On a review of these Seven Essays, few things strike one more forcibly than the utterly untenable ground occupied by their authors. They are "in a position in which it is impossible to remain. The theory of Mr. Jewett and his fellows is as false to philosophy as to the Church of England. More may be true, or less; but to attempt to halt where they would stop is a simple absurdity [235] ."

To exactness of method or System, their work can hardly pretend; and yet they have a system, -- which has only not been rounded into symmetry, by the singular circumstance that these seven writers "have written in entire independence of one another, and without concert or comparison." They avow a common purpose, however; for they "hope" that their joint labours "will be received as an attempt to illustrate," (whatever that may mean,) "the advantage derivable to the cause of Religion and Moral Truth" from what they have here attempted; and which they justly characterize as "free handling." Putting oneself in their position, it is easy to imagine the sorrow and concern, -- the horror rather, -- with which a good man, when the first edition of Essays and Reviews' made its appearance, would have discovered the kind of complicity into which he had been inadvertently betrayed; and how eagerly he would have withdrawn from a literary partnership which had resulted so disastrously. At the end of nine largo editions, however, the corporate responsibility of each individual author has become fully established; and besides the many proofs of sympathy between the several authors which these pages contain [236] , it is no longer doubtful that the sentiments of the work are to be quoted without reference to the individual writers. It would be unfair to assume that not one of these seven men has had the manliness to avow that his own individual convictions are opposed to those of his fellows. We are compelled to regard their joint labours as one production. It is the corporate efficacy of the several contributions which constitutes the chief criminality of the volume. It is to the respectability and weight of the combined names of its authors, and to their combined efforts, that Essays and Reviews' are indebted for all their power.

What then is the system, or theory, or view, advocated by these seven Authors? -- They are all agreed that we are "placed evidently at an epoch when Humanity finds itself under new conditions, to form some definite conception to ourselves of the way in which Christianity is henceforward to act upon the world which is our own." (p.158.) To do this, we must emerge from our "narrow chamber of Doctrinal and Ecclesiastical prepossessions." (Ibid.) Accordingly, we find insinuated "a very wide-spread alienation, both in educated and uneducated persons, from the Christianity which is ordinarily presented in our Churches and Chapels." (p.150.) There has been a spontaneous recoil." (p.151.) We cannot "resist the tide of civilization on which we are borne." (p.412.) "The time has come when it is no longer possible to ignore the results of criticism." It is therefore "of importance that Christianity should be seen to be in harmony with them." (p.374.) "The arguments of our genuine critics, with the Convictions of our most learned clergy" (p.66) are all opposed to the actual teaching of the Church. Meantime, "the Christian Religion is in a false position when all the tendencies of knowledge are opposed to it." (p.374.) "Time was when the Gospel was before the age: . . . when the highest minds found in its truths not only the rule of their lives, but a well-spring of intellectual delight. Is it to be held a thing impossible that the Christian Religion may again embrace the thoughts of men upon the earth?" (pp.374-5.)

In the mean time, the Bible is a stubborn fact in the way of the new Religion. Nay, the English Book of Common Prayer is a great hindrance for those "formulæ of past thinkings, have long lost all sense of any kind;" (p.297;) so that the Prayer-book "is on the way to become a useless encumbrance, the rubbish of the past, blocking the road." (Ibid.) But the Prayer-book confessedly stands on a different footing from the Bible. The Bible erects itself hopelessly in the way of "the negative religion." (p.151.) O those many prophecies, which for 4000 long years sustained the faith of God's chosen people, and at last found fulfilment in the person of Christ, or in the circumstances which attended the establishment of His Kingdom! O that glorious retinue of types and shadows which heralded Messiah's approach! . . . And then, -- O the miraculous evidence which attested to the reality of His Divinity [237] ! O the confirmation, (to those who needed it,) when He walked the water, and stilled the storm, and cast out devils by His word, and by one strong cry broke the gates of Death, and caused Lazarus to "Come forth!" . . . O the solemn independent testimony borne by Creeds, from the very birthday of Christianity, -- (whether planted in Syria or in Asia Minor, in Africa or in Italy, in Greece or in Gaul; "in Germany or in Spain, among the Celts or in the far East, in Egypt or in Libya, or in the middle regions of the globe [238] .") Lastly, -- O the adoring voice of the whole Church Catholic throughout the world, for many a succeeding century, -- translating, expounding, defining, explaining, defending to the death! . . . How shall all this formidable mass of evidence possibly be set aside?

