Dean of Norwich ; the Rev, Canon Wordsworth, the Ven. Archdeacon Grant, the Rev. Canon Woodgate, and other gentlemen, attended before their lordships, and stated that the Lower House having, on the preceding day, discussed the merits of the volume of ' Essays and RevieAvs,' written by Dr Temple, Dr WiUiams, Mr Wilson, Mr Jowett, Mr Goodwin, Mr Baden Powell, and Mr Mark Pattison, had come to the following resolution : — ' That the clergy of the Lower House of Convocation of the Province of Canterbury, having agreed to the unanimous censure which has been already pronounced and published by the archbishops and bishops of both provinces, on certain opinions con- tained in a book entitled " Essays and Reviews," enter- tain an earnest hope that, under the Divine blessing, the faithful zeal of the Christian Church may be enabled to counteract the pernicious influences of the erroneous opinions contained in the said volume.' APPENDIX. 267 Xo. (4.) COXVOCATIOX. PROVINCE OF YORK. — THE LOWER HOUSE. The following resolutions were moved by the Rev. Dr M'Xeile, seconded by Dr (Joode, Dean of Ripon, sup- ported by Archdeacon Jones, and agreed to, — 1. That this House desires to express its unfeigned satisfaction at the condemnation of a volume entitled ' Essays and Reviews,' pronounced by the Archbishop and Bishops of the Province, in concert with their Right Rev. Brethren of the Province of Canterbury. 2. That on one of the principles advocated in that volume, of making what is called the verifying faculty in man the test whereby he is to sit in eclectic judgment on the contents of the Bible — determining which are Divine and which human, which true and which false — we are of opinion, the fundamental and distinguishing truths of Christianity must, in all consistency, be rejected ; seeing tlv^t the ever-blessed Trinity, the Holy Incarnation, and the Resurrection of the Body, are mysteries not to be re- ceived by any verifying faculty in man, but only in sub- mission of mind to a reasonably attested revelation from God. And, therefore, we hold it a solemn duty — dis- tinguishing between the evidence for a revelation of which man is fully capable of judging, and the contents of a revelation of many of which man may be wholly incom- petent to judge — ^to record our utter rejection, nay, our unfeigned abhorrence of the principle referred to. as well as of other kindred principles characteristic of the volume. Fcas. BY THE SAME AUTHOR. I.— ^COMFORT IN AFFLICTION.' Twenty-Fuurth Thousand, 2s. 6d. II.— IMPROVEMENT OF AFFLICTION.' Ninth Thousand, 2s. 6d. III. — ^ THE OFFICE AND WORK OF THE SPIRIT.' Eighth Thousand, 6s. IV. — ON THE * TRACTS FOR THE TIMES.' Second Thousand, Is. 6d. v.— 'FAITH IN GOD AND MODERN ATHEISM COMPARED.' 2 vols. 8vo cloth, lettered, 21s. * Son onvrage vaut surtout a raes yeux par I'exactitude avec laquelle il a recueille, classe, analyse', les questuns, les solutions, les objections, et les variantes des doctrines prin- cipales. C'est un tableau etendu et fidele de tous les etats connus de la pensee et de la croyance en Europe sur les fondemens de toute religion.' — C. de Remusat 'Revue de* Deux Mondes.' • It is a great argument for Theism, and against Atheism ; magnificent in its strength, order, and beauty.' — Preface to the American Edition. 'A book at once for scholars, and a book for all thinking men.' — Christian Revieic, Baltimore. 'This work. is emphatically a book for the times; — it is learned, ingenious, distinguished for largeness of conception as well as for logical acuteness ; and it is convincing and impressive, because the author evidently reasons and writes in a spirit of believing earnestness.' — Londonderry Standard. 1 1012 01082 6925 HIGHSMITH # 45220