mistakes does not detract from the religious inspiration of the writers. The former is the view taken by Mr. Rogers. He contends, in entire agreement with Mr. Newman, that a distinction between the Divine and human contents of Scripture is impossible, that historical inaccuracy cannot coexist with religious infallibility. Men will think it strange,' he says, that Divine aid should not have gone a little farther, and, since the destined revelation was to be embedded in history, illustrated by imagination, enforced by argument, and expressed in human language, its authors should have been left liable to destroy the substance by perpetual blunders as to the form.' Hence he concludes that, textual and transcriptional errors excepted, the whole of Scripture is infallibly accurate, and that all its writers were miraculously preserved from the possibility of error, whether physiological, geological, astronomical, historical, or exegetical.

The argument relied on, it must be observed, is here entirely à priori. Men would expect that a revelation should be infallible in all respects; it would be desirable that it should be so; it would involve us in great perplexities if it were not so.' Yet surely in a matter of this kind it is our duty to investigate the facts before we lay down so peremptory a conclusion. Having the most cogent reasons for believing the Bible to be a revelation from God, we should carefully examine what its construction and character actually is, and not permit ourselves to decide dogmatically what it ought to have been. If we find that there are historical discrepancies and scientific inaccuracies in the canonical books, it is vain to say that their occurrence is perplexing, and it is worse than vain to explain them away, as some commentators have done, by subterfuge and evasion. We will not venture dogmatically to assert, in contradiction to the opinion of Mr. Rogers, that the apparent mistakes in Scripture are absolutely incapable of such an explanation as would vindicate them from the charge of error; but it is certain that those who have devoted the most patient investigation to exegetical study are the most thoroughly convinced that there are some cases which do not admit of such a possibility. This is now so generally admitted, that it is acknowledged even in the standard educational works of orthodox divinity. For example, in the edition of the Greek Testament published for collegiate use by Mr. Alford, whom no one will accuse of want of reverence for the Bible, or the articles of our most holy faith, there occurs the following sentence: 'In the last apology of Stephen, which he spoke being full of the Holy Ghost, and with Divine influence beaming from his countenance, we have, at least, two demon

strable

strable historical mistakes; and the occurrence of similar ones in the Gospels does not in any way affect the inspiration or the veracity of the Evangelists.' (Alford's Testament, vol. i., Prolegomena.) Nor have Mr. Alford's most orthodox reviewers excepted against this statement. Such being the case, it is surely very dangerous to maintain that historical infallibility is essential to the inspiration of the Scriptural writers. This belief, if unfounded, exposes the faith of its votaries to tremble at every German commentary, every scientific treatise, and every fresh discovery of Egyptian hieroglyphics, and it is but too likely to bring them to the conclusion which Mr. Newman draws from the same premises.

6

Moreover the Apostles themselves do not lead us to suppose them infallible in matters of human knowledge. They speak of themselves as earthen vessels,' though employed to contain a heavenly treasure. They call themselves ambassadors' charged with a message from God; and in the case of ambassadors from an earthly sovereign, the credentials would not be invalidated, nor the substantial accuracy of the communication rendered doubtful, by mistakes on details irrelevant to the substance of their commission. Even looking at the question à priori, we see no reason why men should have expected a revelation of moral and spiritual truth to supersede the researches of history, or to anticipate the discoveries of science. Nay, as a fact, the heathen philosopher who most earnestly desired such a revelation expressly guards against such expectations. He tells his disciples to expect no revelation from heaven concerning matters open to human investigation, while at the same time he encourages them to hope for Divine communications on subjects beyond the scope of man's discovery.*

But it is impracticable, it may be said, to distinguish in Scripture

* The expressions of Socrates on this subject are very remarkable:- Aasvav ἔφη τοὺς μαντευομένους ἃ τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἔδωκαν οἱ θεοὶ μαθοῦσι διακρίνειν· οἷον * * * ἃ ἔξεστιν ἀριθμήσαντας ἢ στήσαντας εἰδέναι τοὺς τὰ τοιαῦτα παρὰ τῶν θεῶν πυνθανομένους ἀθέμιστα ποιεῖν ἡγεῖτο· ἔφη δὲ δεῖν, ἃ μὲν μαθόντας ποιεῖν ἔδωκαν οἱ Θεοὶ μανθάνειν· ὁ δὲ μὴ δῆλα τοῖς ἀνθρώποις ἐστὶ, πειρᾶσθαι παρὰ τῶν θεῶν πυνθάνεσθαι.—Memorabilia Socratis, i. 1.