It is plain that Prophecy must be evacuated of its meaning; or rather, must be denied entirely: and to do this, falls to the share of the vulgar awl violent Vice-Principal of Lampeter College. Disprove he cannot; so he sneers and rails and blusters instead. Prophecy, he calls "omniscience;" "a notion of foresight by vision of particulars;" (p.70;) "a kind of clairvoyance," (p.70,) and "literal prognostication." (p.65.) Mr. Jowett (as we have lately seen [239] ,) lends plaintive help: but indeed Dr. Williams does not lack supporters.

To deny the truth of Miracles falls to the lot of the Savilian Professor of Astronomy. His method has the merit of extreme simplicity: for it is based on the ground that, in the writer's opinion, Miracles are impossible, -- which of course must be held to be decisive of the question.

The battle against the Inspiration of the Word of God is reserved for the Regius Professor of Greek; who requires for his purpose twice the space of any of his fellows. His method is also of the simplest kind, when divested of its many encumbrances. He simply assumes it as proved that the Bible is a book not essentially different from Sophocles and Plato. In other words he assumes that the Bible is not inspired; and reproaches, pities, or sneers at every one who is not of his opinion.

In the meantime, What is Prophecy? What are Miracles? Of what sort is that Bible which has imposed upon mankind so grossly, and so long? They are facts, and must be explained. What are they? Prophecy, then, is "only the power of seeing the ideal in the actual, or of tracing the Divine Government in the movements of men." (p.70.) As for Miracles, "their evidential force is wholly relative to the apprehensions of the parties addressed. . . . Columbus' prediction of the Eclipse to the native islanders," (p.115,) is advanced as an illustration of the nature of the argument from. Miracles. By whatever method the Bible has attained its present footing in the world, it is a book which has been hitherto misunderstood; and it must plainly be dealt with after a new fashion. Our Lord's Incarnation, Temptation, Death and Burial, Resurrection and Ascension into Heaven, -- all His Miracles, in short, will be best interpreted Ideologically; in other words, by a principle "which resolves into an ideal the whole of the historical and doctrinal person of Jesus." (p.200.) So interpreted, "the Gospel may win again the minds of intellectual men;" (p.376;) but it will find it no easy matter. There is in fact "a higher wisdom" than the Gospel, "which is known to those who are perfect," -- "that reconcilement," namely, "of Faith and Knowledge which may be termed Christian Philosophy." (p.413.)

The great object, in short, is to bring about "a reconciliation" (p.375,) between "the minds of intellectual men" (p.376,) and Christianity. Such a reconciliation is to be regarded as a "restoration of belief." (p.375.) And it is to be effected by "taking away some of the external supports, because they are not needed and do harm: also because they interfere with the meaning." (p.375.) -- Those "external supports" are (1) a belief in the Inspiration of the Bible; -- (2) the writings of the Fathers and Doctors of the Church; -- (3) Creeds and the decisions of Councils , -- (4) the works of Anglican Divines; -- (5) Learning; (p.337;) -- (6) a profound acquaintance with the Greek language; (p.393;) -- (7) a minute knowledge of Greek Grammar; (p.391;) -- (8) the Doctrine of the Greek Article; -- (9) the free use of the parallel passages. . . . The Bible, when interpreted by any self-relying young man who knows a little Greek, and attends to the meaning of words, -- will be seen in all the freshness of its early beauty, like an old picture which has been recently cleaned. "A new interest" will be excited by this new Bible, which will "make for itself a new kind of authority." By being thus literally interpreted, it will be transformed into "a spirit." Then, (but not before) the Bible will enjoy the sublime satisfaction of keeping pace with the Age. It may so, even yet, "embrace the thoughts of men upon the earth."

