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 G.o.d is reserved for the Regius Professor of Greek; who requires for his purpose twice the s.p.a.ce of any of his fellows. _His_ method is also of the simplest kind, when divested of its many enc.u.mbrances. He simply _a.s.sumes it as proved_ that the Bible is a book not essentially different from Sophocles and Plato. In other words he _a.s.sumes_ 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 ill.u.s.tration 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 pa.s.sages.... 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[241]. 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 antic.i.p.ated 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. 156,) it is not obscurely hinted that something quite different is to be subst.i.tuted 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 Inst.i.tution. The State will "develop itself into a Church" by "throwing its elements, or the best of them, into another mould; and const.i.tuting 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 "the possession of a supernaturally communicated speculation (!) concerning G.o.d," 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. 44.) 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 ma.s.s of general readers? Is it designed for students at the Universities? Do they suppose that this mult.i.tude 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 G.o.d,--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 G.o.d'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[242]?"

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 G.o.d 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:--G?????e?te, st??ete ?? t?

p?ste? ??d???es?e, ??ata???s?e. p??ta ??? ?? ???p? ????s??. ? ?????

t?? ?????? ??s?? ???st?? e?' ???. ? ???p? ?? et? p??t?? ???.

Your friend, J. W. B.

ORIEL, _June 22nd_, 1861.

FOOTNOTES:

[19] I abstain from enumerating Dr. Temple's mistakes,--for such things do not belong to the essence of a composition. And yet I must remark that it is hardly creditable in a Doctor of Divinity to write as he does. "In _all_ (!) the doctrinal disputes of the fourth and fifth centuries, the decisive voice came from Rome. Every controversy was finally settled by her opinion, because she alone possessed _the art of framing formulas_," &c. (p. 16.) Would the learned writer favour us with _a single warrant_ for this a.s.sertion?... At p. 9, Dr. Temple mistakes for Micah's, words spoken 700 years before by Balaam. At p. 10, he says that "Prayer, as a regular and necessary part of worship, first appears in the later books of the Old Testament."--His account of the papacy is contained in the following words:--"Law was the lesson which Rome was intended to teach the world. Hence (?) the Bishop of Rome soon became the Head of the Church. Rome was in fact the centre of the traditions which had once governed the world; and their spirit still remained; and the Roman Church developed into the papacy simply because a head was wanted (!), and no better one could be found."--p. 16. At p. 10 we have a truly puerile misconception of the meaning of 1 Cor. xv. 56, &c., &c.

[20] Deut. vi. 4.

[21] 1 Sam. xv. 22, where see the places in the margin.

[22] Hos. vi. 6, quoted by our LORD, St. Matth. ix. 13: xii. 7.

[23] Consider Ps. xxvi. 6: l. 13, 14: li. 16, 17: cxvi. 15: cxix. 108: cxli. 2, &c.

[24] St. Matth. xvi. 4: xii. 39. Compare St. Mark viii. 38.

[25] St. James iv. 4.

[26] St. Matth. xxiii. 33.

[27] Ezek. xvi. 47-52.

[28] Is. i. 4, 6, 15.

[29] St. John viii. 9. "I cannot but speak my mind," (says Josephus, after taking a survey of the extreme wickedness of his countrymen, in connexion with the horrors of the siege of Jerusalem,) "and it is this: I suppose that if the Romans had delayed to come against these sinners, either the earth would have swallowed them up; or the city would have been swept away by another Flood; or it would have been consumed, like a second Sodom, by fire from Heaven."

[30] S. John xii. 38-40. "_They have blinded_ their eyes," &c. (See the place in the LXX.:) sc. ? ?a?? ??t??.

[31] "Had the revelation of CHRIST been delayed till now, a.s.suredly it would have been hard for us to recognize His Divinity.... We, of course, have in our turn counterbalancing advantages. (!) If we have lost that freshness of faith which would be the first (_sic_) to say to a poor carpenter,--Thou art the CHRIST, the SON of the living G.o.d,--yet we possess in the greater cultivation of our religious understanding, that which perhaps we ought not to be willing to give in exchange (!) ...

They had not the same clearness of understanding as we; the same recognition that it is G.o.d and not the Devil who rules the World; the same power of discrimination between different kinds of truth.... Had our LORD come later, He would have come to mankind already beginning to stiffen into the fixedness of maturity.... The truth of His Divine Nature would not have been recognized." (pp. 24-5.)--Is this meant for bitter satire on the age we live in; or for disparagement of the Incarnate WORD?... But in the face of such antic.i.p.ations, the keenest satire of all is contained in the author's claim to a "religious understanding, cultivated" to a degree unknown to the best ages of the Church; as well as to surpa.s.sing "clearness of understanding," and "powers of discrimination." Lamentable in _any_ quarter, how deplorable is such conceit in one who shews himself _unacquainted with the first principles of Theological Science_; and who puts forth an Essay on the Education of the World, which would have been discreditable to an advanced school-boy!

[32] Quite ineffectual, at the very close of this unhappy composition, as a set off to the compacted and often repeated a.s.severations of his earlier pages, is the amiable author's plaintive plea for "even the perverted use of the Bible;" adding,--"And meanwhile, how utterly impossible it would be in the manhood of the world to imagine any other instructor of mankind!" (p. 47.) It is one of the favourite devices of these seven writers, side by side with their most objectionable statements, to insert isolated pa.s.sages of admitted truth,--and occasionally even of considerable beauty: which however are _utterly meaningless_ and out of place where they stand; and (like the sentence above written,) powerless to undo the circ.u.mstantial wickedness of what went before. I repeat, that the words above-written are meaningless _where they stand_: for if Dr. Temple really means that it is "_utterly impossible in the manhood of the world to IMAGINE any other instructor of mankind_" than THE BIBLE,--what becomes of his Essay?

[33] _pa?a_t??e?s?e: i.e. "ye _mis_observe," "keep _in a wrong way_."

[34] Gal. iv. 1-10.

[35] Gal. iii. 24, 25.

[36] Gal. v. 1.

[37] 2 St. John v. 10, 11.

[38] Rom. viii. 21.

[39] It is presumed that the article in the _Dict. of Antiquities_ will be held unexceptionable authority as to the office of the pa?da?????.--"Rex filio paedagogum const.i.tuit, et singulis diebus ad eum invisit, interrogans eum: Num comedit filius meus? _num in scholam abiit? num ex schola rediit_?"--Wetstein, in loc.--So Plato _Lysis_, p.

118.

[40] 1 St. Peter ii. 21. Comp. St. James v. 10.

[41] 1 Cor. xi. 1: iv. 16. Phil. iii. 17. 2 Thess. iii. 9. Heb. xiii. 7, &c.

[42] 1 St. Pet. i. 11.

[43] 1 Tim. i. 10: iv. 6. t.i.t. i. 9: ii. 1. Comp. 2 St. John v. 10.

[44] 2 Tim. i. 13.

[45] 2 Tim. i. 13, 14: ii. 2. Also 1 Tim. vi. 20. On both places, Dr.

Wordsworth's _Notes_ may be consulted with advantage.

[46] 2 Tim. iv. 3.

[47] 2 Thess. ii. 7, 8, &c.