As a proof of this impracticability, Mr. Newman supposes physiological researches to have thrown a doubt on the descent of all men from Adam. And if all are not descended from Adam, what becomes of St. Paul's parallel between the first and second Adam, and the doctrine of headship and atonement founded on it?' To which it may be replied, that, even if all mankind had not descended from a single pair, the truths laid down by St. Paul in the passage referred to would be untouched; for when he speaks of all men as dead in Adam, he is speaking of Adam as the representative of human nature in its natural and fallen state. Human corruption is a fact, and involves the necessity of an Atonement. It would be well, however, to warn Mr. Newman's readers not to take his scientific assertions

Scripture between spiritual and scientific, between moral and historical truth. It is easy for hostile minds to conjure up hypothetical difficulties, but religion was given for the practical use of man, and no doctrine necessary to salvation, no precept conducive to holiness, will ever be jeopardised by this palpable distinction. Admitting, nevertheless, that wherever we draw the line of demarcation, there will be some doubt as to a few comparatively unimportant positions on the border territories, is not this, we may ask, the necessary condition of all our moral and religious knowledge? Is there not abundant difference of opinion on religious truth, even among those who agree in the universal infallibility of Scripture? The same restless discontent at any shadow of uncertainty which leads men to demand scientific and historical infallibility leads them also to require an infallible interpreter of Scripture. Hence they have set up the Pope as the living voice of God. But even this is insufficient; for a Papal bull is not authoritative without the fulfilment of many complicated conditions, so that no private Romanist can be sure whether any particular bull is valid or not. Thus nothing could satisfy this craving for religious certainty but a perpetual oracle, whose answers should be daily issued and visibly printed in the sky. Such is not the method by which the will of God is made known to man. 'We walk by faith, not by sight;'Having not seen, we love:' these are the mottoes of Christian experience. Doubt transmuted into trust is an essential element in the perfection of the soul.

In this, as in other points, to demand absolute certainty must conduct us to absolute scepticism. A Pyrrhonian suspension of belief is the only position tenable by the understanding which demands a creed without a difficulty. Though on the single point of historical infallibility Mr. Rogers has, we venture to think, lost sight of this cardinal truth, yet no one has ever stated it more forcibly or applied it more ably than he. Witness the following passage:

At last, after much discussion in this and preceding ages, the world, I think and hope, is beginning to comprehend that it is not sufficient to discredit Christianity, or indeed any other system, to propound plausible or even insoluble objections; since it is a sort of weapon by which Atheism, Pantheism, and the half-score systems of Deism may be alike easily foiled. And if there is any theory of religion which is not in the same predicament as Christianity, nay, which is not exposed to yet greater

assertions for granted. They are at the least as fallible as he supposes those of the apostles to be. For example, in the present case it is not true that scientific research has led philosophers to disbelieve the descent of mankind from a single stock; it has, on the contrary, established the extreme probability of such a descent. objections,

objections, I shall be glad to be informed of it; I can only say, it is a perfect novelty to me. Certainly it is not any of the theories of Deism, the varieties of which have sprung out of the very eagerness with which the advocates of each have sought to evade the difficulties which press the abettors of every other.

Encompassed on all sides by impassable barriers, in whatever direction we speculate-and in none by loftier or more solid walls of rock than in metaphysical or moral philosophy-we are not called upon to answer every objection which may be made to our tenets, for that is impossible, whatever the hypothesis that may be adopted: the only real question is, on which side the greatest weight of positive evidence is found, and the least weight of opposing objections.