But what kind of thing will this Bible be? The beginning of Genesis, (pp.207-253,) is to be rejected because it "is not an authentic utterance of Divine knowledge, but a human utterance, which it has pleased Providence to use in a special way for the education of mankind." (p.253.) We are invited to "a frank recognition of the erroneous views of Nature which the Bible contains." (p.211.) Thus, all miraculous transactions will have to be explained away. The volume of Prophecy will have to be regarded as a volume of History. The very History will have to be read with distrust. Like other records, it is subject to the conditions of "knowledge which existed in an early stage of the world." (p.411.) It does not even begin to be authentic, until B.C.1900; or rather, until B.C.900 [240] . What remains is to be looked upon as "the continuous witness in all ages of the higher things in the heart of man," (p.375,) -- (whatever that may happen to mean.) The Gospel is to be looked upon as "a life of Christ in the soul, instead of a theory of Christ which is in a book, or written down," (p.423.) "The lessons of Scripture, when disengaged from theological formulas, have a nearer way to the hearts of the poor." (p.424.) Even "in Missions to the heathen, Scripture is to be treated as the expression of universal truths, rather than of the tenets of particular men and Churches." (p.423.) It is anticipated that this "would remove many obstacles to the reception of Christianity." (Ibid.) "It is not the Book of Scripture which we should seek to give the heathen;" "but the truth of the Book; the mind of Christ and His Apostles, in which all lesser details and differences should be lost and absorbed;" "the purer light or element of Religion, of which Christianity is the expression." (p.427.) . . . . Such is the ghostly phantom, by the aid of which the Heathen are to become evangelized!

But this historical Bible is not to be regarded as the rule of a man's life, or indeed as an external Law at all. (pp.36, 45.) "We walk now by Reason and Conscience alone." (p.21.) The Bible is to be identified "with the voice of Conscience," (p.45,) -- which it has "to evoke, not to override." (p.44.) "The principle of private judgment . . . makes Conscience the supreme interpreter." (p.45.) Ours is "a law which is not imposed upon us by another power, but by our own enlightened will:" (p.35:) for the "Spirit, or Conscience" "legislates" henceforth "without appeal except to himself." (p.31.)

Having thus disposed of "Traditional Christianity," (p.1560 it is not obscurely hinted that something quite different is to be substituted in its place. And first, next to "a frank appeal to Reason, and a frank criticism of Scripture," (p.174,) the nature and "office of the Church is to be properly understood." (p.194.)

The Church then is a spontaneous development of the State, as "part of its own organization," (p.195,) -- a purely secular Institution. The State will "develop itself into a Church" by "throwing its elements, or the best of them, into another mould; and constituting out of them a Society, which is in it, though in some sense not of it (?), -- which is another (?), yet the same." (p.194.) The nation must provide, from time to time, that the teaching of one age does "not traditionally harden, so as to become an exclusive barrier in a subsequent one; and so the moral growth of those who are committed to the hands of the Church be checked." (Ibid.) The Church is founded, therefore, not upon "tile possession of a supernaturally communicated speculation (!) concerning God," but "upon the manifestation of a Divine Life in Man." "Speculative doctrines should be left to philosophical schools. A national Church must be concerned with the ethical development of its members." (p.195.) It should be "free from dogmatic tests, and similar intellectual bondage;" (p.168;) hampered by no Doctrines, pledged to no Creeds. These may be retained indeed; but "we refuse to be bound by them." (p.4d.) The Subscription of the Clergy to the Articles should also be abolished: for "no promise can reach fluctuations of opinion, and personal conviction." (!!!) Open heretical teaching may, to be sure, be dealt with by the Law; but the Law "should not require any act which appears to signify I think.'" (p.189.) Witness "the reluctance of the stronger minds to enter an Order in which their intellects may not have free play." (p.190.) . . . Such then is the Negative Religion! Such is the new faith which Doctors Temple and Williams, Professors Powell and Jowett, Messieurs Wilson, Goodwin, and Pattison, have deliberately combined to offer to the acceptance of the World!

It is high time to conclude. I cannot lay down my pen however until I have re-echoed the sentiments of one with whom I heartily agree. I allude to Dr. Moberly; who professes that he is "struck almost more with what seems to him the hardheartedness, and exceeding unkindness of this book, than with its unsoundness. Have the writers," (he asks,) "considered how far the suggesting of innumerable doubts, -- doubts unargued and unproved, -- will check honest devotion, and embolden timid sin? For whom do they intend this book? Is it written for the mass of general readers? Is it designed for students at the Universities? Do they suppose that this multitude of random suggestions will be carefully wrought out by these readers, and be rejected if unsound; so as to leave their faith and devotion untarnished? . . . Have they reflected how many souls for whom Christ died may be slain in their weakness by their self-styled strength?"

"Suppose, for a moment, that the Holy Scriptures are (p.177,) the Word of the Spirit of Gov, -- that the Miracles, (cf. p.109,) including the Resurrection of Christ, are actual objective facts, which have really happened, -- that the Doctrines of the Church are true, (p.195,) and the Creeds (p.355,) the authoritative expositions of them, -- and that men are to reach Salvation through faith in Christ, Virgin-born, according to the Scriptures, and making atonement (cf. p.87,) for their sins upon the Cross. On this supposition, -- Is not the publication of this book an act of real hostility to God's Truth; and one which endangers the Faith and Salvation of Men? And is this hostility less real, or the danger diminished, because the writers are, all but one, Clergymen, some of them Tutors and Schoolmasters; because they wear the dress, and use the language of friends, and threaten us with bitter opposition if we do not regard them as such [241] ?"

With this I lay down my pen. My last words shall be simple and affectionate, addressed solely to yourselves.

I trace these concluding lines, -- (of a work which, but for you, would never have been undertaken,) -- in a quite empty College; and in the room where we have so often and so happily met on Sunday evenings. Can you wonder if, at the conclusion of what has proved rather a heavy task, (so hateful to me is controversy,) my thoughts revert with affectionate solicitude to yourselves, already scattered in all directions; and to those evenings which more, I think, than any other thing, have gilded my College life? . . . In thus sending you a written farewell, and praying from my soul that God may bless and keep you all, I cannot suppress the earnest entreaty that you would remember the best words of counsel which may have at any time fallen from my lips: that you would persevere in the daily study of the pure Book of Life; and that you would read it, not as feeling yourselves called upon to sit in judgment on its adorable contents; but rather, as men who are permitted to draw near; and invited to listen, and to learn, and to live. And so farewell! . . . "Watch ye, stand fast in the Faith," -- nay, take it in the original, which is far better: -- Gregoreite, stekete en te pistei, andrizesthe, krataiousthe. panta humon en agape ginestho. He charis tou Kuriou Iesou Christou meth' humon. he agape mou meta panton humon.

Your Friend,

J. W. B.

Oriel,

June 22nd, 1861.

---

Footnotes:

[143] Rev. M. Pattison, in Essays and Reviews, p. 307.

[144] pp. 338, 375, 420 top line, 428, &c.

[145] See all this very ably and interestingly explained in an article reprinted from the Christian Remembrancer' (Jan. 1861,) On certain Characteristics of Holy Scripture, by the Rev. J. G. Cazenove, p. 11, &c.

[146] Nor is this a mere slip of Mr. Jowett's pen. At p. 372, he states that "a majority of the Clergy throughout the world,"--(with whom he associates the "instincts of many laymen, perhaps also individual interest,")--are in favour of "withholding the Truth." But, he adds, (with the indignant emphasis of Virtue when she is reproaching Vice,)--"a higher expediency pleads that honesty is the best policy,' and that truth alone makes free!"--How would such insolence be treated in the common intercourse of daily life?--(I will not pause to remark on Mr. Jowett's wanton abuse of the Divine saying recorded in St. John 8:32,--repeated at p. 351.)

[147] I suppose that there may have been many inspired Psalmists; and that perhaps the book of Judges was not all by one hand. With reference to the two books of Samuel, Kings and Chronicles, see 1 Chronicles 29:29, 30. 2 Chron. ix. 29: xi. 2: xii. 15, 5, 7: xiii. 22.

[148] By the Jews themselves they were reckoned as 22.

[149] "It is remarkable that the word Graphe, which means simply Writing, is reserved and appropriated in the New Testament (where it occurs fifty times) to the Sacred writings, i.e. to the Holy Scriptures; and marks the separation of the Scriptures from all "common books," indeed from all other writings in the world."--Wordsworth On Inspiration,'--p. 85.

[150] St. Luke 16:17.

[151] ou dunatai luthenai he graphe,--St. John 10:35.