To any such objections-the substantial points of the evidence remaining the Christian feels himself entitled to say, "Stand by; I cannot stop for you." In relation to many of them he may boldly say, when called to solve them, "I cannot; time may solve them, as I see it has solved many; and these, like those, may then be transferred to the other side of the account; but even now they do not materially affect the columns which give the total." And, in my judgment, it is in many cases not only wise to say this, but the only honest course. Much mischief has often been done by pretending to give a solution, which neither he who gives, nor he who demands it, feels to be sufficient.'-Defence, p. 178.

We may add that to all such objections the Christian possesses an anti-syllogism, in the indisputable proposition that Christianity does turn bad men into good, and is the only approximate cure hitherto discovered for the moral pestilence which desolates humanity. If tempted to leave his Master, because of any such stumbling-blocks in his path, the disciple has still the same reason as of old to exclaim'Lord, to whom shall we go? other refuge is open to the doubting soul. No other teaching calms the wounded conscience. No other ray of light falls from the clouded heavens to pierce the veil which hides us from the Father of our spirits.

6

6

No

In conclusion we will venture to express our hope that, in another edition, the Defence' of the Eclipse of Faith' may be made in some respects more worthy of its predecessor. Its author informs us that it was written in great haste, and it bears the marks of this throughout. Not that it lacks either vigorous argument or keen sarcasm. On the contrary, it is in these respects perhaps even more powerful than the former work; but it bears traces of having been struck off at a single heat, with a conversational carelessness of style, and a colloquial use of derisive epithets, which occasionally overleaps the bounds of good taste.

It has too much the air of chuckling over a prostrate foe. We earnestly trust that these blemishes will be removed in a future edition, for at present they are likely to create a prejudice

against

against the substance of a most valuable book by the offence that may be taken at the form. In all the higher departments of the argument Mr. Newman writhes in the grasp of his antagonist as helplessly as a pigmy in the gripe of a giant, and for that very reason everything like contortion and grimace should be left by the victorious to the vanquished combatant.

Finally, let us thank Mr. Rogers for the addition he has made to the philosophical literature of England, and to the defensive armoury of Christendom; and still more for his promise to deal with Pantheism as he has already dealt with Deism. We trust that he may be spared to redeem this pledge in the amplest manner, and also to recast his present work by omitting those ephemeral topics which might hinder its permanent appreciation. If he lives to accomplish our expectations, we feel little doubt that his name will share with those of Butler and of Pascal in the gratitude and veneration of posterity.

ART. VII.-Papers relative to the Obstruction of Public Business. By Arthur Symonds, Esq. Printed for Private Circulation. London, 1853.

IN

N our number of last March (vol. xciv. p. 461) we expressed the regret which, in common with all friends to the judicial system of this country and to the constitution of parliament, we felt at the impediments thrown in the way of the measures sanctioned by the House of Lords during the session before the last for the digesting of the criminal law. It is truly painful to find that the last session has shown how their Lordships have been met by new difficulties and from other quarters. The Report of their Select Committee, recommending that for the present only the digesting of the statute law should be persevered in, indicates pretty plainly what we have reason to know, that the members mainly yielded to the apprehensions of endless discussions being raised by the Commons, rendering hopeless the passing a Bill of many hundreds of clauses, however fully considered by those most capable of satisfactorily dealing with

As a specimen of our meaning, we may mention the frequent occurrence of such epithets (used derisively) as pleasant,' worthy,' 'queer,' &c. Also such expressions as gobble up,' artful dodge,' 'I see a thing or two," the missionaries (worthy souls); and more especially the application of such terms as 'chucked,' bakes, boils, and fries,' and crunches like a lion,' to describe the acts of the Deity. These blemishes might all be removed by drawing the pen through a dozen lines. We would suggest also that it would be desirable to incorporate the Defence' and the Eclipse into a single volume.

the