[152] e. g. (i) Long passages:-- Judges 1:11-15 quotes Joshua 15:15-19.--2 Sam. xxii. quotes Psalm 18.-1 Chron. xvi. quotes Psalm 96. and Psalm 105.-2 Kings xix. quotes Isaiah 37.-2 Kings xx. quotes Isaiah 38. xxxix. (ii) One or two sentences:-- Numbers 14:18 quotes Exodus 36:6, 7.--Ps. lxviii. 1 quotes Numbers 10:35.--Ps. lxviii. 7, 8 quotes Judges 5:4, 5.--Ps. cxviii. 14 quotes Exodus 15:2.--Prov. xxx. 5 quotes Psalm 18:30.--Joel ii. 13 quotes Jonah 4:2.--Isaiah xii. 2 quotes Exodus 15:2.--Isaiah xiii. 6 quotes Joel 1:15.--Isaiah li. 6 quotes Psalm 102:25-7.--Isaiah lii. 10 quotes Psalm 98:2, 3.--Micah iv. 1, 2, 3 quotes Isaiah 2:2, 3, 4.--Nahum i. 15 quotes Isaiah 52:7.--Zeph. iii. 19 quotes Micah 4:6.--Habakkuk ii. 14 quotes Isaiah 11:9.--Jeremiah x. 13: li. 16 quotes Psalm 135:7.--Jeremiah xlviii. quotes Isaiah 15:16.--Jeremiah xxvi. 18 quotes Micah 3:12.--1 Chron. xxix. 15 quotes Psalm 39:12. (iii) Allusive references.--(This would involve a prolonged reference to the Hebrew Scriptures, which would be even out of place here.)

[153] See pp. 234-5.

[154] Rev. Ralph Churton's Sermon "On the Quotations in the Old Testament," (1807,) published in Townson's Works, vol. i. p. cxxxiv.,--where see the interesting note.

[155] Rev. Ralph Churton's Sermon, quoted in note (t), pp. cxliv-v.

[156] E. g. Genesis 28:11, 12: xxxii. 1-3. Exodus 24:10.--St. Luke 22:43-45. St. Matth. xxvii. 52, 53. St. Jude ver. 9.

[157] E.g. Jacob, Joseph, David.--St. Paul, St. Peter, St. John.

[158] E.g. Genesis 8:9: xxxvii. 15-17: xlviii. 17, 18. Exodus 2:6.--St. Luke 8:55. St. John 13:4, 5: xxi.

[159] E. g. Hebrews 8:8-12, where Jeremiah 31:31-36 is quoted. See Acts 2:17-21, where Joel 2:28-32 is quoted.

[160] It is supposed that the three well-known references to profane writers, (Acts 17:28.1 Corinthians 15:33. Titus 1:12, [concerning which see Jerome, Opp. i. 424: vii. 471,])--the place in St. Matthew, (xxvii. 9,)--and St. James 4:5,--are scarcely exceptions to the statement in the text.

[161] See above,--(d).

[162] Only given by St. Matthew and St. Luke.

[163] Only found in St. Luke 3:36.

[164] Only found in St. Matth. i. 5.

[165] Only found in Acts 7:16.

[166] Only found in Acts 7:23.

[167] St. James 5:17,--mentioned also by our Lord, St. Luke 4:25; who informs us that Jonah was a sign to the Ninevites. This is only revealed in St. Luke 11:30.

[168] 2 Corinthians 11:3.

[169] St. Jude ver. 9.

[170] 2 Timothy 3:8.

[171] See Hebrews 11:19. Consider Romans 4:19.

[172] Acts 7:16.

[173] Compare Exodus 2:2, 3 with Acts 7:20. Consider Revelation 2:14: also Hebrews 12:21: also Hebrews 9:19, &c.

[174] Sermons, by the Rev. 100. P. Eden, p. 185.

[175] Ti gar estin ho Nomos; Euangelion prokatengelmenon; ti de to Euangelion; Nomos pepleromenos. Justin: Quæst. ci. p. 456.

[176] Eadem sunt in Vetere et Novo: ibi obumbrata, hic revelata; ibi præfigurata, hix manifesto. (Augustine: Quæst. xxxiii., in Num. 1. m. iii.-p. 541.)--In Veteri Testamento est occultatio Novi: in Novo Testamento est manifestatio Veteris. (Id. De Catechiz. Rudibus, 8.--See also Quæst. lxxiii. in Exod.)

[177] See below, from the foot of p. 174 to the beginning of p. 176.

[178] Below, p. 108. The render is requested to refer to the place.

[179] E. g. Genesis 11:5-8: xviii. 17-21.

[180] E. g. Genesis 6:6.2 Samuel 11:27.

[181] E.g. 2 Kings xix. 35. St. Matth. xxviii. 2, 3.

[182] Rev. 1. 10, 11.

[183] Analogy, P. II. ch. vii.

[184] Butler's Analogy, P. II. ch. vii.

[185] Hebrews 8:1.

[186] St. Luke 4:21.

[187] St. John 5:46.

[188] St. Luke 24:27.

[189] St. Luke 24:44.

[190] Dr. Wordsworth (Occasional Sermon 54,) On the Inspiration of the Old Testament, (I859.)--p. 70.

[191] 2 Timothy 2:2.

[192] See the middle of p. cxcvii.

[193] Photius, p. 195, ed. Bekker.--"Eos simul jungendos censui,--Polycarpum, Irenæum, Hippolytum; cum Hippolytus discipulus Irenæi fuisset, Irenæusque Polycarpum, Joannis Apostoli discipulum, audivisset."--Routh, Preface to Opuscula, p. x.

[194] St. Luke 24:27.

[195] St. John 14:26. The fulfilment of this promise repeatedly occurs: as in St. John 2:17, 22: xii. 16: xiii. 7: St.. Luke 24:8. Consider St. John 20:9.

[196] 1 Corinthians 12. xiv., &c.

[197] St. Luke 24:45.

[198] Acts 2:4-21.

[199] See Mr. Jowett's Essay, p. 354.

[200] Psalm 92:5.

[201] Acts 8:30, 31.--"Revela,' inquit David, oculos meos, et considerabo mirabilia de Lege Tuâ.' Si tantus Propheta tenebras ignorantiæ confitetur, quâ nos putas parvulos, et peno lactantes, inscitiæ nocte circumdari? Hoc autem velamen non solum in facie Moysi, sed et in Evangelistis et in Apostolis positum est."--Hieronymus, Ep. 58. vol. i.[p. 323.

[202] Dr. Moberly, as before, pp. liii.-iv.

[203] Minor Works, vol. ii.[p. 10.

[204] Ibid. p. 6.

[205] See Serm. I.-pp. 10-11, 13, &c.

[206] See below, p. 142.

[207] From a Sermon by the Rev. F. Woodward, quoted below, at p. 249.--In illustration of the learned writer's concluding remark, take this from the Creed of Lyons, contained in Irenæus (A.D. 180),--Kai eis Pneuma Hagion, to dia ton Propheton kekeruchos tas oikonomias, kai tas eleuseis In the Creed of Constantinople, we read, To Pneuma to Hagion . . . to lalesan dia ton Propheton.

[208] The Creed of Lyons begins by describing itself as that which he men Hekklesia, kaiper keth' holes tes oikoumenes heos peraton tes ges diesparmene, para de ton Hapostolon kai ton ekeinon matheton paralabousa, k.t.l. Most refreshing of all, however, are the concluding words of that Creed: so comfortable are they that I cannot deny myself the consolation of transcribing them here, where indeed they are very much ad rem:-- Touto to kerugma pareilephuia, kai tauten ten pistin, hos proephaman, he ekklesia, kaiper en holo to kosmo diesparmene, epimelos phulassei, hos hena oikon oikousa; kai homoios pisteuei toutois, hos mian psuchen kai ten auten echousa kardian; kai sumphonos tauta kerussei, kai didaskei, kai paradidosin, hos hen stoma kektemene; Kai gar hai kata ton kosmon dialektoi anomoiai, all' he dunamis tes paradoseos mia kai he aute. Kai oute hai en Germaniais hidrumenai ekklesiai allos pepisteukasin, e allos paradidoasin, oute en tais Iberiais, oute en Keltois, oute kata tas anatolas, oute en Aigupto, oute en Libue, oute hai kata mesa tou kosmou hidrumenai. All' hosper ho helios, to ktisma tou Theou, en holo to kosmo eis kai ho autos, houto kai to kerugma tes aletheias pantache phainei, kai photizei partas anthropous tous boulomenous eis epignosin aletheias elthein. Kai oute ho panu dunatos en logo ton en tais ekklesiais proestoton hetera touton erei, (oudeis gar huper ton didaskalon,) oute ho asthenes en to logo elattosei ten paradosin. Mias gar kai tes autes pisteos ouses, oute ho polu peri autes dunamenos eipein epleonasen, oute ho to oligon helattonese.--See Heurtley's Harmonia Symbolica, p. 9.

[209] Abridged from Dr. Moberly, as before, pp. lii.-v.

[210] Kai honper tropon ho tou sinapeos sporos, en mikro kokko, pollous periechei tous kladous, houto kai he Pistis haute, en oligois rhemasi, pasan ten en te Palaia kai Kaine tes eusebeias gnosin enkekolpistai.--Cyril. Hieros. Cat. v. 12,--quoted by Heurtley.

[211] Answer. He certainly does not employ the identical language of the Nicene Council, or of the (so called) Athanasian Creed. But what then?

[212] Ans. Passages of the Epistles "distributed in alternate clauses between our Lord's Humanity and Divinity," begging Mr. Jowett's pardon, is nonsense. But no passage in St. Paul's Epistles which relates to the Humanity, or to the Divinity of Christ, could be said to "lose its meaning" by being unlocked by its own proper clue: or, if the statement be complex, by being distributed under two heads.

[213] Ans. But not, I suppose, to reconcile them? Why use inaccurate language on so solemn a subject?

[214] Ans. Doubtless we have to suppose this!

[215] Ans. Not so. For "there is one Person of the Father, and another of the Son."

[216] Ans. Doubtless we have to suppose this!

[217] Ans. But He did not doubt!

[218] 1 St. John 4:2, 3.--2 St. John ver. 7.

[219] Dr. Moberly, as before, p. xlvii.

[220] E.g. "We should observe how the popular explanations of Prophecy, as in heathen (Thucyd. ii. 54,) so also in Christian times, had adapted themselves to the circumstances of mankind." (The Reverend writer can never for a moment divest himself of his theory that Thucydides and the Bible stand on the same footing!) "We might remark that in our own country, and in the present generation especially, the interpretation of Scripture had assumed an apologetic character, as though making an effort to defend itself against some supposed inroad of Science and Criticism." (p. 340.) . . . . Just as if any other attitude was possible when one has to do with Essayists and Reviewers!'

[221] One would imagine that the Essayist and his critic were entirely agreed. See below, p. 74,--"I refuse to accept any theory whatsoever." And p. 11 5,--"Theory I have none."

[222] Had the following passage occurred sooner to my recollection, it should have been sooner inserted:--"Are we to conduct the Interpretation of Holy Scripture as we would that of any other writing? We are and we are not. So far as the words are concerned, the mere words of Scripture have the same office with those of all language written or spoken in sincerity." They must be studied "by the same means and the same rules which would guide us to the meaning of any other work; by a knowledge of the languages in which the books were written, the Hebrew, the Chaldee, the Greek, and of those other languages, as the Syriac and Arabic, which may illustrate them; and of all the ordinary rules of Grammar and Criticism, and the peculiar information respecting times and circumstances, history and customs,--all the resources, in a word, of the Interpretation of any work of any kind. The Grammatical and _Historical interpretation of profane or sacred writings is the same. . . . "All Scripture," meanwhile, "is given by Inspiration of God:" and this at once introduces several important differences; which whoever neglects may yet, with whatsoever advantages of learning and talent, fail to discover the real meaning of the Word of God."--From Dr. Hawkins (Provost of Oriel) 's Inaugural Lecture as Dean Ireland's Professor, delivered in 1847,--pp. 29-30. It is but fair to Mr. Jowett to add that, in terms, he has very nearly (not quite) said the self-same thing himself, at p. 337, (upper half the page.) But it is the peculiar method of this most slippery writer, or most illogical thinker, occasionally to grant almost all that heart can desire, as far as words go; but straightway to deny, or evacuate, or explain away, the thing which those words ought to signify.--Thus, at p. 337, he volunteers the remark that "No one who has a Christian feeling would place Classical on a level with Sacred Literature;" and at p. 377, he observes that, "There are many respects in which Scripture is unlike any other book." And yet, (as I have shewn, p. cxliii. to p. cl.,) Mr. Jowett puts the Bible on a level with Sophocles and Plato; and argues throughout as if Scripture were in no essential respect unlike any other book!

[223] "Had this writer reminded us that the New Testament Greek is a Greek of different age from that of the classical writers; had he simply warned us that we must not press our Attic Greek scholarship too far, but study the Alexandrian Greek of the Septuagint, Philo, &c. in order to ascertain the exact meaning of the words and phrases of the writers of the New Testament;--still more, if, as the result of such study on his own part, he had offered us some well-digested observations on the use of tenses, articles, or particles in the sacred writings;--he would have done some service. But this talk about excessive attention to the article,' and particles being often mere excrescences of style,' is of no effect except to expose the writer to ridicule. It sounds as if he had been accustomed to lay down the law to an admiring audience of clever young men,' and had forgotten that there were still men in Denmark' who understood Greek."--Some Remarks on Essays and Reviews, prefixed to Dr. Moberly's 'Sermons on the Beatitudes.' (1861.) pp. lxii.-iii.

[224] Quarterly Review, No. 217, p. 298.

[225] Quarterly Review, No. 217, pp. 265-6.

[226] St. Matth. ii. 1, 22.

[227] Luke 2:41.

[228] See Sermon VII., pp. 222-232.

[229] Essays and Reviews, p. 109.

[230] See Dr. Moberly, (as before,) p. lv-lx.

[231] Edinburgh Review, (April, 1861,) p. 476.

[232] The Rev. H. B. Wilson says,--"If those who distinguish themselves in Science and Literature cannot, in a scientific and literary age, be effectually and cordially attached to the Church of their nation, they must sooner or later be driven into a position of hostility to it." (p. 198.) This is one of the many notes, if not of "concert and comparison," at least of intense sympathy between the Essayists and Reviewers.

[233] Quarterly Review, No. 217, p. 266.

[234] See at pp. 351, 352, 357, 358, 361, 365, 367, 413, &c.

[235] Quarterly Review, as before, p. 282.

[236] Take a few instances:--Mr. Wilson and Mr. Jowett speak of the Gospels as more or less accurately embodying a common tradition, pp. 161 and 346.--Dr. Temple and Mr. Jowett propose the heart and conscience, as the overruling principle, pp. 42-5, and 410:--and insist that the Bible is "a Spirit, not a Letter," pp. 36 and 357, 375, 425.--Dr. Temple and Dr. Williams regard the Bible as the voice of conscience, pp. 45 and 78:--look for a verifying faculty in the individual, pp. 45 and 83:--dwell on the "interpolations" in Scripture, pp. 47 and 78.--Mr. Wilson and Mr. Jowett insist on the meaning which Scripture had to those who first heard it, as its true meaning, pp. 219, 223, 230, 232, and 338, 378:--on the necessity of reconciling Intellectual men to Scripture, pp. 198 and 374.--Professor Powell and Mr. Jowett are of one mind as to Miracles, pp. 109 and 349.--Dr. Temple and Mr. Jowett delight in the same image of the Colossal Man, pp. 1-49 and 331, 387, 422.--Dr. Williams and Mr. Jowett coincide in their estimate of the German Commentators, pp. 67 and 340.--Dr. Temple and Dr. Williams are of one mind as to the past training of our Race, pp. 1-49, and 51. They are generally agreed as to the untrustworthiness of Genesis, and of the Scripture generally, the hopeless contradictions between the Evangelists, &c., &c. They hold the same language about our having outlived the Faith, (Traditional Christianity,' as it is called;) the impossibility of freedom of thought; the necessity of providing some new Religious system; the effete nature of Creeds and formularies of Belief; the advance in Natural Science as likely to prove fatal to Theology, &c., &c.

[237] See St. John 3:2: v. 36: x. 25, 37-8: xiv. 11: xv. 24: St. Luke 7:20-22, &c., &c.

[238] Creed of Lyons, A.D. 180; see above, p. clxxx., note.

[239] pp. cxciv.-v.

[240] See pp. 57 and 170.

[241] Some Remarks, &c., pp. xxiii.-xxv.